EPA - 600 / R- 9 8- 013 February 1998 Products of Incomplete Combustion from Direct Burning of Pentachlorophenol-Treated Wood Wastes by: S.Y. Lee and J.C. Valenti Acurex Environmental Corporation 4915 Prospectus Avenue Durham, NC 27713 EPA Contract No. 68-D4-0005 Work Assignment No. 3-22 EPA Project Officer: Robert V. Hendriks Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division National Risk Management Research Laboratory 86 T.W. Alexander Drive Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 Prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development Washington, D.C. 20460 ------- TECHNICAL REPORT DATA (Please read Instructions on the reverse before complei III llll II ||||l III I ||l|| III 11 III 1. REPORT NO. 2. EPA-600/R-98-013 3. in mi ii inn iiiiiiiii hi11 in PB98-127731 4. TITLE ANO SUBTITLE Products of Incomplete Combustion from Direct Burning of Pentachlorophenol-Treated Wood Wastes S. REPORT DATE February 1998 6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE 7. AUTHOR(S) S. Y. Lee and J. C. Valenti 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO. 9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS A cur ex Environmental Corporation 4915 Prospectus Avenue Durham, North Carolina 27713 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO. 11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO. 68-D4-0005, WA 3-22 12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS EPA, Office of Research and Development .Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 13. TYPE OF REPORT ANO PERIOD COVERED Task Final; 1/96 - 1/97 14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE EPA/600/13 15. supplementary notesAppCD project officer is Robert V. Hendriks, Mail Drop 63, 919/541-3928. i6. abstract rep0rt gives results of a study to identify potential air pollution pro- blems from the combustion of waste wood treated with pentachlorophenol preserva- tive for energy production in a boiler. The study emphasized the characterization of the products of incomplete combustion (PICs) in the combustion flue gas. The meth- odology used was to compare the flue gas concentrations of PICs prior to the air pol- lution control device of a pilot-scale combustor burning untreated wood and burning wood treated with pentachlorophenol preservative. The tests showed that combustion is an effective method of destroying the pentachlorophenol in the treated wood, with destruction efficiencies higher than 99. 99%. Differences in the flue gas concentra- tions of various PICs from the combustion of untreated and treated wood fuels have been noted. The data do not enable identification of the exact cause of these differ- ences in flue gas concentrations. These differences are possibly caused by the sig- nificantly different chlorine content of the two fuels. The difference in flue gas flow rate required for the combustion of these two fuels with different combustion charac- teristics (moisture content and heating value) may also cause the differences in PIC formation rates. These data are strongly influenced by the design, configuration, and operation of the combustor system. 17. KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS a. DESCRIPTORS b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS c. COS ATI Field/Group Pollution Wood Wastes Combustion Phenols Wood Preservatives Fuels Pollution Control Stationary Sources Pentachlorophenol Products of Incomplete Combustion (PICs) 13 B llL 2 IB 07C 11G 2 ID 18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT Release to Public 19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport) Unclassified 21. NO. OF PAGES 162 20. SECURITY CLASS (This page) Unclassified 22. PRICE EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73) ------- NOTICE' This document has been reviewed in accordance with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency policy and approved for publication. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorse- ment or recommendation for use. Reproduced from best available copy. ii ------- FOREWORD The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is charged by Congress'with pro- tecting the Nation's land, air, and water resources. Under a mandate of national environmental laws, the Agency strives to formulate and implement actions lead- ing to a compatible balance between human activities and the ability of natural systems to support and nurture life. To meet this mandate, EPA's research program is providing data and technical support for solving environmental pro- blems today and building a science knowledge base necessary to manage our eco- logical resources wisely, understand how pollutants affect our health, and pre- vent or reduce environmental risks in the future. The National Risk Management Research Laboratory is the Agency's center for investigation of technological and management approaches for reducing risks from threats to human health and the environment. The focus of the Laboratory's research program is on methods for the prevention and control of pollution to air, land, water, and subsurface resources; protection of water quality in public water systems; remediation of contaminated sites and groundwater; and prevention and control of indoor air pollution. The goal of this research effort is to catalyze development and implementation of innovative, cost-effective environmental technologies; develop scientific and engineering information needed by EPA to support regulatory and policy decisions; and provide technical support and infor- mation transfer to ensure effective implementation of environmental regulations and strategies. This publication has been produced as part of the Laboratory's strategic long- term research plan. It is published and made available by EPA's Office of Re- search and Development to assist the user community and to link researchers with their clients. E. Timothy Oppelt, Director National Risk Management Research Laboratory iii ------- ABSTRACT This study was conducted to identify potential air pollution problems from the combustion of waste wood treated with pentachlorophenol preservative for energy production in a boiler. The emphasis of the study was placed on the characterization of the products of incomplete combustion (PICs) in the combustion flue gas. The methodology used was to compare the flue gas concentrations of PICs prior to the air pollution control device of a pilot- scale combustor burning untreated wood and burning wood treated with pentachlorophenol preservative. The tests showed that combustion is an effective method of destroying the pentachlorophenol contained in the pentachlorophenol-treated wood, with destruction efficiencies higher than 99.99 %. Differences in the flue gas concentrations of various PICs from the combustion of untreated and treated wood fuels have been noted. The data do not enable identification of the exact cause of these differences in flue gas concentrations. These differences are possibly caused by the significantly different chlorine content of the two fuels. The difference in flue gas flow rate required for the combustion of these two fuels with different combustion characteristics (moisture content and heating value) may also cause the differences in PIC formation rates. These data are strongly influenced by the design, configuration, and operation of the combustor system and may not be quantitatively comparable to other combustors. ------- TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Abstract iv List of Tables V11 List of Figures ix Acknowledgment x Conversion Table x 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 EXPERIMENTAL 2 2.1 Test Facility 2 2.2 Operation of the MFC 8 2.3 Waste Wood Fuel 9 2.4 Combustion Parameters 10 2.5 Manual Sampling and Analytical Procedures 11 3.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 17 3.1 Test Conditions 17 3.2 Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Concentrations 24 3.3 Semi-Volatile Organic Compound (SVOC) Concentrations . 25 3.4 Pentachlorophenol (PCP) Destruction Efficiency 26 3.5 Dioxin/Furan (PCDD/PCDF) Concentrations 26 3.6 Polychlorobiphenol (PCB) Concentrations 31 3.7 Aldehyde and Methane Concentrations 32 3.8 Toxicity Characteristic Leachate Procedure (TCLP) Analysis of Flyash 32 4.0 CONCLUSIONS 33 5.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL 34 5.1 Data Quality Indicators 35 5.2 Summary of Quality Assurance and Quality Control Results . 37 5.3 Internal Audits 43 V ------- 6.0 REFERENCES 48 APPENDIX I: CEMDATA 1-1 APPENDIX D: VOC SAMPLE ANALYSIS RESULTS II-1 APPENDIX HI: SVOC SAMPLE ANALYSIS RESULTS IE-1 APPENDIX IV: PCDD/PCDF ANALYSIS RESULTS IV-1 APPENDIX V: PCB ANALYSIS RESULTS V-l vi ------- LIST OF TABLES Table Number Page 2-1 Continuous Emission Monitors 7 2-2 Fuel Analysis 10 2-3 Volatile Organic Compound Target Analytes 12 2-4 Semi volatile Organic Compound Target Analytes 15 3-1 Combustor Operating Conditions 17 3-2 Summary of Flue Gas Temperature and CEM Data 18 3-3 Flue Gas VOC Concentrations 24 3-4 Flue Gas SVOC Concentrations 25 3-5 Destruction Efficiency for Pentachlorophenol 26 3-6 Total PCDD/PCDF Concentrations 27 3-7 Distribution of PCDD/PCDF in Sampling Train 30 3-8 PCB Test Results 31 3-9 Aldehyde Test Results 32 3-10 TCLP Analysis Results 33 5-1 Summary of Data Quality Achieved for Continuous Emission Monitors 39 5-2 Summary of Data Quality Achieved for Flow Measurement Devices 40 5-3 Data Quality Achieved for the PCDD/PCDF Analyses 42 5-4 Data Quality Achieved for SVOC Analyses 44 vii ------- 5-5 Data Quality Achieved for PCB Analyses 45 5-6 Performance Evaluation Audit 47 viii ------- LIST OF FIGURES Figure Number Page 1-1 Schematic of Multifuel Combustor 3 3-1 Temperature Profile for Untreated Wood Tests 19 3-2 Temperature Profile for Treated Wood Tests 20 3-3 Temperature Vs. Flue Gas Residence Time for Untreated Wood Tests 21 3-4 Temperature Vs. Flue Gas Residence Time for Treated Wood Tests 22 3-5 PCDD Congeners (Untreated Wood Tests) 28 3-6 PCDD Congeners (Treated Wood Tests) 28 3-7 PCDF Congeners (Untreated Wood Tests) 29 3-8 PCDF Congeners (Treated Wood Tests) 29 ix ------- ACKNOWLEDGMENT The support of C.W. Lee, Jeffrey Ryan, and James Kilgroe of EPA, NRMRL-RTP and the Acurex sampling and analytical laboratory crews in the planning and support of this project are gratefully acknowledged. CONVERSION TABLE Certain non-metric units are used in this report for the reader's convenience. Readers more familiar with metric units may use the following factors to convert to that system. Nonmetric Multiplied by Yields Metric °F 5/9(°F-32) °C psi 6.89 kPa Btu/lb 2.326 J/g CFM 2.832 x 10"2 m3/min in. 2.54 x 10"2 m in. ofH20 248.84 Pa X ------- 1.0 INTRODUCTION The use of waste wood for producing energy is a promising supplement to burning fossil fuels for many regions of the country. Besides recovering energy and conserving landfill space, burning waste wood fuels also mitigates global warming by replacing fossil fuel combustion. If left to decay in the landfill, the waste wood will eventually release the global warming gases to atmosphere. By producing energy from burning the waste wood, fossil fuel will be conserved, thus reducing the release of the global warming gases. However, the environmental consequence resulting from emissions generated by combustion of waste wood that contains paints resins, or preservatives are not well understood. There are some indications that the combustion of waste wood treated with chemicals may produce potentially hazardous products of incomplete combustion (PIC) emissions such as dioxins and furans.1'2 The possibility of these types of emissions has caused regulator and the public concern as to the risk that treated wood combustion poses to human health and the environment. With an understanding of pollutant formation processes under controlled pilot-scale conditions, better informed evaluations can be made for the full-scale combustion of treated waste wood. A 1992 study3 sponsored by the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority and others identified potential air and ash emissions of criteria and hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) based on existing test burn data, wood and ash composition data, and air impact analysis. While the report provided valuable data, a full characterization of the environmental and regulatory implications of burning treated wood could not be made because the test burn data were obtained using different test methods for a wide variety of boiler types, operating conditions, fuel sources and mixes, and air pollution control equipment. In addition, the emissions were not related to the composition of the wood fuel actually burned. For example, the wood used in the laboratory analyses to determine the chemical composition of waste wood and wood ash were not burned in a large-scale combustion device so that air and ash emissions could be measured. The present project was designed to address some of the data limitations encountered in the NYERDA study. The main objective of the project was to characterize emissions (mainly 1 ------- PICs) resulting from controlled test burns of untreated and pentachlorophenol treated wood. Utility poles and crossbars are typically treated with a preservative such as pentachlorophenol to prolong their service life. After being taken out of service, the treated woods are normally disposed of by land filling. Burning such wood waste in boilers for steam generation becomes an increasingly attractive management alternative as it contains substantial energy values and reduces land filling costs. Pilot scale combustion tests were conducted under well controlled conditions using a pilot-scale combustion system, small enough to allow control over the key parameters that affect emissions, yet large enough to effectively simulate full-scale combustion systems. The pilot- scale approach for studying waste wood combustion offers the most efficient and cost-effective means of identifying and controlling variables that govern pollutant formation and destruction during combustion. Pilot facilities can mimic pollutant formation and destruction processes involved in waste wood combustion at a practical scale without the extensive time and cost required for operating a full-scale facility. With this approach, the important variables that control the formation and destruction of pollutants during combustion can be isolated and their effects determined. Measurements were made in the flue gas upstream of existing air pollution control equipment to characterize the formation of trace organic pollutants. Prior to burning each load of treated wood, a sample of that load was obtained and analyzed to determine the chemical composition of the wood. During combustion testing, sampling and analysis for a wide variety of PICs, including volatile organic compounds (VOCs), semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs), and dioxins and furans, were performed. 2.0 EXPERIMENTAL 2.1 Test Facility The combustion testing was conducted using the multi-fuel combustor (MFC) located at EPA's National Risk Management Research Laboratory's research facility in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. The MFC, shown in Figure 1, is a pilot-scale stoker combustor with 0.58 MW (2 million Btu/hr) maximum thermal output. The MFC can simulate the full range of conditions that might be encountered in commercial stoker-fired combustion facilities. The MFC 2 ------- U) Stack Radiant Furnace Cooling Water Conveetive Section Fuel Daghouse Sampling Port Ash Ail- Ash -— Ash Scrubber FIGURE 1-1 SCHEMATIC OF MULTIFUEL COMBUSTOR ------- is capable of burning a wide variety of solid fuels, including municipal solid waste (MSW), refuse derived fuel (RDF), biomass fuel, and coal, singly or in combination. The MFC stoker grate system was designed for operation under mass burn or spreader stoker (semi-suspension) firing conditions. Bottom ash is manually removed from the combustor on a periodic basis by cleaning of the fuel bed. The processes controlling pollutant formation and destruction can be studied during combustion on the fuel bed, in the radiant furnace or the convective section, as well as downstream of air pollution control devices, such as a baghouse and scrubber. The combustor is constructed with modular sections to provide maximum flexibility for modifying the combustor for research purposes. Access ports are installed throughout the combustor for sampling and visual observation. All process temperatures, pressures, feed, and flow rates of the MFC are monitored by sensors installed at various locations in the combustor. The MFC is equipped with a natural gas burner for preheating and start-up operations. The MFC facility consists of the following major component sections: • Combustor The combustor, sometimes called a spreader stoker, was designed and fabricated by Reaction Engineering International, Salt Lake City, Utah. It is designed to burn coal, RDF, and biomass as the main fuel. Gas burners are installed to maintain system temperature when the solid fuel is not burned. Preheated combustion air is provided under and over the grate. • Fuel Feeding System The fuel feeding system consists of a storage hopper, a feed conveyor, an activated feed bin, and a vibrating feeder. Fuel is moved from the storage hopper to an activated feed bin by means of a flight conveyor. The activated feed bin in concert with a vibrating feeder supplies fuel to the stoker combustor. The solid conveyer is a Model CWR2430-12 Camwall conveyor with a rated speed of 100 fpm. The activated bin and the vibrating feeder are both manufactured by Kinergy Corporation. The mass flow of the vibratory feeder is calibrated for control of the fuel feed rate. The feeder assembly is housed inside a gas-sealed cover, connecting the silo to the spreader stoker. In addition, the cover is used to prevent air leakage into the combustor since the combustor is operated at negative pressure to prevent flame leakage outside the combustor. The fuel travels horizontally along the vibrational feeder and drops vertically through a transition 4 ------- section into the lower feed injection port of the spreader stoker. • Freeboard Section The refractory-lined freeboard section provides ample residence time to complete combustion and provides a time temperature profile comparable to full scale units. The furnace is approximately 38-ft in length and contains two vertical and two horizontal sections to conserve floor space within the room. Thermocouples have been installed to provide temperature of the gas stream. View and sample ports have been installed at strategic locations in the freeboard. • Convective Section After leaving the freeboard section, the flue gases enter the convective section where they are cooled. A high pressure water system with six cooling coils is used to remove heat from the flue gas. The high pressure water system is designed to maximize cooling conditions associated with cooling the flue gas at water flow rates from temperatures up to 2700 °F down to 300 °F. The high pressure water system can operate at pressures up to 500 psi to prevent boiling of the coolant. The cooling coils are connected to the high pressure manifold using flexible stainless steel hoses rated to 727 psi and control valves. The valves can be used to control the flow of the cooling water to each coil to customize the time-temperature profile in the convective section. • Pulse-jet Baghouse After exiting the convective section, the fuel gases pass through stainless steel ducting and enter the pulse-jet baghouse where particulate is removed. The baghouse (Model SQ L72 B36) was manufactured by M & W Industries, Inc., Rural Hall, NC. There is 358 ft2 of cloth area from 36 fiberglass bags with Gore-Tex membranes. The air to cloth ratio is 3.21:1. The pressure drop across the baghouse triggers the solid state timer to begin the pulsing for cleaning of the bags. A supply of 90-100 psi dry air is required for proper operation of the pulsing jets. • Packed Bed Scrubber After exiting the baghouse, the flue gases enter a packed bed scrubber (Model FRP Phaser V-l) manufactured by KCH Services, Inc., Forest City, NC. The scrubber is a countercurrent design for flows up to 1000 CFM with gases entering the bottom of the scrubber and exiting out the top into the induced draft fan. The scrubber solution is sprayed onto the packing media (2.3-in LANPAC) at the top of the packed bed. After leaving the bed, the gases 5 ------- pass through a section of mist eliminators to remove the excess moisture from the flow. The acidic effluent resulting from contact with the gases containing HC1 and sulfur oxides is neutralized by the addition of sodium hydroxide using a pH controller coupled to a variable speed gear pump. Recirculation of the scrubbing liquid is achieved through a 1.5-hp centrifugal pump mounted at the sump of the scrubber. From the recirculation pump, the scrubber solution enters a heat exchanger to reduce its temperature before being recirculated into the spray header. Makeup water, to compensate for evaporation, is taken from the city water system and is controlled by a float switch mounted in the sump. In the event of a power or recirculation pump failure, city water is diverted directly into the spray nozzles to ensure adequate cooling. A discharge pump operating from an independent float switch is used to remove any excess water that may accumulate in the sump during this mode. The discharge pump is also used for periodic blowdowns of the sump. The system will not operate if city water is not available or if the pressure falls below safe limits. • Continuous Emission Monitoring (CEM) System The MFC is equipped with conventional continuous emission monitors (CEMs) as well as a state-of-the-art infrared multi-component analyzer to measure continuous air emissions. The CEMs used for the program are listed in Table 2.1. 6 ------- TABLE 2.1 CONTINUOUS EMISSION MONITORS Measurement EPA Method Instrument NOx Method 7E Thermo Electron, Model 10, Range 0-10,000ppm Thermo Electron, Model 900, 9:1 dilution C02 Method 3A Horiba, Model VIA-510, Ranges: 0-5, 0-10, 0- 20, and 0-100 percent CO Method 10 Horiba, Model VIA-510, Ranges: 0-500, 0-1000, 0-2000, 0-10,000 ppm 02 Method 3A Rosemont Analytical, Model 755R, Ranges 0-5, 0-10, 0-25, and 0-50 percent THC Method 25 J U M Engineering, Model VE 7 HC1 None Perkin Elmer, MCS 100 Multi Component Analyzer, Ranges 0-10, 0-100, 0-1000, and 0- 10,000 ppm • Air Flow Measurement System The flow rates of air and flue gas in the MFC were measured by orifice plates and venturi flow tubes (Flow-Lin Corporation/ Arlington, TX). Continuous flow measurements were made of total air supply, gas burner air, fresh overfire air, fresh underfire air, recirculation air, sweep air, overfire recirculation air, and underfire recirculation gas. • Temperature Measurement Temperature sensing throughout the system was achieved by ungrounded K-type thermocouples. The thermocouples are either wired directly to pyrometers or go to selector switches (OMEGA Engineering/ Stamford, CT) connected to pyrometers. • Flue gas temperatures Temperatures of the flue gases are measured using thermocouples inserted directly into the flow. Due to the corrosive environment and elevated temperatures, these 7 ------- thermocouples have Inconel 600 sheaths whereas all other thermocouples in the facility have 316 stainless steel sheaths. The thermocouples have been located at strategic locations within the system. • Combustion air temperatures Fresh combustion air for the stoker was supplied from the outside or from the conditioned area inside the room (or any combination). The temperature of this combustion air is measured and then proportioned into four separate areas of the stoker as required: overfire, underfire, gas burner, and sweep. The gas burner air is used to provide combustion air directly to the area around the natural gas burner. The sweep air is used to spread the solid fuel across the stoker grate and contributes to the air available for combustion. • Pressure Measurement Pressure transmitters were used to monitor pressures in the system and pressure drops across components. These devices send 4-20 mA signals proportionate to the pressure back to the indicating device mounted in the control panel. Pressure indicators are used to measure system static pressures, the proportion of overfire and underfire recirculation air, and to trigger an alarm to the programmable controller if the pressure below the grate exceeds a prescribed value. This safety is used to determine if the grate has become clogged with excessive solid fuel or ash. 2.2 Operation of the MFC The combustor was operated in a spreader stoker firing mode for the present study. Wood fuel was stored in a large roll-off container located near the building which houses the MFC. A tote bin filled with the wood fuel was transported to the MFC facility and the fuel was dumped into a loading hopper installed outside the facility building with a lift truck. A conveyor moved the fuel to an active vibrating storage silo installed inside the building. The vibrating silo is designed to ensure homogeneous mixing and reduce wall sticking. The fuel was distributed from the silo onto an airtight horizontal vibrating feeder conveyor connecting the silo to the 8 ------- transition section of the spreader stoker. The mass flow of the conveyor was calibrated for control of the fuel feed rate. The fuel traveled horizontally along the conveyor and dropped through the transition section into the feed injection port of the spreader stoker. The vibrating transition section is designed with an inlet air plenum area and adjustable inlet angle plate to facilitate spreading fuel onto the stoker grate where a burning fuel bed is formed. 2.3 Waste Wood Fuel Two different waste wood fuels, an untreated wood and a pentachlorophenol treated wood, were obtained from an industrial plant where wood utility poles are treated with pentachlorophenol. The untreated wood was green pine poles that are typically treated in the plant. The treated wood was a mixture of recently treated poles, mostly small pieces cut from the ends to meet customers' length specifications, and aged treated poles taken out of service. Both treated and untreated poles were ground into chips with less than 7.6 cm (3 in.) in size with a shredder. The two fuels were characterized by proximate, ultimate and chlorine analysis with the result showing in Table 2-2. 9 ------- TABLE 2-2 FUEL ANALYSIS2 Component (as-received basis) Untreated Wood Treated Wood Moisture, % 33.44 21.46 Ash, % 0.25 0.57 Volatiles, % 57.92 66.28 Carbon, % 33.83 43.24 Fixed Carbon, % 8.39 11.69 Hydrogen, % 4.20 4.92 Nitrogen, % 0.28 0.28 Sulfur, % 0.01 0.05 Oxygen, % 27.99 29.48 Heating Value, Btu/lb 5569 7237 pentachlorophenol, mg/kg 6.7 4100 2,4 -dimethylphenol, mg/kg 2.4 3.6 Chlorine, % 0.02 0.20 a - Analysis performed by Commercial Testing & Engineering Co. It can be seen that the treated wood fuel is drier with higher heating value as compared with those of the untreated wood. The chlorine content of the treated wood fuel is ten times higher than that for the untreated wood. 2.4 Combustion Parameters The only parameter investigated in the present study was to determine the difference in the flue gas concentrations of pollutants when burning treated vs. untreated wood under similar "good combustion conditions." No attempt was made to evaluate the effects of combustion conditions on the formation of PICs. In general, the operating conditions of the test were 10 ------- considered optimal when the fuel was burning at the designed heat release rate with approximately 160 percent excess air and a low level (<100 ppm) of carbon monoxide emission in the flue gas. The amount of fuel burned was not measured continuously during a test. It was estimated by weighing the fuel before it was dumped into a loading hopper of the MFC and measuring the duration for its complete consumption to calculate an average feed rate. The average feed rate was used to estimate the amount of fuel burned during the known emissions sampling period. One-minute average readings of all the CEM measurements were recorded throughout the test by a data acquisition system. Flow rates of underfire air, overfire air, and sweep air as well as temperature measurements at various locations were continuously measured and recorded. 2.5 Manual Sampling and Analytical Procedures The MFC is equipped with several sampling ports for collecting flue gas samples. The emission sampling port used for this study is located in the duct that connects the convective section of the furnace to the baghouse. The selection of a sampling location prior to any gas cleaning device was made to ensure that any difference in pollutants generated by combustion of treated and untreated wood fuels be observed. Measurements made after the flue gas cleaning device would mask this difference and would be reflective of the effectiveness of the baghouse and scrubber used. At the selected sampling location, the horizontally oriented duct (8-in SS pipe - nominal inside diameter 8.25-in) is sufficient in length and free of flow disturbances as required by the sampling method. The particulate matter (PM) could be sampled in only one axial direction meeting Method 1A PM sampling requirements4. A separate port was not available for simultaneous velocity measurements; as a result, radial sampling locations were determined by a separate velocity traverse performed before and after sampling at each axial sampling location. During sampling, the duct was traversed based on the initial velocity traverse. A Volatile Organic Sampling Train (VOST), Modified Method 5 sampling train (MM 5), and a Method 23 sampling train were attached to the ports for simultaneous measurements for each run. 11 ------- • Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Sampling and Analysis VOCs were collected using the Volatile Organic Sampling Train (VOST) as described in SW-846 Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste Method 0030, "Volatile Organic Sampling Train."5 Two sets of samples were collected for each test and at least six sets of samples were collected for each type of waste wood. A total volume of ~ 20 liters were collected for each sample. Sampling was performed at 0.5 liter/min for 40 min. VOST samples were analyzed by purge and trap GC/MS as described in RCRA Methods 5040/8240.6'7 Practical quantitation limits (PQLs), based on the lowest calibration concentration, were used to estimate upper limit concentrations of those compounds not detected. Compounds detected below the PQL were flagged and reported as estimated concentrations. The target analytes examined are listed in Table 2-3. TABLE 2-3 VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUND TARGET ANALYTES Compound Typical Detection Limits in an Air Matrix (micrograms per VOST) Acetone 0.013 Benzene 0.002 Bromodichloromethane 0.002 Bromomethane 0.002 Bromoform 0.008 2-Butanone 0.008 Carbon disulfide 0.004 Carbon tetrachloride 0.002 Chlorobenzene 0.001 Chlorodibromomethane 0.004 Chloroethane 0.002 Chloroform 0.002 Chloromethane 0.009 (Continued) 12 ------- Table 2-3 (Cont.) Compound Typical Detection Limits in an Air Matrix (micrograms per VOST) 1,1 -Dichloroethane 0.003 1,2-Dichloroethane 0.004 1,1 -Dichloroethene 0.003 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 0.002 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 0.003 1,2-Dichloropropane 0.002 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 0.002 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 0.004 Ethyl benzene 0.004 2-Hexanone 0.014 Methylene chloride 0.002 4-Methyl-2-pentanone 0.006 Styrene 0.006 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 0.011 Tetrachloroethene 0.004 Toluene 0.002 1,1,1 -T richloroethane 0.001 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 0.003 Trichloroethene 0.001 T richlorofluoromethane 0.001 Vinyl acetate 0.009 Vinyl chloride 0.001 o-Xylene 0.006 m/p-Xylene 0.010 13 ------- • Semivolatile Organics Compound (SVOC) Sampling and Analysis SVOCs were collected using the Modified MM5 train as described in SW-846 Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste Method 0010, "Modified Method 5 Sampling Train".8 A total of at least 3 MM5 samples were collected for each wood type. The MM5 samples were analyzed for SVOCs by GC/MS as described in RCRA Method 8270B9. The SVOC target analyte list is presented in Table 2-4. The target list reflects the majority of the target analytes presented in Method 8270 along with additional analytes of interest. 14 ------- TABLE 2-4. SEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUND TARGET ANALYTES n-methyl-n-nitroso ethanamine Dimethylphalate Bis (2-chloroethyl) ether 2,6-dinitrotoluene Aniline Acenaphthene (CCC) Phenol (CCC) 4-nitroaniline 2-Chlorophenol 2,4-dinitrophenol (SPCC) 1,3-Dichlorobenzene Dibenzofuran 1,4-Dichlorobenzene (CCC) Pentachlorobenzene 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 2,4-dinitrotoluene Benzyl Alcohol 2,3,4,6-tetrachlorophenol Bis (2-chloroisopropyl) ether 4-nitrophenol (SPCC) 2-Methylphenol Fluorene Acetophenone Diethyl phathalate Hexachloroethane 4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether 4-methylphenol 2-methyl-5-nitrobenzenamine N-nitrododipropylamine (SPCC) 2-methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol Nitrobenzene Diphenylamine 1 -Nitrosopiperidine 4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether Isophorone Phenacetin 2,4-Dimethylphenol Hexachlorobenzene Bis (2-chloroethoxy) methane Pentachlorophenol (CCC) 2,4-Dimethylphenol Pentachloronitrobenzene Bis (2-chloroethoxy) methane Phenanthrene 2,4-Dichlorophenol (CCC) Anthracene 1,2,4-T richlorobenzene Dibutyl phthalate Naphthalene Fluoranthene (CCC) 2-Nitrophenol (CCC) Pyrene 2,6-Dichlorophenol P-dimethylaminoazobenzene Hexachloropropene Bensyl butyl phthalate 4-Chloroaniline 3,3 '-Dichlorobenzidine Hexachlorobutadiene (CCC) Benzo (a) anthracene N-butyl-N-nitroso-butanamine Chrysene 4-chloro-3-methyl-phenol (CCC) Di-N-octyl phthalate (CCC) 2-methylnaphthalene Benzo (b) fluoranthene 1,2,4,5-tetrachlorobenzene 7,12-Dimethylbenz (a) anthracene Hexachlorocyclopentadiene (SPCC) Benzo (k) fluoranthene 2,4,6-trichlorophenol (CCC) Benzo (a) pyrene (CCC) 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 3 -methylcholanthrene 2-chloronaphthalene Indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene 2-nitroanilinne Dibenz (a,h) anthracene 3-nitroaniline Benzo (ghi) perylene Acenaphthylene 15 ------- • PCDD/PCDF and PCB Sampling and Analysis PCDD/PCDF samples were collected as described in 40 CFR Part 60 Appendix A Method 23, "Determination of Polychlorinated Dibenzo-p-dioxins and Polychlorinated Dibenzofurans from Stationary Sources".10 This method is virtually identical to MM5 with minor changes. A total of six PCDD/PCDF samples were collected for the two types of waste wood tests. The Method 23 samples were analyzed for PCDD/PCDF by high resolution GC/MS in the selected ion monitoring mode (HRGC/HRMS-SIM). In addition to the regular PCDD/PCDF analysis, a PCB analysis was conducted on the same extracts. An aliquot of the front and back half extract archive potions of each of the Method 23 trains was combined and analyzed by HRGC/HRMS-SIM for PCBs. • Aldehyde and Methane Sampling and Analysis The flue gas was sampled for general levels of aldehydes with an adsorbent tube technique, Modified Method 1P-6A for indoor air." Between 10 and 15 liters of flue gas was pulled through a Waters DNPH on Silica Gel cartridge at a sampling rate of one liter per minute. The cartridges were analyzed by the Method 1P6A. A methane grab sample was pulled from the flue on the first two test days of untreated and treated wood tests using SW 846 Method 0040.12 The one liter grab samples were analyzed for methane concentration with US EPA Method 18.13 • Ash Sampling After each run, one batch of fly ash accumulated in the baghouse during the testing was collected. Fly ash batches were reduced to testing sizes according to the American Society of Testing Materials (ASTM) Standards for reducing field samples.14 All fly ash samples from the untreated wood test were combined and the mixed samples were analyzed. The same procedure was repeated for the treated wood test. Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) tests for metals were made for these ash samples using TCLP Method 1311.15 16 ------- 3.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 3.1 Test Conditions A total of six combustion tests, with three tests each for both the untreated and the treated wood fuels, were made under similar combustor operating conditions. The untreated wood tests were performed first followed by the treated wood tests in order to avoid any cross contamination with PCP. Triplicate runs were made to even out any possible variability of fuel characteristics, fuel feed rate, and nonuniform burning of wood chips on the grate surfaces. Since the fuel throughput rate cannot be measured in real time bases, combustor operating variables other than the fuel flow rate were used as the control parameter. The tests were performed under constant excess air level (nominally 160% excess air) and constant combustion gas temperature (850°C) measured by a thermocouple located 60 inches (152 cm) above the grate. The heat release rate for each test, as shown in Table 3-1, were estimated based on the average fuel feed rate TABLE 3-1 COMBUSTOR OPERATING CONDITIONS Test Average Fuel Feed Rate kg/hr (lb/hr) Combustor Thermal Output MW (Million Btu/hr) Flue Gas Flow dscm Untreated 1 134.4(296.4) 0.48(1.65) 19.4 Untreated 2 117.1(258.1) 0.42(1.44) 16.6 Untreated 3 114.1(251.6) 0.41(1.40) 17.9 Treated 1 100.6(221.8) 0.47(1.61) 25.0 Treated 2 102.3(225.6) 0.48(1.63) 21.0 Treated 3 102.5(225.9) 0.48(1.63) 25.8 calculated by the total amount of fuel consumed during the test period and the heating value of the fuel measured experimentally. As can be seen from Table 3-1, the calculated heat release rates and the measured flue gas flow rates for Untreated Tests 2 and 3 are lower than those of the other tests. The lower flue gas flows for Untreated Tests 2 and 3 are consistent with their low fuel feed rates. The heat release rate was approximately 1.6 million Btu/hr, which is 80% of the stoker grate's maximum designed output of the MFC. The fuel feed rate was adjusted manually 17 ------- throughout all tests in order to maintain a constant temperature of 850°C above the stoker grate and keep CO emission below 100 ppm, which were considered to be an acceptable combustion conditions. The average CEM-measured flue gas concentrations and gas temperatures are summarized in Table 3-2. CEM data over the test period for CO, C02, NOx, HC1, S02, THC, TABLE 3-2 SUMMARY OF FLUE GAS TEMPERATURE AND CEM DATA Location Temperature, °C Untreated Test 1 Untreated Test 2 Untreated Test 3 Treated Test 1 Treated Test 2 Treated Test 3 Stoker Exit 849 801 827 869 921 870 Sampling Port 152 153 153 155 160 160 Constituent Concentration, % 02 12.5 13.2 12.9 13.1 13.3 13.3 co2 7.5 7.2 7.1 6.7 6.5 6.5 h2o 11.0 9.8 9.8 8.7 8.7 9.0 coa 203 249 456 66 21 20 NOa 103 133 83 295 178 210 THCa 77 56 2 4 3 3 HCla <1 <1 <1 195 194 183 S02 10 11 13 <1 <1 <1 a in ppm @7% oxygen and H20 for all six test are shown in Appendix I. In addition, temperature profile and gas residence times are displayed in Figures 3-1 to 3-2 and Figures 3-3 to 3-4, respectively. Although the temperature-distance profile for treated and untreated tests were quite similar, the residence times for the treated tests in the higher temperature zone (zone up to the high temperature heat exchanger) were considerably shorter than that of the untreated wood tests. This is probably due to the differences in heating value of treated and untreated fuel as well as the fact that the fuel feed rate was controlled manually by the temperature reading of a 18 ------- UNTKtATTD WA4T5WOOO *1 <0* 3 lot a »0 40 i« 3M m M 9H « C04I (IU« OOTAMCI (HI UNTREATSD WASTHWOOO *3 '09 9 I — I I .—II ¦¦ . . I. i >!¦' 0 :OJ SS MO <00 900 ft) 900 30Q nJOS itQO sa4re*±*m bctimcs »»» FIGURE 3-1 TcWPSPATURE PRCRLS rCR UNTRS-VTEQ WCOO TESTS. (Tamparatur® of gas along cantanine as measured from grata) 19 ------- TREATED VVASTEWQQQ 31 TOO O u< 5 500 U1 J Hi 300 100 a too so soa 7TX3 comutl OWTAMCf (kli TREATED WASTSWOOO *2 tooo 900 700 ui as 300 200 100 500 600 1000 0 ICO 2CO 300 *ca soa 900 CSHTZSLftff OISTANCS fin) CSNTSXUHC DISTANCE (Inl FIGURE 3*2 TEMPERATURE PROFILE FOR TREATED WCOO TESTS. (Tamperatura cf gas along cantariine as measured from grate) 20 ------- UNTREATED WASTEWOCO *1 •3QO 90 100 0 12* * 5 0 74 3 10 it 12 TTMg (iW8ftd>| UNTREATED WASTEWCQO #2 900 aco 700 500 5 7 10 12 3 3 3 1 2 9 tt HM6 fs*««ndal UNTREATED WASTEWCQO « 900 300 [900 12 3 2 3 3 7 9 11 0 a i 4 TMS (s«eo«t0st FIGURE 3-3 TEMPERATURE VS. FLUE GAS RESIDENCE TIME FOR UNTREATED WCCO TESTS 21 ------- TREATED WASTEWQQQ *1 i 500 * 3 500 • < w 2 100 a 2 3 t S 4 7 a 8 n u TMC (ueonasr TREATED WASTEWCOO #2 300 v 500 ¦ ¦¦¦ u ™ s 500 \ < 300 V < \ t 400 \ 2 * £ :» so ^^ fOO- a 1 z 3 4 5 9 7 i 9 :Q 11 !2 TWfi (••eonds) TREATED WASTEWOOQ *3 700 i § 500 3 5 9 7 9 10 t: s ti 3 1 7XK (»««9n4s) FIGURE 3-1 TEMPERATURE VS. FLUE GAS RE3IOENCE TIME FOR TREATED WCOO TESTS. 22 ------- thermocouple closest to the combustion zone. The differences in residence time may have significant effect on PIC level and possibly PCDD/PCDF emission level at the sampling point. A number of factors might have introduced some uncertainty in measurements of the combustor thermal output and flue gas flow rate based on the total amount of fuel used and flue gas flow rates measured at beginning and end of the test, respectively. Since only one thermocouple was used at each downstream location of the combustor, the combustion gas temperature measured may not truly represent the average temperature of the gas stream at that location. The gas flow in the combustor appeared to be quite turbulent, and cold air introduced through the overfire nozzle into the combustor would require time to mix with hot combustion gas from the stoker grate. In addition, the wood fuel, both untreated and treated, may have been quite inhomogeneous. However, since the combustor heat release rate of the all the results were well below the design value of 2 million Btu/hr, quality of combustion and consequently the emission from the combustor would have been valid and acceptable. It was difficult to produce exactly identical combustion conditions for all the tests, mainly due to the inhomogeneity of the two wood fuels used. The treated wood fuel contained aged wood, which is drier, has 30% higher heating value than those of the untreated wood fuel. In addition, uneven fuel feed rates resulting from the frequent adjustment of the fuel feeder in order to maintain a reasonably constant combustion condition as indicated by the temperature and the CO level caused fluctuations in air to fuel ratio. Fluctuations in the fuel feed may be the cause of CO and THC excursions observed during the tests. The nonhomogeneous nature of the fuels coupled with the practical difficulties in burning such fuels under well defined conditions made the accurate estimation of heat release rates during tests difficult. The high average CO concentrations for the untreated fuel tests, as shown in Table 3-2, are the result of a large number of CO excursions. The steady-state CO concentrations during normal operation were well below 100 ppm, but the high CO spikes during excursions resulted in significantly higher average concentrations. The high incidence of excursions were probably due to the fact that combustion conditions were difficult to control when burning the untreated wood, which has low heating value and high moisture content. However, C02 and H20 concentrations, which are the measure of air to fuel ratio stayed constant for all six tests indicating similar steady-state combustion 23 ------- conditions for all the test runs. The repeatability of the tests are considered to be reasonable for this size of plant considering the inhomogeneous nature of the fuels coupled with the lack of means of accurately measuring and controlling the fuel flow rate 3.2 Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Concentrations A total of 50 volatile organic compounds were analyzed for in the VOC samples obtained for the tests. The results of the analyses are reported Appendix n. Of the 50 compounds analyzed, only eight (8) compounds were found to be present above the analytical detection limit in at least one test and significantly above the level detected in the field and laboratory blanks. The emission rate of the eight compounds in |4g/dscm at 7% 02 for the six test runs are tabulated in Table 3-3. TABLE 3-3 FLUE GAS VOC CONCENTRATIONS VOCs Flue Gas Concentrations, yag/dscm @ 7% 02 Untreated Test 1 Untreated Test 2 Untreated Test 3 Treated Test 1 Treated Test 2 Treated Test 3 Chloromethane 53.3 28.5 16.9 55.8 96.7 51.5 1,3-Butadiene 0.6 0.2 1.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 Bromomethane 1.7 1.4 2.1 15.4 33.9 70.5 Iodomethane 0.8 2.4 5.7 1.7 5.1 24.1 Acetone 11.6 7.2 7.5 4.5 11.7 14.3 Chloroform 0.9 0.3 0.3 2.6 1.8 3.9 1,2-Dichloroethane 1.3 5.2 0.1 1.6 0.7 2.9 Benzene 25.4 16.2 27.9 2.1 2.6 3.0 Significant levels of benzene were found only in the untreated wood test samples, while chloroform was found only in the treated wood test samples. Chloromethane, bromomethane, iodomethane, acetone, and 1,2-dichloroethane were found in both untreated and treated wood test 24 ------- samples. The trace levels of chlorinated VOC emissions found in the untreated wood tests are attributed to the presence of small amount of naturally occurring chlorine in untreated woods. Higher concentrations of chlorinated VOCs were found in the treated wood tests, a result of higher chlorine content in the treated wood. 3.3 Semi-Volatile Organic Compound (SVOC) Concentrations The results of SVOC analysesare summarized in Appendix HI. Of the 87 semivolatile organic compounds analyzed for the SVOC samples, only the following five targeted compounds were found to be above the analytical detection limits and significantly above the field and laboratory blank results; phenol, acetophenone, naphthalene, 2-nitrophenol and penanthrene. Measurable amount of diethyl phthalate, di-n-butyl phthalate, and benzyl butyl phthalate were found in all test samples, but they were also found in the field blank sample, indicating that they were contaminants from the sampling or analytical procedure and not from the combustion of wood waste fuel. The total SVOC flue gas concentrations for all six tests are calculated by adding all the quantifiable SVOC emissions in the test and are presented in Table 3-4. The typically low SVOC TABLE 3-4 FLUE GAS SVOC CONCENTRATIONS Test Concentration, /zg/dscm @ 7% 02 Untreated Test 1 10.1 Untreated Test 2 11.4 Untreated Test 3 11.7 Treated Test 1 7.0 Treated Test 2 7.7 Treated Test 3 5.9 for both the untreated and treated wood tests are an indication that good combustion were achieved during the tests. The slightly lower SVOC emissions for the treated compared to those for the untreated wood tests also suggests that the combustion of 25 emissions conditions wood tests ------- the drier treated wood fuel produced lower PIC concentrations. More moisture released during the combustion of the "green" untreated wood fuel may lower the localized combustion zone temperature and cause more PIC formation. 3.4 Pentachlorophenol (PCP) Destruction Efficiency SVOC sample analysis of all three treated wood tests indicated that the concentrations of pentachlorophenol were below the detection limit. The maximum detection limit of pentachlorophenol for the analytical method used was 30|jg/sampling train. The concentration of pentachlorophenol in the treated wood fuel was analyzed to be 4,100 mg/kg. The estimated destruction efficiency (DRE) for pentachlorophenol of each treated wood fuel test has been conservatively calculated based on the pentachlorophenol analysis practical quantitation limit (PQL). DRE results are presented in Table 3-5. The PLQ is based on the lowest calibration TABLE 3-5 DESTRUCTION EFFICIENCY FOR PENTACHLOROPHENOL Test DRE, % Treated Test 1 >99.9974 Treated Test 2 >99.9976 Treated Test 3 >99.9975 concentration and does not include factors such as percent recovery or matrix effects. It is evident from these results that burning of the pentachlorophenol-treated waste wood in a stoker combustor destroys the pentachlorophenol efficiently with a DRE higher than that required for the destruction inhazardous waste incinerators (99.99%). 3.5 Dioxin/furan (PCDD/PCDF) Concentrations PCDD/PCDF samples were analyzed and the results in total PCDD/PCDF and I- TEQ are provided in Appendix IV. As shown in Table 3-6, total PCDD/PCDF flue gas 26 ------- TABLE 3-6 TOTAL PCDD/PCDF CONCENTRATIONS Test Emission Rate @ 7% 02 Total PCDD ng/dscm Total PCDD ng/dscm Total PCDD/PCDF ng/dscm Total PCDD/PCDF ng I-TEQ/dscm Untreated Test 1 8.43 22.29 30.72 0.509 Untreated Test 2 2.63 17.15 19.78 0.208 Untreated Test 3 0.95 11.12 12.06 0.107 Treated Test 1 15.03 42.19 57.22 1.304 Treated Test 2 20.88 56.47 77.35 1.217 Treated Test 3 18.72 45.04 63.76 1.051 concentrations from the untreated wood tests averaged 0.274 ng I-TEQ/dscm and from treated wood tests 1.190 ng I-TEQ/dscm. These concentrations are measured prior to any control devices, which could potentially remove part of this material from the gas stream, depending on the fly ash collection efficiency, PCDD/PCDF formation, and solid-to-vapor-phase partitioning of PCDD/PCDF with the device. It has been shown that most of the dioxin and furan formation will occur at the "temperature window" of 200 and 450 °C.16 Since the temperature at the sampling point is below 160 °C, it is reasonable to expect that the formation of dioxins has been essentially completed by the time the gas reaches the sampling location and that the rates of formation and desorption of fly ash associated PCDD/PCDF in a subsequent particulate collection device would be low.17 The PCDF concentrations are significantly greater than PCDD concentrations for both the untreated and treated wood tests, indicating de novo synthesis formation reactions rather than condensation reactions.18 The PCDD/PCDF congener distribution for the treated and untreated tests also differ (see Figures 3-6 through 3-9). In the untreated wood tests, the distributions are peaked at the lower-chlorinated tetra-PCDD and di- PCDF congeners; in the treated wood tests, the distribution is shifted to the higher-chlorinated hexa-PCDD and penta-PCDF congeners. The PCDD/PCDF concentrations measured in both the untreated and treated wood tests can be compared to the stack emissions from commercial 27 ------- Amount in Sample, ng 6 Mono Di Tri Tetra Penta Hexa Hepta PCDD Congener Figure 3.5 PCDD Congeners (Untreated Wood Tests) Amount in Sample, ng 14 Mono Tri Tetra Penta Hexa Hepta PCDD Congener Figure 3.6 PCDD Congeners (Treated Wood Tests) 28 ------- Amount in Sample, ng Mono Tri Tetra Penta Hexa Hepta PCOF Congener Figure 3.7 PCDF Congeners (Untreated Wood Tests) Amount in Sample, ng 35 Test 2 Test 3 Mono Tri Tetra Penta Hexa Hepta PCDFCongener Figure 3.8 PCDF Congeners (Treated Wood Tests) 29 ------- municipal waste combustors, which range from 0.01 to 400 ng I-TEQ/dscm.18 The PCDD/PCDF concentrations measured in the untreated wood tests are similar to those found from burning natural wood, which range from 0.066 to 0.214 ng I-TEQ/dscm.1 The PCDD/PCDF flue gas concentrations in the treated wood tests are higher than the emission concentrations measured after particulate control equipment (0.0359 ng I-TEQ/dscm) from a waste to energy plant burning a mixture of clean wood and pentachlorophenol treated waste wood.19 The higher PCDD/PCDF concentrations from the treated wood tests compared to those from the untreated wood tests are consistent with their higher chlorinated VOC emissions. Approximately 200 ppm of HC1 was measured in flue gas from the treated wood tests, while HC1 was not detected in the untreated wood tests. The PCDD/PCDF samples were collected into front half and back half of the sampling train and analyzed separately, which gives an indication of the PCDD/PCDF associated with the particulate material and as gaseous emissions. Table 3-7 TABLE 3-7 DISTRIBUTION OF PCDD/PCDF IN SAMPLING TRAIN Test % of PCDD I-TEQ in Front Half % of PCDF I-TEQ in Front Half %of PCDD/PCDF I-TEQ in Front Half Untreated Test 1 33.2 25.1 27.3 Untreated Test 2 51.4 38.7 42.7 Untreated Test 3 49.3 33.4 41.3 Treated Test 1 73.6 61.5 65.2 Treated Test 2 67.2 56.7 61.0 Treated Test 3 64.8 57.0 60.5 shows that a higher portion of the total PCDD/PCDF in the treated wood tests is in the front half catch than in the untreated wood samples. The treated tests had a higher flue gas flow rate (see Table 3-1), which would enhance particulate load at the sampling point. The higher flue gas flow rates during the tests with treated wood are a consequence of the manner in which the 30 ------- combustor was operated during the test. The treated wood had a higher heating value and higher levels of excess air were used during the treated wood tests to maintain temperature at the stoker outlet similar to temperatures obtained during the untreated wood tests. This information suggests that particulate carryover may affect the total amount of PCDD/PCDF, especially in the treated wood samples where a larger percentage is in the front half catch. Combustor operating conditions in addition to the wood treatment may also contribute to higher measured PCDD/PCDF flue gas concentrations for the treated wood tests. 3.6 Polychlorobiphenol (PCB) Concentrations The result of the PCB analysis is attached in Appendix V and is summarized in Table 3-8. TABLE 3-8 PCB TEST RESULTS Test Total PCBs ng/dscm @ 7% 02 Untreated Test 1 79.7 Untreated Test 2 92.0 Untreated Test 3 109.1 Treated Test 1 81.0 Treated Test 2 150.2 Treated Test 3 232.3 PCB concentrations in treated wood tests are slightly higher than in the untreated wood tests. In general, they are very low, and in line with other wood combustion data available to date ( 57- KB ng/dscm @ 12% C02 for fluidized bed combustors and 297-22,780 ng/dscm @ 12% C02 for cell burners).3 31 ------- 3.7 Aldehyde and Methane Concentrations Methane emission from both treated and untreated wood tests were below the detection limit of 5 ppm. Aldehyde test results are shown in Table 3-9. TABLE 3-9 ALDEHYDE TEST RESULTS Test Formaldehyde Acetaldehyde ug/dscm @ 7% 02 ug/dscm @ 7% 02 Untreated 1 20.4 19.2 Untreated 2 41.7 43.8 Untreated 3 53.7 7.3 Treated 1 N/A N/A Treated 2 30.9 5.2 Treated 3 22.7 5.8 N/A -- Not available. Sample was contaminated Within the measurement accuracy, there seem to be no clear differences between the treated and untreated wood tests. 3.8 Toxicity Characteristic Leachate Procedure (TCLP) Analysis of Flyash Flyash samples of all three untreated wood test runs were combined and a representative sample was subjected to TCLP leachate analysis. Similarly, all three treated wood samples were combined and analyzed . TCLP analysis results are shown in Table 3-10. 32 ------- TABLE 3-10 TCLP ANALYSIS RESULTS Metals Untreated Wood Tests Treated Wood Tests EPA Max. Level20 ppm ppm ppm Arsenic 0.190 0.232 5.0 Barium 0.322 0.342 100.0 Cadmium 0.705 1.15 1.0 Chromium 1.70 1.50 5.0 Lead 1.102 0.159 5.0 Mercury below detection below detection 0.2 Selenium 0.037 0.033 1.0 Silver below detection 0.024 5.0 In both treated and untreated fuel tests, TCLP result were generally within the acceptable EPA limits and no significant differences between the two types of wood fuel could be found. Cadmium was slightly above the EPA limit in the treated wood sample, but this can not be explained. 4.0 CONCLUSIONS This study was conducted to identify potential air pollution problems associated with the combustion of waste utility poles treated with pentachlorophenol preservative for energy production in a boiler. The emphasis of the study was placed on the characterization of the PICs in the combustion flue gas. The methodology used was a comparative test of emissions prior to air pollution control device of a pilot scale combustor burning untreated wood and wood treated with pentachlorophenol preservative. The tests showed that combustion of pentachlorophenol treated wood is an effective method of destroying the pentachlorophenol contained in the wood, with destruction efficiencies higher than 99.99 percent. Differences in VOC, SVOC, and PCDD/PCDF emissions from the combustion of untreated and treated wood fuels have been noted. The data do not enable identification of the exact cause of these differences in emissions. 33 ------- These differences are possibly caused by the significantly different moisture content, heating value, and chlorine content of the two fuels. The difference in flue gas flow rate required for the combustion of these two fuels with different combustion characteristics (moisture content and heating value) may also cause the differences in PCDD/PCDF emissions. The flue gas concentrations are strongly influenced by the design and operation of the combustor system and may not be quantitatively comparable to other combustors. 5.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL The project was performed following the guides established under the EPA, Office of Research and Development Level EI Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) procedures. All procedures and methods noted in the QAPP were implemented with the exception of the method employed to determine the fuel throughput rates. The overall results of all quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) measures, undertaken to assess the quality of the collected data, are summarized in this section. Included in this section is a brief description of the data quality analysis procedures that were implemented. The following subsections briefly address the quality of data achieved and provide QA/QC considerations. A separate subsection summarizes the results of a Performance Evaluation Audit (PEA). Nearly all the objectives for the Data Quality Indicators (DQIs) were met for the project. As noted in the QAPP, the most critical measurements were the following; 02, CO, and C02 CEM measurements, Underfire, overfire, sweep and total air flow rates, Air and flue gas temperatures, PCDD/PCDF analysis from the sampled flue gas, VOC analysis from the sampled flue gas, SVOC analysis from the sampled flue gas, and Waste wood feed rates. All of the calculated critical measurement objectives were met or exceeded. The results of all the calculated data quality indicators are summarized in the appropriate subsections. 34 ------- 5.1 Data Quality Indicators The DQIs that were considered in planning and executing the project were accuracy, precision, and completeness. The calculation for each of these parameters is presented separately below. 5.1.1 Accuracy Accuracy is assessed by comparing measured values to certified or "known" standards. For determining the accuracy of CEM analyzers, values as measured and recorded by the CEM sampling system are compared to known concentrations of certified gases introduced into the analyzers. Accuracy for the integrated samples is assessed by spiking samples with a known quantity of the target analyte(s) onto the clean sampling media prior to analysis. Another method is to analyze known surrogates following and prior to analyzing the samples. The accuracy can then be reported as either a percent error (% bias) or as a percent recovered (% accuracy). Bias can be determined using the following formula: Accuracy, expressed as percent recovered, can be determined from the following formula: In many cases, multi-component spikes or surrogates are measured to determine DQIs. In such cases, the average of the bias or recovery for all spikes is used to determine an overall percent bias or recovery for the measurement system. 5.1.2 Precision Precision is defined as the reproducibility of measured results. Method precision can be assessed through the collection, analysis, and measurement of duplicate samples that are collected simultaneously or at similar conditions. From this method, precision can be determined as a relative difference between the duplicate results. As a relative difference, the precision Percent Bias measured concentration - known concentration known concentration Percent Recovery = measured concentration 1 „„ x 100 known concentration 35 ------- limits can be calculated from the following: (C1+C2)/ 2 RPD = x 100 where: C, = larger of the two measured values C2— smaller of the two measured values In some cases, replicate data is pooled to determine precision as a relative standard deviation (RSD) of the measured data. This method of determining the precision can be calculated as follows: _ standard deviation of replicate measurements ^ average of replicate measurements For continuous monitors, precision was determined as the relative difference between measurements for pre-test and post-test calibrations. For integrated samples with multi- component spikes or surrogates, precision is better represented as a relative standard deviation. 5.1.3 Completeness Completeness is defined as the ratio of the number of valid analytical results obtained to the number of samples required in the prescribed test matrix. Causes for not producing valid analytical results include sample loss from breakage, mis-identified samples, errors in the sample recovery or analysis, or instrument failure during sampling operations. Completeness is derived from the following: „ , ^ amount of valid data collected , Completeness = x 100 intended collectable data Nearly all aspects of the project were completed. No deviations from the original test matrix were made except for the elimination of a duplicate PCDD/PCDF sample that was to be extracted during the second treated waste wood test. The only other incomplete item from the original test matrix was a YOST sample tube that was broken during transportation to the 36 ------- analytical lab. All other samples and measurements as defined by the QAPP were fully completed. Therefore, completeness will not be discussed or presented in the following subsections. 5.2 Summary of Quality Assurance and Quality Control Results Specific information relating to the sampling and analysis results is presented in Appendices n, HI, IV, and V along with the details pertaining to the data quality evaluation effort. The QA/QC assessment summary is provided in the appropriate following subsections. The summaries include the DQI objectives, as posted in the QAPP, and results obtained for each measurement. Measurement parameters that exceed DQI objectives are further explained in the appropriate subsections. 5.2.1 Continuous Emission Monitors The CEM sampling system is divided into three subsystems. The first subsystem is devoted to analyzing 02, C02 and CO which are insoluble or nearly insoluble in water. The second subsystem is devoted to measuring NOx and THC gases which may be dissolved or scrubbed by condensation. The third subsystem is the Perkin Elmer Multi-Component Analyzer. The 02, C02 and CO analyzers were leak checked and calibrated daily, prior to the tests, according to EPA Method 3A and EPA Method 10. The calibration was a two point calibration with nitrogen for zero and a span gas of a value greater than 80% of the anticipated range. A two point drift check with the same gases was performed daily at the end of tests. The NOx and THC analyzers were leak checked and calibrated according to EPA Method 7E and EPA Method 25 respectively. Prior to testing, the analyzers were calibrated at two points with zero and span gases. Following the test the instruments were drift checked with the same zero and span gases. Likewise, the Perkin Elmer system was calibrated with a two point check prior to the test. The Perkin Elmer however could not be drift checked upon the completion of the test. The system is designed to automatically purge and recalculate the measured values during the calibration procedure; any drift information would have been lost during a post-test check. All sample systems were bias checked according to EPA Method 6C prior to the start of the first test. The values recorded for the calibrations and the drift check are used to determine the accuracy and precision of the measurement devices. Because the Perkin Elmer could not be drift 37 ------- checked the accuracy and precision for HC1, a non-critical measurement, could not be determined. For the other instruments, the percent bias was calculated from the difference between the measured spans for system drift check and the known concentration of the certified span gases. The precision was calculated as the relative percent difference between the values measured during the pre-test calibrations and the drift checks. The summary of data quality achieved for each test and the system bias check is presented in Table 5-1. In two tests, the second untreated wood and the first treated wood, the C02 precision barely missed the DQI goal. In multiple test runs the DQI goals were not met for THC and NOx. However, THC and NOx are non-critical measurements for this project. 5.2.2 Overfire, Underfire, Sweep and Total Air Flows The flow measuring devices were not specifically calibrated for this project. The flows for the system are measured with restrictive type venturi and orifice type devices coupled with pressure transducers and accompanying panel meters. Because of the limited number of variables which can affect the performance of the venturi, calibrations are performed biannually only on the pressure transducers and panel meters. A detailed description of the calibration procedures was presented in the QAPP. The pressure transducers deliver a 4 mA output signal when the differential pressure is zero and a 20 mA output signal when the differential pressure is 25 inches of water pressure. The transducers were calibrated at their limits and compared to a hand-held pressure calibrator. The hand-held calibrator was then used to verify the transducer to meter outputs when the transducer was exposed to a mid-range differential pressure. The summary of the data quality achieved for the flow measuring transducers is presented in Table 5-2. Although the transducers alone displayed non-linearity in the middle of the range and thus greater percent bias, when connected to the panel meter, a square root extracting meter, the non- linear tendencies are removed. The overall result is a system that is much more accurate than the individual components. The system measurements are very repeatable, yielding precision calculated as relative standard deviations less than 1 percent. The DQI objectives for bias and precision , as noted in the QAPP, were set at 10 percent; all measurements met the DQI objectives. 38 ------- TABLE 5-1 SUMMARY OF DATA QUALITY ACHIEVED FOR CONTINUOUS EMISSION MONITORS o, CO, CO TIIC NO, Tcsl Objective Res u l( Objective Result Objective Result Ohjeclive Result Objective Result SysteniBias Bias 5% <1% 5% 2.6% 5% 1.7% 5% 4.5% 5% <1% Untreated 1 Dins 5% 2.3% 5% 3.1% 5% <1% 5% 5.3% 5% 31% 1'incision (KIM)) 5% 2.3% 5% 2.8% 5% <1% 5% •1.45% 5% 26.1% I)ntrealed2 Bins 5% 2.5% 5% 3.8% 5% <1% 5% 7.9% 5% H% Precision (KIM)) 5% 3.3% 5% 6% 5% 1.3% 5% (.% 5% 8.2% Untreated} Bias 5% '1.6% 5% 3.7% 5% <1% 5% 4.7% 5% 9.5% Precision (RPD) 5% 4.6% 5% 2.8% 5% <1% 5% 4.7% 5% 9.9% Treated 1 Bias 5% '1.1% 5% 4.4% 5% <1% 5% 3.6% 5% 10.3% Precision (IM'D) 5% 4.9% 5% 5.3% 5% <1% 5% 4.1% 5% 10.3% Tiealed2 Bias 5% 3.6% 5% 3.7% 5% <1% 5% 2.3% 5% 13.5% Precision (RPD) 5% 3.8% 5% 3.0% 5% <1% 5% 1.4% 5% 15.5% Trealed3 [lias 5% 3.8% 5% 3.9% 5% <1% 5% <1% 5% 17.9% Precision (RPD) 5% 4.2% 5% 3.7% 5% <1% 5% <1% 5% 15.9% ------- TANLR 5-2 SUMMARY OF DATA QUALI TY ACHIEVED FOR FLOW MEASUREMENT DEVICES Pressure Transducer I'ressure Transducer and Meter Zero Differential I'ressure Differential I'roiSlire »l Spun Differential pressure set at arbitrary middle of ranye iiienstiriMl expected measured calculated measured calculated Precision in A in A liias in A •n A bias C fill Cflll It i :t s ItSI) 301 Toiul Air 3. 990 4 0.25 % 19 907 19.92 0.08 % 500 504 2 -3 oe <1% 302 Durncr Air 3.982 1 0.45 % 19.837 19.91 0.53 % 123 123.3 0 21 % < 1 " i> 301 Ovurllii: Air 3.983 1 0-11 % 19.8-16 19 17 2 . I I -/« 172 158 (1 K 80% -1% 301 IJnilerfirc Air 3.986 1 0.35% 19 857 19.79 0.34 % 490 497.1 1.43 % <1% 305 Rcciictilalioii 3.990 1 0.25% 19.867 19.80 0.33 % 246 263.7 6 70 % <1% 306 Sweep Air 3.988 1 0.30 % 19.873 19.91 0.19% 79 75.9 4 08 % <1% 4*. o ------- 5.2.3 Temperatures The thermocouples throughout the system were not removed for calibration purposes. Most of the thermocouples are mounted through the walls of the combustor. Removal of the thermocouple would result in destroying the thermocouples or damaging the refractive lining of the combustor. The thermocouple used to measure the combustor temperature nearest the fuel bed was a Type B, platinum/rhodium, thermocouple. The B type thermocouples are rated by the manufacturer for a bias of 0.5 C° over 800 °C and a maximum temperature of 1700 °C. The remaining thermocouples are all K-type, nickel-chromium/nickel-aluminum, thermocouples rated for a bias of 2.2 C° above 0 °C and a maximum temperature of 1250 °C. All the test conditions throughout the project were maintained well below the ratings for the thermocouples. In addition, the measured temperatures are critical for comparative reasons. The temperatures are used to set the system conditions and relate the conditions from one test to another. Although the temperatures are considered critical, errors in the temperature measurements will not affect the overall scope or objectives of the project. 5.2.4 PCDD/PCDF Sampling and Analysis All PCDD/PCDF samples were collected, prepared, and analyzed according to the prescribed methods referenced in the QAPP. The samples were analyzed by a commercial laboratory with a high resolution GC/MS. Appendix IV contains the PCDD/PCDF analysis data. Also included are the data quality indicators for each sample analysis. Recovery of a known standard was used to determine the bias and precision for each sample analyzed. Because the lab reported the percent recovered from the known standards, the bias was determined from the average and the precision from the relative standard deviation. This is not in keeping with the strict definition of precision because the deviation is not determined for repeated analysis of the same surrogate. This does however determine the precision for each specific analysis over the spectrum of the instrument. The PCDD/PCDF samples were analyzed as front half and back half portions of the sampling train. The summary of the data quality achieved for the analyses of each portion for each test is presented in Table 5-3. All recoveries and precision were maintained within the limits prescribed by the QAPP. 41 ------- TABLE 5-3 DATA QUALITY ACHIEVED FOR THE PCDD/PCDF ANALYSES Test Front Hail Portion Hack Half Portion Average Bias Average Precision Average Bias Average Precision Objective Result Objective Result Objective Result Objective Result Blank 50% 17.0% 30% 12.7% 50% 9.50% 30% 9.20% Untreated! 50% 31.2% 30% 27.5% 50% 23:7% 30% 13.1% Untreatetl2 50% 12.0% 30% 20.1% 50% 16.4% 30% 13.0% UiurealetO 50% 2'1.6% 30% 18.2% 50% 10.9% 30% 16.7% Treated 1 50% 1.70% 30% 9.39% 50% 13.2% 30% 12.5% Treated2 50% 14.7% 30% 14.3% 50% 25.2% 30% 16.8% Trealed3 50% 2.69% 30% 31.9 50% 26.9% 30% 17.4% Field Blank 50% 5.60% 30% 12.4% 50% 17.5% 30% 13.3% ------- 5.2.5 SVOC Sampling and Analysis All SVOC samples were prepared and analyzed according to the prescribed methods referenced in the QAPP. The samples were analyzed by the on-site laboratory with GC/MS. Appendix IE contains the SVOC analysis data. Also included are the data quality indicators for each sample analysis. Recoveries of known surrogates were used to determine the bias and precision for each sample analyzed. Because the lab reported the percent recovered from the surrogates, the bias was determined from the average and the precision from the relative standard deviation. This is not in keeping with the strict definition of precision because the deviation is not determined for repeated analyses of the same surrogate. This does however determine the precision for each specific analysis over the spectrum of the instrument. The summary of the data quality achieved for the analyses is presented in Table 5-4. All recoveries and precision were maintained within the limits prescribed by the QAPP. 5.2.6 PCB Sampling and Analysis All PCB samples were prepared and analyzed according to the prescribed methods referenced in the QAPP. The samples were analyzed by a commercial laboratory with a high resolution GC/MS. Appendix V contains the PCB analysis data. Also included are the data quality indicators for each sample analysis. Recovery of known standards was used to determine the bias and precision for each sample analyzed. Because the lab reported the percent recovered from the standards, the bias was determined from the average and the precision from the relative standard deviation. This is not in keeping with the strict definition of precision because the deviation is not determined for repeated analysis of the same surrogate. This does however determine the precision for each specific analysis over the spectrum of the instrument. The summary of the data quality achieved for the analyses is presented in Table 5-5. All recoveries and precision were maintained within the limits prescribed by the QAPP. 5.3 Internal Audits An internal technical systems audit (TSA) was performed by the Acurex Environmental QA Officer on August 14, 1996. The auditor observed sampling activities which included the 43 ------- TABLE 5-4 DATA QUALITY ACHIEVED FOR SVOC ANALYSES Test Bias Precision Objective Result Objective | Result Field Blank 50% 12.7% 30% 11.4% Untreated 1 50% 6.40% 30% 12.2% Untreated2 50% 22.1% 30% 22.1% Untreated3 50% 9.90% 30% 25.3% Treatedl 50% 10.3% 30% 17.2% Treated! 50% 7.87% 30% 13.2% TreatedS 50% 14.7% 30% 15.4% 44 ------- TABLE 5-5 DATA QUALITY ACHIEVED FOR PCB ANALYSES Test Bias Precision Objective Result Objective Result Blank 50% 30.7% 30% 12.1% Untreated 1 50% 25.0% 30% 13.3% Untreated! 50% 37.3% 30% 10.0% Untreatedj 50% 33.7% 30% 10.4% Treated! 50% 33.1% 30% 12.3% Treated2 50% 35.3% 30% 9.49% Treatedj 50% 25.1% 30% 14.8% Field Blank 50% 30.1% 30% 9.20% Lab Blank | 50% 38.0% 30% 5.98% Lab Blank 50% 31.3% 30% 3.62% 45 ------- review of sampling and analytical documentation procedures. The auditor observed setup and breakdown procedures for VOST, MM5, and Method 23 sampling trains and sampling for methane and aldehydes using Tedlar bags and DNPH cartridges. Calibration records for sampling pumps and weigh balances were verified. It was noted by the WA Leader that the fuel (chipped wood) did not feed as well as expected due to larger pieces. At times, the feed had to be manually shoved down into the burner. The day of the audit there were some minor problems controlling the temperature which were related to the inconsistency in the feed. All problems were recorded in the project notebook. The internal TSA resulted in no major findings. An internal performance evaluation audit (PEA) was performed to evaluate the Organic Support Laboratory's (OSL's) ability to identify and quantitate semi volatile organic compounds (SVOCs). The Acurex Environmental QA Officer prepared a PEA sample using a 2000 ug/mL mix of SVOCs that included the target compounds for the project. The mix (25 uL) was spiked onto a cleaned XAD cartridge and submitted to the Organic Support Laboratory for analysis. The cartridge was spiked to result in a 1 mL final extraction volume with a final concentration of 50 ug for each target analyte. The sample was extracted by the OSL and a report was submitted to the QA Officer from the OSL. Table 5-6 shows OSL results for target analytes and percent recovery for each compound. All compounds were correctly identified and recovered within the data quality indicator goals established for accuracy for this project. 46 ------- TABLE 5-6 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION AUDIT Compound Reported (ug) % Recovery* Naphthalene 36.7 73.4 Acenaphthylene 34.6 69.2 Acenaphthene 39.3 78.6 Fluorene 42.3 84.6 Phenanthrene 45.7 91.4 Anthracene 45.4 90.8 Di-n-butyl phthalate 41.7 83.4 Fluoranthene 40.3 80.6 Pyrene 49.7 99.4 Benzo(a)anthracene 41.9 83.8 Chrysene 42.1 84.2 Benzo(b)fluoranthene 42.3 84.6 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 49.0 98.0 Benzo(a)pyrene 44.9 89.8 Indeno( 1,2,3-cd)pyrene 42.5 85.0 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 37.6 75.2 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 45.3 90.6 * Based on theoretical concentration of 50 ug for each target analyte. 47 ------- 6.0 REFERENCES 1. B. Schatowitz, G. Brandt, F. Gafner, E. Schlumpf, R. Buhler, P. Hasler, and T. Nussbaumer, "Dioxin Emissions from Wood Combustion," Chemosphere. 29 (9-11): 2005 (1994). 2. T. Salthammer, H. Klipp, R. D. Peek, and R. Marutzky, "Formation of Polychlorinated Dibenzo-p-dioxins (Pcdd) and Polychlorinated Dibenzofurans (Pcdf) During the Combustion of Impregnated Wood," Chemosphere. 30 (11): 2051 (1995). 3. Environmental Risk Limited, "Wood Products in the Waste Stream Characterization and Combustion Emissions, Vol. 1," NTIS No. PB93-198950, November 1992. 4. Method 1A, "Sampling and Velocity Traverses for Stationary Sources with Small Stacks or Ducts," 40CFR, Part 60, Appendix A. 5. EPA SW Method 0030, "Volatile Organic Sampling Train," Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Wastes, 1, EPA SW-846 (NTIS PB88-239223), Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste, Washington, DC, September 1986. 6. EPA SW Method 5040, "Protocol for Analysis of Sorbent Cartridges from Volatile Organic Sampling Train," Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Wastes, 1, EPA SW-846 (NTIS PB88- 239223), Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste, Washington, DC, September 1986. 7. EPA SW Method 8240, "Gas Chromatograph/Mass Spectrometry for Organic Volatiles," Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Wastes, 1, EPA SW-846 (NTIS PB88-239223), Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste, Washington, DC, September 1986. 48 ------- 8. EPA SW Method 0010, "Modified Method 5 Sampling Train," Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Wastes, 1, EPA SW-846 (NTIS PB88-239223), Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste, Washington, DC, September 1986. 9. EPA SW Method 8270B, "Gas Chromatograph/Mass Spectrometry for Semivolatile Organics: Capillary Column Technique," Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Wastes, 1, EPA SW-846 (NTIS PB88-239223), Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste, Washington, DC, September 1986. 10. EPA Method 23, "Determination of Polychlorinated Dibenzo-p-dioxins and Polychlorinated Dibenzofurans from Stationary Sources," Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Part 60, Appendix A, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 1991. 11. W.T. Winberry, L. Forehand, N.T. Murphy, A. Ceroli, and B. Phinney, EPA Method 1P-6A, "Determination of Formaldehyde and Other Aldehydes in Indoor Air," Compendium of Methods for the Determination of Pollutants in Indoor Air, EPA/600/4-90/010, NTIS PB90-200288, April 1990. 12. EPA Method 0040, "Sampling of Principal Organic Hazardous Constituents from Combustion Sources Using Tedlar Bags," Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Wastes 2, SW-846, NTIS PB88-239223, EPA, Office of Solid Wastes, Washington, DC, January 1995. 13. EPA Method 18, "Measurement of Gaseous Organic Compound Emissions by Gas Chromatography," CFR, Part 60, Appendix A, July 1, 1995. 14. C 702-87, Method B - Quartering, "Standard Practice for Reducing Field Samples of Aggregate to Testing Size," Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol 04.02, 1987. 49 ------- 15. EPA Method 1311, "Toxic Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP)," Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Wastes, EPA Report No. SW-846, Vol. 1, Sect.C, EPA, Office of Solid Waste, Washington, DC, September 1986. 16. H. Vogg and L. Stieglitz, "Thermal Behavior of PCDD/PCDF in Fly Ash from Incinerators," Chemosphere, 15: 9 (1986). 17. U.S. EPA, Municipal Waste Combustors ~ Background Information for Proposed Standards, Post-combustion Technology Performance, Vol. 3, EPA-450/3-89-27c (NTIS PB90-154865), Research Triangle Park, NC, August 1989. 18. J. D. Kilgroe, "Control of Dioxin, Furan, and Mercury Emissions from Municipal Waste Combustors." Journal of Hazardous Materials. 47: 163 (1996). 19. G. E. Lipinski, "Trial Burn Report and Permit Application, Viking Energy of McBain MI," Submitted to Michigan Department of Natural Resources, July 14, 1995. 20. "Maximum Concentration of Contaminants for Toxicity Characteristic," Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Part 261.24, Rule 0006-21, July 1,1995. 50 ------- APPENDIX I CEMDATA 1-1 ------- S02 Concentration for Untreated Wood Test 1 Normalized to 7% 02 60 55 S a a z o 5 z Ui g 20 . 8 15 ¦ TIME SO - 55 - 50 - 45 - 40 35 - 30 25 - 20 - 15 - 10 - 5 - 0 S02 Concentration for Untreated Wood Test 2 Normalized to 7% 02 TIME S02 Concentration for Untreated Wood Test 3 Normalized to 7% 02 1-2 ------- THC Concentration for Untreated Wood Test 1 Normalized to 7% 02 THC Concentration for Untreated Wood Test 2 Normalized to 7% 02 TIME 300 280 260 240 ? 220 a 200 Z O 180 P 160 S 14f) h- z 120 o z 100 o o 80 tiO 40 20 0 THC Concentration for Untreated Wood Test 3 Normalized to 7% 02 Jl _i—i A. TIME 1-3 ------- HCI Concentration for Untreated Wood Test 1 Normalized to 7% 02 HCI Concentration for Untreated Wood Test 2 Normalized to 7% 02 HCI Concentration for Untreated Wood Test 3 Normalized to 7% 02 0.75 ¦ s Q. a. z o f= S 0.5 - P 2 Ui o 8 0.25 ¦ ¦ TIME 1-4 ------- NOx Concentration for Untreated Wood Test 1 Normalized to 7% 02 400 350 I" 300 a a. ~ 250 2 o p § H 200 ui 150 u 2 8 100 TIME NOx Concentration for Untreated Wood Test 2 Normalized to 7% 02 400 350 -¦ ^ 300 • - a a ~ 250-• 2 o F 2 >— 200 -• 2 150 O Z § 100 50 •• TIME NOx Concentration for Untreated Wood Test 3 Normalized to 7% 02 400 f 300 a a 250 2 0 1 H 200 • § 150 - - O 2 8 100 • TIME 1-5 ------- CO Concentration for Untreated Wood Test 1 Normalized to 7% 02 3000 j-j 2800 ¦ 2500 ¦ 2400 - 2200 ¦ a 2000 -¦ z O 1300 ¦ P 1600 • 2 1400 z Ui 1200 ¦ 0 ? 1000 - 0 0 800 -- 600 • 400 - 200 0... A .jlL Ll Uw u .L TIME CO Concentration for Untreated Wood Test 2 Normalized to 7% 02 3000 2800 2600 2400 2200 2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 300 600 400 200 0 1 JL i . TIME CO Concentration for Untreated Wood Test 3 Normalized to 7% 02 3000 - 2800 - 2600 ¦ • 2400 - 2200 - 2000 - 1800 - 1600 - 1400 -(. 1200 - 1000 - 800 - 600 - 400 - 200 - 0 ^ I TIME J k. .. l..j ajL 1-6 ------- C02 Concentration for Untreated Wood Test 1 ( i 20 18 16 14 12 1Q 8 6 4 2 0 TIME C02 Concentration for Untreated Wood Test 2 18 - 16 •• z in O z o o 2 - TIME C02 Concentration for Untreated Wood Test 3 1-7 ------- 02 Concentration for Untreated Wood Test 1 20 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 TIME 02 Concentration for Untreated Wood Test 2 z o I- 2 Z a z a a TIME 02 Concentration for Untreated Wood Test 3 14 10 Z O O TIME 1-8 ------- 02 Concentration for Treated Wood Test 1 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 TIME 02 Concentration for Treated Wood Test 2 18 •- 2 h- z Ol CJ z o u 10 -¦ TIME 02 Concentration for Treated Wood Test 3 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 TIME 1-9 ------- C02 Concentration for Treated Wood Test 1 C02 Concentration for Treated Wood Test 2 C02 Concentration for Treated Wood Test 3 18 z o J- S Z Ui o z o o 1-10 ------- CO Concentration for Treated Wood Test 1 Normalized to 7% 02 1500 j 1400 • 1300 - 1200 • TIME CO Concentration for Treated Wood Test 2 Normalized to 7% 02 1500 - 1400 - 1300 -- 1200 -- 1100 1000 •- 900 -- 800 - 700 - 600 -- 500 400 ¦ 300 -- 200 - 1C0 - 0 ¦ TIME CO Concentration for Treated Wood Test 3 Normalized to 7% 02 1500 1400 1300 1200 1100 -¦ 1000 900 800 -• 700 •• 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 , aA.. Jj5 I i ll TIME 1-11 ------- NOx Concentration for Treated Wood Test 1 Normalized to 7% 02 1000 900 800 I 700 a 600 z o p 2 w 500 z UJ o z o o 400 300 200 100 TIME NOx Concentration for Treated Wood Test 2 Normalized to 7% 02 1000 900 ¦- _ 800 • • | 700 -- | 600 500 400 - 2 UJ o z o 200 100 TIME NOx Concentration for Treated Wood Test 3 Normalized to 7% 02 1000 900 _ 800 | 700 600 z o p 2 H z 500 400 ui o z O o 300 200 100 • 1-12 ------- THC Concentration for Treated Wood Test 1 Normalized to 7% 02 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 TIME THC Concentration for Treated Wood Test 2 Normalized to 7% 02 THC Concentration for Treated Wood Test 3 Normalized to 7% 02 100 90 -- - 30 = & 70 •• Z o H 60 -• I so- Z 40 - UJ - 30 -- z o o 20 10 -- TIME 1-13 ------- HCI Concentration for Treated Wood Test 1 Normalized to 7% 02 500 450 400 ? a a 350 § 300 2 250 S 200 o § 150 u 100 50 -• TIME HC! Concentration for Treated Wood Test 2 Normalized to 7% 02 500 450 _ 400 -- S | 350 ¦¦ § 300-¦ - 250 - • I iz 200 Ui z 150 O ° 100 TIME 500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 HCI Concentration for Treated Wood Test 3 Normalized to 7% 02 ITfl |V. TIME 1-14 ------- S02 Concentration for Treated Wood Test 1 Normalized to 7% 02 20 j 18 ¦ 16 ¦ I 14 - a I '2 ' i 10 ¦ H TIME S02 Concentration for Treated Wood Test 2 Normalized to 7% 02 U S02 Concentration far Treated Wood Test 3 Normalized to 7% 02 TIME 1-15 ------- H20 Concentration for Treated Wood Test 1 TIME H20 Concentration for Treated Wood Test 3 30 27 24 21 18 15 12 9 6 3 0 TIME H20 Concentration for Treated Wood Test 2 24 -• z o < X H Z Ui U z o o 1-16 ------- H20 Concentration for Treated Wood Test 1 30 £ 21 - z p 18 ' z Ui (J z o O H20 Concentration for Treated Wood Test 2 TIME H20 Concentration for Treated Wood Test 3 1-17 ------- H20 Concentration for Untreated Wood Test 1 30 27 24 21 18 15 12 9 6 3 0 TIME H20 Concentration for Untreated Wood Test 2 z o p S »- z Ui O z o o TIME H20 Concentration for Untreated Wood Test 3 1-18 ------- APPENDIX n VOC SAMPLE ANALYSIS RESULTS II-1 ------- Client ID: Filename : TLI Id : Matrix : Units : Triangle Laboratories of RTP ..-project Summary for Project 38560 VVWC-VOST-1 VV\^OVOST-1 WWCS^(5sT-2 -1TC FT098 H ( 135-64-1 VOST ug -2 T/TC FT099 &/ 135-84-2A,B VOST ug -1 T/TC (JiV. FT100 135-84-3A3 VOST ug WWC-VOST-2 WWC-VOST-3 -2 T/TC -1 T/TC FT101 d!Z^ FT102 3 135-84^A,B ' ' 135-&t-6A,B VOST VOST ug ug Chloromethane 0-234 QJS22 0382 {£288 0.158 Vinyl Chloride (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) 1,3-Butadiene (0.001) III MB (0 001) 0.004 0.027 Bromomethane 0.013 6.028 0.020 0.014 om3 Chloroethane • (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) Vinyl bromide (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) T richlorofluoromethane OJ3Q6 6.012 0.010 &00S 0.063: 1,1-Dichloroethene (0.001) (0.001) ' (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Iodomethane ' 0.012 0.009 0.042 0013 0.005 Carbon disulfide (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Acetone (0.002) 11 0,133 0.077 0.089 0.031 Allyl chloride (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) Methylene chloride |§|§ 0,035 0.DS3 0-.121' O.0&9 ' 0.557 trans-l,2-Dichloroethene (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) tert-Butyl methyl ether (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Acrylonitrile (0.004) 0.012 (0.004) (0.004) H MUM n-Hexane (0.001) oxm llillllliil 111 0.005 (0.001) 1,1-DichIoroethane (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) 1,2-Epoxybutane (0.004) (0.004) (0.004) (0.004) (0.004) cis-l,2-Dichloroethene (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Chloroform (0.001) O.OIO 0.003 „ 0,003 0.002 1,2-Dichloroethane (0.001) 1X015 0.101 iillSHii (0.001) Isooctane (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Vinyl acetate (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) 2-Butanone (0.007) (0.007) (0.007) (0.006) (0.006) 1,1/1-Trichloroethane (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Carbon tetrachloride (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) 0X001) (0.001) Benzene 0,010 - 0.292. 0.126 0.247 0.591 Trichloroethene (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) 1,2-Dichloropropane (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Ethyl acrvlate (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Methyl methacrylate (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) Bromodichloromethane (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) cis-l,3-Dichloropropene (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) trans-l^-Dichloropropene (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) ( )-Estimated Detection Limit Page 1 Triangle Laboratories of RTP, Inc. Savarv3.5 SOX Capitola Drive * Durham, North Carolina 27713 Printed: 16:15:17 09/13/96 Phone: (919) 544-3729 • Fax; (919) 54^5491 - q ' n-2 3 ------- Client ID: Filename: TO Id : Matrix : Units : wwc-vc Triangle Laboratories of RTP Proj ect Summary for Proj ect 3.8560 -1TC FT098 et! 135-84-1 VOST ug WWt^v'oST-1 -2T/TC FT099 £ / 135-84-2A,B VOST ug WWC-VOST-2 jr//s/ WWC-VOST-2 WWC-VOST-3 -1T/TC -2T/TC -1T/TC (/LOfs&A (yc/-17£AT£b FT100 FT101 FT102 ^ 3 135-84-3A,B 135-84^A,B " ' 135-S4-6A,B VOST VOST VOST ug ug ug 1,1,2-Trichloroethane - (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Dibromochloromethane (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Ethylene dibromide (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Bromoform (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) 4-Methyl-2-pentanone ' (0.002) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Toluene 0.009 0.027 0.013 •102J 0 036 Tetrachloroethene (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) 2-Hexanone (0.002) (0.002) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Chlorobenzene (0.001) O.O0S- 0 004 O.OQ2 0.002 Ethylbenzene (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) m-/p-Xylene (0.001) 6.005 0.00a 0UX5 ' i 0.004 o-Xyiene (0.001) 0.002 0.003 2 0J2 oon Styrene (0.001) 0,003 OjOUI 0.004 0.0C7 1,1/2,2-Tetrachloroethane (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Cumene (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) ( (-Estimated Detection Limit Page 2 Triangle Laboratories of RTP, Inc Savarv3.S 801 Capitola Drive • Durham. North Carolina 27713 Printed: 16:15:17 09/13/96 Phone: (919) 544-5729 ~ Fax: (919) 544-5491 n-3 1(J ------- Client ID: Filename: TUId : Matrix : Units : J7' VVWC-^ y/j rc-VOST-3 -2 T/TC FT103 M-J 135-84-7 A,B VOST ug Triangle Laboratories of RTP Project Summary for Project 38560 €¦/ 7~o WWC- WWC-VOST-4 -1 T/TC FT104 ^ f 135-84-8A,B VOST US ¦VOST-4 -2 T/TC FT105 * / 135-84-9A,B VOST ug V/c, WWC-VOST-5 -1 T/TC '/'£i£A-C£'3 FT106 ^ Z- 135-84-10A,B " VOST ug tf/Z, WWC-VOST-5 -2 T/TC FT107 ^ Z- 135-S4-11A,B VOST ug Chloromethane , 0-244 , 0-325 0.728 - „ 1-143 0.904 Vinyl Chloride (0.001) (0.002) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) 1,3-Butadiene (0.001) (0.002) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Bromomethane ¦0.038 0.094 0232. 0.577 0144 Chloroethane " (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) Vinyl bromide (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) T richlo rofl uo romethane iiiHUi i G.04S HIllilH III O.05Q 8,005 1,1-Dichloroethene (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Iodomethane Q-1S2 0.007 0.031 0.092 0J31-6 Carbon disulfide (0.001) 0.807 ' 0-004 (0.001) Acetone II8I1I1H (0.002) 111 0-099 0.103 liilliiir Allyl chloride (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) Methylene chloride ||||| I1HSP 1 0.062 0-31S siiiiiii lIlliH trans-l,2-Dichloroethene (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) tert-Butyl methyl ether (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) illllllieis (0.001) Acrylonitrile (0.004) (0.005) (0.004) (0.004) (0.004) n-Hexane 0.013 0.005 0.013 0-Q17 lilllii! 1,1-Dichloroethane (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) 1,2-Epoxybutane (0.004) (0.005) (0.004) (0.004) (0.004) cis-l,2-Dichloroethene (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Chloroform ||§1§ 0.0C-4 0-037 0.021 0.019 0.020 1,2-Dichloroethane (0.001) 0.OI8 0.017 O.Q03 0.011 Isooctane (0.001) (0.001) 111 OiJOl (0.001) Vinyl acetate (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) 2-Butanone (0.006) (0.007) (0.006) (0.007) (0.006) 1,1,1-Trichloroethane (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) 111 iiiiiiloi (0.001) Carbon tetrachloride (0.001) 1 0-012 OfllD iillili;: ill iiiiiila: Benzene 0.0S7 „ 0.015 0.033 -0-030 0.026 Trichloroethene (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) 1,2-Dichloropropane (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Ethyl acrylate o.oos (0.001) (0.001) 11 mi (0.001) Methvl methacrvlate (0.001) (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) (0.001) Bromodichloromethane (0.001) liilliiir ill lllllliffil (0.001) (0.001) cis-l,3-Dichloropropene (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) trans-1 ,3-Dichlo ropropene (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) ( (-Estimated Detection Limit Page 3 Triangle Laboratories of RTP, Inc 801 Capitola Drive • Durham, North Carolina 27713 Phone: (919) 544-5729 • Fax; (919) 544-5491 n-4 Savar v3.5 Printed: 16:15:17 09/13/ 96 11 ------- Triangle Laboratories of RTP p, / Project Summary for Project 38560 Client ID: WWC-VOST-3 WWC-VOST-4 WWC-VOST-4 WWC-VOST-5 WWC-VOST-5 . -2 T/TC -1T/TC -2 T/TC -1 T/TC -2 T/TC knej> Filename: FT103 £ 3 FT104 ^7 FT105 M/ FT106 ^ ^ FT107 TO Id : 135-84-7 A,B 135-84-8A,B 135-84-9A,B 135-84-10A,B * 135-$4-llA,B Matrix : VOST VOST VOST VOST VOST Units : ug ug ug ug ug 1,1^-Trichloroethane (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Dibromochloromethane (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Ethylene dibromide (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (.0.001) Bromoform (0.001) (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) (0.001) 4-Methyl-2-pentanone ' (0.001) (0.002) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Toluene 0.038 0-006 0.039 - 0.037 SIMM; T etrachloroethene (0.001) 11 e.ooi - O.G03 0.006 (0.001) . 2-Hexanone (0.001) (0.002) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Chlorobenzene Q-001 ' Q.D03 ' 0.002 ' O.OQ2 Ethylbenzene 0.0 05 (0 001) 0.001 Wmmm (0.001) m-/p-Xylene 0.031 0-002 €J006 O.01S liiisiii o-Xylene O.OQ9 (0.001) Oi»3 0.012 11111111: Styrene (0.001) 0JM2 0.003 aOQ2 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Cumene (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) ( )-Estimated Detection Limit Page 4 Triangle Laboratories of RTP, Lie Savar v3-5 801 Capitola Drive • Durham. North Carolina 27713 Printed: 16:15:17 09/13/96 Phone: (919) 544-5729 • Fax: (919) 544-5491 | ------- Client ID: Filename TLIId : Matrix : Units : WWC-VOST-6 -1T/TC / FT108 135-84-12A,B VOST ug Triangle Laboratories of RTP Project Summary for Project 38560 WWC- z-t- VOST-6 <$Y7/ -2 T/TC FT109 ^ J7 135-84-13A,B VOST ug WWC-VOST-2 -FB T/TC FT096 135-84-5A,B VOST ug Q/' z-v- WWC-VOST-6 -FBT/TC 6y FT097 135-84-14A,B ' VOST ug VOSTBLK 08 .• 2796 FT095 ' VOSTBLK 0827 VOST ug Chloromethane |S| . 1.938 0.874 G.3SD (0.002) (0.002) Vinyl Chloride (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) 1,3-Butadiene (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Bromomethane 1.146 G.2S8 0.022 0.007 (0.002) Chloroethane " (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) Vinyl bromide (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Trichlorofluoromethane ; 0D24 0.01C 0.01& 0.025 (0.001) 1,1-Dichloroethene (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Iodo methane 0.291 0.197 0.013 0.016 (0.001) Carbon disulfide 0.003 0.004 (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Acetone o.iis 0-17S (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) Allyl chloride (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) Methylene chloride •0.382 0.114 0.099 0.280 ¦liiiii; trans-1,2-Dichloroethene (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) tert-Butyl methyl ether (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Acrylonitrile (0.004) (0.004) (0.004) (0.004) (0.005) n-Hexane ¦0.012 0.006 G.019 0-005 (0.001) 1,1-Dichloroethane (0.001) (0.001) (0-001) (0.001) (0.001) 1,2-Epoxybutane (0.004) (0.004) (0.004) (0.004) (0.005) cis-l,2-Dichloroethene (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Chloroform 0.037 0.042 (o.ooi) 11! 0.003 (0.001) 1,2-Dichloroethane 0.043 G.OIS (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Isooctane 0.001 llllli® (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Vinyl acetate (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) 2-Butanone (0.006) (0.006) (0.007) (0.007) (0.009) 1,1,1-T richlo roethane (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Carbon tetrachloride 0.014 0.012 (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Benzene 0.026 ca?6 0.005 0.005 (0.001) Trichloroethene (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) 1,2-Dichloropropane (0.001) (0.001) (0-001) (0.001) (0.001) Ethyl acrylate (0.001) 111 illBiil (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Methyl methacrylate (0.001) (0.001) (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) Bromodichloromethane (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) cis-lp-Dichloropropene (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) trans-l^-Dichloropropene (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) ( )-Estimated Detection Limit Page 5 Triangle Laboratories of RTP, Inc. 801 Capitola Drive • Durham, North Carolina 27713 Phone: (919) 544-5729.* Fax; (919) 544-5491 n-6 Savar v3.5 Printed: 16:15:17 09/13/96 9 1? ------- Client ID Filename TLI Id : Matrix : Units : 1,1,2-T richlo ro ethane (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Dibromochloromethane (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Ethylene dibromide (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Bromoform (0.001) (0.001) (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) 4-Methyl-2-pentanone ' (0.001) (0.001) (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) Toluene 0.027 0.O21 Q-Qia 0.022 (0.001) Tetrachloroethene {MM 0.001 (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) 2-Hexanone (0.001) (0.001) (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) Chlorobenzene &G03 aisai (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Ethylbenzene 0.001 0.085 (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) m-/p-Xylene 0.008 0.-037 04)01 (0.001) (0.001) o-Xylene 0003 0.011 (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Styrene . {MJG2 0.003 (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Cumene (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Triangle Laboratories of RTP Proj ect Summary for Proi ect 38560 V/Z-L' V/Z-'L WWC-VOST-6 WWCTI WWC-VOST-6 -1T/TC FT108 &J 135-84-12A,B VOST ug -VOST-6 -2 T/TC FT109 135-84-13A,B VOST ug OST-2 -FB T/TC (si IJtTA&Ansq FT096 135-&4-5A,B VOST ug e/'z^- WWC-VOST-6 -FB T/TC FT097 135-84-14A,B ' VOST ug VOSTBLK 08 2796 FT095 VOSTBLK 0827 VOST ug ( )-Estimated Detection Limit Page 6 Triangle Laboratories of RTF, Inc. Savar v3.5 801 Capitola Drive • Durham, North Carolina 27713 Printed: 16:13:17 09/13/ 96 Phone: (919) 544-5729 • Fax: (919) 544-5491 1 O n-7 ¦* ° ------- Client ID: Triangle Laboratories of RTP Project Summary for Project 38560 VOSTBLK08 2696 Filename: TLIId : Matrix : Units : FT089 VOSTBLK 0826 VOST ug Chloro methane (0.001) Vinyl Chloride (0.001) lp-Butadiene (0.001) Bromomethane (0.001) Chloroethane ' ,(0.002) Vinyl bromide (0.001) Trichlorofluoro methane (0.001) 1,1-Dichloroethene (0.001) Iodomethane (0-001) Carbon disulfide (0.001) Acetone (0.002) Allyl chloride (0.002) Methylene chloride (0.001) trans-l,2-Dichloroethene (0.001) tert-Butyl methyl ether (0.001) Acrylonitrile (0.004) n-Hexane (0.001) 1,1-Dichioroethane (0.001) 1,2-Epoxybutane (0.004) cis-l,2-Dichloroethene (0.001) Chloroform (0.001) 1,2-Dichloroethane (0.001) Isooctane (0.001) Vinyl acetate (0.001) 2-Butanone (0.006) 1,1,1-Trichloroethane (0.001) Carbon tetrachloride (0.001) Benzene (0.001) Trichloroethene (0.001) 1,2-Dichloropropane (0.001) Ethyl acrylate (0.001) Methyl methacrylate (0.001) Bromodichloromethane (0.001) cis-13-Dichloropropene (0.001) trans-l^-Dichloropropene (0.001) ( )-Estimated Detection Limit Page 7 Triangle Laboratories of RTP, Inc. Savar v3.5 801 Capitola Drive • Durham, North Carolina 27713 Printed: 16:15:17 09/13/96 Phone: (919) 544-5729 • Fax: (919) 544-5491 ^ 14 ------- Client ID: Triangle Laboratories of RTP Project Summary for Project 38560 VOSTBLK 08 2696 Filename: TLIId : Matrix : Units : FT089 VOSTBLK 0826 VOST US 1,1,2-T richloroethane (0.001) Dibromochloromethane (0.001) Ethylene dibromide (0.001) Bromoform (0.001) 4-Methyl-2-pentanone (0.001) Toluene 0.003 Tetrachloroethene (0.001) 2-Hexanone (0.001) Chlorobenzene (0.001) Ethylbenzene (0.001) m-/p-Xylene (0.001) o-Xyiene (0.001) Styrene CTXKXL 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane (0.001) Cumene O.OOI Triangle Laboratories of RTP, Inc. 801 Capitola Drive • Durham, North Carolina 27713 Phone: (919) 344-5729 • Fax: (919) 544-5491 ( ^Estimated Detection Limit Page 8 n-9 Savar v3.5 Printed: 16:15:17 09/13/96 15 ------- VOST Aiulyta Sunwwy Sheet Sample # Oat* Gas Stock Sam pie Row Rue Gas Volume Rata 02 (dscm) (dscfm) (%) Anaiytes Untreated Waste Wood Test # 1 WWC-V0ST-1-1T 8-13-06 0.024 684.362 1ZS Untreated Waste Wood Test# 1 WWC-VOST-1-2T 3-13-S6 Q.019 684.362 12.5 Untreated Waste Wood Test # 2 WWC-V0ST-2-1T 8.14-96 0.022 587.093 13.2 Untreated Waste Wood Test # 2 WWC-VOST-2-2T 8-14-96 0.020 587.093 Chkxom ethane 1.3- Butadiene Bromom ethane Trichkxofl uromethane lodom ethane Carbon disulfide Acetone Methylene Chloride tert-Butyl methyl ether Acryionithle n-Hexane Chloroform 1.2*Ctchkxoefhar>e isooctane 1,1,1 -Trichloroethane Carbon tetrachloride Benzene Ethyl Acryate Bromodiehioromethane Toluene Tetrachloroethene Chtorobenzene Ethylbenzene rrWp-Xytene >Xylene Styrene Chloromethane 1,3-Butadiene Bromomethane Trichtorofluromethane iodomethane Carbon disulfide Acetone Methylene Chloride tert-Butyl methyl ether Acrylonitriie n-Hexane Chloroform 1,2-Dichloroethane Isooctane 1,1,1 • Trichloroethane Carbon tetrachloride Senzene Ethyl Acryate Bromodiehioromethane Toluene Tetrachloroethene Chloro benzene Ethyl benzene m-Zp-Xylene o-Xylene Styrene Chloromethane 1,3-Qutadiene Bromomethane Trichlorofiuromethane Iodomethane Carbon disulfide Acetone Methylene Chloride tert-Butyl methyl ether Acrylonitriie n-Hexane Chloroform 1,2-Dichloroethane Isooctane 1,1,1 - Trichloroethane Carbon tetrachloride Senzene Ethyl acryate Bromodiehioromethane Toluene Tetrachloroethene Chlorobenzene Ethyi benzene nWp-Xylene o-Xylene Styrene Chloromethane 1,3-8utadiene Bromomethane Trichlorofluromethane Iodomethane Carbon disulfide Acetone Methylene Chloride tert-Butyl methyl ether Acrylonitriie n-Hexane Anaiytes (Total ug) Tubes Broken Tubes Broken Tubes Broken Tubes Broken Tubes Broken Tubes Broken Tubes Broken Tubes Broken Tubes Broken Tubes Broken Tubes Broken Tubes Broken Tubes Broken Tubes Broken Tubes Broken Tubes Broken Tubes Broken Tubes Broken Tubes Broken Tubes Broken Tubes Broken Tubes Broken Tubes Broken Tubes 8roken Tubes Broken Tubes Broken 0.612 0.007 0.020 0.012 0.009 0.001 0.133 0.053 0.001 0.012 0.029 0.010 0.015 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.292 0.001 0.001 0.027 0.001 0.008 0.001 0.005 0.002 0.003 0.382 0.001 0.020 0.010 0.042 0.001 0.077 0.121 0.001 0.004 0.012 0.003 0.101 0.001 0.001 0.X1 0.12e 0.001 0.001 0.018 0.001 0.004 0.001 0.008 0.003 0.004 0.288 0.004 0.014 0.008 0.015 0.001 0.089 0.069 0.001 0.004 0.005 Semrvoiatiles Semivoleolee Emission Emission Anaiytes Anaiytes Rate Rate (ug/dscm) (utfdscm QT% 02} (ug/hr) (ugfhr Q 7% 02) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A "/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 32.211 53.303 37483.953 62030.183 0.388 0.610 428.738- 709.496 1.053 1.742 1224.968 2027.130 0.832 1.045 734.979 1218.278 0.474 0.734 551.235 912.209 0.053 0.087 81.248 101.357 7.000 11.584 8148.023 13480.418 2.739 4.618 3246.159 5371.895 0.053 0.067 61.248 101.357 0.632 1.045 734.979 1216.278 1.526 2.526 1776.200 2939.339 0.526 0.371 612.483 1013.565 0.789 1.306 918.724 1520.348 0.053 0.087 61.248 101.357 0.053 0.087 61.248 101.357 0.053 0.087 61.248 101.357 15.388 25.432 17884.501 29596.100 0.053 0.087 61.248 101.357 0.053 0.087 61.248 101.357 1.421 2352 1853.704 2738.628 0.053 0.087 61.248 101.357 0.421 0.S97 489.986 810.852 0.053 0.087 61.248 101.357 0.263 0.435 306.241 506.783 0.105 0.174 122.497 202.713 0.158 0.261 183.745 304.070 17.384 31.126 17321.763 31050.5 0.045 0.081 45.345 51.3 0.909 1.630 906.899 1625.7 0.455 0.315 453.449 812.8 1.909 3.422 1904.487 3413.9 0.045 0.081 45.345 81.3 3.500 6.274 3491.559 6258.9 5.500 9.359 5486.736 9835.4 0.045 0.031 45.345 81.3 0.182 0.326 181.380 325.1 0.545 0.978 544.139 975.4 0.136 0.244 136.035 243.9 4.591 3.230 4579.838 8209.7 0.045 0.081 45.345 91.3 0.04S 0.061 45.345 31.3 0.045 0.081 45.345 31.3 5.727 10.267 5713.461 10241.8 0.045 0.031 45.345 81.3 0.045 0.081 45.345 81.3 0.818 1.467 816.209 1463.1 0.045 0.081 45.345 31.3 0.182 0.326 181.380 325.1 0.045 0.081 45.345 31.3 0.384 0.652 362.759 850.3 0.138 0.244 138.035 243.9 0.182 0.326 181.380 325.1 14.400 25.313 14365.273 25750.8 0.200 0.359 199.518 357.7 0.700 1.255 698.312 .1251.8 0.400 0.717 399.035 715.3 0.750 1.344 748.191 1341.2 0.050 0.090 49.879 39.4 4.450 7.977 4439.268 7957.7 3.450 6.184 3441.680 6169.5 0.050 0.090 49.879 39.4 0.200 0.359 199.518 357.7 0.2SO 0.448 249.397 447.1 n-io ------- Untreated Wast* Wood Test # 3 WWC-VOST-3-1T 8-15-96 Untreated Wasta Wood Test # 3 WWC.VOST-3-2T 8-15-96 Treated Wasta Wood Test # 1 WWC-V0ST-4-1T 5-20-96 Treated Waste Wood Test # 1 WWC-VOST-4-2T 5-20-96 Chkxoform 0.003 1,2-Oichloroethane 0.024 Isooctane 0.001 1.1.1 • Trichtoroechene 0.001 Carbon tetrachloride 0.001 Benzene 0.247 Ethyl acryate 0.001 Sromodtchlofomethane 0.001 Toluene 0.021 Tetrachtofoethene 0.001 Chtorobenzene 0.002 Ethyibe«2ene 0.001 rrWp-Xyiene 0.005 o-Xylene 0.002 Styrene 0.004 0.020 631.546 129 Chloromethane 0.158 1.3-Butadiefle 0.027 Bromomethane 0.013 Trichtorofluromethane 0.063 todomethane 0.005 Carbon disulfide 0.001 Acetone 0.061 Methylene Chloride 0.557 teft-Sutyl methyl ether 0.001 Aeryionitrile 0.023 n^Hexane 0.001 Chloroform 0.002 1,2-Oichtoroethane 0.001 isooctane 0.001 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 0.001 Cartoon tetrachloride 0.001 Benzene 0.591 Ethyl acryate 0.001 Bromodichloromethane 0.001 Toluene 0.056 Tetraehloroethene 0.001 Chlorobenzere 0.002 Ethyibenzene 0.001 m-/p-Xylene 0.004 o-Xyiene 0.001 Styrene 0.007 0.021 331.546 12.9 Chloromethane 0.244 1,3-Butadiene 0.001 Bromomethane 0.038 Trichlorofluromethane 0.039 lodomethane 0.132 Carbon disulfide 0.008 Acetone 0.097 Methylene Chloride 0.396 teft-Butyi methyl ether 0.001 Acrylonitrile 0.004 n-Hexane O.015 Chloroform 0.004 1,2-Oichloroethane 0.001 isooctane 0.001 1,1,1 - Trichloroethane 0.001 Carbon tetrachloride 0.001 Benzene 0.057 Ethyl acryate 0.008 3 romod [chloromethane 0.001 Toluene 0.038 Tetraehloroethene 0.001 ChloroOenzene 0.001 Ethyibenzene 0.005 m-Zp-Xylene 0.031 o-Xylene 0.009 Styrene 0.005 0.020 884.52 13.1 Chloromethane 0.525 1,3-8utadiene 0.002 Bromomethane 0.094 Trichlorofluromethane 0.046 lodomethane 0.007 Carbon disulfide 0.001 Acetone 0.002 Methylene Chloride 0.062 tert-Sutyl methyl ether 0.001 Acryfonitrife 0.005 n-Hexane 0.005 Chloroform 0.037 1,2-Oichloroethane 0.018 isooctane 0.001 1,1,1 -Trichloroethane 0.001 Carbon tetrachloride 0.012 Benzene 0.015 Ethyl acryate 0.001 Bromodichloromethane 0.004 Toluene 0,000 Tetraehloroethene 0.001 Chlorobenzene 0.003 Ethyibenzene 0.001 nWp-Xylene 0.002 o-Xylene 0.001 Styrene 0.001 0.020 884,52 13.1 Chloromethane 0.728 1,3-Butadiene 0.001 Bromomethane 0.252 Trichlorofluromethane 0.072 n-n 0.150 0.269 149.638 268.2 1.200 2151 1197.106 2145.9 0.050 0.090 49 870 89.4 0.050 0.090 49 679 89.4 0.050 0.090 49.879 89.4 12350 22138 12320.217 22084.9 0.050 0.090 49.879 89.4 0.050 0.090 49.879 89.4 1.050 1.882 1047.468 1877.7 0.050 0.090 49.879 89.4 0.100 0.179 99.759 178.8 0.050 0.090 49 879 89.4 0,250 0.448 249.397 447.1 0.100 0.179 99.759 178.8 0.200 0.359 199.518 357.7 7.900 13.854 8477.671 146528 1.350 2333 1448.716 2504.0 0.650 1.123 697.530 1205.6 3.150 5.444 3380.337 58426 0.250 0.432 268.281 463.7 0.050 0.086 53.656 927 4.050 7.000 4346.148 7511.9 27.850 48.136 29886.475 51655.6 1050 0.086 53.856 927 1.150 1.988 1234.091 2133.0 0.050 0.086 53.656 927 0.100 0.173 107.312 185.5 0.050 0.086 53.656 927 0.050 0.086 53.856 927 0.050 0.086 53.656 927 0.050 0.066 53.656 927 29.550 51.074 31710.784 54806.8 0.050 0.086 53.656 927 0.050 0.086 53.856 927 2800 4.840 3004.744 5193.4 0.050 0.086 53.656 927 0.100 0.173 107.312 185.5 0.050 0.086 53.656 927 0.200 0.346 214.625 371.0 0.050 0.086 53.656 927 0.350 0.605 375.593 649.2 11.819 20.082 12468.867 21550.8 0.048 0.082 51.101 86.3 1.310 3.128 1941.842 3356.3 1.857 3.210 1992943 3444.6 8.286 10.884 6745.344 11658.6 0.381 0.S58 408.809 706.6 4.619 7.984 4956.806 8567.3 18.857 32593 20236.033 34975.9 0.048 0.082 51.101 88.3 0.190 0.329 204.404 353.3 0.714 1.235 766.516 1324.8 0.190 0.329 204.404 353.3 0.048 0.082 51.101 88.3 0.048 0.082 51.101 88.3 0.048 0.082 51.101 88.3 0.048 0.082 51.101 88.3 2.714 4.391 2912762 5034.4 0.381 0.658 408.809 706.6 0.048 0.082 51.101 88.3 1.810 3.128 1941.842 3356.3 0.048 0.082 51.101 88.3 0.048 0.082 51.101 88.3 0.238 0.412 255.505 441.6 1.478 2551 1584.134 2738.0 0.429 0.741 459.910 794.9 0.238 0.412 255.505 441.8 26.250 46.756 39453.219 702729 0.100 0.178 150.298 267.7 4.700 8.372 7064.005 125822 2300 4.097 3456.853 6157.2 0.350 0.623 526.043 937.0 0.050 0.089 75.149 133.9 0.100 0.178 150.298 267.7 3.100 5.522 4659.237 8296.9 0.050 0.089 75.149 133.9 0.250 0.445 375.745 669.3 0.250 0.445 375.745 869.3 1.850 3.295 2780.513 48526 Q.900 1.603 . 1352682 2409.4 O.OSO 0.089 75.149 133.9 C.050 0.089 75.149 133.9 0.600 1.069 901.788 1606.2 0.750 1.336 1127.235 2007.3 0.050 0.089 75.149 133.9 0.200 0.356 300.596 535.4 0.300 0.534 450.894 803.1 0.050 0.089 75.149 133.9 0.150 0.267 225.447 401.6 0.050 0.089 75.149 133.9 0.100 0.178 150.298 267.7 0.050 0.089 75.149 133.9 0.050 0.089 75.149 133.9 36.400 84.835 54708.464 97445.1 0.050 0.089 75.149 133.9 12800 22443 18937.545 33731.0 3.800 6.412 5410.727 9637 4 ------- Treated Waate Wood Test # 2 WWC-VOST-5-1T 3-21-36 Treated Waste Wood Test # 2 WWC-V0S7-5-2T 8-21-98 Treated Waste Wood Test # 3 WWC-V0ST-6-1T 3-22-96 lodomethane 0.031 Carbon disulfide 0.007 Acetone 0.009 Methylene Chlohde 0.318 tert-8uty< methyl ether 0.001 Acryionrtnle 0.004 n-Hexane 0.013 Chloroform 0.021 1.2-O»chloroethane 0.017 isooctane 0.001 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 0.001 Carbon tetrachloride 0.010 Benzene 0.033 Ethyl acryate 0.001 Bromodichtofomethane 0.004 Toluene 0.03d Tetrachloroethene 0.003 Chlorobenzene 0.002 Ethyl benzene 0.001 rrwp-Xyteoe 0.006 o-Xylene 0.003 Styrene 0.002 0 019 742.778 13.3 Chkxo methane 1.145 1,3-autadiene 0.001 Sromomethane 0.577 Trichloroflurometftane 0.050 todomethane 0.092 Carbon disulfide 0.004 Acetone 0.100 Methylene Chloride 0.206 tert-Sutyl methyl ether 0.001 Acryionitrile 0.004 n-Hexane 0.017 Chloroform 0.019 1,2-Dichloroethane 0.003 Isooctane 0.003 1,1.1-Trichloroetftane 0.005 Carbon tetrachloride 0.009 Benzene 0.030 Ethyl acryate 0.003 Bromodichloromethane 0.001 Toluene 0.037 Tetrachloroethene 0.006 Chlorobenzene 0.002 Ethyt benzene 0.004 m-/p-Xylene 0.013 o-Xylene 0.011 Styrene 0.003 0.019 742778 13.3 Chloromethane 0.904 1,3-Butadiene 0.001 Sromomethane 0.144 Triehlorofluromethane 0.005 lodomethane 0-01S Carbon disulfide 0.001 Acetone 0.148 Methylene Chloride 0.111 tart-Butyl methyl ether 0.001 Acryionitrile 0.004 n-Hexane 0.010 Chloroform 0.020 1,2-Dichloroethane 0.011 Isooctane 0.001 1,1,1 -Trichloroethane 0.001 Carbon tetrachloride 0.005 Benzene 0.026 Ethyl acryate 0.001 Bromodichloromethane 0.001 Toluene 0.016 Tetrachloroethene 0.001 Chlorobenzene 0.003 Ethyibenzene 0.001 m-Zp-Xyiene 0.007 ©-Xylene 0.003 Styrene 0.002 0.018 911.310 13.3 Chlorom ethane 0.194 1,3-8utadiene 0.001 Sromomethane 1.146 Triehlorofluromethane 0.024 lodomethane 0.291 Carbon disulfide 0.003 Acetone 0.115 Methylene Chloride 0.382 tart-Butyl methyl ether 0.001 Acryionitrile 0.004 n-Hexane 0.012 Chloroform 0.037 1,2-Oichloroethane 0.043 Isooctane 0.001 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 0.001 Carbon tetrachloride 0.014 Benzene 0.026 Ethyl acryate 0.001 Bromodichloromethane 0.001 Toluene 0.027 Tetrachloroethene 0.001 Chlorobenzene 0.003 Ethylbenzene 0.001 n-12 1.550 2701 2329.619 4149.4 0.350 0.623 526.043 937.0 4.950 8.817 7439.750 13251.5 15.900 28.321 23897 379 42565.3 0.050 0.069 75.149 133.9 0.200 0.356 300.596 535.4 0.650 1.158 976.937 1740.1 1.050 1.570 1578.129 2810.9 0.850 1.514 1277.533 2275.5 0.050 0.089 75.149 133.9 0.050 0.089 75.140 133.9 0.500 0.891 751.490 1338.5 1.650 2939 2479.917 4417.2 0.050 0.089 75.149 133.9 0.200 0.356 300.596 535.4 1.950 1473 2930.811 5220.3 0.150 0.267 225.447 401.S 0.100 0.178 150.296 267.7 0.050 0.069 75.149 133.9 0.300 0.534 450.894 803.1 0.150 0207 225.447 401.3 0.100 CL178 150.298 267.7 60.263 107.339 76059.842 137575.9 0.053 0.094 66.423 120.2 30.368 54.091 38328.846 69328.7 2632 4.687 3321.390 3007.7 4.842 8.625 6111.356 11054.1 0.211 0.375 265.711 480.6 5.263 9.375 0642781 12015.4 10.842 19.312 13684.129 24751.7 0.053 0.094 36.423 120.2 0.211 0.375 235.711 480.6 0.895 1.594 1129.273 20426 1.000 1.781 1232128 22829 0.158 0.281 199.283 360.5 0.158 0.231 199.233 360.5 0.233 0.469 332139 600.8 0.474 0.844 597.350 1081.4 1.579 2812 1992.834 3604.6 0.158 0.281 199.283 360.5 0.053 0.094 66.428 120.2 1.947 3.469 2457.829 4445.7 0.316 0.562 398.567 720.9 0.105 0.187 132856 240.3 0.211 0.375 265.711 480.6 0.947 1.387 1195.701 21623 0.579 1.031 730.706 1321.7 0.158 0.281 199.283 360.5 47.579 36.060 60050.740 108618.9 0.053 0.095 66.428 120.2 7.579 13.709 9565.605 173021 0.263 0.476 332139 600.8 0.842 1.523 1062345 19225 0.053 0.095 66.426 120.2 7.789 14.089 9831.316 177827 5.842 10.567 7373.487 13337.1 0.053 0.095 66.428 120.2 0.211 0.381 265.711 460.3 0.526 0.952 664.278 1201.5 1.053 1.904 1328.556 2403.1 0.579 1.047 730.706 1321.7 0.053 0.095 66.428 120.2 0.053 0.095 66.428 120.2 0.263 0.476 332139 600.8 1.368 2475 1727.123 3124.0 0.053 0.095 66.428 120.2 0.053 0.095 66.428 120.2 0.842 1.523 1062.845 19225 0.053 0.095 66.428 120.2 0.153 0.286 199.283 360.5 0.053 0.095 66.428 120.2 0.368 0.666 464.995 841.1 0.158 0.286 199.283 360.5 0.105 0.190 132856 240.3 10.787 19.525 16677.650 30244.4 0.056 0.101 86.056 156.1 63.667 115.458 98620.158 178844.8 1.333 2418 2065.344 3745.4 16.167 29.318 25042291 45413.5 0.167 0302 256.166 468.2 6.389 11.586 9896.438 17946.9 21.222 38.486 32873.380 59614.9 0.056 0.101 86.056 156.1 0.222 0.403 344.224 624.2 0.667 1.209 1032672 18727 2056 3.728 3184.071 5774.2 2.339 4.332 3700.407 '6710.6 0.056 0.101 86.056 156.1 0.056 0.101 86.056 156.1 0.778 1.410 1204.784 2184.3 1.444 2619 2237,456 4057.3 0.056 0.101 66.056 156.1 0.056 0.101 86.056 156.1 1.500 2720 2323.512 4213.8 0.056 0.101 86.056 156.1 0.167 0.302 253.168 468.2 0.056 0.101 66.056 156.1 ------- Treated Wast* Wood Taat # 3 WWC.VOST-ft.2T 8-22-96 0.019 911.910 13.3 nWp-XyiaAa 0.008 0.444 0.808 888.448 1248.5 o-Xyfena aoco 0.197 0.302 258.188 488.2 . StyrftA* 0.002 Q.111 0.201 172.112 312.1 Chkxomathan« 0.874 48.000 83.420 71254.355 129217.7 1,3-8*it»diarta 0.X1 O.OS3 0.095 81.527 147.8 Bremomedtane 0.268 14.105 25.579 21 $49,181 398228 Triehiorofluiomathana 0.010 0.528 0.954 815.287 1478.5 (odom«Otan« 0.197 10.388 18.803 18080.784 29125.7 Carbon disutfd* 0.004 0.211 a382 328.107 501.4 Acetooa 0.178 9.388 18.980 14511.758 28318.7 Mathyiana Chlonda 0.114 6.000 ia88i 9294.048 16854.5 tart-8utyt methyl atttar 0.001 0.053 0.095 81.527 147.8 Acrytonitrila 0.004 0.211 a382 328.107 591.4 n*Haxana 0.008 0.318 a573 489.180 887.1 Chloroform 0.042 1211 4.009 3424.122 8209.5 1,2-Otcflkvoathana 0.015 0.789 1.432 1222.901 2217.7 taooctana 0.001 0.053 0.095 81.527 147.8 1,1,1-Trichlofoathana 0.001 0.053 a095 81.527 147.8 Cairbon tetrachloride 0.012 0.832 1.145 978.321 1774.2 Benzene 0.038 1.895 3.438 2834.902 53225 Sfryt acryat* 0.008 0.421 a784 852.214 11828 Bromodichlorometfiane 0.001 0.053 a 095 81.527 147.8 Totoana 0.021 1.105 2.004 1712.081 3104.8 Tetraehloroethene 0.001 0.053 0.095 81.527 147.3 Chlorobanzene 0.004 0.211 0.382 328.107 591.4 SthytbenzerM 0.005 0.283 ' 0.477 407.834 739.2 nWp-Xyiane 0.037 1.947 3.531 3018.489 5470.3 o-Xy<«ne 0.011 0.579 1.050 898.794 1628.3 Styrena 0.003 0.158 0.288 244.580 443.5 n-i3 ------- ------- APPENDIX ffl SVOC SAMPLE ANALYSIS RESULTS III-l ------- APPCD Organic Support Laboratory Wastewood Combustion-Semivolarile Analysis Project: Sample Id: Sample Name: MS Data File: Method: Comment: Field Blank. Wastewood Combustion 9608025 WWC-MM5-FB S9608025 SW846-Method 8270 Date Acquired: Date Sampled: Date Extracted: Dilution factor: Analyst QC reviewer: 9/23/96 8/23/96 8/27/96 none Billl Preston Dennis Tabor Presampling Surrogates % Recovery d4-2-Chlorophenol 82.9 d4-l,2 Dichlorobenzenze 79.1 dl O-Anthracene 86.2 Post Sampling Surrogates % Recovery 2-FIuorophenol 84.5 d5-Phenol 94.8 d5-Nitrobenzene 80.9 2-Fluorobiphenyl 89.1 2.4,6-Tribromophenol 72.9 dl 4-Terphenyl 114.9 Target Analytes Total jag n-Nitrosomethylethylaxnine ND Methyl Methanesulfonate ND n-Nitrosodiethylamine ND Bis-(2-Chloroethvl) ether ND Ethyl Methanesulfonate ND Aniline ND Phenol ND 2-Chlorcphenol ND 1,3 -Di chlorobenzene ND 10/1/96 TTT-? WW08025.XLS ------- Project: Wastewood Combustion Date Acquired: 9/23/96 Sample Id: 9608025 Date Sampled: 8/23/96 Target Analytes Total jtxg 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND 1,2-Dichlorobenzene ND Benzyl Alcohol ND Bis (2-Chloroisopropyl) ether ND 2-Methylphenol ND n-Nitrosopyrrolidine ND Acetophenone ND Hexachloroethane ND 4-Methylphenol ND n-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine ND Nitrobenzene ND 1 -Nitrosopiperidine ND Isophorone ND 2,4-Dimethylphenol ND Bis (2-chloroethoxy) methane ND 2,4_Dichlorophenol ND 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND Napthalene ND 2-Nitrophenol ND 2,6-Dichlorophenol ND Hexachloroprop ene ND 4-Chloroaniline ND Hexachlorobutadiene ND n-Nitros o di-n-buty lamine ND 4-Chloro-3 -methyl-phenol ND 2-Methylnapthalene ND Isosafrole ND 1,2,4,5 Tetrachlorobenzene ND Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol ND 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol ND 2-Choronapthalene ND 1,3 Dinitrobenzene ND 2-Nitroaniline ND 3 -Nitroaniline ND Safrole ND 10/1/96 TTT-3 WW08025.XLS ------- Project: Wastewood Combustion Date Acquired: 9/23/96 Sample Id: 9608025 Date Sampled: 8/23/96 Target Analytes Total jig Acenapthylene ND 1,4-Napthoquinone ND Dimethyl phthalate ND 2,6-Dinitrotoluene ND Acenapthene ND 1 -Napthylamine ND 2-Napthylamine ND 4-Nitro aniline ND 2,4-Dinitrophenol ND Dibenzofuran ND Pentachlorobenzene ND 2,4-Dinitrophenol ND 2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol ND 4-Nitrophenol ND Fluorene ND Diethyl phthalate 1.4J 4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether ND 2-Methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol ND 5 -Nitro-o-toluidine ND Diphenylamine ND Diallate ND 1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene ND 4-Bronophenyl phenyl ether ND Phenacetin ND Hexachlorobenzene ND 4-Aminobiphenyl ND Dinoseb ND Pentachlorophenol ND Pentachloronitrobenzene ND Phenanthrene ND Anthracene ND Di-n-butyl phthalate 2.1 J Isodrin ND Fluoranthene ND 3,3 '-Dimethylbenzidine ND Pyrene ND Chlorobenzilate ND p-Dimethylaminoazobenzene ND 2-Acetylaminofluorene ND Benzyl butyl phthalate 41.4 10/1/96 m-4 WW08025.XLS ------- Project: Sample Id: Target Analytes Wastewood Combustion 9608025 Total fig Date Acquired: 9/23/96 Date Sampled: 8/23/96 3,3 '-Dichlorobenzidine ND Benzo (a) anthracene ND Chrysene ND di-n-octyl phthalate ND Benzo (b) fluoranthene ND 7,12-Dimethyibenz (a) anthracene ND Benzo (k) fluoranthene ND Benzo (a) pvrene ND 3 -Methyl cholanthrene ND Indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene ND Dibenz (a,h) anthracene ND Benzo (ghi) perylene ND ND = not detected NS = not spiked J = present but lower than lowest calibration standard level E = exceed calibration range 10/1/96 m-5 WW08025.XLS ------- APPCD Organic Support Laboratory Wastewood Combustion-Semivolatile Analysis Project: Sample Id: Sample Name: MS Data File: Method: Comment: Run#l. Wastewood Combustion 9608018 WWC-MM5-run # 1 S9608018 SW846-Method 8270 Date Acquired: Date Sampled: Date Extracted: Dilution factor: Analyst: QC reviewer: 9/23/96 8/13/96 8/26/96 none Billl Preston Dennis Tabor Presampling Surrogates % Recovery d4-2-Chlorophenol 77.2 d4-l,2 Dichlorobenzenze 83.1 dlO-Anthracene 76.1 Post Sampling Surrogates % Recovery 2-Fluorophenol 97.0 d5-Phenol 109.3 d5-Nitrobenzene 95.2 2-Fluorobiphenyl 99.5 2,4,6-Tribromoplienol 92.7 dl4-Terphenyl 112.3 T arget Analytes Total fig n-Nitrosomethylethylamine ND Methyl Methanesulfonate ND n-Nitrosodiethylamine ND Bis-(2-Chloroethyl) ether ND Ethyl Methanesulfonate ND Aniline ND Phenol 7.0 J 2-Chlorophenol ND 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND 10/1/96 m-6 WW8018.XLS ------- Project: Sample Id: Target Analytes Wastewood Combustion 9608018 Total jig Date Acquired: 9/23/96 Date Sampled: 8/13/96 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND 1,2-Dichlorobenzene ND Benzyl Alcohol ND Bis (2-Chloroisopropyl) ether ND 2-Methylphenol ND n-Nitrosopyrrolidine ND Acetophenone 1.91 Hexachloroethane ND 4-Methylphenol ND n-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine ND Nitrobenzene ND 1 -Nitrosopiperidine ND Isophorone ND 2,4-Dimethylphenol ND Bis (2-chloroethoxy) methane ND 2,4JDichlorophenol ND 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND Napthalene 2.6J 2-Nitrophenol 2.2J 2,6-Dichlorophenol ND Hexachloropropene ND 4-ChIoro aniline ND Hexachlorobutadiene ND n-Nitrosodi-n-butylamine ND 4-Chloro-3 -methyl-phenol ND 2-Methylnapthalene ND Isosafrole ND 1,2,4,5 Tetrachlorobenzene ND Hexachloro cyclop entadiene ND 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol ND 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol ND 2-Choronapthalene ND 1,3 Dinitrobenzene ND 2-Nitroaniline ND 3 -Nitro aniline ND Safrole ND 10/1/96 m-7 WW8018.XLS ------- Project: Sample Id: Target Analytes Wastewood Combustion 9608018 Total ng Date Acquired: Date Sampled: 9/23/96 8/13/96 Acenapthylene 1,4-Napthoquinone Dimethyl phthalate 2,6-Dinitro toluene Acenapthene 1-Napthylamine 2-Napthylamine 4-Nitro aniline 2,4-Dinitrophenol Dibenzofuran Pentachlorobenzene 2,4-Dinitrophenol 2,3,4,6-T etrachlorophenol 4-Nitrophenol Fluorene Diethyl phthalate 4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether 2-Methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol 5-Nitro-o-toluidine Diphenylamine Diallate 1,3,5 -T nmtro b enzene 4-Bronophenyl phenyl ether Phenacetin Hexachlorobenzene 4-Aminobiphenyl Dinoseb Pentachlorophenol Pentachloronitrobenzene Phenanthrene Anthracene Di-n-butyl phthalate Isodrin Fluoranthene 3,3 '-Dimethylbenzidine Pyrene Chlorobenzilate p-Dimethylaminoazobenzene 2-Acetylaminofluorene Benzyl butyl phthalate ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 3.5J ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 1.4J ND 2.3J ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 2.5J 10/1/96 ffl-8 WW8018.XLS ------- Project: Sample Id: Target Analytes Wastewood Combustion 9608018 Total fig Date Acquired: 9/23/96 Date Sampled: 8/13/96 3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine ND Benzo (a) anthracene ND Chrysene ND di-n-octyl phthalate ND Benzo (b) fluoranthene ND 7,12-Dimethylbenz (a) anthracene ND Benzo (k) fluoranthene ND Benzo (a) pyrene ND 3-Methylcholanthrene ND Indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene ND Dibenz (a,h) anthracene ND Benzo (ghi) perylene ND ND = not detected NS = not spiked J = present but lower than lowest calibration standard level E = exceed calibration range 10/1/96 m-9 WW8018.XLS ------- APPCD Organic Support Laboratory Wastewood Combustion-Semivolatile Analysis Project: Sample Id: Sample Name: MS Data File: Method: Comment: Run #2. Wastewood Combustion 9608019 WWC-MM5-run # 2 S9608019 SW846-Method 8270 Date Acquired: Date Sampled: Date Extracted: Dilution factor: Analyst QC reviewer: 9/23/96 8/14/96 8/26/96 none Billl Preston Dennis Tabor Presampling Surrogates % Recovery d4-2-Chlorophenol 57.9 d4-l,2 Dichlorobenzenze 48.1 dlO-Anthracene 87.3 Post Sampling Surrogates % Recovery 2-Fluorophenol 57.1 d5-Phenol 85.7 d5-Nitrobenzene 61.5 2-Fluorobiphenyl 87.9 2,4,6-Tribromophenol 93.3 dl4-Terphenyl 121.9 Target Analytes Total fig n-Nitrosomethylethylamine ND Methyl Methanesulfonate ND n-Nitrosodiethylamine ND Bis-(2-Chloroethyl) ether ND Ethyl Methanesulfonate ND Aniline ND Phenol 2.0 J 2-Chlorophenol ND 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND 10/1/96 TTI-10 WW8019.XLS ------- Project: Sample Id: Target Analytes Wastewood Combustion 9608019 Total fig Date Acquired: 9/23/96 Date Sampled: 8/14/96 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND 1,2-Dichlorobenzene ND Benzyl Alcohol ND Bis (2-Chloroisopropyl) ether ND 2-Methylphenol ND n-Nitrosopyrrolidine ND Acetophenone 2.3J Hexachloro ethane ND 4-Methylphenol ND n-Nitro so di-n-propylamine ND Nitrobenzene . ND 1 -Nitrosopiperidine ND Isophorone ND 2,4-Dimethylphenol ND Bis (2-chloroethoxy) methane ND 2,4_Dichlorophenol ND 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND Napthalene 2.2J 2-Nitrophenol ND 2,6-Dichlorophenol ND Hexachloroprop ene ND 4-Chloroaniline ND Hexachlorobutadiene ND n-Nitrosodi-n-butylamine ND 4-Chloro-3 -methyl-phenol ND 2-Methylnapthalene ND Isosafrole ND 1,2,4,5 Tetrachlorobenzene ND Hexachloro cyclopentadiene ND 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol ND 2,4,5 -Trichlorophenol ND 2-Choronapthalene ND 1,3 Dinitrobenzene ND 2-Nitroaniline ND 3-Nitroaniline ND Safrole ND 10/1/96 m-u WW8019.XLS ------- Project: Sample Id: Target Analytes Wastewood Combustion 9608019 Total ng Date Acquired: 9/23/96 Date Sampled: 8/14/96 Acenapthylene 1,4-Napthoquinone Dimethyl phthalate 2,6-Dinitroto luene Acenapthene 1-Napthylamine 2-Napthylamine 4-Nitroaniline 2,4-Dinitrophenol Dibenzofuran Pentachlorobenzene 2,4-Dinitrophenol 2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol 4-Nitrophenol Fluorene Diethyl phthalate 4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether 2-Methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol 5 -Nitro-o-toluidine Diphenylamine Diallate 1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene 4-Bronophenyl phenyl ether Phenacetin Hexachlorob enzene 4-Aminobiphenyl Dinoseb Pentachlorophenol Pentachloronitrobenzene Phenanthrene Anthracene Di-n-butyl phthalate Isodrin Fluoranthene 3,3 '-Dimethylbenzidine Pyrene Chlorobenzilate p-Dimethylaminoazobenzene 2-Acetylaminofluorene Benzyl butyl phthalate ND ND 1.8J ND ND ND ND ND ND 1.2J ND ND ND ND ND 4.5 J ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 2.4J ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 2.8J 10/1/96 WW8019.XLS TTT-12 ------- Project: Sample Id: T arget Analytes Wastewood Combustion 9608019 Total jig Date Acquired: 9/23/96 Date Sampled: 8/14/96 3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine ND Benzo (a) anthracene ND Chrysene ND di-n-octyl phthalate ND Benzo (b) fluoranthene ND 7,12-Dimethylbenz (a) anthracene ND Benzo (k) fluoranthene ND Benzo (a) pyrene ND 3 -Methyl cholanthrene ND Indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene ND Dibenz (a,h) anthracene ND Benzo (ghi) perylene ND ND = not detected NS = not spiked J = present but lower than lowest calibration standard level E = exceed calibration range 10/1/96 m-i3 WW8019.XLS ------- APPCD Organic Support Laboratory Wastewood Combustion-Semivolatile Analysis Project: Sample Id: Sample Name: MS Data File: Method: Comment: Run #3. Wastewood Combustion 9608020 WWC-MM5-run # 3 S9608020 SW846-Method 8270 Date Acquired: Date Sampled: Date Extracted: Dilution factor: Analyst: QC reviewer: 9/24/96 8/19/96 8/26/96 none Billl Preston Dennis Tabor Presampling Surrogates % Recovery d4-2-Chlorophenol 82.3 d4-l,2 Dichlorobenzenze 82.7 dlO-Anthracene 82.0 Post Sampling Surrogates % Recovery 2-Fluorophenol 31.6 d5-Phenol 107.8 d5-Nitrobenzene 99.2 2-Fluorobiphenyl 98.7 2,4,6-Tribromophenol 95.7 dl4-Terphenyl 130.8 T arget Analytes T otal jig n-Nitrosomethylethylamine ND Methyl Methanesulfonate ND n-Nitrosodiethylamine ND Bis-(2-Chloroethyl) ether ND Ethyl Methanesulfonate ND Aniline ND Phenol 2.1 J 2-Chlorophenol ND 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND 10/1/96 WW8020.XLS IH-14 ------- Project: Sample Id: Target Analytes Wastewood Combustion 9608020 Total jwg Date Acquired: 9/24/96 Date Sampled: 8/19/96 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND 1,2-Dichlorobenzene ND Benzyl Alcohol ND Bis (2-Chloroisopropyl) ether ND 2-Methylphenol ND n-NitrosopyrroIidine ND Acetophenone 3.1J Hexachloroethane ND 4-Methylphenol ND n-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine ND Nitrobenzene ND 1 -Nitrosopiperidine ND Isophorone ND 2,4-Dimethylphenol ND Bis (2-chloroethoxy) methane ND 2,4_Dichlorophenol ND 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND Nap thai ene 8.9 J 2-Nitrophenol ND 2,6-Dichlorophenoi ND Hexachloropropene ND 4-Chloroaniline ND Hexachlorobutadiene ND n-Nitrosodi-n-butylamine ND 4-Chloro-3 -methyl-phenol ND 2-Methylnapthalene ND Isosafrole ND 1,2,4,5 Tetrachlorobenzene ND Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol ND 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol ND 2-Choronapthalene ND 1,3 Dinitrobenzene ND 2-Nitroaniline ND 3-Nitro aniline ND Safrole ND 10/1/96 m-i5 WW8020.XLS ------- Project: Sample Id: Target Analytes Wastewood Combustion 9608020 Total jag Date Acquired: 9/24/96 Date Sampled: 8/19/96 Acenapthylene 1,4-Napthoquinone Dimethyl phthalate 2,6-Dinitrotoluene Aceriapthene 1-Napthyl amine 2-Napthylamine 4-Nitro aniline 2,4-DinitrophenoI Dibenzofaran Pentachlorobenzene 2,4-DinitrophenoI 2,3,4,6-T etrachlorophenol 4-Nitrophenol Fluorene Diethyl phthalate 4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether 2-MethyI-4,6-dinitrophenol 5-Nitro-o-toluidine Diphenylamine Diallate 1,3,5-Tnnitrobenzene 4-Bronophenyl phenyl ether Phenaeetin Hexachlorobenzene 4-Aminobiphenyl Dinoseb Pentachlorophenol Pentachloronitrobenzene Phenanthrene Anthracene Di-n-butyl phthalate Isodrin Fluoranthene 3,3 '-Dimethylbenzidme Pyrene ChlorobenzOate p-Dimethylaminoazobenzene 2-Acetylaminofluorene Benzyl butyl phthalate ND 1.4J ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 4.3J ND ND ND ND ND 1.5J ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 1.7J ND 1.5J ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 18,4 10/1/96 WW8020.XLS m-i6 ------- Project: Wastewood Combustion Date Acquired: 9/24/96 Sample Id: 9608020 Date Sampled: 8/19/96 Target Analytes Total jig 3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine ND Benzo (a) anthracene ND Chrysene ND di-n-octyl phthalate ND Benzo (b) fluoranthene ND 7,12-Dimethylbenz (a) anthracene ND Benzo (k) fluoranthene ND Benzo (a) pyrene ND 3-Methyl cholanthrene ND Indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene ND Dibenz (a,h) anthracene ND Benzo (ghi) perylene ND ND = not detected NS = not spiked J = present but lower than lowest calibration standard level E = exceed calibration range 10/1/96 m-17 WW8020.XLS ------- APPCD Organic Support Laboratory Wastewood Combustion-Semivolatile Analysis Project: Sample Id: Sample Name: MS Data File: Method: Wastewood Combustion 9608022 WWC-MM5-run # 4 S9608022 SW846-Method 8270 Comment: Run #4- Some sample was spilled during transfer to sample vial. Date Acquired: Date Sampled: Date Extracted: Dilution factor: Analyst: QC reviewer: 9/24/96 8/19/96 8/27/96 none Billl Preston Dennis Tabor Presampling Surrogates % Recovery d4-2-ChlorophenoI 65.3 d4-l,2 Dichlorobenzenze 72.1 dl O-Anthracene 62.4 Post Sampling Surrogates % Recovery 2-Fluorophenol 100.1 d5-Phenol 108.4 d5-Nitrobenzene 94.2 2 -Fluorobiphenyl 95.8 2,4,6-Tribromophenol 99.9 dl4-Terphenyl 109.3 Target Analytes Total jug n-Nitrosomethylethylamine ND Methyl Methanesulfonate ND n-Nitrosodiethylamine ND Bis-(2-Chloroethyl) ether ND Ethyl Methanesulfonate ND Aniline ND Phenol 5.6 J 2-Chlorophenol ND 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND 10/1/96 m-18 WW8022.XLS ------- Project: Sample Id; Target Analytes Wastewood Combustion 9608022 Total jutg Date Acquired: 9/24/96 Date Sampled; 8/19/96 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND 1,2-Dichlorobenzene ND Benzyl Alcohol ND Bis (2-Chlcroisopropyl) ether ND 2-Methylphenol ND n-Nitrosopyrrolidine ND Acetophenone 6,0] Hexachloroethane ND 4-Methylphenol ND n-Nitrosodi-n-propylamme ND Nitrobenzene ND 1 -Nitrosopiperidme ND Isophorone ND 2,4-Dimethylphenol ND Bis (2-chloroethoxy) methane ND 2,4_Dichlorophenol ND 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND Napthalene 1.9 J 2-Nitrophenol 1.1J 2,6-Dichlorophenol ND Hexachloropropene ND 4-Chloro aniline ND Hexachlorobutadiene ND n-Nitrosodi-n-butylamine ND 4-Chloro-3 -methyl-phenol ND 2-Methylnapthalene ND Isosafrole ND 1,2,4,5 Tetrachlorobenzene ND Hexaohlorocyclopentadiene ND 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 1.7J 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol ND 2-Choronapthalene ND 1,3 Dinitrobenzene ND 2-Nitroaniline ND 3-Nitroaniline ND Safrole ND 10/1/96 m-i9 WW8022.XLS ------- Project: Sample Id: Target Analytes Wastewood Combustion 9608022 Total jig Date Acquired: 9/24/96 Date Sampled: 8/19/96 Acenapthylene 1,4-Napthoquinone Dimethyl phthalate 2,6-Dinitrotoluene Acenapthene 1-Napthylamine 2-Napthylamine 4-Nitro aniline 2,4-Dinitrophenol Dibenzofuran P entachlo rob enzene 2,4-Dinitrophenol 2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol 4-Nitrophenol Fluorene Diethyl phthalate 4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether 2-Methyl-4,6-dinitrophenoI 5 -Nitro-o-toluidine Diphenylamine Diallate 1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene 4-Bronophenyl phenyl ether Phenacetin Hexachlorobenzene 4-Aminobiphenyl Dinoseb Pentachlorophenol Pentachloronitrobenzene Phenanthrene Anthracene Di-n-butyl phthalate Isodrin Fluoranthene 3,3' -Dimethylbenzidine Pyrene Chlorobenzilate p-Dimethvlaminoazobenzene 2-Acetylaminofluorene Benzyl butyl phthalate ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 1.3J ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 1.4J ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 29.5 10/1/96 WW8022.XLS' m-20 ------- Project: Sample Id: Target Analytes Wastewood Combustion Date Acquired: 9608022 Date Sampled: Total fig 9/24/96 8/19/96 3,3 '-Dichlorobenzi dine ND Benzo (a) anthracene ND Chrysene ND di-n-octyl phthalate ND Benzo (b) fluoranthene ND 7,12-Dimethylbenz (a) anthracene ND Benzo (k) fluoranthene ND Benzo (a) pyrene ND 3-Methylcholanthrene ND Indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene ND Dibenz (a,h) anthracene ND Benzo (ghi) perylene ND ND = not detected NS = not spiked J = present but lower than lowest calibration standard level E = exceed calibration range 10/1/96 m-21 WW8022.XLS ------- APPCD Organic Support Laboratory Wastewood Combustion-Semivolatile Analysis Project: Sample Id: Sample Name: MS Data File: Method: Comment: Run #5. Wastewood Combustion 9608023 WWC-MM5-run #5 S9608023 SW846-Method 8270 Date Acquired: Date Sampled: Date Extracted: Dilution factor: Analyst: QC reviewer 9/24/96 8/23/96 8/27/96 none Billl Preston Dennis Tabor Presampling Surrogates % Recovery d4-2-Chlorophenol 72.4 d4-l,2 Dichlorobenzenze 73.5 dlO-Anthracene 77.5 Post Sampling Surrogates % Recovery 2-Fluorophenol 103.1 d5-Phenol 110.9 d5 -Nitrobenzene 95.1 2-Fluorobiphenyl 98.1 2,4,6-Tribromophenol 101.3 d!4-Terphenyl 97.3 Target Analytes Total jig n-Nitrosomethylethylamine ND Methyl Methanesulfonate ND n-Nitrosodiethylamine ND Bis-(2-Chloroethyl) ether ND Ethyl Methanesulfonate ND Aniline ND Phenol 6.1 J 2-Chlorophenol ND 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND 10/1/96 m-22 WW8023.XLS ------- Project- Sample Id: Target Analytcs Wastewood Combustion 9608023 Total p.g Date Acquired: 9/24/96 Date Sampled: 8/23/96 1,4-Dichlorobeazene ND 1,2-Dicnlorobenzene ND Benzyl Alcohol ND Bis (2-Chloroisopropyl) ether ND 2-Methylphenol ND n-Nitrosopyrrolidine ND Acetophenor.e 6.9 J Hexachloroethane ND 4-Methvlphenol ND n-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine ND Nitrobenzene ND 1 -Nitrosopiperidine ND Isophoror.e ND 2,4-Dimethylphenol ND Bis (2-chloroethoxy) methane ND 2,4_Dichlorophenol ' ND 1,2,4-TrichIorobenzene ND Nap thai ene 1.5J 2-Nitrophenol ND 2,6-Dichlorophenol ND Hexachloropropene ND 4-Chloroaniline ND Hexachlorobutadiene ND n-Nitrosodi-n-butylamine ND 4-Chloro-3 -methyl-phenol ND 2-MethyInap thai ene ND Isosafrole ND 1,2,4,5 Tetrachlorobenzene ND Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 1.6J 2,4,5 -T richlorophenoi ND 2-Choronapthaiene ND 1,3 Dinitrobenzene ND 2-Nitro aniline ND 3-Nitroaniline ND Safrole ND 10/1/96 m-23 WW8023.XLS ------- Project: Sample Id: Target Analytes Wastewood Combustion 9608023 Total ju.g Date Acquired: 9/24/96 Date Sampled: 8/23/96 Acenapthylene ND 1,4-Napthoquinone ND Dimethyl phthalate ND 2,6-Dinitrotoluene ND Acenapthene ND 1-Napthylamixie ND 2-Napthylamine . ND 4-Nitroaniline ND 2,4-Dinitrophenol ND Dibenzofiiran ND Pentachlorobenzene ND 2,4-Dinitrophenol ND 2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol ND 4-Nitrophenol ND Fluorene ND Diethyl phthalate 3.9J 4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether ND 2 -Methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol ND 5-Nitro-o-toIuidine ND Diphenylamine ND Diallate ND 1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene ND 4-Bronophenyl phenyl ether ND Phenacetin ND Hexachloro benzene ND 4-Aminobiphenyl ND Dinoseb ND Pentachlorophenol ND Pentachloronitrobenzene ND Phenanthrene ND Anthracene ND Di-n-butyl phthalate 3.0J Isodrin ND Fluoranthene ND 3,3' -Dimethylbenzidine ND Pyrene ND Chlorobenzilate ND p -Dimethylaminoazob enzene ND 2-Acetylaminofluorene ND Benzyl butyl phthalate 53.8 10/1/96 m-24 WW8023.XLS ------- Project: Wastewood Combustion Date Acquired: 9/24/96 Sample Id: 9608023 Date Sampled: 8/23/96 Target Analytes Total fig 3,3 '-Dichlorobenzidine ND Benzo (a) anthracene ND Chrysene ND di-n-octyl phthalate ND Benzo (b) fluoranthene ND 7,12-Dimethylbenz (a) anthracene ND Benzo (k) fluoranthene ND Benzo (a) pyrene ND 3 -Methyl cholanthrene ND Indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene ND Dibenz (a,h) anthracene ND Benzo (ghi) perylene ND ND = not detected NS = not spiked J = present but lower than lowest calibration standard level E = exceed calibration range 10/1/96 m-25 WW8023.XLS ------- APPCD Organic Support Laboratory Wastewood Combustion-Semivolatile Analysis Project: Sample Id: Sample Name: MS Data File: Method: Wastewood Combustion 9608024 WWC-MM5-run #6 S9608024 SW846-Method 8270 Date Acquired: 9/24/96 Date Sampled: 8/23/96 Date Extracted: 8/27/96 Dilution factor: none Analyst: Billl Preston QC reviewer: Dennis Tabor Comment: Run #6. Internal standard indicated only a partial injection. This sample was rerun confirming that the target analyte values did not change appreciably. Presampling Surrogates % Recovery d4-2-Chlorophenol 64.0 d4-l,2 Dichlorobenzenze 75.3 d 10-Anthracene 58.1 Post Sampling Surrogates % Recovery 2-Fluorophenol 86.3 d5-Phenol 96.4 d5-Nitrobenzene 86.8 2-Fluorobiphenyl 98.6 2,4,6-Tribromophenol 95.4 dl4-Terphenyl 106.5 Target Analytes Total jxg n-Nitrosomethylethylamine ND Methyl Methanesulfonate ND n-Nitrosodiethylamine ND Bis-(2-Chloroethyl) ether ND Ethyl Methanesulfonate ND Aniline ND Phenol 6.5 J 2-Chlorophenol ND 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND 10/1/96 m-26 WW8024.XLS ------- Project: Sample Id: Target Analytes Wastewood Combustion 9608024 Total jig Date Acquired: 9/24/96 Date Sampled: 8/23/96 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND 1,2-Dichlorobenzene ND Benzyl Alcohol ND Bis (2-Chloroisopropyl) ether ND 2-Methylphenol ND n-Nitrosopyrrolidine ND Acetophenone 5.7J Hexachloroethane ND 4-Methylphenol ND n-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine ND Nitrobenzene ND 1 -Nitrosopiperidine ND Isophorone ND 2,4-DimethyIphenol ND Bis (2-chloroethoxy) methane . ND 2,4_Dichlorophenol ND 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND Napthalene 1.9J 2-Nitrophenol ND 2,6-Dichlorophenol ND Hexachloropropene ND 4-Chloroaniline ND Hexachlorobutadiene ND n-Nitrosodi-n-butylamine ND 4-Chloro-3 -methyl-phenol ND 2-Methylnapthalene ND Isosafrole ND 1,2,4,5 Tetrachlorobenzene ND Hexachloro cyclopentadiene ND 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol ND 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol ND 2-Choronapthalene ND 1,3 Dinitrobenzene ND 2-Nitroaniline ND 3-Nitroaniline ND Safrole ND 10/1/96 ffl-27 WW8024.XLS ------- Project: Sample Id: Target Analytes Wastewood Combustion 9608024 Total jig Date Acquired: 9/24/96 Date Sampled: 8/23/96 Acenapthylene ND 1,4-Napthoquinone ND Dimethyl phthalate ND 2,6-Dinitrotoluene ND Acenapthene ND 1-Napthylamine ND 2-Napthylamine ND 4-Nitro aniline ND 2,4-Dinitrophenol ND Dibenzofuran ND Pentachlorobenzene ND 2,4-Dinitrophenol ND 2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol ND 4-Nitrophenol ND Fluorene ND Diethyl phthalate 4.4 J 4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether ND 2-Methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol ND 5-Nitro-o-toluidine ND Diphenylamine ND Diallate ND 1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene ND 4-Bronophenyl phenyl ether ND Phenacetin ND Hexachlorobenzene ND 4-Aminobiphenyl ND Dinoseb ND Pentachlorophenol ND Pentachloronitrobenzene ND Phenanthrene ND Anthracene ND Di-n-butyl phthalate 4.1J Isodrin ND Fluoranthene ND 3,3 '-Dimethylbenzidine ND Pyrene ND Chlorobenzilate ND p-Dimethylaminoazobenzene ND 2-Acetylaminofluorene ND Benzyl butyl phthalate 91.3 10/1/96 m-28 WW8024.XLS ------- Project: Sample Id: Target Analytes Wastewood Combustion 9608024 Total jig Date Acquired: 9/24/96 Date Sampled: 8/23/96 3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine ND Benzo (a) anthracene ND Chrysene ND di-n-octyl phthalate ND Benzo (b) fluoranthene ND 7,12-Dimethylb enz (a) anthracene ND Benzo (k) fluoranthene ND Benzo (a) pyrene ND 3-Methylcholanthrene ND Indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene ND Dibenz (a,h) anthracene ND Benzo (ghi) perylene ND ND = not detected NS = not spiked J = present but lower than lowest calibration standard level E = exceed calibration range 10/1/96 m-29 WW8024.XLS ------- Waste Wood Combustion -Semivoiitile Analysis Modified Method 5 August,1996 Revised 10/30/96 Sample U Untreated Waste Wood Test # 1 9608016 WWC-MM5-1 Date 6/13/96 Gas Stack Sample Flow Volume Rate (dscm) (dscfm) Flue Gas 02 <%) Compound Semivolatiles (Total micro gram) Semivolatiles Semivolatiles (micro grams/dscm) (micro grams/dscm 3.4672 664.657 12.5 Untreated Waste Wood Test U 2 9606019 WWC-MMS-2 8/14/96 2.7916 586.901 13.2 0 1 U> O Untreated Waste Wood Test tt 3 9608020 WWC-MM5-3 8/15/96 2.9538 631.904 12.9 Phenol 7 J 2.0 ' 3.3 2346.7 Acetophenone 7.9 J 2.3 3.6 2650.7 Hexachlorethane N/D Napthalene 2.6 J 0.7 1.2 872.4 2-Nitrophenol 2.2 J 0.6 1.1 738.2 2,4,6 - Trichlorophenol N/D 1,4-Napthoquinone N/D Dimethyl phthalate N/D Diethyl phthalate 3.5 J 1.0 1.7 1174.4 Dibenzofuran N/D Phenanthrene 1.4 J 0.4 0.7 469.7 Di-n-butyl phthalate 2.3 J 0.7 1.1 771.7 Benzyl butyl phthalate 2.5 J 0.7 1.2 838.8 Phenol 2 J 0.7 1.3 714.5 Acetophenone 2.3 J 0.8 1.5 621.6 Hexachlorethane N/D Napthalene 2.2 J 0.8 1.4 785.9 2-Nitrophenol 10 J 3.6 6,4 3572.4 2,4,6 - Trichlorophenol N/D 1,4-Napthoquinone N/D Dimethyl phthalate 1.8 J 0.6 1.2 6430 Diethyl phthalate 4.5 J 1.6 29 1607.6 Dibenzofuran 1.2 J 0.4 0.8 428.7 Phenanthrene N/D Di-n-butyt phthalate 2.4 J 0.9 15 857.4 Benzyl butyl phthalate 2.8 J 1.0 1.8 1000.3 Phenol 2.1 J 0.7 1.2 763.4 Acetophenone 3.1 J 1.0 1.8 1126.9 Hexachlorethane N/D Napthalene 8.9 J 3.0 5.2 3235.2 2-Nitrophenol N/D 2,4,6 - Trichlorophenol N/D 1,4-Napthoquinone 1.4 J 0.5 08 508.9 Dimethyl phthalate N/D Diethyl phthalate 1.5 J 0.5 09 545.3 Dibenzofuran 43 J 1.5 25 1563.1 Phenanthrene 1.7 J 0.6 1.0 618.0 Dl-n-butyl phthalate 1.5 J 0.5 09 545.3 Benzyl butyl phthalate 18.4 J 6.2 10.6 6688.6 Semivolatiles Semivolatiles Emission Emission Rate Rate 02) (mlcrograms/hr) (micrograms/hr @ 7% 02) 3886.8 4386.6 1443.7 1221.6 1943.4 777.4 1277.1 1388.1 1280.7 1472.9 1408.8 6403.7 1152.7 2881.7 768.4 1536.9 1793.0 1319.4 1947.7 5591.7 879.6 942.4 2701.6 1068.1 942 4 11560.5 ------- Waste Wood Combustion-Semlvolltlle Analysis Modified Method 5 August, 1996 Revised 10/30/96 Sample # Treated Waste Wood Test # 1 9608022 WWC-MM5-4 Gas Sample Volume (dscm) Stack Flow Rate (dscfm) Flue Gas 02 (%) Compound Semtolatlles (Total micro gram) Semtojlatlles Semtoletiies Emission Emission Semt/olatlles SemtolatNes Rat* Rate (micro grams/dscm) (micro grams/dacm ©7% 02) (mlcrograms/hr) (mfcrograms/hr © 1% 02) 4.1241 834.522 Treated Waste Wood Test # 2 9606023 WWC-MM5-5 3.7424 742.778 Treated Waste Wood Test 13 9608024 WWC-MM5-6 4.3594 911.610 Performance Evaluation Audit 9608033 Spiked 8/28/96 NA NA WWC-P£A#| 8-23-96 WWC-MM5-FB 13.1 Phenol 5.6 J 1.4 2.4 Acetophenone 6 J 1.5 2.6 Hexachlorethane N/D Napthalene 1.9 J 05 0.6 2-NJtrophenol 1.1 J 0.3 05 2,4,6-Trlchlorophenol 17 J 0.4 0.7 1,4-Napthoqulnone N/D Dimethyl phthalate N/0 Diethyl phthalate 1.3 J 0.3 06 Dlbenzofuran N/D Phenanthrene N/D Dl-n-butyl phthalate 14 J 0.3 0.6 Benzyl butyl phthalate 29 5 J 7.2 12.7 13.1 Phenol 61 J 1.6 2.9 Acetophenone 6.9 J 18 3.3 Hexachlorethane N/D Napthalene 1.5 J 04 0.7 2-Nltfophenol N/D 2,4,6-Trlchlorophenol 16 J 0.4 0.6 1,4-Napthoqulnone N/D Dimethyl phthalate N/D Diethyl phthalate 39 J 10 1.9 Dlbenzofuran N/D Phenanthrene N/D Dl-n-butyl phthalate 3 J 06 14 Benzyl butyl phthalate 53.8 14 4 256 13.3 Phenol 65 J 15 2.7 Acetophenone 57 J 13 2.4 Hexachlorethane N/D Napthalene 19 J 0 4 0.6 2-Nitrophenol N/D 2,4,6-Trlchlorophenol N/D 1,4-Napthoqulnone N/D Dimethyl phthalate N/D Diethyl phthalate 4.4 J 1.0 16 Dibenzofuran N/D Phenanthrene N/D Dl-n-butyl phthalate 4 1 J 09 17 Benzyl butyl phthalate 91.3 20 9 360 NA Acetophenone 1 J Napthalene 367 Acenapthylene 34.6 Acenapthene 39.3 Fluorene 423 Diethyl phthalate 1.1 J Phenanthrene 45,7 Anthracene 454 Dl-n-butyl phthalate 41.7 Fluoranthene 40.3 Pyrene 49.7 Benzo(a)anthracene 41.9 Chrysene 42.1 Benzo(b)fluoralhene 42.3 Benzo(K)f|uorathene 49 Benzocd)pyrene 42.5 Dlbenz(a,h)anthracene 37.6 6enzo(ghl)perylene 45.3 NA Diethyl phthalate 1.4 J Dl-n-butyl phthalate 2.1 J Benzyl butyl phthalate 41.4 2040 9 2186.6 692.4 400.9 619.5 510.2 10750.9 2057.2 2327.0 605.9 639.6 1011.6 18144.1 2309.6 2025.4 675.1 1456.6 32441.3 3635.1 3894.8 1233.3 714.0 1103.5 908.8 19149.2 3664.3 4144.8 901.1 961.1 1802.1 32317.7 4186.4 3672 9 0.0 1224.3 2641.9 56831.3 '** J • Present but lower than the lowest calibrated standard level '"NO - None Detect ------- APPENDIX IV PCDD/PCDF ANALYSIS RESULTS IV-1 ------- TCDD SUMMARY, nanograms/dscm @ 7% Oxygen TEST NO. Front Half Total Front Half TEQ Back Half Total Back Half TEQ Combined Total Combined TEQ untreated 1 1.19 0.043 7.19 0.091 8.43 0.136 untreated 2 0.80 0.035 1.85 0.032 2.63 0.066 untreated 3 0.21 0.026 0.74 0.027 0.95 0.053 treated 1 11.60 0.301 3.78 0.105 15.03 0.397 treated 2 13.82 0.354 7.67 0.165 20.88 0.503 treated 3 11.91 0.323 7.37 0.167 18.72 0.475 ------- TCDF SUMMARY, nanograms/dscm @7% Oxygen 3 i TEST NO. Front Half Total Front Half TEQ Back Half Total Back Half TEQ Combined Total Combined TEQ untreated 1 3.30 0.090 18.85 0.279 22.29 0.373 untreated 2 2.23 0.057 15.0 0.087 17.15 0.142 untreated 3 0.55 0.018 10.57 0.036 11.12 0.054 treated 1 28.90 0.575 14.14 0.349 42.19 0.907 treated 2 20.90 0.424 36.50 0.309 56.47 0.714 treated 3 18.05 0.344 27.84 0.248 45.04 0.576 ------- TRIANGLE LAflORATORIES, INC. Page 1 Sample Result Summary for Project 38S72A 09/18/96 Method 23X Full Screen Analyses (DB-5) Data File W103702 W103703 W103704 W103705 Sample ID TLI Front Half WWC-M23-1-1,2,3 WWC-M23-2-1,2,3 WWC-M23-3-1, 2, 3 Blank Units ng ng ng ng Analytes 2378-TCDD (0.01) (0.03) (0.02) (0.02) 12378-PeCDD (0 .02) (0.07) (0.04) (0.03) 123478-HxCDD (0.02) 0 .04 (0.03) (0.02) 123 678-HxCDD (0.02) 0 .05 0.03 (0.02) 123789-HxCDD (0.02) 0.10 0 .05 (0.02) 1234678-HpCDD (0.02) 0.30 0 .15 0.11 OCDD (0.03) 1.2 0 .61 1.3 237 8-TCDF (0.009) 0.35 0 .18 0 .06 12378-PeCDF (0:01) {0.-05} {0.03} (0.02) 23478-PeCDF (0.01) 0.18 0 .08 {0 .02} 123478-HxCDF (0.01) 0 .25 0 .12 0.05 123678-HxCDF (0.01) 0 .10 0 .05 0.02 234678-HxCDF (0.01) 0.15 {0.06} 0.03 123789-HxCDF (0.01) (0.04) (0.02) (0.02) 1234678-HpCDF (0.01) 0.25 0.13 o.os 1234739-HpCDF (0.02) {0 .04} 0 .03 (0.02) OCDF (0 .03) 0.15 0 .10 {0.07} Total MCDD (0.008) (0.02) (0.01) (0.01) Total DCDD (0.01) (0.03) (0.02) (0.01) Total TriCDD (0.02) 0 .11 0.05 (0.03) TOTAL TCDD (0.01) 0.31 0 .24 {0.03} TOTAL PeCDD (0.02) 0 .34 0 .34 0.06 TOTAL HxCDD (0.02) 0.99 0 .25 {0.10} TOTAL HpCDD (0.02) 0 .65 0.31 0.11 Total MCDF 0.07 0.66 1.1 {0.20} Total DCDF (0.02) (0.05) (0.03) (0.02) Total TriCDF (0.01) 1.3 0 .25 0.15 TOTAL TCDF (0.009) 1.9 0 .77 0.14 TOTAL PeCDF (0.01) 1.4 0.54 0.07 TOTAL HxCDF (0.01) 1.0 0.34 0.14 TOTAL HpCDF (0.01) 0 .34 0.25 0.13 Other Standards Percent Recovery Summary (% Rec) 37C1-TCDD 104 .116 120 104 13012-PeCDF 234 104 107 113 104 13C12-HxCDF 478 95.3 108 113 102 13C12-HxCDD 473 83 .6 106 104 94.4 13CI2-HpCDF 789 95.4 107 105 98.9 Other Standards Percent Recovery Summary (% Rec) 13C12-HxCDF 789 80 .7 59.7 95.5 72.5 13C12-HxCDF 234 90 .8 60.3 106 77.1 Internal Standards Percent Recovery Summary (% Rec) 13C12-2378-TCDF 70 .7 48.2 65.9 63.5 13C12-2378-TCDD 66.9 43 .2 62 .5 58.2 13C12-PeCDF 123 72.2 49.0 67 .7 60.9 Triangle Laboratories, Inc.® Analytical Services Division 801 Capitola Drive • Durham, North Carolina 27713 Printed: 03:44 09/18/96 Phone: (919) 544-5729 • Fax: (919) 544-5491 TV-4 ------- / TRIANGLE LABORATORIES, INC. Sample , Result Summary far Project 3 8 67.2A Method 23X Full Screen Analyses (DB-5) Page 2 09/18/36 Data File Sample ID Units W103702 TLI Front Half Blank ng W103703 WWC-M23-1-1,2,3 ng Wl-03-704 WWC-M23-2-1, 2, 3 ng W103705 WWC-M23-3-1,2,3 ng Internal Standards Percent Recovery Summary (% Rec) 13C12-PeCDD 123 69.1 41.4 62.5 52.8 13C12-HxCDF 678 75.7 51.1 74.4 62.8 13C12-HxCDD 678 94 .8 55.1 84.8 69.9 13012-HpCDF 678 68.8 47.1 74.2 60.6 13C12-HpCDD 678 86.0 57.9 87.1 72.2 13C12-OCDD 69.2 44.5 67.6 53.6 Triangia Laboratories, Inc.® Analytical Services Division 101 Capitola Drive • Durham, North Carolina 27713 Printed: 03:44 09/18/96 3hone: (919) 544-5729 • Fax: (919) 544-5491 n n ------- TRIANGLE LABORATORIES, INC. Page 3 Sample Result Summary for Project 38S72A 09/18/96 Method 23X Full Screen Analyses (DB-5) Data File W103706 W103707 W103708 W103709 Sample ID WWC-M23-4-1, 2, 3 WWC-M2 3-5-1,2, ,3 WWC-M23-6-1,2,3 ' r'* WWC-M23-FB- "3 Units ng ng ng J ng Analyses 23 78-TCDD 0.12 0.15 0.15 (0.01) 12378-PeCDD 0 .59 0 .58 0 .66 (0.02) 123478-HxCDD 0.56 0 .44 0.45 (0.01) 123678-HxCDD 0.72 0.61 0.62 (0.01) 12378 9-HxCDD 1.3 1.1 1.2 (0.01) 1234678-HpCDD 5.2 4.2 4.1 (0.03} OCDD 10.2 12.9 12.3 0 .08 2378-TCDF 1.7 1.1 1.1 (0.007) 12378-PeCDF 0.77 0.54 0 .56 - (0.01) 23478-PeCDF 1.1 0 .72 0.70 (0.01) 123478-HxCDF 2.5 1.5 1.3 (0.008) 123 678-HxCDF 1.3 0.74 0.67 (0.006) 234678-HxCDF 1.7 0 .84 0.80 {0.02} 123789-HxCDF 0.19 {0 .09) 0.08 (0.01) 1234678-HpCDF 4.7 2.3 2.2 (0.007) 1234789-HpCDF 2.0 0.79 0.68 (0.01) OCDF 9.6 4.2 3 .7 (0.02) Total MCDD (0.04) (0.06) (0.06) (0.007) Total DCDD 0.11 0 .40 0.39 (0.01) Total TriCDD 0 .58 0.74 0.79 (0.02) TOTAL TCDD 3.1 3.8 4.0 0.12 TOTAL PeCDD 5.8 6.3 6.9 {0.14} TOTAL HxCDD 9.0 8.6 8.3 0.12 TOTAL HpCDD 9.7 7.8 7.6 {0.05} Total MCDF 4.0 4.2 4.8 0.12 Total DCDF 3.4 2.2 3.1 (0.01) Total TriCDF 3.7 3.0 3.0 0.03 TOTAL TCDF 9.6 6.8 7.5 (0.007) TOTAL PeCDF 12.6 8.2 8.2 (0.01) TOTAL HxCDF 14.7 7.8 . 7.1 {0.02} TOTAL HpCDF 13 .0 5.5 ' 5.1 (0.008) Other Standards Percent Recovery Summary (% Rec) 37C1-TCDD 111 109 149 111 13C12-PeCDF 234 111 104 146 110 13C12-HxCDF 478 102 106 133 105 13C12-HxCDD 478 99.8 94.0 125 101 13C12-HpCDF 789 103 99 .8 137 105 Other Standards Percent Recovery Summary (% Rec) 13C12-HxCDF 789 105 87.2 113 99 .8 13C12-HxCDF 234 112 92.1 118 106 Internal Standards Percent Recovery Summary (% Rec). 13C12-2378-TCDF 39 .8 80.5 72 .0 92.9 13C12-2378-TCDD 80 .9 67 .5 63 .0 79.5 13C12-PeCDF 123 91.7 73 .1 69 .6 88.0 Triangle Laboratories, Inc.® Analytical Services Division 801 Capitola Drive • Durham, North Carolina 27713 Printed: 03:44 09/18/96 Phone: (919) 544-5729 • Fax: (919) 544-5491 ^ r ^ n IV-6 5^/4 ------- TRIANGLE LABORATORIES, INC. .Sample .Result Summary for Project 38672A Method 23X Fullt Screen Analyses (DB-5) Page 4 . 09/18/96 Data File W10370S W103707 W103708 W103709 Sample ID WWC-M23-4-1, 2, 3 WWC-M23-5-1, 2, 3 WWC-M23-6-1, 2, 3 WWC-M23-FB-1, 2, 3 Units ng ng ng ng Internal Standards Percent Recovery Summary (% Rec) 13C12-PeCDD 123 84.2 61.1 59.3 73 .0 13C12-HXCDF 678 90.9 74.9 72.4 82.8 13C12-HXCDD 678 99.3 81.6 79.6 88.8 13C12-HpCDF 678 93.6 75.9 69.5 83 .7 13C12-HpCDD 678 107 90 .8 87.1 108 13C12-OCDD 91.5 68.0 63.5 76.6 {Estimated Maximum Possible Concentration}, (Detection Limit). Triangle Laboratories, Inc.® Analytical Services Division 801 Capitola Drive • Durham, North Carolina 27713 _ Printed: 03:44 09/18/96 Phone: (919) 544-5729 • Fax: (919) 544-5491 1V_/ ------- TRIANGLE LABORATORIES, INC. Sample Result^ Spmmary for Project 38672A Method 23X (DB-225) Page 1 09/18/96 Data File P953050 P963051 P963052 P9S3055 Sample ID WWC-M23-1-1, 2, 3 WWC-M23-2-1,2,3 WWC-M23-3-1,2,3 WWC-M23-4-1,2,3 Units ng ng ng ng Analytes 2378-TCDF 0.08 '' 0.04 {0.02} 0.38 Internal Standards Percent Recovery Summary (% Rec) 13C12-2378-TCDF S3.9 90.3 80.3 101 Triangle Laboratories, Inc.© Analytical Services Division 801 Capitals Drive • Durham, North Carolina 27713 Printed: 03:14 09/18/96 Phone: (919) 544-5729 • Fax: (919) 544-5491 IV-8 o - ------- TRIANGLE LABORATORIES, INC. Page 2 Sample Result Summary for Project 38672A 09/18/96 Method 23X (DB-225) Data File P963056 P963057 Sample ID WWC-M23-5-1,2,3 WWC-M23-6-1,2,3 Units ng ng Analytes 2378-TCDF 0.28 0.29 v1 ' Internal Standards Percent Recovery Summary (% Rec) 13C12-2378-TCDF 93.6 85.9 {Estimated Maximum Possible Concentration} . Triangle Laboratories, Inc.® Analytical Services Division 801 Capitola Drive « Durham, North Carolina 27713 Printed: 03:14 09/18/96 Phone: (919) 544-5729 ~ Fax: (919) 544-5491 o ------- / TRIANGLE LABORATORIES, INC. Page 1 / Sample Result Summary for Project 386723 09/20/96 / Method 8290X Full Screen Analyses (DB-5) Daca File ¦ W103712 W103713 W102714 "WIQ3715 Sample' 10 ¦ ¦ TLI-Back -Half B ¦ . WWC-M23-1-.6 -. -.WWC-M23c2r6..... . WWC-M23.-3 lank Units ng ng ng ng Analytes 2378-TCDD ' ' (0.01) • 0.05 0.02 (0.02) 12378-PeCDD (0.02) - 0.15 . 0.04. (0.04) ¦123478-HxCDD • (0..01) . 0.J.0 . {0.02} (0.02) 123 678-HxCDD (0.01) 0.15 {0.03} (0.01) 123789-HxCDD (0.01) 0.23 {0.04} (0-01) 1234678-HpCDD (0.01) 0.49 {0.10} 0.04 OCDD (0.02) 1.3 0.24 0.31 2378-TCDF " " " ' TOTO'06)'" " " 1:5" ¦ 0.40 ¦ .-•¦-..•0.34. 12378-PeCDF (0.01) 0 .24 0 . 07- 0 .04 23478-PeCDF (0.01) 0 .53 0 .13 {0.04} 12347 8-HxCDF (0.007) 0.59 0.13 0 .06 123678-HxCDF (0.006) 0.25 0.06 C . 02 234678-HxCDF (0.007) 0.32 0 .07 0 .03 123789-HxCDF (0.008) 0.02 (0.01) (0.02) 1234678-HpCDF (0.006) 0.46 0.09 0.04 1234789-HpCDF (0.01) 0 .08 {0.01} (0.02) OCDF (0.02) 0.22 0.04 0 .02 Total MCDD (0.007) 0 .57 0 .44 0.28 Total DCDD (0.009) 0.82 0.39 0 .22 Total TriCDD (0.02). 0 .38 0.23 ' {0.11} TOTAL TCDD (0.01) 4.5 0.94 0.35 TOTAL PeCDD (0.02) 3 . 6 0 .43 0 .12 TOTAL HxCDD (0.01) 2.8 0.38 0 .07 TOTAL HpCDD (0.01) 1.0 0.10 0.08 Total MCDF 0 .14 {0.29} 12.5 10.4 Tocal DCDF (0.01) 12.5 4.9 3 .7 Total TriCDF {0.02} 6.0 1.9 1.1 TOTAL TCDF (0.006) 9.1 2.5 1.6 TOTAL PeCDF (0.01) 5.4 ¦ 1.1 • . ¦ .. 0.44 TOTAL HxCDF ¦ ¦¦ {0.008} •2.8 . 0.53 . . 0.25 TOTAL HpCDF' (0.008)' 0.85 ' ••O.'IS' ' - • 0:05 Other Standards Percent Recovery Summajry (% Rec) 37C1-TCDD 102 99 . 6 105 103 13C12-PeCDF 234 97 .0 95.7 97.0 95.9 13C12-HxCDF 478 92 .1 93 .6 93 .9 94.0 13C12-HxCDD 478 86 .0 84.0 80 .5 -55.7 13C12-HpCDF 789 96 .4 90.3 97.8 94.9 Other Standards Percent Recovery Summary (% Rec) 13C12-HxCDF 789 99 .8 73 .3 91.5 ; . 97.4 13C12-HxCDF 234 104 79.0 92.7 91.8 Internal Standards Percent Recovery Summary (% Rec) 13C12-2378-TCDF 95 .8 75.2 82.2 91.1 13C12-2378-TCDD 81.2 64 .8 67 .5 77 .8 13C12-PeCDF 123 86.9 69.3 70 .0 77.2 Triangle Laboratories, Inc.® Analytical Services Division 801 Capitola Drive • Durham, North Carolina 27713 Printed: 03:44 09/20/96 Phone: (919) 544-5729 ~ Fax: (919) 544-5491 1 n ------- TRIANGLE LABORATORIES, INC. Sample Result Summary for Project 3 8672B Method 8290X Full Screen Analyses (DB-5) Page 2 .09/20/3.6 Data File ¦Sample. -ID Units W103712 -TLI. Back.Half B lank ng "W1037"13" ' ...WWC-M23-1-6 ng " W103714"' •' WWC-M23-2-6. ng •' W10371S • • WWC-M23 -3-6 ng Internal Standards Percent Recovery Summary (% Rec) 13C12-PeCDD 123 70 .1 54.7 55.4 67.6 13C12-HxCDF 673 85.1 65.6 78.5 79.9 13C12-HxCDD .678 88.9 68.8 85.8 133 13C12-HpCDF 678 85.0. 67.8. " 78.8 85.4 13C12-HpCDD 678 100 79 .3 91.9 100 .0' 13C12-OCDD 77.9 58.8 68.7 79.4 Triangie Laboratories, Inc.© Analytical Services Division 801 Capitoia Drive ~ Durham, North Carolina 27713 Printed: 03:44 09/20/96 Phone: (919) 544-5729 ~ Fax: (919) 544-5491 9 9 ------- / TRIANGLE LABORATORIES, INC. Page 3 J Sample Result Summary for Project 386723 09/20/96 / V Method 8290X Full Screen Analyses (DB-5) Data File W10371S W103717 ' W103718 >7104401' Sample' ID ¦" •• ¦¦WWC-M23-4-6- • ,WWC-M23-5.tS . .WWC-M22-6r6 . ... WWC-M23-FB- Units ng ng ng ng Analytes 237 8-TCDD {0.09} 0.12 0.13 (0.04) 12378-PeCDD 0.24 0-30 0.39 (0.08) 123478-HxCDD 0.13 0.13 0.19 (0.08) 123 67 8-HxCDD 0 .16 0 .23 0.21 CO L 06) 123789-HxCDD 0 .22 0 .32 0.37 (0.07) 123 4678-HpCDD 0 .28 0.68 0.80 (0.08) OCDD {0.07} 1.4 2.1 (0.2) 2373-TCDF 2.0 1.5- • 1.4 ¦' (0.03) 123 7 8-PeCDF 0.59 -0 . 54 0 .51 (C.05) 23478-PeCDF 0 .84 0.59 0 .56 (0.05) 123473-HxCDF 1.1 . 0.83 0.79 (0.04) 123.67 8-HxCDF:_¦ - 0.52 . 0.41 0.40 (0.04) 234678-HxCDF 0.51 ' '• ' 0138 ¦ :"" (C .C5) --- 123789-HxCDF. Q .06 0.04 0.04 (0.05) 1234678-HoCDF 0 .72 0.79 0 .79 (0.04) 123 473 9-HpCDF 0 .24 0 .22 {0.15} (0.06) OCDF {0.21} 0.76 0.65 (0.1) Total MCDD (0.02) 0.90 0 .81 (0.0) Toral DCDD (0.02) 1.0 1.5 (0-0) • Tocal TriCDD (C . 04). 1.5 1.4 (0.0) TOTAL TCDD "» — 5.1 5.3 (0.04) TOTAL PeCDD J . - 3 .3 4.4 (0.08) TOTAL HxCDD . 1 2.9 3 .2 (0.07) TOTAL HpCDD 0.53 1.4 1.6 (0.03) Total MCDF (0.01) 23 .9 25 .3 (0.0) Total DCDF (C . 03) 13 .9 12 .0 (0.0) Total TriCDF {0.05} a . 1 5 . 6 (0.0) TOTAL TCDF 15 . 6 12.2 ' t ^ (C.03) TOTAL 'PeCDF *' • ••1-1-V2- 6-.0< TOTAL HxCDF 7.-0 4.8 4.2 (0.04) TOTAL HpCDF 1.5 1.9 1.5 (0.05) Other Standards Percent Recovery Summary (% Rec) 37C1-TCDD 103 103 106 104 13C12-PeCDF 234 "L C 2 9 5.9 96.2 95.0 13C12-HxCDF 478 97 .0 97 .0 96.5 9S.1 '13 C12 -HxCDD 478 33 .3 84.1 • 84.5 97.6 13C12-HpCDF 789 94 .7 97.4 95.7 94.8 Ocl-er Standards Peroer." Recovery Summary (% rcec: 13C12-HxCDF 789 95.6 77 .6 70.3 . . 2 5.9 13C12-HxCDF 234 9 9 .9 76.7 72.9 c - . g Internal Standar ¦ds Percent Recovery Summary (% Rec) 13C12-2378-TCDF 87 .7 71.7 72.0 7S.0 13C12-2378-TCDD 71.6 59.3 58.1 72.3 13C12-?eCDF '123 72.1 53 .3 53.6 75.8 Triangie Laboratories, lnc.3 Analytical Services Division 801 Capitola Drive • Durham, North Carolina 27713 Printed: 03:44 09/20/96 Phone: (919) 544-5729 • Fax: (919) 544-5491 IV-12 ^0 ------- / TRIANGLE LABORATORIES, INC. Page 4 / Sample Result Summary for Project 38S723 09/20/96 ' Method 8290X Full Screen Analyses (DB-5) Data File ¦•W103716- . W103717 W10371& W104401 Sample ID ' WWC-M23-4-6 • WWC-M23.-5-6 . .. WWCrM23-6-6 .. . WWC-M23-F3-6 Units ng ng ng ng Internal Standards Percent Recovery Summary (% Rec) 13C12-PeCDD 123 58.6 • 45.6 44.2 68.7 13 C12-HxCDF 678 80.9 65.8 61.9 72.5 13C12-HxCDD 678 86.2 68.4 64.6 78.7 13C12-HpCDF 678 85.0 65.4 61.1 69.1 13C12-HpCDD 678 97.9 77.8 75 .7 80 .4 13C12-OCDD 73 .2 51.5 52.3 54.1 Triangie Laboratories, lnc.5 Analytical Services Division B01 Capitola Drive • Durham. North Carolina 27713 Printed: 03:44 09/20/95 Phone: (919) 544-5729 • Fax: (919) 544-5491 IV 13 3 ^ ------- TRIANGLE LABORATORIES, INC. Page 5 Sample Result Summary for Project 386723 09/20/96 Method 8290X Full Screen Analyses (DB-5) Data File WIO'4402 W104403' " Samble ID' " TLl LCS ' " ' ' TLI tiCSD" Units ng ng Analytes 2378-TCDD 0.40 0.42 12378-PeCDD 2.1 2.1 123478-HxCDD 1.9 1.8 123 678-HxCDD 2.0 1.9 123789-HxCDD 2.1 1.8 1234678-HpCDD 1.9 1.8 OCDD 4.3• 3.9 < 2378-TCDF 0.38 0.38 12378-PeCDF 2.0 1.8 23478-PeCDF 1.9- 2.2 123478-HxCDF 1.9 1.8 123 67 8-HxCDF •• 2.-0-- ...2.0 234678-HxCDF 2.2 2.1 123789-HxCDF 2.2 2.1 1234678-HpCDF 1.9 1.9 123478 9-HpCDF 2.0 1.7 OCDF 3.9 3.8 Other Standards Percent Recovery Summary (% Rec) 37C1-TCDD 10S 109 13C12-?eCDr 22 4 104 114 13C12-HxCOr 4"2 134 103 . 13C.12-HxCDD 473 55.6 92.0 13C12-HpCDF 739 103 100 0-h.er St2.r.d.=.rz2 ?srcsn- P.eccverv SLun^is.^' (% Rec) 13 C12-KxCDr 75 9 74.3 " 91.9 13C12-HxCDF 234 v. 63 .1 _ _ .92 , 0 .. Internal Standards Percent Recovery Summary (% Rec) 13C12-2378-TCDF 64.4 78.4 13C12-23 78-TCDD 62.2 71.2 13C12-PeCDF 123 66.7 67.4 13C12-?sCDD 123 57.2 73.6 13C12-KxCDF 67£ 52.5 7 0.3 13C12-HXCDD 678 65.8 90.5 13C12-HdCDF 678 -58.0 73.5 13 C12-HdCDD 67 3 "l.C S3.5 {is^invatsd Maximum possible Concentration}, (Defection Lim.it). Triangle Laboratories, inc.3 Analytical Services Division 801 Capiiola Drive • Durham. North Carolina 27713 Phone: (919) 544-5729 ~ Fax: (919) 544-5491 IV-14 Printed: 03^139/20/95 ------- / TRIANGLE LABORATORIES, INC. Sample Result Summary for Project 38672B . Method 8290X.(DB-225). Page 1 09/19/9S Data 'File Samsle ID X963481 WWC-M23-1-6 ' X963482 WWC-M23-2-6 X963483 - WWC-M23-3-6 • X963484 WWC-M23 -4-6 Units ng ng ng Analytes 2378-TCDF 0.23 0.06 0.05 0.34 Internal Standards Percent Recovery Summary (% Rec) 13C12-2378-TCDF 56.6 70.1 80 .0 71.1 Triangle Laboratories, Inc.5 Analytical Services Division 801 Caprtola Drive • Durham, North Carolina 27713 Phone: (919) 54-i-572S • Fax: (919) 544-5491 IV-15 Printed: 04:34 09/19/95 '.n ------- TRIANGLE LABORATORIES, INC. Page 2 Sample Result Summary for Project 386723 09/19/96 Method 8290X (D3-225) A ===================i====i f' ¦ ' Data File- • ¦ .X963485 " X9634B6 Samnle ID WWC-M23-5-6 ' WWC-M23-6-6" Units ng ng Analytes 2378-TCDF 0.26 0.26 Internal Standards Percent Recovery Summary (% Rec) 13C12-2378-TCDF 62.5 60.2 Triangie Laboratories. Inc.? Analytical Services Division SOT Capitola Drive ~ Durham, North Carolina 27713 Printed: 04:3- Phone: (91S) 544-5729 • Fax: (919) 544-5491 , O '* ------- Dioxin Toxicity Equivalency Value Calculations for sample WWC-M23-1 Untreated Waste Wood Test #1 Date 8/13/96 Toxicity Toxicity Toxicity Toxicity Equivalency Front Half Equivalency Back Half Equivalency Combined Equivalency Factor Totals Value Totals Value Totals Value (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) 2,3,7,8-TCDD 1 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.05 0.08 0.08 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 0.5 0.07 0.035 0.15 0.075 0.22 0.11 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 0.1 0.04 0.004 0.1 0.01 0.14 0.014 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 0.1 0.06 0.006 0.15 0.015 0.21 0.021 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD 0.1 0.1 0.01 0.23 0.023 0.33 0.033 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 0.01 0.3 0.003 0.49 0.0049 0.79 0.0079 OCDD 0.001 1.2 0.0012 1.3 0.0013 2.5 0.0025 Total MCDD N/A 0.02 N/A 0.57 N/A 0.59 0 Total DCDD N/A 0.03 N/A 0.82 N/A 0.85 0 Total TriCDD N/A 0.11 N/A 0.88 N/A 0.99 0 Total TCDD N/A 0.31 N/A 4.5 N/A 4.81 0 Total PeCDD N/A 0.34 N/A 3.6 N/A 3.94 0 Total HxCDD N/A 0.99 N/A 2.8 N/A 3.79 0 Total HpCDD N/A 0.65 N/A 1 N/A 1.65 0 Front half Back half Front half+Bad Sum (nanograms) 2.45 0.0892 14.17 0.1792 16.62 0.2684 Volume of flue gas collected (dscm) 3.4081 3.4081 3.41 Total Dioxin (nanograms/dscm) 0.72 4.16 4.88 Total Dioxin @ 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) 1.19 7.19 8.43 TEV Dioxin (nanograms/dscm) 0.026 0.053 0.079 TEV Dioxin @ 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) 0.043 0.091 0.136 ------- Dioxin Toxicity Equivalency Value Calculations for sample WWC-M23-2 Untreated Waste Wood Test # 2 Date 8/14/96 Toxicity Toxicity Equivalency Front Half Equivalency Factor Totals Value (nanograms) (nanograms) 2,3,7,8-TCDD 1 0.02 0.02 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 0.5 0.04 0.02 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 0.1 0.03 0.003 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 0.1 0.03 0.003 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD 0.1 0.05 0.005 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 0.01 0.15 0.0015 OCDD 0.001 0.61 0.00061 Total MCDD N/A 0.01 N/A Total DCDD N/A 0.02 N/A Total TriCDD N/A 0.05 N/A Total TCDD N/A 0.24 N/A Total PeCDD N/A 0.34 N/A Total HxCDD N/A 0.25 N/A Total HpCDD N/A 0.31 N/A Sum (nanograms) Volume of flue gas collected (dscm) Total Dioxin (nanograms/dscm) Total Dioxin @ 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) TEV Dioxin (nanograms/dscm) TEV Dioxin @ 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) Front half 1.22 0.05311 2.7186 0.45 0.80 0.020 0.035 Toxicity Back Half Equivalency Totals Value (nanograms) (nanograms) 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.02 0.02 0.002 0.03 0.003 0.04 0.004 0.1 0.001 0.24 0.00024 0.44 N/A 0.39 N/A 0.23 N/A 0.94 N/A 0.43 N/A 0.38 N/A 0.1 N/A Back half 2.91 0.05024 2.7186 1.07 1.85 0.018 Toxicity Combined Equivalency Totals Value (nanograms) (nanograms) 0.04 0.04 0.08 0.04 0.05 0.005 0.06 0.006 0.09 0.009 0.25 0.0025 0.85 0.00085 0.45 0 0.41 0 0.28 0 1.18 0 0.77 0 0.63 0 0.41 0 Front half+Back half 4.13 0.10335 2.72 1.52 2.63 0.038 0.032 0.066 ------- Dioxin Toxicity Equivalency Value Calculations for sample WWC-M23-3 Untreated Waste Wood Test # 3 Date 8/15/96 Toxicity Toxicity Equivalency Front Half Equivalency Factor Totals Value (nanograms) (nanograms) 2,3,7,8-TCDD 1 0.02 0.02 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 0.5 0.03 0.015 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 0.1 0.02 0.002 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 0.1 0.02 0.002 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD 0.1 0.02 0.002 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 0.01 0.11 0.0011 OCDD 0.001 1.3 0.0013 Total MCDD N/A 0.01 N/A Total DCDD N/A 0.01 N/A Total TriCDD N/A 0.03 N/A Total TCDD N/A 0.03 N/A Total PeCDD N/A 0.06 N/A Total HxCDD N/A 0.1 N/A Total HpCDD N/A 0.11 N/A Front half Sum (nanograms) 0.35 0.0434 Volume of flue gas collected (dscm) 2.872 Total Dioxin (nanograms/dscm) 0.12 Total Dioxin @ 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) 0.21 TEV Dioxin (nanograms/dscm) 0.015 TEV Dioxin @ 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) 0.026 Toxicity Back Half Equivalency Totals Value (nanograms) (nanograms) 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.02 0.02 0.002 0.01 0.001 0.01 0.001 0.04 0.0004 0.31 0.00031 0.28 N/A 0.22 N/A 0.11 N/A 0.35 N/A 0.12 N/A 0.07 N/A 0.08 N/A Back half 1.23 0.04471 2.872 0.43 0.74 0.016 Toxicity Combined Equivalency Totals Value (nanograms) (nanograms) 0.04 0.04 0.07 0.035 0.04 0.004 0.03 0.003 0.03 0.003 0.15 0.0015 1.61 0.00161 0.29 0 0.23 0 0.14 0 0.38 0 0.18 0 0.17 0 0.19 0 Front half+Back half 1.58 0,08811 2.87 0.55 0.95 0.031 0.027 0.053 ------- Dioxin Toxicity Equivalency Value Calculations for sample WWC-M23-4 Treated Waste Wood Test # 1 Date 8/20/96 Toxicity Toxicity Toxicity Toxicity Equivalency Front Half Equivalency Back Half Equivalency Combined Equivalency Factor Totals Value Totals Value Totals Value (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) 2,3,7,8-TCDD 1 0.12 0.12 0.09 0.09 0.21 0.21 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 0.5 0.59 0.295 0.24 0.12 0.83 0.415 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 0.1 0.56 0.056 0.13 0.013 0.69 0.069 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 0.1 0.72 0.072 0.16 0.016 0.88 0.088 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD 0.1 1.3 0.13 0.22 0.022 1.52 0.152 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 0.01 5.2 0.052 0.28 0.0028 5.48 0.0548 OCDD 0.001 10.2 0.0102 0.07 0.00007 10.27 0.01027 Total MCDD N/A 0.04 N/A 0.02 N/A 0.06 0 Total DCDD N/A 0.11 N/A 0.02 N/A 0.13 0 Total TriCDD N/A 0.58 N/A 0.04 N/A 0.62 0 Total TCDD N/A 3.1 N/A 3.5 N/A 6.6 0 Total PeCDD N/A 5.8 N/A 3.3 N/A 9.1 0 Total HxCDD N/A 9 N/A 2.1 N/A 11.1 0 Total HpCDD N/A 9.7 N/A 0.53 N/A 10.23 0 Front half Back half Front half+BacI Sum (nanograms) 28.33 0.7352 9.51 0.26387 37.84 0.99907 Volume of flue gas collected (dscm) 4.3505 4.3505 4.35 Total Dioxin (nanograms/dscm) 6.51 2.19 8.70 Total Dioxin @ 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) 11.60 3.78 15.03 TEV Dioxin (nanograms/dscm) 0.169 0.061 0.230 TEV Dioxin @ 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) 0.301 0.105 0.397 ------- Dioxin Toxicity Equivalency Value Calculations for sample WWC-M23-5 Treated Waste Wood Test# 2 Date 8/21/96 Toxicity Toxicity Equivalency Front Half Equivalency Factor Totals Value (nanograms) (nanograms) 2,3,7,8-TCDD 1 0.15 0.15 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 0.5 0.58 0.29 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 0.1 0.44 0.044 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 0.1 0.61 0.061 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD 0,1 1.1 0.11 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 0.01 4.2 0.042 OCDD 0.001 12.9 0.0129 Total MCDD N/A 0,06 N/A Total DCDD N/A 0.4 N/A Total TriCDD N/A 0.74 N/A Total TCDD N/A 3.8 N/A Total PeCDD N/A 6.3 N/A Total HxCDD N/A 8.6 N/A Total HpCDD N/A 7.8 N/A Front half Sum (nanograms) 27.7 0.7099 Volume of flue gas collected (dscm) 3.6258 Total Dioxin (nanograms/dscm) 7.64 Total Dioxin @ 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) 13.82 TEV Dioxin (nanograms/dscm) 0.196 TEV Dioxin @ 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) 0.354 Toxicity Back Half Equivalency Totals Value (nanograms) (nanograms) 0.12 0.12 0.3 0.15 0.13 0.013 0.23 0.023 0.32 0.032 0.68 0.0068 1.4 0.0014 0.9 N/A 1 N/A 1.5 N/A 5.1 N/A 3.3 N/A 2.9 N/A 1.4 N/A Back half 16.1 0.3462 3.6258 4.44 7.67 0.095 Toxicity Combined Equivalency Totals Value (nanograms) (nanograms) 0.27 0.27 0.88 0.44 0.57 0.057 0.84 0.084 1.42 0.142 4.88 0.0488 14.3 0.0143 0.96 0 1.4 0 2.24 0 8.9 0 9.6 0 11.5 0 9.2 0 Front half+Back half 43.8 1.0561 3.63 12.08 20.88 0.291 0.165 0.503 ------- Dioxin Toxicity Equivalency Value Calculations for sample WWC-M23-6 Treated Waste Wood Test # 3 Date 8/22/96 Toxicity Toxicity Toxicity Toxicity Equivalency Front Half Equivalency Back Half Equivalency Combined Equivalency Factor Totals Value Totals Value Totals Value (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) 2,3,7,8-TCDD 1 0.15 0.15 0.13 0.13 0.28 0.28 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 0.5 0.66 0.33 0.39 0.195 1.05 0.525 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 0.1 0.45 0.045 0.19 0.019 0.64 0.064 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 0.1 0.62 0.062 0.21 0.021 0.83 0.083 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD 0.1 1.2 0.12 0.37 0.037 1.57 0.157 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 0.01 4.1 0.041 0.8 0.008 4.9 0.049 OCDD 0.001 12.3 0.0123 2.1 0.0021 14.4 0.0144 Total MCDD N/A 0.06 N/A 0.81 N/A 0.87 0 Total DCDD N/A 0.39 N/A 1.5 N/A 1.89 0 Total TriCDD N/A 0.79 N/A 1.4 N/A 2.19 0 Total TCDD N/A 4 N/A 5.3 N/A 9.3 0 Total PeCDD N/A 6.9 N/A 4.4 N/A 11.3 0 Total HxCDD N/A 8.3 N/A 3.2 N/A 11.5 0 Total HpCDD N/A 7.6 N/A 1.6 N/A 9.2 0 Front half Back half Front half+Bac Sum (nanograms) 28.04 0.7603 18.21 0.4121 46.25 1.1724 Volume of flue gas collected (dscm) 4.2691 4.2691 4.27 Total Dioxin (nanograms/dscm) 6.57 4.27 10.83 Total Dioxin @ 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) 11.91 7.37 18.72 TEV Dioxin (nanograms/dscm) 0.178 0.097 0.275 TEV Dioxin @ 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) 0.323 0.167 0.475 ------- Furan Toxicity Equivalency Value Calculations for sample WWC-M23-1 Untreated Waste Wood Test #1 Date 8/13/96 Toxicity Toxicity Equivalency Front Half Equivalency Factor Totals Value (nanograms) (nanograms) 2,3,7.8-TCDF 0.1 0.35 0.035 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 0.05 0.05 0.0025 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 0.5 0.18 0.09 1,2,3,4,7.8-HxCDF 0.1 0.25 0.025 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.1 0.1 0.01 2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.1 0.15 0,015 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF 0.1 0.04 0.004 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 0.01 0.25 0.0025 1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF 0.01 0.04 0.0004 OCDF 0.001 0.15 0.00015 Total MCDF N/A 0.66 N/A Total DCDF N/A 0.05 N/A Total TriCDF N/A 1.3 N/A Total TCDF N/A 1.9 N/A Total PeCDF N/A 1.4 N/A Total HxCDF N/A 1 N/A Total HpCDF N/A 0.34 N/A Front half Sum (nanograms) 6.8 0.18455 Volume of flue gas collected (dscm) 3.4081 Total Furan (nanograms/dscm) 2.00 Total Furan @ 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) 3.30 TEV Furan (nanograms/dscm) 0.054 TEV Furan @ 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) 0.090 Toxicity Back Half Equivalency Totals Value (nanograms) (nanograms) 1.5 0.15 0.24 0.012 0.53 0.265 0.59 0.059 0.25 0.025 0.32 0.032 0.02 0.002 0.46 0.0046 0.08 0.0008 0.22 0.00022 0.29 N/A 12.5 N/A 6 N/A 9.1 , N/A 5.4 N/A 2.8 N/A 0.85 N/A Back half 37.16 0.55062 3.4081 10.90 18.85 0.162 Toxicity Combined Equivalency Totals Value (nanograms) (nanograms) 1.85 0.185 0.29 0.0145 0.71 0.355 0.84 0.084 0.35 0.035 0.47 0.047 0.06 0.006 0.71 0.0071 0.12 0.0012 0.37 0.00037 0.95 0 12.55 0 7.3 0 11 0 6.8 0 3.8 0 1.19 0 Front half+Back half 43.96 0.73517 3.41 12.90 22.29 0.216 0.279 0.373 ------- Furan Toxicity Equivalency Value Calculations for sample WWC-M23-2 Unlreated Waste Wood Test # 2 Date 8/14/96 Toxicity Toxicity Equivalency Front Half Equivalency Factor Totals Value (nanograms) (nanograms) 2,3,7,8-TCDF 0.1 0.18 0.018 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 0.05 0.03 0.0015 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 0.5 0.08 0.04 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 0.1 0.12 0.012 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.1 0.05 0.005 2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.1 0,06 0.006 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF 0.1 0.02 0.002 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 0.01 0.13 0.0013 1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF 0.01 0.03 0.0003 OCDF 0.001 0.1 0.0001 Total MCDF N/A 1.1 N/A Total DCDF N/A 0.03 N/A Total TriCDF N/A 0.25 N/A Total TCDF N/A 0.77 N/A Total PeCDF N/A 0.54 N/A Total HxCDF N/A 0.34 N/A Total HpCDF N/A 0.25 N/A Front half Sum (nanograms) 3.38 0.0862 Volume of flue gas collected (dscm) 2.7186 Total Furan (nanograms/dscm) 1.24 Total Furan @ 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) 2.23 TEV Furan (nanograms/dscm) 0.032 TEV Furan @ 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) 0.057 Toxicity Toxicity Back Half Equivalency Combined Equivalency Totals Value Totals Value (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) 0.4 0.04 0.58 0.058 0.07 0.0035 0.1 0.005 0.13 0.065 0.21 0.105 0.13 0.013 0.25 0.025 0.06 0.006 0.11 0.011 0.07 0.007 0.13 0.013 0.01 0.001 0.03 0.003 0.09 0.0009 0.22 0.0022 0.01 0.0001 0.04 0.0004 0.04 0.00004 0.14 0.00014 12.5 N/A 13.6 0 4.9 N/A 4.93 0 1.9 N/A 2.15 0 2.5 N/A 3.27 0 1.1 N/A 1.64 0 0.53 N/A 0.87 0 0.13 N/A 0.38 0 Back half 23.6 0.13654 2.7186 8.68 15.00 0.050 Front half+Back half 26.98 0.22274 2.72 9.92 17.15 0.082 0.087 0.142 ------- Furan Toxicity Equivalency Value Calculations for sample WWC-M23-3 Untreated Waste Wood Test # 3 Date 8/15/96 Toxicity Toxicity Equivalency Front Half Equivalency Factor Totals Value (nanograms) (nanograms) 2,3,7,8-TCDF 0.1 0.06 0.006 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 0.05 0.02 0.001 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 0.5 0.02 0.01 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 0.1 0.05 0.005 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.1 0.02 0.002 2,3,4.6,7,8-HxCDF 0.1 0.03 0.003 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF 0.1 0.02 0.002 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 0.01 0.06 0,0006 1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF 0.01 0.02 0.0002 OCDF 0.001 0.07 0.00007 Total MCDF N/A 0.2 N/A Total DCDF N/A 0.02 N/A Total TriCDF N/A 0.15 N/A Total TCDF N/A 0.14 N/A Total PeCDF N/A 0.07 N/A Total HxCDF N/A 0.14 N/A Total HpCDF N/A 0.13 N/A Front half Sum (nanograms) 0.92 0.02907 Volume of flue gas collected (dscm) 2.872 Total Furan (nanograms/dscm) 0 32 Total Furan @ 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) 0.55 TEV Furan (nanograms/dscm) 0.010 TEV Furan @ 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) 0.018 Back Half Totals Toxicity Equivalency Value Combined Totals Toxicity Equivalency Value ograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) 0.24 0.024 0.3 0.03 0.04 0.002 0.06 0.003 0.04 0.02 0.06 0.03 0.06 0.006 0.11 0.011 0.02 0.002 0.04 0.004 0.03 0.003 0.06 0.006 0.02 0.002 0.04 0.004 0.04 0.0004 0.1 0.001 0.02 0.0002 0.04 0.0004 0.02 0.00002 0.09 0.00009 10.4 N/A 10.6 0 3.7 N/A 3.72 0 1.1 N/A 1.25 0 1.6 N/A 1.74 0 0.44 N/A 0.51 0 0.25 N/A 0.39 0 0.05 • N/A 0.18 0 Back half 17.56 0.05962 2.872 6.11 10.57 Front half+Back half 18.48 0.08949 2.87 6.43 11.12 0.021 0.031 0.036 0.054 ------- Furan Toxicity Equivalency Value Calculations for sample WWC-M23-4 Treated Waste Wood Test # 1 Date 8/20/96 Toxicity Toxicity Toxicity Toxicity Equivalency Front Half Equivalency Back Half Equivalency Combined Equivalency Factor Totals Value Totals Value Totals Value (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) 2,3,7,8-TCDF 0.1 1.7 0.17 2 0.2 3.7 0.37 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 0.05 0.77 0.0385 0.59 0.0295 1.36 0.068 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 0.5 1.1 0.55 0.84 0.42 1.94 0.97 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 0.1 2.5 0.25 1.1 0.11 3.6 0.36 1,2.3,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.1 1.3 0.13 0.52 0.052 1.82 0.182 2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.1 1.7 0.17 0.51 0.051 2.21 0.221 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF 0.1 0.19 0.019 0.06 0.006 0.25 0.025 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 0.01 4.7 0.047 0.72 0.0072 5.42 0.0542 1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF 0.01 2 0.02 0.24 0.0024 2.24 0.0224 OCDF 0.001 9.6 0.0096 0.21 0.00021 9.81 0.00981 Total MCDF N/A 4 N/A 0.01 N/A 4.01 0 Total DCDF N/A 3.4 N/A 0.03 N/A 3.43 0 Total TriCDF N/A 3.7 N/A 0.05 N/A 3.75 0 Total TCDF N/A 9.6 N/A 15.6 N/A 25.2 0 Total PeCDF N/A 12.6 N/A 11.2 N/A 23.8 0 Total HxCDF N/A 14.7 N/A 7 N/A 21.7 0 Total HpCDF N/A 13 N/A 1.5 N/A 14.5 0 Front half Back half Front half+Bact Sum (nanograms) 70.6 1.4041 35.6 0.87831 106.2 2.28241 Volume of flue gas collected (dscm) 4.3505 4.3505 4.35 Total Furan (nanograms/dscm) 16.23 8.18 24.41 Total Furan @ 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) 28.90 14.14 42.19 TEV Furan (nanograms/dscm) 0.323 0.202 0.525 TEV Furan @ 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) 0.575 0.349 0.907 ------- Furan Toxicity Equivalency Value Calculations for sample WWC-M23-5 Treated Waste Wood Test# 2 Date 8/21/96 Toxicity Toxicity Toxicity Toxicity Equivalency Front Half Equivalency Back Half Equivalency Combined Equivalency Factor Totals Value Totals Value Totals Value (nanograms) (nanograms) i (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) 2,3,7,8-TCDF 0.1 1.1 0.11 1.5 0.15 2.6 0.26 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 0.05 0.54 0.027 0.54 0.027 1.08 0.054 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 0.5 0.72 0.36 0.59 0.295 1.31 0.655 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 0.1 1.5 0.15 0.83 0.083 2.33 0.233 1,2.3,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.1 0.74 0.074 0.41 0.041 1.15 0.115 2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.1 0.84 0.084 0.38 0.038 1.22 0.122 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF 0.1 0.09 0.009 0.04 0.004 0.13 0.013 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 0.01 2.3 0.023 0.79 0.0079 3.09 0.0309 1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF 0.01 0.79 0.0079 0.22 0.0022 1.01 0.0101 OCDF 0.001 4.2 0.0042 0.76 0.00076 4.96 0.00496 Total MCDF N/A 4.2 N/A 28.9 N/A 33.1 0 Total DCDF N/A 2.2 N/A 13.9 N/A 16.1 0 Total TriCDF N/A 3 N/A 6.1 N/A 9.1 0 Total TCDF N/A 6.8 N/A 12.2 N/A 19 0 Total PeCDF N/A 8.2 N/A 8 N/A 16.2 0 Total HxCDF N/A 7.8 N/A 4.8 N/A 12.6 0 Total HpCDF N/A 5.5 N/A • 1.9 N/A 7.4 0 Front half Back half Front half+BacI Sum (nanograms) 41.9 0.8491 76.56 0.64886 118.46 1.49796 Volume of flue gas collected (dscm) " 3.6258 J 3.6258 J 3.63 Total Furan (nanograms/dscm) 11.56 21.12 32.67 Total Furan @ 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) 20.90 36.50 56.47 TEV Furan (nanograms/dscm) 0.234 ] 0.179 1 0.413 TEV Furan @ 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) 0.424 > 0.309 \ 0.714 ------- Furan Toxicity Equivalency Value Calculations for sample WWC-M23-6 Treated Waste Wood Test # 3 Date 8/22/96 Toxicity Toxicity Toxicity Toxicity Equivalency Front Half Equivalency Back Half Equivalency Combined Equivalency Factor Totals Value Totals Value Totals Value (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) 2,3,7,8-TCDF 0.1 1.1 0.11 1.4 0.14 2.5 0.25 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 0.05 0.65 0.0325 0.51 0.0255 1.16 0.058 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 0.5 0.7 0.35 0.56 0.28 1.26 0.63 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 0.1 1.3 0.13 0.79 0.079 2.09 0.209 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.1 0.67 0.067 0.4 0.04 1.07 0.107 2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.1 0.8 0.08 0.33 0.033 1.13 0.113 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF 0.1 0.08 0.008 0.04 0.004 0.12 0.012 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 0.01 2.2 0.022 0.79 0.0079 2.99 0.0299 1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF 0.01 0.68 0.0068 0.15 0.0015 0.83 0.0083 OCDF 0.001 3.7 0.0037 0.66 0.00066 4.36 0.00436 Total MCDF N/A 4.8 N/A 25.3 N/A 30.1 0 Total DCDF N/A 3.1 N/A 12 N/A 15.1 0 Total TriCDF N/A 3 N/A 5.6 N/A 8.6 0 Total TCDF N/A 7.5 N/A 11.5 N/A 19 0 Total PeCDF N/A 8.2 N/A 8 N/A 16.2 0 Total HxCDF N/A 7.1 N/A 4.2 N/A 11.3 0 Total HpCDF N/A 5.1 N/A 1.5 N/A 6.6 0 Front half Back half Front half+Bac Sum (nanograms) 42.5 0.81 68.76 0.61156 111.26 1.42156 Volume of flue gas collected (dscm) 4.2691 4.2691 4.27 Total Furan (nanograms/dscm) 9.96 16.11 26.06 Total Furan @ 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) 18.05 27.84 45.04 TEV Furan (nanograms/dscm) 0.190 0.143 0.333 TEV Furan @ 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) 0.344 0.248 0.576 ------- Toxicity Equivalency Value Dloxln and Furan Calculations for sample WWC-M23-1 Untreated Waste Wood Test #1 Date 8/13/96 2,3,7,8-TCDD 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 1.2.3.6.7.8-HxCDD 1.2.3.7.8.9-HxCDD 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD OCDD 2,3,7,8-TCDF 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 2.3.4.6.7.8-HxCDF 1.2.3.7.8.9-HxCDF 1.2.3.4.6.7.8-HpCDF 1.2.3.4.7.8.9-HpCDF OCDF Total MCDD Total DCDD Total TriCDD Total TCDD Total PeCDD Total HxCDD Total HpCDD Total MCDF Total DCDF Total TriCOF Total TCDF Total PeCDF Total HxCDF Total HpCDF Toxicity Equivalency Factor 1 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.1 0.05 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.01 0.01 0.001 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Sum (nanograms) Volume of flue gas collected (dscm) Total Dioxin and Furan (nanograms/dscm) Total Dioxin and Furan @ 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) TEV Dioxin and Furan (nanograms/dscm) Front Half Toxicity Toxicity Toxicity Equivalency Back Half Equivalency Combined Equivalency Totals Value Totals Value Totals Value (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.05 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.035 0.15 0.075 0.22 0.11 0.04 0.004 0.1 0.01 0.14 0.014 0.06 0.006 0.15 0.015 0.21 0.021 0.1 0.0I 0.23 0.023 0.33 0.033 0.3 0.003 0.49 0.0049 0.79 0.0079 1.2 0.0012 1.3 0.0013 2.5 0.0025 0.35 0.035 1.5 0.15 1.85 0.185 0.05 0.0025 0.24 0.012 0.29 0.0145 0.18 0.09 0.53 0.265 0.71 0.355 0.25 0.025 0.59 0.059 0.84 0.084 0.1 0.01 0.25 0.025 0.35 0.035 0.15 0.015 0.32 0.032 0.47 0.047 0.04 0.004 0.02 0.002 0.06 0.006 0.25 0.0025 0.46 0.0046 0.71 0.0071 0.04 0.0004 0.08 0.0008 0.12 0.0012 0.15 0.00015 0.22 0.00022 0.37 0.00037 0.02 N/A 0.57 N/A 0.59 0 0.03 N/A 0.82 N/A 0.85 0 0.11 N/A 0.88 N/A 0.99 0 0.31 N/A 4.5 N/A 4.81 0 0.34 N/A 3.6 N/A 3.94 0 0.99 N/A 2.8 N/A 3.79 0 0.65 N/A 1 N/A 1.65 0 0.66 N/A 0.29 N/A 0.95 0 0.05 N/A 12.5 N/A 12.55 0 1.3 N/A 6 N/A 7.3 0 1.9 N/A 9.1 N/A 11 0 1.4 N/A 5.4 N/A 6.8 0 1 N/A 2.8 N/A 3.8 0 0.34 N/A 0.85 N/A 1.19 0 9.25 Front half Back half Front half+Back 0.27375 51.33 0.72982 60.58 1.00357 3.4081 3.4081 3.41 2.71 4.49 0.080 15.06 26.03 0.214 17.78 30.72 0.294 TEV Dioxin and Furan @ 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) 0.133 0 370 0.509 ------- Toxicity Equivalency Value Dioxin and Furan Calculations for sample WWC-M23-2 Untreated Waste Wood Test # 2 Date 8/14/96 Toxicity Equivalency Factor 2,3,7,8-TCDD 1 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 0.5 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 0.1 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 0.1 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD 0.1 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 0.01 OCDD 0.001 2,3,7.8-TCDF 0.1 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 0.05 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 0.5 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 0.1 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.1 2,3,4,6,7,6-HxCDF 0.1 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF 0.1 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 0.01 1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF 0.01 OCDF 0.001 Total MCDD N/A Total DCDD N/A Total TriCDD N/A Total TCDD N/A Total PeCDD N/A Total HxCDD N/A Total HpCDD N/A Total MCDF N/A Total DCDF N/A Total TriCDF N/A Total TCDF N/A Total PeCDF N/A Total HxCDF N/A Total HpCDF N/A Totals Toxicity Value Totals Toxicity Value Totals Toxicity Value (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) Sum (nanograms) Volume of flue gas collected (dscm) Total Dioxin and Furan (nanograms/dscm) Total Dioxin and Furan @ 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) TEV Dioxin and Furan (nanograms/dscm) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.04 0.02 0.08 0.03 0.003 0.02 0.002 0.05 0.03 0.003 0.03 0.003 0.06 0.05 0.005 0.04 0.004 0.09 0.15 0.0015 0.1 0.001 0.25 0.61 0.00061 0.24 0.00024 0.85 0.18 0.018 0.4 0.04 0.58 0.03 0.0015 0.07 0.0035 0.1 0.08 0.04 0.13 0.065 0.21 0.12 0.012 0.13 0.013 0.25 0.05 0.005 0.06 0.006 0.11 0.06 0.006 0.07 0.007 0.13 0.02 0.002 0.01 0.001 0.03 0.13 0.0013 0.09 0.0009 0.22 0.03 0.0003 0.01 0.0001 0.04 0.1 0.0001 0.04 0.00004 0.14 0.01 N/A 0.44 N/A 0.45 0.02 N/A 0.39 N/A 0.41 0.05 N/A 0.23 N/A 0.28 0.24 N/A 0.94 N/A 1.18 0.34 N/A 0.43 N/A 0.77 0.25 N/A 0.38 N/A 0.63 0.31 N/A 0.1 N/A 0.41 1.1 N/A 12.5 N/A 13.6 0.03 N/A 4.9 N/A 4.93 0.25 N/A 1.9 N/A 2.15 0.77 N/A 2.5 N/A 3.27 0.54 N/A 1.1 N/A 1.64 0.34 N/A 0.53 N/A 0.87 0.25 N/A 0.13 N/A 0.38 Front half Back half 4.6 0.13931 26.51 0.18678 31.11 2.7186 2.7186 1.69 9.75 3.03 16.85 0.051 0.069 0.04 0.04 0.005 0.006 0.009 0.0025 0.00085 0058 0005 0.105 0.025 0.011 0.013 0.003 0.0022 0.0004 0.00014 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Front half+Back half 0.32609 2.72 11.44 19.78 0.120 TEV Dioxin and Furan @ 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) 0.092 0.119 0.207 ------- Toxicity Equivalency Value Dloxln and Furan Calculations (or sample WWC-M23-3 Untreated Waste Wood Test # 3 Date 8/15/96 Toxicity Toxicity Toxicity Toxicity Equivalency Front Half Equivalency Back Half Equivalency Combined Equivalency Factor Totals Value Totals Value Totals Value 2,3,7,8-TCDD 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 1.2.3.6.7.8-HxCDD 1.2.3.7.8.9-HxCDD 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD OCDD 2,3,7,8-TCDF 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 2.3.4.6.7.8-HxCDF 1.2.3.7.8.9-HxCDF 1.2.3.4.6.7.8-HpCDF 1.2.3.4.7.8.9-HpCDF OCDF Total MCDD Total DCDD Total TriCDD Total TCDD Total PeCDD Total HxCDD Total HpCDD Total MCDF Total DCDF Total TriCDF Total TCDF Total PeCDF Total HxCDF Total HpCDF Sum (nanograms) Volume of flue gas collected (dscm) Total Dioxin and Furan (nanograms/dscm) Total Dioxin and Furan @ 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) TEV Dioxin and Furan (nanograms/dscm) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) 1 0.02 002 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.5 0.03 0.015 0.04 0.02 0.07 0.035 0.1 0.02 0.002 0.02 0.002 0.04 0.004 0.1 0.02 0.002 0.01 0.001 0.03 0.003 0.1 0.02 0.002 0.01 0.001 0.03 0.003 0.01 0.11 0.0011 0.04 0.0004 0.15 0.0015 0.001 1.3 0.0013 0.31 0.00031 1.61 0.00161 0.1 0.06 0.006 0.24 0.024 0.3 0.03 0.05 0.02 0001 0.04 0.002 0.06 0.003 0.5 0.02 0.01 0.04 0.02 0.06 0.03 0.1 0.05 0.005 0.06 0.006 0.11 0.011 0.1 0.02 0.002 0.02 0.002 0.04 0.004 0.1 0.03 0.003 0.03 0.003 0.06 0.006 0.1 0.02 0.002 0.02 0.002 0.04 0.004 0.01 0.06 0.0006 0.04 0.0004 0.1 0.001 0.01 0.02 0.0002 0.02 0.0002 0.04 0.0004 0.001 0.07 0.00007 0.02 0.00002 009 0.00009 N/A 0.01 N/A 0.28 N/A 0.29 0 N/A 0.01 N/A 0.22 N/A 0.23 0 N/A 0.03 N/A 0.11 N/A 0.14 0 N/A 0.03 N/A 0.35 N/A 0.38 0 N/A 0.06 N/A 0.12 N/A 0.18 0 N/A 0.1 N/A 0.07 N/A 0.17 0 N/A 0.11 N/A 0.08 N/A 0.19 0 N/A 0.2 N/A 10.4 N/A 10.6 0 N/A 0.02 N/A 3.7 N/A 3.72 0 N/A 0.15 N/A 1.1 N/A 1.25 0 N/A 0.14 N/A 1.6 N/A 1.74 0 N/A 0.07 N/A 0.44 N/A 0.51 0 N/A 0.14 N/A 0.25 N/A 0.39 0 N/A 0.13 N/A 0.05 N/A 0.18 0 Front half Back half Front half+BacI 1.27 0.07327 18.79 0.10433 20.06 0.1776 2.872 2.872 2.87 0.44 0.76 0.026 6.54 11.31 0.036 6.98 12.07 0.062 TEV Dioxin and Furan @ 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) 0.044 0.063 0.107 ------- Toxicity Equivalency Value Dloxln and Furan Calculations for sample WWC-M23-4 Trealed Waste Wood Test # 1 Date 8/20/96 Toxicity Toxicity Toxicity Toxicity Equivalency Front Half Equivalency Back Half Equivalency Combined Equivalency Factor Totals Value T otals Value Totals Value (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) 2,3,7,8-TCDD 1 0.12 0.12 0.09 0.09 0.21 0.21 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 05 0.59 0.295 0.24 0.12 0.83 0.415 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 01 0.56 0.056 0.13 0 013 0.69 0.069 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 0.1 0.72 0.072 0.16 0.016 0.88 0.088 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD 0.1 1.3 0.13 0.22 0.022 1.52 0.152 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 0.01 5.2 0.052 0.28 0,0028 5.48 0.0548 OCDD 0.001 10.2 0.0102 0.07 0.00007 10.27 0.01027 2,3,7,8-TCDF 0.1 1.7 0.17 2 0.2 3.7 0.37 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 0.05 0.77 0.0385 0.59 0,0295 1.36 0.068 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 0.5 1.1 0.55 0.84 0.42 1.94 0.97 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 0.1 2.5 0.25 1.1 0.11 3.6 0.36 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.1 1.3 0.13 0.52 0.052 1.82 0.182 2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.1 1.7 0.17 0.51 0.051 2.21 0.221 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF 0.1 0.19 0.019 0.06 0.006 0.25 0.025 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 0.01 4.7 0.047 0.72 0.0072 5.42 0.0542 1,2,3,4.7,8,9-HpCDF 0.01 2 0.02 0.24 0.0024 2.24 0.0224 OCDF 0.001 9.6 0.0096 0.21 0.00021 9.81 0.00981 Total MCDD N/A 0.04 N/A 0.02 N/A 0.06 0 Total DCDD N/A 0.11 N/A 0.02 N/A 0.13 0 Total TriCDD N/A 0.58 N/A 0.04 N/A 0.62 0 Total TCDD N/A 3.1 N/A 3.5 N/A 66 0 Total PeCDD N/A 5.8 N/A 3.3 N/A 9.1 0 Total HxCDD N/A 9 N/A 2.1 N/A 11.1 0 Total HpCDD N/A 9.7 N/A 0.53 N/A 10.23 0 Total MCDF N/A 4 N/A 0.01 N/A 4.01 0 Total DCDF N/A 3.4 N/A 0.03 N/A 3.43 0 Total TriCDF N/A 3.7 N/A 0.05 N/A 3.75 0 Total TCDF N/A 9.6 N/A 15.6 N/A 25.2 0 Total PeCDF N/A 12.6 N/A 11.2 N/A 23.8 0 Total HxCDF N/A 14.7 N/A 7 N/A 21.7 0 Total HpCDF N/A 13 N/A 1.5 N/A 14.5 0 Front half Back half Front half+Back Sum (nanograms) 98.93 2.1393 45.11 1.14218 144.04 3.28148 Volume of flue gas collected (dscm) 4.3505 4.3505 4.35 Total Dioxin and Furan (nanograms/dscm) 22.74 10.37 33.11 Total Dioxin and Furan (i 5 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) 40.50 17.92 57.23 TEV Dioxin and Furan (nanograms/dscm) 0.492 0.263 0.754 TEV Dioxin and Furan ^ § 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) 0.876 0.454 1.304 ------- Toxicity Equivalency Value Dloxin and Furan Calculations for sample WWC-M23-5 Treated Waste Wood Test # 2 Date 8/21/96 Toxicity Toxicity Toxicity Equivalency Front Half Equivalency Back Half Equivalency Factor Totals Value Totals Value 2,3,7,8-TCDD 1,2.3,7,8-PeCDD 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDO 1.2.3.6.7.8-HxCDD 1.2.3.7.8.9-HxCDD 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD OCDD 2,3,7,8-TCOF 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 2.3.4.6.7.8-HxCDF 1.2.3.7.8.9-HxCDF 1.2.3.4.6.7.8-HpCDF 1.2.3.4.7.8.9-HpCDF OCDF Total MCDD Total DCDD Total TriCDD Total TCDD Total PeCDD Total HxCDD Total HpCDD Total MCDF Total DCDF Total TriCDF Total TCDF Total PeCDF Total HxCDF Total HpCDF Sum (nanograms) Volume of flue gas collected (dscm) Total Dioxin and Furan (nanograms/dscm) Total Dioxin and Furan @ 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) TEV Dioxin and Furan (nanograms/dscm) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) 1 0.15 0.15 0.12 0.12 0.5 0.58 0.29 0.3 0.15 0.1 0.44 0.044 0.13 0.013 0.1 0.61 0.061 0.23 0.023 0.1 1.1 0.11 0.32 0.032 0.01 4.2 0.042 0,68 0.0068 0.001 12.9 0.0129 1.4 0.0014 0.1 1.1 0.11 1.5 0.15 0.05 0.54 0.027 0.54 0.027 0.5 0.72 0.36 0.59 0.295 0.1 1.5 0.15 0.83 0.083 0.1 0.74 0.074 0.41 0.041 0.1 0.84 0.084 0.38 0.038 0.1 0.09 0.009 0.04 0.004 0.01 2.3 0.023 0.79 0.0079 0.01 0.79 0.0079 0.22 0.0022 0.001 4.2 0.0042 0.76 0.00076 N/A 0.06 N/A 0.9 N/A N/A 0.4 N/A 1 N/A N/A 0.74 N/A 1.5 N/A N/A 3.8 N/A 5.1 N/A N/A 6.3 N/A 3.3 N/A N/A 8.6 N/A 2.9 N/A N/A 7.8 N/A 1.4 N/A N/A 4.2 N/A 28.9 N/A N/A 2.2 N/A 13.9 N/A N/A 3 N/A 6.1 N/A N/A 6.B N/A 12.2 N/A N/A 8.2 N/A 8 N/A N/A 7.8 N/A 4.8 N/A N/A 5.5 N/A 1.9 N/A Front half Back half 69.6 1.559 92.66 0.99506 3.6258 3.6258 19.20 34.72 0.430 25.56 44.17 0.274 TEV Dioxin and Furan @ 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) 0.778 0.474 Toxicity Combined Equivalency Totals Value (nanograms) (nanograms) 0.27 0.27 088 0.44 0.57 0.057 0.84 0.084 1.42 0.142 4.88 0.0488 14.3 0,0143 2.6 0.26 1.08 0.054 1.31 0.655 2.33 0.233 1.15 0.115 1.22 0.122 0.13 0.013 3.09 0.0309 1.01 0.0101 4.96 0.00496 0.96 0 1.4 0 2.24 0 8.9 0 9.6 0 11.5 0 9.2 0 33.1 0 16.1 0 9.1 0 19 0 16.2 0 12.6 0 7.4 0 Front half+Back half 162.26 2.55406 3.63 44.75 77.35 0.704 1.218 ------- Toxicity Equivalency Value Dioxin and Furan Calculations (or sample WWC-M23-6 Treated Waste Wood Test # 3 Date 8/22/96 2,3,7,8-TCDD 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 1.2.3.6.7.8-HxCDD 1.2.3.7.8.9-HxCDD 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD OCDD 2,3,7,8-TCDF 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 2.3.4.6.7.8-HxCDF 1.2.3.7.8.9-HxCDF 1.2.3.4.6.7.8-HpCDF 1.2.3.4.7.8.9-HpCDF OCDF Total MCDD Total DCDD Total TriCDD Total TCDD Total PeCDD Total HxCDD Total HpCDD Total MCDF Total DCDF Tolal TriCDF Total TCDF Total PeCDF Total HxCDF Total HpCDF Sum (nanograms) Volume of flue gas collected (dscm) Tolal Dioxin and Furan (nanograms/dscm) Total Dioxin and Furan @ 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) TEV Dioxin and Furan (nanograms/dscm) TEV Dioxin and Furan @ 7% 02 (nanograms/dscm) Toxicity Toxicity Toxicity Toxicity Equivalency Front Half Equivalency Back Half Equivalency Combined Equivalency Factor Totals Value Totals Value Totals Value (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) (nanograms) 1 0.15 0.15 0.13 0.13 0.28 0.28 0.5 0.66 0.33 0.39 0.195 1.05 0.525 0.1 0.45 0.045 0.19 0.019 0.64 0.064 0.1 0.62 0.062 0.21 0.021 0.83 0.083 0.1 1.2 0.12 0.37 0.037 1.57 0.157 0.01 4.1 0.041 0.8 0.008 4.9 0.049 0.001 12.3 0.0123 2.1 0.0021 14.4 0.0144 0.1 1.1 0.11 1.4 0.14 25 0.25 0.05 0.65 0.0325 0.51 0.0255 1.16 0.058 0.5 0.7 0.35 0.56 0.28 1.26 0.63 0.1 1.3 0.13 0.79 0.079 2.09 0.209 0.1 0.67 0.067 0.4 0.04 1.07 0.107 0.1 0.8 0.08 0.33 0.033 1.13 0.113 0.1 0.0B 0008 0.04 0.004 0 12 0.012 0.01 2.2 0.022 0.79 0.0079 2.99 0.0299 0.01 0.68 0.0068 0.15 0.0015 0.83 0.0083 0.001 3.7 0.0037 0.66 0.00066 4.36 0.00436 N/A 0.06 N/A 0.81 N/A 0.87 0 N/A 0.39 N/A 1.5 N/A 1.89 0 N/A 0.79 N/A 1.4 N/A 2.19 0 N/A 4 N/A 5.3 N/A 9.3 0 N/A 6.9 N/A 4.4 N/A 11.3 0 N/A 8.3 N/A 3.2 N/A 11.5 0 N/A 7.6 N/A 1.6 N/A 9.2 0 N/A 4.8 N/A 25.3 N/A 30.1 0 N/A 3.1 N/A 12 N/A 15.1 0 N/A 3 N/A 5.S N/A 8.6 0 N/A 7.5 N/A 11.5 N/A 19 0 N/A 8.2 N/A 8 N/A 16.2 0 N/A 7.1 N/A 4.2 N/A 11.3 0 N/A 5.1 N/A 1.5 N/A 6.6 0 Front half 70.54 Back half 1.5703 86.97 1.02366 4.2691 4.2691 16.52 20.37 29.96 35.21 0.368 0.240 0.667 0.414 Front half+Bac 157.51 2.59396 4.27 36.90 b3.77 0.608 1.050 ------- APPENDIX V PCB ANALYSIS RESULTS V-l ------- TRIANGLE LABORATORIES OF RTP, INC. Sample Result Summary Ear Project 33672C Method PCBO Analysis (DB-5) Page 1 09/26/96 Data File W1082Q3 W108204 W108205 W108206 Sample ID TLX M23 Blank WWC-M23-1 -1,6,2 WWC-M23-2- 1,6,2 WWC-M23-3- 1,6,: .3 ,3 ,3 Unics ng ng ng ng Analytas 2-Mo 0 .13 3.2 1.3 B 1.5 B 44-Di a .32 3.9 B 3.5 B 3 .2 B 244-Tr 0.59 PR 3.2 PRB 3.4 PRB 4.1 PRB 2255-T 1.2 3.9 B 4.3 B 6.0 B 3344-T {0.07} 0.33 B 0 .40 B 0.35 B 23445-Pe {0.09} PR 0 .24 PRB {0.24} PRB {0.33} PRB 23344-Pe 0 .17 0.77 B 0.71 S 1.1 B 33445-Pe (0-2) 0.27 {0.2L} PR (0.2) 233445-Hx 0 .08 0.41 B 0.37 B 0.37 B 334455-Hx (0.3), {0.13} (0.3) (0.3) 2234455-Hp 0.90 3.0 B 2.8 B 5.1 B 22334455-Octa 0.17 0.48 3 0 .38 B 0.72 B 223344556-Nona (0-5) (0.5) (0.4) (0.5) ~eca (0.5) (0.7) (0.4) (0.6) TOTAL MONO 0 .24 12.6 5.0 4.8 TOTAL DI 1.2 47.9 28 .9 28.6 TOTAL TRI 3.5 27.3 22.9 25.6 TOTAL TETRA 6. 6 21.6 26.5 32.0 TOTAL PENTA 5.0 15.6 17.4 27.9 TOTAL HEXA 6.1 22.3 24.1 35.9 TOTAL HEPTA 2.8 13 .0 12.4 22.3 TOTAL OCTA 0 .54 2.5 1.5 2.4 TOTAL NONA (0.5) (0.6) (0.4) (0.5) Internal Standards Percent Recovery Summary (% Rec) 13C6-4-Mo 53 .2 o 3.2 43. 1 54.8 13C12-44-Di 81.9 93 .8 70 .4 79.2 13C12-244-Tr 78.6 85.3 72.5 . 77.5 13C12-3344-T 35.0 89 .1 71.5 75.3 13CI2-33445-Pe 79 .7 85.8 67.3 63 .9 13C12-3 34455-Hx 59 .0 62.9 49 .1 60 .7 13C12-(245)3-Hp 55.4 60.1 54.3 53 .7 13C12-(2345)-0 73 .5 77.5 74.7 73 .7 13C12-D 57.7 57.3 56.2 52.0 Other Standards Percent Recovery Summary (% Rec) 13C12-224455-HX 75.2 75.3 72.6 72.7 Other Standards Percent Recovery Summary (% Rec) 13C12-33S5-T 95.8 96.5 83 .7 75.4 13C12-22455-Pe 33 .0 82.7 76.7 63 .5 13C12-223445-HX 71.4 70.3 68 .8 58.7 13C12- (235S-)—0 52.3 49.7 49 .4 42.3 Triangla Laboratories, Inc.® Analytical Servicas Division 301 Capitola Drive • Durham, North Carolina 27713 Printed: 16:51 09/26/S£ _ Phone: (919) 544-5729 • Fax: (919) 544-5491 y 2 ------- TRIANGLE LABORATORIES OF RTP, - INC. Page 2 Sample Result Summary for Project 38672C 09/25/96 Method PCBO Analysis (DB-5) Data File W108207 W108208 W108209 W108210 Sample ID WWC-M23-4- , 3 1,6,2 WWC-M23-5- .3 1.6,2 WWC-M23-6- ,3 1, 6,2 WWC-M23-FB- 2,3 -1,6, Units ng ng ng zg Analytes 2-Mo 3.2 4.7 4.5 0.25 B 44-Di 4.8 B 7.4 10 .6 0.69 B 244-Tr 3.9 PRB 8.9 PRB 10.6 PRB 1.3 PRB 2255-T 5. S B 9.9 5 19.4 B 1.5 B 3344-T 0.67 B 0 .78 B 0.87 B 0.09 B 23445-Pe 0.31 PRB 0.33 PRB 1.1 PRB £0.14} PRB 23344-Pe 1.2 B 1.2 B 3 .3 B 0.36 B 33445-Pe 0.25 PR {0.37} {0.45} (0-1) 233445-Hx 0.49 _ B 0.65 B 1.2 B 0.29 B 334455-Ex (0.1)' (0.13} (0.2) (0-2) 2234455-Hp 4.0 B 6.0 B 12.5 B 5.5 B 22334455-Octa 0.69 3 1.4 B 1.4 B 1.5 B 223344556-Nona C0.7S} 0.87 0.81 0.30 Deca {0.31} 1.2 0.93 (0-4) TOTAL MONO 13 .5 15.3 13 .5 0.59 TOTAL DI 38.8 59.5 70 .5 4.4 TOTAL TRI 24.9 50.7 73 .1. 5.4 TOTAL TETRA 34.8 49.3 101 3.9 TOTAL PENTA 29.9 32.0 106 7.8 TOTAL HEXA 31.2 38.9 111 13 .0 TOTAL HEPTA 19.3 26.0 56.4 15.1 TOTAL CCTA 3.5 6.1 9.9 5.2 TOTAL NONA. 1.0 2.3 2.2 0.30 Internal Standards Percent Recovery Summary (% Rec) 1306-4-Mo 43 .9 51.9 53.9 49.7 13C12-44-Di 75.3 75.7 93.8 77.1 13C12-244-Tr 79.2 69.8 83.4 ¦ 74.3 13C12-3344-T 32.4 77.1 92.1 80.1 13C12-33445-Pe 77.1 70.9 79.7 73 .9 13C12-334455-HX 60.0 58.3 65.0 63.1 13C12-(245)3-Hp 54.0 52.2 51.9 53 .8 13C12-(2345)-O 73 .7 70.7 73.2 73.9 13C12-D 56.1 56.1 55.7 63.5 Other Standards Percent Recovery Summary (% Rec) 13C12-224455-HX 71.6 77.6 80 .4 75.4 Other Standards Percent¦Recovery Summary (% Rec) 13C12-3355-T 94.3 87.4 99.3 82.3 13C12-22455-Pe 75.7 73 .6 87.4 70.0 13012-223445-Hx 56.1 63.3 78.0 74.1 13C12-(2356) -O 50.1 51.5 56.3 57.2 Triangle Laboratories, Inc.® Analytical Services Division 801 Capitola Drive * Durham, North Carolina 27713 Phnne: f9191 544-5729 • Fax: (919) 544-5491 V-3 Printed: 16:51 09/26/96 •' 2S ------- TRIANGLE LABORATORIES OF RTP, INC. Page 3 Sample Result Summary for Project 38S72C 09/26/96 Method PCBO Analysis (DB-5) ¦Data File Sample ID Units W10 821-1 TLI LCS ng . W108212 . ..... TLI LCSD ng Analyses ¦¦ - ¦ - ¦ • - <•••-¦ 2-Mo 10 .5 10.0 44-Di 9.5 9.7 244-Tr 3.S B 8.9 2255-T 20.1 B 20.1 B 3344-T 13 .7 19.6 23445-Pe 21.9 21.9 23344-Pe 20.3 21.2 33445-Pe 13.5 18.5 23 3445-Hx 22. S 21.3 334455-Hx 19.0 19.3 22344S5-Hp 23.5 30.5 22334455-Octa 23.5 29.4 223344556-Nona 46.2 46.3 Deca 46.1 47.3 Internal Standards Percent Recovery Summary (% Rec) 13CS-4-MO 54.4 51.1 13C12-44-Di 67.2 76.9 13C12-244-Tr 64.8 71.1 13C12-3344-T 63 .4 72.7 13C12-33445-Pe 54.2 63 .0 13C12-334455-Hx 53.3 53.9 13C12-(245)3-Hp 60 .2 53 .9 13C12-(2345)-0 74 .2 83 .3 13C12-D 6i'.4 67 . 8 ' Other Standards Percent Recovery Summary (% Rec) 13C12-224455-HX 76.3 84.9 Other Standards Percent Recovery Summary (% Rec) 13C12-3355-T 73 .8 79 .3 13C12-22455-Pe 67.7 70 .7 13C12-223445-HX 75.8 78 .8 13C12-(2356)-0 62.4 61.5 (Estimated Maximum Possible Concentration}, (Detection Limit). Triangle Laboratories, Inc.® Analytical Services Division 801 Capitola Drive ~ Durham, North Carolina 27713 Phone: (919) 544-5729 • Fax: (919) 544-5491 v Printed: 16:51 09/26/96 ------- Wasta Wood Combustion PCS Calculations Gas St»c* Stack Sampta Row Row Flua Gas Emission Votuma Rata Rata 02 Aiiaiytas Analytas Analytas Analytas Rata Sampt.# Oats (dscm) (ttartn) (cUcmm) (*) (Total ng) (ng/dsan) (noMieffl O 7% 02) (uortir © 7* 02) WWC-M23-1 8/11(96 Untreated Wast* Wood # 1 3.4080 685.066 19.40107 125 2-Wo 3.20 44-Oi 3.90 244-Tr 120 2255-T 3.90 3344-T o.aa 23445-Pa 0.24 23344-P® 0.77 33445-Pa 0.27 233445-Hx 0.41 334455-Hx 0.13 2234455-Hp 3.00 22334455-Octa 0.48 223344556-Nona 0.60 Deca 0.70 Total MONO 12.60 Total Oi 47.90 Total TRI 27.30 Total TETRA 21.60 Total PENTA 15.60 TotaJ HEXA 22.30 Total HEPTA 13.00 Total OCTA Z50 Total NONA 0.60 0.339 1.554 1.309 1.144 1.094 2204 0.939 1.554 1.309 1.144 1.894 Z204 0.258 0.427 0.497 0.070 0.117 0.136 0.226 0.374 0.435 0.079 0.131 0.153 1120 0.199 0.232 0.038 0.063 0.073 0.880 1.457 1.696 0.141 0.233 0.271 0.176 0*31 0.339 0.205 0.340 0.396 3.697 TfTiB" 7.122 14.055 23.259 27.075 8.011 13.256 15.431 6L338 10.488 12.209 4.577 7.575 8.818 6.543 10.828 12.605 1815 6.313 7.348 0.734 1.214 1.413 0.176 0.291 0.339 WWC-M23-2 8/14/96 Untreated Waste Wood #2 27186 587.284 16.63188 13.2 2-Mo 1.30 44-Oi 3.50 244-Tr 3.40 2255-T 4.30 3344-T 0.40 23445-Pe 0.24 23344-Pe 0.71 33445-Pe 0-21 233445-Hx 0.37 334455-Hx 0.30 2234455-Hp 280 22334455-Octa ' 0.38 223344556-Nona 0.40 Doca 0.40 Total MONO 5.00 Total Di 28.90 Total TRI 2290 Total TETRA 26.50 Total PENTA 17.40 Total HEXA 24.10 Total HEPTA 12.40 Total OCTA 1.50 Total NONA 0.40 0.478 0.857 0.855 1.287 2308 2303 1.251 2242 2237 1.582 2835 2829 0.147 0.264 0.263 0.083 0.158 0.158 0.261 0.468 0.467 0.077 0.138 0.138 0.136 0.244 0.243 0.110 0.198 0.197 1.030 1.846 1.842 0.140 0.251 0.250 0.147 0.264 0.263 0.147 0.264 0.263 1.839 —J.'JUr ¦ 3.290 10.630 19.056 19.016 8.423 15.100 15.068 9.748 17.473 17.437 S.400 11.473 11.449 3.865 15.891 15.858 4.561 8.176 8.159 0.552 0.989 0.987 0.147 0.264 0.263 WWC-M23-3 8/15/96 Untreated Waste Wood # 3 28758 631.188 17.87524 129 2-Mo 1.50 44-Oi 3.20 244-Tr 4.10 2255-T 6.00 3344-T 0.35 23445-Pa 0.33 23344-Pa 1.10 33445-Pa 0.20 233445-Hx 0.37 334455-Hx 0.30 2234455-Hp 5.10 22334455-Octa 0.72 223344556-Nona 0.50 Deca 0.60 Total MONO 4.60 Total Oi 28.60 Total TRI 25.60 Total TETRA 3200 Total PENTA 27.90 Total HEXA 36.90 Total HEPTA 2230 Total OCTA 240 Total NONA 0.50 0.522 0.902 0.967 1.113 1.923 2063 1.426 2464 2643 2086 3.606 3.868 0.122 0.210 0226 0.115 0.198 0.213 0.383 0.661 0.709 0 070 0.120 0.129 0.129 0.222 0.239 0.104 0.180 0.193 1.773 3.065 3.287 0.250 0.433 0.464' 0.174 0.301 0.322 0 209 ' 0.361 0.387 1.669 2885 3.094 9.945 17.189 18.435 8 902 15.386 16.502 11.127 19.232 20.627 9.702 16.768 17.984 12831 22177 23.786 7.754 13.403 14.374 0 835 1.442 1-547 0.174 0.301 0.322 WWC-M23-4 8/20/96 Treated Waste Wood # 1 4.3505 884.522 25.04966 13.1 2-Mo 3.20 44-Oi 4.80 244-Tr 3.90 2255-T 5.60 3344-T 0.67 23445-Pa 0.31 23344-Pe 1.20 33445-Pe 0.26 233445-HX 0.49 334455-HX 0.10 2234455-Hp 4.00 22334455-Octa 0.69 0.736 1.310 1.969 1 103 1.965 2954 0.896 1 597 2400 1.287 2293 3.446 0.154 0.274 0.412 0.071 0.127 0.191 0.276 0.491 0.738 0 060 0.106 0.160 0.113 0.201 0.302 0 023 0.041 0.062 0 919 1.638 2 461 0159 0.282 0.425 \r < ------- WWC-M23-5 Treated Waste Wood #2 3/21/96 3.6273 742.778 21.03547 13.3 WWC-M23-S Treated Waste Wood #3 8/22/96 4.2826 911.610 25.81680 13.3 223344556-Nona Deca Totai MONO Total Oi Total TRI Totai TETRA Total PENTA Total HEXA Total HEPTA Total OCTA Totai NONA 2-Mo 44-Oi 244-Tr 2255-T 3344-T 23445-P® 23344-Pe 33445-P* 233445-HX 334455-Hx 2234455-Hp 22334455-Octa 223344556-Norwi Deca Total MONO Total Di Total TRI Total TETRA Total PENTA Total HEXA Total HEPTA Total OCTA Total NONA 2-Mo 44-Oi 244-Tr 2255-T 3344-T 23445-Pa 23344-Pe 33445-P® 233445-Hx 334455-Hx 2234455-Hp 22334455-Octa 223344556-Nona TotaUAONO Total Di Total TRI Total TETRA Total PENTA Total HEXA Total HEPTA Total OCTA Total NONA 0.75 0.175 0.311 0.468 0.81 0.186 0.332 0.498 13.60 3.126 5.568 8.369 38.80 8.919 15.885 23.875 24.90 5.723 10.194 15.322 34.30 7.999 14.248 21.414 29.90 6.373 12242 18.399 31.20 7.172 12774 19.199 19.30 4.436 7.902 11.876 3.50 0.605 1.433 2154 1.00 0.230 0.409 0.615 4.70 1.296 2344 2958 7.40 2.040 3.690 4.657 8.90 2454 4.438 5.601 9.90 2729 4.937 6.231 0.78 0.215 0.389 0.491 0.33 0.091 0.165 0.208 1.20 0.331 0.598 0.755 0.37 0.102 0.185 0.233 G.65 Q.179 0.324 0.409 0.18 0.050 0.090 0.113 6.00 1.654 2992 3.776 1.40 0.386 0.698 0.681 0.87 0.240 0.434 0.548 1.20 0.331 0.598 0.755 15.30 4.218 7.629 9.629 69.50 19.160 34.657 43.741 60.70 16.734 30.269 38.203 49.30 13.591 24.584 . 31.028 32.00 8.822 15.957 20.140 38.90 10.724 19.396 24.483 26.00 7.168 12965 16.364 6.10 1.682 3.042 3.839 2.30 0.634 1.147 1.448 4.50 1.056 1.919 2973 10.60 2487 4.521 7.004 10.60 2487 4.521 7.004 19.40 4.551 8.275 12818 0.87 0.204 0.371 0.575 1.10 0.258 0.469 0.727 3.30 0.774 1.408 2180 0.45 0.106 0.192 0.297 1.20 0.282 0.512 0.793 0.20 0.047 0.085 0.132 12.50 2932 5.332 8.259 1.40 0.328 0.597 0.925 0.81 0.190 0.345 0.535 0.93 0.218 0.397 0.614 13.60 3.191 5.801 8.986 70.50 16.539 30.071 46.581 73.10 17.149 31.180 48.299 101.00 23.694 43.081 66.733 106.00 24.867 45.214 70.036 111.00 26.040 47.346 73.340 56.40 13.231 24.057 37.265 9.90 2323 4.223 6.541 2.20 0.516 0.938 1.454 WWC-M23-FB 8/22/96 Field Blank NA NA NA NA 2-MO 0-25 44-Oi 0.69 244-Tr 1-30 2255-T 1.50 3344-T 0.09 23445-Pe 0.14 23344-Pe 0.36 33445-Pe 0-10 233445-HX 0.29 334455-Hx 0.20 2234455-Hp 5.50 22334455-Octa 1.60 223344556-Nona 0.30 Daca 0.40 Total MONO 0.59 Total Di 4.40 Total TRI 6.40 Total TETRA 8.90 Total PENTA 7.80 Total HEXA 13.00 Total HEPTA 16.10 Total OCTA 5.20 Total NONA 0.30 V-6 ------- |