United States
         Environmental Protection
         Agency
Risk Reduction Engineering
Laboratory
Cincinnati OH 45268
EPA/540/5-89/007a
April 1989
         Superfund
         Technology Evaluation
         Report:

         SITE Program
         Demonstration Test
         Shirco Pilot-Scale Infrared
         Incineration System at the
         Rose Township Demode
         Road Superfund Site
         Volume I
IPERFUND INNOVATIVE
CHNOLOGY EVALUATION

-------

-------
                                          EPA/540/5-89/007a
                                               April 1989
     Technology Evaluation Report:
         SITE Program Demonstration Test
Shirco Pilot-Scale Infrared Incineration System at the
   Rose Township Demode Road Superfund Site
                    Volume I
            Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
            Office of Research and Development
            U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                 Cincinnati, OH 45268

-------
                             NOTICE
The information in this document has been funded, wholly or in
part,  by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under
Contract No. 68-03-3255 to Foster Wheeler Enviresponse,
Incorporated and the Superfund Innovative Technology
Evaluation  (SITE) Program.  It has been subjected to the
Agency's peer and administrative review, and it has been
approved for publication as an EPA document.  Mention of trade
names or commercial products does not constitute an
endorsement or recommendation  for use.

-------
                              FOREWORD
     The  Superfund
 was  authorized  in
 a  joint  effort
 and  the  Office
 purpose  of  the
 waste  treatment
                   Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) program
                   the 1986 Superfund amendments.   The program is
                between EPA's Office of Research and Development
                of Solid Waste and Emergency Response.  The
                program is  to assist the development of hazardous
                 technologies necessary to  implement new cleanup
 standards  which  require  greater  reliance  on  permanent  remedies.
 This  is  accomplished  through  technology demonstrations  which  are
 designed to  provide engineering  and  cost  data  on  selected
 technologi es.

    This project  consists  of  an  analysis  of  Shirco's Pilot-Scale
 Infrared Incineration  System  and  represents  the third  field
 demonstration  in  the  SITE  program.   The technology  demonstration
 took  place at  an  abandoned waste  site which  comprises  the  Demode
 Road  Superfund Site in Rose Township, Michigan.   The
 demonstration  effort  was directed at obtaining information on  the
 performance  and cost  of  the system for use in  assessments  at
 other sites.   Documentation will  consist  of  two reports    This
 Technology Evaluation  Report  describes the field  activities and
 laboratory results.   An  Applications Analysis  Report will  follow
 and provide  an interpretation of  the data and  conclusions  on the
 results and  potential   applicability  of the technology.

    Additional copies  of this report may  be  obtained at no charge
 from  EPA s Center for  Environmental   Research Information,  26 West
 Martin Luther King Drive, Cincinnati, Ohio,  45268, using the EPA
 document number found  on the  report's front  cover.  Once this
 supply is exhausted, copies can be purchased from the National
 Technical Information  Service, Ravensworth Bldg.,  Sprinqfield
 VA  22161,  (702)  487-4600.   Reference copies will  be available at
 EPA libraries in  their Hazardous Waste Collection.  You can also
 call the SITE Clearinghouse hotline  at 1-800-424-9346 or (202)
382-3000 in Washington, DC  to inquire about the availability of
other  reports.
Margarejt M
DirectoV,  Technology Staff,
Office of Program Management
and Technology
                                           W .LjjKhsrey,  Acting
                                          arrOffice of
                                    Environmental  Engineering
                                    and  Technology Demonstration
                                111

-------
                           ABSTRACT

The Shirco Pilot-Scale Infrared Incineration System was
evaluated during a series of seventeen test runs under varied
operating conditions at the Demode Road Superfund Site located
in Rose Township, Michigan.  The tests sought to demonstrate
the effectiveness of the unit and the technology in thermal
destruction of soil contaminants, as recommended by the
Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study conducted between
1984 and 1986.  The report includes a process description ot
the unit and field operations documentation including a
discussion of the operational history during the test program,
a summary of operating conditions, and the operating log
data.  The report also includes sampling and analytical
procedures and data along with the approved quality assurance
project plan.  The report provides a performance evaluation  ot
the unit based on the test program data and observations and
an overall unit  cost  analysis and evaluation.   Based on the
above  information, the report provides the  initial data and
evaluation criteria to enable the EPA  to determine the
applicability of  the  Shirco  technology to  Superfund site
investigations  and cleanups  throughout the  country.  The
report covers a  period from  May  11,  1987 to September  30,
1988,  with the  test demonstration of  the unit occurring from
November  2,  1987  to November 13,  1987.
                                i v

-------
                            VOLUME I

                            CONTENTS
Foreword .  .
Abstract .  .
Figures  .  .
Tables ...
Abbreviations
Conversi ons
Acknowledgments
 and Symbols
    1.   Introduction	'' .
            1.1  Background  .......
            1.2  Program Objectives  . •!  . • '.
    2.   Executive Summary ......
    3.   Process Description ....!.'].'!
            3.1  General  Process Description  .'
            3.2  Detailed Process Description
    4.   Field  Operations Documentation    . .
            4.1  Pretest  Samp!ing  	
            4.2  Test Summary  	
            4.3  Operating Log  Data  .  .   '   ' •
    5.   Sampling and Analysis  Program  .   .'
            5.1  Sampling Procedures  .  .
            5.2  Analytical  Procedures  .  !
            5.3  Sampling and Analytical  Report
    6.   Performance  Data Evaluation
            6
            6
            6,
            6,
            6,
            6.
           6.7
           6
           6
           6.

           6.
           6.
           6.
8
9
10

11
12
13
 Introduction
 Characteristics of the  Feed  .'  .'
 Characteristics of the  Furnace Ash*
 Residual PCBs in Furnace Ash
 Mobility of Heavy Metals   ....
 Destruction and Removal Efficiency'
 (ORE) of PCBs 	
 Other Organic Stack Gas and PCC
 Offgas Emissions  	
 Acid Gas Removal  .....'.'.'.'*
 Parti cul ate Emissions .'.'.'. ,'  .'  [
Analysis of Scrubber Makeup Water,'
 Scrubber Water,  and Scrubber Solids
Overall  Disposition of Metals .
Optimum  Operating  Conditions  .
QA Summary   	
 Page

  iii
   i v
  vi i
 vi i i
    x
  xiv
   xv

   1
   1
   2
   4
  20
  20
  21
  28
  28
  33
  45
  48
  58
  73
  80
  81
  81
  82
 84
 87
 88

 90

 93
 93
 96

 96
 98
103
104

-------
                           VOLUME II

                            CONTENTS
Appendices
    A.   Operating Log Data
    B.   Sampling and Analytical Report
    C.   Quality Assurance Project Plan/Test Plan
    D.   Pretest Waste Characterization Analytical Results
    E.   Test Plan for the Monitoring of Vapor Phase Lead
           Emissions From the Shirco Portable Pilot Unit
           During the Rose Township Demonstration Test
    F.   Monitoring Studies for Vapor Phase Lead  Emissions
           From The Shirco Portable Unit During the Rose
           Township Demonstration Tests
    G.   Evaluation of EP and TCLP Extraction Procedures
           For Pb-Contamiriated  Soils and Combustion
           Residues
                                VI

-------
                            FIGURES
Number
  1
  2
  3   .
  4
  5   ;
  6
System process flow 	
Overall test site..-.  .-.-, ,
Demode Road Superfund  Site  .:<
Pretest sampling grid  .  .  . . .
Sampling locations - system, process flow
Sampling locations - overall  tes>t site  ,
Page
  6
  7
 29
 30
 59
 60.
                             VI 1

-------
Number
  1
  2
  3
  4
  6
  7
  8
  9

  10

  11
  12

  13

  14

  15
  16
  17
  18
  19
  20
                   TABLES
                                               Page
SITE Demonstration Test Results Summary .  .  .    11
Safety Interlock Systems	..-:..    27
Pretest Sample Analyses 	 	    31
Pretest Sample Analyses - Composite of
All Sectors	    32
Pretest Sample Analyses - Composite of
Ten Grid Sectors with Maximum PCB and
Lead Contamination	    34
Proposed Test Matrix	    35
Operations Summary   	    39
Power Usage - Actual Operations  ........    40
Summary of Sampling  and Analytical  Program,
   Phase I	   49
Summary of Sampling  and Analytical  Program,
   Phase II	   55
Feed  Characteristics	•  • •   83
Characteristics  of the  Furnace  Ash  -  Organics
and Metals Analyses	   85
Characteristics  of the  Furnace  Ash  -  Ultimate
Analyses   .	   85
Comparison of Leachable  Lead  in the
Feed  and  Furnace Ash	•  •   89
Destruction  and  Removal  Efficiency  of PCBs   .   92
PCC Offgas  and  Stack Gas  Organic Emissions   .   94
Acid  Gas  Removal Efficiency	   -95
 Particulate  Emissions	,......«    97
 Scrubber  Makeup  Water  Analysis	    "
 Scrubber  Water Analysis	   100
                               VI 1 1

-------
                      TABLES  (continued)
21

22



23
Lead Flows Through the System
Lead Concentrations in Feed, Ash, and
Particulates  ....... .....
Optimum Operating Conditions - Energy
Consumption ..........
102


103


105

-------
                   ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS
AAS        Atomic absorption spectroscopy
acfm       Actual cubic feet per minute
APC        Air pollution control
Btu        British thermal units          ,
CC         Cubic centimeter
CEM        Continuous emission monitor
CFR        Code  of Federal Regulations
Cl         Chlorine
CO         Carbon monoxide
C0£        Carbon dioxide
DE         Decontamination efficiency
DGM        Dry gas meter
ORE        Destruction  and removal  efficiency
dscf       Dry standard  cubic  feet
dscfm      Dry standard  cubic  feet  per  minute
dscm       Dry standard  cubic  meters
dscmm      Dry standard  cubic  meters  per  minute
ECD        Electron  capture  detection
EMB        Emissions Measurement  Branch
EPA        U.S.  Environmental  Protection  Agency
EP Tox     EP Toxicity  Test  Procedure
FID        Flame ionization  detection
ft        Feet
FWEI        Foster Wheeler: Enviresponse, Inc.
g         Grams

-------
 gal
 GC
 GMW
 gpm
 HC1
 HHV
 ICAP
 ID
 in
 J
 kg
 Kw
 L
 Ib
 m
 MDNR
 mg
 min
 ml
 m
 ug
 MM5
 MS
 NBS
ND
NDIR
   ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS (continued)
 Gallons
 Gas  chromatograph
 General Motor Works
 Gallons per minute
 Hydrogen chloride
 High  heating  value
 Inductively coupled argon  plasma
 Inside  di ameter
 Inches
 Joules
 Ki1ograms
 Kilowatts
 Liters
 Pound
 Meters.      ;
 Michigan Department  of Natural Resources
 Mi 11igrams
 Minutes          ,   ,
 Mi 11i Ti ters
 micron
 M i c r o g r a m s    •-•••.
 Modified Method  5              ,
 Mass spectrophotometer
 National Bureau  of Standards
 Notdetected
Non dispersive infrared
                    xi

-------
ng
Mm3
NOX
OAQPS
OD
ORD
OSWER
02
Pb
PCBs
PCC
PCDD
PCDF
PIC
 POHC
 PP
 ppb
 ppm
 ppt
 psig
 PUF
 %
 QA/QC
 QAPP
 RCRA
  RF
  RI/FS
  ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS (continued)
Nanograms
Normal cubic meters
Nitrogen oxide
Office of Air Quality, Planning, and Standards
Outside diameter
Office of Research and Development
Office of Solid Waste and  Emergency Response
Oxygen
Lead
Polychlorinated biphenyls
Primary  combustion  chamber
Polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin
Polychlorinated dibenzofuran
 Product  of  incomplete combustion
 Principal  organic hazardous constituent
 Priority pollutant
 Parts per bi11i on
 Parts per million
 Parts per trillion
 Pounds per  square inch gauge
 Polyurethane foam
 Percent
 Quality Assurance/Quality  Control
 Quality Assurance  Project  Plan
 Resource Conservation  and  Recovery Act
 Response Factor
 Remedial  Investigation/Feasibility Study
                     xi i

-------
 ROD
 RREL
 S
 S&A
 SARA

 SASS
 SCC,
 SCFM
 sec
 SITE
 sq ft
 SV
 TCDD
 TCDF
 TCLP
 TDS
 THC
 TOC
 TSCA
 TSS
 UV
 v
 V
 VOA
 VOST
WC
wt
   ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS  (continued)
 Record of Decision
 Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
 Sulfur
 Sampling and Analysis
 Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of
 1986
 Source assessment sampling system
 Secondary combustion chamber
 Standard cubic feet per minute
 Seconds
 Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation Program
 Square  feet
 Semivolatile
 Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
 Tetrachlorodibenzofuran
 Toxicity  Characteristic  Leaching  Procedure
 Total dissolved  solids
 Total hydrocarbons
 Total organic  carbon
 Toxic Substances Control Act  of 1976
 Total suspended solids
 Ultraviolet
 Volume
 Volatile
 Volatile organic analysis
 Volatile organic sampling train
Water column
Weight
                  xi i i

-------
                             CONVERSIONS
To convert from
Btu/lb
Cu ft
Cu yd
ft
°F
gal
HP
Ib
Btu/hr
to.
J/g
m3
m3
m
°C
m3
kW
kg
J/hr
Multiply  bv
2.326  E+00
2.832  E-02
7.646  E-01
3,048  E-01
(t,:-32)/1.8
3.785  E-03
 7.46 E-01
 4.535  E-01
 1.055  E + 03
                                   xiv

-------
                                ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS


     This  report was prepared  under the  direction and coordination of Mr
Howard Wall, EPA SITE Program  Manager  in the Risk Reduction Engineering
Laboratory  (RREL), Cincinnati,  Ohio.   Contributors and reviewers for this
/SESnJ WeC6 Ml> ?teven L"zkow  of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources
(MDNR), the Michigan SITE Project Manager  j Ms. Linda Galer of the Office of
Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER); Mr. Kevin Adler of EPA Region V-
Mr. Frank Freestone of RREL.   Organizations which contributed to the report
were MDRN, Shirco Infrared Systems, Inc.;  ECOVA Corporation; and Radian
Corporation (sampling and analysis).

     This report was prepared  for EPA's  Superfund Innovative Technology
Evaluation (SITE) Program by Mr. Seymour Rosenthal, Task Manager for Foster
Wheeler Enviresponse, Inc. for the U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency under
Contract No. 68-03-3255.
                                     xv

-------

-------
                            SECTION 1

                          INTRODUCTION
 1.1   BACKGROUND

 In  response  to  the  Superfund  Amendments  and  Reauthorization
 Act  of  1986  (SARA),  the  U.S.  Environmental  Protection  Agency's
 (EPA) Offices of  Research  and Development  (ORD)  and  Solid
 Waste and  Emergency  Response  (OSWER)  have  established  a  formal
 program  to  accelerate  the  development, demonstration,  and  use
 of  new  or  innovative technologies  for hazardous  waste  site
 cleanups.   This program  is  called  the Superfund  Innovative
 Technology  Evaluation  (SITE)  Program.
 The  major  objective  of  this  demonstration
 develop  reliable  cost and  performance  info
 innovative  alternative  technologies, so  th
 considered  in  Superfund  decision  making.
 monitoring,  and evaluation guidelines  and
 developed  by ORD  and are used  to  collect d
 from the demonstrations.   SITE demonstrati
 conducted  at Superfund  Federal or  State  si
 facilities,  private  sites, and EPA or  deve
 evaluation  facilities can  be used.
program is to
rmation on
at they can be
Common measurement,
protocols have been
ata and information
ons usually will  be
tes.   Federal
loper test and
One site that has been chosen to demonstrate an innovative
technology is the Demode Road Superfund Site located  in Rose
Township, Oakland County, Michigan, approximately 40  miles
northwest of Detroit.

The 12-acre waste site first was used for disposal and storage
of industrial wastes in 1966.  Bulk wastes brought to the site
were discharged to surface and shallow lagoons and pits.
Drums of waste either were buried, dumped into disposal pits,
or stockpiled.  The site was used as a disposal facility
through 1968, and possibly was used on an intermittent basis
until  1971.

In June 1979, the Michigan Department of Natural  Resources
(MDNR) inspected the site and discovered many drums leaking.
Sampling of the drums showed the contents to be paint sludges
solvents, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs),  oils  and greases,
phenols, and heavy metals.   MDNR proceeded to remove over
5,000  drums  of waste material.   In 1983,  an  additional 1,500
tons of contaminated soil  were removed.

MDNR conducted a Remedial  Investigation  and  Feasibility Study

-------
                                              be cleaned
                                              groundwater
(RI/FS)  of the site from 1984 through 1986.   The data from the
RI/FS indicated that the soils at the site contained
concentrations of PCBs .as high as 980 ppm, lead conceintrati ons
as high  as 1,480 ppm, and quantities of other organics and
heavy metals.  The RI/FS recommended that the site
up by extraction and treatment of the contaminated
and thermal destruction of contaminants in the soil.  The
recommendation led the SITE Program to select the Demode Road
Superfund Site for the demonstration of the Shirco Pilot-Scale
Infrared Incineration System.  Thermal destruction ultimately
was chosen in the Record of Decision (ROD) for this site,
which was signed on September 30, 1987.

During the period from November 2-13, 1987, Shirco Infrared
Systems, Inc., Dallas, Texas, demonstrated the capability of
its pilot-scale unit to treat 1,799 kg (3,967 Ib), at test
conditions, of the contaminated soil at the Demode Road site.

The Shirco Pilot-Scale Infrared Incineration System is
enclosed in a single 45-ft trailer  and is designed to treat
wastes at a pilot-scale rate  of one ton per day.  A specific
process description  of the unit is  presented in Section 4.1  of
this report.

During the test period, a detailed  sampling and analytical
program as defined by an  EPA  Category  II  Quality  Assurance
Project Plan  (QAPP),  included in Appendix C, Volume  II, was
conducted.

1.2  PROGRAM  OBJECTIVES

The  major  objectives  of this  demonstration were to  determine
the  following:

o    ORE levels  for  PCBs  and  the  presence  of  PICs  in  the  stack
     gas.   The  regulatory  standards  are 99.99%  ORE under  the
     Resource  Conservation  and Recovery Act  (RCRA)  and 99.9999%
     ORE under  the  Toxic  Substances  and Control  Act  (TSCA).

o    Level  of hydrogen  chloride  (HC1)  and  particulates  in  the
     stack  gas.   The  RCRA  standard  for  HC1  in  the  stack  gas  is
     1.8  kg/hr  (4  Ib/hr)  or  99 wt%  HC1  removal  efficiency.   The
     RCRA  standard  for particulate  emissions  in  the  stack gas
     is  180  mg/dscm (0.08  gr/dscf).
Level  of residual PCBs in the
varied operating conditions.
                                   furnace  ash  at  normal  and
Mobility of
furnace ash
                 heavy metals,  particularly lead,  in  the
                 as compared to the feed.
Mobility of heavy metals in the furnace ash as compared to
the RCRA Extraction Procedure Toxicity (EP Tox)
Characteristic (as measured by the EP Tox test) and the

-------
proposed toxicity characteristic (as measured by the
Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP)).

Level of residual heavy metals and organic compounds, and
other physical and chemical characteristics in the
scrubber water discharged from the unit.

The operating conditions that reduce energy consumption
without decreasing soil decontamination effectiveness.

Effect of varying operating conditions on residual  levels
of heavy metals and organics in the furnace ash versus the
level s in the feed.                                .      ,•

Adherence-of the quality assurance (QA) procedures  to the
requirements of the RREL approved QA Project Plan
(Category II), as defined by the Document No.  PA
QAPP-0007-GFS, "Preparation Aid for HWERL's Category II
Quality Assurance Project Plans", June, 1987.             •

-------
                           SECTION 2

                       EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION

In response to the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization
Act of 1986 (SARA), the Environmental Protection Agency's
Office of Research and Development (ORD) and Solid Waste and
Emergency Response (OSWER) have established a formal program
to accelerate the development, demonstration, and use of new
or innovative technologies as alternatives to current
containment systems for hazardous wastes.  This new program is
called Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation or SITE.
The principal goal of the SITE program is to demonstrate new
technologies in the field and develop reliable economics and
performance information.

The SITE program demonstration of the Shirco Pilot-Scale
Infrared Incineration System  for thermal treatment developed
by Shirco  Infrared Systems, Inc. of  Dallas, Texas, was
conducted  at the Demode Road  Superfund Site  in Rose  Township,
Michigan.  The Demode Road site is a  12-acre waste site
previously used to bury,  dump, and store industrial wastes
such  as  paint sludges,  solvents, and  other wastes containing
PCBs, oils and greases, phenols, and  heavy metals.   PCBs  and
lead  are the principal  contaminants  in the soil used for  the
test  of  the  Infrared  System.

The test was conducted  from November  2-13, 1987 and  treated
1,799 kg (3,967 Ib) of  contaminated  soil under various  test
conditions.  The major  objectives of  this  demonstration  were
to determine the  following:

o   ORE  levels  for PCBs and the presence of  PICs  in  the  stack
    gas.   The regulatory  standards are  99.99%. ORE. under  the
    Resource  Conservation and Recovery  Act  (RCRA)  and  99.9999%
    DRE  under the  Toxic Substances and  Control Act  (TSCA).

o   Level  of  hydrogen chloride  (HC1)  and  particulates  in  the
    stack  gas.  The RCRA  standard  for HC1  in  the  stack gas  is
    1.8  kg/hr  (4  Ib/hr) or  99 wt%  HC1 removal  efficiency.   The
    RCRA standard  for particulate  emissions  in  the  stack gas
    is  180 mg/dscm (0.08  gr/dscf).

o   Level  of residual PCBs  in the  furnace  ash  at  normal  and   ..
    varied operating  conditions.
     Mobility of
     furnace ash
heavy metals,  particularly lead,  in the
as compared to the feed.
     Mobility of heavy metals in the furnace ash as compared to
     the RCRA Extraction Procedure Toxicity (EP Tox)

-------
     Characteristic (as measured by the EP Tox test) and the
     proposed toxicity characteristic (as measured by the
     Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP)).

     Level  of residual heavy metals and organic compounds,  and
     other  physical and chemical characteristics in the
     scrubber water discharged from the unit.

     The  operating  conditions that reduce energy consumption
     without  decreasing soil  decontamination  effectiveness.
     Effect  of varying  operating  conditions  on  residual
     of  heavy  metals  and  organics in  the  furnace  ash
     levels  in the  feed.
                                                        1 eve!s
                                                     versus  the
 o    Adherence  of  the  quality  assurance  (QA)  procedures  to  the
     requirements  of  the  RREL  approved  QA  Project  Plan
     (Category  II), as  defined  by  the Document  No.  PA
     QAPP-0007-GFS, "Preparation Aid  for HWERL's  Category  II
     Quality  Assurance  Project  Plans",  June,  1987.

 FEED  PREPARATION

 The  demonstration  test used soil  from  an  area  of  the site  that
 was  highly contaminated  with  PCBs  and  lead,  as determined  in
 the  original remedial  investigations performed at  the site.
 Pretest  sampling  and  analysis  further  identified  those  sectors
 within the area most  highly contaminated  with  PCBs  and  lead
 for  excavation.   Other organic and heavy  metals were also
 present  in these  sectors.  Soil from these sectors  to be used
 as feed  for  the test was excavated and mixed into  a pile using
 a front-end  loader, and  then screened to  remove aggregate  and
 debris greater than one  inch in diameter.  The screened soil
 was drummed  and transferred to a designated  zone  adjacent  to
 the test unit.  Two drums of soil were blended with 3 wt%  fuel
 oil to be used for several of the test runs  to investigate the
 effect of increased feed heating value on overall  unit
 performance  and energy consumption at varying operating
 conditions.                                           s

 PROCESS  DESCRIPTION
The Shirco
of a waste
combustion
combustion
system, an
system, all
           Pilot-Scale Infrared Incineration System consists
           feed system, an (electric) infrared primary
           chamber, a supplemental propane-fired secondary
           chamber, a venturi scrubber emissions control
           exhaust system, and a data collection and control
            enclosed in a 45-ft trailer.   The system process
flow and the overall 250 ft x 100 ft test site "
presented schematically in Figures 1 and
                                         2,
   layout are
respectively.
During the test, the feed material was transferred from the
drums to pails, weighed, and then fed manually to a hopper

-------
                                                      FENCING
                               EXCLUSION ZONE
                 DRUM STORAGE AREA
                  • WASTE FEED
                  • ASH
                  • SLOWDOWN WATER
                  • EMPTY DRUMS
                                             SHIRCO PILOT-SCALE INFRARED INCINERATOR SYSTEM
WASTE FEED
TRANSFER -
DRUMS TO
PAILS
                                  PCC TO SCC VAPOR DUCT
                                                                SCC VAPOR OUTLET DUCT
                                                     BURNER FORCED
                                                      AIR BLOWER
WASTE FEED
WEIGH SCALE
                                                                                              CONTROL CABINET
                                                                                              BELT SPEED CONTROL
                                                                                              BURNER CONTROL
                                                                                              LIGHT PANEL
                                                                                              MOTOR CONTROL CENTER
                                                                                              TRANSFORMER
                                                                                              ELECTRICAL SERVICE
                                                                                              HEPC
                                             SECONDARY COMBUSTION CHAMBER

                                                           >
                     PRIMARY COMBUSTION CHAMBER
CONTAMINATION! /  /  /  /  /   /  /   /««/   '  /   / ™™E /  /   /   '
REDUCTION  !
   ZONE     '
                                                         SUPPLY
                                                                          /WATER/   / SCRUBBER //////
                                                                            DRUM      SLOWDOWN        /\J GRADE
                                                                                      DRUM
                                                                       MAKEUP WATER
                                                                        FROM WATER
                                                                       SUPPLY TRAILER
  Figure 1.   System  process  flow.

-------
                                      FENCING
                                                             X—X—X—
                        EXCLUSION ZONE
WASTE FEED
TRANSFER -
DRUMS TO
PAILS
                                   DRUM STORAGE AREA
                                     • WASTE FEED
                                     • ASH
                                     • SLOWDOWN WATER
                                     • EMPTY DRUMS
            WEIGH SCALE
                           SHIRCO PILOT-SCALE INFRARED
                              INCINERATOR SYSTEM
        I  CONTAMINATION  I
        1    REDUCTION    I
   ELECTRICAL
   SUPPLY-
   DIESEL
   GENERATORS
                                        RADIAN ANALYTICAL
                                            TRAILER
                                          SHIRCO SUPPORT TRAILER
                              EXISTING VEGETATION
                               SITE PROGRAM OFFICE TRAILER
-x—x—x—x—x—x—x—x—x—x—x—x—x—x
                                    FENCING
 figure 2.   Overall  test site.
                                                    PARKING AREA
TO FENCED
HAZARDOUS
WASTE SITE
x_Xn it©

«
! '
•
V / |
A—- --' \
b •
<. • ••••
-xP , I
>-^ 1
"^
x ^ /

'




5

>
i '
1 ' METEOROLOGICAL
J ' STATION
< -n (1
m , ,
z / /
^ / /
o • / /
,/ /
X 1 Q /

I Si
? ' £ '
•^fe- 	 '§i
^l I/
)

* •*• . f- /
< ~^ 0} ,
• ** c /
N D i
X 1 ~ i

/ /
X ' 1

' 	 N*

/ /
< / /
/ /
jc/>< X / /
, 
3
5
^_ 	
/ •/
4 / /
/ /
< / /
/ /
T / /
— x-J / /
s>. / /
*- - J I 	 TO EXIT
f 1 FROM SITE
*-- /

-------
mounted over a metering conveyor belt.   The waste was fed at a
controlled rate through a sealed feed chute onto the   ^ •
incinerator conveyor (a tightly woven wire belt which moved
the waste material through the primary combustion chamber).
The conveyor belt speed can be adjusted to achieve feed
residence times in the PCC from 6 to 60 min.  Typically
residence times range from 10 to 25 min.  The depth of the
waste on the conveyor belt ranged from one to one and a halt
inches.

The primary combustion chamber  (PCC) is a rectangular box
insulated by layers of ceramic  fiber.  Combustion air-i s •
supplied to the primary combustion chamber through a  series of
air ports at points along the length of the chamber.  The  gas
flow  in the incinerator is countercurrent -to the  conveyed  feed
material.   Electric infrared  heating elements  installed  above
the conveyor belt heat the waste to  the designated temperature
(nominally  1,600°F), which results  in  desorption  or     .
incineration of organic contaminants from  the  feed.   Rotary
rakes  gently turn the  material  to  ensure  adequate mixing- and
complete  desorption.   When the  thermally  treated  soi  ,  now
referred  to as  furnace ash,  reaches  the discharge end of the
PCC,  it  drops  off the  belt through  a chute  and  into  an.  _
enclosed  hopper  and discharge storage  drum.  The  drums  of.
furnace  ash are  then  stored  for final  disposal.

Exhaust  gas containing the desorbed  -contaminants .-exits -the   -
primary  combustion  chamber  into a  secondary combustion  chamber
 (SCC)  or afterburner,  where  a propane-fired burner  combusts
residual  organic  compounds  into C02,  CO,  HC1,  and H20.;
The SCC  is  typically  operated at 2:2000F  and  a gas  residence
time  exceeding 2  sec.   Secondary air is supplied to  ensure
 adequate excess oxygen levels for  complete combustion.
 Exhaust  gas from the  secondary combustion chamber then is
 quenched by a water-fed  venturi scrubber  emissions  control
 system to remove particulate matter and acid gases.   An  .
 induced  draft fan transfers  the gas to the exhaust  stack for
 discharge to  the atmosphere.

 The same trailer housing the thermal system also contains the
 control  panel  for the main unit, and data collection
 indicators and recorders.  Safety interlocks also are  .
 integrated into the tailor-mounted unit to automatically
 correct abnormal operating conditions, maintain system  . .  .  <
 performance,  and if necessary, shut down feed and heat  input
 to the unit.

 TEST  PROCEDURE
                                                            :  C
 In order to meet the  objectives of  the demonstration test  (see
 Introduction), a total of 17 test runs were conducted    Three?
 runs  were  performed under design  operating conditions to

                                 8

-------
anH
and 14
                UnU  °Per^tio"
            runs  were conducted
                                    system  performance  (Phase
                                 under  varying  operational
  ? ?nOF  r
a 2,200 F SCC
mm.  Each of

UUfo  PCBlat'An
it tor PCBs.  An

        9 condlt°s
   were c°nducted at 1,600°F PCC temperature,
temperature, and a PCC residence time of 20
the three runs was sufficiently long (six to

                                k  as
                                at the same
                                samples that
                 tional  run
                 t0   bta1n
                                 was
                                     conducted
                                         stack
   ns
                    n
          successfully collected during two of the previous
                                                            had
makpnn
makeup
solids
 The Phase II runs were conducted for approximately one hour
 under varied operating conditions that included the PCC
 temperature (900, 1,200,  1,400, and 1,600°F), SCC
 temperature (1,800 and 2  200°F), PCC feed 'residence time
 iiJV5'.20' ?nd 25 minutes),- and PCC combustion air flow (on,
 atmosphere)1     oxidizi"9 or non-oxidizing (pyrolytic) PCC


             e  I rUnS'  samPles were  tal
-------
monoxide, oxides of nitrogen, and total  hydrocarbons.  All of
the remaining sampled streams were analyzed for PCBs, dvoxins
and furans  metals, and other physical and chemical properties
and components specific to the characterization of each
samPUdPma?rix.  In addition, the EP Tox and TCLP leaching
tests were performed on these samples and the extracts were
evaluated for metals.
                                            conducted in
                                                      of the
All of the sampling and analytical work was        nnalitv
accordance with QA/QC Category II and include data q ality
credibility statements for the precision and accuracy
data reported.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A detailed summary of the SITE demonstration test results is
Presented in Table 1.  Based on the test objectives outlined
in the Introduction, the  following results were obtained.

o   Characteristics  of the Feed

    Based on  data  from the previous remedial investigation  of
    the  site,  a  specific  area within  the site was identified
    with  the  highest concentrations of  both  PCBs  and  lead,  the
    major soil  contaminants  of  concern.  The remedial
    investigation  also described  the  soil  as a  dry,  brown,
    sandy,  and silty clay topsoil  which  upon excavation  proved
    to  be  an  accurate  observation.   Subsequent  Pretest
    sampling  and analysis of the  specific  area  of the site
    identified particular sectors with  the hl9hest
    contamination  of PCBs and  lead   *  composite  sample  of  all
    the  sectors within  the area indicated  a 7.8 pH,  9.0  wt./o
    molstSrl? 81 it  % ash,  less than  1000  Btu/lb  high heating
    va  ue,  and a 0.95 g/cc density.   The composite  sample
     contained 570  ppm of total  PCBs  and 580 ppm lead
     (elemental lead  after digestion  and conversion  to
     inorganic form).  A composite sample of the 10  sectors  _
     chosen  for excavation contained  626 ppm PCBs   560 ppm of
     lead  55 ppb of tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD),  and
     4?2 ppb of tetrachlorodibenzofuran (TCDF)    Once the feed
     excavation was  begun, it became evident that the front-end
     loader could not confine its large-scale activi1  IBS to the
     10 specific sectors  and an area comprising 14 specific
     sectors was excavated for the unit's  feed  source.

     Table 1 summarizes the  PCB and lead contaminant
     concentrations  measured in the soil from the composite of
     the grab  samples of  feed taken during each of the test
     runs   In  addition to lead,  where concentrations ranged
     frSm 290  to 3000 ppm and averaged 778 ppm, several  other
     metals were present  at  average concentrations exceeding 50
                                 10

-------
TABLE 1.   SITE DEMONSTRATION TEST RESULTS  SUMMARY
Operating Conditions , Uaste Feed
PCC Characteristics

Temp.
0-
F
900(a.b)
900
1600(a,b)

(a)

CO

(9)
(h)
Residence EP Tox TCLP
time PCB Pb (Pb) (Pb)
min. ppm ppm ppm ppm
20 327 590 0.29 0.81
20 20.2 660 0.67 0.88
25 367 290 0.32 7.00
20 297 640 0.05 0.56
15 27.6 870 0.20 0.44
25 456 590 0.12 0.53
20 669 610 0.20 0.71

15 602 470 0.18 0.53
15 309 370 0.21 0.96
20 , 56.0 740 0.07 0.89
20 10.2 3000 0.15 0.67
20 35.2 1400 0.20 0.35
20 20.4 550 0.23 1.30
20 (f) 1100 0.14 0.49
10 391 620 0.25 0.73
15 451 620 ND 0.66
15(c) 271 390 0.53 1.80
15 , 311 500 0.07 0.55
3.00(g) 1.40(g)
Waste feed blended with 3 wt.% fuel oil.
, Non-oxidizing atmosphere.
PCC bed depth at 1 inch. All other tests at 1
PCB levels below analytical detection limits.
indicated in analyses.
ND - nondetectable value.

PCB
ppm
2.079
3.396
0.168
0.115(d)
0.077
0.108(d)
0.066(d)

0.025(d)
0.066(d)
0.087(d)
0.037
' 0.112
0.003
(f)
0.045(d)
0.117(d)
0.004
0.061(d)



1/2 inches.
Total shown is


Furnace Ash
Characteristics

(Pb)
ppm
1000
1400
860
1100
1000
1200
1200

2000
1000
1600
1100
1300
1100
420
1700
840
1500
800




sum of


EP Tox
(Pb)
ppm
0,38
0.89
0.88
4.10
0.38
0.14
0.06
4.90(g)
(h)
0.46
ND
0.05
ND
0.13
0.28
ND
0.43
0.27
1.10




TCLP
(Pb)
ppm
2.90
6.20
3.80.
1.60
3.60
, 0.05
4.10
2.80(g)
(h) ,
0.82
0.15
ND
ND
0.05
1.80
1.00
0.17
0.23
2.40




detectable limits




Run was conducted to makeup for incomplete semivolatile organics, PCDD/PCDF, soluble
chromium and stack gas particulate samplings on
Data from additional EP Tox and TCLP tests.
ND due to broken sample container.
other runs.











                   11

-------
ppm including barium (591 ppm),  zinc (301 ppm),  and
chromium (85 ppm).  Total PCBs concentration ranged from
10.2 to 669 ppm and averaged 272 ppm.

Several samples of the feed contained small quantities of
TCDFs ranging from 0.04 to 0.1 ppb.  Volatile and   _
semivolatile organic compounds including methyl  ethyl
ketone, trichloroethene, and bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
were measured in feed samples at concentrations less than
50 ppm.  Methyl ethyl ketone and trichloroethene were also
detected in solvent blanks and are attributed to
analytical laboratory contamination.

Characteristics of the of Furnace Ash

Table  1 summarizes the PCB and lead  contaminant
concentrations measured  in the furnace  ash  from the
composited grab samples  taken at the conclusion of  each
test run.   In  addition to lead, where  concentrations
ranged  from 420 to 2000  ppm  and averaged  1173 ppm,  several
other  metals  were  present at  average concentrations
exceeding  50  ppm  including barium  (1061  ppm), zinc  (410
ppm),  and  chromium  (81  ppm).  Total  PCBs  concentration
ranged  from 0.004  to  3.396 ppm.  Two samples  of  furnace
ash  contained  0.07  and  0.3 ppb  of  TCDF  during two  runs
conducted  at  a  900°F  PCC operating  temperature;  the
normal  PCC  operating  temperature  is  1600°F.   These  runs
were  also  conducted  without  the  input  of PCC  combustion
air  to simulate  non-oxidizing or  pyrolytic combustion
conditions.   The  low PCC temperature and pyrolytic
environment  could have  led  to the  incomplete  desorption  or
incineration  of TCDF present in  the  feed or to  the     •
production of TCDF from the  incomplete combustion  of PCBs
in the feed.   Volatile  compounds  including - methylene
chloride,  methyl  ethyl  ketone,  tetrachloroethene,  and
trichloroethene were also measured in  the furnace  ash
samples in concentrations ranging  from 3.9 to 64  ppm with
one sample containing 980 ppm of methylene chloride.
Methyl ethyl  ketone and trichloroethene were also  detected
 in solvent blanks and methylene chloride is commonly
 employed  in laboratory procedures; therefore .these
 compounds may be products of incomplete combustion and/or
 the result of laboratory contamination.

 Residual  PCBs in Furnace Ash

 During the demonstration test,  a total of 17 runs were
 conducted at varying operating  conditions.   In addition to
 the ORE levels, which are an indication of the performance
 of the Shirco Pilot-Scale Infrared  Incineration System and
 its ability to meet RCRA and/or TSCA regulatory standards,
 the reduction of PCB concentration  from the  feed to the

                            12

-------
     furnace  ash  is  also  a  measure  of  the  unit's  ability  to
     effectively  destroy  PCBs  and produce  a  furnace  ash with  a
     PCB  concentration  below the T.SCA  guidance  level  of 2  ppm
                                                         of
                                                            The
 Based on the data presented in Table 1, two samples
 furnace as.h exceeded the TSCA guidance levels and
 contained 3.396 and 2.079 ppm of total residual PCBs
 satngles were produced during two runs conducted at a
 900 F PCC operating temperature (20 minutes residence
 time),  which is significantly lower than the normal PCC
 operating temperature of 1600°F.  These runs were also
 conducted without the input of PCC combustion air to
 simulate non-oxidizing or pyrolytic combustion
 conditions.   At this low PCC temperature and pyrolytic
 condition,  these higher total  residual  PCB levels in the
 furnace ash  may be the result of the incomplete combustion
    ?$BV!Lthe  feed-  This  is  further substantiated by the
 residual  TCDF present in the furnace ash samples from
 these same  two  runs, as discussed  previously.   The
 remaining runs  conducted at 1200,  1400,  and 1600°F
 resulted  in  total  residual  PCB concentrations  in the
 furnace ash  ranging  from 0.003 to  0.117  ppm.   A third run,
 which was conducted  at a 900°F PCC operating  temperature
 but  with  an  increased PCC residence time of 25 minutes
 resulted  in  a total  furnace ash  PCB
 ppm  with  no  detectable TCDF.   It is
 increased residence  time in the  PCC
 low  900°F PCC operating temperature
 additional processing time  for the
    destruction of the PCBs in the feed
                                        concentration of 0.
                                        possible that the
                                        may have offset the
                                        and provided the
                                       sati sf act.ory
168
o   Mobility of Heavy Metals - Feed and Furnace
                                            Ash
    In order to determine whether heavy metals,  particularly
    lead,  would leach from the furnace ash produced in the
    Shirco Pilot-Scale Infrared Incineration System,  EP Tox
    and JCLP tests were conducted to determine the mobility of
    heavy  metals from the furnace ash as compared to  the feed.

    The initial  EP Tox analyses for lead in  the  leachate
    ranged from 0.05  to 0.67 ppm for the feed  and 0.05 to 4 1
    ppm for the furnace ash.  The initial  TCLP analyses ranged
    from 0.35  to 1.80 ppm (with one sample at  7.0 ppm) for the
    teed and 0.05  to  4.1  ppm (with  one sample  at  6.2  ppm) for
    the furnace ash.                                      .
                                                           on
A comparison of the EP Tox and TCLP analyses conducted
the furnace ash and the feed do not show any trend or
evidence that indicate reduced mobility of lead from the
furnace ash versus the feed as a result of the thermal
treatment.   The comparison did reveal  that the
concentrations of lead in the TCLP leachates from both the
                              13

-------
feed and the furnace ash were
corresponding EP Tox tests on
                             consistently higher than
                             the same samples.
                                                       the
When several samples were retested to verify the results,
the concentrations of lead in the EP Tox leachates (4.9
ppm feed, 3.0 ppm furnace ash) were higher than during the
initial tests and, in direct reversal to the original
data, exceeding corresponding TCLP leachate concentrations
(2.8 ppm feed, 1.4 ppm furnace ash).  The results of the
retest again did not indicate reduced mobility of lead
from the furnace ash versus the feed as a result of the
thermal treatment.

Mobility of Heavy Metals  - EP Tox and Proposed TCLP
Toxicity Characteristic Standards

EP Tox and  TCLP tests were conducted on the feed, furnace
ash, scrubber water, and  scrubber solids.  All of the
results were  below the EP Tox and proposed TCLP toxicity
characteristic standards  of  5 ppm arsenic, 100 ppm barium,
1  ppm  cadmium, 5  ppm chromium, 5  ppm lead, 0.2 ppm
mercury, 1  ppm selenium,  and  5 ppm  silver  except  for  one
feed sample  at 7.0 ppm lead  (TCLP)  and  one furnace ash
sample at 6.2 ppm lead (TCLP).  A comparison  of the  EP  Tox
and  TCLP analyses on all  the  sampled streams  to the
abovementioned standards  do  not  show any  trend or evidence
that indicate reduced mobility of heavy metals as a  result
of the thermal treatment.

Destruction and  Removal  Efficiency  (ORE)  of PCBs
                     the  first
The ORE of PCBs for
greater than 99.99%.  In contrast,
for incineration under the RCRA is
TSCA is 99.9999% ORE.  The low PCB
feed resulted in PCB levels in the
less than the analytical detection
runs.
on the
three runs (Phase I)  is
     the regulatory standard
     99.99% ORE and under
     concentrati ons
     stack gas that
     1imits for two
                                                   in  the
                                                   were
                                                   of  the
        Therefore for these runs,  ORE is  calculated based
        sum of the detection limits  of the  PCB congeners  in
 order to compare the ORE for the runs  on  the  same basis.,
 Stack gas measurements conducted during the third run did
 detect trichlorobiphenyl and tetrachlorobiphenyl  congeners
 and a ORE is shown based on this measurement.   Ihe less
 rigorous sampling in Phase II of the test was  not designed
 to allow calculation of ORE.

 Other Organic Stack Gas and PCC Offgas Emissions

 Several volatile and semivolati1e organic compounds were
 detected in the stack gas at concentrations less  than 100
 ppb and established standards for direct inhalation.  Low
 levels of several phthalate compounds were also detected
 in blank samples and may be traced to contamination f;rom
                            14

-------
     plastic  components  in  the  process,  sampling  equipment,  or
     laboratory  apparatus.   Several  volatile  organic  compounds
     including benzene  and  toluene  were  detected  in the  stack,
     gas  and  the  scrubber makeup  water  and  may  be  attributable
     to contamination from  the  makeup water although  PIC
     formation is  a  possibility.  Other  volatile  and
     sennvolatile  organic compounds, which  probably represent
     PICs, were  detected.   They  include  halomethanes,
     chlorinated  species including  chlorobenzene  and  methylene
     chloride, other volatile organics  including  xylenes,
     styrene  and  ethyl benzene,  oxygenated hydrocarbons
     including acetone and  acrolein, carbon disulfide, and
     p-cnlor-m-cresol .  Dioxins and  furans  were not detected  in
     the  stack gas samples.

     The  majority  of the organic  compounds  present in the PCC
     off  gas  samples at levels  less  than 500  ppb were also
     present  in the stack gas.  The  additional destruction of
     organics that take place in  the SCC and  emissions
     scrubbing system reduced the concentration of these
     organic  compounds in the corresponding stack gas samples.

o    Acid Gas Removal

     During the Phase I  Runs 1-3, HC1 emissions ranged from
     0.181 to 0.998 g/hr, which were significantly below the
     RCRA performance standard of 1800 g/hr that would require
     a 99 wt.% HC1 removal  efficiency.   HC1  removal
     efficiencies ranged from 97.23  to 99.35 wt.%.  Acid gas
     removal  was  not measured in Phase II.

o   Particulate  Emissions

    Particulate  emissions  were  measured throughout the  test
    and  ranged from 7  to 68 mg/dscm, well  below the  RCRA
    standard  of  180 mg/dscm.
    Analysis of Scrubber Makeup
    S c r u b b e r S o 1 i d s
                            Water, Scrubber Water, and
                                                      i n  a
Scrubber makeup water was transported to the site
tank truck that may have contained some residual
contamination prior to fill  up.  Samples of scrubber
makeup water were taken at the end of each run.  No PCBs,
dioxins, furans, or semivolatile organic compounds were
detected.  Several  volatile  organics including benzene,
toluene, and trichloroethene were measured at
concentrations less than 15  ppm.  The concentrations of
heavy metals were all  less than 0.2 ppm.

Samples of the water recirculation through the venturi
scrubber system, referred  to as scrubber water, were also
                              15

-------
    taken  at  the  end  of  each  run.   PCB  concentrations were
    less  than 200 ppt and  no  dioxins, furans,  or  semivolatile
    organic  compounds were detected  Small  quantities of
    benzene  (2 ppm)  and  toluene  (5.7  to 11  ppm) were  measured
    in  several of the samples and  are attributable  to the
    similar  contaminants in the  scrubber makeup water.  The
    concentrations of heavy metals in the scrubber  water  were
    all  less  than 1  ppm  except for barium,  which  ranged from
    0.2 to 2.2 ppm,  and  lead, which ranged  from 0.12  to 1.8
    ppm.

    Insufficient  quantities of scrubber solids in the  scrubber
    water were available for analysis.

o   Overall  Disposition  of Metals

    Total metals  analyses of the feed,  furnace ash, PCC  offgas
    and stack gas particulars,  scrubber makeup  water,
    scrubber water,   and  scrubber solids showed that the
    majority  of the  detectable metals,  including  lead,  that
    entered  the unit with the feed remained in the furnace
    ash.  An  overall mass balance  of lead through the unit was
    calculated based on  the  analysis of lead  in  the samples,
    the measured feed rate as weighed  during  the  runs
    operating periods,  the calculated  furnace ash flow rate
    based on  the ultimate  analysis of  ash in  the  feed sample,
    and the  measured particle mass and gas volume obtained
    from  the  gas' EPA Method  5  sampling trains.   Phase I
    results  indicate an average lead mass flow rate of 28.3
    g/hr  in  the  feed, 37.0 g/hr in the  furnace ash, 0.206 g/hr
    in the PCC offgas particulates,  and  0.109 g/hr in the
    stack gas particulates.   The  quantity of  lead  leaving the
    unit  with scrubber  water effluent  is approximately 0.204
    g/hr  based on the maximum measured concentration of  1.8
    Dpm  lead in  the  scrubber water and an overall  approximate
    water flow rate  of  30 gph.  The  PCC  offgas participates
    sampled  during  the  Phase I  runs  contained an average  of
    5364  ppm of  lead as compared  to  stack gas particulates,
    which contained  an  average  of 15,830 ppm  of  lead.  By
    contrast, the  average concentration  of  lead  in the teed
    was  1550 ppm.   Although  the concentration of lead in  the
    particulate  matter  increases  as  the  process  flow
    progresses through  the unit,  the actual  mass flow
    decreases as the gas  stream is cooled  and treated
    the  emissions control system.

     For  the  Phase I  runs  sampling and  analysis procedures  were
     conducted to evaluate vaporous lead concentrations  in  the
     PCC  offgas  and  soluble chromium  concentrations in  the HLL
     offgas  and stack gas  particulates.  The special  sampling
     for vapor phase lead and soluble chromium were unable to
     detect  any of either metal  at levels less than 2.7  ppb and
     264 ppb, respectively; therefore the evaluations were
     i nconclusive.
of lead
through
                                16

-------
    Other heavy metals, particularly barium and zinc, with
    average concentrations exceeding 100 ppm in the feed
    (barium 591 ppm, zinc 301 ppm) were also present in high
    concentrations, relative to other heavy metals, in the
    furnace ash (barium 1061 ppm, zinc 410 ppm) and scrubber
    water (barium 0.8 ppm, zinc 0.3 ppm).

o   Optimum Operating Conditions

    Phase II was designed to examine the effect on energy
    consumption and changes in the residual levels of heavy
    metals and organics in the furnace ash versus the levels
    in the feed by varying operating conditions.

    Based on the data obtained an analysis was  conducted to
    compare energy consumption in the unit at  operating
    conditions that did not affect the performance of the
    ?2nn6r J r?o™oion  ln the PCC Derating temperature from
    1600  F to  1200UF reduced the average PCC  power usage
    48% from 0.2294 to  0.1200 kwhr/lb feed.  A  reduction in
    the SCC  operating temperature from 2200°F  to  1800°F
    oooTC?d  ^roanera-?e ProPatie  ^1  consumption  by 51% from
    3997  to  1952 Btu/lb feed.   The use  of  3 wt.%  fuel  oil  to
    supplement the fuel  value of the  feed  further  decreased
    Jf iSSSor  US39?oo^6  to  67% at  PCC  operating  temperatures
    of 1600°F  and  1200°F,  respectively,  with  accompanying
    increases  in overall  feed  rate of 32%  and 26%.   The  costs
    for fuel oil  and its  attendant facilities still  must  be
    examined for specific  applications  to  determine  the  cost
    effectiveness  of a  fuel  oil  additive to the waste  feed
   As discussed  in  previous  sections  the  resul
   provide  any trend  or  change  in  the  residual
   heavy metals  and organics  in  the furnace  as
   levels in the  feed  as the  operating conditi
   and PCC  operating  temperatures  were maintai
   1600 F.  At an abnormally  low PCC  operating
   of 900UF, without  the input  of  combustion a
   simulate non-oxidizing or  pyrolytic combust
   total PCB and  TCDF  concentrations  in the  fu
   increased.  The  increases  may indicate that
   conditions led to  incomplete desorption or
   PCB and  TCDF and to the production of TCDF
   incomplete combustion of PCBs in the feed.

   QA Summary
ts did not
 levels of the
h versus the
ons were varied
ned at 1200 to
 temperature
i r to
ion conditions,
rnace ash
 these PCC
incineration of
from the
   The Phase I and II runs had a well-defined quality
   assurance/quality control  program to ensure the collection
   of accurate data.   This program was developed as part of
   the test program preparation activities and was formalized
   in the RREL approved QA Project Plan (Category II).  All
   of the sampling and analytical  work was conducted in
                              17

-------
    accordance with this QA Project  Plan  and  the  results
    include data quality credibility statements  and
    information that confirm the satisfactory precision  and
    accuracy of the data reported..
CONCLUSIONS

Based on the above
conclusions can be
performance of the
System.
               data and discussion,  the  following
               made concerning the operation  and
               Shirco Pilot-Scale Infrared Incineration
1.
2.
The PCC equipped with infrared heating rods reduced PCBs
f?om an average of 272 ppm and a maximum of 669 ppm in the
feed to less than 0.2 ppm PCBs in the furnace ash when PCC
temperature was 1200°F or higher.  Performance was well
below the TSCA guidance level of 2 ppm of PCBs in
treatment residuals.              ".....''

The majority of the lead and other heavy metals present in
the feed remained in the furnace ash, regardless of
operating conditions.  However,  the  scrubber water
contained levels of lead and barium  (up to 1.8 to  2.2  ppm,
respectively),  and metals also concentrated to some^extent
in  the  furnace  ash.  Both residual streams may require
further treatment when metals  are present  in the feed.
(See below).
     Based on  two leaching  tests,  the  EP  Tox
     mobility  of lead and other heavy  metals
     feed and  the furnace ash,  and there  was
     treatment affected metals  leaching.
                                         and  TCLP,  the
                                         was  similar  in  the
                                         no  evidence  that
                                               the extract of
                                                             on
 In  most cases  concentrations  of metals  in
 the furnace ash  did not exceed  their  respective  EP  Tox  and
 TCLP toxicity  characteristic  standards.   The  need  tor
 further treatment of the furnace ash  to  reduce  °r
 immobilize the metals is site specific,  and will  depend
 the cleanup standards for the site.

 The unit achieved DREs of PCBs  greater than 99  99%, based
 on one actual  calculation and in two  cases on detection
 limits.  PCB concentrations in  the feed and analytical
 detection limits did not allow the demonstration of
 99 9999% ORE required under TSCA.  However, this unit
 achieved greater than 99.9999% ORE in other tests,  and
 this time at least one full-scale infrared system has
 demonstrated greater than 99.9999% ORE for PCBs and  is
 permitted undir TSCA to process  PCB waste.  The upcoming
 Applications Analysis  Report will incorporate this
 additional data.
                                                            at
                                18

-------
8,
The unit achieved regulatory standards for acid gas
removal and particulate emissions.  These data apply-to
.the operation and performance of the air pollution control
system installed on this unit.-. Additional data on the
performance of air pollution control systems on full-scale
Shirco Infrared units will be discussed in the
Applications Analysis Report.

Several semivolatile and volatile organic compounds
measured in. the stack gas in the parts per bi 11 i on may be
PICs.   These levels are much lower than established
standards for direct inhalation of these compounds.

The unit was able to reduce the PCBs in the feed using
less power when fuel oil was added to the waste and when
PCC temperature was reduced.  The addition of fuel oil
also increased the feed rate.  Cost savings in specific
applications will  depend on local  fuel  and electrical
costs,  and a minimum PCC temperature must be maintained to
avoid  .inadequate desorption of the organics in the feed
and the production of PICs.
                              19

-------
                           SECTION 3

                      PROCESS DESCRIPTION
3.1  GENERAL PROCESS DESCRIPTION

Contaminated soils at the Demode Road Superfund Site were
incinerated in the Shirco Pilot-Scale Infrared Incineration
System designed and manufactured by Shirco Infrared Systems,
Inc. of Dallas, Texas.  The system consists of a waste feed
system, infrared primary combustion chamber (PCC),      ,crr\
supplemental propane-fired secondary combustion chamber (SLL),
venturi scrubber emissions control system, exhaust system, and
data collection and control system all enclosed in a 45-ft
trailer.  The  system process flow is presented in Figure  1 and
the overall 250xlOO-ft test site layout is presented
schematically  in Figure 2.

The waste feed material is fed manually to a  hopper mounted
over a metering conveyor belt.  This metering  conveyor belt  is
synchronized with  the primary combustion  chamber  conveyor  to
control the material  feedrate through a sealed feed chute  to
the primary combustion chamber.

The incinerator conveyor,  a tightly woven wire belt, moves  the
waste  material through the insulated  heating  modules of the
primary combustion chamber.  The  waste material  is  heated  by
electric  infrared  heating  elements  and contaminant  desorption
from the  solid waste  feed  and subsequent  volatilization of the
organic contaminants  occurs.  Rotary  rakes gently turn the
material  to ensure adequate mixing  and contact with the  heated
chamber environment.   When the  combusted  feed residual ,. now
furnace ash,  reaches  the  discharge  end of the furnace,  it
drops  off the  belt through a  chute  and  into  an enclosed  hopper
and discharge  storage drum.   Combustion  air  is supplied  to the
primary combustion chamber through  a  series  of overfire  air
ports  at  points  along the  length  of the  chamber.   The  gas flow
 in the incinerator is countercurrent  to  the  conveyed  waste
 feed  materi al.

 Exhaust  gas containing the desorbed contaminants exits  the
 primary  combustion chamber and  passes to  a secondary
 combustion chamber (afterburner)  where  a  propane-fired  burner
 provides  the  final thermal  destruction  of any residual
 organics.  Secondary air is  supplied to  ensure adequate  excess
 Oo levels for complete combustion.   Exhaust  gas  from  the
 secondary combustion chamber then is quenched by a water-fed
 venturi  scrubber  emissions control  system to remove
 particulate matter and acid  gases.   The  gas  then is
 transferred to the exhaust stack by an  induced draft  fan and
 discharged to the atmosphere.
                                20

-------
 The main unit controls and data collection
 indicators/recorders comprising the data collection and
 control system are housed in the system trailer.  Safety
 interlocks also are integrated into the trailer-mounted unit
 to automatically correct abnormal  unit operating conditions
 maintain system performance, and,  if necessary shut down waste
 feed and heat input to the unit.

 3.2  DETAILED PROCESS DESCRIPTION

 The Shirco Pilot-Scale Infrared Incineration System consists
 of the following major mechanical  subsystems and components:

     o     Waste Feed System                                   ,
     o     Primary Combustion  Chamber (electrically heated)
     o     Secondary Combustion  Chamber
     o     Emissions Control  System
     o     Exhaust System
     o     Data Collection  and Control System

 Additional  equipment  was  provided  to support the unit  during
 operation;  this  includes  two diesel  generator sets  to  meet
 electrical  requirements and  a  water supply  tank  trailer for
 makeup  water  needs.

 3.2.1   Waste  Feed  System

 Up  to  150  Ib/hr  of waste  material  (prescreened or preprocessed
 soils,  solids,  semi-solids,  and sludges)  is  fed  manually from
 s-gai  pails into  a  hopper  mounted  over  a  metering conveyor
 belt.   The  conveyor is  shrouded and equipped  with rubber
 skirts  to  minimize  infiltration of  air  or escape  of  furnace
 gases.   An  adjustable  guillotine-type gate  is provided  at the
 conveyor discharge.  The  gate  distributes the material  across
 the width  of  the metering  belt and  assists  in furnace
 S5-  I9ki  F.in?i  feed area  sealin9  is provided by  an  additional
 adjustable  knife gate  in  the feed  chute into  the  primary
 combustion  chamber.  The metering  conveyor  belt  is
 synchronized  with  the  primary  combustion  chamber conveyor for
 control  of  the material feedrate.

 3.2.2   Primary Combustion Chamber

 The primary combustion  chamber design and operation  is  unique
 to the  Shirco technology.  It  is in this primary chamber that
 the waste material is brought to a  specified operating
 temperature by electric infrared heating and conveyed through
 temperature-controlled  zones at a predetermined rate.  The
 primary combustion chamber provides the heat required for the
 initial contaminant desorption of organic contaminants from
 the solid waste feed.   The majority of  the metai.contaminants
 remain   in the  furnace  ash that exits the primary  combustion
chamber.
                              21

-------
          ion chamber is a rectangular, box ( length
          ft, height 6.58 ft) constructed of 0.25-vn
          It is insulated with ceramic fiber blanket
          on stainless steel studs and retained with
           The  insulation is manufactured by
           consists of an 85% silica/15% alumina
           that can sustain  a continuous surface
          °F.   The  insulation is  7 in thick .on the
           and  end  plates,  and 5  in  on the chamber
The primary combust
9.75 ft, width 2.5
A36 carbon steel.
insulation mounted
ceramic fasteners.
Carborundum Co. and
asbestos-free blend
temperature of 2400
chamber top, sides,
bottom.                                                  ,

The material to be processed  is conveyed through the furnace
on  a woven wire belt,  at  a  bed depth ranging from 0.5_to 2  in,
that is supported  on  high-temperature  alloy shafts.  The
shafts  are, in  turn,  supported by  external flange-mounted
bearings.  A friction  drive system is  used to  pull  the  belt
through the furnace.   The belt is  woven  (to a  thickness  of
0.25 in)  from  16-gauge,  Type-314  stainless steel,  ^^belt •
speed  is  controlled  via  a constant speed motor/variab  e  speed
reducer,  and can  be  adjusted  to  achieve  waste  material
residence times of 6  to  60  min.
 energy is provided by 18 transversely-mounted silicon
rod heating elements mounted on 3.07-in centers 8.75
 the furnace belt.  These 1.0-in OD (outside diameter)
elements are manufactured by Carborundum Co., and are
 33 1 watts/in2 of radiating surface with a maximum
temperature of 2000°F.  The primary chamber is
into two temperature control zones, with six heating
 serving each zone.  The temperature in each zone can
sely regulated between 500°F and 1850UF.  The
operating temperature of the primary chamber zones  is
 Infrared
 carbide
 in  above
 heating
 rated at
 surface
 divided
 elements
 be  preci
 maximum
 1900°F.

 Four rotary rakes transversely-mounted on 1-ft centers gently.
 turn the material on the belt, increasing exposure.  The
 rotary ?akes consist of L-s.haped fingers (O.J9-}n OD^Jnconel •
 601) welded to Type-316 stainless steel shafts that rotate at
 a rate of 1.8 revolutions/in of belt travel.  The shafts are
 synchronized with the belt speed through a chain and sprocket
 drive system.

 Combustion air is supplied to the primary chamber through 16
 1.0-in-diameter  overfire air ports located 1.75-in above the
 belt surface in  a single row of 8 ports on each  side of^the
 chamber.  Combustion air flowrate and  distribution to each
 group of four ports  (two groups per chamber  side)  are '  __-
 Controlled by manual gate valves.  The  combustion  air b ower
 is  manufactured  by  New  York Blower Co.  and  is rated  at  185
 scfm at a static pressure of  0.25-in water column  (WC); The
 combustion air supply can be  controlled to provide either
 oxidizing or reducing atmospheres.
                       22

-------
 meUI contamJnllf  JJ9tt5^desorbed or9anic  contaminants  and
 pyitc £°ntamlnants ^^ did not  remain  in the  furnace  ash
 ^,,0     /rJmarfCombustlQn chamber and flows through  the
 flue gas ductwork to the secondary combustion  chamber./

 3.2.3  Secondary Combustion Chamber
    hnut1on Camber consists of a rectangular
 carbon steel box (length 11.0 ft, width 3.33 ft, height 3 33

 ?n u at1nnWlth i1^" "Carborundum ceramic fiber blanket
  nfni?  ? +  ,all int!;rior walls.  The insulation type is
 identical to that used in the primary chamber   The internal
 cross-sectional area of the chamber is 1.56 ft2 and -the      --
 internal  volume is 28.9 ft5.  The unit is designed for
        nXCtSS air.°Peration with a maximum continuous
        ng temperature of 2300°F and a minimum residence time
 of 1.3 sec at a maximum actual gas flow of 830 acfm   At these

 ?hT?Un? ^ndit^°!]S the secondary combustion chamber prov des
 cont  npH ,1 ;e[["al Destruction of the organic contaminants
 contained in the flue gas from, the primary combustion chamber.

 Supplemental  fuel  firing is supplied by a 375,000 Btu/hr  "
 propane burner  manufactured by MAXON.   The burner is equipped
 with a .continuous  pilot flame monitor,  automatic  fuel  shut off"
 and  purge system interlocked with the  secondary combustion
 chamber temperature  sensor  and manual  fuel  contro?  valve   •

 adjustable  l?r  revert ^ b"™" •**  Control led by .manual ly
                +ion  air  (excess .air)  is. supplied  to the
thp rhh    u?u tW°  '-in-^ameter ports  located  at  the  tap  of
the chamber: they are directed at the  interface  of  the  burner
flame pattern and the exhaust gas inlet  flow.  Secondary
^nnni! ;." ai? 1S suPP11ed by the same fan that  is  used to
supply the primary chamber combustion  air.  A splitter
manifold with dampers at  the fan outlet  allows air
distribution to both chambers.  A manual  gate valve adjusts
the air flowrate to the secondary chamber!

3.2.4  .Emissions Control  System                           . :

The emissions control
 nw
tower
        Z
                      system consists of a venturi , scrubber
                      tower'  Water is used as the'scrubbing'
            ime-s1urry system 1s Provided if acid gas      9
            0J 1S re(1uyed-  The venturi section and separator
     , are each equipped with two water-spray nozzles   The
vetn.         at%r fl°wrate is 2 gpm and' 10 gpm to {he
venturi and separator tower, respectively.   If an external

^?Lh?rViCe °t 25-3° P5ig and "5 9Pm (minimum) is no[
available, a makeup water system is provided.   The venturi
rnnt^°? 1S equiPPed w1*h a manually adjustable plumb bob to
control gas phase pressure drop between  8 and  14 in WC and to
effect  maximum collection efficiency.         .          ana to
                              23

-------
The scrubber is equipped with an integral  45-gal  sump tank,
external 50-gal holding tank, and recirculation pump tor
Affluent handling and disposal.  Makeup water is  supplied from
a water supply tank trailer, as required to account for  >
evaporative losses.  Total scrubber water blowdown is
approximately 30-45 gal/day.

In addition to removing particulate, the scrubber cools the
gases  (incoming temperatures:  1000°F - 2300°F, depending
on system configuration)  to  saturation temperature (usually
about  180°F).  Subcooling to a  lower temperature can be
performed if required,  but this procedure consumes
substantially  more water  than  cooling to  saturation
temperature.

3.2.5   Exhaust System

An induced  draft  fan  located downstream of  the scrubber
exhausts  the  scrubbed  gas to the  stack.   The  fan  is
manufactured  by  New  York  Blower Co.  and  is  rated  at  400  acfm
at a  static pressure  of 14-in  WC.

Exhaust gases  are vented  to  the atmosphere  through  a 4.0-in  ID
stack, which  extends  through the  roof of  the  trailer to  an
elevation of 23.6-in  above  grade  (10 ft  above trailer  roof).
The  stack is  equipped with  two 3.0-in ID  sampling  ports.
Access to the sampling ports is from the  trailer  roof.

 3.2.6  Data Collection and  Control  System

 The  data collection  and control system is designed to ensure
 that the various process operating conditions are maintained
 wUhin the appropriate range for effective thermal  treatment
 of the waste   Operating conditions are logged and compiled
 for future evaluation of the system's performance.

 The Shirco Portable Demonstration Unit is fully  instrumented
 to monitor the following process parameters:

 o   Temperature

     Primary Chamber:
               Waste  feed zone
               Zone Al
               Zone A2
               Mid-zone
               Zone Bl
               Zone B2
               Exhaust  gas
               Ash discharge chute
                                24

-------
     Secondary  Chamber:
               Mid-chamber
               Exhaust  gas
     Stack:
    Recorder:
    Pressure
               Exhaust  gas
               Six-point continuous  stripchart
         Combustion air fan outlet
         Primary chamber draft
         Primary chamber exhaust draft
         Secondary chamber draft

         Secondary chamber combustion air
         Scrubber differential pressure
         Scrubbing liquor delivery pressure

o   Liquor Flow

         Venturi 'scrubber liquor
         Separator tower liquor

o   Exhaust Gas Analysis - Secondary Chamber Outlet

         Continuous 0? monitor w/strip chart recorder
         Continuous CO monitor w/strip chart recorder
         Continuous C02 monitor w/strip chart recorder

o   Master Control  Panel

A master control panel contains the following devices for
process data monitoring, recording, and control:

         Nine-point digital  temperature display with rotary
         selector

         Six-point  temperature strip chart recorder

         Primary chamber heat  zone  temperature  controllers

         Primary chamber belt  speed controller

         Annunciator

         Hand-Off-Auto switches for mechanical  components.

         Three-point  stripchart recorder  for continuous
         emissionmonitors.
                              25

-------
                           of
o   Safety Interlocks                            \

The Shirco system is equipped with safety interlocks. to
automatically correct abnormal incinerator operating
conditions and maintain system performance.   A description
the various interlock systems, corrective actions,  and
corrective action limits is presented in Table 2.  The system
also is equipped with an automatic waste feed cutoff system
that will stop the waste feed conveyor belt motion  in the
event of low secondary chamber temperature.   The cutoff limit
for the waste feed shutdown control is adjustable.
26

-------
                     TABLE 2.  SAFETY  INTERLOCK SYSTEMS
        Interlock
 Corrective action
Corrective
  action
  limit
 Low primary  chamber
 temperature
 High  primary  chamber
 temperature

 Low secondary chamber
 temperature

 High  secondary chamber
 temperature

 Emissions control
 during unit shutdown
Excessive stack gas
temperature

Low secondary chamber
exhaust 02

High secondary chamber
exhaust CO
 Infrared  electric  heating
 element power  center  on/
 Waste  feed  belt  stop

 Infrared  electric  heating
 element power  center  off

 Propane burner on/
 Waste  feed  belt  stop

 Propane burner off
Secondary chamber
temperature maintained
until primary chamber
temperature drops below
action limits

Alarm (manual adjustment
of scrubbing liquor flow)

Alarm/Waste feed belt stop
Alarm/Waste feed belt stop
 1600°F*



 1850°F


 1800°F


 2300°F


  400°F
 200°F


   4%


 100 ppm
*  This was modified temporarily to allow the 900°F and 1200°F
   runs in Phase II testing.
                              27

-------
                           SECTION 4

                 FIELD  OPERATIONS  DOCUMENTATION
4.1  PRETEST SAMPLING

The Demode Road Superfund Site is a 12-acre field,
approximately 950x550 ft.  By 1983, MDNR had removed drums of
waste that were either buried or left on the ground and over
1,500 tons of contaminated soil.  From 1984 to 1987 MDNR
conducted a remedial investigation and feasibi1ity study
(RI/FS) to determine the nature and extent of the remaining
contamination at the site and evaluate alternative cleanup
technologies and methodologies.  Based on the data presented
in the RI/FS, a 10,000-sq ft area located in the southwestern
section of the site was  identified as having the highest soil
PCB contamination.  The  remedial investigation described the
soil as a dry, brown, sandy, and silty clay topsoi;l .  This
area was the focus  of the pretest sampling phase, which was
performed during the week of July 13, 1987 to identify the
most highly contaminated waste feed source for the planned
SITE test program.  Figure 3 illustrates the entire Rose
Township site and the specific excavation area as identified
by the RI/FS.
The area was  surveyed  from  existing  survey markers,  and  a
12,100-sq  ft  grid with  100-sq  ft  sections was  superimposed
over the identified  10,000-sq  ft  site;  the overlap  ensured
complete coverage of the  area.   Figure  4  illustrates the grid
definition  and  specific  sector  ID  numbers.

Based  on the  sampling  grid  the  area  was divided  into
thirty-six  100  sq ft sectors,  S-l  through S-36.   Four  samples
were taken  in each  sector (:a  total of  144 samples)  and
composited.   These  36  soil  samples were analyzed  for PCB and
lead content  as presented in  Table 3.   A  single  composite
sample of  the 36 soil  samples  was  analyzed for density,  pH,
moisture,  ash,  Btu  value, and  ultimate  analysis,  as presented
in  Table 4.   A summary report  of the pretest  characterization
analyses is  presented  in  Appendix  D,  Volume  II.   These
analyses confirmed  significant PCB and  lead  contamination  in
sectors that  were to be  excavated  to provide  the  waste  feed
source for the Shirco  unit  operation during  the  SITE
demonstration.   The analyses  also  characterized  the waste  feed
source so  that Shirco  could define optimum unit  operating
conditions.

Ten of the 36 sectors  were  identified  as  areas that contained
the maximum PCB- and/or lead-contaminated soils.   Ten  sectors
                               28

-------
ro
10

    -V   -«     y   ' " / 7..--/V-- 'A^"1*"^;/-'---'^-- -.-::?i:-,-\/« >•Y\'llf',r^l'V5'H nf\t-f+r\u  iit+& I c. e+r\C.f\' \ls"VN-y\
         r~^  * •-'','/'•  -''^ s^- '---^^  *^^'^S^-; '45*s^i/']'/^V;'''l\l ;>-  '    A«'  : '//^~~'' V- 'i:>VY-~ "::!t%!; :^
    ^%o»A j'™"v  /'/O''  x~^^^^r^"""'"-'^^'^              !   ^•-•^'fL.-:^"*Tr^''ii/- • '"-;i1;/° /."/{>•'£•  //-,">,,{C"'-'^oSl iV'.V.v^'  ->i^ f AA'1^1 •""';     .    • / •   y////- -'1«B      ^'C
           DEMODE
           ROAD
                   '/ o
                                                                                      EXCAVATION AREA
                                                                                     '      NO         V

                                                            DEMONSTRATION
                                                                  AREA
        Figure  3.   Demode  Road  Superfund Site.

-------
CO
o
A1
B  >
C  .
D  S
E  .
F  S:
G
H
I
J
K
L
                       2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9 10  11 12
                      7    S8    S9
                                                  ~^>
                  Sll
                       3   S14   S15  $16  S17   S
S20
SE2
                          S26  S27  S28  SE9  S
                          8
                                                     6
            NOTES                  N
              1) CIRCLED SECTORS CONTAIN MAXIMUM PCS AND LEAD
                CONTAMINATION.
              2) BOXED AREAS REPRESENT ACTUAL EXCAVATED SECTORS.
             Figure 4.   Pretest sampling grid.

-------
TABLE 3.   PRETEST SAMPLE ANALYSES
Grid sector
sample ID No.
SI
S2
S3
S4 (a) (b)
S5 (a) (b)
S6 (b)
S7
S8
S9
S10 (a) (b)
Sll (b)
S12 (a) (b)
S13
S 1 4
SI 5
S16 .
S17
S 1 8
• S19 (a) (b)
S20 (b)
S21 (a) (b)
S22 (a) (b)
S23 (a) (b.)
S24 (a) (b;)
S25 :-; (b)
S26 .
S27 . - .
. S28 .
S29
S30 ,
S31 (a) (b)
S3 2
S33
S34 • ' 	
S35
S36 , -;.
(a) Ten sectors designated
Calculated composite PC
sectors is 902 ppm PCB
Total PCB
content (com)
70
49
169
1,270
29
28
132
71
232
1,230 .
180
29
200
164
610
301
360 ;
115
66
47
1,550
1,300
1,410
1,120
550
128
270 •
262-
	 46
290
1,020
295
. 28 •• •>-. .
148
103
560
as maximum PCB- and 1
B and lead concentrat
and 446 ppm lead.
(b) Actual sectors that were field-excavated for
Shi rco unit.

Total Lead
	 content (ppm)
100
240
310
370
740
560
. 400 :
130
:'"'.' 240 -
.'' 330 '
530
i,foo • ; ' -
• 450 .
4'0 0 ' r
22:0
210
34.0". "U;
: •'".' 140
680 rv- '
440-
240
160
200
1 80
300
240
.: 390
'9 3 • - •
260
180
, ..-• . ,4&0
380

- • • 81
110
340
ead-contami nated .
ions for these ten

waste feed supply to

             31

-------
              TABLE 4.   PRETEST SAMPLE ANALYSES--
                        COMPOSITE OF ALL SECTORS
Analytical parameter

pH
Moisture, wt.%
Ash, wt.%
HHV, Btu/lb
Density, g/cc

Ultimate Analysis, wt.%

C
H
N
0
Cl
S
P
PCB, ppm
Pb, ppm
     7.8
     9.0
    81
<1000
     0.95
     2.27
     0.84
  ND/0.06*
     4.06
     0.15
     0.032
     0.042
   570
   580
*  ND denotes not detected.  Value shown is the detection
   1imit.
                               32

-------
 were chosen to ensure that sufficient soil quantities would be
 unUaVd3 r?nt0theei/Hhe W3S^ feed requirements of the Sh r o
 thlL ?n  9 + he 12*WS of operation.  A composite sample of
 these 10 sectors also was prepared and analyzed for PCBs,
  Prnn,P^HCDrSrli;ated dibenz°-P-dioxins, and dibenzofurans
 (PCDDs and PCDFs)  as presented in Table 5.  A summary report
 of these analyses  1S included in Appendix D, Volume II   The

                                                           "
 Based on the pretest sampling and analyses discussed above,
 comprehensive profile of the 10,000-sq ft area and its
 inchvidual  sectors was obtained.   Tables 3,  4, and 5 present
 the  analytical  results of this pretest sampling program
                    10  S^t0rs  were  chosen  for excavation to a
                     "  th*.waste  feed  suPPly  for the  SITE test
 PvHpnth          e*9avatlon  activities  began,  it  became
 evident  that  an  exacting  excavation  of these  10  specific
 sectors  was  precluded  because  of  the difficult  terrain  and the
 crude  excavation  ability  of  the front-end  loader   The
 nnurp l°h  arhaSKthe!l  Were def1ned  m°re broadly  as  shown in
 Figure 4  by  the  boxed  areas.   Table  3  defines  the originally
 specified  10  sectors and  the more broadly  defined areas  that
 were actually  excavated for  the waste  feed  supply to  the
 Shirco unit.   Section  4.2.2  discusses  the  waste  feed
 nfC?hn iaVC£iVit1eS  ^hat Preceded  the drumming and  transport
 of the waste  feed  supply  to  the Shirco unit.

 4.2  TEST SUMMARY

 4.2.1  Pretest Operations
On 10/26/87 Sh
screening and
During the fol
covered with g
that seri ously
gravel fill  an
resulted in  a
support traile
and set up for
Unit arrived o
unloaded, and
the Rose Towns
               irco  personnel  arrived  on  site  to  observe  feed
               site  preparation  for  the portable  unit  test
               lowing week, the  test site was  leveled  and
               ravel fill.  Following  a significant  rainfall
               deteriorated portions  of  the site, additional
               d drainage to a sump  hole  were  provided that
               level and well-drained  test site.  The  Shirco
               r and two diesel  power  generators  were  delivered
               the  test.  The Shirco  Portable Demonstration
               n site on 10/30/87.   Demonstration supplies were
               the trailer was prepared for a  public viewing at
               hip Hall  on 10/31/87.

        successful  public showing at  the Township Hall,  the
        ; Unit was taken back to the job site  for setup.   On
         electrical power was hooked  up,  and  scrubber water
supply hose  control panel  instruments, the ash discharge
barrel  scrubber drain  hose,  the interior trailer lights, and
the exhaust stack all  were  installed  by Shirco personnel    The
                              33

-------
             TABLE  5.   PRETEST  SAMPLE  ANALYSES--
                        COMPOSITE  OF  TEN  GRID  SECTORS  WITH
                        MAXIMUM  PCB AND LEAD CONTAMINATION
                    Composited  arid  sectors

                              S4
                              S5
                              S10
                              S12
                              S19
                              S21
                              S22
                              S23
                              S24
                              S31
Total PCDD, ppb
Total PCDF, ppb
Total PCB, ppm
Total Pb, ppm
Actual composite
   analvsi s	

      55
       4.2
     626
     560
                                          Calculated composite
                                           anal y <: i s (Table 3)
902
446
                                34

-------
 overall test site layout is presented schematically in Figure
     Ine furnace was heated to processing temperatures and then
 cooled to verify that all systems were operational.

 A Health and Safety Plan was issued that defined the specific
 program organization and individual personnel responsible for
 specific health and safety and operating activities.  The
 health and safety procedures also discussed site-specific and
 process-specific hazards, levels of protection,  health and
 training requirements,  and medical  monitoring.   An exclusion
 zone surrounding the waste feed handling and input area of the
 Snirco unit required Level  C personnel  protection from waste
 feed particles.  Access  to other sectors within  the
 demonstration area,  as  agreed upon  by FWEI, MDNR, and  Shirco
 health and safety personnel,  required Level D personnel
 protection with coveralls,  gloves,  boots and coverings,  safety
 glasses,  and a  hard  hat.   Discussions with  the  local  fire
 department ensured  that  the  local  authorities who would  be
 responsible for a site  emergency response were  aware of  the
 test program.

 4.2.2   Material  Feed

 Based  on  the pretest sampling  and  analysis,  as discussed  in
 Section  4.1,  feed material  from  selected contaminated  areas
 was  excavated using  a front-end  loader  and  transported  to an
 adjacent  flat staging area within the hazardous  waste  site
 The  excavated area was located  within a  steeply  sloped
 irregular  in grade,  and  overgrown terrain.   This  precluded a
 sophisticated large-scale  grubbing  and  excavation  operation
 consistent  with  the  small-scale  pretest  sampling "and analysis
 that provided the definition  of  the overall  sector  as
 presented  in  Tables  3, 4,  and  5.  The staging area  was covered
 with plastic  sheeting to  eliminate  any  cross-contamination
 from the excavated soil to the  staging  area  soil.   The
 excavated  soil  was mixed  using the  front-end  loader  shovel to
 produce a  blended mix and then dumped onto  a  free-standing
 screen to  remove  any debris larger  than one  inch  in diameter
 before being  shoveled into 55-gal drums.  Two of  the drums
 were filled  with  screened soil that had been  blended with  3
 wt/0  oil.  The drums  then were moved into the  exclusion zone
 inside the test  area for storage.  The material was
 transferred  from  the drums to 5-gal pails in  40-lb  increments
 for  feeding  to the unit.   The scale was tared with  the pail to
 zero, so that when the pails were weighed,  the weight recorded
would be the net weight of the feed.  A lid was quickly placed
 on the pail  to minimize any evaporation of organics in the
 feed .

4.2.3  Operational History

The initiation of the formal  demonstration  test runs began on
November 2, 1987.  The program originally was designed  to

                               35

-------
                                              TABLE 6
                                       PROPOSED TEST MATRIX
Day

1
2
3
4
5
5
6
7
8
8
8
9
9
10
10
11
11
11
12
12
12
Run

0 A
1
2
3
4
5


6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Time

0900-1800
0900-1800
0900-1800
0900-1800
0900-1300
1400-1800


0900-1300
1400-1530
1600-1800
0900-1300
1400-1800
0900-1300
1400-1800
0900-1300
1330-1530
1600-1800
0900-1300
1330-1530
1600-1800
Operating t«
PCC(°F)
1600
1600
1600
1600
1600
1600


1600
1600
1600
1200
1200
1200
1200
1200
1200
1200
900
900
900
>mperature
SCC(°F)
2200
2200
2200
2200
1800
2200


1800
2200
1800
2200
1800
2200
1800
2200
1800
1800
2200
1800
1800
Approximate F
Waste feed r
(Ibs) t
40-60
40-60
40-60
40-60
35-50
40-60


50-75
60-90
50-75
35-50
35-50
40-60
40-60
50-75
50-75
50-75
35-50
40-60
40-60
urnace
•esidence
:ime(min;
20
20
20
20
25
20


15
10
15
25
25
20
20
15
15
15
25
20
20
> Atmosphere N
1
Oxidizing
Oxidizing
Oxidizing
Oxidizing
Oxidizing!
Oxidizing


Oxidizing
Oxidizing
Non-OxidSzing
Nox- Oxidizing
Oxidizing
Non-Oxidizing
Oxidizing
Non-Oxidizing
Oxidizing
Non-Oxidizing
Non-Oxidizing
Non-Oxidizing
Non-Oxidizing
lisc.






B


• C

C



B


C


C
A - Formal sampling not proposed.   System shakedown and checkout to be performed.

B - Secondary combustion chamber to be heated electrically.

C - Feed to be blended with 3-5% fuel oil.
                                                   36

-------
 follow the proposed test matrix, as summarized in Table 6 and
.the daily chronology in Section 4.2.3.1.

 Section 4.2.3.2.defines the actual  operations and test matrix
 that was fo  owed during the test program.  Differences from
 inSection3!  2 !^3posed Pr°9ram ™* test matrix are discussed


 4.2.3.1  Daily Chronology of Proposed Program

 Day 1  of the  test program was designed for system shakedown
 and checkout.   The selection of operating parameters during
 this day was  based, upon previous experience decontaminating
 PCB-contaminated  soils.

 These  parameters  were  also  selected for the three replicate
 runs to be  conducted on Days 2,  3,  and 4.

 Day 5  of the  program was to consist of two 4-hour runs with  an
 oxidizing  atmosphere in the primary chamber.   The residence
 time in the furnace  would  be varied to help determine  the
 minimum time  required  for  detoxification.   In  addition  the
 secondary  combustion chamber temperature  would  be varied  to
 obtain  data regarding  optimization  of  utility  requirements
 Note that during  one of these  proposed runs,  the  secondary
 chamber was to  be  heated by electrical  heating  elements.
 Results of  previous  testing conducted  with  the  Shirco  system
 have met  EPA-required  DREs  for  PCBs  with  secondary  chamber
 temperatures of 1800°F.

 Days 6  and 7 were  set  aside for  preventative maintenance on
 the  pilot unit  and preparation  for  the  foil owing  week's
 testing.                                        3

 Day  8 of the program was to  consist  of  three runs.   One run
 would employ a non-oxidizing atmosphere in  the  primary furnace
 to  determine the effect  on  lead  fixation.   Temperatures in the
 secondary chamber  and furnace residence time were to be varied
 again for further  optimization of system operating parameters
 and  material throughput.  In addition,  two  of the runs were to
 be  conducted utilizing  feed material blended with 3-5% fuel
 oil.  This would provide data regarding maximization of
material throughput  as well as minimization of utility
consumption.

Day 9 of the program was designed to consist of two runs
utilizing lower temperature in the primary  furnace to
determine the  minimum operating temperature and the effect on
metals  present in  the feed.   The atmosphere in the furnace
again would be varied to provide data on metals fixation;  the
secondary chamber  temperature was to be lowered during one run
to optimize  utility consumption.
                              37

-------
Day 10 of the program was to consist of two runs similar to
those conducted on Day 9.  However, the secondary chamber
would be heated electrically to further investigate the_
potential minimization of utility consumption, and the furnace
residence time would be reduced to maximize throughput.

Day 11 of the program was to consist of three runs similar to
those of Days 9 and 10; however, furnace residence time would
be reduced further.  In addition, one of the runs would be
conducted utilizing feed blended with fuel oil to determine
the effect on material throughput.

Day 12 of the program was to consist of three runs, all of
which would  be conducted with  a non-oxidizing atmosphere and
lower temperatures  in the primary  furnace.  The  primary
objective of these  tests was to provide data on  potential
metals fixation with the Shirco process.

In order to  fully  evaluate  the  effect  of  proposed variations
in process operating parameters,  composite samples of  feed,
ash,  and scrubber  blowdown  water  were  to  be taken during each
of the runs.

Upon  completion of testing,  Shirco  personnel  were to  initiate
decontamination procedures  on  the  pilot unit  and prepare for
demobilization  15  days  after arrival.
 4.2.3.2   Actual  Operations
                                                        the
The actual test program schedule of runs deviated from
proposed test matrix outlined in Section 4.2.3.1.  The
following discussion summarizes the actual operational history
of the overall program.  Tables 7 and 8 present a summary of
the operating conditions and energy input to the unit during
the demonstration test runs.  The references to run numbers
refers to the original proposed test matrix, as discussed and
defined in Section 4.2.3.1 and Table 6.  The actual test^
oroqram operated at test conditions for 51 hrs 11 mm and
processed 1,799 kg (3,967 Ibs) of contaminated waste  feed.

November  2.  1987.  The primary combustion chamber heatup was
started at 08:20 hours.  When the primary combustion  chamber
reached 1000°F, the secondary combustion  chamber was  fired
and brought  up to 2200°F using maximum  propane flow to
minimize  heatup time.  This  heatup  procedure was followed
during all startups.   While  the  sampling  and analytical
subcontractor was completing  the  setup  of their  equipment,  the
system was maintained  at operating  temperature.  Feed material
was introduced to the  unit  at  15:20  hours at 20  mm residence
time  and  a bed depth  of  1  1/2-in  in  the primary  combustion   ,
chamber.  Unit operation continued  until  17:13 hours  to
establish feedrate  and stack velocity  for the  demonstration  ,
tests.
                                38

-------
      TABLE 7
OPERATIONS SUMMARY

Date
11-02-87
11-03-87

11-04-87

11-05-87

11-06-87

11-07-87
11-08-87
11-09-87


11-10-87







ll-12-87

ll -13-87
1 — 	
Time period Test run
15:20-17:13 
-------
                                              TABLE 8.  POWER USAGE - ACTUAL OPERATIONS

Date
11-03-87
11-04-87
11-05-87
11-06-87
11-09-87
11-10-87
11-11-87
11-12-87
Time period
Time intervals
11:40-18:25
09:45-20:13
08:16-18:37
10:32-15:31
09:34-10:35
11:26-12:27
13:45-14:47
09:30-10:30
11:20-12:20
13:13-14:14
15:07-16:07
09:04-10:05
11:30-12:31
13:20-14:20
15:10-16:10
10:27-11:27
.12:35-13:35
Hrs.
6.75
10.47
10.35
4.98
1.02
1.02
1.03
1.00
1.00
1.02
1.00
1.02
1.02
1.00
•-• 1.00
• i.oo
1.00
Zone A
81.5
119.3
124.3
60.5
8.6
8.7
9.2
12.5
9.0
1.6
0.9 '
12.7
5.4
3.0
7.9
5.5
5.8
Primary combustion chamber
kwhr kw
Zone B Cumulative
52.1
71.6
75.8
43.9
6.7
6.9
7.5
8.7
7.4
3.0
1.3
8.5
3.3
2.0
2.6
3.6
4.6
133.6
190.9
200.1
103.9
15.3
15.6
16.7
21.2
16.4
4.6
2.2
21.2
8.7
5.0
. 10.5
9.1
10.4
19.79
18.24
19.33
20.85
15.05
15.34
16.16
21.20
16.40
4.52
2.20
20.85
8.56
5.00
10.50
9.10
10.40
kwhr/Lb feed
0.2975
0.2495
0.2497
0.2919
0.1913
0.1608
0.2456
0.1914
0.1367
0.0451
0.0275
0.1827
0.1360
0.0678
0.1189
-0.1400
' 0.1486
Secondary combustion chamber
Propane usage
Lb/Hr Btu/Hr Btu/Lb feed
13.75
13.45
16.38
12.56
10.73
9.14
17.99
9.36
8.97
8.04
10.75
16.69
16.69
11.95
11.95
17.13
8.77
295895
289463
352501
270165
231570
197277
385950
201543
192975
173678
231570
360220
360220
. 257300
257300
368788
188678
4458.24
3914.35
4560.48
3846.64
2992.24
2102.14
6060.09
1819.47
1608.13
1759.91
2894.63
'3209.59
5817.69
3484.09
2914.25
5673.66
2695.40
11-13-87-    10:12-11:12
                              1,00    11.8
                                                9.0
                                                           20.8
                                                                    20.80  -
                                                                                0.2356
                                                                                                 9.96
                                                                                                           214408
                                                                                                                             2428.45

-------
 ncVnn ur 3l 1987'  The Portable -unit heatup was started at
 05:00 hours to prepare the unit for a test start at 08-00
 hours   Feed was introduced to the unit at 07:30 hours to
 stabilize the unit for testing.  Feeding was halted at 08:30
 hours and the system was maintained on operating status to
 allow the sampling and analytical  subcontractor the time to
 complete setup of their equipment.  Feed material  was again
 initiated to the unit under an oxidizing atmosphere at 10-20
 hours at 20-min residence time and a bed depth of 1 1/2-in in
 the primary combustion chamber.  The primary combustion
 chamber temperature was set at 1600°F,  and the secondary
 combustion chamber was controlled  at 2200°F.   Run  1 was
 started at 11:40 hours with all continuous monitoring and
 sampling equipment checked out and operating  properly
 Testing was stopped at 18:25  hours to  secure  the unit'for the
 night.   Because of the shortened operating period  during Run 1
 the sample trains for semivolatile organics,  PCDD/PCDF,  and
 soluble chromium were not run.  These  remaining sampling runs
 dur^n"  R W6re  reschedu1ed for  November  6 and  were  conducted

 November 4,  1987,
OA -r	   Tne portable unit heatup was started at
20 hours.  Feed was introduced to the unit at 07:33   Run
under an oxidizing atmosphere, was not started until 09-45
   to allow time for the safety meeting and the final  setup
                     The operating parameters were set at
                                             a primary
                                             secondary
 05
 2
 hours
 of  sampling  equipment.
 20-min  residence  time,  a  bed  depth  of  1  1/2-in,
 combustion  chamber  temperature  of  1600°F,  and  a
 combustion  chamber  temperature  of  2200°F.   The  secondary
 combustion  chamber  automatic  temperature  control  system began
 to  malfunction  at  12:45 hours;  the  operator switched  to manual
 control without affecting  the test.  As  a  result  of the
 problem with  the  secondary  combustion  chamber  control  system
 the  burner  tripped  off  at  15:40  hours.   The burner was
 restarted without  affecting the  test.  Run  2 was  completed  at
 20:13 hours,  and  unit cooldown  began as  soon as all of the
 waste material  had  been discharged  into  the ash chute.  During
 Kun  2 the Method  5  sampling train for  participate matter
 malfunctioned and data was  not  obtained.  This sampling run
 was  rescheduled for November 6  and was conducted  during Run


 November 5, 1987.   The portable  unit heatup was started at
 05:35 hours and feed was introduced to the  unit at 07:55.    Run
 3,  under an oxidizing atmosphere, was  started at  08:16 hours
 the  operating parameters were retained at the previous
 settings of 20-min residence time,  a bed depth of 1 1/2-in  a
 primary combustion chamber temperature of 1600°F.  and a
 secondary combustion chamber temperature of 2200°F.  With
the  exception of the ash discharge  screw tripping  out
momentarily, Run 3 was problem-free and was completed at 18-37
hours.   Unit cooldown began as soon as all  of the  waste
material had been  discharged into the ash chute
                               41

-------
         6.  1987.  The portable unit heatup was started at
08-30 hours  and feed was started to the unit at 09:55.  The
testing program consisted of the  sampling runs that remained
from Run 1 and Run 2 and was designated as Run 1-2;   me  _
operating parameters were left at the previous settings of
20-min residence time, a bed depth of 1 1/2-in, a primary
combustion chamber temperature of 1600°F, and a secondary
combustion chamber temperature of 2200°F.  After another
delay caused by  a leak in ttje continuous emission monitoring
(CEM) system, the test started at 10:32 hours.  At  11:20
hours, the venturi recycle flow was lost for no apparent
reason.  The test equipment was shut down, feeding  was
resumed, and the test was restarted at  11:40 hours.   The  test
runs were finished at 15:31 hours,  and  cooldown began  as  soon
as all of the waste material had  been discharged into  the  ash
chute.

November 7/8.  1987.   The unit was  shutdown during  the  weekend
November  9
	1987.  The portable unit heatup was
07:15 hours and feed was introduced to the unit
hours   The anticipated test schedule consisted
14, and 12, all under an oxidizing atmosphere.
20-min residence time, a bed depth of 1 1/2-in,
combustion chamber temperature of 1200_F, and a
              started at
              at 08,: 55
              of Runs 10,
              Run 10, with
              a 'primary
              secondary
 combustion  chamber  temperature  of 1800°F,  was  started  at
 09:34  and  completed at  10:35  hours.   After changing  the
 primary  combustion  chamber material  residence  time  to  15
 minutes,  Run 14 began at 11:26  and was completed at  12:27
 hours?  The secondary combustion chamber auxiliary  heat^source
 was  changed to electrical  glowbars for Run 12; however the
 electrical  rods would not  hold  the temperature in the  chamber
 at the specified 1800°F.  After checking and f i ne-tum ng^the
 secondary combustion chamber's  heating element power^center
 (HEPC) system, the  electrical glowbars again failed  to
 maintain the temperature in the chamber.  The  propane  burner
 was  used to increase the secondary combustion  chamber  to
 2200°F and Run 5, under an oxidizing atmosphere, was carried
 out  to replace Run  12.   The primary combustion chamber
 temperature was increased to 1400°F, and the residence time
 was  verified at 20  minutes.  Run 5 began at 13:45 hours and
 was  completed at 14:47  hours.  After the testing was finished,
 the secondary combustion chamber again was changed over to
 electrical heating  and  the HEPC  system was
 effort to maintain  the  desired temperature
 Unit  cooldown was  initiated  at 16:00  hours
 was secured for the  night.
                                            tuned  further  in
                                            during operati.on .
                                            and  all  equipment
                           an
 November 10. 1987
                     The portable
                 feed was started
unit heatup
to the unit
 07:55 hours and  .	
 The test schedule consisted of  Runs 6, 8
 feed for these test runs
 prior to the tests.  The
                    was started at
                    at 08:,59 hours.
                 15,  and 18.  The
had been blended with 3 wt.% oil
method of transferring the waste  to
                                42

-------
 the incinerator was the same .as described above.   Run 6,  with
 a 15-min residence time,  a bed depth'of 1 1/2-in,  a primary
 combustion  chamber temperature of 1600°F, a secondary
 combustion  chamber temperature of 1800°F, and an  oxidizing
 atmosphere  was  started at 09:30 and was completed  at 10:30
 hours.   After changing to a non-oxidizing atmosphere, Run 8
 began  at 11:20  hours with the other parameters remaining  the
 same.   Run  8  was completed at 12:20 hours.   The primary
 combustion  chamber temperature was  decreased to 1200°F for
 the next run  while the remaining variables  were held
 constant..  Run  15 began at 13:13 hours  and  was completed  at
 14:14  hours.   For Run 18  the primary combustion chamber
 temperature was reduced to 900°F,  and  the residence time  was
 increased to  20 minutes.   The run  commenced at 15:07 hours and
 ended  a.t. 16:07  hours.  After the testing  was completed and the
 waste  was totally off the belt,  unit cooldown was  initiated at
 16:32  hours and all  equipment was  secured for the  night.

 November 11,  1987.   The portable unit  heatup was  started- at
 06:15  hours and feed was  started to the unit at 08:40 hours
 The  test schedule consisted of Runs 7,  4,  and the  rescheduled
 12.  Run 7 began  at  09:04 hours.  The  test  parameters were set
 at  a 10-min residence time,  a bed depth of  1 1/2-in,  a primary
 combustion chamber  temperature of  1600°F,  a  secondary
 combustion chamber  temperature of 2200°F,  and an oxidizing
 atmosphere.   The  test was completed at  10:05 hours.   In an
 attempt  to conduct  Runs 4 and 12, the  secondary combustion
 chamber  heat  source  was changed  over from propane  fuel  to
 electrical power.   With the  feed material low in organics,  the
 chamber  temperature  again failed to reach the desired limits
 The  propane burner  was  refired and  the  testing  proceeded  with
 Runs 9,  11, and  13.   Run  9,  with the variables  set  at 25-min
 residence time,  a  bed depth  of 1 1/2-in,  a  primary  combustion
 chamber  temperature  of  1200°F,  a secondary  combustion
 chamber  temperature  of  2200°F,  and  a non-oxidizing
 atmosphere,  began  at  11:30  hours and ended  at  12:31  hours.
 The material  residence  time  in  the  primary  combustion  chamber
 was reduced for the  next  run  to  20  minutes;  Run 11  commenced
 at  13:20 hours  and was  completed at  14:20 hours.   For  Run  13
 the residence time was  further  reduced  to 15  minutes.  The  run
 began at 15:10  hours  and  ended  at 16:10 hours.  After  the
 testing  was finished  and  the  feed was completely off  the  belt,
 unit cooldown was started  and  all equipment  was secured for
 the night.

 November 12,   1987.  The portable unit heatup  was started  at
 08:45 hours  and feed  was  started to  the unit  at 09:48  hours.
 The test schedule consisted of Runs  16  and 17.  For Run 16,
 the parameters were set at a  25-min  residence time, a  bed
 depth of 1 1/2-in, a  primary  combustion chamber temperature of
 900 F,  a secondary combustion  chamber temperature of
 2200 F,  and  a  non-oxidizing atmosphere.  The  run started at
 10:27 hours  and ended at  11:27 hours.  The residence time  in
the primary  combustion chamber was reduced to 20 min, and

                               43

-------
secondary combustion chamber temperature reduced to 1800 F.
Run 17 commenced at 12:35 hours and was completed at 13:35
hours.  After the testing was finished and the feed was
completely off the belt, the unit was cooled and all support
equipment secured for the night.
November 13. 1987
^___	____   Run 19 was added to the matrix Runs 4 and
12 that were dropped due to the inability to maintain the
temperature  in the secondary combustion chamber with
electrical power and a desire to extend the test operations
matrix with  the remaining oil-blended soil.  The unit heatup
             at 08:25 hours and feed was started to the unit at
            ,  The parameters were set at a 15-min residence
             depth of one inch, a primary combustion chamber
             of 1600°F, a secondary combustion chamber
             of 1800°F, and an oxidizing atmosphere.  The run
           10:12 hours and ended at 11:12 hours.
was started
09:40 hours
time, a bed
temperature
temperature
started at
Run
bed
the
the
bed.
    19 was  identical to Run 6 except for a reduction;in PCC
    depth from  1  1/2 in to one  inch to examine the eiFfect on
    decontamination of the solid waste feed  in the PCC with
    more  intimate  heat effect on the 1-in deep incinerator
With the  completion  of  Run  19,  the  test matrix  for  the  SITE
demonstration  program was completed.   The  Shirco  Portable
Demonstration  Unit was  baked  out  and  decontaminated  according
to  the  site  safety plan.  Site  equipment was  decontaminated
and  removed  from  the job  site.  The remaining contaminated
waste,  the  residual  ash,  and  the  scrubber  water were  stored
securely  in  55-gal drums, labeled,  and set aside  on  the test
site for  future disposal.   The  drums  were  transported  and
placed  within  the MDNR-designated fenced hazardous  waste site,

Posttest  Activities.  Shirco  personnel remained on  site
through November  16, 1987 to  complete the  decontamination  and
removal of  the Shirco  Unit  and  all  support equipment.   The
Portable  Demonstration  Unit departed the job  site on  November
16,  1987.
 4.2.3.3
          Changes In Operation - Proposed Program Versus  Actual
             Operations
 During the second week of testing,  the test matrix was
 modified by Shirco.  The test schedule was rearranged into
 groups of tests with parameters that ensured the most
 efficient and satisfactory operation of the unit as conditions
 were varied from test to test.

 The scheduled length of time for each run also was shortened
 to approximately 1 hr from the proposed range of 1.5 to 4 hrs
 for individual runs.  The 1-hr steady-state operation provided
 sufficient sampling time to ensure representative analytical
                                44

-------
  results  for each  test
            run.   The  unit  was
                                         operated
                                                    for
                                                   »
                                                        r
In addition to the changes
run,  the following changes
as defined in the proposed
                             in the  scheduled  length  of  each
                             also were made to  individual  runs
                             test program.
        Runs 4 and 12
        attain an SCC
        the heat source
                     were aborted because of an inability
                     operating temperature of 1800°F when
        T   4.  .          was changed over from propane fuel to
       electrical  power via the infrared '
       in  the  SCC.
                                               to
                                          heating rods located
        ??
        12.
        reduction in

        the^Jcc6 w t\h
        the PCC with the
        deep incinerator
                                                       4  and
19 was added to the matrix in place of Runs
 Run  19 was identical  to Run 6 except for a
         the PCC bed depth from 1  1/2 in  to 1  in
               on solid  waste decontamination  in
             more intimate heat effect on the  1-in
             bed.
                                                            to
                aJ °Perated With a PCC ^sidence time of 20 min
          PCC       t-6 ProP°sed 25 min-   Run 5 was operated at
        a PCC  operating temperature of 1400°F instead of thP

        nPrnnPnSeH  1™° *'   JheSe ch^es  in  operation  f?om the
        SI?S  h6?  Ki3Sef W6re not Planned  a^ can  only  be
        attributable  to an  inaccurate  interpretation  of  the
        proposed  operating  conditions.

 4.3   OPERATING LOG DATA
The  unit  log  data
staff  is  included
     attached  Tab! (
                 as inputted by the Shirco unit operations
                                                the
                                                      operati ng
4.3.1  Primary Combustion Chamber Waste Feed Rates

The weight of material fed during all operating periods was
         [   From°thra i"9 ]°? data included in Appendix A,

         test ?ondnion°wasacalcuUtVera9e feedrate dUring a
feedrate values shown on Table 7.      ^  1$ presented as the

The actual  test program operated at test conditions for 51 hrs
11 mm and  processed 1,799 (3,967.1bs) of contaminated waste
                              45

-------
feed.  The total unit operating time including heatup and
cooldown periods without waste feed to the unit, and startup,
sSSldowl'and transi tional. periods betweeirrirns at^non-test
conditions was 74 hrs 21 mm.  For 66 hrs 48 min of that
overall -operating period a total of 2,274 kg (5,015 Ibs) ot
Contaminated waste feed was processed through the unit.,,

During each of the emissions  sampling test periods, a, new pail
Sf material was fed to the unit as emissions sampling was
initiated.  A series of pails were completely fed to the
furnace through the end of the  sampling period   The total
       of material  fed to  the furnace was adjusted  for  the

                                                    1
 for the test  run.

 4.3.2   Primary  Combustion  Chamber  Residence  Time

 Recorded  on  the logsheets  included in  Appendix  A,  Volume  II
 and on  Table  7  are  the  material  residence  times in  the  primary
 combust on  chamber.   The  operator  adjusted the  speed  of the
 fTrnTceTonveyor belt for  'each test Condition  using electronic
 rontrol  for  the motor/gear reducer, a  stop watch,  and tne
 calibrated  scale mounted  on the end of the feed end terminal
 drum  shaft.   This iterative adjustment is  made  until  the belt
 sjeed produces  the  nominal specified residence  time tor the
 test  run.

 4.3.3  System Operating Temperatures

 The average operating temperatures of the primary and
                                         A, Volume
                                                        the
                                                     and the
operating log data included in
temperature recorder charts.

4.3.4  Power and Fuel Usage

4.3.4.1  Primary Combustion Chamber

A s.immarv of the primary combustion chamber power usage is
M en?ed li Table 8.  The  data is based on the compre ensive
log data found  in Appendix  A, Volume II.  Note that this data
    not  be  used as a direct scale-up for a full-scale system.
  may
  The  portable  unit  has  a  much  greater  surface  area  per
  material  processed than  does  a large  commerci al -seal e
           Pheat loss per  pound of feed is  proporti onately

            !!! isTmaK

     °
  energy retirement.  Full-scale
  proportionately smaller.
                                                      pound
                                                      unit.
                                                              of
                                                         in  the
                                                         ng
                                  larger-scale  system  in  which
                                  percentage  of the  operating
                                 power  usage  therefore would be
                                 46

-------
4.3.4.2  Secondary Combustion Chamber

A summary of the propane fuel consumption rates for the
secondary combustion chamber is presented in Table 8   The
                             47

-------
(Phase I)
discussed
were made
three-day
                           SECTION 5

                 SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PROGRAM


The SITE program for the Shirco Pilot-Scale Infrared
Incineration System at the Demode Road Superfund Site was
conducted in two phases:  under normal/optimum conditions
          and varied operating conditions (Phase 11), as
          in Section 4.  During the first phase measurements
          for three identical test runs conducted over a
          period.  In the second phase runs, parametric
factors affecting incinerator performance were evaluated.
Tables 9 and 10 present  sampling and  analytical program     .
summaries for the test runs  conducted  in each phase, including
sampling frequencies, sampling methods, and analytical
parameters  and methods for each sampling location.   The
complete Sampling and Analytical report is  presented in
Appendix B, Volume II.   A separate  report discussing the
results obtained during  the  continuous monitoring of the  PCI
offgas for  vaporous lead emissions  is  presented  in  Appendix  h,
Volume  II.

The demonstration plan  for this  program, dated  October  23,
1987,  is  included in  Appendix  C,  Volume  II.   The  continuous
monitoring  of  the PCC  offgas for  vaporous  lead  emissions  is
presented  in Appendix  E, Volume  II.   These  documents  provide
Sore detailed  discussions  and  definitions  of  the  overall
sampling  and  analytical  procedures  and methods  discussed  in
this section.

 It should  be  noted  that in  the discussions  that follow,
references  to  various sampling and  analytical  protocols are
 included    These recommended methods  for  sampling and
 analyzing  samples  are coded  to the  following  standards:

 o "S" and "A"  refer to Arthur D.  Little,  Inc.,  "Sampling and
   Analysis Methods  for Hazardous Waste Combustion,,  EPA
   600/8-84-002,  PB84-155845, February, 1984.

 o  "ASTM"  refers to American Society for Testing Materials,
    "Annual  Book of ASTM  Standards,"  Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

 o  "EPA Method" refers to Code of Federal  Re9u]atjon*
    40CFR Part 60, Appendix A, revised  as of July 1,  I

 o  "M" refers to U.S. EPA, "Methods for Chemical Analysis
    of Water and Wastes," EPA-600/4-79-020,  March, 19/9.

 o  "SW" refers to U.S. EPA,  "Test Methods for Evaluating  Solid
    Waste-Physical/Chemical Methods,"  SW-846, Third  Edition,   ;
    November, 1986.
                                48

-------
                                            TABLE 9.  SUMMARY OF SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL  PROGRAM,  PHASE  I
  Source
        Sample
 collection frequency
                                                               Sampling method
                                                                                           Analysis parameters
                                                                                        Analysis method
  Stack Gas
                                Composite  over 3- to
                                6-hour  period
                               EPA Method 5
                               with 0.1 N NaOH
10
Composite over 3- to
6-hour period

Composite over 3- to
6-hour period
                               Composite  over 4 hour
                               period
                              6 pairs of samples over
                              2 hour period (one
                              aqueous condehsate)

                              Continuous
                                                              SASS  with XAD-2 (SW0020)
                              Modified Method 5
                              (No filter/0.1 N NaOH)

                              Gas bag (Grab)

                              VOST (SW0030)
                                                             Continuous  emission
                                                             monitors
 Particulate Matter
 HCl
 Volumetric flowrate
 Moisture
 Metals (particulate
 on filter)
                                                              SASS with XAD-2  (SW0020)      PCB
PCDD/PCDF
Semivolatile Priority
Pollutants (plus 10
higher peaks)

Soluble Chromium
                                                                                          co2, o2
                                                           Volatile Priority
                                                           Pollutants (plus 10
                                                           highest peaks)
                                                                                         co2
                                                                                         CO
                                                                                         THC
EPA Method 5
Ion Chromatography
EPA Methods 1-4
EPA Method 4
SW 6010,7060,7041,7421
7740,7470/7471

EPA 680
                                                                                                                      SW 8280
                                                                                                                      SW 8270
                            M218.4


                            EPA Method 3

                            SW 8240
                                                                                       Paramagnetic
                                                                                       NDIR
                                                                                       NDIR
                                                                                       FID
                                                                                       Chemiluminescence
                                                                  (continued)

-------
                                                              TABLE 9  (continued)
 Source
 Primary Furnace Offgas
01
o
                                     Sample
                               collection  frequency
Composite over 3- to
6-hour period
Composite over 3- to
6-hour period

Composite over 3- to
6-hour period
                                Composite  over 4 hour
                                period
                                6 pairs of samples over
                                2 hour period (one
                                aqueous condensate)

                                Continuous
                               Sampling method
EPA Method 5
with 0.1 N NaOH
                                                              SASS with XAD-2 (SW0020)
                                Modified Method 5
                                (No filter/0.1 N NaOH)

                                Gas bag (Grab)

                                VOST (SW0030)
                                Cont i nuous emi ss i on
                                monitors
                             Analysis parameters
Particulate Matter
HCl
Volumetric flowrate
Moisture
Metals (particulate
on filter)
                                                              SASS with XAD-2 (SW0020)      PCB
                             PCDD/PCDF
                             Semivolatile Priority
                             Pollutants (plus 10
                             higher peaks) •

                             Soluble  Chromium
                              C02'°2  .,-.'

                              Volatile Priority
                              Pollutants (plus 10
                              highest peaks)
                                                                                            co2
                                                                                            oo ;
                                                                                            THC
                                                                                            Lead
                                                                                       Analysis method
EPA Method 5
Ion Chromatography
EPA Methods 1-4
EPA Method 4
SW 6010,7060,7041,7421
7740,7470/7471

EPA 680
                            SW 8280
                            SU 8270
                             M218.4


                             EPA Method 3

                             SW 8240
                                                          Paramagnetic
                                                          NOIR '
                                                          -NBIR
                                                          FID
                                                          Chemiluminescence
                                                          EPRI/DOE Special
                                                                     (continued)

-------
                                                                TABLE 9  (continued)
 Source
 Solid Waste Feed
       Sample
collection frequency
                               Grab sample every 30
                               minutes and composite
                                                              Sampling method
                               S007
Scrubber Solids
                              Sample at  end of  test
                              period and composite
                             S002
                                                                                          Analysis  parameters
                                                           Chlorine
                                                           PCDD/PCDF
                                                           PC8
                                                           Metals
 TCLP  (Proposed)

 EP Toxicity
 Volatile Priority
 Pollutants (plus 10
 highest peaks)

 Semivolatile Priority
 Pollutants (plus 10
 highest peaks)
 Moisture,  Ash
 Ultimate
 Higher Heating Valve
 Density

 PCB
 PCDD'/PCDF
 Chlorine
 Metals

 EP Toxicity
 TCLP (Proposed)

Volatile Priority
Pollutants (plus 10
highest peaks)
                                                                                       Analysis method
  A003
  SW8280
  EPA 680
  SW 6010,7060,7041,
  7421,7740,7470/7471

  Fed. Reg. Vol. 51,
  No.  114
  C004,SW1310
 -SW8240
                                                                                                                      SW8270
 A001''
 A003
 A006
 GRAV/VCi

 EPA 680
 SW8280   '  " ;
 A003'' !    '  '''
'SW  6010,7060,7041
 7421,7740,7470/7471
 C004, SW1310
 Fed. Reg. Vol. 51,
 No,  114
 SW 8240
                                                                  (continued)

-------
                                                              TABLE 9  (continued)
Source
                                     Sample
                              collection frequency
                              Sampling method
 Scrubber Makeup Water
Sample at end of test
period and composite
                                                              S004
tn
rvs
  Ambient Air
 Continuous during unit
 operation; One upwind
 and one-downwind
General Metal Works
Model PS-1 Air Sampler
w/ Polyurethane Foam
(PDF) Plugs and Florisil
Sorbent

General Metal Works
Model 2000H High Volume
Sampler w/ glass fiber
filters
                           Analysis parameters
                            Semivolatile Priority
                            Pollutants  (plus  10
                            highest peaks)
                            Ash
                            Ultimate
                            Density

                            PCB
                            PCDD/PCDF
                            pH
                            Chloride
                            Metals

                            Volatile Priority
                            Pollutants  (plus 10
                            highest peaks)
                            Semivolatile Priority
                            Pollutants  (plus 10
                            highest peaks)
                            Total  Organic Carbon
                            Total  Suspended  Solids
                            Total  Dissolved  Solids

                            PCB
                                                                                            Metals
                                                                                       Analysis method
                                                                                                                      SW 8270
A001
A003
GRAV/VOL

EPA 680
EPA 8280
M150.1
Ion Chromatography
SW 6010,7060,7041,
7421,7740.. 7470/7471
SW 8240
                                                                                                                       SW 8270
                                                                                                                       M415.1
                                                                                                                       M160.1
                                                                                                                       M160.2

                                                                                                                       EPA 680
                                                                                         SW 6010,7060,7041
                                                                                         7421,7740,7470/7471
                                                                     (continued)

-------
                                                                TABLE 9  (continued)
  Source
       Sample
collection frequency
                                                              Sampling method
                                                           Analysis parameters
                                                                                                                       Analysis method
  Furnace Ash
                                Sample composite at end of
                                test period
                              S007
cn
Co
                                                           PCB
                                                           PCDD/PCDF
                                                           Metals
                                                           EP Toxicity
                                                           TCLP (Proposed)

                                                           Volatile Priority
                                                           Pollutants (plus 10
                                                           highest peaks)
                                                           Semivolatile Priority
                                                           Pollutants (plus 10
                                                           highest peaks)
                             EPA 680
                             SW 8280
                             SW 6010,7060,7041,7421
                             7740,7470/7471

                             C004,  SW1310
                             Fed. Reg.  Vol. 51,
                             No. 114
                             SW 8240
                                                                                                                      SW 8270
 Scrubber Water
                               Sample at end of  test
                               period
                              S002
Moisture, Ash
Chlorine
Density

PCB
PCDD/PCDF
PH
Chlorine
Metals
                                                                                          EP Toxicity
                                                                                          TCLP (Proposed)
A001
A003
GRAV/VOL

EPA 680
EPA 8280
M150.1
Ion Chromatography
SW 6010,7060,7041,
7421,7740,7470/7471

C004, SW1310
Fed. Reg. Vol.  51,
No. 114
                                                                   (continued)

-------
                                                                  TABLE 9   (continued)
    Source
                                        Sample
                                  collection frequency
Sampling method
Analysis parameters
                                                        Analysis method
                                                                                             Volatile Priority           SW 8240
                                                                                             Pollutants (plus 10
                                                                                             highest peaks)
                                                                                             Semivoiatile Priority       SW 8270 •
                                                                                             Pollutants (plus 10
                                                                                             highest peaks)
                                                                                             Total Organic Carbon        H415.1
                                                                                             Total Suspended Solids      H160.1
                                                                                             Total Dissolved Solids      M160.2
en

-------
     Source
     Stack Gas and
     Primary Furnace Offgas
     ,   Sample
 collection frequency
 Composite over 3- to
 6-hour period
                                                                  Sampling method
EPA Method 5
                                                            Analysis parameters
                             Particulate Matter
                                                                                                                          Analysis method
                                                         EPA Method 5
     Solid Waste Feed
en
en
    Scrubber Solids
                                   Continuous
Grab sample every
30 minutes and composite
                                  Grab sample once per
                                  hour and composite
                                                                 Continuous emission
                                                                 monitors
                                                                 S007
                              S002
                                                                                              Volumetric flowrate
                                                                                              Moisture
                                                                                              co2
                                                                                              CO
                                                                                              THC
                                                                                              NO
                            PCDD/PCDF
                            PC8
                            Metals
                            TCLP (Proposed)

                            EP Toxicity
                            Moisture,  Ash
                            Ultimate
                            Density

                            PCB
                            PCDD/PCDF
                            Metals

                            EP Toxicity
                            TCLP  (Proposed)

                            Ash
                            Ultimate
                            Density
 EPA Methods 1-4
 EPA Method 4

 Paramagnetic
 NDIR
 NDIR
 FID
 Chemiluminescence

 SU8280
 EPA 680
 SW 6010,7060,7041,
 7431,7740,7470/7471

 Fed.  Reg.  Vol.  51,
 No.  114
 C004.SW1310
 A001
 A003
 GRAV/VOL

 EPA 680
 SW8280
 SW 6010,7060,7041
 7421,7740,7470/7471
 C004, SW1310
 Fed. Reg. Vol. 51,
 No. 114  '
A001
A003
GRAV/VOL
                                                                      (continued)

-------
                                                                 TABLE 10   (continued)
   Source
                                        Sample
                                 collection frequency
                               Sampling method
                             Analysis parameters
                                                                                       Analysis method
   Ambient Air
Continuous during unit
operation; one upwind
and one downwind
General Metal Works          PCB
Model PS-1 Air Sampler
w/ Polyurethane Foam
(PUT) Plugs and Florisil
Sorbent

General Metal Works          Metals
Kodel 2000H High Volume
Sampler w/ glass fiber
filters
                                                                                                                        EPA  680
                                                                                                                         SW 6010,7060,7041,
                                                                                                                         7421.7740,7470/7471
oi
en
    Furnace Ash
Sample at end of test
period and composite
                                                                S007
                             PCB
                             PCDD/PCDF
                             Metals
EPA 680
SW 8280
SU 6010,7060,7041,7421,
7740,7470/7471
                                                                                             EP Toxicity
                                                                                             TCLP (Proposed)
                                                                                        C004, SW1310
                                                                                        Fed. Reg. Vol. 51,
                                                                                        No. 114
                                                                                             Moisture, Ash
                                                                                             Chlorine
                                                                                             Density
                                                                                        A001
                                                                                        A003
                                                                                        GRAV/VOL
                                                                       (continued)

-------
                                                                  TABLE  10.  (continued)
     Source
       Sample
collection frequency
                                                                 Sampling method
                                                           Analysis  parameters
                                                                                                                          Analysis method
.en
Scrubber Water Sample at end of test S002 RGB
period and composite PCDD/PCDF
PH
Metals

EP Toxicity
TCLP (Proposed)

Total Organic Carbon
Total Suspended Solids
Total Dissolved Solids
EPA 680
EPA 8280
M150.1
SW 6010,7060,7041,
7421^7740,7470/7471
C004, SW1310
Fed. Reg. Vol. 51,
No. 114
M415.1
M160.1
M160.2

-------
o "SASS" refers to U.S. EPA, "Modified Method 5 Train and
  Source Assessment Sampling System Operator's Manual,
  EPA-600/8-85-003, February, 1985.

o "VOST" refers to U.S. EPA, "Protocol for the Collection
  and Analysis of Volatile POHCs Using VOST,"
  EPA-600/8-84-007, March, 1984.

o "EPA" refers to U.S. EPA,  "Methods for Organic Chemical
  Analysis of Municipal and  Industrial Wastewater,"
  EPA-600/4-82-057.

5.1  SAMPLING PROCEDURES                           .

5.1.1   Sampling Locations

The  streams that  were  sampled,  at  locations  depicted in
Figures 5  and 6,  are:

     1.   Stack Gases
     2.   Primary  Furnace  Offgas
     3.   Feed
     4.   Furnace  Ash
     5.   Scrubber Water
     6.   Scrubber Solids
     7.   Scrubber Makeup  Water
     8.   Ambient  Air,  upwind and  downwind

 5.1.1.1 Stack Gases                               ;

 Secondary  combustion  chamber gases were  drawn through  the
 scrubber unit  by  an  induced draft fan  and  exhausted  through  a
 4  0-in  ID  stack.   The stack extended  through the  roof  of the
 trailer to an  elevation  of 23.6 feet  above grade
 above  the  trailer roof).   The stack was  equipped
 ports  accessible  from the trailer roof.   Because
 of the  exhaust stack, the duct  was not traversed
 were collected at a  single point in the  center of
(10 feet -.•
with sampling
of the size
  Al1  samples
 the pi'pe.
 About 3 feet above the roof of the trailer was a 3-in flanged
 port and a 1-in sample tap.  Approximately 3 feet above these
 ports was another 3-in flanged port.  The two 3-in ports above
 the trailer roof were used to collect source assessment
 sampling system (SASS), Method 5, and Modified Method 5
 samples!  Prior to the point at which the exhaust stack passes
 through the trailer roof was a 2-in port accessed through a
 bulkhead in the trailer.  Volatile organic sampling train
 (VOST) samples were collected at this location.

 The 1-in port above the roof had been projected as the CEM    :
 sampling tap.  However, due to the potential for in-leakage
 through the 3-in port at the same location during sampling

                                58

-------
                                                        FENCING
en
                                                                                                      X—X—
                                  EXCLUSION ZONE
                     DRUM STORAGE:AREA
                     '• WASTE FEED
                      • ASH    ,
                      • SLOWDOWN WATER
                       EMPTY DRUMS
SHIRCO PILOT-SCALE INFRARED INCINERATOR SYSTEM
                                    I
       WASTE FEED
       TRANSFER -
       DRUMS TO
       PAILS
    £• WASTE FEED
       WEIGH SCALE
                                            CONTROL CABINET
                                            BELT SPEED CONTROL
                                            BURNER CONTROL
                                            LIGHT PANEL  .
                                            MOTOR CONTROL CENTER
                                            TRANSFORMER
                                            ELECTRICAL SERVICE
                                            HEPC
                           ' -T *  •»   •»  *   «x
                           (J   BELT CONVEYOR  (") I
                           RIMARY COMBUSTION CH    T
SECONDARY COMBUSTION CHAMBER
                            J COMBUSTION
                             AIR BLOWEfl
   J CONTAMINATION,'
   I   REDUCTION  I
   I     ZONE
                                                  AT GRADE
    Figure  5.   Sampling  locations - system  process flow.
                                                                      MAKEUP WATER
                                                                       FROM WATER
                                                                      SUPPLY TRAILER.
                                                                                1  STACK GASES
                                                                                2  PRIMARY FURNACE OFFGAS
                                                                                3  SOLID WASTE FEED
                                                                                4  FURNACE ASH  ;
                                                                                5  SCRUBBER WATER
                                                                                6  SCRUBBER SOLIDS
                                                                                7  SCRUBBER MAKEUP WATER

-------
                                                                                  TO FENCED
                                                                                 HAZARDOUS
                                                                                 WASTE SITE
                                  FENCING
        • WASTE FEED
                               DRUM STORAGE AREA
                                 • WASTE FEED
                                 •ASH
                                 • SLOWDOWN WATER
                                 • EMPTY DRUMS
         • WASTE FEED
          WEIGH SCALE
                                                             METEOROLOGICAL
                                                                 STATION
                       SHIRCO PILOT-SCALE INFRARED
                          INCINERATOR SYSTEM
        CONTAMINATION
          REDUCTION
            ZONE
   ELECTRICAL
   SUPPLY-
   DIESEL
   GENERATORS
                    RADIAN ANALYTICAL
                        TRAILER
                                      SHIRCO SUPPORT TRAILER
                                                           t
                                                         SLOPE
                                                         DOWN
EXISTING VEGETATION
                             SITE PROGRAM OFFICE TRAILER
                                                            STACK GASES
                                                            PRIMARY FURNACE OFFGAS
                                                            SOLID WASTE FEED
                                                            FURNACE ASH
                                                            SCRUBBER WATER
                                                            SCRUBBER SOLIDS
                                                            SCRUBBER MAKEUP WATER
                                                          83 AMBIENT AIR (UPWIND)
                                                          8b AMBIENT AIR (DOWNWIND)
           —x— x—x—x—x—x—x— x—x—x—x
                                  FENCING                       X
                                                PARKING AREA
rT'
                                                    TO EXIT
                                                 I FROM SITE
Figure 6.   Sampling  locations - overall  test site.

-------
 activities,  a  sampling  tap  was  installed  in  the  exhaust  pipe
 upstream  of  the  VOST  sampling port.

 In  addition  to the  above  ports,  a  2-in tap was installed to
 accommodate  a  fixed pitot tube  and thermocouple  in the exhaust
 stack  to  continuously monitor stack  flue  gas velocity.

 Because of the small  exhaust duct  size, following conventional
 sampling  protocol using a nozzle,  pitot,  and thermocouple at
 the  sampling point  in the duct  would overly  obstruct flow and
 potentially  bias data.  With this  tap, flue  gas  velocity was
 monitored upstream  of the sampling locations in  an
 unobstructed flow region.   These data were used  to determine
 isokinetic sampling rates.

 5.1.1.2   Primary Furnace  Offgas

 The  offgas from  the primary furnace  passed through a 2x2-ft
 duct into the  secondary combustion chamber.  There were two
 4-in 150-lb  flanged ports available  for sampling access
 located on either side of the duct.  An additional 1-inch port
 also was  available  for collection of sampling gas for the
 continuous monitors.  Sampling  access was via Ix2-ft bulkheads
 on either side of the trailer and  in line with the ports.

 5.1.1.3   Feed

 Grab samples were collected by  Shirco personnel   every 30
 minutes during the tests from the incinerator feed pail  using
 a scoop.  Two liters of sample  were collected during each of
 the  runs.   Samples for analysis were composited   in 1-liter
 amber glass jars with teflon-lined caps.

 5.1.1.4  Furnace Ash
Ash samples
end of each
composi ted
            were collected from the ash collection drum at the
            test period.  The samples were collected and
           in 1-liter amber glass jars with teflon-lined lids.
5.1.1.5  Scrubber Water

The scrubber water was recirculated
outside of the incinerator trailer.
water were taken at the end of each
                                    through a 50-gal  drum
                                     Samples of the scrubber
                                    test period from  the drum
using a dipper.  Six liters of scrubber water were collected
               jars with teflon-lined lids,  along with three
i n amber glass
40-mL volatile
               organic analysis (VOA)  vials
5.1.1.6  Scrubber Sol ids

Particulate matter and salts were removed from the exhaust gas
by  a venturi  scrubber.  These solids settled out of the
scrubber water and collected at the bottom of the 50-gal
recirculation drum.   Scrubber solids were to be collected at

                               61

-------
the end of each test period using a dipper.   Approximately
2,500 grams of sample were required to achieve all  analytical
requirements; during the test period,  insufficient  solids were
collected to accommodate analytical requirements,  and the
analysis of scrubber solids was eliminated.   During each test,
several scrubber water sample's were collected and  analyzed for
total suspended solids to evaluate the solids loading of the
scrubber water.
5.1.1.7  Scrubber Makeup Water
                                                           tap
Samples of the scrubber makeup water were collected from a
in the line running from the holding tank to the scrubber
intake port at the end of each test period.   Six liters of
scrubber make-up water were collected in amber glass jars with
teflon-lined lids, along with three 40-mL VGA vials.

5.1.1.8  Ambient Air

PCB concentration in the ambient air and metals concentrations
in the ambient air particulate matter were measured upwind and
downwind of the incineration area during the demonstration
tests.  Samples were collected continuously during the
operation of the unit.

5.1.2  Process Data

Shirco operating personnel recorded process data during the
test periods at hourly intervals.  Selected process data is
included in Section 4.  Actual operating log data;is included
in Appendix A, Volume  II.
5.1.3  Stack  Gas  and
       Procedures
                     Primary Furnace Offgas Samp!i
 5.1.3.1   EPA  Method  5

 The  stack gas  and  primary  furnace  offgas were  sampled  for
 measurement of particulate  matter,  HC1, volumetric  flowrate
 moisture,  and  metals  using  an  EPA  Method 5  sampling  train.
 The  method was modified  by  including  0.1 N  NaOH  in  the
 impingers to  collect  HC1.
 Based  on  the  EPA  Method  5  technique,  a  s
 particulate-1aden flue gas was  withdrawn
 a  gooseneck  nozzle and heat-traced,  glas
 particulate  matter was collected  on  a gl
 maintained  at  a  temperature in  the  range
 The  particulate  mass  was determined  grav
 residues  collected on the  filter  and in
 associated  glassware  prior to  the filter
 the  flue  gas  entered  a chilled  impinger
 collected in  the  first two Greenburg-Smi
 contained 200  ml  of 0.1  N  NaOH.  A  third
                                         amp!e of     :
                                          i sokinetically using
                                         s-lined probe.  The
                                         ass fiber f i1ter
                                          of 248° + 25° F.
                                         imetrically  from the
                                         the probe and
                                           After the filter,
                                         trai n where  HC1 was
                                         th Impingers, which
                                          dry  impinger was
                               62

-------
 employed  to  collect condensate or mist carryover from the
 previous  impingers.  The  third impinger was  a modified    ,   .
 Greenburg-Smith  type.   The  fourth impinger contained a, known
 weight  of si 1 i ca. gel  desi ccant to collect  remaining  moisture.
 A  pump  and dry  gas  meter  were  used to  control  and  monitor the
 gas  flowrate.        .

 During  collection  of  EPA  Method  5 samples,  S-type  pitot    '   '.
 measurements  were  taken  in  the flue  gas duct  to  determine the
 isokinetic sampling rate.   The pitot differential  pressure
 measurements,  along with  the flue gas  composition  (C0?,
 0?>  N2, HpO),  also  were  used to  determine  the  volumetric
 flue  gas  flowrate  by. correl ati on  to  the cross-sectiona-1  area
 of the  duct  at  the  sampling location.   Grab  samples  of the
 stack gas were  collected  to determine  the  concentrations  of  •
 CO?  and 0? directly., and  No  by  difference,  in  accordance
 with  EPA  Method  3  protocol.  The  moisture  content  of the
 sample  gas was measured during  the runs following  EPA Method 4
 protocol .

 At the  end of the  sampling  period, the  .nozzle, probe, liner,
 and glassware preceding the filter housing were  rinsed with
 acetone and. deionized water to  remove  particulate  matter.  The
 resulting wash was  evaporated  and  the  mass of  particulate
 residue was determined gravimetrically.  The glass fiber
 filter was removed  from the filter holder, desiccated  for  24
        and weighed  to determine the  mass of particulate on the
          Th.e total  mass of particulate  present on  the  filter
       the probe wash then .was divided  by  the  total .volume of
hours,
filter
and in
gas sampled to determine the particulate loading

The impingers used during particulate sampling were weighed
before and after sampling to .determine, the moisture content of
the flue gas.  The HC1 concentration of the flue gas was
determined by analyzing two sodium hydroxide impingers for
chloride.  Since the impinger solutions were caustic, COo
also was removed.  To account for the C02 removal, the 071
NaOH impinger solutions also were analyzed for carbonate.
metered gas sample volume was -adjusted using the carbonate
analytical values.                             .
                                                           N
                                                           The
The particulate matter collected on the.glass fiber filter,wa^s
analyzed for metals.  The measured metals concentration along
with the particulate loading and flue gas flowrate were used
to determine the emission rates of those metals..
                                                          and
5.1.3.2  Source Assessment Sampling System (SASS)

SASS trains were used to collect samples of the stack gas
primary furnace offgas for the determination of PCBs,
SV-PP+10,  and PCDDs/PCDFs.  Samples were collected in separate
SASS trains for PCBs, semivolatile priority pollutants
(identifying the ten highest other peaks),  and PCDDs/PCDFs.
                              63

-------
The sampling system consisted of a heated probe,  a heated
filter, a condenser, a sorbent module containing  an organic
adsorption resin (XAD-2) used to efficiently collect vapor
phase organics, and a pumping and metering unit.   Because of
the low particulate loading in the gas stream, the three
cyclones of the SASS were removed from the train  for
sampling.  The probe was a stainless steel sheath, which
contained a heat-traced stainless steel .sample liner.  A
gooseneck nozzle of proper size to allow near-isokinetic
sample collection was attached to the probe.  The probe was
fixed to the heated enclosure, which housed a high-efficiency
glass fiber filter.  The enclosure was maintained at a
temperature of 400°F.

From the heated filter, the sample gas entered a water-cooled
condenser followed  by the XAD-2 sorbent  module.  A condensate
trap followed  the sorbent module, which  collected the  aqueous
condensate.

After  the condensate trap were three dry impingers to  collect
any mist carry-over from the  condensate  trap  and  a final
impinger containing a desiccant to dry the  sample gas  prior  to
metering.   The sample gas was drawn  by two  double diaphragm
pumps,  and  the sample gas volume  was measured  using  a,  dry  gas
meter.

The  design  of  the  SASS  train  precluded traversing  of the
stack.   Sample collection was performed  at  a  point  of  average
qas  velocity  that  was  selected  based  on  previously .determined
velocity  traverse  data.  The  SASS probe  included  a  fixed  pitot
tube  and  thermocouple  in the  exhaust  stack  to continuously
monitor stack  gas  velocity.                   ?

 5.1.3.3  Soluble  Chromium                       •  :

 Soluble chromium  (hexavalent  chromium)  sampling  of  the stack
 gas  and primary furnace offgas  was  conducted  according to the
 procedures  (with  modifications)  currently being  used by the
 EPA's Emission Measurement  Branch (EMB)  of  the Office of Air .
 Quality,  Planning,  and  Standards  (OAQPS), Research  Triangle
 Park,  NC for sampling hexavalent  chromium emissions from
 municipal  waste incinerators.  This procedure involves the use
 of an EPA Method  5 sampling train with the  following         ,;;
 modifications:

 o   0.1 N NaOH impingers in place of water.

 o   No filter.                                                :

 o   A glass nozzle in place of stainless steel.         ;      j

 o   0.1 N NaOH rinse to recover  the sample.                   ;
                                64

-------
 o    Minimal  0.1  N  NaOH  in  the  sample  recovery
                                               process
  ^ 3°Jzl?i P™b<: 1iner' and pre-impinger glassware rinse were
 added to the impinger catches and the sample analyzed by
 atomic absorption spectroscopy.   The soluble chromium sampling
 train was run approximately 4 hours at a point of average flue
 gas velocity to achieve adequate analytical  sensitivity.

 5.1.3.4  Volatile Organic Sampling Train (VOST)

 The stack
                                                    (plus the
                                             was  designed to
                                        points  less  than
          gas and primary furnace offgas were sampled for
volatile organic compounds and priority pollutants
10 highest peaks) using the VOST.  The VOST
collect volatile organics with boiling
100 C using a pair of absorbent resin traps in series.

Volatile organics were removed from the gas in sorbent resin
coo£S C°ntain1n9 Tenax and Tenax-charcoal  maintained at
68 F.  The first resin trap contained Tenax, and the second
trap contained Tenax followed by petroleum-based charcoal
After sampling,  the resin traps were sealed and returned to
the laboratory for analysis.   A 20-L sample of gaseous
effluent was collected at a flowrate of 1.0 L/min using a
glass-lined probe.   A dry gas meter was used to measure the
volume of gas passed through  the pair of traps
 During  the  test,  the  VOST
 pairs of  traps, with  each
 for  20  minutes  at  the  1.0
 sampling, two 40-mL VOA  vi
 condensate  collected  in  th
 performed on the  six  resin
 aqueous condensate vials.
 fixed point of  average gas
 sampling was not  required
 gas  phase.

 5.1.3.5  Molecular Weight
                          run consisted of collecting six
                          pair of traps exposed to sample gas
                          L/min flowrate.   After daily
                          als were used to collect the aqueous
                          e condenser.   Three analyses were
                           trap pairs  and  on  one of the
                           The samples  were collected at  a
                           velocity in  the duct.  Isokinetic
                          since the volatile  POHCs were in the
Stack gas and primary furnace offgas were collected at a
single point in the stack in tedlar gas bags for determination
ot 02 and C02 concentrations.  The samples were extracted
through a stainless steel probe and passed through a silica
gel impinger to dry the gas before collection in the qas bag
Analysis was conducted by EPA Method 3.
5.1.3.6  Continuous Emission Monitors (CEMs)

CEMs were used during the demonstration test to
monitor the concentrations of CO, C02,  0?,  NO
in the stack gas or primary furnace offgas  using one set of
instruments, which were switched between the two sources every
                                               continuously
                                               and THC
                              65

-------
30 minutes.  A stainless steel probe was inserted at the stack
gas and primary furnace offgas sampling locations.   Gases were
withdrawn and transported via separate heat-traced,(at
300°C) Teflon@ sample lines to the instrumentation  area.
There the stack gas and primary furnace offgas sample lines
were fed into a three-way valve.  The selected stream was
conditioned prior to analysis to remove both particulate
matter and water.

Gases first entered an impinger train having a series of
short-stemmed impingers (as condensers) immersed in an  ice
bath.  After the impinger train, particulate matter was
removed by a glass fiber filter.  After filtration, the gases
were further dried using a Perma-Pure dryer, which utilizes a
water xapor permeable membrane.  The gases were drawn by a
TeflonR coated diaphragm pump located between the filter and
the  Perma-Pure dryer.  Gases  for the five instruments;
(discussed below) were drawn  from a manifold downstream of the
pump.

A  Bendix Model 85-105CA analyzer was used to measure  CO
concentration  in the gases.,  This instrument  is  a
nondispersive  infrared  (NDIR) analyzer, which measures  the   _
concentration  of CO  by  infrared absorption  at a  characteristic
wavelength.  To  measure the  C02 concentration in the  gases,
an  MSA Model 303 NDIR  analyzer  was  used.  This  instrument
measures the concentration of C02 by  infrared absorption  at
a  characteristic wavelength.
                     oxygen  analyzer
                     the  gases.   The
       was  used  to
       Taylor  540A
                                                determine  the
                                                measures
A Taylor Model 540A
Oo concentration of <,,,^ 3	.   .-•- - -„ ---
oxygen concentrations on the basis of the strong paramagnetic
properties of Oo compared to other.compounds present in
combustion gases.  In the presence of a strong magnetic
Oo molecules become temporary magnets.  The Taylor,540A
determines the sample gas 02 concentration by detecting
                                                         field

                                                         the
 displacement torque of the sample
 a magnetic field.
     test body in  the  presence of
 A TECO
 of NO
 NO
used to measure the concentration
 This instrument determines
                           the
       Model  10 analyzer was
     Y present in the gases.
  v concentrations by converting all  nitrogen oxides in
sample gas to nitric oxide and then reacting the nitric oxide
with ozone.  The reaction produces a chemilumlnescence
proportional  to the NOX concentration in the sample gas.
The chemilumlnescence is measured using a high-sensitivity
photomultiplier.

A Beckman Model 40OA was used to continuously measure the.
concentration of hydrocarbons present in the gases.  The
analyzer utilizes a hydrogen flame ionization detector.   ine
sensor is a burner in which a regulated flow of sample gas
passes through a flame sustained by regulated flows of a^fuei
gas and air.   Within the flame, the hydrocarbon components of,
the sample stream undergo a complex ionization that produces
                                66

-------
                                                           ,„
 5-'-4
 The Test
 sampling

                                        Lead
          Plan for the experimental  primary furnace  offaas

          ^Sthm 1S ?^ernted 1n APPendix E,  Vo?um"  ?l.9a  t  was
          m the fiei-d to accomodate the  port configuration  on
                                                           an
    a  Type-se  stam
                   n1ess
                                               ,      * r-
                                         i$  a probe "^isting
                                    covered  by  a qlass  "sork"

                                             pump, and then to
                                 _. . „      -•   The samp!e line
                         zones.  The first zone extended from
                         e port to approximately t
   »F
bS?ner
                              for 1 ntroduct ion  no the
                                                        was
  tror
introduct
nebulzatTon
                th                      that  samp  e
             to the oxidant side negatively  influenced
             rate and produced back-pressures  in the  sample
line.)   To prevent changes  in  the flame  characteristics  from
one type of sample to another,  all  gases  (?allb?at1oJ  blend
sample)  were introduced  into  the full  side^eed of the burner
                          i
                              ?9  the  GBC-900  atomic  adsorption
                              67

-------
an impact bead nebulizer and pre-mix air-acetylene burner
an MM p«\. u _ "        _._j.j j_ 4-..,^ .p/-. VMYI a •»• c •  numerical outou
                                                            to
                                                      air  and
                                                      blend
originanyWchoserhara^certified composition  of  5.0  percent
C02, 8.0 percent 02, and 87 percent N2.         .    ,

5.1.5  Solid  and Liquid Sampling  Procedures

Sampling procedures  that were  used  to  collect  samples from
solid  and  liquid streams are  described in  this section.

5.1.5.1  Solid  and  Liquid  Sample  Container Preparation

S^e containers  f.r,^^0^^ tnffi.15" ™
           ties  used for solid and liquid samples  were amber
glass  with Teflon1* cap liners.
 Each ...PL bottl.,th.tj.»(«»adht.f,t.r.i,..PDl..ef.r9.rS.n1c

 analysis
         i
 5.1.5.2  Solid Sampling Procedures

 Samoles of the feed, furnace ash, and  scrubber  solids  were
 2 500 g of sample were  necessary  for  analysis.
  subsequent  analysis.

  5.1.5.3   Liquid  Sampling Procedures

  Scrubber water and scrubber makeup water samples, were
                                 68

-------
                he VOA samPles were composited at the  time  of
                                                          "
 5.1.6  Ambient Air Sampling  Procedures
 Ambient air both  upwind  and  downwind of the test  site was
 jsj ;".:.; ^^^r^ .-&   ° If I
 Sh rco unit   The  upwind and downwind samplers  were located
 using on-site,  continuous meteorological  data   i  e   w?nH
 hour  LT  The Wind ^ection ^s checked  at'last'once per
 ha  be  n' ^n"sampl ers should not be moved after s mpl ng
 Qn°  fSSIont   the  average wind direction  deviated by more tha
 90 ,  amblent .sampling was terminated for  that period.
 5.1.6.1   PCBs


 5.1.6.2  Metals
Ambient
H Jh
8xlS  n
        concentrations of metals  upwind and downwind of the
                   USinn9 a Ge"eral Metal Works Sodel 2000H
        o        er   Particulate matter was collected  on
           1     .
5.1.6.3  Meteorological  Measurements
During the siting  of  the ambient air sampling  stations  a
location for the meteorological monitoring  station also was
operated Jortab e^J091'?1 dat? W3S Capt"red  ^ing a battery
operated portable  meteorological station  (Meteoroloqical
                     M°de1  1072) P^itioned  at the iJ-fi
                   ion and wind speed  were  recorded on a
stnpGhart recorder.  Temperature measured  by  the
meteorological station was  recorded  on  a  strfpchart recorder;
                              69

-------
all  other  temperature measurements were recorded by  hand and
entered  on  the data sheet.                              '
5.1.7  Sampling  Equipment Calibration Procedures
                                  au
results have been  properly documented  and retained.
5.1.7.1  S-Type Pitot Tube
The EPA has specified guidelines, as presented  in  Section
31 1 Sf EPA Document 600/4-77-027b ("Quality Assurance      .
Handbook for Air Pollution Measurement Systems," August, 1977)
                 -

                                    *
 and  documented as meeting  EPA  specifications.
 5.1.7.2   Samp! ing Nozzle
 5.1.7.3  Differential Pressure Gauge
             gauges  were used during  this  project to measure

  agneeicR is described.  The Magnehel i c«  gauges were   -
 calibrated prior to field sampling and checked  at a single
 representative value following the field  sampling.
 5.1.7.4  Temperature Measuring Device
 mirina source sampling,  accurate temperature  measurements are
      i     SceSueu§L^KrnusL^sr3%wr^^
 600/4-77-027b?  All sensors  were calibrated prior  to  fiel
 samp! ing.
  5.1.7.5   Dry  Gas Meter
                               70

-------
  DHor  to  ?hpCHrre°,tl0n fa.Ct?r at standard conditions)  just
  nnc?t   S  the  departure of the equipment to the field   A
  and  Dostt^  Vbariath°n;C'heCk alS°,Was ^formed.  The pretest
  and  posttest  calibrations agreed to within 5  percent.
 The DGMs used in the SASS, Modified Method 5, and Method
                                                           5
                                                           '
 Method^  o<
 dSnng t5heevsi testing9"

 5.1.7.6  Analytical  Balance
                                 the  Sflss'  Modified  Method  5  and
                                  °™-115- lo-fl..' DGM  was  used
      9 ?•!! fleld measurempnt program, the analytical  balances
         !NBS na?r^the 6XPec^d range of use with standard

              C
 5.1.7.7   CEMs


 Calibrations  of  all  continuous  monitors  were  accomplished  bv
 introducing  standard  gases  at  the  front  end of the  CEM

 an™lHVr0^ Pr1°r  to  and  after  dai1^  sampling.   This
 all rnnA°r  ^  assessment   of  any impact  caused  by the  sample
 fine   ™1thT;n?iTtri'K1ncluding the heat-tracedysample   P
 line,  on  the pollutants  being monitored.   All  instruments
 underwent multipoint  linearity  checks  (two points plus zero)
 bracketing the predicted  sample values   These  checks werp''
 performed at the  beginning and  end  of the  simp! iSg  per? oSv


 ^tanH^HtiCa1 b1ank 5^  a Sin9le-Point response factor (RF)
 standard was analyzed daily  prior  to testing for all
               t?rS:  A  fin9le-Point drift check also was
             analyzing the same standard used for the
             RF determination at the end of each day of
                                        •
 DPrf™Hh
 performed  by
 single-point
                                                           is
5.1.7.8  PUF 'Sampler Calibration

Calibration of the General Metal Works (GMW) PS-1 sampler

               .3 GMW Mode1 40 orifice calibration unit
                    1^31^-15 calibrated ^ the manufacturer
                     K a 1inear regressions analysis of the
                    ation coefficient of at least 0.9998.  The
and
     s
     S
5.1.7.9  Hi-Volume Sampler Calibration                 •    ,

Multipoint flowrate calibrations of the Hi-Vol sampler flow

                               71

-------
rate recorders were performed using the procedures outlined in
40 CFR? Pan 50 11, Appendix B, July 1, 1975.  A calibrated
orifice and a series of five resistance plates were used to
calibrate the flow recorder response.

5.1.7.10  Meteorological Equipment Calibration

The following calibration procedures for the meteorological
senses were performed  once in the field prior to sampling:

o   Wind Direction--The wind sensor  was set  at north, south,
    east,  and west.  The recorder  was  checked at  each setting
    for correct response.   The setting for north  was
    determined using a  compass.  A correction for the site
    declination was made during  data analysis.

o   Wind Speed--The chart  speed  was  checked  for  consistent
    movement.

o   Temperature--The thermocouples were  calibrated  by
    comparison  of three separate measurements  against  an  ASTM
    reference thermocouple at  different  times  of day.   The
    melsuHng thermocouple was positioned  in cl ose  Proximity
    to the temperature sensor  of the meteorological  station
    The temperature readout of the ^tripchart  recorder  on the
    meteorological station then  was compared to the reference
    thermocouple.
 All calibration data and
 were recorded on meteorological
 forms.

 5.1.8  Sample Custody
                                                        sensors
                         test data from meteorological
                                instrumentation  calibration
                                    program were based on
                                    samples were analyzed on
                                    facilities, the custody
                                    documentation of
                                    field  analytical data
Sample custody procedures for this
EPA-recommended procedures.  Since
site, as well as at the laboratory
procedures used emphasized careful
monitoring, sample collection, and .  . _. _ -...  „
generation, and the use of chain-of-custody records for
samples being transported.

ThP  field  samolinq leader was responsible for ensuring that
Jroper custody  an9d documentation  procedures were; foil owed for
the  field  sampling and  field  analytical efforts   He was
assisted  in  this effort by the sampling personnel involved  in
sample recovery.

All  sampling  data, including  sampling  times,  locations,  and
any  specific  considerations  associated with sample
acauisition,  were  recorded on preformatted data  sheets.
Follow  ng  sample  collection,  all  samples were   ogged  into  a  ;
master  logbook  (bound  notebook)  and  given  a unique
                                 72

-------
                                        "»  P"..nn.l
                                                              In
                             •'
                                      C°°lln9 requirements
            were employed  for  all  s-ample  transfer  activities.

 5.2  ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES









 ^nanal*t1Cal  ««°<* a- P-enlJ a^n°-fo?^r°nS
 5.2.1   Solid Streams Analysis
                                                """er

                               '

5.2.2
        Liquid  Streams  Analysis
5.2.3  Stack Gas an-d Primary Furnace Offgas Analysis
                                                      Toxicity
systems rrFMci f«;~ usjng continuous emission monitoring
systems (CEMs) for carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, oxygen,


                               73

-------
   eco

dioxide and oxygen using an Orsat analyzer

Three EPA Method 5 samples were collected for analysis of
particulate matter, moisture, flowrate, and HC1 .

condensate  vial  also was  analyzed.

Three  EPA Modified  Method 5  (MM5)  samples were collected  for
analysis of soluble chromium.
for PCDD/PCDF and SV-PP+10.

5.2.4  Ambient Air
Ambient air samples were collected daily upwind

^nVal^a^icSla^ ma'itJ M! £ J 1
and PUF samples were analyzed for PCBs.

5.2.5 V-PP+10 Analysis
                                                      «t,ls,
 liquid incinerator  samples included:

 o    Feed

 o    Furnace  Ash

 o    Scrubber Water

 o    Scrubber Makeup Water

 o    Scrubber Solids
         s

       If sample used the following
  5.2.5.1  Stack Gas and Primary Furnace Offgas Analysis for
           V-PP+10                                '   .      ••
                                 74

-------
 ninnr/c  Vola^'le 5omP°unds were separated and detected
 using GC/MS as outlined in SW-8240.
 5.2.5.2 Liquid and Solid Sample Analysis for V-PP+10
 V-PP+10 compounds in liquid and solid samples were analyzed
 using SW-8240.  The methods detailed the purge and trap
 procedure for preparing field samples for GC/MS analysis.
 5.2.6 SV-PP+10 Analysis
 SV-PP+10 analyses were conducted on all  samples streams
 including:
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
     Feed
     Furnace Ash
     Scrubber Water
     Scrubber Makeup  Water
     Scrubber Sol ids
     Primary Furnace  Offgas
     StackGases
 5.2.6.1  Stack  Gas  and  Primary  Furnace  Offgas  Analysis  for
         SV-PP+10 Analysis                      ..,-_..-
 SV-PP+10  analysis  using  SW-8270 was  performed  on  the  stack  gas
 15  PpIiTry/P™n/DrSrfgaS  samPles collected  using  the  SASS
 hv'.nt ?t-   PCDD/PCDF were  analyzed in the same  SASS  sample
 by  splitting the solvent extract for the two  analyses
 Surrogates applicable to both  analyses were injected  into the
 Dr^r%Vri%r-^eXtraCti°n'   SV-PP+1° analysis was completed
 prior to  initiation of cleanup steps for the  PCDD/PCDF
 analysis.                                    '     '
 5.2.6.2 Liquid and Solid Sample Analysis for SV-PP+10
caJnlhS °f ^ feed, scrubber water, scrubber makeup water,
scrubber solids, and furnace ash were analyzed by SW-8270
Liquid samples were extracted using SW-3520. Solid samples
were extracted using SW-3540.  Extracts of liquid and solid
             3nalyZed for semivolatile organic contaminants
5.2.7  PCB Analysis
PUF ^lrS "^^o analyze stack gas,  primary furnace offgas,
PUF samples (ambient air),  and solid and liquid samples for
                              75

-------
PCBs by GC/MS.  GC/MS analysis using selected ion morCoring
is superior for PCB analysis of gas samples.   This type of
analysis monitors for ions indicative of biphenyls with two
chlorines, three chlorines, etc.  The results are presented as
the sum of individual chlorinated blphenyl congener instead of
mixtures of such congeners, as defined by Aroclor number,
which is most common in GC/ECD analysis.

5.2.7.1 Stack Gas and Primary Furnace Offgas Analysis for PCBs

Samoles of the  stack gas  and primary furnace offgas were
collected using  a SASS train with XAD-2 as the adsorbent resin
for PCB analysis.  The samples were recovered using methanol
and methvlene chloride.   The SASS train provides  three
subsamDles-   (1) the glass  fiber filter;  (2) methanol  and
methyUne chloride rinses  of the probe, filter holder,  and  the
condenser/resin  trap; and  (3) the  aqueous  conden  ate    Each
subsample was extracted  separately  and  then  combined  for
analysis.
 5.2.7.2
Liquid
PCBs
and Solid,  and Ambient Air Sample Analysis for
 EPA  680  was  followed  for PCB analysis  of  the  feed,  furnace
 ash,  scrubber water,  scrubber water makeup,  scrubber sol ids,
 and  ambient  air particulates.  Solid samples  were;
 Soxhlet-extracted using SW-3540.   Liquid  samples  were
 extracted using SW-3520.

 5.2.8  PCDDs and PCDF Analysis

 All  sampled  streams were analyzed for polychlorinated
 dibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDDs) and polychlorinated dibenzofurans
 (PCDFs)  using SW-8280.

 5.2.8.1   Stack Gas and  Primary Furnace Offgas Analysis for
          PCDDs and PCDFs

 Stack aas and primary  furnace offgas samples for analysis of
 PCDDs Ind PCDFs were  collected using a SASS  train and were
 analyzed according to  SW-8280.   PCDD/PCDF analyses  were
 performed on the same  SASS  samples  as SV-PP+10 by splitting
 the  SASS sample  extract for  each  analysis.

 5.2.8.2  Liquid  and Solid Samples  Analysis for PCDDs  and  PCDFs
 The  liquid  and  solid  samples  collected  for
 measurements  were  analyzed  using  SW-8280.
 were extracted  by  continuous  1iquid/Iiquid
 according  to  SW-3520.   SW-3540, which  is  a
 technique,  was  used  to  extract  solids.
                                   PCDD and  PCDF
                                   Aqueous  samples
                                   extraction
                                   Soxhlet  extraction
                                76

-------
  5.2.9  Metals
                    t   93S'  Binary  furnace  offgas  and  ambient
  m          •     .™atter'  sollds>  and  liquids  were  analyzed  for
  metals  by  inductively coupled  argon  plasma emission
  spectroscopy  (ICAP)  using  SW-6010,  and  by  atomic  absorption
                                              °ma  SP
                                                           -re
 The samples were analyzed for a total of thirty-one elements
 The volatile -elements (lead, arsenic, antimony  selen urn  and
 mercury) were analyzed by AAS.  Arsenic, antimony? iSad  and
 (sl67060 "yo^l^y^r'"6^^]^ 9«ph1tef furnace techni ues
 (*u 7060, 7041, 7421, and 7740,  respectively)   Mercurv was
 determined by the cold vapor technique  (SW - 7470/7471 )

 Aqueous samples (SW-7470) were acidified prior to analysis.

 5.2.9.1  Continuous Monitoring - Vaporous Lead

 Radian Corporation, through  work with the Electric Power
 Research.lnstltute  and the Department of Energy,  has dlvel ooed
 an  experimenta  continuous vapor phase monltorfor lellcted
 metals .including  lead.   The monitor was not  defined by  an
 approved EPA method or QAPP  review but was  incorporated  ?n  the
 overall  program to  study  the monitoring  system's  ability to

         conatroimofd:PtafiWh1C^ ""  all°"  3  pr°C «s  evlluJtlSn
 vooroi   ?!«5  3n  Ih     S emi^sions-   Continuous  monitoring  of
 vaporous lead   n  the  primary furnace  offgas was  conducted  to
 desternvntehth6  1ncinera+tor operating  conditions required  to
 destroy  the  organic material  while minimizing  the
 volatilization  of lead from  the  contaminated  soi 1 .   The

 n  the  P?fSnifS   ld "^ det?Ct Vap°r  phase  lead  concentrations
 i"  „??     offgas samples  at  levels  less than  2.7  ppb; the
 Tes? Pl.nT  1^onc1u!ive  and  the  program was  aborted!   The
 Test Plan  for  this  activity,  as  proposed and defined by  Radian
 Corp.,  is  included  in  Appendix E,  Volume II.   The  results of
 these  monitoring studies  are  included  in Appendix  F? Volume


 5.2.10 Soluble Chromium

 ^ia°l!i9aSuand.pr1'!'ary  furnace offgas samples were analyzed for
 soluble  chromium (hexavalent chromium) using EPA M218.4   By
 this method,  the hexavalent chromium is chelated using
 ammonium pyrrolidine di thi o'carbamate .  The chelated chromium
 kS?nnpS  e^ract?d from the sample medium using methyl isobutyl
 ketone   The  solvent extract  then is analyzed  by flame atomic
absorption spectroscopy.                          • nine atomic
                               77

-------
                                                        sol id
                                                           EP
The stability of hexavalent chromium is not completely
understood, and the method recommends that chelation
extraction be carried out as soon as possible.  The stack gas
samples for soluble chromium analysis were chelated and
exacted on site after sample collection.  The results did
not detect soluble chromium concentrations at levels less than
264 ppb and were inconclusive.

5.2.11 EP Toxicity Leaching Procedure                :

The feed, furnace ash,  scrubber water, and scrubber  solids
were analyzed  by the  RCRA Characteristic  of EP Toxicity
(SW-1310).  The method  involves the  acidic extraction  of
samples followed by  analysis  of specific  trace metals   The
Toxicity  analysis was  performed for  trace  metals  only.
specifically,  arsenic,  barium, cadmium,  chromium,  lead,
mercury,  selenium,  and  silver.

5.2.12 Toxicity  Characteristic Leaching  Procedure

The  feed,  furnace  ash,  scrubber  water,  and scrubber sol ids
were  analyzed  by  the proposed Toxic  Characteristic Leaching
 Procedure (TCLP).   TCLP was proposed by  EPA  to expand the
 ?oxicity  cnaracieristic to  Delude  additional chemica-ls  and  to
 incorporate a  new  extraction  procedure.   Extracj!°*M^0
 volatiles involves  acidic extraction in  a zero-head  ace
 extractor  which is rotated in an end-over-end fashion at 30+2
 rpm   Extract  on for metals and  semivolati1es uses the same
 pTScedure except that it is done in a glass  container rather
 than the zero-headspace.  The metals were analyzed a:^
 described for EP Toxicity.   The  organic contaminants were
 analyzed using SW-8240 and 8270.

 5.2.13  Other Analyses                              !

 The feed  furnace ash, and scrubber solids were  analyzed for
 chlorine', ash  and  ultimate  analysis, and the feed  for higher
 heating value.
                                       ash,  and  scrubber
                                        The  samples  were
                                       an alkaline solution.
                                       chlorine  (as  chloride)
 5.2.13.1 Chlorine Analysis

 Chlorine analyses of  the  feed,  furnace
 solids were  performed using  ASTM  D808.
 combusted  in  an  oxygen  bomb  containing
 The  alkaline  solution was analyzed  for
 using  titration.

 5.2.13.2   Ash Analysis

 The  ash  content  of .the.feed^furnac^ash,^ scru bb.r^.l ids..
were determined using ASTM 03174^
after burning, was ashed at 1427 F
residue then was weighed.
                                     in a
muffle furnace.  The
                               78

-------
 5.2.13.3 Ultimate Analysis (C, H, Ov S, N, Moisture)
                  solids  were  analyzed  for
                  for  ultimate  analysis
                  of carbon, hydrogen
                         deteJmTneHy
                  of ASTM methods.  ASTM
 The feed, furnace ash, and scrubber
 elemental concentrations using A003
 The procedure involves the analysis

 d1ffU?PnrpSUll!!n* '^ moisture-
 difference.  A003 is a conglomerate
 D3178 analyzes for carbon and hydrogen by burning the samples
 rLhnT UStl°n Sy^tem followed by fixation of the products of
 combustion in an absorption train for analysis   Nitroaen is
 ann!yZtdHb? AS™ D3179«   The nitrogen in the "ample IV
 converted to ammonium salts by destructive digestion.   Ammonia
 is recovered and analyzed ti trimetrically .  ASTM D3177 is used
 to measure sulfur using  bomb calorimetry!  The recovered
 sulfur is precipitated as BaS04 and determined
 gravimetrically.   Moisture  is determined by ASTM D3173  which
 is a gravimetric technique  involving drying of the sample.
 5.2.13.4  Higher Heating Value Analysis
 The  higher heating
 determined using  a
 D2015-77  for  solid
value (HHV) of the solid waste
bomb calorimeter,  according to
waste.
feed
ASTM
was
 5.2.14   TSS  and  TDS  Analysis
 The  concentration  of  Total  Suspended  Solids  (TSS)  and  Total
 Dissolved  Solids  (TDS)  present  in  the  scrubber  1  quid  effluent
 and  scrubber  water  inlet  was  determined  using gravimetric
 procedures  EPA  M160.1  and M160. 2,  respectively

 5.2.15   pHAnalysis


 ™%PKi°f  uhe fcrubber  liquid samples  was determined using a .
 portable pH meter and  combination  electrode with  temperature
 compensation  in accordance  with EPA M150.1.

 5.2.16   Density
     n   dei?si^ °f the ^ed, furnace ash, and scrubber sol i ds
were determined .using a gravimetric/volumetric method.

5.2.17   Particulate Matter

Particulate material was measured in the stack gas and primary
furnace offgas using EPA Method 5.                     primary

5.2.18   Flue Gas Moisture

The moisture content of the gas streams  was determined using
the technique specified in EPA Method 4.
                              79

-------
5.2.19   HC1  Determination

For the determination of HC1 in the stack gas and primary
furnace offgas, samples of gas were passed through a series of
impingers immersed in an ice bath.  The first two jmpingers
contained 200 ml of 0.1 N NaOH and were Greenburg-Smith type
impinqers.  Following the first two impingers are a dry,
modified Greenburg-Smith impinger and an impinger containing a
desiccant.  The sample was analyzed using an ion chromatograpn
following Method 27 from the "FGD Chemistry and Analytical
Methods Handbook," Volume 2, Radian Corporation, July 1984.

5.2.20   Carbon Dioxide

During the sampling for HC1  in the stack gas and primary
furnace offgas, the collection of C02  in the 0.1 N NaOH
impinger  is a  consideration  that  had^to  be  addressed.   Because
the  impinger  solutions  are  caustic, C02  also was removed
from the  stack  gas.   Thus,  the metered  sample gas  volume  was
low  by the amount  of  C02  removed  by the  impinger solutions.
To account for
solutions were
was  corrected.
the CO? removal,  the 0.1 N NaOH impinger
analyzed for carbonate;  total  gas volume then
 5.2.21    Oxygen  and  Carbon  Dioxide  Analysis
 Grab  bag  samples  of the  stack gas  and  primary  furnace  offgas
 were  collected in the field according  to  EPA Method  3  for
 COo and 02.   These samples were analyzed  within  3  :hours  ot
 collection using  an Orsat analyzer.
 5.2.22   Total  Organic Carbon

 Total  carbon was measured using a carbonaceous analyzer by
 quantitatively converting the organic and inorganic carbon in
 a sample to carbon dioxide, which then was measured by an
 infrared detector.  Total inorganic carbon is determined by
 sparging carbonates from the sample as C02, which is
 measured by IR.  The UV-catalyzed oxidation of organics is not
 used.   Total organic carbon is calculated from the difference
 of total carbon/total inorganic carbon.

 5.3  SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL REPORT               /

 The Sampling and Analytical Report is  included as Appendix B,
 Volume  II.
                                80

-------
                            SECTION  6

                   PERFORMANCE  DATA  EVALUATION
 6.1   INTRODUCTION
 Based  on  the  operating  data  presented  in  Section  4  and  Appen-
 dix A,  and  the  analytical  results  presented  in Appendix B,  and
 Appendices  D-G,  an  evaluation was  conducted  to determine  the
 effectiveness of  the  Shirco  Pilot-scale Infrared  Incineration
 System  in treating  the  feed  at  the  Demode  Road Superfund  Site
 under  a series  of varied operating  conditions.

 A total of  17 runs,  were conducted.  Three  runs were performed
 under  design  operating  conditions  to assess  overall unit
 operation and system  performance  (Phase I).  These  runs were
 conducted at  1600°F PCC temperature, a 2200°F SCC temperature,
 and a  PCC residence time of  20  min.  Each  of the  three  runs
 was sufficiently  long (6 to  10  hours) to gather a large enough
 sample of stack gas to  analyze  it  for PCBs.  An additional  run
 was conducted at  the  same  operating conditions to obtain  spe-
 cific  stack samples that had not been successfully  collected
 during two  of the previous runs.

 Fourteen runs were  conducted under varying operational  para-
 meters to evaluate  their effect on system  performance and
 energy consumption.   These runs were conducted for  approxi-
 mately one  hour under varied operating conditions that
 included the PCC temperature (900, 1200,  1400, and  1600°F),
 SCC temperature (1800 and  2200°F), PCC feed residence time
 (10, 15, 20, and 25 minutes), and PCC combustion air flow (on
 or off to simulate oxidizing or non-oxidizing/pyrolytic PCC
 atmosphere).  Specific discussions addressing the field
 operations of each run and the  operating  conditions under
which it was carried out are provided in  Section 4.

This section addresses the Shirco unit's  ability under the
various operating conditions to meet specific evaluation
objectives that have been set in the following areas:

o  ORE levels  for PCBs and the presence of PICs  in the stack
   gas.  The regulatory  standards are 99.99% DRE under the
   Resource  Conservation and Recovery Act  (RCRA)  and 99.9999%
   DRE under the Toxic Substances and Control Act  (TSCA).
                              81

-------
o  Level  of hydrogen chloride (HC1) and particulars in the
   stack gas.  The RCRA standard for HC1 in the stack gas is
   1.8 kg/hr (4 Ib/hr) or 99 wt% HC1 removal efficiency.  The
   RCRA standard for participate emissions in the stack gas is
   180 mg/dscm (0.08 gr/dscf).

o  Level  of residual PCBs in the furnace ash at normal and
   varied operating conditions.

o  Mobility of heavy metals, particularly lead, in the furnace
   ash as compared to the feed.

o  Mobility of heavy metals in the  furnace ash as compared to
   the RCRA Extraction Procedure Toxicity (EP Tox) Character-
   istic (as measured by the EP Tox test) and the proposed  -
   toxicity characteristic  (as measured by the Toxicity
   Characteristic Leaching  Procedure (TCLP)).

o  Level of residual heavy  metals  and  organic compounds,  and
   other physical and chemical characteristics in the  scrubber
   water discharged from the unit.

o  The operating  conditions that reduce energy consumption
   without decreasing soil  decontamination  effectiveness.

o  Effect of varying operating conditions on residual  levels
   of  heavy metals  and organics in  the furnace ash  versus  the
   levels in the  feed.

o  Adherence of  the quality assurance  (QA)  procedures  to  the
   requirements  of  the RREL-approved QA Project  Plan  (Category
   II),  as defined  by the Document  No.  PA  QAPP-0007-GFS,
   "Preparation  Aid for  HWERL's Category  II  Quality Assurance
   Project  Plans,"  June  1987.

 6.2   CHARACTERISTICS  OF  THE FEED

 The  results  of the  analyses of  the composites  of  the  grab
 samples  of  feed  taken during each  of the  test  runs  are
 reported in  Appendix  B and  summarized  in  Table  11.   Highlights
 of these results are  as  follows:

 o  During  the  runs  conducted  on  soil feed  mixed  with  3 wt%
   fuel  oil,  the analyses  of  the  feed  samples  showed  the
   expected  trend of  increased  HHV, moisture content  and
   carbon,  hydrogen,  and oxygen  contents,  and  decreased ash
   content,  as compared  to  the  excavated  soil  feed  with no
   fuel  oil  addition.                                ,'...;',,

 o  Total PCBs  concentration ranged from 10.2 to  669 ppm and
   averaged  272 ppm.
                               82

-------
                TABLE 11.  FEED CHARACTERISTICS  (b,c)
 Characterization
 Density, g/cc
 High Heating Value
 Moi sture,  wt%
 Carbon,  wt% (a)
 Hydrogen,  wt% (a)
 Oxygen,  wt% (a)
 Nitrogen,  wt% (a)
 Sulfur,.wt% (a)  . .
 Chlorine,  wt% (a)
 Ash,  wt% (a)   .	
                    (HHV), Btu/lb
                   Average
                w/o Fuel  Oil

                      2.31
                       210
                     10:81
                      2.45
                      1.48
                     11.87
                      0.10
                      0.02
                      0.11
                     83.98
                    Average
                   w/Fuel Oil

                       2.23
                        588
                      12.68
                       3.54
                       1.64
                      12.86
                       0.11
                       0.03
                       0.09
                      81.75
 Orqanics

 Total  PCBs,  ppm   .
 Total  PCDD,  ppb
 Total  PCDF  (TCDF),
 Semivolatiles, ppm
    Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
 Volatiles,  ppm
    Methyl ethyl  ketone   	
    Trichloroethene   	
                    ppb
                                          Range (d)    Average fe)
                    10.2-669
                          ND
                     ND-0.1

                    <.1.0-5. 5

                      31-34
                    <2.0-17
                         272
                          ND
                       0.065

                         5,5

                          32
                        10.2
Metals, ppm   Range(d).  Avg(e)  J  Metals.
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryl 1ium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead  	
              <0.3-26
               9.8-13
              390-940
               <0.097
               2.6-11
               59-180
                15-34
             290-3000
   2.7
  10.6
   591
<0.097
   4.4
  84.9
  18.1
   778
                                          4>pm    Ranqefd)   Avgfe)
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thai 1i urn
Vanadium
Zinc
<0.005-0.3   0.11
    19-110   30.8
      <0.3   <0.3
 <0.87-6.2    2.3
      <8.7   <8.7
     16-26   20.4
   200-590    301
»  *
(d)
(e)
U)   Jl!!IS;ital+Jna1?ses'iwtX) are on a mo^ture-free basis.
/ui   Average wt% values do not total to 100%.
(b)   ND indicates not detected,  or less than detection limits
     which vary for each.PCDD/PCDF homolog.
(c)   <  indicates ND at detection limit (as indicated)
     Range values shown represent all  data
     Average values shown  represent  the average of all  data
     aair™beJ°?hdeJeJt12?  liraits were Deluded in t  e
     average at the detection limit.
                              83

-------
o  Several samples of the feed contained small  quantities of
   TCDFs ranging from 0.04 to 0.1 ppb.

o  Volatile and semivolatile organic compounds including
   methyl ethyl ketone, trichloroethene, and bi s (Z-ethy I -
   hexyl)phthalate were measured in feed samples at concen-
   ?rat ins less than 50 ppm,  Methyl ethyl ketone and
   trichloroethene were also detected in solvent blanks and
   are attributed to analytical laboratory contamination.

o  In addition to lead, the primary heavy metal contaminant,
   whose  concentrations ranged from 290 to 3,000 ppm and
   averaged 778 ppm, several other metals were present  at
   average concentrations exceeding 50  ppm including barium
   (591  ppm),  zinc  (301 ppm),  and  chromium (85 ppm).  Other
   heavy  metals were present  in  lesser  concentrations,  as
   reported in the  table.

 6.3   CHARACTERISTICS OF THE  FURNACE ASH

 The  results of the  analyses  of the composites  of  the grab
 samples  of furnace  ash  taken  during  each  of  the test runs  are
 reported in Appendix B  and  summarized in  Tables 12  and  13.
 Highlights of these results  are  as follows:

 o  The  total  concentration  of PCBs ranged  from 0.004 to 3.396
   ppm.   Additional  discussion on  the residual  PCBs  in  the
   furnace  ash is presented  in Section  6.4.

 o  Two  samples of furnace ash contained 0.07 and  0.3  ppb of
   TCDF during Runs 17 and  18 conducted at a 900°F PCC  oper-
    ating temperature; the normal  PCC operating temperature is
    1 600°F  These runs were also  conducted without the input
    of PCC combustion air to simulate non-oxidizing or pyro-
    lytic combustion conditions.  The low PCC temperature and
    pyrolytic environment could have led to the incomplete
    desorption or incineration of TCDF present in the feed or
    to the production of TCDF from the incomplete combustion of
    PCBs in the feed.

    The ultimate analysis data tend to substantiate the incom-
    plete desorption of contaminants from the feed, as dis-
    cussed above for TCDF desorption, and in Section  ^4 for
    PCBs   At the low PCC operating temperature of 900 F and
    nyrolytic combustion conditions, the presence of  higher
    TCDF and  PCB concentrations in the furnace ash .is comple-
    mented by higher  carbon  contents and lower noncombusti bl e
    ash contents in  the furnace ash that are indicative of  an
    incomplete desorption or  incineration process.  For the
    three  runs conducted  at  a  PCC operating  temperature of
    900°F, carbon contents  averaged 2.08 wt%,  vs.  0.80 wU
    for the  other runs; noncombusti bl e ash  contents averaged
    93 88  wt% vs. 98.04 wt%  for the remaining  runs.
                                84

-------
TABLE 12.   CHARACTERISTICS OF THE FURNACE ASH - ORGANICS AND METALS ANALYSES
PCC Oraanics
Residence PCDF (g)
Run Temp. Time PCB (TCDF) MeC
No- <°F) (min.) (ppm) (ppb) (ppm)
18 900(a,b) 20 2.079 0.07
17 9QO(b) 20 3.396 0.30
16 900(b) 25 0.168 ND
1.0 1200 20 0.115(d) ND
14 1200 15 0.077 ND
9 1200(b) 25 0.108(d) ND
11 1200(b) 20 0.066(d) ND
13 12QO(b) 15 0.025(d) ND
15 1200(a,b) 15 0.066(d) ND
5 1400 20 0.087(d) ND
1 1600 20 0.037 ND ND
2 1600 ,20 0.112 ND 980
3 1600 20 0.003 ND ND
1-2 1600(f) 20 (f) ND
7 1600 10 0.045 15 0.061(d) ND
(a) Waste feed blended with 3 wt% fuel oil.
(b) Non-oxidizing atmosphere.
(c) PCC bed depth at 1 inch. All other tests at
(d) PCB levels below analytical detection limits.
limits indicated in analyses.
(e) ND - nondetectable value.
 Metals (i)
(g) (g) (g)
MEK TeCE TrCE Pb Ba Zn
(ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm)
1,000 720 380
1,400 940 410
860 940 410
1,100 970 380
1,000 1,000 420
1,200 1,000 360
1,200 760 510
2,000 690 350
1,000 1,800 640
1,600 950 420
36 ND 5 1,100 1,400 360
64 6.4 3.9 1,300 1,200 410
40 ND ND 1,100 1,000 340
420 1,100 350
1,700 . 940 400
840 790 380
1,500 1,800 440
800 1,100 420


1-1/2 inches.
Total shown is sum of detectable


Cr
(ppm)
86
94
85
77
100
78
76
74
84
81
78
79
110
71
75
62
79
68




(f) Run was conducted to make up for incomplete semivotatile organics, PCDD/PCDF,
soluble chromium and stack gas particulate samplings during Runs 1 and 2.
(g) MeC: Methylene chloride; HER: Methyl ethyl ketone; TeCE: Tetrachloroethylene;
TpCE: Trichloroethene.
(h) Reported data is presented. For runs with no
were not conducted.
(i) Only heavy metals with concentrations greater
values shown, organic analyses
than 50 ppm are shown.


                                      85

-------
            TABLE 13.  CHARACTERISTICS OF THE  FURNACE ASH - ULTIMATE ANALYSES
Operating Conditions
PCC
Run
No.
18
17
16
10
14
9
11
13
15
5
1
2
3
1-2
7
6
19
8
(a)
Cb>
(c)
Residence
Temp. Time
<°F) (min)
900(a,b)
900(b)
900 
-------
    For the Phase I Runs 1-3, volatile and semivolati1e organic
    analyses were conducted on the furnace ash samples.  No semi-
    volatile organics were detected.  Volatile compounds includ-
    ing methylene chloride, methyl ethyl ketone, tetrachloro-
    ethene, and trichloroethene were measured in the furnace ash
    samples in concentrations ranging from 3.9 to 64 ppm with one
    sample containing 980 ppm of methylene chloride. Methyl ethyl
    ketone and trichloroethene were also detected in solvent
    blanks and methylene chloride is commonly employed in labora-
    tory procedures;  therefore,  these compounds may be products
    of incomplete combustion and/or the result of laboratory
    contamination.
 o  In addition to lead,  for which concentrations ranged from 420
    to 2,000 ppm and averaged 1,173 ppm,  several  other metals
    were present at average concentrations exceeding 50 ppm
    including barium (1061 ppm),  zinc (410 ppm),  and chromii
    ppm).

 6.4  RESIDUAL PCBs IN FURNACE ASH
turn  (81
 During  the  demonstration  test,  a  total  of 17  runs  were conducted
 at  varying  operating  conditions.   In  addition to  the  ORE levels
 which  are  an  indication  of the  performance  of the  Shirco Pilot-'
  c5/e  I^irared  Incineration  System  and  its  ability to meet  RCRA
 and/or  TSCA regulatory  standards,  the  reduction of PCB concentra-
 tion from  the  feed  to the  furnace  ash  is  also a measure of  the
 unit s  ability  to  effectively destroy  PCBs  and produce a furnace
 ash with a  PCB  concentration below  the  TSCA guidance  level  of  2
 ppm.

 As  shown by the data presented  in Table  12, two samples of
 furnace ash exceeded the TSCA guidance  levels  and  contained
 3.396 and 2.079 ppm of total residual PCBs.   The samples  were
 produced during Runs 17 and  18  conducted  at a  900°F PCC
 operating temperature (20  minutes residence time), which  is
 fl^OrCaTJly lower than the normal PCC operating  temperature of
 1600 F.  These  runs were also conducted without the input of
 PCC combustion  air to simulate  non-oxidizing  or pyrolytic
 combustion  conditions.  At this low PCC temperature and
 pyrolytic condition, these higher total residual  PCB  levels in
 the furnace ash may be the result of the  incomplete combustion
 of PCBs in  the feed.  This is further substantiated by  the
 residual TCDF present in the furnace ash  samples  from  these same
 two runs,  as discussed in  Section 6.3. The remaining  runs
 conducted  at 1200°F, 1400°F, and 1600°F resulted  in total
     lal PCB concentrations in  the furnace ash ranging  from
onnor nrr°'117 P?1"'  Run 16' wnich was also conducted  at a
900 F PCC  operating temperature, but with an increased  PCC
residence  time of 25 minutes, resulted in a total  furnace ash
PCB concentration  of 0.168 ppm  with no detectable  TCDF.  It is
P?!S1?'?uthnat the  jncreased residence  time in  the  PCC may have
offset  the  low 900°F PCC operating temperature and  provided
                              87

-------
the additional processing time for the satisfactory;destruction
of the PCBs in the feed.

6.5  MOBILITY OF HEAVY METALS

EP Tox and TCLP tests were conducted on the feed, furnace ash,
scrubber water, and scrubber solids.  The tests were conducted
to document any trend or evidence which, as a result ot the
thermal treatment, shows reduced mobility of heavy metals in
effluent streams based on the toxicity characteristic standards,
as compared to the feed.  The results of these tests are
reported in Appendix B and Appendix G.  Table 14 summarizes the
data reported for the heavy metal of particular concern in these
tests, lead,  as analyzed in the  leachate fronf the feed and the
furnace ash.  Highlights of the  results are as follows:

6.5.1  Mobility of Heavy Metals  -'Feed and Furnace Ash

In order to determine whether heavy metals, particularly  lead,
would  leach from the furnace  ash produced  in the Shirco Pilot-
Scale  Infrared  Incineration System, EP Tox and TCLP  tests were
conducted  to  determine  the mobility of  heavy metals  from  the
furnace ash as  compared  to the  feed.

o  The initial  EP  Tox  analyses  for  lead  in the leachate ranged
   from 0.05  to  0.67  ppm for  the feed  and  0.05 to 4.1  ppm for
   the furnace  ash.   The initial TCLP  analyses ranged  from  0.35
   to  1.80 ppm  (with  one sample at  7.0  ppm)  for  the  feed  and
   0.05 to 4.1  ppm (with one  sample  at  6.2 ppm)  for  the  furnace
   ash.
    A comparison of
    furnace ash and
    that indicates
    versus the feed
    comparison did
    TCLP leachates
    consistently hi
    results on the
 the EP Tox and TCLP analyses  conducted on the
 the feed does not show any trend or evidence
reduced mobility of lead from  the furnace ash
 as a result of the thermal treatment.   The
reveal that the concentrations of lead  in the
from both the feed and the furnace ash  were
gher than the corresponding EP Tox test
same samples.                         ,   ,   ,  -
    When several samples were retested to verify the results, the
    concentrations of lead in the EP Tox leachates (4.9 ppm feed,
    3 0 pm furnace ash) were higher than during the initial
    tests, and  in direct reversal from the original data,
    exceeded corresponding TCLP leachate concentrations (2.8 ppm
    feed, 1.4 ppm furnace ash).  The results of the retest again
    did not indicate reduced mobility of lead from the furnace
    ash versus  the feed as a result of the thermal treatment.
                                88

-------
TABLE 14.  COMPARISON OF LEACHABLE LEAD IN THE FEED AND FURNACE ASH
Operating Conditions
PCC
Run
No.
18
17
16
10
14
9
11
13
15
5
1
2
3
1-2
7
6
19
8

ND =
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(g)
Residence
Temp. Time
( F) (min.)
900 ( a, b.)
900(b)
900(b)
1200
1200
1200(b)
1200(b)
1200(b)
1200(a,b)
1400
1600
1600
1600
1600(d)
1600
1600(a)
1600(a)
1600(a,b)

Not Detected.
20
20
25
20
15
25
20
15
15
20
20
20
20
20
10
15
15(c)
15


Waste feed blended with 3
Non-oxidizing
atmosphere.
EP Toxicitv
Feed
(mg/L)
(ppm)(f)
0.29
0.67
0.32
0.05
0.20
0.12
0.20
0.18
0.21
0.07
0.15
0.20
0.23
0.14
0.25
ND
0.53
0.07
3.00(e)

wt% fuel oil .

Ash
(mg/L)
(Ppm)(f)
0.38
0.89
0.88
4.10
0.38
0.14
0.06
4.90(e)
(g)
0.46
ND
0.05
ND
0.13
0.28
ND
0.43
0.27
1.10




PCC bed depth at 1 inch. All other tests at 1-1/2
Run was conducted to make up for incomplete semi vol
PCDD/PCDF, soluble chromium, and stack gas parti cul
other runs.
in P
Feed
(mg/L)
(ppm)(f)
0.81
0.88
7.00
0.56
0.44
0.53
0.71
0.53
0.96
0.89
0.67
0.35
1.30
0.49
1.73
0.66
1.80
0.55
1.40(e)



Ash
(mg/L) ,
(Ppm)(f)
2.90 -
6.20
3.80
1.60
3.60
0.05
4.10
2.80(e)
(g)
0.82
0.15
ND
ND
0.05
1.80
1.00
0.17
0.23
2.40




inches.
atile organics,
ate samplings on
Data from additional EP Tox and TCLP tests as presented in Appendix G
Nn £? 3Hd PtrOPKSed- TCLP tox1city Characteristic standard Is 5 mg/L
No data due to broken sample container.
                    89

-------
6 5 2  Mobility of Heavy  Metals  -  EP Tox and Proposed TCLP
       Toxicity Characteristic Standards

The results of the EP Tox and TCLP tests conducted on the feed,
furnace ash, and scrubber water  were below the EP Tox and

   e^d is                              no at.

thermal treatment.

6.6  DESTRUCTION AND REMOVAL EFFICIENCY (ORE)  OF  PCBs


The  Phase  I Runs 1-3 were designed to operate  for a  suffi-
 balance  of  PCBs  during these runs.

 The. PPR  analyses performed on the feed indicated detectable but
 l«.J-th"-«pUtSdrpCB  Uvehs based on the         "-
     ees                           P  o      o
comoared to the analyses  of  the  feed employed during Runs 1-3,
which varied from VzOO  ng/g  to  35,200 ng/g as shown on Table
15   These low-feed PCB concentrations contributed to stack gas
PCB cJSclntra?ions that were less than th%a^1/tf^alRlJJe]eCtl °n
limit for Runs 1 and 2 and minimally detectable for Run 3.
However! the PCBs were destroyed  and not  found in the furnace
ash or the stack gas.




    ? !  ' IS

     s s •:!  his?

     UEIo^co^^t^ln^rat^^ha/l^rretroa SIS
 a  hSmogeneSus  waste feed source, the results  discussed  above
 did not confirm  our expectations.

 In order  to  provide the most conservative ORE values,  the
 detectable  levels  of  PCBs in the feed along with  the  sum of  the
                                                          an
                                90

-------
 detection limits for each PCB congener in the stack gas (as
 reported in Appendix B) were employed.  ORE levels for PCBs
 during the Phase I runs were calculated based on the above
 ?uan In1n«-,and ra"9ed from greater than 99.9922% to greater
 than 99.9976%, as shown in Table 15.
 With a RCRA ORE standard of 99.99%, the runs indicated ORE
 levels in excess of the RCRA standard.  In order
 the unit's ability to meet
 99.9999%, the feed
                                                 to  have  proved
                            or  exceed  the  TSCA  ORE  standard  of
                    required higher  PCB  concentrations.
 For Run  3,  where a detectable PCB concentration in the stack
 gas also was obtained,  a ORE of 99.9982% was  calculated   This
 value,  however,  may be  suspect because of apparent concentra-
 tions  of similar PCB congeners in a reagent  blank.  Thus the
 detectable  PCB  concentration in 'the stack gas  may have been  the
 result  of contamination  during analysis.

 The Phase I  runs indicated  ORE levels  in  excess of the RCRA
 standard of  99.99%   Based  on the operating  and sampling and
 3    ifnnn    a*a'  ^ feed  required  a  PCB  concentration exceed-
 ing 1000 ppm in  order to calculate  a  ORE  of  99.9999%.   With  an
 average  PCB  concentration  of 626  ppm  in  the  ten-sector compos-
 ite sample and  actual PCB  concentrations  ranging  from  10 2 to
 35.2 ppm during  Runs 1-3,  as  discussed  above,  the  waste  feed
 required spiking  with additional  PCB material  to  the 1000 ppm
 concentration level  in order  to have ensured a  unit operation
 that would have  met  the  TSCA  ORE  standard  of 99.9999%.         ;
was
MnnnnH-  p
(Appendix C)
                    di?9ussions concerning the ORE calculations
                 anallcal me™°<* employed for the determina-
                   H-°n5 1n.,the feed and stack 9as samples
               Aas + d.(rfined and aPProved in the program's QAPP
               At this time, however, it appears that the two
 nH MfthnHa«n«analytlCal meth°ds for measuring PCBs, Method 680
and Method 8080  may not be adequate for a treatment process
involving thermal destruction of PCBs, such as the tested
Shirco technology.   Method 680 presents difficulties with
detection limits .for individual PCB congeners, and Method 8080
is not applicable to samples that have had their Arochlor
patterns altered due to thermal treatment.   Without a specific
PCB analytical procedure to follow,  Method 680 was employed and
conservative ORE values were obtained utilizing the resulting
analytical  data and a defined calculation  method,  as discussed
aDove.
                              91

-------
             TABLE 15.  DESTRUCTION AND REMOVAL EFFICIENCY OF.PCBs


Date
(Time)
PCB concentration
in waste feed
Ufl<:te feedrate (q/hr)

1
11/3/87
(1228-1800)
10200
30178
Run
2
11/4/87
(1608-1924)
35200
33163
No.
3(a) :
11/5/87
(0938-1330)
20400
35113

3(b)
11/5/87
(0938-1330)
20400
35113
PCB Mass feedrate
(ng/hr x 10a)

PCB concentration in
stack gas (ng/nr)

Stack gas flowrate
(dscmm)

PCB mass emission rate
(ng/hr x 104)

ORE (%)
   3.078
    3.60


  <2.391

>99.9922
  11.673


  <142.9


    3.26


  <2.795

>99.9976
   7.163


  <177.5


    3.14


  <3.344

>99.9953
  7.163


   68.0


   3.14


  1.281

99.9982
 (a)   Calculated  ORE for Run  3  based  on  the  sum  of  the detection  limits
      for each  PCB congener in  the  stack gas.  This calculated  DRt  is
      consistent  with the ORE calculation method for Runs  1  and 2,,

 (b)   Calculated  ORE for Run  3  based  on  a detectable PCB concentration  in
      the stack gas.
                                92

-------
 6.7  OTHER ORGANIC STACK GAS AND PCC OFFGAS EMISSIONS
 The results  of the analyses  of the stack gas  and PCC offgas
 samples  obtained from the SASS and VOST sampling trains  during
 the Phase  I  runs are presented in  Appendix B  and summarized  in
 Table  16.   Highlights of these results  are as follows:

 o   Several  volatile and  semivolatile  organic  compounds were
    detected  in the stack gas  at concentrations  less  than  100
    ppb  and  below established  standards  for direct  inhalation.
 o   Low  levels  of  several  phthalate  compounds  were  also  detected
    in blank  samples  and  may  be  traced  to  contamination  from
                              process,  sampling  equipment,  or
plastic components in the
laboratory apparatus.
 o   Several  volatile  organic  compounds  including  benzene  and
    toluene  were  detected  in  the  stack  gas  and  the  scrubber
    makeup water  and  may be attributable  to  contamination  from
    the  makeup water,  although  PIC  formation  is a possibility.

 o   Other volatile  and  semivolatile organic  compounds, which
    probably  represent  PICs,  were detected.   They include
    halomethanes; chlorinated species including chlorobenzene
    and  methylene chloride; volatile organics including xylenes,
    styrene  and ethyl benzene; oxygenated  hydrocarbons including
    acetone  and acrolein;  carbon disulfide;  and
    p-chloro-m-cresol.
   Dioxins and
   samp!es.
            furans  were  not  detected  in  the  stack  gas
o  The majority of the organic compounds present in the PCC
   offgas samples at levels less than 500 ppb were also present
   in the stack gas.  The additional destruction and removal of
   organics that takes place in the SCC and emissions scrubbing
   systems reduced the concentration of these organic compounds
   in the corresponding stack gas samples.

6.8  ACID GAS REMOVAL
The concentration
the EPA Method 5
1-3.  During Run
results were obta
additional set of
was obtained from
taken during each
EPA Method 5 and
and summarized in
fol1ows:
              of HC1  in the stack gas was measured during
             sampling conducted during the Phase  I Runs
             2, the sampling train malfunctioned  and no
             ined.  Run 1-2 was conducted to obtain the
              data.   The chlorine concentration in the feed
              the ultimate analyses of the feed samples
              of the  runs.  The complete results  of these
             ultimate analyses are reported in Appendix B
              Table 17.  Highlights of these results are as
                              93

-------
     TABLE 16.  PCC OFFGAS AND STACK GAS ORGANIC EMISSIONS
                                       Average Concentration*
                                     PCC Offgas      Stack Gas
                      ppb
Semivolatile oraanics,
   Benzole acid	
   Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
   p-Chloro-m-cresol   	
   Diethylphthalate   	
   Di-n-butylphthalate  	
                   ppb
Volatile orqanics,
   Acetone
   Acrolein  	
   Benzene  	
   Bromomethane
   2-Butanone  	
   Carbon di sulfide  	
   Carbon tetrachloride
   Chlorobenzene  	
   Chloroform  	
   Chloromethane  	. . .
   l,4-Dichloro-2-butene
   Ethyl benzene   	
   lodomethane   	
   Methylene chloride
   Styrene	
   Tetrachloroethene   ....
   To!uene  	
   1,1,1-Trichloroethane
   Trichlorofluoromethane
   Vinyl  chloride   	
   Xylenes  	
                                         2.5
                                         2.0
                                         1.4
                                        24.0
                                         4.4
                                          7
                                         86
                                        200
                                          4
                                          2
                                          2
                                          0
                                         10
                                          0
                                         74
                                          6
                                          5
                                         16
                                          6
                                         12
                                          0
                                         34
                                          0
                                          1
                                          4
                                          3
.9
.7
.0
.7
.6
.6
.4
.4
.7
.7
.6
.7
.6
,6
.5
.2
.2
.3
.2
.6
.3
                6.5
                2.4

                9.1
                9.3
 4.7
 4.0
16.0
 0.7

 9.3
 0.2
 1.4
 0.1
 8.3

 0.4
 2.3
14.4
 3.7
 0.3
 1.3
 0.2
 0.2

 0.7
*  Average values shown represent the
   Values below detection limits were
   at the detection limit.
                                       average  of  all  data.
                                       included  in  the  average
                               94

-------
            TABLE 17.  ACID  GAS  REMOVAL EFFICIENCY


Date
Time 16
Stack gas flowrate (dscfm)
HC1 cone, (ppmv)
HC1 emission rate (g/hr)
Waste feedrate (g/hr)
Ultimate analysis
waste feed (wt% Cl)
HC1 to scrubber (g/hr)
HC1 removal efficiency (wt%)

1
11/3/87
:30-17:50
139
0.4
0.181
30178
0.09
27.93
99.35
Run No.
3
11/5/87 ,;
13:01-13:54
119
2.0
0.590
35113
0.09
32.49
98.18
: 	 ======
1-2*
11/6/87
10:57-12:55
132
3.0
0.998
31856
0.11
36.03
97.23
------ _ _ . . vt M  vwil^vlWV^-tVit W V III Vl l\ G ' M is  I \J I
EPA Method  5  sampling run for  Run  2.
                            95

-------
   Based  on  measured  stack  gas  flowrates  and  HC1  concentra-
   tions,  HC1  emission  rates  were  calculated  and  ranged  from
   0  181  to  0.998  g/hr.   These  values  are below  the  RCRA per-
   formance  standard  of 1.8 kg/hr  (1800  g/hr)  of  HC1  or  a 99
   wt% removal  efficiency.
   Based on
   trations
   flowrate
the ultimate analyses of the feed,  chlorine concen-
ranged from 0.09 to 0.11 wt%,  equivalent to an HC1
to the scrubber ranging from 27.93  to 36.03 g/hr.
   From the above,  calculated HC1  or acid gas
   cies ranged from 97.23 to 99.35 wt%.
                                  removal  efficien-
o  With the HC1 emissions rate being below the RCRA performance
   standard and the scrubber water being maintained at a
   neutral pH of 7.25-8.65 with no caustic addition, the unit
   satisfactorily met acid gas removal  requirements and dis-
   played sufficient capacity to process higher acid gas
   loadings.

The impinger train of the EPA Method 5 runs was not analyzed
for sulfate to determine the concentration of SOo in the
stack qas; therefore, SOo removal efficiency could not, be
calculated.  For the Phase I tests, sulfur concentrations in
the waste feed were less than 0.01 wt% as presented in Appendix
B.  At these low levels, total S02 flows and loadings on the
scrubber  system were minimal.                     \

6.9  PARTICULATE EMISSIONS

Mass particulate loadings in the  stack were measured ;during  the
EPA Method  5 sampling conducted  during the test program.  The
results  are reported in  Appendix  B  and summarized ,in Tab! e  18.

The data  indicate  that  for the entire demonstration, particu-
late emissions  ranged from 7 to  69  mg/dscm, which  is lower  than
the RCRA  standard  of 180 mg/dscm and indicative of  satisfactory
particulate emissions control  at  a  conservative venturi  pres-
sure drop of less  than  20 inches  WC.
   10   ANALYSIS  OF  SCRUBBER  MAKEUP  WATER,  SCRUBBER  WATER,
       SCRUBBER  SOLIDS
                                              AND
 The  results  of the  analyses  of the  samples  of  scrubber  makeup
 water,  scrubber water,  and  scrubber solids  taken  durung the
 test runs  are  reported  in  Appendix  B and  summarized  in  Tables
 19  and  20.  Highlights of these results  are  as  follows:

 o  Scrubber  makeup  water was transported  to the  site in a tank
    truck that  may have  contained some residual  contamination
    prior to  fill up.   Samples of scrubber makeup  water  were
    taken at  the end of  each  run.  No PCBs,  dioxins,  furans,  or
    semivolatile organic compounds were  detected.   Several
                                96

-------
                          TABLE  18.   PARTICULATE  EMISSIONS
Run
No.
1
2
1-2*
10
14
5
6
8
15
18
7
9
11
13
16
17
19
Date
11/03/87
11/05/87
11/06/87
11/09/87
11/09/87
11/09/87
11/10/87
11/10/87
11/10/87
11/10/87
11/11/87
11/11/87
11/11/87
11/11/87
11/12/87
11/12/87
11/13/87
Stack Gas
Fl owrate
Time (dscfm)
1630-1750
1301-1354
1057-1255
1936-1036
1126-1226
1346-1446
0931-1031
1121-1221
1313-1413
1508-1608
0904-1004
1132-1422
1322-1422
1511-1611
1028-1128
1235-1335
1010-1110
139
119
132
131
122
120
127
119
99
136
140
129
100
109
125
109
112
Oxygen
Content
(wt%)
8.5
9.8
7.2
!10.7
12;3
7.5
8.6
8.3
9.8
11.1
8.9
9.8
9.2
9.0
9.0
11.4
9.3
Participate Emissions
Concentration
Measured
(gr/dscf)
0.0093
0.024
0.015
0.0061
0.0042
0.0048
0.0045
0.0029
0.0035
0.0028
0.0073
0.0082
0.0078
0.0078
0.0071
0.0055
0.0055
7% 02 7% 0?
(gr/dscf) (mg/dscm)
0.010
0.030
0.015
0.0083
0.0068
0.0050
0.0051
0.0032
0.0044
0.0040
0.0084
0.0100
0.0093
0.0091
0.0083
0.0080
0.0066
23
69
34
19
16
11
12
7
10
9
19
23
21
21
19
18
15
*  Run 1-2 was conducted to make up for incomplete samplings on
   Runs 1 and 2, that include the particulate sampling for Run 2.
                              97

-------
   volatile  organics  including  benzene,  toluene,  and  trichloro-
   ethene  were measured at  concentrations  less  than  15  ppm.
   The  concentrations of heavy  metals  were all  less  than  0.2
   ppm.   Scrubber makeup water  was  also  analyzed  for  pH,  total
   suspended solids (TSS),  total dissolved solids (IDS),
   chloride, and total  organic  carbon  (TOC).   Average values
   were 7.94 pH, 0.12 mg/L  TSS, 339 mg/L TDS,  25.7 mg/L
   chlorides,  and 2.3 mg/L  TOC.

o  Samples of the water recirculation  through  the venturi
   scrubber  system, referred to as  scrubber water, were also
   taken at  the end of each run.  PCB  concentrations  were less
   than 200  ppt and no dioxins, furans,  or semivolatile organic
   compounds were detected. Small quantities of benzene (2 ppm)
   and toluene  (5.7 to 11 ppm)  were measured in several of the
   samples and  are attributable to  the similar contaminants in
   the scrubber makeup water.  The  concentrations of heavy
   metals in the scrubber water were all less  than 1 ppm except
   for barium,  which ranged from 0.2 to 2.2 ppm,  and lead,
   which ranged from 0.12 to 1.8 ppm.   Scrubber water was also
   analyzed for pH, TSS, TDS,  chloride, and TOC.   Average
   values were  7.7i pH, 116.1  mg/L TSS, 1272 mg/L TDS  6309
   mg/L chlorides, and 2.7 mg/L TOC.  A comparison of the high
   TSS, TDS,  and chloride values as compared to the  scrubber
   makeup water illustrate the  effect of the venturi scrubber
   system on  removing  particulate  carryover from the vapor
   stream prior to its exit  at  the stack.          .  ,

 o  Insufficient quantities of  scrubber  solids  in the scrubber
   water were  available for  representative analyses.

 6.11  OVERALL  DISPOSITION  OF METALS                     ,

 Total metals  analyses  were conducted  on samples  from each  of
 the test  runs  of the  feed, furnace ash, scrubber  makeup  water,
 and scrubber  water.   Metals  analyses  on the scrubber sol ids
 were  incomplete and  suspended  due  to  the  small quantity  of
 recoverable solids.

 Total  metals  analyses  were  also conducted  on  the  particulate
 material  and  probe and nozzle  washes  collected on  the  EPA
 Method  5  sampling  trains from  the  PCC offgas  and  stack gas
 streams  during Phase I Runs  1, 3,  and 1-2.  Run  1-2  was  con-
 ducted  to make up  for incomplete samplings  during  Runs 1  and 2
 and,  in  particular,  the  malfunctioned EPA Method  5  sampling
 during  Run  2.

 The  results of these analyses  are  reported  in  Appendix B and
 summarized  in preceding tables. An overall mass balance of
 lead  through the unit and  a  breakdown of  the  calculated  lead
 concentration in the feed,  furnace ash, and  PCC  offgas and
 stack gas particulates,  is summarized in  Tables  21  and 22.
 Highlights  of these results  are as follows:
                               98

-------
             TABLE 19,  SCRUBBER MAKEUP WATER ANALYSIS
 Characterization
Organi cs
Metals
                                         Range Tc)    Average (d)
pH 	 	 ..:...
TSS, mg/L 	
TDS, mg/L ............
Cl , mg/L 	 . . 	 	
TOC, mg/L 	
7 O.R
0'
. . . . 3 n fi
. . . . 2 4 ft
:• 	 . . < 1
Q ^ O
- p . oo
n 8 A
U . OH
- 7fiK
J 0 0
- 9fi Q
£. D . y
- fi

. 94
. 1 2
O O rt
do 9
0 C 7
dO . /
9 •?
   Total  PCBs,  ppt	
   Total  PCDD/PCDF,  ppt   ...!!!!."'.'.'.*•
   Semivolatiles, ppb   	;.!.'
   Volatiles, ppm                   '
      Benzene	
      Tol uene	  <
      Trichloroethene	 . .'  <
  ND (a)
  ND (a)
  ND (a)
2.0
2.0
2.0
13.0
 5.3
 7.1
   All metals concentrations less than 0.2 ppm.
ND (a)
ND (a)
ND (a)

 6.3
 3.2
 3.7
(a)  ND indicates not detected or less than detection limits
     which vary for each PCB congener, PCDD/PCDF homolog, and
     organic compound.                                 a

(b)  < indicates ND at detectionlimit (as indicated).

(c)  Range values shown represent all  data.

(d)  Average values shown represent  the average of all data

                                                       ' average
                              99

-------
               TABLE 20.  SCRUBBER WATER ANALYSIS
                                        Range (c)   Averaae (d)
Characterization

   nu                         	   6.19 - 8.65     7.71
   TSS 'mq/L*"". '.'.'.'.'. '.'.'.'. '•'•	   49.4 - 557 :   ,116.1
   TDS  mq/L          	    722 - 2653     1272
   c??'•;?(  .::::....	-513.7 - 575.3   *3o.9
   TOC, mg/L  	    < 1 - 6         Z *'

Oraanics

   Total PCBs, ppt	      ND  (a)       ND  (a)
   Total PCDD/PCDF,  ppt	      ND  a        ND  a
   Semivolatiles, ppb	      ND .(a)       ND(a)
   Volatiles, ppm                                 r  • •
       Benzene   	•	  < 2.0 -  2.0      z.o
       Toluene	  < 2.0 - 11.0      6.2

Metals, ppm

   Barium           	    0.2  - ,2.2       0.8
   Barium   	                n  19   10       n?
   |_ea(j   	    O.lt  - l.o       u./

   All  other metals  concentrations  less than  1,ppm  and,average
   concentrations  less  than 0.3  ppm.
 fa)   ND  indicates  not detected  or less  than  detection  limits
      which  vary for each  PCB congener,  PCDD/PCDF homolog,  and
      organic compound.

 (b)   < indicates ND at,detection limit  (as  indicated).

 (c)   Range  values  shown  represent all  data.       :

 (d)   Average values shown represent the average of all  data.
      Values below detection limits were included in the average
      at  the detection limit.
                               100

-------
 The data indicate that a
 of the heavy metals that
 with the furnace ash.
high concentration of the majority
enter the unit with the feed remain
 An overall mass balance of lead through the unit was calcu-
 lated based on the analysis of lead in the samples, the
 measured fe.ed.rate as weighed during the runs' operating
 periods, -the calculated furnace ash flow based on the ulti-
 mate analysis of ash in the feed sample, and the measured
 particle mass and gas volume obtained from the Method 5
 sampling trains.   The balance shows that the majority of the
 lead entering the unit with the feed also remained with the
 Phase I results indicate an average lead mass flowrate of
 n,t  •   r».innJ>e f!ed)  37'° g/hr in the furnace ash,  0.206
 g/nr in the PCC offgas  parti cul ates ,  and 0.109 g/hr in the
 stack gas particulates.   The  quantity of lead leaving the
 unit with scrubber water effluent is  approximately 01204
 g/hr based on  the  maximum measured  concentration  of 1 8 ppm

 Howrate^f 30rUber ^^ ^  *" overa11  approximate 'water
 In  contrast  to  the  high  mass  flowrates  of  lead  in  the  feed
 and  furnace  ash  as  compared  to  the  particul ates , the  PCC  off
 gas  particulates  sampled during  the  Phase  I  runs contained
 an  average of 5364  ppm of lead  and  the  stack gas particu
 lates  contained  an  average of 15,830  ppm of  lead.   By
 ?S£nrn™' ^fjjverage concentration  of  lead  in the  feed was
 1550 ppm.  Although  the  concentration of lead in the
 particulate  matter  increases as  the  process  flow progresses
 through  the  unit, the actual mass flow  of  lead decreases  as
 the  gas  stream  is cooled  and treated  through  the emissions
 contro I  system .
rnnrf    JhJSe  * i™"? samPlin9 and analysis procedures were
conducted to evaluate vaporous lead concentrations in the
rut orrgas and soluble chromium concentrations in the PCC
offgas and stack gas particulates.  The special sampling for
vapor phase lead and soluble chromium were unable to detect
any of either metal 'at levels less than 2.7 ppb and 264 ppb
respectively; -therefore, the evaluations were inconclusive

Other heavy metals, particularly barium and zinc,  with aver-
age concentrations exceeding 100 ppm in the feed (barium 591
ppm, zinc 301 ppm) were also present in high  concentrations
inli in6 to.othernheavy metals,  in the furnace ash (barium
1061 ppm,  zinc 410 ppm)  and scrubber water (barium 0  8 DDm
zinc 0.3 ppm) .                                          r K '
                           101

-------
        TABLE  21.   LEAD  FLOWS THROUGH THE SYSTEM
Test
1
3
1-2*
2
10
14
5
6
8
15
18
7
9
11
13
16
17
1 Q
j. y
Averaqe
Feed
g/hr
90.6
19.3
35.1
46.5
22.9
37.7
22.1
36.2
27.2
16.8
21.4
32.1
16.9
20.4
18.8
8.6
21.0
15 6
jL */ • \y
28.3
PCC Stack
Ash particulates participates
g/hr g/hr g/hr
28.7 0.039 0.122
32.1 0.278 0.098
11.2 0.302 0.108
36.0
33.4 ..-.•;
36.5
39.4
34.8
35.8
37.2
29.8
73.4
29.5 ,
33.5 .
67.3 .-..'.
21.2
37.4
49.0
37.0 0,206 0.109
Run 1-2 was conducted to make up for incomplete samplings
on Runs 1 and 2 that include the PCC offgas and stack gas
particulate sampling for Run 2.
                           102

-------
  TABLE 22.  LEAD CONCENTRATIONS IN FEED, ASH, AND PARTICULATES
 Test
                 Feed
                 ppm
                          Ash
                          ppm
                                        PCC
                                    particulates
                                        ppm
               Stack
            particul.ates
                PPm
  1
  3
 1-2*

 Average
                 3000
                  550
                 1100

                 1550
                          1100
                          1100
                           420

                           873
3939
6114
6040

5364
24493
 8990
14017

15830
    Run  1-2  was  conducted to make up
    on  Runs  1  and  2  that  include the
    particulate  sampling  for Run 2.
                                     for  incomplete
                                     PCC  offgas  and
                                                    samplings
                                                    stack  gas
6.12  OPTIMUM  OPERATING  CONDITIONS

Phase II was designed  to  examine  over  varying  operating
conditions the energy  consumption and  changes  in  the  residual
leve s of heavy metals and organics  in the  furnace  ash versus
tne  levels in  the feed.
Based
the
                                                             of
8 rspr??nn & S"? f? cSn * umP J } on dat* Presented in Tables 7 a-nti
8 (Section 4.2.3.2), Table 23 presents a comparative summary
    power and energy consumption of the unit at varied

                 0"!'!!!?* 51? n0t affect the Performance1 of the
                  of this data are as follows:
uit
unit
° ' -  r°n  n tne PCC operating
                                    temperature from
                                     power usage 48%
                                                     1600°F
                                                     from'
°  J r?o^0r°n !n the SCC operating temperature from 2200°F
   The use of 3 wt% fuel  oil  to supplement the heating value of
   the feed further decreased PCC power usage by 26% to 67% at
   PCC operating temperatures of 1600°F and 1200°F  respec-
        y     h accomPanying  increases  in  overall  feedrate of
                              103

-------
o  Based on the data presented in Table 11 (Section 6 2)   the
   addition of the fuel oil increased the average HHV of the
   feed from 210 to 588 Btu/lb,  This increase in heating value
   is equivalent to a savings of 0.11 kwhr/lb feed.  Based on
   the data presented in Table 23, reductions or savings in
   power when fuel oil was added to the feed were 0.07 and 0.09
   kwhr/lb feed, which closely approximates the calculated
   value of 0.11 kwhr/lb feed based on heating value.

o  The costs for fuel oil  and its attendant facilities still
   must be examined for specific applications to determine the
   cost effectiveness of a fuel oil additive to the feed.  The
   cost of power, the moisture content of the feed, the total
   heating value of the feed, PCC residence time,  and the
   overall PCC design heating input will  all impact on the
   necessity for and  the quantity of the  addition  of fuel  oil
   to the  feed.

As discussed in previous sections, the results did not provide
any  trend  or change  in the residual levels  of the  heavy metals
and  organics in the  furnace  ash  versus the  levels  in the  feed
as the  operating  conditions  were  varied  and  PCC  operating  tem-
peratures  were  maintained  at  1200° to  1600°F. At  an  abnormally
low  PCC operating  temperature  of  900°F,  without  the  input  of
combustion air  to  simulate non-oxidizing  or  pyrolytic combustion
conditions,  total  PCB and  TCDF  concentrations  in  the  furnace ash
 increased.   The  increases  may  indicate that  these  PCC conditions
 led  to  incomplete  desorption  or  incineration  of  PCB  and  TCDF and  to
the  production  of  TCDF  from  the  incomplete  combustion of  PCBs  in
 the  feed.

 6.13  QA  SUMMARY

 The  Phase I  and II runs  had  a we!1-defined  quality assurance/
 Quality control  program  to ensure the  collection of  accurate data.
 This program was  developed as part  of  the test  program  preparation
 activities and was formalized in the  RREL-approved QA Project  Plan
 (Category II).   All  of the sampling  and  analytical work was
 conducted in accordance  with this QA Project Plan, and  the results
 include data quality credibility statements and information that
 confirm the satisfactory precision  and accuracy of the  data
 reported.

 Overall,  the QA/QC data indicate that the measurement data are
 acceptable and defensible.  Samples  were analyzed for PCBs, dioxins
 and furans, volatiles, semivolatiles,  metals,  TCLP extracts
 (volatiles, semivolatiles, and metals),  EP extract metals, chloride
 in filters, hexavalent chromium, total organic carbon,  and solids
 characterization.  The most significant problems noted, from a
 QA/QC standpoint, were that the analyses for PCBs and semiyolat-1les
 were not carried out within the holding time specified by the QAPP
 and selenium was not recovered in the matrix spike samples  for
 solids, TCLP and EP  extracts, and filters.
                               104

-------
TABLE 23.  OPTIMUM OPERATING CONDITIONS - ENERGY CONSUMPTION
Run
No.
1
2
3
1-2
7
Avg

Feed'-.'
rate
(Ib/hr)
66.53
73.11
77.41
70.23
114.10
80.28

1600°
PCC temp.
power
(kwhr/lb feed)
0.2975
0.2495
0.2497
0.2919
0.1827
0.2543

w/fuel oil
6
8
19 .,
Avg

110.77
120.00
88.29
106.35
Overal 1
0.1914
0.1367
0.2356
0.1879
Avg 0.2294
2200°F
SCC temp.
Propane fuel
(Btu/lb feed)
4458
3914
4560
3847
3210
'
3997

1800° SCC
1819
1608
2428
1952

Run
No.
10
14
9
11
13
Avg

Feed-
rate
(Ib/hr)
78.68
95.41
62.95
73.85
88.29
79.84

1200°F
PCC temp.
power
(kwhr/lb feed)
0.1913
0.1608
0.1360
0.0678
0.1189
0.1350

w/fuel oil
15


Avg

100.33


100.33
Overal 1
0.0451


0 0451
Avg 0.1200
                        105

-------
Analyses of solid, liquid, and filter samples for PCBs met most
of the specifications in the QAPP, except for holding time
Blank recoveries were acceptable for all matrices.  Surrogate
spike recoveries tended to be low for feed, higher weight PCBs
in liquids, and ambient air filters.  Recoveries were generally
low for matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate compounds for fur-
nace ash, scrubber makeup water, and the filter blank sample.
Repeatability of the matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate
samples was excellent except for one sample of scrubber makeup
water?  Recovery for the other sample of scrubber makeup water
was within specifications.
                                                sp;ike compounds
                                                are probably
Low recoveries for the PCB surrogate and matrix
suggest that reported results for field samples
lower than the true concentrations.

Analyses of dioxins and furans .in solid and 1 }j|"^j"mPrl
most of the acceptance criteria specified in the QAPP.  Blank
sample analyses showed no contamination from analytical
sources.  Although surrogate recoveries were low for the higher
molecular weight .dioxins, and furans for both types of matrices-,
none of the native dioxins and furans were detected-in  field
samples. Surrogates were recovered  at about 30%  which  suggests
that actual field sample concentrations are probably no greater
than about three times the laboratory-stated detect!on-  limit.
Repeatability for the compounds reported  in two pairs ot
duplicates was excellent.

Quality control data  for volatiles  in solids,  liquids,  VOST
samples, and  TCLP extracts showed  no  significant problems  in
these  analyses.  Some common  laboratory contaminants  (methyl
ethyl  ketone, l,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane,  and  xylene.s) were
detected in more than one blank  analyzed  with  the  solid
samples.   None of these  compounds  should  be considered  a  sig-
nificant contaminant  since they  were  detected  at less  than  five
times  the  method detection limit.   Recoveries  of surrogate
spike  and  matrix  spike  compounds was  excellent  for all  four
matrix types.

No  quality control  problems  were detected with  the se'mivol atile
analyses  except  for  the  holding  time  violation.  Surrogate  and
matrix spike  recoveries  are  acceptable  for almost  all  com-
pounds.   Surrogate  recovery  was  low for 2-fluorophenyl  in TCLP
extracts  of feed  and furnace ash  samples.  This may have  been
due to exceeded  holding  time;  however,  recovery of the other
five surrogate  compounds was acceptable.

Analyses  of metals  were performed  on  solids,  liquids,,  TCLP and
 EP extracts,  and  filter samples.   Several elements (arsenic,
 barium, beryllium,  cadmium,  chromium, copper,
 vanadium,  and zinc)  were detected  in  the   .             ulani,
              However, only  one element (barium),  in one blank
             recovered at greater than five times the detection
                                               lead, silver,
                                          blanks above the detec-
 tion limit.
 sample, was
                                106

-------
    ike
the  data.
                   ,
                   q
           1
     s  and  Inavr,..

       ^^
                    ,
ny  control.   No  problems  were  detected in
                * U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1989-648-163/87097
          107

-------

-------

-------
Agency
                                    Cincinnati OH 45268
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
          EPA
   PERMIT No. G-35
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use, $300
                                                                 Please make all necessary changes on the above label.
                                                                 detach or copy, and return to the address in the upper
                                                                 left-hand corner.

                                                                 If you do not wish to receive these reports CHECK HERE D;
                                                                 detach, or copy this cover, and return to the address in the
                                                                 upper left-hand corner.
                                                                EPA/540/5-89/007a

-------