WAG AG AC GHD47345

Alcoa World Alumina
Emissions to Air from Residue
Disposal Area
Assessment of Emissions from Diffuse
Area Sources
GHD Report
Project Management and Technical Review by
Greg Power and Associates
March 2005
Contents
Executive Summary
4
1.
Introduction
6
1.1
6
2.
3.
4.
Objectives
Scope of Work
7
2.1
Phase 1 Scope:
7
2.2
Phase 2 Scope
8
Methods
11
3.1
Flux Hood
11
3.2
Odour Sampling
13
3.3
VOCs and Carbonyls
15
3.4
Quality Assurance
15
3.5
Quality Control
19
3.6
Safety
20
Results
21
4.1
Quality Control Results
21
4.2
Flux Hood Comparison
23
4.3
Emission Rates from Liquor Sources
29
4.4
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)
31
4.5
Bitumen
33
4.6
Odour
33
5.
Discussion
36
6.
Conclusions
38
7.
Recommendations
39
Table Index
61/15324/47345
Table 1. Phase 1. Sampling Program
7
Table 2
Phase 2. Sampling Program
9
Table 3. Residual Standard Deviation of Replicates (from
emission rates)
22
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
Table 4. Odour Emissions during First Phase
34
Table 5. Odour Emissions during Second Phase
35
Figure Index
Figure 1. Location of Sampling Points
10
Figure 2. Flux Hood Floating on ROWS pond.
12
Figure 3. Sampling hood connected to Automated Sampling
system
14
Figure 4: Effect of Ambient Temperature and Hood Material on
Hood Temperature for Dry Residue
24
Figure 5: Effect of Ambient Temperature and Hood Material on
Hood Temperature for Wet Residue
25
Figure 6: Comparison of Acetone Emission Rates for Acetone
Measured by SS and PP Hoods
26
Figure 7: Emission Rates vs. Regional Temperature for Dry
Residue: Run 1
27
Figure 8: Emission Rates vs. Regional Temperature for Dry
residue: Run 2
27
Figure 9: Emission Rates vs. Regional Temperature for Wet
Residue
28
Figure 10: Emission Rates vs. Regional Temperature for TO17
Compounds
29
Figure 11: Emission Rates of Carbonyls from Super-thickener and
RDA2 Liquor
30
Figure 12: Carbonyl Emission Rates from the Cooling Pond
30
Figure 13: TO17 Emission Rates from the Cooling Pond
31
Figure 14: ROWS Pond
32
Figure 15: PAH Emissions
33
Appendices
61/15324/47345
A
Emission Rates
B
Laboratory Results
C
Field Notes
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
Executive Summary
GHD was commissioned by Alcoa World Alumina Pty Ltd (AWA) to undertake an assessment the
contribution of diffuse area sources (as opposed to point sources) to the overall emissions of Volatile
Organic Compounds (VOCs) and odour from the Wagerup Alumina Refinery. Greg Power and
Associates managed the overall program interface and technical review. Independent review of the
project was undertaken by Dr. Neil Salisbury (Environ Pty Ltd). Previous studies have established
knowledge of the point source emissions, through an initial Emissions Inventory and a programme of
ongoing measurements1,2. The intention of this study was to provide the information required for inclusion
of the gaseous emissions from the Residue Drying Areas (RDAs) and various liquor storage areas
associated with them, in the Refinery Emissions Inventory. This was in response to a finding of the
Environmental Audit by AWN in 2003-33, and similar recommendation in the more recent Review by
CSIRO4. Both recommended the use of an emission isolation flux chamber and method as described in
USEPA document EPA/600/8-86/0085.
The study was carried out in two Phases. Phase 1 was a preliminary survey of the main area sources in
order to establish the overall order of magnitude contribution of these sources to air emissions, and to
enable priorities for further investigation to be established. In Phase 2 more detailed study was made of
the priority areas indicated from Phase 1. Two of the key issues investigated were the effect of diurnal
variation on emissions, and the effect of the material of construction of the flux hood on the results
obtained.
All sampling and analysis was carried out according to standard USEPA techniques, or where an exact
method was not available USEPA methods were adapted and tested to ensure their applicability in the
specific application required. For example, USEPA methods for sampling of ambient air were adapted to
collect samples on the flux hood discharge, which required recovery tests to be conducted to ensure that
the absorbent materials were not overloaded. Also, there is no USEPA standard for flux hood
measurements, EPA/600/8-86/008 being a “User’s Guide”5. This document was used as the basis of the
methods used, along with other more recent information as appropriate.
The main results from the Phase 1 study, carried out in October 2004, were:
The main compounds detected in measurable amounts over most of the diffuse emission sources
were formaldehyde, acetaldehyde and acetone, with smaller amounts of other carbonyl compounds
and aromatics detected in a number of sources;
The most concentrated emission sources are the Super-thickener and Cooling Pond, both of which
contain relatively hot liquor;
The rate of emission from residue is low, with dry residue lower than wet residue;
1
“Wagerup Refinery Air Emissions Inventory”, Alcoa World Alumina Australia, September 2002
2
“Wagerup Refinery Bi-Monthly Monitoring Programme “, Alcoa World Alumina Australia, reports from 2002 onwards
3
“Environmental Audit of Alcoa World Alumina Australia Wagerup Refinery”, AWN Pty Ltd, May 2003, Finding 13.1.5.3, p 13.3
4
“ Wagerup Air Quality Review”, CSIRO Atmospheric Research, May 2004, Recommendation 7, p 127
5
“Measurement of Gaseous Emission Rates from Land Surfaces Using an Emission Isolation Flux Chamber – User’s Guide”,
USEPA Document EPA/600/8-86/008, 1986
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
4
The only Polycyclic Aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) that could be detected was naphthalene, and then
only from the Super-thickener;
The results of Phase 1 were reviewed with Alcoa and other consultants. From this review a number of
issues were identified for investigation in Phase 2. They were:
The flux hood used in Phase 1 has a stainless steel hood, whereas the 1986 USEPA report refers to
a plexiglass hood. The possibility that this difference could influence the results should be
investigated and any differences quantified;
There is likely to be diurnal variation in the rate of emissions from residue surfaces. This should be
investigated and quantified;
The residue areas vary considerably in relation to the time since deposition, the degree of drying
that has taken place, and the effects of ploughing to promote evaporation and sprinkling to control
dust. Some additional investigation of these effects should be done to improve the overall estimates
of emission rates;
The sources with the highest specific emission rates are the Super-thickener and Cooling Pond.
Additional samples should be taken to confirm the measured rates and provide some indication of
variability;
An attempt should be made to achieve lower detection limits for PAHs on the Super-thickener and
Cooling Pond.
Phase 2 of the study was carried out in February 2005. The main results were:
The stainless steel and Perspex flux hoods gave comparable results under most conditions. Under
conditions of strong sunlight on residue surfaces, the Perspex hood was subject to solar heating that
raised the temperature in the hood significantly above the ambient temperature. The stainless steel
hood therefore better represented the undisturbed surface environment under those conditions;
The diurnal variation in emissions from residue surfaces was quantified, and a correlation was found
between ambient temperature and emission rates;
The emissions from dry and wet residue surfaces were investigated. It was found that emission rate
is a function of dryness, with emissions from very dry surfaces close to or below detection for most
compounds;
Extended sampling times to achieve lower detection limits gave additional information on trace
emissions of PAHs from the hot liquor sources, but attempts to lower detection limits in this way for
the more soluble compounds from the liquor sources appears to have resulted in loss of sample due
to moisture effects.
This work has provided a set of indicative data on the emission rates of VOCs and odour form the main
diffuse sources at the RDAs. This data is presented in a form suitable as input to a dispersion model for
determining ground level concentrations in the surrounding region.
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
5
1.
Introduction
GHD was commissioned by Alcoa World Alumina Pty Ltd (AWA) to undertake an assessment the
contribution of diffuse area sources (as opposed to point sources) to the overall emissions of Volatile
Organic Compounds (VOCs) and odour from the Wagerup Alumina Refinery. Greg Power and
Associates managed the overall program interface and technical review. Independent review of the
project was undertaken by Dr. Neil Salisbury (Environ Pty Ltd). Previous studies have established
knowledge of the point source emissions, through an initial Emissions Inventory and a programme of
ongoing measurements6,7. The intention of this study was to provide the information required for inclusion
of the gaseous emissions from the Residue Drying Areas (RDAs) and various liquor storage areas
associated with them, in the Refinery Emissions Inventory. This was in response to a finding of the
Environmental Audit by AWN in 2003-38, and similar recommendation in the more recent Review by
CSIRO9. Both recommended the use of an emission isolation flux chamber and method as described in
USEPA document EPA/600/8-86/00810.
The study was carried out in two Phases. Phase 1 was a preliminary survey of the main area sources in
order to establish the overall order of magnitude contribution of these sources to air emissions, and to
enable priorities for further investigation to be established. In Phase 2 more detailed study was made of
the priority areas indicated from Phase 1. Two of the key issues investigated were the effect of diurnal
variation on emissions, and the effect of the material of construction of the flux hood on the results
obtained.
1.1
Objectives
Phase 1
Undertake preliminary assessment of emissions of a range of analytes from the residue area at Wagerup
in order to provide a basis for decision making.
Identify issues and constraints, which can be addressed in second phase.
Determine sources that appear to be significant.
Phase 2
Validate method used in phase 1.
Assess spatial and temporal variability of “significant sources”.
Increase overall dataset in order to improve statistical validity.
6
“Wagerup Refinery Air Emissions Inventory”, Alcoa World Alumina Australia, September 2002
7
“Wagerup Refinery Bi-Monthly Monitoring Programme “, Alcoa World Alumina Australia, reports from 2002 onwards
8
“Environmental Audit of Alcoa World Alumina Australia Wagerup Refinery”, AWN Pty Ltd, May 2003, Finding 13.1.5.3, p 13.3
9
“ Wagerup Air Quality Review”, CSIRO Atmospheric Research, May 2004, Recommendation 7, p 127
10
“Measurement of Gaseous Emission Rates from Land Surfaces Using an Emission Isolation Flux Chamber – User’s Guide”,
USEPA Document EPA/600/8-86/008, 1986
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
6
2.
Scope of Work
An initial Scope of Work was developed by GHD and Alcoa in September 2004. This scope was based
on a requirement in the response to the 2003 Environmental Audit3, and the need to provide input data
for atmospheric dispersion modelling needed for the Health Risk Assessment (HRA) required for the
Wagerup III project approval process. The initial Scope became the scope for Phase 1 of the project.
Following review of the Phase 1 results, additional work was defined for Phase 2, which was carried out
in February 2005.
2.1
Phase 1 Scope:
2.1.1
General
Samples to be collected using the isolation flux hood method described in USEPA Document
EPA/600/8-86/0085, as recommended by independent consultants3,4
Sample capture and preparation to be according to Australian or International standard methods as
far as possible, with any deviations from strict standards to be justified and validated as appropriate
Analysis of all samples to be undertaken using recognised international standard methods in certified
laboratories under NATA accreditation
Collect bag samples for analysis for odour by dynamic olfactometry on selected samples
Alcoa safety policies and procedures to be strictly adhered to, and personal safety to be a priority at
all times in the work
2.1.2
Sampling Plan
Samples to be collected from the following sites (Table 1):
Table 1. Phase 1. Sampling Program
Sample Site
Number of
Sampling
Runs
Standard Analysis Required
Comments
Cooling Pond
(CP)
2
TO17, TO11A, AS 4323.3
One sample close to inlet, one
from main water body. One
volumetric air sample (not
reported here).
Run-off Water
Storage (ROWS)
2
TO17, TO11A, AS 4323.3
One sample close to inlet, one
from main water body
Runoff Collection
Pond (ROCP)
2
TO17, TO11A, AS 4323.3
One sample close to inlet, one
from main water body
Residue Disposal
Area 2 (RDA2)
2
TO17, TO11A, AS 4323.3
Samples to be taken on surface
of liquor currently stored in this
area
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
7
Sample Site
Number of
Sampling
Runs
Standard Analysis Required
Super-thickener
(ST)
1
TO17, TO11A, AS 4323.3
Oxalate Storage
2
TO17, TO11A, AS 4323.3
Wet Residue11
1
TO17, TO11A, AS 4323.3
Dry Residue
1
TO17, TO11A, AS 4323.3
Wet Sand6
1
TO17, TO11A, AS 4323.3
Lower Dam
2
TO17, TO11A, AS 4323.3
2.1.3
Comments
Reporting
All results to be reported as specific emission rates, in units of micrograms per square meter per
minute (µg/m2/min) or odour units per square meter per minute (OU/m2/min);
Results to be provided in a summary report, and all original data to be made available, including field
notes, laboratory reports, calculations, and quality control;
2.2
Phase 2 Scope
2.2.1
General
General conditions as for Phase 1;
In order to validate the method, conduct comparative evaluation of the performance of the stainless
steel flux hood and a Perspex-domed flux hood of identical dimensions, both complying with
specifications given in EPA 600/8-86/0085 in all other respects;
Conduct an evaluation of the variation in emissions from dry and wet residue areas over two periods
of 24 hours;
Collect replicate samples from selected sources to enhance overall data set;
Undertake sampling for PAHs on selected sources, targeting lower detection limits by collecting larger
sample volumes;
Collect bag samples for analysis for odour by dynamic olfactometry on selected samples.
11
In this report “residue” refers to the fine fraction of the Bayer residue, and “sand” refers to the coarse fraction
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
8
2.2.2
Sampling Plan
Samples to be collected from the following sites (Table 2):
Table 2
Phase 2. Sampling Program
Sample Site
Number
of
Sampling
Runs
Standard
Analysis
Required
Comments
RDA: Dry
Residue just
after tilling,
and after a
period of
solar drying
32
TO17,
TO11A, AS
4323.3
Stainless steel (Ss) and Perspex hoods co-located on dry
residue RDA during two 24 hour cycles – the first set of
samples from residue that had been recently tilled, and
the second from the same area a week later after solar
drying in hot conditions; TO-17 and TO-11A samples
collected from both hoods every three hours; hoods
removed from sampling site for at least an hour on each
run to allow site to re-equilibrate to ambient conditions; 8
samples of odour collected from the stainless steel hood
in addition to the other samples on second 24 hour run.
RDA: Wet
Residue
16
TO17,
TO11A, AS
4323.3
Ss and Perspex hoods co-located on wet residue RDA
during two 24 hour cycles; TO-17 and TO-11A samples
collected from both hoods every six hours; hoods
removed from sampling site for at least an hour on each
run to allow site to re-equilibrate to ambient conditions; 4
samples of odour collected from the stainless steel hood
in addition to the other samples on second 24 hour run;
compared locating sample tube inside vs. outside the
Perspex hood.
Cooling Pond
3
TO17,
TO11A
Samples taken close to inlet, close to outlet, and at an
intermediate location
RDA2
3
TO17,
TO11A
Samples taken around the perimeter of the liquor area
ROWS
4
TO17,
TO11A
Two samples during daylight, one at night; one pair near
inlet, the other pair away from inlet
Bitumen
2
TO17,
TO11A
Freshly sprayed area and area sprayed several weeks
earlier sampled.
Superthickener
2
TO17,
TO11A
Samples taken from open area away from still-well
Dry Residue,
Cooling
Pond, Superthickener
3
PAH
(Method
Number
(TO13)
Extended sample times and larger absorbent volumes
were used to improve the sensitivity for PAH
determination. Method largely conforms to TO-13, but is
relying on Tenax to retain vapours that might not be
retained by PUF plug alone.
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
9
Figure 1. Location of Sampling Points
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
10
3.
Methods
Data was required to be provided in the form of specific emission rates (emission rate per unit area) of
VOCs and odour, suitable for input to an air pollution model for determining dispersion in the surrounding
environment. The requirement from Alcoa was to undertake this assessment according to standard
methods where these exist. Any departure from standard methods was to be identified and where
possible quantified as part of this study. It is noted that there is no accredited standard for the
determination of emissions using an isolation flux hood. Rather, the USEPA document that is used is a
“User’s Guide”5. The hood obtained by GHD for the initial sampling runs complies to the specifications in
the User’s Guide in every respect except the material of construction of the dome. A hood with a
stainless steel dome was chosen for this work, based on a) the knowledge that this design has become
widely used in the USA and Europe, and b) the 1992 paper by B Eklund of Radian Corp, the commercial
developers of the hood12. Eklund notes that there are advantages to using a stainless steel hood in
corrosive environments, and also that artefacts due to solar heating are reduced. The matter of solar
heating as a difficulty with Perspex hoods is also mentioned in the USEPA paper5. Nevertheless,
following a review of the work by AWN13, it was decided to conduct a field evaluation of the stainless
steel hood in comparison to a Perspex hood in Phase 2.
GHD sourced a stainless steel emission isolation flux hood that complies with the published method in all
respects except for the material of construction of the dome. The stainless steel hood has been used
extensively in the United States and elsewhere, and was the preferred option for the Bayer liquor ponds
because acrylic is identified as not being chemically resistant to alkalis. The comparison of the two types
of hood carried out in this work also showed the stainless steel hood to have the advantage of minimising
artefacts associated with enhanced solar heating on solid surfaces.
3.1
Flux Hood
The flux hood is dimensionally the same as the flux hood described in EPA report EPA/600/8-86/008 and
is shown in Figure 2.
12
“Practical Guidance for Flux Chamber Measurements of Fugitive Volatile Organic Emission Rates”, B Eklund, Radian
Corporation Austin, Texas, in J Air Waste Management Assoc, 42, 1583-1591, Dec 1992
13
“Point Source and Area Source Emission Test Methods – Review”, AWN Pty Ltd, consultants report to Alcoa, Dec 2004
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
11
Figure 2. Flux Hood Floating on ROWS pond.
The dimensions of the flux hood were exactly 16 inches (40.5 cm) diameter at the skirt giving an actual
volume of 25.4 litres to the base of the skirt. Under the USEPA method the skirt can be inserted into the
media (liquor, water, mud) to a maximum depth of 2.5 cm. At maximum insertion the volume in the skirt
is 21.9 litres. The stainless steel dome was 17.4 cm high and is slightly flattened at the top to allow the 4
ports. This gives a volume inside the dome of 17 litres, providing an overall volume of 42.4 litres to the
base of the skirt or 38.9 litres to the insertion depth. At 5 litres a minutes this allows 3 times the volume to
be circulated in approximately 25 minutes. This dome shape departs slightly from the USEPA method in
that it has a small flat area on the top. However, Eklund (1996) indicates that tests have been
undertaken comparing a completely cylindrical hood with the USEPA dome hood and there was no
statistical difference in the results. The Perspex dome used in the second program was a perfect dome
as described in the USEPA method.
Ultrapure nitrogen was supplied to an inlet port via tygon tubing that was degassed for 48 hours by
pulling ambient air through the tubing before it was used on site during the first study. In the second
program all lines were swapped to be PTFE lines with stainless steel fittings in order to conform more
accurately to the USEPA method. The nitrogen was then distributed via PTFE tube (in the stainless steel
hood) and stainless steel tube (in the Perspex hood) run around the circumference, which had four holes,
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
12
located at equidistant points around the tube in accordance with the published USEPA method. Sample
collection tubes (2 off) were run from the top of the dome to the centre of the dome.
During the second program, it became clear that the higher temperature associated with the Perspex
hood was leading to increased moisture condensation in tubes and samples lines outside of the Perspex
dome. This was a cause for concern due to the potential for sample loss. Therefore a decision was
made to locate the sample tubes as internal "probes" inside the Perspex hood since this would make the
tubes the same temperature as the inside of the dome and avoid excessive condensation. Two
comparison replicate runs were undertaken to test the efficacy of this approach.
A fourth outlet was left open to allow the sweep air to exit. This port was also used to allow a
thermocouple wire access to the interior of the flux hood. During the first program, the thermocouple
logged continuously, both inside and outside of the flux hood to ascertain any temperature differential
that might require correction. The nominal diameter of this port was 1.8 cm, noting that the thermocouple
wire took up some of this space. In the second program temperatures in the hoods were collected at the
start middle and end of each sample run.
Operation of the hood requires that ultra-pure nitrogen or air is passed through the hood at a rate of 5
litres per minutes throughout the sampling run. To confirm that this was happening a field rotameter
(SKC, Nutech Scientific, Victoria Park, WA) was connected onto the hood inlet line. The field rotameter
was calibrated on a daily basis using a bubble flow meter supplied by SKC. When the sampling position
allowed, the flow was regularly reviewed and adjusted as required. Where a crane was used, any
change in flow rate was noted and logged when the system was returned to shore. In practice the flow
rate proved stable throughout the 90 –120 minutes of a sampling run.
The published method requires that no more than 40% (2 litres per minute) of the sweep gas can be
drawn as sample at any time. Samples were collected sequentially, but because of the dual pump
arrangement the total sampling rate of the two pumps was adjusted to ensure that the flow would not be
greater than 2 litres a minute even if there was an overlap in the pumps triggering.
Each time the hood was removed from the water surface and replaced it was necessary to equilibrate the
hood by passing at least three volumes of sweep air through the hood prior to sampling. GHD
equilibrated the hood for 30 minutes prior to collecting the samples giving more time than required to
ensure this requirement was exceeded on each run.
During the second program, when the two hoods were being compared the supply gas was split to the
two hoods from a single cylinder.
3.2
Odour Sampling
Odour sampling was undertaken according to Australian Standard Method AS4323.3. A lung type barrel
(Figure 3) was located in the cage and connected to the hood using 3/8” PTFE tubing. GHD prefers the
use of this wide bore tubing because it lowers flow resistance between the hood and the barrel enabling
better control of flow rate using a constant flow rate pump. Calibrations of this system were undertaken
daily and provided confidence that the flow drawn from the hood was a constant 1.8 liters per minute and
below the 40% of sweep air allowed as part of the USEPA published report.
Samples were collected into nalopthane bags supplied by The Odour Unit. The Odour Unit degasses the
nalopthane bags prior to dispatch, however GHD also equilibrated them with the sample matrix by filling
each bag from the hood and then evacuating this prior to collecting the sample for analysis. In some
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
13
cases this required that the system be returned to shore and that the hood therefore be re-equilibrated
prior to collection of the samples. This usually meant that each sampling site required in excess of three
hours to collect the required number of samples.
The sample pump used in this method was a battery powered Aircheck 2000 (SKC). The Aircheck 2000
is a time programmable, mass flow controlled, constant flow pump. This allowed the pump to be
triggered at an appropriate time once the hood had equilibrated and then collect a suitable sample
volume at the appropriate flow prior to shutting down. The pump retains data on each run within internal
memory and, on return to the shore, the pump characteristics were reviewed to ensure that it had
operated correctly.
Odour samples were assessed using dynamic olfactometry according to Australian Standard AS4323.3
by The Odour Unit, a Perth Based laboratory (Myaree, WA) that is NATA accredited for this method.
Samples were presented to the laboratory within 24 hours in order to allow compliance with the
maximum time limit of 30 hours under the standard.
Figure 3. Sampling hood connected to Automated Sampling system
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
14
3.3
VOCs and Carbonyls
VOCs were collected and analysed using the USEPA standard method TO-17, whilst Carbonyls were
collected and analysed using USEPA TO-11A. TO-17 VOC tubes were packed and supplied by Geotech
Laboratories (Welshpool, WA). TO-11A tubes were supplied by SKC (Nutech Scientific, Victoria Park
WA).
Please note that the TO-17 and TO-11A methods are designed for ambient monitoring of these
substances and therefore there is some risk of sample breakthrough if emission sources were elevated
or high in humidity. In view of this a qualitative assessment of the potential source strength and moisture
was made of each source prior to sampling and the sampling volume reduced if this was considered a
problem.
Between one and three litres of sample was drawn though the TO-17 tubes in the first phase and this
was increased on some sources to 6 litres in the second phase. Between 5 and 10 litres was drawn
though the TO-11A tubes at a rate of 200ml per minute during the first phase and this was increased to
up to 60 litres at a rate of 1 litre/min during the second phase. This gave detection limits for emission
sources only two or three times higher than ambient guidelines where they exist (e.g. benzene,
formaldehyde) and is therefore more than appropriate when receptors are located some distance away
from the source.
Tenax/Carbosieve packing was used for the TO-17 tubes and DNPH coated silica gel was used for the
carbonyls tubes.
Samples were collected using an Aircheck 2000 constant volume pump fitted with a constant pressure
low flow adapter during the first phase. The packing on some of the tubes was found to be variable and
this affected the flow rate through each tube. In view if this, the pump and tube combinations were
individually calibrated immediately prior to sampling using a bubble flow meter. In order to reduce the
risk of cross contamination the tubes were calibrated on 100 ml timed volumes and two calibration blanks
were sent to the laboratory to ensure that there was no contamination from the calibration equipment.
During the second phase all samples were collected using mass flow controlled constant volume pumps
in order to reduce potential error from the constant pressure adapters.
Each sample for odour required 2 runs (one to equilibrate the bag and one to collect the sample) and
therefore it was possible to swap between tube types without incurring additional runs.
3.4
Quality Assurance
3.4.1
Sample Collection and Handling
Quality assurance is a process that begins prior to the collection of sampling, with the selection of
appropriate methods and sampling sites.
In this study all air sampling methods were standard methods, although, as noted the TO-17 and TO-11A
methods are ambient methods and therefore potential for sample loss was considered at all stages and
where evidence appeared additional review and sampling was undertaken.
The flux hood is the subject of a report by the USEPA and follow up clarification by Radian (the designer
of that hood). Both reports are quite difficult to obtain and therefore are available to an interested reader
in PDF format from the GHD Perth Library.
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
15
The flux hood matches the design of the EPA report except in two considerations;
1. The flux hood used in this program had two proximal sample collection tubes with the hood allowing
for collection of two sample streams. This change is considered an improvement over the original
method in that it allows for absolute integrity of sample flow where multiple samples are to be drawn
simultaneously from the hood.
2. The flux hood dome comprised stainless steel as opposed to Perspex as in the original report. In
both cases the skirt of the hood was stainless steel. A stainless steel dome was selected because of
the lower reactivity of this material to hot caustic solution. It is noted in the companion report (Eklund,
1992) that the importance or otherwise of net energy flux (solar insolation) is discussed and identified
as being important for contaminated surface soils and quiescent liquids with an organic layer over the
surface. Since this is not the situation for all sources except, perhaps, dry residue, there is no sample
integrity reason to support the use of a plexiglass hood over a stainless steel hood. Indeed we note
that plexiglass is not chemically inert and may contribute to sample loss at low concentrations of
analyte. With this in mind, appropriate sample recovery tests were performed. Eklund (1992), does
however note that plexiglass allows the assessment of condensation levels within the flux hood.
Condensation from the sources at Alcoa was a persistent problem and this is discussed when
reviewing the results. However, GHD were aware of this issue as being significant because
condensation beads formed on the surfaces of the transparent PTFE odour line and we were
therefore able to consider this issue without the need for plexiglass.
3.4.2
Laboratory Quality Assurance Procedures
This section is based on information and notes provided by Geotech Laboratories14. It is a summary and
explanation of their NATA accredited procedures.
TO17 Quality Assurance
Theory
– The USEPA TO-17 sampling protocol collects VOCs from air samples by passing a known volume
of air through suitable adsorbent medium, (Tenax) followed by thermal desorption. The desorbed
components are then separated by gas chromatography and analysed by mass spectrometry.
The method is considered capable of measuring VOC concentrations of 0.5 ppb to 25 ppb in
ambient air. In using this method for the current application, care is taken to ensure effects due to
overloading of the adsorbent by moisture or high VOC concentrations are avoided.
– The sample tubes are analysed using a Thermal Desorber coupled to a GC-MS by methods based
on Sections 8 to 13 of US EPA TO17. This method must achieve a detection limit of ≤ 0.5 ppb (V).
All limits specified below are derived from US EPA TO15 and TO17. Target compounds are
quantified based on instrument responses of a set of authentic external standards, relative to an
internal standard. The standards are prepared by adding a known amount of authentic material
into a solvent and then diluting these as necessary. The standards are then introduced onto the
tubes by a system designed to simulate sampling. A range of quality control measures is in place
to ensure that the results are as robust and accurate as is practicable.
Multipoint Calibration
14
Nigel West, Geotech Laboratories, private communication.
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
16
– A six point calibration curve is prepared for each target compound (this does not include the
system blank i.e. zero). One calibration point may be deleted from each compound to ensure a
correlation coefficient of > 0.96 for the range of compounds monitored.
Daily / Single Point Calibration
– A single point calibrant (normally 100 ng) is used to check that the system is still operating within
acceptable parameters i.e. all compounds are responding within 30% of the multi point calibration.
Blank Analyses
– The system is monitored to ensure that any possible laboratory contamination is kept to a
minimum.
Analytical Procedure
– After the system has passed all QC and cleanliness checks, samples may be analysed. The
system is monitored by analysing a Check standard (Chkstd) after every 9-10 samples. This
ensures that what happens to the samples while they are waiting for analysis also occurs to the
Chkstd. A laboratory blank is also analysed at the end of the sequence.
Reproducibility
– The reproducibility of each of the sources of error, syringes, balances, MS etc is measured every
six months. The results of these tests are entered into an Excel spreadsheet that is sent out with
the client data. See the error analysis worksheet for an example.
Error Analysis
– The calculations used to derive the uncertainty estimations are based on the CSIRO National
Measurement Laboratory Course Notes TM089 (Author R. Cook and W. Giardini). The results of
these tests are included in the Excel spreadsheet that is sent out with the client data.
Audit Accuracy
– The accuracy of the benzene standard is determined six monthly. This gives the laboratory an
independent indication of whether the standards need to be replaced.
TO-11A Quality Assurance
The USEPA TO-11A method is applicable for monitoring ambient air with low carbonyl content requires a
calibrated pumping system to sample ambient air for a known time. The airflow can be between 100
mL/minute and 2000 mL/minute, depending on the concentration of organics present. The air is passed
through a cartridge containing an adsorbent such as silica coated with 2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazine
(DNPH) and a strong acid catalyst. The hydrazones resulting from reaction with airborne carbonyls and
ketones are later analysed using high performance liquid chromatography. Before contacting the DNPH
adsorbent, the ambient air is passed through granular potassium iodide to remove ozone, necessary to
prevent loss of the DNPH product prior to analysis. Using TO-11A, low molecular weight carbonyl
compounds including benzaldehyde are commonly measured to less than 0.5 ppb by volume. In using
this method for the current application, care is taken to ensure effects due to overlading of the adsorbent
by moisture or high VOC concentrations are avoided.
Theory
– Carbonyls reach equilibrium with 2,4 dinitrophenylhydrazine in acidic medium in the reaction
described below. These derivatised carbonyls are extracted from their sample matrix (tube or
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
17
solution) and then analysed by HPLC. Quantitation is carried out by comparison with authentic
standards. This procedure is based on a combination of USEPA Method 8315A, USEPA Method
0011, USEPA TO-5 and USEPA TO-11A.
Preparation of Standards
– Target compounds are quantified based on instrument responses of a set of authentic external
standards. External standards are replaced as needed. The standards are then analysed and the
data processed and reported
Purity of Reagents and Derivatives:
– After preparation of a fresh aldehyde or ketone DNPH derivative the compound needs to be
diluted and analysed by HPLC to ensure that it is > 96 % pure. If not a different source of
aldehyde or ketone needs to be obtained, or the raw material needs to be checked by another
technique eg thermal desorption gas chromatography mass spectrometry. Once the purity of the
standard has been established suitable adjustments need to be made to the calibration of that
compound when the data is processed, this is done automatically in the Excel files used to
calculate the abundance of the material.
Multipoint Calibration
– The entire suite of carbonyl standards is analysed in duplicate at least every six months, sooner if
the daily calibration fails.
Independent Standard:
– Can be purchased from Novachem Phone. This standard is used to check the accuracy of the
standards that are prepared in-house and should be run after the multipoint calibration. If this
standard is kept sealed in the fridge it should last at least 18 months.
Precision
– A mid range standard is analysed with every batch of samples.
Validation of Compounds Detected
– Any new compounds that are added to the target suite need to be validated. This validation need
only be carried out if the compound is not covered in USEPA TO-5 and TO-11A. Recoveries need
to be > 80% for the compound to be acceptable. Validation comprises adding the new compound,
at known concentrations, to either or both of the derivatising media at 0.2 ppm.
Method Detection Limit: (MDL)
– A very low range standard is analysed every six months.
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
18
Column Performance
– The efficiency of the column is determined from the 0.1 ppm standard data.
Daily Calibration
– The HPLC is calibrated with a mid or low range standard with every batch of samples analysed. A
single point calibrant is used to check that the system is still operating within acceptable
parameters i.e. all compounds are responding within 10% of the multi point calibration. This
analysis may be repeated until the system passes or in cases where the calibration will never pass
a multi point calibration should be carried out with fresh standards.
Blank Analyses
– The system is monitored by analysing laboratory and system blanks to ensure that any possible
laboratory contamination is kept to a minimum.
Sample Analysis Procedure:
– After the system has passed all QC and cleanliness checks, samples may be extracted and then
analysed. The system is monitored by re-analysing the single point calibrant after every 10
samples (20 analyses). The laboratory blank is also analysed at the end of the sequence.
Reproducibility
– The reproducibility of each of the sources of error, syringes, balances, MS etc is measured every
six months. The results of these tests are entered into an Excel spreadsheet that is sent out with
the client data.
Error Analysis
– The calculations used to derive the uncertainty estimations are based on the CSIRO National
Measurement Laboratory Course Notes TM089 (Author R. Cook and W. Giardini). The results of
these tests are included in the Excel spreadsheet that is sent out with the client data.
3.5
Quality Control
Two trip/calibration blanks for TO-17 and TO-11A were collected during the initial monitoring round at
Wagerup. Calibration blanks were used because of the need to calibrate each tube individually prior to
collection of a sample. This exposed each tube to a small amount of ambient air, which needed to be
accounted for. In the event, the trip/calibration blanks all returned values below the quantifiable detection
limit.
In the first phase, replicate samples were collected at the Superthickener for odour, TO-17 and TO-11A
methods. In the event it appears that multiple sampling of some well-mixed area sources has also given
good indication of repeatability. Additional replicates were also collected at the superthickener to confirm
the emissions found at higher volumes.
The second phase replicates were again collected to TO-17 and TO-11a at the superthickener.
System blanks were collected according to the method described by Radian (USEPA, 1986). In this
case the hood was placed on a Teflon sheet and equilibrated using the ultrapure nitrogen. Once
equilibrated, samples were collected for each analyte according to the standard field methods and
volumes. Initially system blanks returned values higher than some of the field samples and this
appeared to be due to offgassing of the PTFE (Teflon). With this in mind, that PTFE was exposed to
ambient air and further system blanks were undertaken. In order to be sure that a valid blank was
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
19
collected the system was also operated whilst being placed on a nalopthane odour bag which had been
cut open This indicated a consistent system odour blank of 56 odour units, the presence of minimal
amounts of acetone and benzaldehyde on the TO-17 tube. There were also small but consistent levels
of formaldehyde, acetaldehyde and acetone on the system blanks. These values have been subtracted
from the final emission estimates and have been included in the consolidated data spreadsheet.
3.6
Safety
Safety consideration are extremely important in a program where personnel are operating next to areas
of caustic liquor or caustic residue and on some occasions next to hot caustic liquors. This issue was
increased due to a need to work at night. The following identifies some of the key safety issues and how
they were addressed. Where this imposed a limitation on the ability to take samples this is also
highlighted.
1. Superthickener – the Superthickener can only be accessed via a moving set of stairs leading to a
rotating gantry. In order to place the sampling hood onto the gantry it was necessary to stop the
rotating gantry and crane lift the equipment onto the gantry. This is a non-trivial logistical exercise
limiting the amount of time available for sampling in this location, because larger cylinders cannot be
transported in this manner and because the logistical requirements take considerable effort to
achieve.
2. Dry Residue – sampling on dry residue requires the location of the equipment on a trailer. In order to
allow an operator to remain in proximity to the equipment during sampling it is important to have a
vehicular refuge that the operator can retreat to between forays (Note that on both occasions winds at
night exceeded 50 km/hour leading to some localised dust lift off and daytime temperatures exceeded
40 degrees C). This had the effect of limiting the choice of sites. It was necessary to turn off
sprinklers during this monitoring.
3. Wet Residue – Access to wet residue is very constrained when access is required at night. This
meant that sampling points had to be immediately adjacent to RDA berms. In one case (RDA – 6)
gas supply lines were extended to approximately 5m, which is within the limits of the published
method.
4. RDA-2 and ROWS pond – sampling and access of most of these sites was achieved by crane. This
limits the ability to cross-check zero gas supplies, however these appeared to be stable on these
runs.
5. Cooling Pond – good access to the surface was possible at the Northern end and had to be
undertaken with care on the Southern end. Samples were collected from the margins of the pond in
these locations and two personnel were stationed at this location throughout the sampling.
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
20
4.
Results
Emission measurements were corrected for any contamination in the sample collection system, by
system blank correction according to the USEPA procedure. The results presented in this report have
not been temperature corrected.
The detailed results, including the original laboratory data, are given in the appendices. Appendix A
presents the results for each location as specific emission rates (emissions per square metre of area) in
µg/m2/min. Note that this allows comparison of results to a standard condition. The original Laboratory
results for each sample are shown in Appendix B, expressed as sample tube loadings in nanograms.
The following sections summarise and discuss the main aspects of the results.
4.1
Quality Control Results
Internal quality control relates to the overall consistency of the data. It includes blank correction and field
replicate data. It also includes a reality check that highest emissions are found from the sites with the
highest liquor concentrations and temperatures, for example, and investigates any results considered
anomalous on the basis of knowledge of the processes and sources, and comparisons between results.
Apart from odour and acetone, all substances were below the detection limit for at least one of the
samples collected. This indicates that any background levels being contributed by the sample collection
system (flux hood, tubing, pumps) in the field were not significant, and that any contribution of the system
is accounted for by system blanks taken under laboratory conditions as required by the USEPA method.
4.1.1
Field Replicates
Duplicate samples were taken at the Super-thickener samples to provide field replicate data. The Superthickener was chosen for this because it is the source expected to have the highest specific emission
rate with low variability due to the uniformity of the source (well mixed liquid of large volume). Due to
constraints associated with location and access, it was not possible to take replicates concurrently so
each type of sample (odour, TO-11A, TO-17) was collected sequentially (that is two odour samples
followed by two carbonyl samples and then two VOC samples).
Replicates were taken at the super-thickener site for all sample types (Table 3). These results indicate
good agreement in most cases (RSD<25%), but there are examples of unexplained variability that
indicate the need for duplicate samples where possible. All determinations of carbonyl and VOC
emission rates were based on multiple measurements.
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
21
Table 3. Residual Standard Deviation of Replicates (from emission rates)
Analyte
Mean
StDev
RSD(%)[1]
5.5
0.8
15%
546
566
81
15%
155
168
27
16%
1.7
1.5
0.4
27%
3.7
3.7
0.07
1.9%
Sample 1
Sample2
Sample 3
Odour
2
(OU/m /s)
4.9
6.1
Acetone
2
(µg/m /min)
678
485
555
Acetaldehyde
(µg/m2/min)
198
181
138
Benzene
(µg/m2/min)
1.2
Toluene
(µg/m2/min)
3.8
Sample 4
[1] Relative Standard Deviation (RSD) = Standard Deviation/Mean x 100
4.1.2
Blank Results
Trip Blanks
Both trip blanks of the TO-17 and TO-11A tubes were sent for analysis to the laboratory and indicated no
detectable levels of analytes.
System Blanks
System blanks were collected according to the USEPA method, which specifies the use of PTFE as the
material that the flux hood should be placed on to represent an uncontaminated surface. However it was
found that the new PTFE (Teflon) used was not completely inert and required out-gassing before use.
Once this was done it returned results consistent with an uncontaminated surface, and which could be
used as a system blank.
A total of five TO-17 system blanks; seven TO-11A system blanks and two odour blanks were collected.
The applicable system blanks were subtracted from all results.
4.1.3
Laboratory QC
Results of Laboratory QC checks and associated comments are included with relevant analytical
documentation in Appendix B.
4.1.4
Sampling Volumes: Sensitivity vs. Sample Recovery
In Phase 2 an attempt was made to improve sensitivity by increasing sample volumes. This was
successful on the residue sources, and enabled determination of emission values for Propanal. MEK,
Benzaldehyde, 2-Pentanone and n-Pentanal, which were below detection limits at the lower volumes.
However it also raised questions in relation to sample recovery in the case of the hot, wet sources
(super-thickener and Cooling Pond) despite the sample volumes and flow rates used in all cases being
within the safe sampling volumes identified in methods TO11A and TO17. There was suggestion of
sample breakthrough for these sources at the higher sample volumes, which could explain lower
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
22
reported emission rates of some compounds in comparison to those recorded in Phase 1, which
warrants further investigation.
4.2
Flux Hood Comparison
4.2.1
Hood Temperature
A series of measurements were carried out to establish the influence of the material of construction of
the hood on the emission rates measured. This work was done in conjunction with the determination of
diurnal variation in emissions from dry and wet residue. Measurements were made of the temperatures
inside the hoods, and these were compared with the ambient temperature as measured at the Bancell
Road weather station just south of the refinery. The results of these determinations on dry residue are
summarised in Figure 4. On both days the Perspex hood showed higher internal temperatures than the
stainless steel hood, but this effect was much greater on the first day. Ambient measurements of the
mud were taken in the field at the sampling location. These agreed well with the readings at the Bancell
Rd monitoring station on the first day, but not on the second day. During the day on the second run, the
field residue temperature and the two hood temperatures agreed quite well, but the Bancell Rd
temperature was significantly lower. All temperatures agreed well during the night.
The corresponding results for wet residue are shown in Figure 5. In this case the hood temperatures for
the two hoods agree very well, indicating that for the wet surface the temperature inside the hood is
determined principally by the temperature of the bulk material and is little influenced by solar flux through
the hood itself. The agreement between field residue temperature and hood temperature suggests that
the surface temperature of the bulk substrate follows the ambient temperature quite closely. The
differences between field residue temperature and Bancell Rd temperature were significant, particularly
during the day as noted for the dry residue runs.
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
23
Figure 4: Effect of Ambient Temperature and Hood Material on Hood Temperature for Dry
Residue
Hood and Ambient Temperatures:
Dry Residue
58
Run 1: 14-15/2/2005
Run 2: 25-26/2/2005
53
Temperature, degC
48
43
pp
ss
Banc Rd
Field
38
33
28
23
1:
00
5
22
:0
0
19
:0
8
16
:0
0
13
:0
0
10
:0
7:
03
4:
12
0
56
:0
0
14
:
00
2:
00
00
0
00
03
:0
12
:
9:
1
4:
6:
0
7:
3:
0
8:
0:
0
05
:0
21
:
19
:0
0
18
Time of Day
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
24
Figure 5: Effect of Ambient Temperature and Hood Material on Hood Temperature for Wet
Residue
Hood vs Ambient Temperatures:
Wet Residue
50
Run 1: 18-19/2/05
Run 2: 28/2-1/3/05
45
Temperature, degC
40
35
PP
SS
Banc Rd
Field
30
25
20
15
10
21:11
3:00
9:30
13:25
9:15
11:15
13:00
17:07
23:00
5:50
Time
4.2.2
Statistical Comparison of Emissions Results Between Hoods
The emission rates measured using the Stainless Steel (ss) and Perspex (pp) hoods were compared on
dry and wet residue, under a range of conditions over 24 hour periods. The example of acetone is given
in Figure 6. It can be seen that the variability between samples in each sequence is greater than the
difference between hoods. In the case of Run 1 the effect of diurnal variation can be seen in both sets of
results, whereas for Run 2 the data agree within the variability of the determination.
The greater amount of data available for wet and dry residue allowed a more detailed test of the overall
emissions and therefore paired t-tests were undertaken on each dry and one wet residue run. These test
indicated that the differences between the two datasets were not statistically significant at the 95%
confidence level.
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
25
Figure 6: Comparison of Acetone Emission Rates for Acetone Measured by SS and PP Hoods
ACETONE: Dry Residue
Comparision of Emission Rates for Stainless Steel and Perspex Hoods
0.8
0.7
Emission Rate, ug/m2/min
0.6
0.5
pp Run 1
ss Run 1
pp Run 2
ss Run 2
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
19:00
21:05:00
0:08:00
3:07:00
6:04:00
9:12:00
12:03:00
14:56:00
Time of Day
4.2.3
Effect of Temperature on Emission Rates
An attempt was made to correlate regional ambient temperature with the measured rates of emissions
from residue in order to enable evaluation of diurnal variations and facilitate emissions rate modelling
over longer periods. Figure 7 to Figure 9 show the results of this for two sets of determinations on each
of dry and wet residue. Essentially, for dry residue that has been recently ploughed there is some
correlation for acetaldehyde but not for formaldehyde or acetone (Figure 7), and for residue that has
undergone additional drying there is no dependence for any of the compounds emitted (Figure 8). Figure
9 indicates no relationship between regional temperature and emissions for any of the compounds
emitted from wet residue, as all the lines of best fit have correlation coefficients of 0.3 or less.
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
26
Figure 7: Emission Rates vs. Regional Temperature for Dry Residue: Run 1
EMISSIONS vs AMBIENT TEMPERATURE
Dry Residue Run 1, 14-15/02/05
4
3.5
Emission Rate, ug/m2/min
3
2.5
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Linear (Acetaldehyde)
Linear (Acetone)
2
1.5
y = 2.4854Ln(x) - 7.7243
2
R = 0.8302
1
0.5
y = 0.0225x - 0.5033
2
R = 0.5607
0
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
36
38
Ambient Temperature (Bancell Rd)
Figure 8: Emission Rates vs. Regional Temperature for Dry residue: Run 2
EMISSIONS vs AMBIENT TEMPERATURE
Dry Residue Run 2, 25-26/02/05
2
1.8
Emission Rate, ug/m2/min
1.6
1.4
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Linear (Formaldehyde)
Linear (Acetaldehyde)
Linear (Acetone)
1.2
1
0.8
y = 0.0109x + 0.1593
2
R = 0.2305
0.6
0.4
y = 0.0159x - 0.1601
2
R = 0.278
0.2
y = 0.0063x - 0.097
2
R = 0.1076
0
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
Temperature, deg C
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
27
Figure 9: Emission Rates vs. Regional Temperature for Wet Residue
CARBONYLS vs TEMPERATURE
Wet Residue Run 1, 18/2/05
6.00
Emission Rate, ug/m2/min
5.00
4.00
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Linear (Formaldehyde)
Linear (Acetaldehyde)
Linear (Acetone)
y = 0.8723Ln(x) - 0.0499
2
R = 0.0969
3.00
2.00
y = 0.0398x - 0.0269
2
R = 0.5773
1.00
y = -0.0419x + 2.0097
2
R = 0.6489
0.00
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
AMBIENT TEMPERATURE degC
The emission rates for the TO17 compounds were all very low from residue surfaces. As expected they
were higher from wet residue than dry residue. Figure 10 summarises the results for wet residue. There
is no significant relationship between emissions of these compounds and regional temperature, as all of
the correlation coefficients are less than 0.15.
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
28
Figure 10: Emission Rates vs. Regional Temperature for TO17 Compounds
TO17 COMPOUNDS vs TEMPERATURE
Wet Residue, 18/2/05 & 26/2/05
0.80
y = 0.0055x - 0.1022
2
R = 0.1368
0.70
y = 0.0082x - 0.1519
2
R = 0.1722
Benzene
2 Methyl Naphthalene
Emission Rate, ug/m2/min
0.60
y = 0.0012x - 0.006
2
R = 0.1146
0.50
0.40
benzene
toluene
naphthalene
2-methyl naphthalene
1-methyl naphthalene
heptane
phenol
nitrobenzene
Linear (benzene)
Linear (2-methyl naphthalene)
Linear (1-methyl naphthalene)
Linear (phenol)
Linear (toluene)
1Methyl Naphthalene
y = 0.0004x + 0.0021
2
R = 0.0485
Phenol
y = 0.0007x + 0.0121
2
R = 0.0409
Toluene
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
-0.10
Ambient Temperature (Bancell Rd)
4.3
Emission Rates from Liquor Sources
4.3.1
Super-thickener
The super-thickener is a large open vessel containing dilute Bayer liquor at a Total Alkali (TA)
concentration of about 20g/L at a temperature of about 55oC. Samples can be taken by suspending the
flux hood from the gantry that provides access to the central rake drive. The specific emission rates are
highest from the super-thickener of all the residue area sources, because of its high temperature and
concentration. Its contribution to overall mass emissions is relatively small however, because of its low
surface area in comparison to the residue drying areas.
4.3.2
RDA-2
The open liquor storage area at RDA2 was also sampled. It has similar concentration to the superthickener, but is cooler. Its specific emission rates are correspondingly less. The specific emission rates
for the carbonyl compounds from the super-thickener and RDA2 liquor are summarised in Figure 11.
4.3.3
Cooling Pond
The specific emission rates of carbonyls from the Cooling Pond are shown in Figure 12, and for the
TO17 compounds in Figure 13,
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
29
Figure 11: Emission Rates of Carbonyls from Super-thickener and RDA2 Liquor
SUPERTHICKENER & RDA2
90
80
Emission Rate, ug/m2/min
70
60
ST 1
ST 2
50
RDA2 1
RDA2 2
RDA2 3
40
30
20
10
0
Formaldehyde Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Propanal
MEK
iso-Butanal
Benzaldehyde 2-Pentanone
n-Pentanal
Figure 12: Carbonyl Emission Rates from the Cooling Pond
COOLING POND
Carbonyls
20.00
18.00
16.00
Emission Rate, ug/m2/min
14.00
12.00
Inlet
Berm
Outlet
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
Formaldehyde
61/15324/47345
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Propanal
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
MEK
Benzaldehyde
2-Pentanone
n-Pentanal
30
Figure 13: TO17 Emission Rates from the Cooling Pond
COOLING POND
TO17 Compounds
12.00
Emission Rate, ug/m2/min
10.00
8.00
Inlet
Berm
Outlet
6.00
4.00
2.00
4.3.4
he
xa
ne
K
yl
cy
cl
o
hy
lb
M
IB
na
l
ut
a
PK
M
m
et
h
m
et
3
ap
ht
ha
le
ne
yl
n
yl
n
ap
ht
ha
le
ne
1m
et
h
ha
le
ne
ht
ne
2m
et
h
na
p
xy
le
1,
3-
en
ze
ne
et
hy
l-b
lu
en
e
to
ze
ne
be
n
he
x
at
rie
n
e
0.00
Run-off Water Storage (ROWS) Pond
A set of four samples was taken on the ROWS Pond. The only compounds detected were the main
carbonyls, and then at low and variable levels, as shown in Figure 14.
4.4
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)
A special set of samples was taken to investigate trace amounts of PAHs in the emissions from the main
liquor sources and dry residue. This was done using a medium volume Tenax absorbent tube and
sampling for extended periods, followed by the normal TO17 analysis. In addition a method based on
USEPA TO-13 was employed to collect the less volatile PAHs. This method varied slightly from the
standard approach in that Tenax was used as the adsorbent. This will have made no difference to the
result. The results are shown in Figure 15. Naphthalene was the main PAH detected, at a specific
emission rate of 23 ng/m2/min from the Super-thickener. Acenaphthylene, acenaphthene, fluorene,
phenanthrene and chrysene were detected in trace amounts (<2 ng/m2/min).
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
31
Figure 14: ROWS Pond
ROWS
2.5
2
Emission Rate, ug/m2/min
1.5
1
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
0.5
0
12:40
15:40
18:45
20:08
-0.5
-1
Time
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
32
Figure 15: PAH Emissions
PAHs
25
Emission Rate, ng/m2/min
20
15
Super Thickener
Cooling Pond
Dry Mud
10
5
0
Naphthalene
4.5
acenaphthylene
acenaphthene
fluorene
phenanthrene
chrysene
Bitumen
Bitumen is sprayed on banks and roads at the residue area for dust control. The area involved is small
overall, but there is from time to time an odour generated after spraying. Samples were taken to
investigate the VOC emissions from fresh and aged bitumen. The results, shown in Appendix B, show
the expected components in the emissions, mainly toluene, xylenes and naphthalenes for freshly
sprayed bitumen, which quickly disappear as the material cures.
4.6
Odour
Table 4 indicates specific odour emission rates found during the first program, whilst Table 5 indicates
specific odour emission rates from the dry residue and wet residue respectively. It can be seen that
odour emissions from dry residue were of a similar magnitude between the two programs. However, wet
residue emissions were found to be higher during the second program. There is also a clear diurnal
variation in odour emissions from the wet residue in Phase 2. Please note that these emission values
were not temperature corrected.
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
33
Table 4. Odour Emissions during First Phase
Specific Emission Rate (OU/m2/s)
Location
Cooling Pond 1
0.78
Cooling Pond 2
1.76
Rows Pond 1
0.13
Rows Pond 2
0.07
RDA 2-1
1.11
RDA 2-2
2.18
Lower Dam 1
0.93
Lower Dam 2
1.07
Oxalate
0.17
Oxalate
0.12
Superthickener 1
5.82
Superthickener 2
7.16
Dry Residue
0.06
Wet Residue
1.00
Wet Sand
1.00
ROCP2-2
0.15
ROCP2-1
0.28
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
34
Table 5. Odour Emissions during Second Phase
Location
RDA-6 (Wet Residue)
RDA-5 (Dry Residue)
61/15324/47345
Time Collected
Specific Emission Rate
(OU/m2/s)
12:30hrs
16.96
18:10hrs
11.36
24:03hrs
5.6
09:15hrs
8.08
04:00hrs
1.2
05:45hrs
0.88
08:26hrs
0.6
10:00hrs
0.24
11:30hrs
0.08
14:20hrs
0.8
17:30hrs
nd
23:17hrs
1
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
35
5.
Discussion
The information presented in this report is the result of a significant campaign of emissions monitoring
undertaken by GHD at Alcoa’s Wagerup Residue Disposal Area. The emissions data is suitable for use
in emission modelling.
Generally, emission strengths were found to follow expected patterns, with the sources known to contain
higher liquor concentrations of contaminants and with higher temperatures showing the higher specific
emission rates (mass emission rate per unit area, µg/min/m2). Accordingly, the super-thickener and
cooling ponds were found to have the highest specific emission rates. In addition, these emission
sources are relatively uniform (well mixed liquor bodies), and for these reasons are more easily
quantified.
The residue disposal areas consist of residue in various stages of drying. These sources exhibit
relatively low specific emission rates. Nevertheless, they have a large surface area, which increases the
significance of their contribution to overall emission rates. The specific emission rates were found to be
a function of factors, which vary according to the history, state of dryness, and environment of the
residue. These factors are important in determining emission rates, which by analogy with soils are
controlled by the following main residue-related factors:
Air-filled porosity
Bulk soil temperature
Surface temperature
The other main determinants of specific emission rates are the concentration and vapour pressure of the
contaminants, and the wind speed10.
To address the soil-related factors, in Phase 2 of the study samples were taken on residue at key stages
of drying. Two sets of samples were taken on freshly deposited wet residue. Samples were also taken
on residue that had been drying for several weeks, but had been recently tilled. That same area was
sampled again after a week of solar drying under hot, dry conditions. In order to investigate the influence
of surface temperature, a study of the diurnal variation in emissions was undertaken on the two dry
residues and on wet residue. It was found that, for the recently tilled dry residue, emission rates tended
to be greater in the heat of the day than at night. It was also found that there was a relationship between
the temperature in the hood, the measured field ambient temperature at the site, and the regional
ambient temperature. The relationship between specific emission rates and regional ambient
temperature was investigated. It was found that there was a weak relationship for acetaldehyde, but not
for the other species. For residue, which had been dried for a further week the emission rates were all
much lower, and there was no longer a relationship with ambient temperature. For wet residue and for
the liquor sources there was no significant relationship between emission rates and ambient
temperature.
The performance of the stainless steel (ss) and Perspex (pp) flux hoods was investigated. It was found
that there was no statistically significant difference in the emission rates determined by the two hoods.
This is consistent with the findings of Eklund10. It was noted that the pp hood has an internal hood
temperature that is higher on sunny days than the ss hood due to the greenhouse effect created by the
transparent dome. This can give rise to artificial enhancement of the emissions from the surface under
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
36
study in some circumstances. It also can increase the moisture content of air in the hood when sampling
wet sources, as was the case for several of the situations in this study. This has the potential to reduce
retention of analytes on the tubes due to condensation. On the other hand, if condensation is an issue it
is more easily observed with a transparent hood. During this program the Perspex hood did not appear
to be affected by the caustic environment. Overall, the performance of the hoods was generally the
same, with some practical advantages to the ss hood.
The sampling of wet sources, particularly when hot as for the super-thickener, is problematic for trace
analysis of VOCs. The USEPA methods used are designed for application to ambient air. In applying
them to flux hood emissions it is necessary to be aware of the limitations of acceptable sample loadings,
and that these may change in the presence of high moisture. Attempts were made in this work to
improve the sensitivity of detection of VOCs by increasing sampling time, but this was only partially
successful. While all sampling times used were well within the limits allowed by the USEPA methods,
recoveries were reduced and this is presumably due to the effects of moisture on the adsorbent media.
Losses in recovery of this kind are to some extent compensated for by the use of deuterated standard
additions by the laboratory. However, it is clearly preferable to avoid excessive condensation during
sampling.
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
37
6.
Conclusions
The main conclusions from this work are:
The USEPA flux hood method can be successfully applied to the determination of specific emission
rates from solid and slurry residue, and open liquor sources at a Bayer alumina refinery, using a
special cage and lowering method designed for this purpose where necessary to achieve access;
The use of a stainless steel hood did not have any negative effect on the results obtained in
comparison to a Perspex hood; the stainless steel hood had some advantages in eliminating artefacts
introduced by greenhouse heating and possibly reducing moisture effects under some circumstances;
for the purposes of this program, the Perspex hood was sufficiently chemically inert for use in contact
with Bayer residue and dilute liquors;
Emission rates were found to be a function of surface properties in the manners expected; moisture,
concentration in substrate, and temperature are the main determinants of emission rates;
The highest emission rates were from the more concentrated, hot liquor sources. The lowest
emission rates were from dry residue and low concentration, cool liquid sources;
The main sources of emissions from the residue areas at Wagerup have been characterised to
enable dispersion modelling for determination of concentrations at regional receptors;
A number of questions arising from this work warrant further investigation, including the effect of
moisture on recoveries, the long and short term variability of emission rates from all sources, and the
spatial and seasonal variability in emissions from the wet and dry residue areas.
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
38
7.
Recommendations
Based on the information provided in this report, the following recommendations are made:
•
The results from the emission rate determinations can be used as input to dispersion modelling;
where possible average results over a large number of samples should be used, and Phase 2
results should be used where possible;
•
A more detailed sampling programme to improve the knowledge of the temporal and spatial
source variability, particularly for the dry and wet residue areas, should be considered;
•
Further investigation of the effects of moisture on sample recovery from hot wet sources on
sensitivity of detection and accuracy of analysis would be of benefit in increasing the applicability
of these standard ambient methods to emission source determinations by flux hood.
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
39
Appendix A
Emission Rates
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
40
Appendix A – List of Tables
Table A1. Phase 2 Bitumen TO17 VOC Emission Rate (No samples collected during Phase 1)...................................................................................... 2
Table A2. Phase 2 Bitumen TO11 Carbonyls Emission Rate (No samples collected during Phase 1)............................................................................ 3
Table A3. Phase 1 Dry Residue TO17 VOC and TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate ................................................................................................................ 4
Table A4. Phase 2 Dry Residue Run 1 TO17 VOC Emission Rate ....................................................................................................................................... 5
Table A5. Phase 2 Dry Residue Run 1 TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate ............................................................................................................................... 6
Table A6. Phase 2 Dry Residue Run 2 TO17 VOC Emission Rate ....................................................................................................................................... 7
Table A7. Phase 2 Dry Residue Run 2 TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate ............................................................................................................................... 8
Table A8. Phase 1 Wet Residue TO17 VOC and TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate................................................................................................................ 9
Table A9. Phase 2 Wet Residue Run 1 TO17 VOC Emission Rate..................................................................................................................................... 10
Table A10. Phase 2 Wet Residue Run 1 TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate........................................................................................................................... 11
Table A11. Phase 2 Wet Residue Run 2 TO17 VOC Emission Rate................................................................................................................................... 12
Table A12. Phase 2 Wet Residue Run 2 TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate........................................................................................................................... 13
Table A13. Phase 1 Cooling Pond TO17 VOC Emission Rate ............................................................................................................................................ 14
Table A14. Phase 1 Cooling Pond TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate .................................................................................................................................... 15
Table A15. Phase 2 Cooling Pond TO17 VOC Emission Rate ............................................................................................................................................ 16
Table A16. Phase 2 Cooling Pond TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate .................................................................................................................................... 17
Table A17. Phase 1 Run-off Water Storage (ROWS) TO17 VOC and TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate ............................................................................ 18
Table A18. Phase 2 Run-off Water Storage (ROWS) TO17 VOC Emission Rate .............................................................................................................. 19
Table A19. Phase 2 Run-off Water Storage (ROWS) TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate....................................................................................................... 20
Table A20. Phase 1 Superthickener TO17 VOC and TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate ....................................................................................................... 21
Table A21. Phase 2 Superthickener TO17 VOC Emission Rate ......................................................................................................................................... 22
Table A22. Phase 2 Superthickener TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate ................................................................................................................................. 23
Table A23. Phase 1 Residue Disposal Area 2 (RDA2) TO17 VOC and TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate.......................................................................... 24
Table A24. Phase 2 Residue Disposal Area 2 (RDA2) TO17 VOC Emission Rate ............................................................................................................ 25
Table A25. Phase 2 Residue Disposal Area 2 (RDA2) TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate .................................................................................................... 26
Table A26. Phase 2 Superthickener, Cooling Pond and Dry Residue PAH Emission Rate ............................................................................................ 27
Table A27. Phase 1 Lower Dam TO17 VOC and TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate (Phase 1 only) .................................................................................... 28
Table A28. Phase 1 ROCP2 TO17 VOC and TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate (Phase 1 only) ........................................................................................... 29
Table A29. Phase 1 Oxalate TO17 VOC and TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate (Phase 1only)............................................................................................ 30
Table A30. Phase 1 Wet Sand TO17 VOC and TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate (Phase 1 only) ....................................................................................... 31
61/15324/50009
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Emissions Appendix
1
Table A1. Phase 2 Bitumen TO17 VOC Emission Rate (No samples collected during Phase 1)
VOCs by WIENV 31
Client ID
TO17
Date
16/02/2005
16/02/2005
16/02/2005
Time
11:50
18:36
21:05
Hood
Perspex
Stainless Steel
Perspex
Tube No
B15517
A01467
A72151
05-053 13
05-053 15
05-053 19
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
0.43
0.04
0.07
nd
0.01
nd
1,3-xylene
0.11
0.05
nd
1,2-xylene
nd
0.01
nd
0.46
0.04
nd
nd
0.01
nd
2-methyl naphthalene
0.06
0.06
0.09
1-methyl naphthalene
0.14
0.14
0.04
MPK
0.04
nd
nd
Geotech ID
Toluene
Ethyl-benzene
Naphthalene
1H-indole
Fresh Bitumen Fresh Bitumen
Old Bitumen
nd = not detected
61/15324/50009
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Emissions Appendix
2
Table A2. Phase 2 Bitumen TO11 Carbonyls Emission Rate (No samples collected during Phase 1)
Carbonyls by WIENV 34 Client ID
Fresh Bitumen
Fresh Bitumen
Old Bitumen
Date
16/02/2005
16/02/2005
16/02/2005
Time
11:50
18:36
21:05
Hood
Perspex
Stainless Steel
Perspex
Tube No
1274305376
1274305375
1274305379
Geotech ID
HP021821.D
HP021845.D
HP021825.D
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
Formaldehyde
0.52
3.11
0.52
Acetaldehyde
nd
1.30
0.23
0.05
0.17
0.03
TO11
Acetone
nd = not detected
61/15324/50009
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Emissions Appendix
3
Table A3. Phase 1 Dry Residue TO17 VOC and TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate
Client ID
Dry Residue 28/10
VOCs by WIENV 31
Tube No
A14300
TO17
Geotech ID
10280416.D
µg/m2/min
Acetone
1.50
Benzene
0.81
Toluene
2.12
Benzaldehyde
0.49
Aceto-phenone
1.18
MEK
1.68
MPK
0.29
Carbonyls by WIENV 34
Dry Residue 28/10
µg/m2/min
TO11
Formaldehyde
nd
Acetaldehyde
8.02
Acetone
28.83
61/15324/50009
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Emissions Appendix
4
Table A4. Phase 2 Dry Residue Run 1 TO17 VOC Emission Rate
VOCs by
WIENV 31
Date
TO17
Time
18:36
18:36
0:08
0:08
3:07
3:07
6:04
6:04
9:12
9:12
12:03
12:03
14:56
14:56
Hood
Perspex
Stainless
Steel
Perspex
Stainless
Steel
Perspex
Stainless
Steel
Perspex
Stainless
Steel
Perspex
Stainless
Steel
Perspex
Stainless
Steel
Perspex
Stainless
Steel
Tube No
A11293
A11144
C06289
A15036
A72258
C06252
B16433
A72158
A12416
C06646
B15881
A11389
A09645
A14439
02180520.D
02180527.D
02180516.D
14/02/2005 14/02/2005
15/02/2005 15/02/2005 15/02/2005 15/02/2005 15/02/2005 15/02/2005 15/02/2005 15/02/2005 15/02/2005 15/02/2005 15/02/2005 15/02/2005
Geotech ID 02180514.D 02180509.D
02180518.D
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
02180511.D 02180521.D
02180522.D 02180524.D 02180510.D 02180504.D 02180512.D 02180526.D
µg/m /min
µg/m /min
µg/m /min
µg/m /min
µg/m /min
µg/m /min
µg/m /min
µg/m /min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
Benzene
nd
0.88
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.05
nd
nd
0.03
nd
nd
Toluene
nd
0.04
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.06
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
1,3-xylene
nd
0.05
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.05
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
MEK
nd
0.30
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.11
nd
MPK
nd
0.13
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Heptane
nd
0.13
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.07
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Phenol
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.04
0.05
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd = not detected
61/15324/50009
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Emissions Appendix
5
Table A5. Phase 2 Dry Residue Run 1 TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate
Carbonyls
by WIENV
34
Date
14/02/2005
TO11
Time
19:19
18:36
21:05
21:05
0:08
0:08
3:07
3:07
6:04
6:04
9:12
9:12
12:03
12:03
14:56
14:56
Hood
Perspex
Stainless
Steel
Perspex
Stainless
Steel
Perspex
Stainless
Steel
Perspex
Stainless
Steel
Perspex
Stainless
Steel
Perspex
Stainless
Steel
Perspex
Stainless
Steel
Perspex
Stainless
Steel
Tube No
14/02/2005 14/02/2005 14/02/2005 15/02/2005 15/02/2005 15/02/2005 15/02/2005 15/02/2005 15/02/2005 15/02/2005 15/02/2005 15/02/2005 15/02/2005 15/02/2005 15/02/2005
1274305376 1274305375 1274305379 1274305370 1274305372 1274305378 1274305377 1274305374 1274305373 1274305371 1274304759 1274304756 1274304758 1274304750 1274304757 1274304753
Geotech ID HP021821.D HP021845.D HP021825.D HP021847.D HP021843.D HP021823.D HP021819.D HP021809.D HP021841.D HP021817.D HP021833.D HP021835.D HP021811.D HP021813.D HP021839.D HP021831.D
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
Formaldehyde
0.77
3.37
0.78
1.16
3.27
0.20
0.20
0.09
0.03
0.01
nd
0.30
1.88
3.76
1.53
1.40
Acetaldehyde
nd
1.30
0.23
0.32
0.26
0.09
0.20
nd
0.20
0.15
0.69
1.12
0.71
1.36
0.15
nd
0.05
0.17
0.03
0.05
0.03
nd
0.01
nd
0.01
nd
0.04
0.12
0.12
0.54
0.45
0.20
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.23
nd
Acetone
MEK
nd = not detected
61/15324/50009
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Emissions Appendix
6
Table A6. Phase 2 Dry Residue Run 2 TO17 VOC Emission Rate
VOCs by WIENV 31 Date
25/02/2005
25/02/2005
25/02/2005
25/02/2005
25/02/2005
25/02/2005
25/02/2005
25/02/2005
Time
4.12
4.12
7.03
7.03
10.00
10.00
13.00
13.00
Hood
Perspex
Stainless Steel
Perspex
Stainless Steel
Perspex
Stainless Steel
Perspex
Stainless Steel
Tube No
A72166
B16459
A10482
A14506
C06514
B16449
A13823
A01467
03010513.D
03010527.D
03010512.D
03010525.D
03020529.D
03010518.D
03010516.D
03010524.D
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
Benzene
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.06
nd
nd
nd
Toluene
nd
nd
0.77
3.37
0.78
1.16
3.27
0.20
Date
25/02/2005
25/02/2005
25/02/2005
25/02/2005
25/02/2005
25/02/2005
26/02/2005
26/02/2005
Time
16.08
16.08
19.00
19.00
22.05
22.05
1.00
1.00
Hood
Perspex
Stainless Steel
Perspex
Stainless Steel
Perspex
Stainless Steel
Perspex
Stainless Steel
Tube No
A10058
B15517
A16087
A15036
A11352
A09645
A70150
A14502
03010519.D
03010526.D
03010511.D
03020528.D
03010514.D
03010523.D
03010515.D
03010521.D
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
Benzene
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Toluene
0.04
0.04
0.05
0.04
0.13
nd
0.06
0.06
TO17
Geotech ID
…contd
Geotech ID
nd = not detected
61/15324/50009
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Emissions Appendix
7
Table A7. Phase 2 Dry Residue Run 2 TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate
Carbonyls by WIENV 34
Date
25/02/2005
25/02/2005
25/02/2005
25/02/2005
25/02/2005
25/02/2005
25/02/2005
25/02/2005
TO11
Time
4.12
4.12
7.03
7.03
10.00
10.00
13.00
13.00
Hood
Perspex
Stainless Steel
Perspex
Stainless Steel
Perspex
Stainless Steel
Perspex
Stainless Steel
Tube No
1274305529
1274305524
1274305521
1274305520
1274305522
1274305528
1274305525
1274305523
Geotech ID
HP030122.D
HP030136.D
HP030116.D
HP030134.D
HP030112.D
HP030110.D
HP030138.D
HP030124.D
µg/m /min
2
µg/m /min
2
µg/m /min
2
µg/m /min
2
µg/m /min
2
µg/m /min
2
µg/m /min
2
µg/m /min
Formaldehyde
0.14
0.16
nd
0.15
0.19
0.43
0.16
0.77
Acetaldehyde
nd
nd
nd
0.07
nd
0.06
0.50
nd
0.38
0.25
0.41
0.34
0.32
0.47
0.73
0.49
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.15
nd
nd
nd
Acetone
MEK
2
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Date
25/02/2005
25/02/2005
25/02/2005
25/02/2005
25/02/2005
25/02/2005
26/02/2005
26/02/2005
Time
16.08
16.08
19.00
19.00
22.05
22.05
1.00
1.00
Hood
Perspex
Stainless Steel
Perspex
Stainless Steel
Perspex
Stainless Steel
Perspex
Stainless Steel
Tube No
1274305526
1274305527
1274305544
1274305545
1274305549
1274305548
1274305547
1274305543
Geotech ID
HP030144.D
HP030140.D
HP030120.D
HP030142.D
HP030114.D
HP030118.D
HP030130.D
HP030132.D
2
µg/m /min
2
µg/m /min
2
µg/m /min
2
µg/m /min
2
µg/m /min
2
µg/m /min
2
µg/m /min
µg/m /min
Formaldehyde
0.19
nd
0.14
0.16
nd
0.13
0.14
nd
Acetaldehyde
nd
nd
nd
0.12
nd
0.02
0.07
nd
Acetone
0.63
0.29
0.27
0.65
0.24
0.35
0.46
0.39
MEK
0.17
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
iso-Butanal
3.25
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
iso-Butanal
…contd
61/15324/50009
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Emissions Appendix
2
8
Table A8. Phase 1 Wet Residue TO17 VOC and TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate
VOCs by WIENV 31
Client ID
Dry Residue 28/10
TO17
Tube No
A14300
Geotech ID
10280416.D
µg/m2/min
Acetone
117.29
Benzene
0.31
Toluene
nd
Benzaldehyde
0.65
Aceto-phenone
1.54
MEK
9.07
MPK
0.56
Heptane
0.70
Carbonyls by WIENV 34
Client ID
Dry Residue 28/10
TO11
Tube No
979701729
Geotech ID
HP110315.D
µg/m2/min
Formaldehyde
nd
Acetaldehyde
0.02
Acetone
7.34
61/15324/50009
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Emissions Appendix
9
Table A9. Phase 2 Wet Residue Run 1 TO17 VOC Emission Rate
VOCs by WIENV 31 Date
18/02/2005
18/02/2005
18/02/2005
18/02/2005
18/02/2005
18/02/2005
18/02/2005
Time
3:00
3:00
9:30
9:30
13:25
13:25
21:11
Type
Perspex
Stainless Steel
Perspex
Stainless Steel
Perspex
Stainless Steel
Perspex
Tube No
A63757
A14314
A10347
A70303
A13110
A10353
A10069
Geotech ID
02240506.D
02240507.D
02240512.D
02240508.D
02240510.D
02240511.D
02240504.D
ug/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
Acetone
104.25
24.06
nd
6.80
nd
nd
71.56
Benzene
nd
nd
0.08
0.06
0.54
nd
0.03
Toluene
nd
nd
0.02
nd
nd
nd
nd
Naphthalene
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.02
2-methyl naphthalene
nd
nd
0.02
nd
0.73
nd
0.06
1-methyl naphthalene
0.03
nd
0.04
nd
0.12
0.02
0.06
MEK
13.21
7.79
0.64
0.88
nd
2.14
5.80
MPK
0.65
0.62
1.42
nd
0.64
0.32
1.43
3 methyl butanal
0.33
0.07
0.05
0.04
nd
0.04
0.04
Heptane
1.53
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Phenol
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.02
0.06
nd
nd
Nitrobenzene
0.02
nd
nd
nd
0.03
nd
nd
Iodomethane
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
TO17
61/15324/50009
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Emissions Appendix
10
Table A10. Phase 2 Wet Residue Run 1 TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate
Carbonyls by WIENV 34 Date
18/02/2005
18/02/2005
18/02/2005
18/02/2005
18/02/2005
18/02/2005
18/02/2005
18/02/2005
Time
3:00
3:00
9:30
9:30
13:25
13:25
21:11
21:11
Hood
Perspex
Stainless Steel
Perspex
Stainless Steel
Perspex
Stainless Steel
Perspex
Stainless Steel
1274304990
1274304995
1274304755
1274304751
1274304997
1274304998
1274304754
1274304752
Geotech ID HP022519.D
HP022513.D
HP022517.D
HP022524.D
HP022526.D
HP022520.D
HP022511.D
HP022515.D
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
Formaldehyde
1.60
0.96
0.99
1.09
0.05
nd
1.11
1.25
Acetaldehyde
0.47
0.09
1.21
1.12
1.48
1.63
1.63
0.72
Acetone
2.92
1.53
1.74
2.29
2.64
5.05
3.99
1.89
Propanal
nd
1.75
nd
0.16
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.32
0.21
nd
0.25
0.41
0.55
0.31
0.17
iso-Butanal
nd
nd
0.15
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Benzaldehyde
nd
nd
nd
0.31
0.26
nd
0.23
nd
TO11
Tube No
MEK
nd = not detected
61/15324/50009
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Emissions Appendix
11
Table A11. Phase 2 Wet Residue Run 2 TO17 VOC Emission Rate
VOCs by WIENV 31 Date
28/02/2005
28/02/2005
28/02/2005
28/02/2005
28/02/2005
28/02/2005
Time
11.15
11.15
17.07
17.07
23.00
23.00
Hood
Perspex
Stainless Steel
Perspex
Stainless Steel
Perspex
Stainless Steel
Tube No
C06289
C06252
A00360
A11408
C06646
A09661
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
Toluene
0.09
0.06
0.07
0.06
0.06
0.05
Styrene
nd
nd
2.00
nd
nd
nd
Benzaldehyde
0.44
0.17
nd
nd
0.08
nd
Aceto-phenone
0.12
0.29
0.32
0.33
0.66
0.13
nd
0.02
0.02
nd
nd
0.01
2-methyl naphthalene
0.14
0.06
0.07
nd
nd
nd
1-methyl naphthalene
0.07
nd
0.04
nd
nd
nd
MPK
0.83
0.65
0.70
0.27
0.11
0.08
MIBK
0.18
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.02
nd
nd
nd
nd
TO17
Naphthalene
Phenol
nd = not detected
61/15324/50009
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Emissions Appendix
12
Table A12. Phase 2 Wet Residue Run 2 TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate
Carbonyls
by WIENV 34 Date
28/02/2005
28/02/2005
28/02/2005
28/02/2005
28/02/2005
28/02/2005
28/02/2005
28/02/2005
28/02/2005
28/02/2005
Time
9.15
9.15
11.15
11.15
13.00
13.00
17.07
17.07
23.00
23.00
Hood
Inside
Outside
Perspex
Stainless Steel
Inside
Outside
Perspex
Stainless Steel
Perspex
Stainless Steel
Tube No
1274304608
1274304603
1274304605
1274304692
1274304691
1274304690
1274305259
1274305250
1274304699
1274304698
Geotech
ID
HP030204.D
HP030202.D
HP030203.D
HP030207.D
HP030206.D
HP030205.D
HP030219.D
HP030215.D
HP030214.D
HP030213.D
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
Formaldehyde
0.08
0.09
0.13
0.16
0.14
0.11
0.10
0.13
nd
nd
Acetaldehyde
0.73
0.35
1.75
0.53
1.18
0.56
1.12
0.88
0.25
nd
Acetone
2.38
1.34
2.78
3.06
2.08
1.38
4.21
3.44
1.64
1.06
MEK
0.27
0.15
0.32
0.62
0.23
0.20
0.42
0.39
0.22
0.21
iso-Butanal
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.33
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
n-Pentanal
nd
nd
1.46
nd
nd
nd
0.20
nd
nd
nd
TO11
nd = not detected
61/15324/50009
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Emissions Appendix
13
Table A13. Phase 1 Cooling Pond TO17 VOC Emission Rate
VOCs by WIENV 31
Client ID
Cooling Pond 1
Cooling Pond 1
Cooling Pond 2
TO17
Tube No
A14306
A70218
A11389
10280407.D
10280409.D
10280421.D
2
µg/m /min
2
µg/m /min
µg/m2/min
Acetone
nd
nd
49.97
Benzene
2.91
7.92
nd
Toluene
0.56
1.10
0.19
nd
0.13
nd
Benzaldehyde
0.83
2.56
0.20
Naphthalene
0.13
0.24
nd
2-methyl
naphthalene
0.12
0.18
0.19
1-methyl
naphthalene
nd
0.16
0.12
MEK
nd
nd
7.32
MPK
0.75
1.97
0.74
MIBK
nd
0.22
nd
Phenol
0.29
nd
nd
Dibutylamine
1.00
2.26
2.39
2 Ethyl Hexanol
3.39
11.17
0.60
Geotech ID
1,3-xylene
61/15324/50009
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Emissions Appendix
14
Table A14. Phase 1 Cooling Pond TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate
Carbonyls by WIENV
34
Client ID
Cooling Pond 1
TO11
Tube No
922803918
922803916
HP102842.D
HP102834.D
Geotech ID
µg/m2/min
Cooling Pond 1
µg/m2/min
Cooling Pond 2
µg/m2/min
Formaldehyde
nd
nd
Acetaldehyde
10.27
37.79
Acetone
31.02
53.36
61/15324/50009
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Emissions Appendix
15
Table A15. Phase 2 Cooling Pond TO17 VOC Emission Rate
VOCs by WIENV 31 Client ID
Cooling Pond Inlet
Cooling Pond Berm
Cooling Pond Outlet
Date
24/02/2005
24/02/2005
24/02/2005
Time
13.33
15.05
16.30
B16456
A11071
A15016
02250507.D
02250506.D
02250509.D
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
0.48
0.16
nd
Benzene
nd
nd
0.62
Toluene
0.43
0.47
nd
nd
0.15
nd
1,3-xylene
0.10
0.11
nd
Naphthalene
0.39
0.47
0.12
2-methyl naphthalene
0.12
0.11
nd
1-methyl naphthalene
0.31
0.35
0.14
MPK
5.81
10.23
2.48
3 methyl butanal
0.39
0.11
nd
MIBK
0.98
0.63
0.64
nd
nd
0.17
TO17
Tube No
Geotech ID
Hexatriene
Ethyl-benzene
Methyl cyclohexane
61/15324/50009
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Emissions Appendix
16
Table A16. Phase 2 Cooling Pond TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate
Carbonyls by WIENV 34
Client ID
Cooling Pond Inlet
Cooling Pond Berm
Cooling Pond Outlet
TO11
Date
24/02/2005
24/02/2005
24/02/2005
Time
13.33
15.05
16.30
B
A
C
HP022530.D
HP022529.D
HP022532.D
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
Formaldehyde
0.25
nd
nd
Acetaldehyde
12.50
nd
17.31
Acetone
7.89
13.28
18.54
Propanal
0.63
nd
0.59
MEK
1.15
1.71
3.07
Benzaldehyde
1.08
nd
0.99
2-Pentanone
0.31
0.44
0.95
n-Pentanal
0.91
0.39
0.82
Tube No
Geotech ID
nd = not detected
61/15324/50009
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Emissions Appendix
17
Table A17. Phase 1 Run-off Water Storage (ROWS) TO17 VOC and TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate
VOCs by WIENV 31
Client ID
Rows Pond 1
Rows Pond 2
TO17
Tube No
A12078
A73725
10280408.D
10280420.D
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
Acetone
nd
1.61
Benzene
nd
2.66
Toluene
nd
1.05
Heptane
nd
11.77
Dibutylamine
12.16
nd
2 Ethyl Hexanol
0.40
nd
Geotech ID
Semi-quantitive Results
Carbonyls by WIENV 34
Client ID
Rows Pond 1
Rows Pond 2
TO11
Tube No
9.23E+08
9.23E+08
HP102813.D
HP102811.D
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
Formaldehyde
nd
nd
Acetaldehyde
1.21
nd
Acetone
0.63
nd
Geotech ID
61/15324/50009
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Emissions Appendix
18
Table A18. Phase 2 Run-off Water Storage (ROWS) TO17 VOC Emission Rate
VOCs by WIENV 31 Client ID
ROWS1
ROWS2
ROWS3A
ROWS3B
Date
24/02/2005
24/02/2005
1/03/2005
1/03/2005
Time
12.40
15.40
18.45
20.08
A11369
A10755
A11293
A72158
03010517.D
02250508.D
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
0.14
nd
0.04
0.02
Aceto-phenone
nd
nd
nd
0.04
Naphthalene
nd
nd
0.01
0.02
Phenol
nd
nd
nd
nd
TO17
Tube No
Geotech ID
Toluene
nd = not detected
61/15324/50009
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Emissions Appendix
19
Table A19. Phase 2 Run-off Water Storage (ROWS) TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate
Carbonyls by WIENV 34
Client ID
ROWS1
ROWS2
ROWS3A
ROWS3B
TO11
Date
24/02/2005
24/02/2005
1/03/2005
1/03/2005
Time
12.40
15.40
18.45
20.08
Tube No
1274304994
1274305255
1274305253
1274305254
Geotech ID
HP030126.D
HP022534.D
HP030217.D
HP030218.D
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
Formaldehyde
nd
2.20
nd
nd
Acetaldehyde
0.02
0.25
nd
nd
Acetone
0.26
0.17
0.25
0.32
nd = not detected
61/15324/50009
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Emissions Appendix
20
Table A20. Phase 1 Superthickener TO17 VOC and TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate
VOCs by WIENV 31
Client ID
Superthickener
Superthickener
TO17
Tube No
A13714
A10353
10280411.D
10280423.D
2
µg/m /min
µg/m2/min
Acetone
nd
2623.38
Benzene
1.38
2.04
Toluene
4.43
4.31
1,3-xylene
1.31
0.33
Benzaldehyde
7.00
7.39
Naphthalene
1.01
nd
2-methyl naphthalene
2.67
2.63
1-methyl naphthalene
1.88
1.79
Biphenyl
0.35
0.35
MEK
nd
407.88
MPK
16.35
29.26
heptane
0.37
0.38
MIBK
2.73
nd
Client ID
Superthickener
Superthickener
Superthickener 3
Superthickener 2
Tube No
979701719.00
979701735.00
# 0979701615
979701634.00
HP110306.D
HP102830.D
2
µg/m /min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
Formaldehyde
nd
nd
23.35
11.37
Acetaldehyde
231.15
211.21
156.90
176.76
Acetone
793.54
567.53
637.26
621.74
Geotech ID
Carbonyls by WIENV 34
Geotech ID
61/15324/50009
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Emissions Appendix
21
Table A21. Phase 2 Superthickener TO17 VOC Emission Rate
VOCs by WIENV 31
Client ID
Superthickener
Superthickener
TO17
Date
1/03/2005
1/03/2005
A72188
A12413
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
Benzene
0.99
1.24
Toluene
4.72
4.29
1,3-xylene
0.28
0.86
1,2-xylene
nd
0.28
Benzaldehyde
nd
0.43
Aceto-phenone
7.07
7.29
Naphthalene
0.12
0.15
2-methyl naphthalene
0.16
0.34
1-methyl naphthalene
0.13
0.26
MPK
16.72
23.58
MIBK
3.00
3.43
DMDS
1.78
1.59
Tube No
61/15324/50009
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Emissions Appendix
22
Table A22. Phase 2 Superthickener TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate
Carbonyls by WIENV 34
Client ID
Superthickener
Superthickener
TO11
Date
1/03/2005
1/03/2005
Tube No
1274304694
1274304693
Geotech ID
HP030209.D
HP030208.D
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
Formaldehyde
0.69
0.87
Acetaldehyde
58.02
55.45
Acetone
74.79
79.92
Propanal
1.60
1.48
MEK
6.99
8.27
iso-Butanal
0.49
0.73
Benzaldehyde
2.01
2.05
2-Pentanone
1.97
2.70
n-Pentanal
2.90
2.41
61/15324/50009
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Emissions Appendix
23
Table A23. Phase 1 Residue Disposal Area 2 (RDA2) TO17 VOC and TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate
VOCs by WIENV 31
Client ID
RDA2-1
RDA2-2
TO17
Tube No
A13823
A00360
10280405.D
10280417.D
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
nd
16.17
0.49
nd
Geotech ID
Acetone
1,3-xylene
Carbonyls by WIENV 34
Client ID
RDA2-1
RDA2-2
TO11
Tube No
922803911.00
922803917.00
HP102824.D
HP102815.D
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
Formaldehyde
nd
nd
Acetaldehyde
8.27
3.05
Acetone
41.39
16.66
Geotech ID
nd = not detected
61/15324/50009
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Emissions Appendix
24
Table A24. Phase 2 Residue Disposal Area 2 (RDA2) TO17 VOC Emission Rate
VOCs by WIENV 31 Date
1/03/2005
1/03/2005
1/03/2005
11.00
13.30
16.00
A72151
A62959
A72163
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
Benzene
nd
nd
0.14
Toluene
nd
0.05
0.43
Benzaldehyde
nd
0.12
nd
Aceto-phenone
nd
0.04
0.86
Naphthalene
nd
0.01
0.09
2-methyl naphthalene
nd
nd
0.16
1-methyl naphthalene
nd
nd
0.12
MPK
0.76
nd
9.32
MIBK
nd
nd
0.86
DMDS
nd
nd
0.13
Dimethylacetamide
nd
0.06
nd
Time
TO17
Tube No
nd = not detected
61/15324/50009
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Emissions Appendix
25
Table A25. Phase 2 Residue Disposal Area 2 (RDA2) TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate
Carbonyls by WIENV 34 Date
Time
TO11
Tube No
1/03/2005
1/03/2005
1/03/2005
11.00
13.30
16.00
1274305251
1274304695
1274304252
Geotech ID HP030216.D HP030210.D HP030201.D
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
Formaldehyde
0.13
0.12
0.14
Acetaldehyde
7.19
9.51
9.41
Acetone
9.54
13.64
11.62
Propanal
nd
0.13
nd
MEK
1.12
1.70
1.58
Benzaldehyde
0.52
0.58
0.65
2-Pentanone
0.47
0.72
0.59
n-Pentanal
0.57
1.03
0.71
nd = not detected
61/15324/50009
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Emissions Appendix
26
Table A26. Phase 2 Superthickener, Cooling Pond and Dry Residue PAH Emission Rate
PAHs
Client ID
Superthickener
Cooling Pond
Dry Residue
01/03/2005
01/03/2005
22/02/2005
DT030305.D
DT030309.D
DT022508.D
ng/m2/min
ng/m2/min
ng/m2/min
Naphthalene
34.38
7.49
13.49
Acenaphthylene
1.74
1.36
nd
Acenaphthene
2.43
0.39
nd
Fluorene
1.82
nd
nd
Phenanthrene
1.23
0.33
nd
Chrysene
0.82
0.23
0.22
Date
Geotech ID
nd = not detected
61/15324/50009
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Emissions Appendix
27
Table A27. Phase 1 Lower Dam TO17 VOC and TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate (Phase 1 only)
VOCs by WIENV 31
Client ID
Lower Dam 1
Lower Dam 2
TO17
Tube No
A08278
A15036
10280404.D
10280416.D
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
Acetone
NM
11.19
Benzene
0.95
nd
Toluene
0.24
nd
nd
0.28
heptane
2.28
nd
Methyl cyclohexane
0.17
nd
Geotech ID
MEK
Carbonyls by WIENV 34
Client ID
Lower Dam 1
Lower Dam 2
TO11
Tube No
922803912.00
922803919.00
HP102840.D
HP102821.D
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
Formaldehyde
nd
nd
Acetaldehyde
0.65
2.53
Acetone
6.29
12.67
Geotech ID
61/15324/50009
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Emissions Appendix
28
Table A28. Phase 1 ROCP2 TO17 VOC and TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate (Phase 1 only)
VOCs by WIENV 31
Client ID
ROCP2-1
ROCP2-2
TO17
Tube No
C06214
A63757
10280406.D
10280418.D
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
Acetone
NM
10.39
Benzene
0.35
0.24
MEK
nd
0.74
MIBK
nd
0.22
Geotech ID
Carbonyls by WIENV 34
Client ID
ROCP2-1
ROCP2-2
TO11
Tube No
922803910.00
922803914.00
HP102832.D
HP102817.D
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
Formaldehyde
nd
nd
Acetaldehyde
7.08
nd
Acetone
3.90
0.87
Geotech ID
61/15324/50009
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Emissions Appendix
29
Table A29. Phase 1 Oxalate TO17 VOC and TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate (Phase 1only)
VOCs by WIENV 31
Client ID
Oxalate
Oxalate
TO17
Tube No
A09661
C06646
10280410.D
10280422.D
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
Acetone
nd
8.82
Benzene
2.20
1.73
Toluene
0.82
0.82
Benzaldehyde
0.42
0.36
MEK
nd
2.74
MPK
0.15
0.38
Heptane
0.17
nd
Phenol
0.10
0.22
Dibutylamine
9.07
17.93
2 Ethyl Hexanol
0.88
1.85
Geotech ID
Carbonyls by WIENV 34
Client ID
Oxalate
Oxalate
TO11
Tube No
979701749.00
979701705.00
HP102819.D
HP102838.D
µg/m2/min
µg/m2/min
Formaldehyde
nd
nd
Acetaldehyde
1.09
2.61
Acetone
2.79
10.21
Geotech ID
61/15324/50009
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Emissions Appendix
30
Table A30. Phase 1 Wet Sand TO17 VOC and TO11 Carbonyl Emission Rate (Phase 1 only)
VOCs by WIENV 31
Client ID
Sand 28/10
TO17
Tube No
A13190
Geotech ID
10280404.D
µg/m2/min
Acetone
119.91
Benzene
1.12
Benzaldehyde
1.47
Aceto-phenone
2.37
2-methyl naphthalene
107.92
MEK
13.64
MPK
0.89
Phenol
0.12
Carbonyls by WIENV 34
Client ID
Sand 28/10
TO11
Tube No
979701772.00
Geotech ID
HP110309.D
µg/m2/min
Formaldehyde
nd
Acetaldehyde
nd
Acetone
nd
61/15324/50009
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Emissions Appendix
31
61/15324/50009
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Emissions Appendix
32
Appendix B
Laboratory Results
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
41
Phase 1
Env 04-314 Final.xls, Report
GHD
PO Box Y3106
Perth WA 6832
Attention:
Your Ref No:
Our Ref No:
November 22, 2004
Mark Goldstone
61-15324
ENV 04-314
REPORT ON SAMPLE ANALYSIS
Introduction:
Fourteen liquid samples, seventeen TO17 tubes and fourteen DNPH tubes were received on the 28th
October 2004, it was requested that the samples be analysed to determine a number of components.
Methods of Analysis:
The TO17 tubes were analysed to determine the amount of Volatile Organic Compounds according to
WIENV 31 (based on the analytical section of US EPA TO15 and TO17). The DNPH tubes were analysed to
determine the amount of aldehydes and keytones according to WIENV 34 (based on USEPA TO5 and
TO11A). The caustic solutions were analysed to determine the amount of VOCs present by purge and trap
gas chromatography mass spectrometry using WIENV 38 based on US EPA Methods 5030 and 8260B.
TOC and carbonate are being determined by SGS laboratories. Sodium and aluminium were determined by
atomic adsorption spectroscopy.
Results
The results are tabulated on the following worksheet.
GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
Nigel West
Senior Chemist
Page 1 of 1
Angela Downey
Environmental Chemist
Data supplied by Geotechnical Services. This report should only be reproduced in full.
(I) RESULTS
Page 1 of 6
acetone
hexatriene
benzene
pyridine
toluene
ethyl-benzene
1,3-xylene
ethynyl-benzene
styrene
1,2-xylene
benzaldehyde
1,3,5-trimethyl-benzene
benzonitrile
benzofuran
aceto-phenone
naphthalene
quinoline
1H-indole
2-methyl naphthalene
1-methyl naphthalene
biphenyl
acenaph-thylene
acenaph-thene
dibenzo-furan
9H-fluorene
MEK
MPK
3 methyl butanal
heptane
MIBK
DMDS
dimethylacetamide
phenol
nitrobenzene
methyl cyclohexane
dimethylformamide
Iodomethane
indene
Semi-quantitive Results
Dibutylamine
2 Ethyl Hexanol
Analyte
VOCs by WIENV 31
Matrix: Mixed
Not Monitored
nd
0.050
nd
0.013
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Not Monitored
nd
nd
0.120
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.009
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.01
0.01
Lower Dam 1
A08278
10280404.D
total ug
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
Client ID
Tube No
Geotech ID
PQL (ug)
nd
nd
0.57
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.014
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Lower Dam 2
A15036
10280416.D
total ug
nd
nd
Not Monitored
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.025
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Not Monitored
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
ROA2-1
A13823
10280405.D
total ug
nd
nd
0.82
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
ROA2-2
A00360
10280417.D
total ug
nd
0.01
Not Monitored
nd
0.018
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Not Monitored
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
ROCP2-1
C06214
10280406.D
total ug
Env 04-314 Final.xls, Summarised Results
nd
nd
0.05
0.17
Not Monitored
nd
0.15
nd
0.028
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.047
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.006
nd
nd
0.006
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Not Monitored
0.038
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.014
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.17
0.84
0.61
0.02
Not Monitored Not Monitored
nd
nd
0.60
nd
nd
nd
0.083
nd
nd
nd
0.010
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.20
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.018
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.014
nd
0.012
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Not Monitored Not Monitored
0.15
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.02
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0
0
2.5
nd
nd
nd
0.010
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.016
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.010
0.006
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.37
0.037
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Data supplied by Geotechnical Services. This report should only be reproduced in full.
0.530
nd
0.012
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.037
nd
nd
nd
0.011
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
ROCP2-2 Cooling Pond 1 Cooling Pond 1 Rows Pond 1 Cooling Pond 2
A63757
A14306
A70218
A12078
A11389
10280418.D
10280407.D
10280409.D
10280408.D
10280421.D
total ug
total ug
total ug
total ug
total ug
Page 2 of 6
nd = not detected
Carbonate (mg/L)
TOC (mg/L)
Sodium by AAS (mg/L)
Aluminium by AAS (mg/L)
Others
1,3, 5 Hexatriene
heptane
methyl cyclohexane
benzene
MIBK
DMDS
toluene
ethylbenzene
1,3-xylene
ethynylbenzene
1,2-xylene
styrene
benzofuran
1,3,5-trimethylbenzene
indene
2 Methyl Nap
1 Methyl Nap
VOCs by WIENV 38
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Propanal
MEK
iso-Butanal
Benzaldehyde
2-Pentanone
n-Pentanal
p-Tolualdehyde
2-Hexanone
Hexanal
Carbonyls by WIENV 34
PQL
10 mg/L
1 mg/L
0.1 mg/L
0.5 mg/L
PQL (mg/L)
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.01
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.03
0.003
0.01
0.03
0.03
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
total ug
Client ID
Lower Dam 1
#7
120
12
20
1.2
Lower Dam 1
#7
PT110209.D
mg/L
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Lower Dam 2
#8
120
10
19
1.0
Lower Dam 2
#8
PT110210.D
mg/L
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.19
0.86
3.80
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Lower Dam 2
922803919
HP102821.D
total ug
Lower Dam 1
922803912
HP102840.D
total ug
nd
0.39
2.2
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Lower Dam 2
Lower Dam 1
ROA2-1
#5
22000
1500
11900
3560
ROA2-1
#5
PT110207.D
mg/L
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.46
2.3
11
nd
1.4
nd
nd
0.35
0.22
nd
nd
nd
ROA2-1
922803911
HP102824.D
total ug
ROA2-1
ROA2-2
#6
22000
1500
12200
3580
ROA2-2
#6
PT110208.D
mg/L
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.2
0.99
4.8
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
ROA2-2
922803917
HP102815.D
total ug
ROA2-2
ROCP2-2
Cooling Pond 1 Cooling Pond 1 Rows Pond 1 Cooling Pond 2
nd
nd
0.84
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
1.2
2.8
8.4
nd
1.1
nd
0.32
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
ROCP2-1
#11
10000
630
4800
510
Cooling Pond 1
#1
17000
1200
9700
2990
Rows 1
#3
3000
120
1600
190
Rows 1
#3
PT110205.D
mg/L
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.26
0.53
0.78
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Cooling Pond 2
#2
22000
1300
10100
3080
Cooling Pond 2
#2
PT110307.D
mg/L
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.44
9.70
14.00
0.49
1.60
nd
0.78
0.33
0.57
nd
nd
nd
Data supplied by Geotechnical Services. This report should only be reproduced in full.
ROCP2-2
#12
8700
470
4600
390
ROCP2-1
ROCP2-2 Cooling Pond 1
#11
#12
#1
PT110214.D PT110213.D PT110203.D
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.2
2
1.6
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
ROCP2-1
ROCP2-2 Cooling Pond 1 Cooling Pond 1 Rows Pond 1 Cooling Pond 2
922803910 922803914
922803918
922803913.00 922803916.00
HP102832.D HP102817.D HP102842.D
HP102813.D
HP102834.D
total ug
total ug
total ug
total ug
total ug
total ug
ROCP2-1
Env 04-314 Final.xls, Summarised Results
(I) RESULTS
Page 3 of 6
acetone
hexatriene
benzene
pyridine
toluene
ethyl-benzene
1,3-xylene
ethynyl-benzene
styrene
1,2-xylene
benzaldehyde
1,3,5-trimethyl-benzene
benzonitrile
benzofuran
aceto-phenone
naphthalene
quinoline
1H-indole
2-methyl naphthalene
1-methyl naphthalene
biphenyl
acenaph-thylene
acenaph-thene
dibenzo-furan
9H-fluorene
MEK
MPK
3 methyl butanal
heptane
MIBK
DMDS
dimethylacetamide
phenol
nitrobenzene
methyl cyclohexane
dimethylformamide
Iodomethane
indene
Semi-quantitive Results
Dibutylamine
2 Ethyl Hexanol
Analyte
VOCs by WIENV 31
Matrix: Mixed
0.106
nd
0.160
nd
0.063
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.708
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
1
1
Rows Pond 2
A73725
10280420.D
total ug
12.5
nd
0.124
nd
0.017
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.093
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.011
nd
nd
0.011
0.009
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
2.3
0.12
nd
0.009
0.014
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Cooling Pond 2
A70310
10280419.D
total ug
0
0
Not Monitored
nd
0.075
nd
0.028
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.020
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Not Monitored
0.005
nd
0.006
nd
nd
nd
0.004
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
26th Oct
A09661
10280410.D
total ug
1
0
0.44
nd
0.084
nd
0.040
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.023
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.13
0.02
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.011
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
26th Oct
C06646
10280422.D
total ug
nd
1
Not Monitored
nd
0.035
nd
0.11
nd
0.033
nd
nd
nd
0.181
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.025
nd
nd
0.067
0.047
0.009
nd
nd
nd
nd
Not Monitored
0.41
nd
0.009
0.069
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
27th Oct
A13714
10280411.D
total ug
nd
1
66.9
nd
0.052
nd
0.11
nd
0.008
nd
nd
nd
0.19
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.067
0.046
0.009
nd
nd
nd
nd
10
0.7
nd
0.010
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
27th Oct
A10353
10280423.D
total ug
5020
nd
47
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
67
nd
nd
nd
99
nd
nd
nd
5
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
570
37
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
5
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Sand 28/10
A13190
10280404.D
total ng
Env 04-314 Final.xls, Summarised Results
3370
nd
9
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
24
nd
nd
nd
44
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
260
16
nd
20
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Wet Mud 28/10
A12494
10280405.D
total ng
nd
nd
Not Monitored
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.008
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Not Monitored
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Untitled
A70014
10280412.D
total ug
Data supplied by Geotechnical Services. This report should only be reproduced in full.
87
nd
42
nd
110
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
31
nd
nd
nd
61
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
87
15
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Dry Mud 28/10
A14300
10280416.D
total ng
Page 4 of 6
nd = not detected
Carbonate (mg/L)
TOC (mg/L)
Sodium by AAS (mg/L)
Aluminium by AAS (mg/L)
Others
1,3, 5 Hexatriene
heptane
methyl cyclohexane
benzene
MIBK
DMDS
toluene
ethylbenzene
1,3-xylene
ethynylbenzene
1,2-xylene
styrene
benzofuran
1,3,5-trimethylbenzene
indene
2 Methyl Nap
1 Methyl Nap
VOCs by WIENV 38
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Propanal
MEK
iso-Butanal
Benzaldehyde
2-Pentanone
n-Pentanal
p-Tolualdehyde
2-Hexanone
Hexanal
Carbonyls by WIENV 34
total ug
Cooling Pond 2
Cooling Pond 2
Rows 2
#4
3000
140
1700
200
Rows 2
#4
PT110206.D
mg/L
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.22
nd
0.52
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Rows Pond 2
922803915.00
HP102811.D
total ug
Rows Pond 2
nd
0.86
3.1
nd
0.4
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
26th Oct
979701705
HP102838.D
total ug
26th Oct
0.41
35.00
120.00
nd
14.00
0.55
0.20
4.20
1.30
nd
nd
nd
27th Oct
979701719
HP110306.D
total ug
27th Oct
0.2
32
86
0.97
9.5
0.33
1.2
2.2
1.3
nd
nd
nd
27th Oct
979701735
HP102830.D
total ug
27th Oct
Oxalate 2 26/10 Oxalate 26/10Thickener 1 27/1Thickener 2 27/10
#14
#13
#9
#10
46000
48000
22000
22000
6200
6200
1500
1500
27000
26000
12300
12200
4300
4200
3900
3900
Oxalate 2 26/10 Oxalate 26/10Thickener 1 27/1Thickener 2 27/10
#14
#13
#9
#10
PT110306.D PT110305.D PT110211.D
PT110212.D
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.011
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.004
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.49
1.3
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
26th Oct
979701749
HP102819.D
total ug
26th Oct
1.1
0.21
0.32
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Sand 28/10
979701772
HP110309.D
total ug
Sand 28/10
Env 04-314 Final.xls, Summarised Results
nd
0.23
2.20
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Wet Mud 28/10
979701638
HP110311.D
total ug
Wet Mud 28/10
Untitled
Data supplied by Geotechnical Services. This report should only be reproduced in full.
1.4
2
7
nd
0.77
nd
0.28
nd
0.47
nd
nd
nd
Dry Mud 28/10
979701729
HP110315.D
total ug
Dry Mud 28/10
(I) RESULTS
Page 5 of 6
acetone
hexatriene
benzene
pyridine
toluene
ethyl-benzene
1,3-xylene
ethynyl-benzene
styrene
1,2-xylene
benzaldehyde
1,3,5-trimethyl-benzene
benzonitrile
benzofuran
aceto-phenone
naphthalene
quinoline
1H-indole
2-methyl naphthalene
1-methyl naphthalene
biphenyl
acenaph-thylene
acenaph-thene
dibenzo-furan
9H-fluorene
MEK
MPK
3 methyl butanal
heptane
MIBK
DMDS
dimethylacetamide
phenol
nitrobenzene
methyl cyclohexane
dimethylformamide
Iodomethane
indene
Semi-quantitive Results
Dibutylamine
2 Ethyl Hexanol
Analyte
VOCs by WIENV 31
Matrix: Mixed
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
1028040.D
total ug
Method Blank
Env 04-314 Final.xls, Summarised Results
Data supplied by Geotechnical Services. This report should only be reproduced in full.
Method Blank
1,3, 5 Hexatriene
heptane
methyl cyclohexane
benzene
MIBK
DMDS
toluene
ethylbenzene
1,3-xylene
ethynylbenzene
1,2-xylene
styrene
benzofuran
1,3,5-trimethylbenzene
indene
2 Methyl Nap
1 Methyl Nap
Others
Page 6 of 6
nd = not detected
nd
nd
nd
nd
PT110304.D
mg/L
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Carbonate (mg/L)
TOC (mg/L)
Sodium by AAS (mg/L)
Aluminium by AAS (mg/L)
Method Blank
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
HP102808.D
total ug
Method Blank
VOCs by WIENV 38
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Propanal
MEK
iso-Butanal
Benzaldehyde
2-Pentanone
n-Pentanal
p-Tolualdehyde
2-Hexanone
Hexanal
Carbonyls by WIENV 34
Method Blank
Env 04-314 Final.xls, Summarised Results
Data supplied by Geotechnical Services. This report should only be reproduced in full.
Env 04-322.xls, Report
GHD
PO Box Y3106
Perth WA 6832
Attention:
Your Ref No:
Our Ref No:
November 10, 2004
Mark Goldstone
6115324
ENV 04-322
REPORT ON SAMPLE ANALYSIS
Introduction:
Three TO17 tubes and four DNPH tubes were received on the 3rd November 2004, it was requested that the
samples be analysed to determine a number of components.
Methods of Analysis:
The TO17 tubes were analysed to determine the amount of Volatile Organic Compounds according to
WIENV 31 (based on the analytical section of US EPA TO15 and TO17). The DNPH tubes were analysed to
determine the amount of aldehydes and ketones according to WIENV 34 (based on USEPA TO5 and
TO11A).
Results
The results are tabulated on the following worksheet.
GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
Nigel West
Senior Chemist
Angela Downey
Environmental Chemist
Page 1 ofThis
1 report should only be reproduced in full. Samples are analysed as received unless stated otherwise.
(I) RESULTS
Matrix: Mixed
VOCs from TO17 tube by WIENV 31
Analyte
acetone
hexatriene
benzene
pyridine
toluene
ethyl-benzene
1,3-xylene
ethynyl-benzene
styrene
1,2-xylene
benzaldehyde
1,3,5-trimethyl-benzene
benzonitrile
benzofuran
aceto-phenone
naphthalene
quinoline
1H-indole
2-methyl naphthalene
1-methyl naphthalene
biphenyl
acenaph-thylene
acenaph-thene
dibenzo-furan
9H-fluorene
MEK
MPK
3 methyl butanal
heptane
MIBK
DMDS
dimethylacetamide
phenol
nitrobenzene
methyl cyclohexane
dimethylformamide
Iodomethane
indene
Carbonyls from DNPH tube by
WIENV 34
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Propanal
MEK
iso-Butanal
Benzaldehyde
2-Pentanone
n-Pentanal
p-Tolualdehyde
2-Hexanone
Hexanal
nd = not detected
Tube No
Geotech ID
PQL (ng)
Sand 28/10
A13190
10280404.D
total ng
28/10
A14300
10280416.D
total ng
28/10
A12494
10280405.D
total ng
1028040.D
total ng
Blank
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5020
nd
47
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
67
nd
nd
nd
99
nd
nd
nd
5
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
570
37
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
5
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
87
nd
42
nd
110
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
31
nd
nd
nd
61
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
87
15
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
3370
nd
9
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
24
nd
nd
nd
44
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
260
16
nd
20
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
GHD ID
Geotech ID
PQL (total ug)
979701772
HP110309.D
total ug
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
1.1
0.21
0.32
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
979701638 979701710
HP110311.D HP110313.D
total ug
total ug
nd
0.23
2.20
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
1.6
10
nd
0.92
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
979701729
HP110315.D
total ug
HP102808.D
total ug
1.4
2
7
nd
0.77
nd
0.28
nd
0.47
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Page 1 of 2
Angela Downey
5
Not Detected
HP112203.D
HP111811.D
HP111815.D
HP111827.D
HP111816.D
Volume of Extract (mL)
nd
Daily Calibration
Multipoint Calibration
MDL Lab No
Precision Lab No
Column Efficiency
ad
HP112205.D
HP112207.D
HP112209.D
CP1 # 0979701610
ST3 # 0979701615
ST2 # 0979701634
Processed By
Geotechnical Services
41-45 Furnace Road
Welshpool Perth
WA 6106 Australia
Lab Number
Sample Name
Checked By
Geotechnical Services
Pass
100
100
100
Analyte
Detection Limit (ug)
Errors + / - %
% Sample Used
nw
Nigel West
1.0
nd
0.752
0.903
Formaldehyde
0.36
11.7
Total ug
Date
ppm standard
nd
4.16
9.09
Acetaldehyde
0.17
11.7
Total ug
26/11/2004
1.86
16.6
31.8
Acetone
0.39
11.7
Total ug
nd
nd
nd
MEK
0.33
12.2
Total ug
Data Supplied by Geotechnical Services. This report should only be reproduced in full.
nd
nd
nd
Propanal
0.37
11.8
Total ug
Test Report for Analysis of Carbonyl Derivatives by WIENV 34 (Based on the Analytical Sections of USEPA TO5 &
Mark Goldstone
Our Ref No
Env 04-347
Samples Received 19-Nov-04
Disclaimer: Geotech has analysed the derivatised samples provid
GHD
Your Ref No
6115324
Samples Analysed 22-Nov-04 on the analytical components of USEPA TO11A and TO5.
Env 04-347.xls, Results
Page 2 of 2
Angela Downey
5
Not Detected
HP112203.D
HP111811.D
HP111815.D
HP111827.D
HP111816.D
Volume of Extract (mL)
nd
Daily Calibration
Multipoint Calibration
MDL Lab No
Precision Lab No
Column Efficiency
ad
HP112205.D
HP112207.D
HP112209.D
CP1 # 0979701610
ST3 # 0979701615
ST2 # 0979701634
Processed By
Geotechnical Services
41-45 Furnace Road
Welshpool Perth
WA 6106 Australia
Lab Number
Sample Name
G
nd
nd
nd
iso-Butanal
0.31
11.8
Total ug
Test Report for Analysis of Carb
& TO11A)
Mark Goldstone
Our Ref No
ded by methods based
GHD
Your Ref No
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Benzaldehyde 2-Pentanone
0.17
0.47
12.1
12.1
Total ug
Total ug
nd
nd
nd
n-Pentanal
0.39
13.2
Total ug
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Hexanal
0.17
12.8
Total ug
Data Supplied by Geotechnical Services. This report should only be reproduced in full.
nd
nd
nd
p-Tolualdehyde 2-Hexanone
0.25
0.47
13.0
13.6
Total ug
Total ug
Env 04-347.xls, Results
GHD
239 Adelaide Terrace
Perth WA 6004
Attention:
Your Ref No:
Our Ref No:
December 1, 2004
L. Jefferys
0456
ENV 04-349
REPORT ON ANALYSIS OF GAS BAGS
Introduction:
Two TO17 tubes and two DNPH impregnated tubes were received on 23/11/04, and analysed according to the
instructions on your chain of custody 0456.
Methods of Analysis:
The tubes were analysed to determine the amount of Volatile Organic Carbon according to WIENV 31 (based on
the analytical section of US EPA TO15 and TO17).The amount of aldehydes and ketones was determined
according to WIENV 34 (based on USEPA TO5 and TO11A).
Results
The results are tabulated on the following worksheets.
GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
Angela Downey
Environmental Chemist
Nigel West
Senior Chemist
Angela Downey
5
Not Detected
HP112403.D
HP111811.D
HP111815.D
HP111827.D
HP111816.D
Volume of Extract (mL)
nd
Daily Calibration
Multipoint Calibration
MDL Lab No
Precision Lab No
Column Efficiency
ad
HP112405.D
HP112407.D
# 0979701714 CD
# 0979701691 UCD
Processed By
Geotechnical Services
41-45 Furnace Road
Welshpool Perth
WA 6106 Australia
Lab Number
Sample Name
Checked By
Geotechnical Services
Pass
100
100
Analyte
Detection Limit (ug)
Errors + / - %
% Sample Used
nw
Nigel West
1.0
2.96
3.31
Formaldehyde
0.36
11.7
Total ug
Date
ppm standard
1.95
0.821
Acetaldehyde
0.17
11.7
Total ug
26/11/2004
1.5
0.802
Acetone
0.39
11.7
Total ug
nd
nd
Propanal
0.37
11.8
Total ug
nd
nd
MEK
0.33
12.2
Total ug
Test Report for Analysis of Carbonyl Derivatives by WIENV 34 (Based on the Analytical Sections of USEPA TO5 &
L. Jeffreys
Our Ref No
Env 04-249
Samples Received 23-Nov-04
Disclaimer: Geotech has analysed the derivatised samples provi
Your Ref No
61/15324
Samples Analysed 24-Nov-04 on the analytical components of USEPA TO11A and TO5.
GHD
nd
nd
iso-Butanal
0.31
11.8
Total ug
ded by methods based
& TO11A)
nd
nd
nd
nd
Benzaldehyde 2-Pentanone
0.17
0.47
12.1
12.1
Total ug
Total ug
nd
nd
n-Pentanal
0.39
13.2
Total ug
nd
nd
nd
nd
p-Tolualdehyde 2-Hexanone
0.25
0.47
13.0
13.6
Total ug
Total ug
nd
nd
Hexanal
0.17
12.8
Total ug
Date
Volume(mLs)
Sample
11230408.D
11230409.D
11230410.D
11230403.D
0 ng
1 ng
2 ng
5 ng
10 ng
20 ng
50 ng
100 ng
10ng std #A14330
20ng std #A13823
50ng std #A70012
100ng std #A61949
200ng std #C06407
500ng std #A13704
1000ng std #A08278
11230404.D
11230407.D
11230406.D
11230402.D
Solid Standards
Liquid Stds
Blank #A70014
11230409.D
Multipoint Calibration
10 ng solids
100ng std
11230411.D
chkstd
Daily Calibration
11230402.D
11230413.D
11230412.D
1
1
1
Lab No
972.1
547.3
254.3
103.7
50.4
nd
nd
nd
104
1170.0
(1000 ng)
nd
820
540
< 5.0
ng
13.7
Units
acetone
Error +/- %
Compound
11230402.D
Not Detected
ad
nw
Page 1 of 4 of Geotechnical Services, Report Env 04-349 Report.xls
965.6
551.6
222.6
95.4
43.8
4.8
nd
nd
95
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.1
ng
hexatriene
73.5
73.5
73.5
73.5
73.5
73.5
73.5
73.5
105
1140.0
(1000 ng)
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.7
ng
benzene
801.5
493.0
216.3
98.9
47.7
13.2
23.6
nd
99
nd
nd
51
33
< 5.0
13.0
ng
pyridine
966.9
540.7
221.2
105.6
47.5
8.1
nd
nd
106
482.0
(400 ng)
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.8
ng
toluene
953.8
553.6
224.2
99.4
42.2
3.4
8.7
nd
99
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.8
ng
ethylbenzene
This document shall not be reproduced except in full. Sample/s are analysed as received unless stated otherwise.
30-Nov-04
Should have the same first four numbers in the Lab No as the samples
From TO15 Worksheet
Should have the same Lab No as the Lab Blank in F9
From TO15 Worksheet
Processed By Angela Downey
Checked By
Nigel West
Date
Geotechnical Services
Geotechnical Services
41-45 Furnace Road
Welshpool Perth
WA 6106 Australia
Month/Day/Yr/Sample No eg 10180204 is analysed on Oct 18th 2002 and is sample No 4
Initials
Errors Determined Without Sampling
BFB Lab Number
nd
Pass
11230402.D
Pass
Daily Calibration Check
09200411.D
Comments 10ng std not used for the majority of samples. (see attached worksheet for further details)
Lab Blank
K-VCD
K-CD
Lab Blank Lab No
Multipoint Calibration Check
Lab Nos
Time
Detection Limits. Based on Sample Volume on tube A09988
Sample ID
1st Precision Lab No
A12374
A09988
No
Tube
956.8
547.9
220.2
99.7
44.1
4.8
9.7
nd
100
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
7.4
ng
1,3-xylene
Test Report for Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds by in-House Method WIENV 31
L.Jefferys
Our Ref No
Env 04-349 Samples Received
23-Nov-04 Disclaimer: Geotechnical Services has not been involved in the collection of these samples.
Your Ref No
61/15324
Samples Analysed
23-Nov-04 Geotech has determined the VOCs by thermal desorption GC-MS
GHD
Env 04-349 Report.xls VOC
Date last opened 30/03/2005
11230411.D
11230409.D
chkstd
10 ng solids
563.6
11230407.D
11230408.D
11230409.D
11230410.D
11230403.D
11230404.D
2 ng
5 ng
10 ng
20 ng
50 ng
100 ng
Date
939.1
111.2
60.0
22.7
970.3
552.9
213.9
98.9
41.2
7.3
10.3
nd
99
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.8
ng
styrene
Page 2 of 4 of Geotechnical Services, Report Env 04-349 Report.xls
h 2002 and is sample No 4
s
Nigel West
nw
me first four numbers in the Lab No as th
eet
me Lab No as the Lab Blank in F9
eet
samples. (see attached worksheet for fur
244.9
11230406.D
28.8
11230402.D
1 ng
nd
111
54.0
(50 ng)
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
0 ng
Solid Standards
11230402.D
11230413.D
11230412.D
Lab No
1
1
1
A09988
ng
12.6
Units
Error +/- %
Volume(mLs)
ethynyl-benzene
Compound
Sample
Compounds by in-House Metho
Samples Received
23-Nov-04
Samples Analysed
23-Nov-04
771.1
535.7
205.8
99.5
42.8
9.2
16.5
nd
100
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.4
ng
benzaldehyde
773.9
501.5
162.3
83.0
35.5
13.7
20.6
11.0
83
nd
11.0
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.8
1,3,5trimethylbenzene
ng
750.6
576.2
222.4
99.3
40.3
nd
7.1
nd
99
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.6
ng
benzonitrile
789.1
509.6
185.9
90.0
45.4
22.7
27.6
nd
90
nd
nd
6.8
6.9
< 5.0
12.9
ng
benzofuran
480.4
542.9
210.6
98.2
46.4
4.4
15.1
nd
98
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
14.2
ng
acetophenone
620.7
535.1
218.0
113.8
54.0
21.8
13.5
nd
11
9.5
(10 ng)
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
12.7
ng
naphthalene
895.0
541.4
218.6
106.3
55.4
21.7
39.1
nd
106
55.6
(50 ng)
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.1
ng
1163.0
572.8
170.4
89.8
26.9
nd
1.3
nd
9
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
15.0
ng
quinoline1H-indole
This document shall not be reproduced except in full. Sample/s are analysed as received unless stated otherwise.
943.8
560.1
239.5
100.0
42.5
nd
6.5
nd
100
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.6
ng
1,2-xylene
Env 04-349 Report.xls VOC
1163.0
572.8
170.4
89.8
26.9
nd
1.3
nd
90
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.1
ng
2-methyl
naphthalene
623.7
528.8
216.5
101.0
52.0
18.3
29.4
nd
101
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.9
ng
1-methyl
naphthalene
Date last opened 30/03/2005
991.5
634.0
Date
974.1
534.4
215.5
101.7
54.1
22.2
16.5
nd
10
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
12.9
ng
acenaphthene
Page 3 of 4 of Geotechnical Services, Report Env 04-349 Report.xls
h 2002 and is sample No 4
s
Nigel West
nw
me first four numbers in the Lab No as th
eet
me Lab No as the Lab Blank in F9
eet
samples. (see attached worksheet for fur
527.0
507.3
11230403.D
11230404.D
50 ng
100 ng
93.0
11230410.D
20 ng
193.3
11230409.D
10 ng
92.0
11230408.D
5 ng
191.9
11230407.D
2 ng
43.8
11230406.D
1 ng
16.4
11230402.D
0 ng
Solid Standards
48.2
9
9
11230409.D
10 ng solids
23.6
nd
nd
11230411.D
chkstd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
1.2
1.3
11230402.D
11230413.D
11230412.D
12.5
< 0.50
< 0.50
Lab No
1
1
1
A09988
nd
15.2
13.3
Error +/- %
20.1
ng
ng
Units
Volume(mLs)
acenaphthylene
Compound
Sample
biphenyl
Compounds by in-House Metho
Samples Received
23-Nov-04
Samples Analysed
23-Nov-04
923.5
529.2
210.3
103.1
53.6
21.3
16.4
nd
10
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
12.9
ng
9H-fluorene
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No data
9H-fluoren9-one
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No data
phenanthrene
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No data
fluoranthene
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No data
pyrene
970.2
493.4
227.5
107.9
53.7
15.3
3.9
nd
108
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.6
ng
MEK
983.4
526.8
212.3
96.1
44.7
7.5
11.3
nd
96
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.6
ng
MPK
1004.1
474.7
230.3
94.1
47.7
17.0
11.5
nd
94
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
15.3
ng
3 methyl butana
This document shall not be reproduced except in full. Sample/s are analysed as received unless stated otherwise.
1012.9
467.8
190.2
83.0
41.3
16.3
12.4
nd
8
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.8
ng
dibenzo-furan
Env 04-349 Report.xls VOC
964.0
557.1
236.6
102.9
46.8
4.2
nd
nd
103
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.7
ng
heptane
964.9
561.4
217.3
111.5
46.8
1.3
13.8
nd
112
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.5
ng
MIBK
978.4
548.5
198.6
108.1
43.1
8.3
12.3
nd
108
35.4
(50 ng)
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.8
ng
DMDS
Date last opened 30/03/2005
796.2
472.5
229.8
108.6
60.4
5.3
25.6
nd
109
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
Bag A
12.6
ng
methylacetam
11230406.D
11230407.D
11230408.D
11230409.D
11230410.D
11230403.D
11230404.D
1 ng
2 ng
5 ng
10 ng
20 ng
50 ng
100 ng
Date
81.0
187.4
554.7
489.5
231.3
553.5
741.6
36.9
37.1
109.4
17.2
12.6
8.8
11.1
nd
1.7
81
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.5
ng
642.5
485.0
251.8
92.2
57.2
9.4
3.3
nd
92
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.7
ng
ng
690.1
500.3
214.3
97.9
51.1
17.3
6.6
nd
98
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
15.5
ng
526.7
441.8
175.9
86.0
54.2
32.7
36.8
18.4
86
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.7
ng
Total
Quantifie
d VOC
11230411.D
11230411.D
11230411.D
Check std
Calibrated against
tol
quinoline indole
solids and MNs
C2 Benz
10
Not Corrected
7
17
T
R
O
P
E
R
F
O
D
12
pyr, DMS dimethylacet/formaNot Corrected
benz, hept, MIBK, me cyhe
E
N
11230411.D
Report
End of
15
Lab No
against chkstd
Correction for Calibration (%)
acetone, hexatriene, MEK, M
Comments
This document shall not be reproduced except in full. Sample/s are analysed as received unless stated otherwise.
690.1
493.7
249.3
97.4
50.5
nd
15.4
nd
97
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.6
ng
nitrobenzeneethyl cyclohexan
methylformam Iodomethane indene
Page 4 of 4 of Geotechnical Services, Report Env 04-349 Report.xls
h 2002 and is sample No 4
s
Nigel West
nw
me first four numbers in the Lab No as th
eet
me Lab No as the Lab Blank in F9
eet
samples. (see attached worksheet for fur
11230402.D
0 ng
Solid Standards
11
nd
11230411.D
11230409.D
chkstd
10 ng solids
< 0.50
Artefacts
nd
nd
nd
1
1
1
Lab No
11230402.D
11230413.D
11230412.D
A09988
ng
13.9
Units
Error +/- %
Volume(mLs)
phenol
Compound
Sample
Compounds by in-House Metho
Samples Received
23-Nov-04
Samples Analysed
23-Nov-04
Env 04-349 Report.xls VOC
Date last opened 30/03/2005
Env 04-351 Report.xls, comments
GHD
239 Adelaide Terrace
Perth WA 6004
Attention:
Your Ref No:
Our Ref No:
December 1, 2004
L. Jefferys
0458
ENV 04-351
REPORT ON ANALYSIS OF GAS BAGS
Introduction:
Two TO17 tubes and two DNPH impregnated tubes were received on 24/11/04, and analysed according to the
instructions on your chain of custody 0458.
Methods of Analysis:
The tubes were analysed to determine the amount of Volatile Organic Carbon according to WIENV 31 (based on
the analytical section of US EPA TO15 and TO17).The amount of aldehydes and ketones was determined
according to WIENV 34 (based on USEPA TO5 and TO11A).
Results
The results are tabulated on the following worksheets.
GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
Angela Downey
Environmental Chemist
Page 1 of 1
Nigel West
Senior Chemist
Data supplied by Geotechnical Services. This report should only be reproduced in full.
2
Not Detected
HP112603.D
HP111811.D
HP111815.D
HP111827.D
HP111816.D
Volume of Extract (mL)
nd
Daily Calibration
Multipoint Calibration
MDL Lab No
Precision Lab No
Column Efficiency
Page 1 of 2
jm
Joanne Menegazzo
HP112605.D
HP112607.D
1274300474/K-DP
1274300475/K-CW
Processed By
Geotechnical Services
41-45 Furnace Road
Welshpool Perth
WA 6106 Australia
Lab Number
Sample Name
1.0
0.80
0.70
Formaldehyde
0.36
11.7
Total ug
ad
Checked By
Angela Downey
Geotechnical Services
Pass
100
100
Analyte
Detection Limit (ug)
Errors + / - %
% Sample Used
29/11/2004
1.1
0.88
Acetone
0.39
11.7
Total ug
nd
nd
Propanal
0.37
11.8
Total ug
nd
nd
MEK
0.33
12.2
Total ug
Data supplied by Geotechnical Services. This report should only be reproduced in full.
Date
ppm standard
0.33
0.29
Acetaldehyde
0.17
11.7
Total ug
Test Report for Analysis of Carbonyl Derivatives by WIENV 34 (Based on the Analytical Sections of USEPA TO5 &
L. Jeffreys
Our Ref No
Env 04-351
Samples Received 24-Nov-04
Disclaimer: Geotech has analysed the derivatised samples provi
GHD
Your CoC No
0458
Samples Analysed 26-Nov-04 on the analytical components of USEPA TO11A and TO5.
Env 04-351 Report.xls, Ald & Ket
2
Not Detected
HP112603.D
HP111811.D
HP111815.D
HP111827.D
HP111816.D
Volume of Extract (mL)
nd
Daily Calibration
Multipoint Calibration
MDL Lab No
Precision Lab No
Column Efficiency
Page 2 of 2
Processed By
Geotechnical Services
41-45 Furnace Road
Welshpool Perth
WA 6106 Australia
HP112605.D
HP112607.D
1274300474/K-DP
1274300475/K-CW
jm
Joanne Menegazzo
Lab Number
Sample Name
G
nd
nd
iso-Butanal
0.31
11.8
Total ug
Test Report for Analysis of Carb& TO11A)
L. Jeffreys
Our Ref No
ided by methods based
GHD
Your CoC No
nd
nd
nd
nd
Benzaldehyde 2-Pentanone
0.17
0.47
12.1
12.1
Total ug
Total ug
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
p-Tolualdehyde 2-Hexanone Hexanal
0.25
0.47
0.17
13.0
13.6
12.8
Total ug
Total ug
Total ug
R
E
P
O
R
T
O
F
E
N
D
End of
Report
Data supplied by Geotechnical Services. This report should only be reproduced in full.
nd
nd
n-Pentanal
0.39
13.2
Total ug
Env 04-351 Report.xls, Ald & Ket
Date
11230408.D
11230409.D
11230410.D
11230403.D
0 ng
1 ng
2 ng
5 ng
10 ng
20 ng
50 ng
100 ng
10ng std #A14330
20ng std #A13823
50ng std #A70012
100ng std #A61949
200ng std #C06407
500ng std #A13704
1000ng std #A08278
11230404.D
11230407.D
11230406.D
11230402.D
Solid Standards
Liquid Stds
Blank #A70014
11260403.D
Multipoint Calibration
10 ng solids
11260423.D
chkstd
100ng std
11260404.D
11260406.D
11260407.D
1
1
1
Lab No
972.1
547.3
254.3
103.7
50.4
nd
nd
nd
100
1450.0
(1000 ng)
nd
nd
150
< 5.0
ng
13.7
Units
acetone
Error +/- %
Compound
Daily Calibration
11260404.D
Not Detected
ad
nw
01-Dec-04
Should have the same first four numbers in the Lab No as the samples
From TO15 Worksheet
Should have the same Lab No as the Lab Blank in F9
From TO15 Worksheet
Processed By Angela Downey
Checked By
Nigel West
Date
Geotechnical Services
Geotechnical Services
41-45 Furnace Road
Welshpool Perth
WA 6106 Australia
Month/Day/Yr/Sample No eg 10180204 is analysed on Oct 18th 2002 and is sample No 4
Initials
Errors Determined Without Sampling
BFB Lab Number
nd
Pass
11260404.D
Pass
Daily Calibration Check
09200411.D
Page 1 of 4
Volume(mLs)
Sample
Comments 10ng std not used for the majority of samples. (see attached worksheet for further details)
Lab Blank
K-DP
K-CW
Lab Blank Lab No
Multipoint Calibration Check
Lab Nos
Time
Detection Limits. Based on Sample Volume on tube A11215
Sample ID
1st Precision Lab No
A11215
C06676
No
Tube
965.6
551.6
222.6
95.4
43.8
4.8
nd
nd
99
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.1
ng
hexatriene
999.2
491.2
197.6
114.5
56.9
18.1
3.8
nd
101
1150.0
(1000 ng)
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.7
ng
benzene
801.5
493.0
216.3
98.9
47.7
13.2
23.6
nd
89
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.0
ng
pyridine
966.9
540.7
221.2
105.6
47.5
8.1
nd
nd
103
446.0
(400 ng)
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.8
ng
toluene
956.8
547.9
220.2
99.7
44.1
4.8
9.7
nd
97
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
7.4
ng
1,3-xylene
Data supplied by Geotechnical Services. This report should only be reproduced in full.
953.8
553.6
224.2
99.4
42.2
3.4
8.7
nd
96
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.8
ng
ethylbenzene
Test Report for Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds by in-House Method WIENV 31
L. Jefferys
Our Ref No
Env 04-351 Samples Received
24-Nov-04 Disclaimer: Geotechnical Services has not been involved in the collection of these samples.
Your Ref No
0458
Samples Analysed
26-Nov-04 Geotech has determined the VOCs by thermal desorption GC-MS
GHD
Env 04-351 Report.xls, Voc
11260423.D
11260403.D
chkstd
10 ng solids
563.6
11230407.D
11230408.D
11230409.D
11230410.D
11230403.D
11230404.D
2 ng
5 ng
10 ng
20 ng
50 ng
100 ng
Date
Page 2 of 4
h 2002 and is sample No 4
s
Nigel West
nw
me first four numbers in the Lab No as th
eet
me Lab No as the Lab Blank in F9
eet
samples. (see attached worksheet for fur
244.9
11230406.D
939.1
111.2
60.0
22.7
28.8
11230402.D
1 ng
nd
121
53.7
(50 ng)
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
0 ng
Solid Standards
11260404.D
11260406.D
11260407.D
Lab No
1
1
1
A11215
ng
12.6
Units
Error +/- %
Volume(mLs)
ethynyl-benzene
Compound
Sample
Compounds by in-House Metho
Samples Received
24-Nov-04
Samples Analysed
26-Nov-04
970.3
552.9
213.9
98.9
41.2
7.3
10.3
nd
98
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.8
ng
styrene
943.8
560.1
239.5
100.0
42.5
nd
6.5
nd
95
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.6
ng
1,2-xylene
771.1
535.7
205.8
99.5
42.8
9.2
16.5
nd
92
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.4
ng
benzaldehyde
773.9
501.5
162.3
83.0
35.5
13.7
20.6
11.0
83
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.8
1,3,5trimethylbenzene
ng
750.6
576.2
222.4
99.3
40.3
nd
7.1
nd
95
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.6
ng
benzonitrile
789.1
509.6
185.9
90.0
45.4
22.7
27.6
nd
89
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.9
ng
benzofuran
Env 04-351 Report.xls, Voc
480.4
542.9
210.6
98.2
46.4
4.4
15.1
nd
88
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
14.2
ng
acetophenone
620.7
535.1
218.0
113.8
54.0
21.8
13.5
nd
10
9.5
(10 ng)
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
12.7
ng
naphthalene
ng
1163.0
572.8
170.4
89.8
26.9
nd
1.3
nd
8
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
15.0
1163.0
572.8
170.4
89.8
26.9
nd
1.3
nd
83
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.1
ng
2-methyl
naphthalene
623.7
528.8
216.5
101.0
52.0
18.3
29.4
nd
105
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.9
ng
1-methyl
naphthalene
Data supplied by Geotechnical Services. This report should only be reproduced in full.
895.0
541.4
218.6
106.3
55.4
21.7
39.1
nd
97
49.2
(50 ng)
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.1
ng
quinoline1H-indole
991.5
634.0
Date
Page 3 of 4
h 2002 and is sample No 4
s
Nigel West
nw
me first four numbers in the Lab No as th
eet
me Lab No as the Lab Blank in F9
eet
samples. (see attached worksheet for fur
527.0
507.3
11230403.D
11230404.D
50 ng
100 ng
93.0
11230410.D
20 ng
193.3
11230409.D
10 ng
92.0
11230408.D
5 ng
191.9
11230407.D
2 ng
43.8
11230406.D
1 ng
16.4
11230402.D
0 ng
Solid Standards
48.2
9
96
11260403.D
10 ng solids
23.6
nd
nd
11260423.D
chkstd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
11260404.D
11260406.D
11260407.D
12.5
< 0.50
< 0.50
Lab No
1
1
1
A11215
nd
15.2
13.3
Error +/- %
20.1
ng
ng
Units
Volume(mLs)
acenaphthylene
Compound
Sample
biphenyl
Compounds by in-House Metho
Samples Received
24-Nov-04
Samples Analysed
26-Nov-04
974.1
534.4
215.5
101.7
54.1
22.2
16.5
nd
10
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
12.9
ng
acenaphthene
1012.9
467.8
190.2
83.0
41.3
16.3
12.4
nd
9
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.8
ng
dibenzo-furan
923.5
529.2
210.3
103.1
53.6
21.3
16.4
nd
10
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
12.9
ng
9H-fluorene
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No data
9H-fluoren9-one
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No data
phenanthrene
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No data
fluoranthene
Env 04-351 Report.xls, Voc
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No data
pyrene
970.2
493.4
227.5
107.9
53.7
15.3
3.9
nd
108
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.6
ng
MEK
983.4
526.8
212.3
96.1
44.7
7.5
11.3
nd
94
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.6
ng
MPK
964.0
557.1
236.6
102.9
46.8
4.2
nd
nd
110
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.7
ng
heptane
964.9
561.4
217.3
111.5
46.8
1.3
13.8
nd
70
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.5
ng
MIBK
978.4
548.5
198.6
108.1
43.1
8.3
12.3
nd
73
41.6
(50 ng)
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.8
ng
DMDS
796.2
472.5
229.8
108.6
60.4
5.3
25.6
nd
106
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
Bag A
12.6
ng
methylacetam
Data supplied by Geotechnical Services. This report should only be reproduced in full.
1004.1
474.7
230.3
94.1
47.7
17.0
11.5
nd
113
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
15.3
ng
3 methyl butana
11230406.D
11230407.D
11230408.D
11230409.D
11230410.D
11230403.D
11230404.D
1 ng
2 ng
5 ng
10 ng
20 ng
50 ng
100 ng
Date
Page 4 of 4
h 2002 and is sample No 4
s
Nigel West
nw
me first four numbers in the Lab No as th
eet
me Lab No as the Lab Blank in F9
eet
samples. (see attached worksheet for fur
11230402.D
0 ng
Solid Standards
81.0
187.4
554.7
489.5
109.4
553.5
741.6
36.9
37.1
231.3
17.2
12.6
8.8
11.1
nd
90
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.5
ng
642.5
485.0
251.8
92.2
57.2
9.4
3.3
nd
132
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.7
ng
690.1
493.7
249.3
97.4
50.5
nd
15.4
nd
73
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.6
ng
690.1
500.3
214.3
97.9
51.1
17.3
6.6
nd
121
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
15.5
ng
526.7
441.8
175.9
86.0
54.2
32.7
36.8
18.4
85
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.7
ng
nitrobenzeneethyl cyclohexan
methylformam Iodomethane indene
1.7
8
nd
11260423.D
11260403.D
chkstd
10 ng solids
< 0.50
Artefacts
nd
nd
2.81
1
1
1
Lab No
11260404.D
11260406.D
11260407.D
A11215
ng
13.9
Units
Error +/- %
Volume(mLs)
phenol
Compound
Sample
Compounds by in-House Metho
Samples Received
24-Nov-04
Samples Analysed
26-Nov-04
ng
Total
Quantifie
d VOC
11260423.D
11260423.D
11260423.D
Check std
Calibrated against
Env 04-351 Report.xls, Voc
tol
quinoline indole
solids and MNs
C2 Benz
T
R
O
P
E
R
F
Data supplied by Geotechnical Services. This report should only be reproduced in full.
Not Corrected
Not Corrected
7
10
O
D
13
pyr, DMS dimethylacet/formaNot Corrected
benz, hept, MIBK, me cyhe
E
N
11260423.D
Report
End of
31
Lab No
against chkstd
Correction for Calibration (%)
acetone, hexatriene, MEK, M
Comments
GHD
239 Adelaide Terrace
Perth WA 6004
Attention:
Your Ref No:
Our Ref No:
December 1, 2004
L. Jefferys
0461
ENV 04-356
REPORT ON ANALYSIS OF GAS BAGS
Introduction:
Three TO17 tubes and four DNPH impregnated tubes were received on 25/11/04, and analysed according to the
instructions on your chain of custody 0461.
Methods of Analysis:
The tubes were analysed to determine the amount of Volatile Organic Carbon according to WIENV 31 (based on
the analytical section of US EPA TO15 and TO17).The amount of aldehydes and ketones was determined
according to WIENV 34 (based on USEPA TO5 and TO11A).
Results
The results are tabulated on the following worksheets. The GC-MS failed during the analysis of tube A14250
(KW), no data is available for this sample
GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
Angela Downey
Environmental Chemist
Nigel West
Senior Chemist
2
Not Detected
HP112603.D
HP111811.D
HP111815.D
HP111827.D
HP111816.D
Volume of Extract (mL)
nd
Daily Calibration
Multipoint Calibration
MDL Lab No
Precision Lab No
Column Efficiency
jm
Joanne Menegazzo
HP112609.D
HP112611.D
HP112613.D
1274300471/K1
1274300472/K1
1274300469/UCW
Processed By
Geotechnical Services
41-45 Furnace Road
Welshpool Perth
WA 6106 Australia
Lab Number
Sample Name
1.0
0.62
0.94
0.62
Formaldehyde
0.14
11.7
Total ug
ad
Checked By
Angela Downey
Geotechnical Services
Pass
100
100
100
Analyte
Detection Limit (ug)
Errors + / - %
% Sample Used
Date
ppm standard
0.29
0.37
0.90
Acetaldehyde
0.07
11.7
Total ug
29/11/2004
0.40
0.40
0.40
Acetone
0.15
11.7
Total ug
nd
nd
< 0.2
Propanal
0.15
11.8
Total ug
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.2
MEK
0.13
12.2
Total ug
Test Report for Analysis of Carbonyl Derivatives by WIENV 34 (Based on the Analytical Sections of USEPA TO5 &
L. Jeffreys
Our Ref No
Env 04-356
Samples Received 25-Nov-04
Disclaimer: Geotech has analysed the derivatised samples provi
Your CoC No
0461
Samples Analysed 26-Nov-04 on the analytical components of USEPA TO11A and TO5.
GHD
nd
nd
nd
iso-Butanal
0.12
11.8
Total ug
ded by methods based
& TO11A)
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Benzaldehyde 2-Pentanone
0.07
0.19
12.1
12.1
Total ug
Total ug
nd
nd
nd
n-Pentanal
0.16
13.2
Total ug
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
p-Tolualdehyde 2-Hexanone
0.10
0.19
13.0
13.6
Total ug
Total ug
nd
nd
nd
Hexanal
0.07
12.8
Total ug
Date
Volume(mLs)
Sample
11230408.D
11230409.D
11230410.D
11230403.D
0 ng
1 ng
2 ng
5 ng
10 ng
20 ng
50 ng
100 ng
10ng std #A14330
20ng std #A13823
50ng std #A70012
100ng std #A61949
200ng std #C06407
500ng std #A13704
1000ng std #A08278
11230404.D
11230407.D
11230406.D
11230402.D
Solid Standards
Liquid Stds
Blank #A70014
11260403.D
Multipoint Calibration
10 ng solids
100ng std
11260423.D
chkstd
Daily Calibration
11260404.D
11260408.D
11260410.D
11260409.D
1
1
1
1
Lab No
11260404.D
Not Detected
972.1
547.3
254.3
103.7
50.4
nd
nd
nd
100
1450.0
(1000 ng)
ad
nw
Page 1 of 4 of Geotechnical Services, Report Env 04-356 Report.xls
< 5.0
12.7
ng
benzene
965.6
551.6
222.6
95.4
43.8
4.8
nd
nd
99
nd
999.2
491.2
197.6
114.5
56.9
18.1
3.8
nd
101
1150.0
(1000 ng)
801.5
493.0
216.3
98.9
47.7
13.2
23.6
nd
89
nd
nd
31
nd
< 5.0
13.0
ng
pyridine
966.9
540.7
221.2
105.6
47.5
8.1
nd
nd
103
446.0
(400 ng)
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.8
ng
toluene
953.8
553.6
224.2
99.4
42.2
3.4
8.7
nd
96
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.8
ng
ethylbenzene
This document shall not be reproduced except in full. Sample/s are analysed as received unless stated otherwise.
01-Dec-04
Should have the same first four numbers in the Lab No as the samples
From TO15 Worksheet
Should have the same Lab No as the Lab Blank in F9
From TO15 Worksheet
Processed By Angela Downey
Checked By
Nigel West
Date
Geotechnical Services
Geotechnical Services
41-45 Furnace Road
Welshpool Perth
WA 6106 Australia
Month/Day/Yr/Sample No eg 10180204 is analysed on Oct 18th 2002 and is sample No 4
Initials
Errors Determined Without Sampling
BFB Lab Number
nd
Pass
11260404.D
Pass
Daily Calibration Check
09200411.D
< 5.0
13.1
ng
hexatriene
nd
nd
nd
290
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Sample lost due to instrument failure.
< 5.0
ng
13.7
Units
acetone
Error +/- %
Compound
Comments 10ng std not used for the majority of samples. (see attached worksheet for further details)
Lab Blank
K1
UCW
K2
Lab Blank Lab No
Multipoint Calibration Check
Lab Nos
Time
Detection Limits. Based on Sample Volume on tube B16431
Sample ID
1st Precision Lab No
B16431
C06705
A14250
No
Tube
956.8
547.9
220.2
99.7
44.1
4.8
9.7
nd
97
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
7.4
ng
1,3-xylene
Test Report for Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds by in-House Method WIENV 31
L.Jefferys
Our Ref No
Env 04-356 Samples Received
25-Nov-04 Disclaimer: Geotechnical Services has not been involved in the collection of these samples.
Your Ref No
0461
Samples Analysed
26-Nov-04 Geotech has determined the VOCs by thermal desorption GC-MS
GHD
Env 04-356 Report.xls VOC
Date last opened 30/03/2005
11260423.D
11260403.D
chkstd
10 ng solids
563.6
11230407.D
11230408.D
11230409.D
11230410.D
11230403.D
11230404.D
2 ng
5 ng
10 ng
20 ng
50 ng
100 ng
Date
939.1
111.2
60.0
22.7
970.3
552.9
213.9
98.9
41.2
7.3
10.3
nd
98
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.8
ng
styrene
Page 2 of 4 of Geotechnical Services, Report Env 04-356 Report.xls
h 2002 and is sample No 4
s
Nigel West
nw
me first four numbers in the Lab No as th
eet
me Lab No as the Lab Blank in F9
eet
samples. (see attached worksheet for fur
244.9
11230406.D
28.8
11230402.D
1 ng
nd
121
53.7
(50 ng)
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
0 ng
Solid Standards
11260404.D
11260408.D
11260410.D
11260409.D
Lab No
1
1
1
1
B16431
ng
12.6
Units
Error +/- %
Volume(mLs)
ethynyl-benzene
Compound
Sample
Compounds by in-House Metho
Samples Received
25-Nov-04
Samples Analysed
26-Nov-04
771.1
535.7
205.8
99.5
42.8
9.2
16.5
nd
92
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.4
ng
benzaldehyde
773.9
501.5
162.3
83.0
35.5
13.7
20.6
11.0
83
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.8
1,3,5trimethylbenzene
ng
750.6
576.2
222.4
99.3
40.3
nd
7.1
nd
95
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.6
ng
benzonitrile
789.1
509.6
185.9
90.0
45.4
22.7
27.6
nd
89
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.9
ng
benzofuran
480.4
542.9
210.6
98.2
46.4
4.4
15.1
nd
88
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
14.2
ng
acetophenone
620.7
535.1
218.0
113.8
54.0
21.8
13.5
nd
10
9.5
(10 ng)
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
12.7
ng
naphthalene
895.0
541.4
218.6
106.3
55.4
21.7
39.1
nd
97
49.2
(50 ng)
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.1
ng
1163.0
572.8
170.4
89.8
26.9
nd
1.3
nd
8
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
15.0
ng
quinoline1H-indole
This document shall not be reproduced except in full. Sample/s are analysed as received unless stated otherwise.
943.8
560.1
239.5
100.0
42.5
nd
6.5
nd
95
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.6
ng
1,2-xylene
Env 04-356 Report.xls VOC
1163.0
572.8
170.4
89.8
26.9
nd
1.3
nd
83
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.1
ng
2-methyl
naphthalene
623.7
528.8
216.5
101.0
52.0
18.3
29.4
nd
105
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.9
ng
1-methyl
naphthalene
Date last opened 30/03/2005
991.5
634.0
Date
974.1
534.4
215.5
101.7
54.1
22.2
16.5
nd
10
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
12.9
ng
acenaphthene
Page 3 of 4 of Geotechnical Services, Report Env 04-356 Report.xls
h 2002 and is sample No 4
s
Nigel West
nw
me first four numbers in the Lab No as th
eet
me Lab No as the Lab Blank in F9
eet
samples. (see attached worksheet for fur
527.0
507.3
11230403.D
11230404.D
50 ng
100 ng
93.0
11230410.D
20 ng
193.3
11230409.D
10 ng
92.0
11230408.D
5 ng
191.9
11230407.D
2 ng
43.8
11230406.D
1 ng
16.4
11230402.D
0 ng
Solid Standards
48.2
9
10
11260403.D
10 ng solids
23.6
nd
nd
11260423.D
chkstd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
11260404.D
11260408.D
11260410.D
11260409.D
12.5
< 0.50
< 0.50
Lab No
1
1
1
1
B16431
nd
15.2
13.3
Error +/- %
20.1
ng
ng
Units
Volume(mLs)
acenaphthylene
Compound
Sample
biphenyl
Compounds by in-House Metho
Samples Received
25-Nov-04
Samples Analysed
26-Nov-04
923.5
529.2
210.3
103.1
53.6
21.3
16.4
nd
10
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
12.9
ng
9H-fluorene
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No data
9H-fluoren9-one
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No data
phenanthrene
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No data
fluoranthene
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No data
pyrene
970.2
493.4
227.5
107.9
53.7
15.3
3.9
nd
108
nd
nd
16
nd
< 5.0
12.6
ng
MEK
983.4
526.8
212.3
96.1
44.7
7.5
11.3
nd
94
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.6
ng
MPK
1004.1
474.7
230.3
94.1
47.7
17.0
11.5
nd
113
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
15.3
ng
3 methyl butana
This document shall not be reproduced except in full. Sample/s are analysed as received unless stated otherwise.
1012.9
467.8
190.2
83.0
41.3
16.3
12.4
nd
9
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.8
ng
dibenzo-furan
Env 04-356 Report.xls VOC
964.0
557.1
236.6
102.9
46.8
4.2
nd
nd
110
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.7
ng
heptane
964.9
561.4
217.3
111.5
46.8
1.3
13.8
nd
70
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.5
ng
MIBK
978.4
548.5
198.6
108.1
43.1
8.3
12.3
nd
73
41.6
(50 ng)
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.8
ng
DMDS
Date last opened 30/03/2005
796.2
472.5
229.8
108.6
60.4
5.3
25.6
nd
106
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
Bag A
12.6
ng
methylacetam
11230406.D
11230407.D
11230408.D
11230409.D
11230410.D
11230403.D
11230404.D
1 ng
2 ng
5 ng
10 ng
20 ng
50 ng
100 ng
Date
81.0
187.4
554.7
489.5
109.4
553.5
741.6
36.9
37.1
231.3
17.2
12.6
8.8
11.1
nd
1.7
90
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.5
ng
642.5
485.0
251.8
92.2
57.2
9.4
3.3
nd
132
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.7
ng
ng
690.1
500.3
214.3
97.9
51.1
17.3
6.6
nd
121
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
15.5
ng
526.7
441.8
175.9
86.0
54.2
32.7
36.8
18.4
85
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.7
ng
Total
Quantifie
d VOC
11260423.D
11260423.D
11260423.D
11260423.D
Check std
Calibrated against
tol
quinoline indole
solids and MNs
C2 Benz
Not Corrected
Not Corrected
7
10
T
R
O
P
E
R
F
O
D
13
pyr, DMS dimethylacet/formaNot Corrected
benz, hept, MIBK, me cyhe
E
N
11260423.D
Report
End of
31
Lab No
against chkstd
Correction for Calibration (%)
acetone, hexatriene, MEK, M
Comments
This document shall not be reproduced except in full. Sample/s are analysed as received unless stated otherwise.
690.1
493.7
249.3
97.4
50.5
nd
15.4
nd
73
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.6
ng
nitrobenzeneethyl cyclohexan
methylformam Iodomethane indene
Page 4 of 4 of Geotechnical Services, Report Env 04-356 Report.xls
h 2002 and is sample No 4
s
Nigel West
nw
me first four numbers in the Lab No as th
eet
me Lab No as the Lab Blank in F9
eet
samples. (see attached worksheet for fur
11230402.D
0 ng
Solid Standards
8
nd
11260423.D
11260403.D
chkstd
10 ng solids
< 0.50
Artefacts
nd
3.2
nd
1
1
1
1
Lab No
11260404.D
11260408.D
11260410.D
11260409.D
B16431
ng
13.9
Units
Error +/- %
Volume(mLs)
phenol
Compound
Sample
Compounds by in-House Metho
Samples Received
25-Nov-04
Samples Analysed
26-Nov-04
Env 04-356 Report.xls VOC
Date last opened 30/03/2005
GHD
239 Adelaide Terrace
Perth WA 6004
Attention:
Your Ref No:
Our Ref No:
December 22, 2004
L. Jefferys / Dr M Goldstone
6115324
ENV 04-372
REPORT ON ANALYSIS OF GAS BAGS
Introduction:
Two TO17 tubes and two DNPH impregnated tubes were received on 16/12/04, and analysed according to the
instructions on your chain of custody 0461.
Methods of Analysis:
The tubes were analysed to determine the amount of Volatile Organic Carbon according to WIENV 31 (based on
the analytical section of US EPA TO15 and TO17).The amount of aldehydes and ketones was determined
according to WIENV 34 (based on USEPA TO5 and TO11A).
Results
The results are tabulated on the following worksheets.
GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
Angela Downey
Environmental Chemist
Nigel West
Senior Chemist
2
Not Detected
HP121703.D
HP121705.D
HP111815.D
HP111827.D
HP111815.D
Volume of Extract (mL)
nd
Daily Calibration
Multipoint Calibration
MDL Lab No
Precision Lab No
Column Efficiency
jm
Joanne Menegazzo
HP121708.D
HP121710.D
1274300476 - teflon
1274300477 - nalopthane
Processed By
Geotechnical Services
41-45 Furnace Road
Welshpool Perth
WA 6106 Australia
Lab Number
Sample Name
Checked By
Geotechnical Services
Pass
100
100
Analyte
Detection Limit (ug)
Errors + / - %
% Sample Used
nw
Nigel West
1.0
1.32
2.01
Formaldehyde
0.29
11.7
Total ug
Date
ppm standard
< 0.2
0.23
Acetaldehyde
0.14
11.7
Total ug
22/12/2004
0.54
0.70
Acetone
0.14
11.7
Total ug
nd
nd
Propanal
0.14
11.8
Total ug
< 0.2
< 0.2
MEK
0.14
12.2
Total ug
Test Report for Analysis of Carbonyl Derivatives by WIENV 34 (Based on the Analytical Sections of USEPA TO5 &
L. Jeffreys
Our Ref No
Env 04-372
Samples Received 16-Dec-04
Disclaimer: Geotech has analysed the derivatised samples provi
Your Job No
6115324
Samples Analysed 17-Dec-04 on the analytical components of USEPA TO11A and TO5.
GHD
< 0.2
< 0.2
iso-Butanal
0.14
11.8
Total ug
ded by methods based
& TO11A)
nd
< 0.2
nd
nd
Benzaldehyde 2-Pentanone
0.14
0.14
12.1
12.1
Total ug
Total ug
nd
nd
n-Pentanal
0.14
13.2
Total ug
nd
nd
nd
nd
p-Tolualdehyde 2-Hexanone
0.14
0.14
13.0
13.6
Total ug
Total ug
nd
nd
Hexanal
0.14
12.8
Total ug
Date
Volume(mLs)
Sample
12200407.D
12200408.D
0 ng
1 ng
2 ng
10ng std #A70251
20ng std #A70014
12200403.D
12200404.D
20 ng
50 ng
100 ng
200ng std #A13888
500ng std #A63757
1000ng std #A11144
12200410.D
12200409.D
5 ng
10 ng
50ng std #C06215
100ng std #A09645
12200406.D
12200402.D
Solid Standards
Liquid Stds
Blank #A72153
12200409.D
Multipoint Calibration
10 ng solids
100ng std
12210408.D
chkstd
Daily Calibration
12210402.D
12210405.D
12220402.D
1
1
1
Lab No
1022.9
511.2
161.0
127.5
62.4
22.5
18.6
nd
130
1300.0
(1000 ng)
nd
nd
9.1
< 5.0
ng
13.7
Units
acetone
Error +/- %
Compound
12210402.D
Not Detected
nw
jm
Page 1 of 4 of Geotechnical Services, Report Env 04-372 Report.xls
1131.5
419.2
176.1
53.0
40.0
21.5
9.4
nd
53
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.1
ng
hexatriene
842.2
463.1
204.4
79.9
41.5
17.3
16.2
nd
80
1800.0
(1000 ng)
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.6
ng
benzene
1072.9
521.6
208.6
117.2
56.0
17.4
8.9
nd
120
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.0
ng
pyridine
872.1
461.7
195.1
124.6
51.8
6.8
10.8
nd
120
440.0
(400 ng)
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.8
ng
toluene
1069.5
491.3
199.9
118.4
49.7
26.1
9.7
7.7
120
5.3
5.0
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.9
ng
ethylbenzene
This document shall not be reproduced except in full. Sample/s are analysed as received unless stated otherwise.
22-Dec-04
Should have the same first four numbers in the Lab No as the samples
From TO15 Worksheet
Should have the same Lab No as the Lab Blank in F9
From TO15 Worksheet
Processed By
Nigel West
Checked By
Joanne Menegazzo Date
Geotechnical Services
Geotechnical Services
41-45 Furnace Road
Welshpool Perth
WA 6106 Australia
Month/Day/Yr/Sample No eg 10180204 is analysed on Oct 18th 2002 and is sample No 4
Initials
Errors Determined With Sampling
BFB Lab Number
nd
Pass
12210402.D
Fail RRT
Daily Calibration Check
11230409.D
Comments 10ng std not used for the majority of samples. (see attached worksheet for further details)
Lab Blank
04-372 14/12
04-372 14/12
Lab Blank Lab No
Multipoint Calibration Check
Lab Nos
Time
Detection Limits. Based on Sample Volume on tube A12353
Sample ID
1st Precision Lab No
353 - nalopth
10347 - teflo
No
Tube
1079.6
477.8
181.2
158.5
47.4
24.1
7.7
5.0
160
3.5
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.7
ng
1,3-xylene
Test Report for Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds by in-House Method WIENV 31
Mark Goldstone
Our Ref No
Env 04-372 Samples Received
16-Dec-04 Disclaimer: Geotechnical Services has not been involved in the collection of these samples.
Your Ref No
61/5324
Samples Analysed
21-Dec-04 Geotech has determined the VOCs by sampling of the bag/s before thermal desorption GC-MS
GHD
Env 04-372 Report.xls VOC
Date last opened 30/03/2005
12210408.D
12200409.D
chkstd
10 ng solids
12200406.D
12200407.D
12200408.D
12200409.D
12200410.D
12200403.D
12200404.D
1 ng
2 ng
5 ng
10 ng
20 ng
50 ng
100 ng
1628.5
667.4
231.9
222.9
45.7
8.3
5.0
nd
220
17.0
(50 ng)
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
992.5
455.2
202.2
113.0
44.6
18.7
10.3
nd
110
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.8
ng
styrene
Page 2 of 4 of Geotechnical Services, Report Env 04-372 Report.xls
h 2002 and is sample No 4
s
Joanne Menegazzo Date
jm
me first four numbers in the Lab No as th
eet
me Lab No as the Lab Blank in F9
eet
samples. (see attached worksheet for fur
12200402.D
0 ng
Solid Standards
12210402.D
12210405.D
12220402.D
Lab No
1
1
1
A12353
ng
12.6
Units
Error +/- %
Volume(mLs)
ethynylbenzene
Compound
Sample
Compounds by in-House Metho
Samples Received
16-Dec-04
Samples Analysed
21-Dec-04
1119.3
512.1
207.0
108.5
44.1
33.5
16.4
16.5
110
9.9
9.9
5.50
nd
< 5.0
13.4
ng
benzaldehyde
851.8
454.3
188.2
115.6
48.4
17.7
10.4
nd
120
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.8
ng
1,3,5-trimethylbenzene
1020.6
498.9
207.3
109.3
50.5
23.7
11.2
3.0
110
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.6
ng
benzonitrile
863.9
449.4
207.4
112.1
52.0
nd
10.6
nd
110
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.9
ng
benzofuran
980.8
495.5
202.9
158.2
48.8
19.9
16.8
nd
160
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
14.2
ng
acetophenone
100.6
49.4
20.3
11.5
5.6
3.3
1.4
nd
11
8.7
(10 ng)
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
12.7
ng
naphthalene
911.0
490.6
200.6
79.3
58.4
8.2
8.2
2.5
79
64.0
(50 ng)
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.1
ng
quinoline
This document shall not be reproduced except in full. Sample/s are analysed as received unless stated otherwise.
1018.9
426.4
143.4
151.0
41.2
12.0
9.2
nd
150
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.7
ng
1,2-xylene
Env 04-372 Report.xls VOC
116.1
57.9
22.3
48.2
5.6
1.2
1.2
nd
48
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
14.9
ng
1Hindole
1161.0
579.5
223.4
481.9
55.7
11.8
12.5
nd
480
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.1
ng
2-methyl
naphthalene
1014.2
493.8
205.3
102.1
50.9
22.7
11.7
nd
100
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.9
ng
1-methyl
naphthalene
Date last opened 30/03/2005
12210408.D
12200409.D
chkstd
10 ng solids
12200403.D
12200404.D
50 ng
100 ng
107.2
51.5
21.4
9.4
104.1
52.1
20.7
11.0
6.0
4.1
1.7
nd
11
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
15.2
ng
acenaphthylene
103.9
51.0
20.0
11.2
5.2
2.5
1.3
nd
11
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
12.9
ng
acenaphthene
Page 3 of 4 of Geotechnical Services, Report Env 04-372 Report.xls
h 2002 and is sample No 4
s
Joanne Menegazzo Date
jm
me first four numbers in the Lab No as th
eet
me Lab No as the Lab Blank in F9
eet
samples. (see attached worksheet for fur
12200410.D
20 ng
5.3
12200408.D
12200409.D
5 ng
12200407.D
2 ng
10 ng
3.2
12200406.D
1.3
12200402.D
1 ng
0.9
9
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
0 ng
Solid Standards
12210402.D
12210405.D
12220402.D
Lab No
1
1
1
A12353
ng
13.3
Units
Error +/- %
Volume(mLs)
biphenyl
Compound
Sample
Compounds by in-House Metho
Samples Received
16-Dec-04
Samples Analysed
21-Dec-04
110.0
50.3
20.1
11.1
5.2
2.2
1.2
nd
11
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
12.9
ng
9H-fluorene
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No data
9H-fluoren9-one
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No data
phenanthrene
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No data
fluoranthene
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No data
pyrene
895.0
532.8
201.8
114.5
53.8
21.9
10.7
nd
110
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.6
ng
MEK
949.1
504.6
225.0
109.9
51.4
17.7
14.1
nd
110
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.6
ng
MPK
951.1
525.0
175.3
57.9
60.7
12.3
nd
nd
58
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
15.3
ng
3 methyl
butanal
This document shall not be reproduced except in full. Sample/s are analysed as received unless stated otherwise.
104.0
50.2
19.9
9.6
5.4
2.1
1.4
nd
10
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.8
ng
dibenzofuran
Env 04-372 Report.xls VOC
1028.6
617.5
168.5
145.6
46.3
38.8
10.0
12.9
150
8.7
11.4
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.7
ng
heptane
1085.2
450.6
206.8
96.4
21.6
27.4
10.3
13.5
96
11.0
9.0
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.5
ng
MIBK
833.0
492.2
170.7
52.5
40.2
21.2
14.6
nd
52
60.0
(50 ng)
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.8
ng
DMDS
Date last opened 30/03/2005
1086.4
535.8
220.2
91.2
66.3
26.6
6.6
17.3
91
14.0
12.0
nd
nd
< 5.0
Bag A
12.7
ng
dimethylace
tamide
12200406.D
12200407.D
12200408.D
12200409.D
12200410.D
12200403.D
12200404.D
1 ng
2 ng
5 ng
10 ng
20 ng
50 ng
100 ng
9.5
18.3
46.1
160.2
212.9
563.7
1037.2
1.8
3.8
4.6
15.4
18.8
52.7
102.6
nd
1.1
160
2.6
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.5
ng
nitrobenzene
Page 4 of 4 of Geotechnical Services, Report Env 04-372 Report.xls
h 2002 and is sample No 4
s
Joanne Menegazzo Date
jm
me first four numbers in the Lab No as th
eet
me Lab No as the Lab Blank in F9
eet
samples. (see attached worksheet for fur
12200402.D
0 ng
Solid Standards
15
nd
12210408.D
12200409.D
chkstd
10 ng solids
< 0.50
Artefacts
nd
nd
nd
1
1
1
Lab No
12210402.D
12210405.D
12220402.D
A12353
ng
13.9
Units
Error +/- %
Volume(mLs)
phenol
Compound
Sample
Compounds by in-House Metho
Samples Received
16-Dec-04
Samples Analysed
21-Dec-04
417.9
243.7
176.3
116.0
32.1
nd
1.3
nd
120
8.6
8.6
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.7
ng
1153.0
562.5
221.5
97.1
51.3
35.9
15.0
24.2
97
21.0
20.7
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.7
ng
dimethylfor
mamide
778.7
378.2
152.0
92.3
27.1
nd
11.3
nd
92
nd
nd
nd
6.5
< 5.0
15.5
ng
Iodomethane
874.7
478.1
206.4
140.4
47.8
11.2
9.2
nd
140
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.7
ng
indene
ng
Total
Quantified
VOC
12210408.D
12210408.D
12210408.D
Check std
Calibrated against
D
tol
quinoline indole
solids and MNs
C2 Benz
22
T
R
O
P
E
R
F
Not Corrected
O
9
Not Corrected
17
44
pyr, DMS dimethylacet/forma
benz, hept, MIBK, me cyhe
E
N
23
12210408.D
Report
against chkstd
Lab No
End of
Correction for Calibration (%)
acetone, hexatriene, MEK, M
Comments
This document shall not be reproduced except in full. Sample/s are analysed as received unless stated otherwise.
methyl
cyclohexane
Env 04-372 Report.xls VOC
Date last opened 30/03/2005
THE ODOUR UNIT PTY LIMITED
Showroom 1
16-32 Hulme Court
Myaree
WA 6154
Phone: +61 8 9330 9476
Facsimile: +61 8 9330 1868
Email:[email protected]
Internet: www.odourunit.com.au
ABN: 53 091 165 061
Accreditation Number:
14974
Form 06 - Perth Laboratory
Odour Concentration Measurement Results
The measurement was commissioned by:
Organisation GHD
Contact Leanne Jefferys
Sampling Site Alcoa Kwinana
Sampling Method Not specified
Order details:
Order requested by
Date of order
Order number
Signed by
Paige Gunnell
08/11/2004
TBA
TBA
Telephone
Facsimile
Email
Sampling Team
Order accepted by
TOU Project #
Project Manager
Testing operator
(08) 9429 6558
(08) 9429 6555
[email protected]
Paige Gunnell
Natasha Bowden
1139.1
Natasha Bowden
Clayton Hough
Investigated Item
Odour concentration in odour units ‘ou’, determined by sensory odour concentration
measurements, of an odour sample supplied in a sampling bag. Odour character is also
assessed, however, this assessment is not covered by AS4323.3:2001.
Identification
The odour sample bags were labelled individually. Each label recorded the testing laboratory,
sample number, sampling location (or Identification), sampling date and time, dilution ratio (if
dilution was used) and whether further chemical analysis was required.
Method
The odour concentration measurements were performed using dynamic olfactometry
according to the Australian Standard ‘Determination of Odour Concentration by Dynamic
Olfactometry AS/NZS4323.3:2001. The odour perception characteristics of the panel within the
presentation series for the samples were analogous to that for butanol calibration. Any
deviation from the Australian standard is recorded in the ‘Comments’ section of this report.
Measuring Range
The measuring range of the olfactometer is 22 ” F ” 218 ou. If the measuring range was
insufficient the odour samples will have been pre-diluted. The machine is not calibrated
beyond dilution setting 217or below setting 23. This is specifically mentioned with the results.
Environment
The measurements were performed in an air- and odour-conditioned room. The room
o
o
temperature is maintained at 25 C or less, with temperature fluctuations of less than ± 3 C.
Measuring Dates
The date of each measurement is specified with the results.
Instrument Used
The olfactometer used during this testing session was: ODORMAT SERIES 200107V05
Instrumental
Precision
The precision of this instrument (expressed as repeatability) for a sensory calibration must be r
d 0.477 in accordance with the Australian Standard AS/NZS4323.3:2001.
ODORMAT SERIES 200107V05: r = 0.384 (20 September, 2004)
Compliance – Yes
Instrumental
Accuracy
The accuracy of this instrument for a sensory calibration must be A d 0.217 in accordance with
the Australian Standard AS/NZS4323.3:2001.
ODORMAT SERIES 200107V05: A = 0.147 (20 September, 2004)
Compliance – Yes
Lower Detection
Limit (LDL)
The LDL for the olfactometer has been determined to be 16 ou (four times the lowest dilution
setting)
Traceability
The measurements have been performed using standards for which the traceability to the
national standard has been demonstrated. The assessors are individually selected to comply
with fixed criteria and are monitored in time to keep within the limits of the standard. The
results from the assessors are traceable to primary standards of n-butanol in nitrogen.
Date: Wednesday, 24 November 2004
Report Number / Panel Roster Number: PER20041123
N. Bowden
T. Schulz
Principal and Managing Director
The Odour Unit Pty Ltd
ACN 091 165 061
Form 06 – Odour Concentration Results Sheet (V05)
Authorised Signatory
Issue Date: 13.11.2003
Issued By: SB
Odour Measurement Manual
Revision: 3
Revision Date: 01.03.2004
Approved By: TJS
1 of 1
PC40908
PC40909
CD
UCD
The Odour Unit Pty Ltd
ACN 091 165 061
Form 06 – Odour Concentration Results Sheet
TOU
Sample
ID
Sample Location
Analysis
Date &
Time
23/11/2004
15:01 hrs
23/11/2004
15:26 hrs
Sampling
Date & Time
22/11/2004
14:25 hrs
22/11/2004
16:20 hrs
5
5
Panel
Size
-
-
Issue Date: 13.11.2003
Issued By: SB
Odour Measurement Manual
10
10
Valid
ITEs
Nominal
Sample
Dilution
Factor
-
-
Actual
Sample
Dilution
(Adjusted for
Temperature)
Odour Sample Measurement Results
208
362
Sample Odour
Concentration
(as received,
in the bag)
(ou)
208
362
Sample Odour
Concentration
(Final,
allowing for
dilution)
(ou)
THE ODOUR UNIT PTY LIMITED
Revision: 2
Revision Date: 13.11.2003
Approved By: TJS
2 of 2
Wetlands
Wetlands
Odour
Character
Accreditation
Number: 14974
52
Concentration of
Reference gas
(ppm)
20 ” F ” 80
Panel Target Range
for n-butanol
(ppb)
1,450
Measured
Concentration
(ou)
36
Measured
Panel Threshold
(ppb)
Yes
Does this panel
calibration
measurement
comply with
AS/NZS4323.3:2001
(Yes / No)
Accreditation
Number: 14974
The Odour Unit Pty Ltd
ACN 091 165 061
Form 06 – Odour Concentration Results Sheet
NATA endorsed test report. This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Issue Date: 13.11.2003
Issued By: SB
Odour Measurement Manual
END OF DOCUMENT
Revision: 2
Revision Date: 13.11.2003
Approved By: TJS
3 of 3
Disclaimer: Parties, other than TOU, responsible for collecting odour samples hereby certify that they have voluntarily furnished these odour samples, appropriately collected and labelled, to The Odour Unit Pty
Limited for the purpose of odour testing. The collection of odour samples by parties other than The Odour Unit Pty Limited relinquishes The Odour Unit Pty Limited from all responsibility for the sample collection
and any effects or actions that the results from the test(s) may have.
None.
PER20041123
n-butanol
Comments
Reference Odorant
Panel Roster
Number
Reference Odorant
Odour Panel Calibration Results
THE ODOUR UNIT PTY LIMITED
THE ODOUR UNIT PTY LIMITED
Showroom 1
16-32 Hulme Court
Myaree
WA 6154
Phone: +61 8 9330 9476
Facsimile: +61 8 9330 1868
Email:[email protected]
Internet: www.odourunit.com.au
ABN: 53 091 165 061
Accreditation Number:
14974
Form 06 - Perth Laboratory
Odour Concentration Measurement Results
The measurement was commissioned by:
Organisation GHD
Contact Mark Goldstone
Sampling Site Alcoa Wagerup
Sampling Method IFH
Order details:
Order requested by
Date of order
Order number
Signed by
Dr. Mark Goldstone
22/09/2004
TBA
TBA
Telephone
Facsimile
Email
Sampling Team
Order accepted by
TOU Project #
Project Manager
Testing operator
(08) 9429 6558
(08) 9429 6555
[email protected]
Paige Gunnell (GHD)
Natasha Bowden
1139.1
Natasha Bowden
Natasha Bowden
Investigated Item
Odour concentration in odour units ‘ou’, determined by sensory odour concentration
measurements, of an odour sample supplied in a sampling bag. Odour character is also
assessed, however, this assessment is not covered by AS4323.3:2001.
Identification
The odour sample bags were labelled individually. Each label recorded the testing laboratory,
sample number, sampling location (or Identification), sampling date and time, dilution ratio (if
dilution was used) and whether further chemical analysis was required.
Method
The odour concentration measurements were performed using dynamic olfactometry
according to the Australian Standard ‘Determination of Odour Concentration by Dynamic
Olfactometry AS/NZS4323.3:2001. The odour perception characteristics of the panel within the
presentation series for the samples were analogous to that for butanol calibration. Any
deviation from the Australian standard is recorded in the ‘Comments’ section of this report.
Measuring Range
The measuring range of the olfactometer is 22 ” F ” 218 ou. If the measuring range was
insufficient the odour samples will have been pre-diluted. The machine is not calibrated
beyond dilution setting 217or below setting 23. This is specifically mentioned with the results.
Environment
The measurements were performed in an air- and odour-conditioned room. The room
temperature is maintained at 25oC or less, with temperature fluctuations of less than ± 3 oC.
Measuring Dates
The date of each measurement is specified with the results.
Instrument Used
The olfactometer used during this testing session was: ODORMAT SERIES 200107V05
Instrumental
Precision
The precision of this instrument (expressed as repeatability) for a sensory calibration must be r
d 0.477 in accordance with the Australian Standard AS/NZS4323.3:2001.
ODORMAT SERIES 200107V05: r = 0.384 (20 September, 2004)
Compliance – Yes
Instrumental
Accuracy
The accuracy of this instrument for a sensory calibration must be A d 0.217 in accordance with
the Australian Standard AS/NZS4323.3:2001.
ODORMAT SERIES 200107V05: A = 0.147 (20 September, 2004)
Compliance – Yes
Lower Detection
Limit (LDL)
The LDL for the olfactometer has been determined to be 16 ou (four times the lowest dilution
setting)
Traceability
The measurements have been performed using standards for which the traceability to the
national standard has been demonstrated. The assessors are individually selected to comply
with fixed criteria and are monitored in time to keep within the limits of the standard. The
results from the assessors are traceable to primary standards of n-butanol in nitrogen.
Date: Wednesday, 3 November 2004
Report Number / Panel Roster Number: PER20041030
N. Bowden
T. Schulz
Principal and Managing Director
Authorised Signatory
1 of 3
The Odour Unit Pty Ltd
ACN 091 165 061
Form 06 – Odour Concentration Results Sheet (V05)
Issue Date: 13.11.2003
Issued By: SB
Odour Measurement Manual
Revision: 3
Revision Date: 01.03.2004
Approved By: TJS
PC40831
PC40832
PC40830
ROCP2-2
Cooling Pond –
Free Sample
ROCP2-1
The Odour Unit Pty Ltd
ACN 091 165 061
Form 06 – Odour Concentration Results Sheet
TOU
Sample
ID
Sample Location
Analysis
Date &
Time
30/10/04
11:13hrs
30/10/04
11:45hrs
30/10/04
12:19hrs
Sampling
Date & Time
29/10/04
13:00hrs
29/10/04
14:45hrs
29/10/04
10:30hrs
5
5
5
Panel
Size
-
-
-
Nominal
Sample
Dilution
Issue Date: 13.11.2003
Issued By: SB
Odour Measurement Manual
10
10
10
Valid
ITEs
-
-
-
Actual
Sample
Dilution
(Adjusted for
Temperature)
Odour Sample Measurement Results
478
256
274
Sample Odour
Concentration
(as received,
in the bag)
(ou)
478
256
274
Sample Odour
Concentration
(Final,
allowing for
dilution)
(ou)
THE ODOUR UNIT PTY LIMITED
Revision: 2
Revision Date: 13.11.2003
Approved By: TJS
2 of 3
Mouldy
Mouldy
Mouldy
Odour Character
Accreditation
Number: 14974
52
Concentration of
Reference gas
(ppm)
20 ” F ” 80
Panel Target Range
for n-butanol
(ppb)
1,450
Measured
Concentration
(ou)
36
Measured
Panel Threshold
(ppb)
Yes
Does this panel
calibration
measurement
comply with
AS/NZS4323.3:2001
(Yes / No)
Accreditation
Number: 14974
The Odour Unit Pty Ltd
ACN 091 165 061
Form 06 – Odour Concentration Results Sheet
NATA endorsed test report. This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Issue Date: 13.11.2003
Issued By: SB
Odour Measurement Manual
END OF DOCUMENT
Revision: 2
Revision Date: 13.11.2003
Approved By: TJS
3 of 3
Disclaimer: Parties, other than TOU, responsible for collecting odour samples hereby certify that they have voluntarily furnished these odour samples, appropriately collected and labelled, to The Odour Unit Pty
Limited for the purpose of odour testing. The collection of odour samples by parties other than The Odour Unit Pty Limited relinquishes The Odour Unit Pty Limited from all responsibility for the sample collection
and any effects or actions that the results from the test(s) may have.
None.
PER20041030
n-butanol
Comments
Reference Odorant
Panel Roster
Number
Reference Odorant
Odour Panel Calibration Results
THE ODOUR UNIT PTY LIMITED
THE ODOUR UNIT PTY LIMITED
Showroom 1
16-32 Hulme Court
Myaree
WA 6154
Phone: +61 8 9330 9476
Facsimile: +61 8 9330 1868
Email:[email protected]
Internet: www.odourunit.com.au
ABN: 53 091 165 061
Accreditation Number:
14974
Form 06 - Perth Laboratory
Odour Concentration Measurement Results
The measurement was commissioned by:
Organisation GHD
Contact Mark Goldstone
Sampling Site Alcoa Wagerup
Sampling Method IFH
Order details:
Order requested by
Date of order
Order number
Signed by
Dr. Mark Goldstone
22/09/2004
TBA
TBA
Telephone
Facsimile
Email
Sampling Team
Order accepted by
TOU Project #
Project Manager
Testing operator
(08) 9429 6558
(08) 9429 6555
[email protected]
Paige Gunnell (GHD)
Natasha Bowden
1139.1
Natasha Bowden
Clayton Hough
Investigated Item
Odour concentration in odour units ‘ou’, determined by sensory odour concentration
measurements, of an odour sample supplied in a sampling bag. Odour character is also
assessed, however, this assessment is not covered by AS4323.3:2001.
Identification
The odour sample bags were labelled individually. Each label recorded the testing laboratory,
sample number, sampling location (or Identification), sampling date and time, dilution ratio (if
dilution was used) and whether further chemical analysis was required.
Method
The odour concentration measurements were performed using dynamic olfactometry
according to the Australian Standard ‘Determination of Odour Concentration by Dynamic
Olfactometry AS/NZS4323.3:2001. The odour perception characteristics of the panel within the
presentation series for the samples were analogous to that for butanol calibration. Any
deviation from the Australian standard is recorded in the ‘Comments’ section of this report.
Measuring Range
The measuring range of the olfactometer is 22 ” F ” 218 ou. If the measuring range was
insufficient the odour samples will have been pre-diluted. The machine is not calibrated
beyond dilution setting 217or below setting 23. This is specifically mentioned with the results.
Environment
The measurements were performed in an air- and odour-conditioned room. The room
temperature is maintained at 25oC or less, with temperature fluctuations of less than ± 3 oC.
Measuring Dates
The date of each measurement is specified with the results.
Instrument Used
The olfactometer used during this testing session was: ODORMAT SERIES 200107V05
Instrumental
Precision
The precision of this instrument (expressed as repeatability) for a sensory calibration must be r
d 0.477 in accordance with the Australian Standard AS/NZS4323.3:2001.
ODORMAT SERIES 200107V05: r = 0.384 (20 September, 2004)
Compliance – Yes
Instrumental
Accuracy
The accuracy of this instrument for a sensory calibration must be A d 0.217 in accordance with
the Australian Standard AS/NZS4323.3:2001.
ODORMAT SERIES 200107V05: A = 0.147 (20 September, 2004)
Compliance – Yes
Lower Detection
Limit (LDL)
The LDL for the olfactometer has been determined to be 16 ou (four times the lowest dilution
setting)
Traceability
The measurements have been performed using standards for which the traceability to the
national standard has been demonstrated. The assessors are individually selected to comply
with fixed criteria and are monitored in time to keep within the limits of the standard. The
results from the assessors are traceable to primary standards of n-butanol in nitrogen.
Date: Wednesday, 3 November 2004
Report Number / Panel Roster Number: PER20041029
C. Hough
T. Schulz
Principal and Managing Director
Authorised Signatory
1 of 2
The Odour Unit Pty Ltd
ACN 091 165 061
Form 06 – Odour Concentration Results Sheet (V05)
Issue Date: 13.11.2003
Issued By: SB
Odour Measurement Manual
Revision: 3
Revision Date: 01.03.2004
Approved By: TJS
PC40827
PC40828
PC40829
Dry Mud
Wet Mud
Wet Sand
The Odour Unit Pty Ltd
ACN 091 165 061
Form 06 – Odour Concentration Results Sheet
TOU
Sample
ID
Sample Location
Analysis
Date &
Time
29/10/04
15:05hrs
29/10/04
15:54hrs
29/10/04
15:30hrs
Sampling
Date & Time
28/10/04
11:50hrs
28/10/04
15:10hrs
28/10/04
16:45hrs
5
5
5
Panel
Size
-
-
-
Nominal
Sample
Dilution
Issue Date: 13.11.2003
Issued By: SB
Odour Measurement Manual
10
10
10
Valid
ITEs
-
-
-
Actual
Sample
Dilution
(Adjusted for
Temperature)
Odour Sample Measurement Results
1,550
1,550
137
Sample Odour
Concentration
(as received,
in the bag)
(ou)
1,550
1,550
137
Sample Odour
Concentration
(Final,
allowing for
dilution)
(ou)
THE ODOUR UNIT PTY LIMITED
Revision: 2
Revision Date: 13.11.2003
Approved By: TJS
2 of 2
Greasy / dirty
Greasy / dirty
Slight metallic
Odour Character
Accreditation
Number: 14974
52
Concentration of
Reference gas
(ppm)
20 ” F ” 80
Panel Target Range
for n-butanol
(ppb)
1,450
Measured
Concentration
(ou)
36
Measured
Panel Threshold
(ppb)
Yes
Does this panel
calibration
measurement
comply with
AS/NZS4323.3:2001
(Yes / No)
Accreditation
Number: 14974
The Odour Unit Pty Ltd
ACN 091 165 061
Form 06 – Odour Concentration Results Sheet
NATA endorsed test report. This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Issue Date: 13.11.2003
Issued By: SB
Odour Measurement Manual
END OF DOCUMENT
Revision: 2
Revision Date: 13.11.2003
Approved By: TJS
3 of 3
Disclaimer: Parties, other than TOU, responsible for collecting odour samples hereby certify that they have voluntarily furnished these odour samples, appropriately collected and labelled, to The Odour Unit Pty
Limited for the purpose of odour testing. The collection of odour samples by parties other than The Odour Unit Pty Limited relinquishes The Odour Unit Pty Limited from all responsibility for the sample collection
and any effects or actions that the results from the test(s) may have.
None.
PER20041029
n-butanol
Comments
Reference Odorant
Panel Roster
Number
Reference Odorant
Odour Panel Calibration Results
THE ODOUR UNIT PTY LIMITED
THE ODOUR UNIT PTY LIMITED
Showroom 1
16-32 Hulme Court
Myaree
WA 6154
Phone: +61 8 9330 9476
Facsimile: +61 8 9330 1868
Email:[email protected]
Internet: www.odourunit.com.au
ABN: 53 091 165 061
Accreditation Number:
14974
Form 06 - Perth Laboratory
Odour Concentration Measurement Results
The measurement was commissioned by:
Organisation GHD
Contact Mark Goldstone
Sampling Site Alcoa Wagerup
Sampling Method IFH
Order details:
Order requested by
Date of order
Order number
Signed by
Dr. Mark Goldstone
22/09/2004
TBA
TBA
Telephone
Facsimile
Email
Sampling Team
Order accepted by
TOU Project #
Project Manager
Testing operator
(08) 9429 6558
(08) 9429 6555
[email protected]
Paige Gunnell (GHD)
Natasha Bowden
1139.1
Natasha Bowden
Clayton Hough
Investigated Item
Odour concentration in odour units ‘ou’, determined by sensory odour concentration
measurements, of an odour sample supplied in a sampling bag. Odour character is also
assessed, however, this assessment is not covered by AS4323.3:2001.
Identification
The odour sample bags were labelled individually. Each label recorded the testing laboratory,
sample number, sampling location (or Identification), sampling date and time, dilution ratio (if
dilution was used) and whether further chemical analysis was required.
Method
The odour concentration measurements were performed using dynamic olfactometry
according to the Australian Standard ‘Determination of Odour Concentration by Dynamic
Olfactometry AS/NZS4323.3:2001. The odour perception characteristics of the panel within the
presentation series for the samples were analogous to that for butanol calibration. Any
deviation from the Australian standard is recorded in the ‘Comments’ section of this report.
Measuring Range
The measuring range of the olfactometer is 22 ” F ” 218 ou. If the measuring range was
insufficient the odour samples will have been pre-diluted. The machine is not calibrated
beyond dilution setting 217or below setting 23. This is specifically mentioned with the results.
Environment
The measurements were performed in an air- and odour-conditioned room. The room
temperature is maintained at 25oC or less, with temperature fluctuations of less than ± 3 oC.
Measuring Dates
The date of each measurement is specified with the results.
Instrument Used
The olfactometer used during this testing session was: ODORMAT SERIES 200107V05
Instrumental
Precision
The precision of this instrument (expressed as repeatability) for a sensory calibration must be r
d 0.477 in accordance with the Australian Standard AS/NZS4323.3:2001.
ODORMAT SERIES 200107V05: r = 0.384 (20 September, 2004)
Compliance – Yes
Instrumental
Accuracy
The accuracy of this instrument for a sensory calibration must be A d 0.217 in accordance with
the Australian Standard AS/NZS4323.3:2001.
ODORMAT SERIES 200107V05: A = 0.147 (20 September, 2004)
Compliance – Yes
Lower Detection
Limit (LDL)
The LDL for the olfactometer has been determined to be 16 ou (four times the lowest dilution
setting)
Traceability
The measurements have been performed using standards for which the traceability to the
national standard has been demonstrated. The assessors are individually selected to comply
with fixed criteria and are monitored in time to keep within the limits of the standard. The
results from the assessors are traceable to primary standards of n-butanol in nitrogen.
Date: Wednesday, 3 November 2004
Report Number / Panel Roster Number: PER20041028
C. Hough
T. Schulz
Principal and Managing Director
Authorised Signatory
1 of 2
The Odour Unit Pty Ltd
ACN 091 165 061
Form 06 – Odour Concentration Results Sheet (V05)
Issue Date: 13.11.2003
Issued By: SB
Odour Measurement Manual
Revision: 3
Revision Date: 01.03.2004
Approved By: TJS
None.
Concentration of
Reference gas
(ppm)
52
10
10
Valid
ITEs
-
-
Nominal
Sample
Dilution
20 ” F ” 80
Panel Target Range
for n-butanol
(ppb)
-
-
1,550
Measured
Concentration
(ou)
Odour Panel Calibration Results
5
5
Panel
Size
10,800
8,780
33
Sharp chemical
Sharp chemical
Odour Character
Yes
Does this panel
calibration
measurement
comply with
AS/NZS4323.3:2001
(Yes / No)
Sample Odour
Concentration
(Final,
allowing for
dilution)
(ou)
Measured
Panel Threshold
(ppb)
10,800
8,780
Sample Odour
Concentration
(as received,
in the bag)
(ou)
Accreditation
Number: 14974
The Odour Unit Pty Ltd
ACN 091 165 061
Form 06 – Odour Concentration Results Sheet
NATA endorsed test report. This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Issue Date: 13.11.2003
Issued By: SB
Odour Measurement Manual
END OF DOCUMENT
Revision: 2
Revision Date: 13.11.2003
Approved By: TJS
2 of 2
Disclaimer: Parties, other than TOU, responsible for collecting odour samples hereby certify that they have voluntarily furnished these odour samples, appropriately collected and labelled, to The Odour Unit Pty
Limited for the purpose of odour testing. The collection of odour samples by parties other than The Odour Unit Pty Limited relinquishes The Odour Unit Pty Limited from all responsibility for the sample collection
and any effects or actions that the results from the test(s) may have.
Comments
PER20041028
n-butanol
PC40826
Super Thickener 2
28/10/04
15:08hrs
28/10/04
15:34hrs
27/10/04
no time given
27/10/04
no time given
Reference Odorant
Panel Roster
Number
PC40825
Super Thickener 1
Analysis
Date &
Time
Sampling
Date & Time
Reference Odorant
TOU
Sample
ID
Sample Location
Actual
Sample
Dilution
(Adjusted for
Temperature)
Odour Sample Measurement Results
THE ODOUR UNIT PTY LIMITED
THE ODOUR UNIT PTY LIMITED
Showroom 1
16-32 Hulme Court
Myaree
WA 6154
Phone: +61 8 9330 9476
Facsimile: +61 8 9330 1868
Email:[email protected]
Internet: www.odourunit.com.au
ABN: 53 091 165 061
Accreditation Number:
14974
Form 06 - Perth Laboratory
Odour Concentration Measurement Results
The measurement was commissioned by:
Organisation GHD
Contact Mark Goldstone
Sampling Site Alcoa Wagerup
Sampling Method IFH
Order details:
Order requested by
Date of order
Order number
Signed by
Dr. Mark Goldstone
22/09/2004
TBA
TBA
Telephone
Facsimile
Email
Sampling Team
Order accepted by
TOU Project #
Project Manager
Testing operator
(08) 9429 6558
(08) 9429 6555
[email protected]
Paige Gunnell (GHD)
Natasha Bowden
1139.1
Natasha Bowden
Clayton Hough
Investigated Item
Odour concentration in odour units ‘ou’, determined by sensory odour concentration
measurements, of an odour sample supplied in a sampling bag. Odour character is also
assessed, however, this assessment is not covered by AS4323.3:2001.
Identification
The odour sample bags were labelled individually. Each label recorded the testing laboratory,
sample number, sampling location (or Identification), sampling date and time, dilution ratio (if
dilution was used) and whether further chemical analysis was required.
Method
The odour concentration measurements were performed using dynamic olfactometry
according to the Australian Standard ‘Determination of Odour Concentration by Dynamic
Olfactometry AS/NZS4323.3:2001. The odour perception characteristics of the panel within the
presentation series for the samples were analogous to that for butanol calibration. Any
deviation from the Australian standard is recorded in the ‘Comments’ section of this report.
Measuring Range
The measuring range of the olfactometer is 22 ” F ” 218 ou. If the measuring range was
insufficient the odour samples will have been pre-diluted. The machine is not calibrated
beyond dilution setting 217or below setting 23. This is specifically mentioned with the results.
Environment
The measurements were performed in an air- and odour-conditioned room. The room
temperature is maintained at 25oC or less, with temperature fluctuations of less than ± 3 oC.
Measuring Dates
The date of each measurement is specified with the results.
Instrument Used
The olfactometer used during this testing session was: ODORMAT SERIES 200107V05
Instrumental
Precision
The precision of this instrument (expressed as repeatability) for a sensory calibration must be r
d 0.477 in accordance with the Australian Standard AS/NZS4323.3:2001.
ODORMAT SERIES 200107V05: r = 0.384 (20 September, 2004)
Compliance – Yes
Instrumental
Accuracy
The accuracy of this instrument for a sensory calibration must be A d 0.217 in accordance with
the Australian Standard AS/NZS4323.3:2001.
ODORMAT SERIES 200107V05: A = 0.147 (20 September, 2004)
Compliance – Yes
Lower Detection
Limit (LDL)
The LDL for the olfactometer has been determined to be 16 ou (four times the lowest dilution
setting)
Traceability
The measurements have been performed using standards for which the traceability to the
national standard has been demonstrated. The assessors are individually selected to comply
with fixed criteria and are monitored in time to keep within the limits of the standard. The
results from the assessors are traceable to primary standards of n-butanol in nitrogen.
Date: Tuesday, 2 November 2004
Report Number / Panel Roster Number: PER20041027
C. Hough
T. Schulz
Principal and Managing Director
Authorised Signatory
1 of 1
The Odour Unit Pty Ltd
ACN 091 165 061
Form 06 – Odour Concentration Results Sheet (V05)
Issue Date: 13.11.2003
Issued By: SB
Odour Measurement Manual
Revision: 3
Revision Date: 01.03.2004
Approved By: TJS
None.
Concentration of
Reference gas
(ppm)
52
10
10
Valid
ITEs
-
-
Nominal
Sample
Dilution
20 ” F ” 80
Panel Target Range
for n-butanol
(ppb)
-
-
1,550
Measured
Concentration
(ou)
Odour Panel Calibration Results
5
5
Panel
Size
239
315
239
315
33
Light caustic /
humid
Light caustic /
humid
Odour Character
Yes
Does this panel
calibration
measurement
comply with
AS/NZS4323.3:2001
(Yes / No)
Sample Odour
Concentration
(Final,
allowing for
dilution)
(ou)
Measured
Panel Threshold
(ppb)
Sample Odour
Concentration
(as received,
in the bag)
(ou)
Accreditation
Number: 14974
The Odour Unit Pty Ltd
ACN 091 165 061
Form 06 – Odour Concentration Results Sheet
NATA endorsed test report. This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Issue Date: 13.11.2003
Issued By: SB
Odour Measurement Manual
END OF DOCUMENT
Revision: 2
Revision Date: 13.11.2003
Approved By: TJS
2 of 2
Disclaimer: Parties, other than TOU, responsible for collecting odour samples hereby certify that they have voluntarily furnished these odour samples, appropriately collected and labelled, to The Odour Unit Pty
Limited for the purpose of odour testing. The collection of odour samples by parties other than The Odour Unit Pty Limited relinquishes The Odour Unit Pty Limited from all responsibility for the sample collection
and any effects or actions that the results from the test(s) may have.
Comments
PER20041027
n-butanol
PC40809
Oxalate 2
27/10/04
11:20hrs
27/10/04
11:45hrs
26/10/04
10:10hrs
26/10/04
12:20hrs
Reference Odorant
Panel Roster
Number
PC40808
Oxalate 1
Analysis
Date &
Time
Sampling
Date &
Time
Reference Odorant
TOU
Sample ID
Sample Location
Actual
Sample
Dilution
(Adjusted for
Temperature)
Odour Sample Measurement Results
THE ODOUR UNIT PTY LIMITED
THE ODOUR UNIT PTY LIMITED
Showroom 1
16-32 Hulme Court
Myaree
WA 6154
Phone: +61 8 9330 9476
Facsimile: +61 8 9330 1868
Email:[email protected]
Internet: www.odourunit.com.au
ABN: 53 091 165 061
Accreditation Number:
14974
Form 06 - Perth Laboratory
Odour Concentration Measurement Results
The measurement was commissioned by:
Organisation GHD
Contact Mark Goldstone
Sampling Site Alcoa Wagerup
Sampling Method IFH
Order details:
Order requested by
Date of order
Order number
Signed by
Dr. Mark Goldstone
22/09/2004
TBA
TBA
Telephone
Facsimile
Email
Sampling Team
Order accepted by
TOU Project #
Project Manager
Testing operator
(08) 9429 6558
(08) 9429 6555
[email protected]
Paige Gunnell (GHD)
Natasha Bowden
1139.1
Natasha Bowden
Natasha Bowden
Investigated Item
Odour concentration in odour units ‘ou’, determined by sensory odour concentration
measurements, of an odour sample supplied in a sampling bag. Odour character is also
assessed, however, this assessment is not covered by AS4323.3:2001.
Identification
The odour sample bags were labelled individually. Each label recorded the testing laboratory,
sample number, sampling location (or Identification), sampling date and time, dilution ratio (if
dilution was used) and whether further chemical analysis was required.
Method
The odour concentration measurements were performed using dynamic olfactometry
according to the Australian Standard ‘Determination of Odour Concentration by Dynamic
Olfactometry AS/NZS4323.3:2001. The odour perception characteristics of the panel within the
presentation series for the samples were analogous to that for butanol calibration. Any
deviation from the Australian standard is recorded in the ‘Comments’ section of this report.
Measuring Range
The measuring range of the olfactometer is 22 ” F ” 218 ou. If the measuring range was
insufficient the odour samples will have been pre-diluted. The machine is not calibrated
beyond dilution setting 217or below setting 23. This is specifically mentioned with the results.
Environment
The measurements were performed in an air- and odour-conditioned room. The room
temperature is maintained at 25oC or less, with temperature fluctuations of less than ± 3 oC.
Measuring Dates
The date of each measurement is specified with the results.
Instrument Used
The olfactometer used during this testing session was: ODORMAT SERIES 200107V05
Instrumental
Precision
The precision of this instrument (expressed as repeatability) for a sensory calibration must be r
d 0.477 in accordance with the Australian Standard AS/NZS4323.3:2001.
ODORMAT SERIES 200107V05: r = 0.384 (20 September, 2004)
Compliance – Yes
Instrumental
Accuracy
The accuracy of this instrument for a sensory calibration must be A d 0.217 in accordance with
the Australian Standard AS/NZS4323.3:2001.
ODORMAT SERIES 200107V05: A = 0.147 (20 September, 2004)
Compliance – Yes
Lower Detection
Limit (LDL)
The LDL for the olfactometer has been determined to be 16 ou (four times the lowest dilution
setting)
Traceability
The measurements have been performed using standards for which the traceability to the
national standard has been demonstrated. The assessors are individually selected to comply
with fixed criteria and are monitored in time to keep within the limits of the standard. The
results from the assessors are traceable to primary standards of n-butanol in nitrogen.
Date: Tuesday, 2 November 2004
Report Number / Panel Roster Number: PER20041026
N. Bowden
T. Schulz
Principal and Managing Director
Authorised Signatory
1 of 1
The Odour Unit Pty Ltd
ACN 091 165 061
Form 06 – Odour Concentration Results Sheet (V05)
Issue Date: 13.11.2003
Issued By: SB
Odour Measurement Manual
Revision: 3
Revision Date: 01.03.2004
Approved By: TJS
None.
Concentration of
Reference gas
(ppm)
52
10
8
Valid
ITEs
-
-
Nominal
Sample
Dilution
20 ” F ” 80
Panel Target Range
for n-butanol
(ppb)
-
-
1,260
Measured
Concentration
(ou)
Odour Panel Calibration Results
5
5
Panel
Size
1,660
1,450
1,660
1,450
41
Wetlands
Wetlands
Odour Character
Yes
Does this panel
calibration
measurement
comply with
AS/NZS4323.3:2001
(Yes / No)
Sample Odour
Concentration
(Final,
allowing for
dilution)
(ou)
Measured
Panel Threshold
(ppb)
Sample Odour
Concentration
(as received,
in the bag)
(ou)
Accreditation
Number: 14974
The Odour Unit Pty Ltd
ACN 091 165 061
Form 06 – Odour Concentration Results Sheet
NATA endorsed test report. This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Issue Date: 13.11.2003
Issued By: SB
Odour Measurement Manual
END OF DOCUMENT
Revision: 2
Revision Date: 13.11.2003
Approved By: TJS
2 of 2
Disclaimer: Parties, other than TOU, responsible for collecting odour samples hereby certify that they have voluntarily furnished these odour samples, appropriately collected and labelled, to The Odour Unit Pty
Limited for the purpose of odour testing. The collection of odour samples by parties other than The Odour Unit Pty Limited relinquishes The Odour Unit Pty Limited from all responsibility for the sample collection
and any effects or actions that the results from the test(s) may have.
Comments
PER20041026
n-butanol
PC40807
Lower Dam 2
26/10/2004
16:38hrs
26/10/2004
17:08hrs
25/10/2004
12:10hrs
25/10/2004
16:00hrs
Reference Odorant
Panel Roster
Number
PC40806
Lower Dam 1
Analysis
Date &
Time
Sampling
Date &
Time
Reference Odorant
TOU
Sample ID
Sample Location
Actual
Sample
Dilution
(Adjusted for
Temperature)
Odour Sample Measurement Results
THE ODOUR UNIT PTY LIMITED
THE ODOUR UNIT PTY LIMITED
Showroom 1
16-32 Hulme Court
Myaree
WA 6154
Phone: +61 8 9330 9476
Facsimile: +61 8 9330 1868
Email:[email protected]
Internet: www.odourunit.com.au
ABN: 53 091 165 061
Accreditation Number:
14974
Form 06 - Perth Laboratory
Odour Concentration Measurement Results
The measurement was commissioned by:
Organisation GHD
Contact Paige Gunnell
Sampling Site Alcoa
Sampling Method Not specified
Order details:
Order requested by
Date of order
Order number
Signed by
Paige Gunnell
15/11/2004
TBA
TBA
Telephone
Facsimile
Email
Sampling Team
Order accepted by
TOU Project #
Project Manager
Testing operator
(08) 9429 6558
(08) 9429 6555
[email protected]
Paige Gunnell
Natasha Bowden
1139.1
Natasha Bowden
Natasha Bowden
Investigated Item
Odour concentration in odour units ‘ou’, determined by sensory odour concentration
measurements, of an odour sample supplied in a sampling bag. Odour character is also
assessed, however, this assessment is not covered by AS4323.3:2001.
Identification
The odour sample bags were labelled individually. Each label recorded the testing laboratory,
sample number, sampling location (or Identification), sampling date and time, dilution ratio (if
dilution was used) and whether further chemical analysis was required.
Method
The odour concentration measurements were performed using dynamic olfactometry
according to the Australian Standard ‘Determination of Odour Concentration by Dynamic
Olfactometry AS/NZS4323.3:2001. The odour perception characteristics of the panel within the
presentation series for the samples were analogous to that for butanol calibration. Any
deviation from the Australian standard is recorded in the ‘Comments’ section of this report.
Measuring Range
The measuring range of the olfactometer is 22 ” F ” 218 ou. If the measuring range was
insufficient the odour samples will have been pre-diluted. The machine is not calibrated
beyond dilution setting 217or below setting 23. This is specifically mentioned with the results.
Environment
The measurements were performed in an air- and odour-conditioned room. The room
temperature is maintained at 25oC or less, with temperature fluctuations of less than ± 3 oC.
Measuring Dates
The date of each measurement is specified with the results.
Instrument Used
The olfactometer used during this testing session was: ODORMAT SERIES 200107V05
Instrumental
Precision
The precision of this instrument (expressed as repeatability) for a sensory calibration must be r
d 0.477 in accordance with the Australian Standard AS/NZS4323.3:2001.
ODORMAT SERIES 200107V05: r = 0.384 (20 September, 2004)
Compliance – Yes
Instrumental
Accuracy
The accuracy of this instrument for a sensory calibration must be A d 0.217 in accordance with
the Australian Standard AS/NZS4323.3:2001.
ODORMAT SERIES 200107V05: A = 0.147 (20 September, 2004)
Compliance – Yes
Lower Detection
Limit (LDL)
The LDL for the olfactometer has been determined to be 16 ou (four times the lowest dilution
setting)
Traceability
The measurements have been performed using standards for which the traceability to the
national standard has been demonstrated. The assessors are individually selected to comply
with fixed criteria and are monitored in time to keep within the limits of the standard. The
results from the assessors are traceable to primary standards of n-butanol in nitrogen.
Date: Monday, 20 December 2004
Report Number / Panel Roster Number: PER20041216
N. Bowden
T. Schulz
Principal and Managing Director
The Odour Unit Pty Ltd
ACN 091 165 061
Form 06 – Odour Concentration Results Sheet (V05)
Authorised Signatory
Issue Date: 13.11.2003
Issued By: SB
Odour Measurement Manual
Revision: 3
Revision Date: 01.03.2004
Approved By: TJS
1 of 3
PC41020
PC41021
PC41022
GHD 1
GHD 2
GHD 3
The Odour Unit Pty Ltd
ACN 091 165 061
Form 06 – Odour Concentration Results Sheet
TOU
Sample
ID
Sample Location
Analysis
Date &
Time
16/12/2004
13:13hrs
16/12/2004
13:39hrs
16/12/2004
14:05hrs
Sampling
Date & Time
15/12/2004
12:00hrs
15/12/2004
14:30hrs
15/12/2004
16:00hrs
5
5
5
Panel
Size
-
-
-
Issue Date: 13.11.2003
Issued By: SB
Odour Measurement Manual
10
10
10
Valid
ITEs
Nominal
Sample
Dilution
Factor
-
-
-
Actual
Sample
Dilution
(Adjusted for
Temperature)
Odour Sample Measurement Results
56
56
60
Sample Odour
Concentration
(as received,
in the bag)
(ou)
56
56
60
Sample Odour
Concentration
(Final,
allowing for
dilution)
(ou)
THE ODOUR UNIT PTY LIMITED
Revision: 2
Revision Date: 13.11.2003
Approved By: TJS
2 of 3
Slight sweet /
musty
Slight sweet /
musty
Slight sweet /
musty
Odour
Character
Accreditation
Number: 14974
52
Concentration of
Reference gas
(ppm)
20 ” F ” 80
Panel Target Range
for n-butanol
(ppb)
1,100
Measured
Concentration
(ou)
47
Measured
Panel Threshold
(ppb)
Yes
Does this panel
calibration
measurement
comply with
AS/NZS4323.3:2001
(Yes / No)
Accreditation
Number: 14974
The Odour Unit Pty Ltd
ACN 091 165 061
Form 06 – Odour Concentration Results Sheet
NATA endorsed test report. This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Issue Date: 13.11.2003
Issued By: SB
Odour Measurement Manual
END OF DOCUMENT
Revision: 2
Revision Date: 13.11.2003
Approved By: TJS
3 of 3
Disclaimer: Parties, other than TOU, responsible for collecting odour samples hereby certify that they have voluntarily furnished these odour samples, appropriately collected and labelled, to The Odour Unit Pty
Limited for the purpose of odour testing. The collection of odour samples by parties other than The Odour Unit Pty Limited relinquishes The Odour Unit Pty Limited from all responsibility for the sample collection
and any effects or actions that the results from the test(s) may have.
None.
PER20041216
n-butanol
Comments
Reference Odorant
Panel Roster
Number
Reference Odorant
Odour Panel Calibration Results
THE ODOUR UNIT PTY LIMITED
Phase 2
Env 05-053.xls, Report
GHD House
239 Adelaide Terrace
Perth WA 6004
Attention:
Your Ref No:
Our Ref No:
February 23, 2005
Mark Goldstone
6115324
ENV 05-053
REPORT ON ANALYSIS OF ALCOA SAMPLES
Introduction:
Twenty three TO17 tubes and eighteen DNPH impregnated tubes were received 18/02/05, these were analysed in
accordance with the chain of custody (0102-0105).
Methods of Analysis:
The tubes were analysed to determine the amount of Volatile Organic Compounds according to WIENV 31 (based
on the analytical section of US EPA TO15 and TO17).The amount of aldehydes and ketones was determined
according to WIENV 34 (based on USEPA TO5 and TO11A).
Results
The results are tabulated on the following worksheets.
GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
Angela Downey
Environmental Chemist
Page 1 of 1
Nigel West
Senior Chemist
Data supplied by Geotechnical Services
HP021804.D
Lab DNPH blank tube
HP021821.D
HP021845.D
HP021825.D
HP021847.D
HP021843.D
HP021823.D
HP021819.D
HP021809.D
HP021841.D
HP021817.D
HP021833.D
HP021835.D
HP021811.D
HP021813.D
HP021839.D
HP021831.D
HP021815.D
HP021837.D
2
Not Detected
HP021803.D
HP111811.D
HP111815.D
HP111827.D
HP111816.D
ad
Angela Downey
1.0ug/ml std
1274300028
1274305376
1274305375
1274305379
1274305370
1274305372
1274305378
1274305377
1274305374
1274305373
1274305371
1274304759
1274304756
1274304758
1274304750
1274304757
1274304753
1274304993
1274304996
Volume of Extract (mL)
nd
Daily Calibration
Multipoint Calibration
MDL Lab No
Precision Lab No
Column Efficiency
Page 1 of 1
Processed By
Geotechnical Services
41-45 Furnace Road
Welshpool Perth
WA 6106 Australia
Lab Number
Sample Name
Our Ref No
Your Ref No
Mark Goldstone
GHD
Checked By
Geotechnical Services
Pass
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Analyte
Detection Limit (ug)
Errors + / - %
% Sample Used
Hood
perspex
stainless
perspex
stainless
perspex
stainless
perspex
stainless
perspex
stainless
perspex
stainless
perspex
stainless
perspex
stainless
lab
lab
Time
19:19
18:36
21:05
21:05
0:08
0:08
3:07
3:07
6:04
6:04
9:12
9:12
12:03
12:03
14:56
14:56
Date
14/02/2005
14/02/2005
14/02/2005
14/02/2005
15/02/2005
15/02/2005
15/02/2005
15/02/2005
15/02/2005
15/02/2005
15/02/2005
15/02/2005
15/02/2005
15/02/2005
15/02/2005
15/02/2005
ppm standard
Date
nw
Nigel West
1.05
nd
nd
2.30
0.58
0.82
0.62
0.35
0.51
nd
0.51
0.43
1.21
1.91
1.31
2.36
0.43
nd
nd
nd
Acetaldehyde
0.07
11.7
Total ug
1.0
1.05
(0.10)
2.47
6.64
2.45
3.43
6.48
1.50
1.50
1.32
1.22
1.20
1.18
1.64
4.13
7.16
3.57
3.41
2.67
4.89
Formaldehyde
0.14
11.7
Total ug
22/02/2005
1.00
(0.11)
0.48
0.68
0.44
0.50
0.44
0.36
0.42
nd
0.42
0.34
0.46
0.58
0.58
1.26
1.10
0.72
nd
0.40
Acetone
0.15
11.8
Total ug
1.03
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Propanal
0.15
11.8
Total ug
1.06
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.35
nd
nd
nd
MEK
0.13
11.9
Total ug
1.06
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
iso-Butanal
0.12
12.7
Total ug
Test Report for Analysis of Carbonyl Derivatives by WIENV 34 (Based on the Analytical Sections of USEPA TO5 & TO11A)
Env 05-053
Samples Received 18-Feb-05
Disclaimer: Geotech has analysed the derivatised samples provided by methods based
on the analytical components of USEPA TO11A and TO5.
6115324
Samples Analysed 18-Feb-05
Env 05-053.xls, DNPH Results
1.02
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
1.05
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Benzaldehyde 2-Pentanone
0.07
0.19
12.0
12.1
Total ug
Total ug
1.03
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
n-Pentanal
0.16
12.5
Total ug
1.02
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
1.02
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Data supplied by Geotechnical Services
1.00
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
p-Tolualdehyde 2-Hexanone Hexanal
0.10
0.19
0.07
17.8
12.9
11.8
Total ug
Total ug
Total ug
Volume(mLs)
Sample
02090510.D
02090503.D
0 ng
1 ng
2 ng
5 ng
10 ng
20 ng
50 ng
100 ng
10ng std #A11408
20ng std #A14330
50ng std #A10058
100ng std #A08348
200ng std #A70150
500ng std #A15002
1000ng std #A10353
Pass
02180502.D
Not Detected
ad
jm
< 5.0
13.6
ng
hexatriene
< 5.0
13.1
ng
benzene
< 5.0
14.1
ng
pyridine
< 5.0
14.5
ng
toluene
< 5.0
13.6
ng
ethylbenzene
873.2
466.8
205.6
104.2
24.3
nd
17.4
nd
110
1300.0
23-Feb-05
979.4
491.6
205.3
103.1
59.5
29.1
18.1
9.4
110
nd
1028.1
489.6
201.9
104.1
44.3
11.4
0.6
nd
110
1100.0
819.6
484.6
195.6
97.0
29.3
2.3
2.6
nd
98
nd
1154.8
528.9
202.7
100.7
47.0
8.8
3.5
nd
100
430.0
1001.3
505.0
197.6
99.9
45.3
10.8
10.7
nd
100
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Not analysed
nd
nd
130
nd
5.90
nd
No analytical data- high levels of moisture in sample caused mass spec to cut out
No analytical data- high levels of moisture in sample caused mass spec to cut out
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Not analysed
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Not analysed
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Not analysed
nd
nd
nd
8.90
nd
Not analysed
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Not analysed
nd
6.40
nd
nd
nd
Not analysed
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Not analysed
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
5.30
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Not analysed
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Not analysed
nd
nd
nd
nd
22.0
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
65.0
nd
Not analysed
nd
nd
nd
25.0
6.70
Not analysed
nd
nd
nd
14.0
nd
Not analysed
(1000 ng)
(1000 ng)
(400 ng)
< 5.0
Should have the same first four numbers in the Lab No as the samples
From TO15 Worksheet
Should have the same Lab No as the Lab Blank in F9
From TO15 Worksheet
Processed By Angela Downey
Checked By
Joanne Menegazzo Date
Geotechnical Services
Geotechnical Services
41-45 Furnace Road
Welshpool Perth
WA 6106 Australia
Month/Day/Yr/Sample No eg 10180204 is analysed on Oct 18th 2002 and is sample No 4
Initials
Errors Determined Without Sampling
BFB Lab Number
nd
Daily Calibration Check
02180502.D
Pass
02090504.D
02090509.D
02090508.D
02090507.D
02090506.D
02090502.D
Solid Standards
Liquid Stds
02180534.D
02180503.D
chkstd
10 ng solids
02180502.D
02180514.D
02180509.D
02180513.D
02180508.D
02180518.D
02180511.D
02180521.D
02180520.D
02180527.D
02180516.D
02180522.D
02180524.D
02180510.D
02180504.D
02180512.D
02180526.D
02180505.D
02180525.D
02180507.D
02180506.D
02180517.D
02180519.D
02180523.D
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Blank #A11369
18:36
18:36
21:05
21:05
0:08
0:08
3:07
3:07
6:04
6:04
9:12
9:12
12:03
12:03
14:56
14:56
Multipoint Calibration
perspex
stainless
perspex
stainless
perspex
stainless
perspex
stainless
perspex
stainless
perspex
stainless
perspex
stainless
perspex
stainless
lab
lab
lab
lab
Lab No
ng
15.4
Units
acetone
Error +/- %
Compound
100ng std
11230409.D
Page 1 of 4
Time
Daily Calibration
14/02/2005
14/02/2005
14/02/2005
14/02/2005
15/02/2005
15/02/2005
15/02/2005
15/02/2005
15/02/2005
15/02/2005
15/02/2005
15/02/2005
15/02/2005
15/02/2005
15/02/2005
15/02/2005
11/02/2005
11/02/2005
11/02/2005
11/02/2005
16/02/2005
16/02/2005
16/02/2005
Lab Blank Lab No
Multipoint Calibration Check
Lab Nos
Hood
Detection Limits. Based on Sample Volume on tube A72261
Date
Comments fail biphenyl
Lab Blank
05-053 11
05-053 6
05-053 10
05-053 5
05-053 14
05-053 8
05-053 17
05-053 16
05-053 23
05-053 12
05-053 18
05-053 20
05-053 7
05-053 1
05-053 9
05-053 22
05-053 2
05-053 21
05-053 4
05-053 3
05-053 13
05-053 15
05-053 19
Sample ID
1st Precision Lab No
A11293
A11144
A14502
A1
C06289
A15036
A72258
C06252
B16433
A72158
A12416
C06646
B15881
A11389
A09645
A14439
A72261
A62959
A70014
B16830
B15517
A01467
A72151
No
Tube
983.8
496.0
202.8
107.8
49.2
17.8
19.3
nd
95
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
6.80
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
16.0
29.0
nd
nd
nd
7.30
< 5.0
14.3
ng
1,3-xylene
Test Report for Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds by in-House Method WIENV 31
Mark Goldstone
Our Ref No
Env 05-053 Samples Received
18-Feb-05 Disclaimer: Geotechnical Services has not been involved in the collection of these samples.
Your Ref No
6115324
Samples Analysed
18-Feb-05 Geotech has determined the VOCs by thermal desorption GC-MS
GHD
Env 05-053.xls, VOC Results
Data supplied by Geotechnical Services
02090506.D
02090507.D
02090508.D
02090509.D
02090510.D
02090503.D
02090504.D
1 ng
2 ng
5 ng
10 ng
20 ng
50 ng
100 ng
Page 2 of 4
ample No 4
s
Joanne Menegazzo Date
jm
me first four numbers in the Lab No as t
heet
me Lab No as the Lab Blank in F9
heet
02090502.D
0 ng
Solid Standards
02180534.D
02180503.D
02180502.D
02180514.D
02180509.D
02180513.D
02180508.D
02180518.D
02180511.D
02180521.D
02180520.D
02180527.D
02180516.D
02180522.D
02180524.D
02180510.D
02180504.D
02180512.D
02180526.D
02180505.D
02180525.D
02180507.D
02180506.D
02180517.D
02180519.D
02180523.D
chkstd
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Lab No
10 ng solids
A72261
806.8
462.6
202.0
100.0
50.5
20.1
9.7
nd
110
959.7
493.8
198.7
100.1
48.4
15.9
7.2
nd
100
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
(50 ng)
54.0
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.2
ng
styrene
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
ng
13.2
Units
Error +/- %
Volume(mLs)
ethynyl-benzene
Compound
Sample
pounds by in-House Method W
Samples Received
18-Feb-05
Samples Analysed
18-Feb-05
946.5
497.8
199.7
99.9
46.9
11.1
3.6
nd
110
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
6.40
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.3
ng
1,2-xylene
295.1
429.4
199.3
101.7
65.3
36.3
56.9
26.0
97
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.5
ng
benzaldehyde
790.8
509.8
188.8
99.1
58.5
29.3
28.2
16.3
110
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.8
1,3,5trimethylbenzene
ng
271.7
377.5
187.0
103.6
66.2
37.5
33.2
21.7
100
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.7
ng
benzonitrile
538.4
431.6
189.8
98.5
59.2
32.0
20.1
20.1
120
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.1
ng
benzofuran
168.4
490.6
190.1
97.1
50.8
20.5
20.9
5.3
110
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
14.0
ng
acetophenone
21.3
27.0
20.3
11.4
5.2
2.1
1.4
nd
10
9.2
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
69.9
28.0
nd
(10 ng)
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
12.9
ng
naphthalene
Env 05-053.xls, VOC Results
835.6
472.7
198.7
99.1
49.6
22.5
13.5
nd
100
41.0
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
(50 ng)
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.0
ng
89.9
41.1
19.4
7.1
5.1
2.9
1.6
nd
8
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
5.90
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
22.0
ng
quinoline1H-indole
899.1
411.4
194.1
71.2
51.4
28.9
15.8
nd
83
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
8.40
59.0
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.1
ng
2-methyl
naphthalene
303.9
345.5
225.3
100.3
50.5
21.8
13.7
nd
95
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
21.0
24.0
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.0
ng
1-methyl
naphthalene
Data supplied by Geotechnical Services
< 0.50
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
9
< 0.50
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
9
02180502.D
02180514.D
02180509.D
02180513.D
02180508.D
02180518.D
02180511.D
02180521.D
02180520.D
02180527.D
02180516.D
02180522.D
02180524.D
02180510.D
02180504.D
02180512.D
02180526.D
02180505.D
02180525.D
02180507.D
02180506.D
02180517.D
02180519.D
02180523.D
02180534.D
02180503.D
chkstd
10 ng solids
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
02090503.D
02090504.D
50 ng
100 ng
Page 3 of 4
ample No 4
s
Joanne Menegazzo Date
jm
me first four numbers in the Lab No as t
heet
me Lab No as the Lab Blank in F9
heet
02090510.D
20 ng
10.0
02090508.D
02090509.D
5 ng
02090507.D
2 ng
10 ng
6.4
02090506.D
47.2
40.6
24.4
14.7
3.4
02090502.D
1 ng
Lab No
0 ng
Solid Standards
A72261
49.3
57.0
21.0
10.1
5.3
2.0
1.5
nd
12.6
13.1
Error +/- %
1.7
ng
ng
Units
Volume(mLs)
acenaphthylene
Compound
Sample
biphenyl
pounds by in-House Method W
Samples Received
18-Feb-05
Samples Analysed
18-Feb-05
54.9
57.9
19.8
10.1
5.0
2.4
1.4
nd
8
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
12.9
ng
79.9
89.9
21.4
10.1
3.2
nd
nd
nd
2
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.1
ng
acenaphdibenzo-furan
thene
71.2
52.4
19.8
10.2
6.0
3.2
2.3
1.4
6
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
12.9
ng
9H-fluorene
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No data
9H-fluoren9-one
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No data
phenanthrene
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No data
fluoranthene
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No data
pyrene
925.1
537.8
210.4
102.9
nd
nd
nd
nd
73
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
17.0
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
44.0
< 5.0
14.6
ng
MEK
Env 05-053.xls, VOC Results
1052.4
530.8
201.6
103.1
45.5
13.7
3.9
nd
92
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
6.70
nd
nd
nd
nd
19.0
< 5.0
13.5
ng
1008.2
464.9
204.9
103.3
47.6
17.4
2.1
2.1
91
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
14.5
ng
MPK 3 methyl butana
840.8
445.1
204.9
104.3
60.4
22.6
18.9
4.1
110
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
9.20
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
19.0
< 5.0
13.9
ng
heptane
1221.9
742.9
207.4
105.9
24.4
nd
nd
nd
93
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.3
ng
MIBK
1553.2
857.4
200.0
92.3
3.0
nd
nd
nd
96
53.0
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
(50 ng)
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.6
ng
1607.0
1300.5
319.7
93.4
nd
nd
nd
nd
99
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
Bag A
12.4
ng
DMDS methylacetam
Data supplied by Geotechnical Services
51.7
02090507.D
02090508.D
02090509.D
02090510.D
02090503.D
02090504.D
2 ng
5 ng
10 ng
20 ng
50 ng
100 ng
Page 4 of 4
ample No 4
s
Joanne Menegazzo Date
jm
me first four numbers in the Lab No as t
heet
me Lab No as the Lab Blank in F9
heet
23.3
02090506.D
1 ng
80.9
16.8
10.4
6.2
2.5
02090502.D
0 ng
957.4
672.7
312.9
221.8
134.7
73.2
47.8
24.8
10
0.7
nd
100
nd
02180534.D
02180503.D
chkstd
10 ng solids
Solid Standards
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
6.00
7.40
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
Artefacts
nd
nd
nd
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Lab No
13.5
ng
537.8
363.7
203.9
102.8
70.5
33.7
27.5
17.9
120
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.9
ng
369.8
402.7
195.1
98.9
42.3
8.1
nd
nd
120
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.4
ng
nitrobenzeneethyl cyclohexa
methylformam
02180502.D
02180514.D
02180509.D
02180513.D
02180508.D
02180518.D
02180511.D
02180521.D
02180520.D
02180527.D
02180516.D
02180522.D
02180524.D
02180510.D
02180504.D
02180512.D
02180526.D
02180505.D
02180525.D
02180507.D
02180506.D
02180517.D
02180519.D
02180523.D
A72261
ng
13.5
Units
Error +/- %
Volume(mLs)
phenol
Compound
Sample
pounds by in-House Method W
Samples Received
18-Feb-05
Samples Analysed
18-Feb-05
924.5
528.3
204.8
103.2
54.0
23.0
29.8
4.5
120
nd
Not analysed.
nd
Not analysed.
Not analysed.
Not analysed.
Not analysed.
Not analysed.
Not analysed.
nd
nd
nd
Not analysed.
nd
Not analysed.
nd
nd
Not analysed.
Not analysed.
Not analysed.
nd
Not analysed.
nd
< 5.0
15.9
ng
Iodomethane
677.4
760.8
188.7
99.3
24.2
nd
nd
nd
110
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.0
ng
indene
<5
<5
17
0
<5
<5
<5
<5
187
184
<5
0
225
0
<5
0
<5
<5
0
<5
7
ng
Total
Quantified
VOC
02180534.D
02180534.D
02180534.D
02180534.D
02180534.D
02180534.D
02180534.D
02180534.D
02180534.D
02180534.D
02180534.D
02180534.D
02180534.D
02180534.D
02180534.D
02180534.D
02180534.D
02180534.D
02180534.D
02180534.D
02180534.D
02180534.D
02180534.D
02180534.D
Check std
Calibrated against
Lab No
02180534.D
acetone, hexatriene, MEK, MPK
23
benz, hept, MIBK, me cyhex
9
pyr, DMS dimethylacet/formamide
6
End of
E
N
D
R
E
P
O
R
T
O
F
Report
tol
7
C2 Benz
7
solids and MNsNot Corrected
quinoline indoleNot Corrected
against chkstd
Correction for Calibration (%)
refined hydrocarbons, possibly diesel, present
refined hydrocarbons, possibly diesel, present
Comments
Env 05-053.xls, VOC Results
Data supplied by Geotechnical Services
GHD House
239 Adelaide Terrace
Perth WA 6004
Attention:
Your Ref No:
Our Ref No:
February 28, 2005
Mark Goldstone
6115324
ENV 05-059
INTERIM REPORT ON ANALYSIS OF SAMPLES
Introduction:
Nine TO17 tubes, one PAH tube, fourteen liquid samples and eight DNPH impregnated tubes were received
24/02/05, these were analysed in accordance with the chain of custody.
Methods of Analysis:
The amount of Volatile Organic Compounds was determined according to WIENV 31 (based on the analytical
section of US EPA TO15 and TO17). The amount of aldehydes and ketones was determined according to WIENV
34 (based on USEPA TO5 and TO11A). The PAH's were determined according to WIENV 44 (based on USEPA
TO13) solvent extraction followed by GCMS. BTEX compounds were determined based on WIENV 38 (based on
USEPA 5030 and 8260).
Results
The results are tabulated on the following worksheets.
Comments
Three of the TO17 tubes were not analysed for acetone or iodomethane. One tube (A72153) had high levels of
moisture which caused the mass spectrometer to fail, no data was collected for this sample. Subsequent samples
were then screened for moisture which meant that no iodomethane or acetone data could be collected. The
amount of Acetone on the first four tubes (A10069, B16859, A63757 and A14314) was significantly out of the
calibration range. Sample A13110 appeared to have no compounds present and the internal standard had been
washed ofF, this indicates a high volume of moisture had passed through the tube.
GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
Angela Downey
Environmental Chemist
Nigel West
Senior Chemist
2
Not Detected
HP022506.D
HP111811.D
HP111815.D
HP111827.D
HP111816.D
Volume of Extract (mL)
nd
Daily Calibration
Multipoint Calibration
MDL Lab No
Precision Lab No
Column Efficiency
Angela Downey
HP022507.D
HP022508.D
HP022511.D
HP022515.D
HP022519.D
HP022513.D
HP022517.D
HP022524.D
HP022526.D
HP022520.D
1.0ug/ml std
Tube Blank
1274304754
1274304752
1274304990
1274304995
1274304755
1274304751
1274304997
1274304998
ad
Lab Number
Sample Name
Processed By
Geotechnical Services
41-45 Furnace Road
Welshpool Perth
WA 6106 Australia
Your Ref No
Our Ref No
Mark Goldstone
GHD
18/02/2005
18/02/2005
19/02/2005
19/02/2005
19/02/2005
19/02/2005
19/02/2005
19/02/2005
Date
21.11
21.11
3.04
3.04
9.30
9.30
13.25
13.25
P
S
P
S
P
S
P
S
Time Hood
Checked By
Geotechnical Services
Pass
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Analyte
Detection Limit (ug)
Errors + / - %
% Sample Used
Env 05-059
6115324
nw
Nigel West
1.0
1.05
nd
1.91
2.19
2.65
1.77
1.81
1.81
0.30
0.26
Date
ppm standard
1.02
nd
2.63
1.31
0.90
0.35
2.09
1.79
1.33
1.38
Samples Analysed 25-Feb-05
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
0.14
0.07
11.7
11.7
Total ug
Total ug
Samples Received 24-Feb-05
28/02/2005
1.03
nd
6.34
3.33
4.77
2.81
3.11
3.65
2.41
4.05
Acetone
0.15
11.8
Total ug
1.01
nd
nd
nd
nd
2.75
nd
0.22
nd
nd
Propanal
0.15
11.8
Total ug
Disclaimer: Geotech has analysed the der
on the analytical components of USEPA TO
Test Report for Analysis of Carbonyl Derivatives by WIENV 34 (Based on the Analytical Sections of USEPA TO5
iso-Butanal
0.12
12.7
Total ug
1.06
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.23
nd
nd
nd
MEK
0.13
11.9
Total ug
1.07
nd
0.46
0.27
0.48
0.33
nd
0.35
0.31
0.40
rivatised samples provided by methods based
O11A and TO5.
& TO11A)
1.03
nd
0.34
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.44
0.20
nd
1.07
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Benzaldehyde 2-Pentanone
0.07
0.19
12.0
12.1
Total ug
Total ug
1.05
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
n-Pentanal
0.16
12.5
Total ug
1.01
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
1.04
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
p-Tolualdehyde 2-Hexanone
0.10
0.19
17.8
12.9
Total ug
Total ug
1.04
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Hexanal
0.07
11.8
Total ug
22/02
nd -- not detected
PQL-- Practical quantitation limit
Blank
SS tube 1
Client ID
Matrix: TO17 PAH tube
(I) RESULTS
DT022502.D
DT022508.D
Geotech ID
Analyte
ug
ug
PQL (ug)
nd
7.53
0.05
nd
nd
0.05
Naphthalene acenaphthylene
nd
nd
0.05
acenaphthene
nd
nd
0.05
fluorene
nd
0.06
0.05
phenanthrene
nd
nd
0.05
anthracene
nd
nd
0.05
fluoranthene
nd
nd
0.05
pyrene
nd
nd
0.05
nd
0.16
0.05
nd
nd
0.05
nd
nd
0.05
nd
nd
0.05
nd
nd
0.05
nd
nd
0.05
nd
nd
0.05
benzo(a)anthracene chrysene enzo(b)fluoranthen
benzo(k)fluoranthen benzo(a)pyreneeno(123cd)pyribenzo(ah)anthracen
enzo(ghi)perylene
nd -- not detec
actical quantitation limit
Time
1st Precision Lab No
Comments
Lab Blank
Env 05-059
Env 05-059
Env 05-059
Env 05-059
Env 05-059
Env 05-059
Env 05-059
Env 05-059
Env 05-059
Hood
Volume(mLs)
Sample
P
From TO15 Worksheet
873.2
466.8
205.6
104.2
24.3
nd
17.4
nd
83
1300.0
(1000 ng)
ad
Without Sampling
nw
< 5.0
< 5.0
13.1
ng
benzene
< 5.0
14.1
ng
pyridine
979.4
491.6
205.3
103.1
59.5
29.1
18.1
9.4
100
nd
1028.1
489.6
201.9
104.1
44.3
11.4
0.6
nd
110
1100.0
(1000 ng)
819.6
484.6
195.6
97.0
29.3
2.3
2.6
nd
89
nd
1154.8
528.9
202.7
100.7
47.0
8.8
3.5
nd
110
460.0
1001.3
505.0
197.6
99.9
45.3
10.8
10.7
nd
110
nd
nd
nd
2.66
nd
(400 ng)
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.6
ng
ethylbenzene
nd
15.00
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
14.5
ng
toluene
This document shall not be reproduced except in full. Sample/s are analysed as received unless stated otherwise.
28-Feb-05
02240502.D Should have the same first four numbers in the Lab No as the samples
Not Detected
Pass
< 5.0
13.6
ng
hexatriene
nd
nd
nd
nd
2700.00
nd
nd
nd
15000.00
nd
nd
nd
nd
40.00
nd
t delay: Not an
930.00
nd
8.70
nd
nd
nd
nd
t delay: Not an
3400.00
nd
nd
nd
No Data as moisture caused Mass Spec to fail
nd
11.00
nd
t delay: Not an
10000.00
nd
3.54
nd
02240502.D Should have the same Lab No as the Lab Blank in F9
Pass
From TO15 Worksheet
11230409.D
fail biphenyl
02090503.D
02090504.D
50 ng
100 ng
500ng std #A150
1000ng std #A10
02090509.D
02090510.D
10 ng
02090508.D
5 ng
50ng std #A100
20 ng
02090507.D
2 ng
20ng std #A143
100ng std #A083
02090506.D
1 ng
200ng std #A70
02090502.D
0 ng
10ng std #A114
Solid Standards
Blank #A1136
Multipoint Calibration Liquid Stds
02240503.D
02240514.D
chkstd
10 ng solids
02240502.D
02240505.D
02240506.D
02240510.D
02240508.D
02240511.D
02240507.D
02240509.D
02240512.D
02240504.D
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Lab No
ng
15.4
Units
acetone
Error +/- %
Compound
Angela DowneyChecked By
Nigel West
Date
Processed By
Geotechnical Services
Geotechnical Services
41-45 Furnace Road
Welshpool Perth
WA 6106 Australia
Month/Day/Yr/Sample No eg 10180204 is analysed on Oct 18th 2002 and is sample No 4
Initials
Errors Determined
BFB Lab Number
nd
Daily Calibration Check
3.04
Daily Calibration 100ng std
19/02/2005
Page 1 of 4 of Geotechnical Services, Report Env 05-059.xls
Lab Nos
Date
Detection Limits. Based on Sample Volume on tube A10069
Sample ID
Lab Blank Lab No
Multipoint Calibration Check
B16859
A63757
A13110
A70303
A10353
A14314
A72153
A10347
A10069
No
Tube
983.8
496.0
202.8
107.8
49.2
17.8
19.3
nd
110
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
14.3
ng
1,3-xylene
Test Report for Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds by in-House Method WIENV 31
Mark Goldstone
Our Ref No Env 05-059Samples Received
24-Feb-05 Disclaimer: Geotechnical Services has not been involved in the collection of these samples.
Your Ref No 6115324 Samples Analysed
24-Feb-05 Geotech has determined the VOCs by thermal desorption GC-MS
GHD
Env 05-059.xls VOC
Date last opened 30/03/2005
02240514.D
02240503.D
chkstd
10 ng solids
02090506.D
02090507.D
02090508.D
02090509.D
02090510.D
02090503.D
02090504.D
1 ng
2 ng
5 ng
10 ng
20 ng
50 ng
100 ng
Date
806.8
462.6
202.0
100.0
50.5
20.1
9.7
nd
110
51.0
959.7
493.8
198.7
100.1
48.4
15.9
7.2
nd
110
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
(50 ng)
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.2
ng
styrene
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
Page 2 of 4 of Geotechnical Services, Report Env 05-059.xls
02 and is sample No 4
Services
Nigel West
nw
e the same first four numbers in the Lab N
Worksheet
e the same Lab No as the Lab Blank in F
Worksheet
02090502.D
0 ng
Solid Standards
02240502.D
02240505.D
02240506.D
02240510.D
02240508.D
02240511.D
02240507.D
02240509.D
02240512.D
02240504.D
Lab No
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
A10069
ng
13.2
Units
Error +/- %
Volume(mLs)
ethynyl-benzene
Compound
Sample
ompounds by in-House Method
Samples Received
24-Feb-05
Samples Analysed
24-Feb-05
295.1
429.4
199.3
101.7
65.3
36.3
56.9
26.0
89
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.5
ng
benzaldehyde
790.8
509.8
188.8
99.1
58.5
29.3
28.2
16.3
100
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.8
1,3,5trimethylbenzene
ng
271.7
377.5
187.0
103.6
66.2
37.5
33.2
21.7
90
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.7
ng
benzonitrile
538.4
431.6
189.8
98.5
59.2
32.0
20.1
20.1
95
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.1
ng
benzofuran
168.4
490.6
190.1
97.1
50.8
20.5
20.9
5.3
97
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
14.0
ng
acetophenone
21.3
27.0
20.3
11.4
5.2
2.1
1.4
nd
10
11.0
(10 ng)
nd
3.49
nd
2.14
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
12.9
ng
naphthalene
835.6
472.7
198.7
99.1
49.6
22.5
13.5
nd
92
45.0
(50 ng)
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.0
ng
89.9
41.1
19.4
7.1
5.1
2.9
1.6
nd
9
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
22.0
ng
quinoline1H-indole
This document shall not be reproduced except in full. Sample/s are analysed as received unless stated otherwise.
946.5
497.8
199.7
99.9
46.9
11.1
3.6
nd
110
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.3
ng
1,2-xylene
Env 05-059.xls VOC
899.1
411.4
194.1
71.2
51.4
28.9
15.8
nd
94
nd
2.78
9.00
nd
8.70
nd
54.00
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.1
ng
2-methyl
naphthalene
303.9
345.5
225.3
100.3
50.5
21.8
13.7
nd
89
nd
6.00
8.70
nd
nd
4.95
8.70
nd
2.14
nd
< 5.0
13.0
ng
1-methyl
naphthalene
Date last opened 30/03/2005
ng
12.6
< 0.50
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
9
ng
13.1
< 0.50
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
10
Units
Error +/- %
02090510.D
02090503.D
02090504.D
20 ng
50 ng
100 ng
Date
5.3
10.1
21.0
57.0
49.3
14.7
24.4
40.6
47.2
Page 3 of 4 of Geotechnical Services, Report Env 05-059.xls
02 and is sample No 4
Services
Nigel West
nw
e the same first four numbers in the Lab N
Worksheet
e the same Lab No as the Lab Blank in F
Worksheet
02090508.D
02090509.D
5 ng
10 ng
10.0
2.0
6.4
02090507.D
2 ng
nd
02090506.D
1 ng
1.5
02090502.D
0 ng
3.4
02240503.D
10 ng solids
1.7
02240514.D
chkstd
Solid Standards
02240502.D
02240505.D
02240506.D
02240510.D
02240508.D
02240511.D
02240507.D
02240509.D
02240512.D
02240504.D
Lab No
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
A10069
Volume(mLs)
acenaphthylene
Compound
Sample
biphenyl
ompounds by in-House Method
Samples Received
24-Feb-05
Samples Analysed
24-Feb-05
54.9
57.9
19.8
10.1
5.0
2.4
1.4
nd
9
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
12.9
ng
acenaphthene
71.2
52.4
19.8
10.2
6.0
3.2
2.3
1.4
9
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
12.9
ng
9H-fluorene
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No data
9H-fluoren9-one
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No data
phenanthrene
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No data
fluoranthene
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No data
pyrene
925.1
537.8
210.4
102.9
nd
nd
nd
nd
110
nd
91.00
810.00
nd
140.00
1900.00
nd
120.00
290.00
1100.00
< 5.0
14.6
ng
MEK
1052.4
530.8
201.6
103.1
45.5
13.7
3.9
nd
99
nd
200.00
200.00
nd
11.00
93.00
47.00
nd
43.00
88.00
< 5.0
13.5
ng
MPK
1008.2
464.9
204.9
103.3
47.6
17.4
2.1
2.1
110
nd
7.60
5.80
5.8
nd
47.00
nd
5.80
5.80
10.00
< 5.0
14.5
ng
3 methyl butana
This document shall not be reproduced except in full. Sample/s are analysed as received unless stated otherwise.
79.9
89.9
21.4
10.1
3.2
nd
nd
nd
5
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.1
ng
dibenzo-furan
Env 05-059.xls VOC
840.8
445.1
204.9
104.3
60.4
22.6
18.9
4.1
110
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
220.00
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.9
ng
heptane
1221.9
742.9
207.4
105.9
24.4
nd
nd
nd
91
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.3
ng
MIBK
1553.2
857.4
200.0
92.3
3.0
nd
nd
nd
94
61.0
(50 ng)
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.6
ng
DMDS
Date last opened 30/03/2005
1607.0
1300.5
319.7
93.4
nd
nd
nd
nd
110
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
Bag A
12.4
ng
methylacetam
02090506.D
02090507.D
02090508.D
02090509.D
02090510.D
02090503.D
02090504.D
1 ng
2 ng
5 ng
10 ng
20 ng
50 ng
100 ng
Date
221.8
312.9
672.7
957.4
51.7
80.9
134.7
10.4
16.8
73.2
6.2
23.3
47.8
2.5
Page 4 of 4 of Geotechnical Services, Report Env 05-059.xls
02 and is sample No 4
Services
Nigel West
nw
e the same first four numbers in the Lab N
Worksheet
e the same Lab No as the Lab Blank in F
Worksheet
02090502.D
0 ng
24.8
93
11
0.7
nd
nd
02240514.D
02240503.D
chkstd
10 ng solids
Solid Standards
nd
nd
4.61
nd
< 5.0
nd
nd
2.56
2.16
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
Artefacts
nd
11.00
2.69
4.07
2.51
nd
2.90
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Lab No
13.5
ng
537.8
363.7
203.9
102.8
70.5
33.7
27.5
17.9
110
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.9
ng
ng
ng
924.5
528.3
204.8
103.2
54.0
23.0
29.8
4.5
110
677.4
760.8
188.7
99.3
24.2
nd
nd
nd
100
nd
nd
nd
t delay: Not an
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.0
nd
2.44
nd
t delay: Not an
nd
t delay: Not an
nd
< 5.0
15.9
ng
Total
Quantifie
d VOC
02240514.D
02240514.D
02240514.D
02240514.D
02240514.D
02240514.D
02240514.D
02240514.D
02240514.D
Check std
Calibrated against
tol
quinoline indole
solids and MNs
C2 Benz
Not Corrected
9
2
13
T
R
O
P
E
R
F
O
D
18
9
pyr, DMS dimethylacet/forma
benz, hept, MIBK, me cyhe
E
N
02240514.D
Report
End of
23
Lab No
against chkstd
Correction for Calibration (%)
acetone, hexatriene, MEK, M
Comments
This document shall not be reproduced except in full. Sample/s are analysed as received unless stated otherwise.
369.8
402.7
195.1
98.9
42.3
8.1
nd
nd
100
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.4
ng
nitrobenzeneethyl cyclohexan
methylformam Iodomethane indene
02240502.D
02240505.D
02240506.D
02240510.D
02240508.D
02240511.D
02240507.D
02240509.D
02240512.D
02240504.D
A10069
ng
13.5
Units
Error +/- %
Volume(mLs)
phenol
Compound
Sample
ompounds by in-House Method
Samples Received
24-Feb-05
Samples Analysed
24-Feb-05
Env 05-059.xls VOC
Date last opened 30/03/2005
GHD House
239 Adelaide Terrace
Perth WA 6004
Attention:
Your Ref No:
Our Ref No:
February 28, 2005
Mark Goldstone
61/15324
ENV 05-061
REPORT ON ANALYSIS OF TUBE SAMPLES
Introduction:
Four TO17 tubes and four DNPH impregnated tubes were received 25/02/05, these were analysed in accordance
with the chain of custody (1108).
Methods of Analysis:
The tubes were analysed to determine the amount of volatile organic compounds according to WIENV 31 (based
on the analytical section of US EPA TO15 and TO17). The amount of aldehydes and ketones was determined
according to WIENV 34 (based on USEPA TO5 and TO11A).
Results
The results are tabulated on the following worksheets.
Comments
GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
Angela Downey
Environmental Chemist
Nigel West
Senior Chemist
Processed By
Geotechnical Services
41-45 Furnace Road
Welshpool Perth
WA 6106 Australia
Volume of Extract (mL)
nd
Daily Calibration
Multipoint Calibration
MDL Lab No
Precision Lab No
Column Efficiency
Location
Cooling Pond Inlet
Cooling Pond Berm
Cooling Pond Outlet
ROWS2
ad
Angela Downey
2
Not Detected
HP022506.D
HP111811.D
HP111815.D
HP111827.D
HP111816.D
HP022507.D
HP022509.D
HP022530.D
HP022529.D
HP022532.D
HP022534.D
Time
13.33
15.05
16.30
15.40
1.0ug/ml std
Tube Blank
B
A
C
1274305255
Date
24/02/2005
24/02/2005
24/02/2005
24/02/2005
Lab Number
Checked By
Geotechnical Services
Pass
100
100
100
100
100
100
Analyte
Detection Limit (ug)
Errors + / - %
% Sample Used
nw
Nigel West
1.0
1.05
nd
0.22
nd
nd
5.20
Formaldehyde
0.14
11.7
Total ug
Date
ppm standard
1.0
nd
10.9
nd
9.4
0.6
Acetaldehyde
0.07
11.7
Total ug
28/02/2005
1.03
nd
6.88
7.60
10.10
0.68
Acetone
0.15
11.8
Total ug
Test Report for Analysis of Carbonyl Derivatives by WIENV 34 (Based on the Analytical Sections of USEPA
Our Ref No
Env 05-061
Samples Received 25-Feb-05
Disclaimer: Geotech
Your Ref No
61/15324
Samples Analysed 25-Feb-05 on the analytical comp
Sample Name
Mark Goldstone
GHD
MEK
0.13
11.9
Total ug
1.07
nd
1.00
0.98
1.67
nd
Propanal
0.15
11.8
Total ug
1.01
nd
0.55
nd
0.32
nd
1.06
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
iso-Butanal
0.12
12.7
Total ug
h has analysed the derivatised samples provided by methods based
ponents of USEPA TO11A and TO5.
A TO5 & TO11A)
1.03
nd
0.94
nd
0.54
nd
1.07
nd
0.27
0.25
0.52
nd
Benzaldehyde 2-Pentanone
0.07
0.19
12.0
12.1
Total ug
Total ug
1.05
nd
0.80
0.22
0.45
nd
n-Pentanal
0.16
12.5
Total ug
1.01
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
1.04
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
p-Tolualdehyde 2-Hexanone
0.10
0.19
17.8
12.9
Total ug
Total ug
1.04
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Hexanal
0.07
11.8
Total ug
Date
Time
0 ng
1 ng
2 ng
5 ng
10 ng
20 ng
50 ng
100 ng
10ng std #A11408
20ng std #A14330
50ng std #A10058
100ng std #A08348
200ng std #A70150
500ng std #A15002
1000ng std #A10353
BFB Lab Number
nd
Daily Calibration Check
ad
Without Sampling
Page 1 of 4 of Geotechnical Services, Report Env 05-061 REC.xls
02090504.D
02090503.D
02090510.D
02090509.D
02090508.D
02090507.D
02090506.D
02090502.D
02250503.D
873.2
466.8
205.6
104.2
24.3
nd
17.4
nd
160
1300.0
(1000 ng)
delay: Not
nd
< 5.0
nw
28-Feb-05
979.4
491.6
205.3
103.1
59.5
29.1
18.1
9.4
100
nd
nd
37.00
8.00
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.6
ng
hexatriene
1028.1
489.6
201.9
104.1
44.3
11.4
0.6
nd
120
1100.0
(1000 ng)
nd
nd
nd
30.00
nd
< 5.0
13.1
ng
benzene
819.6
484.6
195.6
97.0
29.3
2.3
2.6
nd
110
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
14.1
ng
pyridine
1154.8
528.9
202.7
100.7
47.0
8.8
3.5
nd
110
460.0
(400 ng)
nd
33.00
24.00
nd
nd
< 5.0
14.5
ng
toluene
This document shall not be reproduced except in full. Sample/s are analysed as received unless stated otherwise.
Date
Should have the same first four numbers in the Lab No as the samples
From TO15 Worksheet
Should have the same Lab No as the Lab Blank in F9
From TO15 Worksheet
Processed By
Angela Downey
Checked By
Nigel West
Geotechnical Services
Geotechnical Services
41-45 Furnace Road
Welshpool Perth
WA 6106 Australia
Month/Day/Yr/Sample No eg 10180204 is analysed on Oct 18th 2002 and is sample No 4
Initials
02250502.D
Not Detected
Pass
02250502.D
Pass
fail biphenyl
Solid Standards
Liquid Stds
Blank #A11369
Multipoint Calibration
10 ng solids
100ng std
02240514.D
chkstd
Daily Calibration
02250502.D
02250507.D
02250506.D
02250509.D
02250508.D
Lab No
ng
15.4
Units
acetone
Error +/- %
Compound
1
1
1
1
1
Cooling Pond Inlet
Cooling Pond Berm
Cooling Pond Outlet
ROWS2
11230409.D
Lab Nos
Volume(mLs)
Sample
13.33
15.05
16.30
15.40
24/02/2005
24/02/2005
24/02/2005
24/02/2005
Lab Blank Lab No
Multipoint Calibration Check
Errors Determined
Location
Detection Limits. Based on Sample Volume on tube A11071
Comments
Lab Blank
Env 05-061
Env 05-061
Env 05-061
Env 05-061
Sample ID
1st Precision Lab No
B16456
A11071
A15016
A10755
No
Tube
1001.3
505.0
197.6
99.9
45.3
10.8
10.7
nd
110
nd
nd
nd
7.40
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.6
ng
ethylbenzene
983.8
496.0
202.8
107.8
49.2
17.8
19.3
nd
100
nd
nd
7.40
5.40
nd
nd
< 5.0
14.3
ng
1,3-xylene
Test Report for Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds by in-House Method WIENV 31
Mark Goldstone
Our Ref No
Env 05-061
Samples Received
25-Feb-05 Disclaimer: Geotechnical Services has not been involved in the collection of these samples.
Your Ref No
61/15324
Samples Analysed
25-Feb-05 Geotech has determined the VOCs by thermal desorption GC-MS
GHD
Env 05-061 REC.xls VOC's
Date last opened 30/03/2005
02240514.D
02250503.D
chkstd
10 ng solids
02090506.D
02090507.D
02090508.D
02090509.D
02090510.D
02090503.D
02090504.D
1 ng
2 ng
5 ng
10 ng
20 ng
50 ng
100 ng
Date
806.8
462.6
202.0
100.0
50.5
20.1
9.7
nd
100
51.0
(50 ng)
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
959.7
493.8
198.7
100.1
48.4
15.9
7.2
nd
110
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.2
ng
styrene
Page 2 of 4 of Geotechnical Services, Report Env 05-061 REC.xls
ample No 4
Nigel West
nw
e first four numbers in the Lab No as the
et
e Lab No as the Lab Blank in F9
et
02090502.D
0 ng
Solid Standards
02250502.D
02250507.D
02250506.D
02250509.D
02250508.D
Lab No
1
1
1
1
1
A11071
ng
13.2
Units
Error +/- %
Volume(mLs)
ethynyl-benzene
Compound
Sample
pounds by in-House Method WIE
Samples Received
25-Feb-05
Samples Analysed
25-Feb-05
295.1
429.4
199.3
101.7
65.3
36.3
56.9
26.0
91
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.5
ng
benzaldehyde
790.8
509.8
188.8
99.1
58.5
29.3
28.2
16.3
99
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.8
1,3,5trimethylbenzene
ng
271.7
377.5
187.0
103.6
66.2
37.5
33.2
21.7
95
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.7
ng
benzonitrile
538.4
431.6
189.8
98.5
59.2
32.0
20.1
20.1
97
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.1
ng
benzofuran
168.4
490.6
190.1
97.1
50.8
20.5
20.9
5.3
100
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
14.0
ng
acetophenone
21.3
27.0
20.3
11.4
5.2
2.1
1.4
nd
10
11.0
(10 ng)
nd
30.00
24.00
6.00
nd
< 0.50
12.9
ng
naphthalene
835.6
472.7
198.7
99.1
49.6
22.5
13.5
nd
110
45.0
(50 ng)
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.0
ng
89.9
41.1
19.4
7.1
5.1
2.9
1.6
nd
4
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
22.0
ng
quinoline1H-indole
This document shall not be reproduced except in full. Sample/s are analysed as received unless stated otherwise.
946.5
497.8
199.7
99.9
46.9
11.1
3.6
nd
120
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.3
ng
1,2-xylene
Env 05-061 REC.xls VOC's
899.1
411.4
194.1
71.2
51.4
28.9
15.8
nd
42
nd
nd
9.50
5.54
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.1
ng
2-methyl
naphthalene
303.9
345.5
225.3
100.3
50.5
21.8
13.7
nd
86
nd
nd
24.00
18.00
6.70
nd
< 5.0
13.0
ng
1-methyl
naphthalene
Date last opened 30/03/2005
ng
12.6
< 0.50
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
10
ng
13.1
< 0.50
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
11
Units
Error +/- %
02090510.D
02090503.D
02090504.D
20 ng
50 ng
100 ng
Date
5.3
10.1
21.0
57.0
49.3
14.7
24.4
40.6
47.2
Page 3 of 4 of Geotechnical Services, Report Env 05-061 REC.xls
ample No 4
Nigel West
nw
e first four numbers in the Lab No as the
et
e Lab No as the Lab Blank in F9
et
02090508.D
02090509.D
5 ng
10 ng
10.0
2.0
6.4
02090507.D
2 ng
nd
02090506.D
1 ng
1.5
02090502.D
0 ng
3.4
02250503.D
10 ng solids
1.7
02240514.D
chkstd
Solid Standards
02250502.D
02250507.D
02250506.D
02250509.D
02250508.D
Lab No
1
1
1
1
1
A11071
Volume(mLs)
acenaphthylene
Compound
Sample
biphenyl
pounds by in-House Method WIE
Samples Received
25-Feb-05
Samples Analysed
25-Feb-05
54.9
57.9
19.8
10.1
5.0
2.4
1.4
nd
10
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
12.9
ng
acenaphthene
71.2
52.4
19.8
10.2
6.0
3.2
2.3
1.4
9
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
12.9
ng
9H-fluorene
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No data
9H-fluoren9-one
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No data
phenanthrene
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No data
fluoranthene
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No data
pyrene
925.1
537.8
210.4
102.9
nd
nd
nd
nd
100
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
14.6
ng
MEK
1052.4
530.8
201.6
103.1
45.5
13.7
3.9
nd
100
nd
nd
450.00
520.00
120.00
nd
< 5.0
13.5
ng
MPK
1008.2
464.9
204.9
103.3
47.6
17.4
2.1
2.1
100
nd
nd
30.00
5.80
nd
nd
< 5.0
14.5
ng
3 methyl butana
This document shall not be reproduced except in full. Sample/s are analysed as received unless stated otherwise.
79.9
89.9
21.4
10.1
3.2
nd
nd
nd
6
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.1
ng
dibenzo-furan
Env 05-061 REC.xls VOC's
840.8
445.1
204.9
104.3
60.4
22.6
18.9
4.1
120
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.9
ng
heptane
1221.9
742.9
207.4
105.9
24.4
nd
nd
nd
110
nd
nd
76.00
32.00
31.00
nd
< 5.0
13.3
ng
MIBK
1553.2
857.4
200.0
92.3
3.0
nd
nd
nd
110
61.0
(50 ng)
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.6
ng
DMDS
Date last opened 30/03/2005
1607.0
1300.5
319.7
93.4
nd
nd
nd
nd
120
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
Bag A
12.4
ng
methylacetam
02090506.D
02090507.D
02090508.D
02090509.D
02090510.D
02090503.D
02090504.D
1 ng
2 ng
5 ng
10 ng
20 ng
50 ng
100 ng
Date
221.8
672.7
957.4
51.7
80.9
134.7
10.4
312.9
73.2
6.2
16.8
47.8
2.5
23.3
24.8
0.7
90
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.5
ng
537.8
363.7
203.9
102.8
70.5
33.7
27.5
17.9
120
nd
nd
nd
8.7
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.9
ng
ng
924.5
528.3
204.8
103.2
54.0
23.0
29.8
4.5
120
nd
delay: Not
nd
< 5.0
15.9
ng
677.4
760.8
188.7
99.3
24.2
nd
nd
nd
100
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.0
ng
Total
Quantifie
d VOC
02240514.D
02240514.D
02240514.D
02240514.D
02240514.D
Check std
Calibrated against
tol
quinoline indole
solids and MNs
C2 Benz
Not Corrected
9
2
13
T
R
O
P
E
R
F
O
D
18
9
pyr, DMS dimethylacet/forma
benz, hept, MIBK, me cyhe
E
N
02240514.D
Report
End of
23
Lab No
against chkstd
Correction for Calibration (%)
acetone, hexatriene, MEK, M
Comments
This document shall not be reproduced except in full. Sample/s are analysed as received unless stated otherwise.
369.8
402.7
195.1
98.9
42.3
8.1
nd
nd
110
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.4
ng
nitrobenzeneethyl cyclohexan
methylformam Iodomethane indene
Page 4 of 4 of Geotechnical Services, Report Env 05-061 REC.xls
ample No 4
Nigel West
nw
e first four numbers in the Lab No as the
et
e Lab No as the Lab Blank in F9
et
02090502.D
0 ng
Solid Standards
12
nd
02240514.D
02250503.D
chkstd
10 ng solids
< 0.50
Artefacts
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
1
1
1
1
1
Lab No
02250502.D
02250507.D
02250506.D
02250509.D
02250508.D
A11071
ng
13.5
Units
Error +/- %
Volume(mLs)
phenol
Compound
Sample
pounds by in-House Method WIE
Samples Received
25-Feb-05
Samples Analysed
25-Feb-05
Env 05-061 REC.xls VOC's
Date last opened 30/03/2005
GHD House
239 Adelaide Terrace
Perth WA 6004
Attention:
Your Ref No:
Our Ref No:
March 5, 2005
Mark Goldstone
6115324
ENV 05-069
INTERIM REPORT ON ANALYSIS OF SAMPLES
Introduction:
Sixteen TO17 tubes, four PAH tubes and eighteen DNPH impregnated tubes were received 2/03/05, these were
analysed in accordance with the chain of custody.
Methods of Analysis:
The amount of Volatile Organic Compounds was determined according to WIENV 31 (based on the analytical
section of US EPA TO15 and TO17). The amount of aldehydes and ketones was determined according to WIENV
34 (based on USEPA TO5 and TO11A). The PAH's were determined according to WIENV 44 (based on USEPA
TO13) solvent extraction followed by GCMS.
Results
The results are tabulated on the following worksheets.
Comments
The tubes were analysed to determine the amount of volatile organic compounds according to WIENV 31 (based
on the analytical section of US EPA TO15 and TO17). The TO17 tubes were not analysed for acetone or
iodomethane. The amount of aldehydes and ketones was determined according to WIENV 34 (based on USEPA
TO5 and TO11A).
The high volume PAH tubes were analysed to determine the amount of polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) using
(described in US EPA TO13) solvent extraction followed by GCMS.
GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
Angela Downey
Environmental Chemist
Nigel West
Senior Chemist
Page 1 of 2
Angela Downey
2
Not Detected
HP030234.D
HP111811.D
HP111815.D
HP111827.D
HP111816.D
Volume of Extract (mL)
nd
Daily Calibration
Multipoint Calibration
MDL Lab No
Precision Lab No
Column Efficiency
ad
HP030209.D
HP030208.D
HP030216.D
HP030210.D
HP030214.D
HP030203.D
HP030219.D
HP030215.D
HP030202.D
HP030211.D
HP030205.D
HP030206.D
HP030212.D
HP030204.D
HP030207.D
HP030213.D
HP030201.D
HP030218.D
HP030217.D
1274304694
1274304693
1274305251
1274304695
1274304699
1274304605
1274305259
1274305250
1274304603
1274304696
1274304690
1274304691
1274304697
1274304608
1274304692
1274304698
1274304252
1274305254
1274305253
Processed By
Geotechnical Services
41-45 Furnace Road
Welshpool Perth
WA 6106 Australia
Lab Number
Sample Name
Checked By
Geotechnical Services
Pass
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Analyte
Detection Limit (ug)
Errors + / - %
% Sample Used
nw
Nigel West
1.0
0.35
0.44
0.20
0.18
nd
0.19
0.15
0.20
0.14
nd
0.17
0.22
nd
0.14
0.25
nd
0.21
nd
nd
Formaldehyde
0.14
11.7
Total ug
Date
ppm standard
29
28
11
15
0.39
2.6
1.6
1.4
0.6
0.7
0.8
1.8
nd
1.2
0.82
nd
15
nd
nd
Acetaldehyde
0.07
11.7
Total ug
3/03/2005
38
41
15
21
2.5
4.2
6.0
5.3
2.2
4.8
2.1
3.2
2.2
3.9
4.8
1.6
18
0.70
0.66
Acetone
0.15
11.8
Total ug
3.5
4.2
1.7
2.6
0.33
0.48
0.60
0.60
0.25
0.54
0.29
0.35
nd
0.44
0.96
0.31
2.44
nd
nd
MEK
0.13
11.9
Total ug
Data Supplied by Geotechnical Services. This report should only be reproduced in full.
0.81
0.75
nd
0.20
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Propanal
0.15
11.8
Total ug
Test Report for Analysis of Carbonyl Derivatives by WIENV 34 (Based on the Analytical Sections of USEPA TO5 &
Mark Goldstone
Our Ref No
Env 05-069
Samples Received 2-Mar-05
Disclaimer: Geotech has analysed the derivatised samples provid
GHD
Your Ref No
6115324
Samples Analysed 2-Mar-05 on the analytical components of USEPA TO11A and TO5.
Env 05-069.xls, Carbonyls
Page 2 of 2
Angela Downey
2
Not Detected
HP030234.D
HP111811.D
HP111815.D
HP111827.D
HP111816.D
Volume of Extract (mL)
nd
Daily Calibration
Multipoint Calibration
MDL Lab No
Precision Lab No
Column Efficiency
ad
HP030209.D
HP030208.D
HP030216.D
HP030210.D
HP030214.D
HP030203.D
HP030219.D
HP030215.D
HP030202.D
HP030211.D
HP030205.D
HP030206.D
HP030212.D
HP030204.D
HP030207.D
HP030213.D
HP030201.D
HP030218.D
HP030217.D
1274304694
1274304693
1274305251
1274304695
1274304699
1274304605
1274305259
1274305250
1274304603
1274304696
1274304690
1274304691
1274304697
1274304608
1274304692
1274304698
1274304252
1274305254
1274305253
Processed By
Geotechnical Services
41-45 Furnace Road
Welshpool Perth
WA 6106 Australia
Lab Number
Sample Name
G
0.25
0.37
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.52
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
iso-Butanal
0.12
12.7
Total ug
Test Report for Analysis of Carb
& TO11A)
Mark Goldstone
Our Ref No
ded by methods based
GHD
Your Ref No
1.0
1.0
0.80
0.88
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
1.0
nd
nd
1.0
1.4
0.73
1.10
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.91
nd
nd
Benzaldehyde 2-Pentanone
0.07
0.19
12.0
12.1
Total ug
Total ug
1.5
1.2
0.88
1.6
nd
2.2
0.29
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
1.1
nd
nd
n-Pentanal
0.16
12.5
Total ug
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Hexanal
0.07
11.8
Total ug
Data Supplied by Geotechnical Services. This report should only be reproduced in full.
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
p-Tolualdehyde 2-Hexanone
0.10
0.19
17.8
12.9
Total ug
Total ug
Env 05-069.xls, Carbonyls
(I) RESULTS
Page 1 of 1
nd -- not detected
PQL-- Practical quantitation limit
DT030306.D
DT030307.D
DT030305.D
DT030309.D
Blank
Blank
ST
CP
01/03
01/03
Geotech ID
Client ID
Matrix: High Volume PAH tubes
ug
ug
ug
ug
Analyte
PQL (ug)
0.44
nd
3.58
1.20
nd
nd
0.17
0.18
Naphthalene acenaphthylene
0.05
0.05
nd
nd
0.24
0.05
acenaphthene
0.05
nd
nd
0.18
nd
fluorene
0.05
0.06
0.06
0.18
0.10
phenanthrene
0.05
nd
nd
nd
nd
anthracene
0.05
nd
nd
nd
nd
fluoranthene
0.05
nd
nd
nd
nd
pyrene
0.05
nd
nd
nd
nd
benzo(a)anthracene
0.05
Env 05-069.xls, PAHs
nd
0.08
0.12
0.07
chrysene
0.05
nd
nd
nd
nd
benzo(b)fluoranthene
0.05
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
dibenzo(ah)anthracene
0.05
nd
nd
nd
nd
benzo(ghi)perylene
0.05
Data supplied by Geotechnical Services. This report should only be reproduced in full.
benzo(k)fluoranthene benzo(a)pyrene indeno(123cd)pyrene
0.05
0.05
0.05
Date
Your Ref No
Volume(mLs)
Sample
Samples Analysed
Samples Received
2 ng
5 ng
10 ng
20 ng
50 ng
100 ng
20ng std #B16456
50ng std #A72250
100ng std #A15016
200ng std #A12353
500ng std #A61949
1000ng std #A72153
03010505.D
From TO15 Worksheet
Should have the same Lab No as the Lab Blank in F9
From TO15 Worksheet
03010504.D
03010503.D
03010510.D
03010509.D
03010508.D
03010507.D
03010506.D
1223.4
370.4
52.2
25.3
17.9
nd
nd
nd
130
NA
(1000 ng)
nd
93000
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
< 5.0
nw
nw
Processed By Nigel West
Checked By
Not Checked
Date
Geotechnical Services
Geotechnical Services
41-45 Furnace Road
Welshpool Perth
WA 6106 Australia
Month/Day/Yr/Sample No eg 10180204 is analysed on Oct 18th 2002 and is sample No 4
Initials
Errors Determined Without Sampling
05-Mar-05
BFB Lab Number 03020508.D Should have the same first four numbers in the Lab No as the samples
nd Not Detected
Pass
03020508.D
Pass
Daily Calibration Check
11230409.D
Comments fail biphenyl and phenol
0 ng
1 ng
Solid Standards
Blank #A13110
Liquid Stds
Multipoint Calibration
03020509.D
03020526.D
chkstd
10 ng solids
03020508.D
03040534.D
03020523.D
03020520.D
03020521.D
03020519.D
03020517.D
03020512.D
03020510.D
03020516.D
03020525.D
03020524.D
03020514.D
03020513.D
03020522.D
03020518.D
03020515.D
Lab No
ng
15.4
Units
acetone
1231.2
389.9
40.7
21.9
10.5
nd
nd
nd
96
nd
nd
2.05
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.6
ng
hexatriene
1237.4
400.3
44.3
25.0
13.1
nd
nd
nd
95
990.0
(1000 ng)
nd
140
46
58
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
19.0
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.1
ng
benzene
746.0
366.3
15.2
5.5
2.6
8.0
3.4
nd
99
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
14.1
ng
pyridine
1383.4
439.8
42.5
22.7
12.0
nd
nd
nd
100
390.0
(400 ng)
nd
370
220
200
nd
6.9
13
10
7.6
8.2
7.30
9.1
8.6
10
60
3.54
5.4
< 5.0
14.5
ng
toluene
1102.8
443.0
42.3
23.0
11.9
nd
nd
nd
100
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.6
ng
1103.7
449.3
42.8
22.6
11.9
nd
nd
nd
100
nd
nd
nd
13.0
40.0
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
14.3
ng
ethyl1,3 and 1,4benzene
xylene
Disclaimer: Geotechnical Services has not been involved in the collection of these
samples. Geotech has determined the VOCs by thermal desorption GC-MS
Error +/- %
Compound
2-Mar-05
2-Mar-05
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
10ng std #A11071
100ng std
Daily Calibration
Lab Blank
IS Recovery mostly acceptable, large number of VOCs present
IS Recovery acceptable, large number of VOCs present
IS Recovery acceptable, large number of VOCs present
Poor Recovery of IS, results are approximations
IS Recovery acceptable
IS Recovery acceptable
Poor Recovery of IS, large number of VOCs present, results are a
Poor Recovery of IS, results are approximations
IS Recovery acceptable
IS Recovery acceptable
IS Recovery acceptable
IS Recovery acceptable
IS Recovery acceptable
IS Recovery acceptable, large number of VOCs present
IS Recovery acceptable
IS Recovery acceptable
Lab Blank Lab No
Multipoint Calibration Check
Lab Nos
Time
Env 05-069
6115324
Detection Limits. Based on Sample Volume on tube A01444
Sample ID
Our Ref No
1st Precision Lab No
A10106
A72188
A12416
A72151
A62959
C06289
A00360
A01444
C06646
A09661
A11408
C06252
B16430
A72163
A72158
A11293
No
Tube
Mark Goldstone
GHD
Test Report for Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds by in-House Method WIENV 31
904.4
682.1
44.6
22.1
11.4
28.4
11.9
0.8
95
40.0
(50 ng)
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.2
ng
ethynylbenzene
1032.3
444.8
42.4
22.7
12.3
nd
nd
nd
100
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
270
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.2
ng
1105.2
453.5
43.4
24.1
12.7
nd
nd
nd
100
nd
nd
nd
nd
13.0
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.3
ng
35.9
316.4
51.5
23.8
13.0
nd
nd
nd
110
nd
nd
nd
nd
20
nd
18
64
nd
nd
12
nd
nd
25
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.5
ng
styrene 1,2-xylene benzaldehyde
Known
breakdown
product of
Tenax
417.1
262.3
2452.8
1318.4
550.7
86.6
106.5
153.7
110
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.8
1,3,5trimethylbenzene
ng
276.3
397.0
2288.2
1195.2
586.6
22.6
11.7
nd
120
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.7
ng
186.9
143.4
27.6
14.2
6.3
nd
nd
nd
120
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.1
ng
benzonitrile benzofuran
18.4
128.7
41.2
19.8
10.9
nd
nd
nd
84
6.6
nd
230
330
340
nd
5.9
18
43
12
94
19
48
42
14
120
5.8
nd
< 5.0
14.0
ng
acetophenone
Known
breakdown
product of
Tenax
202.2
300.8
43.2
23.6
10.2
17.2
10.5
nd
95
8.9
(10 ng)
2.4
2.4
5.6
7
nd
1.4
nd
2.5
1
nd
1.1
nd
2.6
nd
12
2.7
0.8
< 0.50
12.9
ng
84.4
49.4
nd
nd
nd
3.3
1.8
1.0
100
62.0
(50 ng)
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.0
ng
naphthalene quinoline
74
03020509.D
602.1
03010504.D
No 4
Date
n the Lab No as the s
Blank in F9
4.3
259.5
03010503.D
03010509.D
03010510.D
nd
1.2
03010508.D
nd
nd
03020526.D
03010507.D
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
03020508.D
03040534.D
03020523.D
03020520.D
03020521.D
03020519.D
03020517.D
03020512.D
03020510.D
03020516.D
03020525.D
03020524.D
03020514.D
03020513.D
03020522.D
03020518.D
03020515.D
nd
< 0.50
Lab No
8.1
22.0
Error +/- %
03010506.D
ng
Units
03010505.D
1H-indole
Compound
2-Mar-05
2-Mar-05
n-House Method
239.5
274.0
42.3
19.8
8.6
13.0
6.5
2.7
120
nd
nd
7.8
8
16
nd
nd
20
10
nd
nd
nd
nd
8.8
3.4
23
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.1
ng
2-methyl
naphthalene
201.5
245.3
33.7
19.2
8.4
16.4
9.7
4.6
100
nd
nd
4.7
6.1
12
nd
nd
10
5.3
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
17
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.0
ng
1-methyl
naphthalene
279.5
281.9
258.1
143.5
83.5
66.5
75.2
108.5
120
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
13.1
ng
biphenyl
Known
breakdown
product of
Tenax
539.4
368.3
38.4
18.1
8.5
24.1
9.7
1.6
89
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
12.6
ng
acenaphthylene
263.2
182.4
2.1
1.0
nd
14.1
6.0
3.1
89
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
12.9
ng
432.8
362.3
39.2
21.8
12.5
46.3
35.6
30.7
88
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.1
ng
583.9
290.2
2.6
1.3
0.6
15.6
7.5
4.4
98
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 0.50
12.9
ng
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No data
acenaph9H-fluorendibenzo-furan 9H-fluorene
thene
9-one
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No data
phenanthrene
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No data
fluoranthene
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No data
pyrene
1125.5
568.8
3749.8
2019.3
1071.5
24.0
11.1
5.5
120
nd
nd
11000
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
< 5.0
14.6
ng
MEK
1239.6
424.3
41.3
21.4
12.4
nd
nd
nd
90
nd
nd
410
780
1100
150
nd
120
95
nd
15
11
40
93
23
1300
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.5
ng
MPK
1229.4
374.1
46.6
23.1
11.9
nd
nd
nd
97
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
14.5
ng
3 methyl
butanal
1245.0
410.2
43.7
23.8
13.6
nd
nd
nd
100
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.9
ng
heptane
921.3
921.9
nd
nd
nd
933.4
866.9
802.8
97
4.9
nd
9.5
140
160
nd
nd
26
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
24
120
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.3
ng
MIBK
921.1
922.2
nd
nd
nd
859.9
803.0
803.0
92
48.0
(50 ng)
nd
48
83
74
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
18
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.6
ng
DMDS
13.5
ng
phenol
949.9
935.7
1.3
1.0
nd
1073.7
952.9
845.5
92
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
353.0
241.9
23.4
10.6
3.7
13.5
7.5
4.7
98
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
8.4
0.20
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
2.76
nd
nd
0.30
nd
< 5.0
< 0.50
Bag Artefacts
12.4
ng
methylacetam
162.9
572.3
47.3
19.6
13.3
13.6
4.5
2.2
90
nd
nd
3.1
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.5
ng
853.9
439.1
56.1
26.9
15.8
nd
nd
nd
98
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
13.9
ng
415.7
487.2
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
98
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
< 5.0
12.4
ng
1250.4
443.3
39.2
31.3
13.6
nd
nd
nd
89
nd
nd
71
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
< 5.0
15.9
ng
nitrobenzeneethyl cyclohexan
methylformam Iodomethane
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
90
nd
nd
nd
9.5
15.5
27.8
172.3
176.6
03020508.D
03040534.D
03020523.D
03020520.D
03020521.D
03020519.D
03020517.D
03020512.D
03020510.D
03020516.D
03020525.D
03020524.D
03020514.D
03020513.D
03020522.D
03020518.D
03020515.D
03020526.D
03020509.D
03010505.D
03010506.D
03010507.D
03010508.D
03010509.D
03010510.D
03010503.D
03010504.D
No 4
Date
n the Lab No as the s
Blank in F9
< 5.0
Lab No
ng
ng
13.0
Units
Total
Quantifie
d VOC
indene
Error +/- %
Compound
2-Mar-05
2-Mar-05
n-House Method
03020526.D
03020526.D
03020526.D
03020526.D
03020526.D
03020526.D
03020526.D
03020526.D
03020526.D
03020526.D
03020526.D
03020526.D
03020526.D
03020526.D
03020526.D
03020526.D
03020526.D
Check std
Calibrated against
quinoline indole
19
solids and MNs Not Corrected
C2 Benz Not Corrected
tol Not Corrected
pyr, DMS dimethylacet/formamide Not Corrected
T
R
O
P
E
R
F
O
D
E
benz, hept, MIBK, me cyhex Not Corrected
03020526.D
Report
End of
N
Lab No
against chkstd
Correction for Calibration (%)
acetone, hexatriene, MEK, MPK Not Corrected
Comments
THE ODOUR UNIT PTY LIMITED
Showroom 1
16-32 Hulme Court
Myaree
WA 6154
Phone: +61 8 9330 9476
Facsimile: +61 8 9330 1868
Email:[email protected]
Internet: www.odourunit.com.au
ABN: 53 091 165 061
Accreditation Number:
14974
Form 06 - Perth Laboratory
Odour Concentration Measurement Results
The measurement was commissioned by:
Organisation GHD
Contact Mark Goldstone
Sampling Site Alcoa Wagerup
Sampling Method Not specified
Order details:
Order requested by
Date of order
Order number
Signed by
Paige Gunnell
26/02/2005
TBA
TBA
Telephone
Facsimile
Email
Sampling Team
Order accepted by
TOU Project #
Project Manager
Testing operator
(08) 9429 6558
(08) 9429 6555
[email protected]
Paige Gunnell, B. Deeley
Natasha Bowden
1139.1
Natasha Bowden
Natasha Bowden
Investigated Item
Odour concentration in odour units ‘ou’, determined by sensory odour concentration
measurements, of an odour sample supplied in a sampling bag. Odour character is also
assessed, however, this assessment is not covered by AS4323.3:2001.
Identification
The odour sample bags were labelled individually. Each label recorded the testing laboratory,
sample number, sampling location (or Identification), sampling date and time, dilution ratio (if
dilution was used) and whether further chemical analysis was required.
Method
The odour concentration measurements were performed using dynamic olfactometry
according to the Australian Standard ‘Determination of Odour Concentration by Dynamic
Olfactometry AS/NZS4323.3:2001. The odour perception characteristics of the panel within the
presentation series for the samples were analogous to that for butanol calibration. Any
deviation from the Australian standard is recorded in the ‘Comments’ section of this report.
Measuring Range
The measuring range of the olfactometer is 22 ” F ” 218 ou. If the measuring range was
insufficient the odour samples will have been pre-diluted. The machine is not calibrated
beyond dilution setting 217or below setting 23. This is specifically mentioned with the results.
Environment
The measurements were performed in an air- and odour-conditioned room. The room
temperature is maintained at 25oC or less, with temperature fluctuations of less than ± 3 oC.
Measuring Dates
The date of each measurement is specified with the results.
Instrument Used
The olfactometer used during this testing session was: ODORMAT SERIES 200107V05
Instrumental
Precision
The precision of this instrument (expressed as repeatability) for a sensory calibration must be r
d 0.477 in accordance with the Australian Standard AS/NZS4323.3:2001.
ODORMAT SERIES 200107V05: r = 0.384 (20 September, 2004)
Compliance – Yes
Instrumental
Accuracy
The accuracy of this instrument for a sensory calibration must be A d 0.217 in accordance with
the Australian Standard AS/NZS4323.3:2001.
ODORMAT SERIES 200107V05: A = 0.147 (20 September, 2004)
Compliance – Yes
Lower Detection
Limit (LDL)
The LDL for the olfactometer has been determined to be 16 ou (four times the lowest dilution
setting)
Traceability
The measurements have been performed using standards for which the traceability to the
national standard has been demonstrated. The assessors are individually selected to comply
with fixed criteria and are monitored in time to keep within the limits of the standard. The
results from the assessors are traceable to primary standards of n-butanol in nitrogen.
Date: Thursday, 3 March 2004
Report Number / Panel Roster Number: PER20050226
N. Bowden
T. Schulz
Principal and Managing Director
The Odour Unit Pty Ltd
ACN 091 165 061
Form 06 – Odour Concentration Results Sheet (V05)
Authorised Signatory
Issue Date: 13.11.2003
Issued By: SB
Odour Measurement Manual
Revision: 3
Revision Date: 01.03.2004
Approved By: TJS
1 of 1
PC50199
PC50200
PC50201
PC50202
PC50203
PC50204
PC50205
PC50206
RDA 5
RDA 5
RDA 5
RDA 5
RDA 5
RDA 5
RDA 5
RDA 5
The Odour Unit Pty Ltd
ACN 091 165 061
Form 06 – Odour Concentration Results Sheet
TOU
Sample
ID
Sample Location
Analysis
Date &
Time
26/02/2005
10:01hrs
26/02/2005
10:26hrs
26/02/2005
11:02hrs
26/02/2005
11:31hrs
26/02/2005
12:37hrs
26/02/2005
13:01hrs
26/02/2005
13:26hrs
26/02/2005
13:50hrs
Sampling
Date & Time
25/02/2005
02:00hrs
25/02/2005
05:45hrs
25/02/2005
08:26hrs
25/02/2005
10:00hrs
25/02/2005
11:30hrs
25/02/2005
14:20hrs
25/02/2005
17:30hrs
25/02/2005
23:17hrs
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
Panel
Size
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Issue Date: 13.11.2003
Issued By: SB
Odour Measurement Manual
10
10
10
10
10
10
8
10
Valid
ITEs
Nominal
Sample
Dilution
Factor
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Actual
Sample
Dilution
(Adjusted for
Temperature)
Odour Sample Measurement Results
79
52
74
56
60
69
76
84 *
Sample Odour
Concentration
(Final,
allowing for
dilution)
(ou)
* See comments below
79
52
74
56
60
69
76
84 *
Sample Odour
Concentration
(as received,
in the bag)
(ou)
THE ODOUR UNIT PTY LIMITED
2 of 2
Revision: 2
Revision Date: 13.11.2003
Approved By: TJS
Musty
Musty
Musty
Musty
Process liquor
Musty
Musty
Musty
Odour
Character
Accreditation
Number: 14974
52
Concentration of
Reference gas
(ppm)
20 ” F ” 80
Panel Target Range
for n-butanol
(ppb)
1,450
Measured
Concentration
(ou)
36
Measured
Panel Threshold
(ppb)
Yes
Does this panel
calibration
measurement
comply with
AS/NZS4323.3:2001
(Yes / No)
Accreditation
Number: 14974
The Odour Unit Pty Ltd
ACN 091 165 061
Form 06 – Odour Concentration Results Sheet
NATA endorsed test report. This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Issue Date: 13.11.2003
Issued By: SB
Odour Measurement Manual
END OF DOCUMENT
Revision: 2
Revision Date: 13.11.2003
Approved By: TJS
3 of 3
Disclaimer: Parties, other than TOU, responsible for collecting odour samples hereby certify that they have voluntarily furnished these odour samples, appropriately collected and labelled, to The Odour Unit Pty
Limited for the purpose of odour testing. The collection of odour samples by parties other than The Odour Unit Pty Limited relinquishes The Odour Unit Pty Limited from all responsibility for the sample collection
and any effects or actions that the results from the test(s) may have.
AS/NZS4323.3:2001 states samples are to be analysed within 30hrs of collection. Sample PC50199 was analysed 32hrs after collection, therefore it
does not meet the Australian Standard and is not NATA certified. GHD Comment - TOU misunderstood collection time, which was 0200 on 26/2/05
PER2005.02.26
n-butanol
Comments
Reference Odorant
Panel Roster
Number
Reference Odorant
Odour Panel Calibration Results
THE ODOUR UNIT PTY LIMITED
THE ODOUR UNIT PTY LIMITED
Showroom 1
16-32 Hulme Court
Myaree
WA 6154
Phone: +61 8 9330 9476
Facsimile: +61 8 9330 1868
Email:[email protected]
Internet: www.odourunit.com.au
ABN: 53 091 165 061
Accreditation Number:
14974
Form 06 - Perth Laboratory
Odour Concentration Measurement Results
The measurement was commissioned by:
Organisation GHD
Contact Mark Goldstone
Sampling Site Alcoa Wagerup
Sampling Method Not specified
Order details:
Order requested by
Date of order
Order number
Signed by
Paige Gunnell
01/03/2005
TBA
TBA
Telephone
Facsimile
Email
Sampling Team
Order accepted by
TOU Project #
Project Manager
Testing operator
(08) 9429 6558
(08) 9429 6555
[email protected]
Paige Gunnell, B. Deeley
Natasha Bowden
1139.1
Natasha Bowden
Clayton Hough
Investigated Item
Odour concentration in odour units ‘ou’, determined by sensory odour concentration
measurements, of an odour sample supplied in a sampling bag. Odour character is also
assessed, however, this assessment is not covered by AS4323.3:2001.
Identification
The odour sample bags were labelled individually. Each label recorded the testing laboratory,
sample number, sampling location (or Identification), sampling date and time, dilution ratio (if
dilution was used) and whether further chemical analysis was required.
Method
The odour concentration measurements were performed using dynamic olfactometry
according to the Australian Standard ‘Determination of Odour Concentration by Dynamic
Olfactometry AS/NZS4323.3:2001. The odour perception characteristics of the panel within the
presentation series for the samples were analogous to that for butanol calibration. Any
deviation from the Australian standard is recorded in the ‘Comments’ section of this report.
Measuring Range
The measuring range of the olfactometer is 22 ” F ” 218 ou. If the measuring range was
insufficient the odour samples will have been pre-diluted. The machine is not calibrated
beyond dilution setting 217or below setting 23. This is specifically mentioned with the results.
Environment
The measurements were performed in an air- and odour-conditioned room. The room
temperature is maintained at 25oC or less, with temperature fluctuations of less than ± 3 oC.
Measuring Dates
The date of each measurement is specified with the results.
Instrument Used
The olfactometer used during this testing session was: ODORMAT SERIES 200107V05
Instrumental
Precision
The precision of this instrument (expressed as repeatability) for a sensory calibration must be r
d 0.477 in accordance with the Australian Standard AS/NZS4323.3:2001.
ODORMAT SERIES 200107V05: r = 0.384 (20 September, 2004)
Compliance – Yes
Instrumental
Accuracy
The accuracy of this instrument for a sensory calibration must be A d 0.217 in accordance with
the Australian Standard AS/NZS4323.3:2001.
ODORMAT SERIES 200107V05: A = 0.147 (20 September, 2004)
Compliance – Yes
Lower Detection
Limit (LDL)
The LDL for the olfactometer has been determined to be 16 ou (four times the lowest dilution
setting)
Traceability
The measurements have been performed using standards for which the traceability to the
national standard has been demonstrated. The assessors are individually selected to comply
with fixed criteria and are monitored in time to keep within the limits of the standard. The
results from the assessors are traceable to primary standards of n-butanol in nitrogen.
Date: Thursday, 3 March 2004
Report Number / Panel Roster Number: PER20050301
C. Hough
T. Schulz
Principal and Managing Director
The Odour Unit Pty Ltd
ACN 091 165 061
Form 06 – Odour Concentration Results Sheet (V05)
Authorised Signatory
Issue Date: 13.11.2003
Issued By: SB
Odour Measurement Manual
Revision: 3
Revision Date: 01.03.2004
Approved By: TJS
1 of 1
PC50216
PC50217
PC50218
PC50219
RDA 6
RDA 6
RDA 6
RDA 6
The Odour Unit Pty Ltd
ACN 091 165 061
Form 06 – Odour Concentration Results Sheet
TOU
Sample
ID
Sample Location
Analysis
Date &
Time
01/03/2005
11:30hrs
01/03/2005
12:00hrs
01/03/2005
12:30hrs
01/03/2005
13:00hrs
Sampling
Date & Time
28/02/2005
12:30hrs
28/02/2005
18:10hrs
01/03/2005
24:03hrs
01/03/2005
07:15hrs
5
5
5
5
Panel
Size
-
-
-
-
Issue Date: 13.11.2003
Issued By: SB
Odour Measurement Manual
10
10
10
10
Valid
ITEs
Nominal
Sample
Dilution
Factor
-
-
-
-
Actual
Sample
Dilution
(Adjusted for
Temperature)
Odour Sample Measurement Results
256
194
338
478
Sample Odour
Concentration
(as received,
in the bag)
(ou)
256
194
338
478
Sample Odour
Concentration
(Final,
allowing for
dilution)
(ou)
THE ODOUR UNIT PTY LIMITED
2 of 2
Revision: 2
Revision Date: 13.11.2003
Approved By: TJS
Musty
Musty
Musty
Mud / cement
Odour
Character
Accreditation
Number: 14974
52
Concentration of
Reference gas
(ppm)
20 ” F ” 80
Panel Target Range
for n-butanol
(ppb)
1,550
Measured
Concentration
(ou)
33
Measured
Panel Threshold
(ppb)
Yes
Does this panel
calibration
measurement
comply with
AS/NZS4323.3:2001
(Yes / No)
Accreditation
Number: 14974
The Odour Unit Pty Ltd
ACN 091 165 061
Form 06 – Odour Concentration Results Sheet
NATA endorsed test report. This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Issue Date: 13.11.2003
Issued By: SB
Odour Measurement Manual
END OF DOCUMENT
Revision: 2
Revision Date: 13.11.2003
Approved By: TJS
3 of 3
Disclaimer: Parties, other than TOU, responsible for collecting odour samples hereby certify that they have voluntarily furnished these odour samples, appropriately collected and labelled, to The Odour Unit Pty
Limited for the purpose of odour testing. The collection of odour samples by parties other than The Odour Unit Pty Limited relinquishes The Odour Unit Pty Limited from all responsibility for the sample collection
and any effects or actions that the results from the test(s) may have.
None.
PER2005.03.01
n-butanol
Comments
Reference Odorant
Panel Roster
Number
Reference Odorant
Odour Panel Calibration Results
THE ODOUR UNIT PTY LIMITED
Appendix C
Field Notes
61/15324/47345
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
42
Appendix C – List of Tables
Table C1. Phase 1 – Field Observations During Monitoring Program ........................................................................................................................ 2
Table C2. Phase 2 Dry Residue Run 1 - Field Observations During Monitoring Program........................................................................................ 7
Table C3. Phase 2 Dry Residue Run 2 - Field Observations During Monitoring Program........................................................................................ 9
Table C4. Phase 2 Wet Residue Run 1 and Bitumen - Field Observations During Monitoring Program .............................................................. 11
Table C5. Phase 2 Wet Residue Run 2 and Bitumen - Field Observations During Monitoring Program .............................................................. 12
Table C6. Phase 2 ROWS - Field Observations During Monitoring Program........................................................................................................... 13
Table C7. Phase 2 Cooling Pond - Field Observations During Monitoring Program............................................................................................... 14
Table C8. Phase 2 RDA2 - Field Observations During Monitoring Program ............................................................................................................ 15
Table C9. Phase 2 Superthickener - Field Observations During Monitoring Program............................................................................................ 16
Table C10. Phase 2 Cooling Pond and RDA5 (PAH Runs) - Field Observations During Monitoring Program ..................................................... 17
61/15324/50156
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Field Observations Appendix
1
Table C1. Phase 1 – Field Observations During Monitoring Program
Date
Location
Type of
Sample ID
Sample
Sample Flow
Hood Internal
Ambient
Sweep Air Flow
Start Time
End Time
Rate
Temp (°C)
Temperature (°C)
Rate (Start/Finish)
(hh:mm)
(hh:mm)
(L/min)
19/10/2004
Cooling Pond
Cooling Pond 2
Cooling Pond
Odour
CP1
1800/min
38
25
5/5
1020
1035
VOC
A70218
100ml/30sec
39
25
5/5
1020
1035
VOC
A14306
100ml/30sec
40
27
5/5
1045
1055
ALD
922803918
100ml/30sec
41
26
5/5
1107
1157
Odour
CP2
1800/min
45
25
1400
1415
VOC
A70310
100ml/30sec
44
24
5/5
1450
1459
ALD
922803916
100ml/30sec
44
24
5/5
1345
1445
VOC
A11389
100ml/30sec
N/A
N/A
N/A
1430
1440
Odour
RP1
1800/min
26
25
5/5
1015
1030
VOC
A12078
100ml/36sec
26
25
5/5
0937
0949
ALD
922803913
100ml/30sec
26
25
5/5
1008
1058
Odour
RP2
1800/min
26
25
5/3
1610
1620
VOC
A73725
100ml/30sec
26
25
5/3
1610
1622
ALD
0822803915
100ml/30sec
26
25
5/5
1425
1515
Free
20/10/2004
ROWS Pond 1
ROWS Pond 2
61/15324/50156
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Field Observations Appendix
2
Date
Location
Type of
Sample ID
Sample
Sample Flow
Hood Internal
Ambient
Sweep Air Flow
Start Time
End Time
Rate
Temp (°C)
Temperature (°C)
Rate (Start/Finish)
(hh:mm)
(hh:mm)
(L/min)
21/10/2004
ROCP2
ROCP2-2
22/10/2004
RDA2-1
RDA2-2
25/10/2004
Lower Dam 1
Lower Dam 2
61/15324/50156
Odour
ROCP2-1
1800/min
24
20
5/4
1100
1115
VOC
C06215
100ml/30sec
25
20
5/5
945
955
ALD
922803910
100ml/30sec
24
20
5/4
1100
1150
Odour
ROCP2-2
1800/min
25
21
5/5
1540
1555
VOC
A63757
100ml/30sec
25
21
5/5
1540
1550
ALD
922803914
100ml/30sec
24
20
5/5
1335
1425
Odour
RDA2-1
1800/min
34
24
5/0
1100
1115
VOC
A13823
100ml/30sec
34
22
5/5
0945
0955
ALD
922803911
100ml/30sec
34
24
5/0
1100
1150
Odour
RDA2-2
1800min
38
24
5/5
1505
1520
VOC
A00360
100ml/30sec
38
24
5/5
1505
1515
ALD
922803917
100ml/30sec
33
23
5/4.5
1305
1355
Odour
LD1
1800/min
28
19
5/4
1120
1135
VOC
A08278
100ml/40sec
25
18
5/4.5
1000
1014
ALD
922803912
100ml/30sec
28
19
5/4
1120
1210
Odour
LD2
1800/min
32
24
5/5
1425
1440
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Field Observations Appendix
3
Date
Location
Type of
Sample ID
Sample
Sample Flow
Hood Internal
Ambient
Sweep Air Flow
Start Time
End Time
Rate
Temp (°C)
Temperature (°C)
Rate (Start/Finish)
(hh:mm)
(hh:mm)
1330
1340
(L/min)
26/10/2004
Oxalate 1
Oxalate 2
27/10/2004
Super-Thcknr 1
Super – Thcknr 2
28/10/2004
Wet Sand
61/15324/50156
VOC
A15036
100ml/30sec
34
22
5/5
ALD
922803919
100ml/30sec
33
24
5/5
Odour
Oxalate 1
1700/min
30
20
5/5
1030
1045
VOC
A09661
100ml/44sec
30
20
5/5
1045
1055
ALD
097901749
100mls/31secs
30
20
5/5
1056
1146
Odour
Oxalate 2
1700
29
25
5/5
1245
1300
VOC
A06466
100mls/31secs
29
25
5/5
1300
1310
ALD
0979701705
100 mls/30secs
29
25
5/5
1311
1401
Odour
ST1
1700
37
24
5/5
1145
1200
VOC
A13714
100ml/69secs
37
24
5/5
1228
1239.5
ALD
0979701719
100ml/30secs
37
24
5/5
1252
1322
Odour
ST2
1700
37
24
5/5
1212
1227
VOC
A10353
100mls/59secs
37
24
5/5
1240
1250
ALD
0979701735
100mls/30secs
37
24
5/5
1323
1353
Odour
Wet Sand
1800 mls/min
34
29
5/5
1045
1100
VOC
A1319054
100mls/54 secs
34
29
5/5
1100
1115
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Field Observations Appendix
4
Date
Location
Type of
Sample ID
Sample
Sample Flow
Hood Internal
Ambient
Sweep Air Flow
Start Time
End Time
Rate
Temp (°C)
Temperature (°C)
Rate (Start/Finish)
(hh:mm)
(hh:mm)
(L/min)
Dry Residue
Wet Residue
29/10/2004
Cooling Pond
ALD
0979701772
100mls/32 secs
34
29
5/5
1115
1205
Odour
Dry Residue
1800 mls/min
38
30
5/5
1240
1255
VOC
A14300
100mls/58secs
38
30
5/5
1345
1405
ALD
09791729
100mls/34secs
38
30
5/5
1255
1345
Odour
Wet Residue
1700 mls/min
35
30
5/5
1500
1515
VOC
A12494
100mls/63secs
35
30
5/5
1515
1527
ALD
0979701638
100mls/35secs
35
30
5/5
1527
1617
Odour
CPF
1800
N/A
N/A
N/A
1440
1450
ALD
979701710
100ml/30sec
N/A
1422
1512
Odour
A1
1800
5/5
1348
1411
VOC
A1
100ml/47sec
5/5
1348
1403
ALD
979701741
100ml/30sec
5/5
1411
1501
VOC
A13888
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
ALD
979701727
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
979701785
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
A4
1800
5/5
1626
1640
Free
10/11/2004
Blank 1
Blank 2
Blank 3
Blank 4
61/15324/50156
Odour
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Field Observations Appendix
5
Date
Location
Type of
Sample ID
Sample
Sample Flow
Hood Internal
Ambient
Sweep Air Flow
Start Time
End Time
Rate
Temp (°C)
Temperature (°C)
Rate (Start/Finish)
(hh:mm)
(hh:mm)
(L/min)
17/11/2004
VOC
A14330
100ml/30sec
5/5
1700
1710
ALD
979701698
100ml/30sec
5/5
1600
1650
Cooling Pond 1
ALD
979701610
100ml/30sec
18
17
5/5
940
955
Super thickener 1
ALD
979701721
100ml/30sec
35
17
5/5
1125
1130
Super thickener 2
ALD
979701634
100ml/30sec
35
17
5/5
1134
1144
Super thickener 3
ALD
979701615
100ml/30sec
35
17
5/5
1150
1155
61/15324/50156
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Field Observations Appendix
6
Table C2. Phase 2 Dry Residue Run 1 - Field Observations During Monitoring Program
Date
14/02/2005
15/02/2005
Location
Hood
RDA5 run 1 S
Type of
Sample
Sample ID
Sample Flow
Rate (mL/min)
Gas Flow
Start Time End Time
(Start/Finish) (hh:mm)
(hh:mm)
(L/min)
Temperature (°C)
Ambient
Temperature (°C)
TO-11a
1274305375
1081
5/5
1836
1936
28
27.6
P
TO-17
A11293
102
5/5
1836
1936
33
27.6
S
TO-17
A11144
100
5/5
1836
1936
24.3
24.8
P
TO-11a
1274305376
1114
5/5
1919
2019
24.0
24.8
S
TO-17
A1
98
5/5
2105
2209
24.3
24.8
P
TO-17
A14502
97
5/5
2105
2209
24
24.8
S
TO-11a
1274305370
1215
5/5
2105
2209
21.6
22.6
P
TO-11a
1274305379
1015
5/5
2105
2209
21.4
22.6
S
TO-17
A15036
96
5/5
2408
108
21.6
22.6
P
TO-17
C06289
95
5/5
2408
108
21.4
22.6
P
TO-11a
1274305372
1079
5/5
2408
108
21.4
22.6
S
TO-11a
1274305378
1053
5/5
2408
108
21.6
22.6
RDA5 run 1 P
TO-11a
1274305377
1068
5/5
307
0407
20.6
21.6
S
TO-11a
1274305374
1065
5/5
307
0407
20.7
21.6
S
TO-17
C06252
95
5/5
307
0407
20.7
21.6
P
TO-17
A72258
94
5/5
307
0407
20.6
21.6
P
TO-17
B16433
187
5/5
604
704
21.7
23
S
TO-17
A72158
94
5/5
604
704
21.2
23
61/15324/50156
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Field Observations Appendix
7
Date
15/02/2005
Location
Hood
Type of
Sample
Sample ID
Sample Flow
Rate (mL/min)
Gas Flow
Start Time End Time
(Start/Finish) (hh:mm)
(hh:mm)
(L/min)
Temperature (°C)
Ambient
Temperature (°C)
S
TO-11a
1274305371
1033
5/5
604
704
21.2
23
P
TO-11a
1274305373
1027
5/5
604
704
21.7
23
RDA5 run 1 S
TO-11a
1274304756
1065
5/5
912
1011
31.2
29.1
P
TO-11a
1274304759
475
5/5
912
1011
41.3
29.1
S
TO-17
C06646
94
5/5
912
1011
31.2
29.1
P
TO-17
A12416
95
5/5
912
1010
41.3
29.1
P
TO-11a
1274304758
469
5/5
1203
1303
53.8
34.3
S
TO-11a
1274304750
469
5/5
1203
1303
40.6
34.3
P
TO-17
B15881
207
5/5
1203
1303
53.8
34.3
S
TO-17
A11389
205
5/5
1203
1304
40.6
34.3
S
TO-17
A14431
100
5/5
1456
1554
46.4
36.3
P
TO-17
A09645
106
5/5
1456
1554
38.8
36.3
P
TO-11a
1274304757
1038
5/5
1456
1555
46.4
36.3
S
TO-11a
1274304753
1064
5/5
1456
1556
38.8
36.3
61/15324/50156
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Field Observations Appendix
8
Table C3. Phase 2 Dry Residue Run 2 - Field Observations During Monitoring Program
Date
Location
Hood
Type of
Sample
Sample ID
25/02/2005
RDA 5 run 2
P
TO-11a
1274305529
1074
5/5
412
512
17.2
17.2
S
TO-11a
1274305524
1025
5/5
412
512
18.15
17.2
S
TO-17
B16459
97
5/5
412
512
18.15
17.2
P
TO-17
A72166
97
5/5
412
512
17.2
17.2
P
TO-11a
1274305521
1012
5/5
703
803
25.75
25
S
TO-11a
1274305520
979
5/5
703
803
26.4
25
S
TO-17
A14506
93
5/5
703
803
26.4
25
P
TO-17
A10482
91
5/5
703
803
25.75
25
S
TO-11a
1274305528
982
5/5
1000
1103
43.1
41
P
TO-11a
1274305522
988
5/5
1000
1103
46.25
41
S
TO-17
B16449
98
5/5
1000
1103
43.1
41
P
TO-17
C06514
95
5/5
1000
1103
46.25
41
P
TO-11a
1274305525
1027
5/5
1300
1400
49.9
46
S
TO-11a
1274305523
990
5/5
1300
1338
47.75
46
S
TO-17
A01467
101
5/5
1300
1400
47.75
46
P
TO-17
A13823
99
5/5
1300
1400
49.9
46
P
TO-11a
1274305526
1031
5/5
1608
1710
31.4
30.8
S
TO-11a
1274305527
1022
5/5
1608
1711
33
30.8
25/02/2005
RDA 5 run 2
61/15324/50156
Sample Flow
Rate (mL/min)
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Field Observations Appendix
Gas Flow
Start Time End Time Temperature (°C)
Ambient
(Start/Finish) (hh:mm)
(hh:mm)
Temperature (°C)
(L/min)
9
S
TO-17
B15517
102
5/5
1608
1710
33
30.8
P
TO-17
A10058
103
5/5
1608
1711
31.4
30.8
5/5
530
542
odour
S
TO-11a
1274305545
1016
5/5
1900
2000
22.4
25.2
P
TO-11a
1274305544
1022
5/5
1900
2000
23.5
25.2
P
TO-17
A16087
99
5/5
1900
2000
23.5
25.2
S
TO-17
A15036
99
5/5
1900
2000
22.4
25.2
5/5
2000
2012
odour
P
TO-11a
1274305549
1007
5/5
2205
2305
18.6
23.5
S
TO-11a
1274305548
1021
5/5
2205
2305
20.9
23.5
S
TO-17
A09645
94
5/5
2205
2305
20.9
23.5
P
TO-17
A11352
96
5/5
2205
2305
18.6
23.5
5/5
2205
2217
odour
S
TO-11a
1274305543
1017
5/5
100
200
18
22.2
P
TO-11a
1274305547
1009
5/5
100
200
17.5
22.2
P
TO-17
A70150
94
5/5
100
200
17.5
22.2
S
TO-17
A14502
93
5/5
100
200
18
22.2
5/5
200
212
odour
61/15324/50156
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Field Observations Appendix
10
Table C4. Phase 2 Wet Residue Run 1 and Bitumen - Field Observations During Monitoring Program
Date
16/02/2005
18/02/2005
Location
Hood
Type of
Sample
Sample ID
Sample Flow
Rate (mL/min)
Gas Flow
(Start/Finish) (L/min)
Start Time
(hh:mm)
End Time Temperature (°C)
Ambient
(hh:mm)
Temperature (°C)
Wet Bitumen
TO-17
B15517
97
5/4.5
1150
1252
25.2
24.2
PAHs
TO-17
A01467
214
5/5
1150
1450
32.4
30.8
Dry Dry Bitumen
TO-17
A72151
100
5/5
1607
1712
25.8
25.8
S
TO-11a
1274304752
1033
5/5
21.11
22.11
27.6
27.6
P
TO-11a
1274304754
993
5/5
21.11
22.11
30.5
27.6
S
TO-17
A72153
95
5/5
21.11
22.11
27.6
27.6
P
TO-17
A10069
93
5/5
21.11
22.11
30.5
27.6
S
TO-11a
1274304995
1049
5/5
3.04
4.04
35.5
28
P
TO-11a
1274304990
997
5/5
3.04
4.04
35.5
28
P
TO-17
A63757
96
5/5
3.04
4.04
35.5
28
S
TO-17
A14314
94
5/5
3.04
4.04
35.5
28
S
TO-11a
1274304751
946
5/5
9.3
10.3
29.6
23.1
P
TO-11a
1274304755
1040
5/5
9.3
10.3
37.6
23.1
S
TO-17
A70306(3)
91
5/5
9.3
10.3
29.6
23.1
P
TO-17
A10347
94
5/5
9.3
10.3
37.6
23.1
P
TO-11a
1274304997
1017
5/5
13.25
13.55
46.1
30.4
S
TO-11a
1274304998
998
5/5
13.25
13.55
43.2
30.4
S
TO-17
A10353
96
5/5
13.25
13.55
43.2
30.4
P
TO-17
A13110
101
5/5
13.25
13.55
46.1
30.4
RDA 3
19/02/2005
19/02/2005
19/02/2005
61/15324/50156
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Field Observations Appendix
11
Table C5. Phase 2 Wet Residue Run 2 and Bitumen - Field Observations During Monitoring Program
Date
Location Hood
Type of
Sample
Sample ID
28/02/2005
RDA-6
Perspex in
TO-11a
1274304608
1016
5/5
915
1020
30
30
28/02/2005
RDA-6
Perspex out
TO-11a
1274304603
1012
5/5
915
1020
30
30
28/02/2005
RDA-6
P
TO-11a
1274304605
985
5/5
1115
1216
36.4
36.4
28/02/2005
RDA-6
S
TO-11a
1274304692
1017
5/5
1115
1216
36.3
36.3
28/02/2005
RDA-6
P
TO-17
C06289
94
5/5
1115
1216
36.4
36.4
28/02/2005
RDA-6
S
TO-17
C06252
94
5/5
1115
1216
36.3
36.3
28/02/2005
RDA-6
Perspex in
TO-11a
1274304691
997
5/5
1300
1402
35.8
35.8
28/02/2005
RDA-6
Perspex out
TO-11a
1274304690
966
5/5
1300
1402
35.8
35.8
28/02/2005
RDA-6
S
TO-11a
1274305250
1015
5/5
1707
1807
24.3
23.5
28/02/2005
RDA-6
P
TO-11a
1274305259
1004
5/5
1707
1807
24.8
23.5
28/02/2005
RDA-6
S
TO-17
A11408
96
5/5
1707
1807
24.3
23.5
28/02/2005
RDA-6
P
TO-17
A00360
88
5/5
1707
1807
24.8
23.5
28/02/2005
RDA-6
P
TO-11a
1274304699
1004
5/5
2300
2401
17.4
15.2
28/02/2005
RDA-6
S
TO-11a
1274304698
1006
5/5
2300
2400
17.5
15.2
28/02/2005
RDA-6
P
TO-17
C06646
93
5/5
2300
2401
17.2
15.2
28/02/2005
RDA-6
S
TO-17
A09661
87
5/5
2300
2405
17.2
15.2
1/03/2005
RDA-6
P
TO-11a
1274304696
1022
5/5
550
650
16.6
16.0
1/03/2005
RDA-6
S
TO-11a
1274304697
958
5/5
550
650
16.8
16.0
1/03/2005
RDA-6
P
TO-17
B16430
93
5/5
550
650
16.6
16.0
1/03/2005
RDA-6
S
TO-17
A01444
87
5/5
550
650
16.8
16.0
61/15324/50156
Sample Flow Rate
(mL/min)
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Field Observations Appendix
Gas Flow
(Start/Finish) (L/min)
Start Time
(hh:mm)
End Time
(hh:mm)
Temperature (°C)
12
Ambient
Temperature (°C)
Table C6. Phase 2 ROWS - Field Observations During Monitoring Program
Date
Location
Hood
Type of
Sample
Sample ID
24/02/2005
ROWS1
S
TO-11a
1274304994
997
5/5
1240
1340
35
35
ROWS1
S
TO-17
A11369
104
5/5
1240
1340
35
35
ROWS2
S
TO-17
A10755
99
5/5
1540
1640
31
31
ROWS2
S
TO-11a
1274305255
1091
5/5
1540
1640
31
31
ROWS3A
S
TO-17
A11293
75
5/5
1845
1945
25.5
24.3
ROWS3A
S
TO-11a
1274305253
1030
5/5
1845
1945
25.5
24.3
ROWS3B
S
TO-11a
1274305254
1000
5/5
2008
2046
24.6
24
ROWS3B
S
TO-17
A72158
75
5/5
2008
2108
24.6
24
1/03/2005
61/15324/50156
Sample Flow
Rate (mL/min)
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Field Observations Appendix
Gas Flow
(Start/Finish)
(L/min)
Start Time End Time Temperature (°C)
Ambient
(hh:mm) (hh:mm)
Temperature (°C)
13
Table C7. Phase 2 Cooling Pond - Field Observations During Monitoring Program
Date
Location
24/02/2005 Cooling Pond Inlet
Hood
Type of
Sample
Sample ID
Sample Flow
Gas Flow
Start Time End Time Temperature (°C)
Rate (mL/min) (Start/Finish) (hh:mm) (hh:mm)
(L/min)
Ambient
Temperature (°C)
P
TO-11a
1274305256 1090
5/5
1333
1405
48
35
Cooling Pond Inlet (b)
P
TO-17
B16456
5/5
1333
1405
48
35
Cooling Pond Berm
P
TO-11a
1274305257 1090
5/5
1505
1524
66.8
52.6
Cooling Pond Berm (a) P
TO-17
A11071
5/5
1505
1526
66.8
52.6
Cooling Pond Outlet
TO-11a
1274305258 1090
5/5
1630
1650
37
37
TO-17
A15016
5/5
1630
1650
37
37
P
Cooling Pond Outlet (c) P
61/15324/50156
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Field Observations Appendix
97
97
97
14
Table C8. Phase 2 RDA2 - Field Observations During Monitoring Program
Date
1/03/2005
Location
RDA 2
61/15324/50156
Hood
Type of
Sample
Sample ID
Sample Flow
Gas Flow
Rate (mL/min) (Start/Finish)
(L/min)
Start Time
(hh:mm)
End Time
(hh:mm)
Temperature (°C)
Ambient
Temperature (°C)
SS
TO-11a
1274305251
1020
5/5
1100
1200
25
25
SS
TO-17
A72151
132
5/5
1100
1200
25
25
SS
TO-11a
1274304695
1019
5/5
1330
1430
30
30
SS
TO-17
A62959
84
5/5
1330
1430
30
30
SS
TO-17
A72163
74
5/5
1600
1715
25
25
SS
TO-11a
1274304252
1027
5/5
1600
1700
25
25
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Field Observations Appendix
15
Table C9. Phase 2 Superthickener - Field Observations During Monitoring Program
Date
1/03/2005
Location
Hood
Superthickener P
Type of
Sample
Sample Flow Rate
(mL/min)
Gas Flow
(Start/Finish)
(L/min)
Start Time End Time Temperature (°C)
Ambient
(hh:mm)
(hh:mm)
Temperature (°C)
TO-11a
1274304694
1014
5/5
10:30
10:50
55
25
P
TO-17
A72188
93
5/5
10:30
10:50
55
25
P
TO-11a
1274304693
1014
5/5
11:20
11:40
55
28
P
TO-17
A12413
93
5/5
11:20
11:40
55
28
T0-17 PAH A16466
180
5/5
12:10
12:30
55
30
A16466
120
5/5
12:30
14:10
55
30
ST1
1800
5/5
12:10
12:30
55
30
ST1
1200
5/5
12:30
14:10
55
30
PAH
61/15324/50156
Sample ID
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Field Observations Appendix
16
Table C10. Phase 2 Cooling Pond and RDA5 (PAH Runs) - Field Observations During Monitoring Program
Date
1/03/2005
Location
Hood
Type of Sample ID Sample Flow
Gas Flow
Sample
Rate (mL/min) (Start/Finish)
(L/min)
Start Time
(hh:mm)
End Time Temperature (°C)
Ambient
(hh:mm)
Temperature (°C)
Cooling Pond
SS
TO-17
A73693
140
5/19
1537
1830
35.7
33.7
Cooling Pond
SS
PAH
CP1
1200
1200
1537
1830
35.7
33.7
22/02/2005
RDA5
SS
TO-17
B16859
146
5/5
1015
1645
34
33.03
22/02/2005
RDA5
SS
PAH
DM1
1800
5/5
1015
1715
34
33.03
61/15324/50156
Wagerup Refinery - Residue Area Emissions Assessment
Field Observations Appendix
17
GHD Pty Ltd
ABN 39 008 488 373
GHD House, 239 Adelaide Tce. Perth, WA 6004
P.O. Box Y3106, Perth WA 6832
T: 61 8 9429 6666 F: 61 8 9429 6555 E: [email protected]
© GHD Pty Ltd 2004
This document is and shall remain the property of GHD Pty Ltd. The document should only be used for
the purposes for which it was commissioned and in accordance with the Terms of Engagement for the
commission. In particular, it should be noted that the results of this study are specific to the Wagerup
alumina refinery, and should not therefore be used elsewhere without appropriate validation.
Unauthorised use of this document in any form whatsoever is prohibited.
Document Status
Rev
No.
Author
61/15324/47345
Reviewer
Name
Approved for Issue
Signature
Residue Pond Emissions
Assessment of Emissions from Area Sources
Name
Signature
Date