&EPA
United States Industrial Environmental Research EPA-600/7-79-063b
Environmental Protection Laboratory February 1979
Agency Research Triangle Park NIC 27711
Level 2 Chemical
Analysis of Fluidized-
Bed Combustor Samples
Interagency
Energy/Environment
R&D Program Report
L
-------
RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into nine series. These nine broad cate-
gories were established to facilitate further development and application of en-
vironmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
The nine series are:
1. Environmental Health Effects Research
2. Environmental Protection Technology
3. Ecological Research
4. Environmental Monitoring
5. Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
6. Scientific and Technical Assessment Reports (STAR)
7. Interagency Energy-Environment Research and Development
8. "Special" Reports
9. Miscellaneous Reports
This report has been assigned to the INTERAGENCY ENERGY-ENVIRONMENT
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT series. Reports in this series result from the
effort funded under the 17-agency Federal Energy/Environment Research and
Development Program. These studies relate to EPA's mission to protect the public
health and welfare from adverse effects of pollutants associated with energy sys-
tems. The goal of the Program is to assure the rapid development of domestic
energy supplies in an environmentally-compatible manner by providing the nec-
essary environmental data and control technology. Investigations include analy-
ses of the transport of energy-related pollutants and their health and ecological
effects; assessments of, and development of, control technologies for energy
systems; and integrated assessments of a wide range of energy-related environ-
mental issues.
EPA REVIEW NOTICE
This report has been reviewed by the participating Federal Agencies, and approved
for publication. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect
the views and policies of the Government, nor does mention of trade names or
commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
-------
EPA-600/7-79-063b
February 1979
Level 2 Chemical Analysis
of Fluidized-Bed Combustor
Samples
Repository Material
Permanent Collection
by
LE. Ryan, R.G. Beimer, and R.F. Maddalone
TRW, Inc.
Defense and Space Systems Group
One Space Park
Redondo Beach, California 90278
Contract No. 68-02-2613
Task No. 6
Program Element No. EHE623
EPA Project Officer: Walter B. Steen
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
Office of Energy, Minerals, and Industry
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Prepared for
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
-------
ABSTRACT
This report has been prepared as a requirement of Contract 68-01-3152,
Tasks 2, 3 and 4 to document the Level 2 chemical data acquired on a set
of Fluidized Bed Combustor (FBC) particulate samples collected by Battelle
Columbus Laboratory. The Level 2 analytical effort followed the approach
described in the companion document "Approach to Level 2 Analysis Based
on Level 1 Results, MEG Categories and Compounds and Decision Criteria" (1).
The companion document should be available to the reader when reviewing
this analytical volume. It contains the necessary technical explanations of
the analytical techniques employed and will be referred to throughout this
report as "the reference text".
Battelle Columbus Laboratory had collected and analyzed by a modifica-
tion of the Level 1 Environmental Assessment protocol a set of FBC
particulate samples. These were run No. 2 of 6" FBC unit, Level 1 report
dated September 22, 1976 under EPA Contract No. 68-02-1409, Task No. 33.
These samples were retained for Level 2 analyses. This report uses the
Level 1 data to prioritize the Level 2 effort (Section 2) and conducts
level 2 inorganic (Section 3) and organic (Section 4) analytical efforts
as described in the reference text.
Section 2 of this document demonstrates the utility of the decision
criteria based on Multimedia Environmental Goal (MEG) compounds at Mini-
mum Acute Toxicity Effluent (MATE) concentrations. It assesses the
modified Level 1 data through their presentation on the "Level 1 Data
Reduction and Decision Charts". This results in a list of inorganic
elements, ions and compounds 'and organic compounds which are specifically
sought for in the inorganic and organic Level 2 efforts. Because the
w
samples were not taken, stored and/or analyzed by the established Level 1
procedures, the Level 1 information is incomplete; however, the information
obtained has been used as a first cut evaluation of the Level 1 to Level 2
process for the selection of specific samples for Level 2 characterization.
Section 3 reports the data generated- from the integrated approach to
Level 2 inorganic compound analysis. The detailed logic networks presented
iii
-------
in the reference text have been followed and their utility demonstrated.
In the Initial Sample Characterization Phase, where elemental composition,
sample stability and bulk morphological structure were determined; the
FBC samples were found to be:
• Highly stable and mostly inorganic in composition.
• Relatively uniform in morphology and without optically identifiable
crystalline materials.
• Flame and fTameless atomic absorption spectrometry adequately
established cation quantities.
The Bulk Composition Characterization for this Level 2 inorganic effort
was qualitative. Oxidation states and compound identification were
established. After this analytical phase the FBC samples were known
to contain the following compounds as major constituents:
• Fe203, Si02, CaS04 • 2H20, CaS04 • 1/2 HgO, CaS04 (anhydrous),
CaS, CaO and CaC03 (vaterite and calcite forms).
The next phase of Individual Particle Characterization confirmed the prior
analytical findings of uniformity and composition. However, it also iden-
tified submicron particles of SiCL which were present as discrete, respirable
crystallites.
The organic Level 2 analytical work is reported in Section 4. The gas
chromatography/mass spectrometric (GC/MS) work resulted in various aromatic
and aliphatic hydrocarbons being quantitated and identified as present in
the FBC emission samples.
Table I summarizes the organic analytical results obtained from this
Level 1 data assessment and Level 2 chemical analyses; Table II summarizes
the inorganic.
Appendices A through D and F contain raw data, calibration curves and
actual spectral scans. Appendix E reports a repeat Level 1 organic analysis
on the FBC samples.
IV
-------
Table I. Organic Sunmary
LEVEL 1 ASSESSMENT
Level 1 Organic
Liquid Chromato-
graphic (LC) Fraction
Requiring Level 2
Analysis
LC 1
LC 2 and 3
LC 4 and 5
LC 6 and 7
MEG Categories
Sought In Level 2
Probable wg/m
Category Concentrations*
Organometallics 7.6 x 102
Unsaturated 1.3 x 103
Alkyl Hal Ides
Halogenerated
Aromatic Hydrocarbons
Benzene, Substitute
Benzene
Fused Aromatic
Hydrocarbons
Fused Nonalternate
Poly cyclic Hydrocarbons
Heterocyclic Sulfur 6.6 x 102
Amines 1.2 x 103
Hercaptans, Sul fides
Halophenols
NHrophenols
Heterocycllc
Nitrogen
LEVEL 2 DATA
MEG Compounds
Identified
KEG MEG
Category Compound
Aliphatic Alkanes (C > 9)
Hydrocarbons
Aliphatic Alkanes (C > 9)
Hydrocarbons
Esters Phthalates**
Fused Aromatic 1,2 Benzan-
Hydrocarbons thracene
Phenanthrene
Methyl Anthra-
cene
Pyrene
Naphthalene
Fused Nonalternate Benzo Fluoran-
Polycycltc Hydrocarbons thene
Fluoranthene
Esters Phthalates**
Esters Phthalates**
Unknown (1) Molecular
Weight 176
Unknown (2) Hydrocarbons
Molecular
Weight 394
vg/m
Concentration
Total PER
PER Compound LC Fractions
1.9 x.103 1.9 x Ifl3
7.7 x 102
1.2 x 102
2.8 x 10
1.7 x 102 1.5 x 103
1.2 x 102
3.5 x 10
1.5 x 10
1.9 x 10
2.1 x 103 2.1 x 103
8.7 x 102
2.4 x 102 2.0 x 103
8.7 x 102
*These are the concentrations determined by the Level 1 analytical effort.
"Only compound which EXCEEDS MATES
-------
Table II. Inorganic Summary
Inorganic HEG
Category Requiring
Level 2 Analyses
L1th1un
Sodium
Potassium
Beryl 11 in
Magnesium
Calcium
Strontl urn
Barlun
Aluminum
Thallium
Silicon
Lead
Nitrogen
Phosphorus
Arsenic
Sulfur
YHrlum
T1tan1un
Zirconium
Vanadlun
Chromium
Haganese
iron
Cobalt
Rhodium
Klckel
Copper
Cadnlin
Uranium
Silver
Z1nc
Mercury
LEVEL 1 ASSESSMENT
HEG Compounds
Sought In Level 2
Probable ug/m3
Compound Concentration*
LI. L1*, L12C03 2.3 x 102
Na* 5.7 x 10*
Kt 2.6 x 105
Be**, BeO, BeO-Al203-S102 4.1
Hg*+, HgO, MgS04, MgC03, 9.8 x 10*
MgC03.CaC03
Ca++, CaC03, CaS04 1.3 x 106
Si**, SrS04 4.3 x 103
Ba, BaC03, BaS04 1.6 x 10*
Al+3, A1203, A1203-3H20 9.4 x 10?
Tl 1.6 x 102
S104"2, S103-2, 5102. S1C 3.5 X 1C*
Pb*2, Pb**. PbO, PbS04, 9.5 x 102
PbC03. Pb3(P04)2
N03-, N02~ 1.8 x 105
P03'3, P04'3 1.1 x 103
As*3, As*5, A$04-3, As03-3, 2.3 x 101
S'2, S04-2, S03-2 2.2 x 10*
Y+3 8.5 x 103
T1+3, Tl**, T102 2.7 x 10*
Zr+*, Zrtfc 3.5 x 103
V*3, VO+2; V04-*, V03, 9.8 x 103
V0*3, VO, V203, V204,
V205. VOS04-5H20
Cr*2, Cr*3, Crt>4-2, ^07-2, 2.1 x 103
Cr203, FeO Cr203, FeCr04
Hn+2. Mn*3, KnO,, HnO, 3.8 x 103
Hn02, HnC03. MnSC*
Fe+2, Fe+3, FeO-Fe203, FeS, 4.3 x 105
Fe203, KFeS120{
C0*2, Co+3, CoCo3-4H20, CoO 1.9 x 102
Rh*3, 2.1 x 102
N1"2, N1+3, NiO 3.8 x 103
Cu*. Cu*2, CuO, Cu20, 9.7 x 102
CuSO,, CuC03
Cd+2. CdO < 6.0 x Up
U 6.4 x IflV
not required
not required
not required
LEVEL
MEG Compounds
Identified
(Indicated)
L1.L1*
Na+, (Na20)
K
none detected
(HgO), Kg**, (HgS04)
Ca**, CaCCh), CaS04, CaS, (CaO)
Sr**, (SrS04)
none detected
Al*3. (A1203)
none detected
S1,(S103"2), S102
pb+2. (PbS04, PbCOj)
(NO/, N02')
not detected
As, (As04"3, As203)
S-*. S04-2, S03-2
none detected
none detected
Zr**. (Zr02)
«. Cvo4-<, V2o3. V2o4. V2o5.
VOS04-5H20)
Cr. Cr*2, Ci-*3, (Cr04"2. Cr204'2,
C^Ss, Cr03)
u +2 Un** /ynfi
TO i nn * V"iiUii
Hn02, MnC03, MnS04)
Fe+3, Fe^.tFeS)
none detected
none detected
none detected
Cu*, Cu*2. (CuO, CuS04.
CuC03)
Cd
not determined
Ag
Zn, (ZnO, ZnS04, ZnS)
Hg
2 DATA
ug/»3
• Concentration
6.3 x 102 EXCEEDS HATE
5.4 x 105 EXCEEDS HATE
6.7 X 10*
7.3 x 10* (as Mg) EXCEEDS HATE
9.5 x 105 (as Ca) EXCEEDS MATE
1.4 x 10* (as Sr) EXCEEDS MATE
5.2 x 10* (as Al) EXCEEDS HATE
1.3 x 102 (as SI) EXCEEDS MATE
3.3 X ID3 (as Pb) EXCEEDS HATE
not determined
5.0 x l100 ppo. >5 x 10* i»g/in3)'.
-------
CONTENTS
Abstract iii
Figures ix
Tables x
Acknowledgments xi
1. INTRODUCTION 1
2. BATTELLE FLUIDIZED BED COMBUSTOR LEVEL 1 DATA AND
RESULTING LEVEL 2 PLAN 3
2.1 Battelle Modified Level 1 Data 3
2.2 Level 2 Required Analysis Based on MATE
Decision Criteria 5
2.3 Problems Anticipated in Using the Provided
Particulate Samples for the Level 2
Approach Evaluation 34
2.4 Details of Level 2 Allocation Plan 35
3. LEVEL 2 INORGANIC CHARACTERIZATION OF THE FLUIDIZED BED
COMBUSTOR PARTICULATES 37
3.1 Initial Sample Characterization 37
3.1.1 List of Potential Inorganic Compounds . . 37
3.1.2 Study of General Characteristics 40
3.1.3 Specific Anion/Cation Tests . 46
3.2 Bulk Composition Characterization 64
3.2.1 FTIR 64
3.2.2 ESCA 66
3.2.3 XRD 69
3.2.4 Summary of MEG Compounds Exceeding
MATE Values Identified 69
3.3 Single Particle Analysis 75
3.3.1 SEM-EDX 75
3.3.2 EPMA 75
3.3.3 TEM-SAED 82
3.3.4 Sample Fractionation Techniques 94
3.4 Conclusions Based on Level 2 Inorganic Analyses. . . 94
4. LEVEL 2 ORGANIC ANALYSIS OF THE FLUIDIZED BED
COMBUSTOR PARTICULATES 119
4.1 Sample Preparation and Allocation Plan 119
4.1.1 Instrument Employed in Sections 3.2,
3.3, and 3.4 119
-------
CONTENTS (Continued)
4.2 Volatile Organic Level 2 Analysis 119
4.3 Low Resolution Mass Spectrometric Identification
of Nonchromatographable Components . 123
4.4 GC/MS Analysis of Liquid Chromatographic Fractions . 124
4.5 Chemical lonization/Gas Chromatography/Mass
Spectrometry 131
4.5.1 Procedure and Results 131
4.6 Conclusions Based on Level 2 Organic Analyses. ... 133
Appendices
A Atomic Absorption Calibration Curves 134
B FTIR Spectral Scans 151
C ESCA Scans 162
D SEM-EDX Scans 180
E Level 1 Organic Data 186
F Selected GC/MS Scans 202
References 213
viii
-------
FIGURES
Number Page
3_1 Logic Flow Chart for Initial Sample Characterization ... 38
3_2 Photomicrograph of FBC Samples, S-2-4 and S-2-5 41
3_3 Photomicrograph of Sample S-2-6 42
3.4 Photomicrograph of Sample S-2-7 43
3-5 Photomicrograph of Sample S-2-7 44
3-6 Representative TGA Scan, Sample S-2-3 49
3-7 Logic Flow for Bulk Composition Characterization 65
3-8 Mounting of ESCA Samples Using "Sticky Gold" Technique. . 68
3-9 Logic Flow for Individual Particle Characterization ... 76
3-10 SEM at 3000X of Sample S-2-3 77
3-11 SEM at 3000X of Sample S-2-4 78
3-12 SEM at 3000X of Sample S-2-5 79
3-13 SEM at 3000X of Sample S-2-6 80
3-14 SEM at 3000X and 6000X of Sample S-2-7 81
3-15 EPMA of Sample S-2-3 83
3-16 EPMA of Sample S-2-4 84
3-17 EPMA of Sample S-2-5 85
3-18 EPMA of Sample S-2-6 86
3-19 EPMA of Sample S-2-7 87
3-20 TEM/SAED Analysis of Sample S-2-3 89
3-21 TEM/SAED Analysis of Sample S-2-4 90
3-22 TEM/SAED Analysis of Sample S-2-5 91
3-23 TEM/SAED Analysis q'f S-2-6 92
3-24 TEM/SAED Analysis of S-2-7 93
4-1 Level 2 Organic Analysis Scheme 12°
4-2 Level 1 and Level 2 Sample Allocation Plan
IX
-------
TABLES
Number page
I Summary of Organic Level 1 Assessment and Level 2
Analytical Results iii
II Summary of Inorganic Level 1 Assessment and Level 2
Analytical Results iv
2-1 Summary of Battelle Level 1 Data with Generalized
Comments on Run No. 2 Data from September 22, 1976
Report 4
2-2 Total Emission Data from 6-inch FBC Unit 6
2-3 Summary of Required Level 2 Analysis 33
2-4 Sample Inventory and General Disbursement Plan 36
3-1 Tabulation of Thermal Gravimetric Data 47
3-2 Sample Codes Used for Quantitative Cation Studies . ... 50
3-3 Atomic Absorption Analytical Operating Parameters .... 52
3-4 Atomic Absorption Particulate Analysis (yg/g) Results . . 53
3-5 Atomic Absorption Leachate Solution Analysis (mg/1)
Result 54
3-6 Percent Recovery of Spiked Samples by Atomic Absorption . 55
3-7 ICPOES Results on Leachate Samples 62
3-8 ICPOES Recovery Results 63
3-9 Infrared Spectral Interpretation 67
3-10 ESCA Results 70
3-11 XRD Results 72
3-12 EPMA Identified Elements 88
3-13 Level 2 Data on FBC Emission Samples 95
3-14 Level 2 Lechate Studies of Overflow Bed Materials .... 107
4-1 Results of Level 2 Survey Analysis for Polynuclear
Organic Compounds 122
4-2 Low Resolution Mass Spectrometric Analysis of
Non-Volatile Components of the FBC Samples. . . 123
4-3 Level 2 Survey Analysis of Liquid Chromatographic
Fractions 124
4-4 Results of Chemical lonization GC/MS Analysis - 132
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This document has been prepared under Tasks 2, 3, and 4 of EPA Contract
68-01-3152. The EPA project officer was Mr. Walter Steen of EPA IERL-RTP.
The TRW program manager was Ms. I.E. Ryan. Major contributions to the ana-
lytical work were provided by J.F. Clausen, W.B. Coleman, R.G. Beimer,
M.L. Kraft, and R.F. Maddalone.
x1
-------
1. INTRODUCTION
In the phased approach to environmental assessment, Level 1 is the
initial survey method by which hazardous streams are distinguished from
those less hazardous or innocuous. Level 1 sampling and analysis have
been designed to generate semiquantitative (±3X) information about the
organic and inorganic species of interest in the sampled stream so that a
dominant offender does not go undetected. The degree of characterization
that Level 1 provides consists of identifying organic classes of compounds
and inorganic elements. This information can then be used to prioritize
the detailed and specific analysis required in Level 2. Level 2 analysis
seeks compound identification and may have higher accuracy requirements
than Level 1.
The decision criteria developed in the companion document, "Approach
to Level 2 Analysis Based on Level 1 Results, MEG Categories and Compounds
and Decision Criteria" (1), has been used here in prioritizing and pro-
ceeding to a Level 2 emission characterization on Fluidized Bed Combustor
(FBC) particulate samples.
A Level 2 analysis was then conducted. In many cases this was the
first application for some techniques to environmental samples.
This Level 2 analysis has generated qualitative and quantitative compound
information based on the analytical schemes developed and presented in the
reference text. Although compound information has been generated for the
FBC samples analyzed, this should be viewed as a preliminary Level 2 environ-
mental assessment. Many of the techniques employed were developmental and
would require greater experimental efforts to optimize and refine these
qualitative methods into quantitative ones. This work will be evolving
as more Level 2 analytical efforts are undertaken and a greater
bank of knowledge is obtained on the behavior of environmental samples
undergoing chemical analyses.
The work presented here was used to modify the reference text and did
provide many insights into sample preparation and analytical technique
utility. The reference text has been edited to reflect the knowledge
gained from each phase of this analytical effort.
-------
This document is based on currently available MEG and MATE values and
state-of-the-art analytical methodologies.
-------
2. BATTELLE FLUIDIZED BED COMBUSTOR LEVEL 1 DATA
AND RESULTING LEVEL 2 PLAN
The Battelle modified Level 1 data from run No. 2 of the 6-inch fluid-
ized bed combustor unit were reported on September 22, 1976, under EPA Con-
tract No. 68-02-1409, Task No. 33. TRW assessed these analytical results
according to the Level 1 - Level 2 transition presented in the "Approach to
Level 2 Analysis Based on Level 1 Results, MEG Categories and Compounds
and Decision Criteria" (1). Based on this assessment, Level 2 inorganic
and organic analyses were conducted according to the approach described
in Sections 5 and 6 of the referenced text.
This section contains a discussion of the modified Level 1 data avail-
able in the Battelle report, and the Level 1 - Level 2 transition details.
It also presents the problems anticipated in using these run No. 2 samples
for the evaluation of the Level 2 approach developed for Level 1 samples
taken specifically according to the IERL-RTP procedures manual. (2)
2.1 BATTELLE MODIFIED LEVEL 1 DATA
The Battelle data provided for evaluation will be referred to through-
out this report as modified Level 1. These data were not generated from a
standard Level 1 environmental assessment according to the IERL-RTP proce-
dures manual (EPA-600/2-76-160a). Table 2-1 summarizes the Battelle sup-
plied data, indicates the areas more complete than a standard Level 1 and less
complete than Level 1, and the impact this modified information has on the
data assessment.
In general the full applicability of the Level 1 Data Reduction and
Decision Charts prepared fbr and presented in the referenced Level 2 text
cannot be demonstrated by the Battelle data. The significant areas
where data are not available or are deficient:
• The on-site volatile organics, C1-C6
• The home-site volatile organics, C6-C12
• Quantitative analysis for arsenic, antimony and mercury
t The Source Assessment Sampling System (SASS) was not used
for sampling. Therefore, the modified Level 1 analysis
-------
Table 2-1. Summary of Battelle Level 1 Data with Generalized Comments
on Run No. 2 Data from September 22, 1976 Report
ASPECT
MORE COMPLETE THAN LEVEL 1
LESS COMPLETE THAN LEVEL 1
IMPACT ON ASSESSMENT
ON-SITE
DATA
• SASS Not Used
• C1-C6 Not Conducted
• Most Emitted Organics Not
Retained for Analysis
• No Data on MEG
-------
was conducted on participate samples only. Efficient
retention of emitted organics was not accomplished.
• Infrared (IR) and Low Resolution Mass Spectrometry (LRMS)
were not conducted. Therefore„ specific MEG categories
are triggered for Level 2 analyses based on liquid chro-
matography (LC) weight criteria only. If IR and LRMS
data were available, it might have been possible to elim-
inate some categories from Level 2 consideration.
Table 2-2 presents total emission data; the summation of the Level 1
data on the sludge (S-2-5), the particulate >27y (S-2-6), and the particu-
late <27y (S-2-7), for the Battelle 6-inch Fluidized Bed Combustor Unit.
Any Level 1 reporting point, e.g., LC fraction, which exceeds a Minimum
Acute Toxicity Effluent (MATE) guideline or is within the Level 1 uncer-
tainty factor of ±2 or 3 triggers the Level 2 analysis of that particular
fraction or sample. Table 2-3 summarizes the MEG categories in LC fractions
and inorganic elements in the FBC run No. 2 samples which have been triggered
for Level 2 analysis by this transition methodology.
2.2 LEVEL 2 REQUIRED ANALYSIS BASED ON MATE DECISION CRITERIA
Table 2-3 summarizes the MEG categories and elements for which Level 2
analyses are required based on the MATE decision criteria. Level 2 is
o
required where the yg/m concentration value for the particular FBC sample
is within a factor of 3 of the MATE value (the Level 1 sampling and anal-
ysis uncertainty factor).
The MEG compound specific Level 2 plan was designed to identify and
quantify the compounds present in each sample or sample fraction and the
plan has been followed for the FBC samples. Level 2 leachate studies were
performed on samples expected to be stored as landfill to assess the FBC
samples' MATE (yg/z) water impact. An aqueous inorganic extraction pro-
cedure outlined in the Level 2 scheme has been followed. These samples
were then analyzed for cation content and assessed as water emission
samples.
The Illinois coal sample, S-2-1, and the limestone sample, S-2-2, data
2
could not be reduced and compared to MATE decision criteria; yg/m does not
apply to these samples. However, they were analyzed in the Level 2
-------
Table 2-2. Total Emission Data From 6-inch FBC Unit*
LEVEL 1 - LEVEL 2 DATA REDUCTION TABLES, REV. II.
CATEGORY
1. ALIPHATIC
HYDROCARBONS
CYCLIC
ALKANES
CYCLIC
Alkenes and
Dienes •
.
2. HALOGENATED
ALIPHATIC
HYDROCARBON
A. SATURATED
ALKYL
HALIDES
COMPOUND
Hexanes
Nonanes
Cyclohexane
Butanes
Octanes
Heptanes
Pentanes
Methane
Ethane
Propane
Cyclopetane
Alkanes (C>9)
Cyclopentadienes
Cyclohexene
Hexenes
Butadienes
Ethyl ene
Propylene
Butyl enes
Pentenes
Cyclohexadiene
Heptenes
Propyne
Acetylene
Butyne
Hexachlorocyclo-
hexane (Lindone)
Methyl iodide
HATE
JIR
(PPn>)
3.6 x 105 (100)
1.05 x 106 (200)
1.05 x 106. (300)
1.4 x 106 (600)
1.45 x 10B (300)
1.6 x 106 (400)
1.8 x 106 (600)
3.3 x 106 (5000)
6.12 x 106 (5000)
9.0 X 10* (5000)
N
N
2.0 X 105 (75)
1.0 X 10$ (300)
1.02 x 106 (300)
2.2 X 106 (1000)
5.71 x 106 (5000)
B.59 X 10e (5000)
N
N
N
N
1.65 X 106 (1000)
5.31 x 106 (5000)
N
5.0 x 10*
8.54 x 10*
MATE
MATER
ug/1
. HEALTH
5.4 x 106
1.57 x 10'
1.58 x 10'
2.1 x 10'
2.18 x 10?
2.4 x 10'
2.7 x 10'
4.91 x 10'
9.18 x 10'
1.35 x 108
N
N
3.0 x 106
1.5 x 10'
1.53 x 10'
3.3 X 10'
8.57 x 10'
1.29 x 108
N
N
N
N
2.48 x Id'
7.97 X 10?
N
7.50 X 103
1.28 x 104
KATE
HATER
ug/i
ECOLOGY
1.0 X 105
N
1.0 x. 103
>1.0 x 105
N
1.0 x 105
1.0 x 103
>1.0 X 105
N
>1.0 x 105
>1.0 x 105
N
N
N
N
1.0 x 103
1.0 x Ifll
1.0 x 105
N
N
N
1.0 x 10s
N
N
N
1.0 X 10?
N
HATE
LAND
US/9
HEALTH
1.1 x 10*
3.2 x 104
3.2 x 104
4.2 x 104
4.4 x 10*
4.8 x ID4
5.4 x 104
9.8 x 104
1.8 x 105
2.8 x 105
1.1 x 104
N
6.0 x 103
3.0 x 104
N
6.6 x 10*
1.7 x 105
2.6 x 105
N
N
N
N
5.0 x 10<
1.6 x 105
N ">
1.5 x 101
2.6 X 10'
KATE
LAND '
u9/9
ECOLOGY
>2.0 X 10*
N
2.0
>2.0 X 10?
N
2.0 X 10*
2.0
>2.0 x 10*
N
>2.0 x 10?
>2.0 x 102
N
N
N
N
2.0
2.0 X 10
2.0 x 10?
H
N
N
2.0 x 10Z
N
N
N
2.0 x 10-1
N
WHERE FOUND
IN
LEVEL I
GAS, FIELD, C6
SASS, LAB, C9
GAS, FIELD, C6
GAS, FIELD, C4
SASS, LAB, C8
SASS, LAB, C7
GAS, FIELD, C5
GAS, FIELD, Cl
GAS, FIELD, C2
GAS, FIELD, C3
GAS, FIELD, C5
SASS, LAB, C10-
12. LCI
GAS, FIELD, C5
GAS. FIELD, C6
GAS, FIELD, C6
GAS, FIELD, C3
GAS, FIELD. Cl
GAS, FIELD, C2
GAS, FIELD, C3
GAS, FiaD, C5
GAS. FIELD, C5
GASjJ^ELD^ C6
GAS, FIELD, C3
GAS, FIELD, C2
GAS, FIELD, C3
SASS, LAB, C11
GAS, FIELD, C5
"9/1
N D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
7.6X102
N.D.
N.D.
H.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
JN.D. _
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
RATIO
SAMPLE
HATE
N
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y»YES
N°NO
TEST-
METHOD1
•TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS*
TEST
COST3
SAMPLE.
ALIQUOT4
TABLE KEY:
1. TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRD
C. MET
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. GC/MS
2. EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH '
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
3. TEST COST
1. REASON-
ABLE '
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
4. SAMPLE
ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
Suontlon of S-2-5, S-2-6 and S-2-7
N.D. Not Determined
N No Value
-------
Table 2-2. Total Emission Data From 6-inch FBC Unit* (Continued)
CATEGORY
B. UHSATURED
ALKVL
HALIDES
3. ETHERS
COMPOUND
Tribronone thane
Hexachloroe thane
1,1,2-Trichloro-
e thane
Carbon tetra-
chloride
HEthyl bromide
Chloroform
1,2-Dichloroe thane
Hethyl chloride
Dichloropropanes
Dichloromethane
Bronuchlorome thane
1.2-Dichloro-l,2-
difluoroe thane
Di chlorodi f 1 uoro-
we thane
Trichlorofluoro-
ne thane
Bromodichloro-
re thane
Dibromodtchloro-
ne thane
Bromobutanes
1-Chlorooctane
Hexachlorocyclo-
pentadlcne
-Chloroethene
Hexachloro-
butadlene
Dichloropropenes
1,1-Di Chloroethene
Tetrachlorocthene
1,2-Dtchloroethene
2-Ethyl-4-Methyl-
1,3-Dloxolanes
1 ,3-Dloxanc
1,4-Dloxanc
Uopropyl ether
2-fethoxybtphcnyl
MATE
AIR
pg/m3 (ppm)
5.0 x 103 (0.5)
1.0 x 10* (1)
4.5 x 10* (10)
5.98 x 10*
6.0 x ID* (15)
1.2 x IDS (25)
2.0 x 10s (50)
2.1 x 10s (100)
3.5 x 105 (757
7.2 x 10s (200)
1.1 x 106 (200)
4.95 x 106 (1000)
4.95 x 106 (1000)
5.6 x 106
N
N
N
N
1.1 x 102 (0.01)
2.55 x 103 (1)
4.0 x 103
1.12 x 10*
2.59 x 105
6.7 x 105 (100)
7.0 x 105 (200)
2.25 x 10*
1.8 x 10s (50)
1.8 x 105
1.05 x 106 (250)
N
HATE
WATER
MS/1
HEALTH
7.5 x 10*
1.5 x 105
6.75 X 10s
8.97 x 105
9.0 x 10s
6.0 x 105
3.0 x 106
3.15 x Ifl6
5.25 x 106
1.08 x 10'
1.7 x 107
7.43 x 10?
7.43 x 107
8.4 x 106
M
N
N
N
1.65 x 103
3.83 x 10*
6.07 x 10*
1.68 x 10*
3.88 x 106
1.01 x 107
1.10 x 107
3.38 x 10s
2.7 x 106
2.7 x 10'
1.58 X 107
N
HATE
WATER
U9/1
ECOLOGY
•N
N
1.0 x 103
1.0 x 103
>1.0 x 105
N
1.0 x 10*
>1.0 x 105
.1.0 X 103
4.5 x 103
N
N
>1.0 x 105
N
N
N
N
N
N
>71.0 x 105
N
1.0 x 103
4.5 x 103
1.0 x 103
1.0 x 10*
N
N
1.0 x 10*
1.0 x 10*
N
MATE
LAND
P9/9
HEALTH.
1.5 x 102
3.0 x 10?
1.* X 103
1.8 x 103
1.8 x 103
1.2 x 103
6.0 x 103
6.4 x 103
1.1 x 10*
3.4 x 10*
1.5 x 105
1.5 x 105
1.7 x 105
N
N
N
N
3.4
7.6 x 101
1.2 x 102
3.4 x 102
2.0 x 10*
2.2 x 10*
6.8 x 102
5.4 x 103
5.4 x 103
3.2 x 10*
N
MATE
LAND
U9/9
ECOLOGY
N
N
2.0
2.0
.72.0 x 102
N
2.0 x 10'
2.0 x 102
2.0
N
N
72.0 x 102
N
N
N
N
N
N
2.0 x 102
II
2.0
2.0
2.0 x IQl
N
2.0 x 10l
2.0 x 10l
2.0 x 10l
H
WHERE FOUND
IN
LEVEL I
SASS, LAB, CIO
SASS, LAB, Cll
GAS, FIELD, C5
GAS, FIELD, C5
GAS, FIELD, C4
GAS, FIELD, «
GAS, FIELD, C5
GAS, FIELD, C3
GAS, FIELD, C6
SASS, LAB, C8
GAS, FIELD, C6
GAS, FIELD, C5
GAS, FIELD, C3
GAS, FIELD, C4
GAS, FIELD, C6
GAS, FIELD, C8
SASS, LAB, C7
SASS, LAB, Cll
SASS, LAB, LC2
GAS, FIELD, C3
SASS, LAB, LC2
GAS, FIELD, C6
GAS. FIELD, C5
SASS, LAB, C8
GAS, FIELD, C5
SASS, LAB, C8
SASS, LAB, C7
SASS, LAB, C7
SASS, LAB, C7
SASS, LAB, C7
Tppin)
vg/\
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.O.
iLD-
7.4xl02
N.D.
7.4x10*
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
RATIO
SAMPLE
HATE
6.7
6.7
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y=YES
N=NO
YCS
,
YCS
TEST
METHOD1
1-E
1-E
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
1
1
TEST
COST3
1
1
SAMPLE,
ALIQUOT*
I
1
1.
2.
1
4.
TABLE KEY:
. TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRD
C. WET
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. GC/MS
, EXPECTED
TEST SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3.- UNKNOWN
TEST COST
1 REASON-
ABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
SAMPLE
ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
itlon of S-2-5, S-2-6, and S-2-7.
N.D. Not Determined
N No Value
-------
Table 2-2. Total Emission Data From 6-inch FBC Unit* (Continued)
00
CATEGORY
4. HXLOGEWTED
. EIDERS
5. ALCOHOLS
A. PRIWKY
ALCOHOLS
B. SECONDARY
ALCOHOLS
COMPOUND
1.1-Dichlonxll-
ethyl ether
1,2-Dlchloro-
ethyl ether
2.2-DichlortxH-
ethyl ether
ChloraKthyl
•ethyl ether
1.1-Dichloro-
•ethyl ether
Z-Chloro-1.2
epoxypropane
2-Chloroethyl
•ethyl ether
l-Chloro-1,2-
oxetane
Oiloroethylethyl
ether
1.2-Dichloroethyl
ethyl ether
a-dilorobutyl-
ethyl ether
bis-(l-CMoroiso-
propyl) ether
BroBDphenyl
phenyl ether
a-llydroxytholyene
Isobutylalcohol
Pentanols (Prinary)
1-Propanol
BuUnols (Primary)
N-Butanol
Nethanol
Ethanol
Phenyl Ethanol
Benzyl
Borneol
2,6-Dtaethyl-4-
heptanol
HATE
AIR
MS/-3 (PP»)
3.0 x 10* (5)
3.0 x 104 (5)
3.0 x 10* (5)
3.68 x 10*
' N
N
H
N
N
N
N
N
N
5.5 x 10-*
1.5 x 105 (50)
3.6 x 105 (100)
5.0 x 105
1.5 x 1(»S (50)
2.6 x 10s (200)
1.9 x 10* (1000)
1.8 x 10*~
5.54 x 10*
9.0 x 104
1.6 x 105
HATE
WATER
V9/1
HEALTH
4.5 x 10s
4.5 x 105
4.5" x 105
5.52 x ID*
N
N
"
N
K
N
N
N
N
8.3 x IflS
2.3 X 106
5.4 x 106
7.5 x 106
2.25 x 106
3.9 x 106
2.85 x 107
2.7 x 105
8.31 x 10s
1.35 x 106
2.4 x 106
HATE
HATER
wg/1
ECOLOGY
N
4.5 x 103
1.0 x 104
4.5 x 103
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
1.0 x 104
1.0 x 104
1.0 x 104
1.0 x 104
>1.0 x.105
>1.0 x 105
>1.0 x 105
N
1.0 x 104
N
N
HATE
LAND
U9/9
HEALTH
9.0 x 102
X
9.0 x 102
1.1 x 103
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
1.7 x 103
4.5 x 103
1.1 x 104
1.5 x 10*
4.5 x 103
7.8 x 103
5.8 x 10*
5.4 x 102
4.8 x 103
4.8 x 103
HATE
LAND
V9/9
ECOLOGY
N
N
2.0 x 10'
9.0
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
h
N
2.0 x 101
2.0 x 10l
2.0 x 101
2.0 x Ifll
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 102
N
N
N
WHERE FOUND
IN
LEVEL I
SASS, LAB, C7
SASS, LAB, C9
SASS, LAB, CIO
GAS, FIELD, C5
SASS, LAB, C7
SASS, LAB. LC4
GAS, FIELD, C6
SASS, LAB, C7
SASS, LAB, C7
SASS, LAB, C9
SASS, LAB, CIO
SASS, LAB, Cll
SASS, LAB, LC4
SASS, LAB, C12
SASS, LAB, C7
SASS, LAB, C8
GAS, FIELD, C6
SASS, LAB, C8
GAS, FIELD, C6
GAS, FIELD, C6
SASS, LAB, LC6
SASS, LAB. LC6
SASS, LAB. LC6
SASS, LAB, C6
(ppm)
U9/1
N.D.
N.D.
N.O.
N.O.
N.O.
4xl02
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
4X102
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D. '
N.O.
N.D.
N.D.
3.6X102
3.6xlOZ
3.6X102
N.D.
RATIO
SAMPLE
HATE
N
N
0.02
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y-YES
N°NO
NO
TEST
METHOD1
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
TEST
COST3
SAHPLE,.
ALIQUOT4
TABLE KEY:
1. TEST HETHOD
1. STANDARD
2. OEVELOP-
HENTAL
3. UNKHOHH
A. AAS
B. XRD
C. MET
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. 6C/MS
2. EXPECTED
TEST SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
3. TEST COST
1 REASON-
ABLE
2. MODERATE.
3. HIGH
4. SAMPLE
ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAHPLE
*Sii(BBt1on of S-2-5. S-2-6 and S-2-7
N.O. Not Determined
N No Value
-------
Table 2-2. Total Emission Data From 6-inch BBC Unit* (Continued)
CATEGORY
C. TERTURY
ALCOHOLS
6. S-YCOLS,
EPOXIDES
A. eLYCOLS
B. EPOXIOES
.
7. ALDEHYDES.
KETONES -
A. ALDEHYDES
B. KETOHES
COMPOUND
Pentonols
(secondary)
2-Butanol
2-Propanol
Tertiary Pentanol
a-Terptneol
Tertiary Butanol
Isoborneol
Ethylene glycol
_Propylene glycol
l-Oiloro-2,3-
epoxypropane
2,3-Epoxy-l-
propanol
AcroTeln
Formaldehyde
Proptonaldehyde
Benzaldehyde
Butyl-aldehyde
AceUldehyde
3-HeUn/lbutanal
Cantor
Isophorone
Acetophenone
Acetone
Butanone
Tetrachloro-
acetone
Oilorohydroxy
Benzophenone
5.6-Benzo-9-
An throne
D1hydro(d)carvone
WTE
pg/irMppm)
3.6 x 10s (100)
4.8 x IO5 (ISO)
9.8 x 105 (400)
4.5 x IO4"
1.95 x 10b
3.0 x 105 (100)
N
1.0 x 104
3.6 x 105 (100)
1.63 X 104
1.5 "x IO4 (50)
2.5 x IO2 (D.I)
1.6 x 103
3.6 x 104
5.83 X 104
1.12 x 10s
1.8 x 105 (100)
3.86 x 105
1.2 x 104 (2)
2.5 x 104
4.05 x 104
2.4 x 10*" (1000)
5.9 x 106 (200)
N
N
N
N
HATE
WATER
P9/1
HEALTH
5.4 x 106
6.75 x 106
1.47 x 10?
6.75 x 1?
2.89 x 106
4.5 x 106
N
1.5 x 105
5.4 x Ifl6
2.45 x 10s
2.3 x 105
3.75 x 103
2.4 x 104
5.4 x 105
8.77 x 105
1.68 x 106
2.7 x 106
5.79 x 106
1.8 x H>5
3.75 x 105
6.07 x 105
3.6 x IO7
8.85 x 10s
N
N
N
N
MATE
HATER
ng/l
ECOLOGY
N
>1.0 x 105
1.0 x 104
>1.0 x 105
N
>1.0 x 105
N
1.0 x 104
>1.0 x 105
1.0 x 103
N
<1.0 x ID2
1.0 x IO3
1.0 x 104
N
1.0 x 102
N
1.0 X 103
N
N
N
>i.6 x io5
>1.0 X 105
N
N
N
N
HATE
LAND
ug/g
HEALTH
1.1 x IO4
1.4 x IO4
3.0 x 104 I
1.4 x IO3
5.8 x IO3
9.0 x IO3
N
3.0 x IO2
I 1.1 x IO4
4.8 x IO2
5.2 x IO3
7.5
4.8 x 101
1.1 x IO3
1.8 x IO3
3.3 x IO3
5.4 x IO3
1.2 x IO4
3.6 x 10r
7.5 x IO2
1.2 x IO3
7.2 x IO4
1.8 x IO4
N
N
N
N
HATE
LAND
ug/9
ECOLOGY
N
2.0 X 102
2.0 x 10
2.0 x 105"
N
2.0 x 102
N
2.0 x 101
2.0 x 102
2.0
N
2.0 X 10-1
2.0
2.0 x 10
N
2.0 X 10'1
N
2.0
N
N
N
>2.0 x 102
>2.0 x 102
N
N
N
N
WHERE FOUND
IN
LEVEL I
SASS, LAB, C8
GAS, FIELD, C6
GAS, FIELD, C6J
GAS, FIELD, C6
SASS, LAB, LC6
SASS, LAB, LC6
SASS, LAB, Cll
SASS, LAB, Cll
SASS, LAB, C8
SASS, LAB, CIO
GAS, FIELD, C5
GAS, FIELD, C3
GAS, FIELD, C5
SASS, LAB, CIO
GAS, FIELD, C6
GAS, FIELD, C4
GAS, FIELD, C6
SASS, LAB, LC4
SASS, LAB, LC4
SASS, LAB, LC4
GAS, FIELD, C5
GAS, FIELD, C6
SASS, LAB, Cll
SASS, LAB. LC4
SASS, LAB, LM
SASS, LAB, LC4
ug/i"
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
3.6xl02
N.D.
3.6xlOZ
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
.N.D.
N.D.
N.O.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
4.1xl02
4.1X102
4.U102
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
4.1xl02
4.1xl02
4.1xl02
RATIO
SAMPLE
MATE
0.002
N .
0.034
N
N
N
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y=YES
N-NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
TEST
METHOD1
•
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
TEST
COST3
'
SAMPLE.
ALIQUOT4
"
TABLE KEY:
1. TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRD
C. WET
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. GC/MS
2. EXPECTED
TEST SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
3. TEST COST
1. REASON-
ABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
4. SAMPLE
ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
itlon of S-2-5, S-2-6 and S-2-7
H.D. Not Deternlned
N (to; Value
-------
Table 2-2. Total Emission Data From 6-inch FBC Unit* (Continued)
CATEGORY
8. CARSOXYLIC ACIDS
A. CARBOXYUC
ACIDS
B. CARBOXYLIC
ACIDS WITH
ADDITIONAL
FUNCTIONAL
GROUPS
C. AMIDES
0. ESTERS
9. HITCHES
COMPOUND
Halelc
Phthallc
Fonnic
Acetic
Benzole
Long Chain
. 3-Hydroxypropanolc
Add Lactone
e-Propiolactone
Hydroxybenzolc Add
Hydroxyacetic Acid
6-Hevanelactam
Fornanlde
Acetanlde
6-Aminohexanofc
Acid
Phthalates
Methyl Hethacry-
Ute
Adi pates
Methyl Benzoate
Phenyl Benzoate
Oi-2-ethylhexyl
phthalate
Long chain esters
1-Cyanoe thane
Tetraaethyl-
succlnonltrlle
Butyronltrlle
Benzonltrlle /
Acrylonltrile
Acetonltrile
NaphthonltrHes
HATE
AIR
iig/m? (ppm)
1.0 x 103 (0.25)
6.0 x I03 (l-.O)
g.o x io3 (5.0)
2.5 x IO4 (10)
1.4 x 105
N
3.17 X IO2
3.2 x IO2
4.01 x IO4
8.78 x 104
1.0 x IO3
3.0 x IO4 (20)
4.5 x IO5
2.33 x IO6
5.0 x ID3
4.1 .x'lflS (100)
1.89 x 10"
1.5 x 105
N
N
N
1.76 x IO3
3.0 x IO3 (0.5)
2.25 x 10*
3.24 x IO4
4.5 x IO4 (20)
7.0 x IO4 (40)
N
HATE
WATER
ug/i
HEALTH
1.5 x IO4
9.0 x IO4
1.4 x IO5
3.8 x 105
2.1 x IO6
N
4.76 x IO3
1.6 X IO3
6.01 x IO5
1.13 x ID*
1.5 X IO4
4.5 x IO5
6.75 X IO6
3.5 x IO7
7.5 x IO4
6.2 x 106
2.83 x 10s
2.25 X IO6
N
N
N
2.64 x IO4
4.5 x IO4
3.37 X IO5
4.86 X 10s
6.8 x IO5
1.05 x 10«
N
MOTE
MATER
wg/i
ECOLOGY
N
N
N
1.0 x 10*
N
N
1.0 x IO4
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
1.5
1 .0 x IO4
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
1.0 X IO3
1.0 X IO5
N
MATE
LAND
vg/g
HEALTH
3.0 x 10'
1.8 X 102
2.7 x IO2
7.6 x IO2
4.2 x IO3
N
9.6
3.2
1.2 x IO3
2.6 x IO3
3.0
9.0 x IO2
1.4 x IO4
N
1.5 x IO2
1.2 x IO4
5.6 x IO2
4.6 x IO3
N
N
N
5.4 x 10
9.0 x 10
6.8 x 102
1.4 x IO3
1.4 x IO3
2.1 x IO3
'N
HATE
LAND
ug/g
ECOLOGY
N
N
N
2.0
N
N
2.0 x 10
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
3.0 x IO-3
2.0 x 10
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
2.0
2.0 x IO2
N
WHERE FOUND
IN
LEVEL I
SASS, LAB, C8
SASS, LAB,
LC7 S 8
SASS, LAB, C8
SASS, LAB,
LC7 & 8
SASS, LAB, C8,
8 & LC7
SASS, LAB, C8,
B 4 LC7
SASS, LAB. CIO
SASS, LAB, C7
SASS, LAB, LC7
SASS, LAB, C7
SASS, LAB, LC7
SASS, LAB, LC7
SASS, LAB, LC8
SASS, LAB, LC6~1
SASS. LAB, C7
SASS, LAB, C8,
9 4 10
SASS, LAB, CIO
SASS, LAB, LC6
SASS, LAB, LC6
SASS, LAB, LC6
GAS, FIELD, C6
SASS. LAB. LC4
SASS. LAB. LC4
SASS, LAB, Cll
SASS, LAB, Cll
GAS, FIELD, C6
SASS, LAB, LC4
1 ppm)
pg/l
N.D.
8.2x10*
N.D.
8.2xl02
8.2x10*
8.2xlOZ
N.D.
N.O.
8.2X102
N.D.
8.2xlOZ
8.2xl02
8.2xl02
3. 6x1?"
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
3.6x10*
3.6x10*
3.6x10*
N.D.
t.lxlO2
».l«inz
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
l.lxlO2
•RATIO
SAMPLE
MATE
0.14
0.03
0.07
N
0.13
N
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y»YES
N=NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nn
TEST .
METHOD1
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
TEST
COST3
SAMPLE,
ALIQUOT4
TABLE KEY:
l.'TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
. A. AAS
B. XRD
' C. WET
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. GC/MS
2. EXPECTED
TEST SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
3. TEST COST
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
4. SAMPLE
ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
Sutotton of S-2-6. S-2-6 and S-2-7
N.D. Not Determined
N No Value
-------
Table 2-2. Total Emission Data From 6-inch FBC Unit* (Continued)
CATEGORY
10. AMINES
A. PRIMARY
B. SECONDARY
C. TERTIARY
AMINES
11. AZO
COMPOUNDS
COMPOUND
1-Aulnonaphtalene
Methyl ami ne
4-Aminfbiphenyl
Ethanolanlne
Butyl amines
Ethylamlne
) ,2-D1aminoethane
Cyclohexylamlne
Propanolantne
3-Amlnopropene
Ethyleneimine
Dlmethylamlne
Morphollne
Diethylamlne
EthylmethyUmlne
Amino toluenes
2-Anrinonaphtnalene
M'-Methylene-
b1s-(2-chloro-
anlHne
Anlsldlnes
4-Amtnlblphenyl
1,4-Dlamfnobenzene
3,3'-Dtcnloro-
benzldlne
Benzldlne
Aniline
Dinethylanlltne
N,N-Dtmethyl-
anlllne
N.H'-Dtmethyl-
hydrazlne
Honoethy 1 - hydraz 1 ne
Dlazomc thane
N.N-OlDKthyl-
hydrazlne
Hydrazobenzene
Dlphenylhydraztnes
Mydrazlne
HATE
AIR
ug/m3 (ppm)
5.5 x 102
1.81 x.103
1.2 x 103 (10)
6.0 x 103 (3)
1.5 x 104 (5)
1.8 x 104 (10)
2.5 x 104 (10)
4.0 x 10* (10)
1.27 x 105 -. -.__
N
3.33 x 102
1.8 x 10* (10)
7.0 x 104 (20)
7.5 x 104 (25)
N
1.1 x TO2
1.7 x 102
2.18 x 102
5.0 x 102 (0.1)
1.3 x 103
4.5 x 103
6.6 x 103
1.4 x 104
1.9 x 104 (5)
2.5 x 104 (5)
2.5 x 104 (5)
3.17 x 10
3.5 x 102 (0.2)
4.0 x 102 (0.2)
1.0 x 103 (0.5)
1.35 x 104
1.4 x 104
N
HATE
HATER
van
HEALTH
8.5 x 103
2.72 x 104
1.8 x 104
9.0 x 104
2.25 x 105
2.7 X 105
3.75 x 105
6.0 x 10*
1.9 x 106
N
5.0 x 103
2.7 x 10s
1.05 x 106
1.13 x 106
N
1.7 x 103
2.5 x 103
3.27 x 103
7.5 X 103
2.0 x 104
6.75 x 104
9.9 x 104
2.1 x.105
2.85 x IflS
3.75 x 105
3.83 x 105
4.76 x 102
5.25 x 103
6.0 x 103
1.5 x 104
2.02 x 105
2.0 x 10s
N
MATE
HATER
ug/i
ECOLOGY
1.0 x 102
N
1.0 x 103
1.0 x 104
>1.0 x 105
1.0 x 103
1.0 x 103
1.0 x 104
N
N
N
1.0 x 103
1.0 x 104
1.0 x 103
N
N
1.0 x 102
N
N
N
N
N
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 103
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
HATE
LAND
U9/9
HEALTH
3.6 x 10
1.8 x 102
4.5 x 102
5.4 x 102
7.6 x 102
1.2 x 103
3.8 x lO3
N
1.0 x 10
5.4 x 102
2.1 x 103
2.2 x 103
N
3.0
5.0
6.0
1.5 X 10
4.0
1.4 x 103
2.0 x 102
4.2 x 102
6.0 x 102
7.5 x 102
7.5 x 102
1.0
1.1 x 10
1.2 x 10
3.0 x 10
4.0 x 102
HATE
LAND
U9/9
ECOLOGY
2.0
2.0 x 10
2.0 x 102
2.0
2.0
2.0 X 10
N
N
N
2.0
2.0 x 10
2.0
N
N
2.0 x 10-1
N
N
N
N
N
2.0 x lO'1
2.0
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
WHERE FOUND
IN
LEVEL I
SASS, LAB, LC7
SASS, LAB, LC6
GAS, FIELD, C6
SASS, LAB, CIO
GAS, FIELD, C6
GAS, FIELD, C4
SASS, LAB, C8
SASS, LAB, CS
SASS, LAB, C9
GAS^FIELD^JS
GAS, FIELD, C3?
GAS, FIELD, C3?
SASS, LAB, LC6?
GAS, FIELD, C3?
GAS, FIELD, C4?
SASS, LAB, Cll
SASS, LAB, LC6
SASS, LAB, LC7
SASS, LAB, LC6
SASS, LAB, LC6
SASS, LAB,. LC6
SASS, LAB. LC7
SASS, LAB, LC7
SASS, LAB, Cll
SASS, LAB, Cll
SASS, LAB, LC6
GAS, FIELD, C6
GAS, FIELD. C6
GAS, FIELD, C3
SASS. LAB, C8
GAS. FIELD. C6
SASS. LAB. LC7
SASS, LAB, CO
Eg/i
8.2xl02
3.6xlOz
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
3.6X102
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
3.6X102
8.2X102
3.6x102
3.6X1B2
3.6X102
8.2xl02
8.2X102
N.D.
N.D.
3.6xl02
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
B.ZxlO2
N.D.
RATIO
SAMPLE
HATE
1.5
0.19
0.005
2.1
3.8
0.7
0.001
,
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y=YES
N=NO
YES
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES..
NO
TEST
METHOD1
1-E
-
1-E
1-E
1-E
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
1
1
1
1
TEST
COST3
1
1
1
1
SAWIE,
ALIQUOT*
1
1
1
1
TABLE KEY:
1. TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRD
C. WET
CHEMICAL
D. £SCA
E. GC/HS
2. EXPECTED
TEST SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
3. TEST COST
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
4. SAMPLE
ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAHPLE
SMMtfon of S-2-5, S-2-6 and S-2-7
N.O. Not Determined
N No Value
-------
Table 2-2. Total Emission Data From 6-inch FBC Unit* (Continued)
ro
CATEGORY
12. NITROSAMIES
13. MERCAPTANS,
SULF10ES
A. MERCAPTAHS
B. SULF1DES
01SULFIDES
14. SULFONIC ACIDS.
. SULFOXIDES
A. SULFONIC
ACIDS
B. SULFOXIDES
. COMPOUND
N-Nitroso-
Dimethylamine
N-Nitroso-
Di ethyl ami ne
N-Methyl-N-
Nitroso-AmHine
N-NHrosp-Di-
propylaime
N-N1troso-Di-
phenylamine
N-NHroso-OHso-
propylamine
N-Nitroso-D1-
pentylamine
Perchl ore methyl
Hercaptan
Methyl Mercaptan
Ethyl Mercaptan
Butyl Mercaptans
Benzenthiol
Propyl Hercaptans
1-Anthranthiol
Dimethyl Sulflde
Phenyl Sulfide
Dlethyl Sulfide
Methyl Disulfide
Benzensulfonic
Add
9,10-Anthraqui-
none-Disulfonic
Add
Dimethyl Sulfoxide
MATE
AIR
ug/m3 (ppm)
1.2
1.21 X 102
1.29 x 103
2.41 x 103
7.4 x 104
3.83 x 104
N
8.0 x 102 (0.1)
1.0 x 103 (0.5)
1.0 x 103 (0.5)
1.5 x 103 (0.5)
2.07 x 103
8.06 x 104
N
2.41 x 10*
9.63 X 104
N
N
4.01 x 104
N
8.14 x 102
MATE
WATER
ug/1
HEALTH
1.8 x 10
1.82 X 103
1.94 x 104
3.62 x Ifll
1.1 x 106
5.75 x 105
N
1.2 x 104
1.5 x 104
1.5 x 104
2.25 x 104
3.10 x 104
1.21 x 106
N
3.61 x IflS
1.44 x 106
N
N
6.01 x lO5-^
N
1.22 x Ifl3
MATE
WATER
H9/1
ECOLOGY
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
r N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N'
N
N
N
MATE
LAND-
ug/g
HEALTH
3.6 x 10-2
3.6
3.8 x 10
7.2 x 10
2.2 x 103
1.2 x 103
N
2.4- x 10
3.0 x 10
3.0 x 10
4.5 x 10
6.2 x 10
2.4 x 103
N
7.2 x 102
2.9
N
N
1.2 x 103
N
2.4
MATE
LAND
pg/g
ECOLOGY
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
WHERE FOUND
IN
LEVEL I
SASS, LAB, C9
SASS, LAB, CIO
SASS, LAB, LC5
SASS, LAB, C12
S LC5
SASS, LAB, LC5
SASS, LAB, Cll
SASS, LAB, LC5
SASS, LAB, LC6
GAS, FIELD, SGC
GAS, FIELD, SGC
GAS, FIELD, SGC
SASS. LAB, LC6
GAS, FIELD, SGC
SASS, LAB. LC6
GAS, FIELD, SGC
SASS, LAB, C9
i LC5
GAS, FIELD, SGC
SASS, LAB, C8
SASS, LAB, LC8
SASS, LAB, LC8
SASS, LAB, Cll
ippm)
ug/1
N.D.
N.D.
2.4X102
2.4xl02
2.4xl02
N.D.
2.4X102
3.6xl02
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
3.6xl02
N.D.
3.6X102
N.D.
2.4X102
N.D.
N.D.
7.6x10
7.6x10
N.D.
RATIO
SAMPLE
HATE
0.18
0.45
0.002
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y=YES
N-NO
NO
YES
NO
TEST
METHOD1
. 1-E
TEST
EXPEC- .
TAT IONS2
1
TEST
COST3
1
SAMPLE,
ALIQUOT4
1
-
TABLE KEY:
1. TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRO
C. WET
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. GC/MS
2. EXPECTED
TEST SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
3. TEST COST
1. REASON-
ABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
4. .SAMPLE
ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAHPLE
Sumatlon of S-2-5, S-2-6 and S-2-7
N.D. Not Determined
N No Value
-------
Table 2-2. Total Emission Data From 6-inch FBC Unit* (Continued)
CATEGORY
15. BENZENE,
SUBSTITUTED
BENZENE
16. HAIOGENATED
AROMATIC
HYDROCARBONS '
A. RING
SUBSTITUEO
AROMAT1CS
COMPOUND
Blphenyl
Benzene
Terphenyls
Indene
Isopropyl Benzene
THmethyl Benzenes
Dihydronaphtha-
lenes
Tetrahydro-
naphthalenes
Propyl Benzene
Dlalkyl Benzene
Butyl Benzene
Indane
.Toluene
Styrene
•Ethyl Benzene
Xylenes
4.4l-D1phenyl-
biphenyl
Tetramethyl
Benzpnes
Pol/chlorinated
biphenyls
Polyciilorlna'ted
benzenes
Chloronaphthalenes
2-Chloro toluene
l,2-D1ch1oro-
bcnzone
Chlorobenzene
1,4-Dkhloro-
bcnzcno
HATE
AIR
ug/m3 (ppm)
1.0 x 103 (0.2)
3.0 x 103 (10)
9.0 x 103 (1)
4.5 x 104 (10)
6.3 x 104
1.2 x 10$ (25)
1.27 x 106
1.29 x 105
2.17 x 105
2.25 x 105
2.25 x 105
2.3 x 105
3.75 x 105 (100)
4.2 x ID* (100)
4.35 x 105 (100)
4.35 x 105 (100)
N
N
5.0 x 102
3.4 x ID4
6.93 x 104
2.5 x 105 (50)
3.0 x 105 (50)
3.5 x 105 (75)
4.75 x 105 (75)
HATE
WATER
ug/i
HEALTH
1.5 x 104
4.5 x 10t
1.35 x 105
6.8 x 105
9.45 x 10s
1.8 x 106
1.91 x I06
1.94 x 106
3.25 x 106
3.38 x 106
3.38 x 106
3.4 x 106
5. 63 x 106
6.3 x 106
6.53 x 106
6.53 x 106
N
N
7.5 x 103
5.1 X 105
1.04 x 106
3.75 x 106
4.5 x I06
5.25 x 10«
6.8 x 106
HATE
WATER
ug/1
ECOLOGY
N
1.0 x 103
N
1.0 x 103
4.5 x 102
N
1.0 x 103
1.0 x 103
1.0 x 103
1.0 x 103
N
N
1.0 x 103
1.0 x 103
1.0 x 103
1.0 x 103
N
1.0 x 104
5.0 x 10-3
1.0 x 102
N
N
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
HATE
LAND
ug/g
HEALTH
3.0 x 10
9.0 x 10
2.8 x 102
1.4
1.9 x 103
3.6 x 103
4.0 x 103
4.0 x 103
6.6 x 103
6.8 x 103
6.8 x 103
6.8 x 103
1.1 x 104
1.3 x 104
1.3 x 104
1.3 x Ifll
N
N
1.0 x 103
1.5 x 10
7.5 x )03
9.0 x 103
1.1 x 104
1.4 x 104
HATE
LAND
ug/g
ECOLOGY
N
2.0
N
N
2.0
N
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
N
N
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
N
2.0 x 10
2.0 x 10-'
1.0 x 10-5
N
2.0 x 10-1
2.0 x 10-1
2.0 x 10-1
WHERE FOUND
IN
LEVEL I
SASS, LAB, LC2
GAS, FIELD, C6
SASS, LAB, LC3
SASS, LAB, LC3
SASS, LAB, C9
SASS, LAB, CIO
SASS, LAB, LC2
SASS, LAB, C12,
LC2
SASS, LAB, C9
SASS, LAB, CIO,
11, 12
SASS, LAB, Cll
SASS, LAB, LC2
SASS, LAB, C8
SASS, LAB. C9
SASS, LAB, C8
SASS, LAB, C9
SASS, LAB, LC2
t, 3
SASS, LAB, Cll
SASS, LAB, LC2
t, 3
SASS, LAB, LC2
4 3
SASS, LAB, LC2
S 3
SASS, LAB, C9
SASS, LAB, CIO
SASS, LAB, C8
SASS, LAB, CIO
(ppm)
pg/1
7.4xl02
N.D.
5.1xl03
5.U103
N.D.
N.D.
7.4xl02
7.4xl02
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
7 4»102
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
1.3xl02
N.D.
I.3xl03
1.3xl03
1.3xl03
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
RATIO
SAHPLE
HATE
0.73
0.06
N
2.6
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y=YES
N-NO
YES
NO
YES
TEST ,
HETHOD1
1-E
1-E
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
1
1
TEST
COST3
1
1
SAHPLE
ALIQUOT4
1
1
TABLE KEY:
TEST HETHOD:
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRO
C. WET
CHEHICAL
D. ESCA
E. GC/HS
EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
TEST COST
1. REASON-
ABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
. SAMPLE
ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
'4. RESAMPLE
Summon of S-2-5, S-2-6 and 5-2-7.
N.O. Not Determined
N No Value
-------
Table 2-2. Total Emission Data From 6-inch FBC Unit* (Continued)
CATEGORY
B. AROHATICS
WITH HALO-
GENERATED
ALKYL SIDE
CHAINS
.17. AROMATIC
NITRO
18. PHENOLS
A. HONOHYDRICS
COMPOUND
Bran and
Dlbranobenzenes
Bromochloro-
benzenes
1,3-Dichloro-
benzenc
a-Chloro toluene
Bts-(chloromethyl)
Benzene
4-NUn>b1phenyl
Dinitrotoluenes
Hethoxynitro-
benzene
Nitrobenzene
l-Chloro-2-
Nltrobenzene
l-Chloro-4-
Nitrobenzene
NHro toluenes
2,2'-Dihydroxy-
diphenyls
Polyalkyl
Phenols
Phenol
Cresols
Phenyl Phenols
AUyl Cresols
2-Hethoxy Phenol
Xylenols
Ethyl phenols
MATE
AIR
ng/m3 (ppm) •
N
N
N
5.54 x 10*
N
1.3 x 103
1.50 x 103
4.5 x 103
5.0 x 103 (1.0)
1.3 x 10*
1.89 x 10*
3.0 x 10* (5)
6.75 x 103
1.49 x 10*
1.9 x 10* (5)
2.2 x 10* (5)
2.3 x 10*
2.39 x 10*
3.26 x 10*
1.3 x 10*
N
HATE
WATER
M9/1
HEALTH
N
N
N
8.31 x 10s
N
2.0 x 10*
2.25 x 10*
6.75 x 10*
7.5 x 10*
1.95 x 105
2.84 x 105
4.5 x 105
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
. 5.0
5.0
MATE
WATER
W/l
ECOLOGY
N
N
N
1.0 x 102
N
N
1.0 x 103
N
.1.0 x 103
1.0 x 10*
N .
1.0 X 103
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 10Z
5.0 x.102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 10Z
5.0 x 10?
5.0 x 102
MATE
LAND
P9/9
HEALTH
N
.N
N
N
4.0 x 10
4.5 x 10
1.4 x 102
1.5 x 102
4.0 x 10?
5.8 x 102
9.0 x '102
1.0 x lO-2
1-.0 x 10-2
1.0 x 10-2
1.0 x 10-2
1.0 x 10-2
1.0 x ID"2
1.0 x 10-2
1.0 x 10-2
1.0 x 10-2
MATE
LAND
P9/9
ECOLOGY
N
N
N
N
N
2.0
N
2.0
2.0 x 10
N
2.0
• 1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0.
•1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
WHERE -FOUND
IN
LEVa I
SAS5, LAB, C9,
12, ft LC2
SASS, LAB, C12
ft LC2
SASS, LAB, CIO
SASS, LAB, Cll
SASS, LAB, LC2
SASS. LAB, LC4
SASS, LAB, LCS
SASS, LAB, LCS
SASS, LAB, C12
ft LC4
SASS, LAB, LC4
SASS, LAB, LC4
SASS, LAB, LCS
SASS, LAB. LC6
SASS. LAB, LC6
SASS, LAB, Cll
SASS, LAB, C12
ft LC6
SASS, LAB. LC6
SASS, LAB, C12
ft LC6
SASS, LAB, LC6
SASS. LAB, LC6
SASS. LAB, LC6
ug/1
7.4xl02
7.4xlOZ
N.D.
N.D.
7.4X102
7.4X102
2.4X10*
2.4X102
4.1X102
4.1X102
4.1xI02
4.1xlOz
3.6x10*
3.6X102
N.D.
3.6X102
3.6xl02
3.6X102
3.6X102
3.6x10*
3.6X102
RATIO
SAMPLE
MATE
N
N
0.32
0.05
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y-YES
N=NO
NO
NO
TEST
METHOD1
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
TEST
COST3
SAMPLE
ALIQUOT*
*
TABLE KEY:
. TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. IRD
C. WET •
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. GC/MS
. EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
. TEST COST
1. REASON-
ABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
. SAMPLE
ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
itlon of S-2-5, S-Z-6 and S-2-7.
N.D. Not Determined
N No Value
-------
Table 2-2. Total Emission Data From 6-inch FBC Unit* (Continued)
CATEGORY
B. DIKYDRICS,
POLYHYDRICS
C. FUSED RING
HTDROXY
COMPOUNDS
19. HALOPHENOLS
20. HITROPHEKOLS
£\. FUSED
AROMATIC
HYDROCARBONS
COMPOUND
1,4-Dlhydroxy-
benzene
Catehol
1,2,3-Trlhydroxy-
benzenes
1,3-Dlhydroxy-
benzene
1-Naphthol
2-Naphthol
Indanols
Phenanthrols
Acenaphthenols
2-Hydroxyfl uorene
2-Hydroxydl benio-
furan
PenUchlorophenol
Chlorinated Cresols
2 , 4- 01 chl orophenol
2-Chlorophenol
Trlnltrophenol
Dlnltro-o-cresol
Dlnltro-p-cresol
Dtnltrophenols
4-Hitrophenol
3-NHrophenol
2-Am1no-4,6-
Nltraphenol
2-N1tropheno1
Benzo(a)pyrene
Dlbenzo(a.h)
anthracene
7,12-Dlmethylbenz-
(a)-anthracene
D1benzo(a,1)pyrene
HATE-
AIR
pg/n3 (ppm)
2.0 x 103
2.0 x 10* (5)
3.55 x 10*
4.5 x 104 (10)
1.17 x 105
1.09 x 105
1.46 x 10s ' ~~
N
N
N
N
5.0 x ID2
2.25 X 10*
7.0 x 103
3.02 x 10*
1.0 x 102 (0.011)
2.0 x 102 (0.025)
6.8 x 102
1.35 x 103
1.58 x 10*
2.01 x 10"
4.64 x 104
5.8 x 104
2.11 x 10-2
9.27 x 10-2
2.6 x ID'1
4.3 x 10
HATE
HATER
iig/1
HEALTH
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5..0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
3.17 X 10-1
1.39
3.91
6.5 x 102
HATE
MATER
wg/i
ECOLOGY
5.0 x 10?
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x ID2
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 10?
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 1fl2
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 X 10?
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0. x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
N
N
N
N
KATE
LAND'
n-j/g
HEALTH
1.0 x 10-2
1.0 x l'o-2
1.0 x 10-2
1.0 x 10-2
1.0 x 10-2
1.0 x 10-2
l.C x 10-2
1.0 x lO-2
1.0 x 10-2
1.0 x 10-2
l.C x ID'2
1.0 x 10-2
l.C x 10-2
l.C x 10-2
1.0 x ID"2
1.0 x 10-2
1.0 x 10-2
1.0 x 10-2
1.0 x 10-2
1.0 x ID"2
1.0 x 10-2
1.0 x 10-2
6.0 x 10-2
3.0 x 10-3
8.0 x ID"3
1.3
NATE
LAND
vg/g •
ECOLOGY
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
N
N
N
N
WERE FOUND
IN
LEVEL I
SASS, LAB, LC6
SASS, LAB, LC6
SASS, LAB, LC6
SASS, LAB, CIO
SASS, LAB, LC6
SASS, LAB, LC6
SASS, LAB, LC6
SASS, LAB, LC6
SASS, LAB, LC6
SASS, LAB, LC6
SASS. LAB, LC6
SASS, LAB, LC7
SASS, LAB, LC6
SASS, 'LAB, C12
SASS, LAB, CIO
SASS, LAB, LC7
SASS, LAB, LC7
SASS, LAB, LC7
SASS, LAB, LC7
SASS, LAB, LC7
SASS, LAB, Cll
4 LC7
SASS, LAB. LC7
SASS, LAB, C12
1 LC7
SASS, LAB, LC3
SASS, LAB, LC3
SASS, LAB, LC3
SASS, LAB, LC3
ug/i
3.6xl02
3.6X102
3.6xl02
N.D.
3.6xl02
3.6x10*
3.6X102
3.6X102
3.6X102
3.6X102
3.6X102
8.2xl02
3.6xlOZ
N.D.
N.D.
1.2xlOZ
).2xlOZ
1.2xlOz
(.2xlOz
).2xl02
1.2x102
B.2xl02
I.2xl02
i.lxlO2
i.lxlO2
S.lxlO2
sTlxlO2^
RATIO
SAMPLE
HATE
0.18
1.6
8.2
2.4xl04
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y=YES
N=NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
TEST
METHOD1
1-E
1-E
1-F
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
•
1
1
1
TEST.
COST3
1
1
1
SAMPLE,
ALIQUOT4
1
1
,
TABLE KEY:
1. TEST METHOD:
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
HENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRD
C. MET
CHEMICAL
0. ESCA
E. GC/KS
2. EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS: '
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOMN
3. TEST COST
1. REASON-
ABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
4. SAMPLE
ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
SuiMtJon of 5-2-5, 6-2-6, and S-2-7.
N.O. Not Determined
N Ho Value
-------
Table 2-2. Total Emission Data From 6-inch FBC Unit* (Continued)
CATEGORY
COMPOUND
9,lO-D1methyl-l.l
2-benzanthracene
Benz(a)anthracene
D1benzo(b,def)
Chrysene
Benzo(g,h,1)
perylene
D1benzo(a,i)pyrene
Phenanthrene
Methylchrysenes
Chrysene
Ptcene
Benzo(e)pyrene
Dibenzo(a,h)pyrene
Dlbenz(a.c)
anthracene
1, 2:3.4-01 benzo-
anthracene
Benzo(g)chrysene
Benzo(c)phen-
anthrene
Methyl phen-anthrenes
Naphthalene
Anthracene iMethyl
Anthracene
Honoalkyl
Naphthalenes
Dimethyl
Naphthalenes
Pyrene
Phenyl Naphtha-
lenes
Acenaphthene;
Acenaphthylene
2,7-Dlmethyl-
anthracene
. Naphthacene
Trlphenylene
MATE
AIR
ug/m3 (ppm)
2.96 x 10
4.45 x 10
3.32 x 102
5.43 x 10?
1.08 x .103
1.59 x 1C3
1.79 x 103
2.2 x 103
2.5 x 103
3.04 x 103
3.68 x 103
9.9 x 103
1.0 x 1C4
1.63 x 104
2.69 x 104
3.04 x ID4
5.0 x ID4
5.6 x 104
2.25 x 105
2.25 x Ifl5
2.33 x 10*
N
N
N
N
N
MATE
HATER'
US/1
HEALTH
4.44 X 102
6.72 X 10*
4.98 x 103
8.15 x 103
1.62 x lO3
2.39 X 104
2.69 x 104
3.3 x 104
3.75 X 104
4.56 X 104
5.52 X 104
1.5 X 105
1.5 x 105 '
2.45 X Ifl5
4.04 x IflS
4.56 x 105
7.5 x 105
8.4 X 10*
3.38 x 106
3.38 X Ifl6
3.5 X 106
N
N
N
N
N
HATE
WATER
ug/1
ECOLOGY
N
N
H
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
1.0 x 102
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
HATE
LAND
W/g
HEALTH
1.3
N
N
3.2 x 10
4.8 X 10
5.4 X 10
6.6 x 10
7.5 x 10
9.1 x 10
1.1 x 10*
3.0 x 10?
4.8 x 102
8.2'x 102
9.1 x 102
1.5 x 103
1.7 x 103
6.8 x 103
6.8 x 103
6.9 x 103
N
N
N
N
N
HATE
LAND
ug/g
ECOLOGY
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
2.0 x 10-1
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
"
WHERE FOUND
IN
- LEVEL I
SASS. LAB. LC3
SASS, LAB, LC3
SASS. LAB. LC3
SASS, LAB. LC3
SASS. LAB, LC3
SASS, LAB, LC3
SASS, LAB, LC3
SASS, LAB, LC3
SASS, LAB, LC3
SASS, LAB, LC3
SASS, LAB. LC3
SASS, LAB, LC3
SASS, LAB, LC3
SASS, LAB, LC3
SASS, LAB, LC3
SASS, LAB, LC3
SASS, LAB, Cll
& LC2
SASS, LAB, LC3
SASS. LAB. LC2
SASS, LAB, LC2
SASS. LAB, LC3
SASS, LAB. LC3
SASS, LAB, LC3
SASS. LAB, LC3
SASS, LAB, LC3
SASS, LAB. LC3
(pptn)
ug/1
5.1xl02
S.lxlO2
S.lxlO2
S.lxlO2
S.lxlO2
S.lxlO*
5.1x10*
5.1.X10*
S.lxlO2
5.1x10^
S.lxlO2
s.ixio2
S.lxlO2
S.lxlO2
S.lxlO2
S.lxlO2
1.3xl03
S.lxlO2
l.SxlO3
1.3xl03
S.lxlO2
S.lxlO2
S.lxlO2
S.lxlO2
S.lxlO2
S.lxlO2
RATIO
SAMPLE
MATE
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y-YES
N-NO
TEST
METHOD'
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
TEST
COST3
SAMPLE.
ALIQUOT4
TABLE KEY:
TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRO
C. WET
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. GC/MS
. EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
. TEST COST
1. REASON-
ABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
. SAMPLE
ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
*Sumw't1on of S-2-5, S-2-6 and S-2-7.
N.D. Not Determined
N No Value
-------
Table 2-2. Total Emission Data From 6-inch FBC Unit* (Continued)
CATEGORY
22. FUSED NON-
ALTERNATE
POLVCYCLIC
HYDROCARBONS
COMPOUND
1-Methyl Pyrene
Dfnethyl Pyrenes
1.2 BenzMphtha-
cene
Perylene
Coronene
3-Hethyl-
L Cholanthrene
Benzo(b)
fluoranthene
Benzo(k)
fluoranthene
Indem>(l,2,3,c,d)
pyrene
Benzo(j)
fluoranthene
1,2:5,6-01 benzo-
fluorenc
Dlcyclopentadlene
Indane, Indene
Fluoranthene,
(Tetrahydro-
fluoroanthene)
Fluorene
Cyclopentano-
naphthalene
2,3-Benzofluor-
ene
1,2-Benzofluorene
CyclopenU(def)-
phenanthrene
Truxene(Tr1benzyl-
ene Benzene)
HATE
AIR
lig/n3 (ppm)
N
N
N
N
N
3.76
8.97 x ID2
1.63 x 103
1.63 X ID3
6.48 x 103
1.32 x ID4
1.59 x 10*
4.5 x JO4 (10)
9.0 x 104
N
N
N
N
H
H
KATE
MATER
W9/1
HEALTH
K
N
N
N
N
5.63 x 10
. 1.35 x 104
2.45 x 104
2.45 x 104
9.72 x 104
1.98 x 10S
2.39 x 105
6.75 x 106
1.35 x 105
N
N
N
N
N
N
• MATE
• HATER
V3/1
ECOLOGY
N
N
H
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
K '
1.0 x 10Z
H
N
K
K
N
H
K
N
MATE
LAND
U9/9
HEALTH
H
N
N
N
N
1.1 X 10"1
2.8 x 10
4.9 x 10
4.8 x 10
2.0 x 102
4.0 x 102
4.8 x 102
N
2.8 x 101
N
N
„
N
H
H
HATE
LAND
. V3f3
ECOLOGY
N
II
K
H
H
H
H
H
H
K
H
2.0 x 10"1
»
H
K
K
N
N
N
N
WHERE FOUND
IN
LEVEL I
SASS, LAB, LC3
SASS. LAB. LC3
SASS. LAB. LC3
SASS.- LAB, LC3
SASS, LAB, LC3
SASS, LAB, LC3
SASS, LAB, LC3
SASS, LAB, LC3
SASS, LAB. LC3
SASS, LAB, LC3
SASS. LAB. LC3
SASS, LAB, CIO
SASS. LAB, Cll
SASS, LAB, LC3
SASS, LAB, LC2
SASS. LAB. LC2
SASS, LAB, LC3
SASS, LAB, LC3
SASS, LAB, LC3
SASS, LAB. LC3
9/1
5. x 102
5. x 10Z
5. x 102
5. x 102
3. x 102
!
d.l x 102
5.1 x 102
Sa'x 102
S.1 x 102
5il x 102
Sil x 102
(i.o.
N.D.
5.1 x I02
1)3 x 103
i
M x 103
5.J1 x 102
5^1 x 102
5 1 x 102
5 1 x 102
RATIO
SAMPLE
"HATE"
1.4 x 102
N
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y-YES
N°NO
YES
TEST,
KETHOD1
t-F
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
l
TEST
COST3
1
SAHPLE.
ALIQUOT4
1
TABLE KEY:
1 TEST METHOD:
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAX
B. XRD
C. MET
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. GC/MS
2. EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
3. TEST COST
1. REASON-
ABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
4. SAHPLE
ALIQUOT
• 1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
a. RESAHPLE
Sunatlon Of S-2-5, S-2-6, and S-2-7.
N.D. Not Detemfned
N No Value
-------
Table 2-2. Total Emission Data From 6-inch FBC Unit* (Continued)
00
CATEGORY
23. HETEROCYCLIC
NITROGEN
A. PYRIDINE I
•SUBSTITUTED
PYRIDINES
B. FUSED
6-HEMBERED
RING v
C. PYRROLE' AND
RING
DERIVATIVES
COMPOUND
Pyrldlne .
01 S polysubstl-
tuted pyrl dines
Picolines
CMoropyrldlne
Collldlnes
. Honosubstltuted
Alkyl Pyrldlnes
Dlbenz(a.h)
acrldlne
Dlbenz(a.j)
acrldlne
Benz(c)acr1d1ne
Qulnollne;
Isoqulnollne
Dlbenz(c.h)
acrldlne
Hethylqulnollnes
Acrldine
Dimethyl qu1 nol 1 nes
Dlhydroacrldlne
Benzo(c)qu1nol1n
Benzo(f)qu1nol1ne
Benzo(h)qu1nol1ne
Benzo(a)acr1d1ne-
Dlbenz H-Indeno
(1,2-b)qu1nol1ne
Indeno (1.2.3.1.J)
Isoqulnollne
Dlbenzo(c.d) . •
carbazole
Pyrrole
Dlbenzo(a.g)
cartaazole
Indole
HATE
AIR
iig/m3 (ppm)
1.5 x 10* (5)
2.7 x 10*
3.56 x 10*
4.82 x 103
5.9 X 10*
N
2.24 X 102
2.47 x 102
1.1 x 10*
1.58 x 10*
2.33 x 10*
5.54 x 10*
9.0 x 10*
N
N
N
N
N ,
N
N
N
1.05 x 103
2.75 X 103
6.03 X 103
1.1 X 10*
HATE
MATER
pg/1
HEALTH
2.25 x 105
4.05 x 10s
5.34 x 105
7.23 x 10*
1.0 x 106
N
3.36 x 103
3.71 x 103
1.6 x 105
2.37 x 105
3.5 x 105
8.31 x 105
1.4 X 106
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
1.58 x 103.
4.13 x 10*
9.05 x 10*
1.7 x 105
HATE
MATER
U9/1
ECOLOGY
1.0 x 10*
N
N
N
N
h
N
N
N
h
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
. N
N
N
N
HATE
LAND
V9/9
HEALTH
4.5 x 10*
8.2 x' 102
1.1 x ID3
1.4 x 102
2.1 x 103
N
6.7
7.4
3.2 x 102
4.7 x 102
6.9 x 102
1.7 x 103
2.7 x 103
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
3,0
8.1 X 10
1.8 x 102
3.3 X 102
.HATE
LAND
V9/9
ECOLOGY
2.0 X 10
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N '
N
N
N
N
WHERE FOUND
. ' IN
LEVEL I
SASS. LAB, C8
SASS, LAB, CIO
SASS, LAB, C6
SASS, LAB, C9
i CIO
SASS, LAB, C8
& LC3
SASS, LAB. LC3
SASS. LAB, LC6
SASS, LAB, LC6
SASS. LAB, LC6'
SASS, LAB, LC6-
SASS, LAB, LC6
SASS, LAB, LC6
SASS. LAB. LC6
SASS, LAB, LC6
SASS. LAB, LC6
SASS, LAB, LC6
SASS. LAB. LC6
SASS. LABi LC6
SASS, LAB, LCS
SASS. LAB. LC6
SASS. LAB, LC6
SASS. LAB, LC6
SASS. LAB. LC6
SASS, LAB. LC6
SASS. LAB. LC6
i"9/l
N.D.
N.O.
N.D.
N.D.
5.1xlOZ
S.lxlO2
3.6X102
3.6xl02
3.6xlOz
3.6X102
3.6xl02
3.6xlOZ
3.6xl02
3.6xlOz
3.6xlOz
s.exio2
3.6xlOz
3.6x10'
3.6x10"
3.6X102
3.6X102
3.6X102
3.6x102
3.6X102
3.6x102
RATIO
SAMPLE
HATE '
0.009
1.6
LEVEL *
REQUIRED
Y=YES
N=NO
NO
YES
TEST .
METHOD1
1-E
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
1
TEST
COST3
1
SAHPLE,
ALIQUOT*
1
1.
2.
3.
4.
TABLE KEY:
TEST METHOD:
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRD
C. WET
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. GC/MS
EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
, TEST COST
1. REASON-
ABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
. SAMPLE
ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
'suBBtlonof $-2-5. S-2-61 and S-2-7.
N.D. Not Detected
« N Value
-------
Table 2-2. Total Emission Data From 6-inch FBC Unit* (Continued)
CATEGORY
D. NITROGEN
HETEROCYCLES
containing
ADON'L HETEROATOHS
24. HETEROCraiC
25. HETEROCVCLIC
SULFUR
26. ORGANO-HETALLICS
A. ALKYL or
ARYL
COMPOUND
Dlbenzo(a.i)
carbazole
Benzo(a)
carbazole
Carbazole
Hethyllndoles
Benzothlazole
Methyl
Benzthiazoles
Tetrahydrofuran
Furan
Benzofuran
Dlbenzofuran
Hethyldibenzo-
• furanes
Naphthofurans
8enzo(b)naphto
(2,3-d)furan
Phenoanthro(9,
10-b)furan
1-9-Benzox-
anthene
Benzonaphtho-
thtopene
Thlophene
Hethylthlophenes
Benzo(b)thtophenc
Dimethyl -
thiophenes
• Trl ; Tetramethyl
thlophenes
2,2-Blthlophene
Dlbenzthlophene
Alkyl Mercury
Tetraethyl Lead
Organotln
Tetraoethyl Lead
Organogermanes
Trlnethyl Arstnc
MATE
AIR
ug/m3 (ppm)
1.15 jt 10<
1.89 x 10*
2.25 x 104
4.5 x 104
4.28 x 103
4.73 x 103
5.9 x 105 (200) .
N _
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
9.86 x 102
4.5 x 103
2.25 x 104
2.30 x 104
N
N
N
N
1.0 x 10 (.001)
1.0 x 102 (.0075)
1.0 x 102
1.5 x 102 (.014)
3.15 x 10*
N
HATE
HATER
vg/l
HEALTH
1.73 X 105
2.84 x 10s
3.38 x 10*
6.75 x 105
6.42 x 10*
7.10 x 104
8.85 x 106
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
1.48 x 104
6.75 x 10*
3.38 x 10*
3.45 x 105
N
t
N
N
l.S x 102
1.5 x 103
1.0 X 103
2.25 x 103
4.73 x Ifl5
N
HATE
WATER
wg/1
ECOLOGY
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N '
N
N
2.0 x 10-4
<4.5 x 101
N
N
N
N
HATE
LAND
U9/9
HEALTH
3.6 x ID2
5.6 x 102
6.8 x 102
1.4 x 103
6.4 x 104
1 .4 x 102
1.8 x 104
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
3.0 X 10
1.4 x 102
7.0 x 102
7.0 x 102
N
N
N
N
3.0 x 10-1
3.0
4.5
9.4 x 102
N
MATE
LAND
"9/9
ECOLOGY
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
4.0 x 10-5
N
N
N
N
WHERE FOUND
IN
LEVEL I
SASS, LAB, LC6
SASS, LAB. LC6
' SASS, LAB, LC6
SASS, LAB, LC6
SASS, LAB, LC6
SASS, LAB, LC6
SASS, LAB, LC5
GAS, FIELD, C5
SASS, LAB, CIO
SASS, LAB, LC5
SASS, LAB, LC5
SASS, LAB, LC5
SASS, LAB. LC5
SASS, LAB, LC5
SASS, LAB, LC5
SASS, LAB, LC4
GAS, FIELD, C5
SASS, LAB, C8
SASS, LAB, LC4
SASS, LAB, C9
SASS, LAB, CIO
SASS, LAB, LC4
SASS, LAB. LC4
GAS. FIELD, C6
SASS, LAB, C12
and LCI
_SflSJ_F.JELJ>,£6
SASS. LAB. C7
GAS. FIELD. C6
GAS, FIELD, C5
(ppm)
U9/1 .
3.6X102
3.6X102
3.6X102
3.6X102!
3.6x10
3.6xl02
2.4xl02
N D
N.D.
9 dvin2
2.4xl02
2.4X102
2.4X102
2.4xl02
2.4xl02
4.1xl02
N.D.
N.D.
4.1xl02
N.D.
N.D.
4.1X10'
4.1x10^
N.D.
7.6xl02
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
RATIO
SAMPLE
MATE
0.42
7.5
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y-YES
N=NO
tm
YES
YES
TEST
METHOD1
1-E
1-E
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
1
1
TEST
COST3
1
1
SAMPLE
ALIQUOT4
1
1
1.
?
3.
4.
TABLE KEY:
. TEST METHOD:
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
8. XRD
C. WET
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. GC/HS
. EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN'
TEST COST
1. REASON-
ABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
SAMPLE
ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAHPLE
Swutlon of S-2-5, S-2-6 and S-2-7.
N.D. Not Determined
N No Value
-------
Table 2-2. Total Emission Data From 6-inch FBC Unit* (Continued)
ro
o
CATEGORY
B. SANDWICH
TYPE
C. METAL
PORPHYRINS
AND OTHER
CHELATES
COMPOUND
Nlckelocene
Ferrocene
D1 benzene
chromium
Complexed
Copper
Complexed
Nickel
Complexed Iron
Complexed Tin
Complexed Zinc
MATE
AIR
vg/m3 (ppra)
3.5 x 103
5.94 X 104
N
3.52 x Ifl3
N
N
N
N
HATE
WATER
van
HEALTH
5.25 X 101
8.91 x 105
N
5.28 x 10*
N
N
N
N
HATE
WATER
f9/l
ECOLOGY
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
HATE
LAND
U9/9
HEALTH
1.0 x 102
1.8 x 103
N
9.0 x 10
N
N
N
N
HATE
LAND
U9/9
ECOLOGY
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
WHERE FOUND
IN
LEVEL I
SASS.LAB.LC4
GAS, FIELD. C6
(ppm)
ug/i
4.1x10*
N.O.
RATIO
SAMPLE
MATE
0.11
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y=YES
N°NO
NO
TEST ,
METHOD1
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS*
TEST
COST
SAMPLE
ALIQUOT4
TABLE KEY:
1. TEST HETHOD:
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRD
C. WET
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. GC/MS
2. EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
3. TEST COST
1. REASON-
ABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
4. SAMPLE
ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
Sumatlon of S-2-5, S-2-6 and S-2-7.
N.D. Not Determined
N No Value
-------
Table 2-2. Total Emission Data From 6-inch FBC Unit* (Continued)
CATEGORY
27. LITHIUM
28. SODIUM
29. POTASSIUM
30. RUBIDIUM
31. CESIUM
32. BERYLLIUM
33. MAGNESIUM.-
34. CALCIUM
COMPOUND
LI
L1+
L1F (as L1)
Ll2C03-(as LI)
L1H
Nat
NaOH
KOH
K
K+ (as K)
Rb+1
cs+i
Be
Be"
BeO (as Be)
BeO-Al203-S102
(as Be)
Magnesium, Mg
Magnesium Ion, Mg*+
Magnesium Oxide,
MgO
Magnesium Fluoride,
MgF2 (as Mg)
Magnesium Sulfate,
MgS04 (as Mg)
Magneslte, MgCOa
(asHg)
Dolomite, MgCOa-
CaCOa (as Mg)
Asbestos (as Mg)
Calcium Ion, Ca**
Calcium Fluoride,
CaF2
Calcium Carbonate,
CaCO
Calcium Sulfate,
CaS04
Dolomite, HgCOa-
CaC03
MATE
AIR
' pg/m3 (ppm)
2.2 x 10
2.2 x 10
2.2 x 10
2.2 x 10
2.5 x 10
5.3' x 10*
2.0 x 103
2.0 x 103
N
N
1.21 x 105
8.19 x 10*
2.0
2.0
2.0
6.0 x 103
6.01 x 103
1.01 x 10*
6.0 x 103
.6.0 x 103
6.0 X 10*
6.0 X 103
6.0 x 103
1.6 x 10*
N
N
N
N
HATE
WATER
wg/i
HEAJ.TH
3.3 x 10*
3.3 x 10?
3.3 x 102
3.3 x 102
3.8 x 10?
8.0 x 10?
3.0 x 10*
3.0 x 10*
N
N
1.82 x 106
1.23 x 106
3.0 x 10
3.0 x 10
3.0 x 10
9.0 x 10*
9.0 x 10*
1.5 x 10s
9.0 x 10*
9.0 x 10*
9.0 x 10*
9.0 x 10*
9.0 x 10*
2.4 x 10*
N
N
N
N
MATE'
HATER
W9/1
ECOLOGY
3.8 x 102
3.8 x 10*
3.8 x 1fl2
3.8 x 102
N
N
N
N
N
2.3 x 10*
N
N
5.5 x 10
5.5 x 10
5.5 x 10
8.7 x 10*
8.7 x 10*
1.0 x 105
8.7 x 10*
•8.7 x 10*
8.7 x 10*
8.7 x 10*
8.7 x 10*
1.6 x 10*
N
N
N
N
HATE
LAND
ug/9
HEALTH
7.0 x 10-1
1.6 x 103
6.0 x 10
6.0 x 10
N
N
3.64 x 103
2.46 x 103
6.0 x 10-2
6.0 x 10-2
6.0 x ID'2
1.8 x 10?
1.8 x 10?
3.0 x 10*
1.8 x 102
1.8 x 102
1.8 x 102,
1.8 x 102
1.8 x-lfl2
4.8 x 102
N
N
N
N
MATE .
LAND
ug/g
ECOLOGY
7.5 x 10'1
N
N
N
N
4.6 x 10
N
N
1.1 x 10-1
1.1 x 10-1
1.1 x ID"1
1.7 x 102
1.7 x 102
2.0 x 102
1.7 x 102
1.7 x 102
1.7 x 102
1.7 x 102
1.7 x 102
3.2 x 10
N
N
N
N
(ppm]
ug/l
2.3xlOz
5.7X10"1
2.6X105
1x10 2
1.7x10
4.1
9.8x10*
1.3X106
RATIO
V
10.5
1.0
2.0
16.3
81.0
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y-YES
N»NO
YES
.•' .'
YES
YES
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
TEST .
METHOD1
1-A
1-A
1-A
1-A
1-A
TEST
EXPEC-.
TATIONS2
1
1
1
1
1
TEST,
COST3
1
1
1
1
1
SAMPLE,
ALIOUOT*
1
1
1
1
1
TABLE KEY:
1 TEST HETHOD
.1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRD
C. WET
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. GC/MS
2. EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
3. TEST COST
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
4. SAMPLE ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
Summation of S-Z-6, S-2-6 and S-2-7
N.D. Not Determined
N No Value
-------
Table 2-2. Total Emission Data From 6-inch FBC Unit* (Continued)
ro
ro
CATEGORY
35. STRONTIUM
36. BARIUM
37. BORON
38. ALUMINUM
39. GALLIUM
COMPOUND
Strontium
Strontlun Ion,
Sr*+ (as Sr)
Strontium Fluoride,
SrF2 (as Sr)
Strontium Sulfate,
SrS04 (as Sr)
Barium, Ba
Barium Ion, Ba**
(as Ba)
Barium Sulfide,
BaS (as Ba)
Barium Ttlio-
carbonate, BaCS3
(as Ba)
Barium Fluoride,
BaFz (as Ba)
Barium Carbonate,
BaC03 (as Ba)
Barium Sulfate,
BaS04 (as Ba)
Boron, B
Borate, 803 (as B)
Metaborate, Bof
(as B)
Boron Oxide, B203
Aluminum, Al
Aluminum Ion,
A1+++
Bauxite, AlyOi-
3tl20 (as Al)
Hydrated Aluminum
Silicate (as Al)
Alums [HA1 (SO*)?]-
(H20)xl(as AlT Z
Aluminum Oxide,
AljfOa
Gallium, Ga
Elemental Species.
Ga
Gallous. 6a+1
(asGa)
HATE
AIR
ua/m3 (ppm)
3.1 X 103
3.1 x 103
3.1 x 103
3.1 x 103
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 X 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
3.1 x 103
3.1 x 103
3.1 x 103
1.0 x 104
5.2 X 103
5.2 X 103
5.2 x 103
5.2 x 103
5.2 x 103
1.0 x 10*
5.0 x 10*
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
HATE
HATER
vg/1
HEALTH
4.6 x 104
4.6 x 10*
4.6 x 10*
4.6 x 104
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
4.7 x 104
4.7 x 10*
4.7 x 104
1.5 x 105
8.0 x 104
8.0 x 104
8.0 x 104
8.0 X 104
8.0 x 104
1.5 x 10s
7.4 x 10»
7.4 x 104
7.4 x 104
MATE
MATER
ug/1
ECOLOGY
N
N
. N
H
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
8.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 10'
2.5 x 104
2.5 x 104
K
1.0 x 103
1.0 x 103
1.0 x 103
1.0 x 103
1.0 x 103
N
N
N
N
MATE-
LAND
V9/9
• HEALTH
9.2 x 10
9.2 x 10
9.2 X 10
9.2 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 X 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
9.3 x 10
9.3 X 10
9.3 x 10
3.0 x 102
1.6 x 10*
1.6 x 102
1.6 x 102
1.6 x 102
1.6 x 102
3.0 x 10?
1.5 x 10*
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
MATE
LAND
ECOLOGY
N
N
N
N
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0 x 10
5.0 X 10
5.0 x 10
N
2.01
N
-2.0
2.0
2.0
N
N
N
N
Sg/1
4.3xl03
1.6x10*
l.OxlO3
9.4X10*
<10
RATIO
SAMPLE
MATE
1.4
32
-
0.32
180
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y-YES
H=HO
YES
YES
NO
YES
NO
TEST
METHOD'
1-A
1-A
1-A
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
1
1
1
TEST
COST3
1
1
1
SAMPLE.
ALIQUOT4
1
1 '
1
TABLE KEY:
1. TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRD
C. WET
CHEMICAL
0. ESCA
E. 6C/MS
2. EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
3. TEST COST
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
4. SAMPLE ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAHPLE
itlon of S-2-5, S-2-6 and S-2-7
N.D. Not Determined
N No Value
-------
Table 2-2. Total Emission Data From 6-inch FBC Unit* (Continued)
ro
CO
CATEGORY
40. INDIUM
41. THALLIUM
•42. CARBON
43. SILICON
44. GERMANIUM
COMPOUND
SalUc, Ga+3
(as Ga)
Gallium Sesqul-
oxlde, SazO,
(asto) *3
Indium. In
Indium Ion, lnf->
Thallium, Tl
Thallous. Tl+1
ThalUc, Tl+3
Elemental Carbon
Coal
Carbide, C-
Carbonate, 3"2
Bicarbonate, HC03
Carbonyl, C0=
Carbon Monoxide
Carbon Dioxide
SI lane, S1H4
Silicon, S1
OrthoslHcate,
S10a-2
Metastlfcate,
S103-2
Silicon Dioxide,
S102
Silicon Dlsulflde,
S1S2
Silicon Carbide, S1C
Germanium, Ge
Gennanous, Ge*2
(as Ge)
Germanic, Ge*4
(as Ge)
Gennanous Sulflde,
GeS (as Ge)
Germanic Sulf1ceK
6eS2 (as Ge)
Germane, GeH4
(asGe)
Germanium Oxide,
6*02 (as Ge)
MOTE
AIR
wg/m3 (ppm)
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
1 .0 x 10*
3.5 x ID3"
N
N
N
N
N
4.0 x 103 (35)
9.0 x 106 (5000)
7.0 x 102
1.0 x 104
N
N
1.0 x 104
N
1.0 x 104
5.6 x 102
5.6 X 102
5.6 x 102
5.6 x I02
5.6 x 102
5.6 x 102
5.6 x 102
HATE
MATER
M9/1
HEALTH
7.4 x 10*
7.4 x 104
1.5 x 103
1.5 x 103
1.5 x 103
1.5 x 103
1.5 x 103
5.3 x 104
N
N
N
N
N
6.0 x 105
N
1.1 x 104
1.5 x 10s
N
N
1.5 x 105
N
1.5 x 1Q5
8.4 x 103
8.4 x 103
8.4 x 103
8.4 x 103
8.4 x 103
8.4 X 103
8.4 x 103
HATE
WATER
U9/1
ECOLOGY
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
6.0 x 10
N
H
N
N
N
N
N
II
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
MATE
LAND
vg/i
HEALTH
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0 '
3.0
1.6 x 102
N
N
N
N
N
N/A
N/A
N
3.0 x 102
N
N
3.0 x 102
N
3.0 x 102
1.7 x 10
1.7 x 10
1.7 X 10
1.7 x 10
1.7 x 10
1.7 x 10
1.7 x 10
MATE
LAND
ug/9
ECOLOGY
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N/A
N/A
2.J x 10
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
ug/1
<30
<20
l.SxlO2
N.D.
N.D.
3.5xl06
1.2x10
RATIO
SAMPLE
~WfT
l.fi
350
LEVEL '2
REQUIRED
Y=YES
. N=NO
NO
m
YFS
YES
NO
TEST .
METHOD1
1-«
1-A
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
.,
1
1
TEST.
COST3
1
1
SAMPLE.
ALIQUOT4
1
1
•
TABLE KEY:
1. TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
• A. AAS
B. XRD
C. WET
CHEMICAL .
D. ESCA
E. GC/MS
2. EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
3. TEST COST
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
4. SAMPLE
ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
SfMtfon of 5-2-5, S-2-6 and S-2-7
N.O. Hot teteralned
N No Value
-------
Table 2-2. Total Emission Data From 6-inch FBC Unit* (Continued)
ro
-p.
CATEGORY
45. TIN
46. LEAD
47. NITROGEN
COMPOUND
Tin Oxide, Sn02
Tin. Sn
Stannous, Sn+2
Stannic, Sn*'
Lead, Pb
Elemental Led. Pb
Plumbous, Pb+2
Plinfclc. Pb+4
(as Pb)
Lead Monoxide .
PbO (as Pb)
Lead Sulfate,
PbS04 (as Pb)
Lead Sulfate,
Pbs (as Pb)
Lead Carbonate,
PbO>3 (as Pb)
Lead Phosphate,
Pb3(P04>2 (as Pb)
Lead Chroma te,
PbCrt>4 (as Pb)
Lead Holybdate,
PbHo04 (as Pb)
Lead Arsenate,
PbllAs04 (as Pb)
Hydrazlne
Alkali Cyanides,
NaCN, KCN
Nitric Acid, HN03
Nitrogen Oxides,
N£0, N02, N204,
N203, N205
Hydrogen Cyanide,
HCN
Anmonla, NH3
Cyanogen, CjNj
Nitride, N=
Nitrate, NQ3-
Nltrlte, NOJ-
Annonluni, Nfy*
HATE
AIR
pg/m3 (ppm)
1.0 x 10*
N
N
N
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 10* •
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 10*
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102 (.1)
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
9.0 x 103
1.1 X 10* (10)
1.8 x 10* (25)
2.0 x 104
N
N
N
N
MATE
WATER
09/1
HEALTH
1.5 x Ifl5
N
N
N
2.5 x ID2
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x ID2
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 10?
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
Z.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.3
5.0 x 102
7.5 x 104
1.4 x 105
5.0 x 102
2.5 x 103
1.0 x 103
N
N
N
N
HATE
MATER
iig/1
ECOLOGY
N
N
N
II
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 X 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
N
2.5 x 10
4.5 x 102
N
2.5 x 10
5.0 x 10
2.5 x 10
N
N
N
N
MATE
LAND
ng/g
HEALlH
3.0
N
N
N
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10'1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x ID"1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
4.5
1.0
1.5 x 103
N/A
1.0
5.0
2.0
N
N
N
N
MATE
LAND
vg/g
ECOLOGY
N
N
N
N
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-:
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1 ..0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
N
5.0 x 10-2
9.0 x 10-1
N/A
5.0 x ID"2
1.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-2
N
N
N
N
rt/T'
1.9xlOZ .
o.Sxin2
N.D.
l.SxlO5
RATIO
SAMPLE
MATE
0.02
63
10
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y=YES
N-NO
NO
YES
YES*
TEST .
METHOD1
1-A
I-C
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
1
1
TEST
COST3
1
1
SAMPLE.
ALiquor
.
1
1
TABLE KEY:
TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRD
C. WET '
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. GC/MS
EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
TEST COST
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
SAMPLE ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
'sunraitlon of S-Z-5, S-2-6 and S-2-7
N.D. Not Determined
N No Value
1. As Anlonlc Species
-------
Table 2-2. Total Emission Data From 6-inch FBC Unit* (Continued)
ro
CATEGORY
48. PHOSPHORUS
49. ARSENIC
50. ANTIMONY
61. BISMUTH
COMPOUND
Phosphorus, P
Phosphite, POi"3
(« P) 3
B1 phosphate,
H2PO,- (as P)
Phosphlne, PHa
Phosphoric Acid,
H3P04 '
Phosphorus
Pentasulfide
Phosphate, K>f3
Arsenic, As
Metallic Arsenic
Arsenous, As+3
Arsenic, As+5
Arsenate, AsOa"3
(as As)
Arsenite, AsOa"3
(as As)
Arsenide. As"3
(as As)
Arsine, AsH3
Arsenic Trioxide,
AS20-,
Antimony Tri-
oxide, Sb203
Antimony Metal, Sb
Antimonous,
(stibnous) Sb*3
Antlnonic (stlbnic)
Sb™
Stiblne, SbH3
(as Sb)
Antimonous Sul-
fide. Sb2S3
Antimony, Sb
Bismuth, Bi
Elemental Bis-
muth, BI
Bismuthous, BI*3
(» Bi)
Bitnithic, 81*5
(at Bi)
HATE
AIR
pg/m3 (ppm)
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
4.0 x 102 (0.3)
1.0 x 103
1.0 x 103 —
N
2.0 x 10
2.0 x 10
2.0 x 10
2.0 x 10
2.0 x 10
2.0 x 10
2.0 x 10
2.0 x 10
2.0 x 10
S.O x 101
5.0 x 10Z
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
4.1 x 102
4.1 X 102
4.1 x 102
4.1 r 102
MATE
HATER
ng/1
HEALTH
1.5 x 104
1.5 x 10"
1.5 x 10*
6.0 x 103
1.5 x 104
1.5 x 104
N
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 'x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
7.5 x 102
7.5 x 10^
7.5 x 103
7.5 x 103
7.5 x 103
7.5 x 103
7.5 x 103
6.1 x 103
6.1 x 103
6.1 x 103
6.1 x 103
MATE
WATER
ng/1
ECOLOGY
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
N
4.5 x 103
N
N
5.0 x 101
5.0 x IQl
5.0 x Ifll
5.0 x 101
5.0 x 101
5.0 X IQl
5.0 x IQl
5.0 x Ifll
5.0 x Ifll
2.0 x 102
(as Sb)
2.0 x 10Z
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 102
N
N
N
N
MATE
LAND
U979
HEALTH
3.0 x 10
3.0 x 10
3.0 X 10
N/A
3.0 x 10
3.0 X 10
N
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
1.5 x 10
1.5 x Ifll
1.5 x Ifll
1.5 x I0l
1.5 x Ifll
1.5 x 101
1.5 x Ifll
1.2 x IQl
1.2 x Ifll
1.2 x I0l
1.2 x Ifll
HATE
LAND
U9./9
ECOLOGY
1.0 x 10-3
1.0 x 10-3
1.0 X ID"3
N/A
9.0
N
N
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 X 10-1-
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 X 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
4.0 x 10-1
(as Sb)
4.0 x 10-1
4.0 x 10-1
4.0 x 10-1
4.0 x 10-1
4.0 x 10-1
4.0 x 10-1
N
N
N
N
Sg/i
l.lxlO3
2.3x10
1.2
1.7x10
RATIO
SAMPLE
~MAfT
11
1.1
0.1
0.4
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y=YES
N*NO
YES
YES
NO
NO
TEST
METHOD!
l-C
\
l-A
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
1
1
TEST
COST3
1
1
SAMPLE,
ALIQUOT4
1
1
TABLE KEY:
. TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRD
C. HET
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. GS/KS
. EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
TEST COST
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH •
SAMPLE ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
lumtlon of S-Z-S, S-2-6 and S-2-7
N.D. Not Determined
N No Value
-------
Table 2-2. Total Emission Data From 6-inch FBC Unit* (Continued)
ro
at
CATEGORY .
52. OXYGEN
S3. SULFUR
54. SELENIUH
55. TELLURIUM
56. FLUORIDE
COMPOUND
Ozone, 03
Rhombic Sulfur, Sg
Sulfide, S-2
Sulfate, S04-2
Sulflte, SOs-2
Thlocyanate, -SOr
Sulfur Trloxlde.
S03
Sulfurtc Acid,
H2S04
Sulfur Dioxides,
S02
Hydrogen Sulfide,
HJS
Carbon Dlsulflde,
CS2
Carbonyl Sulfide,
COS
Selenium, Se
Elemental Selenium,
Se
Selenlde, Se'2 .
Selenltes, SeO*-2
(as Se)
Selena tes, Sety"2
(asSe)
Hydrogen Selenlde,
HjSe
Carbon Dlselenlde,
CSez (as Se)
Selenium Dioxide,
SeO? (as Se)
Tellurium, Te
Tellurlde. Te'2
Tellurlte, TeOs'2
(as Te)
Tellurate, TeOi
(as Te) ~*
Fluoride Ion, F~
Hydrogen Fluoride,
HF
MATE
AIR
ug/m3 (ppm)
2.0 x 102 (0.1)
N
N
" -
N
N '
N
1.0 x 103
1.3 x 10*
1.5 x 10* (10)
6.0 x 104 (20)
4.4 x 10*
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 102 (.05)
2.0 x'102
2.0 X 102
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
2.5 x 103
2.0 X.103
MATE
HATER
vg/i
HEALTH
N/A
N
N
N
N
N
N
1.5 x 10*
2.0 x 105
2.3 X Id*
9.0 x 105
It/A
5.0 x IQl
5.0 x 101
5.0 'x IQl
5.0 x 101
5.0 x 101
5.0 x 101
(asSe)
5.0 x Ifll
5.0 x 101
1.5 x ID3
1.5 x 103
1.5 x 103
1.5 x 103
3.8 x 10*
3.0 x 10*
HATE
HATER
"9/1
ECOLOGY
N/A
N
N
N
N
N
H
4.5 x 102
N
1.0 x lol
1.0 x 10*
N/A
2.5 x IQl
2.5 x Ifll
2.5 x 101
2.5 x 10l
2.5 x 10'
2.5 x 10'
(asSe)
2.5 x 10'
2.5 X 101
N
N
N
N
N
N
MATE
LAND
H^ft,
N/A
N
N
N
N
• N
N
3.0 x Ifll
4.0 x 102
N/A
N/A
N/A
• 1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10- !
1.0 x 10'1
1.0 x 10"1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
(asSe)
1.0 x 10-'
1.0 x 10'1
3.0 x 10
3.0 x 10
3.0 X 10 '
3.0 x 10
7.5 x 101
N/A
HATE
LAND
ECOLOGY
N/A
N
N
N
N
N
N
9.0 x 102
N
N/A
N/A
N/A
5.0 x 10-2
5.0 x ID"2
5.0 x 10"2
5.0 x lO"2
5.0 x 10"2
5.0 x 10-2
(as Se)
5.0 x 10-2
5.0 x ID"2
N
N
N
N
N
NA
Tppm)
"g/i
N.D.
2.2x10*
H.D.
N.D.
H.D.
N.D.
N.D.
7.5
<5.5
N.D.
N.D.
RATIO
gAHPLE
HATE
N
0.04
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y-YES
N-NO
NO
NO
TEST ,
METHOD1
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
TEST
COST3
SAMPLE.
ALIQUOT*
TABLE KEY:
TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRO
C. MET
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. GS/KS
EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
. TEST COST
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
SAMPLE ALIQUOT
T. ADEQUATE
2. MARGIHAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
of S-2-5. S-2-6 and S-2-7
N.D. Not Determined
N No V«1i»
-------
Table 2-2. Total Emission Data From 6-inch FBC Unit* (Continued)
ro
CATEGORY
57. CHLORINE
58. BROMINE
59. IODINE
60. SCANDIUM
6i. YTTRIUM
62. TITANIUM
63, ZIRCONIUM
64. HAFNIUM
66. VANADIUM
CONFOUND
Chloride Ion, CT'
Hypochlortte.
C10-
Chlorlte. C102~
Chlorate, Cl(>3
Chlorine Dioxide,
CIO?
Carbonyl Chloride
(phosgene),
COC12
Hydrogen Chloride,
HC1
Braride Ion, Br~
Bromide Ion, Br~
Hydrogen Bronlde,
HBr
Iodide Ion, I-
ScandiuB, Sc
Scandiun Ion, Sc+3
Yttrium Ion,.**3
Tltanlun. T1
Tltanous, T1+3
(as T1)
Titanic, T1+4
(as TO
Titanium Dioxide,
T102 (as T1)
Zlrconlui Ion,
Zt-M
ZlrconliB Dioxide,
ZrOz (as Zr)
HafnliB Ion, Hf*4
Vanadium, V
Elemental
VanadlM, V
Vanadlc. V*3 (as V)
. Vanadyl, Vo*2
(a«V)
Orthovanadate,
VOT* (a> V)
HATE
MS/"3 (PP»)
N
N
N
•N
N
4.0 x 10*
7.0 X 103
N
N
1.0 x 104
N
5.3 x 10*
5.3 X 104
1.0 x 103
6.0 x 103
6.0" x ID3
6.0 x 103
6.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 10*
5.0" x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
(.0 x 102
HATE
WATER
HEALTH
1.3 x 106
N
N
N
N
6.0 x 103
1.1 x 105
N
N
1.5 x 10s
N
8.0 x 10
8.0 x 10
1.5 x 104
9.0 x 104
.9.0 x 104
9.0 x lO4
9.0 x 104
7.5 x 104
7.5 x 104
7.5 x 104
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
HATE
HATER
V9/1
ECOLOGY
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
K
N
N
N
8.2 x 102
Us
Ti[S04]2)
8.2 x 102
8.2 x 102
8.2 x 102
N
N
N
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 10?
1.5 x 102
1.5 X 102
1.5 X 102
HATE
LAND
ug/9
HEALTH
2.6 x 103
• N
N
N
N
N/A
N/A
N
K
N/A
N
1.6 x ID"2
1.6 x lO"2
3.0 x Ifll
1.8 x 102
1.8 x 102
l.ftx.102
1.8 x 102
1.5 x 101
1.5 x 10l
1.5 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 X 10
5.0 X 10
. HATE
LAND
U9/9
ECOLOGY
N
N
N
N
N
N/A
N/A
N
N
N/A
N
N
N
N
1.6 x 10
1.6 x 10
1.6 x 10
1.6 x 10
N
N
N
3.0 x 10-'
3.0 x 10-1
3.0 x 10-1
3.0 x 10-1
3.0 x lp-1
yg/1
i.exio4
N.D.
N.D.
10.6
N.D.
1.1x10
5.6X102
B.5X103
2.7xl04
3.5xl03
B.fjjclO
9.8X103
RATIO
w'
N
N
N
0.85
4.5
.0.7
19.6
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y-YES
N=HO
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
TEST
METHOD1
1-C
1-C
1-C
1-A
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
2
1
1
1
TEST-
COST3
1
1
1
1
SAMPLE
ALIQUOT4
2
1
2
1
TABLE KEY:
1. TEST HETHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRO
C. MET
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. &C/HS
2. EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
3. TEST COST
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
4. SAMPLE ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
tlon of S-2-5, S-2-6. and S-2-7
H.D. Hot Determined
N Ho Value
-------
Table 2-2. Total Emission Data From 6-inch FBC Unit* (Continued)
ro
oo
CATEGORY
65. NIOBIUM
67. TANTALUM'
66. CHROMIUM
COMPOUND
Metavanadate, V03-
(as V)
Vanadylic, VO*3
(as V)
Vanadium Monoxide,
VO (as V)
Vanadium Trtoxlde,
V203 (as V)
Vanadium Tetra-
oxlde, V20a, (as V)
Vanadium Pent-
oxide. V206 (as V)
Vanadium Carbide,
VC (as V)
Vanadium Hono-
sulflde, VS (as V)
Vanadium Nitride,
VN (as V)
Vanadyl Sulfate,
VOS04-5H?0 (as V)
Nlobus, Nb+3
Nloblc, Nb+5
Niobium Oxides,
NbO, Nb?05 (as Nb)
Tantalum Ion,
Ta+5
Chromium, Cr
Chromous, Cr*2
(as Cr)
Chromic, Cr+3
(as Cr)
Chroma tes, CrOi"2
(as Cr)
Chromltes, CrjOi"2
(as Cr)
D1 chroma tes,
CrjOTMss Cr)
Chromium Carbonyl ,
Cr(CO)6 (as Cr)
Chromium Sulflde,
Cr2S3
Chromic Oxide,
Crz03 (as Cr)
Chronrite Mineral ,
FeO CrjOa (as Cr)
MATE
AIR
ug/m3 (ppm)
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x I02'
5.0 x 102
5.0 x. 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
2.2 x 104
2.2 x 104
2.2 x 104
5.0 x 103
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
HATE
HATER
P9/1
HEALTH
2.5 X 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 1C3
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
3.3 x 105
3.3 x 105
•3.3 x 103
7.5 x 104
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
HATE
HATER
U9/1
ECOLOGY
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 1C2'
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 10*
1.5 x 102
N
N
N
N
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
MATE
LAND
ug/9
HEALTH
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
6.5 x 102
6.5 x 102
6.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10'1
5.0 x lO'l
5.0 x lO"1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x ID"1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
HATE
LAND
vg/9
ECOLOGY
3.0 x 10-1
3.0 x 10-1
3.0 x 10-1
3.0 x 10-1
3.0 x 10-1
3.0 x 10-1
3.0 x 10-1
3.0 x 10-1
3.0 x 10-1
3.0 x 10-1
N
N
N
N
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10"'
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
~v ppm)
U9/1-
8.6x10
3.7x10
2.1xl03
N.D.
RATIO
SAMPLE
MATE
210
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y=YES
N=NO
NO
NO
YES
TEST
METHODl
1-C -
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
1
TEST,
COST3
1
SAMPLE,
ALIQUOT4
1
TABLE KEY
TEST HETHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
8. XRD
C. WET
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. GC/MS
EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
TEST COST
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
SAMPLE ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL--
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
Summation of S-2-5, S-2-6, and S-2-7
N.D. Not Determined
N No Value
-------
Table 2-2. Total Emission Data From 6-inch FBC Unit* (Continued)
ro
10
CATEGORY
69. MOLYBDEN
70. TUNGSTEN
71. MANGANESE
72. IRON
COMPOUND
Hydrous Chromium
Phosphate, CrP04
XH20 (as Cr)
Iron Chroma te,
FeCri>4 (as Cr)
Molybdenum, Mo
Molybdenous, Mo*2
Molybdlc, Mo+3
Molybdate, MoOd"2
(as Mo)
Molybdenum Sulflde,
MoS2 (as Mo)
Molybdenum Tr1 oxide,
Mo03 (as Mo)
Tungsten, M
Tungsten Ions, W+z,
H*4, w+5, w+6, W04-2
Tungsten Disulfide,
WS2 (as H)
Wolframite Mineral,
FeW04-MnW04 (as W)
Manganese, Mn
Hanganous, Mn+2 •
Manganic, Mn+3
Permanganate, MnOAT
(as Mn!
Hanganous Oxide,
MnO (as Mn)
Manganese Dioxide,
Hn02 (as Mn)
Manganese Carbonate,
McCOs (as Mn)
Manganous Sulfate,
MnS04 (as Mn)
Manganese Sulfide,
MnS2 (as Mn)
Iron Carbonyls,
Fe(CO)5, Fe(CO)9,
F£3(CO)12
Ferrous, Fe+2
Ferric, Fe*3
Ferrous Oxide, FeO
MATE
AIR
ug/m3 (ppm)
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
1.0 x 103
'N
1.0 x 103
1.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 > Ifl3
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103'
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
7.0 x 102
i
1.0 x 103
1.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
MATE
HATER
ug/1
HEALTH
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
7.5 x 104
7.5 x 101
7.5 x Ifll
7.5 x 104
7.5 x 101
7.5_ x 101
1.? x 104
N
1.5 x 104
1.5 x 104
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
1.1 , x 104
1.5 x 103
1.5 X 103
7.6 x 104
MATE
WATER
P9/1
ECOLOGY
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 1C2
7.0 x 103
7.0 x 103
7.0 x 103
7.0 x 103
7.0 x 103
7.0 x 103
N
N
N
N
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 1C2
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
N
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
N
MATE
LAND
ug/g
HEALTH
5.0 x ID"1
5.0 x 10-1
1.5 x 1C2
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
3.0 x 101
N
3.0 x 101
3.0 x 101
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0'x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
2.1 x Ifll
3.0 x 10
3.0 x 10
1.5 x 102
HATE
LAND
ug/9
ECOLOGY
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
1.4 x 10'
1.4 x 10l
1.4 x Ifll
1.4 x lol
1.4 » 101
1.4 x 10l
N
N
N
N
2.0 x 10-1
2.0 x 10-1
2.0 x 10-'
2.0 x 10-1
2.0 x 10-1
2.0 x 10-1
2.0 x 10-1
2.0 x 10-1
2.0 x 10-1
N
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
N
(ppmp
U9/1
3.7xl02
1 x 10
3.8xl03
N.D.
4.3xl05
RATIO
SAMPLE
HATE
0.07
6.76
456
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y=YES
N=NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
TEST
METHOD'
l-A
l-A
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
1
1
TEST,
COST3
1
1
SAMPLE.
ALIQUO.T4
1
1
TABLE KEY:
TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRO
C. WET
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. GC/MS
EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
TEST COST
1 REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH"
SAItPLE ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAHPLE
*JunMtion of S-2-6, S-2-6, and S-2-7 N.D. Not Determined
H No Value
-------
2-2.
Total Emission Data From 6-inch FBC Unit* (Continued)
CO
o
CATEGORY
73. RUTHENIUM
74. COBALT
75. RHOOIIM
76. HCKa
COMPOUND
Magnetite,
FeO-Fej03
Ferrocyanlde,
Fe1.0 x 10s
h
N
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102 •
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
N
1.0 x 10'
1.0 x 10'
l.Ox 10'
1 .0 x 101
HATE
LAND
U9/9
HEALTH
3.8 x 10'
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
l.S x 10
1.5 x 10
1.5 x 10
1.5 x 10
1.5 x 10
1.5 x 10
1.5 x 10
1.5 x 10
1.5 x 10
1.5 x 10
1.5 x 10
3.0 x 10-2
4.5 x 10-1
4.5 x 10-1
4.5 x 10-1
4.5 x lO-1
NATE
LAND
ug/9
ECOLOGY
N
N
N
N
N
N
2.0 x 102
N
N
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x ID"1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 X 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 X 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 X 10-1
N
2.0 x 10-2
2.0 x 10~2
2.0 x 10-2
2.0 x 10-2
ug/l
<9
1.9X102
N.D.
2-lxlO2
3-BxlO3
RATIO
SAMPLE
HATE
N
3.8
21
250
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y-YES
N=NO
YES
YES
YES
TEST
METHOD!
l-C
l-C
l-A
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
1
1
1
TEST,
COST3
1
1
1
SAMPLE
ALIQUOT4
1
1
1
TABLE KEY
1 TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRD
C. WET
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. GC/MS
2. EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
3. TEST COST
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
4. SAMPLE ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL '
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
oB of S-2-5. S-2-6 and S-2-7
N.D. Not Determined
N No Value
-------
Table 2-2. Total Emission Data From 6-inch FBC Unit* (Continued)
CO
CATEGORY
77. PLATINUM
78. COPPER
79. SILVER
80. GOLD
81. ZINC
COHPOUND
Nickel Oxide. N10
(as HI)
Nickel Antlmnlde,
'N1Sb (as N1)
Nickel Arsenic Sul-
flde, NIAsS (as N1)
Nickel Carbonyl,
N1(CO)4
Elemental Platinum,
Pt
Copper
Cuprous, Cu+
Cupric, Cu+2
Copper Fluoride,
CuF2 (as Cu)
Copper Oxides, CuO,
CujO (as Cu)
Copper Sulfate,
CuS04 (as Cu)
Copper Sul fides, CuS,
Cu2S (as Cu)
Copper Carbonate,
CuCOa (as Cu)
Malachite Mineral,
CuC03-Cu(OH)2 (as Cu)
Chalcopyrlte
Mineral, CuFeSz
Silver, Ag
Silver Ion, Ag*
(as Ag)
Silver Chloride,
AgCl (as Ag)
Silver Cyanide, AgCN
(as Ag)
Silver Sulflde,
Ag2S (as Ag)
Elemental Gold
Z1nc, Zn
Elemental Zinc, Zn
Zinc Ion, Zn«
Zinc Oxide, ZnO
(a* Zn).
HATE
AIR
Iig/m3 (ppm)
1.5 x Ifll
1.5 x 10.1
1.5 x 101
4.3 x 10'
2.0 x 10
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 102
2,0 x Ifl2
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 102
N
1.0 x 101
1.0 x 10'
1.0 x 101
1.0 x Ifll
1.0 x 101
N
4.0 x 103
4.0 x 103
4.0 x 103
4.0 x 103
HATE
HATER
MS/1
HEALTH
2.3 x 10*
2.3 x 102
2.3 x 102
6.5 x 10*
3.0 x 101
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 1C3
5.0 -x 103
5.0 'X 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
'5.0 •> 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
N
2.5 x 10*
2.5 x 10?
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 10?
N
2.5 x 104
2.5 x ID4
2.5 x 104-
2.5 x 10*
HATE
WATER
ug/i
ECOLOGY
1.0 x 101
1.0 x 101
1.0 x 10'
1.0 x 101
(as H1)
N
5.0 x 10'
5.0 x 101
5.0 x 101
5.0 x 101
5.0 x IQl
5.0 x 10l
5.0 x 101
5.0 x Id
5.0 x 101
N
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
N
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
HATE
' LAND
U9/9
HEALTH
4.5 x 10-1
4.5 x 10-1
4.5 x 10-1
1.0 x 10
6.0 x ID'2
1.0 x Ifll
1.0 x 10l
1.0 x 10'
1.0 x Ifll
1.0 x 10l
1.0 x Ifll
1.0 x Ifll
1.0 x IQl
1.0 x Ifll
N
5.0 x 10-1.
5.0 X 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
N
5.0 x 10'
5.0 X 10]
5.0 x 101
5.0 x 10'
HATE
LAND
• W9/9
ECOLOGY
2.0 X 10-2
2.0 x 10-2
2.0 x ID'2
2.0 x 10'3
N
1.0 x 10-'
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 X 10-1
1.0 x 10-5
1.0 x 10"1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
N
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
N
2.0 x 10-1
2.0 x 10-1
2.0 x 10-1
2.0 x 10-1
ug/l
N.D.
<5
o.Txin2
<1
<5»10
RATIO
W
4.9
N
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y-YES
• N-NO
NO
YES
NO
TEST
METHOD1
l-A
.
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
1
TEST
COST3
1
SAMPLE,
ALIQUOT4
1
TABLE KEY:
. TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRD
C. WET
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. GC/HS
EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
TEST COST
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
SAMPLE ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
' *SMHt1on of S-2-5, S-2-«'and 5-2-7
N.D. Not Determined
H No Value
-------
Table 2-2. Total Emission Data From 6-inch FBC Unit* (Concluded)
CO
ro
CATEGORY
82. CADMIUH
83. MERCURY
84. CERIUH
85. URANIUM
86. THORIUM
COMPOUND
Zinc Sulfate, ZnSOa
(as Zn)
Zinc Sulfide. ZnS
(as Zn) '
Cadnlun. Cd
Elemental Cadmium,
Cd
Cadmium Ion, Cd+2
Cadjuium Sulfide, CdS
(as Cd)
Cadnium Oxide, CdO
(as Cd)
Mercury, Hg
Elemental Mercury, Hg
Hercurous, Hgz**
Mercuric, Hg++
Mercuric Sulfide.
HgS
Mercuric Chloride, .
HgCl2
Dysprosium, Dy
(Dy*3)
Cerium. Ce (Ce+3,
Ce+4. Cetfs)
Praseodymium, Pr
(Pr+3)
Samarium. Sn (Sm+3)
Lanthanum, La
Neodyniun, Nd (Nd«)
Uranium, U (U+6)
Thorium, Th (Th+4)
.HATE
AIR
Iig/n3 (ppn)
4.0 .x 103
4.0 x 103
1.0 x 101
1.0 x 101
1.0 x Ifll
1.0 x 101
1.0 x 101
5.0 x Ifll
5.0 x 10'
5.0 x 101
5.0 x 10'
5.0 x IQl
5.0 x 101
9.3 x 103
3.7 x 10*
5.1 x 10*
5.3 x 10*
1.1 x 10b
N
9.0 x 10
4.2 x 102
HATE
HATER
ug/l
HEALTH
2.5 x 10*
2.5 x 10*
5.0 x 10'
S.O x Ifll
5.0 x 10?
5.0 x Ifll
5.0 x Ipl
1.0 x 101
1.0. x 101
1.0 x 101
1.0 x 10l
1.0 x 10l
1.0 x 10l
2.3 x 105
5.5 x 105
7.7 X 105
7.9 x 105
1.7 x 106
N
6.0 x 10*
6.3 x 10?
HATE
HATER
ECOLOGY
1.0 x 10*
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5.x 102
N
N
N
N
N
N
5,0 x 102
N
HATE
LAND
wg/g
HEAL1H
5.0 x Ifll
5.0 x 10l
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
2-.0 x 10-2
2.0 x 10-2
2.0 x 10-2
2.0 x 10-2
2.0 x 10-2
2.0 x 10-2
4.6 x 102
1.1 x 103
1.5 x 103'
1.6 x 103
3.4 x 103
N
1.2 x 102
1.3 x 10 •
HATE
LAND
ECOLOGY
2.0 x 10-1
2.0 x 10-1
2.0 x 10-3
2.0 x 10-3
2.0 x 10-3
2.0 x 10-3
2.0 x 10-3
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
H
N
N
N
N
N
1.0 x 10
N
if
<6 X 10
1 x 10
i:exio3
6.4x10
1.6xlOZ
RATIO
SAMPLE
HATE
6
-
0.2
0.04
0.7
0.39
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y-YES
N-NO
YES
NO
NO
YES
YES
TEST
HETHOO1
1-A
1-C
1-C
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
1
1
1
TEST
COST3
1
1
1
-SAMPLE.
ALIQUOT*
1
1
1
TABLE KEY:
, TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRD
C. HET
CHEMICAL
0. ESCA
E. GC/MS
. EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
. TEST COST
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
. SAMPLE ALIQU01
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAHPLE
.Sumation of S-2-5. S-2-6 and S-2-7
N.D. Not Determined
N No Value
-------
Table 2-3. Summary of Required Level 2 Analysis
Assessment
of Individ-
ual FBC
Samples
Assessment
of Total
Emission
Data
(Table 1-2)
Ft...
FBC Saigple
S-2-3, Overflow
Bed Material
>325 Mesh
S-2-4 Bed
Material Ash -
325 Mesh
S-Z-5 Sludge
Sample
S-2-6, >27y
Partlculate
S-2-7, < 27 v
Partlculate
S-2-9, FLUE*
Gas Sample
(Level 2
sample not
available)'
S-2-5,
S-2-6 and
S-2-7
MEG Category Number Requiring Level 2 Analyses by LC Fraction
LC
1
26
26
26
26
26
26
26
LC
2
2.16,21.22
21.22
2,16,21.22
2,16,21,22
2,16,21,22
2,16.21
2,15.16,22
LC
3
16,21.22
21.22
16.21.22
16,21,22
16,21.22
16.21
16.21.22
LC
4
17
25
LC
5
12,17
LC
6
8,10.13,19.23
10.23
10,23
10,19,23
10,13,19,23
10,13,23
LC
7
8,10,19.20
10,20
10,20
10,19.20
10.19,20
10.19.20
LC
8
8
8
8
Inorganics
LI, Na, K, Mg, Sr, Ba,
Aft, Ge. Sn, Pb, P. As. S.
Se. T1, V, Cr, Fe, Rh.
N1, Pt, Cu, Ag, Cd, Hg
Na, K, Mg, Ca, S1, Pb,
As, S, Ci, Cr, Fe, Rh,
Cu
LI, Na, K, Mg, Ca, Ba,
AH, Sn, Pb, N, As, S, Se,
«, T1, V, Cr, Fe, Rh,
N1, Cu, Cd, Hg
L1, Na, K, Be, Mg. Ca,
Sr, Ba, Alt. C, S1, Pb,
N, P, As, Se, S, C*. T1,
Zr, V, Cr, Mn, Fe. Co, Rh,
N1, Pt, Cu, Ag. Cd. Hg
Na, K. Ca. At. S1, P, As.
S, T1, V. Cr. Fe, HI, Hg
LI, Na, K. Be. Mg. Ca. Sr.
Ba, At, T1. S1, Pb. N. P.
As, Y. T1, Zr. y. Cr. Mn,
Fe, Co. Ph. N1.
Cd. U. Th
Level II
Leachate Studies
2, 8, 10, 13. 16, 19,
20. 21, 22. 23, 26,
L1. Na. K. Mg. Sr,
Ba, At. Ge. Sn, Pb. P,
As, S, Ct.-Br. F, I,
Se, T(. V, Cr. Fe, Mi.
N1. Pt. Cu. Ag. Cd, Hg.
21. 22. 26, Na, K.
Mg. Cr. SI. Pb, As, S.
Ci, Cr, Fe, Rh, Cu
CO
CO
level 2 Sampling Effort Required
-------
analytical scheme, both neat samples and leachates, to generate organic
compound input information and MATE inorganic water impact data.
The complete details of the sample preparation and Level 2 analytical
results are contained in the following sections of this volume.
2.3 PROBLEMS ANTICIPATED IN USING THE PROVIDED PARTICULATE SAMPLES
FOR THE LEVEL 2 APPROACH EVALUATION
Some specific problem areas, which had been anticipated in using the
remaining run No. 2 particulate samples as a Level 2 methodology evaluation,
were identified prior to analyses. The problem areas were:
• The emission samples were all hot zone particulates.
Their organic contents were expected to be low.
• A SASS was not used. Therefore, an organic module and
condensate were not available for Level 2 evaluation.
This combined with the above point would mean that
insufficient quantities of organics would be present
for a proper evaluation of "the Level 2 organic
approach.
• The samples were approximately 8 months old. It is not
specifically known what changes take place in environ-
mental samples in storage for this period of time.
Therefore, their Level 2 assessment may not be repre-
sentative of one conducted much closer to their collec-
tion date.
• Sufficient quantities of samples were not available to
conduct replicate analyses or to conduct some specific
inorganic tests. Also sample quantities extracted for
organic analyses would have been much larger (at least
a factor of 2) had more sample been available.
In spite of the above list of problems, valuable environmental assess-
ment information was gathered from analyzing these samples. These were:
evaluation and modification of the Level 2 approach developed earlier in
this project and presented in the reference text, the identification of
those analytical techniques which require further optimization and a
Level 2 characterization of the Battelle FBC samples.
34
-------
2.4 DETAILS OF LEVEL 2 ALLOCATION PLAN
Table 2-4 contains an inventory of the provided samples and the gen-
eral disbursement plan. In one case, the particulate <27y, the provided
quantity was lower than had been documented by Battelle as being sent for
analysis.
The S-2-5 sludge sample was provided as dried solids. This sample,
the S-2-4 Overflow Bed Material -325 mesh, and the parti cul ate <27|i all
were provided in too small a quantity for their inclusion in Level 2 leach-
ate studies.
35
-------
Table 2-4. Sample Inventory and General Disbursement Plan
Sample
Number
S-2-1
S-2-2
S-2-3
S-2-4
S-2-5
S-2-6
S-2-7
(-2 and
Description
Illinois Coal No. 6
Grove Limestone
Overflow Bed Material
>325 mesh
Overflow Bed Material
-325 mesh
Sludge
Parti oil a tes >27y
Particulates <27y
-3)
Total
Quantity
(g)
10.0
16.0
20.0
^0.7
6.0
8.0
0.90
Organic
(g)*
4.0138
3.9991
9.9820
0.3605
3.9652
3.9355
0.5335
Inorganic
(g)
2.0
4.0
4.0
Remainder
Remainder
2.0
Remainder
Dilute
Acid
Leachate
(g)
2.0
4.0
3.0
1.0
Dilute
Base
Leachate
(g)
2.0
4.0
3,'0
1.0
CO
CT>
Actual Sample Allocated
-------
3. LEVEL 2 INORGANIC CHARACTERIZATION OF THE
FLUIDIZED BED COMBUSTOR PARTICIPATES
The Fluidized Bed Combustor samples were all particulates. The
inorganic Level 2 approach was followed as completely as possible for the
limited quantities provided. The logic flow charts published as a guide to
the analyst in the "Approach to Level 2 Analysis Based on Level 1 Results,
MEG Categories and Compounds and Decision Criteria" were the focal point
for the compound identification matrix utilized. These flow charts coordi-
nate the use of a variety of analytical techniques. Acidic and basic
leachates were prepared for cation Teachability assessment from samples:
Illinois coal (S-2-1), Grove limestone (S-2-2), the overflow bed material
(S-2-3), and the particulates >27u (S-2-6). The following section contains
the details of sample preparation, instruments utilized, and the informa-
tion obtained for each phase of this inorganic Level 2 effort. The refer-
ence text should be used by the reader for the theoretical background on
each analytical technique.
3.1 INITIAL SAMPLE CHARACTERIZATION (Refer to Figure 3-1)
The Level 1 elemental data have been tabulated and summarized in Sec-
tion 1. Unfortunately anion data (other than the common elements which
form anions) were not available from this modified Level 1 assessment. This
was unfortunate not only from the standpoint of drafting a potential Level 2
compound list but also because insufficient quantities of samples were avail-
able to conduct quantitative Level 2 anion analysis although qualitative tech-
niques were applied. However, a list of potential emitted compounds was
drafted based on knowledge of the process stream and sampling conditions.
3.1.1 List of Potential Inorganic Compounds
For the Battelle FBC samples, the air feed rate (87.3 Ib/hr) produces
an oxidizing condition for the bed material and stack effluent. The coal
37
-------
I
.
3-1.
f SOLID "N
^ SAMPLE J
/ ELEMENTAL LEVEL 1 /
/ DATA /
< MATE ./ >*
\/Ai UK / WHAT \.
VALUED ELEMENTS \
/ELEMENTS
(NOT EXCEEDING/
MATE VALUES /
AVAILABLE
MEG
COMPOUNDS
1 LIST UNSTABLE ,
/COMPOUNDS AND/
/ CONDITIONS /
S
s
1
'•
MICROSOLUBI
TESTS
*
t
PLM
*
rUDY SHAPETOLOR
ZE. REFRACTIVE
MDEX
t
LITY MICR(
ON
ANIOI
/SOLUBILITY OF /
SPECIFIC GROUPS /
OF PARTICLES /
xl
T
/ LISTS OF /
/ ANION VJ /
f SOLUBILITY /
l^-( EXCEED )
^\ MATE /
N. VALUES /
y^MATE VALUES
/LIST ELEMENTS /
EXCEEDING MATE /
VALUES /
A
T
LIST POTENTIAL
"• COMPOUNDS
PRESENT
/THESE \
P v^OMPOUNDSX
' / STABLE \
*— SUNDER PROCESSOR/
YYK
/UP-DATE POTENTIAL / 3 1 1
/ COMPOUND LIST / "
*
STUDY GENERAL -5 1 O
CHARACTERISTICS 0 . . &
OF PARTICLES
*
t
TGA/OSC
(N2 OR AIR)
*
CHARACTERIZE
SAMPLE FOR
WEIGHT GAIN/ LOSS
PHASE CHANGES
~"J
3-SPOT TEST
SPECIFIC i
«IS/CATIONS
/ STABLE DRYING /
/ TEMPERATURES, VAPOR-/ .
/IZATION TEMPERATURES, /
/DECOMPOSITION POINTS/
/AND AIR STABILITY /
I
,
UP-DATE LIST OF
POTENTIAL
COMPOUNDS
i
SELECTS SPECIFIC ANION/
CATION TESTS FOR
POTENTIAL ELEMENTS
(•>
•
AAS
I
/ * U% ELEMENT / /
/ COMPOSITION / /
3.1.3
|
WET CHEMICAL
OR INSTRUMENTAL
ANION TESTS
i
r*15% ANION /
COMPOSITION /
1
RATIO CATION/
ANION VALUES
*
/ UPDATE POTENTIAL /
/ COMPOUND LIST /
/ WITH WEIGHT /
/ INFORMATION /
/HAS\
/ MASS \
/CLOSURE OF\
/MEG COMFOUNDK ,
\EXCEEDING MATE/T±
\VALUES BEEN / ™s
\ATTAI NED/
/LIST POSSIBLE /
ASSIGNED COM - /
SUNOS AT SUSPECTED/
LEVELS /
/ LIST IDENTIFIED
/ COMPOUNDS
•7 WITH ESTIMATED
/ CONCENTRATIONS^
Figure 3:-l. Logic Flow Chart for Initial Sample Characterization
38
-------
emitted SCL forms metallic sulfide, sulfite and sulfate compounds under
FBC operating conditions. In general oxides, sulfur species, carbonates
and some nitrate are the expected compound classes. Thefore, the potential
list of compounds based on the Level 1 elemental inorganic data of the
total emission samples, MEG list and process conditions is as follows:
Li, Li+, Li2 C03
Na+
K+
Be++, BeO, BeO • A1203 • Si02
Mg++, MgO, MgS04> MgC03, MgC03 - CaC03
Ca"1"1", CaC03, CaS04, MgC03 • CaC03
Sr++, SrS04
Ba, BaC03, BaS04
Al*3, A1203 • 3H20, A1203
Tl
Si04"2-, S103~2, Si02, SiC
Pb+2, Pb+4, PbO, PbS04, PbC03, Pb3(P04)2, PbCr04
"V3' P°3"3
As+3, As+5, As04"3, As03"3, As203
-9 -2 -2
s *, so4 *, so3 (
Y+3.
Ti+3, Ti+4, Ti02
Zr+4, Zr02-
v^3, vo+2, vo4-4,.vo3, vo+3, vo, v2o3, v2b4, v2o5, voso4 - 5H2o
Cr+2, Cr+3, Cr0i2, Cr'2, Cr2, Cr03, FeO Cr^, FeCr04
39
-------
Mn+2, Mn+3, Mn04, MnO, Mn02, MnCOg, MnS04
Fe+2, Fe+3, FeO, FeO • Fe203, Fe203, K
Co"1"2, Co"1"3, CoC03 • 4H20, CoO
Rh+3
Ni+2, Ni"1"3, NiO
Cu"1", Cu+2, CuO, Cu20, CuS04, CuC03
Cd+2, CdO
Kg"1"1", HgCl
U
Th
In most cases, e.g., Na"1", K+, Y+3, Rh+3, U, and Th based on the cur-
rent MEG list, only elemental concentration data are necessary in the Level 2
analysis scheme.
3.1.2 Study of General Characteristics
The FBC particulate samples were examined by polarized light
microscopy (PLM) (Figures 3-2 through 3-5). Representative photomicro-
graphs at 42X were made. The samples were mounted on glass slides and
illuminated from the top.
The coal feed (S-2-1) and the >27u particulate (S-2-6) contain the same
types of amorphous materials. The bulk of the particles .are gray or black
in color. The size range of these particles in the >27y fraction varies
up to approximately 200y. A white opaque material accounts for about
5 percent of the material observed. There are also traces of a yellow
substance which ranges in size up to lOOu and a bright red-yellow material
which varied in size in the particulate catch from 15y to 125vi. This
visual observation may indicate incomplete combustion of the coal
feed fines.
40
-------
S-2-4 S-2-5
Figure 3-2. Photomicrograph of FBC Samples, S-2-4 and S-2-5
-------
«< V
Representative
Appearance of
FBC Sample
S-2-6 (42X)
Figure 3-3. Photomicrograph of Sample S-2-6
42
-------
-gk
CO
Representative
Appearance
Unusually Large Yellow
Amorphous Particle
(Two Seen)
Figure 3-4. Photomicrograph of Sample S-2-7
-------
(42X)
Size Variation of Agglomerates Observed
Figure 3-5. Photomicrograph of Sample S-2-7
-------
The overflow bed, sludge, and the participate samples (S-2-4-1,
S-2-5, S-2-7-2 and S-2-7-3) were agglomerates of gray and sand colored
materials. The smallest cluster, and some individual particles, were
about 15u in diameter. There were also traces of white and red materials.
S-2-7-2 contained some unusually large materials, which are described
below:
Color Shape Size (u) Comments
White, opaque Trapezoidal 150 x 220 Observed numerous
parallel lines in
particle, suggest
crystalline material
Yellow Rectangular 90 x 100
230 x 305
This sample also contained a few long, narrow rod like objects, all about
500y x 40v.
S-2-7-3 contained traces of fibrous appearing material and bright,
shiny, maybe metallic particles.
The bulk of particles in the emission samples S-2-5, S-2-6 and
S-2-7 were uniform in character and comparable to one another.
When the sample history is well known, an analyst can determine
if the unusual particulates are sample or contaminants introduced
through sampling, transfer or storage. This technique then becomes
a very valuable quality assurance tool.
Microsolubility and micrtfspot tests were not conducted.
Another technique used in the study of a solid particulate's
general characteristics is Thermal Analysis. This includes
Thermal Gravimetric Analysis (TGA) and Differential Scanning Calo-
rimety (DSC).
45
-------
A DuPont 990 Thermal Analysis System was used for this study.
The Thermal Gravimetric Analysis was conducted on the FBC particulates
first. In this mode of operation, the 990 model is accurate to
+0.25% weight change and +0.5°C. When the thermograms were assessed
and very little sample activity was recorded, it was decided the DSC
conducted below 800°C would not produce any meaningful data. The DSC
can determine reaction temperatures and phase changes. However, these
characteristics usually have been noted as weight gains or losses in
the TGA.
The TGA results are reported in Table 3-1. These data indicate
that the emitted particulates and overflow bed materials are pre-
dominantly inorganic. Figure 3-6 is shown as an example of a TGA. It
is the analytical run on sample S-2-3.
With samples that are identified as relatively inactive by the
TGA/DSC and uniform in appearance by the PLM, the necessary information,
which allows for an updating of the potential compound list, has not
been derived. This is the case with regard to the FBC run #2 particu-
lates. However, a stable drying temperature of 150°C was established
for all samples.
3.1.3 Specific Anion/Cation Tests
Two techniques were chosen for quantisation of the MATE triggered
cations. These were flame and flame!ess atomic absorption spectro-
scopy (AAS) and induction coupled plasma optical emission spectroscopy
(ICPOES).
3.1.3.1 Sample Preparation
Weighted particulate samples were transferred to Parr Teflon
Digestion bombs and digested overnight at 130°C with 5 millimeters of
aqua regia. The resultant solutions were filtered through Whatman #41
filter paper. The collected residue was ignited in platinum labware,
fused with 1 gram of high purity sodium carbonate Na2C03, dissolved,
combined with the original filtrate and then diluted to 50 milliliters.
46
-------
Table 3-1. Tabulation of Thermal Gravimetric Data
Sampl e
Number
S-2-1
S-2-2
S-2-3
S-2-4
S-2-5
Sample Temperature of
Description Activity (°C)
Illinois Coal No. 6 100
150
200
300
350
Grove Limestone 100
150
>200
Overflow Bed 100
Material >325 Mesh 150
200
300
350
400
Overflow Bed 100
Material - 325 Mesh 150
200
300
350
400
Sludge 100
150
200
300
350
400
Precentage Weight
Loss (% w/w)
4.0
7.0
9.0
9.0
Onset of Organic
Fraction Decomposition
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Onset of Organic
Fraction Decomposition
2.0
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
Onset of Organic
Fraction Decomposition
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
Onset of Organic
Fraction Decomposition
47
-------
Table 3-1. Tabulation of Thermal Gravimetric Data (Continued)
Sample Sample
Number Description
S-2-6 Particulates > 27 M
S-2-7 Particulates < 27 M
Temperature of
Activity (°C)
100
150
200
300
350
400
100
150
200
300
350
400
Precentage Weight
Loss (% w/w)
0
0
0
0
0
Onset of Organic
Fraction Decomposition
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Onset of Organic
Fraction Decomposition
Leachate samples were prepared through 24-hour refluxing extractions
in an acidic solution of hydrochloric acid at pH 4 and a basic solution of
ammonium hydroxide at a pH 9. Undissolved particulates were removed by
filtration and they were not recovered for further analyses because
only the Teachable materials were of interest in this portion of the study.
Table 3-2 lists the sample codes used throughout this segment of
the Level 2 tests.
3.1.3.2 Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy (AAS)
The instrument employed for this analytical effort was a Jarrell-Ash
810 equipped with a FLA-10 Graphite Tube Furnace. The procedures employed
and discussed here were chosen to meet an accuracy requirement of +15%
for this technique.
All the procedures were evaluated for matrix effects and accuracy.
Evaluations included: (1) comparison of calibration slopes from each sample
type with the slope generated from a deionized water standard, (2) recovery
48
-------
i
i
1
A
K/1EABU IHEO VADIARI P (fl(J P[]|
f
I
RUN NO OA-relL/Z^D
OPERATOR K*HMe*»M
SAMPLE:
S-T-3
ATM &.
FLOW
H
TT4^
) • 1
-h—
-i-l — i-
SEE
i ' ! ',
•*-*-i—
VRA*
TTT;
-~ — i-
. <.i 1
j.. . i.
L^
rcHv
j-H — f-
•n — r
i i I •
, ] I
p
I • : ! i
—
U
_ti-
»T!
— t-
^
-H
T
g —
T;
1— r —
tr
T-AXIS
5CAL
PFK3G
HEAT
SHIFT
— ; — r
— r-*-r
— ^
^~1t
E.-C/
.FLAT
Ct
.In
DTA-DSC . "{£*)
10 50
E. •C/mln_\S»_
ini icso
0
i ,-„
-^ — u
• 1 _ i
-t-
T3
=.L
—
-
^~Sl
r"
-- r—
rr^_
3D — '
s
TEN
SCALE. *C/r
(meal/
WEIGHT, m
REFERENC
-li:^
=0
1PERX
-—
" '
3C
VTUR
^
a«c3/>
o S
tf
= T
ri
1
EF~
i-c c
—
—
—
— d
CHRC
— -
in —
MEL/
CALE
UPPP
fEIGH
ME C
Y. (m(
— M-L
—
21
ALLJN
mQfir
IESSIC
rr. mo
orosri
S±
i-t -
)O '
1EL)
1M "^.
^
—
3!
-r~-
: i
Xf~^
TMA
sc
MC
SA
LD
dV
3 — -
:
—
"5!
ALE. mils/In
)OE
MPLE SIZE
An, 0
(1OX
- — -I-
±rrr
!D—
3. ( mils
— -si
/min),
— -
TJ
-H r
. | i-T-
i_u
J :
— • 1-
^
.
_..,
— r~
— B?
•t+rr
' ' i
—
t-H-
4-
-ki-
W
1
-»-
Figure 3-6. Representative TGA Scan, Sample S-2-3
-------
Table 3-2. Sample Codes Used for Quantitative
Cation Studies
Sample Identification Sample Code Number
NBS Flyash #1663 NBS
NBS Flyash #1663 - acidic leachate NBS-A
NBS Flyash #1663 - basic leachate NBS-B
Illinois Coal No. 6 S-2-1
Illinois Coal No. 6 -acidic leachate S-2-1-A
Illinois Coal No. 6 -basic leachate S-2-1-B
Grove Limestone S-2-2
Grove Limestone — acidic leachate S-2-2-A
Grove Limestone — basic leachate S-2-2-B
Overflow Bed Material >325 S-2-3
Overflow Bed Material >325 -acidic leachate S-2-3-A
Overflow Bed Material >325 - basic leachate S-2-3-B
Overflow Bed Material - 325 S-2-4
Sludge S-2-5
Particulates >27]i S-2-6
Particulates >27y - acidic leachate S-2-6-A
Particulates >27u - basic leachate S-2-6-B
Particulates >27p S-2-7
of spiked elements in the sample matrix, and (3) comparison of analytical
results of NBS 1633 flyash standard (digested particulate samples only).
The continuity of the calibration data was also evaluated from correlation
coefficients generated for each curve. The elements determined for each
sample included: Hg, Li, Sr, Pb, Cu, Ag, Zn, Mg, Ni, Cd, Be, Cr, Pt, V
and Si.
Prior experience (3,4,5) has indicated that, even when utilizing the
best possible techniques, the attainment of a ±15% accuracy is difficult.
In the analysis of the FBC particulates the ability to acquire this accur-
acy goal was complicated by the limited quantity of sample available.
50
-------
Calibration curves were generated for each element in each general
matrix type, i.e., acidic leachates, basic leachates and dissolved particu-
lates. These curves were prepared using standard additions to each of the
respective blank solutions associated with each of the above matrix types.
The calibration curves are contained in Appendix A. These curves were then
compared to curves generated with deionized water to assess the presence or
absence of general matrix interferences. Recovery experiments were also
performed for each element in each matrix by spiking an actual leachate or
particulate sample. This was done to assure the absence of interferences
from unknown dissolved species. Atomic absorption techniques and parameters
were chosen so as to obtain the optimum in accuracy and sensitivity using
a minimum of solution. These operating parameters are listed in Table 3-3.
The graphite furnace and background correction mode were employed when-
ever possible. The graphite furnace technique.is the most sensitive
method available and the correction eliminates nonanalyte absorbance (6).
The most sensitive analytical lines and optimum instrumental settings were
also used (7-11). Quantitative analytical results are reported in Tables
3-4 and 3-5. These values are reagent blank corrected. Discussions on each
elemental determination follow. Table 3-6 reports the recovery percentages
for spiked sample.
LITHIUM
Lithium was determined by flame emission. The sensitivity by this
technique (0.005 yg/ml) is very close to the graphite furnace. The cali-
bration curve is A~l in Appendix A.
SILVER
Silver was determined as an internal standard for assessment of the
cleanliness of sample preparation techniques. The Graphite Furnace was
employed. Only one calibration (Curve A-2, Appendix A) was performed using
deionized water; spiked leachate blanks gave results within ±10% of the
developed calibration. Leachate samples S-2-2-B and S-2-6-A were spiked with
0.02 vig/ml of silver and showed recoveries of 80%. The low recovery in the
actual leachate samples is most likely due to substances extracted from the
samples either complexing the silver or suppressing its atomization in the
graphite furnace. Since most of the leachate samples were very close to the
detection limit of 0.0005 jig/ml, this 80% recovery shows that this detection
limit may be applied to the leachate samples.
51
-------
Table 3-3. Atomic Absorption Analytical Operating Parameters
Element
Ag
Cu
Ni
Li
Mg
Pb
Zn
Hg
Cd
Be
Cr
Pt
V
Si
Sr
Analytical
Wavelength, A
3281
3247
2320
6708
2852
2833
2139
2536
2288
2349
3579
2659
3185
2516
4607
Background
Wavelength, A
3235 (Ne)
None
2316
None
None
2825
None
None
None
None
None
Continuum
3196
None
None
Slit
Width, A
10
10
4
2
4
4
4
10
4
4
4
4
2
2
2
Atomization
Source
6.F.*
G.F.*
6.F.*
Air-C2H2
Air-C2H2
6.F.*
Air-C2H2
Flame! ess
Air-C2H2
N20-C2H2
Air-C2H2
G.F.*
6.F.*
N20-C2H2
Air-C2H2
Analytical Procedure
Dry - 30 sec. @ 200°C
Ash - 60 sec. @ 400°C
Atomize - 7 sec. @ 2300°C -
Argon Gas
Dry - 30 sec. @ 200°C
Ash - 60 sec. @ 600°C
Atomize - 6 sec. @ 2500° C -
Argon Gas
Dry - 20 sec. @ 200°C
Ash - 30 sec. @ 800°C
Atomize - 6 sec. @ 2800°C -
Argon Gas
Atomic Emission
Atomic Absorption
Dry -40 sec. @ 200°C
Ash - 40 sec. @ 600°C
Atomize - 6 sec. @ 1900°C
10 /if 1.0% HN03 & 0.2%
(NHjgMo-0.. added in furnace
Atomic Absorption
SnC12 reduction N2 Sparge 1 1/min
Atomic Absorption
Atomic Absorption
Atomic Absorption
Dry - 30 sec. @ 300°C
Ash - 30 sec. @ 1150°C
Atomize - 5 sec. @ 2700°C -
Argon Gas
Dry - 30 sec. @ 200°C
Ash -40 sec. @ 1000°C
Atomize - 5 sec. @ 2800 C -
Argon Gas
Atomic Absorption
Atomic Emission
Graphite furnace.
52
-------
Table 3-4. Atomic Absorption participate Analysis (yg/g) Results
Ol
CO
Elements
Sample #
S-2-3.
S-2-4
S-2-5
S-2-6
S-2-7-2
S-2-7-3
Weight (g)
0.0623
0.0638
0.0677
0.0957
0.0163
0.0138
Li
13
26
72
31
74
76
A91
12
N.D.
N.D.
21
N.D.
N.D.
Cr
76
204
316
418
756
538
Mg
5,950
10,552
5,365
3,456
7,779
6,884
Hg
<0.8
N.D.
441
12
176
87
Zn
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
360
N.D.
N.D.
Cd
8.0
15.7
<4
<3
31
<18
Be
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
<5
N.D.
N.D.
Pb
52
314
<4
167
1,194
58
V
48
180
370
104
491
580
Si
<4,020
4,700
111,000
679,000
178,000
138,000
Sr
1092
N.D.
N.D.
762
N.D.
N.D.
Blank value higher than samples. Values reported not corrected for any blank.
N.D. -not determined. Based on MATE values these elements were not required in the Level 2 effort.
-------
Table 3-5. Atomic Absorption Leachate Solution Analysis (mg/1) Result
CJI
•£»
Solution
Acidic
NBS-A
S-2-1-A
S-2-2-A
S-2-3-A
S-2-6-A
Basic
NBS-B
S-2-1-B
S-2-2-B
S-2-3-B
S-2-6-B
Elements
Zn
N.0.< 0.005
N.D. < 0.005
0.020
0.22
N.D. <0.005
0.046
0.071
N.D. <0.005
N.D. <0.005
N.D. <0.005
Ag
N.D. <0.0005
0.0014
N.D. <0.0005
0.0041
N.D. <0.0005
N.D. <0.0005
0.0005
0.0009
N.D. <0.0005
N.D. <0.0005
Li
0.095
0.007
N.D. <0.002
0.035
0.043
0.092
0.005
0.006
0.023
0.026
V
% 0.08
0.14
0.05
N.D. <0.02
0.05
N.D. <0.02
0.08
N.D. <0.02
N.D. <0.02
N.D. <0.02
Pb
N.D. <0.02
0.24
0.05
0.22
0.10
N.D. <0.02
0.49
N.D. <0.02
0.010
N.D. <0.002
Cu
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
Ni
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
<0.01
0.03
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.04
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
Hg
0.0003
N.D. <0.0002
0.0002
N.D. <0.0002
N.D. <0.0002
N.D. <0.0002
N.D. <0.0002
N.D. <0.0002
N.D. <0.0002
N.D. <0.0002
Be
N.D. <0.01
N.D. <0.01
N.D. <0.01
N.D. <0.01
0.02
N.D. <0.01
N.D. <0.01
N.D. <0.01
N.D. <0.01
—
Pt Si
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
<0.05
<0.05
0.15
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05 N.D.
<0.05 N.D.
75
74
34
260
300
71
12
144
<5
<5
Sr
0.70
N.D. <0.02
N.D. <0.02
1.67
0.28
0.40
0.60
N.D. <0.02
2.19
0.55
N.D. Not Detected.
-------
Table 3-6. Percent Recovery of Spiked Samples
by Atomic Absorption
Solutions
Leachates
El ement
Zn
Mg
Ag
Ni
Li
Cu
Cd
Be
Cr
Pb
Pt
V
Si
Hg
Sr
Acid
104
-
80
60
104
80
-
100
-
105, 97
100
113
96
100
i
75
Basic
105
-
80
110
103
80
-
100
-
93
64
107
122
100
80
Parti cul ate
-
95
78
-
-
-
110
100
84
130, 84
-
116
107
102
106
The particulate samples were more of a problem as the reagent blank
contained a background contamination of almost 0.025 yg/ml silver. This
contamination is known to have been Introduced Into the samples during
the ashing phase 1n the muffle furnace and was therefore, used as an
internal standard for assessment of the sample preparation techniques.
A 9Q% recovery was obtained from a spiked reagent blank from this
series. A detection limit of 0.05 ppm was assigned to the particulate
samples and 1s due to the high background experienced.
55
-------
CHROMIUM
Chromium was determined by flame atomic absorption on the particulate
samples only, so only two calibration curves were generated, A-3, Appendix A.
As is represented by the slopes, the two calibrations are linear and
lie almost directly atop each other. The recovery of 80% of the spiked
chromium is low but within the necessary tolerance range, however, it may
have been possible to better this recovery and increase sensitivity using
the graphite furnace.
MAGNESIUM
Magnesium was determined on the particulate samples only by utilizing
the atomic absorption flame technique. This was the selected method of
c.
analysis as the reagent blank contained approximately 1000 times the sensi-
tivity check for the graphite furnace atomization technique. All of the
samples proved to be outside the linear range of the primary wavelength,
making dilution of between one-in-ten and one-in-forty necessary. Since
the samples required this great a dilution, little background problems due
to the solution matrices were anticipated. The spike recovery on the di-
luted blank and particulate samples of 95% and 105% bore out this opinion.
The values were, therefore, determined using the linear graph constructed
with standards of 0, 0.1, 0.25, 0.5 and 1.0 HS/ml magnesium in distilled
water, calibration curve A-4, Appendix A.
MERCURY
Mercury was determined using a "cold vapor AA" procedure which entails
the reduction of ionic mercury by SnClg in acid solution to its elemental
form. This is followed sequentially with sparging of the solution with
nitrogen and passage of the gas stream through a UV cell where the mercury
resonant wavelength at 253.6 mm is monitored. Experience on EPA contracts
No. 68-02-2165 and 68-02-2197 in this laboratory has shown that the proce-
dure is applicable to a wide variety of matrices, hence only one calibration
with deionized water was performed. Spikes of the leachate and particulate
samples yielded recoveries of 100% for both leachates and 102% for particu-
late sample S-2-6. Calibration curve A-5, Appendix A, was used to generate
this data set.
56
-------
ZINC
The flame atomic absorption technique was employed for the zinc deter-
mination due to reported source contamination in using the graphite
furnace as an atomization source. A calibration curve using deionized water
and 1% HC1 was generated, A-6 Appendix A. Due to limited sample size,
rapid reduction of the sample was a problem. Therefore, only the deionized
water calibration curve was capable of being generated. The recovery of
105% of the basic spike of sample S-2-2-B and 104% of the acidic spike of
sample S-2-2-A would show that the use of the deionized water and 1% HC1
calibration curve would be proper for reporting values in the two back-
ground matrices. The single particulate sample determination necessitated
a one-in-ten dilution to bring it into working range and, therefore, matrix
background was not considered a problem.
CADMIUM
Cadmium was determined on the particulate samples only and the flame
atomic absorption technique was utilized. Calibration curves were devel-
oped with the deionized hLO, HC1, and particulate reagent blank background
matrices, A-7, Appendix A. They were identical in slope and correlation
coefficient.
The sensitivity of cadmium utilizing the graphite furnace technique is
reported as being a factor of two better, and its use should be considered
in subsequent analysis.
BERYLLIUM
i
Beryllium was determined utilizing the flame atomic absorption tech-
nique. Calibration curves were plotted using deionized H20 and 1% HC1,
acidic leachate blank, basic leachate blanks, and particulate reagent blank,
A-8, Appendix A.
LEAD
In the first attempt at determining Pb, utilizing the graphite furnace
as the atomization source, the "neat" solutions were injected into the appa-
ratus. The calibration curves produced by this method proved to be unsatis-
factory and the spiked leachate samples showed a recovery of less than
57
-------
30%. With these results generated, it was necessary to obtain more informa-
tion on the determination of Pb by this atomization technique. In the Nov-
ember 1977 issue of American Laboratory, an article suggested that solutions
for the analysis of lead contain 0.5% HN03 (w/v) and 0.1% (NH4)gMo7024 (w/v);
because the FBC samples were too small 1n volume to use sufficient sample
to produce these dilutions, an addition was made directly into the graphite
furnace. A solution containing 1.0% HN03 (w/v) and 0.2% (NH4)gMo7024
(w/v) was injected into the graphite furnace in 10 v& increments, followed
by 10 yA of sample or standard solution. The calibration curves, A-9,
Appendix A, were then acceptable. The particulate reagent blank calibration
yielded a substantially depressed slope even with the addition of
(NH4)gMo7024< Recoveries of spikes from leachate samples were excellent
and those from the particulate sample marginally acceptable.
VANADIUM
Vanadium was determined utilizing the graphite furnace for atomization.
Four calibration curves, A-10, Appendix A, were generated using 2% HNO~ in
deionized H20, basic and acidic leachate blanks, and the particulate reagent
blank. The recovery of spikes in the actual acidic, basic, and particulate
samples were: 113%, 107%, and 116%, respectively, and the correlation coef-
ficient of all calibration curves was 0.99%. These were quite acceptable
to the Level 2 requirements.
SILICON
Silicon was determined by atomic absorption. Use of the graphite fur-
nace as an atomization source was attempted, however, levels of silicon 1n
all the groups of samples were well-above the effective range of this method.
Massive dilutions would have been necessary to bring the samples into the
linear range of the graphite furnace method. Therefore, it would be inap-
propriate for this analysis.
Calibration curves were generated for each of the four different back-
ground matrices, A-11, Appendix A.
The calibration curves lie in close proximity and have good correlation
coefficients.
58
-------
Spiked samples show a recovery of 122% in the basic leachate sample,
96% in the acid leachate sample, and 107% in the particulate sample. The
high recovery in the basic leachate was rechecked and confirmed. The rea-
son for the high recovery in the basic leachate would necessitate further
experimentation as the interference appears to be caused by something other
than simply the background matrix.
STRONTIUM
Strontium was determined using flame atomic emission. Due to the small
quantity of sample available and the need for relatively long aspiration
times only deiom'zed water matrix calibration curves were developed. The
calibration curves were set up in two ranges - 0.0 to 1.0 and 0 to 10 rather
than diluting the samples to meet the requirements of one range, A-12 and
and A-.13, Appendix A.
Although separate calibration curves were not developed, spiked samples
were utilized to assess the accuracy effects for each group. The recovery
1n the spiked samples were 80% in the acidic, 75% in the basic, and 106% in
the particulate. Further experimentation using the graphite furnace and
more complete research into the problems of background matrices should be
explored for this element.
COPPER
The graphite furnace was utilized as the atomization source for the
copper determination. The samples, standards, and leachate standards were
Injected, "neat," into the furnace cavity and this was found to give satis-
factory results. '
The calibration curves generated, A-14, Appendix A, showed an excellent
correlation between the array of slopes. A recovery of only 80% of the
spiked copper in both the acidic and basic leachate samples was somewhat
disappointing as was the sensitivity check of 0.165 ug/mfc for 0.2 absorbance
reading.
NICKEL
Nickel was determ'lned utilizing the graphic furnace as an atomization
source. Three calibration curves were produced using the delonized water
59
-------
with HN03> basic leachate blank, and acidic leachate blank as background
matrices, A-15, Appendix A.
Although the slopes varied as much as 0.38, the three calibration
curves showed good linearity and correlation coefficients. This type of
comparison between calibration curves shows the need for methods which
will take the problem of matrix background on a case-by-case basis.
Particulate sample values were determined from the acidic leachate
calibration curve, as the particulate reagent blank showed a nickel level
of 0.26 ppm. This high nickel value was most likely due to contamination
from the muffle furnace used in the sample preparation.
PLATINUM
Platinum was determined utilizing the graphite furnace as the atomiza-
tion source. The samples, blanks, and standards were injected, "neat,"
into the furnace cavity and the calibration curves generated, A-16, Appen-
dix A, showed good correlation between the three background matrices.
Recovery of spiked samples was 100% inthe acidic leachate and a rather
poor (64%) in the basic leachate. Low recovery of the basic leachate sam-
ple spike might have been due simply to the basic nature of the background
matrix, however, this is not the case in the basic blank standard addition.
These two observations point to the probability of an interference produced
in the actual leaching process.
Particulate samples were checked for platinum content as the fusion
was performed in platinum crucibles; as a result, all samples showed
platinum present.
3.1.3.3 Induction Coupled Plasma Optical Emission Spectroscopy (ICPOES)
ICPOES analyses were conducted using an Applied Research Laboratories
(ARL) prototype instrument, Model QA-137, on all the leachate solutions.
In this instrumental technique, liquid samples are aspirated into a high
temperature argon plasma produced by inductively coupling radio-frequency
electromagnetic radiation to the argon gas (12). The high temperature of the
plasma (^10,000°K) causes dissociation, molecular breakdown, atomization,
and/or ionization and excitation of the metals in solution. The resultant
radiation produced as the excited atoms relax is passed through the entrance
60
-------
slit of a dispersive device where it is separated into discrete wavelengths.
In this multielement technique, the intensity of each of the characteristic
wavelengths is associated with a metallic element and is measured by a
photomultiplier tube. The photocurrent is transformed, by reference stan-
dards, to concentration values. In general the detection limits are on
the order of 0.01 yg/m£, although they vary from element to element and
from matrix to matrix.
Standard additions of Al, Ca, Cd, Cr, Co, Cu, Fe, Pb, Mg, Mn, Mo, Ni,
K and Ba were made to each leachate to assess matrix effects and recovery.
Calibration of the instrument was accomplished using reagent salts diluted
with deionized water. Some precipitation was observed (thought to be
Fe(OHK based on its reddish-brown color) in the spiked solutions:
S-2-1-B, S-2-3-B, and S-2-6-B. This effects the recovery of not only the
spiked Fe but also other elements capable of coprecipitation or occlusion
in these solutions. Accuracy of recovery in ICPOES is effected by:
• Viscosity —affects flow rate of solution and nebuliza-
tion efficiency.
• Shifts in the emission maximum in the plasma, thus, not
all elements are equal.ly excited.
Table 3-7 lists the mg/Z values obtained for each element scanned in
each leachate.
Table 3-8 reports the average percent recovery. This is based on 11
standard additions of the following elements in each matrix: Fe, K, Mg,
Mn, Al, Ba, Ca, Cu, Cd, Cr, Co, Pb. In general the average recovery of
96.1% in the acidic leachates and 96.7% in the basic leachates are excel-
lent and within the technique requirements of ±15%.
These quantitative cation values generated from the AAS and the
ICPOES efforts will be used subsequently to derive the compound concentra-
tions when a single compound has been identified. For example, if Fe203
is the only iron compound identified, then its quantitative value in the
particulates will be based on the Fe content established by AAS. In future
Level 2 efforts the compound identification techniques used in Section 3.2
can be optimized to provide semiquantitative conformation. However, this
61
-------
Table 3-7. ICPOES Results on Leachate Samples
Elaent (mg/t)
Sample
Code Fe K Hg ( Mn Na P Se W B Ba Be Ca CuAg As Cd .Co Cr No'DIZr
S-2-1-A 45.97 0.8 2.06 0.16 N.D. N.D. N.D. 1.11 2.9 N.D. N.D. 20.0 0.007 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 0.009 N.D. N.D. N.D.
Acidic S-2-2* O-082 °-7 0.547 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 0.64 1.5 0.46 N.D. 10.04 0.004 N.D. 0.2 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. NJ>.
0> Leachates S_2_3_A 0<802 4.5 j.ag H.p. H.D. N.D. N.D. 7.14 20.3 N.D. N.D. 985.0 0.012 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D.
ro
S-2-6-A 0.197 12.3 1.32 0.59 1.0 N.D. N.D. 15.1 15.76 N.D. N.D. 277.0 0.014 N.D. 0.3 N.D. N.D. 0.018 H.D. N.D. . 0.007
S-2-1-B 58.3 2.2 0.72 0.10 75.0 N.D. N.D. 0.94 1.90 N.D. N.D. 6.86 0.019 0.012 N.D. N.D. 0.12 0.014 0.20 N.D. N.D.
g^g S-2-2-B N.D. 4.0 0.08 N.D. 14.0 N.D. N.D. 0.26 6.49 N.D. N.D. 15.76 0.01 0.013 N.D. N.D. 0.11 0.007 0.44 N.D. 0.016
Leachates S_2_3_B H>D< 2.7 N.D. N.D. 17.0 N.D. N.D. 0.21 10.5 N.D. N.D. 266.0 0.002 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 0.06 0.17 N.D.
S-2-6-B 22.9 9.9 4.28 0.803 125.0 N.D. N.D. 2.4 9.9 N.D. N.D. 34.0 0.002 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 0.17 N.D. N.D.
N.D. Not Detected
-------
Table 2-8. ICPOES Recovery Results
Average
Fe K Mg Mn Al B Ba Ca Cu Cd Co Cr Mo Ni Recovery
Leachates 94*05 98i4 94>0 93*° 94'9 100'3 103>0 96'5 94'5 91>1 96'6 97'7 94'5 97'2 %'1
25 Leachates 74<1* 102'° 95'2 94'3 95>1 94*° 112'° 104'3 97'4 96'7 96'3 92<7 94'2 1°5*1 96"7
Fe(OH)o was observed as a precipttate.
-------
study is the first conducted and quantisation was not yet feasible with
many of these developmental techniques. The time expended to generate
reasonably accurate cation data was, therefore, very necessary to this
analysis.
3.1.3.4 Anion Quantisation
Unfortunately, sufficient quantities of sample were not available for
specific anion studies. It was felt that sufficient, as well as additional,
information would be obtained from alternate techniques which require less
sample, e.g., FTIR using only 50 mg.
Without sufficient sample for cation quantisation the inorganic Level 2
analysis proceeded onto phase two, the Study of Bulk Chemical Composition.
3.2 BULK COMPOSITION CHARACTERIZATION (Refer to Figure 3-7)
In this segment of the analysis three techniques, Fourier Transform
Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR), Electron Spectroscopy for Chemical Analysis
(ESCA), and X-Ray Powder Diffraction (XRD), were used to identify compounds
present and oxidation states.
3.2.1 FTIR
The instrument employed in this study was a Nicolet Series 7000,
Fourier Transform Infrared System. This system has excellent compound sen-
sitivity and wavelength accuracy to 0.06 cnf . Its computer capabilities
provide for background correction and spectral enhancement.
3.2.1.1 Sample Preparation
Based on the prior T6A data, drying was not necessary to produce
acceptable FTIR spectra on the FBC particulate samples. Therefore, the
sample required only mulling with mineral oil (Nujol) and deposition on
AgCl or polyethylene infrared windows. The samples analyzed by this
technique were the emitted particulates (S-2-6 and S-2-7), the sludge (S-2-5),
and the overflow bed materials (S-2-3 and S-2-4). The feed materials were
not submitted for analysis. Aqua regia extraction and subtraction of
insolubles was not possible due to sample quantities.
Spectra were taken in both the far IR (400-50 cm" ) and the mid IR
regions (1400-400 cm ). The far IR measurements were characterized as con-
sistently uninterpretable. This was due to the low energy throughput and
the high scattering of these particulate samples. Background subtraction
64
-------
ASSIGN PROBABILITY TO
SEE POTENTIAL COM-
POUNDS WITH SPECIFIC
METHOD
ALLOWS
MATCH UP OF
METHOD WITH COMPOUNDS
BASED ON CONCENTRATION
CQ
»
EXTRAa ALIQUOT
OF SAMPLE WITH
AQUA REGIA
*
RECORD
IN FAR IR
n« || 3.2.1
j
4
| | ESCA | 3.2.2 | | *«> | 3.
,
PERFORM FARIR SCAN FOR STUDY SURFACE TRACE DIRECT ID
TRANSITION ELEMENT ELEMENT COMPOSITION OF CRYSTALLINE
ANIONS IN BULK OF SAMPLE OXIDATION STATES COMPOUNDS
I CHEMICAL AT 0.1% OR GREATER
• 1 . ENVIRONMENT CONCENTRATION
SUBTRACT INSOLUILES
ORIGINAL SAMPLE
*
/ PRESENCE OF /
/ TRANSITION /
/ ELEMENT ANIONS /
L_
I
/PRESENCE Of 1 1 LIST OF SPECIFIC /
ABSORBED SPECIES / / COMPOUNDS /
1
QUANTITATE
SPECIFIC
ANIONS
*
WET CHEMICAL OR
INSTRUMENTAL
ANION TESTS
1 1
/LIST POSSIBLE NEW /
/ COMPOUNDS /
' FOUND /
1
LIST IDENTIFIED
COMPOUNDS WITH
ESTIMATED
CONCENTRATION
HAVE
ALL MEG
COMPOUNDS
EXCEEDING MATE
VALUES BEEN
FOUND
3.2.4
LIST ASSIGNED
ELEMENTS EXCEEDING
MATE VALUES
IS FURTHER
ANALYSIS COST
JUSTIFIED FOR
UNASSIGNED
ELEMENTS
Figure 3-7.
Logic Flow for Bulk Composition Characterization
65
-------
of the Nujol was attempted but because of the nonreproducib'le scattering
effects spectral absorption bands could not be characterized with confidence.
The mid IR region work produced excellent quality spectra and the Nujol
background was subtracted. The spectra have been reproduced in Appendix B.
3.2.1.2 Spectral Interpretation
Interpretation is based on peak correlation with known spectra. Three
major references for inorganic interpretation which were especially useful
in this analytical segment were:
1) Richard A Nyquist and Ronald 0. Kagel, Infrared Spectra
of Inorganic Compounds, Academic Press, New York, 1971.
2) Foil A. Miller and Charles H. Wilkins, Infrared Spectra
and Characteristic Frequencies of Inorganic Ions, Anal.
Chem.. Vol 24, 1253, 1952.
3) Leonard C. Afremow and John T. Vanderberg, High Resolu-
tion Spectra of Inorganic Pigments and Extenders In the
Mid-Infrared Region from 1500 cm-1 to 200 cm-1, Beckman
Reprint R-6236.
Table 3-9 reports the compounds identified from spectral correlation.
In the far IR only the spectrum obtained for S-2-6 was interpretable. In
summary, the compounds identified by this technique were CaSO^ (anhydrous
and in two hydrated forms), CaC03 (two crystalline forms), SiOg and FegOg.
3.2.2 ESCA
Electron spectroscopy for chemical analysis (ESCA) was conducted on
the sludge sample (S-2-5), the particulates >27y (S-2-6), and the particu-
lates <27y (S-2-7). The instrument employed was Physical Electronic Indus-
tries, Model 540A.
3.2.2.1 Sample Preparation
Sample preparation followed that outlined in the reference text
using the "sticky gold" technique. This mounting approach (shown 1n Fig-
ure 3-8) overcomes the conductivity problem and provides a secure mount for
the samples.
3.2.2.2 ESCA Results
Appendix C contains the ESCA scans. Surface analysis was conducted on
all samples analyzed and Argon etching was employed to detect interior
66
-------
Table 3-9. Infrared Spectral Interpretation
Spectral
Region
Far Infrared
M1d Infrared
Compound
Sample Code Identified
S-2-6 CaSO. • 1/2 H,0
*r b
Fe,0.
J *f
CaS04 • 2H20
S-2-3 CaSO. • 2H,0
and 4 2
CaSO. (anhydrous)
H
CaCO, (vateHte)
0
S-2-4 CaCO, (caldte)
O
CaSO. • 2H,0
and 4 2
CaSO. (anhydrous)
H
S10, (crystalline)
£
S-2-5 S10, (crystalline)
e>
S-2-6 ' CaSO, • 2H,0
and 4 z
CaSO, (anhydrous)
H
S10«
&
Fe203
S-2-7-;2 and S10,
S-2-7-3 '
CaSO. • 2H,0
and4 2
CaSO. (anhydrous)
H
* Major > 10%
Medium 5-10%
Low 1-5%
Trace < 1% 67
Absorption
Peaks Identified
(wavelength, cm-1)
250
175
120
410
200
320
1100-1190
725
670
610
1400
875 (side peak
850)
740
710
1400
875
715
1100-1190
725
670
610
595
800
780
1050 (broad)
800
780
695
460
1100-1190
725
670
610
595
800
780
460
410
1100 (broad)
800
780
460
1100-1190
725
670
610
595
*
Relative
Abundance
Major
Medium
Medium
Major
Medium
Medium
Medium
Low
Major
Medium
Low
Low
Medium
-------
SAMPLE
CARBON PASTE
oo
GOLD COVER LAYER
"STICKY GOLD" LAYER
DOUBLE SIDED
SCOTCH TAPE
MOUNTING STAGE
Figure 3-8. Mounting of ESCA Samples Using "Sticky Gold" Technique
-------
variations and obtain elemental profiles on some. Table 3-10 summarizes
the data generated. The most interesting information derived from this
phase of the analysis was that the participates <27y contained SCL on the
surface and a mixture of SO^ and S= in the interior. The average ratio of
SO^ to S~ in this sample is approximately 5.5 SOT to 4.5 S=. Correlation
with the infrared data would indicate that Ca is present as CaSCL and CaS
and that the other inorganic elements are present as oxides, i.e., Fe20oj
A1203, Na20, and Si Op.
3.2.3 XRD
X-ray powder diffraction, a direct inorganic compound identification
technique, was applied to 100 mg samples of the overflow bed materials
(S-2-3, S-2-4), the sludge (S-2-5), the particulates >27y (S-2-6), and the
particulates <27y (S-2-7). Due to the limited sample quantities, an alter-
native technique to the low angle-high sensitivity one had to be utilized.
The technique employed used the General Electric XRD-6 instrument equipped
with a powder diffraction camera for long analysis and exposure times.
Fast speed film was used at longer than normal exposure to produce
acceptable diffraction patterns. Numerous diffraction lines were obtained
in all samples. The accuracy of the d-spacings using this technique is
±0.05 -0.1. The major compounds identified are given in Table 3-11.
3.2.3.1 Sample Preparation
All these samples were packed into glass capillary tubes and irradi-
ated using an iron tube for 24 hours.
3.2.3.2 XRD Results
The 29 angles and d-spacings were calculated and the literature was
searched for compound correlation. Many lines remain unassigned. Computer
aid was not available to improve the literature search for compound
identification.
3.2.4 Summary of MEG Compounds Exceeding MATE Values Identified
Based on this set of data and that generated from that Initial Sample
Characterization phase, the following circled compounds, elements or ions
have been identified in the total emission samples. This is the potential
compound list generated under Section 3.1.1.
69
-------
Table 3-10. ESCA Results
Sample Elements
Code Sample Area Identified
S-2-5 Surface Fe2
°ls
Ca2P
Cls
Nals
S2P
Si2s
A12S
0
Interior 100A Fe2
°ls
Ca2p
Cls
Nals
S2P
Si2s
Al2s
S-2-6 Surface Fe2
°ls
Ca2p
Cls
S2P
Si2s
A12S
Atom
Percent
3
64
4
-
0.2
1
18
10
3
54
0.6
-
0.03
-
21
18
2
62
4
-
2
22
8
Oxidation States
Derived
Fe3
O"2
Ca2
C
Na1
S6
Si2
Al3
0
Fe3
O"2
Ca2
C
Na1
S6
Si2
Al3
Fe3
o-2
Ca2
C
S6
SI2
Al3
70
-------
Table 3-10. ESCA Results (Continued)
Sample Elements
Code Sample Area Identified
S-2-7 Surface Fe2
°ls
Ca2P
Cls
Nau
S2P
si2s
A12S
S-2-7 Interior 100A Fe2
°is
Ca2P
Cls
Nals
S2P
S12s
A12S
'0
Interior 200A Fe2
°ls
Ca2p
Cls
Nals
S2P
S12s
Aloe
Atom
Percent
1
61
5
-
2
7
13
12
1
53
10
-
1
5
16
15
2
53
9
-
1
3
17
14
Oxidation States
Derived
Fe3
o-2
Ca2
C
Na1
S6
SI2
Al3
Fe3
o-2
Ca2
C
Ita1
SO., S~ ratio 6:4
Si2
Al3
3
Fe
O"2
Ca2
C..
Na1
SO^, S" ratio 5.5:4.5
SI2
Al3
71
-------
Table 3-11. XRD Results
Sampl e
Code
S-2-5
S-2-6
Determined
d-spacings
2.52
3.68
2.69
1.48
1.84
1.69
3.36
4.26
1.82
1.54
2.46
2.26
2.84
2.28
3.06
3.37
4.27
1.82
1.54
2.47
2.29
2.52
3.64
2.70
1.49
1.70
2.85
2.30
3.04
2.85
2.09
1.61
2.41
1.74
2.70
Compound Literature
Identified d-spacings
Fe90, 2.51
* J 3.66
2.69
1.48
1.84
1.69
SiO- 3.34
c 4.26
1.82
1.54
2.46
2.28
CaSOA 2.85
^ 2.33
3.05
SiO, 3.34
^ 4.26
1.82
1.54
2.46
2.28
Fe90- 2.51
* 6 3.66
2.69
1.48
1.69
CaSO. 2.85
^ 2.33
3.05
CaS * 2.85
2.01
1.64 v
CaO 2.41
• 1.70
2.78
Relative
Intensity
Strong
Medium
Medium
Strong
Medium
Medium
Low
Low
72
-------
Table 3-11. XRD Results (Continued)
Sample
Code
S-2-7
Determined Compound Literature
d-spacings Identified d-spacings
3.34 Si09
4.26 i
1.82
2.46
2.28
2.84 CaSO.
3.67 4
2.69
1.69
2.84 CaS
2.03
1.64
2.51 Fe90-,
3.67 * J
2.69
1.69
3.34
4.26
1.82
2.46
2.28
2.85
-3.66
2.69
1.69
2.85
2.01
1.64
2.51
3.66
2.69
1.69
Relative
Intensity
Strong
Strong
Medium
Low
Compounds, Elements and Ions Identified:
@) Q
, BeO, BeO
Si0
MgO, MgS04, MgC03, MgC03 • CaC03
, (caSOJ , MgC03 • CaCOg
. SrS04
'$&) , BaC02 , BaS04
• 3H20, A1203
TT
73
-------
Si04~2, Si03"2, (£iO^ , SiC (Si)
\!L/ ' \!L/ ' Pb0> PbS04' PbC03> Pb3(p°4)2'
po4-3 (7)
©, (As+^) , AsO."3, AsO,"3, As90o
\^^^j/ * 3 C. O
Y + 3
, SeO ~2, SeOA"2, SeO,
CJ ^r £
Ti+3, Ti+4, Ti0
, vo+2, vo4"4, vo3, vo+3, vo, v2o3, v2o4, v2o5, voso4
-2 -2 -2
, Cr04 % Cr204 ^, Cr207 ', Cr2(
1n+2) , fcn4"3) , Mn04, MnO, Mn02, MnC03, MnS04
, FeO
, FeO, FeO . Fe203,
, CoC03 • 4H20, CoO
K FeSi206
Rh
+3
(Ni+Z) , (Ni+;>) , NiO
5H20
FeCr0
, CuO, Cu20, CuS04, CuC03
AgT) , AgCl
Cd "•) , CdO
, HgCl
74
-------
Further analysis was necessary to confirm and assess how these compounds
were present in the relatively uniform samples, e.g., are any hazardous spe-
cies in the smaller, respirable size range. The remainder of the
FBC analysis, therefore, centered on individual particle characterization.
3.3 SINGLE PARTICLE ANALYSIS (Figure 3-9)
This phase of analysis was conducted to verify prior data, assess the
uniformity of the emitted particulates, and obtain a reasonable closure to
the Level 1 triggered species. The techniques employed consist of: Scan-
ning Electron Microscopy (SEM) with Energy Dispersive Analysis of X-rays
(EDX), Electron Beam Microprobe (EPMA), and Transmission Electron Microscopy
(TEM) with Selected Area Electron Diffraction (SAED).
3.3.1 SEM-EDX
The overflow bed materials, sludge, and particulates were scanned using
the JEOL SEM equipped with the Princeton Gamma Tech EDX unit. In general
the samples were uniform in appearance with the EDX giving bulk composition
information. Figures 3-10 through 3-14 are representative of the SEM images
and their composition by EDX is indicated. The EDX scans are presented in
Appendix D. SEM photographs accompany these indicating the exact areas
where EDX analysis was performed.
3.3.1.1 Sample Preparation
Samples were mounted on gold sample stages. They were uncoated. The
gold stage was found to provide an excellent conducting mount. A clean stage
t
was analyzed to provide any necessary background information.
3.3,1.2 SEM-EDX Results
In general the data correlated excellently with those found in earlier
phases of the analyses. The samples are fairly uniform in composition with
the major elements present identified as calcium, and silicon with traces of
elements such as titanium and potassium. Iron is present in the instrument
background and, therefore, cannot be detected above this background.
3.3.2 EPMA
The Electron Beam Microprobe analysis was conducted on the samples
mounted and imaged on the SEM. The instrument employed was an Applied
75
-------
PERFORM SINGLf
PARTICLE ANALYSIS
SEM-EDX
3.3
3.3.1
OBTAIN DETAILED MORPHOLOGICAL
INFORMATION, SINGLE
PARTICLE ELEMENTAL
SCAN AND ELEMENTAL RATIOS
1 LIST COMPOUNDS
WITH CONCENTRATION
ESTIMATE BASED ON
ELEMENTAL VALUES
ESTABLISHED ELEMENTA
RATIOS FOR SINGLE
PARTICLE
VE AL
UNASSIGNED
EG COMPO
XCEEDING MAT
ALUES BEE
FOUND
IS
FURTHER
ANALYSIS COS
JUSTIFIED FOR
UNASSIGNED
ELEMENTS
3.3.2
ELEMENTAL
RATIOS ESTABLISHED
FOR SINGLE PARTICLES
FOR ELEMENTS t C
LIST COMPOUNDS
WITH CONCENTRATION
ESTIMATE BASED ON
ELEMENTAL VALUES
CAN
UNAS-
SIGNED MATE
COMPOUNDS BE
DENTIFIED WIT
THESE
RATIOS
3.3.3
DETERMINE XRD SPECTRA
OF SINGLE PARTICLE OR
AREA IN PARTICLE
SPECIFIC COMPOUND/*.
IDENTIRED j
VE ALL
UNASSIGNED
G COMPOUN
EXCEEDING MA
ALUES BEE
FOUND
7
ELEMENTAL
DATA USED TO
QUANTIFY
/ LIST UNASSIGNED
/ FRACTION OF
' KNOWN ELEMENTAL
COMPOSITION
BASED ON SOLUBILITY
AND ELEMENTAL DATA
SELECT SEPARATION
SCHEME
\ 1
MAGNETIC
SEPARATION
DENSITY
GRADIENT
SEPARATION
SELECTIVE
DISSOLUTION
SEPARATION
3.3.4
DOES
FRACTION
CONTAIN
UNASSIGNED
MATE
ELEMENT
Figure 3-9. Logic Flow for Individual Particle Characterization
76
-------
Figure 3-10. ,SEM at 3000X of Sample S-2-3.
Uniform appearing spheres (approximately 10
microns) with aggregates with 40-350 microns in
size. Spheres identified as predominantly
calcium. (Anions such as SO* are not deter-
mined by this technique.)
77
-------
Figure 3-11. SEM at 3000X of Sample S-2-4. Pre-
dominant species are spheres (Ib) of approximately
25-5 microns with very irregular surfaces giving
the impression that they are composed of numerous
smaller fused spheres. Also present are large,
60-30 microns, irregular flakes (2a). The spheres
(Ib) are composed of calcium. The flakes (2a) are
predominantly silicon.
78
-------
Figure 3-12. SEN at 3000X of Sample S-2-5. These
particulates are very crystalline and irregular
in nature. There are some spheres present with
highly irregular porous surfaces. The spheres
(2a) range in size from 10 to 40 microns. The
thick appearing fused material (3b) range up to
100 x 60 microns, thin flakes (Ic) 40 x 90 microns.
The spheres (2a) are composed of calcium. The
fused crystalline material in area Ic is pre-
dominantly silicon with iron present, and in area
3b silicon is major but calcium is also present
(fused in the silicon matrix).
79
-------
Figure 3-13. SEM at 3000X of Sample S-2-6. Highly
fused particulates, large (4000 microns), uniform,
porous and thin. Silicon is the major component
with potassium and calcium present.
80
-------
Figure 3-14. SEM at 3000X and 6000X of Sample
S-2-7. Very irregular spheres 25-130 microns, and
thin flakes. The larger spheres (130 microns)
are porous and smaller spheres (5-10 microns)
adhere to their surface. The major sphere
component is silicon with calcium present in
the matrix. The major component of the smaller
spheres is calcium with silicon present in the
matrix. The flakes vary in dominant species
but show both silicon and calcium as major
components.
81
-------
Research Laboratories, Model EMX. The backscattered X-rays produced when
the sample was irradiated were imaged. This was done to verify areas
which were high in particular elements and to establish the association
between those elements found present in prior analyses, e.g., are Ca and S
present at the same sample location?
3.3.2.1 Sample Preparation
The samples were analyzed directly after SEM work and remained mounted
on the gold sample stages.
3.3.2.2 EPMA Results
The gallery of photographs (Figures 3-15 through 3-19) which follows
indicates the relationship of elements to location on each particle analyzed.
Figure 3-17, Sample S-2-5, exhibits the distinctive characterization of an
area on the sample where calcium and silicon are not present at same loca-
tion. All the other samples are fairly uniform in elemental dispersion.
Table 3-12 lists all the elements identified by EPMA in each sample.
3.3.3 TEM-SAED
The transmission electron microscope analysis with selective area elec-
tron diffraction was employed to assess the uniqueness in composition of the
individual particles observed in the SEM. All prior analyses had indicated
that the emission samples were uniform mixtures of compounds without distinc-
tive particle sizes, ranges, colors, or shapes indicative of individual spe-
cies. The system used in this portion of the inorganic work was an RCA
Model EMU-3H. It has a resolution of loft and a 100 kV beam. The accuracy
of the determined d-spacings is ±0.5.
3.3.3.1 Sample Preparation
The samples (S-2-3, S-2-4, S-2-5, S-2-6, and S-2-7) were mounted on a
copper mesh screen coated with graphite. This provides for electron trans-
mission and conductance. They were then coated with carbon to secure them
during analysis.
3.3.3.2 TEM-SAED Results
Figures 3-20 through 3-24 are the TEM images of the samples. The
arrows indicate the areas were SAED patterns were generated. The
82
-------
FLYASH
S-2-3
Calcium, Kd, Backscattered Image
uxygen, na, Backscattered Image
Silicon. Ka, Backscattered Image
iulfur, Kd, Backscattered Imag
Iron, KQ, Backscattered Image
potassium, Ka, Backscattered Inage
Figure 3-15. EPMA of Sample S-2-3
83
-------
FUASH
S-Z-4
Calcium, Ko. Backscattered iMgc
Oxygen, Ka, Backscattered I«ge
Si , Ka, taCkiCIttimd Image
Sulfur. Ka, Backscattered Image
Iron, Ka, Backscmered Image
Potassium, Ka, Backscattered Image
Figure 3-16. EPMA of Sample S-2-4
84
-------
FLYASH
S-2-5
Calcium, Ka, Backscattered image
Silicon, Ko, Backscattered Image
Oxygen, Ka, Backscattered Image
Sulfur, Ka, Backscattered Image
Iron, Ka, Backscattered Image
Potasslin, Ka, Btckscattsred
Figure 3-17. EPMA of Sample S-2-5
85
-------
FLY ASH
S-2-6
Calcium, Ka, Backscattered Image
t*.
IT •;• '
Silicon, K<>, Backscattcred Image
Oxygen, Ka, Backscattered Image
Sulfur, Ko, Backscattered Image
Iron, Ka, flackscattered Image
Potassium, Ka, Backscattered Image
Figure 3-18. EPMA of Sample S-2-6
86
-------
FLYASH
S-2-7-3
Calcium. Ka, Backscattered Image
Oxygen, Ka, Backscattered Image
»v=Vs-*£*S
S&&&3
_' -»«_^^.- . * -V- , '
-------
Table 3-12. EPMA Identified Elements
Sample Code
S-2-3
S-2-4
S-2-5
S-2-6
S-2-7
Elements Detected
Calcium
Sulfur
Oxygen
Silicon
Iron
Potassium
Calcium
Sulfur
Oxygen
Silicon
Iron
Potassium
Chlorine
Magnesium
Aluminum
Calcium
Sulfur
Oxygen
Silicon
Iron
Potassium
Aluminum
Calcium
Sulfur
Oxygen
Silicon
Iron
Potassium
Calcium
Sulfur
Oxygen
Silicon
Iron
Potassium
Aluminum
Magnesium
Chlorine
Titanium
Relative Abundance*
Major
Medium
Medium
Medium
Low
Low
Major
Medi urn
Medium
Medium
Low
Low
Trace
Trace
Trace
Major
Medium
Major
Major
Medium
Medium
Low
Medi urn
Medium
Medium
Major
Low
Medium
Major
Major
Major
Major
Medium
Medium
Low
Low
Low
Low
Major >10%
Medium 5-10%
Low -1-5%
Trace <1%
-------
TEM Image, Sample S-2-3.
Crystalline appearing
particles were analyzed
using SAED.
Electron Diffraction Pattern
Crystalline Material Analysis
Determined
d-spacings
4.19
3.59
1.93
1.67
Compound Literature
Identified d-spacings
SiO? 4.26
3.34
1.82
1.54
Figure 3-20. TEM/SAED Analysis of Sample S-2-3
89
-------
c\
TEM Image, Sample S-2-4.
Thin area analyzed using
SAED.
Electron Diffraction Pattern
Area Analyzed
Determined
d-spacings
2.64
1.68
1.40
Compound Literature
Identified d-spacings
Fe90, 2.69
c J 1.69
1.48
Figure 3-21. TEM/SAED Analysis of Sample S-2-4
90
-------
TEM Image, Sample S-2-5.
Thin area analyzed using
SAED.
Electron Diffraction Pattern
Area Analyzed
Determined
d-spacings
4.41
3.14
2.64
2.28
1.93
1.48
Compound Literature
Identified d-spacings
SiCL 4.26
3.34
2.46
2.28
1.82
1.54
Figure 3-22. TEM/SAED Analysis of Sample S-2-5
91
-------
TEM Image, Sample S-2-6.
Thin area analyzed using
SAED.
Electron Diffraction Pattern
Area Analyzed
Determined
d-spacings
3.33
2.51
1.68
1.26
Compound
Identified
Fe0CL
2 3
Literature
d-spacings
3.6
2.51
1.69
1.48
Figure 3-23. TEM/SAED Analysis of S-2-6
92
-------
TEM Image, Sample S-2-7.
Thin area analyzed using
SAED.
Electron Diffraction Pattern
Area Analyzed
Determined
d-spacings
4.57
2.28
1.52
2.64
1.68
2.56
Compound
Identified
Si02
Fe203
Literature
d-spacings
4.26
2.28
1.54
2.69
1.69
2.51
Figure 3-24. TEM/SAED Analysis of S-2-7
93
-------
interpretation of the SAED patterns has a general uncertainty about it
because of the accuracy of the technique. The TEM images are not of good
quality due to the sample thickness, >1500A. In most cases thin areas of
the sample had to be chosen for electron diffraction analysis rather than
uniquely appearing crystalline material.
Only sample S-2-3 is a good example of TEM/SAED application. In this
case a definite fine crystalline material was imaged, isolated, and identi-
fied as silica. These fine particulates are less than a micron in size and,
therefore, respirable.
3.3.4 Sample Fractionation Techniques
In the case of the FBC samples, there was simply insufficient
quantity to attempt a sample fractionation matrix. Also, the inorganic
data generated had indicated that compounds, elements and ions were dis-
persed and bound in a silica matrix. This would have made separation diffi-
cult and success would not be likely.
3.4 CONCLUSIONS BASED ON LEVEL 2 INORGANIC ANALYSES
The inorganic data are summarized on the Level 1 - Level 2 data reduc-
tion and presentation tables (Table 3-13). Quantisation is based on the
data generated in Section 3.1.3 and qualitative compound identification is
based directly on those compound identification techniques employed.
Assumptions which were made in completing these tables were based on
the fact that for most inorganic MEG compounds the MATE values are based
on the elemental abundance. Therefore, if the elemental concentration
exceeds the MATE and compound types for that element have been identified,
then they too would exceed the MATE.
The leachates are reported on a separate set of tables (Table 3-14).
94
-------
Table 3-13. Level 2 Data on FBC Emission Samples
«£>
Ul
CATEGORY
27. LITHIUM
28. SODIUM
29. POTASSIUM
30. RUBIDIUM
31. CESIUM
32. BERYLLIUM
33. MAGNESIUM
34. CALCIUM
COMPOUND
L1
L1*
L1F (as Li)
L12C03 (as L1)
L1H
Na*
NaOH
KOH
K
K* (as K)
Rb*'
cs*i
Be
Be**
Bed (as Be)
BeO-Al203-S102
(as Be)
Magnesium, Mg
Magnesium Ion, Mg**
Magnesium Oxide,
MgO
Magnesium Fluoride,
HgF2 (as Mg)
Magnesium Sulfate,
MgS04 (as Mg)
Magneslte, MgCOs
(as Mg)
Dolomite, MgCOi-
CaC03 (as Mg)
Asbestos (as Mg)
Calcium Ion, Ca++
Calcium Fluoride,
C.F2
Calcium Carbonate,
UCO,
Calcium Sulfate,
CaS04
Dolomite, HgCOa-
CaC03
MATE
AIR
ug/n3 (ppm)
2.2 x 10
2.2 x 10
2.2 x 10
2.2 x 10
2.5 x 10
5.3 x 104
2.0 x 103
2.0 x 103
N
N
1.21 x 105
8.19 x 104
2.0
2.0
2.0
6.0 x 103
6.01 x 103
1.01 x Ifll
6.0 x 103
6.0 x 103
6.0 -x 103
6.0 x 103
6.0 x 103
1.6 x 104
N
N
N
N
MATE
WATER
ug/1
HEALTH
3.3 x 102
3.3 x 102
3.3 x 10*
3.3 x 102
3.8 x 102
8.0 x 105
3.0 x 104
3.0 x 104
N
N
1.82 x 106
1.23 x 106
3.0 x 10
3.0 x 10
3.0 x 10
9.0 x 104
9.0 x 104
1.5 x 105
9.0 x 104
9.0 x 104
9.0 x 104
9.0 x 104
9.0 x 104
2.4 x 105
N
N
N
N
MATE
WATER
wg/i
ECOLOGY
3.8 x 102
3.8 x 102
3.8 x 102
3.8 x 1C2
N
N
N
N
N
2.3 X 104
N
N
5.5 x 10
5.5 x 10
5.5 x 10
8.7 x 104
8.7 x 104
1.0 x 105
8.7 x 1C4
8.7 x 104
8.7 x 104
8.7 x 104
8.7 x 104
1.6 x 104
N
N
N
N
HATE
LAND
ug/i
HEALTH
7.0 x 10-1
1.6 x 103
6.0 x 10
6.0 X 10
N
N
3.64 x 103
2.46 x 103
6.0 x 10-2
6.0 x 10-2
6.0 x lO"2
1.8 x 102
1.8 x 102
3.0 x lO2
1.8 x 102
'1.8 x 102
1.8 x 102
1.8 x 102
1.8 x 102
4.8 x 102
N
N
N
N
MATE
LAND
pg/9
ECOLOGY
7.5 x ID"1
N
N
N
N
4.6 x 10
N
N
1.1 x 10-1
1.1 x 10-1
1.1 x 10-1
1.7 x 102
1.7 x 102
2.0 x 102
1.7 x 102
1.7 x 102
1.7 x 102
1.7 x 102
1.7 x 10?
3.2 x 10
'N
N
N
N
(ppm)
ug/1
6.9xlOZ
5.4xl05
6. 7x10'
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.O.
7. 34x1 0*
3.7xl03
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
9.5xl05
N.D.
Present
Present
N.D.
RATIO
SAMPLE
.
Present E
Present i
Based oh
Based on
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y-YES
,N=NO
ixceeds Ma
ixceeds Ma
See Note 1
See Note 1
TEST
METHOD1
e
e - See No
Exceeds Mate
See Note 1
ased on Co
ased on Con
Exceeds Ma
Compound D
Compound 0
ipound Dati
ipound Dati
te - See N
ta
ta
TEST
EXPEC-,
TAT IONS2
te 1
te 1
TEST
COST3
SAMPLE,
ALIQUOT4
-
TABLE KEY:
1 TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRD
C. WET
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. GC/MS
2. EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
3. TEST COST
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
4. SAMPLE ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
•Summation of S-2-5, S-2-6 and 5-2-7 N.D. Not Detected
' 1. Bated on Level 2 leachate study of sample S-2-6.
-------
Table 3-13. Level 2 Data on FBC Emission Samples (Continued)
10
CATEGORY
35. STRONTIUM
36. BARIUM
37. BORON
38. ALUMINUM
39. GALLIUM
COMPOUND
Strontium
Strontium Ion,
Sr" (as Sr)
Strontium Fluoride,
SrF2 (as Sr)
Strontium Sulfate,
SrS04 (as Sr)
Barium, 8a
Barium Ion, Ba+i
(as Ba)
Barium Sulfide,
BaS (as Ba)
Barium Th1o-
carbonate, BaCSa
(as Ba)
Barium Fluoride,
BaFz (as Ba)
Barium Carbonate,
BoC03 (as Ba)
Barium Sulfate,
BaS04 (as Ba)
Boron, B
Borate, 603 (as B)
Metaborate, Bo?-
(as B)
Boron Oxide, B203
Aluminum, Al
Aluminum Ion,
Al+++
Bauxite, AljOi-
31(20 (as Al)
Kydrated Aluminum
Silicate (as Al)
Alums [M Al ($04),]-
(H20)x (as Al)
Aluminum Oxide,
A12°3
Gallium, Si
Elemental Species,
Ga
Gallous, Ga+1
(as Ga)
MATE
AIR
ug/m3 (ppm)
3.1 x 103
3.1 x IO3
3.1 x 103
3.1 x 103
5.0 x 10*
5.0 x IO2
5.0 x 102
5.0 r \02
5.0 'x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
3.1 x 103
3.1 x 103
3.1 x 103
1.0 x IO4
5.2 x 103
5.2 x 103
5.2 x 103.
5.2 x 103
5.2 X 103
1.0 I 104
5,0 X 10J
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
MATE
HATER
ug/1
HEALTH
1.6 x 10*
4.6 x 10*
4.6 x 10*
4.6 x 10*
5.0 x 103
5.0 x IO3
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 X 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
4.7 x 10*
4.7 x 10*
4.7 x 10*
1.5 x 105
8.0 x 10*
8.0 x 10*
8.0 x 10*
8.0 x 10*
8.0 x 10*
1.5 x 105
7.4 x 10*
7.4 x 10*
7.4 x 10*
HATE
MATER
ug/1
ECOLOGY
N
N
N
N
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
8.5 x 1C3
2.5 x iO3
2.5 x IO'
2.5 x 10*
2.5 x 10*
N
1.0 x IO3
1.0 x IO3
1.0 x IO3
1.0 x IO3
1.0 x IO3
(i
N
N
1.
MATE
•LAND
U9/9
HEALTH
9.2 x 10
9.2 x 10
9.2 X 10
9.2 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
9.3 x 10
9.3 X..10
9.3 x 10
3.0 x IO2
1.6 x 10Z
1.6 x IO2
1.6 x IO2
1.6 x IO2
1.6 x IO2
3.0 x IO2
1.5 x 10'
l.SxlO2
1.5 x IO2
MATE
LAND
U9/9
ECOLOGY
N
N
N
N
5.0
5.0
5:0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
N
2.01
N
2.0
2.0
2.0
' N
N
N
N
(pptn)
U9/1
1.4xl04
N.D.
Present
. N.O.
N.R.
5.2xl04
Present
N.R.
RATIO
SAMPLE
MATE
Based on
Based on
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y«YES
N«NO
TEST
METHOD1
Exceeds Mate
lompound Da
Exceeds Ha
:a
e - See Ho
impound Data
TEST
EXPEC-,
TATIONS2
te 1
TEST
COST3
SAMPLE,
ALIQUOT*
TABLE KEY:
1. TEST METHOD'
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
HENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRD
C. HET
CHEHICAL
D. ESCA
E. GC/HS
2. EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
3. TEST COST
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
4. SAMPLE ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
•Summation of S-2-5, S-2-6 and S-2-7. N.D. Not Detected
N.R. Not Required on Level 2
1 Based on Level 2 leachate study of sample S-2-6.
-------
Table 3-13.i Level 2 Data on FBC Emission Samples (Continued)
CATEGORY
40. INDIUM
»
41. THALLIUM
42. CARBON
43. SILICON
44. GERMANIUM
COMPOUND
Gallic. Ga+3
(as Ga)
SalHum Sesquf-
oxlde, GazO,
(as Ga) 3
Indium, In
Indium Ion, In+J
Thallium, Tl
Thallous, Tl+l
ThalUc, Tl+3
Elemental Carbon
Coal
Carbide, C-
Carbonate, CDs"2
Bicarbonate, HC03
Carbonyl , C0=
Carbon Monoxide
Carbon Dioxide
Silane, S1H4
Silicon, Si
Orthosllicate,
S104-2
Metasilicate,
S103-2
Silicon Dioxide,
Si02
Silicon Bisulfide,
S1S2
Silicon Carbide, S1C
Germanium, Ge
Germanous, Ge*2
(as Ge)
Germanic, Ge+4
(as Ge)
Germanous Sulfide,
GeS (as Ge)
Germanic Sulflce,
GeS2 (as Gc)
Germane, GcH
-------
Table 3-13. Level 2 Data on FBC Emission Samples (Continued)
CATEGORY
45. TIN
46. LEAD
47. NITROGEN
COMPOUND
Tin Oxide, SnOj
Tin, Sn
Stannous, Sntz
Stannic, Sn+1
. Lead, Pb
Elemental Lead.Pb
Plumbous, Pb+2
Plumbic, Pb+*
Us Pb)
Lead Monoxide,
PbO (as Pb)
Lead Sulfate,
PbS04 (as Pb)
Lead Sulfate,
Pbs (as Pb)
Lead Carbonate,
PbCOa (as Pb)
Lead Phosphate,
Pb3(P04>2 (as Pb)
Lead Chroma te,
PbCrOi) (as Pb)
Lead Holybdate,
PbMo04 (as Pb)
Lead Arsenate,
PbHAsOn (as Pb)
. Hydrazine
Alkali Cyanides,
NaCN, KCN
Nitric Acid,. HN03
Nitrogen Oxides,
N20, N02. N204>
N2°3- N205
Hydrogen Cyanide,
HCN
Ammonia, NHs,
Cyanogen, C2N2
• Nitride, 11=
Nitrate, H03-
N1 trite, N02-
- Aimonlum, NH4+
HATE
AIR
ug/m3 (ppm)
1.0 x 10*
N
N
N
1.5 x 10Z
1.5 x 10*
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 10*
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 10*
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 10Z (.1)
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
9.0 x 103
1.1 x 104 (.10)
1.8 x 104 (25)
2.0 x 10'
N
N
N
N
HATE
HATER
pg/l
HEALTH
1.5 x 10s
N
N
N
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x lp2
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 X 102
2.3
5.0 x 102
7.5 x 104
1.4 x 105
5.0 x 102
2.5 x 103
1.0 x 103
N
N
N
N
HATE
MATER
ug/1
ECOLOGY
N
N
N
N
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
'5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0'x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
N
2.5 x 10
4.5 x 102
N
2.5 x 10
5.0 x 10
2.5 x 10
N
N
N
N
MATE •
LAND
pg/1
HEALTH
3.0
N '
N
N
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 X lO-1
5.0 X ID"1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 X 10-1
5,0 x 10-1
5,0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5,0 x 10-1
4.5
1.0
1.5 x 103
N/A
. 1.0
5.0
2.0
N
N
N
N
MATE
LAND
ug/9
ECOLOGY
N
N
N
N
1.0 x 10-'
1.0 X 10-1
1.0 X 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-:
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 X 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
N
5.0 x lO'2
9.0 x 10-1
N/A
5.0 x 10-2
1.0 x 10-'
5.0 x 10-2
N
N
N
N.
Tppm)
ug/1
N.R.
3.3xlOJ
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
Present
N.D.
Present
N.D.
N.O.
N.D.
N.D.
N.R.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
RATIO
SAMPLE
MATE
Based on
lased on
Based on
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y=YES
N=NO '
Exceeds Ma
impound Da
ompound Da
TEST ,
METHOD1
te
ta
ta
Compound Data
Based on Compound Data
Based on Compound Data
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
TEST
COST3
SAMPLE.
ALIQUOT1
TABLE KEY:
. TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRD
C. WET
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. GC/MS
, EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
TEST COST
1 REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
SAMPLE ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
*Summation of S-2-5, S-2-6 and S-2-6.
1. Based on Level 2 leachate study-of sample S-2-6
N.D. Not Detected
N.R. Not Required on Level 2
-------
Table 3-13. Level 2 Data on FBC Emission Samples (continued)
vo
to
CATEGORY
,48. PHOSPHORUS
49. ARSENIC
50. ANTIMONY
SI, BISMUTH
COMPOUND
Phosphorus, P
Phosphite, POi"3
(« P)
B1 phosphate,
H2PO/T (as'P)
Phosphine, PH3
Phosphoric Add,
H3P04
Phosphorus
Pentasulflde
Phosphate, POa/3
Arsenic, As
Metallic Arsenic
Arsenous, As+3
Arsenic, As+5
Arsenate, AsOa"3
(as As)
Arsenlte, AsO?"3
(as As)
Arsenide, As"3
(as As)
Arslne, AsH3
Arsenic Trloxide,
As-jO,
Antimony Trl-
oxide, Sb20s
Antimony Metal, Sb
Antlnnnous,
(stlbnous) Sb+3
AnJJmonlc (stlbnlc)
5t1b1nc, SbHi
(«s Sb)
Antlmonous Sul-
flde, Sb2S3
Antimony, Sb
Bismuth, B1
Elemental Bis-
muth, 81
Blimuthous, B1*3
in B1)
BtimuthU, oi'1'
(01 B1)
HATE
AIR
U9/m3 (ppm)
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
4.0 x 102 (0.3)
1.0 x 1C3
1.0 t 103
N
2.0 x 10
2.0 x 10
2.0 x 10
2.0 x 10
2.0 x 10
2.0 i. 10
2.0 x 10
2.0 x 10
2.0 x 10
5.0 x 101
5.0 x 10Z
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
4.1 x 102
4.1 x 102
4,1 x 102
4,1 x 102
HATE
HATER
US/1
HEALTH
1.5 x 101
1.5 x 104
1.5 x 104
6.0 x 103
1.5 x 104
1.5 x 104
N
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 X 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
7.5 X 102
7.5 x 10J
7.5 x 103
7.5 x 103
7.5 x 103
7.5 x 103
7.5 x 103
6.1 x 103
6.1 x 103
6.1 x 103
6,1 x 103
' MATE
WATER
U9/1
ECOLOGY
5.0 x 10-1
'5.0,x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
N
'4.5 x 103
N
N
5.0 x 101
5.0 x 101
5.0 x Ifll
5.0 x 101
5.0 X 101
5.0 x Ifll
5.0 x Ifll
5.0 x I0l
5.0 x Ifll
2.0 x 102
(as Sb)
2.0 X 102
2.0 x 102
.2.0 x 102
2.0 X 102
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 102
N
N
N
N
MATE
LAND
HEALTH
3.0 x 10
3.0 x 10
3.0 x 10
N/A
3.0 x 10
3.0 x 10
N
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
1.5 x 10
1.5 x 10'
1.5 X 10'
1.5 x Ifll
1.5 x Ifll
1.5 x 101
1.5 x Ifll
1.2 x 10'
1.2 x Ifll
1.2 x IQl
1,2 x IQl
MATE
LAND
U9/9
ECOLOGY
1.0 x 10-3
1.0 x 10-3
1.0 x ID"3
N/A
9.0
\
N
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-'
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
4.0 x 10-'
(as Sb)
4.0 x 10-'
4.0 x 10-1
4.0 x 10-1
4.0 x 10-1
4.0 x 10-1
4.0 x 10-1
N
N
N
N
SAJffilE*
(ppm)
ug/i
N.O.
N.D.
N.D.
.5.0 x 1
5.0 x 1
5.0 x 1
Present
Present
Present
N.R.
N.R.
RATIO
SAMPLE
"MATT
o-i
o-i
0-'
Based on
3ased on
Based on
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y=YES
N=NO
Compound 0
Compound U<
Compound 0<
TEST
METHOD'
See Note 1
See Note 1
See Note '
Se
Se
Se
ta
ta
ta
TEST
EXPEC-,
TATIONS2
> Note 1
> Note 1
e'Note 1
TEST •
COST3
SAMPLE,
ALIQUOT4
TABLE KEY:
TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRD
C. WET
CHEMICAL
0. ESCA
E. GS/MS
EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
TEST COST
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
SAMPLE ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
'VwiMtlon of 5-2-5, S-2-fi and 5-2-7,
I, H»',«l on l.i/vol '/. loachato ',tudy of tamp In S-2-6,
N.D. Not Detected.
N.R. Not lleiiulred on Level 't
-------
Table 3-13. Level 2 Data on FBC Emission Samples (Continued)
o
o
CATEGORY
52. OXYGEN
53. SULFUR
54. SELENIUM
55. TELLURIUM
56. FLUORIDE
COMPOUND
Ozone, 03
Rhombic Sulfur, Sg
Sulflde, S-2
Sulfate, S04-2
Sulflte, SOa-2
TMocyanate, SCN"
Sulfur Trioxide,
S03
Sulfuric Acid,
H2S04
Sulfur Dioxides,
S02
Hydrogen Sulflde,
H2S
Carbon Disulfide,
CS2
Carbonyl Sulflde,
COS
Selenium, Se
Elemental Selenium,
Se
Selenide, Se-2
Selenites, Se03-2
(as Se)
Selenates, SeOq"2
(as Se)
Hydrogen Selenide,
H2Se
Carbon Diselenide,
CSe2 (as Se)
Selenium Dioxide,
SeO? (as Se)
Tellurium, Te
Tellurlde, Te"2
TellurHe. TeOi'2
(as Te)
Tellurate, TeOa
(as Te)
Fluoride Ion, F"
Hydrogen Fluoride,
IIP
HATE
AIR
ug/m3 (ppm)
2.0 x 102 (0.1)
N
N
N
N
N
N
1.0 x 103
1.3 x 104
1.5 x 104 (10)
6.0 x 104 (20)
4.4 x 105
2.0 x 10Z
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 102 (.05)
2.0 .x 102
2.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
2.5 x 103
2.0 x 103
MATE
WATER
ug/1
HEALTH
N/A
N
N
N
N
N
N .
1.5 X 104
2.0 x 105
2.3 r 104
9.0 * 105
tl/A
5.0 x 101
5.0 x Ifll
5.0 x 10'
5.0 x 10'
5.0 x 101
5.0 x 101
(as Se)
5.0 -x Ifll
5.0 x 101
1.5 x 103
1.5 x 103
1.5 x 103
1.5 x 103
3.8 x 104
3.0 x 104
MATE
WATER
wg/1
ECOLOGY
N/A
N
N
N
N
N
N
4.5 x 102
N
1.0 x 101
1.0 x 104
N/A
2.5 x Ifll
2.5 x Ifll
2.5 x 101
2.5 x 10'
2.5 x 101
2.5 x 10'
(as Se)
2.5 x 101
2.5 x 10'
N
N
N
N
N
N
KATE
LAND
ug/g
HEALTH
N/A
N
N
• N
N
• N
N
3.0 x 101
4.0 x 1C2
N/A
N/A
N/A
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x lO"1
1.0 x 10"1
1.0 x 10-'
1.0 x 10-'
1.0 x 10-1
(as Se)
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x lO'l
3.0 x 10
3.0 x 10
3.0 x 10
3.0 x 10
7.5 X 1C1
N/A
MATE
LAND
"g/g
ECOLOGY
N/A
N
N
N
N
N '
N
9.0 x 102
N
N/A
N/A
N/A
5.0 x 10-2
5.0 x 10'2
5.0 X lO"2
5.0 x 10-2
5.0 x 10'2
5.0 x 10-2
(as Se)
5.0 x lO'2
5.0 x ID'2
N
N
N
N
N
N/
(ppm)
"9/1
N.R.
Present
Present
N.R.
N.R.
N.R.
RATIO
SAMPLE
MATE
Based on
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y-YES
N'NO
Compound D
TEST ,
METHOD1
ata
Based on Compound Data
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
TEST,
COST3
SAMPLE.
ALIQUOT4
TABLE KEY:
1 TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
X. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRD
C. WET.
' CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. GS/HS
2. EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
3. TEST COST
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
4. SAMPLE ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
f Summation of S-2-5, S-2-6 and S-2-7.
1. Based on Level 2 leachate study of sample S-2-6.
N.D. Not Detected.
N.R. Not Required on Level 2.
-------
Table 3-13. Level 2 Data on FBC Emission Samples (Continued)
CATEGORY
57. CHLORINE
58. BROMINE
59. IODINE
60. SCANDIUM
61. YTTRIUM
62. TITANIUM
63. ZIRCONIUM
64. HAFNIUM
65. VANADIUM
COMPOUND
Chloride Ion, Cl"
HypochTorUe,
cio-
Chlorlte, C102"
Chlorate, €103
Chlorine Dioxide,
CIOz
Carbohyl Chloride
(phosgene),
COC12
Hydrogen Chloride,
HC1
Bromide Ion, Br*
Bromide Ion, Br"
Hydrogen Bromide,
HBr
Iodide Ion, I-
Scandlum, Sc
Scandium Ion, Sc+3
Yttrium Ion, Y*3
Titanium, T1
TUanous, T1+3
(as T1)
Titanic, ml
(as Tt)
Titanium Dioxide,
T10? (as T1)
Zirconium Ion,
Zr+4
Zirconium Dioxide,
Zr02 (as Zr)
Hafnium Ion, Hf+4
Vanadium, V
Elemental
Vanadium, V
Vanadlc, V+3 (as V)
Vanadyl, Vo*2
(as V)
Orthgvanadate,
WM"4 (as V)
HATE
AIR
ug/m3 (ppm)
N
N
N
N
N
4.0 x 102 -
7.0 x !03
N
N
l.'O x 104
N
5.3 x 104
5.3 x 104
1.0 x 103
6.0 x 103
6.0 r 103-
6.0 x 103
6.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 10*
5.0 x 10*
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
6.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
MATE
HATER
ug/1
HEALTH
1.3 x ID6
N
N
N
N
6.0 X 103
1.1 x 105
N
N
1.5 x 105
N
8.0 x 10
8.0 x 10
1.5 x 104
9.0 x 104
9.0 / 104
9.0 x 104
9.0 x 104
7.5 x 104
7.5 x 104
7.5 x 104
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.6 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 X 103
MATE
HATER
ug/1
ECOLOGY
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
8.2 x 102
(as
TUS04]2)
8.2 x 102
8.2 x 102
8.2 x 102
N
N
N
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 X 102
HATE
LAND
ug/g
HEALTH
2.6 x 103
N
N
N
N
N/A
• N/A
N
N
N/A
N
1.6 x 10-2
1.6 x ID"2
3.0 x 101
1.8 x 102
1.8 x 102
1.8 x 102
1.8 x 102
1.5 x 10'
1.5 X 10'
1.5 x 10
5.0 X 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
HATE
LAND
ug/9
ECOLOGY
N
N
N
N
n
N/A
N/A
N
N
N/A
N
N
N
N
1.6 x 10
1.6 x 10
1.6 x 10
1.6 x 10
N
N
N
3.0 x 10"'
3.0 x 10-1
3.0 x 10-1
3.0 x 10-'
3.0 x 10-'
(ppm)
ug/i
N.R.
N.R.
N.R.
N.R.
N.R.
N.D.
2.0x10
N.R.
2.6X103
Present
RATIO
SAMPLE
MATE
Does Not
Exceeds
Based on
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y-YES
N=NO
bxceed Ma
Hate
Compound Di
TEST .
METHOD1
'
e
ta
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2 .
TEST,
COST3
SAMPLE
ALIQUOT4
TABLE KEY:
1 TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRD
C. WET
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. GC/KS
i. EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
3. TEST COST
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
4. SAMPLE ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
* iummatfon of S-2-5, S-2-6 and S-2-7.
I Bated on Level 2 leachato study of S-2-6.
N.D. Not Detected.
N.R. Not Required on Level 2.
-------
Table 3-13. Level 2 Data on FBC Emission Samples (Continued)
o
ro
CATEGORY
66. NIOBIUM
67. TANTALUM
68. CHROMIUM
COMPOUND
Metavanadate, V03"
(« V) 3
Vanadyllc, VO*3
(asfl
Vanadium Monoxide,
VO (as V)
Vanadium Trloxlde,
VZ03 (as V)
Vanadium Tetra-
oxlde, V204> (as V)
Vanadium Pent-
oxide, V205 (as V)
Vanadium Carbide,
VC (as V)
Vanadium Hono-
sulflde, VS (as V)
Vanadium Nitride,
VN' (as V)
Vanadyl Sulfate,
VOS04-5H20 (as V)
Niobus, Nb>+3
Nloblc, Kb*5
Niobium Oxides, '
NbO, Nb?05 (as Kb)
Tantalum 'Ion,
Chronlum, Cr
Chromous. Cr+z
(as Cr)
Chromic, Cr«
(as Cr)
Coronates, CrOf2
(as Cr)
Chromltes. CrgOa'2
(as Cr)
01 chroma tes,
CrzOj-* (as Cr)
Chromium Carhonyl,
Cr(CO)6 (as Cr)
Chromium Sulflde.
CrzS3
Chronic Oxide,
CrzOs (as Cr)
Chromite Mineral,
FeO Crz03 (as Cr)
HATE
ug/m3 (ppm)
S.O x 102
5.0 x 102
S.O x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 10Z
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 10?
2.2 x lO*
2.2 x 10*
2.2 x 10*
.5.0 x 103
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 X 10
1.0 X 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
MATE
HATER
P9/1
HEALTH
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
3.3 x 105
3.3 X 105
3.3 x 103
7.5 x 10*
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 1C2
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 10Z
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
HATE
HATER
ug/1
ECOLOGY
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 10?
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x ID2
N
N
N
N
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 10Z
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 10?
2.5 x 102
MATE
LAND
ug/g
HEALTH
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
6.5 x ID2
6.5 x 102
6.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10"1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x ID"1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
MATE
LAND
ug/9
ECOLOGY
3.0 x 10'1
3.0 x 10-1
3.0 x 10-1
3.0 x 10-'
3.0 x lO"1
3.0 x 10-1
3.0 x 10-1
3.0 x 10-'
3,0 x 10-1
3.0 x 10-1
N
N
N
' N
5.0 x 10'1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10'1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
S.O x ID"1
5.0 x 10-1
Tppm)
i.g/1
Present
Present
Present
Present
N.R.
N.R.
RATIO
SAMPLE
"MATT
Based on
Based on
Based on
Based on
8. 34x1 03 Exceeds
3.9x10
3.9x10
Present
Present
Present
Present
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y-YES
N-NO
Compound D
Compound 0
Compound D
Impound Di
late
Exceeds Mate - See
Based on
Based on
Based on
Based 'on
late - See
Compound 1
Compound 1
Compound
Compound
TEST
METHOD'
ita
ita
ita
ta
Note 1
tote 1
ata
ata
ata
>ata
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
TEST
COST3
SAMPLE.
ALIQUOT4
TABLE KEY
1. TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVaOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRD
C. HET
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. GC/MS
2. EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
3. TEST COST
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
4. SAMPLE ALIQUOT
I. ADEQUATE
2V MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
* Simulation of S-2-5, S-2-6 and S-2-7:
1 Based on Level 2 leachate_study of S-2-6.
N.D. Not Detected.
N.R. Not Required on Level 2.
-------
Table 3-13. Level 2 Data on FBC Emission Samples (Continued)
o
CO
CATEGORY
69. MOLYBDEN
70. TUNGSTEN
71. MANGANESE
72. IRON
COMPOUND
Hydrous Chromlun
Phosphate, CrPOa
.XHzO (as Cr)
Iron Chromate,
FeCrt>4 (as Cr)
Molybdenum, Mo
Holybdenous, Mo+z
Holybdfc, Ho+3
Molybdate, MoOd"2
(as Mo)
Molybdenum Sulflde,
MoSz (as Ho)
Molybdenum THoxlde,
. HdOs (as Ho)
Tungsten, W
Tungsten Ions. W+2,
H+*, If+S, H+6, H04-2
Tungsten Dlsulflde,
WS2 (as H)
Wolframite Mineral,
FeH04-MnW04 (as H)
Manganese, Mn
Manganous, Mn+2
Manganic, Hn+3
Permanganate, HnO*-
(as Hn)
Manganous Oxide,
MnO (as Hn)
Manganese Dioxide,
Hn02 (as Mn)
Manganese Carbonate,
McCOa (as Hn)
Manganous Sulfate,
MnS04 (as Hn)
Manganese Sulflde,
HnSj (as Mn)
Iron Carbonyls,
Mi/6'005"
Ferrous, Fe«
Ferric, Fe+3
Fcrroui Oxide, FeO
HATE
»g/n3 (ppm)
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
S.O x. 103 .
5.0 x 103 -
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
1.0 x 103
N
1.0 x 103
1.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 X 103
5.0 x 103
7.0 x 102
1.0 x 103
1.0 x 103
S.O x 103
MATE
HATER
vg/1
HEALTH
2.5 x 102
2.5 x ID2
7.5 x 10*
7.5 x 10*
7.5 x 10*
7.5 x 10*
7.5 x 10*
.7.5 x 10*
1.5 x 10*
N
1.5 x 10*
1.5 x 10*
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
1.1 x 10*
1.5 x 103
1.5 x 103
7.5 x 10*
HATE
• HATER
W9/1
ECOLOGY
2.5 x 102
2.5 x'lO2
7.0 x ID3
7.0 x 103
7.0 x 103
7.0 x 103
7.0 x 103
•7.0 x 103
N
N
'N
N
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
N
2.5 x )02
2.5 x 102
N
HATE
. LAND-
• l>g/9
HEALTH
5.0 x 10'1
5.0 x 10-1
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 10?
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x ID2
3.0 x 101
N
3.0 x 10'
3.0 x Ifll
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
2.1 x Ifll
3.0 x 10
3.0 x 10
1.5 x 102
MATE
LAND
U9/9
ECOLOGY
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
1.4 x IQl
1.4 x 101
1.4 x 101
1.4 x Ifll
1.4 x 10l
1.4 x Ifll
N
N
N
N
2.0 x 10-1
2.0 X 10-1
2.0 x 10-1
2.0 x 10-1
2.0 X 10-'
2.0 x 10-1
2.0 X 10-1
2.0 X 10-1
2.0 x 10-1
t
5.0 X ID'1
5.0 x 10-1
N
ng/i-
N.R.
N.R.
1.3xl02
1.3xl02
5.6xlOZ
RATIO
SAMPLE
TttrT
Does Not
Does Not
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y-YES
N=NO
Exceed Hat
Exceed Mat
5.6xl02' Does Not' Exceed Ha
N.D.
TEST ,
METHOOl
e
Q
e
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
TEST,
COST3
SAMPLE.'
ALIQUOT*
TABLE KEY:
TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRD
C. NET
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. GC/MS
EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS: '
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
, TEST COST
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
, SAMPLE ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAHPLE
* Sunutlon of -2-5, S-2-6 and S-Z-7.
1. Baud on Level 2 lochate study of temple S-2-6.
N.D. Not Detected.
N.R. Not Required on Level 2.
-------
Table 3-13. Level 2 Data on FBC Emission Samples (Continued)
•s
. CATEGORY
73. RUTHENIUM
74. COBALT
75. RHODIUM
76. NICKEL
COMPOUND
Magnetite.
FeO-FezOa
Ferrocyanlde,
Fe(CN)6-<
Ferrl cyanide,
Fe(CN)e-3
Ferric Oxide, FejOa
Ferric Hydroxide
(hydrated)
Fe203-XH20
Iron Sul fides, FeS,
Fe2S3
Pyrite, FeSz
Potassium Iron Sili-
cate, KFeSlzOe
Ruthenium Ion, Ru+3
Cobalt, Co
Cobaltous, Co**
Cobaltlc, Co+3
Cobaltous Carbonate,
hydrated, CoCOs-HzO
(as Co)
Cobalt Carbide,
CosC (as Co) .
Cobalt Sulfldes, CoS,
C02$3 (as Co)
Cobalt Arsenic •
Sulflde, CoAsS
(as Co)
Cobalt Arsenide,
CoAsj (as Co)
Cobalt Carbonyl,
Co(CO>4 (as Co)
Cobaltous Oxide,
CoO (as Co)
Cobaltous Hydroxide,
Co(OH)2 (as Co)
Rhodium Ion, Rh+3
Nlckelous. N1+2
Nlckellc, Nl«
Nlckelous Sulflde,
MS. (as N1)
Nickel Arsenide;
N1As (as Ni)
HATE
AIR
u9/m3 (ppm)
9.3 x 103
. N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
5.0 x 10'
5.0 x Ifll
5.0 X 10l
5.0 x 1C1
5.0 x Ifll
5.0 x 10'
5.0 x Ifll
5.0 x.lfll
5.0 x 101
5.0 x Ifll
5.0 x 101
1.0 x 10
1.5 x 10l
1.5 x 101
1.5 x 101
1.5 x 101
MATE
HATER
U9/1
HEALTH
6.2 x 103
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
7.5 x 10Z
7.5 x 102
7.5 x 10?
7.5 x 102
7.5 x 102
7.5 x 102
7.5 x 10*
' 7.5 x 102
7.5 x 102
7.5 x 102
7.5 x 102
1.5 x 10l
2.3 x 102
2.3 x 102
2.3 x 102
2.3 x 102
MATE
HATER
us/1
ECOLOGY
N
N
N
N
H
N
>1.0 x 105
N
N
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 X lO2
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
N
1.0 x Ifll
1.0 x 101
1.0 x 101
1.0 x 10'
MATE
LAND
wg/g
HEALTH
3.8 x 101
N
N
N
N
N
N
.N
N
1.5 x 10
1.5 x 10
1.5 x 10
1.5 x 10
1.5 x 10
1.5 x 10
1.5 x 10
1.5 x 10
1.5 x 10
1.5 x 10
1.5 x 10
3.0 x 10-2
4.5 x 10-1
4.5 x 10-1
4.5 x 10-1
4.5 x 10-1
MATE
LAND
ug/g
ECOLOGY
H
N
N
N
N
N
2.0 x 102
N
N
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 X 10-1
5.0 x lO'l
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
N
2.0 x 10-2
2.0 x 10-2
2.0 x 10-2
2.0 x 10-2
Tppm)
M9/1
Present
N.R.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
RATIO
SAMPLE'
MATE .
Based on
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y-YES
N'NO
Compound D
See Note rl
See Note
1
TEST
METHOD1
ta
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
TEST,
COST*
SAMPLE.
ALIQUOT*
•'
TABLE KEY
1. TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRD
C. HET
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. GC/MS
2. EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
3. TEST COST
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
4. SAMPLE ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
* Summation of S-2-5, S-2-6 and S-2-7.
1. Based on Level 2 leachate study of sample S-2-6.
N.D.
N.R.
Not Detected.
Not Required on Level
-------
Table 3-13. Level 2 Data on FBC Emission Samples (Continued)
o
C71
CATEGORY
77. PLATINUM
78. COPPER
79. SILVER
80. GOLD
81. ZINC
COMPOUND
Nickel Oxide, N10
(as N1)
Nickel Antlnonlde, '
NISb (as1 N1)
Nickel Arsenic Sul-
flde. NIAsS (as N1)
Nickel Carbonyl,
H1(CO)4
Elemental Platinum.
Pt
Copper
Cuprous, Cu+
Cupric, Cu+2
Copper Fluoride,
CuF2 (as Cu)
Copper Oxides, CuO,
CuzO (as Cu)
Copper Sulfate,
CuS04 (as Cu)
Copper Sylfldes, CuS,
CU2S (as Cu)
Copper Carbonate,
CuCOa (as Cu)
Malachite Mineral ,
CuC03-Cu(OH)2 (as Cu)
Chalcopyrfte
Mineral, CuFeS;
Silver, Ag
Silver Ion, Ag+
(»s Aa)
Silver Chloride,
AgCl (n Ag)
Silver Cyanide, AgCN-
(as Ag)
Silver Sulflde,
Ag2S (as Ag)
Elemental Gold
Zinc, Zn
Elemental Zinc, Zn
Z1nc Ion, Zn+2
Zinc Oxide, ZnO
(a» Zn)
HATE
AIR
iig/p|3 (ppm)
1.5 x 101
1.5 x 101
1.5 x 101
4.3 X 1C'
2.0 x 10 '" —
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 10*
2.0 x 102
2.0 X 102
2.0 x 102
2.0 X 102.
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 102
N
1.0 x 101
UO x 10l
1.0 X 10'
1.0 x I0l
1.0 x 101
N
4.0 x ID?
4.0 x 103
4.0 x 103
4.0 x 103
HATE
HATER
vg/i
HEALTH
2.3 X 102
2.3 x 102
2.3 X 102
6.5 x 10?
3.0 x 101
5.0 x Ifl3
5.0 x 103
S.O x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
N
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
N
2.5 x 10*
2.5 x Ifl4
2.5 x 104
2.5 x ID*
MATE
HATER
wg/i
ECOLOGY
1.0 x 101
1.0 x Ifll
1.0 x 101
1.0 x 101
(as N1)
N
5.0 x Ifll
5.0 'x Ifll
5.0 x Ifll
•5.0 x Ifll
5.0 x 10V
5.0 x 10'
5.0 x Ifll
5.0 x 10'
S.O x 10'
N
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
S.O x 10
N
1 .0 x 102
1.0 X 102
1.0 x IflZ
1 .0 x 102
HATE
LAND '
ug/g
HEALTH
4.5 x 10-1
4.5 X 10-1
4.5 x 10-1
1.0 x 10
6.0 x ID"2
1.0 x 101
1.0 x 10l
1.0 x Xfll
1.0 x Ifll
1.0 x Ifll
1.0 x Ifli '
1.0 x Ifll
1.0 x 10l
1.0 x 101
N
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 X 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 X 10-1
N
5.0 x 10'
5.0 X 10'
5.0 X 101
5.0 X 10l
HATE
LAND .
. ng/g •
ECOLOGY
2.0 x 10-2
2.0 x 10-2
2.0 x ID"-2
2.0 x ID'3
N
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 X 10-1
1.0 x ID'5
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
N
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 X 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
N
2.0 x 10-1
2.0 x 10-1
2.0 x 10-1
2.0 x 10-1
SABof
ug/i
N.R.
4.6x10
4.6x10
3.9X102
Present
N.R.
6.6xl03
Present
RATIO
SAMPLE
MATE
Does
Does
Based on
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y-YES
N-NO .
TEST
METHODl-
tot Exceed Hate
Not Exceed Mate
Exceeds Ma
Compound D
Exceeds Ma
lased on Compound Da
e
ta
e
ta
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
TEST,
COST3
SAMPLE,
ALIQUOT4
TABLE KEY:
TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRD
C. HET
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. 6C/MS
EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
TEST COST
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
SAMPLE ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
* Sumutlon of S-2-5, S-2-6 and S-2-7,
1 Baud on Lgyal 2 Itachtta study of umple S-2-6.
N.O. Not Detected.
N.R. Not Required on Level 2.
-------
Table 3-13. Level 2 Data on FBC Emission Samples (Continued)
CATEGORY
82. CADMIUM
83. MERCURY
84. CERIUM
85. URANIUM
86. THORIUM
COMPOUND
Zinc Sulfate, ZnS04
(as Zn)
Zinc Sulfide, ZnS
(as Zn)
Cadmium. Cd
Elemental Cadmium,
Cd
Cadmium Ion, Cd*2
Cadmium SuKide. CdS
(as Cd)
Cadmium Oxide, CdO
(as Cd)
Mercury, Hg
Elemental Mercury, Hg
Hercurous, Hgz**
Mercuric, Hg«
Mercuric Sulfide,
HgS
Mercuric Chloride,
HgCl2
Dysprosium, Dy
(Ry*3)
Cerium, Ce (Ce+3,
Ce+4. Ce203)
Praseodymium, Pr
(Pr+3)
Samarium, Sm (Sm+3)
Lanthanum, La
Neodymium, Nd (Nd+3)
Uranium, U (U+6)
Thorium, Th (Th+4)
HATE
AIR
ug/m3 (ppm)
4.0 x 103
4.0 jc lO3
V.O x 10'
1.0 x 101
1.0 x Ifll
1.0 x Ifll
1.0 x 101
5.0 x Ifll
5.0 x Ifll
5.0 x 101
S.O x 10l
5.0 x 10l
b.O X ifll
9.3 X lO3
3.7 X 10"
5.1 x 101
5.3 X 101
1.1 X 10b
N
9.0 X 10
4.2 X IflH
1 HATE
HATER
ug/1
HEALTH
2.5 x 10*
2.5 X.10*
5.0 x Ifll
_ 5.0 X IO1
5.0 X Ifll
5.0 X IO1
5.0 X IO1
1.0 X 10l
1.0 X 101
1.0 X 101
1.0 x 10l
1.0 X Ifll
1.0 x 10l
2.3 x 105
5.5 x 105
7.7 X 105
7.9 x 105
1.7 x IO6
N
6.0 X 104
6.3 x 103
MATE
MATER
ug/1
ECOLOGV
1.0 x IO2
1.0 x"102
1.0 X 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 X 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 10?
N
N
N
N
N
N
5.0 x 102
N
HATE
LAND
U9/9
HEALTH
5.0 x I0l
5.0 x 10*
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x ID"1
1.0 x IO-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
2.0 x 10-2
2.0 x 10-2
2.0 x 10-2
2.0 X 10-2
2.0 x 10-2
2.0 x 10-2
4.6 x 102
1.1 x lO3
1.5 x 103
T.6 x IO3
3.4 x IO3
N
1.2 x 102
1.3 x 10
HATE
LAND
ug/9
ECOLOGY
2.0 x 10-1
2.0 x 10-1
2.0 x 10-3
2.0 x IO-3
2.0 x 10-3
2.0 x IO-3
2.0 X IO-3
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
N
N
N
N
N
N
1.0 x 10
N
1 ppm)
t.g/1
Present
Present
5.0
9.3xl02
N.R.
N.D.
N.O.
RATIO
SAMPLE
HATE
Jased on
Based on
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y»YES
N-NO
lompound Da
Compound Da
TEST
METHOD1
ta
ta
Does not exceed mate
Exceeds Ma
e
TEST
EXPEC-,
TATIONS'
V
TEST,
COST3
SAMPLE,
ALIQUOT4
TABLE KEY:
TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRO
C. MET
CHEMICAL
0. ESCA
E. GC/MS
EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
TEST COST
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
SAMPLE ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
* Sunution of S-2-5, S-2-6 and S-2-7.
1. Based on Level 2 leachate study'of sample S-2-6.
N.D. Not Detected.
N.R. Not Required on Level 2.
-------
Table 3-14. Level 2 Leachate Studies of Overflow Bed Materials
Level 2 Leachate Studies of Overflow Bed Materials*
CATEGORY
27. LITHIUM
28. SODIUM
29. POTASSIUM
30. RUBIDIUM
31. CESIUM
32. BERYLLIUM
33. MAGNESIUM
34. CALCIUM
COMPOUND
Li
L1+
L1F (is LI)
LizCOa (as Li)
L1H
Na*
NaOH
KOH
K
K* (as K)
Rb+'
CS*'
Be
Be"
BeO (as Be)
BeO-Al203-S102
(as Be)
Magnesium, Mg
Magnesium Ion. Hg**
Magnesium Oxide.
MgO
Magnesium Fluoride.
HgF2 (as Mg)
Magnesium Sulfate,
MgS04 (as Hg)
Hagnesite, HgCOa
(as Hg)
Dolomite, MgC03-
CaC03 (as Mg)
Asbestos (as Mg)
Calciun Ion. Ca**
Calcium Fluoride.
CaF2
Calcium Carbonate.
CeCO,
Calcium Sulfate.
CaS04
Dolomite, MgCOs-
CaC03
HATE
AIR
ug/ra3 (ppn)
2.2 x 10
2.2 X 10
2.2 x 10
2.2 x 10
2.S x 10
5.3 X 10*
2.0 x 103
2.0 t 103
N
N
1.21 x 10s
8.19 x 104
2.0
2.0
2.0
6.0 x 103
6.01 x 10?
1.01 x 104
6.0 x 103
6.0 x 103
6.0 x 103
6.0 x 103
6.0 x 103
1.6 x 10*
N
N
N
N
NATE
WATER
/WT\
(HEALTH)
3.3 x 10*
3.3 X 102
3.3 x 102
3.3 X 102
3.8 x 102
8.0 X 105
3.0 x 104
3.0 x 10*
N
N
1.82 x 106
1.23 x 106
3.0 x 10
3.0 x 10
3.0 x 10
9.0 x 104
9.0 x 104
1.5 x 105
9.0 X 104
9.0 x 10«
9.0 X 104
9.0 x 104
9.0 X 104
2.4 x 105
N
N
K
N
NATE
MATER
U9/1
ECOLOGY
3.8 x 102
3.8 x 10*
3.8-x 102
3.8 x 102
N
N
K
H
H
2.3 x 104
N
N
5.5 x 10
5.5 x 10
5.5 x 10
8.7 x 104
8.7 x 104
1.0 x 10s
8.7 x 104
8.7 x 104
8.7 x ID4
8.7 x 104
8.7 x 104
1.6 x 104
N
N
N
N
KATE
LAND
K9/0
HEALTH
7.0 x 10-'
1.6 X 103
6.0 x 10
6.0 x 10
N
N
3.64 x 103
2.46 x 103
6.0 x 10-2
6.0 x lO-2
6.0 x 10"z
1.8 x 102
1.8 x 10?
3.0 x 102
1.8 x 102
1.8 x 102
1.8 x 102
1.8 x 102
1.8 x 102
4.0 x 102
N
N
N
N
HATE
LAND
U9/S
ECOLOGY
7.5 x ID"1
N
N
N
N
4.6 x 10
N
N
I.I x 10-'
1.1 x 10-1
1.1 x 10-'
1.7 x 10*
1.7 x 102
2.0 x 102
1.7 x 102
1.7 x 102
1.7 x 102
1.7 x 102
1.7 x 102
3.2 x 10
N
N
N
N
SAMPLE
»9/"r
5.8x10
1.7 x
7.2 x
N.O.
N.U.
N.D.
1.4 x
1.3 x 1
RATIO
W
t
a*
n3
!
O6
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
V-YES
N-NO
Exceeds
Does No
Does No
Does Not
L Exceeds
TEST .
NETHOO'
Mate
t Exceed 14
t Exceed t
Exceed Ma
Hate
TEST
EXPEC-.
TATIONS2
ate
late
te
TEST
COST3
SAMPLE,
ALIQUOT4
TABLE KEY:
. TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
8. XRD
C. WET
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. GC/MS
. EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
TEST COST
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
SAMPLE ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARR1SAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
'Only sample S-2-3, summation of acidic and basic. N.D. Not Detected
-------
Table 3-14. Level 2 Leachate Studies of Overflow Bed Materials (Continued)
Level 2 Leachate Studies of Overflow Bed Material*
CATEGORY
35. STRONTIUM
36. BARIUM
37. BORON
38. ALUMINUM
39. GALLIUM
COMPOUND
Strontium ,
Strontium Ion.
Sr*+ (as Sr)
Strontium Fluoride,
SrFz (as Sr)
Strontium Sulfate,
SrS04 (as Sr)
Barium, Ba
Barium Ion, Ba*+
(as Ba)
Barium Sulflde,
BaS (as Ba)
Barium Th1o-
carbonate, BaCS3
(as Ba)
Barium Fluoride,
BaF2 (as Ba)
Barium Carbonate,
BaC03 (as Ba)
Barium Sulfate,
BaS04 (as Ba)
Boron, B
Borate, B03 (as B)
Hetaborate, Bo?-
fas B)
Boron Oxide, 6203
Aluminum. Al
Aluminum Ion,
A1+++
Bauxite, Al?03*
3II20 (as Al)
Hydrated Aluminum
Silicate (as Al)
Alums [H Al (S04M-
(H20)x (as Al)
Aluminum Oxide,
A1203
Gallium, Ga
Elemental Species,
Ga
Gallous, Ga*1
(asGa)
MATE
AIR
ug/m3 (ppm)
3.1 X 103
3.1 x 103
3.1 x 103
3.1 x 103
5.0 x 102
S.O x 102
5.0 X 102
5.0 x 10*
5.0 x 102
5.0 X 102
5.0 x 102
3.1 X 103
3.1 x 103
3.1 x 103
1.0 x 104
5.2 x 103
5.2 x 103
5.2 x 103
5.2 x 103
5.2 x 103
1.0 x 104
5.0 x 10J
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
WTE
4.6 x 104
4.6 x 104
4.6 x 104
4.6 x 104
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 X 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
4.7 X 104
4.7 X 104
4.7 x 104
1.5 x 105
8.0 x 10'
8.0 x 104
8.0 x 104
8.0 x 104
8.0 x 104
1.5 x 10s
7.4 x 10'
7.4 x 104
7.4 x 104
HATE
HATER
ug/1 •
ECOLOGY
N
N
N
N
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
8.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 10'
2.5 x 104
2.5 x 10*
N
1.0 x 103
1.0 x 103
1.0 x 103
1.0 x 103
1.0 x 103
N
N
N
N
MATE
LAND
U9/3
HEAL IK
9.2 x 10
9.2 x .10
9.2 x 10
9.2 x 10
1.0 X 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
9.3 x 10
9.3 x 10
9.3 x 10
3.0 x 102
1.6 x 10Z
1.6 x 102
1.6 x 102
1.6 x 102
1.6 x 102
3.0 x 102
1.5 x 10Z
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
HATE
LAND
ug/g
ECOLOGV
N
N
N
N
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
N
2.01
N
2.0
2.0
2.0
N
N
N
N
SAMPLE
yg/m3
(PPm)
Sals
3.9 x 1
N.D.
3.1 x 1(
7.4 x 1
N.O.
RATIO
SAMPLE
"MATT
)2 Doe
4 Doe
)3 Do<
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y-VES
N-HO
s Not Exce
Not Exce
s Not Exce
TEST ,
METHOD1
ed Mate
d Mate
ed Mate
TEST
EXPEC-,
TATIONS2
TEST
COST3
SAMPLE.
ALIQUOT4
TABLE KEY:
1. TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRD
C. HET
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. GC/HS
2. EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
4. SAMPLE ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
*0nly sample S-2-3, summation of acidic and basic. N.D. Not Detected
-------
Table 3-14. Level 2 Leachate Studies of Overflow Bed Materials (Continued)
o
vo
Level 2 Leachate Studies of Overflow Bed Material*
'Only sample S-2-3, summation of addle and basic. N.O. Not Detected
CATEGORY
40. INDIUM
41. THALLIUM
4Z. CARBON
43. SILICON
44. GERMANIUM
COMPOUND
Gallic. 6a*3
(as 6a)
Gallium Sesqul-
oxlde, GaoO-i
(as 6a)
Indium, In
Indium Ion, In*-*
Thallium, T1
Thallous, Tl*'
Thalllc, Tl*3
Elemental Carbon
Coal
Carbide, C-
Carbonate, C03"2
Bicarbonate, HC03
Carbony! , CO*
Carbon Monoxide
Carbon Dioxide
Sllane, Si Ha
Silicon, S1
OrthoslHcate,
S104-2
MetaslHcate.
S103-2
Silicon Dioxide,
S102
Silicon Dlsulflde,
S1S2
Silicon Carbide, SIC
Geraanlun, Ge
Germanous, Ge*2
(as Ge)
Germanic, Ge+<
(as Ge)
Germanous Sulflde,
GeS (as Co)
Germanic Sulflce.
GeS2 (as Ge)
Germane, GeH4
(as Go)
Germanium Oxide,
GeOz (a< Ge)
MATE
AIR
B9/IH3 (pom)
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
.0 x 102
.0 x 10*
.0 x IO2
.0 x 102
,0 x 10*
3.5 x 103
N
N
H
n
N
4.0 x IO3 (35)
9.0 x IO6 (5000)
7.0 x 102
1.0 x 10'
K
N
1.0 x 10'
N
1.0 x 104
5.6 x 102
5.6 x 102
5.6 > IO2
5.6 x ID2
5.6 x IO2
5.6 x !02
5.6 x 102
HATE
WATJR
(JIEALTH)
7.4 x 104
7.4 x 10'
1.5 x 103
1.5 x 103
1.5 x 103
1.5 x 103
1.5 x 103
5.3 x 104
N
H
N
N
N
6.0 x 10s
II
1.1 x 104
1.5 x 105
N
N
1.5 x 105
N
1.5 x 105
8.4 x 103
a. 4 x io3
0.4 x IO3
6.4 x ID3
8.4 x IO3
8.4 x IO3
8.4 < Id3
MATE
WATER
u9/l
ECOLOGY
N
N
N
N
H
H
N
N
N
H
N
N
N
6.0 « 10
H
14
N
N
N
N
N
n
N
II
N
II
H
N
N
MATE
LAND
U9./-3
HEALTTl
1.5 x IO2
1.5 x 10?
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
1.6 x IO2
N
N
H
H
«
II/A
N/A
N
3.0 x IO2
H
H
3.0 x IO2
N
3.0 x 102
1.7 x 10
1.7 x 10
1.7 x 10
1.7 x 10
1.7 . 10
1.7 x 10
1.7 x 10
KATE
LAND
»9/9
ECOLOGY
N
N
N
N
N
N
H
N
N
N
N
N
N
N/A
N/A
2.1 x 10
N
n
N
H
N
N
N
II
N
H
N
N
N
SAMPLE
N.D.
N.D.
N.O.
2.6 x 1
N.O.
RATIO
SAMPLE
TRTT
)5
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y-YES
N-NO
ExC
TEST ,
METHOD1
•eds Hate
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
TEST
COST3
SAMPLE,
ALIOUOT*
TABLE KEY:
1. TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
'2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
6. XRO
C. WET
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. GC/HS
2. EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
I. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
3. TEST COST
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
4. SAMPLE
ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RCSAHPLE
-------
Table 3-14. Level 2 Leachate Studies of Overflow Bed Materials (Continued)
Level 2 Leachate Studies of Overflow Bed Material*
CAIECOKY
45. 11*
46. LEAD
47. MTRDGEH
OMPOUHD
Tin Oxide, SnOz
Tin, So
StanmXS. Sn*2
Stannic. Sn«4
Lead. Pb
: Elnenul iLead.Pb
FludxHS. Pb«
PluAlc. Pb*4
(as Fl>)
Lead Monoxide,
PM) (as Pb)
Lead Sulfate.
PbS04 (as Pb)
Lead Sulfate,
Pt» (as Pb)
Lead Carbonate,
PbCOa (as Pb)
Lead Phosphate.
Pb3(P04)2 (as Pb)
Lead Chraate.
PbCr04 (as Pb)
' Lead Nolybdate.
PbtbOi (as Pb)
Lead-Arsenate,
PftWsOi (as Pb)
Hydrazlne
Alkali Cyanides.
NaCH. UN
MMC Add, HID}
nitrogen Oxides,
3M*
Hydrogen Qranide,
HCN
Aimia, »3
Cyanogen. Czlfe
Mtride. R-
mtrate, Nfc-
Mtrlte. Nur
AMaolui. NKt*
NATE
AIR
vg/W5 (pp«)
1.0 x 10*
H
n
N
1.5 x 10Z
1.5 x 102
1.5 xlc*
1.5 X 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 X 102
1.5 X 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 X 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x ID2
1.5 x 10* (.1)
5.0 X ID3
5.0 x 103
9.0 x Id3
1.1 x 10* (10)
1.8 x 10* (25)
2.0 x 10*
N
N
N
».. „.-•
MTE
1.5 x 105
N
N
N
2.5 x ID2
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x ID2
2.5 X 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 X 102
2.5 I 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.3
5.0 X 102
7.5 x 104
1.4 x IflS
5.0 x 102
2.5 x 103
1.0 x 103
N
H
N
N
WTE
HATER
U9/1
ECOLOGY
N
N
N
n
5.0 x 10
5.0 X 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 X 10
5.0 I 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 X 10
5.0 X 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
N
2.5 x 10
4.5 x 102
N
2.5 x 10
5.0 x 10
2.5 x 10
II
K
N
N
IWTE
LAND
U9/9
HEALTH
3.0
N
N
N
5.0 X 10-1
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 X 10-1
5.0 x lO-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 X 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
4.5
1.0
1.5 x 103
H/A
1.0
5.0
.2.0
N
N
N
N
IWTE
LAW)
U9/9
ECOLOGY
1.0 10-'
i.o 10-1
1.0 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-:
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 I «H
1.0 x ID"1
l.Ox 10-1
II
5.0 X 10-2
9.0 x 10-1
K/A
5.0 x lO"2
1.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-2
N
N
N
II
§
N.D.
2.3 x 1
N.O.
RATIO
SAMPLE
HtTE
f
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y-YES
N-m
DC
TEST
NETHOO1
res Nat Ex
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
ceed Hate
TEST
COST3
SAMPLE.
ALIQUOT4
TABLE KEY:
. TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. i
A. AAS
B. XRD
C. WET
CHEMICAL
0. ESCA
E. GC/HS
. EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
. TEST COST
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
. SAMPLE ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
•Only sanple S-2-3, suaation of acidic and basic. N.O. Not Detected
-------
Table 3-14. Level 2 Leachate Studies of Overflow Bed Materials (Continued)
Level 2 Le
CATEGORY
48. PHOSPHORUS
49. ARSENIC
SO. ANTIMONY
51. BISHUTH
COMPOUND
Phosphorus f P
Phosphite, POi"3
(as P)
fllphosphate,
H2P04- (as P)
Phosphtne. PHa
Phosphoric Acid,
H3P04
Phosphorus ,
PenUsulflde
Phosphate, PO^3
Arsenic, As
Metallic Arsenic
Arsenous, As4"3
Arsenic, As*5
Arsenate, AsOa"3
(as As)
Arstnlte, AsOs"3
(as As)
Arsenide, As"3
(as As)
Arslne, AsH.3
Arsenic Trloxlde,
AsjO,
Antimony Trl-
oxlde, Sb20,
Antimony Metal , Sb
Antlmonous.
(stlbnous) Sb*3
Antlmnfc (stlbnlc)
Sb*5
Stlblne, SbH3
(as Sb)
Antlmonous Sul-
flde, Sb2$3
Antimony, Sb
Bismuth, B1
Elemntal BIs-
nuth, 81
Blsnithoui, Bl»3
(M 81)
Bluuthtc, Bl»6
(as SI)
achate Studies of
MATE
AIR
lig/m3 (ppm)
1.0 X 102
1.0 X 102
1.0 X 102
4.0 x 102 (0.3)
1.0 x-103
1.0 x 103
N
2.0 x 10
2.0 x 10
2.0 x 10
2.0 X 10
2.0 x 10
2.0 x 10
2.0 x 10
2.0 x 10
2.0 x 10
5.0 x ID'
5.0 x 10Z
5.0 x 10*
5.0 x Id2
5.0 x 102
5.0 x I02
5.0 x 102
4.1 x lO2
4.1 X ID2
4.1 x 102
4.1 X 102
Overflow Bee
MATE
HATER
1.5 x 104
1.5 X 10*
1.5 x 10<
6.0 X 103
1.5 x 104
1.5 x ID4
N
2.5 x 10?
2.5 x 102
2.S x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
7.5 x 102
7.5 X 10J
7.5 X 103
7.5 x 103
7.5 x 103
7,5 x 103
7.5 x 103
6.1 x 103
6.1 x 103
6.1 x 103
6.1 X 103
M?t*Hfll*
MATE
HATER
ug/l
ECOLOGY
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x lO'l
N
4.5 x 103
N
K
5.0 X 101
5.0 X 101
5.0 x 101
5.0 x 101
5.0 x 10!
5.0 x 101
5.0 x 10'
5.0 x 101
5.0 x 101
2.0 x 102
(as Sb)
2.0 x 10Z
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 102
2.0 X 102
N
N
N
N
MATE
LAND
H^fll
3.0 x 10
3.0 x 10
3.0 x 10
N/A
3.0 x 10
3.0 x 10
N
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
1.5 x 10
1.5 x 10'
1.5 x I0l
1.5 x 10'
1.5 x 10'
1.5 x 101
1.5 x Ifll
1.2 x 101
1.2 x 10'
1.2 x 10'
1.2 x 10<
MATE
LAND
U9/9
ECOLOGY
1.0 x 10-3
1.0 x 10-3
1.0 x 10"3
N/A
9.0
N
N
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-'
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
4.0 x 10-!
(as Sb)
4.0 x 10-1
4.0 x 10-1
4.0 x 10-1
4.0 X 10-1
4.0 x 10-1
4.0 x 10-1
N
N
N
N
SAMPLE
ug/m3
£57J)
N.D.
N.D.
N.O.
N.D.
RATIO
SAMPLE
MATE
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y-YES
N«NO
TEST
METHOD!
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
TEST
COST3
SAMPLED
ALIQUOT4
TABLE KEY:
. TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRD
C. HET
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. GS/MS
, EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
TEST COST
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
SAMPLE ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
•Only simple S-2-3, suitnutlon of acldtc and basic, N.D. Not Detected
-------
Table 3-14. Level 2 Leachate Studies of Overflow Bed Materials (Continued)
Level 2 Leachate Studies of Overflow Bed Material*
CATEGORY
52. OXYGEN
53. SULFUR
54. SELENIUM
55. TELLURIUM
56. FLUORIDE
COMPOUND
Ozone, 03
Rhocfclc Sulfur. %
Sulflde. S-Z
Sul fate. S04'2
Sulflte. $03-2
TMocyanate, SOT
Sulfur Trloxlde,
S03
Sulfurlc Actd.
H2S04
Sulfur Dioxides,
S02
Hydrogen Sulftde.
HJS
Carbon Dlsulflde.
CS2
Carbonyl Sulflde,
COS
Selenlin, Se
Elemental Selenlin.
Se
Selenide, Se-2
Selenltes, SeO*-2
(as Se) ^
Selenates, Se04'z
(as Se)
Hydrogen Selenide,
H2Se
Carbon 01selen1de,
CSB2 (as Se)
Selenium Dioxide,
SeOj (as Se)
Tellurium. Te
Tellurtde, Te'2
Tellurlte. TeD3-2
(as Te)
Tellurate. Te04
(as Te)
Fluoride Ion, r
Hydrogen Fluoride,
HATE
AIR
vg/u> (pp.)
2.0 x 10* (0.1)
N
N
N
N
N
N
1.0 X 103
1.3 X 10«
1.5 X 104 (10)
6.0 X 104 (20)
4.4 x 10s
2.0 X ID2
2.0 x 102
2.0 X ID2
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 10* (.05)
2.0 x ID2
2.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
1.0 X 102
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 10*
2.5 x 103
2.0 x 103
HATE
N/A
N
N
N
N
H
N
1.5 x 104
2.0 x 10s
2.3 X 104
9.0 x 105
N/A
5.0 x Id1
5.0 x IQl
5.0 x 10'
5.0 X 101
5.0 X 101
5.0 x 101
(as Se)
5.0 x 10'
5.0 x 101
1.5 x 103
1.5 X 103
1.5 x 103
1.5 x 103
3.8 x 104
3.0 x 104
HATE
HATER
ug/l
ECOLOGY
N/A
N
H
N
N
H
N
4.5 x 102
N
1.0 x 10'
1.0 x 104
N/A
2.5 x 10'
2.5 x 101
2.5 X 101
2.5 x 10'
2.5 X 10'
2.5 x 10'
(as Se)
2.5 x 10'
2.5 X 101
N
N
N
N
N
N
MATE
LAND
HEALTH
N/A
N
H
N
N
• N
H
3.0 X 10'
4.0 x 102
N/A
N/A
N/A
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 X 10-1
1.0 x 10"1
1.0 X lO'1
1.0 X 10-1
1.0 X 10-1
(as Se)
1.0 X 10-'
1.0 x 10-1
3.0 x 10
3.0 x 10
3.0 X 10
3.0 x 10
7.5 x 101
N/A
HATE
LAND
ECOLOGY
H/A
N
N
N
N
N
N
9.0 x 102
N
H/A
N/A
N/A
5.0 x 10-2
5.0 x ID'2
5.0 x ID"2
5.0 x 10-2
5.0 x ID"2
5.0 x 10-2
(as Se)
5.0 x lO-2
5.0 x 10-2
N
N
N
N
N
N/
SAMPLE
ug/m3
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
RATIO
SAMPLE
HATE
,
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y-YES
N-HO
s
•
TEST .
METHOD1
TEST
EXPEC-,
TATIOHS2
TEST,
COST3
SAMPLE.
ALIQUOT4
TABLE KEY:
. TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRD
C. WET
CHEMICAL
0. ESCA
E. 6S/HS
. EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
. TEST COST
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
. SAMPLE ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAHPLE
*0nly sample S-2-3, summation of acidic and basic. N.D. Not Detected
-------
Table 3-14. Level 2 Leachate Studies of Overflow Bed Materials (Continued)
Level 2 Leachate Studies of Overflow Bed Material*
CATEGORY
57. CHLORINE
58. BROMINE
59. IODINE
60. SCANDIUM
61. YTTRIUM
62. TITANIUM
63. ZIRCONIUM
64. HAFNIUM
65. VANADIUM
COMPOUND
Chloride Ion, Cr
Hypochlorlte,
cio-
ChloHte, C102-
Chl orate, CIO]
Chlorine Dioxide,
C102
Carbonyl Chlorfde
(phosgene),
COC12
Hydrogen Chloride,
HC1
Bromide Ion, Br~
Broirtde Ion, Br-
Hydrogen Bromide,
Iodide Ion, I-
Scandlun, Sc
Scandium Ion. Sc*3
Yttrlun Ion, Y*3
Tltantun, T1
THanous, T1*3
(as Tt)
Titanic, T1+«
(as T1)
Titanium Dioxide,
T10j (as T1)
Zirconium Ion,
Zr+i
Zirconium Dioxide,
ZrOz (as Zr)
Hafnium Ion, Hf*4
Vanadlin, V
Elemental
Vanadlun, V
Vanadlc, V*3 (as V)
Vanadyl, VO*2
(a> V)
Orthovanadate,
V04-* (as V)
MATE
JIR
. (PPn)
N
N
N
N
N
4.0 x_102
7.0 X 103
N
N
1.0 x 104
N
5.3 x 104
5.3 x 1C4
1.0 x 103
6.0 x 103
6.0 X 103
6.0 x 103
6.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 102
5.0 X 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 X 102
6.0 x 102
HATE
1.3 x 106
N
N
N
N
6.0 x Id3
1.1 x 10*
N
N
1.5 x 10s
N
8.0 x 10
8.0 x 10
1.5 x 10*
9.0 x 10*
9.0 X 104
9.0 x 10*
9.0 x 10*
7.5 x 10*
7.5 x 104
7.5 x 10*
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 X 103
HATE'
HATER
ug/1
ECOLOGY
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
8.2 x 102
(as
Tt[S002>
8.2 x 102
8.2 x 102
8.2 x 102
N
N
N
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 10*
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
HATE
UNO
ug/g
HEALTH
2.6 x 103
N
N
N
N
N/A
N/A
N
N
N/A
N
1.6 x 10-2
1.6 x 10'2
3.0 x 101
l.S x 102
1.8 x 1C2
1.8 x 102
1.8 x 1C2
1.5 x 101
1.5 x 10'
1.5 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
HATE
LAND
ug/g
ECOLOGY
N
N
N
N
N
N/A
N/A
N
N
N/A
N
N
N
N
1.6 x 10
1.6 x 10
1.6 x 10
1.6 x 10
N
N
N
3.0 x 10"1
3.0 x 10-'
3.0 x 10-1
3.0 x 10-'
3.0 x 10-'
SAMPLE
ug/m3
(£jri.
N.D.
N.O.
N.O.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
RATIO
SAMPLE
HATE
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y-YES
H=NO
TEST
METHOD1
TEST
EXPEC-,
TATIONS2
TEST
COST3
SAMPLE
ALIQUOT4
TABLE KEY:
. TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRD
C. MET
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
t. GC/MS
. EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
TEST COST
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
SAMPLE ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
•Only sample S-2-3, suimatlon of acidic and basic. N.D. Not Detected.
-------
Table 3-14. Level 2 Leachate Studies of Overflow Bed Materials (Continued)
Level 2 Leachate Studies of Overflow Bed Material*
CATE60RY
66. NIOBIUM
67. TAKTALUM
68. CHDOHIUH
COMPOUND
Hetavanadate, V0a-
(as V)
Vanadyltc, VO*3
(as V)
Vanadlun Monoxide,
VO (as v)
Vanadlun THoxIde,
VJ03 (as V)
Vanadium Tetra-
oxlde. V204, (as V)
Vanadium Pent-
oxide. V205 (as V)
Vanadlun Carbide,
VC (as V)
Vanadium Hono-
sulflde, VS (as V)
Vanadlun Nitride,
VN (as V)
Vanadyl Sulfate,
VOS04-5H2P (as V)
Nlobus, Kb*3
Nloblc, Kb*5
Niobium Oxides,
NbO, Nb,0s (as Kb)
Tantalum Ion,
Ta*5
Chronlun, Cr
Chroonus, Cr*2
(as Cr)
Chromic, Cr*3
(as Cr)
Chromates, Crta"2
(as Cr) '
Qlromttes. CrzOf2
(as Cr)
Dlchroutes,
Cr207:r(as Cr)
Oircxilum Cartonyl,
Cr(CO)6 (as Cr)
Chromium Sulflde,
CrzSs
Chromic Oxide,
CrjOs (as Cr)
Chromlte Mineral,
F«0 CrjOs (as Cr)
HATE
AIR
pg/m3 (ppm)
S.O x 102
5.0 x 102
S.O x I02
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 102
5.0 x 10?
S.O x 102
2.2 x 10*
2.2 x 10*
2.2 x 104
S.O x 103
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
MATE
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 » 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.6 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 x 103
2.5 x I03
3.3 x 105
3.3 x 105
3.3 x 103
7.5 x 10*
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
MATE
HATER
ug/1
ECOLOGY
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x 102
1.5 x Id2
1.5 x 102
1 .5 x 102
1.5 x 102
l.S x 102
N
N
' H
N
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x ID2
HATE
LAND
ug/q
HEALTH
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 n 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
S.O x 10
6.5 x 102
6.5 x 102
6.5 x I02
1.5 x 102
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x 10"'
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x ID'1
5.0 x 10-1
HATE
LAND
tA
3.0 « 10-1
3.0 x 10-'
3.0 x 10-1
3.0 x 10-1
3.0 x 10-1
3.0 x 10-1
3.0 x 10-'
3.0 x 10-'
3.0 x 10-1
3.0 x 10-1
N
N
N
N
5.0 x 10"'
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x 10"'
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
S.O x 10-1
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-'
S.O x 10-1
SAMPLE
ua/m3
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
RATIO
SAMPLE
HATE
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y-YES
N-NO
TEST
HETHODl
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
TEST
COST3
SAMPLE.
ALIQUOT4
TABLE KEY
TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRO
C. WET
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. GC/MS
. EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
TEST COST
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
SAMPLE ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RCSAHPLE
*0nly sample S-2-3, summation of acidic and basic. N.O. Not Detected
-------
Table 3-14. Level 2 Leachate Studies of Overflow Bed Materials (Continued)
Level 2 Leachate Studies of Overflow Bed Material*
CATEGORY
0. NOLY8DEH
JO. TUNGSTEN
71. NWCANESE
72. IRON
COMPOUND
Hyplrous Chroalui
Phosphate, CrPQ4
DtzO (as Cr)
Iron ChrOBate,
FeCrO4 (is Cr)
Kriybdenu*. No
H>lybdem»s. Ho«
Molrbdlc, Bo*3
Hjlrtxtlte, IttJT2
(as No)
IfclyMeu- Sulflde.
NoS2 (as No)
Nolybdenui Tr1 oxide.
NoOj (as MJ)
Tungsten. V
Tungsten Ions. K»2.
HUTU'S. H*«, M04-2
Tungsten Olsulffde,
MS2(asll)
Uolfrarite Ntneral,
FeUQ4-NnU04 (as U)
Hanganese. Hn
Nanganous. Nn*2
Nanganlc, Mn*3
Permanganate. Nn04~
(as Hi)
Htnganous Oxide.
NnO (as Nn)
Nanganese Dioxide.
Mrtfe (as Nn)
Nanganese Carbonate.
fcCO3 (as Nn)
Minganous Sulfate,
NnSOa (as Nn)
Nanganese Sulflde,
MiS2 (as Mi)
Iron Carbonyls.
Fe(CO)s. Fe(CO)g,
FE3(CO)l2
Ferrous. Fe*2
Ferric. Fe»3
Ferrous Oxide, FeO
mn
»g/«3 (pp.)
1.0 X 10
1.0 x 10 •
S.O x 103
5.0 x 103
S.O JC-103
S.O * 103
S.O x 103
S.O x 103
1.0 x 10?
N
1.0 x 103
1.0 x 103
S.O x 103
S.O x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 i 103
7.0 x 102
IX) x 103
1.0 x 103
S.O x 103
MTE
/Hg/iN
(imju/
2.S I 102
2.5 x 10?
7.5 x 10*
7.5 x 10*
7.5 x 10*
7.5 x 10*
7.5 x 10*
7.5 x 10«
1.5 x 104
N
1.5 x 10*
1.5 x 104
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 10*
2.5 x ID?
2.5 x 102
2.5 x ID2
2.5 x 10*
1.1 x 10<
l.S x 103
1.5 x ID3
7.5 x 1(H
NATE
WATER
P9/1
ECOLOGY
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
7.0 x 103
7.0 x 103
7.0 x 1C3
7.0 x 103
7.0 x 103
7.0 x 103
K
K
H
H
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 10*
1.0 x 10?
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
1.0 x lO2
1.0 x 102
N
2.5 x ID2
2.5 * 102
H
WTE
LAND
HEALTH
5.0 x 10"1
S.O x 10-1
1.5 x 102
1.5 x ID?
1.5 x ID2
1.5 x ID2
1.5 x ID2
1.5 x 102
3.0 x 101
N
3.0 x 101
3.0 x 101
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
S.O x 10-'
5.0 x 10-'
S.O x 10-'
S.O x 10-1
5.0 K 10-1
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x 10-'
2.1 x 101
3.0 x 10
3.0 > 10
1.5 » 102 .
NATE
LAUD
ug/g
ECOLOGY
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x 10-1
1.4 > Ifll
1.4 x 101
1.4 x 101
1.4 x 101
1.4 x 101
1.4 x ID'
H
n
N
n
2.0 x 10-'
2.0 x 10-1
2.0 x 10-'
2.0 x 10-1
2.0 x 10-'
2.0 x 10-'
2.0 x 10-'
2.0 x 10-1
2.0 x 10-'
N
s.o x.vr1
5.0 » 10-'
N
SAMPLE
"SimP
6.0 x K
N.D.
N.D.
3.0 x 1
RATIO
SAMPLE
HATE
I3
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
T-TES
K-m
TEST
METHOD'
Does Not Exceed
DC
es Not Ex
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
Hate
coed Hate
TEST
COST3
SAMPLE.
ALIQUOT'
TABLE KEY:
TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XKD
C. MET
CHENICAL
D. ESCA
E. GC/HS
. EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
. TEST COST
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
. SAMPLE ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAH>LE
•Only sample S-2-3, surnnatlon of acidic and basic. N.D. Not Detected
-------
Table 3-14. Level 2 Leachate Studies of Overflow Bed Materials (Continued)
CATEGORY
13. RUTHENIUM
74. COBALT
75. RHODIUM
76. NICKEL
COMPOUND
Magnetite,
FeO'Fe203
Ferrocyanlde,
Fe(CN)6-<
Ferrl cyanide,
Fe(CN)«-3
Ferric Oxide, fe^s
Ferric Hydroxide
(hydra tod)
FC203-XH20
Iron Sulfldes, Fei,
Fe2S3
Pyrlte, FeS2
Potassium Iron Sili-
cate, KFeS1?06
Ruthenium Ion, Ru+3
Cobalt, Co
Cobaltous, Co*2
Cobaltlc. Co*3
Cobaltous Carbonate,
hydra ted, CoC03-H20
(as Co)
Cobalt Carbide,
C03C (as Co)
Cobalt Sulfldes, CoS,
CojSa (as Co)
Cobalt Arsenic
Sulflde, CoAsS
(as Co)
Cobalt Arsenide,
CoAsz (as Co)
Cobalt Carbonyl,
Co(CO)4 (as Co)
Cobaltous Oxide,
CoO (as Co)
Cobaltous Hydroxide,
Co(OH)2 (as Co)
Rhodium Ion, Rh+3
Nlckelous, N1*2
Nlckellc, N1*3
Nlckelous Sulflde,
N1S (as N1)
Nickel Arsenide,
N1As (as N1)
— — — Level z
MATE
AIR
gg/m3 (ppm)
9.3 x 103
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
5.0 x 10'
5.0 x 10'
5.0 x 10'
5.0 x 10'
5.0 x 10'
5.0 x 101
5.0 x 101
5.0 x 10'
5.0 x 101
5.0 x 10'
5.0 x 10'
1.0 X 10
1.5 X 10'
1.5 X 101
1.5 x 101
1.5 X 10'
Leachate St
MATE
6.2 x 103
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
7.5 x 102
7.5 x 102
7.5 x 102
7.5 x 10*
7.5 x 102
7.5 x 102
7.5 x 102
7.5 x 102
7.5 x 102
7.5 x 10*
7.5 x 102
1.5 x 10'
2.3 x 102
2.3 x 102
2.3 x 102
2.3 x 102
udles of Ovc
MATE
WATER
u 9/1
ECOLOGY
N
N
N
N
N
N
>1.0 x 10b
N
II
2.5 X 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 X 102
2.5 X 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
N
1.0 x 10'
1.0 x ID'
1.0 x 10'
1.0 x 10'
rflow Bed M
MATE
LAND
HEALTH
3.8 x 10'
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
1.5 x 10
1.5 x 10
1.5 x 10
1.5 x 10
1.5 x 10
1.5 x 10
1.5 x 10
1.5 x 10
1.5 x 10
1.5 x 10
1.5 x 10
3.0 x 10-2
4.5 x 10-'
4.5 x 10-'
4.5 x lO'1
4.5 x 10-'
iterlal*
MATE
LAND
ECOLOGY
N
N
N
N
N
N
2.0 x 102
N
N
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x 10-'
N
2.0 x 10-2
2.0 x ID"2
2.0 x 10-2
2.0 x 10-2
SAMPLE
U9/0|3
N.D.
N.D.
N.O.
1.7 x
RATIO
w
a'
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y-YES
N.NO
TEST
METHOO'
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
Does Not Exceed Hate
TEST.
COST3
SAMPLE
ALIQUOT4
TABLE KEY
1. TEST METHOO
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRD
C. WET
CHEMICAL
0. ESCA
E. GC/MS
2. EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
3. TEST COST
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
4. SAMPLE ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
•Only sample, S-2-3, summation of acidic and basic. N.D. Not Detected
-------
Table 3-14. Level 2 Leachate Studies of Overflow Bed Materials (Continued)
CATEGORY
77. PLATINUM
78. COPPER
79. SILVER
80. GOLD
81. ZINC
COMPOUND
Nickel Oxide, NfO
(as HI)
Nickel Antfmonlde,
NISb (as NO
Nickel Arsenic Sul-
fide. NfAsS (as N1)
Nickel Carbonyl,
IH(CO)4
Elemental Platinum*
Pt
Copper
Cuprous, Cu*
Cuprlc, Cu*2
Copper Fluoride,
CuFj (as Cu)
Copper Oxides, CuO,
CuzO (as Cu)
Copper Sulfate,
CuSO* (as Cu)
Copper Sulfldes, CuS,
Cu2S (is Cu)
Copper Carbonate,
CuCOs (as Cu)
Malachite Mineral,
CuC03-Cu(OHJ2 (as Cu)
ChalcopyrUe
Mineral, CuFeS2
Silver, Ag
Silver Ion, Ag*
(as Ag)
Silver Chloride,
AgCl (as Ag)
Silver Cyanide, AgCN
(as Ag)
Silver Sulflde,
Ag?S (as Ag)
Elemental Gold
Zinc, Zn
Elemental Zinc, Zn
Z1nc Ion, Zn»2
Zinc Oxide, ZnO
(as Zn)
Level 2 Le'achatf
MATE
AIR
pg/m3 (ppm)
1.5 x 10'
1.5 x 10'
1.5 x 101
4.3 X 10' __
2.0 x 10
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 102
2.0 x tO2
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 102
2.0 x 102
II
1.0 x 101
1.0 x 10'
1.0 x 101
1.0 x 101
1.0 x 10'
N
4.0 x 103
4.0 x 103
4.0 x 103
4.0 x 103
Studies of
MUTE
/uS/M
(HEALTH/1
2.3 x 102
2.3 x 102
2.3 x 102
6.5 x 102
3.0 x 101
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x lO3
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
N
2.5 x lO2
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 1C2
2.5 x 102
II
2.5 x 10*
2.5 x 10*
2.5 x 10*
2.5 x 10*
Overflow Be
KATE
WATER
ug/1
ECOLOGY
1.0 x 101
1.0 x 10'
1.0 x 101
1.0 x 101
(as N1)
N
5.0 x I0l
5.0 x 10'
5.0 x IQl
5.0 x 10'
5.0 x 10'
5.0 x 10'
5.0 x lol
5.0 x 10'
5.0 x lol
N
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 x 10
5.0 K 10
5.0 x 10
N
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
d Material*
MATE
LAND
"S/9
HEALTH
4.5 x 10-'
4.5 x 10-1
4.5 x 10-'
1.0 x 10
6.0 x ID'2
1.0 x 10'
1.0 x 10'
1.0 x 10'
1.0 x 10'
1.0 x 10'
1.0 x 10'
1.0 x I0l
1.0 x 10'
1.0 x 10'
N
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x 10-'
5.0 x 10-'
N
5.0 x 10'
5.0 K 101
5.0 x 101
5.0 x 101
NATE
LAND
ug/g
ECOLOGY
2.0 x 10-2
2.0 x 10-2
2.0 x ID'2
2.0 x 10-3
N
1.0 x 10-'
1.0 x 10-'
1.0 x 10-'
1.0 x 10-'
1.0 x lO-5
1.0 x 10-'
1.0 x 10-'
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
H
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-'
1.0 x 10-'
1.0 x 10-1
H
2.0 K 10-1
2.0 x 10-1
2.0 x 10-1
2.0 x 10-'
SAMPLE
ug/m3
N.D.
1.4 x K
N.D.
N.D.
2.2 x 1
RATIO
SAMPLE
MATE
O2
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y-YES
K-NO
[
TEST ,
METHOD'
Does No
oes Not E
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
t Exceed H
xceed Mat
TEST
COST3
ate
SAMPLE,
ALIQUOT*
TABLE KEY:
TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRO
C. HET
CHEHICAL
D. ESCA
E. GC/KS
EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
TEST COST
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3. HIGH
SAMPLE ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAMPLE
"Only sample S-2-3, summation of acidic and basic. N.D. Not Detected
-------
Table 3-14. Level 2 Leachate Studies of Overflow Bed Materials (Continued)
Level 2 Leachate Studies of Overflow Bed Material*
CD
CATEGORY
82. CADMIUM
83. MERCURY
84. CERIUM
85. UMHW
86. THORIUM
COMPOUND
Ztnc Sulfate. ZnSO*
(as Zn)
Zinc Sulflde. ZnS
(asZn)
CadiiuB, Cd
Elemental CaikriuB,
Cd
CadMM Ion. Cd*
Cadniun Sulflde. CdS
(as Cd)
Cadmlun Oxide. CdO
(as Cd)
Mercury. HS
Eleoental Mercury. Hg
Nercurous. Hgj**
Mercuric. Hg*+
Mercuric Sulflde,
HoS
Mercuric Chloride.
HgClz
w- *
wwr"-'
PraseodyniuB. Pr
(iv«r
Saurian, So (SB»3)
Lanthamn, La
MeodyaiuB, Nd (Nd*3)
Uraniiii. U (U**)
Thorium, Th (Th*«)
DATE
AIR
MO/-3 (pp.)
4.0 x 103
4.0 x 103
1.0 x 10'
1.0 x 101
1.0 x 10l
1.0 x I0l
1.0 x 101
5.0 x 10'
5.0 x 10l
5.0 x 101
5.0 X 10'
5.0 x 101
5.0 x 10l •
9.3 x 103
3.7 x 10«
5.1 x 10*
5.3 x 10*
1.1 x 10*
H
9.0 x 10
4.2 x 10*
WTE
2.5 x 10»
2.5 x 10*
5.0 x Ifll
5.0 x 101
5.0 x 101
5.0 x 101
5.0 x 10'
1.0 x 101
1.0 x 101
1.0 x 101
1.0 x IQl
1 .0 x 10l
1.0 x 101
2.3 x 105
5.5 x IflS
7.7 x 105
7.9 x 105
1.7 x 106
N
6.0 x 10*
6.3 x 103
WTE
HATER
ug/1
ECOLOGY
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 102
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
1.0 x 10
2.5 x loZ
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
2.5 x 102
N
N
N
N
N
N
5.0 x 102
N
MATE
LAND
„!£&
5.0 x Ifll
5.0 x Ifll
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x ID"1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-1
1.0 x 10-'
2.0 x 10-2
2.0 x 10-2
2.0 x 10-2
2.0 x 10-2
2.0 x 10-2
2.0 x 10-2
4.6 x 102
1.1 x 1fl3
1.5 x 103
1.6 x 103
3.4 x 103
N
1.2 x 102
1.3 x 10
HATE
LAND
ECOLOGY
2.0 x 10-1
2.0 x 10-1
2.0 x 10-3
2.0 x 10-3
2.0 x 10-3
2.0 x 10-3
2.0 x 10-3
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
N
N
N
N
N
N
1.0 x 10
N
SAMPLE
M9/03
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.O.
RATIO
SAMPLE
NATE
LEVEL 2
REQUIRED
Y=YES
N=NO
TEST
METHOD1
TEST
EXPEC-
TATIONS2
TEST
COST3
SAMPLE.
ALIQUOT*
TABLE KEY:
TEST METHOD
1. STANDARD
2. DEVELOP-
MENTAL
3. UNKNOWN
A. AAS
B. XRD
C. WET
CHEMICAL
D. ESCA
E. GC/MS
EXPECTED TEST
SUCCESS:
1. HIGH
2. MODERATE
3. UNKNOWN
TEST COST
1. REASONABLE
2. MODERATE
3., HIGH
SAMPLE ALIQUOT
1. ADEQUATE
2. MARGINAL
3. INADEQUATE
4. RESAHPLE
*0nly sanple S-2-3. suomation of acidic and basic. N.D. Not Detected
-------
4. LEVEL 2 ORGANIC ANALYSIS OF THE FLUIDIZED
BED COMBUSTOR PARTICULATES
The Level 2 organic analysis conducted on the FBC participate samples
followed the plan outlined in the reference text and depicted here as Fig-
ure 4-1. The Level 2 analysis technique employed for compound identifica-
tion was gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS).
Level 1 organic analysis was also conducted and these data are reported
in Appendix E. Closure to the Level 1 data was sought throughout the con-
ductance of the Level 2 and can be evaluated through the summation Table I
presented in the Abstract, page iii.
4.1 SAMPLE PREPARATION AND ALLOCATION PLAN
All the FBC particulate samples were extracted in methylene chloride
according to both the Level 1 protocol and the Level 2 organic approach.
Because both Level 1 and Level 2 analysis had to be conducted with such a
limited quantity of sample, the allocation plan depicted in Figure 4-2 was
designed to provide a sufficient quantity of material for each analytical
phase. The quantities of particulates extracted are given in Section 2.0
on Table 2-4, Sample Inventory and General Disbursement Plan.
4.1.1 Instrument Employed in Sections 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4
A Finnigan 4QOO GC/MS with microprocessor controlled gas chromatograph,
one second scan time, high sensitivity, high resolution, switchable dual CI/
El source, and capillary GC capability was employed. This instrument is
interfaced to an INCOS 2000 data system. The data acquisition system con-
sists of a Nova III computer, high density dual disk storage, a Versetec
printer/plotter and a CRT terminal. The data system features a foreground/
background processing capability which allows for simultaneous data acqui-
sition and processing of mass spectrometer data. Spectra may be displayed
from previously recorded files or from the file actually being acquired.
The data system incorporates the EPA spectral file together with the NIH
reference file for library searching.
4.2 VOLATILE ORGANIC LEVEL 2 ANALYSIS
Figure 4-1 is the overall organic Level 2 plan. The FBC samples
were prepared as SASS train particulate samples (details are given in
Appendix E), e.g., a cyclone catch. An initial gas chromatography/mass
119
-------
LEVEL 2 ORGANIC ANALYSIS OF FBC SAMPLES
/LOW/_
VOLATILITY r*~
ORGANICS /
(SOLID J
SAMPLES^/
METHYLENE
CHLORIDE
EXTRAaiON
2 ML
GC/MS
4.2
/ VOLATILE /
/ ORGANICS/
CONCENTRATE
SAMPLE
1 ML
GC/MS
IIML
SOLID
PROBE HRMS
^1
7
LIQUID
CHROMATO-
GRAPH
GC/MS
FRACTIONS
fNON-
CHROMATO
GRAPHABLE
ORGANICS
-/ 4.3
COLUMN AND
CONDITIONS
SET FOR EACH
LC FRACTION
4.4
Figure 4-1. Level 2 Organic Analysis Scheme.
120
-------
ORGANIC LEVEL I/LEVEL 2 APPROACH
METHYLENE
CHLORIDE
EXTRACTS
(KNOWN
VOLUMES)
1 ML-GC ANALYSIS
C7-C16
1 ML - LEVEL 2
GCMS
REMAINDER-KUDERNA'
DANISH
10 ML
1 ML - GRAVIMETRIC
& IR
1 ML - LEVEL 2
GCMS
8 ML - LIQUID
CHROMATOGRAPHY
• LEVEL 2
GCMS
- GRAVIMETRIC
& IR
• LEVEL 2
GCMS
GRAVIMETRIC
& IR
LEVEL 2
GCMS
GRAVIMETRIC
& IR
LEVEL 2
GCMS
GRAVIMETRIC
& IR
LEVEL 2
GCMS
GRAVIMETRIC
& IR
LEVEL 2
GCMS
GRAVIMETRIC
&IR
LEVEL 2
GCMS
GRAVIMETRIC
& IR
Figure 4-2. Level 1 and Level 2 Sample Allocation Plan
-------
spectrometry (GC/MS) analysis was conducted on the concentrated (but not to
dryness) aliquot from the methylene chloride (MeCl2). This was conducted
as a survey analysis for volatiles and identified and quantified some of the
Polynuclear Organic Compounds (POM) of interest in these samples. These
compounds are found in MEG categories 21 and 22. Sample S-2-2 was not sub-
jected to Level 2 organic analysis because of its very low organic content
(see Level 1 data in Appendix E).
These survey data are reported in Table 4-1. Detection limits vary
due to the quantity of sample available for analysis and the emission rate
factors:
Table 4-1. Results of Level 2 Survey
Analysis for Polynuclear Organic Compounds
Sample
Number
S-2-1
S-2-2
S-2-3
S-2-4
S-2-5
S-2-6
S-2-7
Compound
Identity
Naphthalene
Dimethyl naphthal ene
Phenanthrene or Anthracene
Methyl anthracene
None Detected
None Detected
None Detected
Phenanthrene
Methyl Anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Benzof 1 uoranthene
Phenanthrene
Fluoranthene
1, 2 - Benzanthracene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene or
Di phenyl acetyl ene
Compound
Quantity
22.9 yg/g*
49.8 yg/g*
17.4 yg/g*
22.4 yg/g*
<1.0 yg/g*
<19.9 yg/M3
<0.2 yg/M3
117.0 yg/M3
1.17.0 yg/M3
117.0 yg/M3
34.7 yg/M
19.3 yg/M3
37.6 yg/M3
89.3 yg/M3
28.2 yg/M3
15.0 yg/M3
18.0 vg/M3
* No Rate Data
122
-------
4.3 LOW RESOLUTION MASS SPECTROMETRIC IDENTIFICATION OF
NON-CHROMATOGRAPHABLE COMPONENTS
The organic extracts of each FBC sample were analysed by direct inlet
mass spectrometry. This was conducted to identify the nonvolatile, non-
chromatographable organic species and verify that no significant species
were being overlooked by just conducting GC/MS analysis. The results of
these analyses are reported in Table 4-2. In the case of all the emitted
particulates this residue was very small and would not be a significant
contributor to the overall organic emissions.
Table 4-2. Low Resolution Mass Spectrometric Analysis of
Non-Volatile Components of the FBC Samples
Samp!e
Number
Mass Spectra Identified
Comments
S-2-1
Free Sulfur, Trans-1-2-3 Trimethyl
-4 Propenyl - Naphthalene, 1,2-
Dimethyl-4-Benzylbenzene,2-Methyl
Anthracene, 1-Methylphenanthrene
Triphenylbenzene, 1,2,4,-5-Tetra-
isopropylbenzene and others.
Very complex spectra of
high molecular weight
aliphatic and substituted
aromatic compounds, all
of which have not been
identified.
S-2-3
1-Octadecene, 1-Heptadecene,
1-Hexadecene, 1-Dodecene
Very small sample residue
with only a trace of
hydrocarbons and a trace
of phthalate ester.
S-2-4
1-Octadecene, 1-Hexadecene
Very small sample residue
with only a trace of
hydrocarbons and a trace
of phthalate ester.
S-2-5
2-Phenyl Naphthalene, 1,6-
Di phenylpenta-1-4-Diene-3-one,
2-Phenyl Naphthalene
Small sample residue with
hydrocarbons, phtalates
and a series of high
molecular weight substi-
tuted aromatics.
S-2-6
1-Octadecene
Small sample residue with
hydrocarbons, phthalates
and a trace of high mole-
cular weight aromatics.
S-2-7
1-Octadecene
Small residue with hydro-
carbons, phthalates and a
trace of high molecular
weight aromatics.
123
-------
4.4 GC/MS ANALYSIS OF LIQUID CHROMATOGRAPHIC FRACTIONS
A Level 2 GC/MS survey analysis was also conducted on combinations of
the liquid chromatographic (LC) fractions. This was performed on an OV-17
column using a heating rate of 10°C/min and heating from 50°C to 300°C.
Non-volatile, non-chromatographable materials would not be analyzed by this
technique. However, this was conducted as a preliminary screening tech-
nique to identify and quantify the predominate volatile organic compounds
in the LC fractions and elucidate the complexity of each fraction. Frac-
tion 8 of each sample was not submitted to this survey analysis. Table 4-3
records the results of this preliminary survey. Compounds listed as
"unknown" were sought during the next analytical phase, chemical
ionization/gas chromatography/mass spectrometry.
Table 4-3. Level 2 Survey Analysis of
Liquid Chromatographic Fractions
Sample
Identification
S-2-1
Liquid
Chromatographic
Fraction
1
Compound
Identity
16 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
17 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
18 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
19 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
20 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
Unknown
Compound
Quantity
Present <16 yg/g*
16 yg/g*
16 yg/g*
16 yg/g*
Present <16 yg/g*
190 yg/g*
S-2-3
16 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
17 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
18 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
19 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
Present <300 yg/M3
Present <300 yg/M3
Present <300 yg/M3
Present <300 yg/M3
124
-------
Table 4-3. Level 2 Survey Analysis of (Cont'd)
Liquid
Sampl e
Identification
S-2-4
S-2-5
S-2-6
S-2-7
Chromatographic Compound
Fraction Identity
20 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
Unknown
1 16 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
17 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
18 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
19 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
20 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
Unknown
1 16 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
17 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
18 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
19 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
20 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
Unknown
1 16 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
17 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
1-6 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
19 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
20 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
Unknown
1 None Detected
Compound
Quantity
Present <300 yg/M3
470 yg/M3
Present <16 yg/M3
Present <16 yg/M3
3
Present <16 yg/M
Present <16 yg/M3
3
Present <16 yg/M
Present <16 yg/M3
Present <20 yg/M3
20 yg/M3
Present <20 yg/M3
Present <20 yg/M3
Present <20 yg/M3
Present 20 yg/M3
Present <300 yg/M3
Present <300 yg/M3
Present <300 yg/M3
Present <300 yg/M3
3
Present <300 yg/M
Present <300 yg/M3
<50 yg/M3
125
-------
Table 4-3. Level 2 Survey Analysis of
Liquid Chromatographic Fractions (Cont'd)
Liquid
Sampl e
Identification
S-2-1
S-2-3
Chroma tographic Compound
Fraction Identity
2 and 3
15 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
16 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
17 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
18 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
19 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
20 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
21 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
Phthalate Ester
Unknown 2
2 and 3
15 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
16 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
17 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
18 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
19 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
20 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
21 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
Phthalate Ester
Unknown
Compound
Quantity
Unknown 80 yg/g*
Present <6 yg/g*
Present <6 yg/g*
Present <6 yg/g*
Present <6 yg/g*
Present <6 yg/g*
Present <6 yg/g*
Present <6 yg/g*
Present <6 yg/g*
<6 yg/g*
Unknown/
Present <120 yg/M3
310 yg/M3
560 yg/M3
1,180 yg/M3
1 ,620 yg/M3
680 yg/M3
560 yg/M3
310 yg/M3
1,120 yg/M3
120 yg/M3
No Rate Data
126
-------
Table 4-3. Level 2 Survey Analysis of
Liquid Chromatographic Fractions (Con't)
Liquid
Sample
Identification
S-2-4
S-2-5
Chromatographic Compound
Fraction Identify
2 and 3
15 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
16 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
17 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
18 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
19 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
20 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
21 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
Phthalate Ester
Unknown
2 and 3
15 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
16 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
17 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
18 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
19 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
20 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
21 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
Compound
Quantity
Unknown 3
Present < 7 yg/M
Present < 7 yg/M3
Present < 7 yg/M3
30 yg/M3
23 yg/M3
3
Present < 7 yg/M
Present < 7 yg/M
Present < 7 yg/M
16 yg/M3
2 Present < 7 yg/M3
Unknown/ 3
Present <10 yg/M
10 yg/M3
20 yg/M3
30 yg/M3
50 yg/M3
30 yg/M3
20 yg/M3
10 yg/M3
127
-------
Table 4-3. Level 2 Survey Analysis of
Liquid Chromatographic Fractions (Con't)
Liquid
Sampl e
Identification
S-2-6
S-2-7
S-2-1
S-2-3
S-2-4
Chroma tographic Compound
Fraction Identify
2 and 3
15 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
16 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
17 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
18 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
19 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
20 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
21 Carbon
Hydrocarbon
Phthalate Ester
Unknown
2 and 3 None Detected
4 and 5 Phthalate Ester
Unknown
Unknown
4 and 5 Phthalate Ester
Unknown
Unknown
4 and 5 Phthalate Ester
Unknown
Unknown
Compound
Quantity
Unknown/ ,
Present <120 yg/MJ
Present <120 yg/M3
Present <120 yg/M3
180 yg/M3
180 yg/M3
120 yg/M3
60 yg/M3
60 yg/M3
Present <120 yg/M3
180 yg/M3
< 50 yg/M3
25 yg/g*
50 yg/g*
60 yg/g*
1,120 yg/M3
870 yg/M3
1,180 yg/M3
50 yg/M3
80 yg/M3
1/2 Present <7 yg/M3
*No Rate Data
128
-------
Table 4-3. Level 2 Survey Analysis of
Liquid Chromatographic Fractions (Con't)
Liquid
Sample Chroma tographic Compound
Identification Fraction Identify
S-2-5 4 and 5 Phthalate Ester
Unknown
Unknown
S-2-6 4 and 5 Phthalate Ester
Unknown
Unknown
S-2-7 4 and 5 None Detected
S-2-1 6 and 7 Propyl Phthalate
Unknown
Unknown
Phthalate Ester
S-2-3 6 and 7 Propyl Phthalate
Unknown
Unknown
Phthalate Ester
S-2-4 6 and 7 Propyl Phthalate
Unknown
Unknown
Phthalate Ester
S-2-5 6 and 7 Propyl Phthalate
Unknown
Unknown
Phthalate Ester
Compound
Quanti ty
Present <10 yg/M3
550 yg/M3
Present <10 yg/M3
2,120 yg/M3
5,500 yg/M3
Present <120 yg/M3
<50 yg/M3
Present <6 yg/g*
220 yg/g*
Present <6 yg/g*
Present <6 yg/g*
4,100 yg/M3
1 ,300 yg/M3
1,740 yg/M3
120 yg/M3
Present <7 yg/M
3
Present <7 yg/M
Present <7 yg/M
410 yg/M3
Present <10 yg/M
120 yg/M3
470 yg/M3
620 yg/M3
*No Rate Data
129
-------
Table 4-3. Level 2 Survey Analysis of
Liquid Chromatographic Fractipns (Con't)
Liquid
Sample Chromatographic Compound
Identification Fraction Identify
S-2-6 6 and 7 Propyl Phthalate
Unknown
Unknown
Phthalate Ester
S-2-7 6 and 7 Unknown
Compound
Quantity
Present
Present
Present
Present
<120 yg/M3
<120 yg/M3
<120 yg/M3
<120 yg/M3
280 yg/M3
*No Rate Data
The materials identified by this analysis were not complex and all
belonged to MEG category 1, alkanes greater than C9, or category 8 Esters,
phthalates.
130
-------
4.5 CHEMICAL IONIZATION/GAS CHROMATOGRAPHY/MASS SPECTROMETRY
GC/MS analysts using chemical ionization was performed on those samples
with peaks unidentified by the impact (El) ionization technique. Chemical
ionization GC/MS was used to obtain molecular weight information which
could be used in identifying the unknowns. The samples were analyzed
according to the following procedure.
4.5.1 Procedure and Results
The samples were analyzed on a Dupont Model 321 GC/MS. A six-foot
glass column containing 3% OV-17 on Chromosorb W-HP was used. The column
oven was programmed from 50°C to 300°C at 8 degrees per minute. The ion
source was heated to 200°C. Methane was used as the reagent gas. Helium
at 30cc/min was used as the chromatograph carrier gas. The mass range from
60 to 450 AMU was scanned every two seconds in a continuous cyclic recording.
The INCOS data system was used to acquire, store, and reduce the data.
In general, the use of GC/MS with chemical ionization did very little
to supply additional information which could be used in identifying the
unknowns found in the El data. Most, if not all, the compounds which were
not identifiable from the El data appeared to be hydrocarbons. Hydrocarbon
compounds are not amenable to chemical ionization because they are not
ionized efficiently.
An additional shortcoming was that the GC parameters could not be
duplicated using the du Pont 321 GC-MS. Therefore there was little basis
for comparing even the chromatograms from the two analyses.
i
The information obtainable from the subject analysis is summarized
in Table 4-4. The table shows that, with the exception of one compound,
the samples do not contain similar components. The one compound that is
common to four samples had an apparent molecular weight of 176 and has a CI
spectra suggestive of a phthalate ester. However, no phthalates exist with
a molecular weight of 176. The identification of this compound remains
unknown. The remaining compounds that were detected in these samples had
compounds that were either tentatively identified as phthalate esters or
hydrocarbons with molecular weights as shown in the table.
131
-------
Table 4-4. Results of Chemical lonization GC/MS Analysis
SAMPLE ^^^
^^"L.C Fraction
S-2-1/1
S-2-1
S-2-3/2&3
S-2-3/6&7
S-2-7/6&7
MW176
X
X
X
X
COMPOUND1
Butyl
Phthalate
X
1st Hydro-
carbon MW 332
X
2nd
Hydrocarbon
X
Phthalate
Ester
X
X
Hydrocarbon
MW 394
X
CO
ro
1
See text for further compound information.
-------
Sample S-2-1 LC/2 and 3 was shown, from the El data, to contain only
one significant compound. The chromatogram obtained from running the
same sample with chemical ionization was rather complex. Computerized
data enhancement was undertaken in order to obtain usable spectral infor-
mation. There are approximately 8 to 10 major peaks along with 10 to 15
additional peaks where additional information may have been able to be obtained,
Five compounds with molecular weights of 184, 178, 192, 192, and 208 caused
substantial peaks. The compound with molecular weight of 208 is very likely the
methyl-ethyl ester of phthalic anhydride.
It is concluded that analyzing these samples by GC/MS, using chemical
ionization, was of little or no value in identifying the compounds which
could not be identified from the El spectra.
4.6 CONCLUSIONS BASED ON LEVEL 2 ORGANIC ANALYSIS
Compounds identified by this Level 2 organic analysis scheme are sum-
marized as follows:
MATE FBC
air •? Emission
MEG Category
1.
8D
21
22
Aliphatic
Hydrocarbons
. Esters
. Fused Aromatic
Hydrocarbons
. Fused Non-
Alternate Poly-
cycllc Hydro-
carbons
Compound
Al kanes
(09)
Phthalates
Benza (a) anth-
racene
Phenanthrene
Naphthalene
Anthracene], Methyl
Anthracene
Pyrene
Benzofluor-
anthrene
Fluoranthrene
v9/mJ Samples* jjg/m3 Comments
N
5.0X103
4.45X10
1.59X103
5.0X104
5.6X104c
2.33X10°
6. 48X1 O3
9.0X10*
8.0X102
3.1X104
2.8X10
1.7X10*
1.5X10*
1 .2X102
3.5X10
1.0X10
1 .3X1 02
No MATE
available for
assessment
Exceeds MATE
Does not exceed MATE
Does not exceed MATE
Does not exceed MATE
Does not exceed MATE
Does not exceed MATE
Does not exceed MATE
Does not exceed MATE
* Summation of S-2-5, S-2-6 and S-2-7
133
-------
APPENDIX A
ATOMIC ABSORPTION CALIBRATION CURVES
134
-------
A-l. Lithium Calibration Curve for
Atomic Emission Procedure
ABS
O DEIONIZED H,q
SLOPE = 2.01
CORR.* = 1.00
STD. DEV.** = 0.142
SLOPE = 2.17
CORR.* = 1.00
STD. DEV ** = .153
CORRELATION COEFFICIENT
**STANDARD DEVIATION
1 1
0.025 0.05 0.075 0.1
PPM Li
135
-------
A-2. Silver Calibration Curve for
Atomic Absorption Procedure
ABS
O DEIONIZEDH.O
D BASIC
A ACIDIC
CORRELATION COEFFICIENT
0.005
A , PPM
136
-------
A-3. Chromium Calibration Curve for Atomic
Absorption Procedure
CO
O DEIONIZED H,O
SLOPE =0.063
CORR .*= 0.999
REAGENT PARTICULATE
SLOPE = 0.062
CORR*. =1.00
CORRELATION COEFFICIENT
**STANDARD DEVIATION
I I
-------
A-4. Magnesium Calibration Curve
for Atomic Absorption Procedure
0.3
0.2
CO
00
ABS
0.1
0,
a
O DEIONIZED H,O
SLOPE = 0.32
CORR.* = 1.00
STD. DEV.** = 0.142
"CORRELATION COEFFICIENT
"STANDARD DEVIATION
I I
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
Mg, PPM
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
-------
A-5. Mercury Calibration Curve for the Cold
Vapor Trap Procedure
.05
.04
CO
10
.03
UgHg
.02
30 40 50
RECORDER UNIT READINGS
60
70
80
-------
A-6. Zinc Calibration Curve
for Atomic Absorption Procedure
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
ABS
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
O DEIONIZED H2O
SLOPE =0.474
CORR.* = 0.996
STD. DEV.** = 0.222
*CORRELATION COEFFICIENT
"STANDARD DEVIATION
0.1
0.2
0.4
0.6
Zn, PPM
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
140
-------
A-7. Cadmium Calibration Curve For Atomic Absorption
Procedure
0.3
O DEIONIZED H2O
SLOPE = 0.23
CORR.* = 0.999
0.2
ABS
0.1
0.01
•CORRELATION COEFFICIENT
0 0.05 0.1
0.3 0.4
0.6
PPM Cd
0.5 0.7 0.8 0.9
1.0
-------
A-8 Beryllium Calibration Curve
for Atomic Absorption Procedure
0.2
0.3
ABS
•DEIONIZED H2O
SLOPE =0.113
CORR.* = 0.999
•BASIC
SLOPE = 0.108
CORR.*= 0.999
ACIDIC
SLOPE =0.113
CORR.* = 0.998
REAGENT PARTICULAR
SLOPE = 0.121
CORE.*= 0.999
'CORRELATION COEFFICIENT
0.5
1.0
1.5 2.0
Be, PPM
2.5
3.0
142
-------
A-9. Lead Calibration Curve for Atomic
Absorption Procedure.
CO
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
MS
0.2
0.1
O DEIONIZED H20
SLOPE =0.131
CORR.* = 0.983
STD. DEV.** = 0.176
D BASIC
SLOPE = 1.40
CORK.* = 1.00
STD. DEV.** = 0.099
A AODIC
SLOPE = 1.65
CORR.* = 0.999
STD. DEV.** = 0.165
- O REAGENT PARTICULATE
SLOPE = 0.60
CORR.*=1.00
STD. DEV.** = 0.084
CORRELATION COEFFICIENT
"STANDARD DEVIATION
0.1
0.2
PB PPM
0.3
0.4
-------
A-10. Vanadium Calibration Curve for Atomic Absorption
Procedure
O DEIONIZED H2O
SLOPE = 0.34
CORR.*=.999
STD. DEV. ** = 0.147 -
D BASIC
SLOPE =0.32
CORR.* = .999
STD. DEV.** = 0.160
A ACIDIC
SLOPE = 0.45
CORR.*=.999
STD. DEV.** =0.194
O REAGENT PARTICULAR -
SLOPE = 0.37
CORR.*= .999
STD. DEV.** = 0.133
CORRELATION COEFFICIENT
**STANDARD DEVIATION
-------
A-ll. Silicon Calibration Curve for Atomic Absorption
Procedure
O DEIONIZED H,O,
SLOPE = 0.328
CORR.*= 0.998
SLOPE = 0.313
CORR .*= 0.999
SLOPE = 0.334
CORR.*= 0.999
O REAGENT PARTICULATE
SLOPE = 0.366
CORR .*= 0.999
•CORRELATION COEFFICIENT
"STANDARD DEVIATION
75 100
PPM, SI
145
-------
A-12. Strontium Calibration Curve for
Atomic Absorption Procedure, Range 0.0-1.00 ppm
0.6
0.5
0.4
ABS
0.3
O DEIONIZED H2O
0.2
0.1
00
0
0.25
0.50
0.75
PPMSr
1.00
146
-------
A-13. Strontium Calibration Curve for Atomic
Absorption Procedure, Range 0.0-10.0 ppm
0.5
0.4
ABS
0.3
0.2
O DEIONIZED hUO
0.1
CORRELATION COEFFICIENT
**STANDARD DEVIATION
4.0
6.0 8.0
Sr, PPM
10.0
147
-------
A-14. Copper Calibration Curve for Atomic
Absorption Procedure
O DEIONIZEDHnO
SLOPE =1.01
CORR.* = 0.996
STD. DEV.** = 0.173
D BASIC
- SLOPE =1.00
CORR.* = 0.988
STD. DEV.** = 0.255
A ACIDIC
SLOPE = 1.03
CORR.* = 0.999
STD. DEV.** = 0,258
*CORRELATION COEFFICIENT
**STANDARD DEVIATION
0.5
148
-------
A-15. Nickel Calibration Curve for
Atomic Absorption Procedure
O DEION1ZED H2O
SLOPE = 0.99
CORR.* = 1.00
D BASIC
SLOPE = 1-20
CORR.* = 1.00
A ACIDIC
SLOPE = 1.37
CORR.*= 1.00
*CORRELATION COEFFICIENT
0.5
149
-------
A-16. Platinum Calibration Curve for Atomic Absorption Procedure
01
o
0.4
ABS
0.3
0.2
0.1
1.0
2.0
PtPPM
O DEIONIZEDH2O
SLOPE = . 156
- CORR.*= .994
A BASIC
SLOPE = . 169
CORR.*=.995
O ACIDIC
SLOPE = -188
CORR.*= .999
CORRELATION COEFFICIENT
"STANDARD DEVIATION
-------
APPENDIX B
FTIR SPECTRAL SCANS
151
-------
o
en
01
ro
CO „
o
CD
4
o J
a
en
(VJ
o
CO
a: .
i- in
o
CD
FAR IR SPECTRUM
S-2-3
f50 fOO 350
3CDO 250 200
WnVENUMBERS
150 100
feo
-------
o
o
in
t*>
o
CD
O
O
v
O
ID
O
O
o _
Ld
O
co,
CvJ
O
O
o .
o
o
FAR IR SPECTRUM
S-2-4
"i 50 'iOO 350
300 250 200
NRVENUMBERS
150 100
^0
-------
o
o
*
o
LD
o
o
a
O _
UJ O
a .
o
cc
O
«
O J
O
O
NICOLET 7199 FT-IR
t50 tOO 350
300 250 200 150
NRVENUMBERS
FAR IR SPECTRUM
S-2-5
100
50
-------
° NICOLET 7199 FT-IR
01
en
O
O
«
to _
O
O
in
o
UJ O
u -
Zj^
cr
cr
DC
»~o
o
CO
o
o
o
o
CaS04 • 1/2H20
2°3 CaS04 • 1/2H20
CaS04 • 1/2H20
FAR IR SPECTRUM
S-2-6
tbo 3^0 300
200 150 100 50
WRVENUMBERS
-------
01
o
a
a .,
oo
a
a
d .
N '
a
o
d .
CD.
a
a
a
UJ 1/5
u
i§
Ho
M :£
z:-*
trt
zo
g°
hSH
a
o
a .
t\j
a
a
d ,
a
a
I1*
NICOLET 7199 FT-I;R
TRW!' '
SRMtfLE
,
'S-;
DO 1300 1200 llbO
-3 !
tia
I.._i
—i
i5o 8o"oTO"OeBo sbo "Too ~ '
01 _
WRVENUMBERS
-------
en
bJ
a
CE
H
(n
CI
cc
a
a
D
j<
o
o
•s
o
o
d
CO
o
o
ui
CO
o
a
a
w
a
o
ifl ,
o
a
o .
o
o
in .
o
a
NI!CQLET 7199 FT-IlFV1
I1* DO 1300 12bo llbo
lobo "gbb" eBo
WflVENUMBERS
-------
a
d
NICOLET 7199 FT-
en
oo
isbo izba nbo loba i55555 ?bo
WRVENUMBER5
-------
01
10
C3
_CO
O
in
NICOLET. 7199 FT-IR
.
Wf--4---
SflMPLE iS-2
-6 !
TtDO 13001200
llbO 1000 900 800 TOO 600 500
WRVENUMBERS
DC
-------
NICOLET 7199 FT-IR
en
o
ebosbo
WRVENUMBERS
-------
ov
a
in
OT"
a
a
CM
US'
a
a
oi
in
a
a
s-
a
a
«
m
in
IJLJ
up
g°
to
HW
cna
zo
a •
tcr-
(- ^H
O
o
J<
J<
o
o
*
o
o
8-
NJCOLET 7199 FT-IR
51°2 C«S04-2H20
'2
DO
1
3bo
izba
11 bo
lobo gbo
WRVENUMBERS
ebo
?bo
ebo
sbo
tbo
-------
APPENDIX C
ESCA SCANS
162
-------
SUR
PCs 100
NO. 10.0KV, 40.0HA
12/15/77
Sf= .667
DATs 8.75
its
Ok
co
O 400.00
BINDING ENERGY. EV
MO.OO
ioo.ao
-------
Atomic concentration C of element X may be estimated by
C = VSx
Where, I is the peak-to-peak height of the Auger electron
signal for element X divided by the proper scale
sensitivity
and S is the sensitivity factor
EXAMPLE: S t£ As
t-«i.p
C.s
ELEMENT Ix (Cm) Sx Ix/'Sx Cx Percent
0-1
.23
I O i *-s O'b 3
i * "^
T.(e> O.b5
4
o-t
.2-
0.0*1
0.7/y .Of* !•& . I®
164
-------
(f) escfl SUR
PE= 100
Itfr. 10.0KV,
MICi CC?
12/IS/77
40.0NA
SFs 1.466
OflTs S.OO
• t • 100 A tf
MM4W
•00.00
MO.00
700.00
.00 100.00 400.00
BINDING ENERGY. EV
too.oo
100.00
-------
Atomic concentration C of element X may bo estimated by
Where, 1^ is the peak-to-peak height of tho Auyer electron
signal for element X divided by the proper scale
sensitivity
and S is the sensitivity factor
4fe
EXAMPLE:
APt«R. |0o8
ELEMENT ZX *Cm)
Sx Vflx
Atom
Percent
0.7
7,f
z-o
1-0 /t/
.71
Z.&
.l&
J./
.03
2-f
166
-------
SUR
PEe 100
116. 10.0KV, 40.0I1A
12/16/77
SF= -732
OflT= 10.00
* t • M*ec
100.00
BINDING ENERGY. EV
-------
Atomic concentration Cv of element X may be estimated by
C__ = Vax
Where, I is the peak-to-peak height of the Auger electron
signal for element X divided by the proper scale
sensitivity
and S is the sensitivity factor
EXAMPLE:
S 2. k AS
ELEMENT
o,$
Ix (Cm)
0.7
6.5-
5,3
Sx VSx
0,71
*•
16
Atom
Percent
2-
2-2-
168
-------
0 ESCfl SUR
PEs 100
flG. 10.0KV, 40.0110
ctt
12/15/77
SF= .975
DATs 5.00
* t 7 t M KCC
(u
UMM.M
MO .00
•00.00
700.00
00 100.00 400.00
BINDING ENERGY. EV
100.00 .00
-------
Atomic concentration C of clement X may bo estimated by
Cx = I*'.!* _
V«/So
Where, I is the peak-to-peak height of the Auqor electron
signal for element X divided by the proper scale
sensitivity
and S is the sensitivity factor
X
EXAMPLE: 5^?2- As
I rcm) S I /q r Atom
ELEMENT 1x tun; bx 1x/bx Cx Percent
O,5 IZ.I
'^ .// K7
1-5
li
*>\,9
170
-------
SUR
PEs 100
«G. 10.0KV, 40.0HA
SF= 1.46S
DATs S.OO
« t ? 1100 M if
12/18/77
tu
»^
Ul
NO.00
1000.00 000.00
000.00
700.00
.00 CM.00 400.00
BINDING ENERGY, EV
too.oo
100.00
.00
-------
Atomic concentration C of element X may be estimated by
X
Cx
X
Where, I is the peak-to-peak height of the Auger electron
signal for element X divided by the proper scale
sensitivity
and S is the sensitivity factor
X
EXAMPLE: *
T (Cm) q i /q e Atom
ELEMENT xx {^m' ^x xx/&x Sc Percent
0.3
Oi5 11.^
N)I*. IS £>•(* i>£r «2-
X ~ —' ;.7
/O
/^
a.lof f,^
60
172
-------
ft
ESCft (1UL
PEs SO
HG. 10.0KV, 40.0MR
CM
EL= S 1
SFs .016
DftT= 17.67
at?
12/15/77
ui
N,
**
UJ
CO
Sto./1
irt.oo
1/4.00
l/t.OO 170.00 1M.OO
BINDING
IM.OO
* CV
114.00
lit .00
IM.OO
IM.OO
-------
nut
PE= 60
HG. 10.0KV. 40.OUR
me* CM
EL= C 1
SFs .104
DRT= 4.71
s t /i t IM M if
12/16/77
ui
ta.oo
tn.oo
.00 «7.M tM.OO tti.OO
BINDING ENERGY* EV
UI.OO
wt.oo
tn.oo
-------
$ €SCA SUR
PCs 100
n&, 10.0KV, 40.011ft
riLf • * t 7
SFs .487
DATs 16.02
S t 7 t tM A
12/18/77
IU
*w
«^
IU
MO.M
.00
tco.oo
>00 IM.OO 100.00
BINDING ENERGY. EV
fto.oo
»"-•
.00
4MM17
-------
Atomic concentration GX of element X may be estimated by
Where, I is the peak-to-peak height of the Auycr electron
signal for element X divided by the proper scale
sensitivity
and S is the sensitivity factor
EXAMPLE:
S3-f2. AfT&fl- 200
0-6
M
ELEMENT Jx (Cm) Sx Ix/Sx Cx Percent
5:3
176
o,s ]o£ .« /;.? ^
2.0 .77 £'6
-------
CSCR SUR
PE= 100
no, IO.OKV, 40.OUR
U4
>.
UJ
SF= 1.465
DATr S.OO
< t ? t CM fl V
12/16/77
1000.00
100.00
000.00
700.00
000.00 100.00 400.00
BINDING ENERGY. EV
aoo.oo
too.oo
100.00
.00
-------
ESCR SUR
PE= 100
no. IO.OKV. 40.oiiA
Ml
12/15/77
SF= 1.46S
DRT= 5.00
9 t 7 tM KCC
u
u
BINDING ENERGY. EV
-------
Atomic concentration C of element X may be estimated by
Cx =
Where, I is the peak-to-peak height of the Auger electron
signal for element X divided by the proper scale
sensitivity
and Sv is the sensitivity factor
X
EXAMPLE: S
T irSn^ C T /G C AtOIH
ELEMENT x ( ' x x/5x x Percent
6-4 /.tff 6.3
!•*• 7/ i,r
44
1.2- 2.>V O-&
1,1
15
-------
APPENDIX D
SEM-EDX SCANS
180
-------
i i i i i i i i-m-n-.-t-t-i-1 i i i i i i | | | | |jjj
-------
-------
-------
-------
i-rrm
it
-------
APPENDIX E
LEVEL 1 ORGANIC DATA
186
-------
The sample aliquots were weighed into pre-extracted (24 hours in
nanograde methyl ene chloride) Whatman No. 41 filter paper and then placed
in the soxhlet glass extraction thimbles and extracted for 24 hours in
nanograde methylene chloride. Procedural blanks consisted of: (1) the
soxhlet apparatus with a pre-extracted filter paper and (2) an NBS
inorganic Standard Fly Ash handled identically to the Battelle FBC parti-
culates. The sample organic extracts were then measured (volume) and
allocated following Figure 3-2. Two milliliters were removed before
sample concentration: one for GC and determination of the volatile
organic components and one for Level 2 Gas Chromatography Mass Spectrometry
(GCMS). The remaining organic extracts were then concentrated using a
Kuderna-Danish apparatus to 10 milliliters. One milliliter was disbursed
for gravimetric and IR analysis and one milliliter was retained for
Level 2 GCMS. Eight milliliters were then separated by Liquid Chromatography
(LC). Two milliliters of each LC fraction were retained for Level 2 GCMS.
The remaining LC fractions were characterized by gravimetric and Infrared
Spectroscopic Analysis. Low Resolution Mass Spectroscopy was conducted
on neat sample extracts and is reported in Section 3.
E.I Gas Chromatographic Analysis
The gas Chromatography (GC) analyses were performed using a Varian
1860 chroma tograph with dual differential flame ionization detectors. The
operating parameters were as follows:
• Column - 3.0% SE-30 on Chromosorb WHP, 100/120 mesh, 0.32 x 183
stainless steel.
0 Flow rates -column, 20 ml/min He; detectors, 300 ml/min air
30 ml/min Hg.
0 Temperatures -detectors, 300°C; injectors, 200°C; column, begin
and hold at ambient for 5 min, then program temperature increase
from 30°C to IIQOC at 100C/min.
0 Electrometer - 1 x 10"10 A/mV.
0 Recorder — 1 mV full scale.
0 Injections — lyl
187
-------
These settings and conditions provide a lower detectable limit of
0.7 ng/yl for n-alkanes. This would be equivalent to a component concen-
tration of approximately 2 x 10 mg/m in the sample gas, which is much
3
below the 0.5 mg/m level of interest in the Level 1 Manual. However,
this is not below some of the MATE concentrations. Therefore, an organic
extract aliquot will be analyzed by the more sensitive GCMS technique.
The instrument was calibrated and analytical results are expressed in
terms of the quantity of n-alkanes boiling in the following temperature
ranges:
• C7 90-110°C
t C8 110-140°C
• C9 140-160°C
• CIO 160-180°C
• Cll 180-200°C
• C12 200-220°C
To calibrate the instrument for these C7-C12 boiling point ranges, chromato-
grams of n-alkane mixtures - C5-C9 and C8-C12 - were obtained and a plot of
normal boiling points versus retention times was constructed as shown
in Figure E-l. The retention times corresponding to the appropriate
boiling ranges were then determined from this plot. Peak areas on chro-
matograms of samples were summed within each retention time interval in
order to convert to quantities of components designated as n-alkanes.
To quantitate the peak areas of actual sample chromatograms, a
n-decane standard was prepared containing 715.6 ng/yl. Two serial tenfold
dilutions were made to prepare standards containing, respectively, 71.56
and-7.156 ng/yl. A plot of response in yV-sec for replicate injections
as compared with concentration in ng/yl was calculated and is shown in
Figure E-2. A linear regression analysis of the data yields a slope of
78.21 yV • sec • yl/ng and an intercept at 70.4 yV • sec.
188
-------
o
o
01
O
CO
[Ortj
L. \\
Hi*
1*1
^rii
\f\
R'R
. j
-••'
j
P"*
-"'
•
—
,JC
_.-•-
^ '
-'"
^
T
: i
80
160 240 320 400
Retention Time, sec
480
560
Figure E-l. Retention Time Versus Normal Boiling Point
The slope of the plot is the sensitivity of the analysis for n-decane.
A plot of molar response versus carbon number for a homologous series
yields a straight line. Therefore, if the weight response of n-decane
is converted to molar response, the molar responses to the n-C7 to n-C12
hydrocarbons can be calculated. The calculated molar responses are as
follows:
n-C-
n-C,
7.79 x 1012 yV'sec'yl/mole
J2
n-C
'10
n-C-
n-C
11
12
= 8.90 x 10'
= 1.00 x 10
= 1.11 x 10
= 1.22 x 10
= 1.34 x 10
13
13
13
13
189
-------
J-
--*. *?
*
a
c
^
s
IV
,
- 1-
*
^
*• II
1
8I_
i
O*,
' ,
i 1 : .
: •'-.
. . i .
E ' i
•c . :
: : : .
-f • •
1 T •
, . .
1 •
i f : •
1— j • •
1
—
...
II"
,;;-
....
..s-
-
~:*
i::.
-:•;
•••
•~
: ..
>
:
•
.
i-
:
.
:
.1*
»».
/
•*•
•• ' rr
. , . ,
/
/ .
"\
.,:
— r
• ';•
'
y
* . i
'<<•.
~:
...
/.
'"'.
'
•
/
'
•
•
•_•
^
•^
/
1
.
'
/
:
:
•
I
-::;.'
"
•
-
/
/
•
•
i-.:.
•
— '— •
•
•r"
_i
...
•
-.
'
•
.
—
^
r'l-
.
.
—
—
— ...
•
'•••I
I • •
.
'• • i
,
"~
"
/
','• t .
i*
.
r;.
;.
/
;
•
:•..
.. .
*
1
'
•.
f.
S-
'
j
5
;
fi
•
•
'
L
•••
„
...
1
.
•
_ _j
: >
•
,
i
• '
'•
:
•
,
'
_
f
. - :
: .
"
-
)
.
"•
'-•
-
1
f
.
• .
...
|-:
•:;;
.-
.
;
:;';
:••
• •
-
'
1 . .
: i ;
/:
."•^"
";.'
•
. . .
; :.!-•
! : I;
."!
:•:
;-
*"
H.
fi
', m .
-"
•'—
:*
r::.
...
.1.
. .:
r..:
_..
••»
KT'
....
•':
:'.',',
L::-
:-r:L
'".'
••'
:r^
...,
;;L
.;.
:••'
•<
"
i
r
?r
!
•••
-
r
.
_^_
-r
-
,
y(
f\>
; -
'•I
' Lf
T 7
.: :
... ,
-• -
. •*
" '\
•H 4^
?• '?
1 *
" T
M
.1 1
T :
i. 4.
.: .r.
1 '-
— rr
-r. :
t.f
r "
J. -L
1 i
too
Idoo
Ng/ul
Concentration
Figure E-2. Response Versus Concentration
190
-------
The weight responses (molar responses divided by molecular weight)
are then calculated:
n-C7 = 77.74 uVsec'yl/ng
n-C8 = 77.94
n-Cg = 78.09
n-C1Q = 78.21
n-C-j-j = 78.31
n~C12 = 78'40
Quantitation is then accomplished by converting areas in the
appropriate retention time intervals to concentrations by using the
appropriate sensitivities. The total amount of material in each sample
is determined by multiplying the concentration by the sample volume and
the fraction of sample extracted. Concentration in the gaseous emissions
is then determined by dividing the weight of material in the sample
extract by the volume of gas sampled. The results of these analyses are
given in Table E-l.
These data are reported on the Level 1-Level 2 data presentation charts
under "SASS, LAB, C7 - SASS, LAB, C12." These are the Level 1 reporting
points for the volatile organic species.
E.2 Gravimetry for C,3 and Higher Hydrocrabons
Gravimetric determinations were performed on the concentrates
methylene chloride extracts in accordance with the procedure in the
Level 1 Manual. All concentrations were performed with Kuderna-Danish
evaporators.
One milliliter all quots were taken from each of the 10 ml volume
concentrates and evaporated to dryness in aluminum pans. The residues
were then weighed on a nricrobalance. Jhe .results are presented in
Table E-l. These data give the total nonvolatile, >C13, organic content
of the samples.
191
-------
Table E-l. Level 1 Data on Run No, 2 FBC Sample
ro
Sample Code
Height of Sample
Extracted
(Emission Rate Factor)
S-2-3 ug
9.820 ug/g,
(48.8) ug/m3
S-2-4 ug
0.3650 ug/g,
(0.095) ug/m3
S-2-5 ug
3.9652 ug/g,
(1.53) ug/m3
S-2-6 yg
3.9355 ug/9,
(18.5) ug/m3
S-2-7 ug
0.5335 ug/g,
(0.16J ug/m3
S-2-1 ug
4.0138 ug/g,
(NO RATE DATA) ug/m3
S-2-2 ug
3.9991 ug/g,
(NO RATE DATA) ug/m3
FLY ASH ug
NBS 11633 ug/g
3.9569
C7-17 Gas Chromatographic* Data
C7 C8 C9 CIO Cll C12 C13
00 00000
300.0 80.0
0 0 822.0 219.0 000
78.0 21.0
66.0
000 16,6 000
25.5
00 00000
00 00000
18,136.0
0 4,518.0 0 0000
00 00000
00 00000
>13
Height
Data
640.0
64.1
3,128.1
730.0
2,000.0
190.0
21,110.0
5,323.0
8,145.5
950.0
241.4
4,466.0
990.0
1,856.0
297.0
70,810.0
17,642.0
140.0
35.0
0
LC Fractional! on Data
LCI LC2 LC3 LC4 LC5 LC6 LC7 LC8
300.0 300.0 500.0 200.0
0 30.0 000 30.0 50.0 20.0
1.467.0 1,467.0 2,444.0 978.0
200.0 200.0 500.0 800.0 100.0
000 549.0 549.0 183.0 2,192.0 274.0
52.0 52.0 17.0 208.0 26.0
1,650.0 1,800.0 1,100.0 1,100.0 3,000.0 400.0 1,700.0
416.0 0 454.0 277.4 277.4 757.0 101.0 429.0
637.0 695.0 424.2 424.2 1,157.6 154.3 656.4
100.0 300.0 200.0 100.0 100.0
0 25.4 0 76.3 0 50.8 25.4 25.4
470.0 1,410.0 940.0 470.0 470.0
400.0 200.0 100.0 800.0
0 750.0 375.0 187.0 0 1,500.0 0 0
120.0 60.0 30.0 240.0
8,000.0 2,200.0 3,000.0 4,800.0 5,200.0 11,200.0 300.0 1,300.0
1,993.0 548.0 747.4 1,196.0 1,296.0 2,790.0 74.7 324.0
NOT CONDUCTED/SAMPLE SIZE NOT
ADEQUATE
000 00 000
U9
Recovery
From LC
1,300.0
1,800.0
10,750.0
800.0
1,500.0
36,000.0
%
Recovery
From LC
203.0
246.0
51.0
84.2
152.0
51.0
*0nly traces were found above C13.
-------
E.3 Infrared Analysis
This procedure is used to determine the functional group types present
in an organic sample or LC fraction of a partitioned sample. The IR
data, when interpreted, provide information on functionality, e.g., carbonyl,
aromatic hydrocarbon, alcohol, amine, aliphatic hydrocarbon, halogenated
organic, etc. Compound information is possible only when that compound
is known to be present as a dominant constituent in the sample. However,,
such foreknowledge is normally unlikely.
Sample amounts required for this analysis are in the milligram (nig)
range with a lower limit of approximately 0.5 mg. A compound must be
present in the sample at about 5%-10% (w/w) or more in order for the
stronger functional groups of the compound to become apparent for inter-
pretive purposes. Organic solvents, water and some inorganic materials
cause interferences. Water and other substances may also cause a decrease
in the quality (e.g., resolution of a spectrum, sensitivity) of the
analysis.
The initial organic sample or LC fraction, after evaporation, is
either (1) taken up in a small amount of carbon tetrachloride or methylene
chloride and transferred to a NaCl window, or (2) mixed with powdered
KBr, ground to a fine consistency, and then pressed into a pellet. If a
LRMS is to be run on the sample, it must be taken up in a solvent and an
aliquot set aside for LRMS analysis. A grating IR spectrophotometer is
used to scan the sample in the IR region from 2.5 to 25 microns. The
spectrum is then interpreted to determine functional group types in the
sample.
Table E-2 presents the spectral interpretations on the gravimetric
residues of the>C13 aliquots and the LC fractions. The major, medium,
minor and trace designations refer to the absorption band intensities.
The interpretation has reported compound types/MEG categories rather than
functionality, e.g., carbonyl. For example, in a case where only aliphatic
hydrocarbon intensities are found in a spectrum and they are at a trace
level, then the interpretation is only reported under that column heading.
193
-------
Table E-2. Infrared Interpretation >C13 and LC Fractions Gravimetric Residue
Sample
Code
>C13
LC 1
LC 2
LC 3
LC 4
LC 5
LC 6
LC 7
LC 8
Sampl e
Code
>C13
Sample
Code
>C13
LC 1
LC 2
LC 3
LC 4
LC 5
LC 6
LC 7
LC 8
Major
Aliphatic Hydrocarbon
Al i phati c Hydrocarbon
Aliphatic Hydrocarbon
Aromatic Hydrocarbon
Ether
Phenol
Phenol
Carbo.xylic Acid
Water
Al i phati c Hydrocarbon
Al i phati c Hydrocarbon
-
Ester, phthalate
-
-
Acid, phthalate
_
Water
Medium Minor
S-2-1
Aromatic Hydrocarbon Water
Aromatic Hydrocarbon Water
Aromatic Hydrocarbon Water
Halogenated Aromatic Water
Halogenated Aromatic Water
Halogenated Aromatic Water
Carboxylic Acid Water
Phenol Water
Carboxylic Acid Water
S-2-2
Water
LC Fractionation not conducted
S-2-3
Aromatic Hydrocarbon Water
-
NO INFRARED ACTIVITY
-
-
-
_
Carboxylic Acid
Trace
Ester
Ester
Ester
Ester
Ester
Ester
Ketone
Ketone
Ketone
Ester
Ester
-
Aliphatic Hydrocarbon
Aliphatic Hydrocarbon
Aliphatic Hydrocarbon
IP
-------
Table E-2. Infrared Interpretation >C13 and LC Fractions Gravimetric Residue (Continued)
Sample
Code
>CT3
LC 1
LC 2
LC 3
1C 4
LC
LC
LC
LC 8
Major
Ali phati c Hydrocarbon
Al iphati c Hydrocarbon
Aromatic Hydrocarbon
Ester
Phenol
Phenol
Carboxylic Acid
Carboxylic Acid
Medium
Minor
S-2-4
Aromatic Hydrocarbon Water
Aromatic Hydrocarbon
Aliphatic Hydrocarbon
Halogenated Aromatic
Carboxylic Acid
Water
Water
Trace
Ester
Ester
Water
10
Ol
Sample
Code
>C13
LC 1
LC 2
LC 3
LC 4
LC 5
LC 6
LC 7
LC 8
Ali phati c Hydrocarbon
Aromatic Hydrocarbon
Aromatic Hydrocarbon
Aromatic Hydrocarbon
Carboxylic Acid,
Ester
Carboxylic Acid
Water
S-2-5
Aromatic Hydrocarbon Ester
Water
Halogenated
Aromatic Hydrocarbons
Ester
Halogenated
Aromatic Hydrocarbons
Water
Water
Carboxylic Acid
Halogenated
Aromatic Hydrocarbons
Ester
Carboxylic Acid
-------
Table E-2. Infrared Interpretation >C13 and LC Fractions Gravimetric Residue (Continued)
Sample
Code
>C13
LC 1
LC 2
LC 3
LC 4
LC 5
LC 6
LC 7
. LC 8
Sample
Code
>C13
LC 1
LC 2
LC 3
LC 4
LC 5
LC 6
LC 7
LC 8
Sampl e
Code
>C13
Major
Aliphatic Hydrocarbon
Aliphatic Hydrocarbon
Aliphatic Hydrocarbon
-
Ester
Phenol
Ester
Carboxylic Acid
Water
Aliphatic Hydrocarbon
Aliphatic Hydrocarbon
\,
-
-
Ester, phthalate
Ester
Medium Minor
S-2-6
Aromatic Hydrocarbon Ester
Aromatic Hydrocarbon
Aromatic Hydrocarbon
Halogenated Aromatic
-
Ester
Phenol
Water Ester
Carboxylic Acid Ester
S-2-7
Aromatic Hydrocarbon Water
Aromatic Hydrocarbon
Aromatic Hydrocarbon
Aromatic Hydrocarbon
•• •*
_
NO INFRARED ACTIVITY
NO INFRARED ACTIVITY
Fly. Ash Standard, NBS #1633
Water NO INFRARED ACTIVITY IN
LC FRACTIONS
Trace
Water
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Ester
-
-
-
Ester
Aliphatic Hydrocarbon
—
10
-------
E.4 Liquid Chromatographic Fractionation
The detailed procedure for the liquid chromatographic (LC) separation
is given in Reference 1. All sample extracts and neat organic liquids are
subjected to this procedure, if sample quantity is adequate. A 100 mg
portion of the sample is preferred for the LC, but smaller quantities down
to a lower limit of about 8 mg may be used. The sample is separated into
approximate classes on silica gel using a gradient elution technique. The
solvent sequence used for the procedure is given in Table E-3.
The LC separation procedure is not a high resolution technique and
consequently there is overlap in class type between many of the fractions.
Fraction 1 contains only the paraffins and possibly some olefins. Frac-
tions 2 through 4 contain predominantly aromatic species. The smaller
aromatics (benzene, naphthalene) will tend to elute in the early fraction
(2) while the larger aromatics (benzopyrene, etc.) will tend to elute in
Fractions 2 through 4. Some low polarity oxygen and sulfur containing
species may also elute in Fraction 4 but most of these will not elute
until addition of methanol.
Table E-3. Solvents Used in Liquid Chromatographic Separations
Fraction
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Solvent Composition
Pentane
20% Methylene Chloride in Pentane
50% Methylene Chloride in Pentane
Methylene Chloride
5% Methanol in Methylene Chloride
20% Methanol in Methylene Chloride
50% Methanol in Methylene Chloride
5/70/30, Cone. HC1/Methanol/Methylene Chloride
197
-------
Fractions 5 through 7 will contain the polar species including phenols,
alcohols, phthalates, amines, ketones, aldehydes, amides, etc. The distri-
bution of class type between Fractions 5 through 7 will be a function of
their polarity and affinity for the silica gel. Some weak acids may elute
in Fraction 7.
The very polar species, primarily acids such as carboxylic acids and
sulfonic acids, will elute in Fraction 8.
After each fraction is collected, it is transferred to a tared alumi-
num micro weighing dish for evaporation and gravimetric analysis (Sec-
tion E.2). Fraction 8 should be dried in a glass container because of its
hydrochloric acid content. Each fraction is subsequently analyzed by IR
(Section E.3) and, when the quantity is sufficient, LRMS.
Table E-4 lists the MEG categories present in each LC fraction. On
the Level 1-Level 2 data presentation charts these are found under "SASS,
LAB, LCI - SASS, LAB, LC8" headings. The Level 1 gravimetric data reported
3
for each LC fraction provide the ng/nr criteria which trigger the deci-
sion to conduct Level 2.
The BatteHe Run #2 organic extract aliquots were all less than the
100 mg sample preferred for the LC fractionation technique. This has
effected the recovery data. In some cases column bleed has produced very
high recoveries and in others sample has been lost on the column. In either
case this should not affect the Level 2 analysis as adequate procedural
blanks have been provided.
198
-------
Table E-4. MEG Categories Present in Each LC Fraction
LC
Fraction
1
2
3
LC
Fraction
4
5
MEG Category Present
1.
2.
2.
15.
16.
21.
22.
15.
16.
21.
22.
23.
Aliphatic Hydrocarbons (HCs)
Halogenated Aliphatic HCs
Halogenated Aliphatic HCs
Benzene, Substituted Benzene HCs
Halogenated Aromatic HCs
Fused Aromatic HCs
Fused Non-Alternant Polycyclic HCs
Benzene, Substituted Benzene HCs
Halogenated Aromatic HCs
Fused Aromatic HCs
Fused Non-Alternant Polycyclic HCs
Heterocyclic Nitrogen Compounds
MEG Category Present
3.
4.
9.
17.
,21.
22.
23.
25.
7.
9.
13.
17.
18.
24.
Ethers
Halogenated Ethers
Nitriles
Aromatic Nitro Compounds
Fused Aromatic HCs
Fused Non-Alternant Polycyclic HCs
Heterocyclic Nitrogen Compounds
Heterocyclic Sulfur Compounds
Aldehydes, Ketones
Nitriles
Mercaptans
Aromatic Nitro Compounds
Phenols
Hetertocyclic Oxygen Compounds
199
-------
Table E-4. MEG Categories Present in Each LC Fraction (Continued)
LC
Fraction
6
7
8
MEG Category Present
5.
7.
8.
9.
10.
18.
19.
8.
10.
11.
18.
20.
8.
14.
Alcohols
Aldehydes, Ketones
Carboxylic Acids, Derivatives
Nitriles
Amines
Phenols
Halophenols
Carboxylic Acids, Derivatives
Amines
Azo Compounds, Hydrazine Derivatives
Phenols
Nitrophenols
Carboxylic Acids, Derivatives
Sulfuric Acid, Sulf oxides
E-5 Conclusions
Although the Level 1-Level 2 data presentation charts have not been
reproduced in this report (due to their bulk), the data generated during
this Level 1 organic analysis activity has been transferred to them from
Table E-l. The results of this data assessment are summarized on
Table E-5. Table E-5 lists, for LC fractions from each sample, the MEG
category numbers requiring Level 2 analysis. The numbers circled are
the results of data assessment from the current analytical activity and
those uncircled are from Battelle's Level 1 effort in September 1976. In
general, volatile or reactive (Categories 10, 21, 22, and 26) have not been
retained. This loss of volatile organics,
-------
Table E-5. Summary of Required Level 2 Organic Analysis
ro
o
BCL Sample
S-2-3, Overflow
Bed Material
>325 Mesh
S-2-4 Bed
Material Ash -
325 Mesh
S-2-5 Sludge
Sample
S-2-6, >27u
Particulate
S-2-7, <27p
Particulate
S-2-9, FLUE
Gas Sample
(Level 2 sample
not available)
LC 1
26
26
©
26
26
26
LC 2
dKg>,21, 22
21, 22
M» .0.0
2,©»<8>.©
2,©,<3>,@
2, 16, 21
LC 3
16, 21, 22
21, 22
®,0,®
,6,0 ,@
©,©.©
16, 21
LC 4
©
©
17
LC 5
©
©
12,
17
LC 6
0> 0.0.0.0
.0.©,©.®
.0.©.©
8, 10, 19,©
8, 10, 13, 19, 23
LC 7
«.o.o.o
0.0.0
10.0.0
,0.©,©
8, 10, 19, 20
8, 10, 19, 20
LC 8
0
®
0
8
8
MEG category numbers are listed. Those circles are indicated from
Battelle data.
the current Level 1 data. Those uncircled are from the
-------
APPENDIX F
SELECTED GC/MS SCAN
202
-------
169.0-,
BIG
12/04/77 14:51:00
SAMPLE: S-2-5
BANGE: G 1. 50 LABEL: N 0, 4.0
DATA: H136D il
CALI: 120377 SI
QUAN: A 0, 1.0 BASE: U 20, 3
SCANS
1 TO 50
122368.
30
3:15
40
4:20
50 SCAN
5:25 TIME
-------
MASS SPECTRUM
12/84/77 14:51:88 +
SAMPLE: S-2-5
1:65
DATA:
CALI:
H136D 818
128377 81
BASE H/E: 282
BIC: 128832.
168.0
50.0-
28 .8
217.8
9936.
350
450
-------
LIBRARY SEARCH DATA: 14136D * 10 BASE M/E: 202
12X04/77 14:51:00 + 1:05 CALI: 120377 * 1 R1C: 60543.
SAMPLE: S-2-5
22990 SPECTRA IN LIBRARYEP SEARCHED FOR MAXIMUM PURITY
B3 MATCHED AT LEAST 4 OF THE 12 LARGEST PEAKS IN THE UNKNOWN
RANK IND NAME
1 16509 P-TERPHENYL
2 16508 2-PHENYL NA
3 12501 1,8-D HI-PR
4 9942 PYRENE
5 10416 2-BENZYLNAP
RANK FORMULA
1 C18.H14
2 C16.H12
3 C16.H12
4 C16.H10
5 C17.H14
MASS INTEN 1
39 33
41 94
43 142
50
51
55 104
56 49
57 160
63
69 SB
70 45
71 107
74
75
B3 35
85 79
87
88
91
97 84
99
100 70
101 94
108
109 60
110
111 63
113 56
115
122
125 38
126 39 39
127 35
139 54 10
141 33
149 139
150 63
151
152 108 188
153
163 74
165 79 79
174
175
176 74 74
177
178 48
179
PHTHfl
OPYNV
HTHAL
2
39
6
38
129
17
9
74
12
72
11
M.UT B.PK PURITY FIT RFIT
230 202 405 793 451
204 202 380 87B 413
204 202 369 814 408
202 202 357 809 388
218 202 352 768 425
345
32 32 32
15
18
18 21 20
31
31 10
44
41 60
49
11
65 67
99 97
73
60
119
35
23
55
63
23
82 5
70 16
22
18
74
205
-------
MASS SPECTRUM
12/04/77 14:51:80 +
SAMPLE: S-2-5
1:37
DATA:
CALI:
14136D 815
120377 ttl
BASE tt/E: 228
BIG: 110208.
180.0-1
227.7
3252.
H/E
-------
LIBRARY SEARCH DATA: 14136D * 15 BftSE M/E: 228
12/04/77 14:51:00 + 1:37 CALI: 120377 * 1 RIC: 45247.
SAMPLE: S-2-5
22990 SPECTRA IN LIBRARYEP SEARCHED FOR MAXIMUM PURITY
56 MATCHED AT LEAST 4 OF THE 12 LARGEST PEAKS IN THE UNKNOUN
RANK IND NAME
1 13994 l,5-DITOLYLPENTADIYN-3-ONE
2 18941 0-TERPHENYL
3 10739 0-TERPHENYL
4 2989 0-TERPHENYL
5 16509 P-TERPHENYL
RANK FORMULA M.UT B.PK PURITY FIT RFIT
1 C19.H14.0 258 230 351 685 415
2 C18.H14 230 230 349 784 386
3 C18.H14 230 230 344 753 397
4 C18.CL14 706 230 334 754 408
5 C18.H14 230 230 319 755 363
MASS INTEN 12345
39 33
41 228 255
43 347 321
51 23 51
55 245
56 391
57 386
63 24 41
69 209
71 278 278
75 20 38
83 175
85 164
88 34 66
91 198
95 137
97 157
100 253
101 143 202 527
107 107
111 139
113 217 217 217
114 249 215
115 95 109
119 201 ,
123 110
125 105
126 21 33
137 94
139 84 21
143 188
149 530
150 132
151 126
152 57 41 36 125 218
163 143 142 142
165 42 41 204 41
167 202
176 101 102 102 .24 102
177 97
178 65
189 198 198 44 36 198
191 154
200 212" 152 116 176 145
201 115 57
202 406 406 459 406 439 464
203 150 150 96
213 225 168 155
-------
188.8
oo
27.9
MASS
12/84/77 15:81:60 +
SAMPLE: S-2-6
1:85
DATA: 14136E «18
CALI: 128377 il
BASE n/E: 28
BIC: 9728.
155,8
69,8
.8
' I'* I 'T' F' | *l iT'1 P I **'[ ' t' I • I ' I ' '| 'I ' I ' I ' I ' | ' I ' I ' I ' I ' T ' ' ' ' ' '
58 188 158 288 258
358
4416.
458
-------
LIBRARY SEflRCH DATA: 14I36E * IB BASE M/E: 43
12/04/77 15:01:00 + 1:05 CALI: 120377 # 1 R1C: 2739.
SAMPLE: S-2-6
0 SPECTRA IN LIBRARYEP SEARCHED FOR MAXIMUM PURITY
0 MATCHED AT LEAST 0 OF THE 12 LARGEST PEAKS IN THE UNKNOUN
MASS INTEN
39 1S7
41 838
43 1000
55 771
56 445
57 841
67 137
69 368
70 274
71 346
81 109
83 294
85 139
94 87
95 67
97 219
111 72
149 124
202 182
250 52
251 271
209
-------
LIBRARY SEARCH
12/04/77 15:01:00 +
SAMPLE: S-2-6
1:50
DATA:
CALI:
14136E *
120377 *
17
1
BASE M/E: 43
RIC: 3347.
22990 SPECTRA IN LIBRARYEP SEARCHED FOR MAXIMUM PURITY
107 MATCHED AT LEAST 6 OF THE 12 LARGEST PEAKS IN THE UNKNOWN
RANK IND NAME
1 3115 1-OCTADECENE
2 10192 1-OCTADECENE
3 14313 6-FORMYL-3-METHYL-2-OXO-4-HEXENOIC ACID
4 10687 EICOSANOL-1
5 2932 2-CHLORO-4-AMINO-6-ETHYLAMINO-S-TRIAZINE
RANK
FORMULA
1 C18.H36
2 C18.H36
3 C7.
4 C20
5 C5.
MASS
39
41
43
44
55
56
57
67
68
69
70
71
81
82
83
84
85
94
95
97
98
105
189
111
123
125
139
140
145
149
154
156
158
168
170
173
175
182
196
210
224
238
249
250
251
252
266
267
H8.04
.H42.0
H8.N5.CL
INTEN
219
886
1000
827
240
845
675
295
512
295
421
257
377
213
254
91
108
167
73
79
187
120
61
143
298
977
146
1
923
968
805
423
647
645
434
381
138
511
206
151
254
86
167
79
39
26
19
14
8
9
16
1
146
2
923
968
885
423
647
645
434
381
138
511
206
151
254
86
167
79
39
26
19
14
8
9
16
1
146
3
762
1114
599
692
966
281
618
566
287
393
292
213
256
119
156
79
58
113
M.UT B
252
252
156
298
173
4
823
1059
749
314
840
267
349
633
334
512
186
403
528
177
239
254
167
79
22
16
12
9
8
7
4
4
9
2
2
.PK PURITY FIT
43 391 868
43 391 868
43 371 853
43 356 750
43 352 832
5
749
1119
357
1074
560
518
647
234
352
368
199
269
167
79
116
120
135
210
RFIT
445
445
434
451
417
-------
108.8-1
BIG
12/04/77 15:09:09
SAMPLE: S-2-7
BANGE: G 1, 50 LABEL: N 0, 4.0 QUAN: A 0, 1.0
1.0
DATA: 14136F il
CALI: 120377 il
BASE: U 20, 3
SCANS
1 TO 50
15584.
10
1:05
20
2:10
30
3:15
40
4:20
50 SCAN
5:25 TIME
-------
188.8
27.9
MASS SPECTBUM
12/94/77 15:89:80 +
SAMPLE: S-2-7
1:05
DATA: 14136F 810
CALI: 120377 SI
BASE M/E: 28
BIC: 15152.
ro
ro
If/E
HH,
156
.6
TT
258
" 'I 'I ' I' I'
350
i • i -1 • |' i • i
450
4672.
-------
REFERENCES
1. Ryan, L. E., R. G. Beimer, and R. F. Maddalone. Approach to Level 2
Analysis Based on Level 1 Results, MEG Categories and Compounds and
Decision Criteria, EPA Contract Number 68-02-2613. 1978.
2. Hamersma, J. W., S. L. Reynolds and R. F. Maddalone. IERL-RTP
Procedures Manual: Level I Environmental Assessment. EPA-600/
2-76-106a. 1976.
3. Ellis, A. J. The I.A.G.C. Interlaboratory Water Analysis Comparison
Programme. Geochiminca Cosmochimca Acta. Vol. 40. Perganon Press,
Great Britain. 1976. pp. 1359-1374.
4. Kraft, M. L., Geothermal Brine Analysis GRR-1 Series. Report to
Battelle Northwest Laboratories. Contract #B-54340-A-11.
5. Chian, E. S. K., F. G. DeWalle. Compilation of Methodology Used
for Measuring Pollution Parameters of Sanitary Landfill Leachate.
Dept. of Civil Engineering, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois.
EPA #600/6-75-011. Prepared for the Environmental Protection
Agency, Solid and Hazardous Waste Research Division Municipal
Environmental Research Laboratory. 1975.
6. Segan, D. A., and A. Y. Cantillo. Direct Determination of Trace
Metals in Sea Water by Flameless Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometry.
Analytical Methods in Oceanography Advances in Chemistry, Series
#147. 1975.
7. Emmel, R. H., et al. Applications of a Two-Channel Atomic
Absorption Spectrophotometer. American Laboratory. 1977.
8. FLA-10 Graphite Tube Furnace Instruction Manual, Fisher Scientific.
9. Non-Absorbing Lines for. Background Correction, Flame Facts. Fisher
Scientific. 1974.
10. Atomic Absorption - AA Methods Manual. Fisher Scientific.
11. Standard HGA Conditions, Perkin Elmer Technical Manual.
12. Fassel, V. A., and R. N. Knisely. Anal. Chem., Vol. 46, 1110A. 1974.
213
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-600/7-79-063b
2.
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
LEVEL 2 CHEMICAL ANALYSIS OF FLUIDIZED-
BED COMBUSTOR SAMPLES
5. REPORT DATE
February 1979
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
L. E. Ryan, R. G. Beimer, and R. F. Maddalone
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
TRW, Inc.
Defense and Space Systems Group
One Space Park
Redondo Beach, California 90278
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
EHE623
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-02-2613, Task 6
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
EPA, Office of Research and Development
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Task Final; 12/76 - 12/78
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/600/13
15.SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES jERL-RTP project officer is Walter B. Steen, MD-61, 919/541-
2825.
16. ABSTRACT The repor|. gives results of a Level 1 data evaluation and prioritization and
the Level 2 environmental assessment (EA) chemical data acquired on a set of
fluidized-bed combustor (FBC) particulate samples. The Level 2 analysis followed
the approach described in 'Approach to Level 2 Analysis Based on Level 1 Results,'
a companion report. The report demonstrates the utility of the decision criteria
based on Multimedia Environmental Goal (MEG) compounds at Minimum Acute Toxi-
city Effluent (MATE) concentrations. It assesses the Level 1 FBC data through their
presentation on the Level 1 Data Reduction and Decision Charts: the assessment
results in a list of inorganic and organic compounds which are specifically sought
in the Level 2 chamical analyses. The data generated from the integrated approach
to Level 2 inorganic compound analysis is detailed, with the raw data appended. This
Level 2 inorganic effort was qualitative and quantitative, with oxidation states and
compound identification established. The organic Level 2 analytical work is based on
gas chromatography/mass spectrometry and resulted in various aromatic and ali-
phatic hydrocarbons quantitated and identified in the FBC emission samples.
7.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. cos AT I Field/Group
Pollution Toxicity
Assessments Inorganic Com-
hemical Analysis pounds
Sampling Organic Compounds
Fluidized-Bed Processing
ombustion
Dust
Pollution Control
Stationary Sources
Environmental Assess-
ment
Particulate
MEGs
MATE
13B
14B
07D
13H,07A
21B
11G
06T
07B
07C
8. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Unlimited
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport)
Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
225
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
Unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
214
. 8.u *
------- |