United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Pesticides
and Toxic Substances
EPA 560/4-88-004p
February 1988
&EPA Title HI Section 313
Release Reporting
Guidance
Estimating Chemical Releases From
Wood Preserving Operations
-------
-------
Estimating Chemical Releases From
Wood Preserving Operations
Facilities engaged In wood preserving
operations may be required to report annu-
ally any releases to the environment of
certain chemicals regulated under Section
313, Title m, of the Superfund Amendments
and Reauthorizatton Act (SARA) of 1986. If
your facility Is classified under SIC codes 20
through 39 (wood preserving facilities gen-
erally fall under SIC code 2491) and has 10
or more full-time employees, for calendar year
1987 you must report all environmental re-
leases of any Section 313-listed chemical or
chemical category manufactured or processed
by your facility in an amount exceeding
75,000 pounds per year or otherwise used In
an amount exceeding 10,000 pounds per
year. For calendar years 1988 and 1989 (and
beyond), the threshold reporting quantity for
manufactured or processed chemicals drops
to 50.OOO and 25.OOO pounds per year,
respectively.
This document has been developed to
assist facilities engaged in wood preserving
operations in the completion of Part HI
(Chemical Specific Information) of the Toxic
Chemical Release Inventory Reporting Form.
Included herein is general information on
toxic chemicals used and process wastes
generated, along with several examples to
demonstrate the types of data needed and
various methodologies available for esti-
mating releases. If your facility performs
other operations In addition to wood pre-
serving, you must also include any releases of
toxic chemicals from these operations.
Step One
Determine If your facility processes or
uses any of the chemicals subject to
reporting under Section 313.
A suggested approach for determination
of the chemicals your facility uses that could
be subject to reporting requirements Is to,
make a detailed review of the chemicals and
materials you have purchased. If you do not
know the specific ingredients of a chemical
formulation, consult your suppliers for this
Information. If they will not provide this In-
formation, you must follow the steps outlined
to handle this eventuality in the Instructions
provided with the Toxic Chemical Release
Inventory Reporting Form.
The list presented here includes chemi-
cals typically used to wood preserving opera-
tions that are subject to reporting under
Section 313. This list does not necessarily
Include all of the chemicals your facility uses
that are subject to reporting, and it may
include many chemicals that you do not use.
You should also determine whether any of the
listed chemicals are created during pro-
cessing at your facility.
Compounds found in wood preserving
agents: Arsenic compounds, copper
compounds, chromium compounds, zinc
compounds, anthracene,-benzene (in
petroleum solvents), o-cresol, penta-
chlorophenol, dibenzofuran, naphthalene,
quinoline
Vapor drying agents: Various solvents
Preserving carriers: Various solvents
-------
Fire retardants: Zinc chloride, antimony
trioxide. titanium dioxide, urea-
melamine-formaldehyde resin
Step Two
Determine if your facility surpassed the
threshold quantities established for
reporting of listed chemicals last year.
You must submit a separate Toxic Chemi-
cal Release Inventory Reporting Form for
each listed chemical that Is "manufactured,"
"processed," or "otherwise used" at your
facility In excess of the threshold quantities
presented earlier. Manufacture Includes
materials produced as byproducts or Impu-
rities. Toxic compounds that are Incorpo-
rated Into your products {for example, wood
preserving agents such as pentachlorophenol)
would be considered "processed" because
they become part of the marketed finished
product. Degreaslng solvents, cleaning
agents, and other chemicals that do not
become part of the finished product (for
example, vapor drying agents and preserving
carriers) would be considered "otherwise
used."
The amount of a chemical processed or
otherwise used at your facility represents the
amount purchased during the year, adjusted
for beginning and ending Inventories. To
ascertain the amount of chemical In a mixed
formulation, multiply the amount of the
mixture (In pounds) by the concentration of
the chemical (weight percent) to obtain the
amount of chemical processed.
Example: Determining whether
chromium, copper, and arsenic were
used in sufficient quantity to require
reporting under Section 313.
In 1987, a wood preserving facility
purchased 600,000 pounds of a chromated
copper arsenate solution containing 23.75
percent chromium oxide (CrOJ, 9.25 per-
cent copper oxide (CuO), 17.0 percent
arsenic pentoxlde (ASyOJ, and 50.0 per-
cent HaO. At the beginning of the year,
36,000 pounds of this solution was held in
storage; the amount in storage at the end
of the year was 18,000 pounds. There-
fore, the total amount of solution processed
during the year would be:
36,000 Ib (beginning inventory) +
600,000 Ib (purchased) -
18,000 Ib (ending inventory)
= 618.000 Ib
The amount of chromium oxide processed
would be equal to:
618,000 Ib solution x
23.75 Ib CrOa/100 Ib solution
= 146,775 Ib
The amount of copper oxide processed
would be equal to:
618,000 Ib solution x
9.25 Ib CuO/100 Ib solution
= 57.165 Ib
The amount of arsenic pentoxide processed
would be equal to:
618,000 Ib solution x
17 Ib AsaOs/100 Ib solution
= 105,060 Ib
In this example, only chromium and
arsenic compounds were processed in
sufficient quantity (that is, more than
75,000 pounds) to require reporting under
Section 313 in calendar year 1987. In
calendar year 1988, reports would be
required for all three metal compounds.
-------
A listed chemical may be a component of
several formulations you purchase, so you
may need to ask your supplier for Informa-
tion on the concentration (percentage) of the
chemical In each. For chemical categories
(for example, chromium compounds), your
reporting obligations are determined by the
total amounts of all chemicals In the
category.
You must complete a report for each
chemical for which a threshold Is exceeded.
The thresholds apply separately; therefore. If
you both process and use a chemical and
either threshold is exceeded, you must report
for both activities. If neither threshold is
exceeded, no report is needed.
Step Three
Identify points of release for the
chemical(s) subject to reporting.
An effective means of evaluating points of
release for listed toxic chemicals Is to draw a
process flow diagram Identifying the opera-
tions performed at your facility. The figure
below is an example flow diagram of a pres-
surized wood-treating process in which vapor
is conditioned. Because each facility is
unique, you are strongly urged to develop a
flow diagram for your particular operations
that details the input of materials and chemi-
cals and the waste sources resulting from the
operation of each unit.
FUGITIVE AIR EMISSIONS
DURING UNLOADING AND CHARGING
WOOD IN
WOOD OUT
VAPORS
TREATING
CYLINDER
PRESERVATIVES
TO WORK TANK
WORK
TANK
"N
J
COOLING
WATER
COOLING
WATER
CYLINDER DRIPPINGS
AND RAIN WATER
AIR AND
VAPORS
PRESERVATIVES
TO CYLINDER
RECOVERED
OILS
wML.O ^ "^
f OIL-WATER V
^SEPARATOR T
CONDENSATE
WASTEWATER.
AIR EMISSIONS
EVAPORATION
TOWER
RECYCLE TO
WORKTANK
SLUDGE
Example Flow Diagram of a Wood Preserving Facility Using the Boulton Conditioning Process
-------
Wood preserving facilities generate
wastewater during the conditioning of the
wood prior to its treatment and as a result of
the condensation of vapors drawn off the
treatment cylinder. Rainwater and spills
collected from the area around the treatment
cylinder also contribute to wastewater vol-
ume. Typically, the preservative chemicals
and solvents (solvents are used during vapor
conditioning) entrained in the wastewater are
recycled to the extent possible. Solid waste
in facilities using oil-borne preservatives is
generated primarily as a result of treatment
and/or evaporation of wastewater. Typical
air emission sources are volatilization of
organic chemicals during wastewater evapo-
ration, vapors released from the treating
cylinder during unloading and charging
operations, and emissions from the vacuum
vent during the treating cycle.
Your reporting must account for all
releases.
Step Four
Estimate releases of toxic chemicals.
After all of the toxic chemicals and waste
sources have been identified, you can esti-
mate the releases of the individual chemicals.
Section 313 requires that releases to air,
water, and land and transfers to ofisite facil-
ities be reported for each toxic chemical
meeting the threshold reporting values. The
usual approach entails first estimating re-
leases from waste sources at your facility
(that Is, wastewater, air release points, and
solid waste) and then, based on the disposal
method used, determining whether releases
from a particular waste source are to air,
water, land, or an offsite disposal facility.
In general, there are four types of release
estimation techniques:
• Direct measurement
• Mass balance
• Engineering calculations
• Emission factors
Descriptions of these techniques are provided
in the general Section 313 guidance docu-
ment. Estimating Releases and Waste-
Treatment Efficiencies for the Toxic Chemical
Release Inventory Form.
Provisions of the Clean Air Act, Clean
Water Act, Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act, and other regulations require
monitoring of certain waste streams. If
available, data gathered for these purposes
can be used to estimate releases. When only
a small amount of direct measurement data
Is available, you must decide if another esti-
mation technique would give a more accurate
estimate.
Mass balances of the entire wood pre-
serving process are of limited value in
estimating emissions. Because recycling is
practiced extensively, the quantities of waste
produced are very small in relation to the
quantities of chemicals processed. Any
inaccuracies in the calculation of the quantity
. of chemical purchased or retained in the
wood product would greatly affect the esti-
mated quantity of chemical released as waste;
therefore, the accuracy of the estimate would
be questionable. The use of mass balances
may be feasible for specific units, however, if
sufficient input and output data are avail-
able. For example, if the quantity of a chemi-
cal entering a wastewater evaporator and the
quantity exiting as a sludge are known, the
quantity exiting as air emissions from the
evaporator can be determined by mass
balance.
4
-------
Engineering assumptions and calcula-
tions can be used to estimate toxic releases in
a variety of situations. Information such as
the water solubility and vapor pressure of a
chemical can be used in conjunction with
process parameters such as treatment
cylinder size, vacuum exhaust rate, and
wastewater evaporation temperature to
develop engineering calculations of releases.
This method of estimation relies heavily on
process operating parameters; thus, the
techniques developed are very site-specific.
Emission factors are usually not available
for wood preserving operations; however, the
reference sources presented at the end of this
document contain considerable information
on wood preserving wastes. You may be able
to use this information to develop emission
factors or waste characteristics applicable to
your facility to serve as a basis for release
estimates. You may also be able to develop
emission factors for your particular facility
in-house by performing detailed measure-
ments of wastes at different production levels.
Toxic Releases Via Wastewater
Most wood preserving facilities do not
discharge wastewater. Instead, the waste-
water is either completely recycled or evapo-
rated. Some facilities, however, discharge
wastewater to publicly owned treatment
works (POTWs) or dispose of it by land ap-
plication, and a few facilities discharge
wastewater directly into navigable waters. If
you dispose of wastewater by landspreading,
the toxic chemicals contained in the waste-
water are considered "released to land." The
same is true for those facilities who discharge
to onsite lagoons that have no discharge;
however, the quantities of chemicals that
evaporate into the air or are removed as
sludge from these lagoons must be accounted
for.
Facilities that use steam conditioning or
the Boulton process must monitor waste-
water discharged to POTWs for copper.
chromium, and arsenic to comply with
pretreatment standards set for this portion of
the industry. These monitoring data can be
used to estimate releases of these toxic
chemicals via wastewater. Release amounts
should be estimated for the parent metal,
even though the facility is processing and
reporting for the metal compound. For other
toxic chemicals, In-house monitoring data
can be used. If such data are unavailable, a
different release estimation technique must
be used.
Although wastewater is not discharged at
most wood preserving facilities, estimates of
the toxic chemical content in wastewater
streams within a facility can be useful for
estimating releases as air emissions or solid
waste. Most process pollutants can be found
in the wastewater generated within the facil-
ity, and they are released as solid waste or air
emissions during recycling, treatment, or
evaporation. The following example demon-
strates the use of an engineering calculation
to estimate toxic releases via wastewater.
Example: Using an engineering
calculation to estimate releases of
pentachlorophenol via wastewater.
A wood preserving facility uses open
steaming to condition wood before tt
undergoes pressure treatment with a
pentachlorophenol (POP) preservative. The
condensed steam used during this con-
ditioning generates wastewater containing
excess preservative. This preservative 1s
recycled to the work tank after the waste-
water Jlows through an oil/water sepa-
rator. The wastewater exiting the oil/
water separator is discharged to a POTW.
No direct measurement data for POP
are generated at this facility. The quantity
of POP discharged can be estimated by use
of an engineering calculation that assumes
the PCP concentration in the wastewater
exiting the oil/water separator is equal to
the PCP's solubility in water (0.002 percent
-------
or 20 Tng/Uter). Based on a known waste-
waterflow rate of 3,250 gallons per day
from a plant that operates 250 days per
year, the quantity of POP released via
wastewater to the POTWcon. be estimated
asfoUows:
Amount of POP released into wastewater =
20mg/literPCPx
3.78 liter/1 gal x
1 lb/453.000mgx
3,250 gal/day x
250 days/year
= 136 Ib
Using this approach, the plant in this ex-
ample could report releases of 140 pounds
of POP to wastewater. if direct measure-
ment data were available for POP in the
wastewater, using these data would be
the preferred method of estimating
releases.
The assumption used In the preceding
example (that the concentration of PCP in the
wastewater exiting the oil/water separator Is
equal to the water solubility of the PCP) may
not be valid at your facility because of waste-
water flow rates and emulsion formations. If
monitoring data are not available or In-house
emission factors cannot be developed, how-
ever, this Is probably the best approach to
estimating releases via wastewater.
Toxic Releases Via Solid Waste
The RCRA regulations specifically list
solid wastes from wood preserving operations
as hazardous. Therefore, the generation,
transportation, and disposal of most of your
solid wastes are regulated under this Act.
The RCRA manifesting procedure for hazard-
ous wastes shipped offsite requires documen-
tation of waste quantities, and treatment,
storage, and disposal facilities must perform
detailed chemical and physical analyses on
the wastes. Your facility may also analyze
these wastes. Therefore, it should be possible
to estimate solid waste releases for a number
of compounds by direct measurement.
Example: Using direct measurement
to estimate releases of toxic chemicals
via solid waste.
Wastewater treatment sludge from a
wood preserving operation was shipped
monthly to an offsite secure chemical
landfill for disposal Shipping manifests
for the past year contain detailed Informa-
tion on the quantity of sludge sent to the
offsite facility. The landfill performed
detailed chemical analysts for penta-
chlorophenol (PCP)'on representative
portions of each shipment before final
disposal The information from the
manifests and landfill records can be
combined to estimate the quantity of PCP
shipped offsite each month in the waste-
water treatment sludge by using the
following equation.
Amount of PCP shipped offsite =
amount of sludge shipped x
PCP concentration
The results of this equation far each month
are shown on the following table. These
results are then totalled to yield the yearly
amount of PCP shipped offsite 1n the
sludge.
Month
January
February
March
AprO.
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Quantity
of sludge
shipped, Ib
2,000
2.400
700
1,500
2,100
2,800
3,200
2,400
2,900
500
1.200
1.300
PCP
cone., %
5.06
5.19
4.88
3.70
3.00
7.50
8.40
5.55
5.00
10.55
6.90
2.0O
PCP In
wastewater
sludge, Ib
101
73
34
56
63
210
269
134
95
53
83
26
Using this approach, the plant in this
example could report that 1,200 pounds of
PCP was transferred offsite tn wastewater
sludge.
-------
Thte example addresses only POP
releases In wastewater sludge. The
landfill would likely also have analytical
data on other toxic chemicals in this
sludge, which could, be used to calculate
releases for those compounds.
When no direct measurement data are
available, another method of estimating re-
leases Is needed. A toxic chemical entering
wastewater treatment or an evaporation
device maybe subject to numerous fates (for
example, air emission, sludge residue, re-
cycling to work tank). This makes it difficult
to estimate releases of the chemical in sludge
unless the content of the influent wastewater
is known. In this case, a mass balance
combined with an engineering assumption
might be used.
Toxic Releases to Air
Your facility probably does not make
direct measurements of fugitive air emission
sources. In the absence of such measure-
ments, a mass balance might be used to
estimate releases of organic chemicals during
wastewater evaporation if sufficient informa-
tion is available on the content of wastewater
entering and sludge exiting the evaporation
device. A mass balance would be difficult to
apply to releases from the treating cylinder
during loading/unloading or from the vac-
uum vent during the treating cycle, however,
and the results generated would be unreli-
able. Another possible approach to deter-
mining fugitive toxic releases would be to
derive emission factors from the considerable
information on air emissions from wood pre-
serving operations contained in the material
referenced at the end of this pamphlet. En-
gineering calculations can also be used to
estimate releases from these sources.
To estimate air releases from wastewater
treatment and evaporation devices, you must
know the concentration of the toxic chemical
of concern in the wastewater. As discussed
earlier, this concentration can be determined
by direct measurement or engineering calcu-
lation. Air releases can then be calculated by
applying mass transfer principles to the pro-
cess parameters of the wastewater treatment
and/or evaporation devices. The EPA's Wood
Preserving Industry Multimedia Emission
Inventory and its Hazardous Waste Treat-
ment, Storage and Disposal Facilities (TSDF)-
Alr Emission Models provide the theoretical
background Information you need to perform
this engineering calculation. For some or-
ganic chemicals commonly found In creosote
and pentachlorophenol preservative solu-
tions, you can use the information in the
following table for quick determination of the
approximate fraction of chemical released to
the atmosphere from evaporation devices.
Effect of Wastewater Treatment
and/or Evaporation
on Organic Constituents*
Preservative
component
Penta
Benzene
Ethylbenzene
Toluene
Phenol
Pentachlorophenol
Trlchlorophenol
Creosote
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene/
anthracene
Percent
emitted during
evaporation
at ambient
temperature
100
100
10O
10O
O
O
0
0
Percent
emitted during
evaporation
at elevated
temperature
(>60°C)
10O
100
100
1OO
O
O
95
4O
Data obtained from Wood Preserving Industry
Multimedia Emission Inventory
Example: Using an emission factor to
estimate air releases of naphthalene
from a wastewater evaporator.
Wastewater entering a thermal (PAN)
evaporator is sampled to characterize its
toxic chemical content The results of the
sampling program show that the average
naphthalene content of wastewater is
5 mg/liter. The wastewaterJlow rate
-------
averages 15,300 gallons per day. The
mass flow rate of naphthalene entering the
evaporator would be:
5mg/ltterx
3.78 liter/gal x
Jib/453,000 nig x
15,300 gal/day
= 0.64 Ib/day
The PAN evaporator is operated at
SO°C. Based on the preceding table, an
estimated 95 percent of the naphthalene
would be emitted to the atmosphere (the
remaining 5 percent would be found 1n the
sludge). Thus, the quantity ofnaphthalene
released to the atrjfom the evaporator
would be 0.61 pound per day. If the plant
operates 250 days a year, the total air
emissions ofnaphthalene per year would
be 150 pounds.
It Is more likely, however, that the
quantity ofnaphthalene disposed of as
solid waste would be known by direct
measurement and the content in the
wastewater would be unknown. If direct
measurement showed that 20 pounds of
naphthalene per year was disposed of as
soltd waste from the evaporator (which
would represent 5 percent of the total
amount), the total amount ofnaphthalene
per year in the influent wastewater would
be:
20 to fO.05 = 400 to
Therefore, the total quantity ofnaph-
thalene released to air annually for this
source would be:
400 to x 0.95 = 380 to
Estimating air releases from the treating
cylinder and vacuum vent can become a
complicated task because of the number of
variables Involved, which include the amount
of preservative solution In the treatment cell,
the surface area of the liquid, the tempera-
ture of the process steam, the barometric
pressure, the humidity, and the length of the
treatment cycle. One approach is to estimate
the volume of gas exhausted and the concen-
tration of toxic chemicals in the exhaust gas.
You can estimate the concentration in the
exhaust air by assuming equilibrium between
the preservative solution and the exhaust air.
At equilibrium, the concentration in the
exhaust air can be expressed as:
PA
PT
mole fraction of A
in gas phase
where P. = partial pressure of compound A
P- = total pressure of system
In this Instance, PT is equal to the barometric
pressure, and PA can be calculated as:
p = *• P°
\A *Alf
where P ° = vapor pressure of pure
compound A
XAL ~ mole-/*"actton of compound A in
solution
Data on vapor pressures are readily available;
however, be sure the vapor pressure used Is
appropriate for the operating temperature of
the air exhaust.
Example: Using engineering calcula-
tions to estimate air releases of
naphthalene from the vacuum
exhaust.
The vacuum vent for a wood preserving
operation in which creosote is used oper-
ates for a total of 4 hours per day at ajlow
rate of 400 cubic feet per minute. The
preservative used In the treatment cycle
contains 0.5 percent naphthalene by
weight. Based on the molecular weights of
the preservative components, the mole
fraction ofnaphthalene 1n the preservative
1s 0.0076 (pounds + molecular weight =
moles). The liquid temperature m the
accumulator Is typically 90° C. The
concentration ofnaphthalene In the air
8
-------
exhausted through the vacuum vent con be
estimated as follows:
Vapor pressure (P°) = 10 mm Hg at
85.8 °C
Partial pressure (PA) = 0.0076x10
= 0.076 mm Hg
760 mm Hg (baro-
metric pressure)
Total pressure (PT)
PT
0.076
760
0.0001 mole fraction of
naphthalene in exhaust air
Assuming 250 operating days per year,
the amount ofnaphthalene released
through the exhaust vent would be
calculated as follows:
Amount ofnaphthalene released through
vent =
0.0001 Ib-mole naphthalene/lb-mole
exhaust gasx
1 Ib-mole exhaust gas/2387 cubic
feetx
128 Ib naphthalene/lb-mole
naphthalene x
400 cubicfeet/minute x
240 minutes/day x
250 days/year
= 129 Ib
Using this approach, the facility in this
example could report air emissions of 130
pounds ofnaphthalene.
The assumption used in the preceding
example (that the exhaust air from the vac-
uum vent is in equilibrium with the preser-
vative liquid) is not entirely appropriate. A
better assumption would be that the exhaust
air is in equilibrium with the condensate
liquid in the accumulator. It is highly un-
likely, however, that the mole fraction of a
particular chemical in the condensate liquid
is known or could be estimated.
Other Toxic Releases
Other wastes in wood preserving opera-
tions from which toxic chemicals may be
released Include:
• Residues from, pollution control
devices
• Wash water from equipment
cleaning
• Product rejects
• Used equipment
• Empty chemical containers
Releases from these sources may already
have been accounted for, depending on the
release estimation methods used. These
items (and any other of a similar nature)
should be included in your development of a
process flow diagram.
The contribution of sources of wastes
such as cleaning out vessels or discarding
containers should be small compared with
process losses. If you do not have data on
such sources (or any monitoring data on
overall water releases), assume up to 1 per-
cent of vessel content may be lost during
each cleaning occurrence. For example, if
you discard (to landfill) "empty" drums that
have not been cleaned, calculate the release
as 1 percent of normal drum content. If the
drums are washed before disposal, this may
contribute 1 percent of the content to your
wastewater loading.
-------
Step Five
Complete the Toxic Chemical Release
Inventory Reporting Form.
After estimating the quantity of each
chemical released via wastewater, solid
waste, and air emissions, you must deter-
mine the amount of each chemical released to
water, land, or air or transferred to an offsite
disposal facility. This determination will be
based on the disposal method you use for
each of your waste streams. Enter the re-
lease estimates for each chemical or chemical
category in Part III of the Toxic Chemical
Release Inventory Reporting Form. Also enter
the code for each treatment method used, the
weight percent by which the treatment
reduces the chemical In the treated waste
stream, and the concentration of the chemi-
cal In the influent to treatment (see Instruc-
tions). Report treatment methods that do not
affect the chemical by entering "0" for
removal efficiency.
10
-------
For More information
Emergency Planning
and Community
Rlght-to-Know
Hotline
Small Business
Ombudsman
Hotline
(800) 535-0202
or
(202) 479-2449
(in Washington, D.C.
and Alaska)
(800) 368-5888
or
(703)557-1938
(In Washington. D.C.
and Virginia)
The EPA brochure, Emergency Planning
and Community Rlght-to-Know Act, Section
313 Release Reporting Requirements (EPA
560/4-88-001) presents an overview of the
new law. It identifies the types of facilities
that come under the provisions of Section
313, the threshold chemical volumes that
trigger reporting requirements, and what
must be reported. It also contains a complete
listing of the chemicals and chemical cate-
gories subject to Section 313 reporting. The
EPA publication. Estimating Releases and
Waste-Treatment Efficiencies for the Toxic
Chemical Release Inventory Form (EPA 560/
4-88-O02). presents more detailed Informa-
tion on general release estimation techniques
than is included In this document.
Additional Sources of Information
on Releases From Wood Preserving
Operations
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Wood
Preserving Industry Multimedia Emission
Inventory. EPA 600/2-81-066. NTIS PBS 1-
205999. April 1981.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Emission and Residue Values From Waste
Disposal During Wood Preserving. EPA-600/
2-82-062. NTIS PB82 234246. April 1982.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. De-
velopment Document for Effluent Limitations
Guidelines, New Source Performance Stan-
dards for the Timber Products Processing
Point Source Category. EPA 440/1-81/023.
NTIS PB81-227282. January 1981.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Multimedia Pollution Assessment of the Wood
Products Industries. EPA-6OO/2-81-008.
NTIS PB84-160366. February 1984.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage and
Disposal Facilities (TSDF)-Alr Emission
Models. EPA Draft Report. April 1987.
11
*U.S. Government Printing Office : 1988 - 516-002/80163
-------
------- |