DAQ-2024-011891

1

DAQC-1189-24
Site ID 10123 (B5)

MEMORANDUM

TO: CEM FILE – HF SINCLAIR WOODS CROSS REFINING LLC

THROUGH: Harold Burge, Major Source Compliance Section Manager

FROM: Rob Leishman, Environmental Scientist

DATE: November 21, 2024

SUBJECT: Source: Refinery Fuel Gas
Contact: Matt Howes – 801-397-7412
Location: 1070 West 500 South, West Bountiful, Davis County, UT
Test Contractor: Alliance Source Testing
FRS ID#: UT0000004901100013
Permit/AO#: AO DAQE-AN101230041-13 dated November 18, 2013
Subject: Review of RA/PST Reports dated June 27, 2024

On July 2, 2024, Utah Division of Air Quality (DAQ) received Relative Accuracy/Performance
Specification Test (RA/PST) reports for the Refinery Fuel Gas at the HF Sinclair North Salt Lake
Refinery. Testing was performed on April 30, 2024, to determine the relative accuracy of the H2S
monitoring systems. This review is based on the data provided by the test contractor and not reproduced
by DAQ spreadsheet review. The test results are:

RA/PST EVALUATION:

Holly Refinery - Refinery Fuel Gas
RATA Test Date - 4/30/2024
Primary
Channel Manufacturer Serial No. Units CEM
Value
RM
Value
Relative
Accuracy
Certification
Status
H2S Siemens - Model Maxum II 300494567000010 ppm dv 18.233 19.656 1.83% Passed
Stack Test Deviation Report
There were no deviations observed during testing.
Calibration gases were in date and met performance specifications.

DEVIATIONS: No deviations were noted in this report.

CONCLUSION: HF Sinclair Woods Cross Refining LLC operates the continuous
emissions monitor (CEM) for the Refinery Fuel Gas to measure H2S
emissions. The CEM was audited by the DAQ and found to meet quality
assurance requirements found in 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix B,
Performance Specification 1, and R307-170, Continuous Emission
Monitoring System Program. Quarterly cylinder gas audits and an annual
relative accuracy test audit were conducted in accordance with the
procedures outlined in UAC R307-170.

1 8 2
2

RECOMMENDATION: The HF Sinclair Refinery Fuel Gas H2S CEM system was operating as
required in R307-170 and 40 CFR 60.13 at the time of this evaluation.

HPV: No.

ATTACHMENTS: RATA Review Sheets.
,.tttF$nctor
June 27,2024
Mr. Bryce Bird, Director
Division of Air Quality
Utah Department of Environmental euality
195 North 1950 West
Salt Lake City, Utah 84115
Certified Mail: 7019 1120 0000 0070 9238
RE: Relative Accuracy Test Audit (RATA) - Fuet Gas H2S Continuous Emission Monitor
HF sinclair woods cross Refining LLC - woods cross, Davis county
Director:
Enclosed please find the Relative Accuracy Test Audit Report for the H2S continuous emission monitorson our refinery Fuel Gas system. The test was conducted on April 30s, 2024. Therelative accuracy wascalculated to be I .83oh fot the HzS monitor. All other data required by R307-l 7o-7(5),and 40 cFR 60Appendix B are found in the report or this cover letter. The following apply to this report:l. Testing was conducted while the point source was operating atihe rate and/oi conditions
specified in the applicable approval order, operating permit, or federal regulation2- During testing, the point source combusted fuels, used raw materials, and maintained process
conditions representative of normal operations, and operated under such other relevani conditionsspecified by the Director.
I certify under penalties of law that, based upon reasonable inquiry of personnel involved the
statements and information contained in this report are truthful and accurate, and are a complete
record of all monitoring related testing events that occurred during the enclosed test audit. lf you have
any questions or need additional information, ptease call Matt Howes at (go1) 3g7-7412.
Sincerely, i)
.. <,-r t
Dustin Simmonds
Vice President and Refinery Manager
Enclosure
cc: E. Benson (r) File 2.4.t.2.2.1
UTAH DEPARTMEI..IT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL OUAUW
DI\-/iSION OF AIR QUALITf
HF Sinclair Woods Cross Refining LLC'1070 W. 500 S, West Bountifut, UT 84087
801 -299-6600 | HFsinclair.com
I,'TAH DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL OUATITY
JUI -. )i
OF AIR OUALIT,
RATA Report
HF Sinclair Woods Cross Refining, LLC
1070 West 500 South
West Bountiful, UT 84087
Source Tested: Fuel Gas
Test Date: April 30,2024
Prepared By
Alliance Technical Group, LLC
3683 W 2270 S, Suite E
West Valley City, UT 841
Proj ect No. AST- 2024 - | 65 l -002
t
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
t
T
T
t
I
I
I
t
t
I
T
I
T
T
I Permit No.
Regulatory Citations
Source Information
DAQE-AN101230041-13
40 CFR 60, Appendix B, Performance Specification 7 and Subpart Ja
t
I
Source Name
Fuel Gas
Contact Information
Target Parameter
HzS
I
I
t
I
I
T
I
T
I
T
I
T
Test Location
HF Sinclair Woods Cross Refining, LLC
1070 West 500 South
West Bountiful, UT 84087
Eric Benson
eric. benson@ hfs inclai r.co m
[phone]
Matthew Howes
matthew. [e-mail]
[phone]
Test Company
Alliance Technical Group, LLC
3683 W 2270 S, Suite E
West Valley City, UT 84120
Project Manager/Field Team Leader
Charles Horton
[e-mail]
(3s2) 663-7s68
QA/QC Manager
Kathleen Shonk
[e-mail]
(812) 4s2-478s
Report Coordinator
Delaine Spangler
delaine.spangler@al liancetg.com
Report Reviewer
Sarah Perry
sarah.perry @alliancetg.com
AST-2024-1651-002
2of44
Page i
I
HF Sinclair - West Bountiful, UT
I
I
T
T
T
I
T
T
I
T
I
T
I
T
T
T
t
T
Source Test Report
Alliance Technical Group, LLC (Alliance) has completed the source testing as described in this report. Results
apply only to the source(s) tested and operating condition(s) for the specific test date(s) and time(s) identified withinthis report. All results are intended to be considered in their entirety, and Alliance is not responsible for use of less
than the complete test report without written consent. This report shall not be reproduced in full or in part without
written approval from the customer.
To the best of my knowledge and abilities, all information, facts and test data are correct. Data presented in this
report has been checked for completeness and is accurate, error-free and legible. Onsite testing was conducted in
accordance with approved internal Standard Operating Procedures. Any deviations or problems are detailed in the
relevant sections in the test report.
This report is only considered valid once an authorized representative of Alliance has signed in the space provided
below; any other version is considered draft. This document was prepared in portable document format (pdf; and
contains pages as identified in the bottom footer of this document.
5131t2024
Charles Horton, QSTI
Alliance Technical Group, LLC
Date
AST-2024-I65l-002
3of44
Page ii
I
HF Sinclair - West Bountiful, UT
Source Test Reporl
I
T
T
I
t
TABLE OF CONTENTS
l.l Process/Control System Descriptions.. ................ l_l
1.4 Site Specific Test Plan & Notification................... ................... l_l
3.1 U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 15 - Hydrogen Su1fide....... .......................3_l
3.2 u.s. EPA Reference Test Method 205 - Gas Dilution System certification. .......................3-l
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-l: Summary of Performance Specification Test Results ...........2_l
APPENDICES
Appendix A Sample Calculations
Appendix B RA and Field Data
Appendix C Quality Assurance/Quality Control Data
Appendix D CEMS and CERMS Data
T
t
t
t
t
T
I
t
t
t
T
T
I
I
AST-2024-l65l-002
4of44
Page iiiHF Sinclair - West Bountiful, UT
I
t
I
t
I
t
T
I
I
T
T
I
t
T
t
T
t
I
I 5of44
F--la
,l
AIt
T Source Test Report
Introduclion
I
T
I
t
t
T
I
I
I
T
T
I
T
T
I
I
1.0 Introduction
Alliance Technical Group, LLC (Alliance) was retained by HF Sinclair Woods Cross Refining, LLC (HF Sinclair)
to conduct performance specification (PS) testing at the Woods Cross refinery in West Bountiful, Utah. portions of
the facility are subject to provisions of the 40 CFR 60, Appendix B, PS 7 and Subpart Ja and the Utah Department of
Environmental Quality, Division of Air Quality (UDAQ) Permit No. DAQE-ANl0l23004l-13. ps testing included
conducting a relative accuracy test audit (RATA) to determine the relative accuracy (RA) of the hydrogen sulfide
(HzS) gas chromatography (cC) continuous emissions monitoring systems (CEMS) serving the Fuel Gas. The RA
procedures were conducted in accordance with 40 CFR 60, Appendix B, PS 7 and 40 CFR 60, Appendix A, Method
15.
1.1 Process/ControlSystemDescriptions
Refinery fuel gas is a byproduct generated by the crude oil refining process. Fuel gas is then combusted in refinery
heaters and boilers as part of the crude refining process. The HzS content of fuel gas combusted in any fuel gas
combustion device is limited by 40 CFR 60.104(a). The concentration of HzS will be measured by aprocess gas
chromatograph which was installed to comply with NSPS Subpart Ja requirements. Refinery personnel will access
and report refinery CEMS results on the day of the RATA.
1.2 CEMS Descriptions
Pollutant
HzS
Siemens
Maxum II
3004945670000 l0
0-300 ppm
Parameter:
Make:
Model:
Serial No.:
Span:
1.3 Project Team
Personnel involved in this project are identified in the following table
Table l-l: Project Team
HF Sinclair Personnel Matthew Howes
Alliance Personnel Charles Horton
Mitchell Manwaring
1.4 Site Specific Test Plan & Notilication
Testing was conducted in accordance with the Site-Specific Test Plan (SSTP) submitted to UDAe by HF Sinclair.
1.5 Test Program Notes
Plant data is one hour behind the field data due to a difference in time zones.
AST-2024-l6sl-002
6of44
Page l-l
t
HF Sinclair - West Bountiful, UT
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I 7 of44
ll
lr
lr
lr
lrI
t
t
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
AI
Source Test Report
2.0 Summary of Results
Alliance conducted PS testing at the HF Sinclair Woods Cross refinery in West Bountiful, Utah on April 30, 2024.
Testing included conducting a RATA to determine the RA of the HzS GC CEMS serving the Fuel Gas.
Table 2-l provides a summary of the RA results in comparison to the applicable RA requirements. Any difference
between the summary results listed in the following table and the detailed results contained in appendices is due to
rounding for presentation.
rCalculatedusingtheapplicablesourcestandardforthepollutant. SeeAppendixBfortheapplicablestandardused
Fra
Jl' ;'i
Table 2-1: Summary of Performance Specification Test Results
Hydrogen Sulfide Data
Concentration, ppmvd
AST-2024- I 65 I -002
8 of44
Page 2-lHF Sinclair - West Bountiful, UT
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
t
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I 9of44
I
I
I
I
t
T
T
t
I
I
I
T
I
t
I
t
I
I
pul6rpe
L .i'.l lr.)A r;il t I Source Test Report
Testing Methodolosy
3.0 Testing Methodology
The emission testing program was conducted in accordance with the test methods listed in Table 3-1. Method
descriptions are provided below while quality assurance/quality control data is provided in Appendix C.
Table 3-1: Source Testing Methodology
3.1 U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 15 - Hydrogen Sulfide
The hydrogen sulfide testing was conducted in accordance with U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 15. The sampling
system consisted of a heated Teflon probe, heated Teflon sample line, gas conditioning system, leak-free pump, unheated
Teflon sample line, and a gas chromatograph (GC) equipped with a flame photometric detector (FpD). The gas
conditioning system consisted of three (3) Teflon impingers. The first two (2) impingers contained 100 mL of citrate
buffer (for SOz removal) and the last was empty. Each test run consisted of 3 injections performed over a period of at
least 60 minutes.
The GC/FPD was calibrated for H:S with a certified calibration gas diluted with a dilution system validated in
accordance with EPA Method 205 to produce three (3) or more concentration levels spanning the linear range of the
FPD. Calibration precision, sample line loss, and calibration drift test values were maintained in accordance with EpA
Method l5 requirements.
The relative accuracy of the HzS CEMS was determined based on procedures found in 40 CFR 60, performance
Specification 7.
3.2 u.s. EPA Reference Test Method 205 - Gas Dilution system certification
A calibration gas dilution system field check was conducted in accordance with U.S. EPA Reference Method 205.
Multiple dilution rates and total gas flow rates were utilized to force the dilution system to perform two dilutions on
each mass flow controller. The diluted calibration gases were sent directly to the analyzer, and the analyzer response
recorded in an electronic field data sheet. The analyzer response agreed within 2o/o of the actual diluted gas
concentration. A second Protocol I calibration gas, with a cylinder concentration within l0% of one of the gas
divider settings described above, was introduced directly to the analyzer, and the analyzer response recorded in an
electronic field data sheet. The cylinder concentration and the analyzer response agreed within 2%o. These steps
were repeated three (3) times. Copies of the Method 205 data can be found in the euality Assurance/euality
Control Appendix.
Hydrogen Sulfide Instrumental Analysis / Gas Chromatography
Gas Dilution System Certification
AST-2024- 165 l -002
l0 of 44
Page 3- I
I
HF Sinclair - West Bountiful, UT
t
T
T
T
t
t
I
I
t
T
I
I
I
t
t
T
t
I
I I I of44
T
I
I
FAI6lrce
SOLJNC' Ti:SIING Example Calculations
T
I
I
T
I
T
T
I
t
t
t
I
I
I
t
I
Corrected Concentration, ppmvd
Crrs : CrrrxRF
where,
Cogs 14.93 = average H2S concentration observed during test, ppmvw
RF --ftT-: system recovery correction factor, unitless
C^,,T=averageH2Sconcentrationduringtest,ppmvw
12 of 44
I
t
I
T
t
T
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I 13 of 44
Xo
-
;a
€
sfXo
-
nXo
o
,
XY
Q
i6
m
*
Xo
o
.
>s
9
6h
s
i\
o
o
r
-h
h
t^{
s
a
a=
9
\N:Nqlr€..
)N
€o\&F.n&td \o
!z
14

of

44
€t
€
dl
x
=lo6l
q
r
HI
?
.=
t
z
6=
!
Oq
)
q
,t

'aL
CBcq(hoaU)
rd
FcaoQJJPQ8>.:66fl
o:8r
Ir
r
O
-
\\
I

O
=1
(:
I
I
t Afjalpe
SOURCE TESTING H2S Data
Location:
Source:
Project No.:
HF Sinclair Woods Cross Refin Bountiful, UT
Fuel Sulfur (Gas)
T AST-2024- l60s
9
2.01
1.5420
I
I
I
t
T
T
I
I
I
t
T
I
I
t
I
I
*, - I * "o' a'tu'"u'"1.1*' wl
AS or R.[l
Confi dence Coefficient, CC
CC=
where,
to.srs
n
Sd
CC
'o= * salJnl
2.306 : degrees offreedom
= number of runs selected for calculating the RA: standard deviation ofdifference: confidence coefficient
= average difference of Reference Method and CEMS
= degrees offreedom
= number of runs selected for calculating the RA: standard deviation ofdifference: applicable standard
= relative accuracy
Relative Accuracy, RA
where,
mean difference
to szs
n
Sd
AS
RA
1.42
2.306
9
LU
162
0"02
Run
No.Date Time Reference Method
H2S
ppmvw
CEMS
H2S
ppmvw
Average
Difference
ppmvwStartEnd
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
4/30/24
4t30124
4130t24
4t30/24
4t30/24
4t30t24
4130t24
4130t24
4/30124
2;10
2:40
3: l0
3:40
4: l0
4:40
5: l0
5:40
6:10
2:39
3:09
3:39
4:09
4:39
5:09
5:39
6:09
6:39
16.2
17.5
r 8.3
18.0
17.5
r 9.0
21.3
25.4
23.7
r6.5
17.4
8.1
7.3
7.9
8.0
9.2
:0.6
9.1
-0.30
0. l0
0.20
0.70
-0.40
1.00
2.10
4.80
4.60
Average 19.7 18.2 1.42
Standard Deviation (Sd)2.0t
Applicable Source Standard (AS)162
Confi dence Coeffi cient (CC)1.542
Relative Accuracy (RA)1.83%
Acceptability Criteria - Applicable Source Standard < 100
Performance Specifi cation Method PS 7 (RM t5)
l5 of44
I
2
J
4
5
t
t
t
t
I
I
I
t
T
t
I
I
I
I
t
T
I
t
T
AlhlrcesirJUrcL lEsiriNc Run l Data
Location: HF Sinclair Woods Cross Refining,LLC - West Bountiful,
Source: Fuel Sulfur (Gas)
Project l,gs.;
Date: 4130/2024
l2:13
l2:19
l2:25
l2:31
l2:37
13.72
14.52
15.41
15.75
15.23
Injection Start Time
Parameter H,S
Uncorrected Run Average (C.6.)14.93
Corrected Run Average (Corr)t6.16
16 of 44
T
T Run 2 Data
Location: HF Sinclair Woods Cross Refining, LLC - West Bountiful,
Source: Fuel Sulfur (Gas)
Project Ye.;
Date: 4/3012024
I
2
3
4
5
t
t
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
T
l2:43
12:49
l2:55
l3:01
t3;07
15.87
r 5.90
16.00
16.88
16.32
Injection Start Time
Parameter H,S
Uncorrected Run Average (Co6r)16.19
Corrected Run Averase (Corr)17.53
17 of 44
4=Alhtrce
Run 3 Data
Location: HF Sinclair Woods Cross Refining, LLC - West Bountiful,
Source:
Project 5ls.;
Date: 413012024
I
2
J
4
5
l3: l3
l3: l9
l3:25
13:3 I
l3:37
16.65
t7.22
16.23
16.94
17.47
Injection Start Time
Parameter HzS
Uncorrected Run Average (Coo.)16.90
Corrected Run Average (Corr)18.30
T l8 of44
t
I
I
I
t
I
I
T
t
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
13:43
13:49
I 3:55
l4:01
l4:07
17.t9
17.tl
16.40
16.13
16.45
AIhrrce
!ra)(.1!toL I Ltir iN{i Run 4 Data
Location: HF Sinclair Woods Cross Refining, LLC - West Bountiful,
Source: Fuel Sulfur (Gas)
Project 16.3
Date:413012024
I
2
3
4
5
Injection Start Time
Parameter H,S
Uncorrected Run Average (C.0.)t6.66
Corrected Run Averase (Corr)18.04
19 of 44
I
)
J
4
5
I
I
T
t
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
T
t
I
I
r:AliarrcesrlUB(;E I IS ftN(]Run 5 Data
Location: HF Sinclair Woods Cross Refining,LLC - West Bountiful,
Source:
Project Y6.;
Date: 4/3012024
l4:13
l4:19
l4:25
l4.,31
l4:37
15.77
15.88
t6.28
16.00
16.7 4
Injection Start Time
Parameter H,S
Uncorrected Run Average (Co6")t6.14
Corrected Run Average (Corr)17.47
20 of 44
I
2
J
4
5
I
t
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
t
t
I
AIialrce
SC)t]I]OL I ES fING Run 6 Data
Location: HF SinclairnVoods Cross Refining, LLC - West Bountiful,
Source: Fuel Sulfur (Gas)
Project lYs.;
Date: 413012024
14:43
l4:49
l4:55
l5:01
I 5:07
r 6.88
17.t6
17.89
17.6t
18.24
Injection Start Time
Parameter H,S
Uncorrected Run Average (Coo.)17.55
orrected Run Average (Corr)19.01
t
I Run 7 Data
I
2
3
4
5
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Location: HF Sinclair Woods Cross Refining, LLC - West Bountiful,
Source: Fuel Sulfur (Gas)
Project lle.;
Date: 4/3012024
l5: l3
l5:19
l5:25
l5:3 I
l5:.37
19.09
18.46
19.10
19.55
21.97
Injection Start Time
Parameter H
Uncorrected Run Average (Co6,)19.64
Corrected Run Average (Corr)21.26
I
T
#Fms Run 8 Data
Location: HF Sinclair woods Cross Refining, LLC - west Bountiful,
I Source:
f Project 1,,16.;r Dat",
I
2
J
4
5
t
I
I
T
I
I
t
I
T
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
l5:43
l5:49
I 5:55
l6:01
l6:07
23.70
23.79
23.78
23.86
22.18
Injection Start Time
Parameter HzS
Uncorrected Run Average (Coo.)23.46
Corrected Run Average (Corr)25.40
23 of 44
I
2
J
4
5
I
I
I
T
t
T
T
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
T
t
AIialrce
s1.)t.tHcL tL$ N(i Run 9 Data
Location: HF Sinclair Woods Cross Refining, LLC - West Bountiful,
Source: Fuel Sulfur (Gas)
Project Ps.;
Date: 413012024
l6:13
l6: l9
l6.,25
l6:31
l6.,37
21.58
21.09
21.87
22.81
22.24
Injection Start Time
Parameter H,S
Uncorrected Run Average (Coo.)21.92
Corrected Run Average (Corr)23.73
24 of 44
T
T
T
T
T
I
T
I
t
T
T
I
t
I
T
t
I
t
I 25 of 44
E:AlianoE)SoUHCE TESTING QA
Location: HF Sinclair Woods Cross Refining, LLC - West Bountiful, UT
- .to*"t'roject No.: AST-2024-l 605
Device CC-FPD
Make SRI
Model N 12 r48
i/N N I 2148
Compourul Bottle ID
H2S cc4'75645 48'1.9 |,/3/2026 34 08
26 of 44
T
T
T
t
I
I
I
I
T
t
I
T
I
t
I
I
t
t
t
rAliarrcesioLJno[ ] t:si ] NC
Location HF Sinclair Woods Cross Refining,LLC - West Bountiful, UT
Source Fuel Sulfur (Gas)
Project No. AST-2024- 1605
Date: 4130/2024
Time: l0:37
***Calibration injections are reanalyzed using the calibration curve***No injeciton can vary from the mean of all 3 injections by >5%
***Chromatograms from calilbration injections are contained in the appendix
Cal QA
H2S High Level calibration Standard Conc' (ppm)
100.00
Mid Level calibration Standard conc' (ppm)
50.00
Iniection RT AC 96 Variation RT AC 94 Varialion
I .523 2339.8 2.5Yo s23 684. I l.3o/"
2 .523 226t.8 0.9Yo s26 672.0 0.5Yo
3 .520 2244.5 1.6Y"s26 670.1 0.8o/o
Mean .522 2282.02 525 67s.39
27 of44
T
T
T
I
T
I
I
I
T
t
T
I
I
I
t
T
T
I
I
AIiarrce!;()llIro[ ] [si I Na)
Location: HF Sinclair Wmds Cross Refinms, LLC - West Bountiful. UT
Recovery-Drift QA
Source: Fuel Sulfu (Gas)
Project No.: AST-2024-1605
GC Drift (Usins HxS Gas)
Prc-Test Pott-T6t
Dal 4/30/2024 Dst(4/30/2024
Tim ll 40AM Timr 5:l0PM
In iection #Measued Concentration (oom 15 l'ariation Measured Concentration (Dpm % r'ariatioh % Dift
5t 19 o ao/^5t.23 o svo 0.3%
2 50 84 0 lvo 5t 02 o 90/d o 30/.
3 50.78 o.4y.5225 1 50/.2.8v.
Mean 5 1.00 5l-50
Pre Test System Recovery (Using HrS Gas)
Det(4/30/2024
Tim e I l:40 AM
ln imrinn #Measued Conc€ntration (DDml '% L'oriation Gas Concentration 7o Recover!
48',73 o 50/.
50 00
9'7 50k
49 03 0 |v.98.t%
3 49.13 O.39/o 9A 3yo
Mean 48.96 97 -90/"
Post Test System Recovery (Using HrS Gas)
Da1€4/30t2024
Tim 5:20 PM
tion #Measued Concentratron (DDm % r'afidlion Gas Concentratlon 7o Recovery
I 46.t4 o to/.
50 00
92 3%
a 46.14 0.lo/o 92 :ro/^
3 46.2 O.2l/o 92 5%
Mesn 46.t8 92.40/o
28 of 44
Analyzer Make :
Anallzer Model:
Analyzer SN:
Environics ID:
Component/Balance Cas:
Cylinder Gas ID (Dilution):
Cylinder Gas Concentration (Dilution), 70;
Cylinder Cas tD (Mid-Level):
Cylinder Gas Concentration (Mid-Level), 7o:
24.0
Target Mass Flow
Tsrget
Dilution
Target Flow
Rate
Tsrget
Conc€ntration
Actual
Concentration
to/"r
Analyzer
Concentrstion
Analyzer
Concentration
Analyzer
Concentration
AVerage
Analyzer
Concentration
to/"\
Difference(v"l Average Error
( x2 'a\0t-/5t-E00 50 t92 89 8.9 -0.25 -t.30/o
orl5t-4E0 50 l5 0.00 0.00/o
I 0t-/t t-'2|J tJ 40 4E 4lt 48 4 4 0.01 0.3%
IOUIL 10.0 4.t)24 4 74 ?44 0.03 t.2yo
Average
Aa^lyzer
Concentrstion
lo/.\
lnjection I
Error
( *.2 %l
Itrjection 2
Error
(*2o/o\
Injection 3
Error
( +2o/.\
18.95 4.2v"0.e/o 0.20/o
Jt to/"o.ov"o.oyo
4 -o.5yo 4.1"/6 o.604
o.0v"I.2yo
Mid-Level
LAIOrAUOn
Gas
Conc€ntratiotrlo/^\
rnJecuon r
Analyzer
Concentration
rnJecuon I
Anrlyzer
Concentrstion
rnJeclron J
Analyzer
Concentration
to/"\
Average
Analyzer
Concentration Difference
Average
Error
( + 2./ol
10.99 IU,E t0 E to 7 l0 7lt -o 2l -t.9"/o
t
T
I
I
I
I
t
I
Al6rrce
S O I' R (l F T F S T IN G
Mass Flow Controller Catibration
Note: The mass flow controller's calibration values are used by the dilution system's operating software to improve accuracy. These calibrations are not
necessarily indicative of the systems overall performance. Performance is verified by conducting a Method 205 prior to each field use.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
t
Calibration Performed By Ryan Lyons
Dilution System Make:
Dilution System Model:
Dilution System S/N:
Calibration Equipment Make:
Calibration Equipment Model:
Calibration Equipment S/N:
Flow Cell S/N:
Flow Cell S/N:
Calibration Gas:
Barometric Pressure, mmHg:
Ambient Temperature,'F:
Environics
4040
8029
Alicat Scientific
M-10SLPD/sMM-D/sM, M-1SLPM-D/sr
197206; L972Oa
797208
797206
Nitrogen
25.5
72
Mass Flow Controller lD
Size, ccm:
Make:
Model:
S/N:
#1
10,000
Environics
4040
455242003
#2
10,000
Environics
4040
455242004
#3
1,000
Environics
4040
455242002
Set Flow True Flow Difference
cc/min cc/min
Set Flow True Flow Difference
cc/min cc/min
Set Flow True Flow Difference
cclmin cc/min
5%
LO%
20%
3Oo/o
40%
5Oo/o
60%
70%
80%
90%
too%
500 502 0.4yo
1,000 1,015 L.5%
2,000 2,040 2.0%
3,000 3,060 2.0%
4,000 4,083 2.r%
5,000 5,093 t.9%
6,000 5,110 L.8%
7,000 7,L24 t.8%
8,000 8,150 t.9%
9,000 9,172 7.9%
10,000 L0,2r4 21%
500 49s 1.0%
1,000 r,0L4 t.4%
2,000 2,037 L.9%
3,000 3,057 t.9%
4,000 4,07t t.8%
5,000 5,082 t.6vo
5,000 6,100 7.7%
7,000 7,L30 7.9%
8,000 8,150 L.9%
9,000 9,L76 2.0%
10,000 L0,202 2.o%
50 47 5.8%
100 98 2.4%
200 199 0.3%
300 301 0.4%
400 403 0.60/o
500 504 0.7%
600 605 0.9%
700 709 L.2%
800 8t4 1.7%
900 919 2.2%
1,000 L,028 2.8%
Dare 4126/21
30 of44
I
I
.r trr u)7 ,.
-\ \\--l /-ffi*a .--..:'4-.'/1 \..s
k--#l***Accreditation ,162754
Red Ball Technical Gas Service
555 Craig Kennedy Way
Shreveport, LA 71107
800-5s1 -81 50
PGVP Vendor lD # G12020
I
I
T
t
I
I
t
I
T
I
t
I
I
I
EPA PROTOCOL GAS CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
Cylinder Number:
Product lD Number:
Cylinder Pressure:
coA #
Customer PO. NO.:
Customer:
JCt19t36
127907
1900 PS|G
)c719736.202008',t0-0
Certification Date:
Expiration Date:
MFG Facility:
Lot Number:
Tracking Number:
Previous Certifi cation Dates:
xEt1Et2020
)4116t2024
snreveoon - I A
;L;/19/36.20200610
098506945
SMART.CERT
This calibration standard has been certifled per the May 2012 EPA Traceability Protocol, Document EPA-600/R-12/531,
G1
Analytical Measurement Data Available Online.
Reference Standard(s)
Certif ied Concentration (s)
Concentration Uncertainty
*ol8 %
*0.12 o/o
Analytical Princlple
NDIR
MPA
Agsayed On
Carbon Dioxide
Oxygen
23.7 08t1712020
08t181202024.0 %
Balance
E8004 1 474.20 1 80504
E80089906.20 1 90405
E80097897.20171018
Analytical lnstrumentation
co2
o2
NDIR Thermo
Thermo
410i
41 0i
1162980025 0A103t2020
1 162980025 0712312020
I
I
t
This is to certify the gases referenced have been calibrated/tested, and verified to meet the defined speciflcations. This
calibration/lest was performed using Gases or Scales that are traceable through National lnsiitute of Standards and
Technology (NIST) to the lnternational Syslem of Units (Sl). The basis of compliance stated is a comparison of the
measurement parameters to lhe specified or required calibration/testing process. The expanded uncertainties use a coverage
factor of k=2 to approximate the 95% confidence level of the measurement, unless otherwise noted. This calibration certificate
applies only to the item described and shall not be reproduced other than in full, without written approval from Red Ball
Technical Gas Seruices. lf not included, the uncertainty of calibrations are available upon request and were taken into account
when determining pass or fail.
/\ il
,Y'"-* /J"dl2
Jasmine Godfrey
Analytical Chemist
Assay Laboratory: Red Ball TGS
Version 02-J. Revised on 2018-09-17
3l of 44
I
I
.*'t.'. i,'';.
-i.,--/_//_il***: /,...-\, .7/^\:z,r', ,tr.s
/*
-,*r.*!*,*Accreditation ,62754
Red Ball Technical Gas Service
555 Craig Kennedy Way
Shreveport, LA 71107
800-s51 -81 50
PGVP Vendor lD # G12023
I
t
T
t
T
I
I
t
t
t
T
I
T
t
EPA PROTOCOL GAS CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
Cylinder Number:
Product lD Number:
Cylinder Pressure:
coA #
Customer PO. NO.:
Customer:
=8OO42240125371
1900 PS|G
-aoo4?74r) 70?3127r)-O
Certification Date:
Expiration Date:
MFG Facility:
Lot Number:
Tracking Number:
Previous Certification Dates:
't2129t2023
1?t77t7031
E8OO42240.20231220
065 1 26635
This calibration standard has been certified per the May 2012 EPA Traceability Protocol, Documenl '1.
G1.
SMART-CERT
Certified Concentration(s)
Concentration Uncertainty
1009 %
10.03 %
Analytical Principle Assayed On
12n9t2023
12127t2023
Carbon Dioxide
Oxygen
10.97 %
10.99 %
NDIR
MPA
Balance
Analytical Measurement Data Available Online.
cc71640E
cc749145
E8000431 5
E8001,1830
cc7 16408.20230'1 09
ccl 191 15 20230104
E80004315.20201022
EB00 1 4E30.20 1 50605
12.003 0/o
20.03 %
24.75 %
9.53 %
Analytical lnstrumentation
o2
co2 NDIR
Thermo
Themo
41 oi
410i
't 162980025 12t1E/2023
1 1629E0025 12t14t2023
t
I
T
This is to certify the gases referenced have been calibrated/tested, and verifled to meet the defined specifications. This
calibration/test was performed using Gases or Scales that are traceable through National lnstitute of Standards and
Technology (NIST) to the lnternational System of Units (Sl). The basis of compliance slated is a comparison of the
measurement parameters to the specified or required calibration/testing process. The expanded uncertainties use a coverage
factor of k=2 to approximate the 95% confidence level of the measurement, unless otherwise noted. This calibration certificate
applies only to the item described and shall not be reproduced other than in full, without wriiten approval from Red Ball
Technical Gas Services. lf not inciuded, the uncertainty of calibrations are available upon requesl and were taken into account
when determining pass or fail.
ll*,p"^ lhn@
Hayden Hartley
Analyst
Assay Laboratory: Red Ball TGS
Version O2-J. Revised on 2018-09-17
32 of 44
I
I
I
I
I
I
Airgas
an Air Liquide company
Customer:
Part Number:
Cylinder Number:
Laboratory:
PGVP Number:
Gas Code:
Airgas Specialty Gases
Airgas USA LLC
98To BAYAREA BLVD
Pasadena, fi 775o7
Airgas.com
EPA PROTOCOL STANDARD
Reference Number: 163-402877350-1
Cylinder Volume: 144.0 CF
Cylinder Pressure: 2015 PSIG
Valve Outlet: 330
Certification Date: Nov 03, 2023
CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
Grade of Product:
ALLIANCE SOURCE
TESTING LLC,
E02Nt99E15A2965
cc475645
124 - Pasadena (SG06) - TX
432023
H2S,BALN
I
I
I
I
t
I
t
T
I
T
t
T
I
Certification performed in accordance wilh "EPA Traceability Protocol for Assay and Certification of Gaseous Calibration Standards (May 20121', documEntEFn-600/R-1 2/531 , using the assay procedures listed. Analytical Methodology does not require correclion for analytical interference. This cylinder has a total analyticaluncertainty as stated below with a confidence level of 95o/o. There are no significant impurities which affecl the uie of this calibration mixture. All concenlrations are on amole/mole basis unless otheMise noted. The results relate only to the items tested. The report shall not be reproduced except in full without approval of the laboratory. DoNot Use This Cylinder below 100 DSiq. i.e. 0.7 meoaoascals.
Sionature on file
psig. a.e
ANALYTICAL RESULTS
Component Requested
Concentration
Actual Protocol Total Relative Assay
DatesConcentration Method Uncertainty
HYDROGEN SULFIDE 500.0 PPM 487.9 PPM Gl +t- 1.4o/o N|ST Traceabte .tO2l2OZelUOg2O23
NITROGEN Balance
CALIBRATION STANDARDSType Lot lD Cylinder No Concentration Uncertainty Expiration DateNTRM 12010315 ND46373 304.5 PPM HYDROGEN suLFtDE/NtrRocEN *t-'t.ov. uar zzloza
ANALYTICAL EQUIPMENTlnstrumenUMake/Model Analytical Principle Last Multipoint Calibration
AAI OMA-406H Oct 19,2023NDUV
Triad Data Available Upon Request
Approved for Release
33 of 44
Page 1 of 1
34 of 44
I
I
t
T
I
t
T
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
t
T
T
I
I
Date/Time
FGASTO H2SPPM
(PPM)
Value
FGASTO H2SPPM
Missing
04t30t2024 11:10 15.6 FALSE
04t30t2024 11:11 5.7 FALSE
O4l30l2O24 11:12 bz FALSE
04/3012024 11:13 6.2 FALSE
04/3012024 11:14 b.z FALSE
O413012024 11:15 6 FALSE
04130/2024 11:16 6.3 FALSE
04t30t2024 11:17 6.3 FALSE
0413012024 11:18 6.3 FALSE
0413012024 11:19 6.2 FALSE
04/3012024 11:20 15.7 FALSE
04130t2024 11:21 5.7 FALSE
04t30t2024 11:22 5.7 FALSE
O4/3O12O24 11:23 5.8 FALSE
04t30t2024 11:24 6.2 FALSE
0413012024 11:25 6.2 FALSE
04130t2024 11:26 16.2 FALSE
04/3012024 11:27 16.3 FALSE
04130t2024 11:28 16.6 FALSE
04t30t2024 11:29 16.6 FALSE
04/3O12024 11:30 16.6 FALSE
04/30t2024 1131 16.9 FALSE
O4t30t2024 11:32 18.1 FALSE
0413012024 1133 18.1 FALSE
0413012024 11:34 18.1 FALSE
0413012024'11:35 17.9 FALSE
0413012024 11:36 17.1 FALSE
04/30/2024 11:37 17.1 FALSE
04/3012024 11:38 17.1 FALSE
O4l3Ol2O24 11:.39 17.1 FALSE
Run
t
16.5
35 of 44
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Date/Time
FGASTO H2SPPM
(PPM)
Value
FGASTO H2SPPM
Missing
0413012024 11:40 17.i FALSE
04/30/2024 11:41 17.4 FALSE
0413012024 11:42 173 FALSE
04t30t2024 11:43 17.2 FALSE
04t30t2024 11:44 16.t FALSE
04t30t2024 11:45 16.8 FALSE
04/30t2024 11:46 16.8 FALSE
04t30t2024 11:47 17.'l FALSE
04t30t2024 11:48 18.6 FALSE
04130t2024 11:49 18.6 FALSE
04t30t2024 11:50 18.6 FALSE
0413012O24 11:51 18.3 FALSE
0413012024 11:52 16.8 FALSE
O4/3012024 11:53 16.8 FALSE
0413012024 11:54 16.8 FALSE
04130/2024 11:55 6.7 FALSE
04130t2024 11:56 6.1 FALSE
0413012024 11 57 16.1 FALSE
04130/2024 11:58 6.1 FALSE
O4/30t2024 11:59 16.5 FALSE
0413012024 12:OO 8.2 FALSE
04t30t2024 12:01 8.2 FALSE
04130t2024 12:02 18.2 FALSE
O4/3012O24 12:03 18.'l FALSE
04t30t2024 12:04 17.7 FALSE
0413012024 12:05 17.7 FALSE
0413012024 12OG 17.7 FALSE
04t30t2024 12:07 17.7 FALSE
0413012024 12:08 17. )FALSE
0413012024 12:09 't7.1 FALSE
Run
2
77.4
36 of 44
T
T
t
t
T
T
t
T
I
I
T
I
T
T
t
T
I
T
I
Dateffime
FGASTO H2SPPM
(PPM)
Value
FGASTO H2SPPM
Missing
0413U2424 12:10 17.7 FALSE
0413012024 12:11 17.6 FALSE
0413012024 12:12 16.7 FALSE
0413012024 12:13 16.7 FALSE
0413012024 12:14 16.7 FALSE
04t3012024 12:15 16.8 FALSE
04t30t2024 12:16 17.S FALSE
04130t2024 12:17 17.5 FALSE
0413012024 12:18 17.S FALSE
04t3012024 12:19 17.5 FALSE
0413012024 12:20 17.t FALSE
0413012024 12:21 17.8 FALSE
0413012024 12:22 17.8 FALSE
04130t2024 12:23 17.5 FALSE
04t30t2024 12:24 18.7 FALSE
04t30t2024 12:25 18.7 FALSE
04t30t2024 12:26 18.7 FALSE
0413012024 12:27 18.7 FALSE
04t30t2024 12:28 17.9 FALSE
0413012024 12:29 17.9 FALSE
04/30t2024 2:30 17.9 FALSE
04t30t2024 2:31 1 FALSE
04t30t2024 2:32 18.6 FALSE
04t30/2024 2:33 18.6 FALSE
0413012024 2:34 18.6 FALSE
04t30t2024 2:35 '18.6 FALSE
04t30/2024 2:36 19.4 FALSE
04t30t2024 2:37 19.4 FALSE
04t30t2024 2:38 19.4 FALSE
04t30t2024 12:39 19.3 FALSE
Run
3
18.1
37 of 44
Run
4
L7.3
T
t
T
I
t
T
T
I
t
I
t
t
t
T
T
I
T
I
I
Date/Time
FGASTO H2SPPM
(PPM)
Value
FGASTO H2SPPM
Missing
O4/30/2024 12:40 18.7 FALSE
04130t2024 12:41 18.7 FALSE
04/3012024 12:42 18.7 FALSE
O4130/2024 12:43 18.6 FALSE
0413012024 12:44 7.7 FALSE
04t30t2024 12:45 7.7 FALSE
0413O12O24 12:46 77 FALSE
04t3012024 12:47 7.)FALSE
04t30t2024 12:48 77 FALSE
04130t2024 12:49 7.7 FALSE
04130t2024 12:50 7.7 FALSE
04130/2024 12:51 7.7 FALSE
04t30t2024 1252 17.4 FALSE
O4/30t2024 12:53 17.4 FALSE
04t3012024 12:54 17.4 FALSE
0413012024 12:55 17.4 FALSE
04130/2024 12:56 17.1 FALSE
0413012024 12:57 17.1 FALSE
0413012024 12:58 17.1 FALSE
04130/2024 12:59 1 FALSE
04t30t2024 13:00 15.8 FALSE
04t3012024 13:01 15.8 FALSE
04t3012024 13:02 15.8 FALSE
04t30t2024 13:03 15.9 FALSE
04130/2024 13:04 16.2 FALSE
0413012024 13:OS 16.2 FALSE
O4/30t2024 13:06 16.2 FALSE
0413012024 13:07 16.4 FALSE
0413012024 13:08 17.9 FALSE
O4/3012024 13:O9 17.5 FALSE
Run
5
L7.9
T
t
!
t
t
T
T
T
t
I
t
I
I
I
T
T
I
t
I
Date/Time
FGASTO H25PPM
(PPM)
Value
FGASTO H2SPPM
Missing
04t30t2024 13:10 17.9 FALSE
0413012024 '13:11 17.9 FALSE
0413012024 13:12 17.8 FALSE
04130/2024 13:13 17.t FALSE
04t30t2024 13:14 17.t FALSE
04t30t2024 13:15 17.1 FALSE
04130t2024 13:16 17.t FALSE
04t30t2024 13:17 17.8 FALSE
O413012024 13:18 17.e FALSE
04t30t2024 13:19 17.7 FALSE
0413012024 13:20 18.7 FALSE
04t30t2024 13:2'l 18.7 FALSE
0413012O24 13:22 18.7 FALSE
0413012024 13:23 18.1 FALSE
0413012024 13:24 '18.4 FALSE
04t30t2024 1325 18.4 FALSE
04t30t2024 13:26 18.4 FALSE
04130/2024 13:27 18.3 FALSE
04t30t2024 1328 17.4 FALSE
O4/3012024 13:29 17.4 FALSE
04t30t2024 13:30 17.4 FALSE
0413012024 13:31 17.4 FALSE
0413012024 13:32 17.6 FALSE
04t30t2024 13:33 17.6 FALSE
0413012024 13:34 17.(FALSE
04t30t2024 13:35 17.(FALSE
04/3012024 13:36 17.t FALSE
04/3012024 13:37 17.e FALSE
04130t2024 13:38 17.e FALSE
04/30t2024 13:39 17.5 FALSE
Run
5
I
I
t
T
I
T
I
I
T
I
t
I
t
I
I
t
T
t
T
Date/Time
FGASTO H2SPPM
(PPM)
Value
FGASTO H2SPPM
Missing
04t30t2024 13:40 16.3 FALSE
0413012024 13:41 16.:FALSE
O4/30/2024 13:42 16.:FALSE
0413012024 13:43 16.'FALSE
04t30t2024 13:44 16.2 FALSE
04t3012024 13:45 16.i FALSE
04t30t2024 13:46 16.2 FALSE
04t30t2024 13:47 16.4 FALSE
O4/30/2024 13:48 18.2 FALSE
0413012024 13:49 18.2 FALSE
0413012024 13:5O 18.2 FALSE
04t3012024 13:51 18.2 FALSE
04130t2024 13:52 18 FALSE
04t30t2024 13:53 18 FALSE
04130t2024 13:54 18 FALSE
04t30t2024 13:55 18 FALSE
04130t2024 13:56 18.4 FALSE
04130/2024 13:57 18.4 FALSE
0413012024 13:58 18.4 FALSE
04/3012024 13:59 18.4 FALSE
04t30t2024 14:00 19 FALSE
04t30t2024 14:01 19 FALSE
04/3012024 14:O2 19 FALSE
04t30t2024 14:03 19.1 FALSE
O413012024 14:04 19.3 FALSE
0413012024 14:05 19.3 FALSE
O4/3O12O24 14:OG 19.3 FALSE
O4130/2024 14:O7 19.:FALSE
0413012024 14OB 18.S FALSE
04t30t2024 14:O9 18.S FALSE
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
t
I
T
I
I
T
t
I
T
Date/Time
FGASTO H25PPM
(PPM)
Value
FGASTO H2SPPM
Missing
O413012024 14:10 '18.€FALSE
0413012024 14:11 18.€FALSE
04130t2024 14:12 19.5 FALSE
0413012024 1413 19. r FALSE
O413012024 14:14 19. €FALSE
0413012024 14:15 19. f FATSE
Q4130t2024 14:16 18.t FALSE
04/3012024 1417 18.t FALSE
0413012024 14:18 18.t FALSE
04130t2024 14:19 18.I FALSE
O413012024 14:20 18.1 FALSE
0413012024 14:21 18. 1 FALSE
04t3012024 14:22 18. 1 FALSE
04t3012024 14:23 18.2 FALSE
0413012024 14:24 19.8 FALSE
0413012024 14:25 19.8 FALSE
04t3012024 1426 19.8 FALSE
0413012024 14:27 19.8 FALSE
04130t2024 14:28 18.6 FALSE
04130t2024 14:29 18.6 FALSE
O4t3012024 14:30 18.6 FALSE
04t3012024 14:31 18.7 FALSE
04t3012024 14:32 20.1 FALSE
0413012024 14:33 20.1 FALSE
o4t30t2024 14 34 20.1 FALSE
04t30/2024 14:35 20.1 FALSE
04130/2024 14:36 19.5 FALSE
04/30t2024 14:37 19.I FALSE
O413012024 1438 19.8 FALSE
04t30t2024 14:39 19.€FALSE
Run
7
L9.2
4l of 44
7
I
I
T
T
T
I
I
t
I
T
t
t
I
I
T
t
t
I
I
Date/Time
FGASTO H2SPPM
(PPM)
Value
FGASTO H2SPPM
Missing
04t30t2024 14:40 20.7 FALSE
04130t2024 14:41 20.7 FALSE
04t30t2024 14:42 20.7 FALSE
04130t2024 14:43 20.7 FALSE
0413012024 14:44 20.7 FALSE
04130/2024 14:45 20.7 FALSE
04t30t2024 14:46 20.7 FALSE
04t30t2024 14:47 20.7 FALSE
0413O12024 14:48 20.s FALSE
04t3012024 14:49 20.s FALSE
O4/30/2024 14:50 20.9 FALSE
04t30t2024 14:51 20.9 FALSE
04130t2024 14:52 21.2 FALSE
04130/2024 14:53 21.2 FALSE
04130t2024 14:54 21.2 FALSE
04/30/2024 14:55 21 FALSE
0413012024 14:56 20.1 FALSE
0413012024 14:57 20.1 FALSE
0413012024 14:58 20.1 FALSE
04t30t2024 14:59 20.1 FALSE
04/3012024 15:00 20.1 FALSE
04t30t2024 15:O1 20.a FALSE
0413012024 15:02 20.8 FALSE
Q4t30t2024 15:03 20.5 FALSE
0413012024 15:04 19.9 FALSE
04/3012024 15:05 19.9 FALSE
04130/2024 15:06 19.S FALSE
0413012024 15:07 19.9 FALSE
04/30t2024 15:08 19.t FALSE
04130t2024 1509 19.E FALSE
Run
8
I
I
t
I
T
I
I
t
I
T
I
I
I
T
t
t
I
t
I
Dateffime
FGASTO H2SPPM
(PPM)
Value
FGASTO H2SPPM
Missing
O413012024 15:10 19.8 FALSE
0413012024 15:11 19.8 FALSE
0413012024 15:'12 '18.8 FALSE
04t30t2024 15:13 18.8 FALSE
O4l30/2024 15:14 18.8 FALSE
04t30t2024 15:15 '18.8 FALSE
04/3012024 15:16 19.6 FALSE
04t30t2024 15:17 19.6 FALSE
04t30t2024 15:18 19.6 FALSE
04t30t2024 15:19 19.6 FALSE
04t30t2024 5:20 18.t FALSE
o4t30t2024 5:21 18.t FALSE
04t30t2024 5:22 18.t FALSE
04t30t2024 5:23 18.8 FALSE
04t30t2024 5:24 19.4 FALSE
04t30t2024 5:25 19.4 FALSE
04t30t2024 5:26 19.4 FALSE
04t30t2024 5:27 19.4 FALSE
04t30t2024 5:28 17.6 FALSE
04130t2024 15:29 17.6 FALSE
04/30t2024 15:30 17.6 FALSE
O4/3012024 15:31 17.1 FALSE
04130t2024 15:32 19.(FALSE
04t30t2024 15:33 19.(FALSE
0413012024 15:34 19€FALSE
O413012024 15:35 19.e FALSE
0413012024 15:36 9.2 FALSE
04t30t2024 15:37 9.2 FALSE
O4/3012024 15:38 9.2 FALSE
0413012024 15:39 9.2 FALSE
Srand Summaries
{vg: 18.2
Sum: 4920.7
Min: 15.6
Max: 21.2
Count: 270
Run
9
19.1
43 of 44
I
I
I
t
I
t
t
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I 44 of 44
Division of Air Quality
Performance Specification Test - CEMS Certification
SO2 Analyzer:Serial No.:3E+14
Acquisition System:Serial No.:
Acquisition System:Serial No.:
Emission Limitations:162
Test Date
Enter
Use H2S Enter
Use TRS SO2
Enter
Use TRS SO2
4/30/2024 RM CEM Diff RM CEM Diff RM CEM Diff
Run#Start Time End Time
1 12:10 12:39 Use 16.20 16.50 -0.3
2 12:40 13:09 Use 17.50 17.40 0.1
3 13:10 13:39 Use 18.30 18.10 0.2
4 13:40 14:09 Use 18.00 17.30 0.7
5 14:10 14:39 Use 17.50 17.90 -0.4
6 14:40 15:09 Use 19.00 18.00 1.0
7 15:10 15:39 Use 21.30 19.20 2.1
8 15:40 16:09 Use 25.40 20.60 4.8
9 16:10 16:39 Use 23.70 19.10 4.6
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Average = 9 19.66 18.23 1.4
Confidence Coefficient =1.5
RA - Relative Accuracy =15.1%
n = 9
t0.975 =2.306
E.L.
Relative Accuracy =>
% of
E.L.12.1%1.8%
a For steam generators;b Average of three samples;c Make sure that RM and M data are on a consistent basis either wet or dry.
40 CFR 60 Performance Specification 2 For SO2 and NOx Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems
4. Performance and Equipment Specifications
4.3 Relative accuracy. The RA of the CEMS shall be no grater than 20 percent of the mean value of the RM test data in terms of the
units of the emission standard or 10 percent of the applicable standard, whichever is greater
For SO2 emission standards between 0.30 and 0.20 lb./MMBtu use 15 Percent of the applicable standard;
For SO2 emission standards below 0.20 lb./MMBtu use 20 Percent of the emission standard;
Title 40: Protection of Environment
PART 60—STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE FOR NEW STATIONARY SOURCES
Subpart J—Standards of Performance for Petroleum Refineries
§ 60.105 Monitoring of emissions and operations.
(iii) The performance evaluations for this SO2monitor under §60.13(c) shall use Performance Specification 2. Methods 6 or 6C and 3 or 3A shall be used for conducting the
relative accuracy evaluations. Method 6 samples shall be taken at a flow rate of approximately 2 liters/min for at least 30 minutes. The relative accuracy limit shall be 20 percent
or 4 ppm, whichever is greater, and the calibration drift limit shall be 5 percent of the established span value.
Siemens - Model MaxumII
ppm dv
% O2 Correction
Select Concentration (ppm) Used
Clear Selection
ppm dv
C ppmdv