Appendix 2. Data Validation Technical Memorandum

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Appendix 2. Data Validation Technical Memorandum"

Lewis Maxwell
5 years ago
Views:

1 Appendix 2 Data Validation Technical Memorandum

2 CE Schmidt, Ph.D. Environmental Consultant ON-SITE SOURCE RE-TESTING OF SELECTED SOURCES AT THE NATURE'S NEEDS COMPOST FACILITY HILLSBORO, OREGON TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Prepared for: Mr. Tom Card Environmental Management Consulting th Way SE Enumclaw, WA Prepared by: CE Schmidt, Ph.D Live Oak Road Red Bluff, California November Live Oak Road Red Bluff, CA (530) Fax CES# WashingtonCo.TM

3 CE Schmidt, Ph.D. Environmental Consultant TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Executive Summary I. Introduction... 1 II. Test Methodology... 6 III. Quality Control... 8 IV. Results and Discussions V. Summary Attachments A- Emissions Measurement Data Sheets B- Chain of Custody C- Lab Reports References 3

4 CE Schmidt, Ph.D. Environmental Consultant EXECUTIVE SUMMARY An on-site source assessment was conducted at the Nature's Needs compost facility located in Hillsboro, Oregon. The re-testing of key sources was conducted on October 15, The purpose of this testing effort was to conduct an assessment of odor emissions from significant air emissions processes at the facility using in-depth assessment technologies applied on a limited basis after significant biofilter redesign and rebuild. Samples were collected and analyzed for olfactory odor and selected fixed gases including methane and carbon dioxide. The sampling plan was executed by a team of professionals including Mr. Tom Card and Dr. CE Schmidt. The sampling included air emissions assessment using a regulatory approved area source emissions assessment approach, a regulatory approved analytical method for odor sampling and off site analysis, and a regulatory approved analytical method for fixed gas sampling and off site analysis. The quality control data for all the species investigated (odor, methane, carbon dioxide, and helium trace gas for estimating advective biofilter flow), were found acceptable except for the trace gas helium when significant dilution of flux chamber gas was evident as with the biofilter samples. After reviewing the data, a laboratory error was discovered where the five biofilter flux samples reported less dilution of trace as indicating a low bias in the estimate of biofilter flow and thus a very low estimate of odor emissions from the biofilter units. The laboratory error effectively caused the high advective flow estimates to be insensitive and thus rendering a low bias estimate of odor flux from these key sources. It is recommended that the measured advective flow not be used in the site odor emissions inventory for the Phase I and Phase II biofilters tested, and that the best engineering estimate of flow into the biofilter be used for the site odor emissions estimate. An acceptable and regulatory approved method for the flow estimate can be realized by using the biofilter fan curve data and site operating conditions, prorated on a surface area basis generating an advective flow into the chamber for these odor flux estimates. Since the biofilters have recently been revised and the operating conditions of the biofilters are well documented, using the engineering estimates from the fan curve data, and bench-marking this estimate by comparing these data to the first round of advective flow measurements using the tracer dilution method, will provide a credible estimate of advective flow from the biofilter units and thus a credible estimate of odor flux from the biofilter units. The primary goal of the program was to identify the air emissions of odor from key, selected locations on unit processes of interest on site after unit process redesign and rebuild. All of the source locations identified in the revised work plan for the retest activity were tested as per the technical approach. This Technical Memorandum documents the testing activities, provides the quality assurance evaluation of the data, reports the laboratory data, and reports the calculated 4

5 CE Schmidt, Ph.D. Environmental Consultant flux for the sources evaluated. The flux data can be used, along with site metric information, to generate emission factors for the sources tested. Emission factor data are reported elsewhere. 5

6 CE Schmidt, Ph.D. Environmental Consultant I. INTRODUCTION The compost test included a 'detailed screening' evaluation focusing on all of selected sources located on the Nature's Need compost site. The scope of work executed is provided in Table 1. A total of 14 flux measurements including multiple sample collection and analytical methods were performed along with two (2) QC samples (one sample set replicate and one sample set media blank sample). The species tested included olfactory odor, and fixed gases (methane, carbon dioxide) and helium trace gas which is used to determine advective flow from certain area sources tested. The total sample count for the odor sample analysis and fixed gas analysis was 14 including QC samples. Samples were collected at each location for ASTM E /EN13725 for odor, and ASTM D for fixed gases and helium (trace gas). The list of area sources tested on side is provided below. Day 1 Fresh Built Windrow, North Pad III 1 Pile #4 Phase II Biofilter II 20 Pile #22, #23 Phase II Biofilter III Pile #24, #25, #26 Phase II ASP II 20 Pile #23 Phase I ASP I 4 Pile #4 Phase I Biofilter I 1 to 5 Pile #3, #4, #5 Phase I Biofilter I 5 to 7? Phase III Windrow Pre Mix III 1 Pile #3 Phase III Fresh Mixed III 1, 3 hrs Pile #3 Phase I Biofilter I 7 to 11 Pile #11, #12, #13 Phase II Biofilter II 26 to 27 Pile #14, #15 Phase II Biofilter II 26 to 27 Pile #14, #15 Phase III Post Mix Compost III 1 Pile #3 Media Blank NA NA NA The area source emission measurements were made by using the USEPA surface emission isolation flux chamber technology (diffusive flow sources), and the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) modified USEPA surface emissions isolation flux chamber technology (advetive flow sources). This technology is used to directly measure the air emissions from selected area sources as identified above and is described as a continuously stirred tank reactor that uses a 6

7 CE Schmidt, Ph.D. Environmental Consultant sweep gas (pure air) added to the chamber at a fixed rate, the chamber is equilibrated, and after equilibration, air samples are collected from the flux chamber. The USEPA technology was modified and tested for use with high advective flow sources such as those found at compost sites. A trace gas is added to the sweep air, and advective flow is determined by the recovery of the trace gas from the chamber. This technology is a tested, validated, documented, and regulatory approved technology for assessing air emissions from area sources. The data obtained from this type of testing are 'flux' data, which express mass transfer per time per a given surface area. These data are considered an engineering unit, and can be used to estimate emissions (mass per time) from those areas tested. The analytical schedule for the air emissions testing is described below. Analyte Method Sample Container Methane, Carbon Dioxide, ASTM D or 3 liter canister Helium Odor Thresholds ASTM E /EN liter tedlar bag The technical effort for the program included: Site inspection and information collection activity, Preparation of field test equipment, Field testing including the collection of flux samples, Sample chain-of-custody/qc sample collection, Sample shipping, Sample analysis;, Laboratory reporting, and Qualification and reporting of results. The results of the testing are reported per sample location and by analytical method. The lab data are reported in concentration units. These data, along with sweep air flow rate/advective flow into the flux chamber per sample location, were used to calculate 'flux' of study compounds per test location. 7

8 CE Schmidt, Ph.D. Environmental Consultant II. TEST METHODOLOGY Testing for surface flux was conducted using the USEPA flux chamber technology (diffusive flow sources- USEPA. Radian Corporation, February 1986) or the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) modified USEPA flux chamber technology for (advective flow sources). Flux chamber sampling was performed on compost and biofilter surfaces as per the testing protocol. The operation of the surface flux chamber is given below: 1) Flux chamber, sweep air, sample collection equipment, and field documents were located onsite. A modified flux chamber with a 6" stack was used for the assessment of advective flow sources; the standard USEPA flux chamber technology was used for non-advective flow sources. 2) The site information, location information, equipment information, date, and proposed time of testing were documented on the Emissions Measurement Field Data Sheet. 3) The exact test location was selected and placed on the test surface sealing the chamber to the source by installing the chamber into the source when appropriate. The chamber was 'sealed' preventing air flow intrusion into the chamber using a flange-type collar for the covered pile test locations. 4) The sweep air flow rate (ultra high purity air or ultra high purity air with a trace gas as additive- 10% helium) was initiated and the rotometer, which stabilizes the flow rate, was set at 5.0 liters per minute. A constant sweep air flow rate was maintained throughout the measurement for each sampling location. 5) Flux chamber data were recorded every residence interval (6 minutes) for five intervals, or 30 minutes with 5 liters per minute added to the chamber. 6) At steady-state (assumed to be greater than 5 residence intervals), sample collection was performed by interfacing the sample container (bag and the canister) to the purged, sample line and filling the sample container/media with sample gas following sample collection protocols as per the workplan. 7) After sample collection the sample collection information was documented on the data sheet. 8) After sampling, the flux measurement was discontinued by shutting off the sweep air, removing the chamber, and securing the equipment. The chamber was cleaned by dry wipe with a clean paper towel and the sample lines were purged with UHP air. 8

9 CE Schmidt, Ph.D. Environmental Consultant 9) Sampling locations were recorded on the field data sheet. The equipment was then relocated to the next test location and steps 1) through 8) were repeated. 9

10 CE Schmidt, Ph.D. Environmental Consultant III. QUALITY CONTROL Control procedures that were used to assure that data of sufficient quality resulted from the detailed screening APA are described below. The application and frequency of these procedures were developed to meet the program data quality objectives as described in the Sampling Plan dated March 7, 2013, prepared by Tom Card, CE Schmidt, and chuck McGinley. Field Documentation -- A field notebook containing data forms, including sample chain-of-custody (COC) forms, was maintained for the testing program. Attachment A contains the Emission Measurement Data Sheets. Chain-of-Custody -- COC forms were not used for field data collection. Field data were recorded on the Chain-of-Custody forms provided in Attachment B. ASTM E-679/EN13725 for Olfactory Odor Field Blank Sample One field blank sample set (O-114) was collected by filling a tedlar bag sample with high purity air and submitting the sample blind for analysis. The odor concentration for sample O-114 was 50 D/T (dilution to threshold value). These data indicate acceptable method performance. Replicate Sample- Second tedlar bag samples were collected from a flux chamber test and submitted for analysis as replicate samples. One sample replicate sample was collected: O-111 and O-112, with a relative percent difference (RPD) of 21. The replicate sample criteria is 50 RPD. These data indicate acceptable method performance. ASTM Method D-1945 for Fixed Gases Laboratory Control Spike (LCS) Recovery One laboratory control spike sample was analyzed using a standard containing carbon dioxide and methane. Both spike compounds were reported within the QC criteria of 70%-to-130%. The LCS for carbon dioxide was 87%, and the LCS for methane was 76%. These data indicate acceptable method performance. Laboratory Control Duplicate (LCD) QC Sample The laboratory control samples was analyzed in duplicate and the duplicate analysis was found within the precision criteria of 25 RPD. The LCD for carbon dioxide was 92%, and the LCD for methane was 76%.These data indicate acceptable method performance. Laboratory Method Blank One laboratory method blank sample was analyzed and carbon dioxide, methane and helium were all reported at or below the method detection limits as follows: carbon dioxide 100 ppmv, methane 0.1 ppmv, and helium 300 ppmv. These data indicate acceptable method performance Live Oak Road Red Bluff, CA (530) Fax CES# WashingtonCo.TM

11 CE Schmidt, Ph.D. Environmental Consultant Media Sample Blank One media blank sample (G-114) was collected by filling a canister samples with high purity air and submitting the sample blind for analysis. No compounds were detected in the blank sample above the stated method detection limits for the fixed gas species. These data indicate acceptable method performance. Note that the blank samples had helium trace gas, and this sample served as the field recovery sample for helium. The recovery of the helium standard was 101%. These data indicate acceptable method performance. Field Replicate QC Sample One field replicate sample was collected and analyzed; G-111/G-112. The precision criteria for field replicate samples is 50 RPD. The sample/replicate pair for carbon dioxide showed 0.17 RPD and for methane showed 11 RPD. These data indicate acceptable method performance. The sample/replicate pair for helium indicated a method problem with one sample showing a detect of 30.01% and the other showed a non-detection at These data indicate acceptable method performance for methane and carbon dioxide, but unacceptable performance for the helium analysis Live Oak Road Red Bluff, CA (530) Fax CES# WashingtonCo.TM

12 CE Schmidt, Ph.D. Environmental Consultant IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS A summary of the field sample collection activities is provided in Table 1. All field data for the on site surface flux chamber testing for temperature, flow rate estimate, along with sample identification and sample ID data are presented in Table 1. In addition, the helium tracer data in the flux chamber are reported and used to calculate advective flow into the flux chamber where appropriate. Reduced surface flux chamber data for odor and fixed gases are provided in Table 2. These flux data include measured advective flow rate in the flux calculation for samples where helium trace gas was used in the testing. Surface flux data are reported for the study species odor and fixed gas compounds. Flux units are reported in units of Dilution-to-Threshold/m2,min-1 for odor, and mg/m2,min-1 for fixed gases. Note that odor is reported in dilution-to-threshold units, and is treated like concentration in the flux rate calculation; (D/T)/m2,min-1. Surface flux data for a surface area source are calculated using measured target compound concentrations (D/T or mg/m3) and flux chamber operating parameter data (sweep air flow rate of 5.0 liters per minute [or m3/min] plus advective flow [m3/min], surface area of 0.13 square meters [m 2 ]). The site emissions can be calculated by multiplying the flux by the surface area of the source. The flux is calculated from the sweep air flow rate Q (cubic meters per minute [m 3 /min]), the species concentration Yi (micrograms per cubic meter [ug/m 3 )], and exposure to the chamber surface area A (square meters [m 2 ]), as follows: Fi = (Q) (Yi) / (A) Emission rate of from a test surface or operating unit can be calculated by multiplying unit or average flux data per compound by surface area and reported as a function of area source. Advective flow into the flux chamber per location was measured by using helium tracer gas in the flux chamber sweep air. The added helium concentration was approximately 10%, and the advective flow caused a dilution of the tracer gas. The recovery of the known tracer by analytical method was within the laboratory accuracy QC limits for the method indicating acceptable performance. Note that two fixed gas samples for the helium analysis appear to have been switched, samples G-101 and G-111. Fortunately, sample O-101 did not have helium added where sample O-111 did. As such, and with confirmation of by the laboratory, the lab data have been corrected in Table 2, and the correction has been footnoted. The quality control data for all the species investigated (odor, methane, carbon dioxide, and Live Oak Road Red Bluff, CA (530) Fax CES# WashingtonCo.TM

13 CE Schmidt, Ph.D. Environmental Consultant helium trace gas for estimating advective biofilter flow), were found acceptable except for the trace gas helium when significant dilution of flux chamber gas was evident as with the biofilter samples. After reviewing the data, a laboratory error was discovered where the five biofilter flux samples reported less dilution of trace indicating a low bias in the estimate of biofilter flow and thus a very low estimate of odor emissions from the biofilter units. The laboratory error effectively caused the high advective flow estimates (low recovered or diluted helium concentration) to be insensitive and thus rendering a low bias estimate of odor flux from these key sources. It is recommended that the measured advective flow not be used in the site odor emissions inventory for the Phase I and Phase II biofilters tested, and that the best engineering estimate of flow into the biofilter be used for the site odor emissions estimate. An acceptable and regulatory approved method for the flow estimate can be realized by using the biofilter fan curve data and site operating conditions, prorated on a surface area basis generating an advective flow into the chamber for these odor flux estimates. Since the biofilters have recently been rebuilt and have new media and uniform air flow, and the operating conditions of the biofilters are well documented, using the engineering estimates from the fan curve data, and benchmarking this estimate by comparing these data to the first round of advective flow measurements using the tracer dilution method, will provide a credible estimate of advective flow from the biofilter units and thus a credible estimate of odor flux from the biofilter units. The estimates provided in Table 2 are reported as provided by the laboratory, and are footnoted as per this discussion and identified as rejected data. It is unfortunate that this laboratory error occurred, however a credible estimate of odor flux using the proposed alternative approach for estimating advective biofilter flow and the measured odor data from the biofilters can be obtained from this data set Live Oak Road Red Bluff, CA (530) Fax CES# WashingtonCo.TM

14 CE Schmidt, Ph.D. Environmental Consultant V. SUMMARY An intensive odor source re-testing program was performed on the Nature's Needs compost facility. Testing was conducted for the purpose of determining the fugitive air emissions of odor and fixed gas compounds from selected area sources on the compost facility after a rebuilding of the biofliters. The following is a summary of activities and results associated with this objective: Surface flux of study compounds were measured at 12 test locations (plus 2 QC samples) on selected sources at Nature's Needs compost facility. Testing was conducted using the USEPA flux chamber technology, or the SCAQMD Modified USEPA recommended surface flux chamber technology as appropriate. This technology quantitatively measures flux at the test surface of study compounds. Field and laboratory quality control data generally indicated acceptable data quality for the methods used. System blank levels were acceptable and precision between replicate field samples most of the species was acceptable. One replicate sample for helium analysis exceeded the quality control limits, which indicated a sample analysis limitation. The odor sample analysis met all QC criteria and are considered acceptable for the intended data use. A lab error was detected with resulted in a low bias for the high advective flow sources. An alternative suggestion was provided in calculating odor flux for the biofilter sources. Rejected data have been properly reported and flagged. The flux data can be used to estimate compound emissions from the tested sources using site metric information such as surface area generating emission factors Live Oak Road Red Bluff, CA (530) Fax CES# WashingtonCo.TM

15 CE Schmidt, Ph.D. Environmental Consultant REFERENCES USEPA "Measurement of Gaseous Emission Rates From Land Surfaces Using an Emission Isolation Flux Chamber, Users Guide." EPA Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory, Las Vegas, Nevada, EPA Contract No , Work Assignment No. 18, Radian Corporation, February NTIS # PB Tom Card, CE Schmidt, C McGinley, March 7, 2013, "Nature's Needs Composting Site Odor Assessment Program, Sampling Plan, Event 1 (1 of 6), Prepared for Washington County Solid Waste & Recycling, Oregon Live Oak Road Red Bluff, CA (530) Fax CES# WashingtonCo.TM

16 CE Schmidt, Ph.D. Environmental Consultant ATTACHMENT A EMISSION MEASUREMENT DATA SHEETS Live Oak Road Red Bluff, CA (530) Fax CES# WashingtonCo.TM

29 CE Schmidt, Ph.D. Environmental Consultant ATTACHMENT B CHAIN OF CUSTODY Live Oak Road Red Bluff, CA (530) Fax CES# WashingtonCo.TM

32 CE Schmidt, Ph.D. Environmental Consultant ATTACHMENT C LABORATORY REPORTS Live Oak Road Red Bluff, CA (530) Fax CES# WashingtonCo.TM

33 St. Croix Sensory, Inc. Environmental Management Consulting Washington County Solid Waste and Recycling Odor Evaluation Report Report No /16/13 Data Release Authorization: Reviewed and Approved: Natasha Satre Laboratory Associate Charles M. McGinley, P.E. Technical Director St. Croix Sensory is a laboratory dedicated to practicing state-of-the-art sensory evaluation and to advancing the science of sensory perception. We are a family owned and operated business providing our clients with personal customer service, flexible scheduling, timely results. Our focus is to provide the best professional services available to help make your project or product a success Stillwater Boulevard North Stillwater, Minnesota U.S.A. Tel: Fax: stcroix@fivesenses.com

34 St. Croix Sensory, Inc. Odor Evaluation Report Client: Environmental Management Consulting Project: Washington County Solid Waste and Recycling Report No.: Evaluation Date: 10/16/13 ASTM E679 & EN13725 ASTM E544 PERSISTENCY CHARACTERIZATION # Field No. Sample Description Detection Threshold Recognition Threshold Intensity Dose-Response Slope Hedonic Tone Principal Odor Descriptors Comments 1 O Sample descriptions were not provided. 2 O Earthy, Offensive, Chemical 3 O Earthy, Chemical, Medicinal, Offensive 4 O O O Earthy, Offensive, Chemical, Floral 7 O Earthy, Chemical, Offensive, Floral 8 O-108 2,600 1,400 9 O-109 1,700 1, O Earthy, Chemical, Offensive 1150 Stillwater Blvd N, Stillwater, MN U.S.A. Tel: Fax: stcroix@fivesenses.com Web:

35 St. Croix Sensory, Inc. Odor Evaluation Report Client: Environmental Management Consulting Report No.: Project: shington County Solid Waste and Recyc Evaluation Date: 10/16/13 ASTM E679 & EN13725 ASTM E544 PERSISTENCY CHARACTERIZATION # Field No. Sample Description Detection Threshold Recognition Threshold Intensity Dose-Response Slope Hedonic Tone Principal Odor Descriptors Comments 11 O Earthy, Medicinal, Chemical, Offensive 12 O O-113 2,100 1, O Stillwater Blvd N, Stillwater, MN U.S.A. Tel: Fax: stcroix@fivesenses.com Web:

36 St. Croix Sensory, Inc. Odor Evaluation Report Client: Environmental Management Consulting O-102 Field No.: Report No.: Project: Washington County Solid Waste and Recycling Description: Evaluation Date: 10/16/13 Sensation Descriptor Graph Warm Odor Descriptor Graph Floral Burning Tingling Medicinal Fruity Pungent Itching Chemical Vegetable Sharp Metallic Fishy Earthy Cool Average Relative Strength KEY Strong Offensive Average Relative Strength Warm Floral 0.0 Tingling 0.2 Fruity Faint Itching 0.2 Vegetable Metallic 0.0 Earthy 2.6 Cool 0.6 Offensive 1.2 Sharp 0.2 Fishy 0.0 Pungent 1.2 Chemical 0.8 Relative Strength Burning 0.2 Medicinal Stillwater Blvd N, Stillwater, MN U.S.A. Tel: Fax: stcroix@fivesenses.com Web:

37 St. Croix Sensory, Inc. Client: Environmental Management Consulting O-102 Project: Washington County Solid Waste and Recycling Odor Evaluation Report Field No.: Report No.: Description: Evaluation Date: 10/16/13 % of Assessors I***********I***********I***********I***********I 100% Varnish ********** Solvent ********** Offensive ******************* Rancid ********** Decay ******************* Earthy ***************************** Musty ************************************** Stale ********** Peat-like ********** Swampy ******************* Smoky ********** 1150 Stillwater Blvd N, Stillwater, MN U.S.A. Tel: Fax: stcroix@fivesenses.com Web:

38 "Perceived Intensity" Response (Log of Intensity as PPM Butanol) "Perceived Intensity" Response (Log of Intensity as PPM Butanol) St. Croix Sensory, Inc. Odor Evaluation Report Client: Environmental Management Consulting O-102 Field No.: Report No.: Project: Washington County Solid Waste and Recycling Description: Evaluation Date: 10/16/ Dose-Response 3.0 Dose-Response as Power Law Log I = n Log C + Log k I = Odor Intensity as n-butanol concentration C = Dilution Ratio of the Odor Sample Presentation k and n are constants for the specific odor sample Log I = n' Log (RT/C) + Log k' I = Odor Intensity as n-butanol concentration RT = Recognition Threshold of the Odor Sample C = Dilution Ratio of the Odor Sample Presentation k' and n' are constants for the specific odor sample Dose (Log of Dilution Ratio) Odor Concentration (Log of RT/Dilution Ratio) 1150 Stillwater Blvd N, Stillwater, MN U.S.A. Tel: Fax: stcroix@fivesenses.com Web:

39 St. Croix Sensory, Inc. Odor Evaluation Report Client: Environmental Management Consulting O-103 Field No.: Report No.: Project: Washington County Solid Waste and Recycling Description: Evaluation Date: 10/16/13 Sensation Descriptor Graph Warm Odor Descriptor Graph Floral Burning Tingling Medicinal Fruity Pungent Itching Chemical Vegetable Sharp Metallic Fishy Earthy Cool Average Relative Strength KEY Strong Offensive Average Relative Strength Warm Floral 0.0 Tingling 0.2 Fruity Faint Itching 0.0 Vegetable Metallic 0.0 Earthy 1.6 Cool 0.4 Offensive 0.2 Sharp 0.4 Fishy 0.0 Pungent 0.4 Chemical 0.4 Relative Strength Burning 0.0 Medicinal Stillwater Blvd N, Stillwater, MN U.S.A. Tel: Fax: stcroix@fivesenses.com Web:

40 St. Croix Sensory, Inc. Client: Environmental Management Consulting O-103 Project: Washington County Solid Waste and Recycling Odor Evaluation Report Field No.: Report No.: Description: Evaluation Date: 10/16/13 % of Assessors I***********I***********I***********I***********I 100% Medicinal ********** Chemical ********** Earthy ******************* Mold ********** Musty ******************* Stale ********** Swampy ********** Woody ********** Smoky ********** 1150 Stillwater Blvd N, Stillwater, MN U.S.A. Tel: Fax: stcroix@fivesenses.com Web:

41 "Perceived Intensity" Response (Log of Intensity as PPM Butanol) "Perceived Intensity" Response (Log of Intensity as PPM Butanol) St. Croix Sensory, Inc. Odor Evaluation Report Client: Environmental Management Consulting O-103 Field No.: Report No.: Project: Washington County Solid Waste and Recycling Description: Evaluation Date: 10/16/ Dose-Response 3.0 Dose-Response as Power Law Log I = n Log C + Log k I = Odor Intensity as n-butanol concentration C = Dilution Ratio of the Odor Sample Presentation k and n are constants for the specific odor sample Log I = n' Log (RT/C) + Log k' I = Odor Intensity as n-butanol concentration RT = Recognition Threshold of the Odor Sample C = Dilution Ratio of the Odor Sample Presentation k' and n' are constants for the specific odor sample Dose (Log of Dilution Ratio) Odor Concentration (Log of RT/Dilution Ratio) 1150 Stillwater Blvd N, Stillwater, MN U.S.A. Tel: Fax: stcroix@fivesenses.com Web:

42 St. Croix Sensory, Inc. Odor Evaluation Report Client: Environmental Management Consulting O-106 Field No.: Report No.: Project: Washington County Solid Waste and Recycling Description: Evaluation Date: 10/16/13 Sensation Descriptor Graph Warm Odor Descriptor Graph Floral Burning Tingling Medicinal Fruity Pungent Itching Chemical Vegetable Sharp Metallic Fishy Earthy Cool Average Relative Strength KEY Strong Offensive Average Relative Strength Warm Floral 0.4 Tingling 0.0 Fruity Faint Itching 0.4 Vegetable Metallic 0.0 Earthy 2.6 Cool 0.4 Offensive 1.4 Sharp 0.4 Fishy 0.0 Pungent 1.4 Chemical 1.0 Relative Strength Burning 0.0 Medicinal Stillwater Blvd N, Stillwater, MN U.S.A. Tel: Fax: stcroix@fivesenses.com Web:

43 St. Croix Sensory, Inc. Client: Environmental Management Consulting O-106 Project: Washington County Solid Waste and Recycling Odor Evaluation Report Field No.: Report No.: Description: Evaluation Date: 10/16/13 % of Assessors I***********I***********I***********I***********I 100% Herbal ********** Cleaning fluid ********** Varnish ********** Offensive ******************* Rancid ********** Decay ******************* Earthy ***************************** Mold ********** Musty ***************************** Stale ********** Ashes ********** Peat-like ********** Grassy ********** Smoky ******************* 1150 Stillwater Blvd N, Stillwater, MN U.S.A. Tel: Fax: stcroix@fivesenses.com Web:

44 "Perceived Intensity" Response (Log of Intensity as PPM Butanol) "Perceived Intensity" Response (Log of Intensity as PPM Butanol) St. Croix Sensory, Inc. Odor Evaluation Report Client: Environmental Management Consulting O-106 Field No.: Report No.: Project: Washington County Solid Waste and Recycling Description: Evaluation Date: 10/16/ Dose-Response 3.0 Dose-Response as Power Law Log I = n Log C + Log k I = Odor Intensity as n-butanol concentration C = Dilution Ratio of the Odor Sample Presentation k and n are constants for the specific odor sample Log I = n' Log (RT/C) + Log k' I = Odor Intensity as n-butanol concentration RT = Recognition Threshold of the Odor Sample C = Dilution Ratio of the Odor Sample Presentation k' and n' are constants for the specific odor sample Dose (Log of Dilution Ratio) Odor Concentration (Log of RT/Dilution Ratio) 1150 Stillwater Blvd N, Stillwater, MN U.S.A. Tel: Fax: stcroix@fivesenses.com Web:

45 St. Croix Sensory, Inc. Odor Evaluation Report Client: Environmental Management Consulting O-107 Field No.: Report No.: Project: Washington County Solid Waste and Recycling Description: Evaluation Date: 10/16/13 Sensation Descriptor Graph Warm Odor Descriptor Graph Floral Burning Tingling Medicinal Fruity Pungent Itching Chemical Vegetable Sharp Metallic Fishy Earthy Cool Average Relative Strength KEY Strong Offensive Average Relative Strength Warm Floral 0.6 Tingling 0.6 Fruity Faint Itching 0.2 Vegetable Metallic 0.0 Earthy 2.4 Cool 0.4 Offensive 0.6 Sharp 0.4 Fishy 0.0 Pungent 0.8 Chemical 0.8 Relative Strength Burning 0.2 Medicinal Stillwater Blvd N, Stillwater, MN U.S.A. Tel: Fax: stcroix@fivesenses.com Web:

46 St. Croix Sensory, Inc. Client: Environmental Management Consulting O-107 Project: Washington County Solid Waste and Recycling Odor Evaluation Report Field No.: Report No.: Description: Evaluation Date: 10/16/13 % of Assessors I***********I***********I***********I***********I 100% Herbal ********** Chemical ********** Car exhaust ********** Solvent ********** Offensive ********** Decay ********** Earthy ***************************** Musty ********** Swampy ********** Pine ******************* Woody ********** Smoky ********** 1150 Stillwater Blvd N, Stillwater, MN U.S.A. Tel: Fax: stcroix@fivesenses.com Web:

47 "Perceived Intensity" Response (Log of Intensity as PPM Butanol) "Perceived Intensity" Response (Log of Intensity as PPM Butanol) St. Croix Sensory, Inc. Odor Evaluation Report Client: Environmental Management Consulting O-107 Field No.: Report No.: Project: Washington County Solid Waste and Recycling Description: Evaluation Date: 10/16/ Dose-Response 3.0 Dose-Response as Power Law Log I = n Log C + Log k I = Odor Intensity as n-butanol concentration C = Dilution Ratio of the Odor Sample Presentation k and n are constants for the specific odor sample Log I = n' Log (RT/C) + Log k' I = Odor Intensity as n-butanol concentration RT = Recognition Threshold of the Odor Sample C = Dilution Ratio of the Odor Sample Presentation k' and n' are constants for the specific odor sample Dose (Log of Dilution Ratio) Odor Concentration (Log of RT/Dilution Ratio) 1150 Stillwater Blvd N, Stillwater, MN U.S.A. Tel: Fax: stcroix@fivesenses.com Web:

48 St. Croix Sensory, Inc. Odor Evaluation Report Client: Environmental Management Consulting O-110 Field No.: Report No.: Project: Washington County Solid Waste and Recycling Description: Evaluation Date: 10/16/13 Sensation Descriptor Graph Warm Odor Descriptor Graph Floral Burning Tingling Medicinal Fruity Pungent Itching Chemical Vegetable Sharp Metallic Fishy Earthy Cool Average Relative Strength KEY Strong Offensive Average Relative Strength Warm Floral 0.0 Tingling 0.2 Fruity Faint Itching 0.0 Vegetable Metallic 0.2 Earthy 2.4 Cool 0.4 Offensive 0.4 Sharp 0.4 Fishy 0.0 Pungent 0.4 Chemical 0.6 Relative Strength Burning 0.0 Medicinal Stillwater Blvd N, Stillwater, MN U.S.A. Tel: Fax: stcroix@fivesenses.com Web:

49 St. Croix Sensory, Inc. Client: Environmental Management Consulting O-110 Project: Washington County Solid Waste and Recycling Odor Evaluation Report Field No.: Report No.: Description: Evaluation Date: 10/16/13 % of Assessors I***********I***********I***********I***********I 100% Chemical ********** Earthy ******************* Mold ********** Musty ******************* Stale ********** Woody ********** Smoky ***************************** 1150 Stillwater Blvd N, Stillwater, MN U.S.A. Tel: Fax: stcroix@fivesenses.com Web:

50 "Perceived Intensity" Response (Log of Intensity as PPM Butanol) "Perceived Intensity" Response (Log of Intensity as PPM Butanol) St. Croix Sensory, Inc. Odor Evaluation Report Client: Environmental Management Consulting O-110 Field No.: Report No.: Project: Washington County Solid Waste and Recycling Description: Evaluation Date: 10/16/ Dose-Response 3.0 Dose-Response as Power Law Log I = n Log C + Log k I = Odor Intensity as n-butanol concentration C = Dilution Ratio of the Odor Sample Presentation k and n are constants for the specific odor sample Log I = n' Log (RT/C) + Log k' I = Odor Intensity as n-butanol concentration RT = Recognition Threshold of the Odor Sample C = Dilution Ratio of the Odor Sample Presentation k' and n' are constants for the specific odor sample Dose (Log of Dilution Ratio) Odor Concentration (Log of RT/Dilution Ratio) 1150 Stillwater Blvd N, Stillwater, MN U.S.A. Tel: Fax: stcroix@fivesenses.com Web:

51 St. Croix Sensory, Inc. Odor Evaluation Report Client: Environmental Management Consulting O-111 Field No.: Report No.: Project: Washington County Solid Waste and Recycling Description: Evaluation Date: 10/16/13 Sensation Descriptor Graph Warm Odor Descriptor Graph Floral Burning Tingling Medicinal Fruity Pungent Itching Chemical Vegetable Sharp Metallic Fishy Earthy Cool Average Relative Strength KEY Strong Offensive Average Relative Strength Warm Floral 0.0 Tingling 0.2 Fruity Faint Itching 0.0 Vegetable Metallic 0.2 Earthy 2.0 Cool 0.2 Offensive 0.4 Sharp 0.4 Fishy 0.0 Pungent 0.6 Chemical 0.4 Relative Strength Burning 0.0 Medicinal Stillwater Blvd N, Stillwater, MN U.S.A. Tel: Fax: stcroix@fivesenses.com Web:

52 St. Croix Sensory, Inc. Client: Environmental Management Consulting O-111 Project: Washington County Solid Waste and Recycling Odor Evaluation Report Field No.: Report No.: Description: Evaluation Date: 10/16/13 % of Assessors I***********I***********I***********I***********I 100% Medicinal ********** Chemical ********** Earthy ******************* Mold ********** Musty ******************* Stale ******************* Woody ********** Smoky ********** 1150 Stillwater Blvd N, Stillwater, MN U.S.A. Tel: Fax: stcroix@fivesenses.com Web:

53 "Perceived Intensity" Response (Log of Intensity as PPM Butanol) "Perceived Intensity" Response (Log of Intensity as PPM Butanol) St. Croix Sensory, Inc. Odor Evaluation Report Client: Environmental Management Consulting O-111 Field No.: Report No.: Project: Washington County Solid Waste and Recycling Description: Evaluation Date: 10/16/ Dose-Response 3.0 Dose-Response as Power Law Log I = n Log C + Log k I = Odor Intensity as n-butanol concentration C = Dilution Ratio of the Odor Sample Presentation k and n are constants for the specific odor sample Log I = n' Log (RT/C) + Log k' I = Odor Intensity as n-butanol concentration RT = Recognition Threshold of the Odor Sample C = Dilution Ratio of the Odor Sample Presentation k' and n' are constants for the specific odor sample Dose (Log of Dilution Ratio) Odor Concentration (Log of RT/Dilution Ratio) 1150 Stillwater Blvd N, Stillwater, MN U.S.A. Tel: Fax: stcroix@fivesenses.com Web: