DAQ-2024-007447

1

DAQC-344-24
Site ID 10847 (B4)

MEMORANDUM

TO: STACK TEST FILE – HYDRO EXTRUSION USA, LLC – Unrecycled Aluminum
Scrap Production – Utah County

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

FROM: Kyle Greenberg, Environmental Scientist

DATE: April 17, 2024

SUBJECT: Source: Melting Furnace #21
Location: 1550 Hydro Way, Spanish Fork, UT 84660
Contact: Cecil Jacobson: 801-798-4716
Tester: Alliance Technical Group
Site ID #: 10847
Permit/AO #: Approval Order DAQE-AN108470016-22 dated July 12, 2022
Subject: Review of Pretest Protocol dated April 1, 2024

On April 16, 2024, DAQ received a protocol for the testing of the Melting Furnace #21 at Hydro
Extrusion USA’s Unrecycled Aluminum Scrap Production facility in Utah County, UT. Testing will be
performed on June 4-6, 2024, to determine compliance with the emission limits found in 40 CFR Part 63
Subpart RRR: National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Secondary Aluminum
Production.

PROTOCOL CONDITIONS:

1. Method 1 used to determine sample traverses: OK
2. Method 2 used to determine stack gas velocity and volumetric flow rate: OK
3. Method 3/3A used to determine O2 and CO2 concentrations of the gas stream: OK
4. Method 4 used to determine moisture content: OK
5. Method 23/Alt-034 used to determine dioxins and furans emissions: OK
6. Method 9 used to determine visible emissions: OK

DEVIATIONS: None.

CONCLUSION: The protocol appears to be acceptable.

2

RECOMMENDATION: The methods proposed in the pretest protocol are sufficient to determine
dioxins and furans emissions from the Melting Furnace #21. The AO
does not have a stack test condition. This test is being performed to
show that the material throughput to the furnace with an increased
percentage of other than clean charge over the Facility's current limit, can
meet the compliance standards of 40 CFR Part 63 Subpart RRR. Hydro
Extrusion USA, LLC is aware that if the current emission standard of
15.0 micrograms toxic equivalency/megagram of feed/charge pursuant to
40 CFR §63.1505(i)(3) at the furnace exhaust outlet is exceeded during
testing, a Compliance Advisory will be issued. It is recommended that
the pretest protocol be determined as acceptable.

ATTACHMENTS: Hydro Extrusion USA’s Test Notification Letter and Pretest Protocol
April 15\ 2024
Bryce C. Bird
Director
Utah Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Air Quality
P.O. Box 144820
Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-4820
Re: Notification Performance Testing for Temporary Compliance Discretion
40 CFR Part 63, Subpart RRR
Hydro Extrusion USA, LLC
Approval Order DAQ DAQE-GN108470016-23
Dear Mr. Bird:
Hydro Extrusion, LLC (Hydro) operates a secondary aluminum production facility located at
1550 Hydro Way in Spanish Fork, Utah County, Utah (Facility). The Facility is regulated by
the Utah Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Approval Order (AO) DAQE-
GNl 08470016-23 and is subject to 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart RRR-National Emission Standards
for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Secondary Aluminum Production (Subpart RRR).
Hydro conducted an initial performance test of Melting Furnace #21 on May 9-10, 2002 in
accordance with the requirements of 40 CFR § 63 .1512( e ). The results of that initial performance
testing event demonstrated compliance with the applicable Subpart RRR dioxin and furans (D/F)
emissions standard 1 of 15.0 micrograms (µg) toxic equivalency (TEQ)/megagram (Mg)
feed/charge pursuant to 40 CFR §63.1505(i)(3) at the furnace exhaust outlet. During this test,
Hydro established site-specific operating parameters ( e.g., 10% painted scrap per total furnace
charge) used to demonstrate ongoing compliance with the applicable D/F emissions standard.
This operating parameter is reflected in DEQ AO DAQE-AN108470016-22 as Condition
II.B.1.e of the AO.
Hydro has a company-wide goal to produce the world's lowest carbon-footprint billet. One of
the main objectives to achieve this goal, is to increase the use of post-consumer aluminum scrap
to make billet. Most post-consumer scrap received at the Facility is classified as other than clean
charge ( e.g., painted). The purpose of this letter is to seek temporary compliance discretion for
a proposed performance test of Melting Furnace #21, while processing an increased percentage
1 Pursuant to 40 CFR §63.1500(c), secondary aluminum production facilities that are area sources of hazardous air
pollutants (HAP) are only subject to the Subpart RRR D/F emission standard.
of other than clean charge over the Facility's current limit, that will be used to confirm
compliance with the applicable Subpart RRR D/F emissions standard. Through a phone
conversation with DEQ held on February 15 , 2023 , Hydro understands that compliance
discretion requests are evaluated on a case-by-case basis.
Specifically, Hydro is requesting compliance discretion for the following two AO conditions
during the proposed performance test. Following the test, Hydro will continue to comply with
the conditions below:
1. Section II.B.1.b which limits opacity to 10%, and
2. Section II.B.1.e which limits painted scrap to 10% of total charge weight per charge.
Hydro will use Method 23 of Appendix A to 40 CPR Part 60 to determine compliance with the
applicable D/F emissions standard and Method 9 of Appendix A to 40 CPR Part 60 to determine
compliance with the opacity limit.
Hydro is planning to conduct a performance testing during June 3rd , 4th , and 5th of 2024. If the
results of the performance test show compliance with the applicable D/F emissions standard in
Subpart RRR, Hydro intends to submit a notice of intent to DEQ to obtain an approval order for
the modification of Condition II.B.1.e.
Should you have any additional questions about this request, please feel free to contact me 801-
798-4 716 or Cecil.Jacobson@),hy dro .com.
Cecil Jacobson
Environmental Engineer
Hydro Extrusion USA, LLC
cc: John Persons (DAQ)
Chad Gilgen (DAQ)
Bill Ferre (Hydro)
Jeff Insalaco (Hydro)
Frank Dougherty (ALL4)
Roy Rakiewicz (ALL4)
Page 2 of2
4/1/2024

Site Specific Test Plan

Hydro Extrusion USA, LLC
1550 Hydro Way
Spanish Fork, UT 84660

Source to be Tested: Melting Furnace #21
Proposed Test Dates: June 4 – 6, 2024

Project No. AST-2024-1704

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-2024-1704 Hydro – Spanish Fork, UT Page i

Regulatory Information

Permit No. DAQE-AN108470016-22
Regulatory Applicability 40 CFR 63, Subpart RRR

Source Information

Source Name Target Parameters
Melting Furnace #21 D/F, VEE

Contact Information

Test Location Test Company Analytical Laboratory
Hydro Extrusion USA, LLC
1550 Hydro Way
Spanish Fork, UT 84660
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
Alan Jensen
[e-mail]
[phone]
(subject to change)

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

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

Eurofins TestAmerica
5815 Middlebrook Pike
Knoxville, TN 37921
Kevin Woodcock
[e-mail]
[phone]

Site Specific Test Plan
Table of Contents

AST-2024-1704 Hydro – Spanish Fork, 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 .................................................................................................................................................. 2-3
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 3/3A – Oxygen/Carbon Dioxide ........................................................... 3-1
3.3 U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 4 – Moisture Content ............................................................................ 3-2
3.4 U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 23/Alternative Method 034– Dioxins/Furans ....................................... 3-2
3.5 U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 9 – Visible Emissions Evaluations ....................................................... 3-2
3.6 Quality Assurance/Quality Control – U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 3/3A .......................................... 3-3
4.0 Quality Assurance Program ......................................................................................................................... 4-1
4.1 Equipment ................................................................................................................................................... 4-1
4.2 Field Sampling ............................................................................................................................................ 4-2
4.3 Analytical Laboratory.................................................................................................................................. 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 Calculations Sheets

Site Specific Test Plan
Introduction

AST-2024-1704 Hydro – Spanish Fork, UT Page 1-1

1.0 Introduction
Alliance Technical Group, LLC (Alliance) was retained by Hydro Extrusion USA, LLC (Hydro) to conduct
compliance testing at the Spanish Fork, Utah facility. Portions of the facility are subject to DAQE-AN108470016-22
and 40 CFR 63, Subpart RRR. Testing will be conducted to determine the emission rate of dioxins and furans (D/F)
from the exhaust of the Melting Furnace #21 at two (2) different feed/charge rates. Visible emissions evaluations
(VEE) will also be conducted at two (2) different feed rates.

This site-specific test plan (SSTP) has been prepared to address the notification and testing requirements of DAQE-
AN108470016-22 and 40 CFR 63, Subpart RRR.
1.1 Facility Descriptions
Hydro Extrusion USA, LLC (Hydro) operates a secondary aluminum production facility at 1550 North Hydro Way in
Spanish Fork, Utah County, Utah (Facility). Hydro currently operates extrusion, fabrication, finishing and cast house
services at the Facility. Clean charge and aluminum scrap are melted to produce aluminum alloys in the casting
process for use in the remainder of the Facility. The clean charge and aluminum scrap are melted in a natural gas-
fired melting furnace and then transferred to a holding furnace for alloying and fluxing. The molten aluminum is
refined further through several spinning nozzle inert flotation (SNIF) units prior to the casting of “logs” in the direct
chill casting units. The cast aluminum logs are heat treated in homogenizing furnaces and cut into “billets” prior to
use in subsequent extrusion operations. The logs or billets are then reheated in homogenizing furnaces before being
extruded into product shapes by extrusion presses. Extruded products are further processed through “aging” furnaces
to harden the aluminum and strengthen the extrusion.
1.2 Project Team
Personnel planned to be involved in this project are identified in the following table.

Table 1-1: Project Team

Hydro Personnel Cecil Jacobson
Regulatory Agency UDAQ
Alliance Personnel Alan Jensen
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-2024-1704 Hydro – Spanish Fork, UT Page 2-1

2.0 Summary of Test Program
To satisfy the requirements of DAQE-AN108470016-22 and 40 CFR 63, Subpart RRR, the facility will conduct a
performance test program to determine the compliance status of the Melting Furnace #21.
2.1 General Description
All testing will be performed in accordance with specifications stipulated in U.S. EPA Reference Test Methods 1, 2,
3 / 3A, 4, 23 / ALT-034, and 9. 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 DAQE-AN108470016-22 and 40 CFR 63,
Subpart RRR.
• Emissions testing will be conducted on the exhaust of Melting Furnace #21.
• Performance testing will be conducted at two (2) different feed/charge rates to be provided by Hydro on the
day of testing.
• Each of the test runs for the Melting Furnace will be approximately 180 minutes in duration per feed rate.
• One (1) VEE test run will be conducted for the different feed/charge rates.
2.2 Process/Control System Parameters to be Monitored and Recorded
The following list identifies the measurements, observations and records that may be collected during the testing
program:

• Clean scrap feed/charge rate
• Painted scrap feed/charge weight
• Purchased scrap feed/charge weight
• Aluminum pucks feed/charge weight
• Batch number
• Batch start time
• Batch end time
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-2024-1704 Hydro – Spanish Fork, 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 – June 3, 2024
Equipment Setup & Pretest QA/QC Checks 6 hr
DAY 2 – June 4, 2024
Melting Furnace #21
2 Runs (Condition 1)
VFR 1-2
3 180 min 12 hr
O2/CO2 3/3A
BWS 4
D/F 23 / ALT-034
VEE 9 1 60 min
DAY 3 – June 5, 2024
Melting Furnace #21
1 Run (Condition 1)
1 Run (Condition 2)
VFR 1-2
3
(per feed rate)
180 min
(per feed rate)
8 hr
O2/CO2 3/3A
BWS 4
D/F 23 / ALT-034
VEE 9 1
(per feed rate)
60 min
(per feed rate)
DAY 4 – June 6, 2024
Melting Furnace #21
2 Runs (Condition 2)
VFR 1-2
3 180 min 12 hr
O2/CO2 3/3A
BWS 4
D/F 23 / ALT-034
VEE 9 1 60 min
DAY 5 – June 7, 2024
Contingency Day (if needed)
2.4 Emission Limits
Emission limits for each pollutant are below.

Table 2-2: Emission Limits

Source Pollutant Citation
Melting Furnace #21
D/F – 15 µg of D/F TEQ per Mg of
feed/charge 40 CFR Subpart RRR
VEE – 10% Permit

Site Specific Test Plan
Summary of Test Programs

AST-2024-1704 Hydro – Spanish Fork, UT Page 2-3

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.
• Laboratory Data – Copies of laboratory report(s) and chain of custody(s).
• 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 Hydro)
to support the test results.

Site Specific Test Plan
Testing Methodology

AST-2024-1704 Hydro – Spanish Fork, 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 3 / 3A Integrated Bag / Instrumental Analysis
Moisture Content 4 Gravimetric Analysis
Dioxins / Furans 23 / ALT-034 Isokinetic Sampling
Visible Emissions Evaluations 9 Certified Observer

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 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 3/3A – Oxygen/Carbon Dioxide
The oxygen (O2) and carbon dioxide (CO2) testing will be conducted in accordance with U.S. EPA Reference Test
Method 3/3A. One (1) integrated Tedlar bag sample will be collected during each test run. The bags will be collected
from the positive pressure side of the sample pump and conditioner. They will be collected through a manifold with
a restriction (either rotometer or critical orifice) to ensure even filling throughout the course of the run. Samples will
be concurrent with the test runs. The bag samples will be analyzed on site with a gas analyzer. The remaining stack
gas constituent will be assumed to be nitrogen for the stack gas molecular weight determination. The quality control
measures are described in Section 3.6.

Site Specific Test Plan
Testing Methodology

AST-2024-1704 Hydro – Spanish Fork, UT Page 3-2

3.3 U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 4 – Moisture Content
The stack gas moisture content will be determined in accordance with U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 4. The gas
conditioning train will consist of a series of chilled impingers. Prior to testing, each impinger will be filled with a
known quantity of water or silica gel. Each impinger will be analyzed gravimetrically before and after each test run
on the same analytical balance to determine the amount of moisture condensed.
3.4 U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 23/Alternative Method 034– Dioxins/Furans
The dioxins and furans testing will be conducted in accordance with U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 23 with
guidance from Alternative Method 034. The sampling system will consist of a Teflon-coated nozzle, heated glass-
lined probe, glass filter holder with pre-cleaned heated glass-fiber filter, condenser coil, XAD resin trap, gas
conditioning train, pump and calibrated dry gas meter. The gas conditioning system will consist of five (5) chilled
impingers. The first impinger will be empty. The next two (2) impingers each will contain 100 mL of water. The
fourth impinger will be empty while the fifth impinger will be charged with 200-300 grams of silica gel. The probe
liner and filter heating systems will be maintained at a temperature of 120 ± 14°C (248 ±25°F), and the impinger
temperature will be maintained below at 20°C (68°F) or less throughout testing.

Method 23 Section 6.1.7 requires the condenser to be oriented at an angle to cause moisture to flow down to the XAD
adsorbent module to facilitate condensate drainage. Glassware with this configuration is not currently available from
a national supplier utilizing a large enough condenser to meet the temperature specifications of the method. Alliance
will continue to work with manufacturers, but until equipment is widely available, the horizontal or vertical condenser
configuration from traditional Method 23 will be utilized.

All glassware leading to the XAD adsorbing resin trap will be cleaned and sealed before mobilizing to the site. The
sampling train will be assembled in the sample recovery area. The pre-cleaned quartz filter will be placed in a glass
filter holder with a Teflon filter support and connected to the condenser coil. All open ends of the sampling train will
be sealed with Teflon tape prior to complete assembly at the sampling location.

Following the completion of each test run, the sampling train will be leak checked at vacuum pressure greater than or
equal to the highest vacuum pressure observed during the run and the contents of the impingers will be measured for
moisture gain. The filter will be removed from the filter holder and placed in sample container 1. The XAD sorbent
module will be sealed on both ends and placed on ice. The nozzle, probe liner, filter holder, condenser and all
connecting glassware will be triple-rinsed and brushed with acetone followed by toluene, and these rinses will be
recovered in sample container 2. All containers will be sealed, labeled and liquid levels marked for transport to the
identified laboratory for analysis.

Method 23 Section 8.2.9 has the impinger water and solvent rinses collected in a single container (No. 3). Due to
analytical method development constraints of the subcontracted laboratory, it is necessary to split this recovery
between two containers: condensate (Container No. 3a) and solvent rinses (Container No. 3b).
3.5 U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 9 – Visible Emissions Evaluations
The stack gas opacity will be determined in accordance with U.S. EPA Reference Test 9. Visible emission evaluations
will be conducted by a certified visible emissions evaluator. Opacity readings will be recorded in 15-second intervals
during each of one (1) 60-minute evaluation per feed rate.

Site Specific Test Plan
Testing Methodology

AST-2024-1704 Hydro – Spanish Fork, UT Page 3-3

3.6 Quality Assurance/Quality Control – U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 3/3A
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.

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-2024-1704 Hydro – Spanish Fork, 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-2024-1704 Hydro – Spanish Fork, 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.
4.3 Analytical Laboratory
Analytical laboratory selection for sample analyses is based on the capabilities, certifications and accreditations that
the laboratory possesses. An approved analytical laboratory subcontractor list is maintained with a copy of the
certificate and analyte list as evidence of compliance. Alliance assumes responsibility to the client for the
subcontractor’s work. Alliance maintains a verifiable copy of the results with chain of custody documentation.

Appendix A

Method 1 Data
Location
Source
Project No.
Date:
in
in
0.00 in
--in
--ft2
--in
ft
--(must be ≥ 0.5)
ft
--(must be ≥ 2)
--
Measurer (Initial and Date):
Reviewer (Initial and Date):
23456789101112
1 25.0 16.7 12.5 10.0 8.3 7.1 6.3 5.6 5.0 4.5 4.2 1 -- -- --
2 75.0 50.0 37.5 30.0 25.0 21.4 18.8 16.7 15.0 13.6 12.5 2 -- -- --
3 -- 83.3 62.5 50.0 41.7 35.7 31.3 27.8 25.0 31.8 20.8 3 -- -- --
4 -- -- 87.5 70.0 58.3 50.0 43.8 38.9 35.0 22.7 29.2 4 -- -- --
5 -- -- -- 90.0 75.0 64.3 56.3 50.0 45.0 40.9 37.5 5 -- -- --
6 -- -- -- -- 91.7 78.6 68.8 61.1 55.0 50.0 45.8 6 -- -- --
7 -- -- -- -- -- 92.9 81.3 72.2 65.0 59.1 54.2 7 -- -- --
8 -- -- -- -- -- -- 93.8 83.3 75.0 68.2 62.5 8 -- -- --
9 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 94.4 85.0 77.3 70.8 9 -- -- --
10 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 95.0 86.4 79.2 10 -- -- --
11 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 95.5 87.5 11 -- -- --
12 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 95.8 12 -- -- --
*Percent of stack diameter from inside wall to traverse point.
A = ft.
B = ft.
Depth of Duct = 0 in.
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
Equivalent Diameter:
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:
DUCT
Duct Design:
Nipple Length:
Depth of Duct:
Width of Duct:
Cross Sectional Area of Duct:
Distance from Far Wall to Outside of Port:
Duct Orientation:
--
--
--
Stack Parameters
Upstream
Disturbance
Downstream
Disturbance
BA
Appendix B
QA/QC Data
Location
Source
Project No.
Parameter
#1 #2 #3 Dn (Average)Difference
-- -- --
Date Probe or
Thermocouple ID
Reference
Temp. (°F)
Indicated
Temp. (°F)Difference Criteria Probe Length
-- -- --
Date
Balance ID:
Certified Weight ID:
Certified Weight Expiration:
Certified Weight (g):
Measured Weight (g):
Weight Difference (g):-- -- -- -- -- --
Flow Rate (lpm): Flow Rate (lpm): Flow Rate (lpm):
Clock Time Temperature Clock Time Temperature Clock Time Temperature
- ----------
- ----------
- ----------
- ----------
- ----------
Acetone (ml) Acetone (ml) Acetone (ml)
± 1.5 % (absolute)
Method 5 Rinse Volumes
Run 1 Run 2 Run 3
Reagent ByDateField LotField Prep
performedLot#
Date Barometric
Pressure
Evidence of
damage?Reading Verified Calibration or
Repair required?
Posttest Purge
Run 1 Run 2 Run 3
Material
Date Meter Box ID Positive Pressure Leak Check
Pass
≤ 0.004 in.
Date Pitot ID
Evidence of
damage?
Barometer ID
Evidence of
mis-alignment?
Calibration or
Repair required?
Field Balance Check
--
--
--
Nozzle Diameter (in.)
Date Nozzle ID Criteria
--
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
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Average --
Method 3/3A Data
Location
Source
Project No.
Date/Time -- -- Date/Time -- --
Make/Model/SN -- -- -- -- -- --
Parameter Cylinder ID
Cylinder
Concentration, %
Analyzer
Concentration, %Cylinder ID Cylinder
Concentration, %
Analyzer
Concentration, %
Zero Gas -- -- -- --
High Range Gas -- -- -- -- -- --
Mid Range Gas -- -- -- -- -- --
Concentration Span, %
Required Accuracy, %
Run No.
Analysis Date/Time -- -- -- -- -- --
Parameter O2 %CO2 %O2 %CO2 %O2 %CO2 %
Analysis #1 -- -- -- -- -- --
Analysis #2 -- -- -- -- -- --
Analysis #3 -- -- -- -- -- --
Average -- -- -- -- -- --
The remaining consistuent is assumed to be nitrogen.
Run 1 Run 2 Run 3
--
--
--
-- --
--
O2 Data CO2 Data
--
Method 4 Data
Location
Source
Project No.
Parameter
Analysis
Run 1 Date:--
Impinger No.1234Total
Contents H2O H2O Empty Silica --
Initial Mass, g --
Final Mass, g --
Gain -- -- -- -- --
Run 2 Date:--
Impinger No.1234Total
Contents H2O H2O Empty Silica --
Initial Mass, g --
Final Mass, g --
Gain -- -- -- -- --
Run 3 Date:--
Impinger No.1234Total
Contents H2O H2O Empty Silica --
Initial Mass, g --
Final Mass, g --
Gain -- -- -- -- --
--
--
--
--
Gravimetric
Isokinetic Field Data
Location: Start Time: Source:
Date: VALID End Time: Project No.:-- --
Moisture:% est.Est. Tm:°F Pb: --in. Hg
Barometric: --in. Hg Est. Ts: --°F Pg: --in. WC
Static Press: --in. WC Est. ΔP: --in. WC O2:--%
Stack Press: --in. Hg Est. Dn: --in.CO2:--%
CO2:--%Target Rate: --scfm Check Pt. Initial Final Corr.
O2:--%LEAK CHECKS Pre Mid 1 Mid 2 Mid 3 Post Mid 1 (cf) --
N2/CO:--%-- --Leak Rate (cfm):-- -- -- Mid 2 (cf) --
Md: --lb/lb-mole -- --
Vacuum (in Hg):-- -- -- Mid 3 (cf) --
Ms: --lb/lb-mole Pitot Tube:-- -- -- --
Stack Probe Filter Imp Exit Aux
Amb. Amb. Amb. Amb.
Amb.
Begin End Ideal Actual -
0.00 #DIV/0!---
#DIV/0! #DIV/0!---
#DIV/0! #DIV/0!---
#DIV/0! #DIV/0!---
#DIV/0! #DIV/0!---
#DIV/0! #DIV/0!---
#DIV/0! #DIV/0!---
#DIV/0! #DIV/0!---
#DIV/0! #DIV/0!---
#DIV/0! #DIV/0!---
#DIV/0! #DIV/0!---
#DIV/0! #DIV/0!---
#DIV/0! #DIV/0!---
#DIV/0! #DIV/0!---
#DIV/0! #DIV/0!---
#DIV/0! #DIV/0!---
#DIV/0! #DIV/0!---
#DIV/0! #DIV/0!---
#DIV/0! #DIV/0!---
#DIV/0! #DIV/0!---
#DIV/0! #DIV/0!---
#DIV/0! #DIV/0!---
#DIV/0! #DIV/0!---
#DIV/0! #DIV/0!---
Final DGM:
Max
Vac %ISO BWS
60.0 min 0.000 ft3 -- in. WC -- °F -- °F -- -- in. WC -- --
Gas Temperatures (°F)
--
Vs
(fps)
Pump
Vac
(in. Hg)
Orifice Press.
ΔH
(in. WC)
Sa
m
p
l
e

Pt
.
Gas Temperatures (°F)
DGM Average
Amb.
Sample Time
(minutes)
Dry Gas Meter
Reading
(ft3)
--
STACK DATA (EST)
--
Run 1
--
--
--
STACK DATA (EST) EQUIPMENT MOIST. DATA
Vlc (ml)
--
K-FACTOR
STACK DATA (FINAL)FILTER NO.
Parameter:--
--
--
Meter Box ID:
Y:
--
YqaΔHTsΔPTm
RE
S
U
L
T
S
--
VmRun Time
ΔH @ (in.WC):
Probe ID:
Nozzle ID:
Nozzle Dn (in.):
Liner Material:
Pitot
Tube
ΔP
(in WC)
Pitot ID:
--
--
Mid-Point Leak Check Vol (cf):--
% ISO
--
Pitot Cp/Type:
Visible Emissions Evaluations
Project No.
Facility Name
Facility Location min 0 15 30 45 min 0 15 30 45
Date 0 30
Observation No. 1 31
Source of Emissions 2 32
Stack Height ft 333
Distance from Source ft 434
Direction from Source 5 35
636
Time 7 37
Wind Direction (From) 8 38
Wind Speed mph mph 939
Ambient Temperature °F °F 10 40
Sky Conditions 11 41
Color of Background 12 42
Plume Color 13 43
Steam Plume? (y/n) 14 44
Attached to Stack? (y/n) 15 45
16 46
17 47
18 48
19 49
20 50
21 51
22 52
23 53
24 54
25 55
26 56
27 57
The highest six (6) minute rolling average was 0.0 28 58
Rolling Average > 20%0 29 59
Rolling Average > 40%0
Lecture Field
Certification Dates
Certification Agency
End
0
0
Start
Observer's NameAdditional Comments
Observations
Limits:
Observer's Signature
Appendix A
Example Calculations
Location:
Source:
Project No.:
Run No.:
Parameter:
Meter Pressure (Pm), in. Hg
where,
Pb -- = barometric pressure, in. Hg
ΔH--= pressure differential of orifice, in H2O
Pm -- = in. Hg
Absolute Stack Gas Pressure (Ps), in. Hg
where,
Pb -- = barometric pressure, in. Hg
Pg --= static pressure, in. H2O
Ps -- = in. Hg
Standard Meter Volume (Vmstd), dscf
where,
Y -- = meter correction factor
Vm 0.000 = meter volume, cf
Pm -- = absolute meter pressure, in. Hg
Tm --= absolute meter temperature, oR
Vmstd -- = dscf
Standard Wet Volume (Vwstd), scf
where,
Vlc --= weight of H2O collected, g
Vwstd -- = scf
Moisture Fraction (BWSsat), dimensionless (theoretical at saturated conditions)
where,
Ts -- = stack temperature, °F
Ps -- = absolute stack gas pressure, in. Hg
BWSsat -- = dimensionless
Moisture Fraction (BWS), dimensionless (measured)
where,
Vwstd -- = standard wet volume, scf
Vmstd -- = standard meter volume, dscf
BWS -- = dimensionless
Moisture Fraction (BWS), dimensionless
where,
BWSsat -- = moisture fraction (theoretical at saturated conditions)
BWSmsd -- = moisture fraction (measured)
BWS --
--
--
--
1
--
Pm ൌ Pb ൅ Δ H
13 6
Ps ൌ Pb ൅ Pg
13 6
𝑉𝑚𝑠𝑡𝑑 ൌ 17.636 ൈ Y ൈ Vm ൈ Pm
𝑇𝑚
Vwstd ൌ 0.04716 ൈ Vlc
BWSsat ൌ 10଺.ଷ଻ି ଶ,଼ଶ଻
୘ୱାଷ଺ହ
Ps
BWS ൌ Vwstd
ሺVwstd ൅ Vmstdሻ
BWS ൌ BWSmsd unless BWSsat ൏ BWSmsd
Appendix A
Example Calculations
Location:
Source:
Project No.:
Run No.:
Parameter:
--
--
--
1
--
Molecular Weight (DRY) (Md), lb/lb-mole
where,
CO2 -- = carbon dioxide concentration, %
O2 -- = oxygen concentration, %
Md -- = lb/lb mol
Molecular Weight (WET) (Ms), lb/lb-mole
where,
Md -- = molecular weight (DRY), lb/lb mol
BWS -- = moisture fraction, dimensionless
Ms -- = lb/lb mol
Average Velocity (Vs), ft/sec
where,
Cp -- = pitot tube coefficient
Δ P1/2 --= velocity head of stack gas, (in. H2O)1/2
Ts -- = absolute stack temperature, °R
Ps -- = absolute stack gas pressure, in. Hg
Ms -- = molecular weight of stack gas, lb/lb mol
Vs -- = ft/sec
Average Stack Gas Flow at Stack Conditions (Qa), acfm
where,
Vs -- = stack gas velocity, ft/sec
As --= cross-sectional area of stack, ft2
Qa -- = acfm
Average Stack Gas Flow at Standard Conditions (Qs), dscfm
where,
Qa -- = average stack gas flow at stack conditions, acfm
BWS -- = moisture fraction, dimensionless
Ps -- = absolute stack gas pressure, in. Hg
Ts -- = absolute stack temperature, °R
Qs -- = dscfm
Dry Gas Meter Calibration Check (Yqa), dimensionless
where,
Y -- = meter correction factor, dimensionless
Θ 60 = run time, min.
Vm 0 = total meter volume, dcf
Tm -- = absolute meter temperature, °R
ΔH@ --= orifice meter calibration coefficient, in. H2O
Pb -- = barometric pressure, in. Hg
ΔH avg --= average pressure differential of orifice, in H2O
Md -- = molecular weight (DRY), lb/lb mol
(Δ H)1/2 --= average squareroot pressure differential of orifice, (in. H2O)1/2
Yqa -- = percent
Md ൌ ሺ0.44 ൈ % COଶሻ ൅ ሺ0.32 ൈ % O2ሻ ൅ ሺ0.28 ሺ100 െ % COଶ െ % O2ሻሻ
Ms ൌ Md ሺ1 െ BWSሻ ൅ 18.015 ሺBWSሻ
Qa ൌ 60 ൈ Vs ൈ As
Qs ൌ 17.636 ൈ Qa ൈ ሺ1 െ BWSሻ ൈ Ps
Ts
Vs ൌ 85.49 ൈ Cp ൈ ሺΔ P ଵ/ଶሻ avg ൈ Ts
Ps x Ms
Yqa ൌ
Y െ Θ
Vm 0.0319 ൈ Tm ൈ 29
Δ𝐻@ ൈ Pb ൅ Δ Havg.
13.6 ൈ𝑀𝑑
ΔH avg.
𝑌 ൈ 100
Appendix A
Example Calculations
Location:
Source:
Project No.:
Run No.:
Parameter:
--
--
--
1
--
Volume of Nozzle (Vn), ft3
where,
Ts -- = absolute stack temperature, °R
Ps -- = absolute stack gas pressure, in. Hg
Vlc --= volume of H2O collected, ml
Vm 0.000 = meter volume, cf
Pm -- = absolute meter pressure, in. Hg
Y -- = meter correction factor, unitless
Tm --= absolute meter temperature, oR
Vn --= volume of nozzle, ft3
Isokinetic Sampling Rate (I), %
where,
Vn -- = nozzle volume, ft3
θ 60.0 = run time, minutes
An --= area of nozzle, ft2
Vs -- = average velocity, ft/sec
I--= %
Vn ൌ 𝑇𝑠
𝑃𝑠0.002669 ൈ𝑉𝑙𝑐൅Vm ൈ𝑃𝑚ൈ𝑌
𝑇𝑚