UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY DATE: April 7, 1980 subject: Interim Report - Organic Analyses and TCOD Determination In Extracts of Samples Collected from the Hempstead Resources Recovery System Incinerator. prom: James B. Homolya, Research Chemist RFSO, ESRL, MD-84 to: Or. J. Spatola, Chief A1r Monitoring Section, 2-SA At this time, sufficient data have been acquired from analyses of the Henpstead samples taken during the July experiments to provide an Interim report of results. Also the Northrop Services report which was reviewed by Region II personnel has been finalized to Include a discussion of experiments designed to verify the results which suggested that both formaldehyde and acetaldehyde were present In the emissions. Those experiments Indicated that the formate and acetate found 1n the Implnger were not the result of artifact formation, but could be formed by the oxidation of formaldehyde and acetaldehyde via hydrogen peroxide 1n the Implnger solutions. However, we cannot be entirely sure that certain unknown species were oxidized 1n solution. I must again point out that all of these experiments were carried out 1n an attempt to verify the findings from a single source characterization sample. Undoubtedly, any future characterization measurements at the Hempstead plant should be deslnged to specifically collect sufficient samples for formaldehyde determinations. He feel that the 1n-stack formaldehyde levels may be quite variable, reflecting shifts in the operating modes of the furnace from complete Incineration to partial pyrolysls. The latter condition would be expected to result 1n higher formaldehyde levels. Attached are Interim reports from Wright State University and the Analytical Chemistry Branch of EPA's Health Effects Research Laboratory which discuss current results of the collaborative analyses of certain Hempstead extracts for TCDO. Our decision to look for these compounds was based upon the Identification of polychlorlnated phenols present 1n samples analyzed by "cursory" gc/ms techniques (attached Northrop Report, ES-TR-80-04, pp 14-19. Samples from Runs 1-3 shown 1n Table 4 of the Northrop report have been assayed for total TCOD by Wright State. At this time the Implnger extracts for Runs 2 and 3 have been analyzed by HERL. A sunmary of the laboratories' findings 1s given 1n Table 1. Table 1 Analyses of Hempstead Extracts for Total TCOD (nanograms) Run # Implnger XAD-2 Cartridge Total ws HERL US WS 1 * * 23.3 ng 23.3 ng 2 10.7 8 28.4 39.1 3 34.3 33.6 35.0 69.3 ~Sample discarded. CPA Fam 1J20-* (Rav. J-74) ------- The confirmatory analyses by HERL have not yet been completed because of delays caused by Instrumentation problems at Wright State. The results from two samples that have been analyzed are 1n good agreement with the Wright State data. We hope to have comparable TCOO analyses for all samples completed within the next two weeks. From their reports, there appears to be some disagreement between each laboratory's estimate of specific TCDD Isomers present and quantitation of the 2,3,7,8-TCDD. This problem Is rooted In the fact that neither laboratory has analytical standards for all 22 TCDD Isomers, making specific Isomer Identification and quantitation tenuous. It Is my understanding that only Dow Chemical Co. and Dr. Rappe, University of Umea, Sweden, have prepared small quantities of all of the tetra Isomers. Recently Wright State was sent the particulate fractions from Runs 1-3 which they will extract and analyze for total TCDD. For completion of the present project, both Wright State and HERL will attempt to determine the concentrations of higher chlorinated dloxlns 1n the extracts. These results m*y give us a clue as to the origin of the TCDD In the flue gases. Table 2 Is abstracted from the work of Rappe, et al., 1n which purified chloro- phenates were sprayed on leaves which were then burned In the laboratory. The distribution of chlorinated d1benzo-d1ox1ns were remarkably different for the two chlorophenates studied. I understand that Midwest Research Institute has Identified 2,4,5- and 2,4, 6-tr1ch1oropheno1 In similar extracts taken from Hempstead samples collected 1n August, 1979. It will be Interesting to examine the similarity 1n the distribution of dloxlns to those samples from July. As the progress of our work nears completion, I will prepare a final report to consolidate the results from both laboratories for your review and comment. ------- Table 2 Amounts of PCDOs Found 1n Burning Experiments of Purified Chlorophenates* (ug PCDDs / g chlorophenate) 2,4,6-Trlchloro- Phentachloro- phenate phenate original birch leaves original birch leaves sample charcoal sample charcoal Tetra-CDDs < 0.02 2100 < 0.02 5.2 Penta-CDDs < 0.03 5.0 < 0.03 14 Hexa-CDDs < 0.03 1.0 < 0.03 56 Hepta-CDDs < 0.1 3.0 0.3 172 Octa-CDD < 0.1 6.0 0.9 710 ~from: Rappe, et a!., Chemosphere, No. 3, pp 269-281. 1978. cc: w/o attachments Dr. A. Ellison Dr. J. Wagman Dr. A. Altshuller Dr. W. Wilson cc: w/attachments rfKr. R. Ogg, Region II (3 copies) Nr. R. Harless, HERL Dr. H. DeLarco, OTS, HQ Mr. A. Freeman, IERL, Cincinnati Dr. B. Del linger, NSI Mr. J. Cheney, ESRL ------- |