Osprey Units 29, 30 

NAIMA/U.S. EPA 

Emissions Test Report 

Prepared for: 

Johns Manville 

Waterville Plant 7 

7500 Dutch Road 

Waterville, Ohio 43566 

Project No. 10-3990.22 

January 12, 2010 

BT Environmental Consulting, Inc. 

2615 Wolcott Street 

Ferndale, Michigan 48220 

(248) 548-8070 
Johns Manville Waterville, Ohio BTEC Project No. 10-3990.22 

NAIMA/U.S. EPA Emissions Test Report January 12, 2011 

i

Executive Summary

U.S. EPA has agreed with the North American Insulation Manufacturer’s Association (NAIMA) 

and its members to a voluntary collection of residual risk-related data for the National Emission 

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Mineral Wool Production1 as well as for 

the NESHAP for Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing2. To assist in collecting the agreed upon data, 

BT Environmental Consulting, Inc. (BTEC) was retained by NAIMA to evaluate emission rates 

of the following pollutants from the one exhaust stack associated with the Pot and Marble Process 

Units 29 and 30 located at the Johns Manville site in Waterville, Ohio: 

• Particulate matter (PM) and particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5) 

• Antimony, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, lead, manganese, nickel, and 

selenium 

• Mercury 

• Hexavalent chromium 

• Hydrogen fluoride and hydrogen chloride 

Reference test methods used and test program methodologies were agreed upon by U.S. EPA and 

NAIMA prior to initiating test program fieldwork. Table I on the following page summarizes the 

overall results of the emissions test program. 

 

1

 Codified at Title 40, Part 63, Subpart DDD of the Code of Federal Regulations (40 CFR 63, Subpart DDD) 

2

 Codified at 40 CFR 63, Subpart NNN 
Johns Manville Waterville, Ohio BTEC Project No. 10-3990.22 

NAIMA/U.S. EPA Emissions Test Report January 12, 2011 

ii

Table I 

Emissions Test Program Results Summary 

Source Test 

Date(s) Pollutant MDL used 

Emission 

Rate 

(lbs/hour) 

Emission 

Rate 

(lbs/ton) 

Emission 

Rate 

(mg/dscm)

Filterable PM2.5 7.0 x 10-1 4.4 x 100

Organic 

Condensible PM2.5

 6.8 x 10-2 4.2 x 10-1

Inorganic 

Condensible PM2.5

< 8.7 x 10-2 5.4 x 10-1

November 

16-18, 2010 

Total PM2.5 < 8.6 x 10-1 5.4 x 100

Filterable 

Particulate 8.8 x 10-1 5.9 x 100

Antimony < 6.9 x 10-5 4.6 x 10-4

Arsenic < 6.9 x 10-5 4.6 x 10-4

Beryllium < 1.7 x 10-5 1.1 x 10-4

Cadmium < 2.2 x 10-5 1.4 x 10-4

Chromium < 6.4 x 10-5 4.2 x 10-4

Cobalt < 4.2 x 10-5 2.7 x 10-4

Lead 2.0 x 10-4 1.3 x 10-3

Manganese < 1.2 x 10-4 7.7 x 10-4

Nickel < 9.6 x 10-5 6.4 x 10-4

November 

16-18, 2010 

Selenium < 1.7 x 10-4 1.1 x 10-3

November 

16-17, 2010 Mercury 2.2 x 10-5 1.4 x 10-4

November 

16-18, 2010 

Hexavalent 

Chromium 1.7 x 10-4 1.1 x 10-3

Hydrogen 

Chloride < 2.2 x 10-2 1.5 x 10-1

Pot and 

Marble 

Unit 29, 

30 

November 

17-18, 2010 Hydrogen Fluoride 3.8 x 10-2 2.6 x 10-1

Notes: (1) Pollutant emission rates in terms of mg/dscm were not corrected to 7% O2 because exhaust from the 

process is essentially ambient (i.e., approximately 20.9% O2). 

(2) The “less than” symbol (<) included in the table indicates that the emission rate was calculated using the method 

detection limit (MDL) value instead of zero because the analytical result was below the MDL for one or more of the 

sample fractions.
Johns Manville Waterville, Ohio BTEC Project No. 10-3990.22 

NAIMA/U.S. EPA Emissions Test Report January 12, 2011 

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................... 1

2.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................... 1

2.1 PROCESS MONITORING ....................................................................................................... 2 

3.0 SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL METHODOLOGIES.............................................. 2

3.1 EXHAUST GAS VELOCITY, MOLECULAR WEIGHT, AND MOISTURE CONTENT .................... 2 

3.2 PM AND PM2.5 CONCENTRATIONS AND EMISSION RATES................................................... 3 

3.3 TOTAL SELECTED METALS CONCENTRATIONS AND EMISSION RATES................................ 3 

3.4 HG CONCENTRATIONS AND EMISSION RATES..................................................................... 3 

3.5 HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM CONCENTRATIONS AND EMISSION RATES................................. 4 

3.6 HF AND HCL CONCENTRATIONS AND EMISSION RATES..................................................... 4 

4.0 TEST RESULTS ................................................................................................................. 5

TABLES

Table 1 – Test Personnel 

Table 2 – Emissions Test Program Summary 

FIGURES

Figure 1 – Exhaust Stack Traverse Point Diagram 

Figure 2 – Method 3A Sampling Train Schematic Drawing 

Figure 3 – OTM 27/OTM 28 Sampling Train Schematic Drawing 

Figure 4 – Method 29 Sampling Train Schematic Drawing 

Figure 5 – Method 30B Sampling Train Schematic Drawing 

Figure 6 – Method 0061 Sampling Train Schematic Drawing 

Figure 7 – Method 26A Sampling Train Schematic Drawing 

APPENDICES

Appendix A – Detailed Test Run Results 

Appendix B – Production Data 

Appendix C – Field and Computer-Generated Data Sheets and Notes 

Appendix D – Equipment Calibration Documents 

Appendix E – Laboratory Analytical Reports 
Johns Manville Waterville, Ohio BTEC Project No. 10-3990.22 

NAIMA/U.S. EPA Emissions Test Report January 12, 2010 

1

1.0 Introduction 

U.S. EPA has agreed with the North American Insulation Manufacturer’s Association (NAIMA) 

and its members to a voluntary collection of residual risk-related data for the National Emission 

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Mineral Wool Production3

 as well as for 

the NESHAP for Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing4

. To assist in collecting the agreed upon data, 

BT Environmental Consulting, Inc. (BTEC) was retained by NAIMA to evaluate emission rates 

of the following pollutants from the one exhaust stack associated with the Pot and Marble Process 

Units 29 and 30 located at the Johns Manville site in Waterville, Ohio: 

• Particulate matter (PM) and particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5) 

• Antimony, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, lead, manganese, nickel, and 

selenium 

• Mercury 

• Hexavalent chromium 

• Hydrogen fluoride and hydrogen chloride 

Reference test methods used and test program methodologies were agreed upon by U.S. EPA and 

NAIMA prior to initiating test program fieldwork. The emissions test program was conducted on 

November 15 through 19, 2010. The test program consisted of emission tests at one exhaust 

stack for each parameter. The field sampling portion of the emissions test program included the 

personnel summarized by Table 1. 

Table 1 

Emissions Test Program Personnel

Personnel Affiliation 

Barry Boulianne BT Environmental Consulting, Inc. 

Todd Wessel BT Environmental Consulting, Inc. 

Matthew Snyder BT Environmental Consulting, Inc. 

Brandon Chase BT Environmental Consulting, Inc. 

Jon Beach BT Environmental Consulting, Inc. 

Sarah Harrison Johns Manville 

2.0 Process Description

Units 29 and 30 are part of the Pot and Marble Process. Glass marbles are melted and the molten 

glass is directed through bushings to form fiber glass. The glass is collected on drums, bailed and 

packaged. Particulate matter is controlled by an Osprey unit. The Osprey unit consists of filter 

media that removes the particulate matter and collects it in a bag. These units can also be 

controlled by the Ducon scrubbers as a backup. 

 

3

 Codified at Title 40, Part 63, Subpart DDD of the Code of Federal Regulations (40 CFR 63, Subpart DDD) 

4

 Codified at 40 CFR 63, Subpart NNN 
Johns Manville Waterville, Ohio BTEC Project No. 10-3990.22 

NAIMA/U.S. EPA Emissions Test Report January 12, 2010 

2

2.1 Process Monitoring 

During the emissions test program, the Pot and Marble Process was operated under normal 

conditions. Process production data is available in Appendix B. Control and/or additional 

production information will be available to the U.S. EPA on request. 

3.0 Sampling and Analytical Methodologies 

Sampling and analytical methodologies for the emissions test program can be separated into six 

categories as follows: 

(1) Measurement of exhaust gas velocity, molecular weight, and moisture content; 

(2) Measurement of exhaust gas PM and PM2.5 concentrations and emission rates; 

(3) Measurement of exhaust gas total selected metals concentrations and emission rates; 

(4) Measurement of exhaust gas Hg concentrations and emission rates; 

(5) Measurement of exhaust gas hexavalent chromium concentrations and emission rates; 

and, 

(6) Measurement of exhaust gas HF and HCl concentrations and emission rates. 

Descriptions of sampling and analytical methodologies by category are summarized by Sections 

3.1 through 3.6, respectively. 

3.1 Exhaust Gas Velocity, Molecular Weight, and Moisture Content 

Measurement of exhaust gas velocity, molecular weight, and moisture content was conducted 

using the following reference test methods codified at Title 40, Part 60, Appendix A of the Code 

of Federal Regulations (40 CFR 60, Appendix A): 

Method 1: “Location of the Sampling Site and Sampling Points”

Method 2: “Determination of Stack Gas Velocity and Volumetric Flowrate” 

Method 3A: “Determination of Oxygen and Carbon Dioxide Concentrations in Emissions 

from Stationary Sources”(Instrumental Analyzer Procedure)

Method 4: “Determination of Moisture Content in Stack Gases”

These test methods were used to evaluate exhaust gas flowrates either in conjunction with the 

isokinetic sampling methodologies used to evaluate some pollutant emission rates or as separate, 

discrete measurements conducted in support of the non-isokinetic sampling methodologies. 

Stack gas velocity traverses were conducted in accordance with the procedures outlined in 

Method 1 and Method 2 (see Figure 1 for a traverse location drawing). An S-type pitot tube with 

a thermocouple assembly, calibrated in accordance with Method 2, Section 4.1.1, was used to 

measure exhaust gas velocity pressures (using a manometer) and temperatures at each location 

during testing. The S-type pitot tube dimensions was within specified limits, therefore, a 

baseline pitot tube coefficient of 0.84 (dimensionless) was assigned. 

Molecular weight was determined according to USEPA Method 3A. The O2 content of the 

exhaust gas was measured using a M&C Products PMA 100-L O2 gas analyzer (or equivalent) 

and the CO2 content of the exhaust gas was measured using a California Analytical Instruments 
Johns Manville Waterville, Ohio BTEC Project No. 10-3990.22 

NAIMA/U.S. EPA Emissions Test Report January 12, 2010 

3

(CAI0 600 Series CO2 gas analyzer (or equivalent). An integrated sample of the gas stream was 

drawn through an insulated stainless-steel probe with an in-line glass fiber filter to remove any 

particulate and into a tedlar sample bag utilizing a evacuated sample lung. At the completion of 

each test the gas sample was introduced to the analyzers. Data was recorded at 4-second 

intervals on a PC equipped with data acquisition software. A schematic drawing of the emission 

monitoring system is provided as Figure 2. 

Exhaust gas moisture content was evaluated using Method 4. Exhaust gas moisture content was 

be determined volumetrically (liquid impingers) and gravimetrically (silica gel impinger). 

3.2 PM and PM2.5 Concentrations and Emission Rates 

PM/PM2.5 concentrations and emission rates were measured using U.S. EPA Other Test 

Methods (OTM) 27 and OTM 28. PM, PM2.5, and CPM concentrations and emission rates were 

measured using BTEC’s Nutech® Model 2010 modular isokinetic stack sampling system. This 

system consisted of (1) a tapered nozzle, (2) a PM10 particle sizer cyclone followed by a PM2.5

particle sizer cyclone, (3) a glass or quartz fiber filter assembly and heated probe, (4) a glass 

recirculating ice water condenser system, (5) a set of four GS impingers, (6) a length of sample 

line, and (7) a Nutech® control case equipped with a pump, dry gas meter, and calibrated 

orifice. Prior to each test, the second and third impingers were filled with 100 ml of HPLC 

water, the first and fourth impingers were empty, and the fifth impinger contained 

approximately 300 g of silica gel desiccant. A schematic drawing of the PM2.5/CPM sample 

train is provided as Figure 3. The total filterable PM faction was collected on the front half of 

the M29 Metals sampling train as per the QAPP. 

3.3 Total Selected Metals Concentrations and Emission Rates

Total selected metals concentrations and emission rates were measured using the procedures of 

40 CFR 60, Appendix A, Method 29. Selected metals concentrations and emission rates were 

measured using BTEC’s Nutech® Model 2010 modular isokinetic stack sampling system. This 

system consisted of (1) a borosilicate glass or quartz nozzle, (2) a steel probe w/glass liner, (3) a 

heated quartz fiber filter assembly, (4) a set of six GS impingers, (5) a length of sample line, 

and (6) a Nutech® control case equipped with a pump, dry gas meter, and calibrated orifice. 

Prior to each test, the first two impingers were filled with 100 ml of a 5% nitric acid 

(HNO3)/10% hydrogen peroxide solution, the third impinger was empty, and the fourth 

contained approximately 300 g of silica gel desiccant. A schematic drawing of the metals 

sampling train is provided as Figure 4. 

3.4 Hg Concentrations and Emission Rates 

Hg concentrations and emission rates were measured using the procedures of 40 CFR 60, 

Appendix A, Method 30B and using BTEC’s Nutech® Model 2010 modular isokinetic stack 

sampling system. This system consisted of (1) a sorbent trap, (2) a steel probe, (3) Teflon 

tubing, (4) three GS impingers, (5) a length of sample line, and (6) a Nutech® control case 

equipped with a pump, dry gas meter, and calibrated orifice. The first impinger was left empty 

as a water knockout, and the remaining two impingers contained approximately 300 g of silica 

gel desiccant. A schematic drawing of the Hg sampling train is provided as Figure 5. 
Johns Manville Waterville, Ohio BTEC Project No. 10-3990.22 

NAIMA/U.S. EPA Emissions Test Report January 12, 2010 

4

3.5 Hexavalent Chromium Concentrations and Emission Rates 

Hexavalent chromium concentrations and emission rates were measured using the procedures of 

Method 0061 with analysis by NCASI CI/WM-98.01. Hexavalent chromium concentrations and 

emission rates were measured using BTEC’s Nutech® Model 2010 modular isokinetic stack 

sampling system. This system consisted of (1) a glass nozzle, (2) a heated steel probe with a 

glass probe liner, (3) a Teflon tee with a recirculating pump, (4) five GS impingers, (5) a length 

of sample line, and (6) a Nutech® control case equipped with a pump, dry gas meter, and a 

calibrated orifice. Prior to each test, the first impinger was filled with 150 mL of 0.1N KOH, the 

next two were filled with 75 mL of 0.1 N KOH, the fourth was empty, and the last impinger 

contained approximately 300 g of silica gel desiccant. A schematic drawing of the Method 0061 

sampling train is provided as Figure 6. 

3.6 HF and HCl Concentrations and Emission Rates 

Measurement of hydrogen halide concentrations and emission rates were conducted using the 

procedures of 40 CFR 60, Appendix A, Method 26A. The Method 26A sampling train consisted 

of: (1) a heated borosilicate or quartz probe liner; (2) a heated borosilicate or quartz glass filter 

holder containing a pre-weighed 110-mm diameter washed quartz filter with Teflon filter 

support; (3) a set of three Greensburg-Smith (GS) impingers each containing 100 ml of 0.1 

Normal Sulfuric Acid (0.1 N H2SO4), (4) a modified GS impinger containing a known weight of 

silica gel desiccant; (5) a length of sample line, and (6) a Nutech control case equipped with a 

pump, dry gas meter, and calibrated orifice. Figure 7 provides an illustration of the Method 26A 

sample train. 
Johns Manville Waterville, Ohio BTEC Project No. 10-3990.22 

NAIMA/U.S. EPA Emissions Test Report January 12, 2010 

5

4.0 Test Results 

The overall results of the emissions test program are summarized by Table 2. 

Table 2 

Emissions Test Program Results Summary

Source Test 

Date(s) Pollutant MDL used 

Emission 

Rate 

(lbs/hour) 

Emission 

Rate 

(lbs/ton) 

Emission 

Rate 

(mg/dscm)

Filterable PM2.5 7.0 x 10-1 4.4 x 100

Organic 

Condensible PM2.5

 6.8 x 10-2 4.2 x 10-1

Inorganic 

Condensible PM2.5

< 8.7 x 10-2 5.4 x 10-1

November 

16-18, 2010 

Total PM2.5 < 8.6 x 10-1 5.4 x 100

Filterable 

Particulate 8.8 x 10-1 5.9 x 100

Antimony < 6.9 x 10-5 4.6 x 10-4

Arsenic < 6.9 x 10-5 4.6 x 10-4

Beryllium < 1.7 x 10-5 1.1 x 10-4

Cadmium < 2.2 x 10-5 1.4 x 10-4

Chromium < 6.4 x 10-5 4.2 x 10-4

Cobalt < 4.2 x 10-5 2.7 x 10-4

Lead 2.0 x 10-4 1.3 x 10-3

Manganese < 1.2 x 10-4 7.7 x 10-4

Nickel < 9.6 x 10-5 6.4 x 10-4

November 

16-18, 2010 

Selenium < 1.7 x 10-4 1.1 x 10-3

November 

16-17, 2010 Mercury 2.2 x 10-5 1.4 x 10-4

November 

16-18, 2010 

Hexavalent 

Chromium 1.7 x 10-4 1.1 x 10-3

Hydrogen 

Chloride < 2.2 x 10-2 1.5 x 10-1

Pot and 

Marble 

Unit 29, 

30 

November 

17-18, 2010 Hydrogen Fluoride 3.8 x 10-2 2.6 x 10-1

Notes: (1) Pollutant emission rates in terms of mg/dscm were not corrected to 7% O2 because exhaust from the 

process is essentially ambient (i.e., approximately 20.9% O2). 

(2) The “less than” symbol (<) included in the table indicates that the emission rate was calculated using the method 

detection limit (MDL) value instead of zero because the analytical result was below the MDL for one or more of the 

sample fractions. 
Johns Manville Waterville, Ohio BTEC Project No. 10-3990.22 

NAIMA/U.S. EPA Emissions Test Report January 12, 2010 

1

Detailed results for individual emission test run are summarized in Appendix A. Process 

production data is included in Appendix B. Field and computer-generated data sheets are 

included in Appendix C. Appendix D includes calibration documents and Appendix E includes 

laboratory analytical reports. 

Limitations

The information and opinions rendered in this report are exclusively for use by NAIMA and/or 

Isolatek International. BTEC will not distribute or publish this report without NAIMA’s consent 

except as required by law or court order. BTEC accepts responsibility for the competent 

performance of its duties in executing the assignment and preparing reports in accordance with 

the normal standards of the profession, but disclaims any responsibility for consequential 

damages. 

This report was prepared by: 

David Center 

Staff Environmental Engineer 

This report was reviewed by: 

Randal J. Tysar 

Senior Environmental Engineer 
FIGURES 
diameter = 83"

Points Distance "

12 1.7

11 5.6

10 9.8

9 14.7

8 20.8

7 29.5

6 53.5

5 62.3

4 68.3

3 73.2

2 77.4

1 81.3

Figure 1

Site:

Johns Manville

Waterville, Ohio

Osprey Unit 29, 30

BT Environmental Consulting, Inc.

2615 Wolcott Street

Ferndale, Michigan

Not to Scale

> 42"

 > 166"
Bags Samples

to analyzers

Figure 2

Site:

USEPA Method 3A

Johns Manville

Lakeland, Florida

Electric Melt Furnace

BT Environmental Consulting, Inc.

2615 Wolcott Street

Ferndale, Michigan

Data Acquisition System

Calibration Gases 

(Fed to Probe Tip)

Environics Gas 

Dilution System

M&C Model 100-L

O2 Analyzer

CAI Series 600

CO2 Analyzer

pump

tedlar 

bag
Site:

USEPA OTM27/28Johns ManvilleWaterville, OhioOsprey Units 29, 30

BT Environmen

2615 

Ferndale

Figure 3

Silica gel

Heated Filter Box

S-Type Pitot w/ Thermocouple

Heated Probe w/ Glass Liner & Nozzle

Meter Rig

Temp.

ProbeFilter

On

Off -+

00:00

1 2 3 4 5

45mm Filter Housing

Verticle Condenser Filter Holder W/ Tef

Pot Belly Impinger 100 mL DI H2O
Figure 4

Site:USEPA Method 5/29Johns ManvilleWaterville, OhioOsprey Units 29,30

BT Environm

26

Fern

Heated Filter Box

S-type pitot w/ thermocouple

Heated probe with glass liner & nozzle

Meter Rig

Temp.

ProbeFilter

On

Off -+

00:00

1 2 3 4 5

100 mL 5% HNO3 / 10% H2O2 solution Empty Silica Gel
Figure 5

Site:USEPA Method 30B Sampling TrainJohns ManvilleWaterville, OhioOsprey Units 29,30

BT Environm

26

Ferndale

Knock out

Temperature sensor

Meter Rig

Temp.

ProbeFilter

On

Off -+

00:00

1 2 3 4 5

Sample Line

MercuryT rap

Probe
Figure 6

Site:USEPA Method 0061Johns ManvilleWaterville, OhioOsprey Units 29, 30

BT Environm

261

Fern

Meter Rig

Temp.

ProbeFilter

On

Off -+

00:00

1 2 3 4 5

150 mL 0.1 N KOH Empty Silica Gel

Perastaltic pump

Teflon tee

75 mL 0.1 N KOH
Empty

Figure 7

Site:USEPA Method 26A Sampling TrainJohns ManvilleWaterville, OhioOsprey Units 29, 30

BT Environm

26

Fern

Heated Filter Box

S-type pitot w/ thermocouple

Heated probe with glass liner

Meter Rig

Temp.

ProbeFilter

On

Off -+

00:00

1 2 3 4 5

Empty 100 mL 0.1N H2SO4 
APPENDIX A 

Detailed Test Run Results 
Plant Job #

Location OTM27/OTM 28 Testing

 Copyright by Walter Smith

Run Number 1 2 3 Average

Date Test Date 11/16/2010 11/17/2010 11/18/2010

Start Run Start Time 7:54:00 8:33:00 10:29:00

Run Finish Time 12:03:10 12:53:39 14:08:41

Net Traversing Points 11 12 12

Θ Net Run Time, minutes 236.37 227.05 215.49 226

DN Nozzle Diameter, inches 0.261 0.261 0.261 0.261

Cp Pitot Tube Coeficient 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84

Y Dry Gas Meter Calibration Factor 0.991 0.991 1.013 0.998

PBr Barometric Pressure, inches of Mercury 29.77 29.82 30.17 29.92

∆H Average orifice meter Differential, inches H2O 0.46 0.47 0.47 0.47

Vm Dry Gas Meter Volume Sampled, cubic feet 88.900 87.162 80.400 85.487

tm Average Dry Gas Meter Temperature, °F 55.91 68.83 68.13 64.29

Vmstd Dry Gas Meter Volume Sampled, dscf 89.815 86.054 82.200 86.023

Vlc Total Moisture Liquid collected, ml 40 41 34 38.3

Vwstd Volume of Water Vapor, standard cubic feet 1.88 1.93 1.60 1.80

% H2O Moisture Content of Stack Gas, % 2.1 2.2 1.9 2.1

Mfd Dry Mole Fraction 0.979 0.978 0.981 0.979

%CO2 Carbon Dioxide, % 0.91 1.01 0.85 0.92

%O2 Oxygen, % 19.62 19.66 19.53 19.60

% CO+ N2 Carbon Monoxide & Nitrogen, % 79.47 79.33 79.62 79.5

Md Dry Molecular Weight, lb/lb-Mole 28.93 28.95 28.92 28.93

Ms Wet Molecular weight, lb/lb-Mole 28.71 28.71 28.71 28.71

Pg Flue Gas Static Pressure, inches of H2O -0.25 -0.25 -0.25 -0.25

Ps Absolute Flue Gas Pressure, inches of Mercury 29.75 29.80 30.15 29.90

ts Average Stack Gas Temperature, °F 294 290 295 293

∆Pavg Average Velocity Head, inches of H2O 0.168 0.170 0.168 0.169

vs Average Stack Gas Velocity, feet/second 27.6 27.7 27.5 27.6

As Stack Crossectional Area, square feet 37.6 37.6 37.6 37.6

Qsd Dry Volumetric Flow Rate, dry scfm 42,771 42,424 42,852 42,682

Qaw Actual Wet Volumetric Flue Gas Flow Rate, acfm 62,377 62,210 61,995 62,194

%I Percent Isokinetic of Sampling Rate, % 90.7 89.6 90.1 90.1

Wp Production, tons glass per hour

W Filterable PM2.5 Catch Weight, mg 10.50 9.91 11.57 10.66

Cmg/dscm Filterable PM2.5 Concentration, mg/dscm 4.1E+00 4.1E+00 5.0E+00 4.4E+00

Cmg/dscm@7%O2 Filterable PM2.5 Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O2 N/A N/A N/A

Elb/hr Filterable PM2.5 Emission Rate, pounds/hr 6.6E-01 6.5E-01 8.0E-01 7.0E-01

Elb/ton product Filterable PM2.5 Emission Rate, pounds/ton product

W Organic Condensible PM2.5 Catch Weight, mg 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0

Cmg/dscm Organic Condensible PM2.5 Concentration, mg/dscm 4.3E-01 4.1E-01 4.3E-01 4.2E-01

Cmg/dscm@7%O2 Organic Condensible PM2.5 Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O2 N/A N/A N/A

Elb/hr Organic Condensible PM2.5 Emission Rate, pounds/hr 6.9E-02 6.6E-02 6.9E-02 6.8E-02

Elb/ton product Organic Condensible PM2.5 Emission Rate, pounds/ton product

W Inorganic Condensible PM2.5 Catch Weight, mg 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.3

Cmg/dscm Inorganic Condensible PM2.5 Concentration, mg/dscm 7.9E-01 4.1E-01 4.3E-01 5.4E-01

Cmg/dscm@7%O2 Inorganic Condensible PM2.5 Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O2 N/A N/A N/A

Elb/hr Inorganic Condensible PM2.5 Emission Rate, pounds/hr 1.2E-01 6.6E-02 6.9E-02 8.7E-02

Elb/ton product Inorganic Condensible PM2.5 Emission Rate, pounds/ton product

W Total PM2.5 Catch Weight, mg 13.6 11.9 13.6 13.0

Cmg/dscm Total PM2.5 Concentration, mg/dscm 5.3E+00 4.9E+00 5.8E+00 5.4E+00

Cmg/dscm@7%O2 Total PM2.5 Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O2 N/A N/A N/A

Elb/hr Total PM2.5 Emission Rate, pounds/hr 8.5E-01 7.8E-01 9.4E-01 8.6E-01

Elb/ton product Total PM2.5 Emission Rate, pounds/ton product

Johns Manville 10-3990.22

Waterville, Ohio

Source Osprey

Personnel TW, JB
Plant Job #

Location Method 29 Metals

 Copyright by Walter Smith

Run Number 1 2 3 Average

Date Test Date 11/16/2010 11/17/2010 11/18/2010

Start Run Start Time 13:12:00 14:08:00 14:42:00

Run Finish Time 16:44:00 17:31:00 18:01:00

Net Traversing Points 24 24 24

Θ Net Run Time, minutes 192 192 192 192

DN Nozzle Diameter, inches 0.374 0.373 0.373 0.373

Cp Pitot Tube Coeficient 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84

Y Dry Gas Meter Calibration Factor 1.013 0.991 0.991 0.998

PBr Barometric Pressure, inches of Mercury 29.77 29.82 30.17 29.92

∆H Average orifice meter Differential, inches H2O 2.25 1.99 1.95 2.06

Vm Dry Gas Meter Volume Sampled, cubic feet 162.188 152.306 152.525 155.673

tm Average Dry Gas Meter Temperature, °F 72.47 73.05 73.31 72.94

Vmstd Dry Gas Meter Volume Sampled, dscf 163.002 149.737 151.615 154.785

Vlc Total Moisture Liquid collected, ml 78 71 60 69.7

Vwstd Volume of Water Vapor, standard cubic feet 3.67 3.34 2.82 3.28

% H2O Moisture Content of Stack Gas, % 2.2 2.2 1.8 2.1

Mfd Dry Mole Fraction 0.978 0.978 0.982 0.979

%CO2 Carbon Dioxide, % 0.64 0.71 0.81 0.7

%O2 Oxygen, % 19.8 19.77 19.55 19.7

% CO+ N2 Carbon Monoxide & Nitrogen, % 79.55 79.52 79.64 79.6

Md Dry Molecular Weight, lb/lb-Mole 28.89 28.90 28.91 28.90

Ms Wet Molecular weight, lb/lb-Mole 28.65 28.67 28.71 28.68

Pg Flue Gas Static Pressure, inches of H2O -0.25 -0.25 -0.25 -0.25

Ps Absolute Flue Gas Pressure, inches of Mercury 29.75 29.80 30.15 29.90

ts Average Stack Gas Temperature, °F 286 298 300 295

∆Pavg Average Velocity Head, inches of H2O 0.163 0.146 0.144 0.151

vs Average Stack Gas Velocity, feet/second 27.1 25.7 25.5 26.1

As Stack Crossectional Area, square feet 37.6 37.6 37.6 37.6

Qsd Dry Volumetric Flow Rate, dry scfm 39,246 42,056 39,547 40,283

Qaw Actual Wet Volumetric Flue Gas Flow Rate, acfm 57,829 61,106 57,523 58,820

%I Percent Isokinetic of Sampling Rate, % 99.5 98.5 98.9 99.0

Wp Production, tons glass per hour

W Particulate Method 5 Catch Weight, mg 17.8 19.5 39.6 25.6

Cmg/dscm Particulate Concentration, mg/dscm 3.9 4.6 9.2 5.9

Cmg/dscm@7%O2 Particulate Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O2 N/A N/A N/A

Elb/hr Particulate Emission Rate, pounds/hr 0.61 0.68 1.37 0.88

Elb/ton product Particulate Emission Rate, pounds/ton product

W Antimony Catch Weight, μg 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0

Cmg/dscm Antimony Concentration, mg/dscm 4.3E-04 4.7E-04 4.7E-04 4.6E-04

Cmg/dscm@7%O2 Antimony Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O2 N/A N/A N/A

Elb/hr Antimony Emission Rate, pounds/hr 6.8E-05 6.9E-05 6.9E-05 6.9E-05

Elb/ton product Antimony Emission Rate, pounds/ton product

W Arsenic Catch Weight, μg 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0

Cmg/dscm Arsenic Concentration, mg/dscm 4.3E-04 4.7E-04 4.7E-04 4.6E-04

Cmg/dscm@7%O2 Arsenic Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O2 N/A N/A N/A

Elb/hr Arsenic Emission Rate, pounds/hr 6.8E-05 6.9E-05 6.9E-05 6.9E-05

Elb/ton product Arsenic Emission Rate, pounds/ton product

W Beryllium Catch Weight, μg 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5

Cmg/dscm Beryllium Concentration, mg/dscm 1.1E-04 1.2E-04 1.2E-04 1.1E-04

Cmg/dscm@7%O2 Beryllium Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O2 N/A N/A N/A

Elb/hr Beryllium Emission Rate, pounds/hr 1.7E-05 1.7E-05 1.7E-05 1.7E-05

Elb/ton product Beryllium Emission Rate, pounds/ton product

W Cadmium Catch Weight, μg 0.8 0.5 0.6 0.6

Cmg/dscm Cadmium Concentration, mg/dscm 1.7E-04 1.2E-04 1.4E-04 1.4E-04

Cmg/dscm@7%O2 Cadmium Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O2 N/A N/A N/A

Elb/hr Cadmium Emission Rate, pounds/hr 2.7E-05 1.7E-05 2.0E-05 2.2E-05

Elb/ton product Cadmium Emission Rate, pounds/ton product

W Chromium Catch Weight, μg 2.6 1.5 1.5 1.9

Cmg/dscm Chromium Concentration, mg/dscm 5.6E-04 3.5E-04 3.5E-04 4.2E-04

Cmg/dscm@7%O2 Chromium Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O2 N/A N/A N/A

Elb/hr Chromium Emission Rate, pounds/hr 8.9E-05 5.2E-05 5.2E-05 6.4E-05

Elb/ton product Chromium Emission Rate, pounds/ton product

W Cobalt Catch Weight, μg 2.58 0.56 0.50 1.21

Cmg/dscm Cobalt Concentration, mg/dscm 5.6E-04 1.3E-04 1.2E-04 2.7E-04

Cmg/dscm@7%O2 Cobalt Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O2 N/A N/A N/A

Elb/hr Cobalt Emission Rate, pounds/hr 8.8E-05 1.9E-05 1.7E-05 4.2E-05

Elb/ton product Cobalt Emission Rate, pounds/ton product

W Lead Catch Weight, μg 12.2 2.8 2.5 5.8

Cmg/dscm Lead Concentration, mg/dscm 2.6E-03 6.6E-04 5.8E-04 1.3E-03

Cmg/dscm@7%O2 Lead Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O2 N/A N/A N/A

Elb/hr Lead Emission Rate, pounds/hr 4.2E-04 9.7E-05 8.6E-05 2.0E-04

Elb/ton product Lead Emission Rate, pounds/ton product

W Manganese Catch Weight, μg 3.8 3.8 2.6 3.4

Cmg/dscm Manganese Concentration, mg/dscm 8.2E-04 9.0E-04 6.1E-04 7.7E-04

Cmg/dscm@7%O2 Manganese Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O2 N/A N/A N/A

Elb/hr Manganese Emission Rate, pounds/hr 1.3E-04 1.3E-04 9.0E-05 1.2E-04

Elb/ton product Manganese Emission Rate, pounds/ton product

W Nickel Catch Weight, μg 3.3 2.5 2.6 2.8

Cmg/dscm Nickel Concentration, mg/dscm 7.1E-04 5.9E-04 6.1E-04 6.4E-04

Cmg/dscm@7%O2 Nickel Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O2 N/A N/A N/A

Elb/hr Nickel Emission Rate, pounds/hr 1.1E-04 8.7E-05 9.0E-05 9.6E-05

Elb/ton product Nickel Emission Rate, pounds/ton product

W Selenium Catch Weight, μg 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0

Cmg/dscm Selenium Concentration, mg/dscm 1.1E-03 1.2E-03 1.2E-03 1.1E-03

Cmg/dscm@7%O2 Selenium Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O2 N/A N/A N/A

Elb/hr Selenium Emission Rate, pounds/hr 1.7E-04 1.7E-04 1.7E-04 1.7E-04

Elb/ton product Selenium Emission Rate, pounds/ton product

Johns-Manville 10-3990.22

Waterville, Ohio

Source Osprey, Unit 29, 30

Personnel TW
M30B Mercury Testing

Company Name Plant Location City Plant Location State Source Name Source IDJohns Manville Waterville Ohio Units 29+30 Pot and Marble Osprey Please note QA/QC documentation starting in Column "S"

Measured Value 

(mg/dscm)

Corrected 

Concentration 

(mg/dscm at 7% O2)

Basis (Wet or Dry) Test Method Used (EPA Method 30B) Data F

BDL

1 11/16/2010 7:50 11/16/2010 9:50 1.44E-04 N/A Wet EPA Method 30B 2 11/16/2010 10:20 11/16/2010 12:20 1.51E-04 N/A Wet EPA Method 30B 3 11/17/2010 8:48 11/17/2010 10:48 1.23E-04 N/A Wet EPA Method 30B 

Total Vapor Phase Mercury Em

Run Number Test Start Date Test Start Time Test End Date Test End Time

Page 1 of 3 
M30B Mercury Testing

 QA/QC Documentation

Process 

Production Rate

(tons glass/hr)

Calculated 

Emission Rate 

(lb/ton)

Trap ID Section 1 Mass (ng) Section 2 Mass (ng) Total Mass (ng) Initial Spike (ng) Total Non- Spike (ng) Sample Volume (dscm) Volum

Differenc

2.1 0.9 19.62 62,210 42,424 293.36

OTM27/28 run 1 for flow and moisture; 11-16-2010 - 7:54-12:03 R1, A 0.7 0.64 1.34 0 1.34 0.14 

2.1 0.9 19.62 62,210 42,424 293.44

OTM27/28 run 1 for flow and moisture; 11-16-2010 - 7:54-12:03 R2, A 1.02 0 1.02 0 1.02 0.15 

2.2 0.6 19.81 62,378 42,771 288.8

OTM27/28 run 2 for flow and moisture; 11-17-2010 - 8:33-12:53 R3, A 0.51 0 0.51 0 0.51 0.12 

Trap #1

Flue Gas 

Temperature (F) Other Supporting Information

Flue Gas 

Moisture 

(%)

Flue Gas 

O2 (%)

Flue Gas 

CO2 (%)

Flue Gas Flow 

Rate (dscfm)

Flue Gas 

Flow Rate 

(acfm)

Page 2 of 3 
M30B Mercury Testing

Concentration 

(μg/dscm) Trap ID Section 1 Mass Section 2 Mass Total Mass Initial Spike Total Non- Spike Sample Volume Volume Difference (%) Volume Diff. Limit Breaktrough (%) Breaktrough Limit Concentration (μg/dscm) Abs. diff. RD (%) Limit C

0.01

R1, B 20.0 0.79 20.79 20 0.79 0.14 0% 4

0.0

0.00 26 

0.01

R2, B 21.3 0.26 21.56 20 1.56 0.15 0% 1

0.0

0.00 21 

0.00

R3, B 20.5 0.06 20.56 20 0.56 0.13 0% 0

0.0

0.00 1 

Trap #2 Paired Trap Agreement (RD) 

≤20% of field 

recovery test

≤ 10% of Section 

1 Hg mass for Hg 

conc. >1 

μg/dscm: or ≤ 

20% of Section 1 

for Hg conc.≤1 

μg/dscm

≥10 % RD mass 

for Hg conc. >1 

μg/dscm: or 

≤20% RD or ≤0.2 

μg/dscm abs.diff. 

for Hg conc. ≤1 

μg/dscm

Page 3 of 3 
Plant Job #

Location Hex Chrome Testing - 0061

 Copyright by Walter Smith

Run Number 1 2 3 Average

Date Test Date 11/16/2010 11/17/2010 11/18/2010

Start Run Start Time 13:12:00 14:08:00 14:42:00

Run Finish Time 16:44:00 17:31:00 18:01:00

Net Traversing Points 24 24 24

Θ Net Run Time, minutes 192 192 192 192

DN Nozzle Diameter, inches 0.373 0.373 0.373 0.373

Cp Pitot Tube Coeficient 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84

Y Dry Gas Meter Calibration Factor 0.991 1.013 1.013 1.006

PBr Barometric Pressure, inches of Mercury 29.77 29.82 30.17 29.92

∆H Average orifice meter Differential, inches H2O 2.29 2.17 2.00 2.16

Vm Dry Gas Meter Volume Sampled, cubic feet 166.643 155.339 149.237 157.073

tm Average Dry Gas Meter Temperature, °F 73.35 70.41 73.92 72.56

Vmstd Dry Gas Meter Volume Sampled, dscf 163.587 156.955 151.487 157.343

Vlc Total Moisture Liquid collected, ml 52 53 57 54.0

Vwstd Volume of Water Vapor, standard cubic feet 2.45 2.49 2.68 2.54

% H2O Moisture Content of Stack Gas, % 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.6

Mfd Dry Mole Fraction 0.985 0.984 0.983 0.984

%CO2 Carbon Dioxide, % 0.64 0.71 0.81 0.72

%O2 Oxygen, % 19.81 19.77 19.55 19.71

% CO+ N2 Carbon Monoxide & Nitrogen, % 79.55 79.52 79.64 79.6

Md Dry Molecular Weight, lb/lb-Mole 28.89 28.90 28.91 28.90

Ms Wet Molecular weight, lb/lb-Mole 28.73 28.73 28.72 28.73

Pg Flue Gas Static Pressure, inches of H2O -0.25 -0.25 -0.25 -0.25

Ps Absolute Flue Gas Pressure, inches of Mercury 29.75 29.80 30.15 29.90

ts Average Stack Gas Temperature, °F 282 298 298 293

∆Pavg Average Velocity Head, inches of H2O 0.168 0.158 0.146 0.157

vs Average Stack Gas Velocity, feet/second 27.4 26.8 25.7 26.6

As Stack Crossectional Area, square feet 37.6 37.6 37.6 37.6

Qsd Dry Volumetric Flow Rate, dry scfm 41,235 43,037 39,909 41,393

Qaw Actual Wet Volumetric Flue Gas Flow Rate, acfm 60,367 61,756 57,835 59,986

%I Percent Isokinetic of Sampling Rate, % 98.1 98.3 97.9 98.1

Wp Production, tons glass per hour

W Hexavalent Chromium Catch Weight, μg 10.8 2.74 1.04 4.9

Cmg/dscm Hexavalent Chromium Concentration, mg/dscm 2.3E-03 6.2E-04 2.4E-04 1.1E-03

Cmg/dscm@7%O2 Hexavalent Chromium Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O2 N/A N/A N/A

Elb/hr Hexavalent Chromium Emission Rate, pounds/hr 3.8E-04 9.5E-05 3.6E-05 1.7E-04

Elb/ton product Hexavalent Chromium Emission Rate, pounds/ton product

Johns-Manville 10-3990.22

Waterville, Ohio

Source Unit 2930 Osprey

Personnel Matt Snyder
Plant Job #

Location HCl and HF Testing - 26A

 Copyright by Walter Smith

Run Number 1 2 3 Average

Date Test Date 11/17/2010 11/18/2010 11/18/2010

Start Run Start Time 11:22:00 8:46:00 10:56:00

Run Finish Time 13:33:00 10:45:30 12:57:00

Net Traversing Points 24 24 24

Θ Net Run Time, minutes 60 60 60 60

DN Nozzle Diameter, inches 0.374 0.373 0.373 0.373

Cp Pitot Tube Coeficient 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84

Y Dry Gas Meter Calibration Factor 1.013 0.991 0.991 0.998

PBr Barometric Pressure, inches of Mercury 29.82 30.17 30.17 30.05

∆H Average orifice meter Differential, inches H2O 1.95 1.99 2.01 1.98

Vm Dry Gas Meter Volume Sampled, cubic feet 47.022 47.495 48.270 47.596

tm Average Dry Gas Meter Temperature, °F 75.35 61.85 71.67 69.63

Vmstd Dry Gas Meter Volume Sampled, dscf 47.047 48.253 48.137 47.812

Vlc Total Moisture Liquid collected, ml 22 24 23 23.0

Vwstd Volume of Water Vapor, standard cubic feet 1.04 1.13 1.08 1.08

% H2O Moisture Content of Stack Gas, % 2.2 2.3 2.2 2.2

Mfd Dry Mole Fraction 0.978 0.977 0.978 0.978

%CO2 Carbon Dioxide, % 0.71 0.86 0.85 0.8

%O2 Oxygen, % 19.77 19.59 19.53 19.6

% CO+ N2 Carbon Monoxide & Nitrogen, % 79.52 79.55 79.62 79.6

Md Dry Molecular Weight, lb/lb-Mole 28.90 28.92 28.92 28.91

Ms Wet Molecular weight, lb/lb-Mole 28.67 28.67 28.68 28.67

Pg Flue Gas Static Pressure, inches of H2O -0.25 -0.25 -0.25 -0.25

Ps Absolute Flue Gas Pressure, inches of Mercury 29.80 30.15 30.15 30.03

ts Average Stack Gas Temperature, °F 299 298 295 297

∆Pavg Average Velocity Head, inches of H2O 0.144 0.153 0.149 0.149

vs Average Stack Gas Velocity, feet/second 25.7 26.2 25.9 25.9

As Stack Crossectional Area, square feet 37.6 37.6 37.6 37.6

Qsd Dry Volumetric Flow Rate, dry scfm 40,582 39,259 40,254 40,032

Qaw Actual Wet Volumetric Flue Gas Flow Rate, acfm 59,143 57,916 58,399 58,486

%I Percent Isokinetic of Sampling Rate, % 98.4 98.2 98.8 98.5

Wp Production, tons glass per hour

W HCl Catch Weight, μg 200 200 200 200

Cmg/dscm HCl Concentration, mg/dscm 1.5E-01 1.5E-01 1.5E-01 1.5E-01

Cmg/dscm@7%O2 HCl Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O2 N/A N/A N/A

Elb/hr HCl Emission Rate, pounds/hr 2.2E-02 2.2E-02 2.2E-02 2.2E-02

Elb/ton product HCl Emission Rate, pounds/ton product

W HF Catch Weight, μg 380 390 270 347

Cmg/dscm HF Concentration, mg/dscm 2.9E-01 2.9E-01 2.0E-01 2.6E-01

Cmg/dscm@7%O2 HF Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O2 N/A N/A N/A

Elb/hr HF Emission Rate, pounds/hr 4.2E-02 4.3E-02 3.0E-02 3.8E-02

Elb/ton product HF Emission Rate, pounds/ton product

Johns Manville 10-3990.22

Waterville, Ohio

Source Units 29,30 Osprey

Personnel JB
APPENDIX B 

Production Data 
APPENDIX C 

Field and ComputerGenerated Data Sheets and 

Notes 




































APPENDIX D 

Equipment Calibration 

Documents 
Method Run Date Nozzle MB TC PT

Moistures 1 11/15/2010 N/A 2 N/A N/A

29 1 11/16/2010 0.374 6 7 ft A 7 ft A

29 2 11/17/2010 0.373 2 7 ft B 7 ft B

29 3 11/18/2010 0.373 2 7 ft A 7 ft A

0061 1 11/16/2010 0.373 2 7 ft B 7 ft B

0061 2 11/17/2010 0.373 6 7 ft A 7 ft A

0061 3 11/18/2010 0.373 6 7 ft B 7 ft B

26A 1 11/17/2010 0.374 6 7 ft A 7 ft A

26A 2 11/18/2010 0.373 2 7 ft A 7 ft A

26A 3 11/18/2010 0.373 2 7 ft A 7 ft A

30B 1 11/16/2010 N/A Clean Air 6ft - Hg 6ft - Hg

30B 2 11/16/2010 N/A Clean Air 6ft - Hg 6ft - Hg

30B 3 11/17/2010 N/A Clean Air 6ft - Hg 6ft - Hg

OTM27/28 1 11/16/2010 0.261 2 8 ft A 8 ft A

OTM27/28 2 11/17/2010 0.261 2 8 ft A 8 ft A

OTM27/28 3 11/18/2010 0.261 6 8 ft A 8 ft A

O2 CO2

22.5 18.2

9.95 10.1

0.00 0.00

high-range

mid-range

low-range

Cylinder ID

EB0021914

EB0023130

CC308758

Johns-Manville; Waterville Ohio - Pot & Marble

BTEC Job# 10-3990.22

CALIBRATION SHEETS

CEM cal value
METHOD 5 DRY GAS METER CALIBRATION USING CRITICAL ORIFICES

1) Select three critical orifices to calibrate the dry gas meter which bracket the expected operating range.2) Record barometric pressure before and after calibration procedure.3) Run at tested vacuum (from Orifice Calibration Report), for a period of time

necessary to achieve a minimum total volume of 5 cubic feet.

4) Record data and information in the GREEN cells, YELLOW cells are calculated.

INITIAL FINAL AVG (Pbar

)

DATE: 8/30/2010 METER SERIAL #: NT-2 BAROMETRIC PRESSURE (in Hg): 30.33 30.25 30.29 

METER PART #: MB2 CRITICAL ORIFICE SET SERIAL #: 1447 

K' TESTED TEMPERATURES °F ELAPSED

FACTOR VACUUM DGM READINGS (FT

3) AMBIENT DGM INLET DGM OUTLET DGM TIME (MIN) DGM ∆H (1) 

ORIFICE # RUN # (AVG) (in Hg) INITIAL FINAL NET (Vm) INITIAL FINAL INITIAL FINAL AVG θ (in H2O) Vm (STD) Vcr 

1 0.5057 16 874.890 880.880 5.990 81 80 83 79 80 80.5 9.00 1.4 5.9450 5.2 0.5057 16 880.880 886.870 5.990 81 83 86 80 81 82.5 9.00 1.4 5.9231 5.3 0.5057 16 886.870 892.885 6.015 82 86 87 81 83 84.25 9.00 1.4 5.9287 5.1 0.8778 16 928.850 934.590 5.740 81 82 82 81 81 81.5 5.00 4.2 5.7249 5.2 0.8778 16 934.590 940.360 5.770 81 82 83 81 81 81.75 5.00 4.2 5.7521 5.3 0.8778 16 940.360 946.120 5.760 81 83 84 81 81 82.25 5.00 4.2 5.7369 5.1 0.3367 16 912.130 917.630 5.50 83 90 90 87 87 88.5 12.00 0.6 5.3686 5.2 0.3367 16 917.630 923.140 5.510 80 90 92 87 89 89.5 12.00 0.6 5.3686 5.3 0.3367 16 923.140 928.680 5.540 83 92 93 89 89 90.75 12.00 0.6 5.3855 5.

AVERAGE DRY GAS METER CALIBRATION FACT

AVERAG

(1) = Net volume of gas sample passed through DGM, corrected to standard conditions

K1 = 17.64 

oR/in. Hg (English), 0.3858 

oK/mm Hg (Metric)

Tm = Absolute DGM avg. temperature (

oR - English, oK - Metric) ∆H@ = 0.

Vcr

(2) = Volume of gas sample passed through the critical orifice, corrected to standard conditions

Tamb = Absolute ambient temperature (

oR - English, oK - Metric)

K' = Average K' factor from Critical Orifice Calibration

(3) = DGM calibration factor

183212

ENVIRONMENTAL 

USING THE CRITICAL ORIFICES AS CALIBRATION STANDARDS:The following equations are used to calculate the standard volumes of air passed through the DGM, Vm (std), and the critical 

orifice, Vcr (std), and the DGM calibration factor, Y. These equations are automatically calculated in the spreadsheet above.

(

Tm

Pbar

H Vm std

K Vm

( 13/ )6.

( ) 1

+ ∆

= ∗ ∗

Tamb

Pbar Vcr std

K

∗ Θ

( ) = '∗

( )

( )

std

std

Vm

Vcr

Y =
METHOD 5 DRY GAS METER CALIBRATION USING CRITICAL ORIFICES

1) Select three critical orifices to calibrate the dry gas meter which bracket the expected operating range.2) Record barometric pressure before and after calibration procedure.3) Run at tested vacuum (from Orifice Calibration Report), for a period of time

necessary to achieve a minimum total volume of 5 cubic feet.

4) Record data and information in the GREEN cells, YELLOW cells are calculated.

INITIAL FINAL AVG (Pbar

)

DATE: 11/24/2010 METER SERIAL #: NT-2 BAROMETRIC PRESSURE (in Hg): 30.36 30.38 30.37 

METER PART #: MB2 CRITICAL ORIFICE SET SERIAL #: 1447 

K' TESTED TEMPERATURES °F ELAPSED

FACTOR VACUUM DGM READINGS (FT

3) AMBIENT DGM INLET DGM OUTLET DGM TIME (MIN) DGM ∆H (1) 

ORIFICE # RUN # (AVG) (in Hg) INITIAL FINAL NET (Vm) INITIAL FINAL INITIAL FINAL AVG θ (in H2O) Vm (STD) Vcr 

1 0.3367 16 40.880 47.10 6.220 61 67 68 66 67 67 14.00 0.59 6.3358 6.2 0.3367 16 47.10 55.090 7.990 61 68 69 67 67 67.75 18.00 0.59 8.1271 8.3 0.3367 16 55.090 59.990 4.90 61 69 69 67 67 68 11.00 0.59 4.9817 4.1 0.8778 16 60.210 66.970 6.760 62 69 71 66 68 68.5 6.00 4.4 6.9295 7.2 0.8778 16 66.970 73.750 6.780 62 71 73 68 68 70 6.00 4.4 6.9303 7.3 0.8778 16 73.750 80.520 6.770 62 73 73 68 69 70.75 6.00 4.4 6.9103 7.1 0.5057 16 80.640 85.870 5.230 62 72 72 69 69 70.5 8.00 1.4 5.3025 5.2 0.5057 16 85.870 91.115 5.245 62 72 72 69 69 70.5 8.00 1.4 5.3177 5.3 0.5057 16 91.115 96.350 5.235 62 72 72 69 69 70.5 8.00 1.4 5.3076 5.

AVERAGE DRY GAS METER CALIBRATION FACT

AVERAG

(1) = Net volume of gas sample passed through DGM, corrected to standard conditions

K1 = 17.64 

oR/in. Hg (English), 0.3858 

oK/mm Hg (Metric)

Tm = Absolute DGM avg. temperature (

oR - English, oK - Metric) ∆H@ = 0.

Vcr

(2) = Volume of gas sample passed through the critical orifice, corrected to standard conditions

Tamb = Absolute ambient temperature (

oR - English, oK - Metric)

K' = Average K' factor from Critical Orifice Calibration

(3) = DGM calibration factor

123218

ENVIRONMENTAL 

USING THE CRITICAL ORIFICES AS CALIBRATION STANDARDS:The following equations are used to calculate the standard volumes of air passed through the DGM, Vm (std), and the critical 

orifice, Vcr (std), and the DGM calibration factor, Y. These equations are automatically calculated in the spreadsheet above.

(

Tm

Pbar

H Vm std

K Vm

( 13/ )6.

( ) 1

+ ∆

= ∗ ∗

Tamb

Pbar Vcr std

K

∗ Θ

( ) = '∗

( )

( )

std

std

Vm

Vcr

Y =
METHOD 5 DRY GAS METER CALIBRATION USING CRITICAL ORIFICES

1) Select three critical orifices to calibrate the dry gas meter which bracket the expected operating range.2) Record barometric pressure before and after calibration procedure.3) Run at tested vacuum (from Orifice Calibration Report), for a period of time

necessary to achieve a minimum total volume of 5 cubic feet.

4) Record data and information in the GREEN cells, YELLOW cells are calculated.

INITIAL FINAL AVG (Pbar

)

DATE: 8/12/2010 METER SERIAL #: 1817 BAROMETRIC PRESSURE (in Hg): 29.8 29.8 29.8 

METER PART #: MB 6 CRITICAL ORIFICE SET SERIAL #: 1447 

K' TESTED TEMPERATURES °F ELAPSED

FACTOR VACUUM DGM READINGS (FT

3

) AMBIENT DGM INLET DGM OUTLET DGM TIME (MIN) DGM ∆H (1) 

ORIFICE # RUN # (AVG) (in Hg) INITIAL FINAL NET (Vm) INITIAL FINAL INITIAL FINAL AVG θ (in H2O) Vm (STD) V

1 0.8778 15 570.245 575.950 5.705 85 86 88 85 85 86 5.00 4.175 5.5523 2 0.8778 15 575.950 581.730 5.780 85 88 86 85 85 86 5.00 4.175 5.6253 3 0.8778 15 581.730 587.441 5.711 85 86 87 85 86 86 5.00 4.175 5.5582 1 0.5057 16 587.441 596.625 9.184 85 87 90 86 87 87.5 14.00 1.325 8.8517 2 0.5057 16 596.625 612.380 15.755 85 90 94 87 88 89.75 24.00 1.325 15.1227 13 0.5057 16 612.380 618.290 5.910 85 94 94 88 89 91.25 9.00 1.325 5.6574 1 0.3367 16 618.290 623.635 5.345 85 93 93 89 89 91 12.00 0.61 5.1099 2 0.3367 16 623.635 628.985 5.350 85 93 93 89 89 91 12.00 0.61 5.1146 3 0.3367 16 628.985 635.664 6.679 85 93 93 89 90 91.25 15.00 0.61 6.3823 

(1) = Net volume of gas sample passed through DGM, corrected to standard conditions

K1 = 17.64 

oR/in. Hg (English), 0.3858 

oK/mm Hg (Metric) AVERAGE DRY GAS METER CALIBRATION FAC

Tm = Absolute DGM avg. temperature (

oR - English, oK - Metric)

∆H@ = 0.75 θ ∆H Vm(std) AVERA

(2) = Volume of gas sample passed through the critical orifice, corrected to standard conditions Vcr(std) Vm

Tamb = Absolute ambient temperature (

oR - English, oK - Metric)

K' = Average K' factor from Critical Orifice Calibration

(3) = DGM calibration factor

321812
METHOD 5 DRY GAS METER CALIBRATION USING CRITICAL ORIFICES

1) Select three critical orifices to calibrate the dry gas meter which bracket the expected operating range.2) Record barometric pressure before and after calibration procedure.3) Run at tested vacuum (from Orifice Calibration Report), for a period of time

necessary to achieve a minimum total volume of 5 cubic feet.

4) Record data and information in the GREEN cells, YELLOW cells are calculated.

INITIAL FINAL AVG (Pbar

)

DATE: 11/22/2010 METER SERIAL #: 1817 BAROMETRIC PRESSURE (in Hg): 29.97 29.92 29.945 

METER PART #: MB 6 CRITICAL ORIFICE SET SERIAL #: 1447 

K' TESTED TEMPERATURES °F ELAPSED

FACTOR VACUUM DGM READINGS (FT

3

) AMBIENT DGM INLET DGM OUTLET DGM TIME (MIN) DGM ∆H (1) 

ORIFICE # RUN # (AVG) (in Hg) INITIAL FINAL NET (Vm) INITIAL FINAL INITIAL FINAL AVG θ (in H2O) Vm (STD) V

1 0.8778 16 757.820 767.990 10.170 66 69 74 68 69 70 9.00 4.2 10.2466 12 0.8778 16 767.990 777.0 9.010 66 74 77 69 70 72.5 8.00 4.2 9.0352 3 0.8778 16 777.0 783.870 6.870 66 77 79 70 70 74 6.00 4.2 6.8698 1 0.5057 16 742.20 747.360 5.160 65 66 69 66 66 66.75 8.00 1.4 5.1953 2 0.5057 16 747.360 752.520 5.160 65 69 71 66 67 68.25 8.00 1.4 5.1806 3 0.5057 16 752.520 757.770 5.250 65 71 73 67 67 69.5 8.00 1.4 5.2585 1 0.3367 16 783.80 788.640 4.840 66 70 72 70 70 70.5 11.00 0.61 4.8293 2 0.3367 16 788.640 793.890 5.250 66 69 70 69 69 69.25 12.00 0.61 5.2508 3 0.3367 16 793.890 798.710 4.820 66 70 72 69 69 70 11.00 0.61 4.8139 

(1) = Net volume of gas sample passed through DGM, corrected to standard conditions

K1 = 17.64 

oR/in. Hg (English), 0.3858 

oK/mm Hg (Metric) AVERAGE DRY GAS METER CALIBRATION FAC

Tm = Absolute DGM avg. temperature (

oR - English, oK - Metric)

∆H@ = 0.75 θ ∆H Vm(std) AVERA

(2) = Volume of gas sample passed through the critical orifice, corrected to standard conditions Vcr(std) Vm

Tamb = Absolute ambient temperature (

oR - English, oK - Metric)

K' = Average K' factor from Critical Orifice Calibration

(3) = DGM calibration factor

321812










APPENDIX E 

Laboratory Analytical 

Reports 
Parameter 

Test Run DateTime Analyzed 13:30 16:44 9:49 13:29 9:03 13:47 

bag 1 bag 2 bag 1 bag 2 bag 1 bag 2 

Oxygen concentration (%) 19.58 19.77 19.64 19.75 19.57 19.54 Oxygen concentration (%) (corrected as per USEPA 3A) 19.62 19.81 19.66 19.77 19.59 19.53 Carbon Dioxide concentration (%) 0.92 0.65 1.04 0.74 0.90 0.91 Carbon Dioxide concentration (%) (corrected as per USEPA 3A) 0.91 0.64 1.01 0.71 0.86 0.85 CO2 Correction

Co 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.07 

Cma 10.10 10.10 10.10 10.10 10.10 10.10 Cm 10.12 10.12 10.21 10.22 10.23 10.11 O2 Correction

Co 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.01 

Cma 9.95 9.95 9.95 9.95 9.95 9.95 Cm 10.0 10.0 10.0 9.9 9.9 10.0 

Co= Average of initial and final zero gasesCma=Actual concentration of the calibration gasCm= Average of initial and final calibration gases

BTEC Project No. 10-3990.22

Johns Manville - Waterville, Ohio

Osprey Oxygen and Carbon Dioxide Concentration Results Summary

11/16/2010 11/17/2010 11/18/201

Sampling Dates: November 16 - 18, 2010
Acetone 

Rinse 

Volume 

(mL)

Particulate 

Weight in 

Acetone 

(mg)

Particulate 

Weight on 

Filter 

(mg)

Organic 

(mg)

Inorganic 

(mg)

Filterable 

PM2.5 Catch 

Weight (mg)

Organic 

PM2.5 Cat

Weight (m

Run 1 98 1.0 10.0 2.1 3.0 10.50 1.1 Run 2 73 1.2 9.40 2.0 1.4 9.91 1.0 Run 3 46 2.8 9.20 2.0 1.3 11.57 1.0 

Blank: 53 0.50 ND 2.7 2.7

RDL: 1 0.5 0.30 1.0 0.50

Corrected

OTM 27/28 PM2.5 Lab Results Blank Correction

Johns-Manville

Waterville, Ohio - Osprey

BTEC job # 10-3990.22

Sampling Dates: October 16-18, 2010

OTM27 OTM28
Acetone 

Rinse 

Volume 

(mL)

Particulate 

Weight in 

Acetone 

Rinse (mg)

Particulate 

Weight on 

Filter (mg)

Particulate 

Weight in 

Acetone 

Rinse (mg)

Combined 

Particulate 

Weight (mg)

Run 1 100 4.1 13.70 4.1 17.8

Run 2 100 4.6 14.90 4.6 19.5

Run 3 88 22.2 17.40 22.2 39.6

Blank 100 ND 0.50

RDL 1 0.5 0.30

Method 5 PM Lab Results Blank Correction

Corrected

Sampling Dates: November 16 - 18, 2010

BTEC job # 10-3990.22

Waterville, Ohio - Osprey

Johns-Manville
Compound/Fraction

Blank 

Filter 

Result

(μg)

Filter 

RDL 

(μg)

R1 

Result

(μg)

R2 

Result

(μg)

R3 

Result

(μg)

Test Run 

Detection 

Limit (RDL)

(μg)

R1

(μg)

R2 

(μg)

Antimony ND 0.40 ND ND ND 2.0 2.0 2.0 

Arsenic 0.71 0.40 ND ND ND 2.0 2.0 2.0 

Berylium ND 0.10 ND ND ND 0.50 0.50 0.50 

Cadmium ND 0.10 0.80 ND 0.59 0.50 0.80 0.50 

Chromium 1.19 0.30 3.8 2.3 2.6 1.5 2.6 1.5 

Cobalt ND 0.10 2.58 0.56 ND 0.50 2.58 0.56 

Lead 0.74 0.20 12.9 3.5 3.20 1.0 12.2 2.8 

Manganese 2.73 0.75 4.5 ND 6.7 3.8 3.8 3.8 

Nickel ND 0.50 3.3 ND 2.6 2.5 3.3 2.5 

Selenium ND 1.0 ND ND ND 5.0 5.0 5.0 

Johns-Manville

Method 29 Lab Results Blank Correction

Corrected

Sampling Dates: November 16 - 18, 2010

BTEC job # 10-3990.22

Waterville, Ohio - Osprey
Corrected

Total Volume 

(ml)

Impinger 

KOH (ml)

Hexavalent 

Chromium, 

Cr6+ [μg] RDL

Hexavalent 

Chromium, 

Cr6+ [μg]

Run 1 870 300 11.0 0.4 10.84

Run 2 870 300 2.9 0.4 2.74

Run 3 870 300 1.2 0.4 1.04

Blank H2O 210 ND

Blank KOH 130 0.07

Method 0061 Lab Results Blank Correction

Sampling Dates: November 16 - 18, 2010

BTEC job # 10-3990.22

Waterville, Ohio - Osprey

Johns-Manville
Volume (mL)

Hydrochloric 

Acid (μg)

Hydrofluoric 

Acid (μg)

Hydrochloric 

Acid (μg)

Hyd

Ac

Run 1 410 ND 380 200 Run 2 390 ND 390 200 Run 3 410 ND 270 200 

Blank H20 220 ND ND

Blank H2SO4 140 ND ND

RDL 1 200 200

Corrected

Method 26A Lab Results Blank Correction

Johns-Manville

Waterville, Ohio - Osprey

BTEC job # 10-3990.22

Sampling Dates: November 17 & 18, 2010
Your Project #: 10-3990.02 

Site: JM WATERVILLE

Your C.O.C. #: 0698

Attention: Barry Boulianne

BT Environmental Consulting

2615 Wolcott St.

Ferndale, MI

USA 48220

Report Date: 2010/12/03

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS

MAXXAM JOB #: B0G8038

Received: 2010/11/22, 14:00

Sample Matrix: Stack Sampling Train

# Samples Received: 8

Date Date Method

Analyses Quantity Extracted Analyzed Laboratory Method Reference

Organic Condensable PM (OTM28) (1 ) 4 2010/11/29 2010/11/29 BRL SOP-00120 EPA OTM 28 

Inorganic Condensable PM (OTM28) (1 ) 4 2010/12/01 2010/12/01 BRL SOP-00120 EPA OTM 28 

2.5 um Particulates on Filter (OTM-027) (2 ) 4 N/A 2010/11/25 BRL SOP-00109 EPA OTM - 027 

<2.5um Particulates in Rinse(OTM-027) (2 ) 4 2010/11/23 2010/11/25 BRL SOP-00109 EPA OTM - 027 

Final Volume of Acetone Probe Rinse 4 N/A 2010/12/01 

Weight of DCM Received 4 N/A 2010/11/26 

Weight of Water from Impingers 4 N/A 2010/11/26 

* RPDs calculated using raw data. The rounding of final results may result in the apparent difference.

(1) This is a non-accredited test.

(2) This test was performed in Maxxam Mississauga under Maxxam Burlington SCC Accreditation

Encryption Key

Please direct all questions regarding this Certificate of Analysis to your Project Manager.

LINA BARRETO, Project Manager

Email: LBarreto@maxxam.ca

Phone# (905) 817-5700

====================================================================

Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section

5.10.2 of ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page.

Total cover pages: 1

Page 1 of 6
BT Environmental Consulting

Maxxam Job #: B0G8038 Client Project #: 10-3990.02

Report Date: 2010/12/03 Project name: JM WATERVILLE

RESULTS OF ANALYSES OF STACK SAMPLING TRAIN

Maxxam ID H X 9 3 8 7 H X 9 3 8 8 H X 9 3 8 9 H X 9 3 9 0 H X 9 3 9 3

Sampling Date 2010/11/15 2010/11/16 2010/11/17 2010/11/18 2010/11/15

COC Number 0698 0698 0698 0698

 U n i t s TRAIN R1-OTM28 R2-OTM28 R3-OTM28 TRAIN RDL QC Batch

BLANK-OTM28 BLANK-OTM27

< 2.5 Particulate Weight in Acetone Rinse mg 0.5 0.5 2338103

< 2.5 Particulate Weight on Filter mg ND 0.30 2339906

Acetone Rinse Volume (2.5) ml 53 1 2338105

Weight g 340 310 400 210 0.1 2342114

DCM Weight g 340 310 340 340 0.1 2342113

Inorganic Condensible PM mg 2.7 3.0 1.4 1.3 0.50 2346181

Organic Condensible PM mg 2.7 2.1 2.0 2.0 1.0 2342111

ND = Not detected

RDL = Reportable Detection Limit

QC Batch = Quality Control Batch

Maxxam ID H X 9 3 9 4 H X 9 3 9 5 H X 9 3 9 6

Sampling Date 2010/11/16 2010/11/17 2010/11/18

COC Number

 U n i t s R1-OTM27 R2-OTM27 R3-OTM27 RDL QC Batch

< 2.5 Particulate Weight in Acetone Rinse mg 1.0 1.2 2.8 0.5 2338103

< 2.5 Particulate Weight on Filter mg 10.0 9.40 9.20 0.30 2339906

Acetone Rinse Volume (2.5) ml 98 73 46 1 2338105

RDL = Reportable Detection Limit

QC Batch = Quality Control Batch

Page 2 of 6
BT Environmental Consulting

Maxxam Job #: B0G8038 Client Project #: 10-3990.02

Report Date: 2010/12/03 Project name: JM WATERVILLE

Test Summary

Maxxam ID HX9387 Collected 2010/11/15

Sample ID TRAIN BLANK-OTM28 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/11/22

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Organic Condensable PM (OTM28) 2342111 2010/11/29 2010/11/29 MGE

Inorganic Condensable PM (OTM28) 2346181 2010/12/01 2010/12/01 BLM

Weight of DCM Received 2342113 N/A 2010/11/26 FMO

Weight of Water from Impingers 2342114 N/A 2010/11/26 BLM

Maxxam ID HX9388 Collected 2010/11/16

Sample ID R1-OTM28 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/11/22

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Organic Condensable PM (OTM28) 2342111 2010/11/29 2010/11/29 MGE

Inorganic Condensable PM (OTM28) 2346181 2010/12/01 2010/12/01 BLM

Weight of DCM Received 2342113 N/A 2010/11/26 FMO

Weight of Water from Impingers 2342114 N/A 2010/11/26 BLM

Maxxam ID HX9389 Collected 2010/11/17

Sample ID R2-OTM28 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/11/22

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Organic Condensable PM (OTM28) 2342111 2010/11/29 2010/11/29 MGE

Inorganic Condensable PM (OTM28) 2346181 2010/12/01 2010/12/01 BLM

Weight of DCM Received 2342113 N/A 2010/11/26 FMO

Weight of Water from Impingers 2342114 N/A 2010/11/26 BLM

Maxxam ID HX9390 Collected 2010/11/18

Sample ID R3-OTM28 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/11/22

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Organic Condensable PM (OTM28) 2342111 2010/11/29 2010/11/29 MGE

Inorganic Condensable PM (OTM28) 2346181 2010/12/01 2010/12/01 BLM

Weight of DCM Received 2342113 N/A 2010/11/26 FMO

Weight of Water from Impingers 2342114 N/A 2010/11/26 BLM

Maxxam ID HX9393 Collected 2010/11/15

Sample ID TRAIN BLANK-OTM27 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/11/22

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

2.5 um Particulates on Filter (OTM-027) BAL 2339906 N/A 2010/11/25 BLM

<2.5um Particulates in Rinse(OTM-027) BAL 2338103 2010/11/23 2010/11/25 NUA

Final Volume of Acetone Probe Rinse 2338105 N/A 2010/12/01 NUA

Page 3 of 6
BT Environmental Consulting

Maxxam Job #: B0G8038 Client Project #: 10-3990.02

Report Date: 2010/12/03 Project name: JM WATERVILLE

Test Summary

Maxxam ID HX9394 Collected 2010/11/16

Sample ID R1-OTM27 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/11/22

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

2.5 um Particulates on Filter (OTM-027) BAL 2339906 N/A 2010/11/25 BLM

<2.5um Particulates in Rinse(OTM-027) BAL 2338103 2010/11/23 2010/11/25 NUA

Final Volume of Acetone Probe Rinse 2338105 N/A 2010/12/01 NUA

Maxxam ID HX9395 Collected 2010/11/17

Sample ID R2-OTM27 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/11/22

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

2.5 um Particulates on Filter (OTM-027) BAL 2339906 N/A 2010/11/25 BLM

<2.5um Particulates in Rinse(OTM-027) BAL 2338103 2010/11/23 2010/11/25 NUA

Final Volume of Acetone Probe Rinse 2338105 N/A 2010/12/01 NUA

Maxxam ID HX9396 Collected 2010/11/18

Sample ID R3-OTM27 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/11/22

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

2.5 um Particulates on Filter (OTM-027) BAL 2339906 N/A 2010/11/25 BLM

<2.5um Particulates in Rinse(OTM-027) BAL 2338103 2010/11/23 2010/11/25 NUA

Final Volume of Acetone Probe Rinse 2338105 N/A 2010/12/01 NUA

Page 4 of 6
BT Environmental Consulting

Maxxam Job #: B0G8038 Client Project #: 10-3990.02

Report Date: 2010/12/03 Project name: JM WATERVILLE

GENERAL COMMENTS

Sample HX9387-01: ORGANIC EXTRACTION : Brownish oily material found in vial.

INORGANIC EXTRACTION : Whitish residue found in aluminum dish.

Sample HX9388-01: ORGANIC EXTRACTION : Brownish oily material found in vial.

INORGANIC EXTRACTION : Whitish residue found in aluminum dish.

Sample HX9389-01: ORGANIC EXTRACTION : Whitish oily material found in vial.

INORGANIC EXTRACTION : Whitish residue found in aluminum dish.

Sample HX9390-01: ORGANIC EXTRACTION : Whitish oily material found in vial.

INORGANIC EXTRACTION : Whitish residue found in aluminum dish.

Results relate only to the items tested.

Page 5 of 6
BT Environmental Consulting

Attention: Barry Boulianne 

Client Project #: 10-3990.02

P.O. #:

Project name: JM WATERVILLE

Quality Assurance Report

Maxxam Job Number: GB0G8038

QA/QC Date

Batch Analyzed

Num Init QC Type Parameter yyyy/mm/dd Value %Recovery Units QC Limits

2338103 NUA Method Blank < 2.5 Particulate Weight in Acetone Rinse 2010/12/01 ND, RDL=0.5 mg

2342111 MGE Spiked Blank Organic Condensible PM 2010/11/29 95 % 70 - 130

Spiked Blank DUP Organic Condensible PM 2010/11/29 93 % 70 - 130

RPD Organic Condensible PM 2010/11/29 2.1 % 20

Method Blank Organic Condensible PM 2010/11/29 ND, RDL=1.0 mg

2346181 MGE Method Blank Inorganic Condensible PM 2010/12/01 ND, RDL=0.50 mg

Duplicate: Paired analysis of a separate portion of the same sample. Used to evaluate the variance in the measurement.

Spiked Blank: A blank matrix to which a known amount of the analyte has been added. Used to evaluate analyte recovery.

Method Blank: A blank matrix containing all reagents used in the analytical procedure. Used to identify laboratory contamination.

Page 6 of 6
Your Project #: 10-3990.02 

Site: JM WATERVILLE

Attention: Barry Boulianne

BT Environmental Consulting

2615 Wolcott St.

Ferndale, MI

USA 48220

Report Date: 2010/12/06

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS

MAXXAM JOB #: B0G8077

Received: 2010/11/22, 14:00

Sample Matrix: Stack Sampling Train

# Samples Received: 4

Date Date Method

Analyses Quantity Extracted Analyzed Laboratory Method Reference

Metals in Combined Train (6020) (1 ) 4 2010/12/02 2010/12/03 BRL SOP-00103/ BRL EPA 6020 / M29 

SOP-00102

Particulates/Acetone Rinse (M5/315/M201) (1 ) 4 2010/11/23 2010/11/30 BRL SOP-00109 EPA 5/315 

Particulates/Filter (M5/315/NJATM1/M201) (1 ) 4 N/A 2010/11/26 BRL SOP-00109 EPA 5/315/NJATM1 

Final Volume of Acetone Probe Rinse 4 N/A 2010/11/25 

* RPDs calculated using raw data. The rounding of final results may result in the apparent difference.

(1) This test was performed in Maxxam Mississauga under Maxxam Burlington SCC Accreditation

Encryption Key

Please direct all questions regarding this Certificate of Analysis to your Project Manager.

LINA BARRETO, Project Manager

Email: LBarreto@maxxam.ca

Phone# (905) 817-5700

====================================================================

Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section

5.10.2 of ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page.

Total cover pages: 1

Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics Burlington:5555 North Service Road, Burlington, Ontario L7L 5H7 Telephone(905) 332-8788 Fax(905) 332-9169

Page 1 of 8
BT Environmental Consulting

Maxxam Job #: B0G8077 Client Project #: 10-3990.02

Report Date: 2010/12/06 Project name: JM WATERVILLE

RESULTS OF ANALYSES OF STACK SAMPLING TRAIN

Maxxam ID H X 9 5 6 2 H X 9 5 6 3 H X 9 5 6 4 H X 9 5 6 5

Sampling Date 2010/11/18 2010/11/16 2010/11/17 2010/11/18

 U n i t s BLANK-M5/29 RUN RUN RUN RDL QC Batch

1-M5/29 2-M5/29 3-M5/29

Acetone Rinse Particulate Weight in Acetone Rinse mg ND 4.1 4.6 22.2 0.5 2338106

Front Half Particulate Weight on Filter mg 0.50 13.7 14.9 17.4 0.30 2339931

Acetone Rinse Volume ml 100 100 100 88 1 2338109

ND = Not detected

RDL = Reportable Detection Limit

QC Batch = Quality Control Batch

Page 2 of 8
BT Environmental Consulting

Maxxam Job #: B0G8077 Client Project #: 10-3990.02

Report Date: 2010/12/06 Project name: JM WATERVILLE

ELEMENTS BY ICP/MS (STACK SAMPLING TRAIN)

Maxxam ID H X 9 5 6 2 H X 9 5 6 3 H X 9 5 6 3 H X 9 5 6 4 H X 9 5 6 5

Sampling Date 2010/11/18 2010/11/16 2010/11/16 2010/11/17 2010/11/18

 U n i t s BLANK-M5/29 RDL RUN RUN RUN RUN RDL QC Batch

1-M5/29 1-M5/29 2-M5/29 3-M5/29

Lab-Dup

Total Antimony (Sb) ug ND 0.40 ND ND ND ND 2.0 2347966

Total Arsenic (As) ug 0.71 0.40 ND ND ND ND 2.0 2347966

Total Beryllium (Be) ug ND 0.10 ND ND ND ND 0.50 2347966

Total Cadmium (Cd) ug ND 0.10 0.80 0.86 ND 0.59 0.50 2347966

Total Chromium (Cr) ug 1.19 0.30 3.8 3.8 2.3 2.6 1.5 2347966

Total Cobalt (Co) ug ND 0.10 2.58 2.52 0.56 ND 0.50 2347966

Total Lead (Pb) ug 0.74 0.20 12.9 13.1 3.5 3.2 1.0 2347966

Total Manganese (Mn) ug 2.73 0.75 4.5 4.6 ND 6.7 3.8 2347966

Total Nickel (Ni) ug ND 0.50 3.3 3.6 ND 2.6 2.5 2347966

Total Selenium (Se) ug ND 1.0 ND ND ND ND 5.0 2347966

ND = Not detected

RDL = Reportable Detection Limit

QC Batch = Quality Control Batch

Page 3 of 8
BT Environmental Consulting

Maxxam Job #: B0G8077 Client Project #: 10-3990.02

Report Date: 2010/12/06 Project name: JM WATERVILLE

Test Summary

Maxxam ID HX9562 Collected 2010/11/18

Sample ID BLANK-M5/29 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/11/22

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Metals in Combined Train (6020) ICP1/MS 2347966 2010/12/02 2010/12/03 N_R

Particulates/Acetone Rinse (M5/315/M201) BAL 2338106 2010/11/23 2010/11/30 NUA

Particulates/Filter (M5/315/NJATM1/M201) BAL 2339931 N/A 2010/11/26 BLM

Final Volume of Acetone Probe Rinse 2338109 N/A 2010/11/25 NUA

Maxxam ID HX9563 Collected 2010/11/16

Sample ID RUN 1-M5/29 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/11/22

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Metals in Combined Train (6020) ICP1/MS 2347966 2010/12/02 2010/12/03 N_R

Particulates/Acetone Rinse (M5/315/M201) BAL 2338106 2010/11/23 2010/11/30 NUA

Particulates/Filter (M5/315/NJATM1/M201) BAL 2339931 N/A 2010/11/26 BLM

Final Volume of Acetone Probe Rinse 2338109 N/A 2010/11/25 NUA

Maxxam ID HX9563 D u p Collected 2010/11/16

Sample ID RUN 1-M5/29 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/11/22

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Metals in Combined Train (6020) ICP1/MS 2347966 2010/12/06 2010/12/03 N_R

Maxxam ID HX9564 Collected 2010/11/17

Sample ID RUN 2-M5/29 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/11/22

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Metals in Combined Train (6020) ICP1/MS 2347966 2010/12/02 2010/12/03 N_R

Particulates/Acetone Rinse (M5/315/M201) BAL 2338106 2010/11/23 2010/11/30 NUA

Particulates/Filter (M5/315/NJATM1/M201) BAL 2339931 N/A 2010/11/26 BLM

Final Volume of Acetone Probe Rinse 2338109 N/A 2010/11/25 NUA

Maxxam ID HX9565 Collected 2010/11/18

Sample ID RUN 3-M5/29 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/11/22

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Metals in Combined Train (6020) ICP1/MS 2347966 2010/12/02 2010/12/03 N_R

Particulates/Acetone Rinse (M5/315/M201) BAL 2338106 2010/11/23 2010/11/30 NUA

Particulates/Filter (M5/315/NJATM1/M201) BAL 2339931 N/A 2010/11/26 BLM

Final Volume of Acetone Probe Rinse 2338109 N/A 2010/11/25 NUA

Page 4 of 8
BT Environmental Consulting

Maxxam Job #: B0G8077 Client Project #: 10-3990.02

Report Date: 2010/12/06 Project name: JM WATERVILLE

RESULTS OF ANALYSES OF STACK SAMPLING TRAIN

Particulates/Acetone Rinse (M5/315/M201): Sample vials HX9563-02R to HX9565-02R were found to contain a white residue after evaporation.

Particulates/Filter (M5/315/NJATM1/M201): Maxxam # Filter Condition

HX9562-01RNormal

HX9563-01RNormal

HX9564-01RNormal

HX9565-01RDE/LFT

Normal Filters received in normal condition

LFT Loose filter material in the petri dish

DE Edges of the filter are frayed

ELEMENTS BY ICP/MS (STACK SAMPLING TRAIN)

Metals in Combined Train (6020): Extra 5x dilution was required for all samples except HX9562, due to the matrix.

Post digestion duplicate and spike was done on sample HX9563.

Trace level As was observed in the Processed Blank.

Results relate only to the items tested.

Page 5 of 8
BT Environmental Consulting

Attention: Barry Boulianne 

Client Project #: 10-3990.02

P.O. #:

Project name: JM WATERVILLE

Quality Assurance Report

Maxxam Job Number: GB0G8077

QA/QC Date

Batch Analyzed

Num Init QC Type Parameter yyyy/mm/dd Value %Recovery Units QC Limits

2338106 NUA Method Blank Acetone Rinse Particulate Weight in Acetone 2010/11/30 ND, RDL=0.5 mg

2347966 N_R Matrix Spike

(HX9563) Total Antimony (Sb) 2010/12/03 100 % 70 - 130

Matrix Spike DUP

(HX9563) Total Antimony (Sb) 2010/12/03 101 % 70 - 130

MS/MSD RPD Total Antimony (Sb) 2010/12/03 1 % 20

Matrix Spike

(HX9563) Total Arsenic (As) 2010/12/03 97 % 70 - 130

Matrix Spike DUP

(HX9563) Total Arsenic (As) 2010/12/03 97 % 70 - 130

MS/MSD RPD Total Arsenic (As) 2010/12/03 0 % 20

Matrix Spike

(HX9563) Total Beryllium (Be) 2010/12/03 98 % 70 - 130

Matrix Spike DUP

(HX9563) Total Beryllium (Be) 2010/12/03 96 % 70 - 130

MS/MSD RPD Total Beryllium (Be) 2010/12/03 2.1 % 20

Matrix Spike

(HX9563) Total Cadmium (Cd) 2010/12/03 97 % 70 - 130

Matrix Spike DUP

(HX9563) Total Cadmium (Cd) 2010/12/03 97 % 70 - 130

MS/MSD RPD Total Cadmium (Cd) 2010/12/03 0 % 20

Matrix Spike

(HX9563) Total Chromium (Cr) 2010/12/03 104 % 70 - 130

Matrix Spike DUP

(HX9563) Total Chromium (Cr) 2010/12/03 104 % 70 - 130

MS/MSD RPD Total Chromium (Cr) 2010/12/03 0 % 20

Matrix Spike

(HX9563) Total Cobalt (Co) 2010/12/03 104 % 70 - 130

Matrix Spike DUP

(HX9563) Total Cobalt (Co) 2010/12/03 104 % 70 - 130

MS/MSD RPD Total Cobalt (Co) 2010/12/03 0 % 20

Matrix Spike

(HX9563) Total Lead (Pb) 2010/12/03 104 % 70 - 130

Matrix Spike DUP

(HX9563) Total Lead (Pb) 2010/12/03 106 % 70 - 130

MS/MSD RPD Total Lead (Pb) 2010/12/03 1.9 % 20

Matrix Spike

(HX9563) Total Manganese (Mn) 2010/12/03 106 % 70 - 130

Matrix Spike DUP

(HX9563) Total Manganese (Mn) 2010/12/03 109 % 70 - 130

MS/MSD RPD Total Manganese (Mn) 2010/12/03 2.8 % 20

Matrix Spike

(HX9563) Total Nickel (Ni) 2010/12/03 103 % 70 - 130

Matrix Spike DUP

(HX9563) Total Nickel (Ni) 2010/12/03 103 % 70 - 130

MS/MSD RPD Total Nickel (Ni) 2010/12/03 0 % 20

Matrix Spike

(HX9563) Total Selenium (Se) 2010/12/03 95 % 70 - 130

Matrix Spike DUP

(HX9563) Total Selenium (Se) 2010/12/03 96 % 70 - 130

MS/MSD RPD Total Selenium (Se) 2010/12/03 1.0 % 20

Spiked Blank Total Antimony (Sb) 2010/12/03 98 % 85 - 115

Spiked Blank DUP Total Antimony (Sb) 2010/12/03 97 % 85 - 115

RPD Total Antimony (Sb) 2010/12/03 0.7 % 20

Spiked Blank Total Arsenic (As) 2010/12/03 97 % 85 - 115

Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics Burlington:5555 North Service Road, Burlington, Ontario L7L 5H7 Telephone(905) 332-8788 Fax(905) 332-9169

Page 6 of 8
BT Environmental Consulting

Attention: Barry Boulianne 

Client Project #: 10-3990.02

P.O. #:

Project name: JM WATERVILLE

Quality Assurance Report (Continued)

Maxxam Job Number: GB0G8077

QA/QC Date

Batch Analyzed

Num Init QC Type Parameter yyyy/mm/dd Value %Recovery Units QC Limits

2347966 N_R Spiked Blank DUP Total Arsenic (As) 2010/12/03 97 % 85 - 115

RPD Total Arsenic (As) 2010/12/03 0.7 % 20

Spiked Blank Total Beryllium (Be) 2010/12/03 98 % 85 - 115

Spiked Blank DUP Total Beryllium (Be) 2010/12/03 98 % 85 - 115

RPD Total Beryllium (Be) 2010/12/03 0.7 % 20

Spiked Blank Total Cadmium (Cd) 2010/12/03 96 % 85 - 115

Spiked Blank DUP Total Cadmium (Cd) 2010/12/03 95 % 85 - 115

RPD Total Cadmium (Cd) 2010/12/03 1.2 % 20

Spiked Blank Total Chromium (Cr) 2010/12/03 96 % 85 - 115

Spiked Blank DUP Total Chromium (Cr) 2010/12/03 100 % 85 - 115

RPD Total Chromium (Cr) 2010/12/03 3.9 % 20

Spiked Blank Total Cobalt (Co) 2010/12/03 101 % 85 - 115

Spiked Blank DUP Total Cobalt (Co) 2010/12/03 101 % 85 - 115

RPD Total Cobalt (Co) 2010/12/03 0.6 % 20

Spiked Blank Total Lead (Pb) 2010/12/03 102 % 85 - 115

Spiked Blank DUP Total Lead (Pb) 2010/12/03 100 % 85 - 115

RPD Total Lead (Pb) 2010/12/03 1.8 % 20

Spiked Blank Total Manganese (Mn) 2010/12/03 99 % 85 - 115

Spiked Blank DUP Total Manganese (Mn) 2010/12/03 100 % 85 - 115

RPD Total Manganese (Mn) 2010/12/03 0.9 % 20

Spiked Blank Total Nickel (Ni) 2010/12/03 99 % 85 - 115

Spiked Blank DUP Total Nickel (Ni) 2010/12/03 99 % 85 - 115

RPD Total Nickel (Ni) 2010/12/03 0.7 % 20

Spiked Blank Total Selenium (Se) 2010/12/03 97 % 85 - 115

Spiked Blank DUP Total Selenium (Se) 2010/12/03 98 % 85 - 115

RPD Total Selenium (Se) 2010/12/03 1.5 % 20

Method Blank Total Antimony (Sb) 2010/12/03 ND, RDL=0.40 ug

Method Blank DUP Total Antimony (Sb) 2010/12/03 ND, RDL=0.40 ug

RPD Total Antimony (Sb) 2010/12/03 NC % 20

Method Blank Total Arsenic (As) 2010/12/03 0.86, RDL=0.40 ug

Method Blank DUP Total Arsenic (As) 2010/12/03 0.84, RDL=0.40 ug

RPD Total Arsenic (As) 2010/12/03 NC % 20

Method Blank Total Beryllium (Be) 2010/12/03 ND, RDL=0.10 ug

Method Blank DUP Total Beryllium (Be) 2010/12/03 ND, RDL=0.10 ug

RPD Total Beryllium (Be) 2010/12/03 NC % 20

Method Blank Total Cadmium (Cd) 2010/12/03 ND, RDL=0.10 ug

Method Blank DUP Total Cadmium (Cd) 2010/12/03 ND, RDL=0.10 ug

RPD Total Cadmium (Cd) 2010/12/03 NC % 20

Method Blank Total Chromium (Cr) 2010/12/03 ND, RDL=0.30 ug

Method Blank DUP Total Chromium (Cr) 2010/12/03 ND, RDL=0.30 ug

RPD Total Chromium (Cr) 2010/12/03 NC % 20

Method Blank Total Cobalt (Co) 2010/12/03 ND, RDL=0.10 ug

Method Blank DUP Total Cobalt (Co) 2010/12/03 ND, RDL=0.10 ug

RPD Total Cobalt (Co) 2010/12/03 NC % 20

Method Blank Total Lead (Pb) 2010/12/03 ND, RDL=0.20 ug

Method Blank DUP Total Lead (Pb) 2010/12/03 ND, RDL=0.20 ug

RPD Total Lead (Pb) 2010/12/03 NC % 20

Method Blank Total Manganese (Mn) 2010/12/03 ND, RDL=0.75 ug

Method Blank DUP Total Manganese (Mn) 2010/12/03 ND, RDL=0.75 ug

RPD Total Manganese (Mn) 2010/12/03 NC % 20

Method Blank Total Nickel (Ni) 2010/12/03 ND, RDL=0.50 ug

Method Blank DUP Total Nickel (Ni) 2010/12/03 0.84, RDL=0.50 ug

RPD Total Nickel (Ni) 2010/12/03 NC % 20

Method Blank Total Selenium (Se) 2010/12/03 ND, RDL=1.0 ug

Method Blank DUP Total Selenium (Se) 2010/12/03 ND, RDL=1.0 ug

Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics Burlington:5555 North Service Road, Burlington, Ontario L7L 5H7 Telephone(905) 332-8788 Fax(905) 332-9169

Page 7 of 8
BT Environmental Consulting

Attention: Barry Boulianne 

Client Project #: 10-3990.02

P.O. #:

Project name: JM WATERVILLE

Quality Assurance Report (Continued)

Maxxam Job Number: GB0G8077

QA/QC Date

Batch Analyzed

Num Init QC Type Parameter yyyy/mm/dd Value %Recovery Units QC Limits

2347966 N_R RPD Total Selenium (Se) 2010/12/03 NC % 20

RPD -

Sample/Sample

Dup Total Antimony (Sb) 2010/12/03 NC % 20

Total Arsenic (As) 2010/12/03 NC % 20

Total Beryllium (Be) 2010/12/03 NC % 20

Total Cadmium (Cd) 2010/12/03 NC % 20

Total Chromium (Cr) 2010/12/03 NC % 20

Total Cobalt (Co) 2010/12/03 2.4 % 20

Total Lead (Pb) 2010/12/03 1.6 % 20

Total Manganese (Mn) 2010/12/03 NC % 20

Total Nickel (Ni) 2010/12/03 NC % 20

Total Selenium (Se) 2010/12/03 NC % 20

Duplicate: Paired analysis of a separate portion of the same sample. Used to evaluate the variance in the measurement.

Matrix Spike: A sample to which a known amount of the analyte of interest has been added. Used to evaluate sample matrix interference.

Spiked Blank: A blank matrix to which a known amount of the analyte has been added. Used to evaluate analyte recovery.

Method Blank: A blank matrix containing all reagents used in the analytical procedure. Used to identify laboratory contamination.

NC (RPD): The RPD was not calculated. The level of analyte detected in the parent sample and its duplicate was not sufficiently significant to permit a

reliable calculation.

Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics Burlington:5555 North Service Road, Burlington, Ontario L7L 5H7 Telephone(905) 332-8788 Fax(905) 332-9169

Page 8 of 8
Ohio Lumex Co., Inc.

9263 Ravenna Rd., Unit A-3

Twinsburg, OH 44087

Phone: (330) 405-0837

Fax: (330) 405-0847

www.ohiolumex.com

Other

Client Name BT Environmental Consulting, Inc. Report Number BTEnvironmental120310 Report 1 of 3

Date 12/3/2010

Contact Name Phone (248)-548-8072 

Trap I.D. Test Location Date Analyzed Scientist

 Mass ng 

Sect.1

 Mass ng 

Sect.2

Spike 

Level 

Date(s) in 

Stack Comments

82389 Waterville, OH 12/2/2010 Matt Carhart 0.70 0.64 11/16/2010 Units 29&30 Osprey, Run 1, Trap A

80399 Waterville, OH 12/2/2010 Matt Carhart 20.0 0.79 20 11/16/2010 Units 29&30 Osprey, Run 1, Trap B

80333 Waterville, OH 12/2/2010 Matt Carhart 1.02 0 11/16/2010 Units 29&30 Osprey, Run 2, Trap A

70845 Waterville, OH 12/2/2010 Matt Carhart 21.3 0.26 20 11/16/2010 Units 29&30 Osprey, Run 2, Trap B

80302 Waterville, OH 12/2/2010 Matt Carhart 0.51 0 11/17/2010 Units 29&30 Osprey, Run 3, Trap A

82423 Waterville, OH 12/2/2010 Matt Carhart 20.5 0.06 20 11/17/2010 Units 29&30 Osprey, Run 3, Trap B

82355 Waterville, OH 12/2/2010 Matt Carhart 0.44 0.82 11/17/2010 Units 29&30 Osprey, Blank, Trap A

82420 Waterville, OH 12/2/2010 Matt Carhart 21.1 0 20 11/17/2010 Units 29&30 Osprey, Blank, Trap B

Variability +- 10%

Turn - Around Time

Standard

48 hour rush

Less than .257 ng is considered "< LDL." Which is less 

than the lowest detection limit.

Plant/Source

Sorbent Trap Analysis Report

Calibration Report Available

Barry Boulianne bboulianne@sbcglobal.net Matthew Smith 

msmith@btecinc.com

Johns Manville 

Your Project #: 10-3990.02 

Site: JM WATERVILLE

Your C.O.C. #: N/A

Attention: Barry Boulianne

BT Environmental Consulting

2615 Wolcott St.

Ferndale, MI

USA 48220

Report Date: 2010/12/06

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS

MAXXAM JOB #: B0G8054

Received: 2010/11/22, 14:00

Sample Matrix: Stack Sampling Train

# Samples Received: 10

Date Date Method

Analyses Quantity Extracted Analyzed Laboratory Method Reference

Hexavalent Chromium (M0061) 5 2010/11/25 2010/11/26 BRL SOP-00106 EPA 7199 (M0061) 

Hydrogen Halides in H2SO4 Imp. (1 ) 5 2010/11/30 2010/11/30 BRL SOP-00108 EPA Method 26A 

Volume of Sulfuric Acid Impinger 5 N/A 2010/11/30 

Final Volume of KOH Impinger 5 N/A 2010/11/26 

* RPDs calculated using raw data. The rounding of final results may result in the apparent difference.

(1) This test was performed in Maxxam Mississauga under Maxxam Burlington SCC Accreditation

Encryption Key

Please direct all questions regarding this Certificate of Analysis to your Project Manager.

LINA BARRETO, Project Manager

Email: LBarreto@maxxam.ca

Phone# (905) 817-5700

====================================================================

Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section

5.10.2 of ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page.

Total cover pages: 1

Page 1 of 6
BT Environmental Consulting

Maxxam Job #: B0G8054 Client Project #: 10-3990.02

Report Date: 2010/12/06 Project name: JM WATERVILLE

RESULTS OF ANALYSES OF STACK SAMPLING TRAIN

Maxxam ID H X 9 4 3 7 H X 9 4 3 8 H X 9 4 3 9 H X 9 4 3 9

Sampling Date 2010/11/18 2010/11/18 2010/11/17 2010/11/17

COC Number N/A N/A N/A N/A

 U n i t s BLANK-H2O-M26A BLANK-H2SO4-M26A RUN RUN RDL QC Batch

1-M26A-H2SO4 1-M26A-H2SO4

Lab-Dup

Volume ml 220 140 410 1 2345550

Hydrochloric Acid ug ND ND ND ND 200 2345566

Hydrofluoric Acid ug ND ND 380 380 200 2345566

ND = Not detected

N/A = Not Applicable

RDL = Reportable Detection Limit

QC Batch = Quality Control Batch

Maxxam ID H X 9 4 4 0 H X 9 4 4 1 H X 9 4 4 2

Sampling Date 2010/11/18 2010/11/18 2010/11/18

COC Number N/A N/A

 U n i t s RUN RUN QC Batch BLANK-H2O-M0061 RDL QC Batch

2-M26A-H2SO4 3-M26A-H2SO4

Volume ml 390 410 2345550 210 1 2340672

Hexavalent Chromium (Cr 6+) ug ND 0.1 2340666

Hydrochloric Acid ug ND ND 2345566 200

Hydrofluoric Acid ug 390 270 2345566 200

ND = Not detected

N/A = Not Applicable

RDL = Reportable Detection Limit

QC Batch = Quality Control Batch

Maxxam ID H X 9 4 4 3 H X 9 4 4 4 H X 9 4 4 4 H X 9 4 4 5 H X 9 4 4 6

Sampling Date 2010/11/18 2010/11/17 2010/11/17 2010/11/17 2010/11/18

COC Number

 U n i t s BLANK-KOH-M0061 RDL RUN RUN RUN RUN RDL QC Batch

1-M0061 1-M0061 2-M0061 3-M0061

Lab-Dup

Volume ml 130 1 870 870 870 1 2340672

Hexavalent Chromium (Cr 6+) ug 0.07 0.06 11 11 2.9 1.2 0.4 2340666

RDL = Reportable Detection Limit

QC Batch = Quality Control Batch

Page 2 of 6
BT Environmental Consulting

Maxxam Job #: B0G8054 Client Project #: 10-3990.02

Report Date: 2010/12/06 Project name: JM WATERVILLE

Test Summary

Maxxam ID HX9437 Collected 2010/11/18

Sample ID BLANK-H2O-M26A Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/11/22

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Hydrogen Halides in H2SO4 Imp. IC/SPEC 2345566 2010/11/30 2010/11/30 A_S

Volume of Sulfuric Acid Impinger 2345550 N/A 2010/11/30 A_S

Maxxam ID HX9438 Collected 2010/11/18

Sample ID BLANK-H2SO4-M26A Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/11/22

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Hydrogen Halides in H2SO4 Imp. IC/SPEC 2345566 2010/11/30 2010/11/30 A_S

Volume of Sulfuric Acid Impinger 2345550 N/A 2010/11/30 A_S

Maxxam ID HX9439 Collected 2010/11/17

Sample ID RUN 1-M26A-H2SO4 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/11/22

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Hydrogen Halides in H2SO4 Imp. IC/SPEC 2345566 2010/11/30 2010/11/30 A_S

Volume of Sulfuric Acid Impinger 2345550 N/A 2010/11/30 A_S

Maxxam ID HX9439 D u p Collected 2010/11/17

Sample ID RUN 1-M26A-H2SO4 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/11/22

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Hydrogen Halides in H2SO4 Imp. IC/SPEC 2345566 2010/11/30 2010/11/30 A_S

Maxxam ID HX9440 Collected 2010/11/18

Sample ID RUN 2-M26A-H2SO4 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/11/22

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Hydrogen Halides in H2SO4 Imp. IC/SPEC 2345566 2010/11/30 2010/11/30 A_S

Volume of Sulfuric Acid Impinger 2345550 N/A 2010/11/30 A_S

Maxxam ID HX9441 Collected 2010/11/18

Sample ID RUN 3-M26A-H2SO4 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/11/22

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Hydrogen Halides in H2SO4 Imp. IC/SPEC 2345566 2010/11/30 2010/11/30 A_S

Volume of Sulfuric Acid Impinger 2345550 N/A 2010/11/30 A_S

Page 3 of 6
BT Environmental Consulting

Maxxam Job #: B0G8054 Client Project #: 10-3990.02

Report Date: 2010/12/06 Project name: JM WATERVILLE

Test Summary

Maxxam ID HX9442 Collected 2010/11/18

Sample ID BLANK-H2O-M0061 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/11/22

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Hexavalent Chromium (M0061) IC/SPEC 2340666 2010/11/25 2010/11/26 LLE

Final Volume of KOH Impinger 2340672 N/A 2010/11/26 FMO

Maxxam ID HX9443 Collected 2010/11/18

Sample ID BLANK-KOH-M0061 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/11/22

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Hexavalent Chromium (M0061) IC/SPEC 2340666 2010/11/25 2010/11/26 LLE

Final Volume of KOH Impinger 2340672 N/A 2010/11/26 FMO

Maxxam ID HX9444 Collected 2010/11/17

Sample ID RUN 1-M0061 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/11/22

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Hexavalent Chromium (M0061) IC/SPEC 2340666 2010/11/25 2010/11/26 LLE

Final Volume of KOH Impinger 2340672 N/A 2010/11/26 FMO

Maxxam ID HX9444 D u p Collected 2010/11/17

Sample ID RUN 1-M0061 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/11/22

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Hexavalent Chromium (M0061) IC/SPEC 2340666 2010/11/25 2010/11/26 LLE

Maxxam ID HX9445 Collected 2010/11/17

Sample ID RUN 2-M0061 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/11/22

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Hexavalent Chromium (M0061) IC/SPEC 2340666 2010/11/25 2010/11/26 LLE

Final Volume of KOH Impinger 2340672 N/A 2010/11/26 FMO

Maxxam ID HX9446 Collected 2010/11/18

Sample ID RUN 3-M0061 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/11/22

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Hexavalent Chromium (M0061) IC/SPEC 2340666 2010/11/25 2010/11/26 LLE

Final Volume of KOH Impinger 2340672 N/A 2010/11/26 FMO

Page 4 of 6
BT Environmental Consulting

Maxxam Job #: B0G8054 Client Project #: 10-3990.02

Report Date: 2010/12/06 Project name: JM WATERVILLE

GENERAL COMMENTS

Results relate only to the items tested.

Page 5 of 6
BT Environmental Consulting

Attention: Barry Boulianne 

Client Project #: 10-3990.02

P.O. #:

Project name: JM WATERVILLE

Quality Assurance Report

Maxxam Job Number: GB0G8054

QA/QC Date

Batch Analyzed

Num Init QC Type Parameter yyyy/mm/dd Value %Recovery Units QC Limits

2340666 LLE Matrix Spike

(HX9444) Hexavalent Chromium (Cr 6+) 2010/11/26 116 % 80 - 120

Spiked Blank Hexavalent Chromium (Cr 6+) 2010/11/26 107 % 90 - 110

Method Blank Hexavalent Chromium (Cr 6+) 2010/11/26 ND, RDL=0.2 ug

RPD -

Sample/Sample

Dup Hexavalent Chromium (Cr 6+) 2010/11/26 0.5 % 20

2345566 A_S Matrix Spike

(HX9439) Hydrochloric Acid 2010/11/30 96 % 80 - 120

Hydrofluoric Acid 2010/11/30 99 % 80 - 120

Spiked Blank Hydrochloric Acid 2010/11/30 98 % 90 - 110

Hydrofluoric Acid 2010/11/30 101 % 90 - 110

Method Blank Hydrochloric Acid 2010/11/30 ND, RDL=200 ug

Hydrofluoric Acid 2010/11/30 ND, RDL=200 ug

RPD -

Sample/Sample

Dup Hydrochloric Acid 2010/11/30 NC % 20

Hydrofluoric Acid 2010/11/30 NC % 20

Matrix Spike: A sample to which a known amount of the analyte of interest has been added. Used to evaluate sample matrix interference.

Spiked Blank: A blank matrix to which a known amount of the analyte has been added. Used to evaluate analyte recovery.

Method Blank: A blank matrix containing all reagents used in the analytical procedure. Used to identify laboratory contamination.

NC (RPD): The RPD was not calculated. The level of analyte detected in the parent sample and its duplicate was not sufficiently significant to permit a

reliable calculation.

Page 6 of 6