1 15 5 https://www.nal.usda.gov/exhibits/speccoll/files/original/5637dd1ac22e588bda025746e2bbba4b.pdf a287c0e2e490431717be21a0baca8bfb PDF Text Text Item D Number °2264 Author Smith R - Corporate Author Report/Article Title Typescript: Chemical Data on Air Samples Collected in and near the Binghamton State Office Building (February, March 1985) Before and After the HVAC System is Returned to Normal, July 17,1985 Journal/Book Title Year 000 ° Month/Day Color Number of biages D 19 Descriptor! Notes Thursday, September 20, 2001 Page 2264 of 2293 �CHEMICAL DATA ON AIR SAMPLES COLLECTED IN AND NEAR THE BINGHAMTON STATE OFFICE BUILDING (FEBRUARY, MARCH 1985) BEFORE AND AFTER THE HVAC SYSTEM IS RETURNED TO NORMAL R. Smith, P. O'Keefe, K. Aldous, D. Hilker, G. Eadon July 17, 1985 Wadsworth Center for Laboratories and Research New York State Department of Health Albany, New York 12201 �INTRODUCTION Air samples were collected and analyzed for chlorinated dibenzofurans (CDFs), chlorinated dibenzodioxins (CDDs) and chlorinated biphenylenes (CBPs) to study the effect of BSOB IIVAC system operating mode on BSOB indoor and outdoor concentrations. This report describes sampling, analytical procedures and results for the determination of these analytes in air samples collected (1) on 2/15/85 at 3 outdoor locations near the BSOB prior to venting of the HVAC, (2) on 2/22/85 at the same locations after venting and (3) on 3/29/85 at the mechanical room mixing boxes on floors 6 and 14 inside the building after venting. Because Prof. C. Rappe of the University of Umea, Sweden, had produced evidence suggesting detectable contamination in an earlier outdoor air sampling, the outdoor samples were collected in duplicate, extracted, and split for independent analysis by Prof. C. Rappe. •»*, Results of the last sampling prior to the return of the IIVAC system to normal (September 1984 samples) showed a mixture of Cl4~Cle CDFs in air from the 6th and 14th floor mixing boxes (similar to that previously found in building air) at concentrations of 47-260 pg/m3 total TCDFs and 29-185 pg/m3 total penta-CDFs ( ) 1. At that time C. Rappe found traces of .sAe*to;al'.:Cl4-Cl<'CDFs in a single sample (September, 1984) of outside air at concentrations of approximately 0.1 pg/m3/isoraer 12378/12348 0.14 pg/m-* uncorrected for recovery) ( ) 1. ; (e.g. To confirm these preliminary findings it was necessary to repeat the outdoor air anlyse% improving detection limits if possible. �METHODOLOGY Air Sample Collection Sample were collected using a two-stage sampling device (0.3 fi particu- late filter, silica gel adsorbent cartridge) specifically designed to collect PCDDs and PCDFs ( ) 2. In the laboratory the 140° activated 25 mm x ' *" *' 45 mm silica gel cartridges were spiked with 13 C 2,3,7,8-TCDD, 2,3,7,8-TCDF, and l »C 1,2,3,7,8 penta-CDF internal standards. 17 C1 The sampling device was then assembled and wrapped in foil for transport. At the site, samples were taken by drawing 80. M3 of air through the sampler at approximately 20 L/min using a 1.5 CFM Gast vacuum pump. the intact device was wrapped in foil and transported After sampling, at room temperature to the laboratory for analysis. Sample Extraction, Compos it ing_, and Splitting The particulate-containing filter was placed in the associated adsorbent cartridge and subjected to Soxhlet extraction with 80 ml benzene for 16 hrs (samples found to contain large amounts of water were extracted with acetone then benzene). The duplicate sample extracts to be combined (e.g. 50363 + 50364) were concentrated if necessary, combined, (as sample #50744) and split 50/50. Sample extracts to be mailed to Umea, Sweden were cotacentrated to 100 (iL, transferred to 2 mm i.d: Pyrex capillary tubes, tfcer the volume was reduced to just dryness under vacuum (exchanged standards were similarly handled). for transport. The capillary tubes were then sealed and packaged The sample extracts to be analyzed by WCL R were additionally spiked with 1! C OCDD and handled as follows: �Sample Clean-up The benzene extract was passed through a 22 nun i.d. chromatography column packed bottom to top with 4 mm Na2S04J 4 mm K Silicate, 4 mm silica gel, 30 mm 44% H2S04 silica gel, 4 mm silica gel,. 40 mm NaaC03, 50 mm silica gel and 4 mm NaaS04 followed by hexane solvent. The sample in 50% benzene/hexane was then cleaned up ***• using a microprocessor controlled sequence of acidic alumina, PX-21 carbon, and neutral alumina chromatography followed by concentration to 100 uL for storage in sealed glass capillaries. Just prior to GC/MS analysis, the samples were concentrated to 4 uL under vacuum. The extract at this stage contains all Cl4-Clg CDFs and CDDs. Capillary GC/LRMS A portion of the sample extract (0.8 to 1.8 uL) was injected onto either a 60 m 0.25 mm i.d. SP2330 or 50 m 0.2 mm i.a. DB5 fused silica GC capillary column, head pressure 20 psi, directly interfaced to a , Hewlett-Packard 5970 Mass Selective Detector. The MSD was used in the El mode with a 235 C source temperature and unit resolution. Data acquisition was accomplished using the single ion monitoring mode with m/e values and chromatographic conditions shown in Table 1. Calculations < 'Kif results were calculated by integrating a single ion chromatographic peak (e.g. 2,3,7,8-TCDF) and by summing total area counts for groups of observed peaks (e.g., TCDFs). it TCDFs and TCDDs were quantitated by an isotope" dilution internal standard method (eq. 1) which inherently corrects for any recovery losses. Detection limits were similarly calculated, substituting nearby MS noise in arbitrary counts (e.g. 1000 area counts) incorporating a detection limit factor of 2.5. �l = XC2 A1/A2 C Where C (eq = the calculated concentration of native CDF (or CDD) in pg/m3. X = a theoretical mass spectral response factor that corrects "*" 13 for differences in isotope abundances (1 for C-TCDD, 2.5 for 37 Cl-TCDF; a measured, response factor may also be used. C = the known concentration of added, isotopically labeled CDF (or CDD) in pg/m 3 . A1 = the measured area under the ion chromatographic peak due to native CDF or CDD (e.g. TCDF at m/z 306) in arbitrary counts. A = the measured area under the ion chromatographic peak to .^ isotopically labeled standard (e.g. TCDF at m/z 312) in arbitrary counts. Response factors relative to the internal standards were also obtained for congener groups by running native standards along with internal standards. .sllserc: poitse factors were applied to the quantitation of Hexa CDFs to Octa CDF and Penta CDDs to Octa CDD. Standards [D1*-C] 2,3,7,8-TCDD (KOR Isotopes, Cambridge, MA) has been used for air sampler recovery experiments. The sample cleanup procedure has been evaluated using all 22 TCDDs, OCDD (Analabs, North Haven, CT) 2,3,7,8-TCDF (NIEOS), 37 C1 penta-CDF mixture of isomers purified by RPLC (KOR), OCDF �(Analabs), and 2367-TC BP (academic source). tation included J C 12 2,3,7,8-TCDD (KOR) and J7 Internal standards for quantiC1 4 2,3,7,8-TCDF (KOR) purified by RPLC, i»C 1,2,3.7,8 penta-CDF and 13 C OCDD. Quality Assurance The following measures ensure the quality of this analysis. Various *v blanks are run concurrently with samples and strict criteria for the identification of each compound class are observed. An isotopically labeled internal standard is added to each sample prior to sampling or analysis to provide both a qualitative check and accurate quantitation when sample recovery data is variable. Blanks Four types of blanks were run: (1) a system blank prior to the use of any glassware to ensure no carryover from prior samples; (2) a method blank, run simultaneously and using the same standards, solvents, adsorbents, and glassware as the actual samples; (3) isotopically-labeled standards; and (4) benzene blanks to check for GC and syringe carryover. Precision The best measure of precision is obtained from replicate samples. is commonly within 20%. This The recovery of the internal standard available for each sample will provide a measure of precision; however, this is based on external standardization (requiring manipulation and accurate measurement of sample volumes of 1 to 4 fil) and is known to be less precise than internal standardization. �Criteria for Detection To be detected as a PCDD or PCDF isomer in a sample all of the following conditions must be met: 1. co-elution on GC with appropriate standard if available. 2. response at a minimum of two ions corresponding to H, M+2; response must be in proper ratio +20%; response at additional fragment iofis such as M-COC1 for greatest reliability when sensitivity permits. 3. adequate recovery of all internal standards. 4. acceptable QC blanks and spikes. 5. negligible mass spectral interference. �RESULTS Table 2 contains the data generated by the New York State Department of Health from outdoor air samples collected prior to (February 15-18) and after (February 22-25) returning the building's HVAC system to normal operations. Table 3 contains the data generated from indoor air samples collected on the 6th and 14th floors on March 29-April 1. or DISCUSSION The outdoor air data both before and after returning the HVAC system to normal operation contains no evidence for the presence of any 3 tetrachlorodibenzofuran isomer (detection limit 0.06-0.15 pg/m ) or any o pentachlorodibenzofuran isomer (detection limit 0.2-0.5 pg/m ). (Doctor C. Rappe's analysis of splits of these samples yielded results consistent with •j this data (not detected at about 1 pg/m /isomer). (Personal Communication, written report to follow). Since tetra and pentachlorofurans are by far the most abundant compounds among the furans, dioxins and biphenylenes within the BSOB, detection of any such BSOB-induced contamination of the outdoor air in either the pre-venting or current post-venting mode of operation is clearly beyond the capacity of present-day analytical techniques. The indoor air data of Table 3 demonstrates the presence of tetra-, penfca--, and hexachlorofurans in detectable concentrations; Hepta- and octachlorofurans, tetra- and penta-chloro-biphenylenes and tetra-, penta-, hexa-, hepta-, and octachlorodibenzodioxins were all below limits of detection. There are many cross comparisons possible among the data produced by WCL&R from the September 1984 and the March 1985 samplings. Dibenzodioxins (tetra through octachloro), hepta and octachloro furans, and pentachlorobiphenylenes were not detected in either sampling; tetrachlorobiphenylenes, barely above the limit of detection in 1984, were not detected in 1985, consistent with the �subsequently discussed decrease in overall concentrations. As Table 4 demonstrates, the patterns observed in the tetra through hexachlorofurans (the only compounds present above detection limits during both samplings) are generally maintained. Thus, for the 6th floor, the ratio total TCDF:total PeCDF:total HxCDF was 1:0.37:0.13 in 9/84 versus 1:0.60:0.14 in 4/85; the corresponding 14th floor ratios were 1:0.60:0.09 and 1:0.42:0.14. For the 6th *3f floor, the ratio 2378-TCDF/total TCDF was 0.07 in 9/84 and 0.06 in 4/85; the corresponding 14th floor ratios were 0.05 and 0.06. The largest 2378-substituted PeCDF peak (actually a mixture of 12378 and 12348-PeCDF) constituted 15% of total PeCDF on the 6th floor in 9/84, and 9% in 4/85. The corresponding values for the 14th floor are 15% and 16%. The most important difference between the two data sets is the significant decrease in concentrations of tetra through hexa CDFs in the April sampling (Table 4 . Thus, for example, total TCDF concentration (averaged over the 6th ) and 14th floors) decreased by a factor of 2.6; the corresponding factors for-total PeCDF and total HxCDF were 2.9 and 2.0. These decreases in concentration as well as improvements in detection limits for 2367-tetrachlorobyphenylene and 12367-pentachlorobiphenylene result in a recalculated "2378-TCDD equivalent" •3 concentration of <4.1 pg/nr3 in April, 1985 versus <11 pg/m (Tabl«= 5). o in November,1984 �REFERENCES 1 Aldous, K., Hilker, D., O'Keefe, P., Smith, R. and Eadon, G., Chemical data on air and wipe samples collected from the Binghamton State Office Building-September 1984, New York State Department of Health Report. 2 Eadon, G., Aldous, K., Hilker, D., O'Keefe, P. and Smith, R., Chemical data on air samples from the Binghamton State Office Building, New York State ~»** Department of Health Report. �TABLE I fj A 7 A. t~-\ r. y ij 7 s T 7 T H Nr R»y. i . i - W n y —54 1 0 3 0 / 5 t o r e M e t h o d •' ME f H : 5 I N ' 5 H : M Description B I H : 2378 iii^MLYSIG O'v 2330 6C "•'"' i'M A G Q' U I 5 I T I 0 W solvent deiaY Group I n f I np 5 stari Tine 8,00 el'l volts 1 2 fi tQ (0.00 0.00 3 5 0.00 13 Jun 85 i & r V ^ an 800 reiAtive 4 5 't 5 0.00 0.00 resulting voirage 2200 B 8 0.00 7 t low MS Resolution NO T E M P' E R ft T U R. E Level i 75.00 P R Q 6 R f\ M etjuiiibrat ion tine initial tEmp 75 6 I S i t0 f cycles per second ].4 i o n A" i 2 3 4 5 5 ri'' 2 303 = '30 305 : 50 31 t = 90 339. 6^j 341 , 85 351 * 90 Dwell 100 100 (00 t00 '0 (0 (00 rim tine HETH-'BINGH.M ,& 0.50 i n i t i a l • Rate tine ODC/Min) 1.00 50.0 . H E A T E D Z 0 N E 5 • sPiitless o-n tine final . tEnp 235 final tine 75,00 3,50 total i,ne r."i,Z0 3 ] ' »i ^j 6 actual (Standby; "5 Inj Fort B1 250 Detector ri Betpt 75 250 Off Linit 300 250 425 actual Inj Fort A Transfer Line 235 Setpt Off 235 'unit 259 300 �TABLE I (continued) D A T A A C Q U I S I T I O N R e v .1 . 3 1-Nov-S4 l o a d / s t o r e Method : METH:BINGIN.M Description : CONGENER GROUP ANALYSIS FOR BINfi INDOOR AIR SAMPLES 1 .Ml ] 4. (a® 14,88 47.88 B8 . 88 95.88 'v'a! ves Spi. i t i e s 5 O f f Group i liass Spec On Group 2 ""* firoup 3 Stop 'Run S I M A C Q U I S I T I O N s o l v e n t ; d e l a Y 14.88 ft OP - 4 . -, „ {. a loi I e'1 v o l t s CD bro u p Ions , 2 3 15 A ••? Ii'its l O W MS rveauiU t ion 1 3 Jun 85 rxrx 888 r e l a t i v e 3 15 on. 2:87 pro 4 4 - 5 4 ' • G 20 riETH:6INGIN.M r e s u l t i n g v o l t a g e 2488 7 8 3 18 7 C* *^ C\ ^ •** "* 0 rtrK IMU L;yi_i63 p6f tjeLuliu w . o 1 ion ft 3 • 4 5 G 7 8 3 !0 en / Z 2 78.80 2 72 . $v3 286.88 288.88 304.88 386.88 31 2.88 328. 8G J22.88 334.88 < rxrx 1 88 100 188 108 108 Dwell 1 lt)W 1 88 1 88 1 88 1 88 ion ft Owe 1 1 ft of C { -1 p } i ' i 1 *. 13 i t)0 1 88 Group Ions ! IS CO' n ma 1 4 ww I 1 1 88 rt n • 14 15 1 88 1 8.8 3 4 in 4 i r- 4 5 4 4 . G •"! r* iivj low MS R e s o 1 u tion NO 7 n 3 18 28 28 20 20 c y c l e s per second 1 .8 r ion S 1 2 7> 4 S B 7 3 r! .fi//: 304.88 386.88 328.88 322.88 348.88 342.88 3b2.88 ,3GB. 88 358.88 Dwell 188 180 188 180 100 !80 108 188 180 Gr'oup ft of Ions . start Time ' 1 IS 1 A .Ti ft A'? 2 3 W 15 4 4 5 4 G 20 7 28 8 28 3 20 18 28 C* "i C rt rt "i — . low MS Resolut ion NO cycles per second 3.6 ion ft 1 2 3 4 5 R 7 8 310 oi/'7 356.88''358.88 374.08 376.00 390.80 392.88 408.88 410.88 424.88 426.88 Dwell 100 180 100 100 100 100 180 180 100 100 ion ft 1 1 . 1 2 13 14 IS m / Z 4 4 4 . 8 8 4 4 6 . 0 0 468.88 462.08 472.00 Dwell 108 188 100 180 100 - . . ,.•--.--•; «;» . ~~~i?i' - .+ it.•-•««• -•'•*-<- -' ' - �TABLE I (continued) T E M P E R A T U R E rUn time Level 1 2 ' 3 .5 5 B 95.00 eQui1ibration time initial tEmp ' 190 . P R O G R A M S, H E A T E D 0.50 initial Rate *" time. . < G C / M i n > 1.00 5.0 . 5.0 ' 5.0 5.0 5.0 Z O N E S s P l l t l e s s on t i m e f i na I tEmp n ^ .'T. (. i. « "i -7 rjC.»)D 250 ". 270 300 t o t a1 t iPit?. f i na I t T Pit-IE) . 88 *1 i i ~? r\ ^ /_ k> . V ) V J ^K i*^ •? "? r* rx J ,J . V VJ r\ ni r~ t / . VtVI * r\ T r*^ / . V.I W 24.00 r\ni r> f . vj w t n , v J vj B5 . 00 nt- ' Him da . ww 7 8 Oven (Standby > Tnj P.irt B Detector A actual 1355 258 — Setpt Limit 190 300 2B0. ' 250 Off 425 actual InJ Port A Transfer Line 278 Setpt Off 275 Llf-ilt 250 300 �TABLE I (continued) D A T A Rev. A C Q U I S I T I O N 1.3 1-Nov-84 load/store Method : METH:BINGIN.M Description : CONGENER GROUP ANALYSIS FOR BINS INDOOR AIR SAMPLES 1.88 14.88 14.88 47.88 G8.88 95.03 X>B-S" Valves Splitlesa Off Group ' Mass Spec On Group 2 -~ Group 3 Stop Run SIM ACQUISITION solvent; d e l a Y 14.88 Group ft oP Ions 13 Jun 85 eM v o l t s CD "1 •raw 47 4 4 -L) 3 15 888 r e l n t i v e " 7 L, 15 f*- Ft Cn 2:87 pw .5 4 M£TH:BINGIN.M r e s u l t i n g v o l t a g e 2468 G 20 7 28 - 3 28 8 28 18 20 i~*r\ low MS -Resolut ion NO cycles per second 8 .6 ir« n n ri 2 It 1 3 4 b o / o 3 10 f'i/Z 270 . 88 272 . 28B .88 288.88 304.80 306.88 312.88 328.88 322.88 334.88 88 Dwell 188 1 08 '1 08 1 88 188 188 108 180 108 i 00 ion ion * 11 1I ^ -? 12 * ^H I • 15 I'M / Z 348.88' j 4 2 00 352 .88 35G.88 358.88 . Dwell 108 1 88 1 80 t 88 1 r» r* WW Group ft oP Ions GO R ] i 15 r*. r\ 3 15 4 4 5 4 B 28 7 28 8 28 3 28 18 20 A »-j low 1-is Resolution NO cycles per second I .0 .ion it 1 2 3 4 5 f i 7 f i S •r-t/Z 304.88 306.80 320.88 322.88 348.88 342.88 35Z-.88 3L!,, v)8 358.88 Dwell 180 100 108 100 100 180 100 1(^8 180 GiTuup ft oP Ions , i start 1 15 7. 3 "CQ 15 4 4 5 4 ,G 20 "1 1 n O rx D < rx 1 K.I 28 20 20 28 T 1 i i pie low ma R e s o l u t ion NO c y c l e s per second 8 .6 ion i t , I 2 3 4 5 G 7 8 310 ci/Z 356.88 358.88 374.08 376.OH 390.00 392.08 408.08 410.00 424.88 426.08 Dwell 100 188 100 100 180 100 188 100 100 180 ion « I! 12 13 14 IS Pi/Z 444.08 446.80 463.00 462.08 472.00 Dwell 100 180 180 IflW 100 . •;>. �TABLE I (continued) T E M P E R A T U R E rUn t i m e Level 1 2 3 .' 95.00 eQui 1 i brat, ion t i m e initial tEmp 190 . initial •** tli>m 1.00 . 4 M •Fi B P R O G R A M S, H E A T E D 0.50 Rate (OC/Min) 5.0 5.0 .. 5.0 s P l i t l e s s on time firm I , . tErop 7.20 235 2 5 0 '' r~ r\ D . W (Standby) Tnj Port B Detector ft actual i 30 Z50 — >~i "7 c\ £. f V/ 5.0 • 300 Set.pt Liroit 'l951 300 250750 Off 425 Z O N E S InJ Port A Trans far' Line final tTr-ie I B . 00 7.00 . ' ' 1 o . 5) w ' 1.88 . total time 23.00 33.00 54.00 '"J n. r\ ( . V.'W r r" ni -T O a . Vlfl 24.00 35.08 actual --278 Setpt Off 275 Llrolt ZR0 ,300 �TABLE I (continued) A T A A, r. 0 ij 7 s Method 1 0 ? d _• 7 7 : T fi N < I?v . i j 3 1 ~M n v - fi 4 NPTr-i r fi T W G I i . H L"25cr i n t ion : 2375 ANALYSIS C'iy 2339 6G COLUMN 5 I I'l A G' Q' U' I 5 I T 1 0 N solvent deiaY Group !i of Ions start Time 8,00 ef'l volts t '2 6 18 t&.M 0.00 3 5 0.00 l a Jun 85 i5)'M3 am 600 relative i'iETH'-BINGH.M resulting voltage 2 4 5 ' 6 4 5' 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 7 t 1 cycles per second 1.4 low "is Resolution txQ i o n Jt 4 i n ' Z 303 = ^0 305 •. 9 ? 3 i ? , 90 339 . 65 34 i .85 35 1 . 90 Dwell .'(00 100 100 100 100 100 T E M F* E R A T U R E run time Level 1 75 . 00 P' R 0G R A M 0.50 eOui i ibrat ion time initial ' tEmp 75 initial time ',0 (0 H EA TED & Ra t e <QC/Min> 50.0 Z O N E S split less on time final tump 235 f ina i 1 1r'ie 75,00- 0. 50 tot ai time 73 . i^0 H Oven (Standby) Inj Fort B Detector A actual 75 250 —- Setpt 7 5 250 Off Limit 300 253 425 actual Inj Fort A Transfer Lino 235 Setpt Off 235 Limit 250 300 �TRBLE 3. Indoor Rir Sariples Collected HIthin the Binghanton State Office Building Cpg/H35 F U R R N LOCflTION Vol HS Recov. Sanpla * 23P8 Te Total To . 231P8 Pe 123P8 Pe+ Racov. 13318 Pe Total P« K March 29-fipril 1 Floor &-HVHC 77. (, 581 00 25 . 38 92 0.1 3 20 10, Floor 6-Hl»fiC PP.6 582 00 32 . 59 51 0.5 2? . 12 6 ?? 583 00 38 . 61 10 1.6 1.1 2? *. Control CSpike? 0 5080-4 180 Control 0 5 8 0 ND CO. 23 05 Blank 0 5129P ND CO. 25 Floor H-HVRC 50 56 - • 198 SPIKE LEVEL ND CO. 35 65 ND CO. 35 90 330 - « ND C0.25 - * ND CO. 25 - 5 618 D I0 X IN LOCRTIOM Vol H3 Sanple * 2 P Te 38 Total Ta Recov. Z PeCDD March 29~flpril 1 Floor 6-HVflC PP.6 50801 NO CO. 35 Floor 6-HVHC P. P6 582 00 ND CO. 35 P? 50803 ND CO. 15 Floor 11-HUnC 5, 15? 82 - ND C0.15 ?2 ND CO. 15 55 ND CO. 55 8? ND CO. 25 Control CSpi ke? 0 581 00 Control 0 5 8 0 ND CO. 25 05 100 ND CO. 25 Blank 0 5 2 ? ND CO. 25 19 103 ND C . 5 02 SPIKE LEVEL ?9 198 8 �o Table 4. Comparison of Polychlorinated Dibenzofuran Concentrations (Pg/m ) in Air Samples 2378 " 4 -89 49 12378 12348 23478 Total -Cl "C15 ~C15 5.0 ND(1)C , 33 2.9 31 0.5 2.0 ND(0.6)C 12C 6.9C NA ND(0.7) NA ND(1.5) 215 64 20.0 4.4 1.4 1.6 130 27 3.5 ND(0.7) 20 9.1 NA ND(l.O) NA ND(2. 1) 150 57 13.0 3.7 1.2 1.1 83 29 16 8.0 NA ND(l.O) NA ND(2. 1) Total C1 6th Floor , Sept., 1984? April, 1985 6.0 2.8 14th Floor Sept., 1984b 10 April, 1985° 3.8 123478 cl " c Total Total cl ~ c 0 Total "C1P o— GRAND AVERAGE Sept., 1984 April, 1985 8. 0 3. 3 2.9 1.2 (a) ND indicates not detected (limit of detection); NA = not analyzed for (b) Average of two samples unless specifically indicated (c) Based on measurement in one sample �. * .>' • / Table 5. Calculation of Average "2,3,7,8-TCDD Equivalents Due to Various Dibenzofurans, Dibenzodioxins and Biphenylenes for 6th and 14th Floor Air Samples Best Estimate of Average Concentration Equivalents" X Relative Activity of Compound Class vs . Dibenzodioxins X X 1/3 X X 1/3 X Relative Activity Due to Chlorine Substitutions = "2,3,7,8TCDD 2,3,7, 8-TCDF 3.3 pg/m3 1 = 1 . 1 pg/m3 X 1 = 1 . 6 pg/m3 1/3 X 1/30 = X 1 X 1 = <0.4 pg/m3 X 1 X 1 = <0.5 pg/m3 X 1 X 1/30 = <0.07 Pg/m3 1 X 1 = <0.2 pg/m3 1 X 1 - <0.2 pg/m3 ' 12378, 12348, 23478-PeCDF 4.8 pg/m3 HEXA CDFs 8.0 pg/m3 2 0.04 pg/m3 2378-TCDD <0.4 pg/m3 12378-PeCDD <0.5 pg/m HEXA CDDs <2.1 pg/m3 2367-Tetrachlorobiphenylene <0.2 pg/m3 X 12367-Pentachlorobiphenylene <0.2 pg/m X Total (a) <4. 1 pg/m3 Since standards are not available to allow quantitation of all 2378-substituted hexa CDFs, it is conservatively assumed that 1/2 of the "total hexa CDF" is 2378-substituted. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange Description An account of the resource <p style="margin-top: -1em; line-height: 1.2em;">The Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange comprises 120 linear feet and spans the late 1800s to 2005; however, the bulk of the coverage is from the 1960s to the 1980s and there are many undated items. The collection was donated to Special Collections of the National Agricultural Library in 1985 by Dr. Alvin L. Young (1942- ). Dr. Young developed the collection as he conducted extensive research on the military defoliant Agent Orange. The collection is in good condition and includes letters, memoranda, books, reports, press releases, journal and newspaper clippings, field logs and notebooks, newsletters, maps, booklets and pamphlets, photographs, memorabilia, and audiotapes of an interview with Dr. Young.</p> <p>For more about this collection, <a href="/exhibits/speccoll/exhibits/show/alvin-l--young-collection-on-a">view the Agent Orange Exhibit.</a></p> Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Box The box containing the original item. 089 Folder The folder containing the original item. 2264 Series The series number of the original item. Series IV Subseries II Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Smith, R. P. O'Keefe K. Aldous D. Hilker G. Eadon Title A name given to the resource Typescript: Chemical Data on Air Samples Collected in and near the Binghamton State Office Building (February, March 1985) Before and After the HVAC System is Returned to Normal, July 17, 1985 Subject The topic of the resource BSOB ambient air sampling https://www.nal.usda.gov/exhibits/speccoll/files/original/acd6fa44b38089188cb031e79efe0a0f.pdf 0ebcb5f74ee0c653b4933c7c5d068ef0 PDF Text Text Item D Number 02237 Author Eadon, G. Corporate Author Center for Laboratories and Research, New York State ROpOPt/APtlClO Titlfl Typescript: Chemical Data on Air Samples From the Binghamton State Office Building Journal/Book Title Yoar Month/Day Color Number of Images 1983 J"i y n D 14 Descriptor) Notes Thursday, September 20, 2001 Page 2237 of 2293 �Chemical Data on Air Samples From the Binghamton State Office Building G. Eadon, K. Aldous, D. Hilker, P. O'Keefe and R. Smith 11 1933 DIRECTOR HEALTH Center for Laboratories and Research New York State Department of Health Albany, New York 12201 �Abstract Air samples collected at 15 distinct locations and/or times within the Binghamton State Office Building have been analyzed for various chlorinated dibenzofurans, dibenzodioxins and biphenylenes. The average 2,3,7,8-TCDF concentration from twelve locations sampled when the building's internal air circulation system was operative was 15.0 + 3.6 pg/m . Samples collected at six locations under similar conditions and analyzed using a cleanup methodology designed to recover the full range of compounds of interest had "total TCDF" and total Penta O CDF" concentrations of 143 + 24 pg/m respectively. O and 42 + 10 pg/m , "Total hexa CDF" was measured at 4.8 + 3.5 pg/m three samples collected under these conditions. in "Total TCDD" concentrations at two locations were 1.0 and 1.3 pg/m , while "total Penta CDD" concentration was < 0.5 pg/m at both locations. Measurement of 2,3,7,8-TCDD at two locations gave concentrations of 0.3 < 3 and 0.5 pg/m . "Total tetrachlorobiphenylenes" were estimated at 0.3, 0.5 and 1.3 pg/m at three locations and "total pentachloro- biphenylenes" at 1.5 and 2.6 pg/m in two locations. A methodology used with apparent success to calculate the "2,3,7,8-TCDD equivalent" concentration in a sample of soot collected in the BSOB was applied to this data to estimate that the overall activity present in the air was ca. 14 pg/m "2,3,7,8-TCDD equivalents." �3 The air of the Binghamton State Office Building (BSOB) was sampled for various chlorinated dibenzofurans, dibenzodioxins and biphenylenes in November 1982 (Smith et al., 1983), February 1983 (Smith et al., 1983a) and April 1983 (Smith et al., 1983b). Detailed descriptions of the method development and validation, analytical methodologies and quality control data have already been provided; the intent of this paper is to summarize the results obtained from the analysis of BSOB air and to use that data to calculate the approximate "2,3,7,8-TCDD equivalent concentration" (Eadon et al., 1982) that these results correspond to. Chemical Data Table 1 contains the analytical data generated during the three samplings of BSOB air. The samples collected in 11/82 were obtained with the internal air circulation system inoperative? therefore, these results will not be referred to in subsequent discussions. Samples collected at 12 different locations on 2/83 and 4/83 had average 2,3,7,8-TCDF concentrations of 15.0 + 3.6 pg/m represent one standard deviation). (error limits The relatively small standard deviation for this large data set for 2,3,7,8-TCDF demonstrates that the compound is fairly uniformly distributed from floor to floor. Since this compound's relevant physical and chemical properties are similar to those of the other analytes discussed in this paper, it is possible that they too are rather uniformly distributed. The more limited data set contained in Table 1 for other classes of compounds is consistent with this proposal. �4 Because 2,3,7,8-TCDF concentrations were determined using an internal standard technique, all data are considered accurate. However, it is believed that "total TCDF" and "total penta CDF" data produced from the 11/82 and 2/83 samplings may underestimate the actual concentrations of these compounds; for example, during analyses of the 2/83 samples, it was observed that only two of three penta CDF standards were adequately recovered during cleanup of spiked samples (Smith et al., 1983a). The methodology used in the cleanup of the 4/83 samples was modified to permit recovery of a broader range of compounds. These data now provide the most reliable estimate of the concentrations of the remaining compounds and groups of isomers of interest and will therefore be used in subsequent discussions. Six locations sampled on 4/83 exhibited an average "total TCDF" o concentration of 148 + 24 pg/m and a "total Penta CDF" concentration of 42 «_ 10 pg/m . Total Hexa CDF averaged 4.8+3.5 + — pg/m at three of the locations. In three samples collected at two • locations, "total TCDD" averaged 1.2 + 0.2 pg/m3 and 2,3,7,8-TCDD 3 3 averaged 0.4 + . 1 pg/rn ; "total Penta CDD" was < 0.5 pg/m . Since no quantitative standards were available for the biphenylenes, only estimates of their concentrations were generated. However, three locations exhibited "total tetrachlorobiphenylene" concentrations of roughly 0.3, 0.5 and 1.3 pg/m 3 , and two locations exhibited "total pentachlorobiphenylene" concentrations of 1.5 and 2.6 pg/m . Several interesting comparisons can be made between the data produced from these air samples and those produced from soot samples ^ �5 collected from above the ceiling panels on various BSOB floors (Eadon et al. , 1982). In 12 soot samples, the ratio of tetra CDFrpenta CDF: hexa CDF was 1.2 + 0.2:1:0.5 ± 0.2. The corresponding relationship produced from the air data summarized above is 3.5 + 0.6:1:0.11 + .02. This increase in the relative concentrations of the less chlorinated and thus more volatile congeners suggests that the air contamination may not be predominantly due to suspended soot particles but may instead be true vapor-phase material. Consistent with this hypothesis, when the particulate material collected using a 0.3 u glass fiber filter was analyzed separately from the silica cartridge portion of the air sampling apparatus, only minor amounts of PCDFs were detected. >For example, three samples in which the glass fiber filter and silica cartridge were analyzed separately, the ratio of "total TCDF" in the two collection media was 0.04 + .01 (Smith et al., 1983a, 1983b). Air samples collected simultaneously with those used for PCDF analysis exhibited PCB concentrations of 0.16 + .02 ug/m (Versar, 1983). This concentration corresponds to a PCB:"total TCDF" ratio of 1200; the ratio in soot was 50. Here, too, the relative concentration of the more volatile component has been markedly enhanced. Calculation of "2,3,7,8-TCDD Equivalents" The assessment of the biological activity of a complex mixture of chlorinated dibenzofurans, dibenzodioxins, and biphenylenes is complicated by the lack of definitive knowledge of the toxicities of most of the individual congeners, by the inability to accurately analyze �6 all congeners and by the possibility of synergistic or antagonistic interactions among these compounds. The most straightforward approach to this problem is to utilize the techniques of animal toxicology to compare the biolgoical activity of the mixture to that of a reference compound. This approach, when applied to a representative sample of soot taken from the BSOB led to the conclusion that the acute oral LD,-n in guinea pigs of the soot was equivalent to that of an inert matrix containing 58 ug/g of 2,3,7,8-TCDD (Badon et al. , 1982). Because of the differing chemical composition of the contaminants present in the air and in the soot, this number has little direct applicability for estimating the biological activity of compounds present in the air. Further, the concentrations present in the air are so low that performing further animal toxicology experiments to estimate the air's biological activity is impractical. An alternative approach to this problem is to utilize available Si analytical and toxicological data together with necessary assumptions . and approximations to estimate the number of "TCDD equivalents" due to particular contaminants, and then summing the overall activity over the range of toxic compounds. Although such an approach is obviously only an estimate, it is notable that, when applied to the soot sample used in the animal toxicology experiments, it produced an estimate of the "TCDD equivalent" concentration that agreed remarkably well with the animal toxicology experimentation. (44 ug/g calculated vs. 58 ug/g observed). The important conclusion was reached that the acute oral LD of the soot could be estimated without the necessity of postulating major synergistic or antagonistic effects (Eadon et al.r 1982). �7 Use of chemical data to "predict" the 2,3,7,8-TCDD equivalent" concentration of the BSOB air is complicated by the fact that no animal toxicology data is available on the effects of inhalation of these compounds. As a consequence, it is necessary to assume that acute oral guinea pig LD^s can be used to relate the air's overall activity to 2,3,7,8-TCDD. Another complication is that only limited data is available on the acute oral guinea pig LD,_0s of dibenzodioxins and no such data is available on biphenylenes or dibenzof urans other than 2,3 ,7,8-TCDF. The following assumptions will therefore be made about the LDcns of these compounds: (1) The ratio of the LD s Of a particular PCDP congener and 2,3,7,8-TCDF or of a particular polychlorinated biphenylene congener and 2 ,3 ,6,7-tetrachlorobiphenylene will be the same as the ratio of the LD5Qs of the corresponding PCDD congener and 2,3,7,8-TCDD. There is presently very little experimental data to support this assumption. \ (2) The LD5Qs of PCDFs , PCDDs and polychlorinated biphenylenes lacking chlorines on at least one of the four lateral positions will be sufficiently high that their influence can be ignored in this calculation. This assumption is based on the LD5Qs in guinea pigs of 2,8-diCDD, 2 ,3 ,7-triCDD, and 1 ,2,4,7, 8-penta-CDD. All have LD5Qs more than 450 times higher than that of 2,3 ,7,8-Tetra CDD itself (Table II). (3) Introduction of a single additional chlorine substituent on a 2,3 ,7,8-substituted PCDD or PCDF congener or a 2,3 ,6,7-substituted polychlorinated biphenylene congener has essentially no effect on the congener's guinea pig LDcn. This assumption is based on comparison of the LD5Qs of 2,3,7,8-TCDD and 1,2,3 ,7, 8-penta-CDD (Table II). �8 (4) Introduction of two additional chlorine substituents on a 2,3 ,7 ,8-chlorinated PCDD or PCDP congener or a 2 ,3 ,6 ,7-substituted polychlorinated biphenylene congener raises its LD5Q by a factor of at least 29 . The assumption is based on comparison of the LD^s of 1,2,3,4,7,8-, 1,2,3,6,7,8-, and 1 ,2 ,3 ,7 ,8,9-hexa CDD and 2,3 ,7 ,8-tetra CDD (Table II). (5) The LDcns of compounds with more than 6 chlorines will be DU sufficiently large that their influence can be ignored in this calculation. This assumption is based on comparison of the LD5Qs of 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-hapta CDD and 2,3 ,7 ,8-teura CDD (Table II). These assumptions require that attention be focused only on 2,3 ,7,8-substituted tetra, penta and hexa-substituted PCDDs , PCDFs and biphenylenes . Measurements of 2,3,7,8-TCDF concentrations at 12 different locations with the internal air circulation system operative 2 gave average concentrations of 15.0 Hr 3.6 pg/m ; since the data in Table II indicate that the LD5Q of 2 ,3,7,8-tetra CDF is about three • times that of 2,3 ,7,8-TCDD, the equivalent in terms of acute oral guinea pig toxicity to a 2 ,3 ,7,8-TCDD concentration is 5 pg/m (Table III). Measurements at 6 different locations all taken with the interval air circulation system operative and using an optimized analytical methodology yielded total penta CDFs of 42 +_ 10 pg/m . Based on earlier soot data, it is conservatively assumed that the most toxic isomers (1,2,3,7,8- and 2,3 ,4 ,7 ,8-penta CDF) together constitute 50% of the penta CDFs and that their LD5Qs equal that of 2,3,7,8-TCDF; thus, o the penta CDFs contribute 7.0 pg/m of 2,3,7,8-TCDD equivalents. Hexa-CDFs were present at total concentrations of 4.8 pg/m samples. in three Based on dioxin studies, the most toxic hexa substituted �9 dioxins are ca 1/30 as toxic as 2,3,1,8-TCDD; to account for the differing toxicities of 2,3,7,8-TCDD and 2,3,7,8-TCDF it will be concluded that the hexa-CDFs contribute less than 0.1 pg/m TCDD equivalents, a negligible number in comparison to the contributions of the tetra- and penta- CDF. The PCDDs themselves also make only a small contribution to the "TCDD equivalent" concentrations present in the air of the BSOB. ThusA o 2,3,7,8-TCDD was present at an average concentration of 0.4 pg/m , corresponding to a contribution of 0.4 pg/m TCDD equivalent. Total Penta CDD was below detection limit (0.5 pg/m ; and therefore can make only a negligible contribution to the "TCDD equivalent" concentration. Total tetrachlorobiphenylenes were roughly 'estimated at 0.7 pg/m . If the conservative assumptions are made that the toxic 2,3,6,7 congener constitutes 50% of the mixture and that biphenylenes are as toxic as the corresponding dioxins, the tetrachlorinated biphenylenes ^ contribute 0.4 pg/rn3 "2,3,7,8-TCDD equivalents." Pentachlorobiphenylenes averaged 2.1 pg/m . are made, this corresponds to 1.1 pg/m If similar assumptions "2,3,7,8-TCDD equivalents." Insufficient sample was available to attempt a measurement of hexa-biphenylenes; however, in view of the factor of 30 estimated difference in toxicity between tetra and hexa substituted compounds, the hexa-biphenylenes are unlikely to be major contributors to the "TCDD. equivalents" in the BSOB air. Based on these calculations, the concentration of "2,3,7,8-TCDD equivalents" in the BSOB air is estimated at 13.5 pg/m ; ca. 90% of this estimated activity resides in the tetra and penta CDF isomers (Table III). �10 Conclusions The concentrations of the principal compounds of concern in the air of the BSOB have been measured. These experiments have provided evidence suggesting that the contamination in the BSOB air is fairly uniformly distributed throughout the working space of the building in floors 3-17 and is in the gas phase, rather than particulate bound. Based on the results of chemical analysis, literature-derived acute oral guinea pig LDggS and a variety of assumptions, it was estimated that the air contains ca. 14 pg/m3 "2,3,7,8-TCDD equivalents." �References Eadon, G., Aldous, K., Frenkel, G., Gierthy, J., Hilker, D., Kaminsky, L., O'Keefe, P., Silkworth, J., and Smith, R. (1982). Comparison of Chemical and Biological Data on Soot Samples from the Binghamton State Office Building, New York State Department of Health Report. Smith, R.M., Hilker, D., O'Keefe, P., and Aldous, K. (1983). Determination of TCDFs and TCDDs in Air Samples from the Sixteenth Floor of the Binghamton State Office Buildng, New York State Department of Health Report, March 16, 1983. Smith, R.M., Hilker, D., O'Keefe, P. .and Aldous, K. (1983a). Determination of Tetra-Hexa CDFs and Tetra CDDS in Air Samples from the 11,14,16, and 17th Floors of the Binghamton State Office Building, New York State Department of Health Report, May 16, 1983. Smith, R.M., Hilker, D., O'Keefe, P. and Aldous, K. (1983b). Determination of Polychlorinated Dibenzofurans, Dibenzodioxins and Biphenylenes in Air Samples from the 3rd, 5th, 7th, and 9th Floors of. the Binghamton State Office Building, New York State Department of Health Report, in preparation. Versar New York Inc. (1983). Determination of the Ratios of Toxic Chemicals in the Air in the BSOB: PCB Analysis, Versar New York Report, May 23, 1983. �Table I Concentrations of Polychlorinated Dibenzofurans, Dibenzodioxins, and Biphenylenes Determined 1n 11/82, 2/83, and 4/83 Samplings of the BSOB1'2 "TOTAL PENTACDF" "TOTAL TCDF" 2,3,7,8-TCDF LOCATION3 DATE 16th, NE 16th, SE 16th, NW 16th, SW 17th, NW 16th, NW 14th, NW 14th, NE llth, SE & NW 11th, NW llth, NW 11/82 11/82 11/82 11/82 2/83 2/83 2/83 2/83 2/83 2/83 4/83 14 pg/m3 13 pg/m3 9.2 pg/m3 7,0 pg/m3 11.5 pq/m3 16 pq/m3 11 pq/m3 14 pg/m3 16 pg/m3 23 pq/m3 97 78 55 52 71 118 92 185 133 76 pg/m3 pg/m3 pg/m3 pg/m3 pg/m3 pg/m3 pg/m? .pg/m3 pg/m3 . pg/m3 9th, SE 9th, NW 4/83 4/83 14 pq/m3 16 pq/m3 150 pq/m3 14^5 pq/m3 7th, NW 5th, NW 3rd, NW 5th, NE AVERAGE CONCENTRATION 4/83 4/83 4/83 4/83 11 11 16 20 pq/m3 pg/m3 pq/m33 pq/ffi 121 'pq/m' 126 pq/m3 151 pq/m3 195 pq/m3 15.0+ 3-6 pg/m3 148+24 Pg/W3 OTHER "TOTAL TCDD" <1,2 pg/m3 "TOTAL TCDD" <1.3 pg/m3 "TOTAL TCDD" <1,3 pg/m3 17 21 21 13 19 16 pg/m3 pg/m3 ps/ni3 pg/m3 pg/m3 pq/m3 ., "TOTAL TCDD" 1.0 pq/m3; 2,3,7,8-TCDD 0.3 pq/m3 "TOTAL PENTACDDs" <0.5 pg/m3} "PENTACHLOROBIPKENYLENES 2.5 pq/m3 "TOTAL HEXACDF" 3.7 pg/m3 "TOTAL TCDD" 1.3 pg/m3-, 2,3,7,8'TCDD 0.5 pg/m3 ""OTAL PENTACDDs" <0.5 pg/m3} "PENTACHLOR03IPHENYLENES 1.4 pg/m3 "TETRACHLOROBIPHENYLENES" 0.5 pg/m3 "TOTAL HEXACDF" 2,0 pg/m3. 5th. MW; 8.7 pg/m3 'Sth, 'NE "TETRACHLOROBIPHENYLENES" 1,3 pq/m3 "TETRACHLOROBIPHENYLENES" 0.3 pc;/m3 "TOTAL HEXACDF"4,8i3..5Pg/ni3; "TOTAL TCDD" 1.2 + 0.2 pg/m3 2,3,7,8^TCDD 0.4 + ,1 pg/m3-, "TOTAL PENTACDD" <0.5 pg/m3 "TETRACHLOROBIPHENYLENES" 0.7 +0,5 pg/m3 "PENTACHLOROBJPHENYLENES" 2,1 +, .5 pg/m3 l Undf!r]incd data were collected with tho building's internal circulation system operative and analyzed using most current methodology. These results are considered to be the most reliable indicators of the building's current condition and are therefore the basis of all subsequent calculations and discussions. * "^abstracted8 (Sml"!! e^af^T' 8n?lyt1cB] Pro«.dur«» an£i Witty control/quality assurance procedures are detailed in the papers from which these data 3 Average concentrations calculated using underlined (best) values only; error limits equal one standard deviation, �Table II. Influence of Structure and Chiorination Pattern on Guinea Pi a Oral LD5Qs (Male, Hartley, 200-250g) Compound LD5Q(ug/kg) 2,3,7,8-Tetra CDD 2,3,7,8-Tetra CDF 1,2,3,7,8-Penta CDD 1,2,3,4,7,8-Hexa CDD 1,2,3,7,8,9-Hexa CDD 2.5a 5-10b 3.1C 73C 60-100C 1,2,3,6,7,8-Hexa CDD 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Hepta CDD 1,2,4,7,8-Penta CDD 2,3,7-TH CDD 2,8-Di CDD 70-100° > 600C 1,125C 29,444C 730,000° a J.B. Silkworth, D. McMartin, A.P. DeCaprio, R. Rej, P. O'Keefe and L. Kaminsky (1982), Acute toxicity in guinea pigs and rabbits of soot from a polychlorinated biphenylcontaining transformer fire, Toxicol.Appl. Pharmacol. 65, 425-39. J.A. Moore, E.E. McConnell, D.W. Dalgard, and M.W. Harris (1979). Comparative toxicity of three halogenated dibenzofurans in guinea pigs, mice and rhesus monkeys. NY Acad. Sci. 320, 151-163. C E.E. McConnell, J.A. Moore, J.K. Haseman, and M.W. Harris (1978). The comparative toxicity of chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins in mice and guinea pigs. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 44, 335-356. �Table III. Calculation of "2,3,7,8-TCDD equivalents," Due to Various Dibenzofurans, Dibenzodioxins and Biphenylenes Relative Activity of Relative Activity Compound Class Due to Chlorine vs. Dibenzobioxins X Substitution = Best Estimate of Concentration X 2,3,7,8-TCDF 15 pg/m3 X 1/3 X 1 5 pg/m3 Penta CDFs 42 pg/m3 2a X 1/3 X 1 7 pg/m3 Hexa CDFs 3 4.8 pg/m 2a X 1/3 X 1/30 X 1 X 1 0.4 rg/m3 1,2,3,7,8-Penta CDD < 0.5 pg/m3 X 2a 1 X 1 < 0.3 pg/m3 2,3,6, 7-Tetrachl orobi phenyl ene 1 0.7 pg/m3 X 2a X 1 0.4 pg/m3 1 ,2,3,6,7-Pentachlorobiphenylene 1 2.1 pg/m3 X 2a X 1 2,3,7,8-TCDD Q.c. pg/m3 = = "2,3,7,8-TCDD equivalents" < 0.1 pg/m3 > 1 pg/m3 ca. 14 pg/m3 When isomer-specific data are unavailable, it is assumed that 1/2 of the "total" value corresponds to 2,3,7,8-(dibenzodioxins and dibenzofurans) or 2,3,6,7(biphenylene) substituted compounds. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange Description An account of the resource <p style="margin-top: -1em; line-height: 1.2em;">The Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange comprises 120 linear feet and spans the late 1800s to 2005; however, the bulk of the coverage is from the 1960s to the 1980s and there are many undated items. The collection was donated to Special Collections of the National Agricultural Library in 1985 by Dr. Alvin L. Young (1942- ). Dr. Young developed the collection as he conducted extensive research on the military defoliant Agent Orange. The collection is in good condition and includes letters, memoranda, books, reports, press releases, journal and newspaper clippings, field logs and notebooks, newsletters, maps, booklets and pamphlets, photographs, memorabilia, and audiotapes of an interview with Dr. Young.</p> <p>For more about this collection, <a href="/exhibits/speccoll/exhibits/show/alvin-l--young-collection-on-a">view the Agent Orange Exhibit.</a></p> Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Box The box containing the original item. 088 Folder The folder containing the original item. 2237 Series The series number of the original item. Series IV Subseries II Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Eadon, G. K. Aldous D. Hilker P. O'Keefe R. Smith Description An account of the resource <strong>Corporate Author: </strong>Center for Laboratories and Research, New York State Department of Health, Albany, New York Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource July 11 1983 Title A name given to the resource Typescript: Chemical Data on Air Samples From the Binghamton State Office Building Subject The topic of the resource BSOB ambient air sampling dioxin https://www.nal.usda.gov/exhibits/speccoll/files/original/ec24d6d6c34c6d09c4852bcd7ae3d072.pdf ef8e8c4e7da2b71fa1b37e46fe07c142 PDF Text Text Ram D Number 02227 Author Smith, R.M. Corporate Author ROpOrt/ArtlGlB TitlO Typescript: Determination of Tetra-Hexa CDFs and Tetra-CDDs in Air Samples from the 11,14,16 and 17th Floors of the Binghamton State Office Building, May 16, 1983 Journal/Book Title Year 000 ° Month/Day Color Number of Images D 50 Descriptor Notes Thursday, September 20, 2001 Page 2227 of 2293 �Determination of Tetra-Hexa CDFs and Tetra-CDDs in Air Samples from the 11, 14, 16 and 17th Floors of the Binghamton State Office Building R. M. Smith, D. Hilker, P. O'Keefe and K. Aldous Laboratory for Organic Analytical Chemistry New York State Department of Health 5/16/83 RECEIVED MAY 2 3 1983 DIRECTOR PUBLIC HEALTH �INTRODUCTION Analysis of air samples taken from the 16th floor (NE, SE, NW, and SW Corners) of the Binghamton State Office Building (March 16, 1983 NYS report) showed concentrations of from 7 to 16 pg/m3 2,3,7,8 TCDF and 52-102 pg/m3 total TCDF. Penta-CDF appeared to be lower in concentration, detected in only one sample out of four at a total concentration of 22 pg/m1. 2,3,7,8 TCDD, found at 0.26-2.2 ppm levels in soot samples analyzed after the transformer fire, was not confirmed in air samples from the 16th floor at concentrations of <1.3 pg/m3, although a signal at m/e 322 was detected. In the present study it was necessary to analyze additional air samples to: 1. determine the floor-to-floor variation of PCDFs in air. 2. re-analyze samples to determine the precision of sampling and analysis. 3. separately analyze the particulate and adsorbed gaseous PCDFs. 4. combine samples for greater sensitivity for both PCDFs and TCDDs. Using silica gel adsorbent cartridges containing labelled 2,3,7,8 TCDD, 13 C 37 C1 OCDD, J'C1 2,3,7,8 TCDF and •7C1 penta- CDF (3 isomers), 50 m3 air were collected. They were then combined as necessary prior to clean-up and analysis by SP 2330 capillary GC/SIM high resolution mass spectrometry. It is important to note that while the analysis has been validated and is quantitative for 2,3,7,8 TCDD, 2,3,7,8 TCDF, OCDD and OCDF, certain non-2,3,7,8 �3 substituted TCDD (and presumably PCDF) isomers have been found to be removed in the clean-up process. EXPERIMENTAL Samples for analysis PCDFs Floor 16, analyzed in our preliminary study of PCDFs in air, was sampled as a repeat analysis. Duplicate samples were taken on the 14th and 17th floor for which previously obtained full-scanning HRMS PCDF in soot (dust) data is available. For 17th floor samples, the glass fiber particulate filter «.3u) was analyzed separately from the silica gel gaseous adsorbent cartridge. To obtain greater sensitivity, particularly for the higher chlorinated PCDFs, a combined sample from the llth floor was analyzed. Duplicate 10 pg/m3 2,3,7,8 TCDF-fortified background air samples (NSA 6S, DOB 1) along with a background air sample (DOH 2) and a solvent blank were also analyzed as part of normal quality control procedures. TCDDs To obtain adequate sensitivity, four 50 m3 samples were extracted, combined and analyzed (in duplicate) for TCDDs, injecting nearly the entire sample in a single injection. A combined solvent blank and a 1 pg/m3 2,3,7,8 TCDD-fortifitfd background air sample were also analyzed. Sampling Procedures Generally, each BSOB sample taken on a given date was identified by a number specifying the floor, a letter specifying the corner of the building, another number indicating replicates and finally a letter P for particulate or G for gaseous, e.g. 17C2G. In addition to the internal standards used in our earlier study (60 pg "C 2,3,7,8 TCDD, 5000 pg » 7 C1 OCDD and 1200 pg » 7 C1 2,3,7,8 TCDF), 24000 pg of "Cl penta-CDF (3 unspiked �isomers) in benzene was deposited directly onto the silica gel (activated at 140 C) trapping adsorbent prior to sampling. The 2 stage sampling apparatus, assembly, transport and sampling has been described in the March 16, 1983 NYS report. Extraction (See March 16, 1983 NYS report) 16 hr benzene soxhlet extraction. Internal standards were added to 17C1P and 17C2P prior to extraction. Native 2,3,7,8 TCDD and 2,3,7,8 TCDF were added to fortified samples prior to extraction. Sample Clean-up (See March 16, 1983 NYS report) The microprocessor controlled clean-up was a sequence of basic alumina, PX-21 carbon, and neutral alumina followed by a single concentration to 5-10 joL for GC/MS injection. Capillary GC/HBMS In summary: 2 \iL of sample extract was injected onto a 0.3 mm x 60 m SP 2330 GC capillary interfaced directly into MS-50 via a fused silica SP 2330 butt-joint transfer line. 3 min, 60°/min to 190°, The GC program was 70° for 2.5°C/min to 240° hold. Kratos MS-50 mass spectrometer was used in the El mode (70 ev), approx. 10,000 resolution (10% valley), source 250°C, DS-55 data system, with multiple peak monitoring mode as follows: For PCDFs (m/e) 1st Injection: 304, 306 - M, M+2 of Tetra CDF 312 - TCDF internal std 340 - M+2 of penta CDF �2nd Injection: (optional) 338, 340 - M, M+2 of penta CDF 348 - penta CDF internal std 374 - hexa CDF For TCDDs 1st Injection: 320, 322 - M, M+2 of TCDD 334 - TCDD internal std. Calculations (See March 16, 1983 NYS report for details) Internal standard method of calculation C^ - X Cz A1/Aa. TCDDs: individual scans at m/e 322 are summed across a single peak (for 2,3,7,8 TCDD) or a range of observed peaks (for total TCDDs). The area under the resulting mass profile is then ratioed to that of the iS C 2^3,7,8 TCDD internal standard at m/e 334. TCDFs: individual scans at m/e 306 are summed across a single peak(for 2,3,7,8 TCDF) or a range of observed peaks (for total TCDFs). The area under the resulting mass profile is then ratioed to that of the J7 C1 2,3,7,8 TCDF internal standard at m/e 312. penta-CDFs: individual scans at m/e 340 are summed across a range of observed peaks for total penta CDFs. The area under the resulting mass profile is then ratioed to that of the 1T C1 2,3,7,8 TCDF internal standard. factor of 1 is assumed. The J7 A response C1 penta CDF internal standards were monitored in a 2nd injection of several samples and not used for quantitation. �hexa-CDFS: individual scans at m/e 374 are summed a range of observed peaks for total hexa CDF. The area under the resulting mass profile is then ratioed to that of the 37 C1 2,3,7,8 TCDF internal standard. A response factor of 1 is assumed. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION In general, air samples taken from the 11, 14, 16 and 17th floors of the Binghamton State Office Building were found to contain complex mixtures of tetra-, penta and possibly hexa CDF isomers as shown by the high resolution (HR) single ion chromatograms in figure 1 for floor 11. Tetra-CDFs were predominant on all floors, having concentrations of from 76 to 185 pg/m3 total TCDF as given in Table 1. Figures 5-12 are HR single ion chromatograms showing the presence of a mixture of TCDF isomers in all samples (except particnlate) from floors 11, 14, 16 and 17. Figures 13 and 14 show a 2378-TCDF-fortif ied sample and solvent blank. A more complete, set of data including HR mass profiles is shown in figs. 17-26 for samples 11C (combined) and 16C1. When intepreting these chromatograms it is important to note that isomer patterns may be distorted as all isomers are not recovered through the sample clean up. The 2,3,7,8 isomer was found in all samples at concentrations of from 0.8 to 23 pg/m3. For floor 17, the glass fiber particulate filter (17C1P, 17C2P) was analyzed separately from the silica gel adsorbent cartridge (17C16, 17C2G). The entire mixture of TCDFs was found on the adsorbent and little or none in the particulate section O.3 |i) of the sample trap (figs. 8-10, 15-16). �Penta CDFs, which were more abundant than tetra CDF in the original soot, were found in all non-particulate air samples however at lower concentrations of from 6.6 to 24.4 pg/m3 (Table 2). A possible .explanation for this is the lower volatility of penta compared to tetra CDFs. High resolution single ion chromatograms and mass profile data for penta CDFs in samples 11B3 + 11B4 + 11C1, 17C1G, 17C1P, and a solvent blank are shown in figures 27-30. A typical 2nd injection of a sample to acquire data on hexa (and penta) CDFs is shown for sample 11B3 + 11B4 + 11C1 in figures 31-34. No hexa CDF could be confirmed at a detection limit of approximately 5 pg/m3. To obtain adequate sensitivity for TCDDs, four 50 m3 BSOB air samples were extracted and combined to form a single sample prior to clean up and analysis. The SP2330 capillary GC/HRMS results for a combined llth floor air sample (analyzed in duplicate), a solvent blank, and a background air sample fortified to 0.82 pg/m3 with native 2,3,7,8 TCDD are given in Table 3. Because only a small amount of sample 11C6" + 11C7 + 11C8 + 11C10 was injected, the signal/noise for that sample was weak (a wide peak was also observed, hence asignificant concentration). The HR single ion chromatograms and mass profiles for a combined BSOB air sample 11C1 + 11C2 + 11C4 + 11C5 (figs. 35-37) showed 226 pg 2,3,7,8 TCDD equivalent to 0.94 pg/m3 air (also possible traces of other TCDDs). A quality control (120 m3 Albany air) sample fortified with 98 pg native 2,3,7,8 TCDD to 0.82 pg/m3 air was analyzed and found to have a concentration of 1.3 pg/m3. A solvent blank was similarly analyzed and found to contain an rather high 47 pg 2,3,7,8 TCDD equivalent to 0.39 pg/m3 air. �CONCLUSIONS Analysis of air samples for a complex mixture of PCDDs and PCDFs at concentrations in the parts per quadrillion range had never been attempted prior to these studies. Although considerable progress has been made in the development and application of the necessary analytical techniques, several problems remain unresolved. The concentration of 2,3,7,8-TCDD in the air of the BSOB could not be accurately determined in this group of samples due to the presence of very low concentrations of interfering compounds in the blank. It is clear, however, that the concentration of 2,3,7,8-TCDD is below 1.5 pg/m3, consistent with an earlier report from the laboratory. A second problem relates to the lack of labelled quantitative PCDF standards (for congeners other than 2,3,7,8-TCDF). Quantitative analysis of a congener without an internal standard is difficult, since recoveries are not accurately known. In the present instance, when even unlabelled standards of the range of compounds sought are unavailable, and certain congeners are demonstrably poorly recovered, the difficulty is even more acute. Thus, calculations of "total TCDF'' and "total PCDF" may underestimate actual concentrations of these mixtures. Attempts will be made to further address these problems in future analyses. Nevertheless, these data permit some important conclusions regarding the PCDD/PCDF concentrations,in the BSOB. The concentration of 2,3,7,8-TCDF measured in six locations varied from 9.9 to 23 pg/m3. The ratio of tetra CDF to penta and hexa CDF is clearly higher in these air samples than �-9- in the soot samples analyzed earlier. Coupled with the observations that the bulk of both 2,3,7,8-TCDF and "total TCDF" was found in the silica gel cartridge rather than in the particulate material, this result suggests that these compounds are predominantly in the gas phase. Finally, these experiments confirm that 2,3,7,8-TCDD is present at concentrations well below those of 2,,3,7,8-TCDF in these air samples. �-10INDEX TO FIGURES PCDFs Figure 1. Tetra, penta and hexa CDFs - floor 11 example 2. Standards - Tetra, penta, hexa CDFs 3. 1 Tetra CDFs 2-4 ion chromatograms - comparison of floors 11, 14, 16, and 17 5-12 fortified sample 13 solvent blank 14 comparison of particulate vs. adsorbed - floor 17 examples: sample 11C1 + 11C2 + 11C4 + 11C5 sample 16C1 4. 18-20 21-26 Penta CDFs example: sample 11B3 + 11B4 + 11C1 comparison of particulate vs. adsrobed - floor 17 solvent blank 5. 15-16 27 28-29 30 Hexa CDFs (2nd injection} example: sample 11B3 + 11B4 + 11C1 (hexa + penta) 31-34 TCDDs 1. Sample 11C1 + 11C2 + 11C4 + 11C5 solvent blank 35-37 38 �Table 1. TETRA-CDFs Volume • m3 Flocr/sa-Dlsi) Concentration of 2378 TCDF (pg/m3) Detectionlimit (pg/m3) Ion® ratio (%) 304/306 Relative retention time TCDF recovery Total TCDF (pg/m3) Detection limit (pg/ir.3) ratio (%) 304/306 Ratio 2273/'tot = l {%) 61 . 5 11 0.4 78 1.0 97 92 0.8 83 12 14 A3 63.0 14 0.3 73 1.0 157 185 0.3 72 8 16 Cl 62.4 16 0.4 74 1.0 88 118 2.7 77 14 17 C1G 62.1 12 1.7 84 1.0 26 79 5 89 15 17 C1P 62.1 08 . 0.7 70 1.0 78 3.9 2.7 89 21 17 C2G 59.8 9 0.3 78 1.0 71 59 4 73 15 17 C2P 59.8 09 . 04 . 126 10 . 74 ND 5 92 — 11 B3 + 11 B4 + 11 Cl 184.5 16 0.5 84 1.0 41 133 3.7 78 12 11 Cl + 11 C2 + 11 C4 + 11 C5 240.8 23 0.3 80 1.0 42 76 4 73 30 0 ND 0.2 — — 110 ND 1.9 110 20 14 Cl Solvent blank - DOH2 background air 49.1 1.9. 0.6 68 1.0 74 9.5 2.5 NSA 6S 10.0 pg/m3 2378 TCDF Fortified backcrour.d air 41.8 9.9 0.4 79 1.0 120 10.2 2.1 DC-HI 8.1 pg/nr3 2378 TCDF Fortified background air 51.6 1.2 80 1.0 75 16.8 2.0 10.0 97 90 (J/e.g. 14A3 is 14th floor,.N cqsT building corner, 3rd sample taken on that date. &> Theoretical ion ratio = 78%. (3 Recovery variation (vs. external standard) is probably due to the volume measurement and manipulation of small (5-10 volumes prior to injection. 60 �Table 2 PENTA CDFs £) lon^-' ratio (%) 338/340 Total Pen ta -CDF (pg/m3 ) Detection Limit (pg/m3) 14C1 20.6 2.4 14A3 12.7 1.6 16C1 21.2 1.2 17C1G 24.4' 7.4 17C1P ND 2.0 6.6 1.3 0.78 2.9 2.1 0.23 11B3 + 11B4 +11C1 19.2 1.5 0.62 11C1 + 11C2 +11C4 + 11C5 16.4 2.3 Solvent blank ND 1.3 DOH2 background ND 2.0 Floor/Sample 17C2P r (V Recovery of three -^Cl Penta CDF internal standard isomers was calculated to be 80%, 91% and <10% for sample 17C2G (other samples were similar). (£/ Multiple ions were checked on a 2nd injection for several samples. �Table 3 Air volume (m ) m/e 322 area (counts) pg found 11C1 -f- 11C2 + 11C4 + 11C5 241 1040165 226 11C6 + 11C7 + 11C8 + 11C10 241 529026 372 Floor/sample / \ / pg/m3 \ ! / i i j 0.94 Solvent blank 2 + 3 DOH 3 + 4 background air fortifie^i with 98 pg native TCDD (=0.82 pg/ m3) 0 20 for calcs.) 120 47 706423 150 ^^s^ \ 0.39 \ 296261 \ 'j .T 7 /* 1.5 X / ! 13C TCDD recovery (%) GC rela-ive re --:•.- ;icr. ri.-.e 0.66 90 i ^p. 29 0.84 58 l.CO 17 0.60 112 1.00 . 13 0,89 78 1.00 Detection limit (pg) 12 ' Ratio® 320/322 • \ 1.3 / \ / \ / \Js' Both BSOB air samples appeared to contain small amounts of several other TCDD isomers as evidenced by a simultaneous response at other retention times for m/e 319.8964 and 321.8935; however, additional ana-lysis is needed for verification. (^Theoretical Ratio = 0.78 �DS5S HIGH RESOLUTION HPM RUHNflME WDHM7 DRTE 3/30/83 RETM TIME 02:30 303,9013 ,05530 , Fig UK. i: 03:30 100X=2711487 Tcne/i- VAV^J ' «»^AW^«~* 176 DS5S HIGH RESOLUTION MPM RUHNfiNE WDHM7 DflTE 3/30/83 RETM TIME 01:00 .05:00 09:00 242 TIME 12:57 .13:00 .17:00 339.8596 M4 .'162 DS55 HIGH RESOLUTION MPM RUNNflME MDHM7 DflTE 4/ 4/83 RETN TIME 30 14:38 .15:30 .16:30 238 314 TIME 12 i l l ,17:30 18:30 �a. : DS55 HIGH RESOLUTION MPM RUNNRME MDHM4 DflTE 3/28/83 RETN TIME 08; 3B t 03:30 i06:30 i ions TIME 69:30 12:30 15:30 TIC .•-_- *- !*• --• .O70O M2 1 .OO7D M3 OD7b M4 65 RUNNflME MDHM4 MflSS 311.8896 SCflNS 295-215 129 193 257 DflTE 3/28/83 TIME 17: 7 SWEEP 300 (PPM) SCRNTIME 0.3 (SECS) i INTENSITY 103419 100 311.8427 *SK OREO ID:1 3T1.6896 *SK fiREfl 11): 2 *SK RREft ID:3 * �DS55 HIGH RESOLUTION MPM RUNNRME MDHM1 DRTE 3/28/83 RETN TIME ©8:30 62:30 06:30 04s 38 TIC - » -J U -*^ - ^, 5'. TIME / L / J) [«tfa«(<ed/ 10:30 03:30 .12:30 / Ws'—*-/u-. Ml M2 M3 M4 A 57 113 169 £25 RUNNflME MDHM1 DflTE 3/28/83 TIME 13: 0 MfiSS 347.8479 SWEEP 300 (PPM) SCRNTIME 0.3 (SECS) SCRNS 94-231 100X INTENSITY 203331 100 347.7956 *SK PREfl I D : 1 347.8479 �4' CDf DSES HIGH RESOLUTION MPtl RUNNflME MDHM2 DflTE 4/ 4/83 RETN TIME 00:36 TIME 8:23 09:38 03:30 12:38 15:38 TIC Ml M2 M3 M4 133 RUNNflME MDHM2 DflTE 4x 4/83 TIME MOSS 373.8208 SWEEP 390 (PPM) SCfiNS 282-297 160". INTENSITY 17744 199 265 8:28 SCflNTIME 8.3 (SECS) 100 373.7646 373.6208 373.8769 -3 3. �DSS5 HIGH RESOLUTION MPM RUHNflME TUDHM6 DOTE RETN TIME 61:00. 303.9013 03:00 3/29/83 05:00 TIM! f a r ^ 5 ; 07:00 09:00 COfs ^ Floor ./*/ 11:00 13:0y Ml 172 BSSS HIGH RESOLUTION MPM RUHNfiME TUDHM6 DfiTE RETN TIME 01:09. 03:60. 305.8986 . 3/29/83 05:00. 224 TIME 12»47 J37J00 .90 0:3 ,11:00, ,13:80, 100v.= 1539305 M2 120 172 224 �DS55 HIGH RESOLUTION MPM RUNNRME TUDHM9 DOTE RETH TIME 84;30 t 06; 59 t 3/29/83 03;39 TIME ?W*- 6 : teta-COfs IK floor /«/ 10:30 100<-:=9053S23 303.9013 lAJ 117 77 157 DS55 HIGH RESOLUTION MPM RUNNflME TUDHM9 DflTE 3/29/83 RETN TIME 06:30 08:30 197 237 TIME 15:44 10:39 12:33 14:38 10QV.= 13363382 395.8986 M2 A 14:39 12:30 T97" �DS55 HIGH RESOLUTION MPM RUNNfiME MDHM3 DOTE 3/28/83 RETN TIME 04:38 TIME .07:38 M HOOK 16 C| ,13:30 , Ml BS5S HIGH RESOLUTION MPM RUNNfiME MDHM3 DfiTE 3/28/83 RETM TIME M2 61:38 04:38 TIME 16:14 13:33 �BS55 HIGH RESOLUTION MPM RUNHflME MDHM5 DOTE 3/28/33 RETH TIME :30 61 ;3G 93; 38 05; 36 07:30 • FIgui* $ : "fetra COfs 09:30 15 10e''.=48173S 124 BS55 HIGH RESOLUTION MPM RUNNRHE MDHM5 ' DflTE 3/28/83 RETN TIME 13:39 :30 303,9013 72 :3Q TIME '176 TIME 18s Q9;3 ,03:30 228 ,13:39 11 ; 395.8986 M2 124 176 228 ,15 �DS55 HIGH RESOLUTION MPM RUHNRME TUDHM4 DOTE 3/29/83 TIME /7CIP RETH TIME 93:30 393.9913 95:30 07:39 09:39 11:30 <= 180497 13:3 Ml TC8 DS55 HICH RESOLUTION MPM RUHNftME TUDHM4 DfiTE RETN TIME 03:09 3588 0.96 05:09 '4 18 3/29/83 07:39 188 223 TIME 10:29 09:00 US09 M2 138 '180 222 13:06 �DS55 HIGH RESOLUTION MPM RUNNBME TDHM10 BflTE RETN TIME 04:30 t 303.9813 66:39 3/29/33 08:39 i j TIME . , 10 '. 10:30 i_ i 12:30 C"LOVS / / r (ooir 1/7 /7C2.6 -e.' ad' 14:30 100*'.= 1129391 Mi 86 130 DS5S HIGH RESOLUTION MPM RUNNflME TDHM10 DOTE RETN TIME 112 '174 3/29/83 218 262 TIME 16:57 I7O ( 64:30 36:30 08:30 10130 12:33 14:30 �DS55 HIGH RESOLUTION MPM RUNNflME UDHM7 DflTE 3/30/83 RETN TIME 02136 05:36 TIME rMguhe I I : oor ^ fl 03:30 17:30^ .^:30. 100v.=2711487 303.9013 Mi 1.76 •44 DS55 H I G H RESOLUTION MPM RUNNfWE WDHM7 BRTE 3/38/83 RETN TIME 62:30 305.8986 05:30 08:33 308 TIME 12s57 11:30 i14:30 t i17:30 i_ 19Q-'.=3432650 TtjOf M2 lie 176 242 508 37- �DS55 HIGH RESOLUTION MPM RUNNflME TDHM5 DfiTE 3/31/83 RETH TIME 94:30 06:30 03:39 |2 TIME 10:39 12:36 393.9013 >'- ifc£ 14:30 16:30 100v.= 1219392 Ml W.v^WslV'Vl-^rf^wuhJWW 236 T36 DS55 HIGH RESOLUTION MPM RUNNflME TDHM5 DflTE. 3/31/83 RETN TIME 64:30 06:30. 3588 0.96 08:38 286 TIME 11:31 .10:30 12:30 14:30 16:30 100'<=> 1550532 M2 T36 186 236 286 �RUHHfiHE MDHM2 RETN TIME 00:30 DRTE 04:30 3/28/83 llML 03:30 uH > i £.: o«.' " |3 . A/Sfl 6 b io; TIC Ml M2 i. M3 M4 153 229 305 * " ;•./'.'••'•*.••!.•.'• C /' r" " ~'" 8.3 CSECS, SCflNS 283-224 109"-i INTENSITY 83355 305.8527 �™. RETN TIME 0 ' 69:39 62:30 w> • • • . * • - 04:30 i J w w f 4 1 IU f° IT 06:36 r TIC Ml M2 M3 M4 SI 101 151 "iSJHTIHE SCflNS 164-178 100v. INTENSITY 26752 201 �RUNNflME MBHM5 DRTE 3/23/33 TIME MflSS 383.9013 SWEEP 380 (PPM) SCRNS 139-199 180'< INTENSITY 24691 IS jxa.vip": ' ' t if SI/ICA 6et ca>T>Wf 100 303.8557 303.9013 303.94 *SK fiREfl ID:1 * RUNNflME MDHM5 DftTE 3^28/83 TIME 18: 0 MOSS 395.8936 SWEEP 308 (PPM) SCflHTIME 0.3 (SECS) SCfiNS 189-199 1Q0'< INTENSITY 23146 160 305.8527 *SK flRER ID:1 305.8986^ 305.944'S �RUHNRME TUBHM4 I* IflSS DOTE 3/29/83 TIM 305.8986 SWEEP 300 (PPM) ; JCflNS 267-217 I00v. INTENSITY 32973 HqUre (6 '. lenYo. COfs ^ Sawiiote I?C/ 09 I Po INV i ^~ ii i /•»!-£• 75 3 i ^ Q **PV* r^ cr l • 50. 25. J JUA&4 ^kf^WlWP^W/kv^Ji^^vllA v Vf V * 1 • " ! tf 2 ' " ' ' 1' 3 ' '" "™" "^HH *SK. RREfl ID:1 * RUNNfiME TUDHM4 DflTE 3/29/83 TIME 19:29 MRSS 303.9613 SWEEP 398 (PPM) SCflNTIME 0.3 (SECS) SCONS 207-217 100t INTENSITY 31235 108 7-5 50 39376557 *SK flRER ID:1 303.9013 303.9479 �DS5S HIGH RESOLUTION MPM RUNNflME TDHH5 DOTE 3/31/83 RETH 17'' TIMI |DVV CDfs SuvipJe UCl+UCi-f sm-flofflrasaag^raR^ ^RS-T^ 3 9 0 l I l l l I I i^ i t I I.I ..1 M i l I t I I I I I > i l —> » I i I I I I I I I 1 l . UISIT TIC ""J»S5&"HI"&H* Sfe'SOLUTION MPM RUNNflME TDHMS DflTE 3^31x83 RETN TIME :3Q 00:33 04:30 TIME ili31 08:30 • i12:30 l 16:30 IS? 235 313 TIC /* Ml M2 i* 1 1 . aayfc> A M3 20 �IS": WQSS pr°6/« -JDSSS HIGH RESOLUT $O»v,j3/e JJCf f //C£-M/C<MlC£ PERK SUMMflTION R RUNNRME TDHM5 DOTE 3/31/83 TIME 11:31 MRSS 3H.8397 SCRM WIDTH 308 PPM SCON TIME 8.3 SECS SCON NUMBERS 279- 287 STRNDRRD 0.6030 FflCTOR 0 1.95 OF 7.6UL SRMPLE «C11(1+2+4+5) MRSS CENTROID 311.8836 311.8588 311.8823 311.9287 ITEM TOTRL 1 2 3 RRER B945755. 8642. 5458992. 7957. BOSELINE SUETRfiCTED YES YES YES YES BRSELINE SKIMMEB NO YES YES YES RELRTIVE RREfl TO STRNDRRD 88.00 0.00 0.13 0.00 80.79 0.06 0.12 0.00 RUNNRME TDHM5 DRTE 3/31/83 TIME 11:31 MRSS 311.8396 SWEEP 300 (PPM) SCRNTIME 0.3 (SECS) SCRNS 279-287 100'-i INTENSITY 127239 100 311.8427 *SK RRER ID:1 31'l. 8896 311 . 3 ' 965 �DS55 HIGH RESOLUT PERK SUMMATION Rl RUNNflME TDHMS DOTE |tj ' ' ' Sa^p/f HCl+//C> i!/C<{f/ia * 3/31/83 TIME 11:31 MOSS 303.9014 SCfiN WIDTH 309 PPM SCflN TIME 8.3 SECS SCflN NUMBERS 279- 287 STflNDflRD 0.0003 FftCTOR 0 1.95 OF 7.6UL SflMPLE *C11(1+2+4+5) MflSS CENTROID 303.8958 303.8628 303.8928 303.9319 ITEM TOTfiL 1 2 3 RREfl 2350334. 7640. 2049323. 14135. BfiSELINE ' SUBTRACTED YES YES YES YES BOSELINE VTOTflL SKIMMED flREfi TO STfiNDflRD NO 75.84 8.08 YES 0.25 0.00 YES 66.13 0.00 YES 0.46 0.90 DS55 HIGH RESOLUTION MPM PEflK SUMMfiTION REPORT RUNNflME TDHMS DflTE 3/31/83 TIME 11:31 MRSS 305.8987 SCflN WIDTH 300 PPM SCflN TIME 0.3 SECS SCflN NUMBERS 279- 287 STflNDflRD 0.0300 FflCTOR 0 1.95 OF 7.6UL SflMPLE *C11(1+2+4+5) MflSS CENTROID 305.8953 305.8621 305.8936 305.9304 ITEM TOTflL 1 2 3 RREfl 2896173. 18242. 2549809. 8232. BflSELINE SUBTRflCTED YES YES YES YES * BflSELINE v.TOTflL RELflTIVE SKIMMED flREfl TO STRHDRRD NO 77.40 0.00 YES 0.49 0.00 YES 63.15 0.60 YES 0.22 0.00 �RUNMRME TBHMS DflTE 3/31/83 TIM f " 3-O ' ^ ^ MflSS 303.9013 SWEEP 380 (PPM) SCRHS 279-287 188'< INTENSITY 54145 100 303.655? 333.9813 383.9470 RUNNRME TDHMS DflTE 3/31/83 TIME 11:31 MflSS 385.8986 SWEEP 388 (PPM) SCRNTIME 8.3 (SECS) SCRNS 279-287 188*<i INTENSITY 76709 109 305.8S27 365.8986 305.9445 �BSSS HIGH RESOLUTION MPM RUNNAME MDHM3 DflTE 3/23/83 RETN TIME ' |0 TIME (a* 3eeraaB^^ I II I I I I I I I I! I I I I I I I I II I | I I It I " END OF DHTR iifzo 101 201 DS55 HIGH RESOLUTION MPM RUNNflME MBHM3 RETN TIME 09:39 DflTE 301 3/28/83 04:39 TIME 16:14 98:39 12:39 16:39 TIC |V>A M2 nr CDfs A L A J\ J. ^ .. JL-JV- 1 M3 M4 77 153 229 305 flCQl �PERK RUNNflME MDHM3 C( DPTE 3/28/yy 16:14 MflSS 311.8897 SCflN WIDTH 360 PPM SCflN TIME Q.3 SECS SCfiN NUMBERS 207- 215 STPNDflRD 0.0909 FflCTOR 6 16C1 2UL OF 8UL TOTflL MflSS CENTROID 311.8806 311.8521 311.8799 311.9202 ITEM TOTOL 1 2 3 flREfl 9961496. 42788. 9403350. 54098. BflSELINE , BfiSELINE SUBTRfiCTED SKIMMED YES NO YES YES YES -YES YES YES XTOTflL RELPTIVE PREfi TO STflHDflRB 93.25 0.00 0.40 0.09 88.02 0.00 0.51 0.00 RUNHRME MDHM3 DflTE 3/28/83 TIME 16:14 MflSS 311.8896I SWEEP 300 (PPM) . SCflNTIME 0.3 (SECS) SCANS 207-2 15 i00'< INTENSITY 207755 100 50 31.1 .8427 *SK PREft ID:1 31'1 .8896 3i1.9365 �l(> Cl DSSS HIGH RESOLU' PEflK SUMMflTION K-. _.„. RUNHflME MDHM3 DflTE 3/28/83 TIME 16:14 MflSS 303.9014 SCflN WIDTH 300 PPM SCflN TIME 8.3 SECS SCflN NUMBERS 207- 215 STRNDRRD 0.0000 FflCTOR 0 16C1 2UL OF 8UL TOTflL MflSS CENTROID 303.8936 303.8611 393.8904 303.9304 ITEM TOTflL i 2 3 flREfl 2709686. 6255. 2261770. 35166. BflSELINE SUBTRRCTED YES YES YES YES BflSELINE SKIMMED NO YES YES YES ".TOTftL RELflTIVE RREfl TO STflNDRRD 78.03 0.00 0.18 0.00 65.13 0.00 1.01 0.00 DS55 HIGH RESOLUTION MPM PEflK SUMMOTION REPORT RUNNflME MDHM3 DflTE 3/23/83 TIME 16:14 MflSS 305.8987 SCflN WIDTH 300 PPM SCflN TIME 0.3 SECS SCflN NUMBERS 287- 215 STflNDflRD 0.0000 FflCTOR 0 16C1 2UL OF 8UL TOTflL MflSS ITEM CENTROID 305.8923 TOTflL 305.8604 1 305.8901 2 305.9292. 3 flREfl 3324966. 13730. 3044845. 44193. BflSELINE SUBTRflCTED YES YES • YES YES BflSELINE v.JOTflL RELflTIVE SKIMMED flREfl TO STflHDflRD NO 81.09 0.60 YES 0.33 0.00 YES 74.26 0.90 YES 1.98 0.00 �RUNNflME MDHN3 DOTE 3/28/83 TIM MflSS 303.9813 SWEEP 300 (PPM) SCflNS 207-2 IB 180v. INTENSITY 61571 16 Cl 100 75 50 25 303.8557 *SKflREflID:1 RUNNRME MDHM3 369.9613 303.9476 * DflTE 3/28/33 TIME 16:14 MflSS 305.8986 SWEEP 300 (PPM) SCONS 207-215 IQQ't INTENSITY 81473 SCRNTIME 0.3 (SECS) 108 50 25 365.8527 *SK RREO ID:1 3'.96 6566 DS55 HIGH RESOLUTION MPM 365.9445 �16 Cl 0/30^^5^x1 bo-. X |0(D - �^> " D555 HIGH RESOLUTION MPM RUNNflME WBHM7 DfiTE 3/30/83 RETH TIME 10800 11:00 339.8596 12-.00 T: 13:00 3L6 '. penta CQfs wl-//ei* 14:00 15:00 .16:90 100^=628585 M4 193 zir RUNNRME WDHM7 MOSS 339.8596 SCflNS 193-317 109 339.8085 DflTE 3/30/83 TIME 12:57 SWEEP 309 (PPM) SCflNTIME 0.3 (SECS) INTENSITY 132598 �RUNNRME MDHM5 DOTE 3/28/83 TI MflSS 339.8596 SWEEP 300 (PPM) SCRNS 114-243 18QV. INTENSITY 106788 100 ^ 9 8 8 3 . 8 5 *SK RRER ID:1 339.8596 DS55 HIGH RESOLUTION MPM RUNNRME MDHM5 DRTE 3/28/83 339.9186 TIME 18: RETN TIME 30 M4 114 140 '166 T 192 218 �DS55 HIGH RESOLUTION MPM RUNNRME TUDHM4 DOTE '3/23/Q3 RETN TIME 05:09 06:00 339.8596 128 97:00 08:09 TIM 39:80 162 I7C4P 18:00 196 11:00 12:08 13:00 100v.= 188Q24 230 RUNHRHE TUDHM4 DOTE 3x29^83 TIME 18:29 MflSS 339.8596 SWEEP 388 (PPM) SCflHTIME 8.3 (SECS) SCflHS 111-259 1Q0V. INTENSITY 88429 339.6995 *SK PREO IP:1 339.6596 339.9106 �DSS5 HIGH RESOLUTION MPM RUNNRME TUDHMS DOTE RETN TIME 03:36 64:39 05:36 3/29/83 0-6; 30 ' r . P0wfei TIM 87:38 08:39 09:30 18:30 M4 126 '5 18 190 RUNNANE TUDHM5 DOTE 3/29/83 TIME 11:48 MASS 339.8596 SWEEP 390 (PPM) SCflNTIME 0.3 (SECS) SCRNS 62-217 100*4 INTENSITY 193549 100 75 339.6665 339.0596 339.9106 �30: DSS5 HIGH RESOLUTION MPM RUNNflME MDHH7 DOTE 4/ 4/83 TIMI jo v\ RETN TIME I I I I I I I I. .1.1. 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I t I I I I I I I I I I I I t END OF DfiTfl RCQU ITION TIC 101 201 DS5B HIGH RESOLUTION MPM RUNNflME MDHM7 DflTE 4/ 4x83 RETN TIME 80130 04:30 03:30 TIME 12stl 12:30 16:30 TIC Ml M2 M3 A. M4 75 223 297- �RUNNflHE MDHH7 fcflTE 4/ 4/83 TIMI MflSS 339.8596 SWEEP 360 (PPM) SCANS 21-166 100v. INTENSITY 232181 31'. u ,//2y .,,/c/ 100 75 CDf 58. 339.6865 *SK PREfi ID:1 RUNNftME MBHM7 MflSS 347.8479 SCRNS 21-166 33^.8596 339.9106 DOTE 4/ 4/83 TIME 12:11 SWEEP 389 (PPM) SCRNTIME 8.3 (SECS) INTENSITY 783769 109 75 A-& 347.F956 *SK flREfl I D : 1 347.9801 .900 �DS55 HIGH RESOLUT! 3-2.'. pn>fi/eS PERK SUMMflTION RE RUNNflME MDHM7 DOTE 4/ 4/83 TIME 12:11 MfiSS 337.8626 SCflH WIDTH 300 PPM SCflH TIME 0.3 SECS SCON NUMBERS 21- 166 STRNDRRB 9.0800 FRCTOR 2.9 OF S.8UL SflMPLE *'S 11 B3 + B4 + Ci MRSS • CENTROIB 337.8582 337.8201 337.8496 337.8914 ITEM TOTRL 1 2 3 RRER 7331942. 35521. 5423822. 59235. BfiSELINE SUBTRACTED YES YES YES YES BflSELINE SKIMMED MO YES YES YES •'.TOTRL RELRTIVE RREfl TO STRNBRRD 29.02 0.00 0.14 0.08 21.47 0.00 0.23 0.68 RUHHRME MBHM7 DOTE 4/ 4/83 TIME 12:11 MRSS 337.8625 SWEEP 390 (PPM) SCRNTIME 0.3 tSECS) SCRNS 21-166 100* INTENSITY 215215 100 337.8117 337.6625 33779133 �Si: dh€.«S - pe^a CDf l//33t DS55 HIGH RESOLUT PERK SUMMflTIOH Ru _____ RUNHflME MDHM7 DOTE 4/ 4/83 TIME 12:11 MRSS 339.3596 SCflN WIDTH 306 PPM SCflN TIME 0.3 SECS SCAN NUMBERS 21- 166 STRNBflRD 0.0909 FflCTOR 0 2.9 OF 5.8UL SRMPLE «'S 11 B3 + B4 + Cl MflSS CENTROID 339.8555 339.8179 339.8489 339.8969 ITEM TOTRL 1 2 3 RRER 11009550. 61729. 8781231. 151949. BflSELINE SUBTRRCTEB YES YES YES YES BflSELINE SKIMMED NO YES YES YES •'.TOTflL RELRTIVE RREfi TO STRNDRRD 37.11 0.00 8.21 0.00 29.60 0.00 0.51 0.90 DS55 HIGH RESOLUTION MPM PERK SUMMRTION REPORT RUNNRME MTJHM7 BRTE 4/ 4/83 TIME 12s 11 MRSS 347.8479 SCRN WIDTH 300 PPM SCflN TIME 0.3 SECS SCRN NUMBERS 21- 166 STRNDRRD 0.0300 FflCTOR 0 2.9 OF 5.8UL SflMPLE *'S 11 B3 + B4 + Cl MRSS CENTROID 347.8423 347.8959 347.8394 347.8823 ITEM flREfl TOTflL 1 2 3 35692518. 93650. 32597346. 304061. BfiSELINE SUBTRflCTED YES . YES YES YES BflSELINE SKIMMED NO YES YES YES VTOTRL RELflTIVE RREfi TO STRHHRRD 65.95 0.66 9.17 0.69 60.23 0.06 6.56 0.66 �• * ?-~~ ;•;:;••: re;oi.jT IOM1 . FL'MMfiME '"I'MnS' T -M 0 0 : •? 0 I^ l: 1 lS:?0 I 0£ : 3 # 0 4 : :• 0 U1 1 10 : 30 J 12 :3C \ TIC "^-v^UJKiwj— 103 1135 16 O'i=9 -5.9193 319.8964 Ml . %,"r. ,'->j n./J V^—<V,>-^.i ?3 • ftw- 145 217- RUNNflME FDHM9 DflTE 3/25/S3 TIME 16:49 MOSS 319.8964 SWEEP 300 (PPM) SCflNTIME 8.3 SCfiNS 103-135 180V. INTENSITY 36335 109 75. tSECS) 14 �P'JHHfiHE FDHM9 DfiTE 3/25/83 TIME MOSS 321.3935 SWEEP 308 ( P P M ) SCONS 193-135 100-: INTENSITY 5 3 3 3 2 . ,iri j. I/Of f!Cm/C*f 100 321.8452 321.8935 D355 HI'SH RESOLUTION MPN PEflK 3UMKS RUHHfiME FDHM9 DPlTE ' 3/25/83 TIME 16:49 HflSS 321 *8935 SCflH WIDTH 300 PPM . SCON TIME 0.3 SECS SCflN NUMBERS 193-135 STRHDflRD 0.0008 FfiCTOR 0 11C 1+2+4+5 3.0UL OF 4.4UL IT-f, CFNTPOID 3?1.8906 ?21 .3535 3?1.5553 •521 .3243 TOTflL 1 2 3 fiREfi 1636672. 26722. 1040165. 15910. BfiSELINE BfiSELINE SUlTRfiCTEB SKIMMED VTOTfiL RELflTIVE OREO TO STOHDORD YES f ti YES YES YES YES 2.!. M r ,00 �36: WE FDHM9 DQTE 3/25/83 TIME MOSS 333.9335 S'-'EEF 50:? (PPM) SCflNS 103-135 108'-: INTENSITY 98853 Saw pi* 100 7-5 I3 I 333.8S35 333.9836 D355 HIGH RESOLUTION MPM PEAK SUKMfiTIOH REPORT RUHNflME FEHM9 BfiTE 3/25/83 TIMC MR3S SCON WIDTH SCfiH TIME 333,9336 300 PPM .3 SECS SCflN NUMBERS 103- 135 STflNDftRD' 0.6009 FflCTOR 6 ItC 1+2+4+5 3.0UL OF 4.4UL HflSS ITEM 333.9302 333.8953 TOTfiL 1 2 3 CPIHTROIB 2215955. 17444. 1106685. S3728. PflSELINE SUBTRflCTED YES YES YES YES BRSELIME SKIMMED NO YES YES YES ":TOTPL RELflTIVE ORES ' STflHDaRD 0 41.29 0.03 0.33 0.00 29.62 9.09 0.00 1.00 �3?'. I'-If i i> I . 1 ill ij Jl H. !!' , lit iiVji|(-i fin I ,i MH] u.i '» I''''! f t III ,\ HMnvVi!-',! •til ft •jl t< I I t k.-j'. t A A 11 T 'TC 321. DSSS HIGH RESOLUTION MPM PERK SUMMATION REPORT RUWJflME FDHM5 SCflW W I B T H . SCfiH TINE SCflH riUMBE DflTE 3x25x33 TIME 14:28 seVppii" 0.3 SECS FflCTOR 2.t 0^ ?,?UL SOLVENT ELflHK (2+3) KflSS CFMTPOIt 321 .353? ?2! ,'?:-":i " 21 t ? ? ? ^ ITEM . HREH i r_ ^ YES YES 'i c.. EflSELIHE SKIMMED HO YES vr T- -iTOTRL RELftTIVE tfFEO TO S S 1 54 or o � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange Description An account of the resource <p style="margin-top: -1em; line-height: 1.2em;">The Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange comprises 120 linear feet and spans the late 1800s to 2005; however, the bulk of the coverage is from the 1960s to the 1980s and there are many undated items. The collection was donated to Special Collections of the National Agricultural Library in 1985 by Dr. Alvin L. Young (1942- ). Dr. Young developed the collection as he conducted extensive research on the military defoliant Agent Orange. The collection is in good condition and includes letters, memoranda, books, reports, press releases, journal and newspaper clippings, field logs and notebooks, newsletters, maps, booklets and pamphlets, photographs, memorabilia, and audiotapes of an interview with Dr. Young.</p> <p>For more about this collection, <a href="/exhibits/speccoll/exhibits/show/alvin-l--young-collection-on-a">view the Agent Orange Exhibit.</a></p> Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Box The box containing the original item. 088 Folder The folder containing the original item. 2227 Series The series number of the original item. Series IV Subseries II Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Smith, R.M. D. Hilker P. O'Keefe K. Aldous Title A name given to the resource Typescript: Determination of Tetra-Hexa CDFs and Tetra-CDDs in Air Samples from the 11, 14, 16 and 17th Floors of the Binghamton State Office Building, May 16, 1983 Subject The topic of the resource BSOB ambient air sampling laboratory protocol dioxin https://www.nal.usda.gov/exhibits/speccoll/files/original/fad60b2f464744741ea38d0ee4bee55b.pdf 3b3d0ab85d68fc9a0d5cdd44025a56f1 PDF Text Text Item D Number 02224 Author Smith, P.M. Corporate Author RapOrt/ArtlClB TltlO Typescript: Determination of TCDFs and TCDDs in Air Samples from the Sixteenth Floor of the Binghamton State Office Building, March 16, 1983 Journal/Book Title Year Month/Day Color Number of Images D 20 Descriptor! Notes Thursday, September 20, 2001 Page 2224 of 2293 �•v. YXi;^ ««ijts~>~>- O -^ " Determination of TCDFs and TCDDs in Air Samples from the Sixteenth Floor of the Binghamton State Office Building R.M. Smith, D. Hilker, P. O'Keefe, K. Aldous Toxicology Institute New York State Department of Health March 16, 1983 RECEIVED APR 8 1983 DIRECTOR PUBLIC HEALTH �INTRODUCTION Prior to building cleanup, analysis of soot samples from ceiling panels on floors 1-17 of the chemically contaninated Binghamton State Office Building (1,2) showed that most samples contained PCBs (28-23000 ppra total) and a complex mixture of tetra- to octa- PCDF isoraers (average concentration in ppra was: Cl.=33, Cl =40> Cl,=18, Gl-.=6, C10 < H j o / o 1-3). The PCDDs were not detected by the less sensitive full scan HUMS method used. 2,3,7, 8 TGDD was then determined in several samples by HPLC/GC SIM techniques and was present at concentrations of 0.26-2.2 ppm. This data corellated well with the results of a biologically based cell keratinization assay (CKA) which screens for "2,3,7,8 TGDD-like activity". It was then necessary to analyze several air samples from a cleanedup section of the building (16th floor was available first) and investigate the sensitive analytical methods necessary to determine PCDFs and ,PCDDs at low (e.g. pg/m ) concentrations in air. The results would also show whether building clean-up efforts were proceeding satisfactorily for re-entry. 3 Approximately 50 ra of air were sampled and analyzed for total (gaseous and particulate) PCDF and PCDD using capillary GC/SIM high resolution mass spectroraetry. Tetra-corapounds were investigated first. Isoraer specificity was provided solely by a SP-2330 capillary column which resolves many but not all of the TCDD and TCDF isoraers. All 38 possible TCDF isoraers have only recently been synthesized and identified (3) but are not yet unavailable to our laboratory. All 22 TCDD isorners howMVrjr are available in our laboratory. �EXPERIMENTAL Laboratory Volatilization and Trapping Studies Experiments using 14 C radiolabeled 2,3,7,8-TCDD demonstrated that it can be volatilized (from 33% at 25° to 97.4% at 280°C)J transported in an air stream and trapped by 8 g of 30-70 mesh silica gel. The appara- tus is shown in Figure 1. At the high air flow rates required for samplo ing (e.g. 20 liter/min = 57.6 M /48 hrs) the trapping efficiency was found to be dependent on temperature and volume of air. Overall TCDD trapping and elution efficiency ranged from 70 to 100% depending on the experimental conditions employed. breakthrough of air. A three day laboratory study of TCDD 3 showed 78% was trapped and recovered from a 74.3 M sample Qualitative analysis by HPLC and GC identified the trapped material as 2,3,7,8 TCDD. For field use, the glass "cartridge" containing silica gel was housed in a rugged teflon housing, sealed with fluoroelastoraer Viton "o" rings and preceded by a glass microfiber air particulate filter (EPM 2000, 0.3u) as shown in Figure 2. A similar "cartridge" design for col- lection of large volumes of semivolatiles has been described in the literature ( ) 4 . Tests of the trapping efficiency of the field sampler by liquid scintillation counting showed a 70% recovery for 2,3,7,8-TCDD volatilized at 280°. This was identical to that found in the lab experiments. Samples for Analysis To investigate the variation of concentration with location, four sampling sites on the (cleaned, air uncirculated) 16th floor were chosen -3- �for analysis. The first group of 4 samples consisted of 3 samples (duplicate for PCDF, 1 for CKA) from site A, the northeast corner of the floor, and 1 sample (for PCDF) from site B, the southeast corner. were simultaneously sampled for independent analysis. PCBs The second group of samples taken 1 week later consisted of 3 samples from site C, the NW corner, and 1 from site D, the SW corner. A solvent blank, a background air sample taken at Albany,, NY, and 2 TCDD and TCDF fortified air samples were also analyzed as part of normal quality control procedures. Sampling Procedures Prior to sampling, internal standards (10 jiL mixed 190 pg/pL 37 C1 2,3,7,8 TCDF, 17.1 pg/pL 13 C 2,3,7,8 TCDD and 714 pg/nL OCDD) in cyclohexane were deposited directly on the 140° activated silica gel trapping adsorbent contained in the pyrex thimble. was added to the sampler for CKA. No internal standard The thimble was plugged with glass •o wool, placed inside its teflon housing, and the entire apparatus was assembled as shown in Figure 2. To check for breakthrough during actual sampling, an additional silica gel adsorbent stage was added in series. It was spiked and analyzed separately. The open ends of each sampling train were'then secured with aluminum foil and the samplers were transported to the Binghamton sampling site. The sampling was conducted by Versar. Each sampler was clamped in a vertical position and connected to a 1.5 CFM Cast vacuum pump (using rubber tubing) via a flowmeter which constantly monitored the air flow. Tne sampling rate was adjusted to 23 L/min. After approximately 50 M 3 �had been sampled, the pumps were turned off, the samplers were wrapped in foil, and returned to the laboratory for clean-up and GC/HRMS analysis. Extraction The Pyrex thimble containing silica gel, internal standards, and adsorbed compounds was removed from each sampler and its exterior was washed with benzene to remove any handling residue. The corresponding glass fiber filter containing collected particles was then folded and placed inside the Pyrex thimble, thus combining the sections. The thimble was then placed in a Pyrex soxhlet apparatus charged with 75 ml distilled-in-glass benzene and conticmously extracted for 16 hrs. Two of the background samples (NSA IS, NSA 2S) were spiked with unlabeled TCDF and TCDD prior to extraction. Sample Clean-up The extracted sample was cleaned up prior to GC/MS to remove PCBs and non-planar aromatics and isolate the Cl, to Cla PCDFs and PCDDs. Each sample was directly injected onto a pre-programmed automatic cleanup system that provides sequential multi-solvent chromatography on basic alumma, PX-21 adsorptive carbon, and neutral alumina (Figure 3 . ) Only a single concentration step was needed i.e. to concentrate the sample to 10 ul prior to GC/MS injection. Capillary GC/High Resolution Mass Spectrometry A portion (typically < 2 pi) of the. purified extract was injected onto a 60 m^t^r capillary gas chromatography column (0.3 ram i.d.) coated _ c __ �with 15% SP2330. The column oven was temperature programmed with a start- ing temperature of 80°C for 1 minute and then ramped at 12°C/min to 205°C. The final temperature, 205°C was held isotherraally until after the analyte eluted. The column was interfaced to the source of the Kratos MS-50 mass spectrometer using an open split interface and deactivated fused silica transfer line. The interface was maintained at approx. 280°C. Data were acquired from the Kratos MS-50 high resolution mass spectrometer operated in electron impact mode (70eV) at approx. 10,OOORP (source teraerature was 250°C) and stored by the Kratos DS-55 data system using a program called HRMPM (high resolution multiple peak monitoring). During the chromatographic run the m/e 303.9016, 305.8987, and 311.8898 masses corresponding to the native tetrachlorodibenzofuran lar ion peaks and the tetra 37 (TCDF) molecu- Cl-labelled internal standard molecular ion peak (m/e 311.8898) were monitored. For the analysis of TCDD, samples were placed into the source of the mass spectrometer by direct introduction probe in order to obtain greater sensitivity. The probe tip was heated ballistically to approx. 200°C and held isothermally until the sample evaporated. TCDD ion and In this case m/e 321.8936 and 333.9338, (native C labelled TCDD internal standard ion) were monitored. The area under the mass peak profile for each of the three ions monitored was summed over the time period in which the TCDF eluted. The area of the internal standard peak was ratioed to the area of the native peak to compute the concentration of the native material. The ratio of the ra/e 303.9016 to 305.8987 intensities (M*, M+2*) along with the coincidence of retention time on the gas chromatograpli provided -6- �additional data used in the verification of native TCDF. Data acquired for the.analysis for TCDD were processed in the same manner, summing the mass peaks profiles over the time period in which the sample evaporated from the probe capillary. Calculations For increased accuracy, the concentration and detection limits of TCDDs and TCDFs in air were calculated using an isotope dilution internal standard method as shown below. The percent recovery ,of internal standard (versus external standard) does not enter into these calculations and is provided in table 1 for information purposes only. Cj = XC2 Aj/A2 Where (eq. 1) C, = the calculated concentration of native TCDF (or TCDD) in pg/M3 X = a theoretical mass spectral response factor that corrects for differences in isotope abundances (1 for 3 C TCDD, 2.5 for Cl TCDF). C. = the known concentration of added, isotopically labeled TCDF (or TCDD) in pg/M3 A. = the measured area under the mass profile due to native TCDF at ra/e 305.8987 (or TCDD at 322) in arbitrary counts. A- = the measured area under the mass profile due to isotopically labeled TCDF at ra/e 311.8898 (or TCDD at 334) in arbitrary counts -7- �We have used the above .calculation and made the assumption that the labeled standard, added to the silica gel adsorbent prior to sampling, is recovered through trapping and clean up identically to the TCDF or TCDD in air. Strictly however, one would expect to observe a slightly lower recovery of internal standard if the trapping efficiency is < 100% 3 (experimentally 78%/74M ) because internal standard is applied at the beggining of the sampling period while trapped compounds are continuously accumulating over a 48 hr period. NSA 2 and NSA 3 samples fortified with native TCDF and TCDD at the end of the trapping period were corrected for this effect. Detection limits were similarly calculated using equation 1, substituting for A, the average MS noise (30 millimass units each side of m/e 305.8987 for TCDFs) in arbitrary counts and incorporating a standard detection limit factor of 2.5. The recovery of 37 Cl labeled TCDF or 13 C labeled TCDD was calculated as follows: A7r R - 100 -~ where (eq. 2) R = percent recovery A = the measured area at m/e 311.8898 due to Cl TCDF internal standard added prior to sampling. r = the measured mass spectral response at m/e 311.8898 for an external 37 Cl TCDF standard in pg/area f = the fraction sample injected t = the total amount of Cl TCOF internal standard added prior to sampling in pg. -8- �RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS All 5 air samples taken from the 16th floor of the BSOB were found to contain small amounts of a complex mixture of TCDFs as shown by the typical high resolution ion chromatograms and mass profiles for sample A2 in figures 4-7. The total concentration of observed TCDF isomers (obtain- ed by summing scans containing the proper response at both 303.9013 and 3 305.8986 TCDF masses) ranged from 52 to 102 pg/tn of air. (See Table 1 which is a summary of results, giving TCDF and TCDD concentrations, detection limits, ion ratios, GC retention times, recoveries, and results of blanks and fortified samples.) Near the detection limit of the instrumen- tation and using a highly selective SP2330 capillary GC column as the only means of TCDF isomer separation, (2 other TCDF isoraers have been shown to have nearly the same GC retention time on this column ( ) , the 3) "2378" TCDF isomer was found to be a major TCDF component. 12-20% of "2378" TCDF was found in all samples. These "2378" TCDF concentrations 3 ranged from 7.0 to 16 pg/m of air. For quality control, 2 air samples taken from the Albany area and fortified to 6.6 and 5.5 pg/ni 2378 TCDF 3 were found to have concentrations of 8.1 and 5.4 pg/m (+23% and -2% errors). Although particulate and/or gaseous compounds were trapped separately, they were combined prior to extraction and analysis. There- fore, all results represent a total of particulate + gaseous compounds. 3 Penta-CDF was detected at a concentration of 22 pg/m (total) only in sample A2 as shown by the mass profiles in figure 8. Other samples 3 had no d e t e c t a b l e penta-CDF at a d e t e c t i o n limit of c_a 5 pg/m . It is i m p o r t a n t to n o t e that q u a n t i t a t i o n for these h e a v i e r compounds was s e v e r e l y l i m i t e d due. to the lack of .3 Libeled p e n t a - C D F i n t u r n a l s t a n d a r d -9- �and native standards from which to obtain experimental response factors and provide fortified quality control samples. The TCDD analysis was accomplished using the direct insertion probe HRMS rather than capillary GC/HRMS because of the greater sensitivity that could be obtained. No TCDD was detected in any air sample at detec- 3 tion limits of < 1.3 pg/m . The MS signal due to internal 13 C 2378 2 TCDD standard in the samples (2.8 pg/m spiking level) was clearly evi- • dent. Because of apparent chemical noise at these low levels, a slight response of signal at ra/e 321.8935 was noted. However it did not meet the normal analytical criteria for TCDD. 3 An Albany air sample fortified to 6.4 pg/m TCDD was similarly 3 analyzed and found ,to have a concentration of 5.4 pg/m (-16% error). Future efforts will be directed towards improving our detecton limits for TCDD. -10- �Table 1. HRMS Results for BSOB 16th Floor Air Samples Total Penta-CDF Total TCDF "2378" TCDF1 37 Concentration of 2,3,7,8-TCDF (pg/M3) SAMPLE detection limit 3436 0/0 relative retention time Cl TCDF Recovery () % concentration (pg/M3) 304/306 2378/Total () % concentration (pg/M3) i f. lo 12 13 9.2 7.0 6.1 .76 1.0 86 93 .83 17 -6 _ _o 5.7 4.2 7.2 3.5 .90 .75 .76 .88 1.0 1.0 1.0 50 55 69 50 102 78 55 52 .0 8 .8 6 .75 .74 12 17 20 16 22^ ND(<5) ND(<5) ND(<5) Solv. Blank3 NSA 1** (background) ND ND 7.3 5.1 NA NA NA NA 57 41 ) NSA 2-S (TCDF=6.6, TCDD-7.7) » NSA 3-S (TCDF=5.5, TCDD=6-4) 8.1 (+23%) % 5.4 (- 2 ) 3.1 28 . .79 .9 7 1.0 35 61 A2 (2nd) ND 8.8 NA NA Al A2 B C2 D (NE (NE (SE (NW (SW corner) corner) corner) corner) corner) i.o-•• 1.0 1 Analyzed by capillary GC/HRMS 2 At least 2 isomers were detected. Detection limits were approximately 5 pg/M3. 3 Cal-culated for a theoretical 60 M3 volume of air. ti NSA 1-3: New Scotland Avenue Samples - considered quality control. 5 Analyzed by direct probe HRMS to obtain extra sensitivity. 6 Entire sample used for PCDFs. Ratio of 342/340 was .53 and .76. » �REFERENCES 1. Determination of Polychlorinated Dibenzofurans in Soot Samples from a Contaminated Office Building, R.M. Smith, D.R. Hilker, P.W. O'Keefe, S. Kumar, and K.M. Aldous. Toxicology 2. NYS Health Department, Institute Report, March, 1982. Comparisons of Chemical and Biological Data on Soot Samples from the Binghamton State Office Building, G. Eadon, K. Aldous, G. Frenkel, J. Gierthy, D. Hilker, L. Karainsky, P. O'Keefe, J. Silkworth and R. Smith. NYS Health Department, Toxicology Institute Report, March, 1982. 3. Synthesis of the 38 Tetrachlorodibenzofuran Isoraers and Identification by Capillary Column Gas Chroraatography/Mass Spectroraetry, T. Mazer, F. Hileraan, R. Noble and J. Brooks. Anal. Chem. 55 (1983) 104-110. 4. Modification and Evaluation of a High-Volume Air Sampler for Pesticides and•Semi Volatile Industrial Organic Chemicals, R. Lewis and M. Jackson, Anal. Chem. 54 (1982) 592-594. -11- �Table 1 Continued TCDD5 TCDD detection limit 13 C TCDD recovery —6 <1.2 <1.3 <1.3 ND 1.1 0.55 0.62 1.0 52 64 66 32 Solv. Blank ND 0.53 57 NSA 1 ND 0.72 64 ~6 5.4 (-16%) 0.27 58 Al A2 B C2 D (NE corner) (NE corner) (SE corner) (NW corner) (SW corner) (background) NSA 2-S (TCDF=6.6, TCDD=7.7) NSA 3-S (TCDF=5.5, TCDD=6-4) �I Offlf / err ——'- --/ / £££vl~ ^—5> fcflM / h*l5ie»> S€Qf I. TCPD VJai"llkaii9n ahj Tvoop/h<5 �r'o /. S 70S^ ar ' <*~1 in \—' <^r "i Air Sourp//no . Fo or PQ305 �fiefovie A>)5 \1_^_-___1 j ^^^^^^^^^^^^w pump W Al&w* Co �1I 12/2D/82 QZ: 7.0 TIME 17: o t'-i: 28 3!?: Sfc- wo/W ~7 - • 85 169 �S- DSSS HIGH RESOLUTION MPM RUNNflME MDHMS DfiTE 12/2Q/32 RETM TIME G8:3Q ,83;38 t TIME 171 3 09:39 66:36 12:39 t!5;30 t TIC 201 383.9813 Ml M2 311 I Ok)^=686629 M3 85 *DL * 169 253 33? �RUNHfiME MDHMS nRTE 12/20/82 TIME 17: 3 MflSS 383.9013 SWEEP 308 (PPM) SCRHTIME 0.3 (SECS) SCONS 42-201 100* INTENSITY 139105 10 8 25 1 303.8557 363.9013 303.9470 RUHHfiME MDHM5 DRTE 12/28/82 TIME 17: 3 MflSS 365.8986 SWEEP 3QQ (PPM) SCRHTIME 0.3 (SECS) SCflNS 42-261 180V. INTENSITY 149793 180 �- £**./»/•? /I 2 IiflTE 1 2 / 2 0 / 3 2 T I N E 17 RUMIIflME SWEEP 300 (PPM) SCfiHTINE 0 . 3 MOSS 311.8896 SCftHS 342-355 100-: INTENSITY 39325 (SECS) 10 Ci 25. 311 .8427 < *SK 311 .936'5 3i'l .6896 RREfl ID:1 DS55 HIGH RESOLUTION 11PM PEfiK SUMMfiTION REPORT RUHHRME MBHM5 DflTE 12/-2V3/82 TIME 17: 3 MftSS 311.8896 SCflH WIDTH 306 PPM SCflN TIME 0.3 SECS SCflH NUMBERS 342- 355 STflNDflRD 8.0800 FflCTOR 6 1 .4 UL OF 6 UL 02 ITEM CENTROID Ml. 8397 3U.85S6 M l . 8926 31 1.9251 TOTflL 1 2 3 (1ST + P) fiRER 1528079. 39753. 1169929. 22833. r•iT HE BHSELIME SUBTRACTED SKIMMED NO YES YES YES YES YES YES YES ri •<TOTflL RELRTIVE RRER TO STflHDRRD 49.99 0.00 1.30 0.00 38.27 0.00 0.75 0.00 �339.5106 •I-. -.".• '<• {•'.-••; -KiOiJ. : " • . . ' ' r>\'- '":•'.£?: '-••.- ••• P.riO r : ;-•:.»-|.--:>T .- •',""..; TOTfiL 36 0 1 v - r • T fir 1103782. YES E-ib"i€?! 56827. YES YES HO YES YES 8.C0 1 0 . C'o 1.11 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange Description An account of the resource <p style="margin-top: -1em; line-height: 1.2em;">The Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange comprises 120 linear feet and spans the late 1800s to 2005; however, the bulk of the coverage is from the 1960s to the 1980s and there are many undated items. The collection was donated to Special Collections of the National Agricultural Library in 1985 by Dr. Alvin L. Young (1942- ). Dr. Young developed the collection as he conducted extensive research on the military defoliant Agent Orange. The collection is in good condition and includes letters, memoranda, books, reports, press releases, journal and newspaper clippings, field logs and notebooks, newsletters, maps, booklets and pamphlets, photographs, memorabilia, and audiotapes of an interview with Dr. Young.</p> <p>For more about this collection, <a href="/exhibits/speccoll/exhibits/show/alvin-l--young-collection-on-a">view the Agent Orange Exhibit.</a></p> Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Box The box containing the original item. 088 Folder The folder containing the original item. 2224 Series The series number of the original item. Series IV Subseries II Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Smith, R.M. D. Hilker P. O'Keefe K. Aldous Title A name given to the resource Typescript: Determination of TCDFs and TCDDs in Air Samples from the Sixteenth Floor of the Binghamton State Office Building, March 16, 1983 Subject The topic of the resource BSOB ambient air sampling dioxin laboratory protocol https://www.nal.usda.gov/exhibits/speccoll/files/original/46d7e8c1116de53f865536a8067e89d2.pdf 63a37902c59369ab5873526d5b2db506 PDF Text Text RBDID Number °2193 Author Eadon G > - Center for Laboratories and Research, New York State Report/Article TltlB Comparisons of Chemical and Biological Data on Soot Samples From the Binghamton State Office Building Journal/Book Title Year 1982 Month/Day March Color Number of Images D 24 Dascrlpton Notes Thursday, September 20, 2001 Page 2193 of 2293 �Comparisons Of Chemical and Biological Data on Soot Samples From the Binghamton State Office Building G. Eadon, K. Aldous, G. Frenkel, J. Gierthy, D. Hilkerr L. Kaminsky, P. O'Keefe, J. Silkworth and R. Smith Center for Laboratories and Research ( New York\State Department of Health Albany, N^ 12201 March, 1982 �Soot samples from two separate samplings of the Binghamton State Office Building (BSOB) have been the objects of a coordinated interdisciplinary study at the New York State Health Department. On May 26, 1981, replicate soot samples were collected from above the ceiling panels of 16 of the 17 floors of the BSOB. Each sample was subjected to exhaustive soxhlet extraction (benzene). One portion of each extract was analyzed for polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), another for polychlorinated dibenzofurans (PCDFs) and related compounds. A third portion of all extracts not spiked with PCDDs and PCDFs as part of the chemical analysis procedure was examined using the cell keratinization assay. Another set of experiments utilized a much larger soot sample collected by a vacuum cleaner on the 3rd and 4th floors of the BSOB shortly after the fire occurred. The bulk of this sample has been used in animal toxicology studies. However/ portions of this soot were extracted and analyzed for PCBs, PCDFs, 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (2,3,7,8-TCDD) and 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzofuran (2,3,7,8-TCDF). The cell keratinization assay was also applied to an extract of this sample. The results of each of these studies have been described in detail in separate reports (Smith et al. , 1981a, 1981b, 1982; Silkworth et al., 1982; Gierthy et al., 1982). This paper will seek comparisons among the various chemical and biological data sets generated with these samples, and will attempt to determine whether the results are mutually consistent. �Chemical Data The number of samples which could be analyzed for PCDFs and related trace contaminants is severely limited by the difficulty of the analytical procedure. In contrast, the quantitation of the much more abundant PCBs is a fairly straightforward process; more than 800 PCB analyses have already been reported on BSOB-related samples. If the ratios of PCB to PCDF are approximately constant then the results of the PCB analyses can be used to estimate PCDF levels, with a considerable savings in time and manpower. Table I contains analytical data relevant to the PCB and PCDF (tetra through octa chlorinated) concentrations on soot samples collected from 16 of 17 floors of the BSOB, and on the soot sample used in animal toxicology experiments. The PCB concentrations vary by nearly 3 orders of magnitude, while total PCDF levels vary from not detected approximately 1200 ppm. «1.0 ppm) to For the 11 samples in which the ratio of total PCDFs to total PCBs has been determined, the total PCDFs measured ranges from 51 ppm to 1200 ppm, and the ratio of PCDF to PCB averages .066 * .024 (error limits represent one standard deviation). t Thus, the total PCDF levels correlate with PCB levels. More detailed consideration of the data in Table I indicates that the total concentrations of tetra CDFs, penta CDFs and hexa CDFs (groupings which include the isomers predicted (see later) to be most active with respect to acute oral toxicity and keratinization) relative to the total PCDF concentration is relatively constant (Table II). In the 11 samples for which these ratios have been determined, tetra CDFs constitute 33 + 5% �of the total PCDF mixture, while penta CDFs constitute 40 + 3%, and the hexa CDFs constitute 18 ± 7% of the total mixture. Thus, the PCB concentration can be used to predict approximate concentrations of each family of chlorinated dibenzofurans in these samples. For illustrative purposes, Table III contains the measured and predicted concentrations. Further studies will be required to rigorously validate the use of PCB analysis as a surrogate for the more elaborate analytical procedures. Since concentrations of dibenzodioxins and biphenylenes (Stalling, 1981) have not yet been determined in these samples, it cannot be demonstrated that the concentrations of these compounds correlate with PCB concentrations. Further, the samples analyzed to date have all been collected before May, 1981 and have been predominantly obtained from the same location on the 17 floors. The validity of the observed correlation must be tested with more recent samples and with samples taken at other locations; the similarity of the ceiling panel samples and vacuum cleaner sample is encouraging in the latter regard. Finally, the validity of the observed correlation in the very slightly contaminated samples likely to be generated during the ! final phases of the clean-up should also be tested. �Biological Data Evaluation of the consistency of the chemical data and the biological data requires knowledge of the concentrations and toxicities of particular congeners believed to be especially active. Because of the very few reference standards available, the laboratories of the Health Department have produced little congener-by-congener analytical data. Therefore, in the following discussions it will be necessary to assume that within a particular isomeric series the relative concentration of a given isomer is comparable to its concentration in a sample earlier subjected to congener by congener analysis (Stalling, 1981; Rappe, 1981). Among the tetra CDFs, the isomer believed to be most toxic is 2,3,7,8-Tetra CDF (Poland et al., 1977). Stalling and Rappe report that this isomer constitutes 68% and 41% of the tetra CDFs. Based on these results it will be assummed that 2,3,7,8-TCDF constitutes 50% of the total tetra CDF concentration in these samples. Given the greater toxicity of 2,3,7,8-chlorinated isomers (Poland et al., 1977) the most toxic penta CDF isomers are predicted to be 1,2,3,7,8- and 2,3,4,7,8-penta CDF. Stalling and Rappe report that these congeners comprise together 47% and 53% of the penta CDF mixture. A value of 50% will be assumed in subsequent discussions. Given the greater toxicity of 2,3,7,8-chlorinated isomers (Poland et al., 1977), the most toxic hexa CDF isomers are predicted to be 1,2,3,4,7,8-, 1,2,3,6,7,8-, 1,2,3,7,8,9- and 2,3,4,6,7,8-hexa CDF. Rappe reports that the total concentration �of three of these isomers in a BSOB sample was 49% of the total hexa CDF concentration. A value of 50% will be assumed here for the four isomers. Knowledge of the relative concentrations of dibenzodioxins and dibenzofurans will also be required for these discussions. In the soot sample used in animal toxicology experiments, the 2,3,7,8-TCDD/2,3,7,8-TCDF ratio was determined to be .025 (Smith et al., 1981b). this sample. This ratio will be used in connection with However, since analytical data on the dioxin levels in the remaining samples is not yet available, an estimate of these concentrations must be made. In a sample analyzed by Rappe and Stalling, Rappe concluded that the tetra through octa PCDD/PCDF ratio was about .01, and Stalling concluded that it was less than .02. In a heavily contaminated soot sample, Smith et al (1981a) concluded that the 2,3,7,8-TCDD/2,3,7,8-TCDF ratio averaged .015. The average ratio observed in the three samples was .017; this value will be assumed for the ceiling panel derived soot samples. Based on Stalling's report (1981), the biphenylene/dibenzofuran ratio in a sample was less than .067. This value will of i necessity be used in subsequent discussions. Efforts are presently underway to obtain experimental data on the soot samples currently under discussion to place these estimates on a firmer basis. a. Animal Toxicology Experiments It is difficult to rigorously demonstrate consistency between results obtained via chemical analysis and acute toxicity data for a number of reasons. The chemical data is incomplete; �7 not all classes of toxicants have been quantified,and the concentrations of individual congeners have not been established. More important, however, very limited data is available on the acute oral toxicities of individual PCDFs, PCDDs or Polychlorinated Biphenylenes. Nevertheless, despite these and other difficulties, crude comparison of this data will be attempted. A useful first step is to express the observed acute oral toxicity of the soot in terms of "2,3,7,8-TCDD equivalents", i.e., the concentrations of 2,3,7,8-TCDD, that, in an inert matrix, would produce the observed LDgQ. An extract of soot when administered to guinea pigs in aqueous suspension exhibited an LD5Q equivalent to 327 mg soot/kg. When 2,3,7,8-TCDD was administered under identical conditions, it exhibited an LD50 of 19 ug/kg. If the soot in fact had contained only 2,3,7,8-TCDD at 58 ug/g, its extract would be predicted to exhibit an LD,-n of 327 mg soot equivalents/kg. Therefore, the "2,3,7,8-TCDD equivalent" contamination of the soot is 58 ug/g. The chemical data can then be used to "predict" the "2,3,7,8-TCDD equivalent" concentration of the soot, based on known toxicities of the components. This is a complicated task, since no data is available on the LDcris of dibenzofurans in bu guinea pigs other than 2,3,7,8-tetra CDF, and since very limited data is available on the PCDDs. The following assumptions will therefore be made about the I<DCQS of these compounds: (1) The ratio of the LDcQs of a particular PCDF congener and 2,3,7,8-tetra CDF will be the same as the ratio of the LD5Qs oE the correspondingly substituted PCDD congener and 2,3,7,8-TCDD. �8 There is no direct experimental data to support this assumption. (2) The LD50s of PCDFs and PCDDs lacking chlorines on all four lateral positions will be sufficiently high that their influence can be ignored in this calculation. This assumption is based on the LD5Qs in guinea pigs of 2,8-diCDD, 2,3,7-triCDD, and 1,2,4,7,8-penta-CDD. All have LE> s more than 450 times higher than that of 2,3,7,8-Tetra CDD itself (Table IV). (3) Introduction of a single additional chlorine substituent on a 2,3,1,8-substituted congener has essentially no effect on the congener's guinea pig LD . This assumption is based on comparison of the LD5Qs of 2,3,7,8-TCDD and 1,2,3,7,8~tetra-CDD (Table IV). (4) Introduction of two additional chlorine substituents on a 2,3,7,8-chlorinated congener raises its LD,-0 by a factor of at least 29. The assumption is based on comparison of the LD5Qs of 1,2,3,4,7,8-, 1,2,3,6,7,8-, and 1,2,3,7,8,9-hexa CDD and 2,3,7,8-tetra CDD (Table IV). (5) The LDf-QS of compounds with more than 6 chlorines will be sufficiently large that their influence can be ignored in this calculation. This assumption is based on comparison of the LD5Qs of 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-hepta CDD and 2,3,7,8-tetra CDD (Table IV). These assumptions require that attention be focussed only on the tetra, penta, and hexasubstituted PCDDs and PCDFs. The concentration of 2,3,7,8-TCDF in the sample used in animal toxicology experiments was measured at 48 ppm; since the data in Table IV indicates that the LD5Q of 2,3,7,8-tetraCDF is about three times that of 2,3,7,8-TCDD, this is equivalent in terms of acute toxicity to a 2,3,7,8-TCDD concentration of ca. 16 ug/g. �Based on assumption (2), other tetra CDFs can be neglected in this calculation. The penta CDFs were measured at 120 ug/g. If 1,2,3,7,8- and 2,3,4,7,8-penta CDF together constitute 50% of the penta CDFs, and if their LDcQS are equal to that of 2,3,7,8-TCDF, this is equivalent in terms of acute toxicity to a 2,3,7,8-TCDD concentration of ca. 20 ug/g. Based on assumption (2), other penta CDFs can be neglected in this calculation. hexa CDFs have been measured at 70 ug/g. The The isomers believed to have the lowest LD5Qs (1,2,3,4,7,8-, 1,2,3,6,7,8-, and 2,3,4,6,7,8-hexa CDF) are expected to comprise 50% of the total hexa CDF mixture. Since, based on assumption (4), their LD^s are 29 times higher than that of 2,3,7,8-TCDF, this is equivalent to a 2,3,7,8-TCDD concentration of 0.4 ug/g. calculated Thus, the PCDFs are to constitute a "2,3,7,8-TCDD equivalent" concentration of 36 ug/g. The concentration of 2,3,7,8-TCDD itself has been measured at 1.2 ppm in this sample. Other tetrachlorinated dibenzodioxins are predicted to have much higher LD,-QS and can be ignored. The concentration of other PCDDs in this sample are unknown, but are likely to be comparable to the TCDDs. Thus, the dioxins as a whole probably have a negligible influence on the soot's "2,3,7,8-TCDD equivalent" concentration. Stalling (1981) has reported on the presence of polychlorinated biphenylenes in a soot sample from BSOB; he cites unpublished results by Dr. Alan Poland that suggests that the toxicity of the 2,3,6,7 congener is comparable to that of 2,3,7,8-tetra CDD. If Stalling's ratio of biphenylene to dibenzofuran is (.067) is assummed to hold for all of these �10 compounds, and if it is assummed that the biphenylenes have acute oral toxicities three times that of the corresponding dibenzofurans, it can be calculated that the biphenylenes will contribute about 0.2 times as much "2,3,7,8-TCDD equivalent" activity as the dibenzofurans. Thus, to a very crude approximation, the polychlorinated biphenylenes account for a "2,3,7,8-TCDD equivalent" concentration of 7 ppm. In summary, the dibenzofurans and the tetra CDDs are estimated to constitute a "2,3,7,8-TCDD equivalent" activity of 37 ug/g. Together, the remaining dibenzodioxins and the biphenylenes probably provide a significant but smaller "2,3,7,8-TCDD equivalent" activity. This calculation is in good, probably somewhat fortuitous agreement with the observed activity in the soot-equivalent to a 2,3,7,8-TCDD concentration of 58 ug/g. Since considerable effort has been devoted to animal toxicology experiments on a single large sample of soot, it is important to assess whether this sample is reasonably typical. The data in Table I indicates that the average PCB concentration in 16 samples collected above the ceiling panels at the BSOB is ( 7200; the PCB concentration in this sample is 5,000 ppm. " The average total PCDF concentration on 14 such samples was ppm; the total PCDF concentration in this sample is 320 ppm. The average ratio of total PCDF to PCB in the 12 samples for which this is well defined is .066; the ratio for this sample was .063. The proportions of tetra- penta-, and hexa CDFs in this sample are similar to those in the ceiling panel samples (Table II). the sample used in animal toxicology experiments appears Thus, �11 comparable to the samples collected from above the ceiling panels, based on presently available data. b. Cell Keratinization Assay Development of the cell keratinization assay based on an in vitro keratinization model (Knutson et al., 1981) has been pursued because of its potential use as an alternative or supplement to chemical analysis. Both applications demand that the biological and chemical methods generate mutually consistent results. One question can be answered fairly readily. Do the two methodologies agree which samples fall into particular broad categories of contamination? The samples and blanks run as part of this program exhibit four broad categories of contamination. Blanks did not exhibit positive responses in this assay. A single sample (floor 1) exhibited activity equivalent to 0.01 0.10 ppm 2,3,7,8-TCDD; chemical analysis detected only 0.2 ppm Tetra-CDF. Three samples (floors 4,6, and 14) exhibited activities near 0.10 - 1.0 ppm; chemical analysis confirmed low levels of PCDFs in these samples (total PCDFs of 51, 76, and 87 ppm). The remaining samples in which PCDFs were detected chemically exhibited activities ranging from 1.1 - 11 ppm to 5.3 ! - 53 ppm. Chemical analysis confirmed that these samples were more heavily contaminated (total PCDFs of 410 , 200, 320, 1200, 400, 750, and 670 ppm). Table V. These results are collected together in They suggest that the keratinization assay results correlate with chemical data. It is markedly more difficult to determine whether the activity observed in the cell keratinization assay is quantitatively consistent with chemical analysis. Little �12 published information exists to relate the keratiniation activities of the various compounds present in the soot to one another. However, the following assumptions will be made to permit a crude calculation: (1) The ratios of the activity of a particular dibenzofuran congener to 2,3,7,8-TCDF is equal to that of the ratio of the activity of the corresponding dibenzodioxin congener to 2,3,1,8-TCDD. assumption. (2) There is no direct support for this 2,3,7,8-Tetra CDF is 1/20 as active as 2,3,7,8-TCDD (Knutson et al., 1980). (3) Congeners not substituted at all four lateral positions are sufficiently inactive to be neglected. This assumption is based on comparison of the activities of 2,3-, 2,7-, 1,6-, 1,3,6,8-, 1,3,7,8-, and 2,3,7- chlorodibenzodioxins to 2,3,7,8-tetra CDD. al., 1980) (Table VI). (4) (Knutson et Introduction of a single additional chlorine on a 2,3,7,8 chlorinated nucleus decreases activity by a factor of 2. This assumption is based on a comparison of the activities of 1,2,3,7,8-Penta CDD and 2,3,7,8-tetra CDD (Knutson et al., 1980) (Table VI). (5) Introduction of two or more chlorines depresses activity sufficiently to make the activity of such compounds negligible. This assumption is based on comparison of the activities of 1,2,3,7,8,9-hexa CDD and 2,3,7,8-tetra CDD (Knutson et al., 1980) (Table VI). (6) Polychlorinated biphenylenes are 1/2 as active as the corresponding dibenzodioxin. This generalization is based on comparison of the activities of 2,3,6,7-tetra CB and 2,3,7,8-tetra CDD (Knutson et al., 1980) (Table VI). As a direct result of assumptions (3) and (5), the bulk of keratinization activity will reside in tetra- and penta- �13 chlorinated compounds. As already discussed, 2,3,7,8-tetra CDF is predicted to be by far the most active tetra CDF, and expected to constitute 50% of the tetra CDF mixture. Since 2,3,7,8-tetra CDF is 1/20 as active as 2,3,7,8-TCDD, the "2,3,7,8-TCDD equivalent" activity due to this compound can be obtained by dividing the total tetra CDF concentration by 40. Similarly, the "TCDD equivalent" activity of the two most active penta CDFs can be estimated by dividing the total penta CDF concentration by 80. The calculated "2,3,7,8-TCDD equivalent" activity due to PCDFs is compared to the experimentally observed value for a number of samples in Table VII. The PCDDs will make a significant contribution to the cell keratinizing activity of these samples; although they are estimated to be 1/50 to 1/100 as abundant as the PCDFs, they may be 20 times as potent in the assay. The polychlorinated biphenylenes may be even more important factors in this analysis. Stalling's data suggests that they may be 1/10 to 1/20 as abundant as the PCDFs. as active. However, they are reported to be 10 times Thus, the calculated values in Table VII are likely to be below the values that would be calculated if more complete t analytical data were available. However, in view of the large uncertainties present in these calculations and the data upon which they are based, the calculated and experimental data are in fair agreement. It should be noted that the soot sample used in the animal toxicology experiments exhibited a cell keratinizing activity of 2-20 ppm "2,3,7,8-TCDD Equivalents", and a calculated activity of 4 ppm due to PCDFs. This differs from the "2,3,7,8-TCDD �14 equivalents" calculated and observed in the animal toxicology experiments This does not represent a discrepancy in the data. Rather, it is due primarily to the large difference between the ratios of the guinea pig LD5Qs for 2,3,7,8-TCDF and 2,3,7,8-TCDD, and the corresponding ratios of cell keratinization activity. Conclusions (1) Available chemical data indicate that the relative concentrations of PCBs, tetra-, penta-, and hexa-CDFs, and total PCDF are similar in soot samples taken from above the ceiling panels of the BSOB, and in a sample collected by vacuum cleaner during the early stages of the clean-up. If this relationshiip is valid for samples collected at other times and from other locations, the PCB analysis can serve as a useful surrogate for the more difficult analytical procedures. (2) A soot sample exhibited an LDcQ in guinea pigs equivalent to 58 ppm 2,3,7,8-Tetra CDD. If certain assumptions are made about the chemical composition of this sample and the LD s of the compounds therein, it can be calculated that the PCDFs, tetra CDDs, and the biphenylenes should account for ca. 45 ppm "2,3,7,8-TCDD equivalent" activity. Since this calculation ignores other chlorinated dioxins, it is in good (probably fortuitous) agreement with the observed value. Based on these results, there appears to be no basis for proposing unusual synergistic or antagonistic effects among the components in this mixture. (3) The cell keratinization assay can reliably distinguish among samples containing widely differing concentrations of PCDFs. If certain assumptions are made about �15 the chemical composition of compounds therein, it can be calculated that the observed keratinizing activity in these extracts is generally plausible. (4) Chemical analysis and the cell keratinization assay suggest that the soot used in animal toxicology studies is fairly typical of the soot samples collected from above the ceiling pannels of the BSOB. �TABLE I Concentrations (ppm) of Polychlorinated Biphenyls and Polychlorinated Dibenzofurans in. Soot Samples Taken From the Binghamton State Office Building Floor # PCBsa PCDFsb Tetra CDF 2 28 3 4 1300 1 6 5 840 7 8 9 2800 6600 1800 23000 10 11 12 9600 21000 11000 13 3400 14 15 930 10000 16 9200 17 Ave 3-4* 6500 7200 5000 0.2 <8g 16 220 23 190 70 320 140 250 d d 32 300 h 220 145 100 Penta CDF <0.2g <9g 21 280 36 180 79 440 170 360 d d 31 310 150h 260 165 120 Hexa CDF <0.3g <llg 13 180 14 35 32 290 84 260 d d e 56 89h 140 86 70 Hepta CDF <0.3g <12g 1.2 62 3 3.7 14 100 6.5 97 d d 5.8 71 33h 32 31 20 Octa CDF <0.3g <14g 1.2 21 0.5 -- 3 35 2 31 d d 2.8 17 llh 15 11 4 51 760 76 410 200 1200 400 1000 — 87 750 670 438 310 .027 .062 .11 .052 .042 .048 .094 .075 .103 .066 .062 Total PCDF Ratio Total PCDF cone. PCB c o n e . . 0 6 1 (a) quantitated as Arochlor 1254; data uncorrected for recovery (b) correction for recovery incorporated ( ) not sampled because of dissimilar ceiling construction c (d) data not used because of poor recovery of internal 37 C1-Tetra CDF standard (<10%) (e) data lost because of instrumental malfunction; for purposes of calculation of total PCDF, it is assummed that hexa CDF is % the concentration of penta ( f Table 2) c. (f) soot collected by vacuum cleaner and used in animal toxicology studies (g) detection limits are per congener, not per chlorination number data not corrected for recovery. Instrument malfunction caused loss of data on 37C1-Tetra CDF recovery �Table II Relative Proportions of Tetra-, Penta-, Hexa-, Hepta- and Octachlorodihenzofurans in Soot Samples Taken from the Binghamton State Office Buildinga Floor # 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 14 15 17 Aveb Tetra CDF 31 29 30 46 35 27 35 25 37 39 33 33 ± 5 32 Penta CDF 41 37 47 44 40 37 41 36 36 41 39 40 ± 3 38 Hexa CDF 25 24 18 9 16 24 21 26 -- 7 21 18 ± 7 22 2 8 4 1 7 8 2 10 7 10 5 6 ± 3 6 Hepta CDF 3-4° _ Octa CDF <1 3 1 <1 1 3 <! 3 (a) Expressed as percent of total PCDF in sample.' (b) Error limits represent one standard deviation. (c) Soot sample used in animal toxicology studies. 3 2 2 _-— 1 �CO Table III Comparison of Predicted3 (and Observed) Concentrations (ppm) of PCDFs in BSOB Soot Samples Floor # 1 3 4 9 6 10 11 14 15 17 3-4 Jetra CDF 0.6(0.2) 26( 8) 17(16) 56(23) 133(190) 39(70) 60(320) 190(140) 420(250) 19(32) 200(300) 130(220) 100(100) Penta CDF 0.9(<.2) 30(<9) 19(21) 64(36) 151(180) 45(79) 130(440) 220(170) 480(360) 21(31) 230(310) 150(260) 115(120) Hexa CDF 0.3(<.3) 16(<11) 10(13) 33(14) 79(35) 23(32) 70(290) 115(84) 250(260) 11C") 120(56) 78(140) 60(70) Hepta CDF 0.1(<.3) 5.6(<12) 3.6(1.2) .6(1.2) 12(3) 28(3.7) 8.4(14) 99(100) 41(6.5) 90(97) 5(5.8) 43(71) 28(32) 22(20) Octa CDF .04(<.3) 1.3(<1.2) 4.2(0.5) 10(--) 35(35) 15(2) 32(31) 1.4(2.8 15(17) 10(15) 84 () Total PCDF 1.9 2(<13) 80 51(51) 3(3) .400(1200) (a) Prediction based on PCB levels and average ratio calculated in Table I and II 580(400) 1300(1000) 57(87) 610(754) 400(670) 300(310) �19 Table IV Influence of Structure and Chlorination Pattern on Guinea Pig Oral LD5Qs (Male, Hartley, 200-250g) Compound LD3 U • <f «— cn(ug/kg) 2,3,7,8-Tetra CDD 2.5a 2,3,7,8-Penta CDF 5-10b 1,2,3,7,8-Penta CDD 3.1° 1,2,3 ,4,7,8-Hexa CDD 73C 1,2,3,7,8,9-Hexa CDD 60-100° 1,2,3,6,7,8-Hexa CDD 70-100° 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Hepta CDD >600° 1,2,4,7,8-Penta CDD 1,125° 2,3,7-Tri CDD 29,444° 2,8-Di CDD 730,000° a J.B. Silkworth, D. McMartin, A.P. DeCaprio, R. Rej, S. Kumar and L. Kaminsky (1981). Acute toxicity in guinea pigs and rabbits of soot from a polychlorinated biphenyl-containing transformer fire, N.Y. State Dept. of Health Report, January 6, 1982. J.A. Moore, E.E. McConnell, D.W. Dalgard, and M.W. Harris (1979). Comparative toxicity of three halogenated dibenzofurans in guinea pigs, mice and thesus monkeys. NY Acad. Sci. 320, 151-163. °E.E. McConnell, J.A. Moore, J.K. Baseman, and M.W. Harris (1978). The comparative toxicity of chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins in mice and guinea pigs. Toxi co 1. Pharmacol. 44, 335-356. 0 �Table V o CSl Comparison of the Observed Keratinization Activities with Total PCDF Concentrations Observed Floor I "2,3,7,8-TCDD Equivalents(ppm) Total PCDF Concentrations 1 . 1 1 0 - 6 0.1-1.0 76 4 .11-1.1 51 14 .12-1.2 87 3 1.2-12 b 9 1.1-11 1200 8 1.6-16 200 3-4a 2-20 310 10 3.2-32 400 15 4.0-40 750 17 4.0-40 670 7 5.3-53 410 a Soot used in animal toxicology experiments •L^ Total concentration not defined, (cf. Table I) b (ppm) �21 Table VI Influence of Structure and Chlorination Pattern on Relative Activity in the Cell Keratinization Assay3. Compound Relative Activity 2,3,7,8-Tetra CDD 1 2,3,7,8-Tetra CDF 0.05 2,3/6,7-Tetrachlorobiphenylene 0.5 1,2,3,7,8-Penta CDD 0.5 2,3,7-Tri CDD 0.01 1,3,7,8-Tetra CDD 0.01 1,2,3,7,8,9-Hexa CDD 0.005 1,3,6,8-Tetra CDD < .003 1,6,-DiCDD < .001 i 2.7-DiCDD < .001 2.3-DiCDD < .001 (a) Data adapted from J.C. Knutson and A. Poland (1980). Keratinization of mouse teratoma cell line XB produced by 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin: an in vitro model of toxicity, Cell 22, 27-36. �Table VII Comparison of the Observed Keratinization Activity in BSOB Soot Samples with Value Predicted based on PCDF Concentrations « Floor # Observed "2,3,7,8-TCDD equi Lents" (ppm) Calculated "2,3,7,8-TCDD equivalents" (ppm) PCDFs only 1 .Ol-.l (b) 6 0.1-1.0 1 4 .11-1.1 1 14 .12-1.2 1 3 1.2-12 (b) 9 1.1-11 10 8 1.6-16 3 3-4a 2-20 4 10 3.2-32 6 15 4.0-40 10 17 4.0-40 9 7 5.3-53 7 (a) -(b) Sample used for animal toxicology studies, PCDFs not detected in chemical analysis. �; 23 REFERENCES Gierthy, J.P. and Prenkel, G.D. (1982). A preliminary report on the c.,-aluation of an In Vitro assay for the detection of "dioxin-like" activity using extracts of soot from the Binghamton State Office Building. New York State Department of Health Report, January, 1982. Knutson, J.C. and Poland, A. (1980). Keratinization of mouse cell line XB produced by 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzodioxin: an in vitro model of toxicity. Cell, 22, 27-36. Poland, A., and Glover, E. (1977). Chlorinated biphenyl induction of aryl hydrocarbon hyudroxylase activity: the structure-activity relationship. a study of Mol. Pharmacol., 13, 924-38. Rappe, C. (1981) Report on the analysis of Binghamton soot. Report, University of Umea, Sweden, 1981. Silkworth, J. , McMartin, D., DeCaprio, A., Re j, R. , O'Keefe, P., and Kaminsky, L. (1982). Acute toxicity in guinea pigs and rabbits of soot from a polychlorinated biphenyl-containing transformer fire. January 6, 1982. New York State Department of Health Report, �'> • I A 'i 24 i Smith, R.M., O'Keefe, P.W. , Hilker, D.L., Jelus-Tyror, B.L., and Aldous, K. (1981a). Analysis of 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzofuran and 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin in a soot sample from a transformer explosion in Binghamton, New York. New York State Department of Health Report, February 20, 1981. Smith, R.M., Hilker, D.L., O'Keefe, P.W., Kumar, S., O'Brien, J., Jelus-Tyror, B.L., and Aldous, K. (1981b) Analysis of a Binghamton soot sample for tetrachlorodibenzofurans and tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins. New York State Department of Health Report, October 1, 1981. Smith, R.M., Hilker, D., O'Keefe, P.W., Kumar, S., Aldous, K., and Jelus-Tyror, B. (1982). Determination of polychlorinated dibenzofurans and polychlorinated dibenzodioxins in soot samples from a contaminated office building. New York State Department of Health Report, March, 1982. Stalling, D.L., (1981) Chlorinated dibenzofurans and related compounds in soot formed in a transformer fire in Binghamton, ( N.Y., Preliminary Report, Columbia National Fisheries REsearch Laboratory, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange Description An account of the resource <p style="margin-top: -1em; line-height: 1.2em;">The Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange comprises 120 linear feet and spans the late 1800s to 2005; however, the bulk of the coverage is from the 1960s to the 1980s and there are many undated items. The collection was donated to Special Collections of the National Agricultural Library in 1985 by Dr. Alvin L. Young (1942- ). Dr. Young developed the collection as he conducted extensive research on the military defoliant Agent Orange. The collection is in good condition and includes letters, memoranda, books, reports, press releases, journal and newspaper clippings, field logs and notebooks, newsletters, maps, booklets and pamphlets, photographs, memorabilia, and audiotapes of an interview with Dr. Young.</p> <p>For more about this collection, <a href="/exhibits/speccoll/exhibits/show/alvin-l--young-collection-on-a">view the Agent Orange Exhibit.</a></p> Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Box The box containing the original item. 087 Folder The folder containing the original item. 2193 Series The series number of the original item. Series IV Subseries II Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Eadon, G. K. Aldous G. Frenkel J. Gierthy D. Hilker L. Kaminsky P. O'Keefe J. Silkworth R. Smith Description An account of the resource <strong>Corporate Author: </strong>Center for Laboratories and Research, New York State Department of Health, Albany, New York Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1982-03-01 Title A name given to the resource Comparisons of Chemical and Biological Data on Soot Samples From the Binghamton State Office Building Subject The topic of the resource BSOB PCBs analytical studies