t.
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
(5305)
EPA530-R-94-014
May 1994
Combustion Emissions
Technical Resource
Document (CETRED)
DRAFT
Recycled/Recyclable
Printed on paper that contains
at least S0% r
-------
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This document was prepared by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Office of
Solid Waste, Waste Management Division. Energy and Environmental Research Corporation
(EER) provided the technical support under EPA Contract No. 68-D2-0164.
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Draft Combustion Emissions Technical Resource Document (CETRED) contains the
initial technical analysis by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concerning
emissions of dioxins/furans and particulate matter from certain types of devices that burn
hazardous waste: cement kilns, light-weight aggregate kilns, incinerators, and industrial boilers.
CETRED represents the first, preliminary step in the development of regulations under the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and the Clean Air Act (CAA) to impose
upgraded standards on hazardous waste combustors (HWCs). CETRED also represents a major
effort towards implementing the commitment made by EPA Administrator Carol M. Browner in the
Draft Hazardous Waste Minimization and Combustion Strategy, released on May 18, 1993, to
upgrade the technical standards governing emissions from HWCs.
EPA's intention in releasing CETRED at this time is to give the regulated community and
other interested persons the earliest possible opportunity to understand the nature of the technical
analysis that EPA is pursuing. CETRED can appropriately be regarded as a preliminary technical
analysis of certain HWCs and their emissions of particulate matter (PM) and dioxins/furans.
CETRED represents the current state of analysis of EPA's technical staff in the Office of Solid
Waste as regards the emission levels of PM and dioxins/furans achievable by the best controlled
sources.
At this time, CETRED does not contain a characterization of emissions for toxic metals and
other hazardous air pollutants from the HWCs studied. EPA will initiate a technical analysis to
characterize these emissions in the near future. EPA expects to make the results of that analysis
available to the public for review prior to the time that any regulatory proposal would be
developed.
Process Descriptions
Cement Kilns. Many cement facilities burning hazardous wastes use "wet" process kilns
where the raw materials are slurried before introduction to the kiln. Hazardous waste is burned in
other types of cement kilns, however, including long dry kilns, preheater kilns, and
preheater/precalriner kilns.
11
-------
Liquid hazardous waste fuels are fired into the hot, lower end of the kiln as a supplement to
fossil fuels. Solid hazardous waste fuels are also fired using several methods, including: (1) in
long wet or dry kilns, containerized waste can be charged through a hatch on the rotating kiln wall
in the calcining zone of the kiln; (2) in preheater or precalciner kilns, solid waste fuels can be
injected directly into the precalciner vessel or preheater inlet; (3) in long wet or dry kilns,
containerized waste can be injected at the hot end of the kiln using an "air cannon" at a high enough
velocity to project the containers in the calcining zone; and (4) powdered hazardous waste can be
pneumatically fired into the hot end of the kiln. ; "
Cement kilns are normally equipped with either an electrostatic precipitator (ESP) or fabric
filter (FF) to control emissions of PM.
Light-weight Aggregate Kilns. Light-weight aggregate kilns slowly heat raw materials
such as clay, shale, or slate to expand the particles to form light-weight materials generally for use
in concrete products. The light-weight aggregate concrete is produced either for structural or
thermal insulation purposes. When burning hazardous waste, these kilns generally burn the liquid
waste as their sole fuel.
Most light-weight aggregate kilns burning hazardous waste are equipped with FFs to
control PM emissions.
Hazardous Waste Incinerators. Hazardous waste incineration technology has been
developed over a number of years as a means of treating various types of waste to destroy toxic
organics in the waste and reduce the volume of the waste. There are many types of incinerators in
use .including rotary kilns, fluidized bed units, liquid injection units, and fixed hearth units.
Incinerators use many types of air pollution control devices to control emissions of
paniculate matter, metals, and acid gases. In general, the control systems can be grouped into the
following three categories: (1) wet systems, where a wet scrubber is used for both particulate and
acid gas control; (2) dry systems, where a FF or ESP is used for PM control, sometimes in
combination with dry scrubbing for acid gas control; and (3) hybrid wet/dry systems where a dry
technique (ESP orFF) is used for PM (and possibly acid gas control with use of dry scrubbing)
followed by a wet technique (venturi or packed bed scrubber) for acid gas control.
111
-------
Boilers. The three common boiler design categories that burn hazardous waste are firetube,
watertube, and stoker-fired. Although most boilers burn liquid hazardous waste, some burn solid
hazardous waste. The hazardous waste firing rate (percentage of heat input contributed by the
hazardous waste) ranges from less than 10% to 100%.
PM Emission Levels
EPA is evaluating PM emission levels because controlling PM will control emissions of
most toxic metals and toxic organic compounds absorbed into the PM. PM levels are evaluated for
several different source categories (or subsets thereof), as well as various degrees of aggregation
of these source categories. For example, commercial incinerators are evaluated separately from on-
site incinerators as a crude attempt to determine if the best controlled of the generally smaller on-
site incinerators are achieving PM emissions levels substantially different from the best controlled
commercial incinerators. Further, PM emissions from the best controlled incinerators, boilers, and
industrial furnaces are evaluated as an aggregated group representing the hazardous waste
combustor source category. While the Agency is interested in examining the appropriateness and
implementability of establishing standards that apply across all types of hazardous waste
combustors, EPA recognizes that in doing so there may be technical and policy determinations that
have not yet been fully illuminated or explored. The Agency emphasizes that, at this time, it has
not decided if and which source categories will be grouped in determining PM emission limits.
For this study, EPA is evaluating PM emission data that facilities had submitted to the EPA
Regional Offices and the States as part of Certifications of Compliance under the Agency's Boiler
and Industrial Furnace (BIF) Rule, and from incinerator trial burns used to consider issuance of
operating permits. To identify the best controlled sources, the sources are ranked in order of
ascending PM emission levels considering the average emission level for the source and the
variability of the emissions data. The best 12% (or best 5 sources, which ever is greater) of the
sources are then selected as (potentially) the best controlled sources. Each of the sources in the
selected pool is then evaluated to determine if they achieve low PM emissions because they use
advanced control techniques or because they simply burn wastes or other materials with low levels
of ash. Sources with low PM levels because of low ash feed rates are screened out of the pool as
being unrepresentative of best controlled sources, and the next best controlled sources are brought
into the pool as replacements.
IV
-------
Once the pool of the best controlled sources is established, their emissions data are
analyzed statistically to predict a PM emission level that could be achieved under two alternative
approaches. Under Option 1, a PM emission level is identified that all of the .sources in the best
controlled source pool could be expected to meet 99% of the time, with 95% confidence. Under
Option 2, a PM emission level is identified that a source with the average emission level of the best
controlled source pool could be expected to meet 99% of the time, with 95% confidence, and
assuming that the variability of the source's emissions data is similar to the variability of the
emissions data from the sources in the pool. Under Option 1, all of the sources in the best
controlled source pool should be able to achieve the PM level without modifications, while under
Option 2, some of the sources in the pool may not be able to achieve the PM level without
modifications to the facility design or operation.
The table below presents the PM emission levels achievable by the best controlled sources
for the source categories and groups of source categories, and for the alternative analytical
approaches:
PM EMISSION LEVELS ACHIEVABLE BY THE BEST CONTROLLED SOURCES
(gr/dscf @ 7% 02)
Source Category
Cement Kilns
Light-weight Agg. Kilns
Commercial Incinerators
On-Site Incinerators
All HW Incinerators
Boilers
All Hazardous Waste Combustors
Option 1*
0.033
0.022 i
0.010
0.015
0.0057 ;
0.021 !
0.0086
Option 2+
0.010
0.0077
0.0049
0.0075
0.004
0.011
0.0052
Under Option 1, a PM emission level is identified that all of the sources in the best controlled source pool
could be expected to meet 99% of the time, with 95% confidence.
Under Option 2, a PM emission level is identified that a:source with emissions equivalent to the average for
the pool of the best controlled sources could be expected to meet 99% of the time, with 95%
confidence, and assuming that the variability of the source's emissions is similar to the variability of
emissions for the sources in the pool.
-------
Dioxin/Furan Emission Levels
Dioxin/furan emission levels are evaluated for hazardous waste burning incinerators,
cement Wins, light-weight aggregate kilns, and boilers in the aggregate (i.e., as a hazardous waste
combustor (HWC) source category). EPA is not currently aware of any overriding technical
reason why all HWCs should not be able to meet the emission level achievable by the best
controlled sources.
The dioxin/furan emissions data used for the analysis are obtained from BIF Certifications
of Compliance and incinerator Trial Burn results. The Agency is using the same methodology
used forPM to identify the best controlled sources, except that the sources in the (potentially) best
controlled source pool are screened for three criteria. First, the pool sources are screened to
determine if they have low dioxin/furan emissions because their feedstreams contain insignificant
levels of chlorine.
Then, two additional screening criteria are used because of concern about the potential
conflict between minimizing dioxin/furan and PM emissions at the same time. Given that
dioxins/furans may be formed in HWCs operating under good combustion practices by surface-
catalyzed reactions, dioxin/furan emissions can be affected by PM emissions. Thus, these
screening criteria ensure that the dioxin/furan emissions from the pool sources are representative of
emissions from sources that use best operating practices to control both PM and dioxin/furans.
The first of these criteria screened out of the pool sources that had low PM emissions because they
are feeding materials with low ash content. These sources may have low dioxin emissions simply
because there was little PM to promote surface-catalyzed formation. The second criterion screened
out sources that have high PM emissions. These sources may have low dioxin emissions simply
because they are not removing PM and thereby providing an attenuated residence time (e.g., in an
ESP or FF) for surface-catalyzed reactions to take place.
After the pool of best controlled and representative sources is identified, the same statistical
approaches used to analyze PM emissions are used to analyze dioxin/furan emissions. The
following table presents the dioxin/furan emission levels achievable by the best controlled HWC
sources under the alternative analytical approaches:
VI
-------
DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSION LEVELS ACHIEVABLE
BY THE BEST CONTROLLED SOURCES
(ng/dscm@7%O2>
Basis
TEQ
Total Tetra through Octa
Congeners
Option 1*
0.17
9.4 :
Option 2+
0.12
5.4
* Under Option 1, an emission level is identified that all of the sources in the best controlled source pool
could be expected to meet 99% of the time, with 95% confidence.
+ Under Option 2, an emission level is identified that a source with emissions equivalent to the average for
the pool of best controlled sources could be expected to meet 99% of the time, with 95% confidence, and
assuming that the variability of the source's emissions is similar to the variability of emissions for the
sources in the pool.
Note that EPA believes that it is appropriate to control dioxin/furan emissions for HWCs
based on toxicity equivalents (TEQs). Under this approach, weighting functions knows as toxicity
equivalence factors are assigned to the various dioxin and furan congeners to account for their
toxicity relative to 2, 3, 7, 8 TCDD. EPA is considering whether it is also appropriate to control
emissions based on total tetra-octa congeners. If so, emission limits would be established on the
basis of total congeners as well as TEQ.
European Emission Regulations ;
On March 23, 1992, the European Economic Community (EEC) issued a proposal for a
Council Directive on the Incineration of Hazardous Waste. The Directive requires all its Member
States to establish laws, regulations, and administrative procedures to comply with the directive by
June 30, 1994. The directive stipulates that any new incinerator must comply immediately and
existing facilities by June 30,1997.
The regulatory approach adopted in the 1992 EEC Directive establishes a wide array of
continuous emission monitoring requirements, including continuous monitors for carbon
monoxide and total dust emission levels, and monthly measurements for metals, dioxins, and
furans. A summary of European guidelines and limits for PM and dioxins/furans is presented in
the following table. :
Vll
-------
EMISSION GUIDELINES/LIMITS FOR WASTE INCINERATION IN EUROPE
Pollutant
(Daily Averages)
Total Dust
(mg/m3)
Dioxin/furan
(ngTEQAn3)i
EEC
Guideline
5
0.1
Netherlands
Limit
5
0.1
Germany
Limit
5
0.1
Waste incineration has been in use in Europe longer than in North America. • The air
pollution control device (APCD) systems are similar. However, because the majority of the
European facilities have undergone retrofits and have faced more stringent emission standards,
design differences exist. Incinerators in Europe currently incorporate some sort of dust control
device, such as wet and dry electrostatic precipitators (ESP) or fabric filters (FF). Most facilities
have added multi-stage wet and dry scrubbers or spray drying and dry absorption processes for
controlling acid gas and heavy metal emissions. The future trend is expected to be toward wet
scrubbers, even though all APCD systems must be zero liquid discharge systems. Some new
technologies that are emerging include adding Selective Catalytic Reduction DeNOx reactors,
activated carbon filters, and gas suspension absorbers. As new options arise, it appears to be the
general practice in Europe to continue to retrofit facilities with new APCDs in series with existing
equipment.!
1 It is important to note that the European guideline or limit of 0.1 TEQ is corrected to 11 %
oxygen, and compliance is based on daily averaging. EPA requires that dioxin/furan emissions be
corrected to a stack gas oxygen level of 7%. A 0.1 limit at a 11 % oxygen correction factor is
equivalent to a 0.14 limit at a 7% correction factor. Further, EPA requires hazardous waste
burning devices operating under RCRA regulations to comply with emissions standards generally
on a hourly rolling averaging period. The European guidelines/limits are based on daily averaging,
a less stringent approach in terms of operational variability. Finally, RCRA regulations require a
facility to comply with the emissions standard for each of three triplicate runs during a Trial Burn
or Compliance Test. Compliance with the European guidelines/limits is based on the average of
test runs.
vm
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section
Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .. ii
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1-1
2.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTIONS 2-1
2.1 Cement kilns process description 2-1
2.1.1 Process components 2-1
2.1.2 Cement kiln types 2-2
2.1.2.1 Wet process kilns 2-3
2.1.2.2 Dry process kilns ...; 2-7
2.1.2.2.1 Long dry process kilns 2-7
2.1.2.2.2 Preheater dry process kiln 2-7
2.1.2.2.3 Preheater/precalciner dry process kiln 2-12
2.1.2.3 Semi-dry process kilns 2-14
2.1.3 Hazardous waste feeding . 2-14
2.1.3.1 Liquids 2-14
2.1.3.2 Solids 2-14
2.2 Lightweight aggregate kiln process description 2-19
2.2.1 Process components ; 2-19
2.2.2 Operating parameters 2-21
2.3 Hazardous waste incinerator 2-22
2.3.1 Rotary kiln incinerators 2-22
2.3.1.1 Process description ..! 2-22
2.3.1.2 Operating parameters 2-26
2.3.2 Liquid Injection Incinerators 2-27
2.3.2.1 Process description 2-27
IX
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Section
2.3.3 Fluidized bed incinerators 2-29
2.3.3.1 Process description 2-29
2.3.3.2 Operating parameters 2-31
2.3.4 Fixed hearth incinerators 2-32
2.3.4.1 Process description 2-32
2.3.4.2 Operating parameters 2-34
2.4 Hazardous waste boilers 2-34
2.4.1 Firetube boilers 2-34
2.4.2 Watertube boiler 2-40
2.4.3 Stokers : 2-42
2.5 References • 2-63
3.0 PROCESS CHARACTERIZATION 3-1
3.1 Cement kilns 3-1
3.1.1 Population 3-1
3.1.2 Air pollution control techniques in use 3-1
3.2 Lightweight aggregate kilns • 3-2
3.2.1 Population , 3-2
3.2.2 Air pollution control techniques in use 3-2
3.3 Hazardous waste incinerator process characterization 3-2
3.3.1 Population 3-2
3.3.2 Air pollution control techniques in use 3-3
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
4.0 INTRODUCTION: PM AND DIOXIN EMISSIONS CHARACTERIZATION. 4-1
4.1 Cement kiln PM emission summary 4-1
4.2 Lightweight aggregate kiln PM emission summary 4-6
4.3 Commercial hazardous waste incinerators PM emission summary 4-6
4.4 On-site hazardous waste incinerator PM emission summary 4-10
4.5 Hazardous waste burning boiler PM emission summary 4-10
4.6 Dioxin/furan formation mechanisms 4-18
4.6.1 Historical basis for technology-based dioxin/furan regulations 4-21
4.7 Cement kiln dioxin emission characteristics .". 4-22
4.8 Analysis of cement kiln dioxin/furan emissions 4-33
4.9 Commercial hazardous waste incinerator dioxin/furan emissions 4-50
4.10 On-site hazardous waste incinerator dioxin/furan emissions 4-53
4.11 Hazardous waste burning boiler dioxin/furan emissions 4-57
4.12 Lightweight aggregate kiln dioxin/furan emissions 4-57
4.13 Summary 4-57
4.14 References ,• 4-62
5.0 DETERMINATION OF TECHNICALLY ACHIEVABLE EMISSIONS 5-1
5.1 Discussion of technology-based emission level determination 5-1
5.2 Methodology for PM emission estimates 5-4
5.2.1 Identification of best performing (BPF) Facilities 5-4
5.2.2 Statistical approach for data analysis 5-7
5.3 Further analysis of the dioxin/furan data 5-11
XI
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Section
Page
5.3.1 Estimation of expected PCDD/PCDF emission levels 5-12
5.3.2 Estimation of total PCDD/PCDF emissions from BOP facilities 5-12
5.3.3 TEQ PCDD/PCDF level procedures 5-14
5.3.4 Estimation of PCDD/PCDF floor emission levels 5-14
5.4 Summary of PM level estimates , 5-15
5.5 Summary of PCDD/PCDF emission level estimates 5-25
5.6 Estimation of PCDD/PCDF floor emission level 5-28
5.7 Summary and discussion : 5-34
5.8 References 5-42
6.0 EUROPEAN EMISSION REGULATIONS 6-1
6.1 Regulatory framework for EEC Directives 6-2
6.2 Regulatory content — 6-3
6.3 European Technology •' 6-4
APPENDIX A: AIR POLLUTION CONTROL TECHNIQUES
A.I Cyclones A'2
A.1.1 Design principles A'2
A.1.2 Performance
A.1.3 Process monitoring
A.1.4 Inspection and maintenance A-4
A.2 Fabric filters A'5
A.2.1 Design principles A~5
A.2.2 Performance A~9
Xll
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Section
A.2.3 Process monitoring A-ll
A.2.4 Inspection and maintenance A-ll
A.3 Electrostatic precipitators A-ll
i
A.3.1 Design principles A-12
A.3.2 Performance A-17
A.3.3 Process monitoring „ A-19
A.3.4 Inspection and maintenance A-20
A.4 Venturi scrubbers A-21
A.4.1 Design principles .: A-21
A.4.2 Performance A-25
A.4.3 Process monitoring A-26
A.4.4 Inspection and maintenance A-26
A.5 Wet scrubbers A-27
A.5.1 Design principles A-27
A.5.1.1 Scrubber designs A-27
A.5.1.2 Reagent preparation and injection equipment A-30
A.5.1.3 Mist eliminators A-31
A.5.1.4 Waste treatment and disposal A-33
A.5.2 Performance A-33
A.5.3 Process monitoring A-36
A.5.4 Inspection and maintenance A-36
A.6 Spray Dryers ; „ A-38
A.6.1 Design principles A-38
Xlll
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Section
Page
A.6.2 Performance ••• • ••<• A-4°
A.6.3 Process monitoring •
A.6.4 Inspection and maintenance •••—• ••
A.7 Flue gas conditioning techniques A'42
A.7.1 Flue gas cooling A-42
A.7.1.1 Air dilution , A'43
A.7.1.2 Heat exchanger ; A-46
A.7.1.3 Quench . .-• A'49
A.8 Activated carbon •••• A"54
A.9 Other technologies A"58
A.10 Combined technologies • A'58
f
A.10.1 Aptus, Inc A'59
A.10.2 Waste Technologies Industries (WTI) A~62
APPENDIX B: DETAILED SUMMARY OF CURRENT PM .
DATA SET FOR CEMENT KILNS Bl
APPENDIX C: DETAILED SUMMARY OF CURRENT PM DATA
SET FOR LIGHTWEIGHT AGGREGATE KILNS C-l
APPENDIX D: DETAILED SUMMARY OF CURRENT PM DATA SET
FOR COMMERCIAL HW INCINERATORS D-l
APPENDIX E: DETAILED SUMMARY OF CURRENT
PM DATA SET FOR ON-SITE HW INCINERATORS E-l
APPENDIX F: DETAILED SUMMARY OF CURRENT
PM DATA SET FOR HW BURNING BOILER F-l
xiv
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Page
APPENDIX G: DETAILED SUMMARY OF CURRENT TOTAL PCDD/PCDF
DATA SET FOR CEMENT KILNS G-l
APPENDIX H: DETAILED SUMMARY OF CURRENT PCDD/PCDF
TEQ DATA SET FOR CEMENT KILNS H-l
APPENDIX I: DETAILED SUMMARY OF CURRENT TOTAL
PCDD/PCDF DATA SET FOR COMMERCIAL HW
INCINERATORS M
APPENDIX J: DETAILED SUMMARY OF CURRENT PCDD/PCDF
TEQ DATA SET FOR COMMERCIAL HW
INCINERATORS .......;..... J-l
APPENDIX K: DETAILED SUMMARY OF CURRENT PCDD/PCDF
TOTAL DATA SET FOR ON-SITE HW FACILITIES K-l
APPENDIX L: DETAILED SUMMARY OF CURRENT PCDD/PCDF TEQ
DATA SET FOR ON-SITE HW INCINERATORS L-1
APPENDIX M: SUMMARY OF POOLED PM DATA SORTED BY PI M-l
xv
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
Figure 2.1-1
Figure 2. l-2a
Figure 2. l-2b
Figure 2.1-3
Figure 2.1-4
Figure 2.1-5
Figure 2.1-6
Figure 2.1-7
Figure 2.1-8
Figure 2.1-9
Figure 2.1-10
Figure 2.2-1
Figure 2.3-1
Figure 2.3-2
Figure 2.3-3
Figure 2.3-4
Figure 2.4-1
Figure 2.4-2
Figure 2.4-3
Figure 2.4-4
Figure 2.4-5
Figure 2.4-6
Wet cement making process schematic
Page
2-4
Typical gas and solids temperature profiles
for a long wet-process cement kiln 2-5
Typical gas velocities for a long wet-process cement kiln 2-6
Dry long kiln schematic 2-8
Dry kiln process material and gas temperatures 2-9
Dry preheater cement kiln schematic '• 2-10
Typical gas and solids temperature and gas velocities
for a preheater cement kiln
2-11
Dry preheater/precalciner cement kiln schematic 2-13
Typical gas and solids temperature
for a preheater/precalciner cement kiln 2-15
Semidry cement kiln schematic 2-16
Sernidry kiln material and gas temperatures 2-17
Lightweight aggregate kiln schematic 2-20
Typical rotary kiln incinerator • 2-23
Typical liquid injection incinerator 2-28
Typical fluidized bed' incinerator 2-30
Typical fixed hearth incinerator 2-33
Firetube boiler 2"35
Horizontal return tubular boiler 2-37
Multiple pass arrangements 2-38
Firebox boiler 2-39
Watertube boiler 2-41
Watertube boiler configurations 2-43
xvi
-------
LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)
Figure
Figure 2.4-7
Figure 2.4-8
Figure 2.4-9
Figure 2.4-10
Figure 2.4-11
Figure 2.4-12
Figure 2.4-13
Figure 2.4-14
Figure 2.4-15
Figure 2.4-16
Figure 2.4-17
Figure 2.4-18
Figure 4.1-1
Figure 4.1-2
Figure 4.1-3.
Figure 4.2-1
Figure 4.3-1
Figure 4.4-1
Figure 4.5-1
Figure 4.7-1
Figure 4.7-2
Page
Stirling boiler 2-44
Vibrating grate stoker ;. 2-46
L
Single retort underfeed stoker with horizontal feed,
side ash discharge 2-47
Underfeed stoker with rear ash discharge 2-48
Cross section of overfeed mass-burning chain-grate stoker 2-50
Cross section of overfeed mass-burning
traveling-grate stoker 2-51
Water-cooled, vibrating-grate stoker 2-52
Spreader stoker with dumping grates 2-56
Spreader stoker with reciprocating grates 2-57
Spreader stoker with vibrating grates 2-58
Spreader stoker with traveling grates 2-59
Spreader stoker with water-cooled vibrating grates 2-61
Cumulative distribution of cement kiln PM emissions 4-3
Plot of cement kiln PM emissions versus ESP
operating power (KVA) 4-4
Plot of cement kiln PM emissions versus ESP
operating power (KVA) 4-5
Cumulative distribution of LWA kiln PM emissions 4-8
Cumulative distribution of HWI PM emissions 4-11
Cumulative distribution of on-site HW incinerator PM emissions.... 4-14
Cumulative distribution of PM emissions for
hazardous waste burning boilers 4-19
Cumulative distribution of cement kiln total dioxin emissions 4-25
Cumulative distribution of cement kiln dioxin TEQ emissions 4-28
xvu
-------
LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)
Figure EagS
Figure 4.7-3 Total versus TEQ dioxin emissions for various
source categories 4-29
Figure 4.8-1 Total cement kiln PCDD/PCDF versus APCD temperature 4-34
Figure 4.8-2 Distribution of total/TEQ ratio for cement kilns 4-35
Figure 4.8-3 Total kiln PCDD/PCDF emissions versus stack HC1 emissions 4-38
Figure 4.8-4 Total PCDD/PCDF emissions versus stack THC emissions 4-39
Figure 4.8-5 Total PCDD/PCDF emissions versus stack percent 0% 4-40
Figure 4.8-6 Total PCDD/PCDF emissions versus stack CO 4-42
Figure 4.8-7 Stack CO versus stack O2 4-43
Figure 4.8-8 Stack CO versus stack THC 4-44
Figure 4.8-9 Temperature normalized PCDD/PCDF versus stack O2 4-46
Figure 4.8-10 Temperature normalized PCDD/PCDF versus stack CO 4-47
Figure 4.8-11 Temperature and CO normalized PCDD/PCDF versus stack O2 4-49
Figure 4.8-12 Impact of cement kiln PCDD/PCDF data normalization 4-51
xvm
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Table 4.1-1 Summary of cement kiln PM data 4-2
Table 4.2-1 Summary of PM emissions from lightweight aggregate kilns 4-7
*
Table 4.3-1 Summary of PM data for| commercial HW incinerators 4-9
Table 4.4-1 Summary of PM data for on-site HW incinerators 4-12
Table 4.5-1 Summary of HW burning boiler PM data 4-15
Table 4.6-1 Comparison of toxic equivalent factor [weighting schemes 4-23
Table 4.7-1 Summary of cement kiln dioxin data in total ng/dscm 4-24
Table 4.7-2 Summary of cement kiln dioxin data in TEQ 4-26
Table 4.7-3 Statistical analysis of total dioxin to TEQ ratios for
various source categories 4-30
Table 4.7-4 MWC total and TEQ emission data sorted by APCD type 4-31
Table 4.7-5 Statistical analysis of MWC total to TEQ ratios 4-32
Table 4.8-1 Regression analysis of cement kiln total PCDD/PCDF to TEQ
emissions data 4-37
Table 4.9-1 PCDD/PCDF data in total ng/dscm for commercial
HW incinerator population 4-52
Table 4.9-2 PCDD/PCDF data in TEQ for commercial HW incinerator population 4-54
Table 4.10-1 PCDD/PCDF data in total ng/dscm for on-site
HW incinerators 4-55
Table 4.10-2 PCDD/PCDF data in total ng/dscm TEQ for on-site
HW incinerators ...; 4-56
Table 4.11-1 PCDD/PCDF data in total ng/dscm for HW burning boilers 4-58
Table 4.11.2 PCDD/PCDF data in ng/dscm TEQ for HW burning boilers 4-59
Table 4.12-1 PCDD/PCDF data in total ng/dscm and total ng/dscm TEQ for
lightweight aggregate kilns , 4-60
Table 5.2.1-1 Sample regression analysis of PM data versus ESP operating power 5-5
xix
-------
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Table
Page
Table 5.2.2-1 One-sided and two-sided statistical tolerance limit factors
for a normal distribution 5-10
Table 5.4-1 PM level analysis for cement kilns 5-16
Table 5.4-2 PM level analysis for aggregate kilns , 5-18
Table 5.4-3 PM level analysis for commercial HWI's '. 5-19
Table 5.4-4 PM level analysis for on-site HWI's 5-20
Table 5.4-5 PM level analysis for boilers 5-21
Table 5.4-6 PM level analysis for cement kilns and LWA kilns 5-22
Table 5.4-7 PM level analysis for commercial and on-site HWI's 5-23
Table 5.4-8 PM level analysis for all facilities 5-24
Table 5.5-1 Summary of total PCDD/PCDF data 5-26
Table 5.5-2 Outlier evaluation for total PCDD/PCDF 5-27
Table 5.5-3 Total PCDD/PCDF level analysis 5-29
Table 5.5-4. Summary of TEQ PCDD/PCDF data 5-30
Table 5.5-5 Outlier evaluation for TEQ data 5-31
Table 5.5-6 TEQ PCDD/PCDF level analysis 5-32
Table 5.6-1 Pool of facilities for TEQ floor estimate 5-33
Table 5.6-2 Floor estimate of PCDD/PCDF (TEQ ng/dscm) 5-35
Table 5.6-3 Pool of facilities for total floor estimate 5-36
Table 5.6-4 Floor estimate of PCDD/PCDF (TOTAL ng/dscm) 5-37
Table 5.7-1 Emission levels achievable by the best controlled sources. 5-38
Table 5.7-2 Summary of PCDD/PCDF floor calculations 5-40
xx
-------
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Table
Page
Table 6.2-1 Emission guidelines for incineration of waste materials in Europe
Table 6.3-1 Observed stack emissions - HW incinerator
Table 6.3-2 Examples of APCD equipment currently installed on
incinerators in Europe ,
6-5
6-7
6-8
xxi
-------
-------
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Draft Combustion Emissions Technical Resource Document (CETRED) contains the
initial technical analysis of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concerning certain
types of devices that combust hazardous waste — cement kilns, lightweight aggregate kilns,
incinerators, and industrial boilers. Other devices can and do burn hazardous waste, but are not
yet included in this draft of CETRED. EPA expects to update CETRED to include information on
these other devices in the future.
In releasing this draft of CETRED, EPA is interested in comments from all interested
persons on the information and analyses presented. CETRED represents an initial technical step in
the development of regulations under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and
the Clean Air Act (CAA) to impose upgraded standards on the various types of incinerators and
boilers and industrial furnaces (BIFs) that burn hazardous waste. Thus, CETRED is not any form
of regulatory proposal. Rather, CETRED represents the current state of analysis of EPA's
emission levels achievable by the best controlled sources for certain types of hazardous waste
combustion facilities. EPA's intention in releasing CETRED at this time, as a preliminary technical
analysis, is to give the regulated community and other interested persons the earliest possible
opportunity to understand the nature of the technical analysis that EPA is pursuing.
This document includes a detailed overview of the thermal processes and equipment used to
combust hazardous waste (Chapter 2), the air pollution control techniques used in these processes
and equipment (Chapter 3), and a characterization of the resulting paniculate matter (PM) and
dioxin and furan emissions (Chapter 4). At this time, CETRED does not contain a characterization1
of emissions for toxic metals and other hazardous air pollutants from the processes and equipment
studied. EPA will initiate a technical analysis to characterize these emissions in the near future.
EPA expects to make the results of that analysis available to the public for review prior to the time
that any regulatory proposal would be developed.
In Chapter 5, the determination of emissions achievable by the best controlled sources is
presented. This determination is based on EPA's current emissions data base for the incinerators
and BIFs studied. This data base may be expanded, either by additional information collected by
EPA or by other data submitted by operators of hazardous waste combustors or members of the
public. Depending on the nature of this additional information (for example, it must meet basic
quality assurance/quality control criteria), EPA intends to update its determinations accordingly.
Finally, in Chapter 6, a survey of European emissions guidelines and regulations is presented.
1-1
-------
CETRED represents a major step towards implementing the commitment made by EPA
Administrator Carol M. Browner in the Draft Hazardous Waste Minimization and Combustion
Strategy, released on May 18,1993, to upgrade the technical standards governing emissions from
hazardous waste incinerators and BIFs. Specifically, EPA announced that it would "develop and
impose implementable and rigorous state-of-the-art safety controls on hazardous waste combustion
facilities by using the best available technologies and the most current science." EPA remains
committed to taking all necessary steps to tighten the emission standards for hazardous waste
combustors in a manner that reflects the best operating practices arid the maximum achievable
emission controls.
1-2
-------
2.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTIONS
Process descriptions for the major types of industrial equipment that burn hazardous waste
are contained in this section. These include cement kilns, lightweight aggregate kilns, hazardous
waste incinerators and boilers. For each process, the process components and operating
parameters related to burning hazardous waste are discussed.
2.1
Cement Kiln Process Description
This section presents an overview of the cement kiln process and the types of kilns used for
cement making. Process operating parameters important to hazardous waste treatment and a
characterization of cement kilns currently burning hazardous wastes are also presented.
2.1.1
Process Components
Cement is made from a carefully proportioned mixture of raw materials containing calcium
(typically limestone), silica and alumina (typically clay, shale, slate, and/or sand), and iron
(typically steel mill scale or iron ore). These materials are ground to a fine powder (80% passing
200 mesh), homogenized, and heated to a very high temperature to produce a cement "clinker"
product. The raw feed material, known as "meal", is heated in a kiln which is a large, inclined,
rotating cylindrical steel furnace lined with refractory materials. The kilns are operated in a
"counter-current" configuration; the gases and solids flow in opposite directions through the kiln,
providing for more efficient heat transfer compared with "co-current" operations. The raw meal is
fed at the upper, "cold" end; the slope (3-6 °) and rotation (50-70 revolutions per hour) cause the
meal to move toward the "hot" lower end. The kiln is fired at the "hot" end, usually with coal or
petroleum coke as the primary fuel; natural gas or fuel oil may also be used as a supplemental fuel.
As the meal moves through the kiln and is heated, it undergoes drying and pyro-processing
reactions to form the clinker. The reactions can be categorized into three major stages (see Figure
2.1-1):
• Drying and Preheating Zone — Residual water is evaporated from the raw meal feed,
and clay materials begin to decompose and are dehydrated (removal of bound water) in
a temperature range of 70 to 1100 °F.
2-1
-------
• Calcining Zone -- Material is "calcined"; that is, calcium carbonate in .the limestone is
dissociated producing calcium oxide ("burnt lime") and carbon dioxide in the
temperature range of 1100 to 1650 °F.
• Burning Zone - In the "burning" zone, also known as the "clinkering" or "sintering"
zone, calcium oxide reacts with silicates, iron, and aluminum to form "clinker." The
clinker is a chemically complex mixture of calcium silicates, aluminates, and alumino-
ferrites. A minimum meal temperature of 2700 °F is necessary in the burning zone of
the kiln to produce the clinker.
The clinker is removed from the kiln at the hot end. After it passes through the burning
zone and by the kiln flame, it enters a short cooling area where the clinker melt begins to solidify;
the cooling rate from the burning zone to the kiln exit is important since it determines the
microstructure of the clinker. The clinker leaves the kiln at about 2000 °F and falls into a clinker
cooler. The cooler is typically a moving grate onto which the clinker sits. Cooling air is blown
through the clinker bed. The cooled clinker consists of grey colored nodules of variable diameters,
typically up to 2 inches. The clinker is blended with gypsum and ground in a ball mill to produce
the final product, cement. Hot exhaust air produced from the clinker cooler is either directed to the
kiln where it is used as combustion air or used to pre-dry the raw feed material in the case of dry
process Mlns.
Kiln exhaust flue gases contain significant amounts of entrained particulate matter due to
the turbulence in the kiln from the rotary action and from the use of finely ground feed material.
The entrained particulate matter, known as "cement kiln dust" (CKD), is removed from the flue gas
by some type of air pollution control device. Many plants return a portion of the CKD to the raw
feed materials. However, in most cases, some CKD must be removed from the kiln system
entirely to lower the buildup of alkali salts. CKD can be used in other industries as neutralizers or
additives; however, the excess CKD is usually land disposed.
2.1.2
Cement Kiln Types
Cement can be produced in three different types of arrangements — wet, dry, or semi-dry
processes — as described below.
2-2
-------
2.1.2.1
Wet Process Kilns
A schematic of the wet cement making process is shown in Figure 2.1-1. Ground raw
materials are mixed with water (about 30% by weight) to form a slurried meal. The slurry is fed to
the kiln through a flow metered pump. Solids in the slurry typically occupy no more than 15 to
20% of the internal kiln volume. Wet kilns typically have a length to diameter ratio of about 30:1
to 40:1 and rotate from 70-80 revolutions per hour. Kiln rotational speed is adjusted to maintain
clinker quality and heat transfer. The wet cement making process is the older process,
characterized in part by handling, mixing, and blending of the raw materials in the slurry form and
lower emissions of kiln dust. However, because all water must be evaporated out of the slurry
mixture, wet process kilns require greater energy input than other types of cement kilns; typically,
from 5 to 7 MMBtu/ton of clinker product is required.
To improve the energy efficiency of the process, steel chains are typically attached to the
inside of the kiln shell in the drying zone. The chains acts as a heat transfer mechanism. As the
kiln rotates, the chains hang by gravity and pick up heat from the kiln flue gases. When the chains
settle back, the heat is transferred to the raw meal.
A typical solids/gas temperature profile of a wet kiln is shown in Figures 2.1-2a and 2.1-
2b. Note that the feed does not begin to heat up until all of the water in the raw meal slurry is
evaporated. The gas temperature in the burning zone approaches 4000 °F, while the clinker
reaches a maximum temperature of approximately 2700 °F, which is required for the formation of
clinker. Flue gas velocity is also shown as a function of kiln axial location (see Figure 2.1-2b).
This relates to a kiln gas residence time of over 10 seconds. Typical solids residence time in the
kiln is 2-3 hours.
2-3
-------
N>
NATURAL GAS/COAL/
PETROLEUM COKE -
WASTE DERIVED FUEL n
I
RAW MATERIAL
MIX (SLURRY)
FUEL - SOLID WDF
8-
SAMPLING
PORTS—i
13.5' DIA. x 500' LONG
CEM
CKD BIN
-------
2400 .
2200 .
2000 .
1800 .
IbOO
1400 -
1200 _
1000 .
000 .
600
400 -
200 .
SLURRY"
I'KEIIKAT
EVAPORATION .
FEED PREHEAT
CALCINATION
CLINKER1NC COOLING
20 4*0 &0 do ido 120 14'0 l&l IJO 2dO 2JO 24*0 2dO 2d() 30*0 3JO 3<0 3gO 3flO 4oT>42"0 440 4JO 4JO
10 20 30 4fl W 6'0 70 80 90 100 1 l'o 1^!0 HO 140 I'
- 4550
_ 4200
. 385(1
. 3500
. 3150
. 2800
. 2450 :
0
. 2100 '
. 1750
. 1400
1050
. 700
. 350
520 SfO ft
Figure 2.1-2a Typical gas (dashed line) and solids (solid line) temperature profiles for a
long wet-process cement kiln.i
1 Bellinger, H., Pershing, D., and Sarofim, A., "Evaluation of the Origin, Emissions and
Control of Organic and Metal Compounds from Cement Kilns Co-fired With Hazardous Wastes,"
Scientific Advisory Board on Cement Kiln Recycling, June 8,1993, p. 20.
2-5
-------
:
7
20
10
0 SO 100 ISO 200 2SO MO 3SO 400 4SO
Uflft* (f*«t)
Figure 2.1-2b Typical gas velocities for a long wet-process cement kiln.
2-6
-------
2.1.2.2
Dry Process Kilns
Due to higher energy efficiency compared with wet kilns (3.4 to 4.5 MMBtu/ton clinker),
dry processes have become popular. In the dry process, the ground raw material is dried and
pneumatically transported to the kiln, or to a preheater if used. Kiln exhaust flue gases or hot
clinker cooler air are typically used for drying the raw materials. There are three different dry
process configurations: long, preheater, or preheater/precalciner.
2.1.2.2.1
Lone Dry Process Kilns
A long dry process kiln schematic is shown in Figure 2.1-3. It has the same configuration
as the wet type; the only difference is that the raw meal is fed in a dry form. Similar to wet kilns,
long dry kilns have typical length-to-diameter ratios of about 30:1. A typical long dry Mln
solid/gas temperature profile is shown in Figure 2.1-4. Note that in comparison to wet kilns, the
raw meal feed is heated more rapidly since the energy required for the evaporation of water is
small. Kiln gas and solids residence times are similar to those of wet kilns (order of 10 seconds
and 2-3 hours, respectively). Internal chains are also used in dry process long kilns to increase
energy efficiency.
2.1.2.2.2
Preheater Dry Process Kiln
The preheater arrangement process schematic is shown in Figure 2.1-5. Preheaters are
used to further increase the thermal efficiency of the cement making process. A suspension
preheater ("Humboldt" Design) consists of a vertical tower containing a series of cyclone-type
vessels (typically containing four stages). Raw meal is introduced at the top of the tower. Hot kiln
exhaust flue gases pass counter-current through the downward moving meal to heat the meal prior
to introduction into the kiln. The meal is separated from the kiln flue gases in the cyclone, and then
dropped into the next stage. Because the meal enters the kiln at a higher temperature than that of
the conventional long dry kilns, the length of the pre-heater kiln is shorter, kilns with preheaters
typically have length-to-diameter ratios of about 15:1. A typical solid/gas temperature profile is
shown in Figure 2.1-6. The kiln has a gas residence time of about 6 seconds and a solids
residence time of about 30 minutes. The gas residence time through the preheater cyclones
(typically four stages) is about 5.5 seconds 2. ;
2 Bellinger.
2-7
-------
PETROLEUM
COKE
STORAGE
GRINDING MILL
BLENDING SILOS
FEED SILO
GROUND FEED STOCK
EXHAUST GASES
*• TO |2 MILL
HOT GAS FROM CLINKER COOLER
COMBUSTION
AIR
, »
U—
FLOW CONTROL SYSTEM
SUPPLEMENTARY
FROM SYSTECH
RECYCLE DUST
TO KILN FEED
PRODUCT STORAGE SILOS
WASTE
DUST
Figure 2.1-3 Dry long kiln schematic.
-------
2400
2200 ,
2000 .
1800
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
FEED PREHEATING
CALCINING
CLINKERING COOLING
20
10
Raw
Material
60
100 1JO 14'0
2dO 2JO 240 26"0 2&0 3do 3JO 340 3^0 380 400 42"p 440 4^0 4I?0 5JO 5JO 5'
4550
4200
3850
3500
3150
2800
2450
2100
1750
1400
1050
700
350
20
30 40
50
60
70
8'0
90
100
ll'O
l'20 130 140 l'50
160
Fuel
Figure 2.1-4 Dry kiln process material (solid line) and gas temperatures (dashed line).2
2 Bellinger, p. 21.
2-9
-------
30 TPH C02 tarn (MckuttM ol Rw IW1
Figure 2.1-5 Dry preheater cement kiln schematic.
2-10
-------
2400 .
2200 .
2000 .
1800 .
1600 .
1400 .
u 1200 .
* 1000 .
800 .
600
400
200 .
FKhKEATING
CALCINING
• —g-l-« I
CLINKER1NG COOLING
20 40 60 80 100 120 140
10 2*0
30
40
. 4550
. 4200
. 3850
3500
. 3150
. 2800
. 2450
. 2100 3-
- 1750
_ 1400
. .1050
. 700
. 350
S3
SO
25
20
15
10
ini
UNDO
oroi
V
^
n n
TCJK
^
\
>
•
aucr
w
\
\
^
M f
^r*
•
—
^
^x
^
^4
m
n n • • • •
m
Length
Figure 2.1-6 Typical gas (dashed line) and solids (solid line) temperature and gas velocities for a
preheater cement kiln.4
4 Bellinger, p. 23.
2-11
-------
With preheater systems, it is often necessary to utilize an "alkali" bypass in which a portion
of the Mln flue gases are routed away from the preheater tower at a location between the feed end
of the rotary kiln and the preheater tower. The bypass is used to remove undesirable components,
such as certain alkali constituents, that may accumulate in the kiln due to an internal circulation loop
caused by volatilization at high temperatures in the kiln and condensation in the lower temperatures
of the preheater. Accumulated alkali salts may cause preheater operating problems such as
clogging of the cyclones and an increase in fine NaCl or KC1 fume in the emissions gases.
Typically 10 to 15% of the flue gas is routed through the bypass. Systems without bypasses are
limited with respect to raw meal and waste concentrations of alkali metals, chloride (greater than
0.015% Cl by weight), and sulfur that can be tolerated in the raw materials.
The internal circulation of alkali components is greater in systems with preheaters compared
to systems without preheaters due to the filtering effect of feed material flow in the preheater
cyclones. Systems without preheaters have a kiln dust with a high content of alkali salts, which
can be removed from the internal cycle when caught in the air pollution control device. However,
for a preheater, a bypass is required to reduce the alkali buildup.
2.1.2.2.3
PreheaierlPrecalciner Dry Process Kiln
A preheater/precalciner process schematic shown in Figure 2.1-7. A preheater/precalciner
is similar to the preheater arrangement described above, with the addition of an auxiliary firing
system to further increase the raw materials temperature prior to introduction into the kiln. An
additional precalciner combustion vessel is added to the bottom of the preheater tower. Typical
systems use 30 to 60% of the kiln fuel in the precalciner to release up to 95% of the CC>2 from the
raw material. Precalciner air can be supplied either directly with the precalciner fuel, or it can be
supplied at the hot end of the kiln. In another arrangement, the kiln flue gas may be routed around
the calciner directly to the preheater. Kilns with preheater/precalciners can be even shorter than
those with preheaters only (length-to-diameter ratio of 10:1).
The primary advantage of using the precalciner is that it increases the production capacity of
the kiln since only the clinker burning is performed there. The use of the precalciner also increases
the Mln refractory lifetime due to reduced thermal load on the burning zone. These configurations
also require a bypass system for alkali control.
2-12
-------
to
PROCEoo MEASUREMENT LOCATIONS
© - PRESSURE
© - TEMPERATURE
©- FLOW
0 - ELECTRICAL CURRENT
(El) - ELECTRICAL POWER
RAW MATERIAL MIX
SAMPLING PORTS
MAIN
ESP.
FAN
FUEL - COAL *
FUEL - NATURAL GAS
FUEL - COAL
FUEL - SOLID W.D.F. 3
FUEL - LIQUID W.D.F.
TERTIARY A« DUCT (T
«5' DIAMETER X~16<' KILN
TJ VW
QJNKER COOLER.
TO CKD BIN
6
Figure 2.1-7 Dry preheater/precalciner cement kiln schematic.
-------
t
A typical solid/gas temperature profile of a kiln with a preheater and precalciner is shown in
Figure 2.1-8. It is similar to that of the preheater kiln; however, the time at which the gas
temperature is above 1650 *F is slightly less in a precalciner type kiln 5.
2.1.2.3
Semi-Dry Process Kilns
Li the semi-dry process, the ground feed material is pelletized with 12 to 14% water. The
pellets are put on a moving "Lepol" grate on which they are dried and partially calcined by hot kiln
exhaust gases before being fed to the rotary kiln. A semi-dry process schematic is shown in
Figure 2.1-9. A typical solids/gas temperature diagram is given in Figure 2.1-10.
2.1.3
Hazardous Waste Feeding
The method of feeding hazardous waste into the kiln is a primary factor in determining the
destruction of the waste, which is dependent on temperature and residence time. The method of
introducing the waste also depends on its physical state, as discussed in the following sections.
2.1.3.1
Liquids
Liquid wastes are either blended directly with conventional fuels provided at the hot end of
the kiln, or they are injected separately through a separate burner/atomizer into the primary kiln
flame.
2.1.3.2
Solids
In the past, solid wastes were fed at the cold end of the kiln with the raw meal. However,
the addition of wastes at the cold end is no longer practiced because as the wastes move down the
kiln and get hotter, volatile components are driven off at temperatures below those required for
complete oxidation and destruction. Thus, significant emissions of unburned volatiles may have
occurred without the use of an afterburner or other add-on volatile emissions control techniques.
Solid wastes are not charged directly into the hot end burning zone since they can create local
reducing conditions which adversely affect clinker quality such as strength, stability, set-up time,
5 Bellinger.
2-14
-------
2400
2200
2000
1800
1600
1400 .
1200 .
1000 .
800 .
600 •
400 -
200 -
PREHEATING CALCINATION
CLINKERING
20 4cT 60 80 100 120 140
IE 2? 3!)43
- 4550
. 4200
. 3850
. 3500
. 3150
. 2800
_ 2450
. 2100
- 1750
. 1400
. 700
. 350
ft
Figure 2.1-8 Typical gas (dashed line) and solids (solid line) temperature for a
preheater/precalciner cement kihi.6
6 Bellinger, p. 26
2-15
-------
o\
PROCESS MEASUREMENT LOCATIONS
(P) - PRESSURE
(D - TEMPERATURE
© - FLOW
0 - ELECTRICAL CURRENT
(@) - ELECTRICAL POWER
FUEL - COAL < ©
FUEL - NATURAL GAS
CLINKER
COOLER
DUST COLLECTOR
SAHPUNG LOCATIONS ©
1 - RAW MATERIAL MIX
2 - LIQUID WASTE DERIVED FUEL
3 - SOLID WASTE DERIVED FUEL
< - COAL
5 - CLINKER
6 - CEMENT KILN DUST
7 - STACK EMISSIONS
RAW MATERIAL MIX
FUEL - SOLID W.D.F. 3 © (j)
15.5' DIAMETER X 160' KILN
BYPASS
COLLECTOR
d
SAMPLING PORTS
/ PREHEAT
/ ID. FAN
BYPASS
10. FAN
*- TO CKD BIN
6©
Figure 2.1-9 Semidry cement kiln schematic.
-------
-*•
2400 .
2200 .
2000 .
1800 .
1600 .
1400 .
1200 .
u 1000 .
oo
"° 800 .
600
400 -
200 -
•I-
EVAPORATION FEED PREHEAT CALCINATION
-I—-
CLINKER1NC
4550
4200
3850
3500
3150
2800
2450
2100
. 1750 ,
3
1400 :
. 1050
. 700
. 350
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 (t
10
20
50
Figure 2.1-10 Semidry kiln material (solid line) and gas (dashed line) temperatures.''
7 Peray, K., The Rotary Cement Kiln, Second Edition, Chemical Publishing Company, New
York, 1986, p. 91.
2-17
-------
and color 8. Oxidizing conditions must be maintained in the burning zone. If insufficient oxygen
is present, a key component of cement clinker, tetra calcium alumino ferrite, does not form;
instead, FeaOs is reduced to FeO. This leads to a clinker product that produces a quick setting
cement with decreased final strength. Additionally, the presence of unburned carbon in the
burning region produces a clinker with an undesirable brown color. To overcome these feeding
location limitations, a variety of techniques are used for the introduction of solid wastes into
cement kilns. The choice depends on the solid waste type (composition and physical attributes)
and kiln configuration (dry long, dry with preheater, wet, etc.).
Three techniques rely on the introduction of the solid waste into the calcining zone. Note
that Boiler and Industrial Furnace (BIF) rules require that if hazardous waste is fed at any location
other than the hot end, the combustion gas temperature must exceed 1800 *F at the point of
introduction and sufficient oxygen must be present to ensure complete combustion of organic
constituents in the waste. For long kilns, this means that the waste is introduced mid-kiln, while
for preheater/precalciner kilns, it is introduced onto the feed shelf. At this location, the solids have
sufficient residence time for the organics to be driven off so that the presence of waste
combustibles do not reach the burning zone and create reducing conditions which are detrimental to
clinker quality, but yet far enough away form the cold end to provide sufficient temperature and
residence time for complete destruction of volatile gaseous organics. These three methods are:
1. For long type wet and dry kilns, and dry kilns with preheaters, a method has been
patented by Benoit et al. (1989) for charging solid wastes directly through a hatch on
the rotating kiln wall at a intermediate location within the calcining zone. 9 At each
rotation, the hatch is opened, and containerized waste solids are fed down a drop tube
that is inserted through the hatch and into the rotating kiln. The drop tube prevents hot
mineral material from escaping through the port or contacting the enclosure. It is
important that the volume of the volatile components do not exceed the capacity for
their complete combustion in the gas stream. Thus, wastes are containerized to
minimizing the potential for overloading the combustion capacity (create local reducing
conditions).
8 Sprung, S., "Technological Problems in Pyroprocessing Cement Clinker: Cause and
Solution," Berton-Verlag, Dusseldorf, Germany, 1985.
& Benoit, M., Hansen, E., et al., U.S. Patent No. 4,850,290, "Method for Energy Recovery
from Solid Hazardous Wastes," July 25, 1989.
2-18
-------
2. For preheater or precalcining kilns, the solid waste may be injected directly into the
precalciner vessel or preheater inlet.
3. Containerized solid wastes may also be injected at the hot end of the kiln at a high
enough velocity so that they are projected into the calcining zone. An "air cannon,"
which is mounted to the kiln hood, is used i to propel the waste containers. Lone Star
Industries (Greencastle, IN) and Continental Cement Co. (Hannibal, MO) use this
method for waste solids feeding. ;
If the waste is in powdered form, it may injected directly into the primary burning zone coal
flame of the cement kiln, as is done at Heartland Cement Co. (Independence, MO). In another set
up, solid waste is burned in a separate kiln or combustor and the flue gas is routed to the hot end of
the cement kiln, which is used as an afterburner and for acid gas control. This is done at Giant
Cement Co. (Harleyville, SC), which has four "resource recovery kilns" in addition to cement
kilns. ;
2.2
Lightweight Aggregate Kiln Process Description
Lightweight aggregates include a wide variety of raw materials which when combined with
cement form concrete products. Lightweight aggregate concrete is produced either for structural
purposes or for thermal insulation purposes. Estimates indicate that the rotary kiln method is used
in the production of 80% of all structural lightweight aggregates. 10 This section presents an
overview of the lightweight aggregate kiln process and a characterization of the lightweight
aggregate kilns currently burning hazardous waste.
2.2.1
Process Components
A lightweight aggregate plant is composed of a quarry, a raw material preparation area, a
kiln, a cooler, and a product storage area. The material flows from the quarry to the raw material
preparation area. From there, the material is fed into the rotary kiln. Figure 2.2-1 provides a
schematic of a lightweight aggregate kiln. \
10 Expanded Shale Clay and Slate Institute, Lightweight Concrete - History, Applications
and Economics. Washington, B.C., 1971.
2-19
-------
To
APCD
Feed
i
Rotary Kiln
Fuel
Cooler
Product
Discharge
Figure 2.2-1 Lightweight aggregate kiln schematic
2-20
-------
A rotary kiln consists of a long steel cylinder, lined internally with refractory bricks, which
is capable of rotating about its axis and is inclined at an angle of about 5° to the horizontal. The
length of the kiln depends in part upon the composition of the raw material to be processed but is
usually 30 to 60 meters. The prepared raw material is fed into the kiln at the higher end, while
firing takes place at the lower end. The dry raw material fed into the kiln is initially preheated by
hot combustion gases. Once the material is preheated, it passes into a second furnace zone where it
melts to a semiplastic state and begins to generate gases which serve as the bloating or expanding
agent. In this zone, specific compounds begin to decompose and form gases such as SOz, COi,
SOs, and C>2 that eventually trigger the desired bloating action within the material. As temperatures
reach their maximum (approximately 2100 °F), the semiplastic raw material becomes viscous and
entraps the expanding gases. This bloating action produces small, unconnected gas cells, which
remain in the material after it cools and solidifies. The product exits the kiln and enters the cooler
section of the process where it is cooled with cold air and then conveyed to the discharge.
2.2.2 Operating Parameters
Kiln operating parameters such as flame temperature, excess air, feed size, material flow,
and speed of rotation vary from plant to plant and are determined by the characteristics of the raw
material. Raw materials include clay, shale or slate which have varying properties linked to their
geological formation. Maximum temperature in the rotary kiln varies from 1120 ° to 1260 °C
(2050 ° to 2300° F), depending on the type of raw material being processed and its moisture
content. Exit temperatures may range from 150 ° to 650 °C (300 °F to 1200 °F), again depending
on the raw material and on the kiln's internal design. Approximately 80% to 100% excess air is
forced into the kiln to aid in expanding the raw material.
A typical lightweight aggregate rotary kiln has a combustion gas residence time of 4
seconds, based on maximum temperature and a temperature range of 700 °F to 2100 °F. A typical
rotary kiln processes approximately 450 Mg (500 tons) of lightweight aggregate per day. This kiln
has an average furnace volume of 1000 cubic meters (35,343 cubic feet) and an average volumetric
flow rate of 1920 Nm3/min (73,170 scfm). n Lightweight aggregate kilns that burn hazardous
waste typically burn 100% liquid hazardous waste (i.e., hazardous waste is the sole fuel).
11 "Evaluation of the Feasibility of Incinerating Hazardous Waste in High-Temperature
Industrial Processes", PEDCo-Environmental, Inc., PB84-159391, February, 1984, p. 4-94.
2-21
-------
2.3
Hazardous Waste Incinerators
Incineration has developed over a number of years as a means of treating various types of
waste materials. During incineration, the volume of waste is reduced and toxic organic compounds
in the waste are destroyed by thermal decomposition. Three important operating conditions for
proper combustion in incineration systems are temperature, residence time and proper mixing of
fuels and combustion gases. These conditions vary with the chemical structure and physical form
of the waste as well as the incinerator design. There are many incinerator designs which are used
on-site and commercially. The following incinerator designs are discussed in this section: rotary
Idln, fluidized bed, liquid injection, and fixed hearth.
2.3.1
Rotary Kiln Incinerators
Rotary kilns are commonly used in both off-site (commercial) and on-site hazardous waste
incineration applications. These kilns handle most if not all forms of wastes (bulk and
containerized solids, sludges, slurries, bulk and containerized liquids, and less common wastes
such as Department of Defense propellants, ammunitions, and nerve agents), as well as most waste
compositions (organics, halogens, heating value, principal organic hazardous constituents
(POHCs), etc.).
2.3.1.1
Process Description
Rotary kiln systems used for hazardous waste incineration typically consist of two
incineration chambers: the rotary kiln and an afterburner. A rotary kiln system is shown in Figure
2.3-1. The rotary kiln itself is a cylindrical refractory-lined steel shell with a diameter which is
typically less than 15-20 feet (to allow for truck or rail shipment) and a length-to-diameter ratio of 2
to 10. The shell is supported by two or more steel "trundles" that ride on rollers, allowing the kiln
to rotate around its horizontal axis. The refractory is an acid resistance brick. Rotary kiln
incinerators are typically sized around 60 MMBtu/hr, but they may be as big as 150 MMBtu/hr.
>
Usually, the inside of the kiln is lined with a smooth refractory, although recent designs
have included internal vanes or paddles to encourage solids mixing along the kiln length. The kiln
is oriented on a slight incline from the horizontal, known as the "rake." The rake is less than 5 °
and typically from 2 to 4 °. The kiln rotation rate typically ranges from 0.5-2 RPM. Mixing may
be improved by increased rotation rate; however, this also acts to reduce solids residence time.
2-22
-------
Combustion
Air
Waste Liquids.
Auxiliary Fuel
Waste Solids,
Containers or'
Sludges
Kiln
Shroud
Discharge
to Quench or
Heat Recovery
Auxiliary Ash
Ash
Rotary Kiln
120%-?00%
Excess Air
1.0-3.0 Seconds
Mean Gas
Residence Time
I ^- Refractory
Afterburner
Figure 2.3-1 Typical rotary kiln incinerator, 12
!2 Dempsey, C., and Oppelt, T., "Incineration of Hazardous Waste: A Critical Review" Air
& Waste, Vol. 43, January, 1993, p. 35.
2-23
-------
Kiln rotation and incline serve three purposes; 1) to promote the mixing of wastes with combustion
air, 2) to facilitate the heat transfer between the waste and hot flames and refractory, and 3) to
move the wastes through the rotary section.
Almost all hazardous waste rotary kiln incinerators are of the co-current design because
they are better suited for treating combustible solid wastes. In the co-current design, as shown in
Figure 2.3-1, wastes and auxiliary fuels are fed at the same end (i.e., the waste and flue gas travel
in the same direction). Co-current designs provide for rapid ignition of the cold wastes and
maximum gas residence time for the products of combustion, and thus achieve the largest amount
of volatile organic destruction in the rotary section.
Solid and liquid wastes are fed directly into the rotary kiln. Solids can be fed, on a
continuous or semi-continuous basis, through a variety of waste feed mechanisms such as a ram
feeder, auger screw feeder, or belt feeder for drums. For batch feeding, an air lock is usually used
to reduce the amount of air infiltration through the feeding chute. Liquid wastes may also be
injected, with steam or air assisted atomizing nozzles, directly into the kiln through the main
burner. These liquid wastes may also be injected through a waste lance and/or mixed with the
solid wastes. In most cases, rotary kilns can handle unprocessed wastes. Waste pretreatment may
include mixing of liquid and solid wastes, as well as neutralizing corrosive wastes prior to being
fed to the kiln. Waste grinding and sizing may aid in smooth kiln operation.
Wastes are heated by the primary iflame, bulk gases, and refractory walls. Through a series
of volatilization and partial combustion reactions, combustible fractions of the wastes are gasified.
The solids continue to heat and burn as they travel down the kiln. Typically, solids retention time
in the kiln is between 0.5 and 1.5 hours, while gas residence time through the kiln is usually
around 2 seconds. Waste feed to the kiln is controlled so that the waste contributes no more than
20% of the kiln volume. Typical flame/solids temperatures in the rotary kiln range from 1200 to
3000 °F. 13
An auxiliary gas or oil burner, located at the feeding end of the kiln, is used for start-up
(bring unit up to temperature) and to maintain desired kiln temperature when sufficient heat input is
not available from the waste. Wastes with an average heating value of 4500 BtuAb are adequate to
sustain combustion at kiln temperatures between 1600 to 1800 °F. Combustion air is provided
through ports on the face of the kiln, as well as through rotary seal leakage. The kiln typically
13 Dempsey, p. 35.
2-24
-------
operates at 50 to 200% excess air. Kiln operating pressure is maintained at negative to the
atmosphere, typically -0.5-2.0 in. H^O gauge, through the use of an induced draft fan which is
located downstream of the air pollution control system. Operation at negative pressure assures that
fugitive emissions of combustion gases to the atmosphere through rotary seal leaks are avoided.
To avoid over-pressurization caused by feeding highly combustible wastes, a "dump stack"
or other emergency relief vent, typically located between the afterburner and the air pollution
control system, can be installed to protect the equipment. Use of the dump stack will allow
potentially harmful gases to be released to the environment. A hot cyclone may be positioned
between the kiln and afterburner for removal of entrained solid particles that may cause slagging
problems in the afterburner.
Inorganics, ash, slag, and other incombustible items that remain when the waste reaches
the end of the kiln are removed by gravity into an ash pit. Typically, the ash is water quenched
with the ash removal system normally provided with a water seal trough. Dry collection systems
allow for undesirable air leakage into the kiln. Dropping of solids into the water seal trough can
result in steam explosions, often resulting in positive pressure excursions.
Flue gas from the kiln is usually routed to a secondary refractory lined combustion
chamber, referred to as an "afterburner". The afterburner typically operates at 2000 to 2500°F,
with 100 to 200% excess air, turbulence flow, and a gas residence time from 1-3 seconds to ensure
complete combustion of the remaining volatile gas phase of unburned components in the kiln flue
gas. An auxiliary fuel, and sometimes pumpable liquid hazardous wastes, are used to maintain the
afterburner temperature.
Design modifications to the rotary kiln have included: 1) a "fast" rotary kiln which rotates
at a rate greater than 20 RPM to provide efficient mixing, 2) starved air and oxygen assisted kilns
to reduce flue gas volume and auxiliary fuel requirements, and 3) "slagging" kilns. The slagging
kiln operates above the ash melting point (2600 to 2800 °F) to generate a molten ash. Eutectic
properties of slag are controlled using additives to the feed. Slagging kilns typically have a
negative rake, permitting for the accumulation of slag in the kiln. In addition, these kilns have the
ability to accept metal drums and salt laden wastes, provide better destruction efficiency, and
generate lower particulate emissions and production of a slag product known as "frit" which is less
leachable than non-slagging kiln ash. However, such kilns also have increased NOX emissions,
shorter refractory lifetime, and the potential for slag to solidify in the kiln.
2-25
-------
2.3.1.2
Operating Parameters
Critical rotary kiln incinerator operating parameters include:
• Kiln and afterburner exit temperature — This is typically maintained above 1500 °F.
Temperature must be maintained above the minimum demonstrated for adequate
destruction of POHCs and to minimize formation of products of incomplete
combustion (PIC). Monitoring limitations include errors in measurement from furnace
and flame radiation. The temperature may be controlled through adjustment of waste,
auxiliary fuel, and combustion air feedrates.
• Kiln pressure — Kiln pressure must be maintained at negative to atmosphere and the
afterburner pressure must be' below that of the .kiln to prevent kiln fugitive emissions
through kiln rotary seals. Pressure is controlled by use of an induced draft fan and
damper system downstream of the combustion chambers.
• Combustion gas velocity fflowrate') — This is controlled to ensure proper combustion
gas residence time at operating temperature for complete destruction of volatile PICs.
Gas flowrate is dependent on waste feed composition and feed rate, as well as auxiliary
fuel and combustion air rates.
• Waste feed rate — This is adjusted to avoid over-loading, over-pressuring, and
depleting kiln oxygen, which may result in kiln fugitives and excessive kiln flue gas
volatiles. If the kiln is fed semi-continuously, the maximum size of each batch must be
controlled.
• Oxygen level at kiln and afterburner exit — This is controlled to assure availability of
oxygen, and thus the potential for complete combustion (i.e., lower CO, THC, and
possibly PIC levels). The kiln is typically operated at 50-100% excess air, while the
afterburner is typically operated at 100-200% excess air.
• CO and THC combustion gas levels — Monitored to ensure satisfactory operation of
kiln and afterburner and to minimize PIC formation.
Kiln solids residence rime — This is typically maintained at between 0.5 and 1.5 hours
and is controlled by rotation rate and kiln rake to ensure that the waste spends enough
2-26
-------
2.3.2
time in the kiln to be thoroughly treated. Controlling residence time is important for
treatment of relatively non-combustible wastes.
Kiln solids and combustion air mixing — These assure that volatiles are thoroughly
combusted.
Liquid Injection Incinerators ,
Liquid injection and rotary kiln incinerators are the most commonly used incinerators for
hazardous waste incineration. 14 Liquid injection combustors can be used to dispose of virtually
any combustible liquid or liquid-like waste 0iquid, slurries, sludges).
2.3.2.1
Process Description
The typical liquid injection incinerator includes a waste burner system, an auxiliary fuel
system, an air supply system, a combustion chamber, and an air pollution control system. A
typical liquid injection incinerator is shown in Figure 2.3.-2. Liquid wastes are fed and atomized
into the combustion chamber through the waste burner nozzles. These nozzles atomize the waste
and mix it with air. Atomization is usually achieved either by mechanical methods such as a rotary
cup or pressure atomization systems, or by twin-fluid nozzles which use high-pressure air or
steam. With a relatively large surface area, the atomized particles vaporize quickly, forming a
highly combustible mix of waste fumes and combustion air. This mixture ignites and burns in the
combustion chamber. Typical combustion chamber residence time and temperature ranges are 0.5
to 2 seconds and 1,300 °F to 3,000 °F (700 °C to 1650° C), respectively. Typical liquid feed rates
are as high as 200 cubic feet per hour (5,600 L/hr). 15
The liquid injection incinerator may dispose of aqueous or non-aqueous waste which can
be atomized through a burner nozzle (i.e., a viscosity less than 10,000 SSU). The waste must be
atomized to small droplets of 40 |im or less. Atomization is usually accomplished mechanically
using rotary cup or pressure atomization systems. Wastes with high solids are filtered prior to
entering the feed tank. The liquid waste fuel system transfers waste from drums into a feed tank.
14 Bonner, T., Hazardous Waste Incineration Engineering, Noyes Data, 1981, p. 3.
15 Bonner, p. 12.
2-27
-------
Aqueous
Waste
25-250%
Excess A!rN
Discharge
to Quench or
Waste Heat Recovery
Auxiliary
Fuel
Liquid
Waste •
Atomizing •
Steam or
Air
\
Primary
Combustion
Air
2600.F-3000-F
0.3-2.0 Seconds '— isnn.F v>nn c
Mean Combustion 1500-F-2200-F
Gas Residence Time
Cross Section
Figure 2.3-2 Typical liquid injection incmerator.16
16 Dempsey, p. 35.
2-28
-------
The tank is pressurized with nitrogen, and waste is fed to the incinerator using a control valve and
a flow meter. The fuel supply line is purged with nitrogen after use. A recirculation system is
used to mix the tank contents.
The combustion chamber can be as simple in design as a refractory-lined cylinder, or it can
be relatively complex with combustion air preheat around the chamber and firing multiple fuel
streams. The incinerator can be designed using either a horizontal or vertical orientation. In either
case, flame impingement on the combustion chamber wall is undesirable because it can lead to
refractory corrosion and loss of heat. Thus, the burner(s) is/are located to prevent flame
impingement on the walls.
2.3.3
Fluidized Bed Incinerators
A fluidized bed is essentially a vertical cylinder containing a bed of granular material at the
bottom. Combustion air is introduced at the bottom of the cylinder and flows up through the bed
material, suspending the granular particles. Solid, liquid, and gaseous waste fuels may be injected
into the bed, where they mix with the combustion air and burn. This section provides a process
description and a discussion of the process operating parameters.
2.3.3.1
Process Description
A fluidized bed incinerator consists of a fluidized bed reactor, fiuidizing ah- blower, waste
feed system, auxiliary fuel feed system, and an air pollution control device system. A typical
reactor, as shown in Figure 2.3-3, has an inside diameter of 26 feet (8 meters) and elevation of 33
feet (10 meters). Silica beds are commonly used and have a depth of 3 feet (1 meter) at rest and
extending up to 6.5 feet (2 meters) in height when fluidizing air is passed through the bed. The
waste is put in direct contact with the bed media, causing heat transfer from the bed particles. At
the proper temperature, waste ignition and combustion occur. The bed media acts to scrub the
waste particles, exposing fresh surface by the abrasion process which encourages rapid
combustion of the waste. Waste and auxiliary fuels are injected radially into the bed and react at
temperatures from 840 °F to 1500 °F (450 °C to 810 °C). Further reaction occurs in the volume
above the bed at temperatures up to 1,800 °F (980 °C). *7 An auxiliary burner is located above the
bed to provide heat for start up, reheat, and maintenance of bed temperature.
17 Bonner, p. 15.
2-29
-------
1.0-5.0 Seconds
Mean Combustion
Gas Residence
Time
Preheat
Burner
Liquid
Sludge
Feed
Fluidizing
Combustion
Air
Discharge
to Cyclone
:;•: Fluidized ••';;•">. »';
Sand or Alumina-
Ash/Bed
Removal
25 - 150%
Excess Air
Solids Feed and
Cyclone Ash Recycle
1400«F - 1600-F
Auxiliary Fuel
Air Distribution
Manifold
Figure 2.3-3 Typical fluidized bed incinerator.
2-30
-------
Generally, fluidized bed incinerators have two separate waste preparation/feed systems —
one for solids and one for liquids. In some cases, four feed systems are employed: wet solids,
dry solids, viscous fluids and non-viscous fluids. Solid wastes are usually fed into a coarse
shredder. The coarsely shredded waste falls into a classifier which separates the light and dense
particles. The lighter particles are transferred to a secondary shredder, and from there they are
conveyed to the hopper for feeding the fluidized bed. Liquid waste is pumped into a larger holding
tank. To ensure that the mixture is as homogeneous as possible, the liquid waste is continuously
pumped through a recirculating loop from the bottom of the tank to the top. A metering pump
draws the waste fuel to be burned from the tank to the primary reactor. Nozzles are used to
atomize and distribute the liquid waste within the bed.
2.3.3.2
Operating Parameters
Critical parameters for optimum performance include fluidized bed temperature, oxygen
level in the bed, solids residence time, bed fluidization, and combustion gas residence time.
« The fluidized bed temperature must be monitored and controlled by waste feed and
auxiliary burner to assure that the temperature remains above an established minimum.
Operating temperatures are normally maintainedin the 1,400 to 1,600 °F range.
• The oxygen level in the bed must be maintained to ensure the potential for complete
combustion.
• Monitoring the carbon monoxide and total hydrocarbon concentration in the flue gas is
also an indication of complete combustion.
• Solids retention time in the bed is a measure of the thorough treatment of the waste.
Retention time is especially important for relatively non-combustible wastes.
• Uniform bed fluidization must be maintained to properly treat the waste.
• The combustion gas residence time must be monitored to assure that the combustion
gas has been exposed to volatile destruction temperature for a sufficient period of time.
The use of a control system could aid in maintaining fluidized bed temperature and flue gas
residence time. The control system would involve the adjustment of waste and auxiliary fuel feed
rates, as well as the ratio of oxidation/Inert fluidization gases.
2-31
-------
2.3.4
Fixed Hearth Incinerators
Fixed hearth incinerators, which are used extensively for medical waste incineration, are
less commonly used to incinerate hazardous wastes. Fixed hearths can handle bulk solids arid
liquids, however, this design does not have the versatility of a rotary kiln.
2.3.4.1
Process Description
Fixed hearth incinerators typically contain two furnace chambers: a primary and secondary
chamber. A typical fixed hearth system is shown in Figure 2.3-4 Solid and liquid wastes may be
charged into the primary chamber. Small units are normally batch-fed, while larger units may be
continuously fed with a screw feeder or moving grate, or semi-continuous fed with a raw pusher.
In some designs, there may be two or three step hearths on which the ash and waste are pushed
with rams through the system. In other designs, rotating rabble arms stir the solid waste material
on the grate (Du Pont, Wilmington, DE). A controlled flow of "underfire" combustion air is
introduced, usually up through the hearth on which the waste sits. In some designs, combustion
air may also be provided from the wall over the waste bed.
In many fixed hearth incinerators, known as controlled air or starved air incinerators, 70 to
80% of the stoichiometric air required is provided in the primary chamber, thus the primary
chamber is operated in a "starved-air" mode. In this situation, the waste is pyrolyzed and partially
combusted. In some cases, steam injection into the primary combustor is used to enhance waste
fixed carbon burnout (fixed carbon is non-volatile carbon which will burn only when exposed to
combustion air).
Temperature in the primary chamber must be high enough to destroy hazardous organics in
the waste (1000 °F) but low enough to reduce the potential for slagging and refractory damage
(1800 °F). Waste slagging may clog the underfire air ports. Bottom ash is removed using a
continuous or semi-continuous method, depending on the unit design. The ash is usually dumped
into a water bath, which provides a seal between the primary unit and the atmosphere.
For controlled air units, due to insufficient supply of air, the primary chamber flue gas will
contain unburned hydrocarbons and high levels of CO and fife. These volatiles are burned out in a
secondary or afterburner chamber. In the secondary chamber, 140 to 200% excess air is provided,
as well as sufficient residence time at temperature for complete volatiles burnout. Liquid wastes
may be injected either in the primary or secondary chamber. Supplementary fuel may be provided
2-32
-------
Discharge
to Quench .or
Heat Recovery
100-200%
Excess Atr
Auxiliary Fuel
0.25-2.5 Seconds
Mean Residence Time
T /
Combustion
Air
Transfer
Ram
Ash Discharge,
Ram
Steam
Auxiliary Fuel or
Liquid Waste
50-80%
Stoichiometric air
Refractory
Ash Discharge
Figure 2.3-4 Typical fixed hearth incinerator.18
18 Dempsey, p. 36.
2-33
-------
in both chambers for the maintenance of temperature. Secondary chamber temperature may be as
high as 2000 °F. Temperatures beyond this are avoided to prevent refractory damage, decreased
gas residence time, and usage of auxiliary fuel.
2.3.4.2 Operating Parameters
Critical fixed hearth operating parameters include primary chamber and afterburner
temperature. Primary chamber temperature is controlled by the underfire air supply. Afterburner
temperature can be controlled by auxiliary fuel firing and primary waste feedrate adjustments.
Note that the capacity of afterburner or secondary chamber limits the primary chamber burning
rate. The afterburner must have adequate volume to accept and oxidize all volatile gases generated
in the primary chamber. Additionally, afterburner must be kept operating at excess air conditions
to ensure complete volatile burnout.
2.4 Hazardous. Wa$te Boilers.
By definition, a boiler is a closed vessel in which water under pressure is transformed into
steam by the application of heat. More specifically, EPA has defined the following characteristics
of a boiler for regulatory purposes under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA):
1) the combustion chamber and primary energy recovery section must be of integral design; 2)
thermal recovery efficiency must be at least 60%; and 3) at least 75% of the recovered energy must
be "exported" (i.e., not for internal boiler uses). 19 Boilers come in a variety of sizes,
configurations, and designs. The three common boiler design categories which burn hazardous
waste are the firetube boiler, the watertube boiler, and stoker-fired boiler.
2.4.1 Firetube Boilers
The firetube boiler can be described in simple terms as a water-filled cylinder with tubes
running through it which provide the escape path for the combustion gases or flue gas (as shown
in Figure 2.4-1). As the flue gas passes through the tubes, the hot gases heat the tubes which then
heat the water to produce steam. The firetube boiler is primarily used in industrial applications.
Firetube boilers are compact, low in initial cost, and easy to modularize based on plant
requirements. However, they are also slow to respond to changes in demand for steam (load)
19 Federal Register, Vol. 56, No. 35, February, 1991, p. 7138.
2-34
-------
FIRE
TUBES
-COOLED GASES
OF COMBUSTION
HEAT AND GASES
OF COMBUSTION
Figure 2.4-1 Firetube boiler.
2-35
-------
compared to watertube boilers, and circulation is slower. Also, stresses are greater in firetube
boilers because of their rigid design and subsequent inability to expand and contract easily.
Firetube boilers usually range in size from less than 2 to 50 million Btu per hour. Most industrial
firetube boilers are either horizontal return tube (HRT), scotch marine, or firebox.
Horizontal Return Tube
A horizontal return tubular (HRT) boiler, as shown in Figure 2.4-2, has a separate furnace
area that is built of refractory brick. In a HRT boiler, the firetubes are horizontal. The fuel firing
burner assembly is at one end, and the products of combustion are recirculated or "returned" to
make two, three, or four passes through the tubes surrounded by the boiler water. A HRT is
classified as an externally-fired firetube boiler since the furnace area is separated from the heat
transfer area. The boiler is encased with brick, and the furnace is set on rollers or suspended on
hangers to allow for expansion and contraction which occurs when the boiler increases and
decreases in temperature.
Scotch Marine
Scotch marine boilers are an example of internally-fired firetube boilers. The original
scotch marine boilers were used on ships and typically fire natural gas or fuel oil to maximize the
convenience of automatic operation. A scotch marine boiler has a water-cooled flue furnace within
a horizontal shell. The flue furnace is composed of a large tube or pipe, usually corrugated, that
passes through the length of the shell. The fuel burner is located at the front end of the flue so that
the combustion flame extends across most of the length of the flue. The combustion gases first
pass through the furnace tube, heating the bottom of the water basin, and then pass through the fire
tubes, heating the water in the basin. Scotch marine boilers may be designed in two-, three-, and
four pass units, as shown in Figure 2.4-3.
Firebox
A firebox boiler is a firetube boiler in which the furnace is surrounded on the sides by
water leg area, as illustrated in Figure 2.4-4. The water space is extended downward so that the
furnace walls are surrounded by water. These flat, side water leg areas are supported by staybolts
to prevent them from bulging. Most firebox boilers burn natural gas or fuel oil. Early firebox
boilers burned coal. Many of these have been converted to natural gas or fuel oil for convenience.
Coal or other fuels and waste may also be burned depending upon the design of the furnace.
2-36
-------
FIRE DOOR
BRICK FURNACE
HORIZONTAL SHELL
GRATES
TOP ROW OF
FIRE TUBES-
COMBUSTION
SPACE
SUSPENDED
BAFFLE
FIRE BRICK
COMMON BRICK
CONCRETE
Figure 2.4-2 Horizontal return tubular boiler.
2-37
-------
2-pass Dryback
3-pass Wfetback
3-pass Dryback
4-pass Dryback
Figure 2.4-3 Multiple pass arrangements.
2-38
-------
FIRE TUBES
FURNACE WALL
WATER LEG AREA
BOILER
SHELL
STAYBOLTS
FIRE DOORS
Figure 2.4-4 Firebox boiler.
2-39
-------
2.4.2
Watertube Boiler
The basic design of a water tube boiler circulates the water through tubes, with the hot
combustion gases passing over the outside surfaces of the tubes. Generally, the boiler can be
physically divided into two sections, the furnace and the convection pass, as shown in
Figure 2.4-5. Furnaces (fireboxes, combustion chambers) will vary in configuration and size, but
their function is to contain the flaming combustion gases and transfer the heat energy to the water-
cooled walls. The convection pass contains the superheaters, reheater, economizer and air
preheater heat exchangers, where the heat of the combustion flue gases is used to increase the
temperature of the steam, water, and combustion air.
The superheaters and reheaters are designed to increase the temperature of the steam
generated within the tubes of the furnace walls. Steam flows inside the tubes and flue gas passes
along the outside surface of the tubes.
The economizer is a counterflow heat exchanger designed to recover energy from the flue
gas after the superheater and the reheater. The boiler economizer is a tube bank type, hot-gas-to-
water heat exchanger. It increases the temperature of the water entering the steam drum. The tube
bundle is typically an arrangement of parallel horizontal serpentine tubes with the water flowing
inside but in an opposite direction to the flue gas. Tube spacing is as small as possible to promote
heat transfer while still permitting adequate tube surface cleaning and limiting flue gas side pressure
loss. By design, steam is usually not generated inside these tubes.
The air heater is not a portion of the steam-water circuit, but serves a key role in the steam
generator system to provide heat transfer and efficiency. In many cases, especially in a high
pressure boiler, the temperature of the flue gas leaving the economizer is still quite high. The air
heater recovers much of this energy and adds it to the combustion air. Heating the combustion air
prior to its entrance to the furnace reduces fuel usage.
Watertube boilers are rapid steamers and respond quickly to changes in demand for steam
due to improved water circulation. They can withstand much higher operating pressures and
temperatures than firetube boilers. In addition, the watertube boiler design is safer. They can also
burn a wide variety of fuels and have the ability to expand and contract more easily than firetube
boilers. The major drawback is that watertube boilers are more expensive to install. They also
require more complicated furnaces and repair techniques.
2-40
-------
Drum
Downcomer-^
Rcheater
Primary
Superheater
Economizer
Figure 2.4. -5 Watertube boiler.
2-41
-------
There are several common designs for watertube boilers. An "O" style boiler is a watertube
boiler with a top steam and water drum and a bottom mud drum. These are interconnected by
banks of symmetrical tubes in an "O" shape. The burner is in the center of the "O", as shown in
Figure 2.4-6. This boiler can be made with a waterwall furnace, which is a popular configuration
for package type boilers. An "O" style boiler commonly burns natural gas and fuel oil.
An "A" style boiler is a watertube boiler with a top steam and water drum and two bottom
mud drums. The steam and water drum is connected to the mud drums by banks of symmetrical
tubes in an "A" shape. This is a popular configuration for package types.
A "D" style boiler is a watertube boiler similar to the "O" style except that the steam-
generating tubes on one side are extended to leave an open area close to the center. This area is for
the combustion of the fuel. The two sides are separated by a baffle so that the gases pass to the
rear on the combustion side and then turn back toward the front for the convection side. There is
either a top or side outlet for the gases to leave the unit.
The final watertube boiler configuration discussed in this document is the Stirling boiler.
The Stirling boiler is a watertube boiler with three steam and water drums on the top and a mud
drum, as shown in Figure 2.4-7. Water enters the top rear drum and passes downward through
the rear bank of tubes to the mud drum. It then goes upward to the top front drum and top center
drum. As the steam separates from the water, equalizing tubes connecting the steam spaces of all
three drums allow the steam pressure to equalize. The steam then flows either to the rear or center
drum to leave the boiler. Circulating tubes connect the water spaces of the top front and top center
drums, allowing the water levels in these drums to balance. Usually, there are no circulating tubes
between the top center and the top rear drums. Circulating tubes in this location would allow water
to short-circuit to the other drums without first flowing through the water tubes.20
2.4.3 Stokers
Stokers are mechanical devices that feed solid fuels such as coal, wood wastes and bagasse
(as well as residential and commercial refuse) onto a grate at the bottom of the furnace and remove
the ash residue after combustion. Stokers are designed to permit continuous or intermittent fuel
feed, fuel ignition, air supply for combustion, free passages for the resulting gaseous products,
20 Wilson, R. Dean, Boiler Operator's Workbook, American Technical Publishers, Inc., 1991.
2-42
-------
STEAM AND
WATER DRUM
WATER
TUBES
STEAM AND
WATER DRUM
. : OPEN AREA
FOR COMBUSTION
MUDDROM\
OPEN AREA
MUD DRUM FOR COMBUSTION,.
"A" STYLE BOILER
WATER
TUBES
• STEAM AND
WATER DRUM
WATER
TUBES
MUD
DRUM
MUD DRUM•
"O" STYLE BOILER
T OPEN AREA
FOR COMBUSTION
"D" STYLE BOILER
Figure 2.4 -6 Watertube boiler configurations.
2-43
-------
. STEAM AND WATER DRUMS
WATER TUBES
FLUE GAS BAFFLES
MUD DRUM
SUPERHEATER
STOKER
_
Figure 2.4-7 Stirling boiler.
2-44
-------
and disposal of non-combustible materials. A stoker firing system typically consists of a fuel
supply system, a stationary or moving grate assembly which supports the burning mass of fuel and
admits most of the combustion air to the fuel, an overfire air system to complete combustion, and
an ash or residual discharge system. A typical vibrating grate stoker is shown in Figure 2.4-8.
There are two general types of stokers: underfeed and overfeed. In an underfeed stoker,
the fuel and air are both supplied from underneath the surface of the grate. Underfeed stokers use
both stationary-grate and moving-grate tuyeres (openings in a shell through which air is forced).
In an overfeed stoker, the fuel is fed from a hopper above the moving grate, and combustion air is
supplied from below the grate, as illustrated in Figure 2.4-8.
Underfeed Stokers
\
To be more specific, there are two general types of underfeed stokers, the horizontal feed
side ash discharge type and the gravity feed rear ash discharge type.
In the side ash discharge type, shown in Figure 2.4-9, the fuel is fed from a hopper to a
central trough or retort by a screw or a ram pusher. In larger units, a ram assisted by pusher
blocks or a sliding retort bottom (fuel distributors) moves the fuel upward and into the retort. As
the retort is filled from the bottom, coal moves upward and out of the retort onto the grate area
where it is exposed to air and radiant heat from the furnace. As the fuel moves along the grate to
the sides and/or rear, the distillation of the volatiles in the fuel occurs and the remaining fuel is
burned out near the edges or end of the grate. High pressure overfire ah* is added to produce high
turbulence to enhance mixing and reduce smoke.
Burning fuel in side ash discharge underfeed stokers increases the chance of producing
large agglomerates of ash slags (clinkering) and layers of ash slag (matting). To reduce this
tendency, alternate fixed and moving grate sections are applied to the underfeed stoker design to
break-up and distribute the fuel.
The gravity feed rear ash discharge underfeed stoker, illustrated in Figure 2.4-10, has a
grate that is inclined at an angle of 20 to 25° above the horizontal, so that gravity assists in
distributing the fuel over the length of the retorts. This type of stoker uses a series of retorts
installed side-by-side and normally extending from front to rear of a boiler, with tuyere sections
between the retorts and along the side walls of the boiler.
2-45
-------
Fuel Supply
Distribution
Air
Grate
Overfire Air Ports
Ash Hopper
Air
Plenum
Figure 2.4-8 Vibrating grate stoker.
2-46
-------
End View
Figure 2.4-9 Single retort underfeed stoker with horizontal feed, side ash discharge.
2-47
-------
Dump Plates
Reciprocating
Extension Grates
Distributing
Pusher Blocks
Coal Hopper
Stationary
Air Tuyeres
Feeder
Rams
Figure 2.4-10 Underfeed stoker with rear ash discharge.
2-48
-------
Round or square rams are installed to move the fuel from the hopper into the upper or front
end of the retorts below the point of combustion air supply. Secondary rams or pusher plates
move the fuel along the retort and upward into the burning zone immediately above the retorts,
where combustion air is supplied to the fuel bed through tuyeres located between and above the
retorts. An adjustable dump grate section is used at the rear end of the retorts to retain the ash and
prevent an avalanching of unburned fuel into the ash pit.
Water-cooled furnaces are preferred with underfeed stokers. On the smaller sizes of side
charge stokers, however, satisfactory performance can be obtained with refractory walls.
Adequate furnace volume must be provided according to manufacturer recommendations.
All underfeed stokers should be provided with an overfire air system designed to provide
adequate furnace turbulence to complete burnout of the hydrocarbons. Depending on the width of
the stoker, load conditions, and fuel burning characteristics, overfire air will represent 7.5 to 12%
of the total combustion air (theoretical air plus excess air).
Overfeed Stokers
The overfeed stokers are divided into mass feed and spreader categories based on the
method of introducing the fuel into the furnace. For,mass feed stokers, there are three basic types
of grates: chain-grate, traveling-grate, and water-cooled vibrating grate.
The grate surface of the chain-grate stoker consists of narrow grates which form links. The
links are staggered and connected by rods extending across the stoker width to form a
wide-continuous-chain assembly, which is pulled or pushed through the furnace by an electric or
a hydraulic drive. A cross section of a chain-grate stoker is illustrated in Figure 2.4-11.
The grate surface of the traveling grate consists of narrow grate clips mounted on lateral
carrier bars attached to the grate chains, which pull or push through the furnace using an electric or
a hydraulic drive. These grate clips are illustrated in Figure 2.4-12.
The grate surface of the water-cooled vibrating^-grate stoker consists of tuyere-type grates
mounted on and in close contact with a grid of water-cooled tubes which are connected to the boiler
circulation system for positive cooling, as illustrated in Figure 2.4-13. The entire structure is
supported on steel flexing plates, permitting the entire water-cooled grid and grate surface to
vibrate with a preset amplitude that moves the fuel bed through the furnace. Vibration of the grate
is intermittent, and the vibration period and delay between vibrations are regulated by a timing
device synchronizing the fuel feeding rate with steam demand.
2-49
-------
- Coal Hopper
Air Zone Seal Plates-
Figure 2.4-11 Cross section of overfeed mass-burning chain-grate stoker.
2-50
-------
Overfire
Air Nozzle
Coal Hopper
Fuel Feed
Grate
Grate Clips •
or Grate Keys
Air Control Dampers
Figure 2.4-12 Cross section of overfeed mass-burning traveling-grate stoker.
2-51
-------
Coal Hopper-
Rear Furnace Arch
Grate Cooling Tubes
Adjustable Ash Dam
Water-Cooled
Header
Grate
Bars
Fuel Feed
Gate
Vibrating
Generator
Grate
Support
and Flexing
Member
Figure 2.4-13 Water-cooled, vibratmg-grate stoker.
2-52
-------
In general, overfeed stokers are best suited for industrial and institutional power plants with
steady load demands. Since all the fuel is consumed on the grate, the stoker grate surface must be
conservatively sized. The grate heat release rate (quantity of heat released per hour divided by
grate area) should be limited to a maximum of 425 Btu/hr-ft2 of active grate area. These stokers
are normally designed for capacities up to 150,000 Ib/hr of steam.
Water-cooled furnaces are preferred with all moving-grate stokers to prevent slag
formation on the furnace walls. The tube spacing of the furnace walls should not exceed twice the
tube diameter. Adequate furnace volume must be provided as recommended by the boiler and
stoker manufacturers.
Overfeed stokers are provided with a high-pressure, overfire-air system consisting of one
or two rows of closely spaced air jets located above the fuel bed in the front wall of the furnace.
The jets provide adequate furnace turbulence to complete the burnout of the hydrocarbons. The
high-pressure air fans will be sized to provide approximately 10% of total air. The static pressure
of the fan is selected to provide proper penetration of the air into the furnace.
The second category of overfeed stokers are spreader stokers. In spreader stokers, the fuel
is spread into the furnace over the grates from feeders located across the front of the unit. The
purpose is to feed the fuel evenly over the grate surface in order to release an equal amount of
energy from each square foot of active grate surface. The air for combustion should then be
i
admitted evenly through the grate to provide the oxygen for burning. Above the grates, an
overfire-air system is provided for additional oxygen and turbulence in the lower-furnace zone
temperature to ensure efficient performance. Since spreader stokers can burn a wide range of solid
fuels and cover a wide range of boiler sizes, the arrangement and design of each of the three basic
components — fuel feeders, type of grate, and overfire-air system — depend on the specific
project.
Fuel Burning
As the fuel is fed to the furnace in a manner to spread it evenly over the complete grate
surface, it burns both in suspension and on the grate. The amount burned in suspension depends
on a number of factors. Fine fuel burns more in suspension; high—volatile fuels release more
energy in suspension. High moisture can increase the energy release on the grate. The burning
fuel bed on the grate may be only about 1 inch thick. This depth depends on fuel characteristics
and firing rate. Under the burning fuel, an ash bed is formed which is usually about 3 inches
thick. The ash-bed thickness also depends on fuel characteristics, but not on the firing rate since
2-53
-------
the rate of ash discharge is regulated to the firing rate. The ash bed provides an insulating barrier
between the burning fuel and the metal-grate surface, which is additionally cooled by the
combustion airflow across the grate.
Fuel Feeders
There are three types of fuel feeders utilized in spreader stokers: reciprocating feeder, chain
feeder, and drum feeder. In general, fuel feeders have a device which meters the fuel to the
combustion control system and delivers it to the built-in rotor.
Reciprocating Feeder: The reciprocating feeder has one or more feed plates which travel
back and forth on a spill plate. On the back stroke, the fuel drops from the hopper in front of the
plate. On forward stroke, the fuel is pushed off from the spill plate onto the rotor. The amount of
fuel per stroke is adjusted by (1) the length of stroke of the feed plate through mechanical devices,
(2) the number of strokes per minute through mechanical variable-speed devices, or (3) electronic
devices such as variable-frequency power units to alternating-current (ac) motors, or silicon
controller rectifier control units to direct-current (dc) motors.
Chain Feeder: A chain feeder has a drag conveyor deliver the fuel out of a hopper, off the
end of the chain, and onto the rotor. The amount of fuel is a function of the speed of the chain and
the depth of the fuel. The depth of the fuel is adjusted by the position of a gate above the chain.
The speed can be regulated by an internal mechanical variable—speed device, or electronically, as
described previously.
Drum Feeder: The drum feeder utilizes a revolving drum with semipockets to deliver the
fuel out of a hopper onto the rotor. As with the chain feeder, the amount of fuel is regulated by the
speed of the drum and the depth of fuel coming out of the hopper onto the drum. A vibrating
feeder delivers the fuel to the rotor out of the fuel hopper on a vibrating conveyor. The amount of
fuel may be adjusted by the frequency of vibration and the depth of the fuel on the conveyor.
Types of Grates
A number of grate types are utilized for spreader-stoker firing. The purpose of the grate is
threefold: 1) to provide a floor on which the fuel can burn, 2) a means of distributing air evenly
through the grates, and 3) a method of discharging the ashes that accumulate on the grate from the
consumed fuel. The various grate designs include stationary and dumping grate, reciprocating
grate, vibrating grate, traveling grate, and vibrating, water-cooled grate. A description of each of
these grate types is given below.
2-54
-------
Stationary and Dumping: The intermittent cleaning types of grates are stationary and
dumping. The stationary grate is rarely used because of hazards to the operator when removing
ashes through the open fire door. It is extremely difficult to clean fires without creating a smoky
fire condition of high opacity.
This manual dumping type of grate, shown in Figure 2.4-14, has one section for each fuel
feeder. To remove ashes, the fuel feed is stopped in front of one of the grate sections to allow
complete burnout of combustible products. The air supply to that section is then cut off with
appropriate dampers, and the ashes can be dumped into a pit below. While this cleaning occurs, it
is necessary for the remaining sections to burn additional fuel to maintain the boiler rating.
After the ashes are dumped, the fuel feeder is started again. When the fuel ignites, the
undergrate damper to that section is reopened to resume normal combustion. It is very difficult to
accomplish this cleaning process without high opacity. Consequently, the dumping grate is
seldom used for burning fuel with a high percentage of volatiles and a low ash content,
Reciprocating: The reciprocating grate, shown in Figure 2.4-15, discharges ashes by a
slow back-and-forth motion of moving grates alternating with stationary grates. Each row of
grates rests on the row in front and has a raised nose which pushes the ashes toward and off the
end of the grate into an ash hopper. It is preferable to discharge the ashes at the front under the
feeders. Since the fuel is thrown toward the rear, the best control of ash discharge with minimum
combustibles in the ashes can be achieved with front ash discharge from any type of conveying
grate. Because of the stepped nature of the reciprocating grate, it is used only for fuels with
sufficient ash quantity to provide an adequate ash depth insulation on top of the grate. The
undergrate air temperature is ambient.
/
Vibrating: The vibrating or oscillating grate (Figure 2.4-16) is suspended on flexing plates.
Either an eccentric drive or rotating weights impart a vibrating action to the grate surface, which
conveys ashes to the front and discharges them into an ash pit. The frequency of vibration is kept
well below the natural frequency, to minimize the forces on the support structure. The rate of ash
discharge is regulated by a timer system that controls the off time between vibrating cycles and the
length of vibrating time.
Traveling: The traveling-grate spreader stoker (Figure 2.4-17) is by far the most popular
type, and there are numerous types of construction. The most important consideration is that the
design of the grate surface should provide a high resistance to airflow through the grate to ensure
even distribution of air through the grate. The traveling grate moves forward to discharge the
ashes at the front end under the fuel feeders. The return grate then passes underneath in the air
2-55
-------
Coal B
opper-\
Over Fire Air Nozzles
Fuel Feeder
- PowerOperated
Dumping Grates
Air Chamber
and
Ash Pit
Figure 2.4-14 Spreader stoker with dumping grates.
2-56
-------
Coal Hopper-\
Over Fire Air Nozzles
Coal Feeder
Figure 2.4-15 Spreader stoker with reciprocating grates.
2-57
-------
Coal Hopper-x
\\
Coal Feeder
>>
Over Fire Air Nozzles
-Vibrating or Oscillating Grates
Figure 2.4 r!6 Spreader stoker with vibrating grates.
2-58
-------
Coal Hopper -v
Over Fire Air Nozzles
\\
Coal Feeder
Figure 2.4-17 Spreader stoker with traveling grates.
2-59
-------
chamber. The traveling grate is driven either mechanically or hydraulically through appropriate
mechanical devices, electronic devices, or hydraulic flow-control valves.
When the ash content in the fuel is consistent, the speed of the grates can be regulated by
the combustion controls to maintain an even ash-bed thickness. The grate bars can be made from
cast iron with small amounts of alloy for heat and wear resistance, or from ductile iron for
increased heat resistance and impact resistance.
Vibrating, Water-Cooled: The water-cooled vibrating grate spreader stoker (Figure 2.4-
18) is used for refuse burning. A water-cooled grid on which a grate surface is fastened is
mounted on a frame. The whole assembly is supported on flexing plates on an angle of 6° down
toward the ash discharge end. An eccentric drive vibrates the grate assembly through a timing
circuit that controls the amount of off and on time. The vibrating action moves the ash to the front
of the grate and into the ash pit. The vibration frequency is kept well below the natural frequency.
The water-cooled grid is cooled by tying into the boiler water-circulation circuit or a separate
forced-cooling system.
Overfire Air
The overfire air system on spreader-stokers has three functions: (1) to provide oxygen and
turbulence to mix the fuel and oxygen in the lower high-temperature zone of the furnace for
complete burnout, (2) to distribute fuel and assist in distribution when the design dictates the use
of air for this purpose, and (3) to provide cooling air for mechanical fuel feeders. The air can
come from a common fan that would have static pressure capabilities of 25 to 30 in H2O to provide
the necessary energy for turbulence or fuel distribution.
Overfire air nozzles are placed in rows in the front and rear walls of the furnace. The
design should place the air nozzles at elevations which will ensure mixing of the furnace gases in
the high-temperature zones, so that the combustion processes can be completed in the furnace.
Air-nozzle spacing in each row should be on centers 10 to 12 inches for complete coverage of the
furnace.
The size of the air nozzles in the various rows is a function of the depth of the penetration
desired and the amount of overfire air required. Bituminous-coal-fired boilers are designed with
15 to 25% overfire air. Lignite-fired boilers are designed with 20 to 25% overfire air. The
overfire air temperature may be either ambient or the temperature of the undergrate air. The choice
of temperature is generally a function of .air heater and boiler system design.
2-60
-------
Over Fire Air Nozzles
Coal Hopper-\
Coal Feeder
Cooling
Water
Inlet
r Cooling
/ Water
Outlet
Water-Cooled Grate
Eccentric Grate Drive
-^- Sifting Hopper
Figure 2.4. -18 Spreader stoker with water-cooled vibrating grates.
2-61
-------
Ffy Carbon Reinfection
The paniculate leaving the furnace of a spreader stoker can contain considerable
combustible material, and thus is termed fly carbon. It is beneficial to return some percentage of
this fly carbon to the furnace for burning to improve the boiler efficiency. This is accomplished by
the conveying system, which transfers the fly carbon from hoppers through a pipeline to the
furnace using air as the conveying medium. By using a nozzle and venturi arrangement, air at a
pressure up to 25 inches of water can create a suction to draw the fly carbon into the pipeline and
pressure-convey it to the furnace.
The air supplied is generally from the overfire air fan; however, a separate fan can be used.
The fly carbon can be collected in hoppers under the boiler's steam generating section, economizer,
air heater, or mechanical dust collector, although continuous evacuation of the hopper is required.
The amount of reinjection sets the increase in boiler efficiency.
2-62
-------
2.5 References
1. Singer, J. G., Combustion: Fossil Power Systems, 3rd edition, Combustion Engineering,
Inc., 1981.
2. Steam, Its Generation and Use, 40th Edition, Babcock and Wilcox Company, 1992.
3. Elliot, C.T., Standard Handbook of Powerplant Engineering, McGraw-Hill Publishing
Company, New York, 1989.
2-63
-------
-------
3.0
PROCESS CHARACTERIZATION
In this section, each of the hazardous waste processes is characterized in terms of
population within the United States and the air pollution control techniques currently in use. A
detailed description of air pollution devices is provided in Appendix A.
3.1
Cement Kilns
3.1.1
Population
Of the 211 cement facilities in the United States, 33 are currently burning hazardous waste
derived fuel. Most cement kilns burning hazardous wastes use "wet" process cement kilns.
However, all kiln types, including long dry, dry preheater/precalciner, dry preheater and semi-dry,
are currently co-firing hazardous waste derived fuels.
3.1.2
Air Pollution Control Techniques in Use
Most cement kilns are equipped with flue gas emissions control devices specifically
designed for the control of paniculate matter. Either electrostatic precipitators (ESPs) or fabric
filters (FFs), occasionally in combination with mechanical cyclone collectors, are used. ESPs have
been the more common choice due to their reliability and low maintenance requirements. Recently
however, with increasingly strict paniculate control standards, FFs have also become common.
Typically, fabric filters are more efficient at collection of submicron paniculate and provide lower
guaranteed paniculate matter emissions levels. Fabric filter technology at the tune of construction
of many of the wet kilns was not capable of operating effectively in high moisture conditions. For
this reason, ESP technology is more commonly found in the present population of wet kilns.
However, there are currently several wet kilns which are equipped with modern FFs capable of
operating in the high moisture conditions found in the flue gas of wet kilns.1 FF paniculate control
is more common at dry process kilns. Depending on the facility, the flue gas at the kiln exit may
need to be cooled before entering the air pollution control device. Air dilution or water spray may
be used for this purpose. For one facility, hot gases leaving the kiln are cooled in a waste heat
boiler which produces steam; the steam is then converted to electricity that is used on-site.
1 Memo From Frank Behan, EPA, May 16, 1994. Conversations with operators of the following wet cement kilns
employing FFs: Dragon Cement,, Thomaston, ME, and Giant Cement, Harleyville, SC.
3-1
-------
3.2
Lightweight Aggregate Kilns
3.2.1
Population
There are more than 36 lightweight aggregate kiln locations in the United States. Of these,
there are currently seven facilities that burn hazardous waste. Within these facilities, there are 11
kilns.
3.2.2
Air Pollution Control Techniques in Use
The lightweight aggregate kilns have one or a combination of air pollution control devices
(APCDs) which include cyclones, fabric filters, venturi scrubbers, wet scrubbers, and spray
dryers, as well as flue gas cooling devices such as quench chambers and heat exchangers.
3.3
Hazardous Waste Incinerator Process Characterization
3.3.1
Population
Hazardous waste incinerators are grouped as either "commercial" or "on-site" facilities.
For a tipping fee, commercial facilities accept and treat wastes which have been generated off-site.
There are currently 20 commercial hazardous waste incineration facility sites operated by 18
companies. There are an additional 15 facilities which are not operating, are under construction, or
are pursuing permits. However, these facilities are a low priority for the Agency to process. The
majority of the commercial incinerators are rotary kilns. Additionally, there are liquid injection,
fluidized bed, fixed hearth, and two-stage furnace devices.
On-site facilities treat only wastes which have been generated at the facility. Currently,
there are 163 on-site hazardous waste incinerators. The on-site facilities consist of approximately
equal numbers of rotary kilns and liquid injection facilities, with a few fixed hearths and fluidized
beds.
3-2
-------
3.3.2
Air Pollution Control Techniques in Use
Many different types of air pollution control devices are used, including wet scrubbers such
as venturi and packed bed type wet scrubbers, ionizing wet scrubbers, electrostatic precipitators
and fabric filters. In general, the control systems can be grouped into the following three
categories:
1)
Wet systems
In wet systems, a wet scrubber is used for both particulate and acid gas control. Typically,
a venturi scrubber and packed bed scrubber are used in series. Also, ionizing wet scrubbers, wet
electrostatic precipitators, and novel venturi-type scrubbers may be used for more efficient
particulate control. The primary drawbacks of using wet systems include generation of a wet
effluent liquid waste stream (scrubber blowdown), relatively inefficient fine particulate control
compared to dry control techniques, and corrosion concerns. However, these types of systems
provide efficient control of acid gases and lower operating temperatures which may help control the
emissions of volatile metals.
2)
Dry systems
In dry systems, a fabric filter or electrostatic precipitator is used for particulate control,
sometimes in combination with dry scrubbing for acid gas control. The primary drawback of the
dry system is a less efficient control of acid gases compared with wet systems.
3)
Hybrid wet/drv systems
In hybrid systems, a dry technique (ESP or fabric filter) is used for particulate control (and
possibly acid control with use of dry scrubbing) followed by a wet technique (venturi and/or
packed bed scrubber) for acid gas control. These systems are both wet and dry (lower operating
temperature for capture of volatile metals, efficient collection of fine particulate, efficient capture of
i
acid gases), which avoids the drawbacks discussed above. In some hybrid systems (known as
zero discharge systems), the wet scrubber liquid is used in the spray drying operation, thus
minimizing the amount of liquid byproduct waste.
3-3
-------
Some liquid injection facilities do not utilize post-combustion air pollution control devices.
These are facilities which generate low levels of particulate when treating low ash content wastes
and/or may not generate acid gases when burning non-halogen containing wastes.
3-4
-------
4.0 INTRODUCnON: PM AND DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS CHARACTERIZATIONS
i
This chapter examines the body of paniculate matter (PM) and dioxin data accumulated to
date for hazardous waste burning cement kilns, lightweight aggregate kilns, incinerators and
boilers. The data presented in this chapter have been compiled from Certificate of Compliance
(C6C) and Trial Burn Reports submitted to EPA's Regional Offices and to the States. EPA's
information gathering effort is ongoing, and the material presented in both this Chapter and in
Chapter 5 will be updated as the data base is expanded. The cement kiln dioxin data are analyzed
in detail to establish parametric relationships which provide key insights into both the formation
mechanism(s) and potential control options associated with dioxin/furan emissions. Subsequent
revisions of this report are expected to contain similar analysis of the data pertaining to lightweight
aggregate kilns, incinerators and boilers. In Chapter 5, further analysis of the current body of data
is presented to identify the expected PM and dioxin/furan emissions of the best performing units
incorporating defined control technologies. '
4.1
Cement Kiln PM Emission Summary
Table 4.1-1 presents a summary of the PM data compiled to date from the CoC/ Trial Burn
Reports. None of the data presented in Table 4.1-1 have been extracted from open literature or
previous compilations. Currently, data have been compiled from 26 separate facilities and 36
separate kilns, with 36 separate data sets and a total of 161 data points. Comparison with the
current kiln population suggests that the PM data set is virtually complete, with minor additions
and revisions anticipated in subsequent revisions of this report. Appendix B presents a more
detailed summary of the current PM data set for cement kilns.
Figure 4.1-1 presents the cumulative distribution of PM emissions for cement kilns. As
shown in this figure, the data indicate that 50% of the kiln population exhibits PM emissions of
less than 0.0125 gr/dscf @ 7% Oi based on the minimum reported data. Similarly, 50% of the
kiln population reported PM emissions of less than 0.02 and 0.03 gr/dscf @ 7% O2 based on the
average and maximum reported emissions, respectively.
The variation in the minimum, maximum and average reported PM emissions from any
specific facility is not only dependant on the scatter in the data anticipated from a facility running at
uniform conditions, but is also largely dependant on trial burn requirements as well as the
sensitivity of the PM emissions to systematic variations in process or APCD operation. Figures
4.1-2 and 4.1-3 present the plot of PM emissions versus ESP operating power (KVA) for eight of
4-1
-------
TABLE 4.1-1. SUMMARY OF CEMENT KILN PM DATA
Company
Location
Unit Report Facility . °APCS * Points Particulme (gr/dscf @ 7%O2)
Tested Date. Type Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Continental Cement Co.
Essroc Materials
Essroc Materials
Giant Cement Co.
Giant Cement Co.
Heartland Cement Co.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam, Inc.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lone Star Industries
Lone Star Industries
Medusa Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co.
National Cement Co.
North Texas Cement
River Cement Co.
Southdown/Dixie
Southdown/Kosmos
Southdown/Southwestern
Texas Industries
w = wet Win
d = drykiln
sd = semi dry kiln
ph=preheater
pc = precalcinator
bp = by-pass
Chanute,KS
Chanute, KS
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Louisville, ME
Louisville, ME
Hannibal, MO
Dorado.PR
Logansport, IN
Harleyville.se
HarleyviUe.se
Independence, KS
darksville,MO
HollyHill.SC
HollyHill.SC
Artesia, MS
Bath, PA
Bath, PA
Alpena, MI
Demopolis, AL
Fredonia, KS
Fredonia, KS
Paulding, OH
Cape Girardeau, MO
Greencastle, IN
Wampum, PA
Wampum, PA
Wampum, PA
Lebec, CA
Midlothian, TX
Festus, MO
Knoxville,TN
Kosmosdale, KY
Fairbom,OH
Midlothian, TX
# of facilities
# of Kilns
# of Data Sets
# of Data Points
1
2
1
2
3
1
2
1
1
1
4
5
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
3
U
1.2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
26
36
36
161
Apr-92
Mar-92
Jul-92
May-92
Jul-92
May-92
Aug-92
Jul-92
Jun-93
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Oct-92
Jul-92
Aug-92
Ang-92
Aug-93
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Jan-93
Aug-92
Jul-92
Jul-92
Mar-93
Aug-92
Oct-92
Oct-92
Mar-92
May-92
Aug-92
May-93
w
w
w
w
w
sd (ph/bp)
d(ph/pc/bp)
w
d (ph/pc/bp)
w
w
w
d
w
w
w
w
w
w
d(?)
d (ph/bp)
w
w
w
d (ph/pc/bp)
w
d
d
d
w
d
d (ph/pc/bp)
d(ph)
d(?/bp)
w
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
FF
ESP
FF
FF
FF
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
FF
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
FF
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
FF
ESP
ESP
FF
FF
FF
ESP
4
4
11
2
6
5
8
. 3
3
4
3
3
6
3
3
3
3
10
10
3
3
3
3
3
6
3
3
3
3
4
3
6
6
9
3
3
0.0609
0.0494
0.049
0.0326
0.0183
0.0653
0.026
0.0403
0.0682
0.083
0.0155
0.0152
0.0425
0.0352
0.0581
0.0291
0.0173
0.0323
0.025
0.006
0.0306
0.033
0.033
0.06
0.026
0.0637
0.032
0.0789
0.0724
0.0228
0.024
0.0352
0.0131
0.00354
0.003
0.01135
0.04808
0.03255
0.02958
0.02020
0.00748
0.03658
0.01859
0.03737
0.04877
0.07075
0.01300
0.01133
0.02660
0.03370
0.04967
0.02263
0.01380
0.02204
0.01500
0.00333
0.01820
0.01900
0.02200
0.03333
0.02350
0.05563
0.02247
0.07687
0.06543
0.01713
0.02067
0.02443
0.01183
0.00261
0.00300
0.00962
0.0375
0.0219
0.0154
0.0078
0.0043
0.016
0.0142
0.03430
0.02310
0.057
0.01050
0.00800
0.019
0.03250
0.04630
0.01480
0.01500
0.0092
0.011
0.00100
0.01000
0.01100
0.00500
0.02000
0.021
0.04560
0.01610
0.07500
0.05200
0.016
0.01600
0.0129.
0.00988
0.00139
0.00300
0.00827
0.00967
0.01201
0.01050
0.01754
0.00542
0.02479
0.00417
0.00300
0.02319
0.01103
0.00250
0.00363
0.00815
0.00137
0.00735
0.00725
0.00340
0.00664
0.00383
0.00252
0.01092
0.01217
0.01493
0.02309
0.00187
0.00921
0.00841
0.00196
0.01164
0.00408
0.00416
0.00786
0.00114
0.00094
0.00000
0.00158
CK.pm/sum
-------
Percent of Population
CD
n
c
3
cr.
cr
cr.
o
S,
1
s
3*
§
C
3
9
N>
-------
PM Emissions (gr/dscf @ 7% O2)
a
to
I
I
f~f
E
i
0>
c
01 -
to
0~
rn
T3 '.
Om-
m
30 co "
1°
CO
en
c
c
3 C
h
i -
» I
> -
«• c
! f
i rv
o
,0
> t
3 C
C
/
if
'I M
/|
O
> fc
3 O
3 C
C
7 c
ii
/
> o
3
3 1
>. c
I.I.I 1.
1 1
1 C
O
3
>
1
O
10
ro
T3 en
O
m »
30
"5 M
> CO
30 *>
i s
* M
PM Emissions (gr/dscf @ 7% O2)
a>
C
c
D
3 C
3 C
»• l\
3 C
3 C
3 O
) C
3 C
3 *
3 C
3 C
>. C
O
/
/ *"*
3 C
3 C
n c
/
/
3 C
3 C
3 -v
3
I
Cfl
CA
i^*
g
CO
I
a
CA
W
&o
ha
1
&
P
(TO
1
s
X"N
i
PM Emissions (gr/dscf @ 7% O2)
o o p p
b b
PM Emissions (gr/dscf @ 7% O2)
o o o o o
oPbPbPbPbP
OO-'OIOOCOOJs.p
oen-j-cnrocncocn-P»enen
o ~
-
CD
m °
w
T3
•o
2-~
< o —
m o .
30
"^
<
> ±
o
_
_!.
t\J -
O
o
"^
I
1 t 1
CO J
0 "
CO
on
m
"D
•n -^
§°:
m
30 K. "
^ *" -
^N
^
30 en
> 0
^3
8 en'
y
cy
o
^/
o
1 1 IJ_
/
nil
/
X0
30
>
g
(0
-------
PM Emissions (gr/dscf @ 7% 02)
ro
cn
ro
>4
o
m ^
8s'
TJ CO
I3
SCO
CO
o
I-
> o
CO
^J
o
CO
to •
o
c
c
c
:3 C
I F
3 C
1
3 J.
3
•»• C
\ {
n r>
3 {
3 n
0 C
3 ?
0 C
1 C
3 \
3 C
0 C
3 ?
0 C
1 •*
/ (
3 fc
3 *
:>. O
3
PM Emissions (gr/dscf @ 7% O2)
p ^p p p ~p p p
b o b b b b b
cn "
•vl
T3 to
•o
o ;
m -* .
3J
ro
cn
ro
\°
\
o
...
oV
\
\
\
o
S
31
1
PM Emissions (gr/dscf @ 7% O2)
ppppppppp
b" b b b b b b "b b
PM Emissions (gr/dscf @ 7% O2)
o ~]
ro J
1 '-
•n CO '_
1°:
m
33 CO r
F;
o
*> -
o
L
'
7
'
o
m
in
-a
Is
m
•» cn
r
? §
cn
o o o
b P b P b P
o o -«• - o--. - ro -- --C
3 01 -* 01 ro 01 c*
O
c
7
../
O
O
31
I
-------
the data sets. Examining the data in this fashion is important when analyzing the reported PM
emission data. As seen in these eight plots, some of the reported data sets for PM have a strong
inverse correlation with.ESP operating power. When this occurs, the interpretation of data must
consider
• That the minimum reported emission MAY not reflect the actual expected minimum
PM emission at the maximum tested KVA level.
• That the scatter in the data does not reflect the natural scatter that would be found
in PM emissions from tests at more uniform conditions.
The absence of a consistent trend (decreasing PM with increasing KVA) between all data
sets suggests that site-specific conditions can dominate in controlling the variability of PM
emissions. As will be discussed further in Chapter 5, the systematic trends in the data from each
of the kiln data sets must be considered in calculating the anticipated PM levels of the best
performing units, as well as in estimating the variability that would be found in PM measurements
from these facilities.
4.2
Lightweight Aggregate Kiln PM Emission Summary
Table 4.2-1 summarizes the PM emissions from the LWA kiln data set. Paniculate matter
data have been compiled from six facilities and 13 units. A total of 12 data sets are available with a
total of 48 points. A more detailed summary of the PM data is provided in Appendix C. Figure
4.2-1 presents the cumulative distribution of PM emissions for LWA kilns. As shown in this
figure, 50% of the LWA kiln data set exhibit PM emissions of less than 0.0025 gr/dscf @ 7% Oi
based on the minimum reported data. Similarly, 50% of the LWA kiln data set exhibit PM
emissions of less than 0.004 and 0.0075 gr/dscf @ 7% Ch based on the average and maximum
reported emissions, respectively. Note that the small sample size makes interpolation of the data to
estimate the median values subject to uncertainty.
4.3
Commercial Hazardous Waste Incinerators PM Emission Summary
Table 4.3-1 presents a summary of the PM data compiled to date from CoC/Trial Burn
reports for commercial HW incinerators. None of the data presented in Table 4.3-1 have been
extracted from open literature or previous compilations. Currently, data have been compiled from
17 separate facilities and 19 separate units, with 22 separate data sets and a total of 133 data points.
4-6
-------
Company
NorliteCorp.
Solite Corp.
Solite Corp.
Solite Corp.
Solite Corp.
Solite Corp.
Solite Corp.
Solite Corp.
Solite Corp.
Solite Corp.
Solite Corp.
•f^ Solite Corp.
# of Facilities
tfofKilns
# of Data Sets
# of Data Points
TABLE 4.2-1. SUMMARY OF PM EMISSIONS FROM
LIGHTWEIGHT AGGREGATE KILNS
Location Unit Report APCS
tested Date # Points Paniculate (gr/dscf@ 7% O2)
Cohoes,NY
Arvonia, VA
Arvonia, VA
Brooks, KY
Cascade, VA .;.
Cascade, VA
Cascade, VA
Green Cove Springs, FL
Norwood, NC
Norwood, NC
Norwood, NC
Norwood, NC
6
12
12
48
1
7
8
2
1
2
4
5
5
6
7
8
Dec-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Mar-94
Aug-92
Aug-92
Jan-94
Aug-93
Aug-93
Aug-93
Jul-93
-'•:.
>
SD/FF/VS/WS
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
- - -
15
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3,
3
3
3
—
Maximum
0.0371
0.008
0.033
0.026
0.0111
0.007
0.018
0.00157
. 0.00796.
0.0102
0.000765
0.00093
Average
0.01227
0.00667
0.02533
0.01833
0.00864
0.00567
0.01000
0.00144
0.00429
0.00512
0.00048
0.00190
. _ _ - -
Minimum
0.0056
. 0.006
0.013
0.013
0.00726
0.004
0.007
0.00127
0.00229
0.00229
0.000298
0.00375
. _ .. _ . . _
Sdev
0.00863
0.00115
0.01079
0.00681
0.00213
0.00153
0.00700
0.00016
0.00318
0.00441
0.00025
0.00161
_ . . : .
AK.pm/sum
-------
8-17
•b
3
1"
n
I
to
Percent of Population
to
1
&
en
3.
cr
S
§'
a
r
0>
§
CO
P
o
p
s
z
©
p
o
g 8
4^.
o
u>
o
888
O\ ~J
p p
o
o
oo
o
§ s
s s
£3 i-R
s?
5
|
; >
• $
' 3
<§
g
|'
1
Ol °
§1
§s
C5 51
Dl F
g >
i^
is
?3 3
-------
TABLE 4.3-1. SUMMARY OF PM DATA FOR COMMERCIAL HW INCINERATORS
Company
Location
No. Unit Report Facility
Units Tested Date Type
APCS
Allied Chemical
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Atochem
CWM Chemical Services
General Electric
Laidlaw Environmental Services
LWD, Inc.
LWD, Inc.
LWD, Inc.
Marine Shale
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Ross Incineration Services
ThermalKEM
Trade Waste Incineration
Waste Tech. Industries
LWD, Inc.
# Points Paniculate (gr/dscf @ 7% 02)
Maximum Average Minimum Sdedv
Birmingham, AL
Aragonite, UT
Coffeyvillle, KS
Carrollton,KY
Chicago, IL
Pittsfield, MA
Roebuck, SC
CalvertCity.KY
CalvertCity.KY
CalvertCity.KY
Amelia, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Bridgeport, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Deerpark, TX
Grafton, OH
Rock Hill, SC
Sauget, IL
East Liverpool, OH
CalvertCity.KY
# of Facilities
# of Units
# of Data Sets
# of Data Points
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
4
1
3
1
1
1
2
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
1
3
17
19
22
133
Feb-89
Aug-92
Dec-90
Jun-90
Mar-92
Apr-91
Jun-91
Mar-93
Mar-93
Jan-93
Jul-95
Apr-87
May-88
Aug-88
Nov-86
Aug-83
Aug-88
Mar-93
Jun-87
Sep-92
May-93
Jan-94
BPF
RK
RK
RK
RK
LI
LI
RK
RK
RK
AK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
FH
RK
RK
RK
none
FF/WS/ESP
FF/WS/IWS
FF/WS
IWS/PS
PS
FF/VS/AFS
FF/WS
FF/WS
FF/WS
SD/FF
WS
IWS
WS
WS
WS
PT/IWS
WS
SD/FF
ESP
FF/WS
7
9
12
9
4
6
8
3
3
3
3
3
9
3
3
3
15
3
7
8
9
3
0.06690
0.00160
0.00600
0.09540
0.03680
0.06320
0.00160
0.01140
0.02390
0.01840
0.0079
0.02410
0.08970
0.03200
0.02950
0.07140
0.02040
0.01000
0.06700
0.00460
0.00350
0.01260
0.01965
0.00063
0.00342
0.02954
0.03110
0.04100
0.00076
0.00854
0.02267
0.00843
0.00580
0.01717
0.03321
0.02700
0.02753
0.05937
0.01385
0.00833
0.05256
0.00168
0.00240
0.00685
0.00447
0.00000
0.00100
0.00270
0.02670
0.01590
0.00050
0.00383
0.02030
0.00183
0.00466
0.00860
0.00620
0.02300
0.02630
0.04190
0.01050
0.00700
0.03450
0.00040
0.00100
0.00270
0.02195
0.00057
0.00138
0.03681
0.00492
0.02054
0.00035
0.00411
0.00205
0.00879
0.00182
0.00788
0.02492
0.00458
0.00172
0.01548
0.00414
0.00153
0.01449
0.00140
0.00087
0.00514
CHWI&PMS
-------
Comparison with the current population suggests that the PM data set is 61% complete. Appendix
D presents a more detailed summary of the current PM data set.
Figure 4.3-1 presents the cumulative distribution of PM emissions. As shown in this
figure, the data indicate that 50% of the commercial HW incinerators exhibit PM emissions of less
than 0.0075 gr/dscf @ 7% C>2 based on the minimum reported data. Similarly, 50% of the
population reported PM emissions of less than .012 and .02 gr/dscf @ 7% C«2 based on the
average and maximum reported emissions, respectively.
4.4
On-Site Hazardous Waste Incinerator PM Emission Summary
Table 4.4-1 presents a summary of the PM data compiled to date. None of the data
presented in Table 4.4-1 have been extracted from open literature or previous compilations.
Currently, data have been compiled from 50 separate facilities and 53 separate units, with 61
separate data sets and a total of 392 data points. Comparison with the estimated total population
suggests that the PM data set represents approximately 36% of the facilities. Appendix E presents
a more detailed summary of the current PM data set.
Figure 4.4-1 presents the cumulative distribution of PM emissions. As shown in this
figure, 50% of the data set exhibit PM emissions of less than 0.0075 gr/dscf @ 7% C>2 based on
'the minimum reported data. Similarly, 50% of the data set reported PM emissions of less than
0.012 and 0.02 gr/dscf @ 7% 62 based on the average and maximum reported emissions,
respectively. Note that for on-site incinerators, low efficiency or no PM control is used in many
instances because of the low ash content in the combined (waste plus primary) fuel.
4.5
Hazardous Waste Burning Boiler PM Emission Summary
Table 4.5-1 presents the summary of the PM data compiled to date from CoC/Trial Burn
reports. None of the data presented in Table 4.5-1 have been extracted from open literature or
previous compilations. Currently, data have been compiled from 87 separate facilities and 135
separate units, with 141 separate data set and a total of 572 data points. Comparison with the total
population suggests that the PM data set is 78% complete. Appendix F presents a more detailed
summary of the current PM data set.
4-10
-------
100% T
Maximum
Average
Minimum
% Pop. Max. Avg. Min.
50% 0.02 0.012 0.0075
0 0.002 0.004 0.005 0.008 0.01 0.015 0.03 0.05 0.1 0.15
PM(gr/dscf@7%O2)
Figure 4.3-1. Cumulative distribution of HWI PM emissions.
OSHWLpm/sum Chart 1
-------
TABLE 4.4-1. SUMMARY OF PM DATA FOR ON-SITE HW INCINERATORS
Company
Location
UnitNo. Report Facility
Tested Date Type
APCS
Sdev
3M
American Cyanamid
Amoco Oil
Aristech Chemical
Ashland Chemical
Burroughs Wellcome
Cargffl
Cargfll
Chevron
Chevron
Chevron
Chevron
Ciba-Geigy
Ciba-Geigy
Cook Composites
Department of the Army
Department of the Army
Department of the Army
Department of the Army
Department of the Army
Dow Chemical Co.
Dow Chemical Co.
Dow Chemical Co.
Dow Chemical Co.
Dupont
Dupont
Dupont
Dupont
Dupont
Dupont
Dupont
Dupont
Eastman Kodak Co.
Hi Lilly and Co.
Hi Lilly and Co.
Hi Lilly and Co.
First Chemical Corp.
Glaxo Inc.
Honeywell
Iowa Army
Iowa Army
Iowa Army
Iowa Army
Lake City Army
M&T Chemicals
Miles Inc.
Cottage Grove, MN
Hannibal, MO
Whiting, IN
Colton,CA
Los Angeles, CA
Greenville, NC
Lynwood, CA
Lynwood, CA
Belle Chase, LA
Philadelphia, PA
Richmond, CA
Richmond, CA
Macintosh, AL
St. Gabriel, LA
Port Washington, WI
Johnston Atoll
Johnston Atoll
Johnston Atoll
Tooele,UT
Tooele, UT
Freeport, TX
Midland, MI
Midland, MI
Plaquemine, LA
Deepwater, NJ
La Place, LA
La Porte, TX
La Porte, TX
La Porte, TX
Orange, TX
Wilmington, DE
Louisville, KY
Rochester, NY
Clinton, IN
Lafayette, IN
Mayaguez, PR
Pascagoula, MS
R.T.P..NC
Pinellas County, FL
Middletown, IA
Middletown.IA
Middletown, IA
Middletown, IA
Independence, MO
Carrollton, KY
NewMartinsviHe.WV
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
. 1
DPS
LIC
LIC
??
??
1
703
830
1
FR-1
1
1
CSI(l)
N-THF
1
1
1
C-10
TJZ
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Sep-90
Aug-89
Jun-89
Jan-89
Dec-88
Jan-93
Jul-89
Jan-88
Feb-88
Sep-91
Jnn-93
Jul-88
Mar-90
May-88
Apr-90
Jnn-92
Jun-91
Jun-92
Apr-92
Oct-93
Nov-88
Jun-89
Mar-92
Feb-88
Jun-89
Sep-89
Mar-89
Jan-89
Feb-89
Aug-90
Dec-92
Jul-89
Sep-92
Feb-89
Feb-89
Nov-87
Jul-91
Oct-93
Jun-88
Nov-88
Oct-91
Jul-93
Oct-91
Mar-93
Jan-89
Sep-92
RK
LI&CA
FB
LI
LI
LI
LI
RH&LI
FB
LI
LI
RK
LI
LI
RK
LI
LI
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
LI
RK&LI
LI
LI
LI
RK
FH
LI
RK
??
LI
LI
??
RH
LI
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
FB
WS
PT
C/VS
None
None
WS/ESP
None
None
VS/PT
VS/WS
VS
VS
VS/PT/ESP
VS/Cyclone
?
VS/PBS
VS/PBS
VS/PBS
VS
VS
IWS
VS/ESP
vs/rws
ESP/PBS
PT/CCS/RJS/ESP
WS
FF
WS
WS
SD/VS
WS
VS/PT
VS/PT
PT/VS
??
DS/FF
??
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF/WS
ESP/WS
8
3
6
6
6
9
4
3
9
5
3
9
6
9
3
4
3
4
4
4
6
11
16
6
3
9
9
9
13
6
6
3
9
10
13
3
9
6
4
6
6
3
9
6
10
6
0.107
0.0577
0.0649
0.004
0.02
0.0823
0.106
0.0114
0.049
0.0193
1.88E-05
0.0054
0.17
0.066
0.039
0.00191
0.00183
0.00196
0.01518
0.01349
0.012
0.0492
0.0366
0.109
0.0033
0.0443
0.0127
0.0567
0.189
0.002
0.0609
0.035
0.078
0.0784
0.0448
0.0453
0.0282
0.00499
0.069
0.216
0.0071
0.0153
0.0152
0.035
0.0436
0.009
0.05995
0.0544
0.04365
0.002833
0.018667
0.032056
0.0505
0.006933
0.032
0.01978
1.82E-05
0.002311
0.062333
0.042711
0.037
0.001261
0.001713
0.001438
0.010988
0.011635
0.0075
0.019804
0.008641
0.032192
0.0029
0.0268
0.002177
0.036767
0.112769
0.00125
0.043633
0.032333
0.052667
0.0415
0.032238
0.043567
0.010922
0.001935
0.06
0.0835
0.00495
0.0138
0.007344
0.028167
0.01339
0.0065
0.0368
0.0489
0.0303
0.001
0.011
0.0121
0.014
0.0022
0.018
0.0093
1.75E-05
0.0008
0.02
0.0253
0.034
0.000485
0.00161
0.00072
0.00436
0.00802
0.004
0.00516
0.0001
0.00835
0.0022
0.015
0.0004
0.0149
0.042
• 0.0005
0.0283
0.031
0.015
0.0243
0.0245
0.0425
0.0103
0.00064
0.044
0.009
0.0039
0.0126
0.0039
0.024
0.0057
0.004
0.024145
0.004795
0.015427
0.001169
0.006501
0.022656
0.039543
0.004606
0.01254
0.011075
6.51E-07
0.001606
0.056302
0.01536
0.002646
0.000799
0.000111
0.000559
0.004955
0.002508
0.00345
0.017404
0.012625
0.038227
0.000608
0.011897
0.003962
0.011892
0.04818
0.000554
0.015178
0.002309
0.024052
0.020123
0.007016
0.001514
0.007875
0.001587
0.011343
0.088163
0.001102
0.001375
0.004078
0.004355
0.013931
0.002168
OSHWI.pm/sum
-------
TABLE 4.4-1. SUMMARY OF PM DATA FOR ON-SITE HW INCINERATORS (Continued)
U)
Company
Location
Unit No. Report Facility
Tested Date Type
APCS
# points
PM(gr/dscf@7%O2)
Monsanto Agricultural Co.
Nepera Inc.
Nepera Inc.
Occidental Chemical Corp.
Olin Corp.
Olin Corp.
Pfizer Inc.
Pfizer Pharmaceuticals Inc.
Radford Army Ammo. Pint
Thermal Oxidation Corp.
US.Dept. of Energy
Upjohn Co.
Vulcan Materials Co.
Vulcan Materials Co.
Muscatine, IA
Herriman, NY
Herriman, NY
Niagara Falls, NY
East Alton, IL
Lake Charles, LA
Groton.CT
Barceloneta, PR
Radford, VA
Roebuck, SC
Oak Ridge, TN
Kalamazop, MI
Wichita, KS
Wichita, KS
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
6A
1
1
.. 1
1
1
May-89
Feb-93
Sep-92
Feb-94
Feb-92
Jan-89
Jul-90
5/89
Jun-93
Mar-87
Aug-89
Dec-90
Apr-91
Feb-91
LI
LI
LI
LI
SA
LI
RH
RK
RK
LI
RK
RK
LI
LI
7? Unable to be determined from information given
na not available
PBS
??
??
IWS
FF
WS
WS
VS/PT
FF/PBS
FF/WS'
VS/PB/IWS
PT/VS
WS
WS
# of Facilities
# of Units
# of Data Sets
# of Data Points
15
3
3
3
4
15
3
3
9
6
3
- 3
6
8
49
52
60
389
0.114
0.0661
0.0271
0.0009
0.00053
0.053
0.04
0.0684
0.00638
0.0109
0.0327
- 0.00602
0.126
0.035
0.07013
0.0375
0.022833
0.0017
0.000291
0.02227
0.036
0.064933
0.00233
0.005743
0.024933
0.003983
0.011362
0.022925
0.029
0.023
0.0207
0.0032
0.00016
0.004
0.033
0.0589
0.00077
0.00153
0.0177
0.00187
0.00917
0.0149
0.023727
0.024769
0.003695
0.0013
0.000173
0.01758
0.003606
0.005244
0.002046
0.003542
0.007514
0.002076
0.001342
0.006745
OSHWI.pm/sum
-------
100% T
90%
80%
70%
I 60% --
30% --
10% ---
Maximum
Average
Minimum
%Pop. Max. Avg. Min.
50% 0.02 0.012 0.0075
0 0.002 0.004 0.005 0.008 0.01 0.015 0.03 0.05 0.1 0.15
PM(gr/dscf@7%O2)
Rgure 4.4-1. Cumulative distribution of on-site HW incinerator PM emissions.
OSHWLpm/sum Chart 1
-------
Company
3M
3M
Air Products
Air Products
Air Products
Allied Signal
American Cyanamid Co.
American Cyanamid Co.
Angus Chemical
Angus Chemical
ARCO
ARCO
ARCO
ARCO
ARCO
Aristech
Arizona Chemical Co.
Arizona Chemical Co.
^ Arkansas Eastman
^ BASF Corp.
Ui BASF Corp.
BASF Corp.
BASF Corp.
Boslik, Inc.
BP Chemicals
TABLE 4.5-1. SUMMARY OF HW
Location Unit Report Facility
Tested Date Type
Decatur, AL
Decatur, AL
Pasadena. TX
Pasadena, TX
Wichita, KS
Philadelphia, PA
Kalamazoo, MI.
Wallingford, CT
Sterlington, LA
Sterlington, LA
Channelview, TX
Channelview.TX
Channelview, TX
Channelview.TX
Channelview.TX
Haverhill.OH
Gulfport, MS
Panama City, FL
Magness, AR
Freeport,TX
Geismar, LA
Geismar, LA
Geismar, LA
Middleton, MA
PortLavaca.TX
Diversified Scientific Systems Kingston, TN
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
. Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
DSM Chemicals
DSM Chemicals
DSM Chemicals
Dupont
Duponl
Dupont
Dupont
Freeport,TX
Freeport,TX
Freeport.TX
Freeport,TX
Freeport,TX
Freeport.TX
Freepon,TX
Gales Ferry, CT
Ironton, OH
Midland, MI
Midland. MI
Plaquemine, LA
Plaquemine, LA
Plaquemine, LA
Torrance, CA
Addis, LA
Augusta, GA
Augusta, GA
Axis, AL
Beaumont, TX
Belle, WV
Orange, TX
1
1
15.2
15.6
1
BL-701
3
1
4
7
Boiler 1
Boiler 2
F-57180
F-57180
F-630
UB
1
2
f
1
3
6
Amines
1
2
- 1
B-901
B-902
B-903
F-210
F-2A/B
F-820A
FTB-400
A
1
1142
1276
F-410
R-4
R-750
' U-305
3
H-002
H-2002
1
6
1
"#7"
Mar-92
Aug-92
Jun-92
Jun-92
Aug-93
Aug-92
Mar-93
Apr-93
May-93
Apr-93
Dec-92
Aug-92
Dec-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
May-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Dec-92
Aug-92
Aug-93
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-93
Jul-92
Jul-92
Aug-93
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Furnace
Furnace
Furnace
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler (Waste)
Boiler
Boiler (NEOL)
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Heater
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler (VGI)
Boiler '
Boiler
Boiler
BURNING BOILER PM DATA
/
Primary APCS
Fuel 1 points Paniculate (gr/dscf@ 7% O2)
Max Avg Min Sdev
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Solvents
Refinery Gas
Refinery Gas
Refinery Gas
Oils&
Natural Gas
Coal
Liquid Waste
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Waste Fuel
Fuel Oil
Fuel Gas
LW
NG
NG
NG
NG
FG
FG
Fuel oil
Oil
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Coal
waste + NG
??
??
??
??
??
??
??
None
??
??
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
??
None
None
None
None
??
. . .?? .
SD/FF/WS/HEPA
WS
ws
WS
ws
ws
ws
ws
None
None
None
None
??
??
??
None
None
??
??
WS
??
??
None
3
3
6
7
6
3
6
6
3
3
3
3
3
4
3
9
"13
12
6
12
3
3
4
3
_.3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
0.0038
0.0092
0.0752
0.0612
0.0316
0.0287
0.0197
0.0296
0.0026 ,
0.0024
0.0052
0.0054
0.0048
0.0127
0.0032
0.0159
0.024
0.057
0.034
0.0216
0.0044
0.0019
0.0065
0.0107
. 0.002271
0.00075
0.011
0.009
0.009
0.017
0.016
0.006
0.003
0.0035
0.0019
0.0316
0.0016
0.0028
0.025
0.072
0.0021
0.000605
0.0053
0.0036
0.0405
0.0075
0.0013
0.0112
0.00263
0.00607
0.03143
0.02944
0.02055
0.02463
0.00965
0.01062
0.00180
0.00157
0.00397
0.00397
0.00307
0.01078
0.00277
0.00703
0.01608
0.04025
0.02270
0.01398
0.00317
0.00153
0.00418
0.00853
0.00173
0.00043
0.00500
0.00767
0.00500
0.00900
0.01033
0.00600
0.00300
0.00240
0.00143
0.01820
0.00123
0.00343
0.01800
0.05933
0.00180
0.00035
0.00443
0.00210
0.03733
0.00707
0.00117
0.00973
0.0013
0.0034
0.009
0.0046
0.0125
0.0213
0.0013
0.0005
0.0014
0.0011
0.0033
0.0029
0.002
0.0099
0.0023
0.0012
0.004
0.016
0.0149
0.0042
0.002
0.0013
0.0025
0.0055
0.001066
0.00025
0.002
0.006
0.003
0.003
0.004
0.006
0.003
0.0014
0.0011
0.0098 '
0.0009
0.0028
0.014
0.053
0.0013
0.000092
0.0039
0.0011
0.0332
0.0067
0.0011
0.0077
0.00126
0.00293
0.02759
0.02549
0.00759
0.00375
0.00877
0.01304
0.00069
0.00072
0.00107
0.00129
0.00151
0.00140
0.00045
0.00560
0.00492
0.01329
0.00695
0.00738
0.00120
0.00032
0.00168
0.00271
0.00061
0.00028
0.00520
0.00153
0.00346
0.00721
0.00603
0.00000
0.00000
0.00105
0.00042
0.01173
0.00035
0.00057
0.00608
0.01097
0.00044
0.00026
0.00076
0.00132
0.00374
0.00040
0.00012
0.00182
BLR.pm/sum.all
-------
TABLE 4.5-1. SUMMARY OF HW BURNING BOILER PM DATA (Continued)
o\
Company
Dupont
Dupont
Dupont
EPI
EPI
Eihyl Corp.
Exxon Chemical
Exxon Chemical
FINAOil
General Electric Plastics
General Electric Plastics
General Electric Plastics
General Electric Plastics
Georgia Gulf
Georgia Gulf
Goodyear Tire and Rubber
Goodyear Tire and Rubber
Hercules
Hercules
Hoechst Celanese
Hoechst Celanese Chemical
Hoechst Celanese Chemical
Hoechst Celanese Chemical
Hulls America
Hulls America
Hulls America
Hulls America
Kalama Chemical
Kalama Chemical
Lonza Inc.
Lonza Inc.
Lyondell Petrochem Co.
Mallinckrodt
Maybelline Products Co. Inc.
Mayo Clinic
Merck & Co. Inc.
Merck & Co. Inc.
Meridiem Co.
Mobile Chemical
Monsanto Chemical Co.
Monsanto Chemical Co.
Monsanto Chemical Co.
Monsanto Chemical Co.
Monsanto Chemical Co.
Natural Gas Odorizing
Neville Chemical Co.
Neville Chemical Co. ..
Neville Chemical Co.
Novacar Chemicals
Location
Orange, TX
Orange, TX
Orange. TX
Toledo, OH
Toledo, OH
Orangeburg.SC
Baton Rouge, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Deer Park, TX
Mount Vernon, IN
Mount Vemon, IN
Selkirk. NY
Selkirk, NY
Pasadena, TX
Plaquemine, LA
Beaumont, TX
Pasadena, TX
West Elizabeth, PA
West Elizabeth, PA
Pasadena, TX
Bay City. TX
Bay City, TX
Mount Holly, NC
Chestertown, ML
Chestertown. ML
Chestertown, ML
Chestertown, ML
Kalama, WA
Kalama. WA
Pasadena. TX
Pasadena. TX
Channelview, TX
Raleigh, NC
North Little Rock, AR
Rochester, MN
Rahway, NJ
Rahway. NJ
Houston, TX
Beaumont, TX
Addyston, OH
Alvin,TX
Alvin. TX
Nitro.WV
Springfield, MA
Baytown, TX
Pittsburgh, PA
Pittsburgh, PA
Pittsburgh. PA
Decatur, AL
Unit
Tested
W
North
South
1
2
»4»
"C"
"D"
1
"A"
"B"
1
3
1
1
B103
M-526
3
5
MH5A
4
5
1
1
2
3
4
U2
U3
lorA
2orB
4
1
TO4
3
7
8
4
B701A
B-4
30H5
B51H5
B-8
B-ll
B-2
B-4
B-6
B-7
Line 1
Report
Date
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-93
Aug-93
Aug-93
Aug-92
Aug-92
Oct-92
Feb-93
Feb-93
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Ang-92
Aug-92
May-93
Aug-92
Ang-92
Jan-93
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-93
Nov-92
Nov-92
Nov-92
Nov-92
Jun-92
Jun-92
Dec-92
Dec-92
Nov-92
Sep-92
Aug-92
Nov-92
Jul-93
Jul-93
Sep-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Apr-93
May-93
Jan-93
Oct-92
Jul-93
Jul-93
Jul-93
May-93
Facility
Type
Boiler
Boiler (ADN)
Boiler (ADM)
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
A/P Oil Heater
Boiler
Hot Oil Heater
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
-Boiler
Heater
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Heater
Heater
Heater
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler .
.Boiler
Boiler
Boiler •
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler (Stoker)
Boiler (Stoker)
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Therminol
Primary
Fuel
waste +NG
ADN+NG
ADN+NG
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
WL
Waste Liquid
Waste Liquid
W
NG + Phenol
NG+phenoI
Natural Gas
.Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
NG
NG
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Waste Oils
Aniline Tar
Natural Gas/
Natural Gas/
Natural Gas/
NG&LW
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Coal
Coal
LW
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Liquid waste
APCS
None
None
None
None
None
FF
None-
None
VS
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
FF
FF
??
??
None
??
??
None
??
??
WS
None
None
None
None
ESP/Cycl
FF
DS/FF/WS
None
None
None
None
* points Paniculate (gr/dscf@ 7% O2)
Mar Av*i Win c^».
3
3
3
3
3
6
3
3
9
4
6
3
3
6
3
3
3
3
3
9
4
3
3
3
4
3
3
6
6
6
6
6
3
6
3
3
3
6
3
3
6
6
6
3
3
3
3
3
3
0.0481
0.033
0.005
0.0185
0.0013
0.0027
0.0021
0.0035
0.0574 .
0.078
0.0769
0.032
0.078
0.0174
0.0521
0.047
0.0086
0.0286
0.025
. 0.0056
0.0235
0.0165
0.044
0.0733
0.032
0.0317
0.0153
0.0072
0.0073
0.0409
0.0137
0.007142
0.00445
0.094
0.00282
0.0101
0.00996
0.0105
0.0122
0.00374
0.00026
0.0006
0.007
0.01
0.006
0.0074
0.0029
0.0048
0.0015
0.02730
0.02783
0.00400
0.01600
0.00120
0.00157
0.00187
0.00280
0.04401
0.05967
0.05083
0.02233
0.05633
0.01070
0.05143
0.02467
0.00710
0.02460
0.01507
0.00281
0.02110
0.01447
0.01534
0.04427
0.02825
0.01830
0.01367
0.00460
0.00532
0.02865
0.00930
0.00339
0.00391
0.08267
0.00246
0.00820
0.00781
0.00452
0.00793
0.00303
0.00013
0.00033
0.00347
0.00840
0.00540
0.00420
0.00227
0.00423
0.00127
0.008
0.0195
0.003
0.014
0.001
0.001
. 0.0016
0.0024
0.0324
0.044
0.033
0.013
0.043
0.0059
0.0504
0.013
0.0055
0.022
0.006
0.0008
0.0156
0.0125
0.00011
0.0285
0.026
0.0097
0.0018
0.0027
0.0036
0.0153
0.0069
0.00082
0.00336
0.072
0.00186
0.00797
0.00566
0.0021
0.0043
0.00242
0
0.0002
0.0007
0.0087
0.005
0.0019
0.0016
0.0032
0.0011
0.02009
0.00729
0.00100
0.00229
0.00017
0.00067
0.00025
0.00061
0.00821
• 0.01716
0.01808
0.00950
0.01893
0.00514
0.00091
0.01935
0.00155
0.00352
0.00953
0.00185
0.00373
0.00200
0.02484
0.02517
0.00263
0.01176
0.00176
0.00174
0.00147
0.01095
0.00250
0.00275
0.00055
0.00745
0.00052
0.00022
0.00215
0.00302
0.00399
0.00067
0.00017
0.00015
0.00229
0.00177
0.00053
0.00286
0.00065
8.96E-04
0.00021
-------
Company
Novacar Chemicals
NutraSweet
NutraSweel
Parke Davis
Reilly Industries
Reilly Industries
Rhone-Poulenc
Richmond Gravure
Rohm and Haas
Rohm and Haas
Rohm and Haas
Rohm and Haas
Rubicon
Rubicon
Rubicon
Rubicon
S.C. Johnson and Sons Inc.
Scheneclady Chemical
Schenectady 'Chemical
Shell Chemical
4x Shell Chemical
i— i Shell Chemical
^ Shell Chemical
Shell Chemical
ShellOil
Shell Oil
Sterling Chemicals
Sterling Chemicals
Sterling Pharmaceutical
Tennessee Eastman
Tennessee Eastman
Tennessee Eastman
Tennessee Eastman
Tennessee Eastman
Tennessee Eastman
Tennessee Eastman
Texaco Chemical Co.
Union Carbide
Union Carbide
Union Carbide
Union Carbide
Union Carbide
Union Carbide
Westvaco Corp.
TABLE 4.5-1.
Location
Indian Orchard, MA
Augusta, GA
Augusta, GA
Holland, MI
Indianapolis, IN
Indianapolis, IN
Institute, WV
Richmond, VA
Bristol, PA
Deer Park, TX
Louisville, KY
Philadelphia, PA
Geismar, LA
Geismar, LA
Geismar, LA
Geismar, LA
Slurtevant, WI
Freeport,TX
Rotterdam Junction, NY
Belpre.OH
Deer Park, TX
Deer Park. TX
Deer Park, TX
Deer Park, TX
Martinez, CA
Martinez, CA
Texas City, TX
Texas City, TX
Barceloneta,PR
Kingsport, TN
Kingsport, TN
Kingsport, TN
Kingsport, TN
Kingsport, TN
Kingsport, TN
Kingsport, TN
PottNeches,TX
Hahnville, LA
Hahnville.LA
South Charleston, WV
South Charleston, WV
Texas City, TX
Texas City, TX
DeRidder.LA
SUMMARY OF HW BURNING BOILER PM DATA (Continued)
Unit Report Facility Primary APCS
Tested Date Type Fuel # points Paniculate (gr/dscf@ 7% O2)
Max Avg Min Sdev
1
1
2
??
1
2
3
1
1
1
100
2
Aniline II
DPAI
DPAII
TDI
1
B-503
4
2
PUT 100
PUT 130
FUT100
FUT130
Co n
Co#l
UB9
WOB1
1
19
21
23
24
30
30
30
2
B30
B31
16
25
4
5
B2&B4
Jun-93
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-93
Aug-93
Aug-92
Jan-93
Oct-92
Aug-92
Mar-93
Dec-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Jun-93
Aug-93
Mar-89
Ang-92
May-93
May-93
Dec-92
Dec-92
Nov-91
Apr-89
Aug-93
Aug-92
Aug-93
Aug-92
Apr-91
Aug-92
Apr-91
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Oct-92
Jun-93
Jun-93
Feb-93
Feb-93
Aug-93
Oct-92
Aug-92
Therminol
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
. Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Superheater
Superheater
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler (CO)
Boiler (CO)
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
* indicates that a soot blow was performed during this run
** Sootblow weighted average for runs indicated
?? Unable to be determined from information given
Liquid waste
WF
WF
Natural Gas/
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
FG
Natural Gas/
Oil Fired
Natural Gas
Oil/Solvents
Natural Gas/
NG
Natural Gas
Coal
Liquid Waste
Liquid Waste
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
RG
Natural Gas
Vent Gas
Natural Gas
Coal
Coal
Coal
Coal
Coal
Coal
Coal
Natural Gas
60% H
60% H
Coal
Coal
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
NG
# of Facilities
# of Units
# of Data Sets
S of Data Points
None
WS
WS
??
None
None
ESP
None
None
??
??
None
FF
??
??
WS
None
??
None
ESP
None
None
None
None
.ESP
ESP
None
None
None
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
None
None
None
ESP
ESP
None
None
ESP
87
135
141
572
3
3
3
3
9
9
3
6
3
3
6
6
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
6
3
3
3
3
7
9
3
3
9
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
0.00692
0.0153
0.0053
0.0028
0.0337
0.0321
0.0193
0.0016
0.0169
0.003
0.0156
0.0258
0.0766
0.0128
0.013
0.0056
0.0715
0.0059
0.0299
0.07
0.0165
0.0224
0.0633
0.0352
0.0028
0.286
0.0138
0.007
0.0382
0.0562
0.0184
0.0545
0.00538
0.0095
0.0675
0.0061
0.00617
0.0017
0.021
0.0781
0.0075
0.0597
0.0404
0.0295
0.00396
0.01507
0.00491
0.00210
0.02218
0.01444
0.01333
0.00053
0.01327
0.00200
0.01212
0.01417
0.06523
0.01237
0.00970
0.00387
0.06507
0.00403
0.02793
0.04400
0.01580
0.02023
0.05277
0.03047
0.00221
0.05133
0.01060
0.00500
0.03480
0.05420
0.01720
0.03930
0.00530
0.00907
0.04893
0.00593
0.00477
0.00107
0.01890
0.06963
0.00703
0.02703
0.01770
0.01727
0.00142
0.0148
0.00463
0.0016
0.0141
0.0064
0.01
0
0.0111
0.001
0.0092
0.0052
0.0427
0.0121
0.0078
0.0018
0.0573
0.0022
0.0256
0.034
0.0146
0.0185
0.0387
0.0255
0.0014
0.011
0.0088
0.002
0.0285
0.0527
0.0158
0.0237
0.00521
0.0087
0.031
0.0057
0.00406
0.0007
0.0177
0.061
0.0066
0.0075
0.0063
0.008
0.00277
0.00025 ,
0.00035
0.00062
0.00525
0.00886
0.00518
0.00072
0.00317
0.00100
0.00260
0.00960
0.01951
0.00038
0.00287
0.00192
0.00719
0.00185
0.00217 '.
0.01417
0.00104
0.00199
0.01267
0.00485
0.00050
0.08934
0.00278
0.00265
0.00303
0.00180
0.00131
0.01540
8.62E-05
0.00040
0.01826
0.00021
0.00121
0.00055
0.00182
0.00855
0.00045
0.02847
0.01966
0.01105
-------
Figure 4.5-1 presents the cumulative distribution of PM emissions. As shown in this
figure, 50% of the data set exhibit PM emissions of less than 0.003 gr/dscf @ 7% O2 based on the
minimum reported data. Similarly, 50% of the reported PM emissions are less than 0.004 and
0.008 gr/dscf @ 7% O2 based on the average and maximum reported emissions, respectively.
Note that for the boiler population, low efficiency or no PM control is used at a significant number
of the facilities because of low ash content fuel usage. This is considered in identifying the best
performing facilities in the next chapter.
4.6
Dioxin/Furan Formation Mechanisms
A significant body of work has teen completed to identify the emission characteristics,
formation mechanisms, and applicability and performance of APCDs to control polychlorinated
dibenzo-p-dioxin (PCDD) and polychlorinated dibenzo furan (PCDF) emissions. Within the U.S.,
a preponderance of the work thus far has focused on Municipal Waste Combustors (MWCs) and
Medical Waste Incinerators (MWIs) as a result of the ongoing development of New Source
Performance Standards (NSPS's). The degree of applicability of the body of experience acquired
in the development of the MWC/MWI NSPS's to the population of cement kilns, lightweight
aggregate kilns, and hazardous waste incinerators is determined in part by similarities in emissions
characteristics found between the various combustion sources.
Laboratory research has produced PCDD/PCDF when simulating post-furnace conditions
of MWCs. Experiments with MWC fly ash have shown substantial dioxin/furan formation when
treated under temperature and gas composition conditions similar to those found in the post furnace
region of an MWC 1.2. Maximum formation of PCDD/PCDF's using MWC fly ash plugs has
been shown to occur around 300 °C 3. Maximum PCDD/PCDF formation in the absence of fly
ash, using PCDD/PCDF precursors (phenol, C12, O2, Cu based catalysts), has been shown to
occur around 400 °C 4. Experiments with both HC1 and C12 without fly ash surfaces have shown
that the chlorination of phenol is more than 4 orders of magnitude greater with C12 than with HC1
5. In the absence of available C12, the Deacon process of chlorine production from HC1 in the
presence of a copper-based catalyst, followed by chlorination of aromatic ring structures through
substitution reactions, has been proposed 6 and validated 7,8. The importance of the roles of both
the fly ash and flue gas characteristics in the formation of PCDD/PCDF can be seen in recent
experiments conducted to explain the apparent reduced PCDD/PCDF levels found from coal- fired
boilers. Experiments have been completed 9 documenting the potential for sulfur "poisoning" of
the copper-based catalysts necessary in the Deacon reaction. These experiments have shown that
while the gas phase SO2 has little effect on the production of PCDD, the reaction of the SO2 with
4-18
-------
61 -V
Percent of Population
w
p
I
ff
Y1
c
I
o
p.
cr
c
o.
§
i
C/9
sr
05
N
o
c
00
3
|
era
cr
2.
I
OJ
o
oo
o
O
O
p
o
o
p
I
p
o
o
o
-J p
§ s
p
I
p
o
p
§
-------
the available copper in the fly ash to form CuSCU produces a less active catalyst for the synthesis
ofPCDD.
Based on the above discussion, the role of the fly ash in both the ability to reduce
PCDD/PCDF emissions exiting the high temperature regions of the furnace, and the formation of
PCDD/PCDF in post combustion regions, is summarized below.
(1) The carbonaceous content of the fly ash provides active sites for adsorption of
PCDD/PCDF exiting the high temperature region of the furnace. This adsorption
(chemi-sorption) of PCDD/PCDF by the PM provides the basic mechanism of
paniculate control as a means of removing PCDD/PCDF formed upstream of the
APCD. The effectiveness of activated carbon injection as a means of PCDD/PCDF
control is based on the adsorption of the PCDD/PCDF. Additionally, the higher
PCDD/PCDF emission levels found from MWIs over MWCs with similar flue gas
characteristics have been attributed to the lower carbon content in the fly ash found
in MWIs over MWCs 10.
(2)
(3)
(4)
The PM provides active sites for the adsorption of PCDD/PCDF precursors,
allowing surface chlorination and formation of PCDD/PCDF which subsequently
may or may not be de-adsorbed from the PM.
The PM itself may provide PCDD/PCDF precursors. These may be chlorinated on
the PM, leading to the production of PCDD/PCDF which subsequently may or may
not be de-adsorbed from the PM.
The particulate matter provides copper-based catalyst sites for the production of
Cl2 through the Deacon reaction for subsequent chlorination of PCDD/PCDF
precursors.
The particulate matter provides carbon for the de novo synthesis of PCDD/PCDF
with O2 and
(5)
While the above discussion emphasizes the role of particulate matter in the post combustion
production and capture of PCDD/PCDF, it is important to note that other parameters can dominate
the production of PCDD/PCDF, and tight post combustion control of PM emissions without
4-20
-------
attention to these other parameters can lead to higher, not lower, dioxin/furan emissions. It is also
important to note that the above discussion does not imply that low PM emissions are necessarily
accompanied by low dioxin emissions. As will be discussed further in the next chapter, it is
possible to minimize post combustion formation of dioxin by limiting APCD inlet temperatures (for
example, by rapidly quenching combustion gases). When this occurs, low dioxin/furan emissions
can be achieved without significant PM control.
As will be discussed further in this Chapter and in Chapter 5, it appears to be quite possible
for HW burning facilities with moderate or even no PM control to exhibit low PCDD/PCDF.
emissions. Similarly, facilities can exhibit extremely high dioxin/furan emissions in the presence
of very low PM emissions.
There are additional parameters which can influence dioxin/furan emissions. The Office of
Solid Waste, through the Air and Energy Engineering Research Laboratory (AEERL) in Research
Triangle Park, has initiated a parametric study evaluating the effect of Cl, HC1, Na and various
combustion parameters on dioxin formation. This study will initially utilize cement kiln dust to
establish the relative reactivity in forming dioxin/furan.
4.6.1
Historical Basis For Technology-Based Dioxin/Furan Regulations
It is important to note the form of the PCDD/PCDF regulation adopted by the EPA air.
program and to contrast that limit to regulations developed by several states and foreign
governments. The EPA NSPS sets a limit on the sum of the mass concentration of tetra- through
octa-chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin and dibenzofuran homologues. An objection often expressed
about this type of quantification is that it does not account for the significant variability in toxicity
of different PCDD and PCDF isomers. An alternate system used by several states and most
European countries is to apply weighting functions to the measured mass emission rate of each
PCDD and PCDF congener, thereby accounting for the relative toxicity of the different congener
groups. A relative toxicity of 1.0 is assigned to 2, 3,7, 8 tetra-chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin, since
it is the most toxic of the various congeners. Other congeners are assigned smaller weighting
functions, known as Toxicity Equivalence Factors (TEFs), to account for their toxicity relative to
2, 3, 7, 8 TCDD. Emission rates calculated though application of TEFs are referred to as Toxic
Equivalents, or TEQs. For the NSPS process, the EPA rejected that approach, arguing that TEFs
are not permanent and are subject to revision. The EPA further argued that a TEQ-based standard
would create confusion because, given current knowledge, there was no way to select or operate a
technology for control of specific PCDD/PCDF isomers.
4-21 '
-------
For purposes such as development of risk assessments, the most direct choice is to use the
TEQ process. Table 4.6-1 lists six different TEF schemes suggested by various international
groups, including the EPA. The columns labeled UBA, BUS, and Nordic refer to TEQ weighting
systems established in Ontario, Canada, in Switzerland, and in the Nordic countries of Europe,
respectively. As shown, there are differences between the various systems. Recently, the EPA
decided to abandon its system of TEFs in favor of the NATO compilation.
Notwithstanding the EPA's decision in the NSPS process, several states have adopted a
risk-based standard for MWC PCDD/PCDF emissions, limiting the stack TEQ rather than total
mass of PCDDs/PCDFs. For instance, Pennsylvania has a TEQ limit of 1 ng/dscm and New York
has a limit of 2 ng/dscm. Under the New York regulation, a facility must show an effort to meet a
TEQ target value of 0.2 ng/dscm. Conversely, Kentucky and Minnesota established limits on total
PCDD/PCDF mass emissions but set maximum allowable concentration above the Federal limit.
Internationally, most European countries have selected the weighted TEQ system. The fact that
PCDD/PCDF emission regulations are expressed in both total mass and TEQ raises the issue
regarding the relationship between the two.
4.7
Cement Kiln Dioxin Emission Characteristics
Dioxin emission data (both total ng/dscm and TEQ) have been extracted from the CoC/Trial
Burn Reports. In general, this body of data is less complete than in the case of PM emissions.
Table 4.7-1 summarizes the current body of dioxin data reported in total ng/dscm. Appendix G
contains a more detailed summary of the total dioxin data. Currently, data are available from 14
separate facilities on 23 separate kilns, with a total of 24 sets of multiple dioxin runs and a total of
86 data points. Comparison with the estimated total population suggests that the kiln total
PCDD/PCDF data set is approximately 46% complete. Note that the kilns are not actually
controlling dioxin emissions, and the data does not indicate the emission levels that could be
achieved.
Figure 4.7-1 presents the cumulative distribution of total dioxin/furan emissions from
cement kilns. As shown in this figure, the data indicate that 50% of the reported minimum
dioxin/furan emissions are less than 20 ng/dscm. Similarly, 50% of the reported average and
maximum dioxin/furan data are less than 70 and 100 ng/dscm, respectively.
Table 4.7-2 summarizes the current body of dioxin data reported in TEQ. Appendix H
presents a more detailed summary of the cement kiln TEQ data. Currently, data are available from
16 facilities and 25 kilns. There are 26 separate data sets with a total of 85 data points.
4-22
-------
TABLE 4.6-1. COMPARISON OF TOXIC EQUIVALENT FACTOR WEIGHTING SCHEMES
Toxic Equivalent Factors
Congeners
2,3,7,8-TCDD
not 2,3,7,8-TCDDs
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD
not 2,3,7,8-PeCDDs
2,3,7,8-HxCDD
not 2,3,7,8-HxCDDs '
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDDs
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDDs
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDDs
2,3,7,8-HpCDD
not 2,3,7,8-HpCDD
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD
OCDD
2,3,7,8-TCDF
not 2,3,7,8-TCDFs
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF
2,3,7,8-PeCDF
not 2,3,7,8-PeCDFs
2,3,7,8-HxCDF
not 2,3,7,8-HxCDFs
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF
2,3,7,8-HpCDF
not 2,3,7,8-HpCDFs
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDFs
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDFs
OCDF
(NATO/CCMS)
(I-TEF)
1
0.5
0.1
0.01
0.001
0.1
0.05
0.5
0.1
0.01
0.001
Eadon86(83) EPA
1 1
0.01
1 0.5
0.005
0.033(0.03) 0.04
0.0004
0.001
0.001
0.33 1 0.1
0.001
0.33 : 0.1
0.001
0.021 (0.011) 0.01
0.0001
0.01
, 0.00001
UBA
1
0.01
0.1
0.01 .
0.1
0.01
0.01
0.001
0.1
0.01
0.1
0.01
0.1
0.01
0.01
0.001
BUS
'1
0.01
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.01 .
0.01
0.001
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.10
0.1
0.1
0.1
Nordic
1
0.5
0.1
0.01
0.001
0.1
0.01
0.5
0.1
0.01
0.001
Sources: Department of the Environment, United Kingdom (1989), Carlsson (1988)
4-23
-------
TABLE 4.7-1. SUMMARY OF CEMENT KILN DIOXIN DATA IN TOTAL NG/DSCM
Company
Location
Unit Report Facility
Tested Date Type
APCS
# Points PCDD/PCDF (ng/dscm @ 7% 02)
Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Continental Cement Co.
Continental Cement Co.
Essroc Materials
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam, Inc.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Medusa Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co.
National Cement Co.
River Cement Co.
Southdown/Dixie
Southdown/Kosmos
w: wet kiln
d: dry kiln
sd: semi-dry kiln
ph: preheater
pc: precalciner
bp: by-pass
Chanute, KS
Chanute, KS
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Louisville, NE
Louisville, NE
Hannibal, MO
Hannibal, MO
Logansport, IN
HollyHill.SC
HollyHill.SC
Artesia, MS
Bath, PA
Bath, PA
Fredonia, KS
Fredonia, KS
Wampum, PA
Wampum, PA
Lebec,CA
Festus, MO
Knoxville,TN
Kosmosdale, KY
# of Facilities
# of Kilns
# of Data Sets
# of Data Points
1
2
1
2
2
3
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
2
3
U
1
1
1
1
14
23
24
86
Apr-92
Mar-92
Jul-92
Jul-93
May-92
Jul-92
May-92
Aug-92
Dec-90
Jul-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-93
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Jul-92
Jul-92
Aug-92
Oct-92
Mar-92
May-92
w
w
w
w
w
w
sd (ph/bp)
d (ph/pc/bp)
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
d
d
d
d
d (ph/pc/bp)
d(ph)
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
FF
ESP
FF
FF
4
4
• 4
3
3
3
5
4
2
3
4
6
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
6
4
277.3
556 .57
874.64
9.68
62.35
160.9
16.28
20.69
630
1369
1863
198
409
58.9
2.66
0.77
1066.37
950
2174
3172
6.91
2299
112.05
121.52
156.2000
303.8175
327.3500
5.3200
32.2700
99.7333
8.4400
12.8700
476.0000
1209.1967
1542.7500
70.9000
182.8750
41.8633
2.4133
0.6833
827.7100
525.4667
1603.3333
2392.3333
6.5967
2008.3333
31.7450
111.2975
68.56
158.84
72.34
188
14.19
58.8
4.96
8.28
322
952.32
1295
5.6
12
19.12
1.98
0.59
627.96
280.4
1093
1598
6.23
1599
8.45
95.67
87.3979
174.7120
374.7511
3.7848
26.2268
53.9735
4.5866
5.7731
217.7889
224.6619
235.7122
81.4300
211.3549
20.4948
0.3765
0.0902
221.7799
369.1169
543.0196
787.1025
0.3431
364.7757
39.7863
11.3203
CK.total/sum
-------
100.00% --
90.00% --
%Pop. Max. Avg. Min.
50% 100 70 20
Maximum
Average
Minimum
0.00%
10 50 100 200 500 1000 1500
Total Dioxin/Furan Emissions (ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
2000 2500 3000
Figure 4.7-1. Cumulative distribution of cement kiln total dioxin emissions.
CK.total/sum Chart 1
-------
TABLE 4.7-2. SUMMARY OF CEMENT KILN DIOXIN DATA IN TEQ
K>
O\
Company
Location Unit Report Facility
Tested Dale Type
APCS
# Points TEQ(ng/dscm@7%02)
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Continental Cement Co.
Continental Cement Co.
Essroc Materials
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnarn, Inc.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lone Star Industries
Medusa Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co.
National Cement Co.
River Cement Co.
Southdown/Kosmos
w = wet kiln
d = dry Win
sd = semi dry Win
ph = preheater
pc=precalcinaior
bp = by-pass
Chanute,KS
Chanute,
Foreman,
Foreman,
Foreman,
Foreman,
Apr-92
KS 2 Mar-92
AR
Jul-92
AR 2 May-92
AR 2 Jul-93
AR 3 Jul-92
Louisville, ME
May-92
Louisville, ME 2 Aug-92
Hannibal, MO
Hannibal, MO
Logansport, IN
Clarksville,MO
HollyHill.SC
Holly Hill, SC '
Artesia, MS
Bath. PA
Balh,PA
Alpena,MI
Fredonia, KS
Jul-92
Dec-90
Aug-92
Jnl-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-93
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Fredonia, KS 2 Aug-92
Greencastle, IN
Aug-92
Wampum, PA 3 Jul-92
Wampum. PA 1,2 Jul-92
Lebec. CA
Festus.MO
Kosmosdale. KY
I Aug-92
I Oct-92
May-92
w
w
w
w
w
w
sd(ph/bp)
d (ph/pc/bp)
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
d(?)
w
w
w
d
d
d
d
d(ph)
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP '
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
FF
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
FF
ESP
FF
4
4
4
3
3
3
5
4
3
2
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
3.050
1.370
12.600
0.571
0.203
1.550
0.281
0.952
25.471
4.130
13.200
0.564
0.370
2.470
7.420
0.016
0.006
0.088
5.900
9.400
4.230
50.900
61.730
0.057
57.300
1.320
1.55250
1.01300
3.80625
0.37033
0.11597
1.02000
0.16734
0.50400
17.14967
3.26500
10.98500
0.21643
0.19733
1.96667
4.94833
0.01600
0.00440
0.05867
3.72333
5.18667
3.62000
32.96667
48.86000
0.05300
49.84333
1.17500
0.350
0.641
0500
0.207
0.068
0.600
0.099
0.300
11.524
2.400
6.640
0.033
0.049
1.430
1.925
0.016
0.003
0.035
2.590
2.560
3.180
23.000
29.890
0.048
40.130
1.060
1.11805
0.30473
5.87936
0.18485
0.07549
0.48446
0.06958
0.30473
7.35389
1.22329
3.02758
0.30115
0.16168
0.52080
2.78873
0.00000
0.00125
0.02695
1.88559
3.68572
0.54525
15.56288
16.77361
0.00458
8.80464
0.10755
# of Facilities 16
# of Kilns 25
# of Data Sets 26
# of Data Points 85
CK.teq/sum
-------
Comparison with the estimated total population suggests that the kiln total PCDD/PCDF data set is
approximately 56% complete. The lack of uniformity in reporting dioxin emissions (total or TEQ)
from the trial burns and compliance tests accounts for the differences in the number of facilities and
kilns with dioxin data sets in the current compilation.
Figure 4.7-2 presents the cumulative distribution of dioxin/furan emissions from cement
kilns reported in TEQ ng/dscm. As indicated on this figure, 50% of the minimum reported kiln
data are less than 0.4 TEQ. Similarly, 50% of the reported average and maximum reported data are
less than 0.8 and 1.0 TEQ, respectively.
The relationship between total dioxin/furan emissions and TEQ is generally a "foot print" of
a specific combustion facility (specific kiln, for example). This "foot print" can vary significantly
within a class of combustion sources; however, there is a large body of data to suggest that the
average ratio of total dioxin/furan emissions to TEQ emissions for cement kilns is statistically
different across classes of combustion facilities (i.e., cement kilns versus municipal waste
incinerators). Figure 4.7-3 presents plots of total dioxin/furan emissions versus TEQ for HWIs,
cement kilns, MWCs and MWIs. As shown in the statistical analysis presented in Table 4.7-3, the
average ratio of total dioxin/furan emissions to TEQ for HWIs, kilns, MWCs and MWIs is 57,
119, 43, and 55, respectively. As presented in this analysis, cement kilns display a statistically
different "foot print" than the other three combustor devices at the 95% confidence level.
Interestingly, this analysis indicates that the average ratio between total dioxin/furan and TEQ for
hazardous waste incinerators cannot be distinguished (at the 95% confidence level) from either
MWCsorMWIs.
It is generally accepted that the combustion device, fuel, operating characteristics, and the
APCD system will contribute to the dioxin/furan congener distribution. Given this, it might be
suggested that APCDs with similar inlet conditions and different APCDs will display different
total dioxin/TEQ ratios. Table 4.7-4 presents the body of MWC data in more detail. In this table,
the total/TEQ data is subdivided by the APCD control device type including: ESPs; spray
dryer/fabric filter combinations (sd/ff); duct injection/ESPs (di/esp); and spray dryer/ESPs
(sd/ESP). As indicated in Table 4.7-5, the total/TEQ ratios cannot be distinguished by APCD
category. In addition, the MWCs with either spray dryer/FF or duct injection (high PM, alkaline)
conditions are still significantly different than the average foot print data exhibited by the cement
kiln population. This analysis would tend to suggest that conditions upstream of the APCD
(combustion systems, fuel types, operation) are more strongly influencing the ultimate dioxin/furan
congener distribution. The data thus suggest that independent control of congener distribution
(and therefore TEQ) will probably not be possible through APCD device type selection.
4-27
-------
100.00% T
90.00% --
80.00% --
70.00% --
'8 60.00%
I
50.00% --
oo 5
40.00% --
30.00% --
20.00% --
10.00% --
0.00%
Maximum
Average
Minimum
%Pop. Max. Avg. Min.
50% 1.0 0.80 0.4
0.1
0.25
0.5 0.75 1
TEQ (ng/dscm @ 7% 02)
10
Figure 4.7-2. Cumulative distribution of cement kiln dioxin TEQ emissions.
CK.teq/sum Chart 1
-------
Municipal Waste Combustors
100
10
©
I
0.1
0.01
Q SD/FF
O SD/ESP
A ESP
10
LI"1 "'* ' ' ' ""
100
1000 10000
Medical Waste Incinerators
1000
I .... ....I . . . 1....
1000 10000
100
-k 10
O
<§) 1
0.1
0.01
0.001
Cement Kilns
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
total PCDD/PCOF (ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
Hazardous Waste Incinerators and Boilers
100
10
0.1
0.01
0.1 1 10 100
Total PCDD/PCDF (ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
1000
Figure 4.7-3. Total versus TEQ dioxin emissions for various source categories.
4-29
-------
TABLE 4.7-3. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF TOTAL DIOXIN TO TEQ RATIOS
FOR VARIOUS SOURCE CATEGORIES
total/TEQ Ratio
No. Points
Mean
Sdev.
MWC
30 ;
43.2
18.1
MWI
31
55.5
16.9
CK
52
119.4
84.2
HWI
41
57.3
35.5
MWI
MWC
CK
HWI
Measured Difference in Means
MWI MWC CK
12.3 '
63.9 "" 763.
1.8 14.1
HWI
.
62.1
Joint Degrees of Freedon v
MWC 59 i^'i'hi"?1;',";->r','
CK 81 80 !?;,^' •
HWI 70 69 91
Joint variance <(nl-l)slA2 + (n2-l)s2A2)/(nl+n2-2)
MWI MWC CK HWI
MWC
CK
HWI
4569.6 5377.9
842.5 868.3
" " " "" "*Vi(,'
4527.3 ,?
Joint t statistic (alfa/2 @
MWI MWC
MWI fe,!^iii::'t^::,ru:T.',,/'::'','
MWC 2 jj:;,;,,' ,:,;' \
CK 22
HWI 22
95%)
CK HWI
^•^v;^f.'.^'!'iir:.v;
, , v"1!.,,;,,'. v'»(" ' ' ,!, '!,," ' '''''I '!',,'
", ,. , ," " 'i'lt , ,;,„, l'iV»;,; v • '•*
A l'''\ :'t'^;;',",i
£. ".,- : ''>'" " !,,'!
Critical Minimum Difference (t*S/sqrt(l/nl+l/n2)
MWI MWC CK HWI
MWI [$%&••''. '"'•:";'! t:t:'.-."y^i;;iv'"••;w'^':!'-:
MWC ' 9.0 r^i'^Vv :-:,ft;;:; .v^'i'
CK 30.7 33.6 ;':£V ;;>;!^ ;!"";,';
HWI 13.8 14.2 28.1 ..:;-.
TEQ_TOT.XLS
4-30
-------
TABLE 4.7-4. MWC TOTAL AND TEQ EMISSION DATA SORTED BY APCD TYPE
Location
Alexandria
Alexandria
Prrtsfield
Zurich
North Andover
Westchester
Saugus
Pinellas
Chicago
Tulsa
Lawrence
Sheridan
Pigeon Pt. (*)
Occidentral (*)
Stellinger
Stapelfeid
Millbury
Borgstrasse
Long Beach
Commerce
Stainislaus
Bridgeport
Bristol
Marrion
Jackson
West Babylon
Wurzburg
GE
Maine (*)
Mid Conn (*)
APCD
di/esp
di/esp
di/esp
esp
esp
esp
esp
esp
esp
esp
esp
esp
esp
esp
sd/esp
sd/esp
sd/esp
sd/esp
sd/ff
sd/ff
sd/ff
sd/ff .
sd/ff
sd/ff
sd/ff
sd/ff
sd/ff
sd/ff
sd/ff
sd/ff,
NG/DSCM @ 7% O2
Total
426
57
110
305.6
374
100
623
104
277
34.5
123.5
580
131.4
1938
109.6
219
45
533
4.57
1.94
6.91
3.07
7.23
2.04
1.73
18.8
49.95
2.183
1.784
3.076
(*) RDF units or mixed RDF MSW fired
TEQ
7.1
1
2.799
6.622
12.1
2.6
15.5
2.132
9.007
1.213
3.095
13.125
1.324
28.7
10.13
3.9
0.964
18.22
0.065
0.067
0.122
0.354
0.167
0.063
0.073
0.535
0.746
0.079
0.034
0.063
ratio
60.0
42.9
39.3
46.1
30.9
38.5
40.2
48.8
30.8
28.4
39.9
44.2
99.2
67.5
10.8
56.2
46.7
29.3
70.3
29.0
56.6
8.7
43.3
32.4
23.7
35.1
67.0
27.6
52.5
48.8
No. Points
3.0
11.0
4.0
12.0
Average
47.4
46.8
35.7
41.2
Sdev
11.1
20.5
20.0
18.5
MWCS.XLS
4-31
-------
TABLE 4.7-5. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF MWC TOTAL TO TEQ RATIOS
total/TEQ Ratio
No. Points
Mean
Sdev.
di/esp
3
47.4
11.1
esp
11
' 46.8
20.5
sd/esp
4
35.7
20
sd/ff
12
41.2
18.5
esp
di/esp
sd/esp
sd/ff
Measured Difference in Means
di/esp sd/esp sd/ff
»ESIlWB1l!*ll«l!l!'Ii'l,!!M?ll«i'P'«''II!!i!!!'1'''1 ' .*>!si!!!!!"!''ii*'!' ' "' '.,, "" '
Joint Degrees of Freedon t
|tjt| 4|iM) ^ j .^ 'J^i.t
'liiij' 'ii'ii ! ' ' i'l'i'^1 ' ! ^
27.2
25.7
16.9
^di/esp
^!,i'| '?,'!»'' j.iV'iV ,'!,
ft 'I'l^'iiit'il''^'!!';'!!') ''iii
20.7
24.5
sd/esp sd/ff
*'*';':• V'," ' „);/'• ' '.' 'iW,,, ,s \ j.
i;!||!|::'';x4'i;li^;>,:r:;]v ;•"!,'• 'I1, ;.i"'
^'\:/'Ii;'1';'',Y'"1111',;,'<'V'1"'!;.1;'Ki;j'i1.
23.3 ! ''•>•' '.""'';! .
MWCR.XLS
4-32
-------
4.8
Analysis of Cement Kiln Dioxin/Furan Emissions
Figure 4.8-1 presents a plot of total cement kiln PCDD/PCDF emissions versus APCD
operating temperature. The data utilized in this analysis was extracted from both the CoC/Trial
Burn Reports compiled as of 1/12/93 and previous compilations. It is anticipated that the analysis
presented in this section will be updated with additional data in subsequent revisions. However, it
is not expected that significant changes to the major observations or conclusions will arise as the
data set is expanded. When the PCDD/PCDF emissions are plotted in this fashion (semi-log), the
straight line drawn through the data is indicative of an exponential relationship between
PCDD/PCDF emissions and APCD operating temperature. As shown on this plot, two distinct
groups of data points exist within the temperature window of 400 °F to 575 °F. However, each
group exhibits a similar dependency on temperature. This relationship, characterized by the line
passing through the group 1 data set, indicates a 1 order magnitude increase in PCDD/PCDF
emissions for every 161 °F increase in ESP/FF operating temperature. The line passing through
the group 2 data is characterized by a 1 order magnitude! increase in PCDD/PCDF emissions with
every 196 °F increase in ESP/FF operating temperature. The PCDD/PCDF temperature
relationships extracted from the cement kiln CoC data are virtually the same as that found during
detailed EPA testing at the Montgomery County MWC n. The Montgomery County MWC was
equipped with a water quench upstream of an ESP. With this configuration, the ESP operating
temperature could be controlled independently of upstream furnace conditions. Results from the
MWC testing produced a semi-log, linear relationship between ESP operating temperature and
PCDD/PCDF formation in the ESP, with PCDD/PCDF production increasing 1 order of magnitude
with every 110 °C (196 °F) increase in ESP operating temperature. The apparent consistency with
the MWC experience suggests but does not conclusively affirm that the PCDD/PCDF emissions
from kilns are predominately generated across the APCD.
As discussed previously, the characteristic "foot print" (ratio of total dioxin/furan emissions
to TEQ) of cement kilns is different than those of other combustion facilities. Generally, the ratio
of total PCDD/PCDF to TEQ is on the order of twice that found from MWCs, MWIs and HW
incinerators. The scatter in the total/TEQ ratio for kilns is large, as evidenced by the distribution
curve presented in Figure 4.8-2. The average ratio is 115, and the median of the ratio value (50%
above and below) is 101. Calculation of an average total to TEQ ratio implicitly assumes that the
plot of total PCDD/PCDF emissions in ng/dscm versus TEQ passes through zero. Clearly, this is
not necessarily the case. It is quite possible that a facility can still exhibit positive total
PCDD/PCDF emissions at zero TEQ. Stated differently, a facility with total PCDD/PCDF
4-33
-------
10000-r
1000-
©
(A
I
UL
a
o
a.
a
o
o.
100-
0.1
XI*
Groi p 2
roup
/
PCDD/PCDF=4J>6E-l*exp(1.17E.2*F)
RA2=0.73
Group 2:
02%: 5.9
COppm:621
THCppm24
HClppmSO
PCDD/PCDF=3.96E-3 * exp( 1.4E-2*F)
R*2=0.75
Group 1:
O2%: 10.3
COppm:117
THCppnrl2.7
HClppnr21
200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
APCD Inlet Temperature (F)
Figure 4.8-1. Total cement kiln PCDD/PCDF versus APCD temperature.
4-34
-------
m
73
% of Data Set
O
o
0
S3
4^.
U>
o
a4
c
i-t
6'
0
o
>-»>
o
f-t
p
O
l~t
5-
*f»
o
i
CD
3
rt
E
!—•
3
CA
o1
ff
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
190
200
210
220
230
240
250
260
270
280
O-
o
O
fO
X !
o— '
p
O
cr
o
o
m
e
TO
a
o'
Accumulative %
-------
emissions can be emitting zero PCDD/PCDF on a TEQ basis. If the cement kiln PCDD/PCDF
total emissions data are regressed versus TEQ, then the slope of least squares fit line is 47, with
positive intercept of 87.5. The 95% confidence intervals on the slope and intercept are 43 to 51
and 33 to 141 ng/dscm, respectively. A summary of the regression analysis is provided in Table
4.8-1. For comparison purposes, the regression analysis for the MWC is also provided. For
MWCs, the 95% confidence interval on the slope and intercept ranges from 42 to 58 and -101 to
37.8 ng/dscm, respectively. Negative intercepts are meaningless, illustrating the significant scatter
in the MWC data. However, when analyzed in this fashion, the incremental change in total
PCDD/PCDF emissions per incremental change in TEQ for kilns cannot be distinguished from
MWCs. This is in contrast to the statistical analysis in the previous section where on an average
ratio basis, there is a clear distinction between the kiln footprint and that exhibited by the MWC
population. A constant incremental (slope) relationship between total PCDD/PCDF emissions and
TEQ can be interpreted as implying that the congener distribution remains constant with total
PCDD/PCDF production, and that only the levels of the individual congeners are increased. One
possible interpretation of the apparent incremental change uniformity in TEQ per unit change in
total PCDD/PCDF (slope) between kilns and MWCs is that the constant slope is associated with
the formation of PCDD/PCDF across similar APCDs (ESP, or baghouses). The apparent
statistical difference in the average ratio (foot print) is associated with different intercepts and may
be linked to the initial nontoxic congener distribution upstream of the APCDs.
Total kiln PCDD/PCDF emissions versus stack HC1 emissions are presented in Figure 4.8-
3. No apparent trend is exhibited for either the kiln data in aggregate or when subdivided into the
group 1 and group 2 data sets.
Total Mln PCDD/PCDF emissions versus stack THC emissions are presented in Figure
4.8-4. As with the HC1 data, no apparent trend is exhibited for either the kiln data in aggregate or
when subdivided into the group 1 and group 2 data sets.
The absence of any apparent trends in the PCDD/PCDF emission data versus either HC1 or
THC does not preclude these as important parameters in characterizing dioxin/furan emissions. It
does suggest, however, that the scatter in the data set combined with other potential dominant
trends can mask smaller effects that might be anticipated.
Figure 4.8-5 presents a plot of total PCDD/PCDF emissions versus stack % oxygen (%
02). The oxygen data ranges from approximately 5-16%, suggesting significant entrainment into
4-36
-------
TABLE 4.8-L REGRESSION ANALYSIS OF CEMENT KILN TOTAL PCDD/PCDF
TO TEQ EMISSIONS DATA
Regression Statistics (cement kilns)
Multiple R
R Square
Adjusted R Square
Standard Error
Observations
Analysis of Variance
Regression
Residual
Total
Intercept
xl
0.96
0.91
0.91
192.59
59.00
df
1.00
57.00
58.00
Coefficients
87.54
47.15
Sum of Squares
22577382.72
2114281.29
24691664.01
Standard Error
27.06
1.91
Mean Square
22577382.72
37092.65
t Statistic
3.24
24.67
F Significance F
608.68 0.0000
P-value Lower 95% Upper 95%
0.00 33.35 141.72
0.00 43.32 50.98
Regression Statistics (MWC's)
Multiple R
R Square
Adjusted R Square
Standard Error
Observations
Analysis of Variance
Regression
Residual
Total
Intercept
xl .
0.917283558
0.841409127
0.835745167
152.6114066
30
df
1
28
29
Coefficients
-31.85665438
50.26881416
Sum of Squares
3459880.10
652126.76
4112006.86
Standard Error
34.04
4.12
f
Mean Square
3459880.10
23290.24
i
t Statistic
-0.94
12.19
F Significance F
148.55 0.00
P-value Lower 95% Upper 95%
0.36 -101.58 37.87
0.00 41.82 58.72
4-37
NEWRATIO.XLS
-------
CM
O
<§>
o
Q)
U.
Q
O
Q.
Q
Q
1000
100
10
•1
0.1
o
0 0
1
d
o
0
o
(
5 4> *
M
o
V
) 0 0
QDO
.0 g 4
** b <
V4
o
D
O
O
, •
0.1
10 100
HCI (ppm)
1000
Group 2
Group 1
Figure 4.8-3. Total kiln PCDD/PCDF emissions versus stack HCI emissions.
4-38
-------
10000-:
c7 :
O
Ss lOUU-
@)
o 100-
(0
1
*••' H r\
u. 10
0
o
Q.
»™» ^
§ 1~
O
a. -
.1
0 C
o
0 0 * *
1 1
THC
00° I
00
0 b
O O ®
p °-> ©
w ^ w o
V
'
0 1C
(ppm)
Group 2
Group 1
Figure 4.8-4. Total PCDD/PCDF emissions versus stack THC emissions.
4-39
-------
CM
O
©
o
(0
O)
u.
o
o
OL
Q
Q
O
Q.
nnn-
uuu
i r\f\-
1UU
-i
1 :
n 1-
0
o3j
o 8:
o
<3
)
i0 0
%
i
\
6>
o
*
*
T>;
T<:
*«
OOF
OOF
o
<#
Group 1
Group 2
4 6 8 10 12
Stack Percent O2
14 16
Figure 4.8-5. Total PCDD/PCDF emissions versus stack percent O2.
4-40
-------
the flue gas path. The data also suggest an inverse oxygen/dioxin relationship. There are,
however, two sets of data which do not follow the dominant trend. As indicated in Figure 4.8-5,
these data correspond to the extremes in APCD temperature in the data set.
Figure 4.8-6 presents a plot of total PCDD/PCDF emissions versus stack carbon monoxide
(CO) levels. The data have been subdivided into the group 1 and group 2 data sets corresponding
to the two,data groups seen in the PCDD/PCDF versus temperature graph of Figure 4.8-1. When
viewed in this fashion, the data suggest that higher levels of total dioxin emissions are associated
with higher measured CO levels. This does not imply, however, that CO is the fundamental
correlating parameter since elevated CO levels are often associated with elevated products of
incomplete combustion (PIC) formation.
Figure 4.8-7 presents a plot of stack CO versus stack O2. The aggregate body of data has
also been subdivided into the group 1 and group 2 data sets corresponding to Figure 4.8-1. This
plot (Figure 4.8-7) displays the characteristic inverse relationship between CO and O? found in all
combustion systems. However, it also displays two sets of data which do not follow this trend.
Cement kiln CO emissions occur not only from incomplete combustion, but can also easily be a
product of the calcining process. For this reason, any plot of CO versus O2 should not only
display the characteristic relationship between CO and O2, but should also show significant scatter
with groups of outliers from this trend (as in Figure 4.8-7).
Figure 4.8-8 presents a plot of stack CO versus stack total hydrocarbon (THC). No
consistent trend in the data set is observed. Given the discussion in the previous paragraph, it is
quite possible that elevated CO levels can be associated with good combustion and low THC
levels. For this reason, it would not be expected that a consistent trend for kilns across the large
variety of units and data sets would be found.
The cement kiln PCDD/PCDF data set suggests a strong APCD inlet temperature
dependency consistent with previous MWC experience. In addition, there would appear to be a
dependency on measured CO levels (mostly likely indirect) and stack 02 levels. The temperature
dependency is dominant, with a ten-fold increase in total dioxin/furan emissions as APCD inlet
temperature is raised approximately 178 °F (average of 161 °F and 196 °F). It is likely that the
dominate trend of increasing PCDD/PCDF emissions with APCD inlet temperature masks lesser
relationships. One approach to further examining the cement kiln dioxin/furan data is to remove
the dominate trends from the data set and try to identify these other less apparent relationships.
4-41
-------
IUUUU
VP mnn
e^ i uuu _
1^ -
(§) :
« mn-
U 1 \JV :
-
U, IU :
Q •
O :
QL
Q 1-
Q 1 =
0 :
DU
0.1-
>
V ,
i
o
o° o q
o ^^
* ° 0
. :r •
\ O
o
o
^
* Group 1
o Group 2
10 100 1000 10000
CO (ppm @ 7% O2)
Figure 4.8-6. Total PCDD/PCDF emissions versus stack CO.
4-42
-------
10000-:
-
1000-
S ;
® :
tt 1 00 —
^ :
o :
o
O -in
£ 1°E
CO :
1-
c
of
'0
to o
8
o
o
o
*
.f
4
*
^
• Group 1
o Group 2
4 6 8 10 12
Stack Percent O2
14. 16
Figure 4.8-7. Stack CO versus stack
4-43
-------
U. IUUV
o
IO
08
Oinf\-
1UU
5£
l>-
©
•7 nn~
u iu
(0
"o>
t
PCDD/PCD
p
LL _
1
ft
i
O(
0 °
®
o
JO
1
•
o
0
o
s
o
Group 1
Group 2
4 6 8 10 12
Stack Percent O2
14 16
Figure 4.8-9. Temperature normalized PCDD/PCDF versus stack
4-46
-------
u. luuu-
O :
10
n
<* I
04 nn
luu-
JE .!
© :
J~ 4(\
% 1°:
5 :
O) '.
c
u. H
'CDD/PCD
D
_!. _
I t I I I i I M
•
V '
f ' f;<
^ ,
.o-wo'c
0 <^D
0 CP
% °§»
o°°
O
• '
:<•*:
S> 0 »
O
0 0
^o C
O
10 100 1000
CO(ppm@7%O2)
Group 1
Group 2
10000
Figure 4.8-10. Temperature normalized PCDD/PCDF versus stack CO.
4-47
-------
of the NSPS for MWCs. As stated previously, it is important to note that this analysis does not
necessarily point to CO as the correlating factor, but more likely points to the existence of PICs
which generally correlate with CO.
The temperature normalized data suggest that CO is a parameter which delineates the
PCDD/PCDF data. To more clearly identify other potential relationships, the temperature
normalized data can be further manipulated to remove the gross effects of CO on the dioxin data.
Equation 4.2 has been implemented on the temperature normalized data set.
PCDD /PCDF(@3SOFiloo ppm co) = PCDD /PCDF(@350F)
*(100/CO)
(1.04)
4.2
Note that there are various ways of normalizing the data with respect to CO. One approach
is to shift the data along a line drawn through the centroid of the separate regions of the data. An
alternate approach, which is reflected in Equation 4.2, is to shift the data along a best fit curve
through the entire data set. Given the scatter in the data, and the clear separation in the two
regions, it is not expected that significant differences will arise in the subsequent observations and
conclusions from either approach.
Figure 4.8-11 presents the temperature and CO normalized PCDD/PCDF emissions data
versus stack % oxygen. The data show a considerable collapse over the data set with just the
temperature normalization (Figure 4.8-9). This collapse in the data supports the assertion of a CO
related dependence and also tends to indicate and confirm the O2 dependance. Note the significant
collapse in the data set of the two separate outlier regions from Figure 4.8-9.
The apparent inverse oxygen dependance exhibited by the PCDD/PCDF data is consistent
with data observed in recent laboratory-scale research 12. Possible explanations for the apparent
i
inverse relationship include:
• Elevated oxygen levels are associated with oxidation of the char, thereby reducing
the potential active sites and participation in the catalyzed surface reactions
associated with PCDD/PCDF formation.
• Reduced oxygen levels are associated with poor combustion and elevated PIC
levels which are not completely accounted for in the CO dependency.
4-48
-------
o
o
1
"• oo
o
o :
T-
u.
o
•O OK "
co 25 .
O 20
@15-
E :
33 :
o) :
u.
a :
H>
O
O
o
KX)
«JD
O
o.
c
9$
= 3.26
is
)
+1*
/
y
*^
\*
exp(-
r
'
"T""*
2.32E
r1-
1-x)
0
IMi^£fiS
§ 0246810 12 14 1
g Stack Percent O2
Q.
Group 1
Group 2
Figure 4.8-11. Temperature and CO normalized PCDD/PCDF versus stack O2.
4-49
-------
The effect of the various data normalizations and assertions of correlating parameters is
summarized in Figure 4.8-12. The baseline set of cement kiln data analyzed in this section had an
average value of 338 ng/dscm. The relative percent error, defined as the standard deviation of the
data set divided by the average value, was just over 190%. Application of Equations 4.1, which
has the effect of estimating the population dioxin emissions with APCD inlet temperature of a
uniform 350 °F, reduced the average PCDD/PCDF emission levels to 38 ng/dscm and collapsed the
relative standard error to 130%. Normalizing the data further to a uniform CO level of 100 ppm
lowered the average further to 6.5 ng/dscm. Note the slight increase in scatter with respect to the
mean from 130% to 140%. Removing the apparent dependency on C>2, and normalizing the data to
a uniform stack level of 10% O2 using Equation 4.3, further reduces the average dioxin/furan
emission levels to 3.1 ng/dscm (with a relative error with respect to the mean level of 100%).
PCDD/PCDF
(@350F,100 ppm CO,10% O2)
=PCDD/PCDF
(@350F,100ppm CO)
*exp
-.232*(10-O2)
4.3
There remains considerable scatter (relative to the mean) in the dioxin/furan data following
the temperature, CO, and 02 normalization. However, dioxin/furan measurement is prone to large
precision errors. Recovery limits of ± 30% are commonly cited. Relative errors of 70-100% in
multiple data points at ostensibly the same operating conditions are common. Given these
limitations, the final relative standard error of 100% following data normalization suggests that the
dominant parameters have been identified and that further trends in the data will be difficult to
find. This is in fact the case with the current data set. No further trends were observed in the
normalized dioxin/furan data sets with HC1, PM or other data currently extracted from the
CoC/Trial Burn Reports.
4.9
Commercial Hazardous Waste Incinerator Dioxin/Furan Emissions
Table 4.9-1 summarizes the current body of PCDD/PCDF data reported in total ng/dscm
for the commercial HW incinerator population. Data have been extracted from seven facilities and
from seven units with a total of 45 data points from eight data sets. This represents approximately
23% of the estimated unit population. Appendix I presents a more detailed summary of the data.
Note that the dioxin data reported from the Rollins facilities are significantly below the other
facilities. The Rollins facilities at Baton Rouge, Bridgeport and Deer Park incorporate a rapid
water quench wet scrubber. These particular wet scrubber systems lower flue gas temperatures
4-50
-------
TO
X
&
O
o
(D
(D
ro
Total PCDD/PCDF (ng/dscm)
p
8
8
8
H-
8
8 8
8 8
8
en
Relative Standard Error
-------
TABLE 4.9-1. PCDD/PCDF DATA IN TOTAL NG/PSCM FOR COMMERCIAL
HW INCINERATOR POPULATION
*».
to
Company
Aptus, Lie.
Aptus, Inc.
General Electric
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Ross Incineration Services
Waste Tech. Industries*
Location Unit Report
Tested Date
Aragonite, UT 1 Aug-92
Coffeyvillle, KS 1 Dec-90
Pittsfield,MA
Baton Rouge, LA
Bridgeport, NJ
Deerpark, TX
Grafton,OH
East Liverpool, OH
Apr-91
Apr-87
Dec-86
Aug-88
Mar-93
Jul-93
Facility
Type
RK
RK
LI
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
APCS
# Points
FF/WS/ESP
FF/WS/IWS
PS
WS
WS
VS
PT/IWS
ESP
9
12
5
3
3
5
3
5
PCDD/PCDF (ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
877.44
222.86
1232.38
4.36
10.70
5.77
1.80
23.54
567.23
117.14
548.61
2.26
6.58
4.31
1.46
12.50
259.01
4Z07
100.93
1.14
3.50
3.06
1.60
7.62
240.46
'50.62
-529.86
1.82
3.71
1.05
0.43
6.49
# of Facilities
# of Units
# of Data Sets
# of Data Points
8
8
8
45
These data do not reflect the results of tests conducted in February 1994.
The preliminary draft report on these recent tests indicates that total dioxin/furan
emissions were 5 ng/dscm (with a TEQ of 0.065 ng/dscm).
CHWI&OQO.TOT
-------
from secondary chamber exit levels to stack exit levels in a time period on the order of milliseconds
(10-3 seconds). This process precludes the downstream formation of dioxin/furans, and based on
the levels summarized in Table 4.9-1, results in both dioxin/furan levels which are significantly
lower than the remaining units and levels which must be associated with those emissions exiting
the secondary chamber. It is important to note, however, that the Rollins facilities exhibit lower
PCDD/PCDF levels, while the particulate matter control of the rapid quench wet scrubber is
generally below that achieved at the other facilities incorporating either ESP or baghouses (Table
4.3-2). The existence of significantly lower PCDD/PCDF emissions yet higher PM emissions
illustrates the point made earlier: low PM emissions do not necessarily lead to low PCDD/PCDF
emissions, and other parameters and operating conditions can lead to low PCDD/PCDF emissions
in the presence of high PM emissions.
Table 4.9-2 summarizes the current body of PCDD/PCDF data reported in TEQ for the
commercial HW incinerator population. Data have been compiled for six facilities and six units
with a total of 30 data points from six data sets. Appendix J presents a more detailed summary of
the PCDD/PCDF TEQ data. The non-uniformity in reporting requirements in the CoC/Trial Burn
Reports account for the one unit difference in data quantity between the TEQ and total emissions
for commercial HW incinerators. !
4.10
On-Site Hazardous Waste Incinerator Dioxin/Furan Emissions
Table 4.10-1 summarizes the current body of PCDD/PCDF data reported in total ng/dscm
for the on-site HW incinerators. Currently, data have been compiled from 10 facilities and from 11
units with a total of 49 data points. This represents approximately 7.8% of the facilities based on
the current number of units in the population. Appendix K summarizes the PCDD/PCDF total data
from the on-site facilities in more detail. In general, the average reported PCDD/PCDF levels are
below 4 ng/dscm.
Table 4.10-2 summarizes the current body of PCDD/PCDF data reported in ng/dscm TEQ
for the on-site HW incinerators. Currently, data have been compiled from 11 facilities and from 12
units with a total of 56 data points. Appendix L summarizes the PCDD/PCDF data reported on a
TEQ basis in more detail. Note that of the four facilities with higher PCDD/PCDF emissions on a
total basis level, all four are significantly different than the remaining facilities when viewed on a
TEQ basis.
4-53
-------
TABLE 4.9-2. PCDD/PCDF DATA IN TEQ FOR
COMMERCIAL HW INCINERATOR POPULATION
Company
Location
Unit Report Facility
Tested Date Type
APCS
# Points TEQ(ng/dscm@7%O2)
Sdcv
fe
Aplus, Inc.
General Electric
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Ross Incineration Services
Waste Tech. Industries
Aragonite.UT
Pittsfield, MA
Baton Rouge, LA
Deerpark,TX
GraTton, OH
East Liverpool, OH
# of Facilities
# of Units
ff of Data Sets
# of Data Points
1
1
1
1
1
1
6
6
6
30
Aug-92
Apr-91
Apr-87
Aug-88
Mar-93
Jul-93
RK
LI
RK
RK
RK
RK
FF/WS/ESP
PS
WS
VS
PT/IWS
ESP
9
5
3
5
3
5
26.02384
76.60000
0.22300
0.77700
0.10640
0.44914
15.29889
34.17800
0.10310
0.42000
0.06330
0.22245
7.64476
3.99000
0.03260
0.10200
0.01710
0.14775
6.78866
34.38260
0.10437
0.28492
0.04473
0.12738
PHWT tfWeum
-------
TABLE 4.10-1. PCDD/PCDF DATA IN TOTAL NG/DSCM FOR
ON-SITE HW INCINERATORS
Company
Location
Unit No. Report Facility
Tested Date Type
APCS
# Points Total(ng/dscm@7%O2)
Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
3M
Chevron
Ciba-Geigy
Department of the Army
Department of the Army
Department of the Army
Department of the Army
Dow Chemical Co.
Dow Chemical Co.
Pfizer Inc.
Vulcan Materials Co.
Cottage Grovef MN
Richmond, CA
St. Gabriel, LA
Johnston Atoll
Johnston Atoll
Tooele, UT
Tooele.UT
Midland, MI
Plaquemine, LA - -•
Grpton,CT
Wichita, KS
1
1
1
DPS
LIC
??
??
703
1
1
1
?? Unable to be determined from information given
na not available
Scp-90 RK
Jul-88 LI
May-88 LI
Jun-92 RK
Jun-91 LI
Apr-92 RK
Oct-93 RK
Jun-89 RK
•: Feb-88 RK
Jul-90 RH
'• Apr-91 LI
# of Facilities
# of Units
# of Data Sets
# of Data Points
WS
VS
VS/Cyclone
VS/PBS
VS/PBS
VS
VS
VS/ESP
ESP/PBS
WS
WS
9
10
11
46
8
6
3
4
3
4
4
3
2
3
6
168.63
0.23
1.34
1.84
0.53
0.63 .
0.09
135.6
12.97
4.5
401.35
80.4750
0.1917
0.9767
1.0054
0.4357
0.4850
0.0700
105.0733
12.0750
3.0873
240.0900
8.65
0.12
0.76
0.63
0.353
0^41
0.06
78.35
11.18
2.12
71.47
61.661
0.040
0.317
0.563
0.089
0.099
0.014
28.814
1.266
1.251
147.320
OSHWI.total/surn
-------
O\
TABLE 4.10-2. PCDD/PCDF DATA IN TOTAL NG/DSCM TEQ FOR
ON-SITE HW INCINERATORS
Location
Unit No. Report Facility
Tested Date Type
Company
3M
Chevron
Ciba-Geigy
Department of the Army
Department of the Army
Department of the Army
Dow Chemical Co.
Dow Chemical Co.
Dow Chemical Co.
Eastman Kodak Co.
Pfizer Inc.
Vulcan Materials Co.
?? Unable to be determined from information given # of Facilities 10
na not available # of Units 11
f of Data Sets 12
i of Data Points 53
APCS
# Points TEQ(ng/dscm@7%O2)
Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
Cottage Grove, MN
Richmond, CA
St. Gabriel, LA
Johnston Atoll
Tooele,UT
Tooele,UT
Midland, MI
Midland, MI
Plaquemine, LA
Rochester, NY
Groton, CT
Wichita. KS
1
1
1
DFS
??
??
703
830
1
1
1
Sep-90
Jul-88
May-88
Jun-92
Apr-92
Oct-93
Jun-89
Mar-92
Feb-88
Sep-92
Jul-90
Apr-91
RK
LI
LI
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RH
LI
WS
VS
VS/Cyclone
VS/PBS
VS
VS
VS/ESP
VS/IWS
ESP/PBS
WS
WS
8
6
3
4
4
4
3
4
2
6
3
6
4.53
0.0474
0.00857
0.14
0.0284
0.00902
0.218
0.1198
0.115
0.837.
0.023
12
2.08325
0.03680
0.00591
0.12515
0.02495
0.00673
0.13773
0.06575
0.10170
0.45867
0.01903
6.49333
0.336
0.0299
0.00292
0.11
0.0224
0.00491
0.0942
0.04112
0.0884
0.176
0.012
1.08
1.58687
0.00768
0.00284
0.01175
0.00251
0.00170
0.06960
0.03650
0.01881
0.26163
0.00636
5.22629
OSHWI.teq/sum
-------
4.11
Hazardous Waste Burning Boiler Dioxin/Furan Emissions
Table 4.11-1 summarizes the current body of PCDD/PCDF data reported in total ng/dscm
for the HW burning boilers. Table 4.11-2 summarizes the current body of PCDD/PCDF data
reported in ng/dscm TEQ (same populations). Currently, data have been compiled from two
facilities and from two units with a total of six data points.
4.12
Lightweight Aggregate Kiln Dioxin/Furan Emissions
Table 4.12-1 summarizes the current body of PCDD/PCDF data reported in total ng/dscm
and TEQ for the LWA kilns. Currently, data have been compiled from one facility and from one
unit with a total of three data points.
4.13
Summary
This chapter has presented a summary of the current compilations of PM and PCDD/PCDF
(both total and TEQ) from the various HW burning facilities. In addition, a detailed analysis of the
cement kiln population for which a more thorough data set is available has been completed. This
analysis has shown that the APCD inlet temperature is a dominant parameter keying elevated
PCDD/PCDF emissions. In addition, CO and 02 were parameters which collapsed the
PCDD/PCDF data. The analysis of the cement kiln PCDD/PCDF emissions and resulting
observed trends are consistent with the large body of data and analysis producing the MWC NSPS
and Guidelines for existing MWC facilities.
The correlation between APCD inlet temperature and PCDD/PCDF emissions, and the
consistency with the MWC experience, points to the formation of dioxin/furan across the APCD as
the dominant source of stack PCDD/PCDF emissions in the presence of good combustion
conditions. The link with elevated CO emissions and elevated PCDD/PCDF emissions is
consistent with the MWC experience which led to the definition of good combustion practices
(GCP) as a first requirement to control PICs and reduce the potential for elevated PCDD/PCDF
emissions. This chapter also discussed the potential role of PM in the dioxin formation
processes). However, as evidenced by many data sets, low PM emissions are not a prerequisite
4-57
-------
TABLE 4.11-1. PCDD/PCDF DATA IN TOTAL NG/DSCM FOR HW BURNING BOILERS
Company
Location
Unit Report Facility Primaiy
Tested Dale Type Fuel
APCS # of Points ToUd(ng/dscm@7%O2)
Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
O.
oo
Union Carbide South Charleston, WV 16 Fcb-93
WestvacoCorp. DeRidder.LA B2&B4 Aug-92
# of Facilities 2
# of Units 2
# of Data Sets .2
Oof Data Points 6
Boiler
Boiler
Coal
Natural Gas
ESP
ESP
1.242
1.907
0.8447
1.1263
0.614
0.574
03456
0.6952
BLR.teq/total
-------
TABLE 4.11-2. PCDD/PCDF DATA IN NG/DSCM TEQ FOR HW BURNING BOILERS
Company
Location
Unit Report Facility
Tested Date Type
Primary APCS # of Points TEQ(ng/dscm@7%O2)
Fuel
t-n
VO
Union Carbide
Weslvaco Corp.
South Charleston, WV
DeRiclder.LA
16 Feb-93 Boiler Coal ESP
B2&B4 Aug-92 Boiler Natural Gas ESP
# of Facilities 2
# of Units 2
# of Data Sets 2
# of Data Points 6
3 0.0461 0.0279 0.0179 0.01S8
3 O.OS1 0.0297 0.0149 0.0189
BLR.teq/lotal
-------
TABLE 4.12-1. PCDD/PCDF DATA IN TOTAL NG/DSCM AND
TOTAL NG/DSCM TEQ FOR LIGHTWEIGHT AGGREGATE KILNS
TEQ DATA FOR LWA KILNS
Company Location Unit Report APCS # Points TEQ (ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
Tested Date Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
SoliteCorp. Cascade, VA 1 Mar-94 FF
0.0508 0.0421 0.0372 0.00755
TOTAL DIOXIN DATA FOR LWA KILNS
Company Location Unit Report APCS # Points Total (ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
Tested Date Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
SoliteCorp. Cascade,VA 1 Mar-94 FF
1.65
1.5767
1.48 0.08737
4-60
AK.teq/total
-------
to low PCDD/PCDF emissions. Control of APCD inlet temperature and PICs (through good
combustion practices) can lead to low PCDD/PCDF levels irrespective of PM levels. Similarly,
poor control of PICs followed by elevated APCD inlet temperatures and good control of PM can
lead to high levels of PCDD/PCDF emissions. The data suggest, however, that at appropriate
APCD (FF, ESP) inlet temperatures, stack PCDD/PCDF emission levels are likely to be reduced
with increased levels of PM control.
4-61
-------
4.14
References
H. Vogg, M. Metzger, and L. Stieglitz, "Recent Findings on the Formation and
Decomposition of PCDD/PCDF in Municipal Solid Waste Incineration," Waste
Management & Research, 5:285-294,1987.
L. Dickson and F. Karasek, "Mechanism of Formation of Polychlorinated
Dibenso-p-dioxins Produced on Municipal Incinerator Fly Ash from Reactions of
Chlorinated Phenols," Journal of Chromatography, 389:127-137,1987.
H. Vogg and L. Stieglitz, "Thermal Behavior of PCDD/PCDF in Fly Ash From Municipal
Waste Incinerators," Chemosphere, 15 (9-12): 1373-1378, 1986.
K.R. Bruce, L.O. Beach, and B.K. Gullett, "The Role of Gas Phase C\2 in the formation
of PCDD/PCDF During Waste Combustion," Waste Management, 11:97-102,1991.
B.K. Gullett, K.R. Bruce, and L.O. Beach, "Formation of Chlorinated Organics During
Solid Waste Combustion," Waste Management & Research, 8:203-214,1990.
R.D. Griffin, "A New Theory of Dioxin Formation in Municipal Solid Waste
Combustion," Chemosphere, 15:1987-1990, 1986.
H. Hagenmaier, M. Kraft, H. Brunner, and R. Haag," Catalytic Effects of Fly Ash from
Waste Incineration Facilities on the Formation and Decomposition of Polychlorinated
Dibenso-p-dioxins and Polychlorinated Dibenzofurans," Environmental Science and
Technology, 21:1080-1084, 1987.
H. Hagenmaier, H. Brunner, R. Haag, and M. Kraft, "Copper-Catalyzed Dechlorination/
Hydrogenation of Polychlorinated Dibenzo-p-dioxins, Polychlorinated Dibensofurans, and
Other Chlorinated Aromatic Compounds," Environmental Science & Technology,
21:1085-1088, 1987.
B.K. Gullett, K.R. Bruce, and L.O. Beach, "Effect of Sulfur Dioxide on the Formation
Mechanism of Polychlorinated Dibenzodioxin and Dibenzofuran in Municipal Waste
Combustors," Environmental Science & Technology, 26:1938-1943,1992.
4-62
-------
10. EER Report, "Investigation of CDD/CDF Emissions: Comparison Between MWIs and
MWCs," September 27,1991.
11. J. Kilgroe, W.S. Lanier, and T.R. Von Alten, "Montgomery County South Incinerator
Test Project: Formation, Emission and Control of Organic Pollutants," Presented at the
Second International Conference on MWC, Tampa, Florida, April 16-19,1991.
12. B. Gullett, P. Lemieux, J. Kilgroe, and J. Dunn, "Formation and Prevention of
Polychlorinated Dibenzo-p-dioxin and Polychlorinated Dibenzofuran During Waste
Combustion: the Role of Combustion and Sorbent Parameters," Presented at the 1993
International Conference on MWC, March 30 to April 2,1993.
4-63
-------
-------
5.0 DETERMINATION OF TECHNICALLY ACHIEVABLE EMISSIONS
This chapter presents a methodology for establishing PM and PCDD/PCDF technology-
based emission levels for the various hazardous waste combustors (HWCs). It presents a rigorous
procedure for establishing numerical levels which takes into account the natural uncontrolled
variability that is exhibited in PM and PCDD/PCDF emissions data. PM emission levels for
various source categories and combinations of source categories are determined using the
predefined analysis procedures. For dioxins/furans, best operating practices currently employed
by HWCs and emission levels achievable by the best controlled sources are identified. The
dioxin/furan emission levels are presented in both total (tetra through octa) ng/dscm and ng/dscm
TEQ.
5.1
Discussion of Technology-based Emission Level Determination
The procedures outlined in this chapter incorporate much of the language and intent of the
Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA's) of 1990 which the Agency is using to establish technology-
based regulations for hazardous air pollutants (HAPS). Prior to the 1990 CAAA's, the national
emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAPS) were to be established by the EPA
Administrator at the level, which in the Administrators judgement, provided ample margin of safety
to protect the public health for each hazardous air pollutant. The 1990 amendments abandoned
that approach for technology-based alternatives. The language and process by which the
NESHAPS are to be established has led the Agency to develop the MACT (maximum achievable
control technology) standards. The amendments provide some guidance as to what is meant by
MACT in the context of new and existing sources. For existing sources, MACT standards may be
less stringent than for new sources, but shall not be less stringent in a category or subcategory than
the average emission level achieved by the best performing 12% (but not fewer than 5 units) of the
existing sources (for which the Administrator has emissions data). This emission level is referred
to as the "floor." The evident intent of the directives for technology-based standards are that
emissions reduction will be achieved by truly demanding maximum achievable control technology.
This chapter does not define, establish, or otherwise attempt to implement the complete
MACT procedures in establishing PM and dioxin emission standards. It does, however, present a
methodology for deriving emission levels that are achievable by the best controlled sources in the
current population of HW burners and would be equivalent to the "floor" emission level under the
MACT process.
5-1
-------
The procedure followed in this chapter to identify emission levels achievable by the best
controlled sources (i.e., the MACT floor) can be broadly characterized by two steps:
1) Identify the best performing facilities (12% or 5 units)
2) Establish a numerical emission level from the average of the emissions
from the pool of facilities identified in Step 1.
The emission levels for PM and dioxins/furans are established under two alternative
approaches. Under Option 1, an emission level is identified that all of the sources in the best
controlled source pool could be expected to meet 99% of the time, with 95 % confidence. Under
Option 2, an emission level is identified thai a source with emissions equivalent to the average for
the pool of best controlled sources could be expected to meet 99% of the time, with 95%
confidence, and assuming that the variability of the source's emissions is similar to the variability
of emissions for the sources in the pool. There is a significant impact on the regulated sources
between these two approaches, as discussed in Section 5.7.
An additional analysis is conducted for dioxins/furans given that EPA has emissions data
on only one HWC that is designed and operated specifically to control dioxin/furan emissions.
Thus, the pool of the best performing facilities identified in Step 1 is comprised virtually entirely of
sources that are not specifically designed and operated to control dioxin/furan emissions.
Therefore, an evaluation is conducted to confirm that HWCs operated under best current operating
practices for dioxin/furan control could be expected to achieve the "floor" emission levels. In this
evaluation, the best technology and operating procedures currently employed to minimize control
of dioxin/furan emissions is defined APRIORI. Having defined the technology and operating
procedures, the current data base is screened to identify those facilities incorporating the
technology and operating procedures. To increase the body of data from which to estimate an
emission level (taking into account the variability of the emissions), the procedure utilizes the
analysis of the cement kiln PCDD/PCDF data presented in the last chapter to estimate what the
emissions would be if the population were to adopt the specified technology and operating
procedures.
The definition of best current operating practice (BOP) for PCDD/PCDF control is based
on the analysis of the body of data presented in the last chapter, as well as the large body of
experience acquired in the development of the MWC NSPS and guidelines for existing facilities.
Best operating practice for PCDD/PCDF has been preliminarily determined to be the use of good
5-2
-------
combustion practices (GCP) and a temperature limitation of 350 °F on the inlet to post combustion
PM control devices. Rapid quenching of the combustion device exhaust gas to temperature below
350 °F is also considered BOP. Best operating practice for PCDD/PCDF control recognizes that
the vast majority of HW burners will require PM control to meet the PM standards. PM control in
ESPs and baghouses at reduced temperatures (below 350 °F) will generally reduce PCDD/PCDF
emissions leaving the stack. The current definition of BOP excludes activated carbon injection and
carbon bed technologies because EPA has data on only one HWC using carbon injection. Thus,
these technologies are not considered to be current practice.
As illustrated in the previous chapter, low PM levels are not a prerequisite for low
PCDD/PCDF levels. Under conditions of poor combustion and elevated APCD control
temperatures, low PM emission levels can lead to high PCDD/PCDF emissions. In addition, the
data clearly indicate that low PCDD/PCDF emissions can be achieved through rapid quenching the
flue gas in the presence of elevated PM emissions.
Good combustion practice (GCP) for the PCDD/PCDF standards, which is part of overall
best operating practices, consists of system design, operation and maintenance techniques which,
when applied with appropriate APCD systems, can increase combustion efficiency and minimize
products of incomplete combustion (PICS). The two major objectives of GCP are to maximize the
destruction of organics and to minimize PM carryover out the combustion device. Good
combustion is associated with low emissions of PCDD/PCDFs and trace organics from the high
temperature regions of the device. Good combustion is typically associated with low carbon
monoxide (CO) levels in the flue gas. Other GCP principles which are more difficult to quantify
but which also participate in the reduction of PCDD/PCDF's and trace organics include combustion
temperature, residence time, adequate mixing of combustion air and control of the amount and
distribution of excess air.
The low temperature formation within the APCD device is in many situations the dominant
source of PCDD/PCDF emissions from combustion devices. The control of the APCD inlet
temperature to less than 350 °F, or rapid quenching of the exhaust gas, is aimed at reducing the
potential for the downstream formation of PCDD/PCDFs. Application of GCP, in concert with
restrictions on APCD inlet temperature, provides a BOP that attempts to limit the formation and
emissions of PCDDs/PCDFs, PICs and suspected precursors leaving the high temperature region
of the device, and reduce the potential for downstream formation.
5-3
-------
5.2
Methodology for Estimating PM Emission Levels
This section describes a rigorous procedure for analyzing the PM emissions data to estimate
levels that the best performing 12% (but no fewer than 5 units) of the population within each
source category can be expected to achieve.
/
The approach is divided into two major steps. The first is to identify the best performing
facilities within each category (cement kilns, LWA kilns, commercial HW incinerators, on-site
incinerators, all incinerator boilers, and all hazardous waste combustors). The best performing
12% (or best 5 units, whichever is greater) within each source category employing APCDs to
control PM emissions are defined as the best performing (BPF) facilities. The data from these
BPF facilities are further analyzed to establish emission levels representative of the sources under
two alternative approaches, as discussed in Section 5.1
5.2.1
Identification of Best Performing (BPF) Facilities
As discussed in the previous chapter, for APCDs incorporating an ESP, the variability
exhibited in the PM emissions data can arise in part from systematic variations in ESP operating
power. When the PM emissions are correlated with ESP power, the average PM emissions and
variability in the data set do not reflect the expected performance from that facility. For each data
set where ESP power was recorded and varied, the PM emissions are regressed against ESP KVA
to determine if the PM data are correlated with ESP operating power at the 95% confidence level.
Table 5.2.1-1 presents a sample regression of a PM data set. When the two-tailed probability
value is less than 0.1, the PM data is considered dependant on the ESP KVA. For this particular
data set, the two-tailed probability estimate is 0.080 (labeled significance F), and the PM data is
correlated with ESP KVA. Note that the more commonly used RA2 value alone (in this case 0.84)
does not establish the existence of a significant linear relationship.
When the PM and KVA values are correlated, the expected PM value from the facility at the
average KVA utilized in the test data is determined from the slope (xl) and intercept determined in
the regression using:
PM;=Intercept + x 1 * Avg KVA
5.1a
where:
PM;=Expected PM level at Average KVA
5-4
-------
TABLE 5.2.1-1. SAMPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS OF PM DATA VERSUS ESP OPERATING POWER
Regression Statistics
Multiple R 0.91986877
R Square 0.84615855
Adjusted RS 0.76923783
Standard Err 0.00529687
Observation 4
Essroc Materials Logansport, D-
KVA PM
32.00000 0.08300
31.70000 0.07500
39.80000 0.06800
42.40000 0.05700
Analysis of Variance
df SumofSquares Mean Square
F Significance F
Regression
Residual
Total
1 0.00030864 0.00030864 11.0003978 0.08013123
2 5.6114E-05 2.8057E-05
3 0.00036475
Coefficients Standard Error
t Statistic
P-value Lower 95% Upper 95%
Intercept 0.13867886 0.02065148 6.71520235 0.00674008 0.04982266 0.22753506
xl -0.00186234 0.00056151 -3.31668476 0.04516581 -0.00427831 0.00055363
CK.PM
-------
When the PM values are not dependant on the ESP power levels, or when other PM
devices were used (i.e., baghouses) and systematic trends could not be determined, the expected
value from the facility is taken as the average PM level in the facility data set using:
= Simple Average of facility data set 5. Ib
When a PM versus KVA dependance has been determined, the variability about the
expected PM level is given by the standard error estimate in the regression (Equation 5.2a). For
the data sets where no dependance was found, the variability about the expected PM level is given
by the standard deviation in the data set (Equation 5.2b).
i= Standard Err.
5.2a
S j= Standard Deviation (facility data set) 5.2b
For the example data set displayed in Table 5.2.1-1, the standard error is 0.0053 gr/dscf at 7% C>2.
The expected PM levels (Equations 5.1) are combined with the facility variability estimates
(Equations 5.2) to identify the best performing facilities. Equation 5.3 is used to define a
combined parameter (PI), which is then used to sort and rank the facilities within each source
category. After sorting and ranking by PI, the best 12% (but no fewer than 5 units) are selected as
the BPF facilities.
5.3
The advantage of using PI instead of the expect value (PMO in sorting and ranking the
facilities can be illustrated in the simple example as follows. Facility A has 4 data points (1,10,
10,10), the average value (PMi) is 7.75, the standard deviation is 4.5, giving a PI value of 16.75.
Facility B has 4 data points (9,9, 9, 9), the average is 9, and the PI value is also 9. On the basis
of average values, Facility A would rank ahead of Facility B. However, on the basis of PI,
Facility B (as is intuitively apparent) would be expected to produce values lower than Facility A.
As discussed in the previous chapter, there are facilities (particularly in the on-site incinerator and
5-6
-------
boiler population) which burn exclusively low ash content wastes and fuels and can achieve very
low PM levels without PM control. These facilities are not representative of the best controlled
sources and are not included in defining the BPF population.
The approach to identifying the BPF facilities within each source category can be
summarized as follows.
1) Eliminate from the source category population those facilities which do
not incorporate or require APCD devices to achieve low PM levels.
2) For each facility, estimate PMi, Si, and Pi using Equations 5.2 and 5.3.
3) Sort the facilities in ascending levels according to the PI levels.
4) Select the top 12% (but no fewer than 5 units) from the sorted list and
define these as the pool of BPF facilities within the source category.
5.2.2
Statistical Approach for Data Analysis d.;2-3- 4>
Under Option 1*, the PM data from the BPF group of facilities within each source category
are further analyzed to established numerical emission levels that any facility within this group can
be expected to achieve. The analysis accounts for the variability associated with the emissions data
exhibited by the individual facility, as well as the ability to select any facility within the BPF group
and achieve the emission level. A statistical tolerance limit approach is used in establishing the PM
value. Using this method, previously acquired data (CoC/trial burn data) are used to establish an
emission level which a specified portion of the population can achieve in the future at a specified
confidence level. The form of the computed limit is:
PMtl=PMa+K*SJ
5.4
* Where an emission level is identified that all of the sources in the best controlled source pool could be
expected to meet 99% of the time, with 95% confidence.
5-7 ;
-------
Where PMa is the computed PM level, PMa is an average PMi value estimated from the BPF
facilities, Sa is an overall estimate of the variability, and K is a statistical quantity defining the
confidence level and the proportion of facilities achieving the level. Both the confidence level and
the proportion of the facilities achieving the levels are required to obtain a mathematically correct
statement concerning levels. Statistical tolerance limits are sometimes confused with other limits
used in engineering and statistical analyses. Statistical tolerance limits are calculated from data to
define the amount of variation that the process (in this case, BPF facilities) exhibits. These limits
will contain a specified proportion of the total population. Confidence limits, a commonly used
approach in data analysis, define an interval within which a population parameter lies.
Within each source category, PMa is computed from the BPF population using Equation
5.5, where (nf) is the number of facilities in the BPF population, and PMi are the facilities'
expected PM values computed using Equations 5.1.
1
nf
PMt= :
nf £
5.5
The population variability is computed using:
5.6a
where:
5.6b
and (np) is the number of points in a facility data set, and (nf) are the number of facilities in the
BPF group. Nt is the total number of data points in the pool of facilities given by:
nf
Nt=InPi 5.6c
and:
nf
nf np
nf
5.6d
5-8
-------
Equation 5.6b, producing the quantity (S i2), will return the weighted average (by npi -1) of the
individual facility variances (Si2). Equation 5.6d, producing (Sa2), essentially accounts for the
variability across the BPF group.
The statistical quantity K (Equation 5.4) can be selected from Table 5.2.2-1 utilizing the
degrees of freedom associated with the joint variance estimate and both the proportion of the
distribution to be covered and the confidence level. Several alternative approaches exist in
determining the joint degrees of freedom. The approach used here is to estimate a K value based
on the relative proportion of S i and 82.
K=
K(Nt)-K(nf)/VT+(K(nf)-K(Nt))/Vl
• - ;=-
(i-i/VJ)
D./a
where:
nf
nf np
:«) /Nt)
Q=
(nf-l)*Si
5.7b
and (J) represents the average number of data points per facility.
Equations 5.7 essentially produce a K value at the degrees of freedom associated with the
Si2 and S22 weighted average of the degrees of freedom associated with Si2 and S22 . The
degrees of freedom associated with application of equations 5.7 can be approximated by:
DOFs!
In general, for Si2 values much greater than S22, the K value is associated with the degrees
of freedom producing Si2 which are (Nt-nf). For $22 values much greater than Si2, the K value is
associated with the degrees of freedom producing S22 which are (nf).
5-9
-------
TABLE5.2.2-1. ONE-SIDED AND TWO-SIDED STATISTICAL TOLERANCE LIMIT FACTORS
FOR A NORMAL DISTRIBUTION
3
4
5
0
7
10
11
12
13
14
15
10
17
18
10
20
21
22
23
24
25
30
35
40
<&
90
4.258
3.187
2.742
2.404
2.33,1
2.219
2.133
2.005
2.012
1.96B
1.028
1.805
1.880
1.842
1.820
1.800
1.781
1.785
1.75D
1.730
1.724
1.712
V.702
1.057
1.023
I .SHU
i.577
UlU)
5.310
3.9S7
3.400
3.091
2.B94
2.755
2.049
3.508
2.503
2.448
2.403
2.363
2.329
2.289
2.272
2.B28
2.208
2.190
2.174
2.150
2.145
2.132
2.000
2.041
2.010
tOBS
7.340
5.437
4.808
4.242
3572
3.783
3.641
3.532
3.444
3.371
3.310
3.257
8.212
3.172
3.138
3.100
3.078
3.052
3.028
3.007
2.987
2.009
2.952
2.BB4
2.833
Z.Tim
2.7(12
1.7*1
0.651
7.128
8.112
5.558
5.201
4.055
4.772
4.629
4.515
4.420
4.341
4374
4.104
4.118
4.07B
4.041
4.000
3.079
3.052
3.027
3.004
3.882
3.794
3.730
3.070
O.J58
4.163
3.407
3.006
2.755
2.582
2.454
2.355
2^75
2JJIO
2.155
2.108
2.068
2.032
2.001
1.074
1.849
1.928
1.905
1JB7
1.BQ9
IJB53
1.838
1.778
1.732
1.697
1.059
J.IUft
* Table A-7, reference 3
55
45
02
97
99
30
n
it
15
)6
ro
L4
iO
!3
m
\z
.3
IB
'1
0
g
9
2
a
a
n
12
15
10.552
7.012
5.741
5X132
4.041
-US3
4.143
3.081
3.652
3.747
3.QS9
3.585
3.520
3.483
3.415
3.370
3.931
3.285
3.282
0 .233
3.200
3,181
3.15B
3.064
2.094
2.34!
2J07
S.Rfl.1
13.857
0.215
7,501
0.012
6.061
6.6BB
5.4L4
3.203
s.oao
4.BOO
4.787
4.890
4.807
4.S34
4.471
4.415
4.3B4
4.319
4.870
4.238
4.204
4.171
4.143
4.022
3.034
3.868
0.811
3.700
4.408
3.850
3.49B
3J4fi
3.043
- 2.897
2.773
8.877
2.592
2J521
2.458
2.405
2.357
3.315
2.275
2241
2.208
2.179
2.154
2.129
2.029
1.957
I. tins
1.857
1.821
•• .•
5.409
4.730
4.287
3.071
3.739
8.557
.3.410
3.200
3.130
3.102
3.026
2:082
2.900
2.8S5
2.807
2.768
2.720
2.093
2.683
2.632
2.516
2.431
2.305
2.313
2.2
-------
The confidence level and the proportion of the BPF population expected to achieve the
emission levels are independently selected. For the analysis presented in this report, the K values
are extracted such that 99% of the BPF population would be expected to achieve the computed
emission levels at the 95% confidence level.
It is important to note that the numerical emission levels arrived at through implementation
of the procedure described in this section are values applied to the individual data points. In this
manner, the numerical level is applied to future data acquired in a similar manner, with similar
procedures and acquired over similar time durations. As such, the numerical levels are values
never to be exceeded by data acquired in the same manner over the same time duration as those
producing the levels.
5.3
Further Analysis of the Dioxin/Furan Data
The calculation of the dioxin/furan floor emission levels is presented in Sections 5.3.4 and
5.6. As discussed in Section 5.1, an analysis is presented here to estimate the emissions and
subsequent emission limits from the population of HWCs operating under BOP. This analysis
provides a check on the ability to achieve the "floor" limits.
There is currently one HW burning facility incorporating technology designed specifically
for the control of dioxin/furan emissions. As discussed in Appendix A, this facility has
incorporated the use of activated carbon injection at multiple locations in the APCD train. There
are, however, other facilities which employ operating practices in conjunction with APCDs which
have the effect of reducing and controlling PCDD/PCDF emissions. It might be suggested that all
these facilities form a basis for deriving the PCDD/PCDF levels in precisely the same manner as
presented in the previous section. Using the terminology adopted in establishing the NESHAPS,
the level identified in this approach is labeled the PCDD/PCDF "FLOOR" emission level. The
potential problems associated with this approach include selecting an emission level which does not
reflect the actual performance capability of control technologies and best operating practices. In
order to address this issue,.an alternative approach is presented which estimates the expected
PCDD/PCDF emissions from the current population of HW burners employing pre-defined
technologies and operating practices suitable for dioxin/furan control. This analysis approach
relies heavily on the analysis of the PCDD/PCDF kiln data presented in the previous chapter, as
well as the body of experience developed in completion of the MWC NSPS and guidelines for
existing facilities. Both approaches (estimation of the FLOOR and estimation of expected
emissions) utilize the same statistical procedures presented in the previous section to account for
the variability observed in the dioxin/furan emissions.
5-11
-------
5.3.1
Estimation of Expected PCDDIPCDF Emission Levels
As discussed in Section 5.1, the approach selected and adopted to reduce PCDD/PCDF
emissions is three-fold. The first component is to adopt the policy of good combustion practices
(GCP). The second component is designed to minimize the potential for the formation of
dioxin/furans in the downstream or post-combustion regions of the device by encouraging rapid
quenching of the flue gas and establishing an upper limit on the flue gas temperature entering the
APCD. The third component is a recognition that a significant proportion of the HW burning
facility population will require PM control to meet PM emission levels. When combined with the
GCP and a limit on the APCD inlet temperature, an appropriate PM APCD will participate in the
capture of PCDD/PCDF entering the device. Note that the effectiveness of PCDD/PCDF capture in
a PM APCD will be dependant on several parameters, including the carbon content of the PM.
The approach to establishing a numerical level on the PCDD/PCDF emissions presented in
this section consists of two main components. The first component is to estimate what the
dioxin/furan emissions would be from the current population of HW burning facilities after
adopting the BOP definition. The second step is to use this body of data to establish a numerical
level which takes into account the natural variability of PCDD/PCDF emissions that those facilities
adopting the predefined operating conditions and suitable technology provision can be expected to
achieve.
5.3.2
Estimation of Total PCDDIPCDF Emissions from BOP Facilities
In the previous chapter, a detailed examination of the cement kiln PCDD/PCDF data was
presented. This analysis indicated an APCD inlet temperature dependency, a CO dependency and
an inverse O2 dependency for PCDD/PCDF emissions. These relationships are consistent with the
MWC experience and support the basis for the PCDD/PCDF BOP provisions. These relationships
(temperature, CO and 02) can be used to estimate the PCDD/PCDF emissions from the cement kiln
population following adoption of the PCDD/PCDF BOP provisions. Specifically, the cement kiln
PCDD/PCDF data (total ng/dscm) can be manipulated to estimate the PCDD/PCDF data if APCD
inlet temperature were restricted to 350 °F. Application of Equation 5.9 to those facilities (and data
points) with reported APCD temperatures greater than 350 °F produces a data set of PCDD/PCDF
emissions that would be anticipated from the kiln population if APCD inlet temperature were
restricted to an upper limit of 350 °F. Note that data from kilns with APCD temperature of less
5-12
-------
than 350 °F are not shifted upwards. Also note that the temperature dependency of Equation 5.9
assumes a 1 order of magnitude increase in PM emission every 180 °F (average of 196 and 164
estimates presented in Chapter 4).
PCDD / PCDF(@350F) = PCDD / PCDF (
-------
5.3.3
TEQ PCDD/PCDF Level Procedures
The procedure described in Section 5.3.1 will estimate the PCDD/PCDF emissions in total
ng/dscm from BOP facilities. The TEQ emission level is estimated using the same temperature,
CO and O2 corrected (if required) total PCDD/PCDF emissions data combined with the reported
TEQ value, and the facility specific foot print ratio (PCDD/PCDF to TEQ ratio). Equations 5.12
are used to estimate the PCDD/PCDF emission in TEQ for each data point reported in the cement
kiln data base from a BOP equipped and operated kiln.
(TEQ)
(@3SOF, 100 ppm CO.10% O2) '
5.12a
where (TEQ)p is the original reported data and:
and:
A(PCDD /PCDF) = (PCDD / PCDF) - (PCDD / PCDF)
(@350F,100 ppm,CO,10% O2)
5.12b
RP=
(PCDD/PCDF)
• 5.12c
(TEQ)p
Note that Rp is the ratio of the original PCDD/PCDF data reported in total ng/dscm to the
original TEQ value. As discussed in the previous chapter, this is generally facility/device type
specific. Also note that the data point (PCDD/PCDF)* (SSOF.IOO PPm co,io% 02) represents either
the corrected data or the original data point in total ng/dscm if the temperature, CO or Q2 correction
has not been applied.
5.3.4
Estimation of PCDD/PCDF Floor Emission Levels
The approach used to estimate the dioxin/furan FLOOR emission level follows the same
procedures outlined in Section 5.2. A pool of facilities are identified from which the best
performing 12% (no fewer than 5 units) are selected. The data from these best performing
facilities (BPF) are further analyzed to establish the numerical emission levels. The statistical
5-14
-------
approach described in Section 5.2.2 is used to account for the observed variability in the emission
data. As discussed previously, the combined goals for best operating practices of incorporating
both GCP and a temperature limit on the PM APCD device are to limit both the PCDD/PCDF
formed in the PM control device and to improve the dioxin/furan capture efficiency on the PM
matter. This strategy recognizes the potential for significant PCDD/PCDF production from units
controlling PM, as well as the potential for dioxin/furan capture in the PM control device. It is
important to note that this control strategy correctly implies that measured dioxin/furan levels from
facilities may be low and not representative if PM levels from those facilities are not controlled and
are higher than PM levels typically achieved by ESPs and baghouses. Similarly, those facilities
achieving very low PM levels without the need for PM control (i.e., facilities with low fuel ash
content) may exhibit low dioxin/furan levels which again are not reflective of the combustion
technology when burning higher ash content fuels. Finally, in establishing the pool of data from
which the floor can be estimated, only those facilities burning halogenated fuels were considered.
5.4
Summary of PM Level Estimates
Table 5.4-1 summarizes the analysis of the cement kiln PM emissions. A brief description
of the spread sheet calculation is provided below illustrating the application of the statistical
procedures described in Section 5.2.1. Appendix M summarizes the kiln and LWA population
sorted by PI.
The values in the column labeled Vi are the square of the facility standard deviation
estimates. Where a correlation between PM and KVA has been determined, Vi is the square of the
standard error in the regression analysis. The column labeled "Total" is the sum of the PM data
points from each facility. This column is added (summed), squared, then divided by the total
number of data points in the BPF population (value 0.00076). The next column labeled
(totalA2/np) is the square of the previous column entries divided by the number of points at the
particular facility, the values in this column are added together to generate the value 0.00076.
The next column labeled (npA2) is the square of the number of facility data points. This column of
data is added together to generate the sum of the squares of the number of facility data points (value
117). The next column labeled np-1 is the number of data points at each facility minus 1. These
are added together to generate the quantity (Nt-nf), value 16. The next column labeled Vi * (np-1)
is the facility variance (Vi) multiplied by (np-1). These quantities are totaled giving the value
2.47e-5. The value of Si2 (Equation 5.6b) is simply the weighted average of the facility variances
5-15
-------
TABLE 5.4-1. PM LEVEL ANALYSIS FOR CEMENT KILNS
Company
Location
Southdown/Soulhwestem Fairborn, OH
Southdown/Kosmos Kosmosdale, KY
Lafarge Corp. Alpena, MI
LafargeCorp. Fredonia,KS
Texas Industries Midlothian, TX
No. Unit
Units Tested
np PMi Sdev RSD(%)
gr/dscf @ 7% 02 gr/dscf@7%02
Total Number of Points (Nt)
Total Number of Facilities (nf)
3
9
3
3
3
21
5
0.00300 0.00000 0.00%
0.002614444 0.000943042 36.07%
0.00333 0.00252 75.50%
0.01100 0.00000 64.03%
0.00962 0.00158 16.39%
Sl»2 (gr/dscf@ 7% O2)*2
S2»2 (gr/dscf @ 7% O2)A2
Sa (gr/dscf @ 7% O2)
Avg PMi (gr/dscf@ 7% O2)
K@Nt
Degrees of Freedom
Q
J
K @ 95%-p, 99%-d
LIMIT (gr/dscf @ 7% O2)
1.55E-06
1.54E-OS
0.00411
0.00591
3.262
6.7
5.10
39.35
4.20
6.48
0.033
PI
(gr/dscf @ 7% 02)
0.00300
0.00450
0.00837
0.01100
0.01277
Vi
Total Totat*2/np np*2 np-1 VI»(np-l)
O.OOE-KK) 0.00900 0.00003
2 O.OOE-HX3
8.89E-07
6.33E-06
3.91E-35
Z48E-06
0.02353
0.01000
0.03300
0.02885
0.00006
0.00003
0.00036
0.00028
81
9
9
9
7.11E-06
1.27E-05
7.82E-35
4.97E-06
SUM(Total)A2/Nt 0.0005188
SUMMATIONS 0.00076 117 16 2.47E-OS
CKPM5-9.XLS
-------
and is given by the sum of VI * (np-1) divided by the sum of (np-1), or (2.47e-5)/16 and has the
value 1.55E-6. The quantity S22 is calculated using equation 5.6d, and has the value
(0.00076-0.000518-(5-l) * (1.55E-6))/(21-l 17/21). Sa is simply the orthogonal addition of the
S12 and S22 (equation 5.6a) and is equal to the sqrt (1.55E-6 + 1.54E-5) and has the value
0.00411. The statistical quantity K at the total number of points (21) is extracted from Table
5.2.1-1 with alfa=95 and P = 99 and has the value 3.262. The statistical quantity K at the total
number of facilities (5) is extracted from Table 5.2.1-1 with alfa=95 and P = 99 and has the value
6.7. The average number of points per facility (J) is 4.2. The quantities Q and the degrees of
freedom (Equations 5.7b, 5.8) are computed to give the values as shown of 39.35 and 5.1. The
effective K value is computed using Equation 5.7a and has the value of 6.48. Note that from Table
5.2.1-1, the K value with 5.1 degrees of freedom and alfa = 95 and P = 99 is very close to the
computed K value and provides a check on the K calculation. The emission level number is given
by Equation 5.4 and is the sum of the average of the facility averages (0.0059) plus the K value
times Sa. This is equal to (0.0059 + 6.48 * 0.00411), which has the value 0.033. This value is
the PM emission level at the 95% confidence level that 99% of the BPF employing BOP would be
expected to achieve.
Table 5.4-2 presents the PM analysis of the LWA kiln population. The PM level is
calculated to be 0.022 gr/dscf @ 7% 62. Table 5.4-3 presents the PM calculation for the
commercial HW incinerator population. The PM level is calculated to be 0.010 gr/dscf at 7% Oi.
Table 5.4-4 presents the PM calculation for the on-site HW incinerator population. The PM level
is calculated as 0.0153 gr/dscf @ 7% 62- Table 5.4-5 presents the PM analysis of the HW
burning boiler population. The PM level is calculated to be 0.021 gr/dscf @ 7% O2.
Table 5.4-6 presents the PM analysis of the combined CK and LWA population. The
emission level is calculated to be 0.0076 gr/dscf @ 7% O2- Table 5.4-7 presents the PM level
analysis of the combined on-site and commercial incinerator population. The level is calculated to
be 0.0057 gr/dscf @ 7% O2- Note that the process of combining populations reduces the level.
This is expected since the process of combining populations results in selection of the best
performers from each population. Also note that when the CK and on-site (OS) populations are
combined, the best units are all using baghouses, which may not define suitable APCD
technology for all kiln processes. Table 5.4-8 presents the analysis of the PM data with all source
categories combined. The limit is calculated as 0.0086 gr/dscf @ 7% O2-
5-17
-------
TABLE 5.4-2. PM LEVEL ANALYSIS FOR AGGREGATE KILNS
Company
*Solite Corp.
*SoliteCorp.
*SolUe Corp.
*Solite Corp.
*SoliteCorp.
oo
Location
Norwood, NC
Green Cove Springs,
Norwood, NC
Cascade, VA
Arvonia,VA
No.
Units
0
0
0
2
2
Unit
Tested
7
5
8
2
7
np
3
3
3
3
3
PMi
gr/dscf @ 7% O2
0.00048
0.00144
0.00190
0.00567
0.00667
Sdev
gr/dscf @ 7% 02
0.00025
0.00016
0.00161
0.00153
0.00115
RSD(%)
53.30%
10.76%
84.65%
26.96%
17.32%
PI
(gr/dscf@7%O2)
0.00098
0.00175
0.00511
0.00872
0.00898
Vi
6.41E-08
2.41E-08
2.58E-06
2.33E-06
1.33E-06
SUMfTotaI)»2/Nt
its(Nl
Hides
1)
(nf)
15
5
Total
0.00143
0.00433
0.00569
0.01700
0.02000
0.0001565
SUMMATIONS
ToUlA2/np
0.00000
0.00001
0.00001
0.00010
0.00013
0.00025
npA2 np-1
9 2
9 2
9 2
9 2
9 2
45 10
VI*(np-l)
1.28E-07
4.83E-08
5.16E-06
4.67E-06
2.67&06
1.27E-05
"LW Aggregate Kiln
SI A2 (gr/dscf @ 7% O2)A2
S2A2 (gr/dscf @ 7% O2)A2
Sa (gr/dscf @ 7% O2)
Avg PMi (gr/dscf @ 7% O2)
K@Nt
K@np
Degrees of Freedom
Q
J
LIMIT (gr/dscf @ 7% O2)
I.27E-06
7.15E-06
M0290
0.00323
3.520
6.7
4.90
17.95
3.00
635
0.022
AKPM5-9.XLS
-------
TABLE 5.4-3. PM LEVEL ANALYSIS FOR COMMERCIAL HWI'S
Company
Location
PMi Sdev RSD(%) PI
gr/dscf@7%02 gr/dscf@7%02 (grAbcf @ 7% 02)
Laidlaw Environmental Services Roebuck, SC
Aptus.Inc. Aragonite,UT
Waste Tech. Industries East Liverpool, OH
Trade Waste Incineration Sauget,IL
Aptus,Inc. Coffeyvfflle,KS
Total Number of Points (Nt)
vo
1
1
1
4
1
(Nt)
les(nf)
1
1
1
4
1
8
9
9
8
12
46
5
0.0008
0.0006
0.0024
0.0017
0.0034
0.0004
0.0006
0.0009
0.0014
0.0014
46:62%
89.32%
36.08%
83.32%
4036%
0.00147
0.00176
0.00413
0.00447
0.00617
Sl«2
-------
TABLE 5.4-4. PM LEVEL ANALYSIS FOR ON-SITE HWI'S
Company
OlinCoip.
Dupont
Dupont
Glaxo Inc.
Upjohn Co.
Miles Inc.
Location Unit
Tested
East Alton, E, 2
Orange, TX 1
Deepwater.NJ FR-1
R.T.P..NC 1
Kalamazoo, MI 1
New Martinsvillc 1
np
4
6
3
6
3
6
PMi
gi/dscf@7%02
0.00029
0.00125
0.00290
0.00193
0.00398
0.00650
Sdev
gi/dscf@7%O2
0.00017
0.00055
0.00061
0.00159
0.00208
0.00217
RSD(%)
5935%
4433%
6336%
16336%
89.93%
2257%
PI
(gr/dscf @ 7% O2)
0.00064
0.00236
0.00412
0.00511
0.00814
0.01084
Vi
2.99E-08
3.07E-07
3.70E-07
252E-06
431B-06
4.70E-06
SUM(Total)*2/Nt
Total Number of Points (Nt)
Total Number of Facilities (nf)
28
6
Total
0.00117
0.00750
0.00870
0.01161
0.01195
0.03900
2.28E-04
SUMMATIONS
Tot«lA2Aip
339E-07
938E-06
2.52E-05
2.25E-05
4.76E-05
2.54E-04
0.00036
np*2
16
36
9
36
9
36
142
np-1
3
5
2
5
2
5
22
Vi*(np-l)
8.97E-08
154E-06
7.40B-07
1.26E-05
S.62E-06
235E-05
4.71E-OS
Sl*2(gr/dscf@7%O2)"2 2.14E-06
S2»2(gr/dscf@7%.O2)'l2 5J2E-06
S> (gr/dscf@ 7% O2) 0.00271
Avg PMI (gr/dscf @ 7% O2) 0.00281
K@Nt 3.100
K@nf 5.M2
Degrees of Freedom 9.94
Q 12.18
J 4.67
K@95%-p,99%-d 4.61
LIMIT (gr/dscf @ 7% O2) 0.0153
OSHPM5-9.XLS
-------
TABLE 5.4-5. PM LEVEL ANALYSIS FOR BOILERS
to
Company
Tennessee Eastman
Tennessee Eastman
Union Carbide
Monsanto Chemical Co.
Tennessee Eastman
Location Unit
Tested
Kingspoit, TN 24
Kingsport,TN 30
South Charleston, ' 25
Nitro,WV B-8
Kingsport, TN 30
np
3
3
3
6
3
PMi
gr/dscf @ 7% O2
0.00530
0.00593
0.00703
0.00347
0.00907
Sdev
gr/dscf @ 7% O2
8.62E-05
0.00021
0.00045
0.00229
0.00040
RSD(%)
2%
4%
6%
66%
4%
PI
(gr/dscf @ 7% O2)
0.00548
0.00635
0.00794
0.00804
0.00987
Vi
7.43E-09
433E-08
2.03E-07
523E-06
1.63E-07
SUM(Total)»2/Nt
Total Number of Points (Nt)
Total Number of Facilities (nl)
18
5
Total
0.01591
0.01780
0.02110
0.02080
0.02720
0.00059
SUMMATIONS
Total^np npA2
8.44E-05 9
1.06E-04 9
1.48E-04 9
7.21E-05 36
2.47E-04 9
0.00066 72
np-1
2
2
2
5
2
13
Vi*(np-l)
1.49E-08
8.67E-08
4.07E-07
2.61E-05
3.27E-07
2.70E-05
Sl*2 (gr/dscf @ 7% O2)*2 2.07E-06
S2*2 (gr/dscf @ 7% O2)A2 4.40E-06
Sa (gr/dscf @ 7% O2) 0.00254
Avg PMI (gr/dscf @ 7% O2) 0.00616
K@Nt 3J70
K@nf 6.7
Degrees of Freedom 6.88
Q 8.42
J 3.60
K@95%-p, 99%-d 5.84
LIMIT (gr/dscf @ 7% O2) 0.0210
BIFPM5-9.XLS
-------
TABLE 5.4-6. PM LEVEL ANALYSIS FOR CEMENT KILNS AND LWA KILNS
Company
Location
•SoliteCorp. Norwood. NC
•SoliteCorp. Green Cove Springs,
Southdown/Southwestern Fairborn, OH
Southdown/Kosmos Kosmosdale, KY
•SoliteCorp. Norwood, NC
LafargeCorp. Alpena, MI
No.
Units
0
0
1
1
0
2
Unit
Tested
7
5
1
1
8
1
np
3
3
3
9
3
3
PMi
gr/dscf@7%02
0.00048
0.00144
0.00300
0.00261
0.00190
0.00333
Sdev
gr/dscf @ 7% 02
0.00025
0.00016
0.00000
0.00094
0.00161
0.00252
RSD(%)
53.30%
10.76%
0.00%
36.07%
84.65%
75.50%
PI
(gr/dscf @ 7% O2)
0.00098
0.00175
0.00300
0.00450
0.00511 '
0.00837
Vi
6.41E-08
2.41E-08
O.OOE+00
8.89E-07
2.58E-06
6.33E-06
SUMCTotal)A2/Nt
nts(Nt;
ilities(
I
nfj
24
6
Total
0.00143
0.00433
0.00900
0.02353
0.00569
0.01000
0.0001214
SUMMATIONS
TouVZ/np
0.00000
0.00001
0.00003
0.00006
0.00001
0.00003
0.00014
npA2
9
9
9
81
9
9
126
np-1 VI*(np-l)
2 1.28E-07
2 4.83E-08
2 O.OOE+00
8 7.11E-06
2 5.16E-06
2 1.27E-05
18 2.51E-OS
to
*LW Aggregate Kiln
SlA2(gr/dscf@7%O2)*2 1.40E-06
S2A2(gr/dscf@7%O2)*2 5.98E-07
Sa (gr/dscf@7%O2) 0.(M»41
Avg PMi (gr/dscf @ 7% O2) 0.00213
K@Nt 3.181
K@np 5.1
Degrees of Freedom 14.10
Q 2.61
J 4.00
K@9S%-p,99%-d 3.87
LIMIT (gr/dscf @ 7% O2) 0.0076
CAKPM5-9.XLS
-------
TABLE 5.4-7. PM LEVEL ANALYSIS FOR COMMERCIAL AND ON-SITE HWI'S
Company
Olin Corp.
Location
East Alton, tt.
Laidlaw Environmental Services Roebuck, SC
Aptus, Inc.
Dupont
Dupont
Waste Tech. Industries
Trade Waste Incineration
Glaxo Inc.
Aragonite, UT
Orange, TX
Deepwater.NJ
East Liverpool, OH
Sauget, IL
R.TJ..NC
Unit
Tested
2
1
1
1
FR-1
1
4
1
np
4
8
9
6
3
9
8
6
PMi
gr/dscf @ 7% 02
0.0003
0.0008
0.0006
0.0013
0.0029
0.0024
0.0017
0.0019
Sdev
gr/dscf @ 7% O2
0.0002
0.0004
0.0006
0.0006
0.0006
0.0009
0.0014
0.0016
RSD(%)
59.35%
46.62%
89.32%
44.33%
20.98%
36.08%
83.32%
82.03%
PI
(gr/dscf @ 7% 02)
0.00064
0.00147
0.00176
0.00236
0.00412
0.00413
0.00447
0.00511
Vi Total TotalA2/hp
2.99E-08 0.00117 3.39E-07
1.26E-07 0.00608 4.62E-06
3.20E-07 0.00570 3.61E-06
3.07E-07 0.00750 9.38E-06
3.70E-07 0.00870 2.52E-05
7.50E-07 0.02160 5.18E-05
1.95E-06 0.01340 2.24E-05
2.52E-06 0.01161 2.25E-05
np*2
16
64
81
36
9
81
64
36
np-1
3
7
8
5
2
8
7
5
Vi*(np-l)
8.97E-08
8.79E-07
2.56E-06
1.54E-06
7.40E-07
6.00E-06
1.36E-05
1.26E-05
SUMCTotai)A2/Nt 0.00010827
Total Number of Points (Nt)
Total Number of Facilities (nt)
53
8
SUMMATIONS 0.00014
387
45
3.80E-OS
SlA2(gr/dscf@7%O2)"2 8.45E-07
S2A2 (gr/dscf @ 7% O2)*2 5.63E-07
Sa (gr/dscf @ 7% O2) 0.00119
AvgPMi (gr/dscf@ 7% O2) 0.00148
K@Nt 2.800
K@nf 4.4
Degrees or Freedom 29.81
Q 5.35
J 6.63
K@95%-p,99%-d 3.59
LIMIT (gr/dscf @ 7% O2) 0.0057
INCPM5-9.XLS
-------
TABLE 5.4-8. PM LEVEL ANALYSIS FOR ALL FACILITIES
Company
Location
Unit
Tested
np PM Sdev RSD(%)
gr/dscf@ 7% O2 gr/dscf@ 7% 02
'
•P"
OlinCoip. East Alton, IL
SotiteCorp. Norwood. NC
Laidlaw Environmental Seivices Roebuck, SC
Solite Corp.
Aptus, Inc.
Dupont
Southdown/Southwestern
Dupont
Waste Tech. Industries
Trade Waste Incineration
Southdown/Kosmos
Solite Corp.
Glaxo Inc.
Tennessee Eastman
Aptus, foe.
Tennessee Eastman
Union Carbide
Green Cove Springs, FL 5
Aragonite, UT
Orange, TX
Fairbora.OH 1
Decpwater.NJ
East Liverpool, OH
Sauget, tt,
Kosmosdale, KY 1
Norwood, NC 8
R.T-P..NC
Kingsport, TN 24
CoffeyvilUe,KS
Kingsport, TN 30
South Charleston, WV 25
Total Number of Points (Nt)
Total Number of Facilities (nf)
4
3
8
3
9
6
3
3
9
8
9
3
6
3
12
3
3
95
17
0.00029
0.00048
0.00076
0.00144
0.00063
0.00125
0.00300
0.00290
0.00240
0.00168
0.00261
0.00190
0.00193
0.00530
0.00342
0.00593
0.00703
0.00017
0.00025
0.00035
0.00016
0.00057
0.00055
0.00000
0.00061
0.00087
0.00140
0.00094
0.00161
0.00159
0.00009
0.00138
0.00021
0.00045
59%
53%
47%
11%
89%
44%
0%
21%
36%
83%
36%
85%
82%
2%
40%
4%
6%
PI
Vi
Total
Tota^Z/np
npA2
,np-l
Vi*(np-l)
(gr/dscf @ 7% 02)
0.00064
0.00098
0.00147
0.00175
0.00176
0.00236
0.00300
0.00412
0.00413
0.00447
0.00450
0.00511
0.00511
0.00548
0.00617
0.00635
0.00794
2.99E-08
6.41E-08
1.26E-07
Z41E-08
3.20E-07
3.07E-07
O.OOE+00
3.70E-07
7.50E-07
1.95E-06
8.89E-07
Z58E-06
Z52E-06
7.43E-09
1.90E-06
4.33E-08
Z03E-07
0.00117
0.00143
0.00608
0.00433
0.00570
0.00750
0.00900
0.00870
0.02160
0.01340
0.02353
0.00569
0.01161
0.01591
0.04100
0.01780
0.02110
3.39E-07
6.77E-07
4.62E-06
6.25&06
3.61E-06
9.38E-06
Z70E-05
Z52E-05
S.18E-05
Z24E-05
6.15E-05
1.08E-05
2.25E-05
8.44E-05
1.40E-04
1.06E-04
1.48E-04
16
9
64
9
81
36
9
9
81
64
81
9-
36
9
144
9
9
3
2
7
2
8
5
2
2
8
7
8
- 2
5
2
11
2
2
8.97E-08
1.28E-07
8.79E-07
4.83E-08
Z56E-06
1.54E-06
O.OOE+00
7.40E-07
6.00E-06
1.36E-05
7.11E-06
5.16E-06
1.26E-05
1.49E-08
Z09E-05
8.67E-08
4.07E-07
SUM(Total)A2/Nt 0.00049
SUMMATIONS
0.00072 675 78 7.19E-OS
S1A2 (gr/dscf@ 7% O2)A2 9.22E-07
S2*2 (gr/dscf @ 7% O2)*2 W1E-06
Sa (gr/dscf @ 7% O2) 0.00185
Avg PMi (gr/dscf @ 7% O2) 0.00253
K@Nt 2.800
K@nf 3.4
Degrees of Freedom 32.64
Q 15.97
J 5^9
K@95%-p,99%-d 3.25
LIMIT (gr/dscf @ 7% O2) 0.0086
TOTPM5-9.XLS
4/15/94
-------
Appendix M summarizes the source categories individually and is category-sorted by the
expected PI value. The facilities within the on-site incinerator and boiler populations which have
been removed from the population are noted. As discussed in the previous section, the pool of
facilities considered for the analysis do not contain those facilities in which low ash content fuels
are burned and those which can achieve low PM levels without high performance scrubbers or
ESP/FF technology. The PM levels established in this section are single point limits. The
expected average PM emission levels from the BPF pool are well below the levels. The expected
averages are presented in Table 5.4-1 through Table 5.4-8 and reflect the average PM emission that
the BPF would be expected to achieve and still achieve the PM level in a single test at the specified
confidence level.
5.5
Summarv of PCDD/PCDF Emission Level Estimates
Table 5.5-1 provides a summary of the PCDD/PCDF data in total ng/dscm following
application of Equations 5.9 through 5.11. This table presents the expected data from the
population of cement kilns with all facilities satisfying the PCDD/PCDF BOP requirements. This
table also includes the dioxin data from the HW population. With the exception of the Aptus
facilities, which are temperature corrected, the HW data is as reported in the Trial Burn/CoC
reports. Note that the average data from the cement kilns now ranges from 0.3 ng/dscm to a
maximum of 50.65 ng/dscm. This is significantly less than the range of the original data set with
facility averages ranging from 0.68 to more than 2000 ng/dscm.
Table 5.5-2 provides an outlier evaluation of the complete set of manipulated PCDD/PCDF
data set in ng/dscm (from Table 5.5-1). Given the extreme data manipulation associated with the
application of Equations 5.8 through 5.9, an outlier evaluation is essential to identify those
facilities which do not follow the trends assumed in the analysis. The outlier test essentially
combines the average data with the suspect data excluded, with some multiplier of the standard
deviation of the data set with the suspect data excluded. The test presented in Table 5.5-2 uses the
"t" statistic from the students-t distribution at the 99% confidence level. The average value for
those facilities, excluding the last eight data sets, is 3.47 ng/dscm. The standard deviation of the
facility averages is 2.65. The t value for the 22 facilities is 2.518. The 99%-one sided confidence
limit is 3.47 + 2.518 * 2.65 and has the value 10.15 ng/dscm. The facility average for each of the
bottom eight facilities in the list are above the level of 10.15 ng/dscm and are considered outliers
from the expected average of the remaining 22 facilities.
5-25
-------
TABLE 5.5-1. SUMMARY OF TOTAL PCDD/PCDF DATA
Company
Aptus.Inc.
•General Electric
•Rollins Environmental Services
•RolHni Environmental Services
•Rollins Environmental Services
•Ross Incineration Services
•SoliteCorp.
•Waste Tech. Industries
Aptus.Inc.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
i Continental Cement Co.
^ Continental Cement Co.
Essroc Materials
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam, Inc.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
LafargeCorp.
LafargeCorp.
Medusa Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co.
National Cement Co.
River Cement Co.
Somhdown/Kosmos
Notes
•Data not corrected
Location
Aragonite,Ur
Pittsfidd.MA
Baton Rouge, LA
Deerpark,TX
Bridgeport, NJ
Grafton, OH
Cascade, VA
East Liverpool, OH
Cofieyvillle,KS
Louisville, NE
Foreman, AR
Louisville, NE
Chanute,KS
Foreman, AR
Chanutc.KS '
Hannibal, MO
Hannibal, MO
Logansport, IN
HoUyHill,SC
Holly Hffl,SC
Artesia.MS
Bath, PA
Bath, PA
Fredonia.KS
Fredonia.KS
Wampum, PA
Wampum, PA
Lebec,CA
Festus,MO
Kosmosdale,KY
Report
Date
Aug-92
Apr-91
Apr-87
Aug-88
Dec-86
Mar-93
Mar-98
Jul-93
Dec-90
May-92
May-92
Aug-92
Apr-92
Jul-92
Mar-92
Dec-90
Jul-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Ang-93
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Jul-92
Jul-92
Aug-92
Oct-92
May-92
APCS
FF/WS/ESP
PS
WS
VS
WS
PT/IWS
FF
ESP
EF/WSAWS
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
FF
ESP
FF
Avg.APCD
•p
icmp
decrees F
470.00
350.00
470.00
250.40
46833
355.00
436.00
476.75
43355
540.00
593.33
608.00
49550
563.00
507.33
413.17
419.17
532.67
496.00
744.00
718.00
54733
638.33
505.07
Avg. CO
Avg. 02 Number of
ppm@79602 Percent
64850
46233
240.75
617.50
248.00
631.00
245.45
344.00
98.75
141.00
146.25
278.23
46.33
26.00
440.67
276.67
4076.33
16133
13.60
135.00
15455
10.82
9.73
10.87
11.46
10.63
11.17
16.97
1Z62
11.79
15.52
5.63
1053
10.65
5.58
1030
1.95
4.67
1Z.10
8.98
7.05
8.03
11.70
12.37
5.50
5.60
1150
6.10
1052
10.10
14.88
of
Points
9
5
3
5
3
5
12
5
3
4
4
4
4
2
3
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
Avg. PCDD/PCDF
(un corrected)
56751
548.61
2.26
431
658
1 Afi
1/tO
1Z50
117.14
8.44
99.73
1Z87
156.20
327.35
303.82
476.00
120950
154Z75
85.35
18Z88
41.86
0.68
2.41
827.71
525.47
239Z33
160333
6.60
200833
11130
Avg. T corrected
PCDD/PCDF
(nK/dscm@7%)
122.09
548.61
256
431
658
1.46
158
1250
2551
8.44
2133
1Z07
49.49
58.51
94.81
41.82
54.47
5653
6.88
11.97
5.09
0.30
0.99
80.11
7631
15.60
14.43
0.53
50.16
35.92
Avg. T.CO corrected
Avg. PCDD/PCDF* Stdev
PCDD/PCDF T.CO, and 02 corrected PCDD/PCDF*
(nR/dscm ® 7% ) (ng/dscm @ 7% ) ~ ••— * -*-•-
122.09 122.086
548.61 51254
2.26 256
431 431
658 658
1.46
158
1250
25.21
1.68
530
4.80
7.25
2189
15.06
17.25
15.07
50.65
4.64
8.01
1.76
0.30
0.99
18.39
25.75
035
8.71 ,
053
36.71
2356
1.46
158
1250
25.21
1:68
1.84
4.75
7.25
8.11
14.70
2.65
430
50.65
2.94
4.10
1.10
0.30
0.99
6.47
9.28
0.35
3.45
0.53
36.71
23.26
vuaici^cu uaia
51.760
497.696
1.820
1.049
3.711
0.433
0.087
6.488
10.896
1.153
1.401
1.705
2527
8.007
6364
1540
0.772
17.167
Z639
4.796
0.091
0.045
0.145
3.029
0.847
0.126
0.184
0.024
6.901
26328
5/9/94
-------
TABLE 5.5-2. OUTLIER EVALUATION FOR TOTAL PCDD/PCDF
Company
Keystone Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co.
National Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Holnam, Inc.
*Ross Incineration Services
*SoliteCorp.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
*Rollins Environmental Services
Continental Cement Co.
Holnam Inc.
Medusa Cement Co.
Holnam Inc.
Continental Cement Co.
*Rollins Environmental Services
Ash Grove Cement Co.
- Lafarge Corp.
*Rollins Environmental Services
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Lafarge Corp.
•Waste Tech. Industries
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Southdown/Kosmos
Aptus, Inc.
River Cement Co.
Essroc Materials
Aptus, Inc.
•General Electric
* Data not corrected
Location
Bath, PA
Wampum, PA
Lebec,CA
Bath, PA
Artesia, MS
Grafton, OH
Cascade, VA
Louisville, ME
Foreman, AR
Baton Rouge, LA .
Hannibal, MO
Holly Hill, SC
Wampum, PA
Holly Hill, SC
Hannibal, MO
Deerpark.TX
Louisville, ME
Fredonia, KS
Bridgeport, NJ
Chanute, KS
Foreman, AR
Fredonia, KS
East Liverpool, OH
Chanute, KS
Kosmosdale,KY
Coffeyvillle, KS
Festus,MO
Logansport, IN
Aragonite, UT
Pittsfield, MA
Index
(0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Average Corrected PCDD/PCDF
(ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
PCDD/PCDF (i)
0.305
0.349
0.528
0.995
1.103
1.457
1.577
1.676
1.840
2.260
2.652
2.938
3.454
4.102
4.299
4.306
4.748
6.472
6.580
7.254
8.108
9.276
12502
14.695
23.264
25.214
36.714
50.647
122.086
512.242
Avg.(ltoi) sdev(l-i) dof-1 t(dof-l) c99%
(ng/dscm@7%O2) (ng/dscm @ 7% O2) @alfa=0.01 (ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
0.30
0.33
0.39
0.54
0.66
0.79
0.90
1.00
1.09
1.21
1.34
1.47
1.63
1.80
1.97
2.11
2.27 .
2.50
2.72
2.94
3.19
3.47
3.86
431
5.07
5.84
6.99
8.55
12.46
29.12
na
0.03
0.12
0.32
0.37
0.47
0.52
0.55
0.59
0.67
0.77
0.86
0.99
1.16
1.29
1.38
1.48
1.74
1.94
2.14
2.37
2.65
3.20
3.84
5.34
6.55
8.75
11.91
24.11
94.27
na
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
na
31.821
6.965
4.541
3.747
3.365
3.143
Z998
2.896
2.821
2.764
2.718
2.681
2.650
2.624
2.602
2.583
2.567
2.552
1539
1528
1518
2.508
2500
2.492
2.485
2.479
2.473
2.467
2.462
na
1.31
1.22
1.98
2.04
2.36
2.53
2.66
2.80
3.09
3.46
3.82
4.29
4.88
5.36
5.70
6.09
6.98
7.66
8.38
9.18
10.15
11.89
13.90
18.36
22.13
28.68
38.00
71.94
261.22
OUTLIER3.XLS
-------
Table 5.5-3 presents the analysis of the PCDD/PCDF data in total ng/dscm with the outliers
removed. The analysis presented in this table is exactly the same as described previously and
produces a PCDD/PCDF level in total ng/dscm of 13.88.
Table 5.5-4 presents a summary of the corrected TEQ values from the cement kiln
population following application of Equations 5.9 through 5.12. This data represents the
anticipated TEQ data from the cement kiln population with all facilities operating under the BOP
guidelines. Table 5.5-5 presents an outlier evaluation performed on the manipulated TEQ data.
The analysis has been done in precisely the same manner as that used to produce Table 5.5-2.
Note that the Logansport Essroc Materials facility and the River Cement Co. facility have again
been identified as outliers. Also note that the Ashgrove facility identified on a total ng/dscm basis
as an outlier has not been identified in this analysis.
Table 5.5-6 presents the analysis for the TEQ * data. The analysis presented in this table is
the same as described previously and produces a PCDD/PCDF level in ng/dscm TEQ of 0.2.
5.6
Estimation of PCDD/PCDF FLOOR Emission Level
This section estimates PCDD/PCDF emission levels in precisely the same manner used to
establish the PM levels. Scaling and manipulation of the dioxin/furan data is not performed. As
discussed previously, low dioxin/furan emissions from burners with uncontrolled or high PM
levels do not necessarily reflect the performance of the same facility requiring reduced PM levels.
In addition, low PM levels arising from the burning of low ash content fuels do not necessarily
reflect the performance of the same facility with respect to dioxin/furan emissions if higher ash
content fuel was burned and PM control required. Finally, dioxin/furan emissions from facilities
burning fuels with extremely low halogen content are not representative of the HW burning
community. For these reasons, the dioxin/furan data from the on-site HW burners and boiler
population have been removed from the pool of data to establish the PCDD/PCDF emission level.
Table 5.6-1 presents the pool of facilities and PCDD/PCDF data (in TEQ ng/dscm) used to
establish the emission limit. Note that all of the facilities at the bottom of the table in bolded italics
are not suitable for use in the pool for reasons just described including:
1. High PM levels.
2. Extremely low PM levels achieved because of the burning of
low ash content feed streams.
3. Halogenated fuels are not burned.
5-28
-------
TABLE 5.5-3. TOTAL PCDD/PCDF LEVEL ANALYSIS
Company
Location
np Average Corrected PCDD/PCDF
(ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
STDEV USD
(ng/dscm @ 7% O2) %
VI
Total
Total*2/np npA2 np-1 Vl*(np-l}
Keystone Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co.
National Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Holnam, Inc.
*Ross Incineration Services
*Solite Corp.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
*Rollins Environmental Services
Continental Cement Co.
Holnam Inc.
Medusa Cement Co.
Holnam Inc.
Continental Cement Co.
*Rollins Environmental Services
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Lafarge Corp.
•Rollins Environmental Services
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Lafarge Corp.
Bath, PA 3
Wampum, PA 3
Lebec, CA 3
Bath, PA 3
Artesia, MS 3
Grafton, OH 3
Cascade, VA 3
Louisville, ME 5
Foreman, AR 3
Baton Rouge, LA 3
Hannibal, MO 2
HollyHill.SC 4
Wampum, PA 3
HoilyHill.SC 4
Hannibal, MO 3
Deerpark, TX 5
Louisville, ME 4
Fredonia,KS 3
Bridgeport, NI 3
Chanute, KS 4
Foreman, AR 4
Fredonia,KS 3
Total Number of Points (Nt) 74
Total Number of Facilities (nl) 22
* Data not corrected
0.30
0.35
0.53
0.99
1.10
1.46
1.58
1.68
1.84
2.26
2.65
2.94
3.45
4.10
430
4.31
4.75
6.47
6.58
7.25
8.11
9.28
0.045
0.126
0.024
0.145
0.091
0.433
0.087
1.153
1.401
1.820
1.540
2.639
0.184
4.796
0.772
1.049
1.705
3.029
3.711
2.227
8.007
0.847
15%
36%
5%
15%
8%
30%
6%
69%
76%
81%
58%
90%
5%
117%
18%
24%
36%
47%
56%
31%
. 99%
9%
1.99E-03
1.59E-02
5.99E-04
2.12E-02
830E-03
1.88E-01
7.63E-03
133E+00
1.96E+00
331E+00
237E+00
6.96E+00
339E-02
230E+01
5.96E-01
UOE+00
2.91E+00
9.18E+00
138E+01
4.96E+00
6.41E+01
7.18E-01
SUM(Total)*2/Nt
0.91
1.05
1.58
2.98
331
437
4.73
838
5.52
6.78
5.30
11.75
10.36
16.41
12.90
21.53
18.99
19.42
19.74
29.01
32.43
27.83
951.1
0.279
0365
0.835
2.967
3.650
6366
7.458
14.051
10.160
15.323
14.062
34.522
35.791
67.303
55.456
92.708
90.161
125.678
129.889
210.466
262.937
258.158
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
25
9
9
4
16
9
16
9
25
16
9
9
16
16
9
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
4
2
2
1
3
2
3
2
4
3
2
2
3
3
2
3.98B-03
3.18E-02
1.20E-03
4.23E-02
1.66E-02
3.75E-01
1.53E-02
532E+00
3.93E+00
6.62E+00
237E+00
2.09E+01
6.78E-02
6.90E+01
1.19E+00
4.40E+00
8.72E+00
1.84E+01
2.75E+01
1.49E+01
1.92E+02
1.44E+00
SUMMATIONS
1438.6
260 52 3.78E+02
Sl"2 (ng/dscm @ 7% O2)A2
S2*2 (ng/dscm @ 7% O2)A2
Sa (ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
Avg. (ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
K@Nt
K@nf
Degrees of Freedom
Q
J
K@95%-p,99%-d
LIMIT (ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
7.26
4.75
3.47
3.47
2.8
3.233
39.74
5.1971
336
3.00
13.88
MACT-TL-2-9599.XLS
-------
TABLE 5.5-4. SUMMARY OF TEQ PCDD/PCDF DATA
Company
Location
*Rollins Environmental Service! Baton Rouge, LA
*RolIins Environmental Services Deerpark, XX
*Ross Incineration Services Grafton,OH
*Solite Corp. Cascade, VA
*Waste Tech, Industries East Liverpool, OH
Aptus,Inc. Aragonite,UT
Ash Grove Cement Co. Foreman, AR
Ash Grove Cement Co. Louisville, NE
Ash Grove Cement Co. Chanute.KS
Ash Grove Cement Co. Chanute, KS
Ash Grove Cement Co. Foreman, AR
Ash Grove Cement Co. Louisville, NE
Ciba-Geigy St. Gabriel, LA
Continental Cement Co. Hannibal, MO
i Continental Cement Co. Hannibal, MO
O Essroc Materials Logansport, IN
General Electric Pittsfield, MA
Hotaamlnc. Holly Hill, SC
Holnanilnc. Holly Hill, SC
Holnam,Inc. Artesia,MS
Keystone Cement Co. Bath, PA
Keystone Cement Co. Bath, PA
Lafarge Corp. Fredonia, KS
LafargeCorp. Fredonia, KS
Medusa Cement Co. Wampum, PA
Medusa Cement Co. Wampum, PA
National Cement Co. Lebec, CA
River Cement Co. Festus.MO
Somhdown/Kosmos Kosraosdale, KY
Report
Date
Apr-87
Aug-88
Mar-93
Mar-98
Jul-93
Aug-92
May-92
May-92
Mar-92
Apr-92
Jul-92
Aug-92-
May-88
Dec-90
Jnl-92
Aug-92
Apr-91
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-93
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Jnl-92
Jul-92
Aug-92
Oct-92
May-92
APCS
WS
VS
PT/TWS
FF
ESP
FF/WS/ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
VS/Cyclone
ESP
ESP
ESP
PS
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
FF
ESP
FF
Number of
of
Points
3
5
3
3
5
9
3
5
4
4
4
4
3
2
3
4
5
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
Avg. Delta PCDD/PCDF
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
445.12
97.89
6.76
289.12
148.95
319.24
8.12
0.65
473.35
1204.90
1492.10
36.36
82.41
178.77
40.76
0.38
1.42
821.24
516.19
2391.98
1599.88
6.07
1971.62
88.03
Orginal
Average TEQ STDBVTEQ
(ng/dscm @ 7% ) (ne/dscm & 7% ) I
0.103
0.420
0.063
0.042
0.222
15.299
1.020
0.167
1.013
1.553
3.806
0.504
0.006
3.265
17.150
10.985
34.178
0.702
1.150
4.948
0.004
0.016
3.723
5.187
48.860
3Z967
0.053
49.843
1.175
0.10437
0.28492
0.04473
0.00755
0.12738
6.78866
0.48446
0.06958
0.30473
1.11805
5.87936
0.30473
0.00284
1.22329
7.35389
3.02758
34.38260
0.95157
1.29793
2.78873
0.00125
0.00030
1.88559
3.68572
16.77361
15.56288
0.00458
8.80464
0.10755
Corrected
Average TEQ STDBVTEQ
[ng/dscm @ 7%) fai>/dscm (3> 7% t
0.103
0.420
0.063
0.042
0.222
3.293
0.019
0.035
0.055
0.069
0.091
0.187
0.002
0.018
0.059
0.373
31.824
0.014
0.026
0.127
0.002
0.007
0.030
0.091
0.007
0.070
0.004
0.911
0.290
0.10437
0.28492
0.04473
0.00755
0.12738
1.46119
0.01285
0.02535
0.03056
0.03645
0.13020
0.10043
0.00101
0.00910
0.01281
0.16469
32.16712
0.01917
0.02941
0.02287
0.00069
0.00014
0.02041
0.01230
0.00208
0.01322
0.00034
0.16668
0.38410
Avg. Ratio
(PCDD/PCDF) /TEQ
21.92
10.25
23.01
37.45
56.20
37.08
98.90
47.98
266.60
105.38
8932
25.41
162.98
146.63
73.31
135.93
16.10
204.75
159.14
8.72
153.69
151.61
218.42
101.72
50.26
49.43
124.48
40.29
80.30
* Data not corrected
POOL-TEQ.XLS
-------
TABLE 5.5-5. OUTLIER EVALUATION FOR TEQ DATA
Company
Location
Index Average Conected PCDD/PCDF Avg.(ltoi) sdev(l-i) dof-1 t(dof-l) c99%
(i) (TEQ ng/dscm @ 7% O2) (ng/dscm @ 7% O2) (ng/dscm @ 7% O2) @ alfa=0.01 (ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
Keystone Cement Co.
Ciba-Geigy
National Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co. «
Holnamlnc.
Continental Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Holnam Lie.
Lafarge Corp.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
*Solite Corp.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Continental Cement Co.
*Ross Incineration Services
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Lafarge Corp.
*Rollins Environmental Services
Holnam, Inc.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
*Waste Tech. Industries
Southdown/Kosmos
Essroc Materials
•Rollins Environmental Services
River Cement Co.
Aptus, Inc.
General Electric
*Datanot Corrected
Bath, PA
St Gabriel, LA
Lebec,CA
Bath, PA
Wampum, PA
Holly Hill, SC
Hannibal, MO
Foreman, AR
HonyHiU,SC
Fredonia,KS
Louisville, NE
Cascade, VA
Chanute, KS
Hannibal, MO
Grafton, OH
Chanute, KS
Wampum, PA
Foreman, AR
Fredonia, KS
Baton Rouge, LA
Artesia,MS
Louisville, NE
East Liverpool, OH
Kosmosdale, KY
Logansport, IN
Deerpark, TX
Festus, MO
Aragonite, UT
Plttsneld,MA
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
0.002
0.002
0.004
0.007
0.007
0.014
0.018
0.019
0.026
0.030
0.035
0.042
-0.055
0.059
0.063
0.069
0.070
0.091
0.091
0.103
0.127
0.187
0.222
0.290
0.373
0.420
0.911
3.293
31.824
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.09
0.12
0.24
1.33
na
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.09
0.11
0.19
0.63
5.90
na
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
'19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
na
31.821
6.965
4.541
3.747
3.365
3.143
2.998
2.896
2.821
2.764
2.718
2.681
2.650
2.624
2.602
2.583
2.567
2.552
2.539
2.528
2.518
2.508
2.500
2.492
2.485
2.479
2.473
2.467
na
0.00
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.03
0.04
0.04
0.05
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.09
0.09
0.11
0.11
0.12
0.14
0.17
0.20
0.25
0.32
0.38
0.60
1.79
15.88
OUTLIER4.XLS
-------
TABLE 5.5-6 TEQ PCDD/PCDF LEVEL ANALYSIS
Compiny
Location
np Avenge PCDD/PCDF
(TEQng/dfcm@7%O2)
STDEV RSD
(TEQ ng/dicm @ 7* O2) %
VI
Total Totol*2/np np»2 np-l Vl«(np-l)
Keystone Cement Co.
Gba-Geigy
Nitionil Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Medina Cement Co.
Holntmlnc.
Continental Cement Co.
Adi Grove Cement Co,
Holnunlhc.
LafargeCorp.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
*SoUteCorp.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Continental Cement Co.
*Ro« Incineration Services
Ash Grave Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co:
LafaigeCorp.
*RolEns Environmental Services
Holnim, Inc.
Bath, PA 3
SLGabriel,LA 3
Lebec,CA 3
Bath, PA 3
Wampum, PA 3
HoUyHai.SC 4
Hannibal, MO 2
Foreman, AR 3
Holly Hill, SC 4
Fredoma,KS 3
Louisville,NE 5
Cascade, VA 3
Chanute.KS 4
Hannibal, MO 3
Grafton, OH 3
Chanute.KS 4
Wampum, PA 3
Foreman, AR 4
Fredonia.KS 3
Baton Rouge, LA 3
Artesia.MS 3
Total Number of Points (Nt) 69
Total Number of Facilities (nl) 21
* Data not corrected
0.002
0.002
0.004
0.007
0.007
0.014
0.018
0.019
0.026
0.030
0.035
0.042
0.055
0.059
0.063
0.069
0.070
0.091
0.091
0.103
0.127
Sl*2 (TEQngtoscm @ 1% 02)*2
S2«2 (TEQ ng/dscm @ 7% 02)"2
S» (TEQ ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
Avg. TEQ (TEQ ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
K@Ni
K@nf
Degrees of Freedom
Q
J
K@9S%-p,99%-d
LIMIT (TEQ ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
0.00069
0.00101
0.00034
0.00014
0.00208
0.01917
0.00910
0.01285
0.02941
0.02041
0.02535
0.00755
0.0305$
0.01281
0.04473
0.03645
0.01322
0.13020
0.01230
0.10437
0.02287
35%
51%
8%
2%
30%
134%
50%
69%
114%
o9%
73%
18%
55%
22%
71%
53%
19%
143%
13%
101%
18%
4.71E-07
1.03E-06
1.18E-07
1.86E-08
4J3E-06
3.67E-04
829E-05
1.65E-04
8.65E-04
4.17E-04
6.42E-04 "
5.71&05
934E-04
1.64E-04
ZOOE-03
133E-03
1.75E-04
1.70E-02
1^1E-04
1.09E-02
5^3E-04
Sl)M(Total)»2/Nt
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.06
0.04
0.06
0.10
0.09
0.17
0.13
032
0.18
0.19
028
0.21
036
021
0.31
038
1.40E-01
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.003
0.003
0.006
0.005
0.012
0.010
0.012
0.019
0.015
0.033
0.025
0.032
0.048
9
9
9
9
9
16
4
9
16
9
25
9
16
9
9
16
9
16
9
9
9
2
2
2
2
2
3
1
2
3
2
4
2
3
2
2
3
2
3
2
2
2
9.42E-07
2.06E-06
236E-07
3.72E-08
8.66E-06
UOE-03
8.29E-05
330E-04
2J9&03
833E-04
257E-03
1.14E-04
2.80E-03
3^8E-04
4.00E-03
3.99E-03
3.49E-04
5.09E-02
3.03E-04
2.18E-02
1.05E-03
1.94E-03
7J7E-04
S.15E-02
0.044
2.800
3262
4044
SUMMATIONS 2JSE-01 235 48 931E-02
2.9S4
0.20
MACT-TQ-2-9599.XLS
-------
TABLE 5.6-1. POOL OF FACILITIES FOR TEQ FLOOR ESTIMATE
Company
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Solite Corp.
National Cement Co.
Lafarge Corp.
Location
Bath, PA
Bath, PA
Cascade, VA
Lebec,CA
Alpena, MI
Ross Incineration Services Grafton, OH
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Dow Chemical Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Foreman, AR
Midland, MI
Louisville, NE
Rollins Environmental Sei Baton Rouge, LA
Waste Tech. Industries
Holnam Inc.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Holnam Inc.
East Liverpool, OH
Holly Hill, SC
Foreman, AR
Clarksville, MO
Rollins Environmental Sei Deerpark, TX
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Southdown/Kosmos
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Holnam Inc.
Ash Grove Cement Co. -
Lone Star Industries
Continental Cement Co.
Lafarge Corp.
Holnam, Inc.
Lafarge Corp.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Essroc Materials
Aptus, Inc.
Continental Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co.
River Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co.
General Electric
Department of the Army
Ciba-Geigy
Department of the Army
Chevron
Union Carbide
Westvaco Corp.
Department of the Army
Pfizer Inc.
Dow Chemical Co.
Dow Chemical Co.
New Bedford Harbor
3M
Vulcan Materials Co.
Eastman Kodak Co.
Louisville, NE
Kosmosdale, KY
Chanute, KS
Foreman, AR
Holly Hill. SC
Chanute, KS
Greencasfle, IN
Hannibal, MO
Fredonia, KS
Artesia, MS
Fredonia, KS
Foreman, AR
Loganspoit, IN
Aragonite, UT
Hannibal, MO
Wampum, PA
Festus, MO
Wampum, PA
Pittsfield, MA
Tooele, UT
St. Gabriel, LA
Tooele, UT
Richmond, CA
South Charleston,
DeRidder, LA
Johnston Atoll
Groton, CT
Midland, MI
Plaquemine, LA
New Bedford, MA
Cottage Grove, Ml
Wichita, KS
Rochester, NY
Report
Date
Aug-92
Aug-92
Mar-98
Aug-92
Aug-92
Mar-93
Jul-93
Jun-89
May-92
Apr-87
Jul-93
Aug-92
May-92
Jul-92
Aug-88
Aug-92
May-92
Mar-92
Jul-92
Aug-92
Apr-92
Aug-92
Dec-90
' Aug-92
Aug-93
Aug-92
Jul-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Jul-92
Jul-92
Oct-92
Jul-92
Apr-91
Oct-93
May-88
Apr-92
Jul-88
Feb-97
Aug-96
Jun-92
Jul-90
Mar-92
Feb-88
Jan-92
Sep-90
Apr-91
Sep-92
Facility
Type
w
w
AK
d
d(?)
RK
w
RK
sd (ph/bp)
RK
|RK
• w
w
w
RK
d (ph/pc/bp)
d(ph)
w
w
w
w
w
• w
w
w
w
w
w
RK
w
d
d
d
II
RK
LI
RK
LI
Boiler
Boiler
RK
RH
RK
RK
RK
RK
LI
RK
APCS PCDD/PCDF
TEQ
Average
ESP
ESP
FF
FF
FF
PT/IWS
ESP
VS/ESP
ESP
WS
ESP
ESP \
ESP
ESP
VS
ESP
FF
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP ;
ESP ;
FF/WS/ESI
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
PS
VS
VSICyclone
VS
VS
ESP
ESP
VSIPBS
WS
VS/IWS ;
ESP/PBS
VS/PBS
WS
WS
0.00440
0.01600
0.0421
0.05300
0.05867
0.06330
0.11597
0.13773
0.16734
0.10310
0.22245
0.19733
0.37033
0.21643
0.42000
0.50400
1.17500
1.01300
1.02000
1.96667
1.55250
3.62000
3.26500
3.72333
4.94833
5.18667
3.80625
10.98500
15.29889
17.14967
32.96667
49.84333
48.86000
34.17800
0.00633
0.00591
0.02806
0.03680
0.0279
0.0297
0.12515
0.01903
0.06575
0.10170
0.09587
2.08325
6.49333
0.45867
PCDD/PCDF
TEQ
Sdev Pl(ng/dscm)
0.00125
0.00000
0.00755
0.00458
0.02695
0.04473
0.07549
0.06960
0.06958
0.10437
0.12738
0.16168
0.18485
0.30115
0.28492
0.30473
0.10755
0.30473
0.48446
0.52080
1.11805
0.54525
1.22329
1.88559
2.78873
3.68572
5.87936
3.02758
6.78866
7.35389
15.56288
8.80464
16.77361
34.38260
0.00172
0.00284
0.00728
0.00768
0.0158
0.0189
0.01175
0.00636
0.03650
0.01881
0.04250
138687
5.22629
0.26163
0.00691
0.01600
0.05721
0.06217
0.11257
0.15276
0.26694
0.27693
0.30650
0.31184
0.47721
0.52069
0.74003
0.81874
0.98985
1.11347
1.39010
1.62247
1.98892
3.00827
3.78859
4.71050
v5.71159
7.49450
10.52579
12.55811
15.56496
17.04016
28.87620
31.85744
64.09243
67.45261
82.40721
102.94319
0.00978
0.01159
0.04263
0.05216
0.05947
0.06751
0.14865
0.03176
0.13875
0.13932
0.18088
535700
16.94591
0.98192
Paniculate
facilities gr/dscf
ck
ck
LWA
ck
ck
chi
ck
osinc
ck
chi
chi
ck
ck
ck
chi
ck
ck
ck
ck
ck
ck
ck
ck
ck
ck
ck
ck
ck
chi
ck
ck
ck
ck
chi
osinc '
osinc
osinc
osinc
BIF
BIF
osinc
osinc
osinc
osinc
osinc
osinc
osinc
osinc
0.0150
0.0220
0.0171
0.00333
0.0083
0.0198
0.0366
0.0172
0.0024
0.0497
0.0202
0.0337
0.0270
0.0186
0.0026
0.0326
0.0075
0.0226
0.0481
0.05563
0.0190
0.0138
0.0220
0.0296
0,0708
0.0034
0.0374
0.0225
0.0244
0.0769
0.0410
0.0098
0.0427
0.0089
0.0023
0.0696
0.0173
0.0013
0.0360
0.15714
0.0322
0.0370
0.0600
0.0114
0.05267
FLRTEQ.XLS7:11PM
5-33
FLRTEQ.XLS
-------
Table 5.6-2 presents the emission level analysis of the body of data. Note that the level of
0.17 ng/dscm TEQ is consistent with the results of the previous analysis (0.2 ng/dscm TEQ).
This agreement would tend to support the analysis used in the previous section, as well as the
assertion that the analysis estimates the emissions from the best performing facilities under BOP.
Table 5.6-3 presents the pool of facilities and the corresponding PCDD/PCDF emission
levels in total ng/dscm. Table 5.6-4 presents the level analysis. Note that the computed value of
9.35 ng/dscm is consistent with the previously estimated limit of 13.8.
5.7
Summary and Discussion
Rigorous procedures have been defined and implemented to derive numerical emission
levels for PM and PCDD/PCDFs. These levels reflect the expected performance of a well-run,
well-maintained facility incorporating defined operating guidelines and control technologies. The
PM level calculations analyzed the data from the best performing facilities within each source
category. In addition, the PM levels were established from the combined population of cement
Mlns and LWA kilns, combined population of commercial and on-site incinerators, and an overall
estimate with all source categories combined. The PM levels were established under two
alternative approaches. Under Option 1, the PM levels are estimates (at the 95% confidence level)
that would be expected to be exceeded 1% of the time by the pool of best performing facilities
from a single test run. This analysis procedure estimates the PM level that all of the best
performing facilities (12% or 5 units) can be expected to achieve 99% of the time in a single run.
For comparison purposes, an upper bound estimate of the 99th percentile (at the 95% confidence
level) of the best performing facilities has been computed (Option 2). This estimate represents a
level that a facility with the average PM level exhibited in the best performing pool, and with the
same variability in PM emission as exhibited by the best performing facilities, would be expected
to exceed 1 % of the time. Both of these PM levels are presented in Table 5.7-1. The difference in
context between these estimates are subtle, yet significant. The Option 1 level is a number that any
of the best performing facilities can be expected to achieve in a single test. The Option 2 estimate is
a level that not all of the facilities would be expected to achieve with the same regularity. A facility
in the BPF pool would not be expected to retrofit and modify the APCD to achieve the Option 1
level. However, the worst performers in the BPF pool would require retrofit to confidently
achieve the Option 2 level in a single test.
5-34
-------
TABLE 5.6-2. FLOOR ESTIMATE OF PCDD/PCDF (TEQ ng/dscm)
Company
Location
Number of Average PCDD/PCDF STDEV RSD Vi SUM(i) SUMA2/np
Points TEQ (ng/dscm @ 7% O2) (ng/dscm) % (ng/dscm)A2
V
Oi
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Solite Corp.
National Cement Co.
LafargeCoip.
Ross Incineration Services
Bath. PA
Bath, PA
Cascade, VA
Lebec,CA
Alpena, MI
Grafton, OH
Total Number of Points
Total Number of Faculties
3.
3
3
3
3
3
18
6
0.00440
0.01600
0.0421
0.05300
0.05867
0.06330
0.00125
0.00000
0.00755
0.00458
0.02695
0.04473
28%
0%
18%
9%
46%
71%
1.57E-06
O.OOE+00
5.71E-05
2.10E-05
7.26E-04
2.00E-03
sumA2/np
SUI
0.013
0.048
0.126
0.159
0.176
0.190
0.028
n(sumA2/nD)
0.000
0.001
0.005
0.008
0.010
0.012
0.037
9
9
9
9
9
9
54
2
2
2
2
-2
2
12
3.14E-06
O.OOE+00
1.14E-04
4.20E-05
1.45&03
4.00E-03
5.61E-03
S1A2 (ng/dscm)A2
S2A2 (ng/dscm)A2
Sa (ng/dscm)
Avg. (TEQ ng/dscm)
K@Nt
K@Nf
Degrees of Freedom
Q
J
K@95%.p,99%-d
0.0005
0.0004
0.03
0.04
3.37
5.062
8.67
3.73
3.00
4.29
FLOOR (TEQ ng/dscm) 0.17
FLRMC-TQ.XLS
-------
TABLE 5.6-3. POOL OF FACILITIES FOR TOTAL FLOOR ESTIMATE
Company
Keystone Cement Co.
Soli te Corp.
Ross Incineration Services
Keystone Cement Co.
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
National Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Rollins Environmental Services
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Waste Tech. Industries
Holnam, Inc.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Southdown/Dixie
Southdown/Kosmos
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Aptuj, Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Holnam Inc.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Continental Cement Co.
Aptus. Inc.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Lafarge Corp.
LafargeCorp.
General Electric
Continental Cement Co.
Essroc Materials
Medusa Cement Co.
River Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co.
Department of the Army
Chevron
Department of the Army
Department of the Army
Union Carbide
Clba-Gelgy
Department of the Army
Westvaco Corp.
Pfizer Inc.
New Bedford Harbor
Dow Chemical Co.
Dow Chemical Co.
3M
Vulcan Materials Co.
Location
Bath, PA
Cascade, VA
Grafton, OH
Bath, PA
Baton Rouge, LA
Deerpark,TX
Lebec,CA
Foreman, AR
Bridgeport, NJ
Louisville, NE
Louisville, NE
East Liverpool, OH
Artesia, MS
Foreman, AR
Knoxville, TN
Kosmosdale, KY
Foreman, AR
Coffeyvillle, KS
Holly Hill, SC
Chanute, KS
HoIlyHill.SC
Chanute, KS
Hannibal, MO
Aragonite, UT
Foreman, AR
Fredonia, KS
Fredonia, KS
Pittsfield,MA
Hannibal, MO
Logansport, IN
Wampum, PA
Festus, MO
Wampum, PA
Tooele, UT
Richmond, CA
Johnston Atoll
Tooele, UT
South Charleston, WV
St. Gabriel, LA
Johnston Atoll
DeRidder.LA
Groton, CT
New Bedford, MA
Plaquemine, LA
Midland, MI
Cottage Grove, MN
Wichita, KS
Report •
Date
Aug-92
Mar-98
Mar-93
Aug-92
Apr-87
Aug-88
Aug-92
Jul-93
Dec-86
May-92
Aug-92
Jul-93
Aug-93
May-92
Mar-92
May-92
Jul-92
Dec-90
Aug-92
Apr-92
Aug-92
Mar-92
Dec-90
Aug-92
Jul-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Apr-91
Jul-92
Aug-92
Jul-92
Oct-92
Jul-92
Oct-93
Jul-88
Jun-91
Apr-92
Feb-97
May-88
Jun-92
Aug-92
Jul-90
Jan-92
Feb-88
Jun-89
Sep-90
Apr-91
. Facility
Type
w
AK
RK
w
RK
RK
d
w
RK
sd (ph/bp)
d (ph/pc/bp)
RK
w
w
d (ph/pc/bp)
d(ph)
w
RK
w
w
w
w
w
RK
w
w
w
LI
w
w
d
d
d
RK
U
U
RK
Boiler/Coal
LI
RK
BoilerlNG
RH
RK
RK
RK
RK
LI
APCS PCDD/PCDF
Total ng/dscm
Average
ESP
FF
PT/IWS
ESP
WS
VS
FF
ESP
WS
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
FF
FF
ESP
FF/WS/IWS
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
FF/WS/ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
PS
ESP.
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
VS
VS
VS/PBS
VS
ESP
VSICyclone
VS/PBS
ESP
WS
VS/PBS
ESP/PBS
VS/ESP
WS
WS
0.6833
1.5767
1.46
2.4133
2.26
4.31
6.5967
5.3200
6.58
8.4400
12.8700
12.50
41.8633
32.2700 .
31.7450
111.2975
99.7333
117.14
70.9000
156.2000
182.8750
303.8175
476.0000
567.23
327.3500
525.4667
827.7100
548.61
1209.1967
1542.7500
1603.3333
2008.3333
2392.3333
0.0820
0.1917
0.4357
03400
0.8447
0.9767
1.0054
1.1263
3.0873
33463
12.0750
105.0733
80.4750
240.0900
PCDD/PCDF
Total ng/dscm
Sdev PI
0.0902
0.08737
0.43
0.3765
1.82
1.05
0.3431
3.7848
3.71
4.5866
5.7731
6.49
20.4948
26.2200
39.7863
11.3203
53.9735
50.62
81.4300
. 87.3979
211.3549
174.7120
217.7889
240.46
374.7511
369.1169
221.7799
529.86
224.6619
235.7122
543.0196
364.7757
787.1025
0.029
0.040
0.089
0.150
0.3456
0.317
0363
0.6952
1351
1.461
1366
28.814
61.661
147.320
0.864
1.751
2.320
3.166
5.900
6.404
7.283
12.890
14.002
17.613
24.416
25.477
82.853
84.710
111.318
133.938
207.680
218.389
233.760
330.996
605.585
653.241
911.578
1048.145
1076.852
1263.700
1271.270
1608.317
1658.521
2014.174
2689.373
2737.885
3966.538
0.141
0371
0.614
0.840
1336
1.610
2.131
2317
5389
6.469
14.606
162.701
203.796
534.730
Category
ck
LWA
chi
ck
chi
chi
ck
ck
chi
ck
ck
chi
ck
ck
ck
ck
ck
chi
ck
ck
ck
ck
ck
chi
ck
ck
ck
chi
ck
ck
ck
ck
ck
osine
osinc
osinc
osinc
BIF
osinc
osinc
BIF
osinc
osinc
osinc
osinc
osinc
osinc
Paniculate
gr/dscf
Average
0.0150
0.0083
0.0220
0:0172
0.0270
0.0171
0.0202
0.0275
0.0366
0.0186
0.0024
0.0138
0.0118
0.0026
0.0075
0.0006
0.0497
0.0481
0.0226
0.0326
0.0034
0.0296
0.0220
0.0190
0.0410
0.0374
0.0708
0.0225
0.0244
0.0769
0.0098
0.0023
0.0017
0.0089
0.0696
0.0427
0.0013
0.0173
0.0360
0.0370
0.0322
0.0198
0.0600
0.0114
FIRTOT.XLS6:59 PM
5-36
FLRTOT.XLS
-------
TABLE 5.6-4 FLOOR ESTIMATE OF PCDD/PCDF (TOTAL ng/dscm)
Company
Keystone Cement Co.
Solite Corp.
Ross Incineration Services
Keystone Cement Co.
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Location
Points
Bath, PA
Cascade, VA
Grafton,OH
Bath, PA
Baton Rouge, LA
Deerpark, TX
Total Number of Points
Total Number of Facilities
3
3
3
3
3
5
20
6
•age PCDD/PCDF
foscm@7%O2)
0.68
1.58
1.46
2.41
2.26
4.31
S1A2 (ng/dscm)A2
S2A2(ng/dscm)A2
Sa (ng/dscm)
Avg. (ng/dscm)
K@Nt
K@Nf
Degrees of Freedom
Q
J
K @ 95%-p,99%-d
?LOOR (ng/dscm)
STDEV
(ng/dscm)
0.09
0.09
0.43
0.38
1.82
1.05
0.84
1.67
1.58
2.12
3.295
5.062
8.01
7.5715
3.33
4.57
9.35
RSD VI
% (ng/dscm)A2
13% 8.13E-03
6% 7.63E-03
29% 1.85E-01
16% 1.42E-01
81% 3.31E+00
24% 1.10E+00
sumA2/np
-
SUM(i)
2.05
4.73
4.38
7.24
6.78
21.53
109.1
SUM*2/np npA2
1.40
7.46
6.39
17.47
15.32
92.71
PA2
9
9
9
9
9
25
70
np-1
2
2
2
2
2
4
14
Vi*(np-l)
(ng/dscm)*2
1.63E-02
1.53E-O2
3.70E-01
2.83E-01
6.62E+00
4.40E+00
1.17E+01
sum(sumA2/np) 140.8
FLRMC-TL.XLS
-------
TABLE 5.7-1. EMISSION LEVELS ACHIEVABLE BY
THE BEST CONTROLLED SOURCES
SOURCE
CK
LWA
CK + LWA(a)
(QHWI
(OS)HWI
(C+OS) HWI 0>)
BOILERS
ALL(c) '
OPTION 1 (d)
(gr/dscf @ 7% 02)
0.033
0.022
0.0076
0.010
0.015
0.0057
0.021
0.0086
OPTION 2 (e)
(gr/dscf @ 7% Oi)
0.010
0.0077
0.0061
0.0049
0.0075
0.004
0.011
0.0052
(a) 3 LWA and 3 CK's, all Fabric Filter APCD's
(b) 5 (C) HWI's and 4 (OS) HWI's
(c) 2 CK's, 3 boilers, 4 (OS) HWI's, 5 (C) HWI's, 3 LWA
(d) An emission level that all of the sources in the best controlled source pool could be expected to
meet 99% of the time, with 95% confidence.
e) An emission level that a source with emissions equivalent to the average for the pool of best
controlled sources (and displaying emissions variability similar to the pool sources) could be
expected to meet 99% of the time with 95% confidence.
5-38
-------
Table 5-7-2 presents the emission level calculations under both analytical options for
dioxin/furans in ng/dscm TEQ and in total tetra though octa congeners. Interpretation of the data
is identical to that discussed in the previous paragraph. The Option 1 level is a value at the 95%
confidence level that any of the BOP pool would be expected to achieve 99% of the time. None of
the facilities in the pool used to establish the level would be expected to require retrofit or
modification to achieve the level. The Option 2 level is a level that a facility with the pool average,
and displaying similar variability as those facilities used to establish the average, would be
expected to exceed 1% of the time. It would be expected that the worst performers in the pool used
to establish this level would require modification or changes in operation to confidently achieve the
Option 2 level. :
The estimates of dioxin/furan emissions from sources that are operating under BOP are in
close agreement .with the floor calculations in both total ng/dscm and TEQ, as expected. (The BOP
estimate for TEQ is 0.20 under Option 1 and 0.16 under Option 2. The BOP estimate for total
congeners is 14 under Option 1 and 11 under Option 2.) The floor levels are derived from the best
performing units and define to a large extent the operating practices and control technologies
establishing BOP. The BOP levels are derived from the expected emissions of facilities
incorporating BOP. The close agreement between BOP and the floor calculations provides
reassurance in the ability of facilities to achieve the calculated levels.
The analysis presented in this chapter is based on the data currently compiled and summarized.
Further data is needed to establish and identify those parameters affecting emissions (particularly
PCDD/PCDF emissions) that the current body of data cannot resolve. Efforts are ongoing to
identify these data needs, and it is anticipated that subsequent revisions to this document will reflect
the additional insight gained from further focused testing.
The PM level calculations of Table 5.7-1 are presented in several different ways that represent
individual source categories (or subsets thereof), as well as various degrees of aggregation of
source categories. While the Agency is interested in examining the appropriateness and
implementability of establishing standards that apply across all types of hazardous waste
combustion facilities, we recognize that in doing so there may be technical and policy
determinations that have not yet been fully illuminated or explored. Hence, comments on this
particular issue will be most helpful. The Agency emphasizes that, at this time, we have not
decided if and which source categories will be grouped in determining the PM level calculations,
and we will consider all comments on the appropriateness of such aggregation.
5-39
-------
TABLE 5.7-2. SUMMARY OF PCDD/PCDF FLOOR CALCULATIONS
CASE
Total Congeners (tetra
through octa)
TJEQ
OPTION 1 (a)
(ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
9.4
0.17
OPTION 2 (b)
(ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
5.4
0.12
(a) An emission level that all of the sources in the best controlled source pool could be expected to
meet 99% of the time, with 95% confidence.
(b) An emission level that a source with emissions equivalent to the average for the pool of best
controlled sources (and displaying emissions variability similar to the pool sources) could be
expected to meet 99% of the time with 95% confidence.
5-40
-------
With respect to dioxin/furan emission levels, note that EPA believes that it is appropriate to
control dioxin/furan emissions for HWCs based on toxicity equivalents (TEQs). Under this
approach, weighting functions known as toxicity equivalence factors are assigned to the various
dioxin and furan congeners to account for their toxicity relative to 2, 3, 7, 8 TCDD. EPA is
considering whether it is also appropriate to control emissions based on total tetra through octa
congeners. If so, emission limits would be established on the basis of total congeners as well as
TEQ. Comments on this issue will be helpful.
5-41
-------
5.8
References
1. Kendall, M. and A. Stuart, The Advanced Theory of Statistics, Volume 2: Section 20.37,
Charles Griffin and Company, London, 1979.
2. Johnson, N.L. and F.C. Leone, Statistics and Experimental Design in Engineering and the
Physical Sciences, Volume 2: Second edition, John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1977.
3. Notrella, M.G., Experimental Statistics, National Bureau of Standards Handbook 91,
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1963.
4. Vangel, M., New Methods for One-Sided Tolerance Limits for a One-Way Balanced
Random-Effects ANOVA Model, Technometrics, May 34(2): 176-185,1992.
5-42
-------
6.0
EUROPEAN EMISSION REGULATIONS
This section provides a brief overview of emerging regulations throughout Europe to
control operation and emissions from hazardous waste incineration systems. Each of the countries
in Europe is an independent nation with the freedom to establish environmental policy as it sees fit.
However, the advent of the European Economic Community (EEC) now provides a strong impetus
and framework for adoption of uniform policy and regulations, although full uniformity has not yet
been achieved.
Since the turn of the century, European countries have pursued incineration as an
alternative to landfilling. This is especially true for countries with high population density and
topography or geology which is not conducive to extensive landfilling. Over the last 15 years,
incineration of waste (municipal as well as hazardous) has played an increasingly important role in
meeting European energy demands and is now an integral part of the continent's industrial base.
The above factors have led to several trends. Because of the high population density,
European countries are acutely concerned with environmental issues. This is particularly true
relative to toxic air emissions (especially, dioxins and furans) and the characteristics of materials
that are landfilled. For example, evidence exists that the presence of carbon in landfilled materials
increases the mobility of trace metals. Based on that information, Germany has recently
promulgated regulations banning the landfilling of any material containing more than 5 weight %
carbon. Thus, by regulation, Germany effectively directs that virtually all organic waste streams
will either be recycled or incinerated. This official German position supporting incineration does
not imply a lack of concern for air, water, or solid waste emissions from incinerators. This fact
will be illustrated in the following paragraphs.
In reviewing European emission regulations, it is important to note that European industry
and governments often interact cooperatively, leading to development of advanced environmental
control technologies. Countries have often issued environmental "regulations" in the form of
research objectives and then supported the affected industry in technology development efforts for
meeting those research objectives. This type of cooperation has helped European companies
remain at the developmental forefront for waste combustion technology, as well as for air pollution
control technologies.
6-1
-------
6.1
Regulatory Framework for EEC Directives
As noted above, each European country is free to develop its own environmental
regulations, but there is a growing movement toward standardization of requirements. This trend
is intimately tied to development of the EEC, which issues directives for use by the various
member countries. An initial set of directives was issued on June 21, 1989, with the intent of
requiring control of certain pollutants from large combustion plants. This directive specifically
included municipal waste combustion systems and required that a study be performed leading to a
new directive specifically addressing hazardous waste incineration. As a result, on March 23,
1992, the Proposal for a Council Directive on the Incineration of Hazardous Waste (92/c 130/01)
was issued. This EEC guideline requires all Member States to establish laws, regulations and
administrative provisions necessary to comply with the directive by June 30, 1994. A review of
regulations for the Member States reveals that:
1) Only Germany, France, the Netherlands, and Spain currently have legally binding
regulations for hazardous waste incineration;
2) Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom have recorded emission guidelines in
the regulations on incineration of hazardous waste. These guidelines serve as
goals for the plants to meet;
3) Belgium, Italy, Luxembourg and Portugal have neither legal nor guideline limits on
emissions at this time. The legal authorities in Luxembourg and Belgium do take
into account the German and Dutch legal limits when negotiating the operating
permits with incineration facilities. In Italy, there is an article that requires all
industrial facilities to install Air Pollution Control Devices (APCDs) to lower
emissions to "the lowest level technically feasible." Portugal defines emission
limits for every facility during the permitting process. The government agencies do
consider the emission limits set by other countries when defining the limits for a
facility.
4) The regulatory situation in Greece is unknown at this time. No information about
emission limits and/or guidelines has been made available to the EEC commission.
6-2
-------
It is important to note that the EEC directive stipulates a timetable for compliance.
Specifically, it stipulates that all Member States should establish laws, regulations and
administrative provisions necessary for compliance by July 30,1994. The directive stipulates that
any new incinerator must comply with the directive immediately and that existing units must
comply by June 30,1997. Small units which cannot afford to retrofit the facility with air pollution
controls will be allowed to continue operation for a period of 5 years but must cease operation on
or before June 30,1999.
6.2
Regulatory Content
The regulatory approach adopted in the 1992 EEC Directive covers all aspects of the
hazardous waste incinerator system operation. This includes requirements associated with waste
feeding, incinerator operation, ash quality, APCD operation, stack emission limits, and continuous
monitoring.
Each hazardous waste incineration facility is assumed to have been specially designed and
is permitted to treat specific types and quantities of waste. The guidelines require the operators to
have proof of the waste composition prior to treatment of the waste. Compliance with this
requirement may be achieved by obtaining an MSDS type form from the waste generator or
through chemical analysis of each lot of waste received. Moreover, the plant must have
demonstrated that it is appropriately designed to treat this type of waste.
Stringent operating conditions and monitoring requirements are also imposed upon the
incineration process. For any incinerator burning organic waste, monitors are required to
determine the temperature and oxygen content of the combustion products as well as the
temperature of the gases as they leave the incinerator. Specifically, the rules require a minimum
temperature of the "gases resulting from the combustion process" measured at the furnace wall of
at least 850 °C and a minimum oxygen concentration of 6%. If the incinerator is burning
halogenated organics, the minimum furnace temperature is set at 1200 °C. There are also
requirements for continuous measurement of furnace chamber pressure, furnace exhaust gas
temperature, and moisture content of the exhaust gases.
To achieve the stack gas emission limits, all incinerators will need to be equipped with
downstream air pollution control systems. Many of the facilities use wet scrubbing technologies
(either alone or in conjunction with dry type controls). Any APCD system used must be a zero
6-3
-------
liquid discharge system. There are also stipulations regarding the quality of the solid residue. The
specific requirement is that each facility must treat the residue to lower the concentration of
hazardous constituents as much as possible before disposal. Several facilities actually recycle the
solid residue to improve the ash quality. Hazardous waste and municipal waste combustion
facilities in Germany are reported to apply thermal treatment to their ash. One of the main purposes
of ash thermal treatment is to destroy dioxins and furans that may be associated with dust collected
in the particulate control device.
Stack emissions are also closely regulated. In general, the emission guidelines establish
limits based on dry combustion gases under metric standard conditions (273° K, 101.3 kPa) and
corrected to 11 % oxygen in the flue gas. Emissions of dioxin and furan are expressed as 2,3.7,8
— TCDD toxic equivalent using the International toxic equivalency factors. The specific limits
provided in the EEC Directive are set out in Table 6.2-1 below. Note that all stack limits are
expressed as daily averages. Also included in the following table are the stack emission limits
formally required in Germany and the Netherlands.
In addition to the above stack emission performance requirements, the EEC directive also
establishes a wide array of continuous emission monitoring requirements. These include
continuous monitors for carbon monoxide and total dust emission levels. Further, there are
requirements that hazardous waste incineration facilities must perform monthly measurements to
quantify emissions of metals, dioxins and furans.
6.3
European Technology
There are a variety of technologies currently available in Europe for control of the specific
pollutants generated by incineration. Technology transfer has reached a stage where the successful
application of any air pollution control technology will rapidly lead to worldwide application.
Waste incineration has been utilized in Europe for a longer period than in North America.
The Air Pollution Control Device (APCD) systems used in North America and Europe possess the
same basic technology, however, there are significant design differences. The design differences
exist in Europe because the majority of the installations are retrofits to existing incinerators with no
emission controls or an ESP as a minimum. These existing incinerators also face more stringent air
pollution regulations. North American applications for APCD technology are usually on new
facilities, and these facilities tend to be larger.
6-4
-------
TABLE 6.2-1. EMISSION GUIDELINES FOR INCINERATION OF
WASTE MATERIALS IN EUROPE
Component
(Daily Averages)
Total Dust
Gaseous inorganic Chlorides as HC1
Gaseous inorganic Fluorides as HF
Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Gases Organic Compounds as C (TOC)
S02
NO, ••••••• :-.-.•...:-•
Heavy Metals and their compounds:
Cadmium (Cd)
Thallium CT1) plus Cadmium (Cd)
Mercury (Hg)
Antimony (Sb), Arsenic (As). Lead (Pb), Chromium (Cr).
Cobalt (Co), Copper (Cu), Manganese (Mn),
Nickel (Ni), Vanadium (V) and Tin (Sn)
Dioxin and Furans (nanograms TEQ/m3)
EEC
5
5
1
50
5
25
Emission Limit Value
(mg/m3)
Netherlands Germany
0.05
0.05
0.50
0.1
5
10
1
50
10
40
70
0.05
0.05
1*
0.1
10
10
1
50
10
50
0.05
0.05
0.50
0.1
* Includes Selenium (Se) and Tellurium (Te) in addition to the 10 metals listed.
NOTE: These numbers are based on 11% O2.
6-5
-------
Significant incineration design and operating experience has been gained in Europe over the
past 25 years. Incinerators in Europe currently incorporate some type of APCD such as wet and
dry electrostatic precipitators (ESPs) or fabric filters (FFs) for dust control. Most of the
incinerators have also added multi-stage wet and dry scrubbers or spray drying and dry adsorption
processes for controlling acid gas and heavy metal emission.
Europe uses an integrated approach toward the control of emissions from hazardous waste
incineration by controlling all potential waste streams. The choice between scrubbing technologies
has been influenced by the regulatory climate in the European community. The future trend is
expected to be more toward wet scrubbers. Wet scrubbers produce less solid residues; they also
require a good liquid effluent management system. Many treatment technologies for the liquid
effluents from the scrubbers are being developed.
Li addition, there are a number of newer technologies being used to try to drive air
emissions to lower levels. These new technologies include the addition of Selective Catalytic
Reduction DeNOx reactors (SCR-DeNOx), activated carbon filters, and gas suspension absorbers.
In Europe, the general practice has been to continue to retrofit facilities with new APCDs in
series with the existing equipment. The typical facility will have an ESP for dust control, followed
by a multistage scrubber for acid gases and metals. Facilities seeking to incorporate more efficient
emission controls have, added SCR-DeNOx for NOX control. For additional organics and metals
removal, activated carbon filters are often added to the end of the existing systems.
Limited emission data has been collected on the more advanced APCD control schemes.
One gas treatment system used on a hazardous waste incinerator in Europe consisted of a dust
collector, a two-stage acid scrubber, and an activated carbon filter. Emission measurements
performed on this system have yielded the results given in Table 6.3-1.
This unit demonstrates, at least under the operational conditions at this facility, that the
limits set forth in the European standards can be met. Table 6.3-2 lists several incinerators in
Europe and their associated air pollution control equipment. Most are older incinerators that
currently operate with ESP's and some type of wet scrubber.
6-6
-------
TABLE 6.3-1. OBSERVED STACK EMISSIONS: HW INCINERATOR
Parameter
Total Dust
HC1
HF
S02
NOX
Hg
Dioxin/Furans
<0.50
0.19
0.05
6
177
0.002
0.03 ng TE/m3 SC
6-7
-------
TABLE 6.3-2. EXAMPLES OF APCD EQUIPMENT CURRENTLY
INSTALLED ON INCINERATORS IN EUROPE
SiKib
RBOfWiMy
Rccadim
Uedobl
BASF
MiiUttUkiillwick
Sckw«bichFidlil>
Hmtn iKioailoe
BBS
LOCATION
Svedn
(Mo, Homy
miYlriaviii
Wnmbmt
Scbw.bth. Wai demur
llenco.WtilOcrmur
Vkau.Ai»llii
Ben».SwiU4rtu>d
RounrKBiiKlBalw
ftrthrim pu> feannui, mckraicil -ptnnoo,
pulp prod ir lie* uxl pltufc lumlai fKilllr
bchmiar cbtmiil mil ptnkil UndfJl
liouiykfl.,! (TIU (inn * RDF fKililr
2 rawy BU» (HW * 2 IMdizal tei (or H»iti lludt>
Mutliinuhniin
NPUT
Mmldpilwuv
blinktpil wim
Mmictmlwuli
POLUTION CONTKOL EQUIPMENT
Noo.
BSPJticnitAei
B3P>aiibt«BUijuulkd
BSPtiaiibbel
WtlicnibteriESP
UP (ill) *Mlicnibcil(pUm«lfotl.5)
2SPMW.4-IUI* TmncliicnjtberpUDicdin 1917
SPEaALFEATUKES
ofdequtle cipicity, 10 lint f of mtiilcuace
AH ciiBi buud: Alan Bo«4 IiadTilk Mat diuu uulfiej ficililr b tl» .old
6,000 kw kn/MclL |ra rf bowcMd IIW. 500 loo n 191
Sill Kid la Bitu. IK .furcbcaial pmdoclioB: OU. wncipidlir SIJ nffliM i» «eu 2 inn: mauint «
,2.000 emplofcu in) 320 ptoducllto UDU
!.c.O«nl
-------
APPENDIX A:
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL TECHNIQUES
-------
-------
APPENDIX A: AIR POLLUTION CONTROL TECHNIQUES
Particulate matter (PM) constitutes a major source of air pollution. Particles generated by
kilns and incinerators have a variety of shapes and sizes, with a wide range of physical and
chemical properties. This appendix presents information on the design, performance, and
operation of common paniculate control devices used for the removal of particles from flue gas
from cement kilns, lightweight aggregate kilns, and hazardous waste incinerators.
For cement kilns, the APCDs consist of electrostatic precipitators (ESP) and fabric filters
(FF). Lightweight aggregate kilns utilize fabric filter baghouses and fabric filter baghouses with a
spray dryer (SD) upstream. Many hazardous waste incinerators in the U.S. operate with the
following combinations of systems: SD/FF; FF with venturi scrubbers (VS); SD/FF with High
Energy Scrubber (HES); ESP with VS; wet ESP with a wet scrubber (WS) and VS. A hazardous
waste incinerator's APCD design is more varied and includes ESP, FF, Venturi Scrubbers, other
wet scrubber designs, and spray dryers.1
The following is a description of the design principles, performance parameters, process
monitoring requirements, and the necessary inspection and maintenance for optimum APCD
operation for:
• Cyclones
• Fabric Filters
• Electrostatic Precipitators
• Venturi Scrubbers
• Wet Scrubbers
• Spray Dryers
In addition, a discussion of flue gas conditioning to improve APCD performance is included.
i "Assessment of Air Pollution Control Devices for Paniculate Matter", EPA Contract 68-
0-0094, Work Assignment 2-4, Subtask 1 Report, September 30, 1993. p. 2 - 3.
A-l
-------
A.1
Cyclones
The cyclone separator is typically incorporated as a pre-filtering process for removing
larger particles. Cyclones can operate at relatively high temperatures and function without moving
parts, making operation simple. The cyclone chamber provides angular (swirling) gas flow which
causes the suspended particles to accelerate toward the chamber walls. Particles, being denser than
gas, separate from the gas stream and impact the cyclone chamber walls. The cyclones are erected
vertically and the particles fall under gravity to the collection hopper.
A.1.1
Desien Principles
The cyclone device is typically positioned immediately downstream of the primary
combustion chamber. The cyclone's service environment is dependent on its construction material.
Cyclones can be constructed to withstand harsh environments such as extreme weather conditions
and high temperatures since they have no moving parts.
The cyclone is typically a vertically erected conical or cylindrical shaped chamber which
receives particle laden gas in the upper chamber region, as shown in Figure A. 1-1. The gas enters
either tangentially or axially in a downward spiral path around the chamber walls. The spiralling
motion causes the particles in the gas flow to accelerate to the chamber walls, where then-
momentum causes them to separate and fall out of the gas stream. The particles drop to the bottom
of the cyclone by gravity and downward motion of the gas. The particles fall into the collection
hoppers and are removed by an ash removal system. The cleaned gas still carries significant levels
of fine particulate which remain suspended in the flow due to their airborne characteristics. The
treated gas reverses direction at the bottom of the chamber and returns up the center of the chamber
and exits out the top.
A-2
-------
CLEM GAS OUTLET
ASCENDING VC*TEX
INL,
•KABUL PUS*
OUTLET
TANGENTIAL
INLET
AXIAL
INLET
(Reprinted from "Pollution Engineering Guide to Fine Paniculate Control in Air Pollution"
by P. Chcnninisoff with permission from Conner Publishing)
Figure A.l-1 Cyclone particle collector.
A-3
-------
A. 1.2
Performance
Cyclone removal efficiency is dependent on the gas velocity, rate of change of gas direction
and the particle size distribution, density and composition. The main limitation of the cyclone is
the inability to effectively remove small particles less than 5|im in diameter. For small particles,
the inertia! separating force (particle momentum) is low and the particles are more prone to remain
suspended in the gas stream.
The removal efficiency of a cyclone can be expanded by increasing the swirling velocity of
the gas, which increases the inertial separating force or particle momentum. This is effectively
accomplished by reducing the diameter of the cyclone chamber or increasing the gas flow rate.
Cyclone performance is affected by gas flow rate, since this affects the swirling velocity in the
cyclone. Cyclone efficiency is relatively insensitive to dust loading, and in fact, the efficiency can
increase with higher loading due to particle interactions.
Cyclone efficiency is generally poor compared with the efficiency of electrostatic
precipitators and fabric filters. Cyclone efficiency is less than 20% for sub-micron paniculate.
Efficiency varies linearly with particle size from 5% for 0.5 micron particles to 50% for 3 micron
particles.
A. 1.3
Process Monitoring
The pressure drop and inlet gas temperature are monitored to assure proper operation. The
pressure drop is monitored so that any tendency of the cyclone to plug can be signaled by high
pressure drop. Also, leaks and cracks in the cyclone can be detected by reduced pressure drop.
Pressure drop is also a function of gas flow and may be used as an indicator of capture efficiency.
Generally, efficiency increases with higher pressure (i.e., higher gas flow). Monitoring of the
inlet gas temperature may be required, depending on the cyclone's application and construction
material, to operate above the acid dew point and avoid corrosive conditions.
A. 1.4
Inspection and Maintenance
Cyclones have minimal maintenance requirements due to the lack of moving parts.
Cyclone wall corrosion, leakage, particle deposits and plugging should be regularly checked. Life
expectancy of cyclones is long and is only limited by material corrosion, erosion and thermal
stresses and cracking. Overall, the cyclone requires very little routine maintenance.
A-4
-------
A.2
Fabric Filters
Fabric filters (FF), also commonly known as baghouses, are used to remove gas
suspended particles much like the filtration device on a Common household vacuum cleaner. The
fabric filter is utilized in relatively low temperature environments (around 350 °F) but always above
the dew point of water and common acid gases. The particle laden gas stream enters the FF
chamber and passes through vertically suspended filter bags. Particles then collect on the filters.
Particle build-up is periodically removed from the filters by one of a variety of methods. The
collected particles fall to the collection hopper situated below the filter bags. The attributes of
fabric filters are:
• High Capture Efficiency
• Capture Efficiency Independent of Particle Characteristics
• Frequent Routine Maintenance
• Monitoring, Inspection and Maintenance is Simple
The following is a description of the design principles, performance parameters, process
monitoring requirements, and the necessary inspection and maintenance for optimum FF operation.
A.2.1
Design Principles
Fabric filters are used to remove suspended particles from flue gas by capturing the
particles on the surface of a porous fabric. Particle laden gas enters the collection device and
passes through an array of cylindrical filtering bags which retain the particles; and the clean gas
exits through the outlet duct. The design of the FF system slows the gas velocity and evenly
distributes the gas to all the filter bags. Particles collect on the filters and form a dust cake on the
surface of the filters. As the dust layer builds, it becomes more difficult for particles to penetrate.
This increases both the pressure drop across the filters and the collection of the particles. It is
actually the dust cake which achieves the high efficiency collection of particulate. For this reason,
unless the filters are preconditioned (i.e., an artificial filter cake is built-up) prior to operation, filter
efficiency is lowest at start-up and after the bags are cleaned.
Fabric filters are usually externally heated and/or insulated to ensure that the device remains
above the minimum required operating temperature to prevent condensation which can plug and
corrode the filter bags. This is especially important during start-up and shutdown operations,
when temperatures are likely to drop below the gas dew point. A FF's maximum operating
A-5
-------
temperature is limited by the working temperature of the fabric. For many common filtering
fabrics, the maximum operating temperature is less than 500 °F. Fabric filters are equipped with
spark arresters upstream to prevent fugitive sparks and hot flash from burning the filters.
Filters are most effective at collecting particles when coated with dust, however, too high a
coating will create a high pressure drop across the filter. The filters need to be cleaned
periodically. When removing the dust build-up, it is important not to remove too much dust cake
or else excessive dust leakage will occur while fresh cake develops. There are four principal types
of cleaning systems: pulse jet, reverse gas, shaker, and sonic.
The pulse jet system utilizes high pressure air to clean the filters, as shown in Figure
A.2.1-1. The high pressure air inflates the bags, cracking the external dust cake. When the air is
removed, the bags return to their original shape and the dust cakes drop into the collection hopper.
Pulse jet systems can be cleaned while on-line, allowing continuous operation of the unit. Filters
can be maintained from outside the collector, which allows the maintenance to be performed in a
clean, safe environment. This vigorous cleaning technique tends to limit filter bag life.
In reverse air systems, the dirty gas enters the fabric filter and passes from the interior to
the exterior of the bags, as illustrated in Figure A.2.1-2. The FF must be divided into modules
which are taken off-line during cleaning. Low pressure air is introduced from the exterior of the
bags, collapsing the bags and cracking the interior dust cake which falls to the collection hopper.
The cleaning is accomplished with relatively low air pressure, resulting in maximum bag life.
Shaker systems move the tops of the bags in a circular path, causing a wave motion
through the bag length. This causes the dust to crack and fall to the hopper. Bags must have high
abrasion resistance for this cleaning technique. In addition, individual bags must be taken off-line
for the cleaning process.
A-6
-------
Exhaust Duct
To
Fume BlowPipe
Sheet
Atmoshere
Manometer
Induced Flow
Collars
Venturi
Nozzles
Wire Retainers
Filter
Cylinders
Collector
Housing
Material Discharge
Figure A.2.1-1. Pulse jet cleaning baghouse. 3
3 Me Keena,, J.D., Turner, J.H., Fabric Filter - Baghouses I: Theory, Design, and Selection,
ETS International, Inc., 1989.
A-7
-------
-TENSION
ADJUSTMENT
CLOSED-
;o
CLEANING
CLEAN
GAS
>BAGS DISTENDED
DUE TO
INFLATION
/S DIRTY
VGAS
OUST COIUCTING MODE
SEWN IN
RINGS —"
1111
iii
• VALVE
CLOSED
DIRTY
GAS TO
OTHER
MODULES
FOR
CLEANING
Figure A.2.1-2. Reverse air cleaning baghouse. 4
4 McKeena.
A-8
-------
Sonic cleaning, if used, usually .augments another cleaning method. Sonic energy is
introduced into the filtering device. The sonic waves generate acceleration forces that tend to
separate the dust from the fabric.
A.2.2
Performance
Fabric filters are very efficient at removal of particles of all sizes. Efficiency ranges
between 99% and 99.9% for particle sizes as low as 0.1 microns. Particle capture is relatively
insensitive to particle and dust physical characteristics such as particle resistivity and dust loading.
Efficiency is decreased as the gas-to-cloth ratio increases as gas velocity rises. Gas-to-cloth ratio is
a ratio of the gas volume flow rate to the filter surface area and is a measure of the superficial gas
velocity through the filter. Typical gas-to-cloth ratios range from 3 to 5 acfm/ft2 , with lower gas-
to cloth ratios of 2 acfm/fi? providing improved performance. Particle capture efficiency is also
dependent on the frequency of bag cleaning, cake build-up, and fabric type and weave, as well as
on the physical condition of the bags.
Fabric filter technology has made significant advances with the improvement in FF bag
materials. As a result, FFs are quickly becoming a preferred APCD, especially since ash effluent
is dry and does not require the handling and disposal of liquid waste. Fabric filter collection
efficiency is reported to be independent of inlet mass loading.
Upgrades to improve FF performance would involve enlarging the device to achieve a
lower gas-to-cloth ratio and selecting improved filtering materials and pre-coating agents. Fabric
filters generally operate at temperatures under 500 °F. The pressure drop across the FF is an
important parameter since it relates directly to energy cost for the induced draft fan. Typical
differential pressures for FFs are 1-6" w.c.2
Factors which specifically affect the efficiency of a baghouse are:
• Holes and tears in the bag and fabric abrasion mainly due to too vigorous a cleaning
• Chemical attack of the fabric
Inadequate cake buildup
2 Dalton, R.S. et. al., " An Assessment of Off-Gas Treatment Technologies for
Application to Thermal Treatment of Department of Energy Wastes." Prepared for U.S. DOE
under contract DE-AC05-84OR21400, September, 1992.
A-9
-------
• Thermal degradation of the bag fabric
• Gas-to-cloth ratio
• Frequency of cleaning
• Fabric specifications (i.e., fabric type and weave)
Three options are available for improving the performance of fabric filters including: 1)
Replacing existing FF unit with larger unit to reduce air to cloth ratio, 2) Adding to existing
baghouse a parallel FF and thereby reducing the AC ratio, and 3) Upgrading the existing FF
material to high performance filters. The last approach, upgrading the cloth material, represents the
least costly option and is examined more fully below.
Basic filter bags were presented at $0.6 /ft2 (Sink, 1991)1 for polyester and polyethylene
bags with a 2-year service life. A service life of 4 years can be achieved with a Teflon membrane
coating (i.e., GORE-TEX® bags) (Brinckman, 1993). These bags cost 3 to 4.5 times the base bag
price (Sink, 1991). It is anticipated that the teflon membrane coated bags for reverse flow
application will cost on the order of $1.9 /ft2 (current estimates), with pulse jet application bags
costing $2.9 /ft2. The costs to retro fit a 2 acfm/ft2 air-to-cloth ratio fabric filter with the upgraded
bags operating on a 200,000 acfm flue gas flow rate would be approximately $127,000 to
$193,000. This retrofit results in a doubling of the life expectancy. If such an approach is
selected, O&M labor costs would be reduced, but material costs would increase. The average
yearly O&M costs would increase from approximately $28,000 to $68,000 for material and labor
based on the following equation (Sink, 1991):
BRC ($/yr) = (BC ($) + labor ($))* CRF
Eq. 2-1
where:
BRC is yearly bag replacement costs
BC is bag costs
labor equals 0.14 times Cloth Area
CRF is costs recovery factor (taken as 0.58 for 2 year bags, 0.4 for 4 year bags)
The annual O&M costs differential for an upgrade in fabric material would be $39,000, $9,750,
and $2,930 for a 200,000, 50,000, and 15,000 acfm device, respectively.
A-10
-------
A.2.3
Process Monitorins
Fabric filter operations are monitored by flue gas inlet temperature, gas flow rate and
pressure drop across the system. The baghouse temperature must be maintained above the acid
condensation point in order to reduce corrosion and fabric wear. This is important during boiler
start-up and shutdown conditions. If acid deposition occurs after shutdown, the acid moisture will
settle on the fabric and eventually leave behind a residue which may contribute to the brittleness of
the bags and cause failure when put into operation again. An atypically high pressure drop can
signify that bags are binding or plugging, gas flow is excessive, or fabric cleaning is inadequate.
Low pressure drop signifies possible filter holes and leakage, leakage between the bag and bag
supports, or inadequate dust cake formation. The FF performance can be monitored with an
opacity meter.
A.2.4
Inspection and Maintenance
Fabric filters are relatively simple to operate and require minimal maintenance and repair.
However, they require frequent routine inspection and maintenance. Several FF inspections and
maintenance items are required on a daily and weekly basis. Filter bags require periodic inspection
for correct tensioning and conditions such as tears, holes due to abrasion, and dust accumulation
on the surface. The typical filter bag life is as much as 10 years using reverse air cleaning, but this
can be reduced to 2 years for improperly operated systems. Filter bags are fragile and prone to
hole formation if not handled carefully.
A.3
Electrostatic Precipitators
ESPs are common APCDs which have been utilized for many years in both the United
States and abroad. Electrostatic precipitators (ESPs) are very efficient at removing fine particles
from flue gas. Electrostatic precipitators are available in a variety of designs and can operate in a
dry or wet mode and in hot or cold gas conditions. ESPs are known for the following
characteristics:
High capture efficiency
Lowest capture occurs with 0.1 to 1 micron particles
Extensive monitoring requirements
Automatic controls
Low routine maintenance
A-ll
-------
ESPs have several advantages, but most significant is the high collection efficiency and low gas
pressure drop.
The following is a description of the design principles, performance parameters, process
monitoring requirements, and the necessary inspection and maintenance for optimum ESP
operation.
A.3.1
Desten Principles
Electrostatic precipitation is a process by which gas suspended particles are electrically
charged and passed through an electric field which propels the charged particles towards the
collecting plates. The charged particles stick to the plates, and periodically a rapping (impact)
mechanism dislodges the collected particles from the plates. The dislodged particles drop into the
collection hopper for removal. Therefore, the principle of electrostatic precipitation is carried out
in three main steps, namely; particle charging, particle collection, and particle removal. A
schematic of an ESP operation is shown in Figure A.3.1-1.
Electrostatic precipitators can be found in both high and low temperature applications from
the material temperature limits of 1,300 °F and down to the condensation point of flue gas
constituents. Precipitators are commonly designed for either hot- or cold-side treatment. Hot-side
precipitators, located upstream of the air preheater, have larger collecting plate areas and are
constructed of suitable steels to handle continuous high temperature operation. The "cold-side"
categorization refers to the ESP located downstream of the air preheater. Dry cold-side ESPs
operate without water spray and at gas temperatures below 500 °F.
A-12
-------
Electrical Fiel
Charged Particles
Particulate-Laden
Gas Flow
Uncharged Particles
Discharge Electrode
at Negative Polarity
Clean Gas Exit
High Tension Supply
from Rectifier
Particles Attracted to Collector Electrode
and Forming Dust Layer
Figure A.3.1-1. ESP particle collection process.
A-13
-------
The general configuration of an ESP is a wire (or rod) discharge electrode positioned at an
equal distance between two collecting plates. The electrostatic precipitator casing houses many
passages of parallel collecting plates with wires (or rods) suspended at regular intervals through the
passage. The plates are further compartmentalized into fields, with each field typically energized
by its own set of power supplies. A negative high-voltage direct-current power is applied to the
discharge electrodes, and the collecting plates are grounded. The high-voltage direct-current power
produces a corona in the wire-to-plate spacing by ionizing the gas. The corona then creates an
avalanche of negative ions traveling from the negative discharge electrode to the grounded
collecting plates. Suspended particles passing through the wire-to-plate spacing are bombarded by
negative ions and become charged. The high voltage electricity produces an electric field between
the wire and the plate which provides the electromotive force to attract the charged particles to the
collecting plates.
Electrostatic precipitators can be classified into three types; tubular, wire-to-plate, and flat
plate. A plate type ESP is shown in Figure A.3.1-2. Some ESPs have prechargers which divide
the precipitator into a charging stage and a collecting stage.
The following process characteristics dictate the specific ESP design:
• Gas volume flow rate
• Particle loading
• Gas temperature
• Particle size distribution
• Particle composition
To accommodate these process characteristics, the following physical and electrical characteristics
of an ESP may be varied:
• Number of fields
• Number of passages per field
• Wire-to-plate spacing
• Collection plate surface area
• Wire (or rod) diameter
• Aspect ratio (length to height)
• Maximum secondary voltage
A-14
-------
COVER PLATE
TOP END
PANEL
DISCHARGE ELECTRODE
RAPPER
INSULATOR
COMPARTMENT
PERFORATED
GAS
DISTRIBUTION
PLATE
CAS FLOW
BOTTOM
END PANEL
ELECTRODE
COLLECTING
PLATE RAPPER
SIDE PANEL
COLLECTING
PLATE
HOPPER
BAFFLE
DISCHARGE
ELECTRODE
WEIGHT
HOPPER
Figure A.3.1-2. Plate type ESP.
(Reprinted from "Pollution Engineering Guide to Fine Particulate Control
in Air Pollution" by P. Cherminisoff, Connor Publishing)
A-15
-------
• Maximum secondary current
• Number of sparks per minute
The charged panicles which accumulate on the collecting surfaces must be periodically
dislodged. Dislodging the collected particle layer is accomplished in several ways using either
mechanical rapping devices or water. Wet electrostatic precipitators utilize water to rinse the
collected particle layer of the collecting surface.
The wet electrostatic precipitator is used effectively in the following conditions:
• after flue gas has been through a wet scrubber,
• low gas temperature and high moisture content,
• high sub-micron particle concentration,
• liquid particle collection,
• for handling dust wet.
Typically, dry electrostatic precipitators utilize mechanical rapping devices which strike the
collecting plates and dislodge the particles. The particles fall into the collection hoppers and are
removed for disposal.
Newly designed ESPs have larger wire-to-plate spacings and use rigid rod discharge
electrodes instead of wire. The newer electrostatic precipitators are capable of operating at higher
voltage, which increases the electric field strength and the subsequent particle capture. Many
electrostatic precipitators are equipped with advanced controlled power supplies which monitor
electrical condition and maximize performance while minimizing power consumption. Advanced
control units provide features such as intermittent energization and spark rate control. Intermittent
energization switches off power repeatably for extremely short durations and maintains ESP
performance while minimizing power consumption. Spark rate is important in the electrical
operation. Sparking is a phenomenon which occurs because an ionized discharge to the collecting
surface resembles an electrical arc. Excessive sparking will reduce the applied voltage and waste
power, insufficient sparking may indicate that the ESP is not operating near its full potential. With
automatic controls, a desired spark rate can be specified and will automatically be monitored and
maintained.
A-16
-------
A.3.2
Performance
Operating efficiency of the ESP increases with increasing plate area, increasing voltage and
decreasing gas flow rate. Capture efficiency is dependent on:
• Specific collection area (SCA)
• Operating voltage
• Particle characteristics
The precipitator's size is measured in terms of specific collection area (SCA), which is the
ratio of collection surface area to gas volume flow rate. Older ESP designs have specific collection
areas (SCAs) which are typically under 300 ft2/kacfm with a plate-to-plate spacing of about 9
inches. The newer designs incorporate wider plate-to-plate spacings with rigid rod discharge
electrodes replacing weighted wire type electrodes. The newer ESPs have state-of-the-art
microprocessor power controls, and the geometry permits higher voltage potentials. The particle
collection is also subsequently improved.
Electrostatic precipitators are least efficient at capturing particles in the 0.1 to 1 micron
diameter size range; however, when designed and operated properly, the ESP is still capable of
excellent collection of particles in this size range. Electrostatic precipitators capture submicrdn
paniculate with approximately 90% to 95% efficiency. From the efficiency on submicron
particles, the efficiency increases linearly to 99.9% for particles of 5 microns. Operation is
sensitive to fluctuations in gas flows, temperature, paniculate and gas composition, and particle
loadings. This is because the electrostatic precipitator's effectiveness is strongly influenced by the
resistivity of the particles in the gas stream.
The ESP is very efficient at capturing particles of all sizes, however, it is not efficient at
capturing particles that have either high or low resistivities. Resistivity is a measure of the
resistance of the particulate matter to being charged and is a function of particle composition and
gas temperature. Resistivity of the particle affects collection in the following manner (U.S. EPA*
draft):
• Low resistivity (<2X108 ohm-cm) - Easily charged, however , too low a
resistivity will cause the collected particles to give up their charge to the
collector plate and easily become re-entrained in the flue gas.
A-17
-------
• High resistivity (>2X1QH ohm-cm) - Difficult to charge and collect. Also,
once collected, they do no readily give up charge to the collector plate and
tend to build up on the electrode.
• Normal resistivity (between 2X1Q8 and 2X1011 ohm-cm) - Most efficiently
collected.
Factors which may adversely affect ESP performance include:
• Hyby of the particle due to exceptionally high operating flow rates in which
the particle travels past the collection plates with enough speed so as not to
be affected by the charged field.
• Misalignment of the electrodes and collectors plates.
• Dust buildup on the electrodes or collection plates.
• Erosion or corrosion of the collection plates.
• Leakage of scrubber liquid when pH is too high (wet ESP only).
• Re-entrainment occurring from redispersion of collected particles during
rapping of the electrodes, seepage of collected dust from the hoppers, and
direct scouring of collecting electrode surfaces by the gas streams.
• Undersized equipment.
• Presence of "back corona" which is due to particle buildup on collection
plates. Ion current generated by the electrodes must pass through the
particle layer before reaching the grounded plate. The current gives rise to
an electrical field in the layer and can become large enough to cause local
electrical breakdown. This condition causes sparking and is called back
corona.
A-18
-------
A four-stage (four-field) ESP would be more efficient for toxic metals removal than a
single-stage ESP. Under reasonable comparable incinerator designs and operating conditions, this
supposition was verified. At two different mass-burn, waterwall incinerators (both using
Wheelabrator-Frye ESPs), the arsenic and chromium recovery efficiencies using one- and four-
stage ESPs were 68% and 83.1% versus 97.4% and 99%, respectively.3
Within the last 2 to 3 years, manufacturers have developed advanced PC-based ESP
controllers which regulate ESP control to improve power delivery. The advanced controllers are
limited to the same peak power, however, the controllers are capable of managing power delivery
and avoiding slow power ramping, such that over time an higher average power through put is
achieved. In addition, these "smart" ESP controllers can incorporate a PM setpoint and use data
from an opacity type meter to provide feedback to control PM emissions directly. In addition,
these controllers can be readily modem linked to allow remote ESP performance monitoring,
potentially reducing maintenance costs. Purchase costs estimates for these type controllers are on
the order of $70,000.
A;3.3
Process Monitoring
To assure proper operation, the inlet gas temperature, flue gas flow rate and electrical
conditions are monitored. On-line electrostatic precipitator performance is typically monitored with
an opacity meter, however, continuous and reliable monitoring of electrostatic precipitator
performance is difficult. An electrostatic precipitator's performance is sensitive to flow rate,
particle composition and temperature, and the electrostatic precipitator's response to these
parameters is relatively slow.
Temperature has a direct effect on particle resistivity, and therefore electrostatic
precipitators must be operated within the designed temperature range. For cold-side ESPs, the
temperature range is limited to temperatures above the condensation point and below the
electrostatic precipitator's material limit usually specified by the manufacturer. For hot-side
3 "A Review of Air Pollution Control 1 Devices Used at Hazardous Waste Incineration
Facilities and Their Removal Efficiencies for Toxic Metals", EPA Contract NO. 68-01-7053, Draft
Final Report, August 28, 1987, p. 56.
A-19
-------
electrostatic precipitators, high temperature is preferred within the maximum operating range
specified by the manufacturer. Particle resistivity peaks at around 400 °F and is lowest at high and
low temperature.
The electrical conditions do depend on the type of ESP. For the conventional cold-side
wire-to-plate ESP, the voltage will range from 25 to 50 kV with even higher voltage for wider
wire-to-plate designed electrostatic precipitators. Spark rate is often optimized on site but is
generally between 50 and 150 sparks per minute. The higher the secondary current the better.
Secondary current may be quenched by excessive particle loading. The secondary current density,
which is the secondary current divided by the collecting plate surface area, is often less than 100
nA/cm2. The secondary current density can be calculated for each field by dividing the field
secondary current by the plate surface area in that field. Generally, the first fields have the lowest
current density because a significant percentage of the current goes into charging the particles
which are captured in fields downstream.
To summarize, the following monitoring activities are required for optimum ESP operation:
• Met gas temperature
• Gas flow rate
• Electrical conditions
• Rapper intensity
• Hopper ash level
A.3.4
Inspection and Maintenance
Maintenance is required for cleaning carbon deposits on plates which can cause short
circuits, corrosion of plates, and erosion of electrodes. Electrostatic precipitators are fairly
sophisticated devices requiring automatic controls for rectifier equipment, measurements systems
for rapper intensity, hopper dust level, and metering systems of gas process variables such as gas
flow and temperature. Because of this complexity, highly trained maintenance personnel are
required. However, routine maintenance requirements for electrostatic precipitators are low
compared with fabric filters. The frequency of inspections and maintenance are typically monthly
for external systems such as power supplies, monitors, etc., and annually for internal systems
such as electrode conditions, electrical connections, etc. Internal inspections and maintenance are
conducted in difficult environments due to the potential mechanical and electrical energy of the
A-20
-------
electrostatic precipitator. Annual inspections of the following are necessary: electrode alignment;
electrode pitting; ash build-ups; ash hardening; hopper performance; electrode insulation; and
rapper operations. ,
To summarize, the following inspection and maintenance activities are required for
optimum ESP operation:
• Low routine maintenance
• Inspection of electrode misalignment, pitting, ash build-up, ash hardening,
hopper blockage, electrode insulation cracks, and rapper performance.
A.4
Venturi Scrubbers
Venturi scrubbers, the primary type of scrubber used for paniculate control, are more
common on smaller units. Occasionally, a venturi scrubber is used on large units downstream of
an ESP or FF for specific emission control such as acid gas or metal emissions.
The following is a description of the design principles, performance parameters, process
monitoring requirements, and the necessary inspection and maintenance for optimum venturi
scrubber operation.
A.4.1
Desien Principles
The conventional venturi scrubber consists of a converging section, a throat section (either
rectangular or circular), and an expansion section. An alkaline recirculating liquid is usually
injected at an angle, in one or more streams, into the throat section or just upstream. The
engineering principle is to accelerate the gas to a high velocity in the throat section, causing
atomization of the liquid. In some cases, however, spray nozzles are used to atomize the liquid.
The solution droplets are then accelerated to their terminal velocity. These droplets provide a large
surface area for collection of fine particles and are many times larger than the particles in the flue
gas. The particles are captured when they collide with the slower moving droplets. As the mixture
decelerates in the expanding section, further impaction occurs and causes the droplets to
agglomerate. Particle capture is primarily related to the amount of liquid atomization achieved.
Once the particles have been trapped by the liquid, a separator (e.g., cyclone, demister,
swirl vanes) is used to remove the liquid from the cleaned gas. Mist eliminators consist of a mesh
A-21
-------
of fine wire or wave plates. They provide a large area of collection surface area while maintaining
a high void space.
As seen in Figure A.4.1-1, the most prominent feature of the venturi design is a
converging throat section which causes acceleration of the flue gas flow. The scrubbing slurry is
introduced at the inlet of the throat and is sheared into fine droplets by the high velocity flue gas
stream. A turbulent zone downstream of the throat promotes thorough mixing of the gas and
slurry droplets. As the droplets slow down through the diverging section, they collide and
agglomerate and are separated from the cleaned gas stream by gravity as the gas passes on to the
stack.
A-22
-------
HOT GAS
INLET
THIMBLE" INLET
SCRUBBING LIQUOR
TO THROAT
(60% OF LIQUID)
ALTERNATE OR SUPPLEMENTAL
NOZZLE LOCATION FOR VERY
HIGH TEMPERATURE GASES
TANGENTIAL LIQUID INLETS
(40% OF LIQUID)
CONVERGING INLET-WETTED
WITH TANGENTIAL LIQUID
SCRUBBING LIQUOR
TOTHROAT
THROAT INSERT
THROAT-CROSS SECTION
VARIES WITH INSERT
POSITION
EXPANDER SECTION
WETTED ELBOW-FILLS
WITH LIQUID
HYDRAULIC OR MECHANICAL
ADJUSTMENT FOR THROAT
Figure A.4.1-1. Venturi scrubber schematic.
A-23
-------
Venturi scrubbers use one of two approaches: wetted or non-wetted. When the gas
entering the venturi is not at saturated conditions, the wetted approach is used. In this approach, a
protective film of liquid is established on the convergent portion of the venturi. This liquid is
introduced upstream of the throat and flows down the converging sides into the throat, where it is
atomized. The gas is cooled by evaporation and reaches the throat at near saturation conditions.
When inlet gases are hot and a significant amount of liquid needs to be evaporated, the wetted
approach is preferred. The non-wetted approach is restricted to gases with subsaturation
temperatures entering the throat
Flux force/condensation/collisions scrubbers are a variation on the venturi type scrubber.
Initially, the flue gas is quench with cooled scrubber water. Gases entering the scrubber are split
into two streams which are directed to separate venturi throats where scrubber liquid is injected into
the gas steam. The discharged gas/liquid streams from the two venturies are directed toward each
other, causing them to collide at a high relative velocity. The head-on collision of the streams
causes the droplets to shear into fine droplets, thus improving the efficiency of the device. Mist
eliminator is used to remove entrained droplets. Through the use of cooled scrubber liquid, a
"flux force condensation" technique is utilized. Flux force condensation is based upon the
principle that when a gas stream is saturated with water and then cooled, a portion of the moisture
will condense, and the fine particles in the gas stream serve as condensation nuclei. As moisture
condenses on the particles, they grow in mass and are more easily collected by conventional
impaction. Therefore, the condensation enhances the scrubbing system's collection of fine
particles, acid gases and metals. (Calvert Co. product literature, 1992).
Free jet scrubbers have the same basic configuration of venturi type scrubbers (i.e.,
quench, scrubber, and moisture separator). The energy for moving gases through the system and
cleaning the gases is provided by the injection of a compressible fluid (typically steam or air) from
a supersonic ejector nozzle which is located inside the flue gas duct. The amount of fluid added
through the ejector is proportional to the mass of gas flowing through the system. The turndown
capacity of the system is high because the ejector supplies the energy required to move the gases
through the system. At the exit of the ejector nozzle, water is injected into the high velocity flow.
The velocity of the steam or air breaks the water into small droplets. The flue gas and ejector fluid
mixture then passes through a subsonic nozzle in which additional water spray is injected. Finally,
the gas passes into an expansion section where free jet mixing takes place, aiding in further
particulate agglomeration and capture. The primary advantage is improved capture efficiency
compared with conventional venturi scrubbers and lower total energy requirements. Disadvantages
include the potential need for on-site steam supply. (John Zink product literature, 1992).
A-24
-------
A.4.2
Performance
To obtain a high collection efficiency, the flue gas throat velocity must be maintained at a
specified level. Approaches that can be used to adjust for varying flue gas flow conditions include:
• Variable throat geometries with adjustable throat inserts.
• Adjustable butterfly valve in the throat region.
• Adjustment of the elbow area in the throat section.
(Most scrubbers have a "flooded elbow" which helps collect entrained
droplets before exiting the venturi.) !
The liquid surface tension and liquid turbidity also are important to capture efficiency. If
the surface tension is too high, small particles will "bounce" off the water droplets. High surface
tension also has an adverse effect on droplet formation. High liquid turbidity will cause erosion
and abrasion of the venturi section.
High pressure differential VS achieve higher particle removal, however, capture of
submicron particles is still relatively inefficient. High pressure differential venturi scrubbers, also
known as high energy scrubbers (HESs), are often equipped with a variable throat for tuning the
capture performance and minimizing pressure drop. The high pressure differential is costly in
terms of electrical power requirements and is impractical for larger units.
Efficiency of a scrubber is affected by the following:
• Inadequate scrubber liquid feed due to erosion and corrosion of the scrubber liquid
transport system.
• Erosion of the venturi wall dimensions.
• Erratic pressure drops due to changes in the gas flow rate.
• Scaling of internal parts.
• High temperatures resulting in atomized scrubber liquid droplets evaporation.
A-25
-------
A.4.3
Process Monitoring
The essential parameters which should be monitored for optimum venturi scrubber
performance include:
• Scrubber blowdown frequency
• Scrubber water suspended solids
• Liquid pH
• Gas inlet temperatures
• Pressure drop across the venturi
• Gas flow rate
• Liquid feed rate
• Liquid/gas ratio
The scrubber operation is monitored by liquid spray rate, gas flow rate, liquid pH,
scrubber blowdown rate and inlet gas temperature. The pressure drop is a good indication of
system performance (particle capture efficiency). The pressure drop is usually controlled with a
variable venturi throat. A pH monitor is used to measure the scrubber liquid pH in order to control
the amount of caustic material added to the scrubber sump. A low scrubber liquor pH will cause
corrosion, while a high pH will cause scaling. Ionizing scrubbers require additional monitoring of
the voltage and current to assure proper operation.
A.4.4
Inspection and Maintenance
Maintenance concerns include prevention of corrosion and scaling on all scrubber internal
surfaces, excessive dust build-up, nozzle damage (abrasion/erosion), plugging and fluid leakage.
However, because the venturi is self cleaning, it has high resistance to fouling. Visual inspection
is usually required for the throat, nozzles and liquid pump. VSs are often applied to hazardous
waste incinerator facilities since they are easily operated and integrated with acid gas control
technologies. A more detailed discussion of the inspection and maintenance of all types of wet
scrubbers in included in Section A.5.4 of this appendix.
A-26
-------
A.5
Wet Scrubbers
Wet scrubbers appear in a variety of configurations with widely variable efficiencies for
controlling paniculate emissions. Wet scrubbers are used for the simultaneous removal of soluble
gaseous pollutants and particulates. The majority of hazardous waste incinerators use packed bed
scrubbers, plate tower scrubbers and venturi scrubbers for air pollution control4. The advantages
of wet scrubbers include high acid gas removal efficiencies coupled with high collection
efficiencies on fine particulates. The following sections describe wet scrubber design principles,
performance, process monitoring, and the necessary inspection and maintenance activities.
A.5.1
Desien Principles
Wet scrubbers remove particles from the gas by capturing the particles in liquid droplets
and separating the droplets from the gas stream. The liquid injected to capture the pollutants can be
***
water or a solution. This solution is often referred to as scrubbing liquor or scrubbing slurry. The
majority of operating scrubbers use lime or limestone as the scrubbing solution because of its wide
availability and low cost. Sodium-based scrubbing solutions are also used, but to a lesser extent.
This section will focus on lime slurry injection type wet scrubbers which have been proven
effective in the removal of particulate, HC1, SOa, dioxin, and volatile metals.5
A.5.1.1
Scrubber Designs
There are a number of scrubber designs currently used in the hazardous waste burning
community. This section of Appendix A contains a description of the wet limestone scrubber, tray
tower, packed tower, flux force/condensation/collisions scrubbers, free jet scrubbers, and ionized
wet scrubbers.
A popular wet limestone scrubber design is the spray tower (shown schematically in
Figure A.5.1.1-1). A Spray tower is a wet scrubbing device that directs the atomized scrubbing
liquid (usually water or a dilute solution of an alkaline agent in water) into a chamber where the
4 Bonner, T. et al., Hazardous Waste Incineration Engineering, Noyes Data Corporation,
1981, p. 135.
5 Buonicore, Anthony J., Davis, Wayne T., Air Pollution Engineering Manual, Air &
Waste Management Association, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1992, p. 293.
A-27
-------
Cleaned
Flue Gas
To Stack
Mist
Eliminators
Flue Gas From
Dust Collector
Limestone
Slurry Feed
Solids Disposal
Figure A.5.1.1-1. Schematic of wet scrubbing spray tower system.
A-28
-------
contaminated gases are flowing in a countercurrent, concurrent, or crossflow direction. This
system will remove principally gaseous plus some paniculate pollutants.
After the flue gas passes through the ESP or baghouse, it enters the scrubber horizontally
just above the scrubber solution level. The flue gas travels up through the spray nozzles, where it
contacts the scrubbing slurry. The acid gas in the flue gas is absorbed into the scrubbing solution
and forms a disposable sludge. The cleaned gas passes through the mist eliminators and travels to
the stack.
Another scrubber design is the tray tower scrubber, which is similar in design to the spray
tower. The flue gas enters at the base and passes upward through the holes in a perforated plate
mounted across the scrubber. Scrubbing slurry is sprayed onto the top of the tray from above.
The slurry on the tray becomes a froth due to the gas passing through it, providing very good
contact of the flue gas with the slurry. The main disadvantage of tray tower scrubbers is that they
cannot handle load variations (flue gas flow variations). At low flue gas flow rates, the slurry will
drop through the sieve (weeping), while at too high of a flow rate, the slurry mixture is blown out
of the scrubber. Additionally, the tray holes are prone to plugging, and the scrubber must be shut
down and cleaned periodically.
Packed tower scrubbers incorporate a bed of packing material (normally small glass balls)
mounted across the scrubber vessel. The flue gas enters at the base of the tower and flows up
through the packing against the slurry flow which is introduced at the top of the scrubber. The
packing slows the flue gas down and provides increased surface area for the gas to contact the
slurry, resulting in high removal efficiencies.
Ionizing wet scrubbers (IWS) combine the principles of electrostatic particle charging,
inertial impaction, and gas absorption to simultaneously collect submicron particles, liquid
droplets, and acid gases. The IWS consists of two sections: a high voltage ionization section and a
packed scrubber section. The gas stream passes through the ionization section where the particles
are electrostatically charged. The charged particles then enter the packed bed section where
particles are removed by attraction to neutral surfaces (collection plates) and impaction on the
packed bed materials. A water or caustic recirculating stream continuously washes the packed bed
to remove collected particles and acid gases. Because the IWS is a fractional removal device,
particle removal efficiency can be increased by employing multiple units in series. IWS advantages
A-29
-------
include increased collection efficiency compared to typical venturi type scrubbers and low pressure
drops. (Ceilcot Product Literature).
A.5.1.2
Reagent Preparation and Injection Equipment
The scrubber slurry side of the process starts with the fresh scrubber slurry being pumped
into the scrubber. The portion of the scrubber that contains the slurry solution is often referred to
as the reaction tank. Next, the scrubbing slurry is pumped from the bottom of the tank to the
slurry nozzles located approximately two-thirds of the way up the tower. The nozzles spray down
against the flue gas flow. The scrubbing solution reacts with the flue gas and most of the particles
fall back into the reaction tank, but some of the slurry (the smaller particles) can become entrained
in the flue gas flow and travel up toward the mist eliminators. The mist eliminators serve to trap
most of the particles entrained in the flue gas, and they are then washed down to the reaction tank
by wash water spray.
Not all of the slurry pumped from the bottom of the reaction tank is sent to the slurry
nozzles. A small percent is removed as waste and is made up for by the fresh slurry feed. The
spent slurry is diverted to a thickener or hydroclone which removes moisture. The dewatered
slurry is disposed of, and the excess moisture is recycled back into the reaction tank and is also
used as mist eliminator wash water.
Limestone and lime-based scrubbing slurries are by far the most commonly used scrubbing
reagents. The main advantages of using lime or limestone include:
1. The process is simple and has few process steps.
2. Capital and operating costs are low and limestone is abundant.
3. SC>2 removal efficiency can be as high as 95%.
The main disadvantages of lime and limestone based scrubbing systems include:
1. Large quantities of waste must be disposed of in an acceptable manner.
2. Limestone systems have a' tendency for scaling, plugging and erosion.
3. Large slurry flows are needed, resulting in large pumps with high electrical
consumption.
A-30
-------
In addition to lime and limestone scrubbing slurries, dual alkali systems are also in use
which utilize a mix of sodium carbonate (NaCOs) and lime or limestone. The main drawback of
the dual alkali process is that scaling (deposits of calcium solids on the scrubber surfaces) is
minimized. The main disadvantage is that sodium may leak out of the system with the waste and
potentially contaminate the area.
Typically, wet limestone and lime scrubbers employ on-site wet grinding (slaking for lime)
for slurry preparation. Figure A.5.1.2-1 shows a typical limestone reagent preparation system.
The raw limestone with a diameter of approximately 1 inch is fed through a weigh belt feeder to a
ballmffl. !
Water is added at the feed chute of the mill. From the mill, the limestone is sent to a
classifier which separates the coarse limestone from the fine limestone. The classifier sends the
fine limestone to the limestone feed tank to be made into scrubber slurry. The coarse limestone is
sent back to the mill for more grinding. Grinds ranging from coarse (70% of the limestone passing
through a 200 mesh sieve) to fine (95% passes through a 325 mesh sieve). The finer the grind, the
better the reduction will be, but the energy consumption for fine grinding is high.
The spray nozzles used to control the slurry mixing with the flue gas typically operate
between 5 and 20 psi and have corkscrew tips. The nozzles produce many droplets of
approximately 2,500 to 4,000 microns in diameter. The SC>2 reduction chemistry occurs on the
droplet surfaces, so the smaller the droplets, the greater the amount of surface area that is available
for reaction, improving SO2 removal efficiency. However, to decrease the droplet size, nozzles
with smaller openings are required. The pressure required to push the slurry through smaller
nozzles is high, and smaller nozzles tend to plug.
A.5.1.3
Mist Eliminators
Mist eliminators are used on wet scrubbers to collect slurry droplets entrained in the
scrubbed flue gas stream and return them to the scrubbing liquor at the bottom of the scrubber.
Mist eliminators are located at the exit to the scrubber as shown earlier in Figure A.5.1.1-1. Most
of the droplets leave the flue gas flow due to gravity, but the small droplets can be carried out with
the gas. If these droplets are not removed from the gas before it exits the scrubber, it can deposit
on the ductwork, the induced draft fan, and the walls of the stack. This may lead to pluggage and
corrosion.
A-31
-------
V
Dry Limestone
Peed Bin
and Gate Grinding
Water Supply
Dilution Water
-XJ-
MiU
Product
Tank
X
Main Process
Water
Mill
Product
Pump
Figure A.5.1.2-1. Limestone reagent preparation system.
A-32
-------
Most mist eliminators are of the impingement type — the small liquid droplets impact a
collection plate, coalesce and fall by gravity back into the scrubbing liquor. The mist eliminators
are sprayed with wash water to remove accumulated solids. The wash water is generally a mixture
of fresh water and clear water from the slurry dewatering system.
A.5.1.4
Waste Treatment and Disposal
There are several types of waste treatment and disposal methods currently in use. The
earliest method of waste disposal was simply to discharge the spent wet slurry to a settling pond.
However, site availability and pond management costs have limited ponding in recent years. The
most popular disposal approach in practice in the U.S. today is to perform two separate stages of
dewatering and then sending the filter cake to a landfill.
The first stage of dewatering (primary dewatering) can use thickeners or hydroclones.
After the primary dewatering, the sludge is between 20% and 30% solids. Secondary dewatering
is accomplished with vacuum filters, or centrifuges. Vacuum drum filters make up 80% of the
secondary dewatering equipment population. Normally, before the dried sludge goes to a landfill,
the sulfites must be mixed with flash and lime. Since gypsum needs no further treatment before it
can be landfilled or sold to wallboard manufacturers, some scrubbers employ forced oxidation
equipment in the reaction tank to convert the calcium sulfite hemihydrate to gypsum.
A.5.2
Performance
To achieve optimum performance, several design and operating parameters must be
considered including:
• Concentration and pH of limestone in scrubbing slurry;
• Scrubbing slurry flow rate compared to gas flow rate;
• Uniform distribution of the scrubbing slurry; and
• Uniform distribution of the flue gas.
The amount of limestone in the slurry controls the amount of calcium ion available to react
with the bisulfite ion. The chemical equations show that, theoretically, 1 molecule of limestone is
required to remove 1 SC>2 molecule. However, due to practical limitations on how well the
limestone and flue gas can mix, up to 1.2 molecules of limestone are typically used for every
molecule of SO2-
A-33
-------
To achieve very good contacting of limestone to acid gases, one might consider increasing
the concentration of limestone in the scrubber solution. However, if too much limestone is added,
the pH of the solution will rise (the solution will become less acidic). The acid gas removal
reactions work most efficiently at pH levels below approximately 6.3. Therefore, the amount of
limestone added must be high enough to allow contacting with the acid gases, but not so high as to
raise the pH above 6.3. Figure A.5.2-1 shows the effect of scrubber solution pH on SOz removal.
In addition to limestone concentration in the scrubbing solution and scrubbing solution pH,
the slurry solution flow rate also determines what level of acid gas reduction can be achieved. The
slurry flow rate is related to the flue gas flow rate and is referred to as the liquid to gas ratio (1/g).
In general, the higher the liquid to gas ratio, the better the acid gas removal efficiency will be.
Typical limestone scrubbers operate at liquid to gas ratios of approximately 30 gallons of slurry for
every 1000 cubic feet of flue gas. Since the flue gas flow rate varies with load, so must the slurry
flow rate if the design liquid to gas ratio is maintained. Figure A.5.2-2 demonstrates how the
liquid to gas ratio (at a constant pH) impacts the SC>2 removal efficiency. As may be seen, liquid to
gas ratios above 30 gallons per 1000 cubic feet of flue gas do not significantly impact SO2
reduction efficiency.
Even if the concentration of limestone, the pH, and the liquid-to-gas ratio are optimum,
good acid gas removal efficiencies will not be achieved unless the scrubbing slurry is sprayed
evenly into the flue gas. To mix the slurry with the flue gas as rapidly and evenly as possible, it is
best to have many small nozzles distributed across the scrubber cross section. If only one or two
nozzles are used, pockets of flue gas can escape the scrubber without being treated.
Unfortunately, small nozzles have a tendency to plug, so the final design must be a compromise
between many small nozzles that evenly distribute the scrubbing slurry but have a tendency to plug
and a few large nozzles that do not evenly distribute the slurry but will not plug.
Finally, the flue gas flow should be evenly distributed across the scrubber. For example,
if most of the flue gas goes up the right side of the scrubber and the scrubbing solution is evenly
sprayed across the scrubber, there will not be enough scrubbing solution to react with all the acid
gas on the right side, causing poor acid gas reduction. The flue gas inlet duct at the bottom of the
scrubber is designed to promote even distribution of the flue gas across the scrubber cross section.
In some cases, perforated plates are used to help distribute the flow, but these cause the pressure
drop across the scrubber to increase and results in a higher electricity consumption by the fan.
A-34
-------
&
o
03
100
go
so
70
60
50
2
l/g=2.5 liters/cubic meter
AP = 4 inches water
Two Stage Absorber
5 6
Scrubber Effluent pH
' 7
Figure A.5.2-1. Impact of slurry pH (acidity) on SOa removal efficiency.
100
= 5.8to7.1
Single Stage Absorber
! 1
10 20 30
Liquid to Gas Ratio (gal/1000 acf)
Figure A.5.2-2. Impact of liquid to gas ratio on SOa removal efficiency.
6 Elliott, Thomas C., Standard Handbook ofPowerplant Engineering, McGraw-Hill
Publishing Co., 1989.
A-35
-------
A.5.3
Process Monitoring
For the reasons previously stated, wet scrubber operation is monitored by the following
key parameters:
• Pressure drop across the scrubber,
• Concentration and pH of scrubbing slurry;
• Liquid-to-gas ratio via gas flow rate and slurry flow rate;
• Accumulation of solids within the scrubber;
• Induced draft fan power consumption;
• Reagent preparation system operation;
• Met and outlet gas temperatures;
• Dewatering process
A.5.4
' Inspection and Maintenance
No matter how well the scrubber has been designed, it will only work as well as the
operation system allows it to. Operators must constantly monitor and control the system to ensure
proper performance. For example, when load changes occur, the scrubber operator needs to reset
the limestone feed rate and use the pH monitor as a backup. In addition to good operation and
communication, a preventive maintenance program specified by the manufacturer should be
implemented. Table A.5.4-1 is an example checklist list.
Visual inspection of the scrubber section and tanks should be performed on a regular basis
to identify leaks, scaling, corrosion and erosion problems. Visual inspection can allow
identification of small problems before damage becomes so extensive that major repair is required.
Mist eliminators tend to be subject to buildup of slurry solids and chemical scale, causing
the passages to restrict the flow of the flue gas. The first sign of scale buildup is typically noticed
by an increase in pressure drop across the scrubber. Water washing is typically sufficient to
prevent serious buildup problems.
Because the scrubber control system is based on flue gas and scrubber flow rates, the
operating staff should routinely monitor and record readings from all instruments used to measure
these flows. If any of the readings appear abnormal, they should be investigated. To verify liquid
A-36
-------
TABLE A.5.4-1. WET SCRUBBER INSPECTION CHECKLIST
Equipment
Action
Frequency
Scrubber Module
Agitators
Mist Eliminators
Wash Water Nozzles
Dampers, Fans, Ducts
Limestone Mil!
Slurry pump
Slurry pipes
Valves
Thickener
Instrumentation
Visually inspect for scale & corrosion
Inspect for corrosion and erosion
Check bearings and seals.
Check for scale
Monitor pressure
Inspect for corrosion and erosion
Inspect visually, lubricate
Check lining, bearings and seals
Check for deposits and wear
Test functionality, leakage, packing
Check coating for corrosion
Check moving parts for wear
Lubricate motor
Flush slurry lines
Calibrate
Annually
Annually
Based on history
Once per shift
Annually
Each usage
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Frequently
Daily
Once per shift
A-37
-------
flow rates or evaluate pump/nozzle erosion, the operator should monitor pressure in the slurry
header and the recirculation pump discharge. An increase in the pressure usually indicates
plugging of nozzles. A decrease can indicate wear of the nozzles or pump impellers. Slurry flow
in pipes can be checked by touching the pipe. If it is cold at the normal operating temperature, then
the line is plugged.
The slurry feed requirement is usually controlled by the pH indicator. The sensor lines
where pH measurement elements are used should be frequently backflushed and calibrated with
buffer solutions to ensure reliable operation.
A.6
Sprav Dryers
In some respects, the spray dryer system represents a less complicated control system than
wet scrubbers. This is because no mist eliminator is required, the number of pumps and amount of
piping are greatly reduced, and the waste material is in the form of dry particulates, which
eliminates the need to treat liquid scrubber wastes and significantly reduces the waste volume.
A.6.1
Desien Principles
For spray dryers, also known as wet/dry scrubbers, hot flue gas enters the top of the dryer
(scrubber) vessel where it is intimately mixed and cooled with a finely atomized lime slurry spray.
Figure A.6.1-1 illustrates several spray dryer arrangements. The moisture is completely
evaporated, leaving the solids as suspended particulates. Mixing occurs in a turbulent flow field.
The quenched and chemically conditioned flue gas then flows to a fabric filter and/or an
electrostatic precipitator. The major equipment found in a typical spray dryer scrubbing system
includes the spray dryer absorber, the paniculate-collection system, reagent and slurry preparation
and handling equipment, solids transfer, and process control and instrumentation. In spray dryer
systems, the particulate collector is downstream and is considered an integral part of the system.
The spray dryer absorber provides the initial contact between the atomized reactive alkali
and the acid-gas contaminants. There are two types of atomizers illustrated in Figure A.6.1-1:
rotatory disks (or wheels) and dual-fluid pneumatic nozzles. In each case, the slurry is atomized as
droplets into the dryer, reacts with the acid gases, and dries to a fine powder which is then carried
over into the ESP or fabric filter and removed. The particulate collector also serves as an additional
contact point between the dried reactants and acid gases, providing additional removal. Some
A-38
-------
10-12 S
Vane Ring
Gas Dtsperser
* Atomizer
Gas
Solids
A. Rotary-Atomizer Dryers
Parallel
Ftow
.Nozzles •
11! I" •
Individual Mixing
7M
10-12S
10-12 S
B. Two-Fluid Pneumatic Nozzle Dryers
Figure A.6.1-1. Spray dryer designs.
10
A-39
-------
spray dryer systems operate with partial recycling of the particulates by mixing the captured
particulates with the fresh lime in either slurry or dry form before being reinjected into the
associated scrubber.
The chosen atomization method affects the design of the spray dryer absorber vessel,
including the physical dimensions. For a rotary-atomizer type of spray dryer, which projects the
droplets radially outward and perpendicular to the gas flow, the length-to-diameter ratio of the
dryer (L/D) is typically 0.8 to 1. The droplets decelerate rapidly owing to the drag forces of the
downward-moving flue gas and eventually attain the speed and direction of the flue gas. To avoid
wall deposition, the designed radial distance between the atomizer and the dryer wall must be
sufficient to allow for adequate drying of the largest droplets. In a dual-fluid pneumatic nozzle
type of spray dryer, which atomizes the droplets in the direction of the gas flow (downward), the
L/D is typically 2:1. In this design, the sidewall deposition is a minor problem. For either design,
optimum spray dryer performance is achieved through proper choice of the L/D, droplet size, and
residence time. The designed residence time for most spray dryers is 10-12 seconds, however few
systems operate at 100% of the design flow rate. Thus, actual residence time for most systems is
12-15 seconds. Spray dryers range from 25 to 50 feet in diameters.
A.6.2
Performance
The application of a spray dryer results in: a flue-gas temperature of 150-170 °F;
approximately 20% less gas flow through the particulate-matter collector due to lower gas
temperatures; a particle size distribution with a mean diameter of 20-30 (im; and a significantly
increased dust loading. The increased particle size distribution and decreased flow rate are
beneficial, but the decreased temperature and increased dust loading tend to increase pressure drops
across fabric filters and to decrease efficiency across ESPs. The increased dust loading caused by
the reacted products ranges from as little as 1.5 gr/acf at 500 ppm of SO2 to as high as 14 gr/acf at
3000 ppm of reacted products.7 Therefore, increased dust loading must be taken into account in
the design of the particulate-matter collector and the associated dust-handling support system.
A.6.3
Process Monitoring
The following process monitoring parameters are the same as those for wet scrubber
applications, with the exception of waste treatment system.
7 Air Pollution Engineering Manual, p. 238.
A-40
-------
• Pressure drop across the scrubber.
• Concentration and pH of scrubbing slurry.
• Liquid-to-gas ratio via gas flow rate and slurry flow rate.
• Accumulation of solids within the scrubber.
• Induced draft fan power consumption.
• Reagent preparation system operation.
• Inlet and outlet gas temperatures.
Most operational problems associated with spray dryers are due to low temperatures at the
exit of the dryer. When the gas approaches the water dew point, acid condensation may result in
the downstream equipment. Therefore, the flue gas exit temperature is a critical process
monitoring parameter.
A.6.4
Inspection and Maintenance
Spray dryer inspection and maintenance is very similar to that required by wet scrubbers.
Operators must constantly monitor and control the system to ensure proper performance. For
example, when load changes occur, the scrubber operator needs to reset the limestone feed rate and
use the pH monitor as a backup. In addition to good operation and communication, a preventive
maintenance program specified by the manufacturer should be implemented which is similar to the
wet scrubber activities summarized in Table A.5.4-1.
Visual inspection of the scrubber section and tanks should be performed on a regular basis
to identify leaks, scaling, corrosion and erosion problems. Visual inspection can allow
identification of small problems before damage becomes so extensive that major repair is required.
Because the scrubber control system is based on flue gas and scrubber flow rates, the
operating staff should routinely monitor and record readings from all instruments used to measure
these flows. If any of the readings appear abnormal, they should be investigated. To verify liquid
flow rates or evaluate pump/nozzle erosion, the operator should monitor pressure in the slurry
header and the recirculation pump discharge. An. increase in the pressure usually indicates
plugging of nozzles. A decrease can indicate wear of the nozzles or pump impellers. Slurry flow
in pipes can be checked by touching the pipe. If it is cold at the normal operating temperature, then
the line is plugged.
A-41
-------
The slurry feed requirement is usually controlled by the pH indicator. The sensor lines
where pH measurement elements are used should be frequently backflushed and calibrated with
buffer solutions to ensure reliable operation.
A.7
Hue Gas Conditioning Techniques
APCD performance may be enhanced by conditioning the flue gas upstream of the APCDs.
The term conditioning includes cooling, humidification, and reagent injection, all of which will be
described in the following paragraphs.
A.7.1
Flue Gas Cooling
The objectives of flue gas cooling are to:
• Protect low-temperature APC equipment.
• Condense vaporized pollutants such as volatile toxic metals.
• Prevent the formation of certain classes of organics due to fly ash catalyzed
reactions. By cooling the flue gas rapidly, the formation of dioxins and furans can
be reduced.8
Rue gas cooling is required prior to particle removal in low temperature devices such as
baghouses, cold ESPs, and wet scrubbers. There are four methods for cooling the flue gas leaving
the incinerator:
• Air dilution;
• Heat exchanger;
• Water quench; and
• Radiation and convection duct cooling.
Radiation and convection cooling utilizes heat transfer from the flue gas flow in a long
uninsulated duct. This is the simplest method in principle. However, this method is not
considered for further review due to large space requirements, particle sedimentation in the duct,
and the lack of the ability for precise temperature control during flue gas temperature and flow
8 Gullett, B.K., Lemieux, P.M., Kilgroe, J.D., and Dunn, J.E., "Formation and
Prevention of Polychlorinated Dibenzo-p-Dioxin and Poly chlorinated Dibenzofuran During Waste
Combustion: The Role of Combustion and Sorbent Parameters".
A-42
-------
fluctuations. The three other methods are reliable and proven technologies which have excellent
track records for use with waste incinerators.
A.7.1.1
Air Dilution
The air dilution cooling method, shown in Figure A.7.1.1-1, is a simple procedure. Air
dilution cooling is performed by injecting cool air directly into the hot flue gas stream. The amount
of dilution air required is dependent on the initial temperature of the flue gas and the amount of
temperature reduction desired, as shown in Figure A.7.1.1-2. The resulting mix of the two gas
streams produces a stream at an intermediate temperature. Air is usually injected tangentially into
the axially flowing flue gas stream. Special air mixing jets may be used so that thorough mixing of
the two streams is obtained within a relatively short distance.
Performance
The use of air dilution as a cooling method has certain drawbacks, including:
• Air dilution creates a substantial increase in the total flue gas volume flow rate.
This additional flow requires downstream pollution control equipment to be
considerably larger.
• The control of both flue gas temperature and velocity is not possible. Downstream
devices which are affected by velocity (e.g., pressure drop and efficiency for filters
and venturi scrubbers) may be adversely affected by changes in quench air
requirements to maintain a target flue gas temperature. .
• There is potential for the intake of ambient moisture and dust if the dilution air is not
preconditioned. This may cause problems in the downstream equipment and may
introduce additional pollutants into the flue gas.
Because of these limitations, air dilution cooling is not generally used as the only means of
gas cooling; however, it is often used to make small changes in flue gas temperature, such as pre-
cooling of the flue gas upstream of a heat exchanger to protect the heat exchanger tubes from high
temperature degradation.
A-43
-------
Hot flue
gas
Dilution air
.......
Air injection
nozzles
_^ Cool
flue gas
Figure A.7.1.1.-1. Air dilution cooling procedure.
A-44
-------
Fluid Bed design
condition
300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700
1 ln(gas)
Note: * Mass Flow Ratio =
mass flow of dilution air
mass flow of hot flue gas
'out
50°C
100°C
150°C
200°C
Figure A.7.1.1-2. Example of the increase in flue gas flow rate using air dilution cooling.
A-45
-------
Monitorabilitv
Failure Modes
The outlet gas temperature and blower flow rate are easily monitored by
thermocouple and flowmeter, respectively, to assure proper operation.
Possible failure modes of the air dilution system under normal conditions
include:
• Exceeding the capacity of the blower, causing the exiting flue gas
stream to be too hot.
'• The blower flow rate cannot be turned down sufficiently to provide
minimum air flow, causing the flue gas stream to be too cold.
The air dilution cooling system has the following failure modes under upset conditions:
• Loss of air flow due to loss of power to the air blower, resulting in
system failure.
• Increased flue gas flow rate or temperature, resulting in an inability
to provide sufficient dilution cooling air, causing a possible system
failure due to the flue gas temperature levels.
A.7.1.2
Heat Exchanger
Heat exchangers can also be used for cooling of the hot flue gas stream. Note that boilers
(which are a type of heat exchanger) are not treated in this review because the low incinerator
temperature makes the use of a boiler impractical. In a heat exchanger, heat is transferred from the
flue gas through a common wall to a cooling fluid. The heat is transferred through a combination
of convective and conductive processes. A wide variety of heat exchangers are commercially
available, including gas-to-gas and gas-to-liquid types, as shown schematically in Figure A.7.1.2-
1. In a gas-to-gas heat exchanger, the cooling fluid is typically air (e.g., a recuperator used to
preheat combustion air). In a gas-to-liquid heat exchanger, the cooling fluid is a liquid, typically
water. The liquid is usually contained in a closed circuit, and liquid cooling is often provided by
ambient air blowing.
A-46
-------
Hot flue gas
Cooling fan
(a)
Outlet
cooling air
Cooling air
Cool flue gas
Inlet cooling fluid Sne!|
I I
'^•^^^^^^
. — . . . .v. . . .V.YWY. ......... £?.\'.°.\'.\' f.' • —iiii". .........
".•• .'.•.•-•.•-•.•-•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•. v.v.-.v.v.V-V •• '•'.} V. V.V.VI7. .... ,'MV.V
(b)
Cool flue
gas
Heat transfer surface
Hot flue
gas
Outlet cooling fluid
Figure A.7.1.2-1. Heat exchanger schematics (a) Gas-gas recuperator
(b) Shell and tube type
A-47
-------
Performance
Maintenance
Monitorabilitv
Failure Modes
Unlike air dilution, and due to the cooling fluid and hot flue gas streams
being separated, the volume of the flue gas remains the same. Therefore, it
is not necessary to increase the size of flue gas cleaning equipment. The
heat exchanger cooling capacity is limited by the heat transfer rate, which is
determined by the cooling fluid flow rate, the inlet temperature, and the
thickness of deposits on the cooling surface.
Liquid heat exchangers are more efficient than gas-to-gas heat exchangers
due to their increased capacity to remove heat. However, as mentioned
earlier, they have increased complexity since they typically utilize a closed
loop cooling fluid. Liquid heat exchanges also have an increased tendency
to promote the condensation of acid gases and subsequent corrosion of
common walls.
If the hot flue gas contains significant amounts of particles, the heat
exchanger tubes will require frequent cleaning. This problem can be
mitigated by the use of a high temperature particle removal device upstream
of the heat exchanger or by the use of soot blowers to keep the tubes clean.
Other maintenance procedures include service of the pumps and blowers.
The outlet gas temperature and coolant flow rate are easily monitored by
thermocouple and flowmeter, respectively. The temperature of the cooling
fluid is also monitored to assure proper operation, especially if the system
has one pass.
Heat exchangers are subject to the following failures under normal
conditions:
Tube corrosion from condensation of flue gas components
(chlorine, sulfur, metals).
Mechanical failure due to thermal expansion of different exchanger
parts at different rates.
Particle deposits collecting on tubes act as an insulator and impair
the heat transfer efficiency (tube fouling).
A-48
-------
A.7.1.3
• Hot-side tube blockage from soot and flash deposits.
• Tube erosion in heavily dust laden gas streams.
Heat exchangers have the following failure modes under upset conditions:
• Loss of coolant from fire, explosion, power outage, system leak, or
mechanical failure of the pump, resulting in a system failure. For
heat exchangers using liquid cooling, however, loss of coolant will
not cause an immediate rise in temperature due to the remaining
thermal inertia of liquid coolant. Additionally, liquid heat
exchangers can avoid the immediate effects of a power or pump
failure by the use of an elevated supply tank to provide the head
necessary to push the fluid through the system.
• Increased flue gas flow rate and temperature, resulting in an inability
to provide sufficient cooling liquid, causing a possible system
failure due to the flue gas temperature levels.
Quench
In a water-quench cooler, as shown in Figure A.7.1.3-1, the hot flue gas is cooled by
injection of water into the gas stream. The gas temperature is reduced as the water spray
evaporates. The quench is performed in a cooling vessel. Hot gases enter the vessel and are
decelerated so that water droplet evaporation occurs completely within the vessel. To ensure
evaporation, the water spray must be atomized into small droplets in sufficient quantities to
maintain a constant outlet gas temperature. The amount of injected water must be controlled in
response to fluctuations in the flue gas temperature. Because it is difficult for the water nozzles to
maintain a small droplet size over a wide range of flow rates, nozzles that are used have either
variable flow areas or utilize two-phase flow (high pressure air or steam can atomize water over a
wide range of flow rates). Rotary nozzles can also be used to maintain a uniform distribution of
water droplets over a wide range of flows.
A water quench is almost always used upstream of a gas scrubber when the inlet flue gas
temperature is above the saturation point. In this situation, to ensure that the temperature is
A-49
-------
Hot flue gas
Quench liquid
spray nozzles
Unevaporated
quench liquid
Cool
flue gas
Figure A.7.1.3-1. Water quench cooling procedure.
A-50
-------
lowered to its saturation temperature (which is required by the scrubber for effective scrubbing
efficiency), a surplus of water is introduced. Because droplets and particles will tend to migrate to
the cooler wall, an inside film of water is often used to wash collected particles from the walls.
This water is drained from bottom of the cooling vessel and discarded or recycled. The amount of
water required to cool the flue gas is shown in Figure A.7.1.3-2.
However, when a water quench is used prior to a baghouse, it is critical that the gas
temperature remain above the saturation level and that all the water droplets completely evaporate.
Otherwise, corrosion and plugging problems may occur in these devices from condensed moisture
and other gases. Complete evaporation is assured by fine atomization and large gas residence
times in the cooler vessel.
Performance
When excess moisture in the flue gas is undesirable, the most important
consideration is that the injected droplets have a uniformly small size range.
Large unevaporated droplets may exit the cooling vessel before they have
time to completely evaporate. These droplets may cause problems with
downstream equipment and may create a non-uniform temperature
distribution in the flue gas. Also, droplets may migrate to the vessel wall,
reducing the cooling potential of the device.
Water quench is used often as a cooling method because it has the following
characteristics:
• Provides the quickest temperature control of the three cooling
methods.
• Potential for capturing acid gases and particles if reagents are
injected with the water.
• Low maintenance requirements.
The use of water cooling does create some problems, however, including:
« It has an increased chance of a visible steam plume.
• It has difficulty in accommodating low flow rates and variations in
moisture feed.
A-51
-------
Note: * Mass Flow Ratio =
mass flow of quench water
mass flow of hot flue gas
T(out) °C
0.35
0.3 -
.2
I Q.25
,0
0.15 -
0.1
Fluid Bed design
condition
400 450 500 550 600 650 700
60
80
100
120
140
(flue gas)in
in <°C)
Figure A.7.1.3-2. Example of increase in flue gas flow rate using water quench cooling.
A-52
-------
Secondary Wastes
Monitorabilitv
Maintenance
Quench has the potential to produce a secondary liquid waste stream when
the liquid spray is not fully evaporated.
Quench operation is indicated by monitoring the outlet gas temperature,
water flow rate, and nozzle pressure.. The outlet gas temperature is easily
monitored by thermocouple. Water flow and nozzle pressure are also easily
monitored.
Maintenance requirements include checking (and occasionally replacing)
spray nozzles for corrosion and pluggage, and inspecting the water pump
system.
Failure Modes Possible failure modes of the water quench system under normal conditions
include:
• Plugged spray nozzles, especially if a dry reagent is used for acid
gas control.
• Corrosion of spray nozzles. This becomes more of a problem if the
spray liquor is collected and recycled and/or if acid gases are present
in the flue gas.
Water quench cooling has the following failure modes under upset
conditions:
• Loss of quench water from fire, explosion, power outage, system
leak, or mechanical failure of the pump, resulting in system failure.
• Increased flue gas flow rate and temperature result in an inability to
provide sufficient quench liquid, causing a possible system failure
due to flue gas temperature levels.
The lowest temperature which can be achieved by quenching/evaporative cooling is
determined by the flue gas dew point. Due to localized temperature variations, the target APCD
inlet temperature is usually 350°F. The amount of water required to achieve this depends on the
flue gas flow rate and temperature.
A-53
-------
The simplest approach is to inject water using a high pressure air carrier. This represents a
low dollar cost approach to cooling the exhaust gas. However, if very high dust loading exists,
the possibility for agglomeration and formation of "mud" may also exist and this approach may not
be feasible. It is anticipated that this approach may be implemented at a cost on the order of
$50,000. The second approach is to install an advanced humidification system, potentially
requiring significant duct work modification upstream of the APCD with multiple location
temperature feedback control. In the absence of a detailed engineering analysis, a budgetary
estimate for this system is $500,000. Depending on the application, a quench system cost will
likely range between $50,000 and $500,000.
A.8
Activated Carbon
Recent work has focused on the capture of mercury and dioxins and furans from
combustion source flue gases with the use of activated carbon. Activated carbon has been shown
to enhance the removal of these species. Various mechanisms have been suggested for the capture
of these species on activated carbon; these include physical adsorption in the pores of the carbon,
catalytic oxidation to mercury oxides, and/or chemically mediated adsorption based on the presence
of oxygen and/or chlorine. The presence of chlorine has been demonstrated to augment capture
efficiency.9
Activated carbon has a very large inner pore surface (large surface to volume ratio), which
can adsorptively bond a very broad range of substances. Typical activated carbon has a surface
area of from 300-800 m2/g; high grade carbon can have surface area of 1500 m2/g.10
Additionally, it posses catalytic properties that can be used for simultaneous NOX control if
required. Two types of activated carbon are commonly used: formation coke (based on coal) and
lignite coke. Lignite coke is more common due to its low cost. In some attempts, impregnation
agents have been added to the activated carbon to enhance its control efficiency. Note that activated
carbon capture of mercury is sometimes considered as an additional benefit to its 99+%
9 Felsvang, K., Gleiser. R., Juip, G., and Nielsen, K., "Activated Carbon Injection in
Spry Dryer/ESP/FF for Mercury and Toxics Control", Trace Elements Transformation in Coal-
Fired Power Systems Workshop, Scottsdale, AZ, April 19-21,1993.
10 Dalton, D., Gillins, R., Harris, T., and Wollerman, A., "An Assessment of Off-Gas
Treatment Technologies for Application to Thermal Treatment of Department of Energy Wastes",
DOE/MWIP-1, September, 1992.
A-54
-------
demonstrated control of organics, polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and dibenzofurans
(PCDD/PCDF) in particular.11
!
Activated carbon can be used in a couple of different arrangements for the control of
mercury and organics in combustion system flue gases. These include:
• Fixed bed process — In the fixed bed process, flue gas flows through one or more
beds of activated carbon arranged in a series; spent activated carbon is withdrawn
from the bottom of each bed segment. Carbon monoxide levels are continuously
monitored across bed to minimize risk of fire. To prevent plugging and
contamination, the bed is usually placed after a flue gas paniculate control device.
Although capture performance tends to increase at lower temperatures, the gas
should not be below saturation temperature to avoid condensation of moisture in
bed. Activated carbon tends to lose its adsorption capacity when it gets
contaminated with moisture.12
Fluidized bed process -- In the fluidized bed process, flue gas is used to fluidized a
bed containing activated carbon. The fluidized bed arrangement consumes less
coke compared to the fixed bed, however, has a higher pressure drop. Circulating
beds have also been used, and have demonstrated very high mercury and dioxin
removal.
Duct injection — In the duct injection process, activated carbon is injected into the
flue gas upstream of a paniculate control device, typically a fabric filter or ESP.
Because of the corona discharge phenomena of an ESP and combustible nature of
activated carbon, an ESP is not considered the best choice for activated carbon
collection from carbon injection system. Additionally, a fabric filter provides for
extended hold-up of the injected activated carbon in the flue gas, allowing for
additional mercury removal compared to an ESP; for the same level of control, a
higher activated carbon feed rate may be required for ESPs compared to fabric
11 Blumbach, J., and Nethe, L., "Sorbalit - A New Economic Approach Reduction
Mercury and Dioxin Emissions", Proceedings of 85th Annual Air and Waste Management
Association (AWMA) meeting, Kansas City, Missouri, June, 1992, 92-41.09.
12 Frillici, P., Li, R., Bacon, G., and Hayes, D., "Evaluation of Mercury Emission
Reduction Alternative for the Fort Dix Resource Recovery Facility", Proceedings of the 86th
Annual AWMA meeting, Denver, Colorado, June, 1993,93-RP-154.03.
A-55
-------
filters. However, relatively no difference between capture using ESP and fabric
filter has been demonstrated.13 In some versions, a cyclone reactor is used to
improve the mixing of the flue gas and the activated carbon before it passes to the
paniculate control device. Activated carbon may also be injected upstream of a
rotary atomizer, similar in design to conventional spray drying units. The activated
carbon may be injected either by itself as a powder or in a dry or wet solution in
combination with an acid gas removing sorbent such as lime, calcium hydroxide, or
sodium sulfide. The duct injection process consumes the least activated carbon of
the three methods, typically from 50-400 mg/m3 of flue gas for municipal waste
combustors.
Potential effects on the duct injection activated carbon effectiveness have been investigated,
including:
• Activated carbon type - Coal-based, lignite-based, and wood-based activated
carbon all perform at similar levels.14
• Activated carbon feedrate — Removal rate increases with increasing activated carbon
feedrate.
• Injection location for duct injection process ~ No noticeable difference in
performance when activated carbon was injected either downstream of the
municipal waste combustor economizer, at spray drier outlet, or along with lime
used for the spray dryer.15
• Temperature — Removal efficiency has been shown to increase at temperatures.
13 Felsvang.
14 White, D., et al., "Parametric Evaluation of Powdered Activated Carbon Injection of
Control of Mercury Emissions form a Municipal Waste Combustor", Proceedings of 85th Annual
AWMA meeting, Kansas, Missouri, June, 1992, 92-40.06.
15 Ibid.
A-56
-------
below 425 °F.16 However, there may be a tradeoff; other research has shown that
at higher temperature, the bond between the mercury and the activated carbon is
stronger compared to the bonding occurring at lower temperature.
Potential drawbacks to the use of activated carbon include:
• Secondary waste volume ~ Activated carbon adds to the total amount (mass and
volume) of secondary waste for disposal.
• Secondary waste treatment — The byproduct residue (activated carbon and fly ash
capture in the air pollution control device or the spent activated carbon in a fixed
bed) may require some type of post-treatment (i.e., stabilization, metals removal,
etc.). The primary concern is to avoid re-releasing capture metals and organics.
Current treatment ideas include a wash process to remove metals, followed by destruction
in the primary combustion source, or vitrifying the activated carbon and fly ash into a glass
substance. Recent studies have shown that post-treatment may not be necessary.17 Captured
activated carbon and fly ash were stored for 3 years in different arrangements: open container,
plastic bag, solidified by water addition, and stored in open container at elevated temperature (50
°C). No significant revolatilzation of mercury was seen in any of the situations during the three
year period. Additionally, leaching studies performed on by-product ash gave results that were
typically below EPA levels. However, the oxygen deficient methane rich environment of a landfill
may enhance the desorption of previously captured mercury.
• Fire hazards ~ Use of combustible substances like activated carbon requires
consideration due to risk of fire and explosion. When present with oxygen,
1 S
activated carbon may self-ignite at temperatures as low as 200 °C.
16 Christiansen, O., and Brown,'B., "Control of Heavy Metals and Dioxins from
Hazardous Waste Incinerators by Spry Dryer Absorption Systems and Activated Carbon
Injection", Proceedings of 85th Annual AWMA meeting, Kansas City, Missouri, June, 1992,92-
41.09.
17 Felsvang.
18 Dalton.
A-57
-------
A.9
Other Technologies
The Rotorfilter was developed by Kurt Jonsson, an Icelandic mechanical engineer. The
device has been used in Iceland since the early 1970s to control pollution from municipal
incinerators and cement kilns. Two Rotorfilter units recently purchased by Our Lady of Lourdes
Memorial Hospital in Binghamton, N.Y., reduce particulates to 0.0067 grain per dry standard
cubic foot. In the typical Rotorfilter configuration, incineration flue gas enters the unit through its
inlet plenum. The gas passes through two rotors, each made up of five counter-rotating wheels
and driven by a separate electrical motor. The wheels project V-shaped airfoil-type spokes that
generate vacuum and centrifugal forces when they are in rotation. This will mechanically remove
pollutants from the flue gas stream by the centrifugal force of rotation, which will funnel them into
the cape, or walls, of the Rotorfilter. The leading edge of the spoke causes the molecular particles
of pollutants to conglomerate into large particles, which facilitate their removal along with the solid
particulates. Although the Rotorfilter is not tested specifically for dioxin control, it could reduce
the gaseous pollutant by conglomeration, as it does sulfur oxides, carbon dioxide, and nitrogen
oxides.19
A.10
Combined Technologies
The technologies discussed thus far may be applied individually to various hazardous
waste incinerators. However, in practice, some incinerators use these devices in a serial "treatment
train" to control more than one pollutant. These air pollution control systems (APGS) are designed
to achieve high acid gas removal efficiency and low paniculate emission rate. As an illustration of
systems using a combination of devices, this section presents two case studies of hazardous waste
incinerators which use multiple air pollution control devices in series. The presentation of these
systems should not be interpreted as recommendations, requirements, or endorsements by the
EPA.
19 Valenti, Michael, "Tougher Standards for Burning Hazardous Waste", Mechanical
Engineering, Vol. 115 /No. 8, August, 1993, p. 69.
A-58
-------
A. 10.1
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc. currently operates a slagging rotary kiln hazardous waste incinerator at its
Coffeyville, Kansas facility. The information presented in this section was obtained from the
December, 1991 "Trial Burn Report" for this facility and from the "Paniculate, Metals and HC1
Emissions Testing Report" ,
The slagging rotary kiln has a diameter of 9.8 feet and a length of 32.8 feet. The
afterburner chamber has a 13-foot diameter and a height of 35 feet. This incinerator system is
designed for a heat input of 61.9 million Btu/hr. The primary fuel is waste oil which is fired in
both the kiln and afterburner chamber.
The kiln operates at a temperature of approximately 1,800 °F to 2,100 °F. Combustion of
the wastes in the kiln produce off-gases which flow into the afterburner chamber where additional
fuel and liquid wastes may be introduced to maintain the temperature above the minimum of 2,012
°F and a normal operating temperature of 2,200 °F. The residence time within the afterburner is
over 2 seconds. Combustion gases exit the afterburner chamber, pass by an emergency relief vent
into the hot duct, and then go into the air pollution control equipment.
The air pollution control system consists of a spray dryer, a baghouse, a spray saturator,
cross-flow wet absorber, a cross-flow scrubber, and two ionizing wet scrubbers (as shown in
Figure A. 10.1-1). An induced draft fan is employed to draw the exhaust gases through the
pollution control equipment. The treated gas is then vented to the atmosphere through the top of a
110-foot stack.
Spray Dryer
Flue gas exiting the afterburner passes through a spray dryer chamber where it is cooled to
approximately 450 °F. The functions of the spray dryer are to reduce the flue gas temperature to
allow proper functioning of the downstream baghouse, provide acid gas control, and condense and
agglomerate the metals and particulate in the combustion gases. These functions are accomplished
by injecting a soda ash acid neutralizing solution (Brine Solution #1). The cooling occurs as the
water in the solution evaporates. The decrease in temperature causes materials in the flue gas to
condense and agglomerate. The soda ash forms a dry powder along with any salts created by the
reaction of the acid gases. These solids are partially removed by falling to the bottom of the spray
dryer. The remaining solids travel with the flue gas to the baghouse.
A-59
-------
Cocnbudon
Fuel Gas toWh>
a
A
Pump NoutpOzidon NHtojtliatoo
Pump
Figure A.10.1-1. APTUS incineration system in Coffeyville, Kansas.
-------
There are three brine solutions/systems designed so that there is no net discharge of liquid
from the incinerator system. Brine Solution #1 is composed of soda ash? and the discharges from
the saturator, the absorber and the second ionizing wet scrubber (IWS #2). This blended solution
is neutralized and then pumped to the spray dryer and recirculated to the saturator and the absorber.
Brine Solution #2 is circulated from the bottom of IWS #1 to the liquid inlet of both the IWS #1
and the scrubber. Brine Solution #3 is circulated from the bottom of the IWS #2 to its charged
pack bed. A slip stream from this recirculation line is fed to IWS #1. Any make-up water that is
feed to these brine systems is evaporated with small amounts of water emitted in the flue gas
exiting the stack. .
Baghouse
From the spray dryer, the flue gas travels to the baghouse for removal of particulate. The
baghouse is a four-chambered unit with vertically mounted filter sacks in each chamber. The filter
cake that develops is removed via pulse jet air, which causes the solids to fall to the bottom of each
chamber. These solids are combined with the solids from the spray dryer and then disposed. In
addition to particulate control, the fabric filter also acts as a reactor to aid in acid-gas absorption.
Acid gases in the flue gas are absorbed by alkaline material in the filter cake on the bags.
Saturator
Next, the flue gas passes through a saturator where it is cooled to a saturation temperature
of approximately 170 °F by the injection of Brine Solution #1. Materials in the gaseous phase at
the inlet of the saturator are condensed at the outlet, which enables the liquid and solids formed to
be removed by the absorber and scrubber downstream.
Cross-flow Absorber
Saturated gases exiting the saturator enter the absorber. In the absorber, most of the
halogen content and some more of the solids are removed by the Brine Solution #1 contacting the
gas stream as it passes through the bed packing. The absorber is arranged for crossflow of gases
and liquids.
A-61
-------
Cross-flow Scrubber
Next, the gases enter the cross-flow wet scrubber. Wet scrubbers are used for the
simultaneous removal of soluble gaseous pollutants and particulates. Wet scrubbers have been
proven effective in the removal of paniculate, HC1, 862, dioxin, and volatile metals. Like the
absorber, the brine solution contacts the-flue gases on the brine wetted packed bed.
Ionizing Wet Scrubbers
The ionizing wet scrubbers remove acid gas aerosols and fine particulates less than 10
microns in size. Each IWS is arranged for cross-flow of the gases through the charging zone,
which is wetted with Brine Solution #3. The charged droplets and particulates enter the
packed/charged scrubber section. The final exhaust gas treatment occurs in IWS #2 where trace
amounts of contaminants are removed prior to the discharge to the atmosphere.
A. 10.2
Waste Technologies Industries (WTI)
WTI operates a hazardous waste incineration system at its facility in East Liverpool, Ohio.
The information presented in this section was extracted from the draft of the "WTI Phase H Risk
Assessment Project Plan", EPA Contract No. 68-W9-0040, dated November, 1993. This system
is designed to treat liquid, solid and sludge type wastes. The WTI incineration system consists of
waste feed mechanisms, a rotary kiln, a secondary combustion chamber or afterburner, a heat
recovery boiler, a spray dryer, activated carbon injection, an ESP, a flue gas quench, and a pack
bed scrubber as shown in Figure A. 10.2-1.
The rotary Mln is 15 feet in diameter and 43 feet long and rotates at approximately 5 to 7
revolutions per hour. Wastes enter the rotary kiln and are oxidized at the internal kiln temperature
of approximately 2,400 °F. Gases from the kiln exit the kiln and enter to the secondary
combustion chamber. The secondary combustion chamber achieves burnout of flue gas and fly
ash by maintaining an elevated temperature which ranges from 1,800 °F to 2,200 °F. Before
leaving the secondary combustion chamber, recycled flue gas is introduced to lower the
temperature of the gas stream to 1,400 °F. This lower temperature causes some entrained particles
to fall out and be removed from the gas stream.
Next, the flue gas is further cooled to approximately 700 °F as it passes through the heat
recovery boiler. The heat absorbed by the boiler is used to generate steam for plant use. From the
A-62
-------
>
ON
LIWE StlO
uiuirv omiic.i/
CONVEYOR (HUM
PHOC(Sr,IUf. QUIlOIMG -,
OvCfiHEAO CRAHC
SECONDARY B00,jJ,rMn
COMOUSIIOH D
-------
boiler, the flue gas enters the spray dryer. The spray dryer rapidly cools flue gases to
approximately 320 °F using a spray of scrubber water. The scrubber water spray removes acid
gases and particulates.
Downstream of the spray dryer, dry, powdered, activated carbon is introduced into the
system through two injection points. The carbon removes residual organic compounds in the flue
gas through adsorption. Immediately downstream of the injection points is the ESP.
The ESP is sized for a the gas flow rate of approximately 72,000 standard cubic feet per
minute at the stack exit. The ESP removes up to 99% of the solids from the flue gas stream. The
flue gas then passes through the quench, which lowers the temperature from 320 °F to
approximately 170 °F. The gas leaves the quench saturated with water and is then drawn into the
wet scrubber.
The wet scrubber consists of four stages which are designed to remove acid gases (HC1,
Cl2, SC>2) and residual particulates from the gas stream. Stages within the scrubber system
consists of two packed bed sections, a venturi stage section, and mist eliminators which dissolve
gas in water, absorb hydrogen halides in packed beds, neutralize acids with sodium hydroxide,
and remove particulates and aerosols from the gas stream.
The flue gas is pulled through the APCS via the induced draft (ID) fan. At the exit of the
ID fan is a plume suppression reheater where hot air is added to the flue gas stream to suppress the
visible plume so that the opacity can be measured by the continuous monitor.20 All the gas is
exhausted through the 150-feet tall stack at an exit temperature of approximately 190 °F.
20 "Final Trial Burn Report for the Rotary Kiln Incinerator", May, 1993, Document
Number 7136-001-800, p. 2-4.
A-64
-------
APPENDIX B:
DETAILED SUMMARY OF CURRENT
PM DATA SET FOR CEMENT KILNS
-------
-------
Company
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
^j Ash Grove Cement Co.
i
^^
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Location
Chanute, KS
Chanute, KS
• Chanute, KS
Chanute, KS
Chanute, KS
Chanute, KS
Chanute, KS
Chanute, KS
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Louisville, NE
Louisville, NE
Louisville, NE
Louisville, NE
Louisville, NE
Unit Report Burn Haz
Tested Date Waste
V
1 Apr-92 y
y
y
y
2 Mar-92 y
y
y
y
1 Jul-92 y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
2 May-92 y
y
y
2 Jul-93 y
y
y
3 Jul-92 y.
y
y
y
y
y
1 May-92 y
y
y
y
y
Facility Run
Type No.
w 1
2
3
4
w 1
2
3
4
w 1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
2-1
2-2
2-3
2-4
PI
P2
P3
w 1
2
3
2
3
4
w 2-1
2-2
2-3
2-4
2-5
2-6
sd (ph/bp) 1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
1-5
APCS
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
O2
(%)
10.8
10.4
10.7
10.7
9.5
10.3
10.6
10.8
8.0
8.0
6.8
7.7
5.5
5.5
4.9
6.4
7.1
7.0
6.0
5.2
6.0
5.7
6.3
4.0
4.0
15.5
15.2
15.7
15.5
15.7
APCS
Temp
(°F)
422
439
435
448
484
412
425
412
387
360
371
356
470
487
494
456
408
405
399
500
485
506
371
365
373
475
470
460
512
522
517
258
238
255
243
258
ESP CO.runavg Paniculate # Points Paniculate (gr/dscf @ 7%O2)
Power ppmv (gr/dscf Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
(kVA) @7%O2 @7%O2)
31.96
30.19
27.58
24.76
46.43
50.55
38.73
48.18
25.2
28.4
32
28.5
27.4-
29.4
21.4
22.2
37.5
37.2
37.9
58
60
58
72.1
71.8
70
104.5
107.3
107.5
104.1
92.1
94.3
18.3
20.5
22.1
26.3
23.2
468
669
636
697
691
415
665
753
312
259
226
195
. ._
296
540
551
898
933
899
243
268
0.03750 4
0.04790
0.04600
0.06090
0.02660 4
0.02190
0.04940
0.03230
0.01630 11
0.03510
0.03560
0.03860
0.03110
0.02430
0.04900
0.03460
0.01540
0.01770
0.02770
0.00780 2
0.03260
na
0.00470 6
0.00550
0.00430
0.01830
0.00750
0.00460
0.01600 5
0.02280
0.01700
0.06530
0.06180
0.0609 0.04808 0.0375 0.00967
0.0494 0.03255 0.0219 0.01201
0.049 0.02958 0.0154 0.01050
0.0326 0.02020 0.0078 0.01754
. _. _ , .
0.0183 0.00748 0.0043 0.00542
0.0653 0.03658 0.016 0.02479
Ash Grove Cement Co. Louisville, NE
2 Aug-92
d(ph/pc/bp) 2-1 ESP 10.5 355 54.9
211 0.02000
0.026 0.01859 0.0142 0.00417
CK.pm
-------
Company
Location Unit Report BumHaz Facility Run APCS
Tested Date Waste Type No.
O2 APCS ESP CO.runavg Paniculate # Points Paniculate (gr/dscf @ 7&O2)
(%) Temp Power ppmv (gr/dscf Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
(kVA) @7%O2 @7%O2)
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Continental Cement Co.
Continental Cement Co.
Continental Cement Co.
Louisville, NE
Louisville, NE
Louisville, NE
Louisville, NE
Louisville, NE
Louisville, NE
Louisville, NE
Hannibal, MO
Hannibal, MO
Hannibal, MO
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
1 Jul-92 y
y
y
2-2
2-3
2-4
2-5
2-6
2-7
2-8
w 1
2
3
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
9.8
10.7
11.1
10.8
11.2
10.0
' 10.7
4.0
5.6
4.4
355
355
355
350
350
350
350
600
600
580
52.7
52.5
54
60.1
59.7
59.3
58.8
340
330
350
181
256
315
344
344
344
0.01860
0.01420
0.02600
0.01550
0.01660
0.01490
0.02290
0.04030 3 0.0403 0.03737 0.03430 0.00300
0.03750
0.03430
Continental Cement Co. Hannibal, MO
Continental Cement Co. Hannibal, MO
Continental Cement Co. Hannibal, MO
Continental Cement Co. Hannibal, MO
Essroc Materials
Essroc Materials
Essroc Materials
Essroc Materials
Essroc Materials
Essroc Materials
Essroc Materials
Essroc Materials
Essroc Materials
Essroc Materials
Essroc Materials
Giant Cement Co.
Giant Cement Co.
Giant Cement Co.
Giant Cement Co.
Giant Cement Co.
Giant Cement Co.
Heartland Cement Co.
Heartland Cement Co.
Heartland Cement Co.
Heartland Cement Co.
Heartland Cement Co.
Heartland Cement Co.
Logansport, IN
Logansport, IN
Logansport, IN
Logansport, IN
Logansport, IN
Logansport, IN
Logansport, IN
Logansport, IN
Dorado, PR
Dorado, PR
Dorado, PR
Harleyville, SC
Harleyville, SC
Harleyville, SC
Harleyville, SC
Harleyville, SC
Harleyvaie,SC
Independence, KS
Independence, KS
Independence, KS
Independence, KS
Independence, KS
Independence, KS
1 Dec-90
1 Aug-92
y
y
n
n
w 3
4
1
5
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
2.0
1.9
3.1
2.0
540
540
443
469
183.9
271.9
219.4
228.6
na
1 Jun-93
4 Aug-92
5 Aug-92
1 Oct-92
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
w 3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
d (ph/pc/bp) 3-1
3-2
3-3
w 1
3
4
w 1
2
3
d 1-1
1-2
1-3
2-1
2-2
2-3
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
11.6
12.6
11.9
123
6.0
4.5
4.0
10.1
10.4
10.2
10.5
10.2
10.4
14.3
14.4
13.9
14.5
14.3
14.4
496
504
492
517
606
605
607
614
553
553
553
549
549
549
440
440
440
440
440
440
32
31.7
39.8
42.4
44.7
34.2
40.5
39.1
_
-
-
_
-
—
_
-
—
_
-
-
-
-
-
0.08300
0.07500
0.06800
0.05700
186
56
70
79
0.02310
0.05500
0.06820
0.01050
0.01300
0.01550
0.01080
0.00800
0.01520
0.02480
0.02160
0.01960
0.02580
0.02530
0.04250
4 0.083 0.07075 0.057 0.01103
3 0.0682 0.04877 0.02310 0.02319
3 0.0155 0.01300 0.01050 0.00250
3 0.0152 0.01133 0.00800 0.00363
6 0.0425 0.02660 0.019 0.00815
CK.pm
-------
Company
Holnam, Inc.
Holnam, Inc.
Holnam, Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
i Holnam Inc.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Location Unit Report
Tested Date
Artesia, MS 1 Aug-93
Artesia, MS
Artesia, MS
Clarksville, MO 1 Jul-92
Claiksville, MO
Clarksville, MO
Clarksville, MO
Clarksville, MO
Clarksville, MO
Holly Hill, SC 1 Aug-92
HollyHill.SC
Holly Hill, SC
Holly Hill. SC
HollyHill.SC
Holly Hill, SC
Holly Hill, SC 2 Aug-92
Holly Hill, SC'
Holly Hill, SC
Holly Hill, SC
HollyHill.SC
Bath, PA 1 Aug-92
Bath, PA
Bath. PA
Bath, PA
Bath, PA
Bath, PA
Bath, PA
Bath, PA
Bath, PA
Bath, PA •
Bath, PA 2 Aug-92
Bath, PA
Bath, PA
Bath, PA
Bath, PA
Bath, PA
Bath, PA
Bath, PA
Bath, PA
Bath, PA
Burn Haz Facility Run
Waste Type No.
y w 2
y 4
y 6
y w 1
y 2
v 3
n 1
n 2
n 3
y w 1
y 2
y 3
n 1
n 2
n 3
y w 1
y 2
y 3
n 1
n 2
y w 1
y 2
y 3
y 4
y s
y 6
y 7
y 8
y 9
y 10
y w 1
y 2
y 3
y 4
y 5
y 6
y • 7
y ^
y 9
y 10
AFC6
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
U2 AFIJ5 i&i' (ju, run avg faiucuiate
(%) Temp Power ppmv (gr/dscf
(°F) (kVA) @7%O2 @7%O2)
8.4 470 140 273 0.01360
7.4 530 140 270.8 0.01730
8.3 522 140 290.9 0.01050
4.4 597 707 0.03340
4.4 597 732 0.03250
4.4 597 700 0.03520
4.9
4.3
5.6
10.1 450 30 110 0.04460
10.1 450 30 110 0.04630
10.1 450 30 110 0.05810
10.3 450 135
10.3 450 135
10.3 450 135
7.0 563 30 150 0.02910
7.0 563 30 150 0.02400
7.2 563 30 145 0.01480
7.0 563 145
7.0 563 145
12.1 421 23 0.02400
13.1 422.5 22 - 27 0.02800
11.7 418 25 26 0.02550
12.3 417 23 25 0.02620
12.5 416 19 0.03230
11.8 410 21 0.02210
11.7 415 19 0.01860
11.4 403 19 0.00920
11.2 393 19 0.01750
11.3 407 21 0.01700
RF fOllllS JrcllliCUlSlC ^gr/QSCI 1Q? / 7O\JjC,)
Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
3 0.0173 0.01380 0.01500 0.00340
3 0.0352 0.03370 0.03250 0.00137
3 0.0581 0.04967 0.04630 0.00735
3 0.0291 0.02263 0.01480 0.00725
10 0.0323 ' 0.02204 0.0092 0.00664
12.3 407 56 47 0.01300 10 0.025 0.01500 0.011 0.00383
11.1 416.5 48 47 0.01400
11.7 416 49 45 0.01500
12.6 419 61 0.01400
11.7 386 0.01500
11.5 410 0.01100
12.1 401 0.02500
11.7 401 0.01500
11.3 407 0.01200
11.7 412 0.01600
CK.pm
-------
Company
Location
Unit Report ButnHaz Facility Run APCS
Tested Dale Waste Type No.
O2 APCS ESP CO.iunavg Paniculate ft Points Paniculate (gr/dscf@ 7&O2)
(%) Temp Power pprav (gr/dscf Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
(kVA) @7%02 @7%02)
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lone Star Industries
Lone Star Industries
Lone Star Industries
Lone Star Industries
Lone Star Industries
Lone Star Industries
Lone Star Industries
Lone Star Industries
Lone Star Industries
Lone Star Industries
Lone Star Industries
Lone Star Industries
Medusa Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co.
Alpena, MI 1 Aug-92
Alpena, MI
Alpena, MI
Demopolis, AL 1 Aug-92
Demopolis, AL
Demopolis, AL
Fredonia, KS 1 Aug-92
Fredonia, KS
Fredonia, KS
Fredonia, KS 2 Aug-92
Fredonia, KS
Fredonia, KS
Fredonia, KS
Paulding, OH 2 Aug-92
Paulding, OH
Paulding, OH
Cape Girardeau, MO 1 Jan-93
Cape Girardeau, MO
Cape Girardeau, MO
Cape Girardeau, MO
Cape Girardeau, MO
Cape Girardeau, MO
Greencastle, IN 1 Aug-92
Greencastle, IN
Greencastle, IN
Greencastle, IN
Greencastle, IN
Greencastle, IN
Wampum, PA 1,2 Jul-92
Wampum, PA
Wampum, PA
Wampum, PA 1,2 Mar-93
Wampum, PA
Wampum, PA
y d(7) 1
y 2
y 3
y d (ph/bp) 4
y 6
y 7
y w 1
y 2
y 3
y w 1
y 2
y 3
y . 4
y w 4
y 5
y 6
y d (ph/pc/bp) 1-2
y 1-3
y 1-4
y 2-3
y 2-4
y 2-5
y w 1-1
y 1-2
y 1-3
n 2-1
n 2-2
n 2-3
y d E-4
y E-5
y E-6
y i •
y 2
y 3
FF
FF
FF
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
.ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
6.9
7.6
9.4
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.6
5.6
5.6
7.0
7.5
7.0
10.2
10.3
10.6
10.0
11.0
10.8
5.4
5.4
5.4
5.0
4.6
5.3
11.2
11.3
11.1
14.6
13.9
14.8
493 - 1365 0.00600
488 - 1499 0.00300
478 - 1708 0.00100
229 120 0.01400
243 65 0.03060
230 55 0.01000
533 5 359 0.03300
536 15 547 0.01300
529 16 416 0.01100
470 38 0.03300
481 38 244 0.02800
511 78 406 0.00500
496 60 180
408 123 0.02000
404 122 0.06000
404 123 0.02000
435 - 0.02200
435 - 0.02500
435 - 0.02100
435 - 0.02600
435 - 0.02400
435 - 0.02300
465 60 0.06370
457 60 0.04560
456 60 0.05760
415 na
419 na
416 na
744 107 2602 0.07670
738 149 4076 0.07500
750 138 8651 0.07890
711 50 0.07190
712 46.8 0.07240
701 57.2 0.05200
3 0.006 0.00333 0.00100 0.00252
3 0.0306 0.01820 0.01000 0.01092
3 0.033 0.01900 0.01100 0.01217
3 0.033 0.02200 0.00500 0.01493
3 0.06 0.03333 0.02000 0.02309
6 0.026 0.02350 0.021 0.00187
3 0.0637 0.05563 0.04560 0.00921
3 0.0789 0.07687 0.07500 0.00196
3 0.0724 0.06543 0.05200 0.01164
Medusa Cement Co. Wampum, PA
3 Jul-92
B-4 ESP 73 718 20
153 0.01930 3 0.032 0.02247 0.01610 0.00841
CK.pm
-------
Company
Medusa Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co.
National Cement Co.
National Cement Co.
National Cement Co.
National Cement Co.
North Texas Cement
North Texas Cement
North Texas Cement
River Cement Co.
River Cement Co.
River Cement Co.
River Cement Co.
River Cement Co.
River Cement Co.
Southdown/Southwestern
Southdown/Southwestern
£j Southdown/Southwestern
y, Southdown/Southwestern
Southdown/Southwestern
Southdown/Southwestern
Southdown/Southwestern
Southdown/Dixie
Southdown/Dixie
Southdown/Dixie
Southdown/Dixie
Southdown/Dixie
Southdown/Dixie
Texas Industries
Texas Industries
Texas Industries
Southdown/Kosmos
Southdown/Kosmos
Southdown/Kosmos
Southdown/Kosmos
Southdown/Kosmos
Southdown/Kosmos
Southdown/Kosmos
Location
Wampum, PA
Wampum, PA
Lebec, CA
Lebec, CA
Lebec, CA
Lebec, CA
Midlothian, TX
Midlothian, TX
Midlothian, TX
Festus, MO
Festus, MO
Festus, MO
Festus, MO
Festus, MO
Festus, MO
Fairborn, OH
Fairborn, OH
Fairborn, OH
Fairborn, OH
Fairborn, OH
Fairborn, OH
Fairborn, OH
Knoxville, TN
Knoxville, TN '
Knoxville, TN
Knoxville, TN
Knoxville, TN
Knoxville, TN
Midlothian, TX
Midlothian, TX
Midlothian, TX
Kosmosdale, KY
Kosmosdale, KY
Kosmosdale, KY
Kosmosdale, KY
Kosmosdale, KY
Kosmosdale, KY_
Kosmosdale, KY
Unit Report BurnHaz Facility Run
Tested Date Waste Type No.
y
y
1 Aug-92 y
y
y
y
2 Oct-92 y
y
y
1 Oct-92 y
y
y
y
y
y
1 Aug-92 y
y
y
y
y
y
y
1 Mar-92 y
y
y
y
y
y
1 May-93 y
y
y
1 May-92 y
y
y
y
y
y
y
B-5
B-6
d 1
2
3
4
w 1
2
3
d 1
2
3
4
5
6
d (?/bp) 2-1
2-2
2-3
I
II
I
II
d(ph/pc/bp) 1-1
1-2
1-3
2-1
2-2
2-3
w 1
2
3
d(ph) Cl-1
Cl-2
Cl-3
C2-1
C2-2
C2-3
C3-1
APCS
ESP
ESP
FF
FF
FF
FF
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
FF
FF
FF
FF/main
FF/main
FF/bypass
FF/bypass
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
ESP
ESP
ESP
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
O2 APCS ESP CO.runavg Paniculate # Points Paniculate (gr/dscf @ 7%O2)
(%) Temp Power ppmv (gr/dscf Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
(°F) (kVA) @7%O2 @7%02)
5.7
5.3
10.6
10.5
10.5
10.7
8.4
8.5
8.4
10.1
10.1
10.1
12.4
12.0
12.0
11.7
116
12.4
6.3
7.0
7.0
14.9
14.6
14.6
15.4
718
718
547
548
547
441
439
449
638
638
639
379
379
547
547
524
507
490
499
489
490
418
414
412
519
514.8
518.7
505.4
504.7
505.1
218
24
_
-
-
230
227
223
—
-
-
-
-
•*-- -
—
_
-
-
-
-
-
79.5
815
98.8
138
193
10.7
7.9
22.2
135
135
135
37
2.3
37
23
145
119
134
114
95
183
158
153
156
150
0.03200
0.01610
0.01310
0.02280
0.01600
0.01660
0.02200
0.02400
0.01600
0.02890
0.02790
0.02190
0.03520
0.01980
0.01290
0.00300
0.00300
0.00300
• - -
0.01130
0.00988
0.01200
0.01200
0.01270
0.01310
0.01135
0.00827
0.00923
0.00242
0.00192
0.00288
0.00264
0.00438
0.00276
0.00354
4 0.0228 0.01713 0.016 0.00408
3 0.024 0.02067 0.01600 0.00416
6 0.0352 0.02443 0.0129 0.00786
3 0.003 0.00300 0.00300 0.00000
. . . .. - r
6 0.0131 0.01183 0.00988 0.00114
3 0.01135 0.00962 0.00827 0.00158
9 0.00354 0.00261 0.00139 0.00094
CK.pm
-------
o\
Company
Southclown/Kosmos
Southdown/Kosmos
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Location
Kosmosdale, KY
Kosmosdale, KY
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
HollyHill.SC
HollyHill.SC
Hollyllill.SC
Holly Hill, SC
HollyHill.SC
HollyHill.SC
Holly Hill, SC
HollyHill.SC
HollyHill.SC
Holly Hill, SC
Holly HOI, SC
Unit Report BurnHaz
Tested Date Waste
y
y
2 May-92 Y
Y
Y
y
y
y
1 Aug-92 y
y
y
n
n
n
2 Aug-92 y
y
y
n
n
Facility Run
Type No.
C3-2
C3-3
w C2-1
C2-2
C2-3
C3-1
C3-2
C3-3
w 1
2
3
1
2
3
w 1
2
3
1
2
APCS
FF
EF
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
O2 APCS ESP CO.ruraavg ParticiJlale # Points ParticuJate (gr/dscf @ 7%O2)
(%) Temp Power ppmv (gr/dscf Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
TO (kVA) @7%O2 @7%O2)
10.1
10.1
10.1
10.3
10.3
10.3
7.0
7.0
7.2
7.0
7.0
500
485
506
450
450
450
450
450
450
563
5.63...
563
563
563
55
60
59
58
60
58
30
30
30
30
30
30
531
291
176
110
110
110
. 135
135
135
150
150
145
145
145
0.00139
0.00160
This data is the same as list above for the
0.00780 same facility, unit and test report
0.03260
0.04460 New Tola] Data, PM data is the same
0.04630
0.05810
0.02910 New Total Data, PM data is the same
0.02400
0.01480
w = wet kiln
d = dry kiln
sd = semi dry kiln
ph=preheater
pc = precalcinator
bp = by-pass
j ^information is missing because report is still incomplete
CK.pm
-------
APPENDIX C:
DETAILED SUMMARY OF CURRENT
PM DATA SET FOR LIGHTWEIGHT AGGREGATE KILNS
-------
-------
Company
Location
No. Unit Report BumHiz Facility Run
Units Tested Date Waste Type No,
APCS
02 APCS ESP PCDD/PCDF TEQ Paniculate
(%) Temp Power (ng/dscm (ng/dicm (gr/dicf # Points Paniculate (gr/dscf @ 7% O2)
NorliteCorp.
NorliteCorp.
NorliteCorp.
NorliteCorp.
NorliteCorp.
NorliteCorp.
NorliteCorp.
NorlileCorp.
Norlitc Coip,
NorliteCoip.
NorliteCorp.
NorliteCorp.
NorliteCorp.
NorliteCorp.
NorliteCorp.
SoliteCorp.
SoliteCorp.
SoliteCorp.
SoliteCorp.
SoliteCorp.
Solite Corp.
SoliteCorp.
SoliteCorp.
Solite Corp.
Solite Corp.
SoliteCorp.
Solite Corp.
SoliteCorp.
SoliteCorp.
SoliteCorp.
Solite Corp.
SoliteCorp.
SoliteCorp.
Solite Corp.
SoliteCorp.
SoliteCorp.
Solite Corp.
SoliteCorp.
SoliteCorp.
SoliteCorp.
Solite Coip.
SoliteCorp.
Solite Corp.
Solite Corp.
Solite Corp.
SoliteCorp.
Solite Corp.
Solite Corp.
Cohoes,NY
Cohoes,NY
Cohoei.NY
Cohoes.NY
Cohoes,NY
Cohoe»,NY
Cohoes.NY
Cohoes,NY
Cohoes,NY
Cohoes.NY
Cohoes.NY
Coboes.NY
Cohoes.NY
Cohoes.NY
Cohoes.NY
Brooks, KY
Brooks, KY
Brooks, KY
Cascade, VA
Cascade, VA
Cascade, VA
Cascade, VA
Cascade, VA
Cascade, VA
Arvonia, VA
Arvonia, VA
Arvonia, VA
Arvonia, VA
Arvonia.VA
Arvonia, VA
Norwood.NC
Norwood.NC
Norwood, NC
Norwood.NC
Norwood.NC
Norwood.NC
Norwood.NC
Norwood.NC
Norwood.NC
Norwood.NC
Norwood,NC
Norwood, NC
Green Cove Springs, FL
Green Cove Springs, FL
Green Cove Springs, FL
Cascade, VA
Cascade, VA
Cascade, VA
2
1
2
2
2
2
4
4
4
4
3
1
2
2
4
7
8
5
5
5
6
6
6
7
7
7
8
8
8
5
1
Dec-92
Aug-92
' Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-93
Aug-93
Aug-93
Iul-93
Jan-94
Mar-94
y
y
y
y •
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
B-l
B-2
B-3
B-4
D-l
D-2
D-3
A-l
A-2
A-3
A-4
C-l
C-2
C-3
C-4
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
SD/FF/VS/WS
SD/FF/VS/WS
SD/FF/VS/WS
SD/FF/VS/WS
SD/FP/VS/WS
SD/FF/VS/WS
SD/FF/VS/WS
SD/FF/VS/WS
SD/FF/VS/WS
SD/FF/VS/WS
SD/FF/VS/WS
SD/FF/VS/WS
SD/FF/VS/WS
SD/FF/VS/WS
SD/FF/VS/WS
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
14.9
153
152
15.4
14.2
14.9
15.4
15.7
15.5
15.8
15.5
15
14.9
14.8
15
17.6 324
17.8 324.6 -
17.7 325.7 -
17.0 423
17.3 401 ~ .
17.1 412
16.0 423
15.9 401
16.1 412
15.0 419
14.8 419
14.6 420
15.5 443
15.5 440
15.1 429
122
12.6
12.9
16.8
17
17.1
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na '
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
1.65
IS
1.48
na
na
na
n«
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
0.0508
Oj0372
0.0383
0.0112 15
0.0082
0.0058
0.0157
0.0081
0.0059
0.0056
0.0085
0.0076
0.0117
0.0060
0.0142
0.0130
0.0371
0.0254
0.01300 3
0.02600
0.01600
0.00400 3
0.00700
0.00600
0.00700 3
0.00500
0.01800
0.00800 3
0.00600
0.00600
0.01300 "3
0.03000
0.03300
0.00262 3
0.00229
0.00796
0.0102 3
0.00286
0.00229
0.000298 3
0.000765
0.000362
0.00101 3
0.00093
0.00375
0.00157 3
0.00149
0.00127
0.00757 3
0.0111
0.00726
OA371 0.0123 0.0056 0.00363
0.026 0.01833 0.013 0.006807
0.007 0.00567 0.004 0.001528
0.018 0.01000 0.007 " 0.007
0.008 0.00667 0.006 0.001155
0.033 0.02533 0.013" 0.010786
0.00796 0.00429 0.00229 0.003183
0.0102 0.00512 0.00229 0.004412
0.000765 0.00048 0.000298 0.000253
0.00375 0,00190 0.00093 0.001606
0.00157 0.00144 0.00127 0.000155
0.0111 0.00864 0.00726 0.002133
AK.pm
-------
-------
Company
Location No. Unit Report Burn Facility Run
Units Tested Date a. Wa Type No.
APCS O2 APCS ESP Paniculate
(%) Temp Power (gr/dscf # Points
(°F) (kVA) @7%O2)
Allied Chemical
Allied Chemical
Allied Chemical
Allied Chemical
Allied Chemical
Allied Chemical
Allied Chemical
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptns, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Atochem
Atochem
Atochem
Atochem
Atochem
Atochem
Atochem
Atochem
Atochem
Birmingham, AL
Birmingham, AL
Birmingham, AL
Birmingham, AL
Birmingham, AL
Birmingham, AL
Birmingham, AL
Aragonite,UT
Aragonite, UT
Aragonite,UT
Aragonite, UT
Aragonite, UT
Aragonite, UT
Aragonite, UT
Aragonite, UT
Aragonite, UT
Coffeyvillle, KS
Coffeyvillle, KS
Coffeyvillle, KS
Coffeyvillle, KS
Coffeyvillle, KS
Coffeyvmie, KS
Coffeyvillle, KS
Coffeyvillle, KS
Coffeyvillle, KS
Coffeyvillle, KS
Coffeyvillle. KS
Coffeyvillle, KS
Coffeyville, KS
Carrollton,KY
Carrollton,KY
Carrollton. KY
Carrollton,KY
Carrollton, KY
Carrollton, KY
Carrollton, KY
Carrollton, KY
Carrollton, KY
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Feb-89
Feb-89
Feb-89
Feb-89
Feb-89
Feb-89
Feb-89
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Dec-90
Dec-90
Dec-90
Dec-90
Dec-90
Dec-90
Dec-90
Dec-90
Dec-90
Dec-90
Dec-90
Dec-90
Dec-91
Jun-90
Jun-90
Jun-90
Jun-90
Jun-90
Jun-90
Jun-90
Jun-90
Jun-90
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
BPF
BPF
BPF
BPF
BPF
BPF
BPF
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
11
12
13
4
5
6
7
8
9
cl-1
cl-2
cl-3
c2-l
c2-2
c2-3
c3-l
c3-2
c3-3
c4-l
c4-2
c4-3
tl-2
tl-3
tl-4
t2-l
t2-2
12-3
t3-l
t3-2
t3-3
none na
FF/WS/ESP 9.91
9.42-
9.59
10.5
8.88
8.96
8.06
9.9
12.2
FF/WS/IWS 10.9
11.6
11.1
11.5
12.1
11.5
12.1
11.5
12.6
11.5
12.5
12.6
FF/WS/IWS
FF/SW
na na
143.1
145.5
147.8
144
146
144
150
146
143
172
173
174
170
168
166
174
170
171
170
172
170
0.00703
0 01770
U*U1 / /U
oofifion
u.uuuyu
0.02420
0 00947
v.uuyt /
ft nciddi
U.UU*? *t /
0.00779
0.00050
0.00000
0.00140
0.00060
0.00160
0.00060
0.00000
0.00080
0.00020
0.00300
0.00300
0.00500
0.00400
0.00300
0.00400
0.00100
0.00200
0.00200
0.00600
0.00400
0.00400
na
0.00270
0.00340
0.00300
o nnttdn
u.uuotu
0.00550
0.01270
0.07790
0 09540
\J*\JirJ*t\J
0.05690
Paniculate (gr/dscf @ 7% O2)
Maximum Average Minimum Sdedv
0.06690 0.01965 0.00447 0.02195
9 0.00160 0.00063 0.00000 0.00057
12 0.00600 0.00342 0.00100 0.00138
0.09540 0.02954 0.00270 0.03681
CHWI.phi
-------
Company
Location No. Unit Report Burn Facility Run
Units Tested Da»e iz.W* Type No.
APCS O2 APCS ESP Particulale
(%) Temp Power (gr/dscf * Points
(°F) (kVA) @7%02)
CWM Chemical Services
CWM Chemical Services
CWM Chemical Services
CWM Chemical Services
General Electric
General Electric
General Electric
General Electric
General Electric
General Electric
General Electric
General Electric
General Electric
General Electric
General Electric
General Electric
Laidlaw Environmental Services
Laidlaw Environmental Services
Laidlaw Environmental Services
Laidlaw Environmental Services
Laidlaw Environmental Services
Laidlaw Environmental Services
Laidlaw Environmental Services
Laidlaw Environmental Services
LWD, Inc.
LWD, Inc.
LWD, Inc.
LWD, Inc.
LWD, Inc.
LWD, Inc.
LWD, Inc.
LWD, Inc.
LWD, Inc.
Marine Shale
Marine Shale
Marine Shale
Chicago, IL
Chicago, IL
Chicago, IL
Chicago, IL
Pittsfield, MA
Pittsfield, MA
Pittsfield, MA
Pittsfield, MA
Pittsfield, MA
Pittsfield, MA
Pittsfield, MA
Pittsfield, MA
Pittsfield, MA
Pittsfield, MA
Pittsfield, MA
Pittsfield, MA
Roebuck, SC
Roebuck, SC
Roebuck, SC
Roebuck, SC
Roebuck, SC
Roebuck, SC
Roebuck, SC
Roebuck, SC
CalvertCity.KY
CalvertCity.KY
CalvertCity.KY
CalvertCity.KY
CalvertCity.KY
CalvertCity.KY
CalvertCity.KY
CalvertCity.KY
CalyertCity.KY
Amelia, LA
Amelia, LA
Amelia, LA
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
3
1
Mar-92
Mar-92
Mar-92
Mar-92
Apr-91
Apr-91
Apr-91
Apr-91
Apr-91
Apr-91
Apr-91
Apr-91
Apr-91
Apr-91
Apr-91
Apr-91
Jun-91
Jun-91
Jun-91
Jun-91
Jun-91
Jun-91
Jun-91
Jun-91
Mar-93
Mar-93
Mar-93
Mar-93
Mar-93
Mar-93
Jan-93
Jan-93
Jan-93
Jul-95
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
'Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
y
y
y
RK
RK
RK
RK
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
AK
AK
AK
1 IWS/PS
2
3
4
O-4 PS
O-5
O-6
OW-4
OW-5
OW-6
O-l
O-2
O-3
OW-1
OW-2
OW-3
1 FF/VS/AFS
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
1 FF/WS
2
3
1 FF/WS
2
3
1 FF/WS
2
3
1 SD/FF
2 SD/FF
3 SD/FF
8.7
8.4
8.4
8.4
10.2
9.8
10.2
9.6
9.6
93
9.8
9.9
9.7
9.S
10.1
9.4
9.8
10.1
10.2
9.6
10.3
10
10
10.3
15.7
15.6
15.7
15.3
14.9
15.7
16.2
15.3
15
10.7
10.4
10.5
164
166
162
165
168.9 na
169
169
170.6
170.6
170.8
169.1
168.7
169
170.6
169.6
170.6
153 na
152
152
151
154
154
154
155
156 na
157
155
159 na
163
157
153 na
154
153
387
398
400
0.03680
0.03360
0.02670
0.02730
0.02610
0.01590
0.02600
0.05820
0.05660
0.06320
0.00160
0.00070
0.00060
0.00050
0.00080
0.00070
0.00070
0.00050
0.01140
0.01040
0.00383
0.02030
0.02390
0.02380
0.01840
0.00505
0.00183
0.00460
0.00490
0.00790
4
6
8
3
3
3
3
Rollins Environmental Services Baton Rouge, LA
1 1 Apr-87 Y
RK
WS
11
94 na
0.02410 3
Paniculate (gr/dscf @ 7% 02)
Maximum Average Minimum Sdedv
0.03680 0.03110 0.02670 0.00492
0.06320 0.04100 0.01590 0.02054
0.00160 0.00076 0.00050 0.00035
0.01140 0.00854 0.00383 0.00411
0.02390 0.02267 0.02030 0.00205
0.01840 0.00843 0.00183 0.00879
0.0079 0.00580 0.00466 0.00182
0.02410 0.01717 0.00860 0.00788
CHWLpm
-------
Company
Location
No. Unit Report Bum
Units Tested Date iz.Wa;
Facility
Type
Run
No.
APCS 02 APCS ESP Paniculate
(%) Temp Power (gr/dscf # Points
(°F) (kVA) @7%O2)
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Baton Rouge, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Bridgeport, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Deerpark, TX
Deerpark, TX
Deerpark, TX
Deerpark, TX
Deerpark, TX
Deerpark, TX.
Deerpark, TX
Deerpark, TX
Deerpark, TX
Deerpark, TX
Deerpark, TX
Deerpark, TX
Deerpark, TX
Deerpark, TX
Deerpark, TX
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
• 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3"
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Apr-87
Apr-87
May-88
May-88
May-88
May-88
May-88
May-88
May-88
May-88
May-88
Aug-88
Nov-86
Nov-86
Nov-86
Dec-86
Dec-86
Dec-86
Aug-83
Aug-83
Aug-83
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
2
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
4
5
6
1
2
4
1
3
4
1
2
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
10.6
11
IWS 10.7
10.3
10.6
9.3
10
9.7
9.3
9.6
10.4
WS ??
WS ??
WS ??
WS _ 10.7
10.2
10.6
WS 10
10.7
11.2
WS 11
10.3
10.2
11.5
12.5
12.8
12.1
11.8
11.6
8.4
8.2
8.7
8.2
7.5
8.2
9
9.2
7.9
97
95
108 na
113
111.7
106.6
100.5
99
92
103.7
97.5
??
??
??
103 na
106
109
101 na
102
102
na na
122.6 na
119
121.2
112.7
117.8
118.2
113.6
124.5
130.9
120.2
115.5
118.5
125.6
129.9
128.4
0.01880
0.00860
0.01640
0.03340
0.03320
0.02570
0.02060
0.02070
0.08970
0.00620
0.05300
0.032
0.026
0.023
0.02950
0.02630
0.02680
na
0.07140
0.04190
0.06480
0.01160
0.01510
0.01610
0.01250
0.01380
0.01770
0.01670
0.01930
0.00320
0.02040
0.01330
0.01050
0.01240
0.01300
0.01220
9
3
3
3
15
Paniculate (gr/dscf @ 7% O2)
Maximum' Average Minimum Sdedv
0.08970 0.03321 0.00620 0.02492
0.03200 0.02700 0.02300 0.00458
0.02950 0.02753 0.02630 0.00172
0.07140 0.05937 0.04190 0.01548
0.02040 0.01385 0.01050 0.00414
CHWI.pm
-------
Company
Ross Incincralion Services
Ross Incineration Services
Ross Incineraiion Services
ThermalKEM
ThermalKEM
ThermalKEM
ThermalKEM
ThermalKEM
ThermalKEM
ThermalKEM
Trade Waste Incineration
Trade Waste Incineration
Trade Waste Incineration
Trade Waste Incineration
Trade Waste Incineration
Trade Waste Incineration
Trade Waste Incineration
Trade Waste Incineraiion
Waste Tech. Industries
Waste Tech. Industries
Waste Tech. Industries
Waste Tech. Industries
Waste Tech. Industries
Waste Tech. Industries
Location
No. Unit Report Bum Facility Run
Units Tested Date iz.Wa: Type No.
APCS O2 APCS ESP PartSculae
(%) Temp Power (gr/dscf # Points
(°F) (kVA) @7%02)
Grafton, OH
Grafton, OH
Grafton, OH
Rock Hill, SC
Rock Hill, SC
Rock Hill, SC
Rock Hill. SC
Rock Hill, SC
Rock Hill, SC
Rock Hill, SC
Sauget, IL
Sauget, IL
Sauget, IL
Sauget, IL
Sauget, IL
Sauget, IL
Sauget, IL
Sauget, IL
East Liverpool, OH
East Liverpool, OH
East Liverpool, OH
East Liverpool, OH
East Liverpool, OH
East Liverpool, OH
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 '
1
1
1
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
Mar-93
Mar-93
Mar-93
Jun-87
Jun-87
Jun-87
Jun-87
Jun-87
Jun-87
Jun-87
Sep-92
Sep-92
Sep-92
Sep-92
Sep-92
Sep-92
Sep-92
Sep-92
May-93
May-93
May-93
May-93
May-93
May-93
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
RK
RK
RK
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
:otary Kil
lotary Kil
:otary Kil
lotary Kil
'.otary Kil
lotary Kil
lotary Kil
'.otary Kil
:otary Kil
lotary Kil
lotary Kil
lotary Kil
lotary Kil
lotary Kil
1
2
3
T-l
T-2
T-3
1
2
3
4
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
2
3
4
5
6
PT/IWS
WS
SD/FF
SD/FF
SD/FF
SD/FF
SD/FF
SD/FF
SD/FF
SD/FF
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
1U
11.2
11
8.6
6.2
8.7
8.8
9.2
10.2
9
11.6
11.6
11.6
11.6
11.8
11.6
11.6
11.6
11.3
11.3
11.7
10.9
11.4
12.8
122 na
125
119
172
181
167
367
367
361
364
363
354
366
362
0.00700
0.00800
0.01000
0.06600
0.06700
0.05600
0.03450
0.04160
0.03710
0.06570
0.00460
0.00120
0.00040
0.00150
0.00170
0.00270
0.00050
0.00080
0.00300
0.00350
0.00170
0.00180
0.00250
0.00340
3
7
8
9
Paniculate (gr/dscf @ 7% O2)
Maximum Average Minimum Sdedv
0.01000 0.00833 0.00700 0.00153
0.06700 0.05256 0.03450 0.01449
0.00460 0.00168 0.00040 0.00140
0.00350 0.00240 0.00100 0.00087
CHWLpm
-------
APPENDIX E:
DETAILED SUMMARY OF CURRENT
PM DATA SET FOR ON-SITE HW INCINERATORS
-------
-------
Company Location No. Unit No. Report
Units Tested Date
American Cyanamid Hannibal, MO 1 1 Aug-89
Amoco Oil Whiting, IN 1 1 Jun-89
Anstech Chemical Cotton, CA 1 1 Jan-89
Ashland Chemical Los Angeles, CA 1 1 Dec-88
W Bnnoughs Wellcome Greenville, NC ?? 2 Jan-93
i— «
Cargill Lynwood,CA 1 1 Jul-89
Caigill Lynwood, CA 11 Jan-88
Chevron Philadelphia, PA 1 1 Sep-91
Chevron Belle Chase, LA 1 1 Feb-88
Bum Facility
Haz. Waste Type
Y LI&CA
Y
Y
Y FB
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
LI
Y LI
- Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y LI
Y
Y
Y
Y LI
Y
Y
Y FB
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y RH&LI
Run
No.
2
.3
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
1-1
1-2
1-3
2-1
2-2
2-3
1-1
1-2
1-3
2-1
2-2
2-3
1-2
1-3
14
n-i
n-2
H-3
ra-i
m-2
m-3
6-19
6-20
6-21
6-22
1600A
1600B
1600C
1
2A '
2B
2C
3
1-2
1-3
APCS
PT
FT
PT
C/VS
C/VS
C/VS
C/VS
C/VS
C/VS
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
WS/ESP
WS/ESP
WS/ESP
WS/ESP
WS/ESP
WS/ESP
WS/ESP
WS/ESP
WS/ESP
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
VS/WS
VS/WS
VS/WS
VS/WS
VS/WS
VS/PT
VS/PT
O2 APCS ESP
(%) Temp Power
(°F) (IcVA)
5.8
5.2
5.1
14.0
13.2
13.7
14.6
13.8
14.5
9
9.5
9.2
8.6
8.1
8
10.2
8
82
7.4
6.4
4.8
11.6
11.7
11.8
12.1
12.3
12.1
122
12.5
12.5
8.8
9
9.1
9.6
10.26
9.61
9.46
15 161
11 177
11 176
10 176
13 160
12.4
12.7
Paniculate
(gr/dscf
@7%O2)
0.0566
0.0577
0.0489
0.0449
0.0649
0.0594
0.0307
0.0303
0.0317
0.004
0.004
0.003
0.001
0.003
0.002
0.02
0.015
0.011
0.014
0.024
0.028
0.0258
0.0225
0.0287
0.0823
0.0535
0.0332
0.0177
0.0127
0.0121
0.106
0.048
0.034
0.014
0.0022
0.0114
0.0072
0.0385
0.0193
0.0158
0.016
0.0093
0.018
•0.018
# points PM (gr/dscf @ 7% 02)
Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
3 0.0577 0.0544 0.0489 0.004795
6 0.0649 0.04365 0.0303 0.015427
6 0.004 0.002833 0.001 0.001169
6 0.02 0.018667 0.011 0.006501
9 0.0823 0.032056 0.0121 0.022656
4 0.106 0.0505 0.014 0.039543
3 0.0114 0.006933 0.0022 0.004606
5 0.0193 0.01978 0.0093 0.011075
9 0.049 0.032 0.018 0.01254
OSHWLpm
-------
Cotnptny
Location
No. UnitNo. Report Bwn Facility Run
Unite Tested Dale Hat Waste Type No.
Chevron
Chevron
Richmond. CA
Richmond, CA
Jun-93
Jul-88
Ciba-Geigy
Macintosh, AL
Mar-90
Ciba-Geigy
St Gabriel, LA
May-88
Department of the Army Johnston Atoll
Department of the Army Johnston Atoll
Department of the Army Johnston Atoll
1 LIC Jun-91
1 LIC Jun-92
1 DPS Jun-92
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
LI
LI
RK
LI
LI
LI
RK
APCS 02 APCS ESP Partfcatas
(%) Temp Power (jr^jcf * points PM(p/ajcf@7%O2)
(fcVA) @7%O2) Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
14
2-3
24
2-5
3-1
3-2
3-3
1
2
3
A-2
A-3
A4
B-5
B-6
B-7
C-8
C-9
C-10
A-ll
1
2
3
4
5
6
1-1
1-2
1-3
n-i
n-2
n-3
ra-i
m-2
m-3
i
2
3
i
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
VS/PT
VS/PT
VS/PT
VS/PT
VS/PT
VS/PT
VS/PT
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS/PT/ESP
VS/PT/ESP
VS/PT/ESP
VS/PT/ESP
VS/PT/ESP
VS/PT/ESP
VS/Cyclone
VS/Cyclone
VS/Cyclone
VS/Cyclone
VS/Cyclone
VS/Cyclone
VS/Cyclone
VS/Cyclone
VS/Cyclone
VS/PBS
VS/PBS
VS/PBS
VS/PBS
VS/PBS
VS/PBS
VS/PBS
VS/PBS
VS/PBS
VS/PBS
VS/PBS
125
11.7
113
12.0
11.8
135
125
33
35
35
3.4
3.2
2.8
3.3
3.1
2.8
2.9
3.6
3
2.7
3.8
3.9
3.8
5.5
5.3
4.9
5.7
5A
5.6
14.6
14.4
14.6
13.9
13.0
13.2
13.1
175
176
174
174
171
173
171
170
172
171
194
198
198
• 0.029
0.022
0.023
0.049
tt045
0.045
0.039
0.0000175
0.0000182
0.0000188
0.0028
0.0016
0,0012
0.0017
0.0054
0,0044
0.0008
0.0009
0.002
0.17
0.029
0.02
0,052
0.074
0.029
0.0388
0.0404
0.0344
0.063
0.0565
0.066
0.0337
0.0263
0.0253
1.61E-03
1.83E-03
1.70E-03
1.96E-03
7.20E-04
1.79E-03
1.28E-03
0.000485
0.00199
0.00191
0.00066
1.88E-05 1.82E-05 1.75E-05 651E-07
0.0054 0.002311 0.0008 0.001606
6 0.17 0.062333 0.02 0.056302
9 0.066 0.042711 0.0253 0.01536
3 0.00183 0.001713 0.00161 0.000111
4 0.00196 0.001438 0.00072 0.000559
4 0.00191 0.001261 0.000485 0.000799
OSHWLpm
-------
Company
Location
Department of the Aimy Tooele,UT
Department of the Army Tooele.UT
Dow Chemical Co. Plaquemine, LA
No. Unit No. Report Bum Facility Run
Units Tested Date Haz. Waste Type No.
77
Dow Chemical Co. Freeport,TX
to
Dow Chemical Co. Midland, MI
Dow Chemical Co. Midland, MI
APCS O2 APCS ESP Paniculate
(%) Temp Power (gr/dscf
(°F) (kVA) @7%O2)
?? Apr-92
1
?? Oct-93
1
1 Feb-88
1 Nov-88
830 Mar-92
703 Jun-89
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
2
3
4
5
1
3
4
5
6
1
CM
Cl-2
Cl-3
C2-1
C2-2
C2-3
1
2
Cl-1
Cl-2
Cl-3
C2-1
C2-2
C2-3
Cl-1
Cl-2
Cl-3
Cl-4
C2-1
C2-2
C2-3
C2-4
C3-1
C3-2
C3-3
C3-4
C4-1
C4-2
C4-3
C4-4
C4-5
Cl-1
Cl-2
Cl-3
Cl-4
C2-1
C2-2
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
ESP/PBS
IWS
VS/IWS
VS/ESP
11.2
11.4
11:5
11.3
11.2
11.4 163.77
11.2 164.26
113 164
11.6 162.45
11.4 161.15
13.5 ?? 7?
13.3
133
93
9.8
10.7
13.37? 7?
13 7? 7?
14.4
13.6
14.1
13.3
13.8
13.3
11.8
11.5
12.1
11.7
11.1
10.8
11.1
10.8
11.7
11.4
11.8
11.7
11.8
11.9
11.1
11.1
10.9
11.9
10.7
0.01518
0.01435
0.00436
0.01006
0.00058 |
0.00802
0.01349
0.01188
0.01315
0.00255 I
0.109
0.0247
0.0163
0.00835
0.0106
0.0242
0.012
0.011
0.008
0.004
0.006
0.004
0.0002
0.0012
0.0001
0.0018
0.0007
0.00058
0.00038
0.0011
0.0017
0.0017
0.0011
0.0366
0.033
0.0226
0.0188
0.0167
0.0114
0.0102
0.00516
0.00668
0.0133
0.0096
PM(gr/dscf@7%O2)
Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
4 0.01518 0.010988 0.00436 0.004955
4 0.01349 0.011635 0.00802 0.002508
6 0.109 0.032192 0.00835 0.038227
6 0.012 0.0075 0.004 0.00345
16 0.0366 0.008641 0.0001 0.012625
11 0.0492 0.019804 0.00516 0.017404
OSHWI.pm
-------
Company
Location
No. UnitNo. Report Bora Fidlty Rao
Unte Tested D»le HiiWtste Type No.
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Dupont
Dupont
Deepwitcr.NJ
L»P!«ce,LA
FR-1 Jun-89
1 Sep-89
Dupont
La Porte. TX
2 N-THF Feb-89
Dupont
La Porte. TX
1 CSI(l) Jan-89
Dupont
La Porte. TX
Mar-89
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
LI
RK&LI
LI
LI
LI
APCS 02 APCS ESP Pmioitae
(%) Teap Power (gt/cr@79i02)
Mobum Avenge Mfafawn Sdev
3 0X5033 0.0029 0.0022 0.000608
9 0.0443 0.0268 . 0.015 0.011897
13 0.189 0.112769 0.042 0.04818
9 0.0567 0.036767 0.0149 0.011892
0.0127 0.002177 0:0004 0.003962
OSHWI.pm
-------
Company Location No. Unit No. Report Bum
Units Tested Date Haz. Waste
Dupont Louisville, KY 1 1 Jul-89 Y
Y
Y
Dapont Orange, TX 1 1 Aug-90 Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Duponl Wilmington, DB 1 1 Dec-92 Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Eastman Kodak Co. Rochester, NY ' Sep-92 Y
Y
w
Ul
Y
Eli Lilly and Co. Mayaguez, PR I 1 Nov-87 Y
Y
First Chemical Corp. Pascagoula, MS 1 1 Jul-91 Y
Y
Y
Honeywell Pinellas County, FL 1 1 Jun.88 Y
Y
Y
lowaAimy Middletown, IA 1 1 Nov-88 Y
Anmunidon Plant v
i
Y
Y
Y
Facility Run APCS
Type No.
LI 1 WS
2
3
RK Cl-1
Cl-2
Cl-3
C2-4
C2-5
C2-6
FH 1 SD/VS
2
3
4
5
6
RK 1-1
1-2
1-3
n-i
n-2
n-s
m-i
m-2
m-3
LI 1 PT/VS
2
3
?? 1-2 ??
1-3
1-4
n-s
n-e
n-7
ra-8
m-9
m-io
LI i n
2
3
4
RK 1 FF
2
3
4
5
O2 APCS
(%) Temp
(°F)
7.8
7.2
7.0
8.2
8.5
8.4
10.7
10.1
10.6
10.4 na
10.4
11.1
11.2
11,0
11.0
12.2
12.0
11.9
13.0
14.1
13.1
14.6
14.8
14.9
10.3
10.4
10.2
2.6
2.4
2.6
na
19.2
19.2
19.3
17.2
17.9
ESP Paniculate
Power (gr/dscf
(kVA) @7%02)
0.03500
0.03100
0.03100
0.00130
0.00200
0.00080
0.00170
0.00050
0.00120
na 0.06090
0.05250
0.05810
0.03340
0.02860
0.02830
0.07400
0.07700
0.07800
0.06200
0.06000
0.05200
0.01500
0.01900
0.03700
0.04530
0.04290
0.04250
0.01530
0.01300
0.01080
0.00410
0.00290
0.00300
0.01030
0.01070
0.02820
na 0.06000
0.06700
0.06900
0.04400
na 0.00900
0.01000
0.01200
0.21600
0.15400
# points PM (gr/dscf @ 7% 02)
Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
3 0.035 0.032333 0.031 0.002309
6 0.002 0.00125 0.0005 0.000554
6 0.0609 0.043633 0.0283 0.015178
9 0.078 0.052667 0.015 0.024052
3 0.0453 0.043567 0.0425 0.001514
9 0.0282 0.010922 0.0103 0.007875
4 0.069 0.06 0.044 0.011343
6 0.216 0.0835 0.009 0.088163
OSHWI.pm
-------
Cora piny
Location No. Unit No. Report Bum Facility
Unite Tested Dale Baz. Waste Type
low* Army Middtaown, IA 1
Ammunition Plant
lowaAimy Middletown, IA 1
Ammunition Flint
Luke City Army Independence, MO 1
Ammunition Plant
M&T Chemicals Canollton. KY 1
Oct-91
1 Jul-93
1 Mar-93
1 Jan-89
W
O\
Miles Inc.
NewMaitinsvilIe,WV
Sep-92
Monsanto Agricultural Co. Muscatine, IA
May-89
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
RK
RK
RK
RK
FB
LI
Run
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
4
5
6
1
2
3
5
7
8
1.1
12
1.3
\A
23
2A
2.5
3.1
3.2
3.3
Cl-1
Cl-2
Cl-3
C2-4
C2-5
C2-6
1-1
1-2
1-3
n-i
n-2
n-3
m-i
m-2
ni-3
w-i
IV-2
IV-3
v-i
V-2
V-3
APCS
FF
FF
FF
FF/WS
ESP/WS
PBS
02 APCS ESP
{%) Temp Power
(•F) (kVA)
18.7
16.6
16.6
15.9
16.0
15.7
15.9
15.9
15.2
15.3
14.8
162
15.1
14.6
15.3
15.2
7.7 162 na
8.8 158
8.9 157
8.0 162.2
8.6 159.8
7.9 160.7
12.3 na
8.7
9.0
9.4
7.7
10.4
7.8
7.8
7.8
7.3
6.7
7.0
7.8
7.5
9.0
PmicuUw
(p/dscf
@7%O2)
0.10000
0.00450
0.00710
0.00470
0.00390
0.00470
0.00480
0.01530
0.01260
0.01350
0.03200
0.02500
0.02600
0,02400
0.03500
0.02700
0.00870
0.00630
0.03540
0.00570
0.00620
0.04360
0.00830
0.00720
0.00660
0.00590
0.00900
0.00900
0.00500
0.00500
0.00700
0.00400
0.09300
0.04800
0.05700
0.07800
0.11400
0.07600
0.06800
0.07400
0.07500
0.09100
0.09400
0.07600
0.04300
0.02900
0.03600
i points PM(p/d3cf@7%O2)
Mtximum Avenge Minimum Sdev
0.0071 0,00495 0.0039 0,001102
3 0.0153 0.0138 0.0126 0.001375
6 0.035 0.028167 0.024 0.004355
10 0.0436 0.01339 0.0057 0.013931
6 0.009 0.0065 0.004 0.002168
15 0.114 0.07013 0.029 0.023727
OSHWLpm
-------
Company
Nepera Inc.
Neperalnc.
Olin Corp.
Olin Corp.
Location
Herriman, NY
Herrhnan,NY
East Alton, IL
Lake Charles, LA
No. Unit No. Report Bum Facility Run
Units Tested Date Haz. Waste Type No.
Pfizer lac.
Groton, CT
Pfizer Pharmaceuticals Inc. Barceloneta, PR
Radford Army Radford, VA
Ammunition Plant
6A
Thennal Oxidation Corp. Roebuck, SC
APCS 02 APCS ESP Paniculate
(%) Temp Power (gr/dscf # points PM(gr/dscf@7%O2)
(°F) (kVA) @7%O2) Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
0.0661 0.0375 0.023 0.024769
3 0.0271 0.022833 0.0207 0.003695
4 0.00053 0.000291 0.00016 0.000173
15 0.053 0.02227 0.004 0.01758
Feb-93 Y
Y
Y
Sep-92 Y
Feb-92 Y
Jan-89
Jul-90
5/89
Jun-93
Mar-87
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
N
Y
Y
LI 1 . ??
2
3
LI i n
2
3
SA 1 FF
2
3
4
LI 1-1 WS
1-2
1-3
n-i
H-2
n-3
ra-i
ra-2
m-3
IV-l
IV-2
IV-3
V-l
V-2
V-3
RH 2 WS
3
5
RK 1 VS/PT
2
3
RK M6-1 FF/PBS
M6-2
M6-3
A-l
A-2
A-3
AA-1
AA-2
AA-3
B-l
B-2
B-3
LI 1 FF/WS
2
5.2
5.1
5.1
5.1
4.6
4.4
17.1
16.0
16.2
16.6
9.3 na
10.6
11.8
6.9
13.0
11.2
135
13.3
11.6
15.0
13.4
18.9
10.8
9.0
10.7
7.3
7.7
7.7
10.8
10.6
11.4
13.1
143
14.9
12.1
12.1
12.0
10.4
10.6
10.6
14.1
12.5
12.9
15.0
14.7
401 na
401
398
399
na
151 na
153
168
187 na
187
185
172
173
172
174
174
174
180
178
179
172
178
177
141 na
133
0.02340
0.02300
0.06610
0.02070
0.02710
0.02070
0.00053
0.00016
0.00031
0.00017
0.03500
0.05300
0.05000
0.00800
0.01600
0.01600
0.00700
0.00900
0.00700
0.00500
0.00400
0.01300
0.04000
0.02700
0.04400
0.04000
0.03500
0.03300
0.06750
0.05890
0.06840
0.00317
0.00638
0.00484
0.00172
0.00095
0.00081
0.00149
0.00080
0.00077
0.00100
0.00053
0.00221
0.00813
0.00253
3 0.04 0.036 0.033 0.003606
3 0.0684 0.064933 0.0589 0.005244
9 0.00638 0.00233 0.00077 0.002046
6 0.0109 0.005743 0.00153 0.003542
OSHWLpm
-------
Coojpwy
location
No. UafcNo, Report Bum Rd% R»n
Unto Teaed Date Hu.Wu»e Type No.
APCS
U.S. Kept of Energy OikRJdge.TN
Upjohn Co.
Ktliroizoo, MI
Viifcin Materials Co. Wichita, KS
1 1 Aug-89
Dec-90
1 1 Apr-91
Vulcan Materials Co. Wichita. KS
Feb-91
CO
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
RK
RK
LI
LI
3
4
5
6
1
2
3
1
2
3
1-2
1-3
1-4
n-i
n-2
n-3
H
1-2
n-i
n-2
m-i
ra-2
IV-l
IV-2
VS/PB/IWS
PT/VS
WS
ws
O2 APCS ESP PHlicaltla
(%) Temp Power (p/ducf * points
(TO (kVA) @7%02)
12 141.7 0.00677
10/J 147.7 0.0109
125 143.7 OJJ0153
135 140 0.0046
115
11.1
11.4
14.1
11.7
135
5.8
3.9
4.4
45
5.1
43
8
5.8
6.8
5.9
2.9
3.7
2
3.7
183m
180
179
116 M
119
118
161 ni
162
161
162
164
165
117 na
121
133
139
149
157
142
141
0.0327
0.0244
0.0177
0.00406
0.00602
0.00187
0.0117
0.0103
0.00917
0.0121
0.0123
0.0126
0.02
0.0149
0.0193
0.0157
0.035
0.0275
0.0258
0.0252
PM(p/asef@7%02)
Maximum Avenfe Mbiaran Sdev
0.0327 0.024933 0.0177 0.007514
3 0.00602 0.003983 0.00187 0.002076
6 0.126 0.011362 0.00917 0.001342
8 0.03S 0.02292S 0.0149 0.006745
OSHWLpm
-------
No. Unit No. Report Burn Facility
Units Tested Date Haz. Waste Type
Revision 1:4/4/94
Run
No.
APCS
Eli Lilly and Co. Lafayette. IN
TJZ Feb-89
Eli Lilly and Co. Clinton, IN
C-10 Feb-89
VO
Glaxo Inc.
R.T.P..NC
1 Oct-93
Iowa Anny Middletown. IA
Ammunition Plant
1 Oct-91
Occidental Chemical Corp. Niagara Falls. NY
Feb-94
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Cook Composites Port Washington, WI 1 1 Apr-90 ?
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
LI
LI
RH
RK
LI
Cl-1
Cl-2
Cl-3
Cl-4
C2-1
C2-2
C2-3
C3-1
C3-2
C3-3
C4-1
C4-2
C4-3
Cl-1
Cl-2
Cl-3
Cl-4
-C2-1
C2-2
C2-3
C3-1
C3-2
C3-3
1
2
3
Sl-1
Sl-2
Sl-3
S2-1
S2-2
S2-3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
2
3
VS/PT
VS/PT
DS/FF
FF
IWS
02 APCS ESP Paniculate
(%) Temp Power (gr/dscf H points PM (gr/dscf @ 7% O2)
(°F) (kVA) @7%02) Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
2.5
3.5
1.9
2
1.5
2.3
3.1
5.6
5.7
5.6
2.4
23
2.4
10.1
10.1
10.6
11.5
9.9
10.4
10
11.4
11.2
12.6
7.7
9
9
14.7
14.0
13.8
14.3
14.7
15.0
15.0
14.2
14.4
11.3
11.3
11.0
0.0315
0.0305
0.0339
0.0361
0.0245
0.0246
0.0288
0.0411
0.0448
0.0429
0.0269
0.0262
0.0273
0.0384
0.0283
0.0289
0.0329
0.0272
0.0243
0.0267
0.0784
0.0601
0.0698
0.039
0.038
0.034
0.00176
0.00499
0.00095
0.00208
0.00119
0.00064
0.00450
0.00710
0.00470
0.00390
0.00470
0.00480
0.00840
0.01520
0.01280
0.00320
0.00090
0.00100
13 0.0448 0.032238 0.0245 0.007016
10 0.0784 0.0415 0.0243 0.020123
3 0.039 0.037 0.034 0.002646
6 0.00499 0.001935 0.00064 0.001587
9 0.0152 0.007344 0.0039 0.004078
3 0.0009 0.0017 0.0032 0.0013
OSHWI.pm
-------
Com pray
3M
Locttkm
No. UnitNo. Report Bum FicKtv Rita
Units Tested Dtle H«z.W«ste Type No.
Cottige Grove, MN 1
1 Sep-90
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
RK
•APCS 02 APCS ESP Poliodite
(%) Temp Power (jr/ascf
(T?) (kVA) @7%02)
WS 145 0.10700
WS 14.0 00643
WS 135 0.0414
WS 13.9 00368
WS 15.4 0.0708
WS 145 0.0746
WS 14.6 0.0395
WS 135 0.0452
» points
PM(jr/dxf@7%O2)
Avenge Minimum
Sdev
0.107 0.05995 0.0368 0.024145
77 UniUe to be detennined from information given
BI notmfliblu
OSHWI.pm
-------
APPENDIX F:
DETAILED SUMMARY OF CURRENT
PM DATA SET FOR HW BURNING BOILERS
-------
-------
Company
3M
3M
3M
3M
3M
3M
Air Products
Air Products
Air Products
Air Products
Air Products
Air Products
Air Products
Air Products
Air Products
Air Products
Air Products
Air Products
*fl Air Products
i— '
Air Products
Air Products
Air Products
Air Products
Air Products
Air Products
Air Products
Air Products
Allied Signal
Allied Signal
Allied Signal
Allied Signal
American Cyanamid Co.
American Cyanamid Co.
American Cyanamid Co.
American Cyanamid Co.
American Cyanamid Co.
American Cyanamid Co.
American Cyanamid Co.
American Cyanamid Co.
Location Unit Report Facility Primary Run APCS O2
Tested Date Type Fuel No. (%)
Decatur.AL 1 Mar-92 Boiler 1 ??
Decatur, AL 2
Decatur, AL 3
Decatur.AL 1 Aug-92 Boiler 1 ??
Decatur, AL 2
Decatur.AL 3
Pasadena, TX 15.2 Jun-92 Boiler 1 ?? 4.2
Pasadena. TX 2 4.1
Pasadena, TX 3 4.2
Pasadena, TX 4 4.1
Pasadena, TX 5 3.9
Pasadena, TX 6 4.1
Pasadena.TX 15.6 Jun-92 Boiler 1 ?? 4.1
Pasadena. TX 2 4
Pasadena.TX 3 4.1
Pasadena, TX ' 4 3.5
Pasadena.TX . 5 3.6
Pasadena, TX 6 3.6
Pasadena.TX 7 3.5
Wichita. KS 1 Aug-93 Boiler Natural Gas A-l ?7
Wichita, KS A-2
Wichita, KS A:l-3**
Wichita, KS B-l
Wichita. KS , B-2
Wichita, KS B:l-3**
Wichita. KS B-3*
Wichita. KS A-3*
Philadelphia. PA BL-701 Aug-92 Boiler Natural Gas 1 ??
Philadelphia, PA 2
Philadelphia, PA 1-3**
Philadelphia, PA 3*
Wallingford, CT 1 Apr-93 Boiler Solvents 8 None
Wallingford, CT 9
Wallingford, CT 8-10**
Wallingford, CT " 4
Wallingford. CT 6
Wallingford. CT 4-6**
Wallingford. CT 10*
Wallingford, CT 5*
APCS ESP Paniculate
Temp Power (gr/dscf # points Paniculate (gr/dscf @ 7% O2)
(°F) (kVA) @7%O2) Max Avg Min Sdev
0.0013 3 0.0038 0.00263 0.0013 0.00126
0.0038
0.0028
0.0056 3 0.0092 0.00607 0.0034 0.00293
0.0092
0.0034
0.0752 6 0.0752 0.03143 0.009 0.02759
0.0419
0.0458
0.0102
0.0065
0.009
0.0549 7 0.0612 0.02944 0.0046 0.02549
0.0532
0.0612
0.0129
0.0109
0.0084
0.0046
0.0243 6 0.0316 0.02055 0.0125 0.00759
0.0155
0.0316
0.0125
0.0142
0.0252
0.0488
0.055
0.0239 3 0.0287 0.02463 0.0213 0.00375
0.0213
0.0287
0.0432
0.0006 6 0.0296 0.01062 0.0005 0.01304
0.0005
0.0006
0.0083
0.02%
0.0241
0.011
0.0352
American Cyanamid Co. Kalamazoo, MI
3 Mar-93 Boiler
0.0172
0.0197 0.00965 0.0013 0.00877
BLR.pm
-------
Company
American Cytnimid Co.
American Cytntmid Co.
American Cyinamid Co.
American Cyinamid Co.
American Cyinamid
Angus Chemical
Angus Chemical
Angus Chemical
Angus Chemical
Angus Chemical
Angus Chemical
ARCO
ARCO
ARCO
ARCO
ARCO
ARCO
ARCO
ARCO
ARCO
ARCO
ARCO
ARCO
ARCO
ARCO
ARCO
ARCO
Arkansas Eastman
Arkansas Eastman
Arkansas Eastman
Arkansas Eastman
Arkansas Eastman
Arkansas Eastman
Arkansas Eastman
Arizona Chemical Co.
Arizona Chemical Co.
Arizona Chemical Co.
Arizona Chemical Co.
Arizona Chemical Co.
Arizona Chemical Co.
Location
Kilamtzoo, Ml
Kaltmazoo, MI
KaJamazoo, MI
Kalamizoo, MI
Kaltmazoo, MI
Sterlington.LA
Sterlington.LA
Sterlington.LA
Sterlington.LA
Sterlington, LA
Sterlington, LA
Channelview, TO
Channelview, TO
Channelview, TO
Channelview, TO
Channelview, TO
Channelview, TO
Channelview, TO
Channelview, TO
Channelview, TO
Channelview, TO
Channelview, TO
Channelview, TO
Channelview, TO
Channelview, TO
Channelview, TO
Channelview, TO
Magness, AR
Magness, AR
Magness. AR
Magness, AR
Magness, AR
Magness, AR
Magness, AR
Gulfport, MS
Gulfport, MS
Gulfport, MS
Gulfport, MS
Gulfport, MS
Gulfport, MS
Unit Report Facility Primary Run
Tested DM6 Type Fuel No.
5
6
1
2
3
4 May-93 Boiler I
(Watertube) 2
4
7 Apr-93 Boiler 4
(Watertube) 5
6
Boiler 1 Dec-92 Boiler 1
2
3
Boiler 2 Aug-92 -Boiler Refinery Gas 8
9
10
F-57180 Dec-92 Furnace 1
2
3
F-630 Aug-92 Furnace Refinery Gas 1
2
3
F-57180 Ang-92 Furnace Refinery Gas 4
5
6
7
1 May-92 Boiler Coal H-l
H-l
H:l-3»*
M-l
M-2
M-3
I H-3*
1 Aug-92 Boiler Oils& 1A
Solvent 1A2
IB
1C
2A
2B
APCS O2 APCS
(%) Temp
TO
??
??
None
None 4.52
4.62
4.89
None
None 7.64
7.72
7.55
None 7.86
7.16
6.75
5.88
?? 7.5
7.6
7.5
7.6
7.5
7.5
None 10.1
10.5
11
11
9.5
9.5
ESP PaitieuJale
Power (gr/dscf 1 points
(IcVA) @7%02)
0.0158
0.0197
0,0022
0.0013
0.0017
0.0026 3
0.0014
0.0014
0.0011 3
0.0012
0.0024
0.0033 3
0.0052
0.0034
0.0036 3
0.0029
0.0054
0.002 3
0.0048
0.0024
0.0023 3
0.0028
0.0032
0.0096 4
0.0127
0.0109
0.0099
0'.0278 6
0.0187
0.0198
0.034
0.0149
0.021
0.0131 |
0.004 13
0.022
0.014
0.016
0.015
0.014
Particulxe (gr/dtcf <§ 7% O2)
Max Avg Min Sdev
0.0026 0.00180 0.0014 0.00069
0.0024 0.00157 0.0011 0.00072
0.0052 0.00397 0.0033 0.00107
0.0054 0.00397 0.0029 0.00129
0.0048 0.00307 0.002 0.00151
0.0032 0.00277 0.0023 0.00045
0.0127 0.01078 0.0099 0.00140
0.034 0.02270 0.0149 0.00695
0.024 0.01608 0.004 0.00492
BLR.pm
-------
Company
Arizona Chemical Co.
Arizona Chemical Co.
Arizona Chemical Co.
Arizona Chemical Co.
Arizona Chemical Co.
Arizona Chemical Co.
Arizona Chemical Co.
Arizona Chemical Co.
Arizona Chemical Co.
Arizona Chemical Co.
Arizona Chemical Co.
Arizona Chemical Co. •
Arizona Chemical Co.
Arizona Chemical Co.
Arizona Chemical Co.
Arizona Chemical Co.
Arizona Chemical Co.
Arizona Chemical Co.
Arizona Chemical Co.
^ BASF Corp.
' BASF Corp.
BASF Corp.
• BASF Corp.
BASF Corp.
BASF Corp.
BASF Corp.
BASF Corp.
BASF Corp.
BASF Corp.
BASF Corp.
BASF Corp.
BASF Corp.
BASF Corp.
BASF Corp.
BASF Corp.
BASF Corp.
BASF Corp.
BASF Corp.
BASF Corp.
BASF Corp.
BASF Corp.
Bostik, Inc.
Bostik. Inc.
Location
Gulfport, MS
Gulfport, MS
Gulfport, MS
Gulfport, MS
Gulfport, MS
Gulfport, MS
Gulfport, MS
Panama City. FL
Panama City, FL
Panama City, FL
Panama City, FL
Panama City, FL
Panama City, FL
Panama City, FL
Panama City, FL
Panama City, FL
Panama City, FL
Panama City, FL
Panama City, FL
Freepoit,TX
Freeport.TX
Freeport.TX
Freeport,TX
Freeport,TX
Freeport.TX
Freeport.TX
Freeport,TX
Freeport,TX
Freeport,TX
Freeport,TX
Freeport, TX
Geismar, LA
Geismar, LA
Geismar, LA
Geismar, LA
Geismar, LA
Geismar, LA
Geismar, LA
Geismar, LA
Geismar, LA
Geismar, LA
Middleton.MA
Middleton, MA
Unit Report Facility Primary Run
Tested Date Type Fuel No.
2C
3A
3B
3C
4A
4B
4C
2 Aug-92 Boiler (Waste) Natural Gas 1-A
1-B
1-C
2-A
2-B
2-C
3-A
3-B
3-C
4-A
4-B
4-C
1 Aug-92 Boiler (NEOL) Liquid Waste C1-R1
C1-R2
C1-R3
C2-R1
C2-R2
C2-R3
C3-R1
C3-R2
C3-R3
C4-R1
C4-R2
C3-R3
Amines Aug-92 Boiler Waste Fuel 1
2
3
4
3 Aug-92 Boiler Natural Gas 1
(Watertube) 2
3
6 Aug-92 Boiler Natural Gas 1
(Firetube) 2
3
1 Dec-92 Boiler Fuel Oil 1
2
APCS 02
(%)
11.5
11
11.3
11..2
7.2
7.4
7.1
None 6.4
6.4
6.8
6.3
6.5
6.5
5.5
5.5
5.7
5.04
5.4
5.4
None 6
5.6
6
4.2
4.6
4.4
4.2
4.4
3.6
4
4.6
4.4
None
None 4
4
4
None 4
-4.5
4.2
?? 5.3
4.8
APCS ESP Paniculate
Temp Power (gr/dscf # points
(°F) (kVA) @7%O2)
0.018
0.019
0.024
0.02
0.014
0.014
0.015
0.018 12
0.016
0.038
0.031
0.037
0.054
0.046
0.04
0.057
0.045
0.047
0.054
0.0049 12
0.0043
0.0042
0.0216
0.0215
0.0184
0.0111
0.0107
0.0084
0.0208
0.021
0.0208
0.0065 4
0.0025
0.0038
0.0039
0.0044 3
0.0031
0.002
0.0014 3
0.0019
0.0013
0.0107 3
0.0094
Paniculate (gr/dscf @ 7% O2)
Max Avg Min Sdev
0.057 0.04025 0.016 0.01329
0.0216 0.01398 0.0042 0.00738
0.0065 0.00418 0.0025 0.00168
0.0044 0.00317 0.002 0.00120
0.0019 0.00153 0.0013 0.00032.
0.0107 0.00853 0.0055 0.00271
BLR.pm
-------
Company
Bostik, Inc.
BP Chemicals
BP Chemicals
BP Chemicals
Location
Middteton.MA
PortLmca.TX
PoitL»vtct,TX
PortL»v»ca,TX
Diversified Scientific Systems Kingston, TN
Diversified Scientific Systems Kingston, TN
Diversified Scientific Systems Kingston, TN
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
71 Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Freeport,TX
Freeport,TX
Freeport,TX
Freeport,TX
Freeport,TX
Freeport,TX
Freeport,TX
Freeport,TX
Freepoit,TX
Freeport.TX
Freeport,TX
Freeport,TX
Freeport,TX
Freeport,TX
Freeport,TX
Freeport,TX
Freeport,TX
Freeport,TX
Freeport,TX
Freeport,TX
Freeport,TX
Gales Ferry, CT
Gales Ferry, CT
Gales Ferry, CT
Ironton, OH
Ironton, OH
Ironton, OH
Midland, MI
Midland, MI
Unit Report
Tested Date
2 Aug-92
1 Aug-93-
F-2A/B Aug-92
F-210 Aug-92
FTB-400 Aug-92
F-820A Aug-92
B-901 Aug-92
B-902 Aug-92
B-903 Aug-92
A Aug-92
1 Aug-92
1142 Aug-92
Facility Primary
Type Fuel
Boiler Fuel Gas
Boiler Liquid Wastes
(Fireiube)
Boiler Fuel Gas
(Fireiube)
Boiler Natural Gas
Boiler Fuel gas
(Fireiube)
Boiler
(Fireiube)
Boiler Natural Gas
(Watenube)
Boiler Natural Gas
(Watertube)
Boiler Natural Gas
(Watertube)
Heater Fuel oil
Boiler Oil
Boiler Natural Gas
Run
No.
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
APCS 02 APCS ESP P»rtict»laie
(%) Temp Power (gr/dscf 1 points
TO (kVA) @7%02)
6.2 0.0055
7? 1.8 0.001857 3
1.9 0.002271
1.8 0.001066
SD/FF/ 0.00025 3
WS/HEPA 0.00029
0.00075
WS 0.016 3
0.004
0.011
WS 0.017 3
0.007
0.003
WS 0.003 3
0.003
0.003
WS 0.006 3
0.006
0.006
WS 0.002 3
0.002
0.011
WS 0.009 3
0.006
0.008
WS 0.003 3
0.003
0.009
None 0.0035 3
0.0014
0.0023
None 0.0013 3
0.0011
0.0019
None 0.0316 3.
0.0132
ParticulaJe (gr/dscf @ 7% O2)
Max AYR Min Sdcv
0.002271
0.00075
0.016
0.017
0.003
0.006
0.011
0.009
0.009
0.0035
0.0019
0.0316
0.00173
0.00043
0.01033
0.00900
0.00300
0.00600
0.00500
0.00767
0.00500
0.00240
0.00143
0.01820
0.001066
0.00025
0.004
0.003
0.003
0.006
0.002
0.006
0.003
0.0014
0.0011
0.0098
0.00061
0.00028'
0.00603
0.00721
0.00000
0.00000
0.00520
0.00153
0.00346
0.00105
0.00042
0.01173
BLR.pm
-------
Company
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
DSM Chemicals
DSM Chemicals
DSM Chemicals
DSM Chemicals
"Tl DSM Chemicals
(!n DSM Chemicals
DSM Chemicals
DSM Chemicals,
DSM Chemicals
Dupont
Dupont
Dupont
Dupont
Dupont
Dupont
Dupont
Dupont
Dupont
Dupont
Dupont
Dupont
Dupont
Dupont
Dupont
Location
Midland, MI
Midland, MI
Midland, MI
Midland, MI
Plaquemine, LA
Plaquemine, LA
Plaquemine, LA
Plaquemine, LA
Plaquemine, LA
Plaquemine, LA
Plaquemine, LA
Plaquemine, LA
Plaquemine, LA
Augusta, GA
Augusta, GA
Augusta, GA
Augusta, GA
Augusta, GA
. Augusta, GA
Addis, LA
Addis, LA
Addis, LA
Axis, AL
Axis, AL
Axis, AL
Beaumont, TX
Beaumont, TX
Beaumont, TX
Belle. WV
Belle, WV
Belle, WV
Orange, TX
Orange, TX
Orange, TX
Orange, TX
Orange, TX
Orange, TX
Unit Report
Tested Date
1276 Aug-92
F-410 Aug-92
R-4 Aug-92
R-750 Aug-92
H-002 Jul-92
H-2002 Jul-92
3 Aug-93
1 Aug-93
6 Aug-92
1 Aug-92
'TT Aug-92
"#8" Aug-92
Facility
Type
Boiler
Boiler
(Firetube)
Boiler
(Firetube)
Boiler
(Firetube)
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler (VGI)
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler .
Boiler
Primary Run
Fuel No.
3
Natural Gas 1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
Natural Gas 1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
Coal 1
2
3
waste + NG 1
2
1-3**
1 3*
waste + NO 1
2
APCS 02 APCS ESP Paniculate
(%) Temp Power (gr/dscf # points
(°F) (kVA) @7%O2)
0.0098
None 0.0009 3
0.0016
0.0012
?? 0.0028 3
0.0039
0.0036
?? 0.014 3
0.025
0.015
?? 0.072 3
0.053
0.053
?? 0.0053 3
0.0039
0.0041
?? 0.0016 3
0.0036
0.0011
None 0.000092 3
0.000605
0.000341
WS 0.0332 3
0.0405
0.0383
?? 2.7 0.0067 3
2.6 0.007
2.8 0.0075
?? .12.16 0.0011 3
14.22 0.0011
13.91 0.0013
None 7.1 0.0103 3
7.6 0.0077
0.0112
9.1 0.0222 |
None 10.3 0.0481 3
11.3 0.008
Paniculate (gr/dscf @ 7% O2)
Max Avg Min Sdev
0.0016
0.0028"
0.025
0.072
0.0053
0.0036
0.000605
0.0405
0.0075
0.0013
0.0112
0.0481
0.00123
0.00343
0.01800
0.05933
0.00443
0.00210
0.00035
0.03733
0.00707
0.00117
0.00973
0.02730
0.0009
0.0028
0.014
0.053
0.0039
0.0011
0.000092
0.0332
0.0067
0.0011
0.0077
0.008
0.00035
0.00057
0.00608
0.01097
0.00076
0.00132
0.00026
0.00374
0.00040
0.00012
0.00182
0.02009
BLR.pm
-------
Company
Dupont
Dupont
Dupont
Dupont
Dupont
Dupont
Dupont
Dupont
EPI
BPI
EPI
EPI
EPI
EPI
Elhyl Corp.
Ethyl Oaip. .
Ethyl Corp.
Ethyl Corp.
"Tl Ethyl Corp.
ON Ethyl Corp.
Exxon Chemical
Exxon Chemical
Exxon Chemical
Exxon Chemical
Exxon Chemical
Exxon Chemical
FINA Oil
FINA Oil
FINA Oil
FINA Oil
FINA Oil
FINA Oil
FINA Oil
FINA Oil
FINA Oil
General Electric Plastics
General Electric Plastics
General Electric Plastics
General Electric Plastics
Location
Orange, TX
Orange, TX
Orange, TX
Orange. TX
Orange, IX
Orange, TX
Orange, TX
Orange, TX
Toledo, OH
Toledo, OH
Toledo, OH
Toledo, OH
Toledo. OH
Toledo, OH
Orangeburg, SC
Orangeburg.SC
Orangeburg, SC
Orangeburg, SC
Orangeburg, SC
Orangeburg, SC
Baton Rouge, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Deer Park, TX
Deer Park, TX
Deer Park, TX
Deer Park, TX
Deer Park, TX
Deer Park. TX
Deer Park, TX
Deer Park, TX
Deer Park, TX
Mount Vemon, IN
Mount Vernon, IN
Mount Vemon, IN
Mount Vemon, IN
Unit Report Facility Primary
Tested Dale Type Fuel
1
North Aug-92 Boiler (ADN) ADN + NG
South Aug-92 Boiler (ADN) ADN+NG
1 Aug-93 Boiler Natural Gas
2 Aug-93 Boiler Natural Gas
"4" Aug-93 Boiler Waste liquid
"C" Aug-92 Boiler Waste Liquid
(Watertube)
"D" Aug-92 Boiler Waste Liquid
(Watertube)
1 Oct-92 Boiler Waste
(Waste Heat) Polymer
Gasses
"A" Feb-93 Boiler NG + Phenol
1
Run
No.
l-3«*
3*
1
2
3
1
2
3
A-l
A-2
A-3
B-l
B-2
B-3
MINI
MIN2
M1N3
MAX1
MAX 2
MAX 3
1
2
3
1
2
3
cl-rl
cl-r2
cl-r3
c2-rl
c2-r2
c2-r3
c3-rl
c3-r2
c3-r3
1
2
1-3**
3*
APCS O2
(%)
9.3
None U6
12
1Z7
None 93
9'A
9.4
None
None
FF 10.06
10.13
9.87
4
3.93
4.2
None 9.2
9.2
9.6
None 3.6
3.8
5.5
VS 15.5
16
15
15.5
13.5
12.5
15.5
15.5
15.5
None 13.5
12.8
13.8
APCS ESP Pirticultte
Temp Power (gr/dscf (points
(*F) (kVA) @7%02)
0.0258
0.0145 |
0.033 3
0.031
0.0195
0.005 3
0.004
0.003
0.0185 3
0.0155
0.014
0.0013 3
0.0013
0.001
341 0.002 6
340 0.0027
341 0.0015
420 0.001
421 0.0012
423 0.001
0.0016 3
0.0021
0.0019
0.0035 3
0.0024
0.0025
0.0574 9
0.0537
0.0437
0.0402
0.0324
0.0348
0.043
0.0418
0.0491
0.057 4
0.044
0.078
0.101 I
PartictiJjJe fer/djcf @ 7% O2)
M»x AVR Min Sdev
0.033 0.02783 0.0195 0.00729
0.005 0.00400 0.003 0.00100
0.0185 0.01600 0.014 0.00229
0.0013 0.00120 0.001 0.00017
0.0027 0.00157 0.001 ' 0.00067
0.0021 0.00187 0.0016 0.00025
0.0035 0.00280 0.0024 0.00061
0.0574 0.04401 0.0324 0.00821
0.078 0.05967 0.044 0.01716
BLR.pm
-------
Company
General Electric Plastics
General Electric Plastics
General Electric Plastics
. General Electric Plastics
General Electric Plastics
General Electric Plastics
General Electric Plastics
General Electric Plastics
General Electric Plastics
General Electric Plastics
General Electric Plastics
General Electric Plastics
General Electric Plastics
General Electric Plastics
Georgia Gulf
Georgia Gulf
Georgia Gulf
Georgia Gulf
Georgia Gulf
Georgia Gulf
i* Georgia Gulf
-J
Georgia Gulf
Georgia Gulf
Georgia Gulf
Georgia Gulf
Goodyear Tire and Rubber
Goodyear Tire and Rubber
Goodyear Tire and Rubber
Goodyear Tire and Rubber
Goodyear Tire and Rubber
Goodyear Tire and Rubber
Goodyear Tire and Rubber
Hercules
Hercules
Hercules
Hercules
Hercules
Hercules
Hercules
Hercules
Location Unit Report Facility Primary Run APCS O2
Tested Date Type Fuel No. (%)
Mount Vemon. IN "B" Feb-93 Boiler NG+phenol 1 None 9.3
Mount Vemon, IN 2 7.5
Mount Vemon, IN 1-3**
Mount Vemon, IN 5 13
Mount Vemon, IN 6 13
Mount Vemon. IN 4-6**
Mount Vemon. IN 3* 10
Mount Vernon. IN 4* 13.5
Selkirk. NY 3 Aug-92 Boiler Natural Gas 1 None 2.1
Selkirk, NY 2 5.4
Selkirk, NY 3 4.3
Selkirk, NY 1 Aug-92 A/P Oil Heater Natural Gas 1 None 8
Selkirk, NY 2 7
Selkirk, NY 3 7.5
Pasadena, TX 1 Aug-92 Hot Oil Heater 1-1 None 1.1
Pasadena, TX 1-2 1.2
Pasadena. TX 1:1-3**
Pasadena", TX 2-11
Pasadena, TX 2-2 1
Pasadena. TX 2-31
Pasadena. TX I 1-3* 1.3
Plaquemine, LA 1 Aug-92 Boiler Natural Gas 1 None
Plaquemine, LA 2
Plaquemine. LA 1-3**
Plaquemine. LA 1 3*
Beaumont, TX B103 Aug-92 Boiler Natural Gas 1-1 None 6.5
Beaumont, TX 1-2 6.5
Beaumont, TX 1-3 6.5
Pasadena, TX M-526 May-93 Boiler Natural Gas 1 None 6.3
Pasadena, TX 2 6.2
Pasadena. TX 1-3**
Pasadena. TX 1 3* 6.5
West Elizabeth, PA 3 Aug-92 Boiler Natural Gas 1 None 12.8
West Elizabeth, PA 3 12.6
West Elizabeth. PA 1-3**
West Elizabeth. PA 1 2* 12.7
West Elizabeth, PA. 5 Aug-92 Boiler Natural Gas 1 None 3.5
West Elizabeth, PA 2 3.1
West Elizabeth. PA . 1-3**
West Elizabeth. PA 1 3* 4.2
APCS ESP Paniculate
Temp Power (gr/dscf # points Paniculate (gr/dscf @ 7% O2)
(°F) (kVA) @7%O2) Max Avg Min Sdev
0.0505 6 0.0769 0.05083 0.033 0.01808
0.0415
0.0769
0.035
0.033
0.0681
0.133
0.13
0.078 3 0.078 0.05633 0.043 0.01893
0.043
0.048
0.032 3 0.032 0.02233 0.013 0.00950
0.022
0.013
0.0174 6 0.0174 0.01070 0.0059 0.00514
0.0132
0.0151
0.0063
0.0063
0.0059
0.01 13 |
0.0504 3 0.0521 0.05143 0.0504 0.00091
0.0518
0.0521
0.0552 |
0.014 3 0.047 0.02467 0.013 0.01935
0.013
0.047
0.0086 3 0.0086 0.00710 0.0055 0.00155
0.0055
0.0072
0.0082 |
0.0232 3 0.0286 0.02460 0.022 0.00352
0.0286
0.022
0.0485 |
0.006 3 0.025 0.01507 0.006 0.00953
0.0142
0.025
0.0164 |
BLR.pm
-------
Company
Hoechit Celanese
Hoechst Celanese
Hoechst Celanese
Hocchsl Celanese
Hocchsl Celanese
Hoechst Celanese
Hoechst Celanese
Hoechst Celanese
Hoechst Celanese
Hoechst Celanese Chemical
Hoechst Celanese Chemical
Hoechst Celanese Chemical
Hoechst Celanese Chemical
Hoechst Celanese Chemical
Hoechst Celanese Chemical
Hoechst Celanese Chemical
Hoechst Celanese Chemical
Hoechst Celanese Chemical
Hoechst Celanese Chemical
Hulls America
Hulls America
Hulls America
Hulls America
Hulls America
Hulls America
Hulls America
Hulls America
Hulls America
Hulls America
Hulls America
Hulls America
Hulls America
Kalama Chemical
Kalama Chemical
Kalama Chemical
Kalama Chemical
Kalama Chemical
Kalama Chemical
Kalama Chemical
Kalama Chemical
Location Unit Report Facility Primary Ron APCS 02
Tested Dale Type Fuel No. (%)
Pasadena, TX MH5A Jan-93 Heater NttwilGu A-l None 9.7
Pasadena, TX A-2 10
Pasadena,TX A-3 10.1
Pasadena, TX B-l 5.9
Pasadena, TX B-2 5.8
Pasadena, TX B-3 6.6
Pasadena, TX C-l 6.4.
Pasadena, TX C-2 6.6
Pasadena, TX C-3 5.8
Bay City, TX 4 Aug-92 Boiler Natural Gas 4 None 6.6
Bay City. TX 5 5.7
Bay City, TX 6 6.3
Bay City, TX 7 7.5
Bay City. TX 5 Ang-92 Boiler Natural Gas 1 None 4.8
Bay City. TX . 2 5.2
Bay City, TX 3 5.2
Mount Holly, NC 1 Aug-93 Boiler Natural Gas 1 None 6.85
Mount Holly, NC -- 2 7.25
Mount Holly, NC 3 7.4
Chestertown, ML 1 Nov-92 Heater Oil 1 None 9.4
Chestertown, ML 2 9.5
Chestertown, ML 3 9.3
Chestertown, ML 2 Nov-92 Healer Oil 1 None 7.5
Chestertown, ML 2 7.1
Chestertown, ML 3 7.1
Chestertown, ML 4 7.1
Chestertown, ML 3 Nov-92 Heater Oil 1 None 10
Chestertown, ML 2 10.4
Chestertown, ML 3 9.9
Chestertown, ML 4 Nov-92 Boiler Oil 1 None 4.3
Chestertown, ML 2 4.4
Chestertown, ML 3 4.3
Kalama, WA U2 Jun-92 Boiler Natural Gas 1 FF
Kalama, WA 2
Kalama, WA 1-3**
Kalama, WA 10
Kalama, WA 11
Kalama, WA 10-12**
Kalama, WA 3*
Kalama, WA 12*
APCS ESP Particalate
Temp Power (grAtocf * point* P»m'cula«e(gr/dscf@7%O2)
CF) (kVA) @7%02) Max AVE Min Sdev
0.0021 9 0.0056 0.00281 0.0008 0.00185
0.0034
0.0016
0.005
0.0045
0.0056
0.0012
0.0011
0.0008
0.022 4 0.0235 0.02110 0.0156 0.00373
0.0233
0.0235
0.0156
0.0165 3 0.0165 0.01447 0.0125 0.00200
0.0125
0.0144
0.00011 3 0.044 0.01534 0.00011 0.02484
0.0019
0.044
0.031 3 0.0733 0.04427 0.0285 0.02517
0.0285
0.0733
0.032 4 0.032 0.02825 0.026 0.00263
0.026
0.028
0.027
0.0317 3 0.0317 0.01830 0.0097 0.01176
0.0135
0.0097
0.0153 3 0.0153 0.01367 0.0018 0.00176
0.0118
0.0139
0.0059 6 0.0072 0.00460 0.0027 0.00174
0.0047
0.0072
0.0029
0.0027
0.0042
0.011
0.0069
BLR.pm
-------
Company
Kalama Chemical
Kalama Chemical
Kalama Chemical
Kalama Chemical
Kalama Chemical
Kalama Chemical
Kalama Chemical
Kalama Chemical
Lonza Inc.
Lonza Inc.
Lonza Inc.
Lonza Inc.
Lonza Inc.
Lonza Inc.
Lonza Inc.
Lonza Inc.
Lonza Inc.
Lonza Inc.
Lonza Inc.
Lonza Inc.
*]d Lyondell Petrochem Co.
VO Lyondell Petrochem Co.
Lyondell Petrochem Co.
Lyondell Petrochem Co.
Lyondell Petrochem Co. •
Lyondell Petrochem Co.
Lyondell Petrochem Co.
Mallinckrodt
Mallinckrodt
Mallinckrodt
Maybelline Products Co. Inc.
Maybelline Products Co. Inc.
Maybelline Products Co. Inc.
Maybelline Products Co. Inc.
Maybelline Products Co. Inc.
Maybelline Products Co. Inc.
Mayo Clinic
Mayo Clinic
Mayo Clinic
Merck & Co. Inc.
Merck & Co. Inc.
Location Unit Report Facility Primary Run APCS 02
Tested Date Type Fuel No. (%)
Kalama, WA U3 Jun-92 Boiler Natural Gas 4 FF
Kalama. WA 5
Kalama, WA 4-6**
Kalama. WA 7
Kalama, WA' 8
Kalama, WA 7-9**
Kaiama.WA 6*
Kalama. WA 9*
Pasadena, TX 2orB Dec-92 Boiler Natural Gas C1-R1 ?? 3.6
Pasadena, TX C1-R2 3.4
Pasadena, TX C1-R3 3.4
Pasadena, TX C2-R1 3.6
Pasadena, TX C2-R2 3.6
Pasadena. TX C2-R3 3.4
Pasadena, TX lor A Dec-92 Boiler Natural Gas CUR] ?? 2.6
Pasadena, TX C1-R2 2.6
Pasadena, TX CNR3 2.6
Pasadena, TX C2-R1 3.8
Pasadena, TX C2-R2 3.8
Pasadena, TX C2-R3 3.8
Channelview, TX 4 Nov-92 Boiler Waste Oils Cl-1 None 6.2
Channelview, TX Cl-2 7.3
Channelview. TX Clrl-3**
Channelview, TX ...... C2-1 None 5.4
Channelview, TX C2-2 6
Channelview, TX C2-3 5.4
Channelview, TX Cl-3* 7.2
Raleigh. NC 1 Sep-92 Boiler Aniline Tar 1 ?? 3.1
Raleigh. NC (Watertube) 2 3.1
Raleigh. NC ' 3 3.3
North Little Rock, AR TO4 Aug-92 Boiler 1.1 ?? 10.2
North Little Rock, AR 1.2 11.2
North Little Rock, AR 1.3 12
North Little Rock, AR 2.2 9.9
North Little Rock, AR 2.3 11.65
North Little Rock, AR 2.4 10.8
Rochester, MN 3 Nov-92 Boiler Natural Gas/ 1 None
Rochester, MN (Watertube) Fuel Oil 2
Rochester, MN . 3
Rahway.NJ 7 Jul-93 Boiler Natural Gas/ 1 ??
Tfchway.NJ Waste Solvent 2
APCS ESP Paniculate
Temp Power (gr/dscf # points Paniculate (gr/dscf @ 7% O2)
(°F) (kVA) @7%O2) Max Avg Min Sdev
0.0067 6 0.0073 0.00532 0.0036 0.00147
0.0043
0.0073
0.0044
0.0036
0.0056
0.011
0.0088
0.0137 6 0.0137 0.00930 0.0069 0.00250
0.0099
0.0081
0.0099
0.0073
0.0069
0.0408 6 0.0409 0.02865 0.0153 0.01095
0.0296
0.0409
0.0277
0.0153 '.:,
0.0176
0.007142 6 0.007142 0.00339 0.00082 0.00275
0.004031
0.006
-. - 0.00082
0.0013
0.00104
0.02561
0.00336 3 0.00445 0.00391 0.00336 0.00055
0.00393
0.00445
0.094 6 0.094 0.08267 0.072 0.00745
0.087
0.083
0.081
0.072
0.079
0.00282 3 0.00282 0.00246 0.00186 0.00052
0.00186
0.0027
0.00797 3 0.0101 0.00820 0.00797 0.00022
0.00841
BLR.pm
-------
11
1
I-'
o
Company
Merck & Co. Inc.
Merck & Co, Inc.
Merck & Co. Inc.
Merck & Co. Inc.
Merck & Co. Inc.
Merck & Co. Inc.
Meridiem Co.
Merichem Co.
Merichem Co.
Merichem Co.
Merichem Co.
Merichem Co.
Mobile Chemical
Mobile Chemical
Mobile Chemical
Monsanto Chemical Co.
Monsanto Chemical Co.
Monsanto Chemical Co.
Monsanto Chemical Co.
Monsanto Chemical Co.
Monsanto Chemical Co.
Monsanto Chemical Co. •
Monsanto Chemical Co.
Monsanto Chemical Co.
Monsanto Chemical Co.
Monsanto Chemical Co.
Monsanto Chemical Co.
Monsanto Chemical Co.
Monsanto Chemical Co.
Monsanto Chemical Co.
Monsanto Chemical Co.
Monsanto Chemical Co.
Monsanto Chemical Co.
Monsanto Chemical Co.
Monsanto Chemical Co.
Monsanto Chemical Co.
Monsanto Chemical Co.
Monsanto Chemical Co.
Monsanto Chemical Co.
Monsanto Chemical Co.
Location
Rahway.NJ
Rahway.NJ
Rahway.NJ
Rahway.NJ
Rsthway. NJ
Rahway.NJ
Houston, IX
Houston, TX
Houston, TX
Houston, TX
Houston, TX
Houston, TX
Beaumont, TX
Beaumont, TX
Beaumont, TX
Addyston, OH
Addyston, OH
Addyston, OH
Addyston, OH
Alvin.TX
Alvin,TX
AIvin,TX
Alvin, TX
AIvin,TX
Alvin, TX
Alvin, TX
Alvin, TX
Alvin, TX
Alvin, TX
Alvin. TX
Alvin. TX
Nitro.WV
Nitro.WV
Nitro.WV
Nitro.WV
Nitro.WV
Nitro.WV
Springfield , MA
Springfield , MA
Springfield , MA
Unit Report Facility Primary
Tested Date Type Fuel
I
8 Jul-93 Boiler Natural Gas/
Waste Solvent
I
4 Sep-92 Boiler Natural Gas/
Liquid Waste
B 701 A Aug-92 Boiler Natural Gas
B-4 Aug-92 Boiler Natural Gas
...
1
BS1HS Apr-93 Boiler Natural Gas
30HS Aug-92 Boiler Natural Gas
B-8 May-93 Boiler (Stoker) Coal Fired
B-ll Jan-93 Boiler (Stoker) Coal Fired
Run
No.
1-3**
3*
1
2
1-3**
3*
N-l
N-2
N-3
R-4
R-5
R-6
1
2
3
1
- 2
1-3**
3*
C1-R1
C1-R2
C1-R3
C2-R1
C2-R2
C2-R3
C1-R1
C1-R2
C1-R3
C2-R1
C2-R2
C2-R3
C1-R1
C1-R2
C1-R3
C2-R1
C2-R2
C2-R3
1
2
3
APCS 02
(%)
??
WS
None 2.6
25
2.5
None 10
10.1
10
None 8
7.1
7.3
7.6
8.4
9.8
None 6
3.5
5.2
5.6
5.7
6.3
Cyclone/ 12.7
ESP 11.2
12.2
8.9
9.1
9
FF 10.2
9.8
9
APCS ESP Paniculate
Temp Power (gi/d»cf 1 points
CF) (kVA) @7%O2)
0.00821
0.0101 |
0.00996 3
0.00566
0.00782
0.0104 |
0.0042 6
0.0031
0.0021
0.0033
0.0039
0.0105
0.0073 3
0.0122
0.0043
0.00242 3
0.00292
0.00374
0.00918 |
0.0004 6
0.0003
0.0006
0.0002
0.0003
0.0002
0 6
0.00041
0.00026
0.00004
0
0.00004
0.0007 6
0.0015
0.0032
0.007
0.0035
0.0049
0.0087 3
•0.0065
0.01
Paniculate ferAbeT @ 1% O2)
Max Avg Min Sdcv
0.00996 0.00781 0.00566 0.00215
0.0105 0.00452 0.0021 0.00302
0.0122 0.00793 0.0043 0.00399
0.00374 0.00303 0.00242 0.00067
0.0006 0.00033 0.0002 0.00015
0.00026 0.00013 0 0.00017
0.007 0.00347 0.0007 0.00229
0.01 0.00840 0.0087 0.00177
BLR.pm
-------
Company
Natural Gas Odorizing
Natural Gas Odorizing
Natural Gas Odorizing
Natural Gas Odorizing
Neville Chemical Co.
Neville Chemical Co.
Neville Chemical Co.
Neville Chemical Co.
Neville Chemical Co.
Neville Chemical Co.
Neville Chemical Co.
Neville Chemical Co.
Neville Chemical Co.
Novacar Chemicals
Novacar Chemicals
Novacar Chemicals
Novacar Chemicals
**1 Novacar Chemicals
•"•* Novacar Chemicals
t— >
NutraSweet
NutraSweet
NutraSweet
NutraSweet
NutraSweet
NutraSweet
Parke Davis
Parke Davis
Parke Davis
Reilly Industries
Reilly Industries
Reilly Industries
Reilly Industries
Reilly Industries
Reilly Industries
Reilly Industries
Reilly Industries
Reilly Industries
Reilly Industries
Reilly Industries
Reilly Industries
Location
Baytown, TO
Baytown. TO
Baytown, TO
Baytown, TO
Pittsburgh, PA
Pittsburgh, PA
Pittsburgh, PA
Pittsburgh, PA
Pittsburgh, PA
Pittsburgh, PA
Pittsburgh, PA
Pittsburgh, PA
Pittsburgh, PA
Decatur, AL
Decatur, AL
Decatur, AL
Indian Orchard, MA
Indian Orchard, MA
Indian Orchard, MA
Augusta, GA
Augusta, GA
Augusta, GA
Augusta, GA
Augusta, GA
Augusta, GA
Holland, MI
Holland, MI
Holland, MI
Indianapolis, IN
Indianapolis, IN
Indianapolis, IN
Indianapolis, IN
Indianapolis, IN
Indianapolis, IN
Indianapolis, IN
Indianapolis, IN
Indianapolis, IN
Indianapolis, IN
Indianapolis, IN
Indianapolis, IN
Unit Report
Tested Date
B-2 Oct-92
B-4 Jul-93
B-6 Jul-93
B-7 . Jul-93
Line 1 May-93
1- Jun-93
2 Aug-92
1 Aug-92
?? Aug-92
1 Aug-93
Facility
Type
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Therminol
Heater
Therminol
Heater
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
(Watertube)
Boiler
(Watertube)
Primary
Fuel
Liquid waste
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Liquid waste
Liquid waste
Waste fuels
Waste fuels
Natural Gas/
Waste Solvent
Natural Gas
Run APCS O2 APCS ESP Paniculate
No. (%) Temp Power (gr/dscf
(°F) (kVA) @7%O2)
1 DS/FF/WS 2 0.006
2 1.89 0.005
1-3** 0.0052
3* 1.91 0.0045 |
1 None 4 ' 0.0033
2 4.8 0.0019
3 5.4 0.0074
1 None 6.8 0.0023
2 5.8 0.0016
3 4.8 0.0029
1 None 4.1 0.0032
2 3.2 0.0048
3 3.6 0.0047
1 None 7.9 0.0012
2 8.7 0.0015
3 7.9 0.0011
1 None 11.6 0.00355
2 11.6 0.00692
3 11.6 0.00142
1 WS 0.8 0.00481
2 0.9 0.00463
3 0.9 0.0053
1 WS 2.8 0.0148
2 2.5 0.0153
3 2.9 0.0151
1 ?? 5.5 0.0028
2 5.5 0.0016
3 5.5 0.0019
1 None 5.22 0.0221
2 4.89 0.0194
1-3** 0.0337
4 5.57 0.0194
5 5.68 0.0141
4-6** 0.0239
8 4.65 0.0214
10 4.59 0.0216
8-10** 0.024
3* 4.87 0.0822
6* 5.5 0.0457
9* 4.77 0.0506
# points Paniculate (gr/dscf @ 7% O2)
Max AVE Min Sdev
3 0.006 0.00540 0.005 0.00053
3 0.0074 0.00420 0.0019 0.00286
3 0.0029 0.00227 0.0016 0.00065
3 0.0048 0.00423 0.0032 8.96E-04
3 0.0015 0.00127 0.0011 0.00021
3 0.00692 0.00396 0.00142 0.00277
3 0.0053 0.00491 0.00463 0.00035
3 0.0153 0.01507 0.0148 0.00025
3 0.0028 0.00210 0.0016 0.00062
9 0.0337 0.02218 0.0141 0.00525
BLR.pm
-------
Company
Shell Chemical
Shell Chemical
Shell Chemical
Shell Chemical
Shell Chemical
Shell Chemical
Shell Chemical
Shell Chemical
Shell Chemical
Shell Oil
Shell Oil
Shell Oil
Shell Oil
Shell Oil
Shell Oil
Shell Oil
Shell Oil
Shell Oil
Shell Oil
Shell Oil
Shell Oil
Shell Oil
Shell Oil
Shell Oil
Shell Oil
Sterling Chemicals
Sterling Chemicals
Sterling Chemicals
Sterling Chemicals
Sterling Chemicals
Sterling Chemicals
Sterling Chemicals
Sterling Pharmaceutical
Sterling Pharmaceutical
Sterling Pharmaceutical
Sterling Pharmaceutical
Sterling Pharmaceutical
Sterling Pharmaceutical
Sterling Pharmaceutical
Sterling Pharmaceutical
Sterling Pharmaceutical
Location
DcerPwfc,TX
DeerParic.TX
Deer Park, TX
Deer Park, TX
Deer Park. TX
Deer Park, TX
Deer Park, TX
DeerPark.TX ,
Deer Park, TX
Martinez, CA
Martinez, CA
Martinez, CA
Martinez, CA
Martinez, CA
Martinez, CA
Martinez, CA
Martinez, CA
Martinez, CA
Martinez, CA
Martinez, CA
Martinez, CA
Martinez, CA
Martinez, CA
Martinez, CA
Martinez, CA
Texas City, TX
Texas City, TX
Texas City. TX
Texas City. TX
Texas City, TX
Texas City, TX
Texas City, TX
BarcelonetaJ'R
Barceloneta,PR
BarcelonetaJPR
Barceloneta^R
BarcelonetafR
BarcelonetaJPR
BarcelonetaJPR
BarcelonetaJ?R
BarcelonetaJPR
Unit Report Facility Primary Ru«
Tested Dale Type Fuel No.
1 3*
PUT 100 May-93 Boiler Liquid Waste 1
2
1-3**
1 3*
PUT 130 May-93 Boiler Liquid Waste 1
2
1-3**
1 3*
Co«2 Nov-91 Boiler (CO) Refinery Gas A-l
A-2
A-3
A-4
B-l
B-2
B-3
Co#l Apr-89 Boiler (CO) 1
2
3
4B
5
6
7
8
9
WOB1 Aug-92 Boiler Vent Gas 1
2
3
UB9 Aug-93 Boiler Natural Gas A-l
A-3
A: 1-3**
I A-2*
1 Aug-93 Boiler Natural Gas Bl-1
Bl-2
Bl-3
B2-2
B2-3
B2-4
B3-1
B3-2
B3-3
APCS 02
(%)
8.9
None
None
ESP 5.7
5.4
5.2
5.3
2
2
1.9
ESP
None
None 7.4
7.4
7.4
None 6.9
8.3
7.3
4.3
4.8
5.6
7.3
9.1
8.2
APCS ESP Particultte
Temp Power (grAbc! # point!
(*F) (kVA) @7%02)
0.0865 1
0.0163 3
0.0146
0.0165
0.0187 |
0.0185 3
0.0198
0.0224
0.0288 |
0.0028 7
0.0027
0.0022
0.0025
0.0021
0.0018
0.0014
0.286 9
0.06
0.017
0.013
0.025
0.011
0.013
0.026
0.011
0.002 3
0.006
0.007
0.0092 3
0.0088
0.0138
0.00234 |
0.0321 9
0.037
0.0371
0.0342
0.0382
0.0367
0.0341
0.0353
0.0285
Particulite (jr/dicf @ 7% O2)
Mix AVR Min Sdev
0.0165 0.01580 0.0146 0.00104
0.0224 0.02023 0.0185 0.00199
0.0028 0.00221 0.0014 0.00050
0.286 0.05133 0.011 0.08934
0.007 0.00500 0.002 0.00265
0.0138 0.01060 0.0088 0.00278
0.0382 0.03480 0.0285 0.00303
BLR.pm
-------
Company
Tennessee Eastman
Tennessee Eastman
Tennessee Eastman
Tennessee Eastman
Tennessee Eastman
Tennessee Eastman
Tennessee Eastman
Tennessee Eastman
Tennessee Eastman
Tennessee Eastman
Tennessee Eastman
Tennessee Eastman
Tennessee Eastman
Tennessee Eastman
Tennessee Eastman
Tennessee Eastman
Tennessee Eastman
Tennessee Eastman
Tennessee Eastman
•fl
i
j^J Tennessee Eastman
Tennessee Eastman
Tennessee Eastman
Tennessee Eastman
Tennessee Eastman
Tennessee Eastman
Tennessee Eastman
Texaco Chemical Co.
Texaco Chemical Co.
Texaco Chemical Co.
Union Carbide
Union Carbide
Union Carbide
Union Carbide
Union Carbide
Union Carbide
Union Carbide
Union Carbide
Union Carbide
Union Carbide
Location Unit Report Facility
Tested Date Type
Kingsport,TN 30 Aug-92 Boiler
Kingsport, TN
Kingsport, TN
Kingsport, TN
Kingsport. TN 30 Aug-92 Boiler
Kingsport. TN
Kingsport. TN
Kingsport, TN
Kingsport. TN 30 Aug-92 Boiler
Kingsport. TN
Kingsport. TN
Kingsport, TN
Kingsport. TN 21 Apr-91 Boiler
Kingsport, TN
Kingsport, TN
Kingsport, TN 19 Aug-92 Boiler
Kingsport, TN
Kingsport, TN
Kingsport, TN
Kingsport, TN 23 Aug-92 Boiler
Kingsport, TN
Kingsport, TN
Kingsport, TN
Kingsport, TN 24 Apr-91 Boiler
Kingsport, TN
Kingsport, TN
PortNeches,TX 2 Oct-92 Boiler
PortNeches.TX
Port Neches, TX
Hahnville. LA B31 Jun-93 Boiler
Hahnville.LA
Hahnville, LA
Hahnville.LA
Hahnville, LA B30 Jun-93 Boiler
Hahnville, LA
Hahnville, LA
South Charleston, WV 16 Feb-93 Boiler
South Charleston, WV
South Charleston. WV
Primary Run
Fuel No.
Coal Fired 1
2
1-3**
|i 3*
Coal Fired 1
2
1-3**
I 3*
Coal Fired 1
2
1-3**
1 3*
Coal Fired 1
2
3
Coal Fired 1
2
1-3**
I 3*
Coal Fired 1
3
1-3**
1 2*
Coal Fired 1
2
3
Natural Gas a-1
a-2
a-3
60% H 5
40%Ch4 6
5-7**
I 7*
a
60% H 2
40%Ch4 3
4
Coal 1
2
1-3**
APCS
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
None
None
None
ESP
O2
(%)
4.4
5.2
4.8
5.5
5.8
6
5.6
5.2
5.2
6.8
6.7
6.7
10
10
9.8
9.8
10
10
8.4
8.4
8.5
10.2
8.6
9.1
9.48
9.13
9.15
2.78
2.78
2.79
9.1
8.7
APCS
Temp
(°F)
339
351
347
351
353
349
351
354
356
295.6
298.7
298.4
441
443
443
366.5
362.2
362.6
ESP
Power
(kVA)
266
255
262
257
257
256
256
256
258
*161.3
*158.5
*157.3
168
168
169
226
219
225
33.34
32.2
" "*
Paniculate
(gr/dscf # points
@7%O2)
0.0095 3
0.0087
0.009
0.0086 |
0.031 3
0.0675
0.0483
0.0466 |
0.0061 3
0.0057
0.006
0.0064 |
0,0174 3
0.0158
0.0184
0.0562 3
0.0527
0.0537
0.0437 |
0.0237 3
0.0397
0.0545
0.0909 I
0.00532 3
0.00538
0.00521
0.00617 3
0.00408
0.00406
0.018 3
0.0177
0.021
0.0411 |
0.0008 3
0.0007
0.0017
0.061 3
0.0781
0.0698
Paniculate (gr/dscf @ 7% O2)
Max Avg Win Sdev
0.0095 0.00907 0.0087 0.0004»
1
0.0675 0.04893 0.031 0.01826
0.0061 0.00593 0.0057 0.00021
0.0184 0.01720 0.0158 0.00131
0.0562 0.05420 0.0527 0.00180
0.0545 0.03930 0.0237 0.01540
0.00538 0.00530 0.00521 8.62E-05
0.00617 0.00477 0.00406 0.00121
0.021 0.01890 0.0177 0.00182
0.0017 0.00107 0.0007 0.00055
0.0781 0.06963 0.061 0.00855
BLR.pm
-------
0\
Company
Union Carbide
Union Carbide
Union Carbide
Union Carbide
Union Carbide
Union Carbide
Union Carbide
Union Carbide
Union Carbide
Union Carbide
Union Carbide
Union Carbide
Union Carbide
Union Carbide
Union Carbide •
Westvaco Corp.
Westvaco Corp.
Westvaco Corp.
Location Unit Report Facility
Tested Date Type -
South Charleston, WV
South Charleston, WV
South Charleston, WV
South Charleston, WV
South Charleston, WV 25 Feb-93 Boiler
South Charleston, WV
South Charleston, WV
South Charleston, WV
Texas City, TX 4 Aug-93 Boiler
Texas City, TX
Texas City, TX
Texas City, TX
Texas City, TX 5 Oct-92 Boiler
Texas City, TX
Texas City, TX
DeRidder.LA B2&B4 Aug-92 Boiler
DeRidder. LA
DeRidder.LA
Primary Run
Fuel No.
2
3
4
1 3*
Coal 5
7
5-7**
• 1 6*
Natural Gas 1
2
1-3**
| 3*
Natural Gas 1
2
3
Natural Gas 1
2
3
APCS 02
7.9
7.9
8.4
9.2
ESP 6.3
6
6
None 7.77
7.75
8.7
None 6.3
6.3
6.3
ESP 15.5
14.4
14.5
APCS ESP
Temp Power
CF) (kVA)
29.79
54.56
50.43
52.2
461 *370
503 *370
• 469 *370
Paniculate
(er/dscf 1 points
@7%02)
0.0717 |
0.0075 3
0.0066
0.007
0.0063 |
0.0075 3
0.0139
0.0597
0.574 |
0.0064 3
0.0063
0.0404
0.0143 3
0.008.
0.0295
Paniculate (gr/dicf @ 7% 02)
Max AVR Min Sdev
0.0075 0.00703 0.0066 0.00045
.0.0597 0.02703 0.0075 0.02847
0.0404 0.01770 0.0063 0.01966
0.0295 0.01727 0.008 0.01105
REVISED DATA 4/4/94
Aristech
Aristech
Arislech
Arislech
Arislech
Arislech
Arislech
Arislech
Arislech
Arislech
Arislech
Arislech
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Haverhill.OH
Haverhill.OH
Haverhill.OH
Haveihill.OH
Haverhill.OH
Haverhill.OH
Haverhill.OH
Haverhill.OH
Haverhill.OH
Haverhill.OH
Haverhill.OH
Haverhill.OH
Torrance. CA
Torrance. CA
Torrance. CA
UB Aug-92 Boiler
UE
U-305 Aug-92 Boiler
LHC-1
LHC-3
3.29
3.69
LHC:l-3**
HHC-4
HHC-6
HHG4-
LHC-8
LHC-9
6**
3.6
3.72
3.72
3.69
LHC:7-9**
LHC-2*
HHC-5*
LHC-7*
2
3
4
None
3.48
3.77
3.83
0.0036
0.0012
0.0047
0.0138
0.0133
0.0159
0.0033
0.0038
0.0037
0.0117
0.0231
0.004
0.002
0.0021
0.0013
9
3
0.0159 0.00703 0.0012 0.00560
0.0021 0.00180 0.0013 0.00044
* indicates that a soot blow was performed during this nm
** Sootblow weighted average for runs indicated
?? Unable to be determined from information given
BLR.pm
-------
APPENDIX G:
DETAILED SUMMARY OF CURRENT TOTAL PCDD/PCDF
DATA SET FOR CEMENT KILNS
-------
-------
Company
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Location
Chanute, KS
Chanute, KS
Chanute, KS
Chanute, KS
Chanute, KS
Chanute, KS
Chanute, KS
Chanute, KS
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR.
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Louisville, NE
Louisville, NE
Louisville, NE
Louisville, NE
Louisville, NE
Louisville, NE
Louisville, NE
Louisville, NE
No. Unit Report BumHaz Facility Run
Units Tested Date Waste Type No.
2 1 Apr-92 y
y
y
y
2 2 Mar-92 y
y
y
y
3 1 Jul-92 y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
3 2 May-92 y
y
y
3 2 Jul-93 y
y
y
3 3 Jul-92 y
y
y
y
y
y
2 1 May-92 y
y
y
y
y
2 2 Aug-92 y
y
y
w 1
2
3
4
w 1
2
3
4
w 1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
2-1
2-2
2-3
2-4
PI
P2
P3
w 1
2
3
w 2
3
4
w 2-1
2-2
2-3
2-4
2-5
2-6
sd (ph/bp) 1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
1-5
d(ph/pc/bp) 2-1
2-2
2-3
APCS
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
O2
10.8
10.4
10.7
10.7
9.5
10.3
10.6
10.8
8.0
8.0
6.8
7.7
5.5
5.5
4.9
6.4
7.1
7.0
6.0
5.2
6.0
5.7
6.3
4.0
4.0
15.5
15.2
15.7
15.5
15.7
105
9.8
10.7
APCS
Temp
422
439
435
448
484
412
425
412
387
360
371
356
470
487
494
456
408
405
399
500
485
506
371
365
373
475
470
460
512
522
517
258
238
255
243
258
355
355
355
ESP CO, run avg
Power ppmv
(kVA) @7%O2
31.96
30.19
27.58
24.76
46.43
50.55
38.73
48.18
25.2
28.4
32
28.5
27.4
29.4
21.4
22.2
37.5
37.2
37.9
58
60
58
72.1
71.8
70
104.5
107.3
107.5
104.1
92.1
94.3
18.3
20.5
22.1
26.3
23.2
54.9
52.7
52.5
468
669
636
697
691
415
665
753
312
259
226
195
296
540
551
898
933
899
243
268
211
181
256
PCDD/PCDF
(ng/dscm
@ 7% 02)
68.56
141.64
137.30
277.30
556.57
229.16
270.70
158.84
72.34
874.64
265.01
97.41
62.35
14.19
20.27
Z88
3.40
9.68
160.90
79.50
58.80
16.28
4.96
5.95
6.36
8.65
8.75
8.28
20.69
# Points PCDD/PCDF (ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
4 277.3 156.2000 68.56 87.3979
4 556.57 303.8175 158.84 174.7120
4 874.64 327.3500 72.34 374.7511
3 62.35 325700 14.19 26.2268
3 9.68 5.3200 2.88 3.7848
3 160.9 99.7333 58.8 53.9735
5 16.28 8.4400 4.96 4.5866
4 20.69 12.8700 8.28 5.7731
CK.tota|
-------
Company
Location
No. Unit Report BumlUz Facility Run APCS 02 APCS ESP CO.nwavg PCDDyPCDF
Units Tested Due Waste Type No.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Continental Cement Co.
Continental Cement Co.
Continental Cement Co.
Louisville, NE
Louisville, NE
Louisville. NE
Louisville, NE
Louisville, NE
Hannibal. MO
Hannibal, MO
Hannibal, MO
y
y
y
y
y
1 1 Jul-92 y
y
y
2-4
2-5
2-6
2-7
2-8
w 1
2
3
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP.
ESP
ESP
11.1
10.8
11.2
10.0
-10.7
4.0
5.6
4.4
355
350
350
350
350
600
600
580
54
60.1
59.7
593
58.8
340
330
350
315
344
344
344
(%) Temp Power ppmv
CF) (kVA) @7%02 @7%02)
fPoims PCDD/PCDP(n8M«OT@7%O2)
Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
13.76
1369.00
952.32
130657
1369 1209.1967 95Z32 224.6619
Continental Cement Co. Hannibal, MO
Continental Cement Co. Hannibal, MO
Continental Cement Co. Hannibal, MO
Continental Cement Co. Hannibal, MO
Dec-90
y
y
n
n
w 3
4
1
5
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
2.0
1.9
3.1
2.0
540
540
443
469
271.9
219.4
183.9
228.6
322.00
630.00
84.00
777.00
630 476.0000 322 217.7889
to
Essroc Materials
Essroc Materials
Essroc Materials
Essroc Materials
Essroc Materials
Essroc Materials
Essroc Materials
Essroc Materials
Essroc Materials
Essroc Materials
Essroc Materials
Giant Cement Co.
Giant Cement Co.
Giant Cement Co.
Giant Cement Co.
Giant Cement Co.
Giant Cement Co.
Heanland Cement Co.
Heartland Cement Co.
Heartland Cement Co.
Heartland Cement Co.
Heartland Cement Co.
Heartland Cement Co.
Holnam, Inc.
Holnam, Inc.
Holnam, Inc.
Logansport, IN
Logansport, IN
Logansport, IN
Logansport, IN
Logansport, IN
Logansport; IN
Logansport, IN
Logansport, IN
Dorado, PR
Dorado, PR
Dorado, PR
Harieyville. SC
Harieyville, SC
Harleyville.se
Harieyville. SC
Harieyville, SC
Harieyville, SC
Independence, KS
Independence, KS
Independence, KS
Independence, KS
Independence, KS
Independence, KS
Artesia, MS
Artesia, MS
Artesia, MS
1 1 Aug-92
1 Jun-93
Aug-92
Aug-92
1 Oct-92
1 1 Aug-93
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
w 3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
d(ph/pc/bp) 3-1
3-2
3-3
w 1
3
4
w 1
2
3
d 1-1
1-2
1-3
2-1
2-2
2-3
w 2
4
6
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
FF
FF
FF
' FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
ESP
ESP
ESP
11.6
12.6
11.9
12.3
6.0
4.5
4.0
10.1
10.4
10.2
10.5
10.2
10.4
143
14.4
13.9
14.5
14.3
14.4
8.4
7.4
8.3
496
504
492
517
606
605
607
614
553
553
553
549
549
549
440
440
440
440
440
440
470
530
522
32
31.7
39.8
42.4
44.7 186
34.2 56
40.5 70
39.1 79
_
-
—
_
-
—
..
-
—
„
-
-
-
-
—
140 273
140 270.8
140 290.9
1295.00
1514.00
1499.00
1863.00
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
19.12
58.90
47.57
1863 1542.7500 1295 235.7122
58.9
41.8633 19.12 20.4948
CK.total
-------
Company
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Keystone Cement Co.
£\ Keystone Cement Co.
.• Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Lafarge Con?.
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Location No. Unit Report
Units Tested Date
Clarksville,MO 1 1 Jul-92
Clarksville. MO
Clarksville, MO
Clarksville, MO
Clarksville, MO
Clarksville, MO
HollyHill.SC 2 1 Aug-92
HollyHill.SC
HollyHill.SC
HollyHill.SC
HollyHill.SC
Holly Hill, SC
HollyHill.SC 2 2 Aug-92
HollyHill.SC
Holly Hill. SC
HollyHill.SC
HollyHill.SC
Bath. PA 2 1 Aug-92
Bath. PA
Bath. PA
Bath. PA
Bath. PA
Bath. PA
Bath. PA
Bath, PA
Bath, PA
Bath, PA
Bath, PA 2 2 Aug-92
Bath. PA
Bath. PA
Bath. PA
Bath, PA
Bath, PA
Bath. PA
Bath, PA
Bath. PA
Bath. PA
BumHaz Facility Run APCS
Waste Type No.
y w 1 ESP
y 2 ESP
y 3 ESP
n 1 ESP
n 2 ESP
n 3 ESP
' y w 1 ESP
y 2 ESP
y 3 ESP
n 1 ESP
n 2 ESP
n 3 ESP
y w 1 ESP
y 2 ESP
y 3 ' ESP
n 1 ESP
n 2 ESP
y" ~ w 1 ESP
y 2 ESP
y 3 ESP
y 4 ESP
y 5 ESP
y 6 ESP
y 7 ESP
y 8 ESP
y 9 ESP
y 10 ESP
y w 1 ESP
y 2 ESP
y 3 ESP
y 4 ESP
y 5 ESP
y 6 ESP
y 7 ESP
y 8 ESP
y 9 ESP
y 10 ESP
AIpena.MI 2 1 Aug-92 y d(7) 1 FF
Alpena, MI
Alpena, MI
y 2 FF
y 3 FF
02 APCS ESP CO.runavg PCDD/PCDF
(%) Temp Power ppmv (ng/dscm
(°F) (kVA) @7%O2 @7%O2)
4.4 597 707
4.4 597 732
4.4 597 700
4.9
4.3
5.6
10.1 450 30 110
10.1 450 30 110
10.1 450 30 110
10.3 450 135
10.3 450 135
10.3 450 135
7.0 563 30 150
7.0 563 30 150
7.2 563 30 145
7.0 563 145
7.0 563 145
12.1 421 23
13.1 422.5 22 27 2.66
11.7 418 25 26 1.98
12.3 417 23 25 2.60
12.5 416 19
11.8 410 21
11.7 415 19 ......
11.4 403 19
11.2 393 19
11.3 407 21
12.3 407 56 47 0.69
11.1 416.5 48 47 0.77
11.7 416 49 45 0.59
12.6 419 61
11.7 386
11.5 410
12.1 401
11.7 401
11.3 407
11.7 412
# Points PCDD/PCDF (ng/dscm @ 7% 02)
Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
3 2.66 Z4133 1.98 0.3765
.
3 0.77 0.6833 0.59 0.0902
6.9 493 - 1365 42.00
7.6 488 - 1499 79.50
9.4 478 - 1708 88.40
Lafarge Corp.
Demopolis, AL
1 1 Aug-92
d(ph/bp)
ESP
229 120
CK.tOtal
-------
Company
Location No, Unit Report BuraHaz Facility Run APCS
Units Tested Dale Waste Type No.
O2 APCS ESP CO.ronavg PCDD/PCDF
(%) Temp Power pprav (ng/djcm flPoinls PCDD/PCDP (nj/ascm @ 7% O2)
@7%O2) Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
Lafarge Corp.
Lafargc Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lone Star Industries
Lone Star Industries
Lone Star Industries
Lone Star Industries
Lone Star Industries
Lone Star Industries
~!' Lone Star Industries
•^ Lone Star Industries
Lone Star Industries
Lone Star Industries
Lone Star Industries
Lone Star Industries
Medusa Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co.
National Cement Co.
National Cement Co.
National Cement Co.
National Cement Co.
Demopolts, AL
DcmopoIis.AL
Fredonia,KS 2 1 Aug-92
Fredonia, KS
Fredonia, KS
Fredonia, KS '2 2 Aug-92
Fredonia. KS
Fredonia, KS
Fredonia, KS
Paulding.OH 2 2 Aug-92
Paulding, OH
Paulding,OH
Cape Girardeau, MO 1 1 Jan-93
Cape Girardeau, MO
Cape Girardeau, MO
Cape Girardeau, MO.
Cape Girardeau, MO
Cape Girardeau, MO
Greencastle,IN 1 1 Aug-92
Greencastle, IN
Greencastle, IN
Greencastle, IN
Greencastle, IN
Greencastle, IN
Wampum. PA 3 1,2 JuI-92
Wampum, PA
Wampum, PA
Wampum, PA 3 1,2 Mar-93
Wampum, PA
Wampum, PA
Wampum, PA 3 3 Jul-92
Wampum, PA
Wampum, PA
Lebe*c.CA 1 1 Aug-92
Lebec,CA
Lebec,CA
Lebec, CA
y 6
y 7
y w I
y 2
y 3
y w 1
y 2
y 3
y 4
y w 4
y 5
y 6
y d(ph/pc/bp) 1-2
y 1-3
y 1-4
y 2-3
y 2-V
y 2-5
y w 1-1
y 1-2
y 1-3
n 2-1
n 2-2
n 2-3
y d E-4
y E-5
y E-6
y d 1
y 2
y 3
y d B-4
y B-5
y B-6
y d 1
' y 2
y 3
y 4
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
FF
FF
FF
FF
243 65 n»
230 55 na
55 533 5 359 1066.37
55 536 15 547 627.96
55 529 16 416 788.80
470 38
5.6 481 38 244 346.00
5.6 511 78 406 950.00
5.6 496 60 180 280.40
7.0 408 123 na
7.5 404 122 na
7.0 404 123 na
10.2 435 - na
10.3 435 ~ na
10.6 435 - na
10.0 435 - na
11.0 435 - na
10.8 435 - na
5.4 465 60
5.4 457 , 60
5.4 456 60
5.0 415
4.6 4i9
5.3 416
11.2 744 107 2602 1598.00
1U 738 149 4076 3172.00
11.1 750 138 8651 2407.00
14.6 71 i 50
' 13.9 712 46.8
14.8 701 57.2
7.3 718 20 153 1093.00
5.7 718 22.8 138 1543.00
5.3 718 24 193 2174.00
10.6 547 - 10.7 6.65
10.5 548 - 7.9 6.91
10.5 547 - 22.2 6.23
10.7
3 106637 827.7100 627.% 221.7799
3 950 525.4667 280.4 369.1169
3 3172 2392.3333 1598 787.1025
3 2174 1603.3333 1093 543.0196
3 6.91 6.5967 6.23 0.3431
CK.total
-------
Company
North Texas Cement
North Texas Cement
North Texas Cement
River Cement Co.
River Cement Co.
River Cement Co.
River Cement Co.
River Cement Co.
River Cement Co.
Southdown/Southwestern
Southdown/Southwestern
Southdown/Southwestern
Southdown/Southwestern
Southdown/Southwestern
Southdown/Southwestern
Southdown/Southwestern
Southdown/Dixie
Southdown/Dixie
Somhdpwn/Dixie
*>. Soulhdown/Dixie
i Southdown/Dixie
{J\
Southdown/Dixie
Texas Industries
Texas Industries
Texas Industries
Somhdown/Kosmos
Southdown/Kosmos
Southdown/Kosmos
Southdown/Kosmos
Southdown/Kosmos
Southdown/Kosmos
Southdown/Kosmos
Southdown/Kosmos
Southdown/Kosmos
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co. .
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Location
Midlothian, TX
Midlothian, TX
Midlothian, TX
Festus, MO
Festus, MO
Festus, MO
Festus, MO
Festus. MO
Festus, MO
Fairbom,OH
Fairbom, OH
Fairbom,OH
Fairbom, OH
Fairbom, OH
Fairbom, OH
Fairbom, OH
KnoxvilIe,TN
Knoxville, TN
Knoxville,TN
Knoxville, TN
Knoxville, TN
Knoxville, TN
Midlothian, TX
Midlothian, TX
Midlothian, TX
Kosmosdale, KY
Kosmosdale, KY
Kosmosdale, KY
Kosmosdale, KY
Kosmosdale, KY
Kosmosdale, KY
Kosmosdale, KY
Kosmosdale, KY
Kosmosdale, KY
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
No. Unit Report BumHaz Facility Run
Units Tested Date Waste Type No.
3 2 Oct-92 y
y
y
2 1 Oct-92 y
y
y
y
y
y
1 1 Aug-92 y
y
y
y
y
y
y
1 1 Mar-92 y
y
y
y
y
y
4 1 May-93 y
y
y
1 1 May-92 y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
3 2 May-92 Y
Y
Y
y
y
y
w 1
2
3
d 1
2
3
4
5
6
d(?/bp) 2-1
2-2
2-3
I
II
I
II
d(ph/pc/bP) 1-1
1-2
1-3
2-1
2-2
2-3
w 1
2
3
d (ph) Cl-1
Cl-2
Cl-3
C2-1
C2-2
C2-3
C3-1
C3-2
C3-3
w C2-1
C2-2
C2-3
C3-1
C3-2
C3-3
APCS
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
FF
FF
FF
FF/main
FF/main
FF/bypass
FF/bypass
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
ESP
ESP
ESP
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
O2 APCS ESP CO.runavg
(%) Temp Power ppmv
(°F) (kVA) @7%O2
8.4
8.5
8.4
10.1
10.1
10.1
12.4
12.0
12.0
11.7
Ii6
12.4
6.3
7.0
7.0
14.9
14.6
14.6
15.4
441 230
439 227
449 223
638
638
639
..
~
~
379 --
379
547
547
J24
507
490
499
489
490
418 79.5
414 82.5
412 98.8
519
514.8
518.7
505.4
504.7
505.1
55
60
59
500 58
485 60
506 58
135 '
135
135
37
2.3
37
2.3
145
119
134
114
95
183
158
153
156
150
531
291
176
PCDD/PCDF
(ng/dscm # Points
@ 7% O2)
na
na
na
2127.00 3
2299.00
1599.00
2.11
1.48
11.40
8.88
22.52 6
112.05
21.15
17.29
9.01
8.45
na
na
na
4
117.25
110.75
121.52
95.67
3
62.35
14.19
20.27
PCDD/PCDF (ng/dscm @ 7% 02)
Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
2299 2008.3333 1599 364.7757
112.05 31.7450 8.45 39.7863
- - -.
121.52 111.2975 95.67 11.3203 ;'
62.35 32.2700 14.19 26.2268
CK.total
-------
Company
o
Location No. Unit Report BumHaz Facility Run APCS 02 APCS ESP CO.mnivg PCDD/PCDF
Uniu Tested Date Waste Type No. (%) Temp Power ppmv (ng/dscm *Po!nu PCDD/PCDF (ng/d*cm@ 7% O2)
(*F) (kVA) @7%02 @7%02) Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
w: wet kiln
d: dry kiln
sd: semi-dry kiln
ph: preheater
pc: precalciner
bp: by-pass
Foreman, AR 3
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
HollyHill.SC 2
HollyHill.SC
HollyHill.SC
HollyHill.SC
HollyHill.SC
Holly Hill, SC
HollyHill.SC 2
HollyHill.SC
HollyHill.SC
HoliyHill.SC
HollyHill.SC
2 Jul-93 y
y
y
1 Aug-92 y
y
y
n
n
n
2 Aug-92 y
y
y
n
n
2
3
4
w 1
2
3
1
2
3
w 1
2
3
1
2
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
•
10.1
10.1
10.1
10.3
10.3
10.3
7.0
7.0
7.2
7.0
7.0
371
365
373
450
450
450
450
450
450
563
563
563
563
563
7Z1
71.8
70
30
30
30
30
30
30
240
256
247
110
110
110
135
135
135
150
150
145
145
145
Z88 3
3.40
9.68
61.00 6
198.00
14ZOO
12.40
6.40
5.60
na -4
317.00
409.00
3.30
2.20
9.68 5.3200 Z88 3.7848
198 70.9000 5.6 81.4300
409 18Z8750 Z2 211.3549
CK.total
-------
APPENDIX H:
DETAILED SUMMARY OF CURRENT PCDD/PCDF
TEQ DATA SET FOR CEMENT KILNS
-------
-------
ffi
Company
Holnam,
Holnamlr
Holnam]
Holnam Ii
Holnamlr
Holnam]
Holnam Ii
Holnam Ii
Holnam L
Holnam I
Holnam
Holnam I
Holnam I
Holnam!
Holnam I
Holnam
Holnam
Holnam
Keystone
Keystone
Keystone
Keystone
Keystone
Keystone
Keystone
Keystone
Keystone
Keystone
Keystone
Keystone
Keystone
Keystone
Keystone
Keystone
Keystone
Keystom
Keystone
Keystonf
Lafarget
LafargeC
Company
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
j_. Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Location
Chanute, KS
Chanute, KS
Chanute, KS
Chanute, KS
Chanute, KS
Chanute, KS
Chanute, KS
Chanute, KS
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Louisville, ME
Louisville, NE
Louisville, ME
Louisville, NE
Louisville, NE
Louisville, NE
Louisville, NE
Unit Report BumHaz Facility Run
Tested Date Waste Type No.
1 Apr-92 y
y
y
y
2 Mar-92 y
y
y
y
1 Jul-92 y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
2 May-92 y
y
y
2 Jul-93 y
y
y
3 Jul-92 y
y
- y
y
y
'y
1 May-92 y
y
y
y
y
2 Aug-92 y
y
w 1
2
3
4
w 1
2
3
4
w 1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
2-1
2-2
2-3
2-4
PI
P2
P3
w 1
2
3
w 2
3
4
w 2-1
2-2
2-3
2-4
2-5
2-6.
sd (ph/bp) 1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
1-5
d(ph/pc/bp) 2-1
2-2
APCS
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
O2 APCS
(%) Temp
(°F)
10.8
10.4.
10.7
10.7
9.5
10.3
10.6
10.8
8.0
8.0
6.8
7.7
5.5
5.5
4.9
6.4
7.1
7.0
6.0
5.2
6.0
5.7
6.3
4.0
4.0
15.5
15.2
15.7
15.5
15.7
10.5
9.8
422
439
435
448
484
412
425
412
387
360
371
356
470
487
494
456
408
405
399
500
485
506
371
365
373
475
470
460
512
522
517
258
238
255
243
258
355
355
ESP CO TEQ
Power Run Av (ng/dscm
(IcV A) ppmv@7%02 @7%O2)
31.96
30.19
27.58
24.76
46.43
50.55
38.73
48.18
25.2
28.4
32
28.5
27.4
29.4
21.4
22.2
37.5
37.2
37.9
58
60
58
72.1
71.8
70
104.5
107.3
107.5
104.1
92.1
94.3
18.3
20.5
22.1
26.3
23.2
54.9
52.7
468
669
636
697
691
415
665
753
312
259
226
195
296
540
551
898
933
899
243
268
211
181
0.350
1.310
1.500
3.050
1.370
0.941
1.100
0.641
0.500
12.600
1.500
0.625
0.571
6.207
0.333
0.077
0.068
0.203
1.550
0.910
0.600
0.281
0.099
0.130
0.151
0.176
0.300
0.325
# Points TEQ (ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
4 3.05000 1.55250 0.35000 1.11805
4 1.37000 1.01300 0.64100 0.30473
4 12.60000 3.80625 0.50000 5.87936
3 0.57100 0.37033 0.20700 0.18485
3 0,20300 0.11597 0.06800 0.07549
''
3 1.55000 1.02000 0.60000 0.48446
5 0.28100 0.16734 0.09900 0.06958
4 0.95200 0.50400 0.30000 0.30473
CK.teq
-------
Company
Location Unit Report BuroHaz Facility Run APCS 02 APCS ESP CO TEQ
Tested Dale Waste Type No. " (%) Temp Power RunAv (ng/dscm * Points TEQ (ng/Bson @ 7% O2)
Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
t-rl
HN
LafargeCoip.
LafargeCoip.
Lafarge Crap.
LafargeCorp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
LafargeCoip.
LafargeCoip.
Lafarge Corp.
LafargeCoip.
LafargeCorp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Lone Star Industries
Lone Star Industries
Lone Star Industries
Lone Star Industries
Lone Star Industries
Lone Star Industries
Lone Star Industries
Lone Star Industries
Lone Star Industries
Lone Star Industries
Lone Star Industries
Lone Star Industries
Medusa Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co.
Medusa Cement Co.
Alpena,Ml
DeroopoHs, AL 1 Aug-92
Demopolis, AL
Demopolis, AL
Fredonia, KS 1 Aug-92
Fredonia, KS
Fredonia, KS
Fredonia, KS 2 Aug-92
Fredonia, KS
Fredonia, KS
Fredonia, KS
Paulding,OH 2 Aug-92
Paulding,OH
Paulding, OH
CapeGirardeau,MO 1 Jan-93
Cape Girardeau, MO
CapeGirardeau,MO
Cape Girardeau, MO
Cape Girardeau, MO
Cape Girardeau, MO
Greencastle,IN 1 Aug-92
Greencastle, IN
Gieencastle, IN
Greencastle, IN
Greencastle, IN
Greencastle, IN
Wampum, PA 1,2 Jul-92
Wampum, PA
Wampum, PA
Wampum, PA 1,2 Mar-93
Wampum, PA
Wampum, PA
Wampum, PA 3 Jul-92
Wampum, PA
Wampum, PA
y 3
y d(ph/bp) 4
y 6
X 7
y w 1
y 2
y 3
y w 1
y 2
y 3
y 4
y w 4
y s
y e
y d (ph/pc/bp) 1-2
y 1-3
y 1-4
y 2-3
y 2-4
y 2-5
y w 1-1
y 1-2
y 1-3
n 2-1
n 2-2
n 2-3
y d E-4
y E-5
y E-6
y i
y 2
y 3
y d B-4
y B-5
y B-6
FF
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
9.4 478 - 1708 0.088
229 120 na
243 65 ' na
230 55 na
5.5 533 5 359 5.900
5.5 536 15 547 2.590
5.5 529 16 416 2.680
470 38
5.6 481 38 244 3.600
5.6 511 78 406 9.400
5.6 496 60 180 2.560
7.0 408 123 na
7.5 404 122 na
7.0 404 123 na
10.2 435 - na
10.3 435 - na
10.6 435 -- na
10.0 435 - na
11.0 435 - na
10.8 435 - na
5.4 465 60 . 3.180
5.4 457 60 3.450
5.4 456 60 4.230
5.0 415 0.175
4.6 419 0.140
5.3 416 0.093
11.2 744 107 2602 29.890-
11.3 738 149 4076 61.730
11.1 750 138 8651 54.960
14.6 711 50
13.9 712 46.8
14.8 701 57.2
7.3 718 20 153 25.000
5.7 718 22.8 138 23.000
5.3 718 24 193 50.900
3 5.90000 3.72333 2.59000 1.88559
3 9.40000 5.18667 2.56000 3.68572
3 4.23000 3.62000 3.18000 0.54525
3 61.73000 48.86000 29.89000 16.77361
na
3 50.90000 32.96667 23.00000 15.56288
02)
nm Sdev
WO 735389
00 1.22329
100 3.02758
National Cement Co. Lebec,CA
1 Aug-92
FF 10.6 547 ~ 10.7. 0.054 3 0.05700 0.05300 0.04800 0.00458
CKLteq
500 2.78873
CK.teq
-------
Company
National Cement Co.
National Cement Co.
National Cement Co.
North Texas Cement
North Texas Cement
North Texas Cement
River Cement Co.
River Cement Co.
River Cement Co.
River Cement Co.
River Cement Co.
River Cement Co.
Southdown/Southwestern
Southdown/Southwestern
Southdown/Southwestern
Southdown/Southwestern
Southdown/Southwestern
Southdown/Southwestern
HH Southdown/Southwestern
i
(Jt
Southdown/Dixie
Southdown/Dixie
Southdown/Dixie
Southdown/Dixie
Southdown/Dixie
Southdown/Dixie
Texas Industries
Texas Industries
Texas Industries
Southdown/Kosmos
Southdown/Kosmos
Southdown/Kosmos
Southdown/Kosmos
Southdown/Kosmos
Southdown/Kosmos
Southdown/Kosmos
Southdown/Kosmos
Southdown/Kosmos
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Location
Lebec,CA
Lebec.CA
Lebec,CA
Midlothian, TX
Midlothian. TX
Midlothian, TX
Festus,MO
Festus, MO
Festus, MO
Feslus. MO
Festus, MO
Festus, MO
Fairbom, OH
Fairbom, OH
Fairbom, OH
Fairborn, OH
Fairbom, OH
Fairbom, OH
Fairbom, OH
Knoxville, TN
Knoxville, TN
Knoxville, TN
Knoxville, TN
Knoxville, TN
Knoxville, TN
Midlothian, TX
Midlothian, TX
Midlothian, TX
Kosmosdale, KY
Kosmosdale, KY
Kosmosdale, KY
Kosmosdale, KY
Kosmosdale, KY
Kosmosdale, KY
Kosmosdale, KY
Kosmosdale, KY
Kosmosdale, KY
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Unit Report BumHaz Facility Run
Tested Date Waste Type No.
y
y
y
2 Oct-92 y
y
y
1 Oct-92 y
y
y
y
y
y
1 Aug-92 y
y
y
y
y
y
y
1 Mar-92 y
y
y
- y .
y
y
1 May-93 y
y
y
1 May-92 y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
2 May-92 Y
Y
2
3
4
w 1
2
3
d 1
2
3
4
5
6
d (?/bp) 2-1
2-2
2-3
I
n
i
n
d(ph/pc/bp) 1-1
1-2
1-3
2-1
2-2
2-3
w ' 1
2
3
d (ph) CM
Cl-2
Cl-3
C2-1
C2-2
C2-3
C3-1
C3-2
C3-3
w C2-1
C2-2
APCS
FF
FF
FF
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
FF
FF
FF
FF/main
FF/main
FF/bypass
FF/bypass
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
ESP
ESP
ESP
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF
JSP
ESP
O2 APCS ESP CO TEQ
(%) Temp Power RunAv (ng/dscm # Points TEQ (ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
(°F) (kVA) ppmv@7%O2 @7%O2) Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
10.5
10.5
10.7
8.4
8.5
8.4
10.1
10.1
10.1
12.4
12.0
12.0
11.7
12.6
12.4
6.3
7.0
7.0
14.9
14.6
14.6
15.4
548 -
547 -
441 230
439 227
449 223
638
638
639
_
-
-
379 ~
379 -
547 -
547 - .
524 ~
507 -
490 -
499 -
489 -
490 -
418 79.5
414 82,5
412 98.8
519
514.8
. 518.7
505.4
504.7
505.1
55
60
7.9 0.057-
22.2 0.048
na
na
na
135 52.100 3 57.30000 49.84333 40.13000 8.80464
135 57.300
135 40.130
37
2.3
37
2.3
145
119
134
114 ... -
95
183
na
na
na
4 1.32000 1.17500 1.06000 0.10755
158 1.160
153 1.060
156 1.160
150 1.320
3 0.57100 0.37033 0.20700 0.18485
CK.teq
-------
Company
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
Holnam Inc.
B
i
0\
Location Unit Report BumHaz Facility Run
Tested Date Waste Type No.
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR 2 Jul-93
Foreman, AR
Foreman, AR
Holly Hill, SC 1 Aug-92
Holly Hill.SC
HollyHffl.SC
Holly Hffl,SC
HollyHffl.SC
HollyHffl.SC
HollyHffl.SC 2 Aug-92
HollyHffl.SC
HollyHill.SC
Holly Hill,SC
HollyHffl.SC
Y C2-3
y C3-1
y C3-2
y C3-3
•y 2
y 3
y 4
y w I
y 2
y 3
n 1
n 2
n 3
y w 1
y 2
y 3
n • 1
n 2
APCS
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
O2 APCS ESP
(%) Temp Power
CF) (kVA)
59
500 58
485 60
506 58
.371 72.1
365 71.8
373 70
10.1 450 30
10.1 450 30
10.1 450 30
10.3 450
10.3 450
10.3 450
7.0 563 30
7.0 563 30
7.2 563 30
7.0 563
7.0 563
" CO
RunAv
ppmv@7%02
531
291
176
240
256
247
110
110
110
135
135
135
150
150
145
145
• 145
TEQ
(ng/dscm
@7%O2)
0.571
0.207
0.333
0.077
0.068
0.203
0.049
0.173
0.370
0.024
0.015
0.032
1.430
2.010
2.510
0.055
0.025
ffPoiols TEQ(ng/ascro@7%O2)
Maximum Avetage Minimum Sdev
3 0.20300 0.11597 0.06800 0.07549
3 0.37000 0.19733 0.02400 0.16168
THIS IS SAME AS HOLNAM. HOLLY HILL
DESCRIBED ABOVE, DISREGARD THIS TEQ DAT.
3 Z51000 1.98333 1.43000, 0.54049
RECALCULATED DATA, USE ORIGINAL DATA
DESCRIBED ABOVE
CK.teq
-------
APPENDIX I:
DETAILED SUMMARY OF CURRENT TOTAL
PCDD/PCDF DATA SET FOR COMMERCIAL HW INCINERATORS
-------
-------
Company
Allied Chemical
Allied Chemical
Allied Chemical
Allied Chemical
Allied Chemical .
Allied Chemical
Allied Chemical
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aplus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.'
Aptus, Inc.
'Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aplus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aplus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aplus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Atochem
Atochem
Atochem
Atochem
Atochem
Atochem
Atochem
Atochem
Atochem
CWM Chemical Services
CWM Chemical Services
Location No. Unit Report
Units Tested Date
Birmingham, AL
Birmingham, AL
Birmingham, AL
Birmingham, AL
• Birmingham, AL
Birmingham, AL
Birmingham, AL
Aragonite, UT
Aragonite, UT
Aragonite, UT
Aragonite, UT
Aragonite, UT
Aragonite, UT
Aragonite, UT
Aragonite, UT
Aragonite, UT
Coffeyvillle. KS
Coffeyvillle, KS
Coffeyvillle, KS
Coffeyvillle, KS
Coffeyvillle. KS
Coffeyvillle, KS
Coffeyvillle, KS
Coffeyvillle, KS
Coffeyvillle, KS
Coffeyvillle. KS
Coffeyvillle. KS
Coffeyvillle. KS
Feb-89
Feb-89
Feb-89
Feb-89
Feb-89
Feb-89
Feb-89
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Dec-90
Dec-90
Dec-90
Dec-90
Dec-90
Dec-90
Dec-90
Dec-90
Dec-90
Dec-90
Dec-90
1 Dec-90
Coffeyville, KS 1 1 Dec-91
Carrollton, KY 1 Jun-90
Carrollton, KY 1 Jun-90
Carrollton, KY - Jun-90
Carrollton, KY Jun-90
Carrolllon, KY Jun-90
Carrollton, KY Jun-90
Carrollton, KY 1 Jun-90
Carrollton. KY 1 1 Jun-90
Carrollton. KY I 1 Jun-90
Chicago, IL 1 1 Mar-92
Chicago, IL 1 1 Mar-92
Bum
Haz.
Waste
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Facility
Type
BPF
BPF
BPF
BPF
BPF
BPF
BPF
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
Run APCS
No.
1 none
2
3
4
5
6
7
11 FF/WS/ESP
12
13
4
5
6
7
8
9
cM - FF/WS/TWS
cl-2
cl-3
c2-l
c2-2
c2-3
c3-l.
c3-2
c3-3
c4-l
c4-2
c4-3
FF/WS/IWS
tl-2 FF/SW
tl-3
tl-4
12-1
12-2
12-3
13-1
t3-2
t3-3
1 IWS/PS
2
O2
(%)
na
9.91
9.42
9.59
10.45
8.88
8.96
8.06
9.9
12.17
10.9
11.6
11.1
11.5
12.1
11.5
12.1
11.5
12.6
11.5
12.5
12.6
8.7
8.4
APCS
Temp
(°F)
na
143.1
145.5
147.8
144
146
144
150
146
143
172
173
174
170
168
166
174
170
171
170
172
170
164
166
ESP PCDD/PCDF
Power ' (ng/dscm
(kVA) @7%O2)
na na
823.64
731.12
395.84
548.11
877.44
778.65
400.74
259.01
290.53
112.95
61.52
85.34
169.41
159.56
89.50
42.07
222.86
87.26
120.06
148.08
107.11
na
na
na
# Points PCDD/PCDF (ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
Maximum Average Minimum Sjev
na
9 877.44 567.23 259.01 240.46
12 222.86 117.14 42.07 50.62
..•
CHWI.total
-------
Company Location
CWM Chemical Services Chicago. IL
CWM Chemical Services Chicago. IL
General Electric Pillsfieid.MA
General Electric Pitlsfield, MA
General Electric Pitlsfield, MA
General Electric Pillsfieid.MA
General Electric Pillsfield. MA
General Electric Pillsfield.MA
General Electric Pittsfield, MA
General Electric Pitlsfield, MA
General Electric Piltsfield.MA
General Electric Pillsfield, MA
General Electric Piltsfield, MA
General Electric Pittsfield, MA
Laidlaw Environmental Services Roebuck, SC
Laidlaw Environmental Services Roebuck, SC
Laidlaw Environmental Services Roebuck, SC
Laidlaw Environment! Services Roebuck, SC
Laidlaw Environmental Services Roebuck, SC
Laidlaw Environmental Services Roebuck, SC
Laidlaw Environmental Services Roebuck, SC
Laidlaw Environmental Services Roebuck, SC
LWD.Inc. CalvertCiiy.KY
LWD.Inc. CalvertCity.KY
LWD.Inc. CalvertCity.KY
LWD.Inc. Calvert City, KY
LWD.Inc. CalvertCity.KY
LWD.Inc. CalvertCity.KY
LWD.Inc. CalvertCity.KY
LWD. Inc. Calvert City. KY
LWD.Inc. CalvertCiiy.KY
Marine Shale Amelia, LA
Marine Shale Amelia, LA '
Marine Shale Amelia, LA
Rollins Environmenlal Services Baton Rouge, LA
Rollins Environmental Services Baton Rouge, LA
Rollins Environmental Services Baton Rouge, LA
No.
(Mis 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
1
1
1
Unit Report Bum
fested Dale Haz.
Waste
1 Mar-92 Y
1 Mar-92 Y
1 Apr-91 Y
1 Apr-91 Y
1 Apr-91 Y
1 Apr-91 Y
1 Apr-91 Y
1 Apr-91 Y
1 Apr-91 Y
1 Apr-91 Y
1 Apr-91 Y
1 Apr-91 Y
1 Apr-91 Y
1 Apr-91 Y
1 Jun-91 Y
Jun-91 Y
Jun-91 Y
Jun-91 Y
Jun-91 Y
Jun-91 Y
Jun-91 Y
Jun-91 Y
Mar-93 Y
Mar-93 Y
Mar-93 Y
2 . Mar-93 Y
2 Mar-93 Y
2 Mar-93 Y
3 Jan-93 Y
3 Jan-93 Y
3 Jan-93 Y
1 Jul-95 y
y
y
1 Apr-87 Y
1 Apr-87 Y
1 Apr-87 Y
Facility
Type
RK
RK
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
AK
AK
AK
RK
RK
RK
Run APCS
No.
3
4
0-4 PS
0-5
0-6
OW-4
OW-S
OW-6
0-1
0-2
O-3
OW-1
OW-2
OW-3
1 FF/VS/AFS
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
1 FF/WS
2
3
1 FF/WS
2
3
1 FF/WS
2
3
1 SD/FF
2 SD/FF
3 SD/FF
1 WS
2
3
02 APCS ESP PCDD/PCDF
(%) Temp Power (ng/dscm » Points PCDD/PCDF(ng/dscm@7%02)
CF) (kVA) @7%O21 Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
8.4 162
8.4 165
10.2 168.9 na 5 1232.38 548.61 100.93 529.86
9.8 169
103. 169
9.6 170.6
9.6 170.6
9.3 170.8
9.8 169.1 206.39
9.9 168.7 123Z38
9.7 169 194.06
9.5 170.6 na
10.1 169.6 100.93
9.4 170.6 1009.27
9.8 153 na na
10.1 152
10.2 152
--9=6 151
10.3 154
10 154
10 154
10.3 155
15.7 156 na na
15.6 157
15.7 155
15.3 159 na na
14.9 163
15.7 157
16.2 153 na na
15.3 154
15 153
10.7 387 - na
10.4 398 - na
10.5 400 - na
11 94 na 4.36 3 4.36 2.26 1.14 1.82
10.6 97 1.28
11 95 1.14
Rollins Environmenlal Services Baton Rouge, LA
1 May-8
RK
IWS
10.7 108 na na
CHWLtotal
-------
Company
Rollins Enviionmental Services
Rollins Envilonmental Services
Rollins Envilonmental Services
Rollins Envilonmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Envilonmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Ross Incineration Services
Location
Baton Rouge, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Bridgeport, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Deerpark,TX
Deerpark,TX
Deerpark,TX
Deerpark,TX
Deerpark,TX
Deerpark,TX
Deerpark,TX
Deerpark,TX
Deerpark,TX
Deerpark,TX
Deerpark,TX
Deerpark,TX
Deerpark,TX
Deerpark,TX
Deerpark,TX
Grafton,OH
No. Unit Report Bum
Units Tested Date Haz.
Waste
1 1 May-88
1 1 May-88
1 1 May-88
1 1 May-88
1 1 May-88
1 1 May-88
1 1 May-88
1 1 May-88
1 1 Aug-88
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
' 3
3
3
3
3
Nov-86
Nov-86
Nov-86
Dec-86
Dec-86
Dec-86
Aug-83
Aug-83
Aug-83
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
1 1 Mar-93
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Facility
Type
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
Run
No.
2
3
4
5.
6
7
8
9
4
5
6
1
2
4-
1
3
4
1
2
3
1
2 '
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
1
2
3
APCS O2
(%)
10.3
10.6
9.3
10
9.7
9.3
9.6
10.4
WS ??
WS ??
WS 77
WS 10.7
10.2
10.6
WS 10
10.7
11.2
WS 11
10.3
10.2
11.5
12.5
12.8
12.1
11.8
11.6
8.4
8.2
8.7
8.2
7.5
8.2
9
9.2
7.9
PT/IWS 11.3
PT/IWS 11.2
PT/IWS 11
APCS ESP PCDD/PCDF
Temp Power (ng/dscm # Points PCDD/PCDF (ng/dscm @ 7% 02)
(°F) (kVA) @7%O2) Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
113
111.7
106.6
100.5
99 1
92
103.7
97.5
??
??
??
103 na na
106
109
101 na 10.70 3 10.70 6.58 3.50 3.71
102 5.54
102 3.50
na na na
122.6 na 5 5.77 4.31 3.06 1.05
119 4.05
121.2
1 12.7
117.8 3.06
118.2
113.6
124.5 5.77
130.9
120.2
115.5 4.89
118.5
125.6
129.9 3.76
128.4
122 na 1.60 3 1.80 1.46 1.60 0.43
125 .97
119 1.80
ThermalKEM
RockHill.se
1 Jun-87
FH
T-l
WS
8.6 172
CHWLtOtal
-------
Company
ThermaJKEM
TbetmalKEM
ThermalKEM
ThetmalKEM
ThermalKEM
ThermalKEM
Trade Waste Incineration
Trade Waste Incineration
Trade Waste Incineration
Trade Waste Incineration
Trade Waste Incineration
Trade Waste Incineration
Trade Waste Incineration
Trade Waste Incineration
Waste Tech. Industries
Waste Tech. Industries '
Waste Tech. Industries
Waste Tech. Industries
Waste Tech. Industries
Waste Tech. Industries
V Waste Tech. Industries
Waste Tech. Industries
Waste Tech. Industries
Location
1
Rock HOI, SC
Rock Hill. SC
RockHai.SC
Rock Hill. SC
Rock Hill. SC
Rock Hill. SC
Sauget,IL
Sauget.IL
Sauget.IL
Sauget.IL
Sauget.IL
Sauget.IL
Sauget,IL
Sauget.IL
East Liverpool, OH
East Liverpool, OH
East Liverpool, OH
East Liverpool, OH
East Liverpool, OH
East Liverpool, OH
East Liverpool, OH
East Liverpool, OH
East Liverpool, OH
No.
Mis
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
1
1
1
Unit
Tested
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
1
1
Report ]
Date
\
Jun-87
Jun-87
Jun-87
Jun-87
Jun-87
Jun-87
Sep-92
Sep-92
Sep-92
Sep-92
Sep-92
Sep-92
Sep-92
Sep-92
May-93
May-93
May-93
May-93
May-93
May-93
May-93
May-93
May-93
3um
Haz.
Vaste
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Facility
Type
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
Run
No.
T-2
T-3
1
2
3
4
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
2
3
4
5.
6
7
9
11
APCS
SD/FF
SD/FF
SD/FF
SD/FF
SD/FF
SD/FF
SD/FF
SD/FF
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
02 A
(%) 1
&2
8.7
8.8
9.2
10.2
9
11.6
11.6
11.6
11.6
11.8
11.6
11.6
11.6
11.3
11.3
11.7
10.9
11.4
12.8
14.1
14.1
14.3
PCS ESP
'erop Power
TO (kVA)
181
167
367
367
361
364
363
354
366
362
PCDD/PCDP
(ng/dscm # Points PCDD/PCDF (ne/dscra@ 7% 02)
@7%O2) Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
240.35 9 281.57 130.45 48.00 80.42
107.90
281.57
92.88
58.31
48.00
76.87
136.31
131.85
CHWLtotal
-------
APPENDIX J:
DETAILED SUMMARY OF CURRENT PCDD/PCDF
TEQ DATA SET FOR COMMERCIAL HW INCINERATORS
-------
-------
Company
Allied Chemical
Allied Chemical
Allied Chemical
Allied Chemical
Allied Chemical
Allied Chemical
Allied Chemical
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
«_, Aptus, Inc.
i-* Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Aptus, Inc.
Atochem
Atochem
Atochem
Atochem
Atochem
Atochem
Atochem
Atochem
Atochem
Location
Birmingham, AL
Birmingham, AL
Birmingham, AL
Birmingham, AL
Birmingham, AL
Birmingham, AL
Birmingham, AL
Aragonite, UT
Aragonite, UT
Aragonite, UT
Aragonite, UT
Aragonite, UT
Aragonite, UT
Aragonite, UT
Aragonite, UT
Aragonite, UT
Coffeyvillle, KS
Coffeyvillle. KS
Coffeyvillle, KS
Coffeyvillle, KS
Coffeyvillle, KS
Coffeyvillle, KS
Coffeyvillle, KS
Coffeyvillle. KS
Coffeyvillle, KS
Coffeyvillle, KS
Coffeyvillle, KS
Coffeyvillle, KS
: Coffeyville, KS
Canollton.KY
Carrollton, KY
Canollton, KY
Carrollton, KY
Carrollton, KY
Carrollton, KY
Carrollton, KY
Canollton, KY
Carrollton, KY
No. Unit Report
Units Tested Date
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Feb-89
Feb-89
Feb-89
Feb-89
Feb-89
Feb-89
Feb-89
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
1 1 Dec-90
1 1 Dec-90
1 1 Dec-90
1 Dec-90
1 Dec-90
1 Dec-90
Dec-90
Dec-90
Dec-90
Dec-90
Dec-90
1 Dec-90
1 1 Dec-91
1 1 Jun-90
1 1 Jun-90
1 1 Jun-90
1 1 Jun-90
1 1 Jun-90
1 1 Jun-90
1 1 Jun-90
1 1 Jun-90
1 1 Jun-90
Burn
Haz
Waste
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Facility
Type
BPF
BPF
BPF
BPF
BPF
BPF
BPF
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
.RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
Run
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
11
12
13
4
5
6
7
8
9
cl-1
cl-2
cl-3
c2-l
62-2
c2-3
c3-l
c3-2
c3-3
c4-l
c4-2
c4-3
tl-2
tl-3
tl-4
12-1
12-2
t2-3
t3-l
t3-2
t3-3
APCS 02
(%)
none na
FF/WS/ESP 9.91
9.42
9.59
10.45
8.88
8.96
8.06
9.9
1Z17
FF/WS/1WS 10.9
1,1.6
11.1
11.5
12.1
11.5
12.1
11.5
12.6
11.5
12.5
1Z6
FF/WS/IWS
FF/SW
APCS ESP TEQ
Temp Power (ng/dscm # Points TEQ (ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
(°F) (kVA) @7%O2) Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
na na na na
143.1 26.1 9 26.02384 15.29889 7.64476 6.78866
145.5 21.1
147.8 10.7
144 13.6
146 22
144 18.5
150 9.98
146 7.67
143 8.04
172 n/a
173
174
170
168
166 ...,.._._
174
170
171
170
172
170
na
na
CHWUeq
-------
Company
Location
No. Unit Report Bum Facility Run APCS 02 APCS ESP TEQ
Units Tested Da«e Haz Type
Waste
No,
(%) Temp Power (ng/dscm I Points
(TF) (kVA) @7%02)
CWM Chemical Services
CWM Chemical Services
CWM Chemical Services
CWM Chemical Services
General Electric
General Electric
General Electric
General Electric
General Electric
General Electric
General Electric
General Electric
General Electric
General Electric
General Electric
General Electric
Laidlaw Environmental Services
Laidlaw Environmental Services
t_i Laidlaw Environmental Services
to Laidlaw Environmental Services
Laidlaw Environmental Services
Laidlaw Environmental Services
Laidlaw Environmental Services
Laidlaw Environmental Services
LWD.Inc.
LWD.Inc.
LWD, Inc.
LWD, Inc.
LWD.Inc.
LWD, Inc.
LWD.Inc.
LWD.Inc.
LWD.Inc.
Marine Shale
Marine Shale
Marine Shale
Chicago, IL
Chicago, IL
Chicago, IL
Chicago, IL
Pittsficld.MA
Pittsficld.MA
Pittsfield, MA
Pittsfield, MA
Pittsfield, MA
Pittsfield. MA
Pittsfield, MA
Pittsfield, MA
Pittsfield, MA
Pittsfield. MA
Pittsfield, MA
Pittsfield, MA
Roebuck, SC
Roebuck, SC
Roebuck, SC
Roebuck, SC
Roebuck, SC
Roebuck, SC
Roebuck, SC
Roebuck, SC
CalveitCity.KY
CalveitCity.KY
Calvert City, KY
Calvert City, KY
Calvert City, KY
Calvert City, KY
Calvert City, KY
Calvert City.KY
Calvert City, KY
Amelia, LA
Amelia, LA
Amelia, LA
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
3
1
Mar-92
Mar-92
Mar-92
Mar-92
Apr-91
Apr-91
Apr-91
Apr-91
Apr-91
Apr-91
Apr-91
Apr-91
Apr-91
Apr-91
Apr-91
Apr-91
Jun-91
Jun-91
Jun-91
Jun-91
Jun-91
Jun-91
Jun-91
Jun-91
Mar-93
Mar-93
Mar-93
Mar-93
Mar-93
Mar-93
Jan-93
Jan-93
Jan-93
Jul-95
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
y
y
y
RK
RK
RK
RK
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
AK
AK
AK
1 IWS/PS
2 '
3
4
O-4 PS
0-5
0-6
OW-4
OW-5
OW-6
O-l
O-2
O-3
OW-1
OW-2
OW-3
1 FF/VS/AFS
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
1 FF/WS
2
3
1 FF/WS
2
3
1 FF/WS
2
3
1 SD/FF
2 SD/FF
3 SD/FF
8.7
8.4
8.4
8.4
10.2
9.8
10.2
9.6
9.6
93
9.8
9.9
9.7
9.5
10.1
9.4
9.8
10.1
10.2
9.6
10.3
10
10
10.3
15.7
15.6
15.7
15.3
14.9
15.7
16.2
15.3
15
10.7
10.4
10.5
164
166
162
165
168.9 na
169
169
170.6
170.6
170.8
169.1
168.7
169
170.6
169.6
170.6
153 na
152
152
151
154
154
154
155
156 na
157
155
159 na
163
157
153 na
154
153
387
398
400
na
9.50000
76.60000
14.60000
na
3.99000
66.20000
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
Rollins Environmental Services Baton Rouge, LA
1 Apr-87 Y
RK
WS
11
94 na
0.22300
TEQO*g/dscra@7%O2)
Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
76.60000 34.17800 3.99000 34.38260
0.22300 0.10310 0.03260 0.10437
"CHWLteq
-------
Company
Location No. Unit Report Burn Facility Run
Units Tested Date Haz Type No.
Waste
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
<— i
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rolb'ns Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Rollins Environmental Services
Baton Rouge, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Bridgeport, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Deerpark, TX
Deerpark, TX
Deerpark, TX
Deerpark, TX
Deerpark, TX
Deerpark, TX
Deerpark, TX
Deerpark, TX
Deerpark, TX
Deerpark, TX
Deerpark, TX
Deerpark, TX
Deerpark, TX
Deerpark, TX
Deerpark, TX
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Apr-87
Apr-87
May-88
May-88
May-88
May-88
May-88
May-88
May-88
May-88
May-88
Aug-88
Nov-86
Nov-86
Nov-86
Dec-86
Dec-86
Dec-86
Aug-83
Aug-83
Aug-83
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
2
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
4
5
6.
1
2
4
1
3
4
1
2
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
10.6
11
IWS 10.7
10.3
10.6
9.3
10
9.7
9.3
9.6
10,4
WS ??
WS ??
WS ??
WS 10.7
10.2
10.6
ws- 10
10.7
11.2
WS 11
10.3
10.2
11.5
12.5
12.8
12.1
11.8
11.6
8.4
8.2
8.7
8.2
7.5
8.2
9
9.2
7.9
97
95
108 na
113
111.7
106.6
100.5
99
92
103.7
97.5
??
??
??
103 na
106
109
101 na
102
102
na na
122.6 na
119
121.2
112.7
117.8
118.2
113.6
124.5
. 130.9
120.2
115.5
118.5
125.6
129.9
128.4
APCS O2 APCS ESP TEQ
(%) Temp Power (ng/dscm # Points TEQ (ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
(°F) (kVA) @7%O2) Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
0.03260
0.05370
na
na
na
0.38700
0.19900
0.63500
0.10200
0.77700
5 0.77700 0.42000 0.10200 0.28492
CHWLteq
-------
Company
Ross Incineration Services
Ross Incineration Services
Ross Incineration Services
ThermalKEM
ThermalKEM
ThermalKEM
ThermalKEM
ThermalKEM
ThermalKEM
ThermalKEM
Trade Waste Incineration
Trade Waste Incineration
Trade Waste Incineration
Trade Waste Incineration
Trade Waste Incineration
Trade Waste Incineration
Trade Waste Incineration
Trade Waste Incineration
Waste Tech. Industries
Waste Tech. Industries
Waste Tech. Industries
Waste Tech. Industries
Waste Tech. Industries
Waste Tech. Industries
Waste Tech. Industries
Waste Tech. Industries
Waste Tech. Industries
Location No. Unit Report Burn Facility Run
Units Tested Date Haz Type No.
Waste
Grafton.OH
Grafton, OH
Grafton.OH
Rock Hill,
Rock Hill,
Rock Hill,
Rock Hill,
Rock Hill,
Rock Hill,
Rock Hill,
Sauget, IL
Sauget, IL
Sauget, IL
Sauget, IL
Sauget, IL
Sauget, IL
Sauget, IL
Sauget, IL
SC
SC
SC
SC
SC
SC
SC
1 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Mar-93
Mar-93
Mar-93
Jun-87
Jun-87
Jun-87
Jun-87
Jun-87
Jun-87
1 Jun-87
4 4 Sep-92
4 4 Sep-92
4 4 Sep-92
4 4 Sep-92
4 4 Sep-92
4 4 Sep-92
4 4 Sep-92
4 4 Sep-92
East Liverpool, OH
East Liverpool, OH
East Liverpool, OH
East Liverpool, OH
East Liverpool, OH
East Liverpool, OH
East Liverpool, OH
East Liverpool, OH
East Liverpool, OH
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 May-93
1 May-93
1 May-93
1 May-93
1 May-93
1 May-93
1 May-93
1 May-93
1 May-93
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
RK
RK
RK
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
1
2
3
T-l
T-2
T-3
1
2
3
4
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
11
PT/IWS
WS
SD/FF
SD/FF
SD/FF
SD/FF
SD/FF
SD/FF
SD/FF
SD/FF
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
11.3
11.2
11
8.6
6.2
8.7
8.8
9.2
10.2
9
11.6
11.6
11.6
11.6
11.8
11.6
11.6
11.6
11.3
11.3
11.7
10.9
11.4
12.8
14.1
14.1
14.3
122 na
125
119
172
181
167
367
367
361
364
363
354
366
362
0.06640
0.01710
0.10640
4.10
1.87
4.85
1.7
1.11
0.817
1.51
Z57
Z56
APCS 02 APCS ESP TEQ
(%) Temp Power (ng/dscm f Points TEQ (ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
(°F) (kVA) @7%O2) Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
0.10640 0.06330 0.01710 0.04473
4.85000 2.34300 0.81700 1.35327
CHWLteq
-------
APPENDIX K:
DETAILED SUMMARY OF CURRENT PCDD/PCDF
TOTAL DATA SET FOR ON-SITE HW FACILITIES
-------
-------
Company Location No. Unit No. Report Bum
Units Tested Date Haz. Waste
American Cyanamid Hannibal, MO 1 1 Ang-89 Y
Y
Y
Amoco Oil Whiting, IN 1 1 jun-89 Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Aristech Chemical Colton.CA 1 1 Jan-89 Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Ashland Chemical Los Angeles, CA 1 1 Dec-88
-
W
i— »
Burroughs Wellcome Greenville, NC ?? 2 Jan-93 Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
CargiH Lynwood,CA 1 1 Jul-89 Y
Y
Y
Y
Cargill Lynwood,CA 1 I Jan-88 y
Y
Y
Chevron Philadelphia, PA 1 1 Sep-91 Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Facility Run
Type No.
LI&CA 2
3
4
FB 1
2
3
4
5
6
1-1
1-2
1-3
2-1
2-2
2-3
LI 1-1
1-2
1-3
2-1
2-2
2-3
LI 1-2
1-3
1-4
II-l
II-2
II-3
m-i
HI-2
ni-3
. LI 6-19
6-20
6-21
6-22
LI 1600A
1600B
1600C
FB 1
2A
2B
2C
3
APCS
PT
PT
PT
C/VS
C/VS
C/VS
C/VS
C/VS
C/VS
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
WS/ESP
WS/ESP
WS/ESP
WS/ESP
WS/ESP
WS/ESP
WS/ESP
WS/ESP
WS/ESP
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
VS/WS
VS/WS
VS/WS
VS/WS
VS/WS
O2 APCS ESP PCDD/PCDF
(%) Temp Power (ng/dscm # Points Total (ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
(°F) (kVA) @7%O2) Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
5.8
5.2
5.1
14.0
13.2
13.7
14.6
13.8
14.5
9
9.5
9.2
8.6
8.1
8
10.2
8
8.2
7.4
6.4
4.8
11.6
11.7
11.8
12.1
12.3
12.1
12.2
12.5
12.5
8.8
9
9.1
9.6
10.26
9.61
9.46
15 161
11 177
11 176
10 176
13 160
OSHWI.total
-------
Coropaiy
Chevron
Location
Belle Chase, LA
No. Unit No. Report Bum F*rftity Run
Units Toted Date Hir-Wute Type No.
1
1 Feb-88
Chevron
Chevron
Richmond, CA
Richmond, CA
1 Jun-93
1 Jul-88
tsi
Ciba-Geigy
Macintosh, AL
1 Mar-90
Ciba-Geigy
St. Gabriel. LA
1 May-88
Department of the Army Johnston Atoll
Department of the Army Johnston Atoll
1 LIC Jun-91
LIC Jun-92
APCS O2 APCS ESP PCDD/PCDP
(%) Temp Power (njMscm fPoints Toul(nt/tfjcra@7%O2)
(*F) (kVA) @7%O2) Miiimtun Avenge Mtiiraorn Sdev
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y.
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
RH&LI 1-2
1-3
14
2-3
24
2-5
3-1
3-2
3-3
LI 1
2
3
LI A-2
A-3
A4
B-5
B-6
B-7
C-8
C-9
C-10
A-ll
RK 1
2
3
4
5
6
LI 1-1
1-2
1-3
n-i
II-2
n-3
ni-i
ni-2
m-3
LI 1
2
3
LI 1
2
3
4
VS/PT
VS/PT
VS/PT
VS/PT
VS/PT
VS/PT
VS/PT
VS/PT
VS/PT
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS/PT/ESP
VS/PT/ESP
VS/PT/ESP
VS/PT/ESP
VS/PT/ESP
VS/PT/ESP
VS/Cyclone
VS/Cyclone
VS/Cyclone
VS/Cyclone
VS/Cyclone
VS/Cyclone
VS/Cyclone
VS/Cyclone
VS/Cyclone
VS/PBS
VS/PBS
VS/PBS
VS/PBS
VS/PBS
VS/PBS
VS/PBS
12.4
12.7
115
11.7
113
12.0
11.8
13.5
12.9
3.3
3.5
3.5
3.4
3.2
2.8
3.3
3.1
2.8
2.9
3.6
3
2.7
3.8
3.9
3.8
5.5
5.3
4.9
5.7
5.8
5.6
14.'6
14.4
14.6
175
176
174
174
171
173
171
170
172
171
194
198
198
0.12
0.19
na
na
na
na
0.23
0.22
0.18
0.21
0.23 0.191667 0.12 0.039707
1.34 0.976667 0.76 0.316596
1.34
0.76
0.83
0.53
0.353
0.424
0.53 0.435667 0.353 0.089075
OSHWLtOtal
-------
Company
Location
Department of the Army Johnston Atoll
Department of the Army Tooe1e,UT
Department of the Army Tooele.UT
Dow Chemical Co. Plaquemine, LA
Dow Chemical Co. Freeport, TX
Dow Chemical Co. Midland, MI
No. Unit No.
Units Tested
1 DPS
77 7?
7? ??
1 1
1 1
1 830
Report Burn
Date Haz. Waste
Jun-92 Y
Y
Y
Y
Apr-92 Y
Y
Y
Y
1 N
Oct-93 Y
Y
Y
Y
1 N
Feb-88 Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Nov-88 Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Mar-92 Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Facility
Type
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
Run
No.
1
2
3
4
2
3
4
5
1
3
4
5
6
1
Cl-1
Cl-2
Cl-3
C2-1
C2-2
C2-3
1
2
Cl-1
Cl-2
Cl-3
C2-1
C2-2
C2-3
Cl-1
Cl-2
Cl-3
Cl-4
C2-1
C2-2
C2-3
C2-4
C3-1
C3-2
C3-3
C3-4
C4-1
C4-2
C4-3
C4-4
C4-5
APCS
VS/PBS
VS/PBS
VS/PBS
VS/PBS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
ESP/PBS
IWS
VS/IWS
O2 APCS ESP
(%) Temp Power
(°F) (kVA)
13.9
13.0
13.2
13.1
11.2
11.4
11.5
11.3
11.2
11.4 163.77
11.2 164.26
11.3 164
11.6 16Z45
11.4 161.15
13.5 77 77
13.3
13.3
9.3
9.8
10.7
13.3 77 77
13 7? 7?
14.4
13.6
14.1
13.3
13.8
13.3
11.8
11.5
1Z1
11.7
11.1
10.8
11.1
10.8
11.7
11.4
11.8
11.7
11.8
11.9
11.1
11.1
10.9
PCDD/PCDF
(ng/dscm .
@ 7% O2)
1.84
0.84
0.71
0.63
. 0.41
0.46
0.63
0.44
0.761
0.09
0.07
0.06
0.06
0.13J
11.18
12.97
1
. # Points Total (ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
4 1.84 1.01 0.63 0.562703
0.41 4 0.63 0.485 0.41 0.09882S
0.09 4 0.09 0.07 0.06 0.014142
2 1Z97 12.075 11.18 1.265721
OSHWI.total
-------
Compmy
DowCbejnfcalCo.
Location
Mldltnd.MI
No. Unit No. Report Bum Facility Run
Unto Tested Date Htz-Wtste Type No.
1 703 Jwj-89
Dupont
Dupont
Deepwater.NJ
La Place. LA
1 FR-1 Jun-89
1 Sep-89
Dupont
La Porte. TX
2 N-THF Feb-89
Dupont
La Porte, TX
1 CSI(l) Jan-89
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
APCS
VS/BSP
RK Cl-1
Cl-2
Cl-3
Cl-4
C2-1
C2-2
C2-3
C2-4
C3-1
C3-2
C3-3
LI PI PT/CCS/RJSyESP 11.4
P2 11.4
P3 11.5
O2 APCS ESP PCDDJPCDP
(%) Temp Power (nf/dsoa fPofa* Toul(nj/ascm@79l02)
(•F) (kVA) @7%02) Mtxinwm Avenge K&faw Sdev
3 135.6 105.0733 7835 28,81388
11.9
10.7
11.4
10.2
RK&LI
LI
LI
Dupont
La Porte, TX
Mar-89
LI
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
10
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
7.1
7.2
7.3
8.1
8.2
8.3
9.1
9.2
9.3
1
2
3
4
7
8
9
10
11
C-l
WS
WS
WS
9.6
9
8.8
10.2
10.4
9.4
12.2
13.6
12.8
5
3.5
2.8
2.5
6
7.8
3.6
6.3
5.1
5.6
6.8
6.2
6.4
4.6
5.5
5.13
6.57
5
6.4
6.2
6
7.4
7835
135.6
10157
FF
OSHWLtotal
-------
Company
Location
No. Unit No. Report
Units Tested Date
Dupont
Dupont
Louisville, KY
Orange, TX
1 Jul-89
1 Aug-90
Dupont
Wilmington, DE
1 Dec-92
Ui
Eastman Kodak Co.
Rochester, NY
Sep-92
Eli Lilly and Co.
First Chemical Corp.
Mayaguez, PR
Pascagoula, MS
1 Nov-87
1 Jul-91
turn
,Wast
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Facility Run
e Type No.
C-2
C-3
C-4
C-5
C-6
C-8
C-9
C-10
LI 1
2
3
RK Cl-1
Cl-2
Cl-3
C2-4
C2-S
C2-6
FH 1
2
3
4
5
6
RK 1-1
1-2
1-3
IM
II-2
H-3
ni-i
ni-2
ni-3
LI I
2
3
?? 1-2
1-3
1-4
n-s
II-6
n-7
m-8
ra-9
m-io
APCS
WS
SD/VS
PT/VS
02 APCS ESP PCDD/PCDF
(%) Temp Power (ng/dscm # Points Total (ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
(°F) (kVA) @7%O2) Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
7.8
7.2
7.0
8.2
8.5
8.4
10.7
10.1
10.6
10.4 na
10.4'
11.1
11.2
11.0
11.0
12.2
12.0
11.9
13.0
14.1
13.1
14.6
14.8
14.9
10.3
10.4
10.2
2.6
2.4
2.6
OSHWI.tota.1
-------
Company
Honeywell
Iowa Army
Ammunition PI tut
Location
OS
Iowa Army
Ammunition Plant
Lake City Army
Ammunition Plant
No. Unit No. Report Bum Facility Run
Unto Tested Dale Haz. Waste Type No.
Rneltas County, FL 1 1 Jon-88
MiddletownJA
Nov-88
lowaAimy Middletown, IA 1
Ammunition Plant
I Oct-91
MiddletownJA
Independence, MO
1 Jnl-93
1 Mar-93
M&T Chemicals CanoIIton,KY 1 1 Jan-89
Miles Inc.
NewMartinsville,WV
1 Sep-92
Monsanto Agricultural Co. Muscatine, IA
1 May-89
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
LI
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
FB
LI
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
4
5
6
1
2
3
5
7
8
1.1
1.2
13
1.4
2.3
Z4
2.S
3.1
3.2
3.3
Cl-1
Cl-2
Cl-3
C2-4
C2-5
C2-6
1-1
1-2
1-3
APCS
7?
FF
FF
FF
FF
FF/WS
ESP/WS
PBS
02 APCS ESP PCDD/PCDF
(%) Temp Power (ngAfocra fPoints Total(ngAbcm@7»02)
("F> (kVA) @7%02) Maximum Average Minfawro Sdev
na
192
193.
193
17.2
17.9
18.7
na
16.6
16.6
15.9
16.0
15.7
15.9
15.9
15.2
15.3
14.8
16.2
15.1
14.6
15.3
15.2
7.7 162 na
8.8 158
8.9 ' 157
8.0 162.2
8.6 159.8
7.9 160.7
1Z3
8.7
9.0
na
na
OSHWLtotal
-------
Company Location No. Unit No. Report Bum Facility Run APCS
Units Tested Date Haz. Waste Type No.
n-i
H-2
II-3
m-i
m-2
m-3
IV-l
rv-2
IV-3
V-l
V-2
V-3
Neperalnc. Herriman.NY 1 1 Feb-93 Y LI 1 ??
Y 2
Y 3
Neperalnc. Herriman.NY 1 1 Sep-92 Y LI 1 7?
2
3
^ OlinCorp. East Alton. IL 2 2 Feb-92 Y SA 1 FF
-J Y 2
Y 3
Y 4
OlinCorp. Lake Charles, LA 1 1 Jan-89 Y LI 1-1 WS
1-2
. 1-3
II-l
H-2
H-3
m-i
m-2
m-3
IV-l
IV-2
IV-3
V-l
V-2
V-3
Pfizer Inc. Groton,CT 1 1 Jui.go y RH 2 WS
Y 3
Y" . 5
Pfizer Pharmaceuticals Inc. Barceloneta, PR 1 i 5/39 y RK j VS/PT
Y 2
Y 3
O2 APCS ESP PCDDyPCDF
(%) Temp Power (ng/dscm # Points Total (ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
(°F) (kVA) @7%O2) Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
9.4
7.7
10.4
7.8
7.8
7.8
7.3
6.7
7.0
7.8
7.5
9.0
5.2
5.1
5.1
5.1
4.6
4.4
17.1 401 na na
16.0 401
16.2 398
16.6 399
9.3 na na na
10.6
11.8
6.9
13.0
11.2
13.5
13.3
11.6
15.0
13.4
18.9
10.8
9.0
10.7
7-3 151n» 2.64 3 4.5 3.09 2.12 1.251058
7.7 153 2.12
7.7 168 4.50
10.8 187 na na
10.6 187
11.4 185
Radford Army
Radford,VA
6A Jun-93
RK B-l
FF/PBS
14.1 172
OSHWI.total
-------
Coropuny
Ammunition Hun
Location
No. Unit No. Report Bwn Facility Rim
Units Tested Date H«.Wwte Type No.
APCS
Thermal Oxidation Corp. Roebuck, SC
1 Mar-87
U.S.Dept. of Energy Oak Ridge. TO
00 Upjohn Co.
Kalamazoo, MI
Vulcan Materials Co. Wichita, KS
1 Aug-89
1 Dec-90
1 Apr-91
Vulcan Materials Co. Wichita, KS
1 Feb-91
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
LI
RK
RK
LI
LI
B-2
&3
M6-1
M6-2
MM
A-l
A-2
A-3
AA-1
AA-2
AA-3
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
3
1
2
3
1-2
1-3
1-4
II-l
II-2
n-3
1-1
1-2
II-l
II-2
m-i
m-2
IV-l
IV-2
FF/WS
VS/PB/IWS
PT/VS
WS
ws
02 APCS ESP PCDD/PCDF
(%) Ten»p Power (ng/ajcm f Points Toial(ns/ascm@79lO2)
CF) (kVA) @7%02) Maxfawn Average Minimum Sdev
125 178
12.9 177
13.1 172
14.3
14.9
12.1
1Z1
1ZO
10.4
10.6
10.6
15.0
14.7
12
10.4
1Z5
13.2
11.5
11.1
11.4
14.1
11.7
13.5
5.8
3.9
4.4
4.5
5.1
4.3
8
5.8
6.8
5.9
2.9
3.7
2
3.7
173
172
174
174
174
180
178
179
141 na
133
141.7
147.7
143.7
140
183 na
• 180
179
116na
119
118
161 na
162
161
162
164
165
117 na
121
133
139
149
157
142
141
na
na
71.47
116.63
388.34
139.98
322.77
401.35
na
401.35 240.09 71.47 147.32
OSHWLtotal
-------
Company
Location
No. Unit No. Report Bum Facility Run
Units Tested Date Haz. Waste Type No.
APCS 02 APCS ESP PCDD/PCDF
(%) Temp Power (ng/dscm # Points Total (ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
(°F) (kVA) @7%O2) Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
Revision 1:4/4/94
Eli Lilly and Co. Lafayette. IN
TJZ Feb-89
Eii Lilly and Co. Clinton, IN
3 C-10 Feb-89
VO
Cook Composites Port Washington, WI 1 1 Apr-90
Glaxo Inc.
R.T.P..NC
1 1 Oct-93
Iowa Army
Ammunition Plant
Middletown, IA
1 1 Oct-91
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
LI
LI
RH
RK
Cl-1
Cl-2
Cl-3
Cl-4
C2-1
C2-2
C2-3
C3-1
C3-2
C3-3
C4-1
C4-2
C4-3
CM
Cl-2
Cl-3
Cl-4
C2-1
C2-2
C2-3
C3-1
C3-2
C3-3
1
2
3
Sl-1
Sl-2
Sl-3
S2-1
S2-2
S2-3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
VS/PT
VS/PT
DS/FF
FF
2.5
3.5
1.9
2
1.5
2.3
3.1
5.6
5.7
5.6
2.4
2.5
2.4
10.1
10.1
10.6
11.5
9.9
10.4
10
11.4
11.2
12.6
7.7
9
9
Occidental Chemical Corp. Niagara Falls, NY 1 1 Feb-94
LI
IWS
14.7
14.0
13.8
14.3
14.7
15.0
15.0
14.2
14.4
11.3
na
OSHWI.total
-------
Company
Location
No. Unit No. Report Bum FiciBty Rim
Unlti Tested Date Hiz. Waste Type No,
APCS
3M
Cottage Grove, MN 1 1 Sep-90
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
RK
2
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
02 APCS ESP PO>DA>CDP
(%) Temp Power (ngMscw »PofoB Toul(uj/a*cm@7%O2)
(T) (kVA) @7%O2) Mwirown Avenge MWrwm Sdev
113
11.0
WS
WS
WS
WS
WS
WS
WS
WS
14.2
14.0
13.5
13.9
15.4
14.2
14.6
13.2
18.61
8.65
28.7
44.93
168.63
127.59
120.41
12628
8
168.63 80.48 8.65 61.66063
11 Unable to be determined from information given
na not available
OSHWLtotal
-------
APPENDIX L:
DETAILED SUMMARY OF CURRENT PCDD/PCDF TEQ
DATA SET FOR ON-SITE HW INCINERATORS
-------
-------
Company Location No. Unit No. Report Bum
Units Tested Date Haz. Waste
American Cyanamid Hannibal, MO 1 1 Aug-89 Y
Y
Y
Amoco Oil Whiting, IN 1 1 Jun-89 Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Aristech Chemical Colton.CA 1 1 Jan-89 Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Ashland Chemical Los Angeles, CA 1 1 Dec-88
r
»— *
Burroughs Wellcome Greenville, NC ?? 2 Jan-93 Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Cargill Lynwood,CA 1 1 Jul-89 Y
Y
Y
Y
Cargill Lynwood,CA 1 1 Jan-88 Y
Y
Y
Chevron Philadelphia, PA 1 1 Sep-91 Y
Y
Facility Run
Type No.
LI&CA 2
3
4
FB 1
2
3
4
5
6
1-1
1-2
1-3
2-1
2-2
2-3
LI 1-1
1-2
1-3
2-1
2-2
2-3
LI 1-2
1-3
1-4
n-i
n-2
n-3
m-i
m-2
m-3
LI 6-19
6-20
6-21
6-22
LI 1600A
1600B
1600C
FB 1
2A
APCS
PT
FT
PT
c/vs
C/VS
C/VS
C/VS
C/VS
C/VS
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
WS/ESP
WS/ESP
WS/ESP
WS/ESP
WS/ESP
WS/ESP
WS/ESP
WS/ESP
WS/ESP
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
VS/WS
VS/WS
O2 TEQ
(%) (ng/dscm # Points TEQ (ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
@7%O2) Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
5.8
5.2
5.1
14.0
13.2
13.7
14.6
13.8
14.5
9
9.5
9.2
8.6
8.1
8
10.2
8
8.2
7.4
6.4
4.8
11.6
11.7
11.8
12.1
12.3
12.1
12.2
12.5
12.5
8.8
9
9.1
9.6
10.26
9.61
9.46
15
11
OSHWI.teq
-------
Company
Location
No. Unit No, Report Bora FidEty Ron
Units Tested Dtie Hiz. Wasle Typo No.
Chevron
Belle Chise, LA
Feb-88
Chevron
Chevron
Richmond, CA
Richmond, CA
Jun-93
Jul-88
Ciba-Geigy
Macintosh, AL
1 Mar-90
Ciba-Geigy
St. Gabriel. LA
1 May-88
Department of the Army Johnston Atoll
LIC Jun-91
APCS O2 TEQ
(%) (ugAJscm # Points TEQ (ng/dwan @ 7% O2)
@7%O2) Mudmttm Avenge Minimum Sdev
y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
2B
2C
3
RH&LI 1-2
1-3
1-4
2-3
2-4
2-5
3-1
3-2
3-3
LI 1
2
3
LI A-2
A-3
A-4
B-5
B-6
B-7
C-8
C-9
C-10
A-ll
RK 1
2
3
4
5
6
LI 1-1
1-2
1-3
n-i
H-2
n-3
m-i
M-2
ffl-3
VS/WS
VS/WS
VS/WS
VS/PT
VS/PT
VS/PT
VS/PT
VS/PT
VS/PT
VS/PT
VS/PT
VS/PT
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS/PT/ESP
VS/PT/ESP
VS/PT/ESP
VS/PT/ESP
VS/PT/ESP
VS/PT/ESP
VS/Cyclone
VS/Cyclone
VS/Cyclone
VS/Cyclone
VS/Cyclone
VS/Cyclone
VS/Cyclone
VS/Cyclone
VS/Cyclone
11
10
13
12.4
12.7
125
11.7
113
12.0
11.8
135
12.9
33
35
35
3.4
3.2
2.8
33
3.1
2.8
2.9
3.6
3
2.7
3.8
3.9
3.8
5.5
53
4.9
5.7
5.8
5.6
3.18E-02
2.99E-02
na
na
na
na
4.47E-02
4.74E-02
3.71E-02
2.99E-02
8.57E-03
2.92E-03
6.25E-03
LI
VS/PBS
0.0474 0.0368 0.0299 0.007682
0.00857 0.005913 0.00292 0.00284
14.6
OSHWLteq
-------
Company
Location
Department of the Army Johnston Atoll
Department of the Army Johnston Atoll
Department of the Army Tooele, UT
Department of the Army Tooele, UT
E
Dow Chemical Co. Plaquemine, LA
Dow Chemical Co. Freepoit,TX
Dow Chemical Co. Midland. MI
No.
Units
1
1
rt
??
i
i
i
Unit No. Report Bum
Tested Date Haz. Waste
Y
Y
LIC Jun-92 Y
Y
Y
Y
DPS Jun-92 Y
Y
Y
Y
?? Apr-92 Y
Y
Y
Y
1 N
77 Oct-93 Y
Y
T
Y
1 N
1 Feb-88 Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
1 Nov-88 Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
830 Mar-92 Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Facility
Type
LI
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
Run
No.
2
3
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
2
3
4
5
1
3
4
5
6
1
CM
Cl-2
Cl-3
C2-1
C2-2
C2-3
1
2
Cl-1
Cl-2
Cl-3
C2-1
C2-2
C2-3
Cl-1
Cl-2
Cl-3
C14
C2-1
C2-2
APCS
VS/PBS
VS/PBS
VS/PBS
VS/PBS
VS/PBS
VS/PBS
VS/PBS
VS/PBS
VS/PBS
VS/PBS
VS
vs
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
ESP/PBS
IWS
VS/IWS
02
(%)
14.4
14.6
13.9
13.0
13.2
13.1
11.2
11.4
11.5
11.3
11.2
11.4
11.2
11.3
11.6
11.4
13.5
13.3
133
9.3
9.8
10.7
133
13
14.4
13.6
14.1
13.3
13.8
13.3
11.8
11.5
12.1
11.7
11.1
10.8
TEQ
(ng/dscm
@ 7% 02)
na
na
0.14
0.11
0.13
0.12
0.0224
0.0246
0.0284
0.0244
0.04051
0.00902
0.00491
0.00664
0.00635
0.004751
0.0884
0.115
0.05529
0.04112
# Points TEQ (ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
0.14 0.13 0.11 0.011752
0.0284 0.02495 0.0224 0.002505
0.00902 0.00673 0.00491 0.001704
-2
0.115 0.1017 0.0884 0.018809
0.1198 0.065753 0.04112 0.036499
OSHWLteq
-------
Company
Location
No. Unit No. Report
Units Tested Date
Dow Chemical Co.
Midland, MI
703 Jun-89
Dupont
Dupont
Deepwater, NJ
La Place, LA
FR-1 Jun-89
1 Sep-89
Dupont
La Porte, TX
N-THF Feb-89
lam
.Wuw
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y-
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Fwality Run
: Type No.
C2-3
C24
C3-1
C3-2
C3-3
C3-4
C4-1
C4-2
C4-3
C4-4
C4-5
RK CM
Cl-2
Cl-3
Cl-4
C2-1
C2-2
C2-3
C2-4
C3-1
C3-2
C3-3
LI PI
P2
P3
RK&LI 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
10
LI 6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
7.1
7.2
7.3
8.1
8.2
APCS
02
11.1
10.8
11.7
11.4
11.8
11.7
11.8
11.9
11.1
11.1
10.9
VS/ESP
PT/CCS/RJS/ESP
WS
WS
TEQ
(ng/dscm
@7%02)
0.0468
0.1198
# Points TEQ(nE/dscm@7%O2)
Maximum Avenge Minimum Sdev
11.9
10.7
11.4
10.2
11.4
11.4
11.5
9.6
9
8.8
10.2
10.4
9.4
123.
13.6
12.8
5
3.5
2.8
2.5
6
7.8
3.6
6.3
5.1
0.218 0.137733 0.0942 0.069596
0.101
0.218
0.0942
OSHWI.teq
-------
Company
Location
No. Unit No. Report Bum Facility Ron
Units Tested Date Haz. Waste Type No.
APCS
02
Dupont
La Porte, TX
1 CSI(l) Jan-89
Dupont
La Porte, TX
1 1 Mar-89
r
Ul
Dupont
Dupont
Louisville. KY
Orange, TX
1 1 Jul-89
1 1 Aug-90
Dupont
Wilmington, DE
1 1 Dec-92
Eastman Kodak Co.
Rochester, NY
Sep-92
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
8.3
9.1
9.2
9.3
LI 1
2
3
4
7
8
9
10
11
LI C-l
C-2
C-3
C-4
C-5
C-6
C-8
C-9
C-10
LI 1
2
3
RK Cl-1
Cl-2
Cl-3
C2-4
C2-5
C2-6
FH 1
2
3
4
5
6
RK 1-1
1-2
1-3
n-i
ws
FF
WS
SD/VS
5.6
6.8
6.2
6.4
4.6
5.5
5.13
6.57
5
6.4
6.2
6
7.4
TEQ
(ng/dscm
@7%02)
# Points TEQ (ng/dscm @ 7% 02)
Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
7.8
7.2
7.0
8.2
8.5
8.4
10.7
10.1
10.6
10.4
10.4
11.1
11.2
11.0
11.0
12.2
12.0
11.9
13.0
0.322
0.837 0.459 0.176 0.261628
OSHWLteq
-------
Company
Location
No. UA No, Report Bam FicSty Ron
Units Tested D»te Haz. Waste Type No.
H-2
H-3
Y m-1
m-2
m-3
APCS 02 TEQ
(%) (ng/dwm #Powtt TEQ(ng/dscm@7%O2)
@7%02) Mtximmn Average Minimum Sdev
14.1 0.217
13.1 0.176
14,6 0.633
14.8 0.567
14.9 0.837
Hi Lilly and Co.
Mayaguez, PR
1 Nov-87
Y
Y
Y
LI
1
2
3
PT/VS
10.4
10.2
First Chemical Corp. Pascagoula, MS
M-91
77
1-2
1-3
1-4
n-s
H-6
H-7
m-s
m-9
ra-io
77
2.6
2.4
2.6
Honeywell
Pinellas County, PL
Jun-8
Y
Y
Y
Y
LI
7?
Iowa Army
Ammunition Plant
Middletown, IA
Nov-88
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
RK
1
2
3
4
5
6
FF
19.2
19.2
19.3
17^
17.9
18.7
Iowa Army
Ammunition Plant
Middletown, IA
1 Oct-91
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
RK
1
2
3
4
5
6
FF
Iowa Army'
Ammunition Plant
Middletown, IA
1 Jul-93
Y
Y
Y
RK
FF
Lake City Arniy
Ammunition Plant
Independence, MO
1 Mar-93
RK
FF
16.6
16.6
15.9
OSHWLteq
-------
Company
Location
No. Unit No. Report Bum Facility
Units Tested Date Haz. Waste Type
M&T Chemicals
Carrollton,KY
1 Jan-89
Miles Lie.
NewMarlinsville,WV
1 Sep-92
Monsanto Agricultural Co. Muscatine, IA
1 May-89
Nepera Inc.
Nepera Lie.
OlinCorp.
Herriman, NY
Herriman, NY
East Alton, IL
Feb-93
Sep-92
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
2 2 Feb-92 Y
Y
RK
FB
LI
LI
LI
SA
Run
No.
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
2.3
2.4
2.5
3.1
3.2
3.3
Cl-1
Cl-2
Cl-3
C2-4
C2-5
C2-6
1-1
1-2
1-3
n-i
n-2
n-3
m-i
m-2
ra-3
IV-l
IV-2
rv-3
v-i
V-2
V-3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
APCS
O2
FF/WS
ESP/WS
PBS
FF
16.0
15.7
15.9
15.9
15.2
15.3
14.8
162
15.1
14.6
15.3
15.2
7.7
8.8
8.9
8.0
8.6
7.9
12.3
8.7
9.0
9.4
7.7
10.4
7.8
7.8
7.8
7.3
6.7
7.0
7.8
7.5
9.0
5.2
5.1
5.1
5.1
4.6
4.4
17.1
16.0
TEQ
(ng/dscm
@ 7% 02)
# Points TEQ (ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
OSHWLteq
-------
Company
Location
OlinCorp.
Lake diaries, LA
No. UnitNo. Report Bum FtcHJty
Units Tested Dtte Haz. Waste Type
Jan-89
Y
Y
Pfizer Lie.
Groton, CT
00
Pfizer Phannaceuticals Inc. Barceloneta, PR
Radford Army
Ammunition Plant
Radfori.VA
Jul-90
5/89
6A Jun-93
Thennal Oxidadon Corp. Roebuck, SC
Mar-87
Ron
No,
APCS
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
LI 1-1
1-2
1-3
H-l
H-2
H-3
m-i
m-2
ffl-3
IV-1
3Y-2
IV-3
V-l
V-2
V-3
RH 2
3
5
RK 1
2
3
RK B-l
B-2
B-3
M6-1
M6-2
M6-3
A-l
A-2
A-3
AA-1
AA-2
AA-3
LI 1
2
3
4
5
6
ws
ws
VS/PT
FE/PBS
FF/WS
O2 TEQ
(%) (ng/dscm
@7%O2)
16.6
TEQ(nE/dson@7%O2)
Maximum Avenge Minimum Sdev
93
10.6
11.8
6.9
13.0
11.2
135
133
11.6
15.0
13.4
18.9
10.8
9.0
10.7
7.3
7.7
7.7
10.8
10.6
11.4
14.1
12.5
12.9
13.1
143
14.9
12.1
12.1
12.0
10.4
10.6
10.6
15.0
14.7
12
10.4
125
na
0.022
0.012
0.023
0.023 0.019 0.012 0.006363
OSHWLteq
-------
Company Location No. Unit No. Report Bum Facility
Units Tested Date Haz. Waste Type
US.Dept. of Energy Oak Ridge, TN 1 1 Aug-89 Y RK
Y
Y
Upjohn Co. Kalamazoo,MI 1 1 Dec-90 Y RK
Y
Y
Vulcan Materials Co. Wichita. KS 1 1 Apr-91 Y LI
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Vulcan Materials Co. Wichita, KS 1 1 Feb-91 Y LI
^^
£
Run APCS
No.
1 VS/PB/TWS
2
3
1 PT/VS
2
3
1-2 WS
1-3
1-4
n-i
n-2
n-3
1-1 WS
1-2
n-i
n-2
rn-i
ra-2
IV-l
IV-2
02
(%)
11.5
11.1
11.4
14.1
11.7
135
5.8
3.9
4.4
4.5
5.1
4.3
8
5.8
6.8
5.9
2.9
3.7
2
3.7
TEQ
(ng/dscm # Points TEQ (ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
@ 7% O2) Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
na
na
1.29 6 12 6.493333 1.08 5.226286
1.08
12
2.99
11.3
10.3
na
OSHWLteq
-------
Company
Location
No. Unit No. Report Bum Facility Ron
Units Tested Date Haz. Waste Type No.
APCS
O2
TEQ
(ng/djan
@7%02)
# Points TEQ(nE/ascm@7%O2)
Maximum Avenge Minimum Sdcv
Revision 1:4/4/94
Hi Lilly «nd Co.
Ltf«yette,IN
TJZ Feb-89
Eli Lilly and Co.
Clinton, IN
3 C-10 Feb-89
r
H-'
o
Cook Composites
Glaxo Inc.
Port Washington, WI 1 1 Apr-90
R.T.P..NC
Oct-93
Iowa Aimy
Ammunition Plant
Middletown,IA
Oct-91
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
?
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
LI Cl-1
Cl-2
Cl-3
Cl-4
C2-1
C2-2
C2-3
C3-1
C3-2
C3-3
C4-1
C4-2
C4-3
?? Cl-1
Cl-2
Cl-3
Cl-4
C2-1
C2-2
C2-3
C3-1
C3-2
C3-3
LI 1
2
3
RH Sl-1
Sl-2
Sl-3
S2-1
S2-2
- S2-3
RK 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
VS/PT
VS/PT
DS/FF
FF
Z5
35
1.9
2
15
23
3.1
5.6
5.7
5.6
Z4
25
2.4
10.1
10.1
10.6
11.5
9.9
10.4
10
11.4
11.2
12.6
7.7
9
9
na
14.7.
14.0
13.8
14.3
14.7
15.0
15.0
OSHWLteq
-------
Company
Location
No. Unit No. Report Bum Facility Run
Units Tested Date Haz. Waste Type No.
APCS
Occidental Chemical Corn. Niagara Falls, NY
Feb-94
3M
Cottage Grove, MN 1 1 Sep-90
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
- Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
LI
RK
IWS
WS
WS
WS
WS
WS
WS
WS
WS
02
(%)
14.2
14.4
11.3
11.3
11.0
14.2
14.0
13.5
13.9
15.4
14.2
14.6
13.2
TEQ
(ng/dscm
@ 7% O2)
0.410
0.336
0.77
1.23
4.53
3.14
2.97
3.28
# Points TEQ (ng/dscm @ 7% O2)
Maximum Average Minimum Sdev
4.53 2.083 0.336 1.586873
?? Unable to be detennined from information given
na not available
OSHWI.teq
-------
-------
APPENDIX M:
SUMMARY OF POOLED PM DATA SORTED BY PI
-------
-------
COMBINED CEMENT KILN AND LIGHT WEIGHT AGGREGATE KILN POPULATION
SORTED BY PI
Company
*Solite Corp.
•Solite Corp.
•Solite Corp.
•Solite Corp.
*SoIiteCorp.
•Solite Corp.
•Solite Corp.
•Solite Corp.
•Solite Corp.
•NorliteCorp.
•Solite Corp.
•Solite Corp.
Southdown/Southwestern
Southdown/Kosmos
Lafarge Corp.
Lafarge Corp.
Texas Industries
Southdown/Dixie
Keystone Cement Co.
Giant Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Giant Cement Co.
Holnam, Inc.
National Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Lone Star Industries
North Texas Cement
Keystone Cement Co.
Holnam be.
Holnam Inc.
Medusa Cement Co.
Lafarge Corp.
River Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Heartland Cement Co.
Continental Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Lafarge Corp.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co. .
Holnam Inc.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Lone Star Industries
Lafarge Corp.
Medusa Cement Co.
Essroc Materials
Medusa Cement Co.
Essroc Materials
Location
Norwood, NC
Green Cove Springs, EL
Norwood, NC
Cascade, VA
Arvonia,VA
Norwood, NC
Cascade, VA
Norwood, NC
Cascade, VA
Cohoes, NY
Brooks, KY
Arvonia, VA
Fairbom, OH
Kosmosdale, KY
Alpena, MI
Fredonia, KS
Midlothian, TX
Knoxville, TN
Bath,PA
Harleyville, SC
Foreman, AR
Harleyville, SC
Artesia, MS
Lebec,CA
Louisville, NE
Cape Girardeau, MO
Midlothian, TX
Bath, PA
Clarksville, MO
Holly Hill, SC
Wampum, PA
Demopolis, AL
Festus, MO
Chanute, KS
Independence, KS
Hannibal, MO
Foreman, AR
Fredonia, KS
Foreman, AR
Chanute, KS
HollyHill.SC
Louisville, NE
GreencasUe, IN
Paulding, OH
Wampum, PA
Logansport, IN
Wampum, PA
Dorado, PR
No.
Units
0
0
0
'2
2
4
3
0
2
2
1
2
1
1
2
2
4
1
2
4
3
4
1
1
2
1
3
2
1
2
3
1
2
2 .
4
I
3
2
3
2
2
2
1
2
3
1
1
Unit
Tested
7
5
8
2
7
5
1
6
4
1
2
8
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
4
3
5
1
1
2
1
2
1
1
2
3
1
1
2
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
2
1,2
1
1,2
1
No. Pis.
average
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
15
3
3
3
9
3
3
3
6
4-
3
6
3
3
4.
8
6
3
10
3
3
3
3
6
4
6
3
11
3
2
4
3
5
3
3
3
4
3
3
0.00048
0.00144
0.00190
O.OOS67
0.00667
0.00429
0.00864
0.00512
0.01000
0.01227
0.01833
0.02533
0.00300
0.00261
0.00333
0.01900
0.00962
0.01183
0.01400
0.01300
0.00748
0.01133
0.01380
0.01713
0.01859
0.02350
0.02067
0.02204
0.03370
0.02263
0.02247
0.01820
0.02443
0.03255
0.02660
0.03737
0.02958
0.02200
0.02020
0.04808
0.04967
0.03658
0.05563
0.03333
0.07687
0.07075
0.06543
0.04877
Stdev
0.00025
0.00016
0.00161
0.00153
0.00115
0.00318
0.00213
0.00441
0.00700
0.00863
0.00681
0.01079
0.00000
0.00094
0.00252
0.01217
0.00158
0.00114
0.00082
0.00250
0.00542
6.00363
0.00340
0.00408
0.00417
0.00187
0.00416
0.00664
0.00137
0.00725
0.00841
0.01092
0.00786
0.01201
0.00815
0.00300
0.01050
0.01493
0.01754
0.00967
0.00735
0.02479
0.00921
0.02309
0.00196
0.01103
0.01164
0.02319
Paniculate
gr/dscf@7%02
StdErr Pred.@Ave.KVA
0.00000
0.00209
0.00088
0.00606
0.00440
0.00372
0.00640
0.00094
0.01189
0.01515
0.00484
0.00359
0.01089
0.00354
0.00000
0.00491
0.01564
0.00000
0.00272
0.00530
0.00460
0.01100
0.00898
0.01354
0.00774
0.01758
0.02373
0.02711
0.03234
0.02272
0.01577
0.03255
0.03577
0.01536
0.00500
0.03260
0.04808
0.03658
' 0.02000
0.07658
0.07075
0.05313
PI
0.00098
0.00175
0.00511
0.00872
0.00898
0.01066
0.01291
0.01394
0.02400
0.02953
0.03195
0.04690
0.00300
0.00450
0.00837
0.01100
0.01277
0.01411
0.01563
0.01800
0.01833
0.01859
0.02061
0.02529
0.02693
0.02724
0.02899
0.03532
0.03645
0.03713
0.03929
0.04005
0.04015
0.04223
0.04291
0.04337
0.05058
0.05187
0.05527
0.05790
0.06437
0.06785
0.07405
0.07952
0.08078
0.08134
0.08871
0.09514
* LW Aggregate Kiln
Facilities in bold suggest KVA and PM correlation
CKAKPMPLxIs
M-l
-------
BOILER POPULATION SORTED BY PI
Company
Tennessee Eastman
Tennessee Eastman
Union Carbide
Monsanto Chemical Co.
Tennessee Eastman
Merichem Co.
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Monsanto Chemical Co.
Dow Chemical
NutraSweet
Tennessee Eastman
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical
Rhone-Poulenc
Westvaco Corp.
Dupont
Tennessee Eastman
FINAOil
Tennessee Eastman
Shell Chemical
Tennessee Eastman
Union Carbide
Rubicon
Shell Oil
Loc&tion
Kingsport, TN
Kingsport, TN
South Charleston, WV
Nitro,WV
Kingsport, TN
Houston, TX
Freeport, TX
Freeport,TX
Springfield, MA
Freeport, TX
Augusta, GA
Kingsport, TN
Freeport, TX
Freeport, TX
Institute, WV
DeRidder, LA
Axis, AL
Kingsport, TN
Deer Park, TX
Kingsport, TN
Belpre, OH
Kingsport, TN
South Charleston, WV
Geismar, LA
Martinez, CA
Diversified Scientific Systems Kingston, TN
Ethyl Corp.
Dow Chemical
Shell Oil
NutraSweet
Dow Chemical
Natural Gas Odorizing
Rubicon
Kalama Chemical
Kalama Chemical
Qrangeburg, SC
Freeport, TX
Martinez, CA
Augusta, GA
Freeport, TX
Baytown, TX
Geismar, LA
Kalama, WA
Kalama, WA
No.
Units
3
8
1
11
11
1
11
11
11
2
4
2
1
V?
2
1
1
11
3
2
11
2
4
2
Unit
Tested
24
30
25
B-8
30
4
B-902
B-903
B-ll
B-901
1
21
F-2A/B
F-210
3
B2&B4
1
19
1
23
2
30
16
Aniline II
Co#l
1
itsn
FTB-400
Co $2
2
F-820A
B-2
TD1
V2
U3
Report
Date
Apr-91
Aug-92
Feb-93
May-93
Aug-92
Sep-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Jan-93
Aug-92
Aug-92
Apr-91
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-93
Aug-92
Oct-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Aug-92
Feb-93
Aug-92
Apr-89
Aug-93
Aug-93
Aug-92
Nov-91
Aug-92
Aug-92
Oct-92
Aug-92
Jun-92
Jun-92
Facility
Type
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler (Stoker)
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler (Stoker)
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler (VGI)
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler (CO)
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler (CO)
Batter
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Primary
Fuel
Coal
Coal
Coal
Coal
Coal
NG&LW
NO
NG
Coal
NG
WF
Coal
FG
' NG
FG
. NG
Coal
W
Coal
Coal
Coal
Coal
LW
WL
FG
RG
WF
LW
NG
NG
NG
APCS
# points
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP/Cycl
ESP
WS
WS
WS
FF
WS
WS
ESP
WS
. WS
ESP
ESP
WS
ESP
VS
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
FF
ESP
SD/FF/WS/HEPA
FF
WS
ESP
WS
WS
DSIFF/WS
WS
FF
FF
3
3
3
6
3
6
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
9
3
6
3
3
3
9
3
6
3
7
3
3
3
3
6
6
Paniculate
(gr/dscf@7%02)
Avg Sdev PI
0.00530
0.00593
0.00703
0.00347
0.00907
0.00452
0.00767
0.00500
0.00840
0.00500
0.01507
0.01720
0.01033
0.00900
0.01333
0.01727
0.03733
0.05420
0.04401
0.03930
0.04400
0.04893
0.06963
0.06523
0.05133
0.00043
0.00157
0.00300
0.00221
0.00491
0.00600
0.00540
0.00387
0.00460
0.00532
8.62E-05
0.00021
0.00045
0.00229
0.00040
0.00302
0.00153
0.00346
0.00177
0.00520
0.00025
0.00131
0.00603
0.00721
0.00518
0.01105
0.00374
0.00180
0.00821
0.01540
0.01417
0.01826
0.00855
0.01951
0.08934
0.00028
0.00067
0.00000
0.00050
0.00035
0.00000
0.00053
0.00192
0.00174
0.00147
0.00548
0.00635
0.00794
0.00804
0.00987
0.01056
0.01072
0.01193
0.01194
0.01539
0.01557
0.01982
0.02239
0.02342
0.02369
0.03937
0.04482
0.05781
0.06043
0.07011
0.07234
0.08545
0.08674
0.10426
0.23001
0.00099
0.00291
0.00300
0.00322
0.00561
0.00600
0.00646
0.00771
0.00808
0.00825
BIFPMPLxIs
-------
COMMERCIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE INCINERATOR POPULATION SORTED BY PI
Company Location
Laidlaw Environmental Services Roebuck, SC
Aptus, Inc. Aragonite, UT
Waste Tech. Industries East Liverpool, OH
Trade Waste Incineration Sauget, IL
Aptus, Inc. Coffeyvillle, KS
Marine Shale Amelia, LA
Ross Incineration Services Graf ton, OH
LWD.Inc. CalvertCity.KY
LWD.Inc. CalvertCity.KY
Rollins Environmental Services Deerpark, TX
LWD.Inc. CalvertCity.KY
LWD.Inc. CalvertCity.KY
Rollins Environmental Services Bridgeport, NJ
Rollins Environmental Services Baton Rouge, LA
Rollins Environmental Services Bridgeport, NJ
CWM Chemical Services Chicago, IL
ThermalKEM Rock Hill, SC
General Electric Pittsfield, MA
Rollins Environmental Services Baton Rouge, LA
Rollins Environmental Services Bridgeport, NJ
Atochem Carrollton, KY
No.
Units
1
1
1
4
1
2
1
3
3
3
3
3
1
1
- 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Unit Report
Tested Date
1
• 1
1
4
1
1
1
1
3
1
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Jun-91
Aug-92
May-93
Sep-92
Dec-90
Jul-95
Mar-93
Mar-93
Jan-94
Aug-88
Jan-93
Mar-93
Nov-86
Apr-87
Aug-88
Mar-92
Jun-87
Apr-91
May-88
Aug-83
Jun-90
Facility
Type
LI
RK
RK
RK
RK
AK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
RK
FH
LI
RK
RK
RK
APCS.
FF/VS/AFS
FF/WS/ESP
ESP
SD/FF
FF/WS/TWS
SD/FF
PT/IWS
FF/WS
FF/WS
VS
FF/WS
FF/WS
WS
WS
WS
IWS/PS
WS
PS
IWS
WS
FF/SW
# Points
8
9
9
8
12
3
3
3
3
15
3
3
3
3
3
4
7
6
9
3
9
Paniculate
(gr/dscf@7%02)
Average Stdev PI
0.0008
0.0006
0.0024
0.0017
0.0034
0.0058
0.0083
0.0085
0.0069
0.0139
0.0084
0.0227
0.0275
0.0172
0.0270
0.0311
0.0526
0.0410
0.0332
0.0594
0.0295
0.0004
0.0006
0.0009
0.0014
0.0014
0.0018
0.0015
0.0041
0.0051
0.0041
0.0088
0.0021
0.0017
0.0079
0.0046
0.0049
0.0145
0.0205
0.0249
0.0155
0.0368 .
0.0015
0.0018
0.0041
0.0045
0.0062
0.0094
0.0114
0.0168
0.0171
0.0221
0.0260
0.0268
0.0310
0.0329
0.0362
0.0409
0.0815
0.0821
0.0830
0.0903
0.1032
Allied Chemical
Birmingham, AL
Feb-89
BPF
none
0.0197 0.0220
0.0636
CHIPMP1.XLS
-------
COMBINED COMMERCIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE INCINERATOR AND ON-SITE
HAZARDOUS WASTE INCINERATOR POPULATION SORTED BY PI
Company
Solilo Corp.
Rollins Environmental Services
Dow Chemical Co.
Keystone Cement Co.
Rollins Environmental Services
Vulcan Materials Co.
Holnam Inc.
Lake City Army Ammunition Plant
Dupont
Holnam Inc.
Medusa Cement Co.
Westvaco Corp.
U.S.DcpL of Energy
Lafarge Corp.
River Cement Co.
CWM Chemical Services
M&T Chemicals
Chevron
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Cook Composites
Heartland Cement Co.
Pfizer Inc.
Continental Cement Co.
Dupont
Eli Lilly and Co.
Ell Lilly and Co.
BROS Lagoon Clean-Up
Solitc Corp.
New Bedford Harbor
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Dupont
Lafarge Corp.
Dow Chemical Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Chevron
Olin Corp.
Tennessee Eastman
Ash Grove Cement Co.
FINAOil
Dupont
American Cyanamid
Holnam Inc.
Tennessee Eastman
Shell Chemical
Ciba-Gclgy
Dupont
Lone Slur Industries
Amoco Oil
Pfizer Pharmaceuticals Inc.
Burroughs Wellcome
Lafarge Corp.
Medusa Cement Co.
Essroc Materials
ThermalKEM
General Electric
Rollins Environmental Services
Tennessee Eastman
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Union Carbide
Medusa Cement Co.
Rollins Environmental Services
Essroc Materials
Atochem
Rubicon
3M
Dow Chemical Co.
Location
Brooks, KY
Baton Rouge, LA
Midland, MI
Bath, PA
Bridgeport, NJ
Wichita, KS
Clarksville, MO
Independence, MO
Louisville, KY
HollyHill.SC
Wampum, PA
DeRidder.LA
Oak Ridge, TN
Demopolis, AL
Festus, MO
Chicago, IL
Carrollton, KY
Philadelphia, PA
Chanutc, KS
Port Washington, WI
Independence, KS
Grolon, CT
Hannibal, MO
Axis, AL
Lafayette, IN
Mayaguez, PR
Bridgeport, NJ
Arvonla, VA
New Bedford, MA
Foreman, AR
La Place, LA
Fredonia, KS
Midland, MI
Foreman, AR
Belle Chase, LA
Lake Charles, LA
Kingsport, TN
Chanutc, KS
Deer Park, TX
La Porte, TX
Hannibal, MO
Holly Hill, SC
Kingsport, TN
Belprc, OH
St. Gabriel. LA
Wilmington, DE
Greencastle, IN
Whiting, IN
Barceloneta, PR
Greenville, NC
Paulding. OH
Wampum, PA
Logansport, IN
Rock Hill, SC
Pius'field, MA
Baton Rouge, LA
Kingsport, TN
Louisville, ME
South Charleston, WV
Wampum, PA
Bridgeport, NJ
Dorado, PR
Carrollton, KY
Geismar, LA
Cottage Grove, MN
Plaquemine, LA
No. Unit No. Pts.
Units Tested
1
1
830
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
4
1
1
2
1
1
1
2
1
4
1
1
2
TJZ
1
1
2
1
3
1
2
703
3
1
1
2
1
2
1
1
2
3
82&B<
1
1
2
1
1
1
8
1
2
2
19
1
1
CSI(l)
1
2
??
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
3
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
23
2
1
2
1.2
1
30
1
16
1,2
1
Aniline)
3
3
16
10
3
8
3
6
3
3
3
3
3
3
6
4
10
5
4
3
6
3
3
3
13
3
9
3
3
11
9
3
11
2
9
15
3
4
9
9
3
3
3
6
9
6
3
6
3
9
3
3
4
7
6
9
3
5
3
3
3
3
9
3
8
6
PMi
0.01833
0.01717
0.00864
0.02204
0.02700
0.02293
0.03370
0.02817
0.03233
0.02263
0.02247
0.01727
0.02493
0.01820
0.02443
0.03110
0.01339
0.01978
0.03255
0.03700
0.02660
0.03600
0.03737
0.03733
0.03224
0.04357
0.02227
0.02533
0.03700
0.02958
0.02680
0.02200
0.01980
0.02020
0.03200
0.02227
0.05420
0.04808
0.04401
0.03677
0.05440
0.04967
0.03930
0.04400
0.04271
0.04363
0.05563
0.04365
0.06493
0.03206
0.03333
0.07687
0.07075
0.05256
0.04100
0.03321
0.04893
0.03658
0.06963
0.06543
0.05937
0.04877
0.02954
0.06523
0.05995
0.03219
Paniculate
(gr/dscf@7%O2)
Stdev
0.00681
0.00788
0.01262
0.00664
0.00458
0.00675
0.00137
0.00436
0.00231
0.00725
0.00841
0.01105
0.00751
0.01092
0.00786
0.00492
0.01393
0.01108
0.00484
0.00265
0.00815
0.00361
0.00300
0.00374
0.00702
0.00151
0.01228
0.01079
0.00656
0.01050
0.01190
0.01493
0.01740
0.01754
0.01254
0.01758
0.00180
0.00491
0.00821
0.01189
0.00479
0.00735
0.01540
0.01417
0.01536
0.01518
0.00921
0.01543
0.00524
0.02266
0.02309
0.00196
0.00530
0.01449
0.02054
0.02492
0.01826
0.02479
0.00855
0.01164
0.01548
0.02319
0.03681
0.01951
0.02414
0.03823
PI
0.03195
0.03292
0.03389
0.03532
0.03617
0.03642
0.03645
0.03688
0.03695
0.03713
0.03929
0.03937
0.03996
0.04005
0.04015
0.04093
0.04125
0.04193
0.04223
0.04229
0.04291
0.04321
0.04337
0.04482
0.04627
0.04660
0.04682
0.04690
0.05011
0.05058
0.05059
0.05187
0.05461
0.05527
0.05708
0.05743
0.05781
0.05790
0.06043
0.06055
0.06399
0.06437
0.07011
0.07234
0.07343
0.07399
0.07405
0.07450
0.07542
0.07737
0.07952
0.08078
0.08134
0.08153
0.08208
0.08304
0.08545
0.08616
0.08674 .
0.08871
0.09033
0.09514
0.10317
0.10426
0.10824
0.10865
Facility
Iwa
INC
onsinc
ck
INC
onsinc
ck
onsinc
onsinc
ck
ck
bif
onsinc
ck
ck
INC
onsinc
onsinc
ck
onsinc
ck
onsinc
ck
bif
onsinc
onsinc
onsinc
Iwa
onsinc
ck
onsinc
ck
onsinc
ck
onsinc
onsinc
bif
ck
bif
onsinc
onsinc
ck
bif
bif
onsinc
onsinc
ck
onsinc
onsinc
onsinc
ck
ck
ck
INC
INC
INC
bif
ck
bif
ck
INC
ck
INC
bif
onsinc
onsinc
TOTPMP1.xls
M-6
-------
COMBINED COMMERCIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE INCINERATOR AND ON-SITE
HAZARDOUS WASTE INCINERATOR POPULATION SORTED BY PI
Company
Monsanto Agricultural Co.
Ciba-Geigy
Dupont
Shell Oil
Location
Muscatine, IA
Macintosh, AL
. La Porte. TX
Martinez, CA
No. Unit
Units Tested
1
1
N-THF
Co#l
No.Pts.
15
6
13
9
PMi
0.07013
0.06233
0.11277
0.05133
Paniculate
(gr/dscf@7%O2)
Sldev
0.02373
0.05630
0.04818
0.08934
PI
0.11759
0.17494
0.20913
0.23001
Facility
onsinc
onsinc
onsinc
bif
TOTPMPLxIs
M-7
-------
------- |