AQ_F_1200107_20220301_CMPL_InspRpt (4)

NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF Asheville Regional Office
AIR QUALITY Valdese Weavers,LLC - Lovelady Road Plant
NC Facility ID 1200107
Inspection Report County/FIPS: Burke/023
Date: 03/02/2022
Facility Data Permit Data
Valdese Weavers, LLC -Lovelady Road Plant Permit 09762/R03
705 Lovelady Road,NE Issued 3/2/2017
Valdese,NC 28690 Expires 2/28/2025
Lat: 35d 45.7562m Long: 8 1 d 32.6161m Class/Status Synthetic Minor
SIC: 2269/Finishing Plants,Nec Permit Status Active
NAICS: 313312/Textile and Fabric Finishing(except Broadwoven Fabric) Mills Current Permit Application(s)None
Contact Data Program Applicability
Facility Contact Authorized Contact Technical Contact SIP
Scott McLaughlin Roger Berrier Scott McLaughlin NSPS: Subpart Dc
Facility Engineer Chief Operating Officer Facility Engineer
[phone] [phone] [phone]
Compliance Data
Comments:
Inspection Date 03/01/2022
Inspector's Name Mamie Colburn
Inspector's Signature: Operating Status Operating
Compliance Status Compliance- inspection
Action Code PCE
Date of Signature: 3'� `22 Inspection Result Compliance
Total Actual emissions in TONS/YEAR:
TSP S02 NOX VOC CO PM10 * HAP
2015 7.84 0.0100 2.26 0.5700 1.90 5.14 944.70
2011 7.83 0.0100 2.29 0.6100 2.09 7.83 967.50
* Highest HAP Emitted inpounds)
Five Year Violation History:None
Date Letter Type Rule Violated Violation Resolution Date
Performed Stack Tests since last FCE:None
Date Test Results Test Method(s) Source(s)Tested

1. The purpose of this visit was to determine whether this facility was operating in compliance with
2D .0521 "Control of Visible Emissions".There had been recent visits and surveillance reports of
excessive visible emissions.
2. Mamie Colburn and I (Michael Koerschner) met at the facility at—12 noon 3/1/2022. We
observed the rooftop stacks from Lovelady road approximately 1200 feet East of the tenter
frame stacks. At that time,there were very little visible emissions from any of the tenter frames.
3. 1 (Michael Koerschner) returned to the site at approximately 13:45 and observed visible
emissions from the rooftop. However, due to the location of the stacks, it did not seem possible
to do a Method 9 observation from outside the plant property.
4. At Approximately 15:20, Mamie Colburn and I met at the plant site. Mamie spoke to the Facility
Contact, Mr. Scott McLaughlin,via cellphone and Mr. McLaughlin gave verbal permission for us
to access the plant rooftop to perform a US EPA Method 9 Observation of the visible emissions.
Mr. McLaughlin stated on the phone that tenter frame #2 stack had been cleaned twice
(2/17/22) and (2/26/22) since the regular facility inspection 2/16/22 when visible emissions
were noted (and cleaning was delinquent during that inspection.)
5. En route to the stairs accessing the rooftop we were met by Mr. Phil Eller, Plant Engineer, who
accompanied us.
6. 1 performed a Method 9 observation of the stack exhausting the "back bays" (bays 4, 5, & 6) of
Tenter Frame No. 2 from 15:40 until 15:52. 1 did not observe any opacity readings greater than
15%opacity.
7. We proceeded off the roof into the facility to verify that the process was running normally.
Tenter Frame No. 2 was observed in operation processing "CR Home", "backing 8". The line
speed was 17 yards/minute and the Set Point temperatures for each of the 6 bays was 335
degrees F.
Bay 1 2 3 4 5 6
Set Point 335 335 335 335 335 335
Temp F
Observed 286 335 334 337 335 305
Temp (F)
Observations were made—16:00 3/1/2022
While at the tenter frame we discussed possible reasons why the Tenter Frame No.2 seems to smoke more than Tenter
Frames Nos. 1 and 3. Possible differences are:
a. Tenter Frame 2 is the smallest of the 3 tenter frames (60%of the size of tenter frame#1) but
apparently runs at the same line speed (-17 yards/minute) as the larger units;
b. Tenter Frame 2 has the fewest heat exchange "bays" (6) whereas the other tenters have more
(and thus tenter frame 2 heats less gradually than the other 2 tenter frames).
c. Tenter Frame 2 exhaust fans are manually controlled whereas the other two tenter frames use
computer controlled exhaust fans.
d. Tenter Frame 2 has two separate fans for convection air inside the unit whereas the other two
tenters use a "split plenum" design.
Conclusion: During this visit,the facility appeared to be in compliance with the visible emissions rule. A
copy of the Method 9 form is in SP.