DAQ-2025-000475

1

DAQC-038-25
Site ID 11841 (B4)

MEMORANDUM

TO: STACK TEST FILE – PEPPERIDGE FARM INCORPORATED – Commercial
Bakery – Cache County

THROUGH: Rik Ombach, Minor Source Oil and Gas Compliance Section Manager

FROM: Kyle Greenberg, Environmental Scientist

DATE: January 15, 2025

SUBJECT: Source: Process Line No. 11
Location: 901 North 200 West, Richmond, Cache County, UT
Contact: Tony Hernandez: 435-750-8405
Tester: Alliance Source Testing
Site ID #: 11841
Permit/AO #: DAQE-AN118410010-24, dated July 26, 2024
Subject: Review of Pretest Protocol received January 14, 2025

On January 14, 2025, DAQ received a protocol for the testing of Process Line No. 11 at Pepperidge Farm
Inc. Commercial Bakery in Cache County, UT. Testing will be performed February 18, 2025, to
determine compliance with the emission limits found in Condition II.B.2 of DAQE-AN118410010-24.

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 O2 and CO2 concentrations: OK
4. RM 25A used to determine VOC emissions: OK
5. RM 205 used to verify gas dilution systems for field instrument calibrations: OK
6. RM 320 used to determine moisture content; methane and ethane emissions: OK

DEVIATIONS: None.

CONCLUSION: The protocol appears to be acceptable.

RECOMMENDATION: The test methods proposed in the pretest protocol are capable to
determine total VOC emissions in lb/hr.

ATTACHMENTS: Alliance Source Testing Pretest Protocol
4 ' - ) - "

Site Specific Test Plan

Pepperidge Farm Incorporated
Commercial Bakery
901 North 200 West
Richmond, UT 84333
Source to be Tested: Process Line No. 11 Proposed Test Date: February 18, 2025 Project No. AST-2025-0357
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-2025-0357 Pepperidge – Richmond, UT Page i
Regulatory Information

Permit No. DAQE-AN118410010-24

Source Information

Source Name Target Parameter Process Line No. 11 VOC (Ethanol) Contact Information

Test Location Test Company
Pepperidge Farm Incorporated
Commercial Bakery
901 North 200 West
Richmond, UT 84333

Tony Hernandez
[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]
(subject to change)

QA/QC Manager
Kathleen Shonk
[e-mail]
[phone]

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

Site Specific Test Plan
Table of Contents

AST-2025-0357 Pepperidge – Richmond, UT Page ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 1-1
1.1 Facility 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 ........................................................................................................................................... 2-2
2.5 Test Report .................................................................................................................................................. 2-2
3.0 Testing Methodology .................................................................................................................................. 3-1
3.1 U.S. EPA Reference Test Methods 1 and 2 – Sampling/Traverse Points and Volumetric Flow Rate ........ 3-1
3.2 U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 3A – Oxygen/Carbon Dioxide .............................................................. 3-1
3.3 U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 25A – Total Hydrocarbons ................................................................... 3-2
3.4 U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 320 – Moisture Content, Methane / Ethane .......................................... 3-2
3.5 U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 205 – Gas Dilution System Certification .............................................. 3-2
3.6 Quality Assurance/Quality Control – U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 3A.............................................. 3-2
3.7 Quality Assurance/Quality Control – U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 25A ............................................ 3-3
3.8 Quality Assurance/Quality Control – U.S. EPA Reference Method 320 .................................................... 3-4
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 ...................................................................................................................................... 2-2
Table 3-1: Source Testing Methodology .................................................................................................................. 3-1
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A Method 1 Data
Appendix B Example Field Data Sheets

Site Specific Test Plan
Introduction

AST-2025-0357 Pepperidge – Richmond, UT Page 1-1
1.0 Introduction
Alliance Technical Group, LLC (Alliance) was retained by Pepperidge Farm Incorporated (Pepperidge) to conduct
compliance testing at the Richmond, Utah facility. Portions of the facility are subject to provisions of the Utah
Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Air Quality (UDAQ) Permit No. DAQE-AN118410010-24.
Testing will be conducted to determine the emission rates of volatile organic compound (VOC) - ethanol from the
Catalytic Oxidizer installed on Process Line No.11.

This site-specific test plan (SSTP) has been prepared to address the notification and testing requirements of the
UDAQ permit.
1.1 Facility Descriptions
Pepperidge Farm Inc. owns and operates a commercial baking plant in Richmond, Utah. The plant operates Process
Line No. 11. Process line No. 11 is a Natural Gas/Propane Fired Oven; emissions are controlled with a Catalytic
Oxidizer for VOC (ethanol) destruction.
1.2 Project Team
Personnel planned to be involved in this project are identified in the following table. Table 1-1: Project Team
Pepperidge Personnel Tony Hernandez
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.

A Job Safety Analysis (JSA) will be completed daily by the Alliance Field Team Leader.

Site Specific Test Plan
Summary of Test Programs

AST-2025-0357 Pepperidge – Richmond, 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 Process Line No. 11.
2.1 General Description
All testing will be performed in accordance with specifications stipulated in U.S. EPA Reference Test Methods 1, 2,
3A, and 320. 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 UDAQ permit.
• Emissions testing will be conducted on the exhaust of Process Line No. 11 Catalytic Oxidizer.
• Performance testing will be conducted at no less than 90% of the maximum production.
• Each of the three (3) test runs will be approximately 60 minutes in duration.
• Ethanol will be sampled for comparison to VOC (ethanol) permit emission limit.
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:

• Production Rate – lb/hr
• Production Status
• Residence Time
• Catalyst Outlet Temperature – °F
• Temperature Rise Across Catalyst – °F
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-2025-0357 Pepperidge – Richmond, 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 – February 17, 2025
Equipment Setup & Pretest QA/QC Checks 5 hr
DAY 2 – February 18, 2025
Process Line No. 11
VFR 1-2
3 60 min 10 hr O2/CO2 3A
THC 25A
BWS/Methane/Ethane 320
DAY 3 – February 19, 2025
Contingency Day (if needed)
2.4 Emission Limits
Emission limits for each pollutant are below. Table 2-2: Emission Limits

Source Pollutant Citation
Process Line No. 11 VOC (Ethanol) – 3.45 lb/hr Permit
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
Pepperidge) to support the test results.

Site Specific Test Plan
Testing Methodology

AST-2025-0357 Pepperidge – Richmond, 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
Volumetric Flow Rate 1 & 2 Full Velocity Traverses
Oxygen / Carbon Dioxide 3A Instrumental Analysis
Total Hydrocarbon 25A Instrumental Analysis
Moisture Content / Methane / Ethane 320 FTIR – Continuous Sampling
Gas Dilution System Certification 205 ---

All stack diameters, depths, widths, upstream and downstream disturbance distances and nipple lengths will be
measured on site with an EPA Method 1 verification measurement provided by the Field Team Leader. These
measurements will be included in the test report.
3.1 U.S. EPA Reference Test Methods 1 and 2 – Sampling/Traverse Points and Volumetric Flow Rate
The sampling location and number of traverse (sampling) points will be selected in accordance with U.S. EPA
Reference Test Method 1. To determine the minimum number of traverse points, the upstream and downstream
distances will be equated into equivalent diameters and compared to Figure 1-1 (for isokinetic sampling) and/or
Figure 1-2 (measuring velocity alone) in U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 1.

Full velocity traverses will be conducted in accordance with U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 2 to determine the
average stack gas velocity pressure, static pressure and temperature. The velocity and static pressure measurement
system will consist of a pitot tube and inclined manometer. The stack gas temperature will be measured with a K-
type thermocouple and pyrometer.

Stack gas velocity pressure and temperature readings will be recorded during each test run. The data collected will
be utilized to calculate the volumetric flow rate in accordance with U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 2.
3.2 U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 3A – Oxygen/Carbon Dioxide
The oxygen (O2) and carbon dioxide (CO2) 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
3.6.

Site Specific Test Plan
Testing Methodology

AST-2025-0357 Pepperidge – Richmond, UT Page 3-2
3.3 U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 25A – Total Hydrocarbons
The total hydrocarbons (THC) testing will be conducted in accordance with U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 25A.
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) and the identified gas analyzer. The quality control measures are described in
Section 3.7.
3.4 U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 320 – Moisture Content, Methane / Ethane
The moisture content and concentrations of methane and ethane will be determined in accordance with U.S. EPA
Reference Test Method 320. Each source gas stream will be extracted at a constant rate through a heated probe, heated
filter and heated sample line and analyzed with a MKS MultiGas 2030 FTIR operated by a portable computer. The
computer has FTIR spectra of calibration gases stored on the hard drive. These single component calibration spectra are
used to analyze the measured sample spectra. The gas components to be measured will be selected from the spectra
library and incorporated into the analytical method. The signal amplitude, linearity, and signal to noise ratio will be
measured and recorded to document analyzer performance. A leak check will be performed on the sample cell. The
instrument path length will be verified using ethylene as the Calibration Transfer Standard. Dynamic spiking will be
performed using a certified standard of the target compound or appropriate surrogate in nitrogen with sulfur hexafluoride
blended as a tracer to calculate the dilution factor. All test spectra, interferograms, and analytical method information are
recorded and stored with the calculated analytical results. The quality control measures are described in Section 3.8
3.5 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. An initial three (3) point calibration will be conducted, using individual Protocol 1 gases, on the analyzer used
to complete the dilution system field check. 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 will be recorded in an electronic field data sheet. A mid-level
supply 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. The average analyzer response must agree within 2% of the predicted gas concentration. No single injection
shall differ more than 2% from the average instrument response for that dilution.
3.6 Quality Assurance/Quality Control – U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 3A
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% 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% (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

Site Specific Test Plan
Testing Methodology

AST-2025-0357 Pepperidge – Richmond, UT Page 3-3
to decrease to a value within 5.0 percent or 0.5% (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% (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% 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
percent of the Calibration Span or 0.5% 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% 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 0.3% (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 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 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.

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.
3.7 Quality Assurance/Quality Control – U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 25A
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.

Within two (2) hours prior to testing, zero gas will be introduced through the sampling system to the analyzer. After
adjusting the analyzer to the Zero 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, and the time required for the analyzer reading to
reach 95 percent of the gas concentration will be recorded to determine the response time. Next, Low and Mid-
Level gases will be introduced through the sampling system to the analyzer, and the response will be recorded when
it is stable. All values must be less than +/- 5 percent of the calibration gas concentrations.

Site Specific Test Plan
Testing Methodology

AST-2025-0357 Pepperidge – Richmond, UT Page 3-4

Mid-Level gas will be introduced through the sampling system. After the analyzer response is stable, the value will
be recorded. Next, Zero gas will be introduced through the sampling system, and the analyzer value recorded once
it reaches a stable response. The Analyzer Drift must be less than +/- 3 percent of the span value.

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.
3.8 Quality Assurance/Quality Control – U.S. EPA Reference Method 320
EPA Protocol 1 Calibration Gases – Cylinder calibration gases used will meet EPA Protocol 1 (+/- 2%) standards or
will be certified standards.

After providing ample time for the FTIR to reach the desired temperature and to stabilize, zero gas (nitrogen) will be
introduced directly to the instrument sample port. While flowing nitrogen the signal amplitude will be recorded, a
background spectra will be taken, a linearity check will be performed and recorded, the peak to peak noise and the
root mean square in the spectral region of interest will be measured and a screenshot will be recorded.

Following the zero gas checks, room air will be pulled through the sample chamber and the line width and resolution
will be verified to be at 1879 cm-1, the peak position will be entered and the FWHH will be recorded (screenshot).
Following these checks, another background spectra will be recorded and the calibration transfer standard (CTS)
will be introduced directly to the instrument sample port. The CTS instrument recovery will be recorded and the
instrument mechanical response time will be measured.

Next, stack gas will be introduced to the FTIR through the sampling system and several scans will be taken until a
stable reading will be achieved. The native concentration of our surrogate or target spiking analyte will be recorded.
Spike gas will be introduced to the sampling system at a constant flow rate ≤ 10% of the total sample flow rate and a
corresponding dilution ratio will be calculated along with a system response time. Matrix spike recovery spectra
will be recorded and will be within the ± 30% of the calculated value of the spike concentration that the method
requires.

The matrix spike recovery will be conducted once at the beginning of the testing and the CTS recovery procedures
will be repeated following each test run. The corresponding values will be recorded.

Site Specific Test Plan
Quality Assurance Program

AST-2025-0357 Pepperidge – Richmond, 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.
• Nozzles. Nozzles are measured three (3) times prior to initiating sampling with a caliper. The maximum
difference between any two (2) dimensions is 0.004 in.
• Digital Calipers. Calipers are calibrated annually by Alliance by using gage blocks that are calibrated
annually by an outside laboratory.

Site Specific Test Plan
Quality Assurance Program

AST-2025-0357 Pepperidge – Richmond, UT Page 4-2
• 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
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. A methane/ethane penetration factor
check is conducted on the total hydrocarbon analyzers equipped with non-methane cutters every six (6)
months following the procedures in 40 CFR 60, Subpart JJJJ. 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:
• Cleaned glassware and sample train components will be sealed until assembly.
• Sample trains will be leak checked before and after each test run.
• Appropriate probe, filter 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.
• An isokinetic sampling rate of 90-110% will be maintained, as applicable.
• 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
31.00 in
4.00 in
27.00 in
3.98 ft2
2
1
3.0 ft
1.3 (must be > 0.5)
10.0 ft
4.4 (must be > 2)
16
16
Measurer (Initial and Date):MDM
Reviewer (Initial and Date):GIR
2345 6 789101112
1 14.6 -- 6.7 -- 4.4 -- 3.2 -- 2.6 -- 2.1 1 3.2 1.00 5
2 85.4 -- 25.0 -- 14.6 -- 10.5 -- 8.2 -- 6.7 2 10.5 2.84 6 13/16
3 -- -- 75.0 -- 29.6 -- 19.4 -- 14.6 -- 11.8 3 19.4 5.24 9 1/4
4 -- -- 93.3 -- 70.4 -- 32.3 -- 22.6 -- 17.7 4 32.3 8.72 12 3/4
5 -- -- -- -- 85.4 -- 67.7 -- 34.2 -- 25.0 5 67.7 18.28 22 1/4
6 -- -- -- -- 95.6 -- 80.6 -- 65.8 -- 35.6 6 80.6 21.76 25 3/4
7 -- -- -- -- -- -- 89.5 -- 77.4 -- 64.4 7 89.5 24.17 28 3/16
8 -- -- -- -- -- -- 96.8 -- 85.4 -- 75.0 8 96.8 26.00 30
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 = 3 ft.
B = 10 ft.
Depth of Duct = 27 in.
Cross Sectional Area of Duct:
Pepperidge Farm Incorporated - Richmond, UT
Process Line No. 11
AST-2024-4537
10/23/24
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
Number of traverse points on a diameter
Stack Diagram
Cross Sectional Area
LOCATION OF TRAVERSE POINTS Traverse
Point
% of
Diameter
Distance
from inside
wall
Distance
from
outside of
port
Upstream
Disturbance
Downstream
Disturbance
B
A

Appendix B

Emissions Calculations
Location
Source
Project No.
Run Number Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Average
Date -- -- -- --
Start Time -- -- -- --
Stop Time -- -- -- --
Moisture Fraction, dimensionless BWS -- -- -- --
Volumetric Flow Rate (M1-4), dscfm Qs -- -- -- --
O₂ Concentration, % dry CO₂-----
CO₂ Concentration, % dry CCO₂-- -- -- --
THC (as C₃H₈) Concentration, ppmvd CTHC -- -- -- --
THC (as C₃H₈) Concentration, ppmvw CTHCw -----
THC (as C₃H₈) Emission Rate, lb/hr ERTHC -- -- -- --
VOC (as Ethanol) Concentration, ppmvd CVOC -- -- -- --
VOC (as Ethanol) Emission Rate, lb/hr ERVOC -- -- -- --
Input Data - Outlet
Calculated Data - Outlet
-- - --
--
--
Run 1 - RM Data
Location:
Source:
Project No.:
Date:
Time O₂ - Outlet CO₂ - Outlet THC - Outlet
Unit % dry % dry ppmvw
Status Valid Valid Valid
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)--NA
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-- - --
--
--
-
Cyclonic Flow Check
Location
Source
Project No.
Date
Sample Point Angle (ΔP=0)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Average --
--
--
--
Field Data
Method 2 Data
Location
Source
Project No.
Δ P
(in. WC)
Ts
(°F)
Δ P
(in. WC)
Ts
(°F)
Δ P
(in. WC)
Ts
(°F)
Average
Square Root of ΔP, (in. WC)1/2 (ΔP)1/2 --
Average ΔP, in. WC (ΔP)--
Pitot Tube Coefficient (Cp)--
Barometric Pressure, in. Hg (Pb)--
Static Pressure, in. WC (Pg)--
Stack Pressure, in. Hg (Ps)--
Average Temperature, °F (Ts)--
Average Temperature, °R (Ts)--
Measured Moisture Fraction (BWSmsd)--
Moisture Fraction @ Saturation (BWSsat)--
Moisture Fraction (BWS)--
O2 Concentration, % (O2)--
CO2 Concentration, % (CO2)--
Molecular Weight, lb/lb-mole (dry) (Md)--
Molecular Weight, lb/lb-mole (wet) (Ms)--
Velocity, ft/sec (Vs)--
VFR at stack conditions, acfm (Qa)--
VFR at standard conditions, scfh (Qsw)--
VFR at standard conditions, scfm (Qsw)--
VFR at standard conditions, dscfm (Qsd)--
--
--
--
Run No. 1 2 3
Status VALID VALID VALID
Date -- --
Stop Time
Start Time
Traverse Point
Leak Check
-- -- --
-- -- --
-- -- --
-- -- --
-- -- --
-- -- --
-- -- --
-- -- --
-- -- --
-- -- --
-- -- --
-- -- --
-- -- --
-- -- --
-- -- --
-- -- --
-- -- --
-- -- --
------
------
QA Data
Location
Source
Project No.
O₂ - Outlet CO₂ - Outlet THC - Outlet
Make -- -- --
Model -- -- --
S/N -- -- --
Operating Range -- -- --
Cylinder ID
Zero NA NA NA
Low NA NA --
Mid -- -- --
High -- -- --
Cylinder Certifed Values
Zero NA NA NA
Low NA NA --
Mid -- -- --
High -- -- --
Cylinder Expiration Date
Zero NA NA NA
Low NA NA --
Mid -- -- --
High -- -- --
Type of Sample Line --
Parameter
-- - --
--
--
Response Times
Location:
Source:
Project No.:
O₂ - Outlet CO₂ - Outlet THC - Outlet
Zero -- -- --
Low NA NA --
Mid -- -- --
High -- -- --
Average -- -- --
-- - --
--
--
Parameter
Response Times, seconds
Calibration Data
Location:
Source:
Project No.:
Date:
O₂ - Outlet CO₂ - Outlet THC - Outlet
Expected Average Concentration -- -- --
Span Between
Low -- -- --
High -- -- --
Desired Span -- -- --
Low Range Gas
Low NA NA --
High NA NA --
Mid Range Gas
Low -- -- --
High -- -- --
High Range Gas
Low NA NA --
High NA NA --
Actual Concentration (% or ppm)
Zero 0.00 0.00 0.00
Low NA NA --
Mid -- -- --
High -- -- --
Response Time (seconds)-- -- --
Upscale Calibration Gas (CMA)-- -- --
Instrument Response (% or ppm)
Zero -- -- --
Low NA NA --
Mid -- -- --
High -- -- --
Performance (% of Span or Cal. Gas Conc.)
Zero -- -- 0.00
Low NA NA --
Mid -- -- --
High -- -- 0.00
Status
Zero -- -- PASS
Low NA NA --
Mid -- -- --
High -- -- PASS
--
-- - --
Parameter
--
--
Bias/Drift Determinations
Location:
Source:
Project No.:
O₂ - Outlet CO₂ - Outlet THC - 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 -- -- NA
Posttest Zero -- -- NA
Pretest Span -- -- NA
Posttest Span -- -- NA
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 -- -- NA
Posttest Zero -- -- NA
Pretest Span -- -- NA
Posttest Span -- -- NA
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 -- -- NA
Posttest Zero -- -- NA
Pretest Span -- -- NA
Posttest Span -- -- NA
Drift (%)
Zero - - -
Mid - - -
Parameter
-- - --
--
--
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 %)
- ---
Average
Analyzer
Concentration
Injection 1
Error
Injection 2
Error
Injection 3
Error
Difference
Average
Error
*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
Component/Balance Gas: O2/N2
Cylinder Gas ID (Dilution):
Cylinder Gas Concentration (Dilution), %:
Analyzer Model: --
Analyzer SN: --
Environics ID: --
Analyzer Make: --
-- - --
--
--
Parameter
Make
Model
S/N
Span
Method Criteria
QA Data
Location
Source
Project No.
Parameter(s)
Date Pitot ID
Evidence of
damage?
Evidence of
mis-alignment?
Calibration or
Repair required?
Date Probe or
Thermocouple ID
Reference
Temp. (°F)
Indicated
Temp. (°F)Difference Criteria
--
Date
Balance ID:
Certified Weight ID:
Certified Weight Expiration:
Certified Weight (g):
Measured Weight (g):
Weight Difference (g):-- -- -- -- --
Date Barometric Pressure
Evidence of
damage?Reading Verified Calibration or
Repair required?
0
Reagent Lot#Field Prep
performed Field Lot Date By
--
--
--
--
± 1.5 % (absolute)
Field Balance Check
Pass
Barometer ID
Date Meter Box ID Positive Pressure Leak Check
Location:
Source:
Project No.:
Date:
Time O2 CO2
(%) (%)
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
-- - --
--
--
Average
Criteria Met
Traverse Point