Minutes of the TAG Meeting Held Friday, August 21, 1998

Room 165A, Department of Environmental Protection
Fort Myers, Florida

Disposal of CCA-Treated Wood:Existing and Alternative Management Options

Agenda for TAG Meeting

1. Welcome
2. Introduction
3. Summary of Year 1 Results Solo-Gabriele/Townsend
4. Discussion of Final Technical Report
5. Year 2 Activities
        - Research Plan Solo-Gabriele
        - Results of Chemical Stain Tests Solo-Gabriele/Kormienko
        - Incineration of Wood Samples Solo-Gabriele/Calitu
        - TCLP/SPLP Townsend/Messick
6. Discussion
7. Adjourn

Present in Ft. Myers:

Phillip Barbaccia, Prog. Adm., Dept. of Environ. Protection, Waste Management, Ft. Myers, FL

Vandin Calitu, Graduate Student, University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL

Lee Casey, Chief of Environ. Compliance Div., Metro-Dade Dept. of Solid Waste, Miami, FL

Kenneth Cogan, Technical Representative, Hickson Corporation, Conley, GA

David Dee, Attorney, Landers & Parsons, Tallahassee, FL

Keith Drescher, Environmental Specialist, Florida Power and Light, West Palm Bch, FL

Bill Gay, Wood Preserving Group Manager, Langdale Forest Products Co., Valdosta, GA

Laura Comer, Department of Environmental Protection, Hazardous Waste, Ft. Myers, FL

Monika Kormienko, Graduate Student, University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL

William Krumbholz, Env. Mgr., Dept. of Environ. Protection , Solid Waste Div., Ft.Myers, FL

Chuck Masella, Department of Environmental Protection, Waste Cleanup, Ft. Myers, FL

Brian Messick, Graduate Student, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL

Michael Provenza, Environ. Health and Safety Manager, Robbins Manufacturing, Tampa, FL

Helena Solo-Gabriele, Assistant Professor, University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL

Donald Surrency, Manager of Plant and Sales, Koppers Industries Inc., Gainesville, FL

Timothy Townsend, Assistant Professor, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL

George Varn, Jr., Project Manager, Varn Wood Products, Hoboken, GA

Present Via Televideo:

John Schert, Exec. Director, Fl. Center for Solid and Haz. Waste Management, Gainesville, FL

Lisa Martin, Engineer II, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Tallahassee, FL


The meeting began at 10:00 am and ended at 1:00 p.m. A 15-minute break occurred from 11:00 to 11:15 am.

1. Introduction

All individuals present at the meeting introduced themselves. John Schert briefly described the functions of the Florida Center for Solid and Hazardous Waste Management.

2. Summary of Year 1 Results

Dr. Helena Solo-Gabriele summarized the results from year 1. The year 1 study was separated into two phases. Phase I, the inventory phase, was designed to determine the characteristics of the wood treatment industry in Florida, estimate treated wood production and disposal quantities, and identify ultimate disposal reservoirs for CCA-treated wood waste. Phase II, alternative management options, focused on waste minimization, reuse, recycling, and ultimate disposal alternatives. The primary conclusions from the first year study were: 1) disposal quantities of CCA treated wood will increase significantly in the near future, 2) the wood waste stream will be more difficult to manage, 3) the primary disposal pathway is through the Construction and Demolition (C&D) waste stream, 4) considerable amounts of CCA-treated wood are burned at cogeneration facilities, and 5) current disposal practices will not be acceptable in the near future. Recommendations from the first year project include promoting research on alternative chemical preservatives, promote reuse and recycling, and improve disposal end management by implementing sorting methods that can separate treated from untreated wood and by identifying new options for ultimate disposal.

Comment: David Dee requested a copy of the presentation overheads. Dr. Helena Solo-Gabriele mentioned that copies would be mailed to TAG members along with the minutes of the meeting.

Question: John Schert asked about the sale of CCA treated wood at the 0.25 pcf and 0.4 pcf retention levels. He noticed that Loews Hardware no longer carries 0.25 pcf. Dr. Helena Solo-Gabriele responded by stating that wood treated at the 0.25 pcf retention level is for above ground applications whereas wood treated at higher retention levels is used for applications where ground contact and contact with salt water is likely. Perhaps the lower retention level was dropped to simplify the store's inventory since wood treated at the 0.4 pcf retention level can also be used for applications that require only 0.25 pcf.

Question: David Dee asked about the potential impacts of CCA-treated wood in C&D landfills. Dr. Townsend mentioned that since treated wood represents such a small fraction of the total amount disposed at C&D landfills, the impacts of CCA-treated wood should be minimal. Dr. Townsend also mentioned that the bond between the wood and the CCA chemical might limit metal leaching.

Question: John Schert asked whether leaching would preferentially occur under aerobic or anaerobic conditions. He mentioned that he was surprised to find that a wood pole he observed was relatively well preserved below the ground but was significantly deteriorated at the ground line. Ken Cogan responded by stating that most leaching occurs at the ground line where water, nutrients, and organisms can readily degrade wood. Below the ground line, less degradation is observed.

Question: John Schert asked whether ground line treatment of wood poles was a common practice. Don Surrency stated that it is very common for utility poles.

3. Research Plan for Year 2

Dr. Helena Solo-Gabriele presented the research plan for the year 2 project titled, "Disposal of CCA-Treated Wood: An Evaluation of Existing and Alternative Management Options." The research focuses on the following three objectives: 1) determine leaching characteristics of CCA-treated wood ash, 2) examine sorting technologies, and 3) evaluate options for Florida. Ash leaching studies will focus on TCLP and SPLP tests as well as the extraction of metals with various other solvents. The sorting work will focus on the use of chemical stains and energy dispersive x-ray fluorescence (EDX) to distinguish between treated and untreated wood. The third objective will focus on identifying practical conditions that limit the implementation of ash leaching and sorting technologies. The results of the study may open-the-door for recycling the CCA chemical, commercialization of sorting technologies aimed at the disposal sector, and can be used to support policy and regulations aimed at handling treated wood.

Question: Chuck Masella asked for more details concerning how the metals content in CCA-treated wood ash was determined. Dr. Helena Solo-Gabriele mentioned that the data presented was obtained from a literature review. The CCA-treated wood data corresponded to a 0.25 pcf retention level. The wood was burned in the laboratory.

4. Results to Date

Dr. Helena Solo-Gabriele presented: the results of the chemical stain tests, EDX work with ASOMA, and sample preparation for leaching studies. Staining experiments included three stains and several sample types including whole pieces of wood, shredded wood, shredded wood mixtures, and field samples from C&D recycling facilities. Results show that stains work well for whole pieces and laboratory generated shredded wood. Stains performed well for 5 of the 7 field samples tested. Stains did not perform well for field samples that contained a large amount of dirt and fibrous material.

Samples have been sent to ASOMA headquarters for a preliminary analysis. Results indicate that the ASOMA model 400 is capable of distinguishing between treated and untreated wood for whole pieces and unmixed shredded wood. The model 400 was also capable of detecting treated wood in a 50% mixture of treated and untreated wood; however, treated wood was not detected when treated wood represented 10% of the mixture. The result from a field sample of C&D recycled wood waste was close to the detection limit of the instrument.

The sample preparation process for ash leaching studies was presented. Wood samples were obtained from a local retail store, shredded, and incinerated in an industrial furnace owned by Florida Power and Light. The steps taken during the incineration process were presented in detail. Initial results from one leaching experiment, total recoverable metals - EPA3050B, were also presented.

Comment: Ken Cogan mentioned that untreated wood is a more correct term than clean wood.

5. TCLP and SPLP

Dr. Timothy Townsend described the regulatory framework for the TCLP and SPLP tests and introduced the work plan for the University of Florida research team. Brian Messick followed by explaining the details of the Toxicity Characteristics Leaching Procedure (TCLP) and Synthetic Precipitation Leaching Procedure (SPLP). He presented federal regulatory limits for a hazardous designation of a waste based on TCLP tests. He also presented Florida's Groundwater Guidance Concentrations.

6. Demonstration of Stain Performance

Monika Kormienko demonstrated the performance of the three stains in distinguishing between treated and untreated wood. Field samples as well as laboratory shredded mixed samples were stained during the demonstration.

Comments: Chuck Masella suggested the addition of heat or fluorescent dyes to the wood may improve the staining process. David Dee and Lee Casey mentioned that the staining process may not be practical in field applications due to the large volume of material that is processed at wood sorting and burning facilities. David Dee mentioned that the large volume of wood that is processed would make it difficult to obtain a representative grab sample. Phil Barbaccia and Don Surrency mentioned that back-end treatment of the ash might be easier. George Varn mentioned that back-end treatment of the ash might be difficult due to the metal alloy that may be formed. Keith Drescher suggested that an economic analysis should be performed. Dr. Helena Solo-Gabriele mentioned that subsequent work this year would also focus on a scanning system available through ASOMA. David Dee considered that a scanning system might be more practical for large-scale field operations.

7. Suggestions for Next Year's Research

Dr. Helena Solo-Gabriele requested suggestions for next year's research project. She mentioned that demonstration projects would be considered to evaluate the practicality of the stain and EDX technology in the field.

8. Next TAG Meeting

The next TAG meeting has been scheduled for Friday December 11, 1998 in Gainesville, Florida.