### Follow-up questions on Treated Wood Council's analytical data and supplemental comments from Novembe r and Decemb e r, 2013 The following questions are being asked to evaluate whether the sampl i ng and analytical approach used by TWC presents results that are comparable to data EPA has collected for comparisons with trad i tional fu e l s: _1.

__ Wood samp li ng- please provi de details on t h e 8 samp les of wood . Are these all age d sa m ples of com m ercia ll y available t rea t ed wood? I f not, please expl ain h ow t hese were obta in ed , n ot ing especia ll y whether they were obtained f ro m comm ercially avai l ab l e wood product s and re p rese nt a fresh o r aged sample. Creosote Non ·Tie Treated Wood (TW)- 40-50 yea r old pole material,**origin<~ ll** **y** 

### and currently commerciaJ.!y-available. Creosote with DOT Borate TW- aged tie materia l . orig i na ll y and current ly commerciallyavailable. Pentach l orophenol TW- aged utility po l e, orig i nally and currently commercia ll y-ava il able. Copper Naphthenate TW- 3 year old treated, originally and current ly commerc i ally-ava ilabl e Copper Naphthenate wit h Borate TW- newly treated tie, commercially-available B

orate TW- 5 yea r old structural lumber, o r iginally and current l y com m erc i ally-availab l e Copper-based, watc'rbome TW- aged decking material, originally and cu rrent l y com m e rciallyavai l able.**Org<~n c-based,**  

### waterborne TW- newly treated decking materia l , commercially-availa bl e. 

## ±

_ 2

_

. _ _ Wood moist ure content - for compa r iso n s to d ata o n a dry basis, should we ass um e a 20% . moist ure content for the l abo ratory dat a p rov id ed by TWC? Your assumption i s OK. and represents a rough estimate of the mean of all samp l es. Our laboratory did not dry the material as thi s could cause a loss of some vo l atile HAPS prior to analysis.**~**



### _ 3

_

. _ _ Anion data- Cl, F , N , and S: These d ata we re pre pa red u sing an aqueous leach method and ap pare ntl y d o not represent a tota l value as p rese n te d in EPA's Nove mb er 2011 tables. I n yo ur December 2013 supp l ement, you compa re t h e m direct l y w i t h t h e total va lu es, bu t i t is unclear whe t her t h is i s an approp r iate compa ri son. How wo ul d you recommen d usi n g the da t a provid ed by t h is t est for compa rin g to totals for t rad i tional f uels? Do yo u prop ose anot her m et h od to make th e TWC lab oratory d ata m ore comparab l e to EPA's Nov em b er 201 1 ta b les or h ave any su p pleme n tal da t a availa b le th at could hel p ensu re an app ropriate compar iso n ? Weat h ered**~nd** 

### freshly treate d wood (lumbe r) samples submitted for analysis in 2013 were ana l yze d for wate r- leach ab l e onions including chloride , f l uoride, nitrate, nitrite and sulfate , mther t h an for tot al levels of ch lorine, f lu orine, nitrogen and sulfur . It i s not possible to correlate one va l ue to t h e other. However, certilln**observa tion~**  

### and calcu l ations can be made to help de term i ne t he level s of tot<ll ch l orine, fluorine, ni trogen and su l fur . Fi rst, there is no fluorin e in t he act ive or inert ingredients of ilny of the wood preserva t ive chemistries in the TWC Petitio n . Any m easu re m ents d e tected in the 2013 an alysis would h ave been [ Formatte d : No bu l lets or numbering

[ Formatte d: No bu llets or numbering

[ Form atted: Indent: First U ne: 0.5"n<1tural amounts in the wood before

**tre<~tm**
**nt .**  EPA

**dat~** show 0-128 mgLkg of fiuorine in untreated wood. Second, we can further add t hat th ere is no chlonne, nitrogen or sulfur in the act ive or mert rngredients in the borate, creosote,

**co ~:mer**  naQh t henate (CuNaQ}, creosot cLboragte or **CuN;"~(2Lborate** t rea ted wood in th e TWC Petition. Third: there is no nitrogen or su l fur in the active or inert ingredients in (lentachlorouhenol treated wood in the TWC Petition. The ch lonne in th e uentachloroQhenol is accounted for in t he

**anal~s**
**s** for (lentachloro(lhenol. Fourth, t h e re

**ma~** be ch l oline, ni trog e n or sulfur in the fuel oil carri er in th e oi l -born e treated w ood {creosote, COf2!JCr na(2hthenate, (2entachloro(2henol or dual treated} . Since we are comQ<uing these tre ated woods to fuel oil , the amounts in the treated wood would

**lwa~ s**  be less than th e amo u nts i n t he who l e fuel oil. Fifth, the

**onl~** two

**chcmi~tries** that might contain chlorine, nitrogen or sulfur are coeecr-bascd waterborne treat ed wood (ACQI (nitros::en} and organic waterbonl\! treated wood (El2} {chlorine , nitrogen <1nd sulfur} {Table 2 i n the Dec. 4, 2013 Su(!f2lemen!al Comments}. We

**~<:~ n**  estimate th e maximum Cl , Nand S con tent in ACQ and El2 treated wood 

### by using th e AWPA sta nd < Hd retentions and the chemical structure of the active ingred ients and esscntral form ulants containrng Cl, Nor S, as

**~ummarized** m th e table below. These valu es re12 resent just the am oun t added durmg the ori gmal wood treat m ent a nd d o not io1Ciude est i ma tes o f com(2o n e n ts naturally occurring i n iLrmber, nor do w e a uem12t to estimate lo sses over ti me due to weathering. The tabl e also gives" com12arison to t ota l ch lorine, fluorin e , nit rogen and su l fur ranges found I n wood and b ioma ss fuels as Qublished

**b~** US EPA in "Contaminant Concentrations in Traditional Fu els: Tables fo r ComQarison." November 29, 2011. These data were

**orisinall~** Qubl ishcd 

### by USEPA OAQPS rn docket numbers EPA-HQ-OAR-2002 -9958-3255 and EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0119 -2 484. Non-HAP Com!Jonents rn ACQ- and El2-TrPated Wood vs . Untreated Wood Concen trat ion range, !lQI1l Chlorine Fl uorine Nitrogen Sulfur Wood and Biomass NO- NO- 

### 2200- NDMaterials' 

### 54 QQ 128 4@1 6100 ACQ- D: conten t from 

# .. 150 

### · - 

# - - 

# - awves' ACQ-0: conteoH from iner1 

### - 

### 5260 

# ·- 

# - - - so lvent'

ACQ-0: total contribution 

# -- - 5410 

## -- 

# - - - EL2: content from DCOI' 

### ill 

# .. Z2 

## 22 - H2: content from 

### 1 . 6 

# -- 3.3 

# -- - -**~~njoac•opr1d** EL2: t01a l co•Hrehul•on 

## ill 

# - 32 §§

**~lti!!Cd** wood andJ>iomass, including bark, bagasse, hog fuel and agncuhu ral

**[! ~n**  **t** residues 1 66.7% CuD+ 33.3%

**OldCC:ildrme h~lammonlum**  brcarbonateLcarbonate, or

**··ooAs~·· (Cu.**  **,~N ·**  HCOdmd 

# ' 2·Aminoethanol or' MEA" (C 1!:!?NOJ 

# • ti,S·D•chloro·2·N oovl·4:)mthiazohn·3-cnt' or ·ocOt" (Cu!:i.,Q.NOSI; 981(, of El2 formulation.

**~(6·Chloro·3..::Qyt~dmyl}rnl'thyi)·N·n•tro** 2·111lld_a1ohdmlmllle

**(C ~!::il** ..**CIN,D~);** 2o/o of EL2 formulat•on Exilm(l lc: tn ACO·D trcilted wood

**th~** AWPA minim!,Jm retention for UC4A exQosure {ground contact} is 

### 0.40 lbs£ft ·. ACQ·D contams 

### 66.7% CuO and 

### 33.3% DDABC, w1th ethilnolamine {MEAl formulant added il t 

### 2.75 x CuO. DDABC contams 

### 3.61% Nand MEA contains 

### 22.94% N Thus,

**Fronl_Df-!i~.QC·** 0.;]9 lb;

**~O.:Q.** 

### x 0 . 333

**lb ~**  OD!?-JK 

### x ft 1 wood 

# - X 0.0361 1!! N X tO" 

## = 1 50 [/ROI N



## -- 

# -

**ft ~·**  **·':'.2 9L.**  

# - lbACQ ·D 321bs lb ODABC from M[A. QA? lbs ACQ·O x 0 61J7 IDS CuD x l.75 lbs MEA x ft 1 woo:1 X 0.2194 l!.l N 

### x 10' 

## = 5260 j21JIT1 N It wood lbACQ·D illCUO 

### p

**~~~** lb MFA Th us, t he tota l n1trogcn ad d ed t o w ood f res hl y- t rea ted with ACQ -D commercia l fo rm ul al i ons is estimated to be 5410 QQm, mostly from t he

**re ive!~**  volatile amine solvent. Weil t hered wood burned for f uel value will have a fracuon of this ilmount.

**~** The following questions are being asked to evaluate whether the preservative types that were sampled and analyzed are re presentative surrogates for the entire category of wood preservative: 

### 1 . Preservative solution· Are there differences in the preservative solution (inactive and act ive ingredients, ) that was used on th e wood that was sampled and analyzed, and other preservative/wood combinations within the same category, that might affect the contaminants presen t in the treated wood ? t:!.Q_ I f so, p l ease explain genera ll y, without revealing any confi d ential business information, if possible. 

# . [ Formatted: No bullets 0< numbering