Superfund Treatability Clearinghouse Litigation Technical Support And Services Rocky Mountain Arsenal (basis F Wastes)


                                         EPA/540/2-89/049
      SUPERFUNDTREATABILITY
             CLEARINGHOUSE
                Document Reference:
EBASCO Services inc. "Litigation Technical Support and Services, Rocky Mountain
Arsenal (Basis F Wastes)." Six-part technical report with a total of approximately 600
 pp. prepared for U.S. Army Program Manager's Office for Rocky Mountain Arsenal
   Cleanup during April and September 1986 and March, April, and May 1987.
              EPA LIBRARY NUMBER:

            Superfund Treatability Clearinghouse - FDBP

-------
                SUPERFUND TREATABILITY CLEARINGHOUSE ABSTRACT
 Treatment Process:

 Media:

 Document Reference:
 Document  Type:

 Contact:
Thermal Treatment - Incineration

Soil/Generic

EBASCO Services Inc.  "Litigation Technical Support
and Services, Rocky Mountain Arsenal (Basis F
Wastes)."  Six-part technical report with a total
of approximately 600 pp. prepared for U.S. Army
Program Manager's Office for Rocky Mountain Arsenal
Cleanup during April and September 1986 and March,
April, and May 1987.

Contractor/Vendor Treatability Study
Bruce Huenfeld
U.S. DOD/USATHAMA
Aberdeen Proving Ground,
301-617-3446
                                                 MD   21010-5401
 Site  Name:
 Location  of  Test:
Rocky Mountain Arsenal,  CO (NPL - Federal facility)

Rocky Mountain, CO
BACKGROUND;  This  report  consists of 5 documents which cover  incineration
tests at  the Rocky Mountain Arsenal (RMA), Denver, CO, ranging  from a  labor-
atory test plan and  bench-scale  test to  full-scale testing.   This abstract
reports only on the  results of bench-scale incineration  tests of contaminants
from Basin F of the  RMA.   Objectives of  the study were to:  1)  Gather  infor-
mation on properties of the wastes, 2) provide a bench-scale  apparatus to
determine incinerability  characteristics of the wastes,  3) demonstrate 99.99%
destruction removal  efficiency (DRE), and 4) determine gas residence time,
temperature and excess 0«  necessary for  99.99% DRE.
OPERATIONAL INFORMATION;   The types of waste discharged  into  the Basin F
lagoon included sodium salts of  chloride, fluoride, hydroxide,  methyl
phosphate, acetate,  sulfate and  pesticides.
    Bench-scale tests were conducted on  pure compounds and field samples.   The
technical approach involved using equipment to simulate  three of the major
incineration mechanisms—pyrolysis, primary incinerator  postflame, and
afterburner postflame.
    The laboratory bench-scale unit was  designed to evaluate  thermal destruc-
tion efficiency up to 1200 F and residence times from 2  to 5 seconds.  The
unit utilized a batch load system with two furnaces and a blended carrier gas.
The first furnace  volatilized the constituents while the carrier gas moved  the
constituents to the  secondary furnace which added ()„ and simulated an  after-
burner in a full-scale unit.
    Residence times  in the afterburner were 1 second or  5 seconds.  Residence
time in the primary  burner was one hour.  Temperature parameters for the pri-
mary and secondary chambers were based on the current limitations of
operational practices for waste  incineration.  Primary burner operating tem-
peratures were 650°, 800° and 900o C.   Secondary afterburner  operating
3/89-22                                              Document Number:   FDBP

   NOTE:  Quality assurance of data nay not be appropriate for all uses.

-------
 temperatures were 650°, 900° and 1200° C.
            0« concentrations were 5%  to 7%.
 Sixteen successful runs were performed.
      The combustion products in the gases were collected by a sampling train
 for subsequent analysis.  A detailed sampling plan is contained in this study.
 An outline of QA/QC measures that will be taken are reported in the "Draft
 Laboratory Test Plan for Incineration of Basin F Wastes  at  Rocky Mountain
 Arsenal, April 1986."  Samples for analysis were collected  from soils,  sludge
 and liquid.  GC/MS was employed to analyze for ten semivolatile compounds in
 the feed stock.  GS/MS selective ion monitoring was used for contaminant
 residue and off gas analysis.
 PERFORMANCE:  In all but a few instances, a 99.99% ORE was  demonstrated for
 the ten principal hazardous organic constituents.   Residues were tested for EP
 Toxicity to determine the leachability of heavy metals contained in the
 Basin F wastes.  No heavy metals exceeded the EP Toxicity limit.   In summary,
 Basin F wastes are incinerable and ORE levels were 99.99% under almost  all the
 conditions investigated.
 CONTAMINANTS;

 Analytical data is provided in the treatability
 of the contaminants by treatability group  is:
 Treatability Group

 WOl-Halogenated  Non-Polar
      Aromatic Compounds
 V03-Halogenated  Phenols
      Cresols and Thiols
WOA-Halogenated Aliphatic
     Solvents
W05-Halogenated Cyclic
     Aliphatics/Ethers/
     Esters/Ketones

W07-Hetercyclics and Simple
     Aromatics
W09-0ther Polar Organic
     Compounds

W13-0ther Organics
CAS Number

108-90-7


CPMS

CPMS02

CPMSO

470-90-6

96-12-8


309-00-2
72-20-8
465-73-6
60-57-1

108-88-3
1330-20-7
ABC

109-92-2
110-71-4
T119-36-8

142-82-5
77-73-6
                 study report.  The breakdown
Contaminants

Chlorobenzene

P-Chlorophenylme thyl
 Sulfide
P-Chlorophenylme thyl
 Sulfone
P-Chlorophenylmethyl
 Sulfoxide
Supona
1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane

Aldrin
Endrin
Isodrin
Dieldrin
Toluene
Xylenes
Alkyl Benzene
Ethoxyethylene
Dimethoxyethane
Benzoic Acid
Heptane
Dicyclopentadiene
Note:  This is a partial listing of data.  Refer to  the document  for  more
       information.
3/89-22                                              Document Number:   FDBP

   NOTE:  Quality assurance of data nay not be appropriate  for all  uses.

-------
                                                               TABLE  1
                                                    REMOVAL EFFICIOKT OF TKM PKIBKriPAL HAZARDOUS
                                                    C COKSn^RJKRS  Mt OWKMHUMO
Tanp Degrees C in
Secondary Burner

Teap Degrees C in
Primary Burner

Gas Residence Ti»e
in Second Burner
(in seconds)

Oxygen Level in
off-gas (%)
                    650     650
                    6SO
                            699
                                    650
                                    650
                                            900     900     900      900      900      900      900      1200    1200    1200    1200
                                            650     800     800      900      900      900
                                                                                             900
                                                                                                      650     900     900     900
                     5.4
                                            5.4
                                                                     5.4
                                                                                     5.4
                                                                                                      5.4     5.4
Run Rumbtc
14 11 6
17
18 20 18 12 3 9 7 8 10 2
13
5

ALDRIN
CPUS
CPMSO
CPMSO2
DBCP
DIELDRIN
ENDRIN
ISODRIN
SUPONA
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
99
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
99
100
.00 100.00 100.00
.00
.00 100.00 100.00
.00
.00 100.00 100.00
.00
.00 100.00 100.00
.00
.00 100.00 100.00
.00
.00 100.00 100.00
.00
.00 100.00 100.00
.00
.00 100.00 100.00
.00
.74 99.38 100.00
.00
100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 99.94 100.00 100.00 100.00 100
100
100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 99.99 100.00 100.00 100.00 100
100
100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 99.41 100.00 100.00 100.00 100
100
100.00 99.99 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100
100
100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100
100
100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 99.97 100.00 100.00 100.00 100
100
100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100
100
100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 99.99 100.00 100.00 100.00 100
100
100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100
, 100
.00 100.00
.00
.00 100.00
.00
.00 100.00
.00
.00 100.00
.00
.00 100.00
.00
.00 100.00
.00
.00 100.00
.00
.00 100.00
.00
.00 100.00
.00
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
3/89-22
                                                                                                         Document Number:  FDBP
                            ROTE:  Quality assurance  of  data  «ay not be appropriate for all uses.

-------
                                                              '  KT-
                                    DRAFT
                      BENCH-SCALE LABORATORY INCINERATION
                                      OF
                                BASIN F WASTES
                            ROCKY MOUNTAIN ARSENAL
                                   MAY 1987
                                 TASK  NO.  17
                         CONTRACT NO. DAAK11-84-D-0017
THE VIEWS,  OPINIONS,  AND/OR FINDINGS CONTAINED  IN  THIS REPORT ARE THOSE  OF
THE AUTHOR(S) AND  SHOULD  NOT BE CONSTRUED AS AN OFFICIAL  DEPARTMENT  OF ARMY
POSITION, POLICY, OR DECISIONS, UNLESS SO DESIGNATED BY OTHER DOCUMENTATION.
THE  USE OF TRADE  NAMES   IN THIS  REPORT DOES  NOT  CONSTITUTE  AN OFFICIAL
ENDORSEMENT OR APPROVAL OF THE USE  OF SUCH COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS.   THIS REPORT
MAY NOT BE CITED FOR PURPOSES OF ADVERTISEMENT.
2306E

-------
                      BENCH-SCALE LABORATORY INCINERATION
                                      OF
                                BASIN F WASTES
                                                                    PAGE
 1.0   INTRODUCTION                                                    1-1
      1.1  PURPOSE                                                    1-1
      1.2  STUDY CONSTRAINTS                                          1-2
      1.3  STUDY APPROACH                                             1-2

 2.0   CHARACTERISTICS OF BASIN F WASTES                               2-1
      2.1  INTRODUCTION                                               2-1
      2.2  BACKGROUND                                                 2-1
          2.2.1  Basin F History                                     2-1
          2.2.2  Basin F Waste Characteristics                       2-2
      2.3  SAMPLING                                                   2-4
      2.4  LABORATORY ANALYSIS                                        2-4
          2.4.1  Objectives                                          2-4
          2.4.2  Analytical Parameters and Methods                   2-5
          2.4.3  Basin F Liquid                                      2-5
          2.4.4  Basin F Overburden                                  2-6

3.0   BENCH-SCALE INCINERATION SYSTEM                                 3-1
      3.1  RATIONAL FOR A BENCH-SCALE SYSTEM                          3-1
      3.2  SYSTEM DESCRIPTION                                         3-1
          3.2.1  Primary Furnace                                     3-2
          3.2.2  Fly Ash Trap                                        3-2
          3.2.3  Secondary Combustor Gas                             3-2
          3.2.4  Secondary Furnace                                   3-2
          3.2.5  Cooling Section                                     3-3
          3.2.6  Sample Collection                                   3-3
     3.3  SAMPLING                                                   3-3
          3.3.1  Introduction                                        3-3
          3.3.2  Particulate and Residue Collection                  3-4
     3.4  OPERATING PROCEDURES                                       3-5
          3.4.1  Soil Tests                                          3-5
77C16F

-------
                              TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                 (continued)
                                                                  PAGE

4.0  BENCH-SCALE INCINERATION TEST CONDITIONS                     4-1
     4.1   SELECTED VARIABLES                                     4-1
           4.1.1  Time Parameters                                 4-1
           4.1.2  Temperature Parameters                          4-1
           4.1.3  Oxygen Concentration                            4-3
     4.2   ANALYTICAL PARAMETERS MONITORED                        4-3

5.0  TEST RESULTS                                                  5-1
     5.1   SUMMARY                                                 5-1
     5.2   FEED SAMPLE ANALYSES                                    5-1
     5.3   RESIDUE ANALYSES                                        5-2
     5.4   OFF-GAS ANALYSES                                        5-2
     5.5   DETERMINATION OF ORE                                    5-3
     5.6   ANALYSIS OF COMBUSTION RESULTS                          5-4
     5.7   ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTS OF INCOMPLETE COMBUSTION           5-8
     5.8   DETERMINATION OF OPTIMUM COMBUSTION CONDITIONS          5-14
     5.9   OPTIMIZATION RUNS                                       5-15
     5.10  EP TOXICITY OF RESIDUE                                  5-15
     5.11  LIQUID TEST BURN RESULTS                                5-15

6.0  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS                                       6-1

APPENDICES
     APPENDIX A   ANALYTICAL RESULTS OF FEED, RESIDUE AND OFF-GAS SAMPLES
     APPENDIX B   CHEMICAL  STRUCTURES  OF  22 SEMI-VOLATILE  ORGANIC  TARGET
                  COMPOUNDS
     APPENDIX C   CHEMICAL STRUCTURES OF IDENTIFIED PRODUCTS OF INCOMPLETE
                  COMBUSTION IN OFF-GASES FROM RUN NOS. 12, 13 AND 14
     APPENDIX D   REFERENCES
                                      ii

-------
                                LIST  OF  FIGURES
Figure 2.2-1
Figure 2.2-2
Location of Boring Sites Within Basin F
Contaminants Identified in the SWLP
  Extracts of the Soils in Basin F
                                                                   Following
                                                                      Page
2-2

2-3
Figure 3.2-1
Figure 3.2-2
Figure 3.2-3
Figure 3.3-1
Figure 3.3-2
Figure 3.3-3
Laboratory Scale Incineration Unit                      3-1
Rotating Tube Furnace Arrangement                       3-2
Rotating Tube Unit                                      3-2
Sampling Train                                          3-4
Solid Residue Collection Flow Chart                     3-4
Modified Sampling Train for High Moisture Samples       3-5
Figure 4.1-1   Exhaust CO and Total Hydrocarbons and Fraction
                 of Test Compound Remaining in Exhaust as a
                 Function of Theoretical Air
                                                        4-3
Figure 5.7.1

Figure 5.7-2

Figure 5.7-3

Figure 5.8-1
Figure 5.8-2
Figure 5.8-3
Figure 5.9-1

Figure 5.9-2
Reconstructed Ion Chromatograph for Products of
  Incompete Combustion in Off-Gases of Run No. 12       5-9
Reconstructed Ion Chromatograph for Products of
  Incomplete Combustion if Off-Gases of Run No. 13      5-9
Reconstructed Ion Chromatograph for Products of
  Incomplete Combustion if Off-Gases of Run No. 14      5-9
Concentration of CO in Off-Gases of Run No. 12         5-14
Concentration of CO in Off-Gases of Run No. 13         5-14
Concentration of CO in Off-Gases of Run No. 14         5-14
Reconstructed Ion Chromatograph for Products of
  Incompete Combustion in Off-Gases of the
  Optimization Run No. 1                               5-15
Reconstructed Ion Chromatograph for Products of
  Incompete Combustion in Off-Gases of the
  Optimization Run No. 2                               5-15
                                      iii

-------
                                LIST OF TABLES
 Table  2.2-1
 Table  2.2-2

 Table  2.4-1
 Table  2.4-2
 Table  2.4-3
 Table  2.4-4
Chemical Characterization of Basin F Liquid
Concentrations of Contaminants in Soil
  Samples Underlying Basin F Liner
Summary of Laboratory Analyses
Physical, Chemical, and Thermodynamic Test
  Results of Basin F Liquid and Overburden
Analytical Results of Basin F Liquid Sample
Analytical Results of the Overburden Sample
Table 3.3-1    Gas Sample Collection Matrix
                                                                   Following
                                                                      Page
2-2

2-4
2-5

2-5
2-5
2-6

3-5
Table 5.1-1
Table 5.2-1
Table 5.3-1
Table 5.4-1
Table 5.5-1

Table 5.7-1

Table 5.7-2

Table 5.7-3

Table 5.7-4

Table 5.9-1
Test Matrix
Feed Sample
Residue Analyses
Contaminants Remaining in Off-Gases
Destruction and Removal Efficiency of
  Principal Organic Hazardous Constituents
Library Search Results of Products of
  Incomplete Combustion in Off-Gas Sample
  From Run No. 12
Library Search Results of Products of
  Incomplete Combustion in Off-Gas Sample
  from Run No. 13
Library Search Results of Products of
  Incomplete Combustion in Off-Gas Sample
  from Run No. 14
Summary of Observed Toxic Products
  of Incomplete Combustion
Summary of Identified Products of Incomplete
  Combustion in Off-Gas Samples of
  Two Optimization Runs
Table 5.10-1   EP Toxicity Results
5-1
5-1
5-2
5-2

5-4

5-9

5-9

5-9

5-9

5-15
5-15
                                      iv

-------
                              TEXT ABBREVIATIONS
A        Frequency Factor
°C       Degree Celsius
DRE      Destruction and Removal Efficiency
E        Activation Energy
EP       Extraction Procedure
FID      Flame lonization Detector
GC-MS    Gas Chromatography - Mass Spectrometry
MM5      Modified Method 5
PCT      Physical, Chemical and Thermodynamic
PIC      Products of Incomplete Combustion
PMO      Program  Manager's Office  for Rocky Mountain  Arsenal Contamination
         Cleanup
POHCs  :  Principal Organic Hazardous Constituents
RCRA   :  Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
SIM    :  Selective Ion Monitoring
SWLP   :  Solid Waste Leaching Procedures
T      :  Temperature
cm
ft
gm
kcal
kg
1
Ib
mg
mm
ppb
ppm
s
fr
ug
centimeter
foot or feet
gram
Kilocalorie
kilogram
liter
pound
milligram
millimeter
parts per billion
parts per million
second
gas residence time
microgram

-------
                             CHEMICAL ABBREVIATIONS
 Ag
 As
 Ba
 BCHO
 Ca
 Cd
 CHClj
 co2
 COD
 CPMS
 CPMSO
 CPMSO,
      A
 Cr
 Cu
 DBCP
 DCPD
 DOE
 DDT
 DIMP
 DMDS
 DMMP
 H
 H20
 HBr
 HCB
 HC1
 HCCPD
 Hg
 K
 Mg
MIBK
N2
Na
 Silver
 Arsenic
 Barium
 Bicycloheptadiene
 Calcium
 Cadmium
 Chloroform
 Carbon Dioxide
 Chemical  Oxygen  Demand
 P-Chlorophenylmethyl Sulfide
 P-Chlorophenylmethyl Sulfoxide
 P-Chlorophenylmethyl Sulfone
 Chromium
 Copper
 Nemagon (Dibromo Chloropropane)
 Dicyclopentadiene
 l,l-dichloro-2,  2-bis-(p-chlorophenyl) ethylene
 Dichloro  diphenyl trichloroethane
 Diisopropylmethyl Phosphonate
 Dimethyl  Disulfide
 Dimethymethyl Phosphate
 Hydrogen
 Water
 Hydrogen  Bromide
 Hexachloro-1, 3-butadiene
 Hydrogen  Chloride
 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Mercury
Potassium
Magnesium
Methyl  Isobutyl  Ketone
Nitrogen
Sodium
2306E
                                      vi

-------
                             CHEMICAL flRRRFVTflTTnK|<;
                                   (Continued)
 NaOH

 °2
 OH
 Pb
 PERC
 PNA
 Se:
 TOC
 Zn
Sodium Hydroxide
Oxygen
Hydroxyl
Lead
Tetrachloroethene
Polynuclear Aromatic
Selenium
Total Organic Carbon
Zinc
                                      vii
2306E

-------
                               1.0   INTRODUCTION
1.1  PURPOSE

The  Program  Manager's  Office  for  Rocky  Mountain  Arsenal  Contamination
Cleanup  (PMO)  is currently  in the process  of gathering information on  the
technical and  economic  aspects of incineration/thermal treatment of Basin  F
wastes.  This  information gathering  process  is one  aspect  of developing  a
broad  remedial  action  alternative  for Basin  F.   The  PMO  has  taken  this
action in accordance with the  National  Contingency Plan,  50  Federal Register
47912  (1985).   Accordingly,  the  PMO  has contracted  Ebasco  to conduct  this
work effort under Task Order 17.

Task Order  17 comprises  several  distinctly separate work elements (Ebasco,
1986a).  One  of these  work elements  consists of laboratory investigations
for determining  the incinerability  characteristics of Basin  F wastes.   Under
this work element,  Ebasco has designed and executed a laboratory test program
(Ebasco,  1986b).  This report  describes  the  rationale,  performance,  and
results of that undertaking.

The objectives of the laboratory test program were to:

    o  Gather  information  on  the  physical,  chemical,  and  thermodynamic
       properties of Basin F wastes (both liquid and contaminated soils) to
       ensure reasonable success in designing an incineration program;

    o  Provide a bench-scale  apparatus that  can  be  used  to  determine the
       incinerability characteristics of Basin F wastes;

    o  Demonstrate that  99.99 percent  destruction  and removal  efficiency
       (ORE) is  achievable for the hazardous organic constituents  associated
       with Basin F wastes;
                                      1-1

-------
     o  Determine what  residence times, temperatures,  and levels of excess
        oxygen  (02)  will   achieve  99.99  percent  ORE  within  the  most
        cost-effective incinerator technology framework; and

     o  Provide guidance for selecting  the  final  incineration  technology  and
        optimizing  the   transition  from  a  bench-scale  system  to  a  pilot
        plant, or from a bench-scale system to a full-scale operation.

1.2  STUDY CONSTRAINTS

The  laboratory test  program was  designed  within  the available  resources.
The  basic  objective  of the program  was to determine and demonstrate  that
contaminants associated with Basin F soils and liquids could be  decomposed
through thermal  treatment.   To  that  extent, the  program was delineated by
the following factors:

     o  The  bench-scale  thermal   destruction   device  was   constructed  to
        determine  the  thermal  decomposition  characteristics  of  Basin  F
        contaminants in a nonflame mode environment;

     o  Testing  of  Basin  F  wastes  was   limited  to  contaminated  solids
        (overburden) overlying the  basin's  asphalt liner and liquid from the
        main impoundment;

     o  Maximum  temperatures at  which  the bench-scale  Incineration system
        was  operated were  900°C  at  the  primary burner  and 1200°C  at the
        secondary burner;

     o  Secondary burner residence times were 2 and 5  seconds; and

     o  Maximum primary burner sample sizes were  limited to 500 grains.

1.3  STUDY APPROACH

The  technical  approach  developed  for  this program  recognizes  the  inherent
limitations of investigations within  a  laboratory environment as well  as the
lack of precise data concerning the feedstocks to be  incinerated.

                                      1-2

-------
The  technical approach  Involves using  equipment  to  simulate  three  of  the
major  incineration  mechanisms:   (1) pyrolysis;  (2) primary incinerator post-
flame; and (3) afterburner postflame.

The  technical  approach  was designed to  focus on and evaluate the impacts of
incinerating  Basin  F contaminated  soil.   Initially,  this approach  did  not
designate one  or more principal  organic  hazardous  constituents (POHCs) to be
incinerated,   but   rather  evaluated   the  impact   of  incineration  on  all
compounds identified in the soil samples.

The  technical  approach  began  with   limited   characterization  of  selected
compounds  in  terms of  physical,  chemical, and  thermodynamlc  properties.
Following this characterization, the  contaminated soil  compounds  were then
tested for determining  the impacts  from  incineration  at  two residence times
(in  the  afterburner),   two   temperatures,   and two  levels  of  excess  02.
Multiple runs  were  used to ensure that  the ORE associated with any compound
would  not  be  masked,   regardless  of  the concentration of  the  incoming
material to be incinerated.
                                      1-3

-------
                     2.0   CHARACTERISTICS OF BASIN F WASTES

 2.1  INTRODUCTION

 Waste characterization  is  a major  factor in  assessing the  feasibility of
 destroying hazardous waste material  by  incineration.   This characterization
 affects  the design  of the  incinerator and its  emission control system, and
 aids in  determining  incinerator operating conditions for complete destruction
 of a specific  organic compound.

 This chapter discusses physical, chemical, and thermodynamic (PCT) properties
 of  Basin   F   wastes that  are  important  in  evaluating  the  incineration
 technology as  well  as  designing a  full-scale  incineration system  based on
 the selected   incineration  technology.   The discussion  of  PCT properties of
 Basin F  wastes are  based on past studies and  limited sampling and analyses
 performed  under this program (Task 17).

 2.2  BACKGROUND

 2.2.1 Basin F History

 Basin F  is located  in  the northwest  part  of the Rocky Mountain Arsenal in
 Section  26.  This asphalt-lined basin had been used  for total retention of
 chemical  wastes   generated  from Army  and Shell  operations.   The  basin was
 used  from 1956 to  1982.  The types  of chemical wastes discharged into the
 basin consisted mainly of aqueous solutions of various  sodium  salts  including
 chloride,  fluoride,  hydroxide,  methyl  phosphonate,  acetate,  sulfate, and
 pesticides.  The  potential for industrial  waste discharge into Basin F was
 eliminated  in  1982  when the  chemical  sewer   line  feeding  the  basin was
 excavated.  The  remaining  Basin  F  liquid has  been evaporating  since  that
 time.  A comprehensive  study conducted in  1982  revealed that the overburden
 and  soil  underneath the  liner of  the  basin   have  been  contaminated  with
various  chemicals that  had accumulated  in Basin  F during  its operational
period.
                                      2-1

-------
 2.2.2  Basin F Waste  Characteristics

 In addition  to the  actual  liquid  wastes contained  within Basin  F,  three
 other categories  of  materials  are present  which may  be  considered  waste
 materials.   These  are the basin liner itself, the overburden above the liner
 (including  precipitates), and  any  contaminated soil adjoining the  basin or
 beneath   the  liner.   Overburden,  liner,  and  contaminated  soils  can  be
 considered together for treatment and disposal.

 Numerous  analyses  have been  conducted  on Basin F  liquid  through the years.
 A  comprehensive review of  the  previous analytical results  was  conducted in
 1977  (Buhts  et  al.,  1977).  The  results of  this effort are  summarized in
 Table 2.2-1.  Contaminant  concentrations in the liquid have likely increased
 since 1977 due to the evaporation of water within the basin.

 A  comprehensive study  of Basin  F was  conducted in  1982 to  determine the
 distribution  of contaminants in  the overburden  and  in the  soil underlying
 the  liner,   and  to assess the  condition of the  liner  (Myers  & Thompson,
 1982).  This  study  involved 16  shallow  borings in the exposed portion of the
 basin as  indicated in Figure  2.2-1.

 The sample cores and  samples  of the overburden were subjected to a series of
 analytic  extraction  procedures.   Among  those  initially  considered  were
 extraction procedure  (EP) toxicity, solid waste  leaching procedures (SWLP),
 and total extraction (bulk  analysis).   The  EP toxicity  procedure  yields  a
 determination  of whether the waste  would be  considered hazardous under the
 Resource  Conservation and Recovery Act  (RCRA).   The SWLP is  similar to the
 EP toxicity  test with the  exception that a  neutral  pH water  is used as an
 extract to  more accurately  simulate leachate migration  potential  (Myers  &
 Thompson,  1982).   Bulk  analyses  utilize  a   solvent  rinse to  determine the
 gross  amount  of  contaminant held  within the  waste matrix  that  could be
 potentially released.

The extracts  from  the SWLP  tests  conducted  on subsamples of the cores  were
analyzed  for  a select  group   of  contaminants   that  had  been identified
previously  in  the Basin  F  liquid.   The  concentrations  of  many  of the
                                      2-2

-------
                              TABLE 2.2-1

               CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF BASIN F LIQUID
Compound or Parameter
PH
Aldrin
Isodrin
Dieldrin
Endrin
Dithiane
DIMP
DMMP
Sulfoxide
Sulfone
Chloride
Sulfate
Copper
Iron
Nitrogen
Phosphorus (total)
Hardness
Fluoride
Arsenic
Magnesium
Mercury
Cyanide
COO
TOC
Units
-
PPb
ppb
PPb
ppb
Ppb
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
PPb
ppm
ppm
ppm
Concentration Ranged
6.9
50.0
2.0
5.0
5.0
30.0
10.0
500.0
4.0
25.0
48,000.0
21,000.0
700.0
5.0
120.0
2,050.0
2,100.0
110.0
1.0
35.0
26.0
1.45
24,500.0
20,500.0
- 7.2
- 400
- 15
- 110
- 40
- 100
- 20
- 2,000
- 10
- 60
- 56,000
- 25,000
- 750
- 6
- 145
- 2,150
- 2,800
- 117
- 1.3
- 40
- 29
- 1.55
- 26,000
- 22,500
I/  Based on analysis of various samples from different locations and
    depths in the basin (Bunts et al., 1977).
2306E

-------
  ^-APPROXIMATE
     WATER LEVEL
         1882
       LIQUID
       BORING LOCATIONS
                                   FIGURE 2.2-1
                        LOCATION OF BORING SITES WITHIN BASIN F
SOURCE: MYERS AND THOMPSON. 1982

-------
 contaminants  in the SWLP  extracts  were very low  or  beiow detectable limits
 (Myers  & Thompson, 1982).   A map summarizing the  SWLP cores is presented in
 Figure  2.2-2.

 The  contaminants  found  above their  respective action  level concentrations
 included Aldrin, Dieldrin, Endrin, Isodrin, organo-sulfur compounds, dibromo-
 chloropropane  (DBCP),  arsenic,  and fluoride.   Borings 01 and  02  were found
 to  have the greatest  number  of contaminants in the  extracts for  all depths
 intervals.   Also,   the concentrations  of the  contaminants   in  the extracts
 from these two  borings were generally higher than those associated with other
 borings.

 The  SWLP tests,  conducted  on  the  overburden  samples  collected  from five
 boring  sites,  resulted in  much higher  concentrations of contaminants in the
 extracts  than  in those associated  with the soils  underlying the  liner.  In
 addition  to the contaminants  identified in the  SWLP extracts from the cores,
 concentrations  of   diisopropylmethyl  phosphate  (DIMP)  and  dicyclopentadiene
 (DCPD)  were found in some of the extracts  from the overburden.

 Only the  extracts  from the cores collected at Boring 02 from the 0 to 1 foot
 (ft)  and 1 to  2 ft  intervals  exhibited  concentrations  exceeding 100 times
 their respective water quality  levels (see Figure 2.2-2).   For the 0 to 1 ft
 interval, the concentrations  of Aldrin, Dieldrin,  Endrin, and  Isodrin in the
 extract  exceeded  the  criteria.   In  the  1  to  2  ft  interval,  only the
 concentration of Dieldrin  in the extract  exceeded  the criteria.

 As discussed previously, Boring 02  was the only boring  location in the  study
 where the liner was  found to  be in  poor condition.   Contamination in the
 overburden  or  liquid  (when  this area  was innundated)  probably was able to
 migrate  in  high  concentrations  into  the  soil  due  to  the deteriorated
 condition of the liner.  In other areas of the basin  evaluated  in  this study,
 the liner appeared to have maintained sufficient integrity to prevent the
migration of large  amounts of contaminants into the underlying  soils.

Recent  investigation  (ESE, 1986)  at Basin  F revealed  that subsurface  soil
contamination has  occurred only in locations where integrity  of  the asphalt
                                      2-3

-------
                                                                        A ALDRIN
                                                                        B DIELORIN
                                                                        C ARSENIC
                                                                        O ENORIN
                                                                        E ISODRIN
                                                                        F FLUORIDE
                                                                        G SULFURS
                                                                        H DBCP
                                                                        X ACTION LEVELS NOT EXCEEDED
                                                                      NO SAMPLE NOT ANALYZED
                                                                        • INDICATES CONCENTRATION
                                                                          EXCEEDS 100X THE ACTION LEVEL
                                                                            NOTE: NUMBERS IN PARENTHESIS
                                                                                 DENOTE INTERVALS BELOW
                                                                                 LINER AS FOLLOWS:
                                                                                 (1)- 0.0 -1.0 FT
                                                                                 (2) -1.0 -2.0 FT
                                                                                 (3) - 2.0 - 3.0 FT
                                                                                 (4) - 3.0 • 4.0 FT
APPROXIMATE
WATER LEVEL
     1982
                                                                   A, B, D (2)
                                                                  31   F(3)
                   X(2)
                 acoi
                  NO (4)
                                                                            AD(1)
                                                                             X(2)
                                                                            NO (3)
                                                                            NO (4)
                                              X(2)
                                              X(3)
                                             NO (4)
                                       C(2)
                                      A, 0(3)
                                       X(4)
                                                                             A.B.C.D. E(1)
                                                                               A, C, D. F (2)
                                                                             A. B, C. D, F (3)
                                                                             A,B,C. D, F(4)
                                                             X(2)
                                                             X(3)
                                                           NO (4)
                                                                          A«B*C. D«E*F. G.
                                                                           A. B*C, 0. E, F. G (2) 02
                                                                             A. B. C. D, F. G (3)
                                                                               A. C, D, F. G (4)
                                                                     X(2)
                                                                     X(3)
                                                                    NO (4)
                                        C(2)
                                       NO (3)
                                       NO (4)
LIQUID
BORING LOCATIONS
                                           FIGURE  2.2-2
                          CONTAMINANTS IDENTIFIED IN THE SWLP EXTRACTS
                                       OF THE SOILS IN BASIN F
OURCE MYERS AND THOMPSON. 1982

-------
 liner is questionable.   Analytical data collected from this investigation is
 presented in Table  2.2-2.   The study  concluded that the  highest  levels of
 contaminants  (a variety of volatile organics, organochlorine pesticides, and
 elevated levels  of  metals) were  found in  the  boreholes  located  along the
 eastern  boundary of  the basin  and/or in areas where liner  integrity was poor
 (ESE,  1986).  Deepest contamination  (35 ft) was  found along the east boundary
 and  in the southernmost area of Basin F.

 2.3  SAMPLING

 The  purpose  of  the  sampling program was to  collect  Basin  F waste materials
 in  sufficient  quantities for  bench-scale  thermal destruction testing.   The
 sampling  program was not  designed to collect representative samples,  i.e.,
 samples  that  represent the average  spectrum of  contaminants associated with
 Basin  F.

 Grab  samples  from the north end of  the  basin were collected using a bucket-
 type  sampler.   Approximately  15 gallons  of liquid was  collected during the
 liquid sampling  program.

 Soil sampling was limited to collecting overburden from the most  contaminated
 area of  the basin.   It  was determined that the  source contamination problems
 should be tested explicitly.   For that reason,  overburden  from  the Borehole
 01  was  collected by  using a hand auger.   Borehole  01  was  selected for
 sampling  because past  study has indicated highest concentrations of contami-
 nants  in this  borehole than any  other boreholes studied.   Approximately 30
 kilograms  of  overburden  sample   were  collected during  the  soil sampling
 program.

 2.4  LABORATORY ANALYSIS

 2.4.1  Objectives

The  Basin  F   wastes  characterization   program  was  designed  to   gather
information on  physical,  chemical,  and  thermodynamic  properties that  are
essential  in  understanding   the  performance   of  the  bench-scale   thermal
                                      2-4

-------
                                    CONCENTRATIONS OF CONTAMINANTS  IN  SOIL SAMPLES UNDERLYING BASIN F LINER
Constituents
Volatile* (N-40)T
Chlorobenzene
CHCIj
1.2-Dichloroe thane
BCHO
BCHD
Ethyl benzene
Tetrachl oroethene
Tetrachloroethene
Toluene
Toluene
1,1,1-Trichloroe thane
m.xylene*
MIBK
DMOS
Benzene
o,p-xy1ene
Semi-Volatiles (N-401
Aldrin
Dieldrin
Endrin
DIMP
Isodrin
OCPD
DBCP
PCPMS
PCPMSO
DMMP
PCPMS02
Hetalt (N-40)
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Zinc
Arsenic
Mercury
Number
of
Detections*

2
3
1
5
1
2
7
1
7
_
1
2
2
3
3
1

9
7
7
2
7
7
7
3
5
6
14

1
36
40
4
35
20
1
Concentrations (ua/om)
Range

0.8-5
0.3-70
1
2-30
25
1-8
1-40
25
1-1000
25
0.4
0.4-5
0.4-1
2-60
1-3
10

0.7-4000
100-2000
90-900
0.5-0.8
100-3000
30-4000
0.044-8.1
6-700
4-70
3-70
0.5-300

2.0
11-34
5.0-2300
18-35
33-320
4.8-18
0.08-0.08
Mean

3
30
9
_
5
10
_
400
__
—
2
0.7
30
2
—

1000
500
500
0.6
1000
1000
2.4
400
20
20
30

19
85
24
68
9.6
0.08
Median

3
4
5
—
5
10
—
300
—
—
2
0.7
10
2
— -

1000
400
400
0.7
1000
600
0.86
400
5
7
5

18
16
21
57
9.2
0.08
Standard
Deviation

3
40
10
_
5
10
—
400
—
—
3
0.4
30
1
~~

1000
500
300
0.2
1000
1000
3.0
400
30
30
70

5.6
370
7.7
49
3.6
0.08
ESE
Detection
Limit
(ug/gm)

0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
__
0.3
0.3
—
0.3
—
0.3
0.3
0.5
0.3
0.3
0.5

0.9
0.3
0.7
0.5
0.3
0.3
0.005
0.3
0.4
2
0.3

0.9
7.2
4.8
17
16
4.7
0.05
MRI
Detection
Limit
(ug/gm)

0.3
0.7
0.4
0.8
«
0.4
0.5
__
0.3
—
0.5
—
0.4
4.0
1.0
0.5

0.5
0.6
4.0
3.0
0.6
6.0
0.005
0.3
1.0
3.0
0.4

0.5
7.4
4.9
16
28
5.2
0.07
•  Number of samples in which constituent was detected.
T  N • Number of samples analyzed.

Source:  ESE (1986).

-------
 destruction unit and also in designing a  full-scale incineration system.  It
 should be recognized that the  sampling and analytical programs were  limited
 in  scope, and as such, the  results  derived from these  programs  may not be
 representative of the entire  spectrum of  wastes  associated with Basin  F.

 2.4.2  Analytical Parameters

 The physical, chemical, and  thermodynamic parameters  that were analyzed  for
 Basin F liquid and overburden samples are identified in Table  2.4-1.

 2.4.3  Basin F Liquid

 The Basin F liquid sample was  described  to have a motor  oil-like  appearance
 and a fairly  homogeneous  composition.  The pH  of  the sample was  6.02.   The
 analytical  results of  the Basin F  liquid sample are shown  in Tables 2.4-2
 and  2.4-3.    Only  parameters  found  in  concentrations  higher  than their
 detection limits  are  reported  in   Tables  2.4-2  and  2.4-3.  Table 2.4-2
 presents  the results  of proximate,  heating value, and ash fusion temperature
 analyses  of  Basin  F liquid and  overburden samples.

 Basin  F  liquid  is highly corrosive  (corrosivity 50  millimeters   per year).
 It  is  neither  ignitable nor  reactive.  The heating value  of the liquid waste
 was  found  to  be 4  Btu/lb.   Table  2.4-3  presents  analytical  results of
 organic,  inorganic,  and  metal  constituents  that were  detected in  Basin  F
 liquid.

 The  concentration of sodium (Na) was  found to be 2300  parts per million (ppm)
 while  calcium (Ca),  magnesium  (Mg)  and  potassium (K)  ranged from  5 to 30
 ppm.   Among  the inorganic constituents,  chloride concentration was found to
 be  the highest  (120,000 ppm) which  is almost  2.5 times  more than what  was
 found in  1977  (See Table 2.2-1).

Among the trace  metals, copper concentration was found to be high (210  ppm)
while  cadmium  (Cd),  lead  (Pb),  and  mercury   (Hg)  were  in the  parts  per
billion (ppb) range (74 to 140  ppb).
                                      2-5

-------
                                  TABLE  2.4-1

                        SUMMARY OF LABORATORY ANALYSES
Overburden (One Sample)

       Volatlles by GC/MS
       Semi-Volatiles by GC/MS
       ICP Metals
       Arsenic
       Mercury
       3 RCRA Tests (ignitability, reactivity, corrosivity)
       Proximate and Ultimate Analysis
       Elemental Composition
       Heating Value

Liquid (One Sample')

       Volatile Aromatics
       Volatile Halocarbons
       Organo Chlorine Pesticides
       DCPD/BCHPD/MIBK
       Organo Sulfur Compounds
       DIMP/DMMP
       ON/OP Pesticides
       Arsenic
       Mercury
       ICP Metals
       3 RCRA Tests
       Elemental Composition
       Heating Value
2306E

-------
                                  TABLE  2.4-2

              PHYSICAL, CHEMICAL, AND THERMODYNAMIC TEST RESULTS
                      OF BASIN F LIQUID  AND OVERBURDEN iX
       Parameter                             Liquid          Overburden
Proximate Analysis (percent weight, wet)
    Moisture                                                   23.93
    Volatiles                                                  14.47
    Fixed Carbon                                                2.33
    Ash                                                        59.20
                                                              100.01
Higher Heating Value (Btu/lb)
    Wet Basis                                 4                37
Ash Fusion Temperature ("F)!/
    Initial Deformation                                      2242 - 2253
    Softening                                                2329 - 2377
    Hemispheric Lump                                         2512 - 2622
    Fluid                                                    2784 - 3000
Reactivity (mg/gm)
    Cyanide                                  <0.02              3.6
    Sulfide                                  <0.02             <0.02
Corrosivity
    Millimeters/year                         50                 1.1
Other
    Bulk Density (lbs/ft3)                                    100
    Specific Heat Dry (Btu/lb-°F)                               0.25  -  0.30
    Thermal Conductivity (Btu/hr-ft-eF)                         0.32

II Tests were conducted by UBTL in Salt Lake City under Task 17.
21 On one of the ash fusion analyses, a eutectic effect was indicated.
2306E

-------
                                  TABLE 2.4-3
                  ANALYTICAL RESULTS OF BASIN F LIQUID SAMPLE
Organics
Aldrin (ppb)
Oieldrin (ppb)
Endrin (ppb)
Isodrin (ppb)
ppDDE (ppb)
ppDOT (ppb)
DIMP (ppb)
CPMSO (ppb)
CPMS02 (ppb)
Hexachlorocylopentadiene (ppb)
Atrazine (ppb)
Malathion (ppb)
Parathion (ppb)
Supona (ppb)
Vapona (ppb)
Benzene (ppb)

2,300
459
596
1,980
109
340
400
1,000
1,000
1,850
220
810
110
340
890
7.7
Inorganics
Calcium (ppm)
Magnesium (ppm)
Potassium (ppm)
Sodium (ppm)
Chloride (ppm)
Fluoride (ppm)

METALS
Arsenic (ppm)
Cadmium (ppb)
Chromium (ppb)
Copper (ppm)
Lead (ppb)
Mercury (ppb)
Zinc (ppb)


6.8
5.6
30
2,300
120,000
21


3.0
8.4
85
210
74
140
950

2306E

-------
 The  Basin  F  liquid  analysis  for  selected  organic  compounds  indicated  no
 volatile  halogenated  organics  present  above  the  limits  of  analytical
 detection.   Of the volatile  aromatic organics, benzene was  found to be 7.7
 ppb.

 Among the  organochlorine pesticides,  Aldrin,  Isodrin,  and hexachlorocylo-
 pentadiene  were found to be  2300 ppb,  1980 ppb,  and 1850 ppb, respectively.
 The remaining chlorinated pesticides  ranged from 109 to 596 ppb.

 The organophosphate pesticides ranged  from 110 to 890 micrograms per liter
 (ug/1) or  ppb,  with highest  concentration being attributed  to Vapona (890
 PPb).

 The  concentration  of DIMP,  CPMSO,   and  CMPS02 were  found  to be  400 ppb,
 1000 ppb, and 1000  ppb, respectively.

 2.4.4 Basin  F Overburden

 The analytical results of  the overburden  sample  are shown  in Tables 2.4-2
 and 2.4-4.   The proximate analysis  showed that the  sample contained  almost
 24  percent  moisture and  15  percent  volatile matters.  The ash content  of the
 sample  was  found  to  be  59 percent.   The heating  value of  the  sample was
 measured to be 37 Btu/lb.

 Analyses  on   reactivity,   corrosivity,   and  ignitability   indicated  the
 overburden  sample  to  be  nonignitable,  corrosive  (corrosivity 1.1 millimeter
 per year), and reactive due to cyanide content  (3.6 milligrams per gram).

 Concentrations  of  sodium and chloride were  found to  be 4500  ppm  and 1700
 ppm,  respectively.  Among the trace metals,  the concentration of copper was
 found to be the highest  (5900 ppm),  followed by zinc (430 ppm)  and  lead (270
The  organic analyses  indicated  an absence  of  any volatile  species.   The
chlorinated pesticides  present in the  sample  were Aldrin, Dieldrin,  Endrin,
                                      2-6

-------
                                 TABLE
                  ANALYTICAL RESULTS OF THE OVERBURDEN SAMPLE
     Organics
                            Inorganics
Aldrin (ppm)
Dieldrin (ppm)
Endrin (ppm)
Isodrin (ppm)
Supona (ppm)
DCPD (ppm)
DBCP (ppm)
CPMS (ppm)
CPMSO (ppm)
CPMS02 (ppm)
2480
1300
 165
 100
   6.7
  69.7
  13.7
 216
  34.7
 180
Sodium (ppm)
Chloride (ppm)

METALS

Arsenic (ppm)
Cadmium (ppm)
Chromium (ppm)
Copper (ppm)
Lead (ppm)
Mercury (ppm)
Zinc (ppm)
4500
1700
   3.9
   1.4
  83
5900
 270
   3.5
 430
2306E

-------
 and Isodrin.   Concentrations  of Aldrin and  Dieldrin were found  to  2480 ppm
 and 1300 ppm, respectively.

 The other  organic  compounds  found in  the  sample  were  DCPD,   DBCP,  CPMS,
 CPMSO, and CPMS02 with concentrations ranging from 13 to 216 ppm.
                                      2-7
2306E

-------
                     3.0  BENCH-SCALE INCINERATION SYSTEM
 3.1  RATIONALE FOR A BENCH-SCALE TEST SYSTEM

 Thermal  decomposition  laboratory  tests  have  been  performed  on both  pure
 compounds  and field samples to  determine  incineration  parameters,  including
 residence  time,  temperature, and  excess  oxygen required to  decompose  toxic
 chemicals.   These  laboratory  tests  have  been  performed  primarily  using
 milligram-to-gram size  samples.  These  small sample  sizes have been adequate
 to characterize  incineration parameters for pure compounds and compounds in
 high concentrations.   For chemicals that  are present in low  concentrations,
 these  small  sample  sizes  have not  been adequate to demonstrate 99.99 percent
 destruction  due  to  the analytical limits  of  detection  of the off-gases.  It
 is  of  interest  to demonstrate  99.99  percent  destruction   for all  toxic
 constituents  in  a  feed sample regardless  of  whether or not that constituent
 is chosen as  a  POHC.  Although  there are  substantial data  on  the thermal
 destruction  of individual compounds,  incineration tests on field samples are
 necessary  to adequately simulate the interaction  of various  constituents at
 high temperatures  and  the production  of  products  of  incomplete combustion
 (PIC).  The  bench-scale test unit  for Task 17 was designed to measure ORE up
 to 99.99  percent for  constituents of  concern  at Basin  F  for soil, sludge,
 and liquid samples.

 3.2  SYSTEM DESCRIPTION

 The laboratory bench-scale unit  was designed to evaluate thermal destruction
 efficiency  at temperatures  up  to  1200°C  and  residence times  from 2  to  5
 seconds.   The unit  utilizes a  batch-load  system  with two   furnaces  and  a
 blended carrier  gas to simulate  combustion gases (Figure  3.2-1).  The  first
 furnace  volatilizes  the   constituents  while  the   carrier  gas  moves   these
 constituents  into  the  secondary furnace  which simulates  afterburners in  a
 full-scale incineration plant.   In the secondary furnace, additional blended
gases  with  0_  are added and  temperature  is increased  to  decompose  the
hazardous  constituents.   The  combustion  products  in  the off-gas  are  then
 collected in various sorbents in the  sampling train.
                                      3-1

-------
          ROTATING
          FURNACE
  "-TFlD
         INCINERATION
           FURNACE
         (AFTERBURNER)
   GAS
 SUPPLY
CONTROLS
AA A
                    FLY ASH
                   SEPARATOR
                  _ COOLING
                  r- SECTION
SAMPLING
 TRAIN

                                   EXHAUST
                                     PUMP
SECONDARY
  GAS
PREHEATER
                        FIGURE 3.2-1
       LABORATORY SCALE INCINERATION  UNIT

-------
 3.2.1  Primary Furnace

 The  primary  furnace  (Figure  3.2-2)  was   an   electric  furnace  with  a
 programmable temperature controller  capable  of maintaining  1000°C with gas
 flows up to 20  liters  per  minute.  A gas supply  system  was  used to provide
 blends  of  nitrogen  (N2),  carbon  dioxide   (C02),   and  02  to  simulate
 various combustion processes  in fuels.   The  primary  furnace barrel (Figure
 3.2-3) was  130  millimeters (mm)  in  diameter  and 200 mm in  length.  During
 test  conditions  the maximum  temperature  rise  of the  primary  furnace was
 about 5.5°C per minute  and  the carrier gas velocity was  maintained between 6
 and 8 centimeters  (cm) per  second.

 3.2.2  Fly  Ash Trap

 A  fly ash  separator  was installed between  the primary and secondary furnace.
 The purpose of this separator was  to remove  ash  from the carrier gas and to
 prevent plugging of  the  secondary furnace.   The ash separator was  a cyclone-
 type  design capable of  removing  particulates  as small  as  100 microns.  It
 was constructed  of  stainless  steel and  insulated  to  prevent  heat  loss
 between the  primary and secondary  furnaces.

 3.2.3   Secondary Combustion Gas

 Additional  gases were introduced  between the  primary and secondary furnaces
 to  simulate  secondary combustion gases.  The  composition of this gas was the
 same  as that of the primary  carrier gas which increases the total gas flow
 rate  by 50  percent.   The carrier  gas was  preheated to near (± 50°C) that of
 the primary  carrier gas temperature.

 3.2.A   Secondary Furnace

 The  secondary  furnace  was designed to  heat  gases  up  to  1200°C from the
primary  furnace  along  with the  secondary  airflow  and  to maintain the  gases
at  this temperature for  between 2  and  5  seconds.   To  have fully developed
flow while avoiding high  pressure losses in the furnace,  a velocity range of
20  cm/sec  to 500  cm/sec was  established.   For this velocity range and the
                                      3-2

-------
 fins Supply
ODD
oo o
        Filter
                On/
                Off
Temperature
Controllers
                                        Temperature
                                        Recorder
                                        Programmer
                  FIGURE 3.2-2
 ROTATING TUBE FURNACE  ARRANGEMENT

-------
      RIDING
       RING
                               130 mm DIA.
       RIDING
        RING
150 mm DIA.
                                                             GAS
                                                            JNI.GT
                                                              TYPE
                                                          THERMOCOUPLE
DRIVE
CHAIN
SPROCKET
              SLIP
              SF.AL
                        FIGURE  3.2-3
                ROTATING TUBE  UNIT

-------
 desired gas flow rate,  the furnace tube diameter was approximately 2-1/2 cm.
 To maintain  a  residence  time  of  5  seconds,  the furnace  tube was  built
 approximately  10 meters long.   The secondary furnace tube was constructed of
 fused quartz to provide a nonreactive environment  at  high temperature.  Two
 furnace tube lengths were used to  provide  2 and 5 second residence times in
 the secondary  burner.

 3.2.5  Cooling Section

 The  cooling section consisted  of a  straight 2.5  cm diameter  quartz tube
 approximately  3 feet long.   Exit temperature  from the  cooling  section was
 monitored  to  insure  that  temperature  was  maintained   between  200°C  and
 300°C.   Insulation was applied to the tube to adjust the exit temperature.

 3.2.6   Sample  Collection

 All  off-gases  from  the secondary  furnace  entered  the  sample  collection
 system  that was  designed  to  remove organic  and inorganic  constituents of
 concern.   A pump  was  used  downstream  of  the  sample collection  system to
 maintain  near-atmospheric  pressure  in  the entire  flow  train.   The  sample
 collection system is described in detail in Section 3.3.

 3.3  SAMPLING

 3.3.1   Introduction

Gases generated  from all test incineration  runs  require  a collection  system
of  nonparticulate  and  particulate  fractions.   In  general,  the   sampling
apparatus for collecting off-gas effluents includes three major components:

       o  One  or more thermostatically  controlled compartments  to  maintain
          the  gas  at a  temperature consistent with  the collection medium,
          usually hot (200°C)  for  particulate collection  and cool (20°C) for
          sorbent collection of the more volatile constituents;

       o  Sample collectors,  such as filters and sorbents;  and
                                      3-3

-------
       o  Vacuum pump and gas meter.

The sampling train used is shown  in  Figure  3.3-1.   This  device  is  physically
similar to the Modified Method 5 (MM5) sampling train.

3.3.2  Particulate and Residue Collection

Bottom residue  left  in the kiln  from the test burn was removed by the most
efficient means available to the lab which was consistent with:

       o  Complete removal (>99 percent);
       o  Prevention of outside contamination; and
       o  Prevention of damage to the kiln.

Residue removal and cleaning of the  kiln were made to  assure subsequent test
burns were  not  cross-contaminated.  Bottom residue was  stored at  about  4°C
in glass bottles with Teflon-lined caps until combined  with the fly ash.

The fly  ash separator retained the  larger  particulates carried through  the
primary furnace tube.  The fly ash was removed and stored at about  4°C.

Filter cassettes were  used to trap particulates which were not separated as
fly ash and may vary in size  from 1 to 100 microns.  The  filter  used was a
glass  fiber-type  and  was  stored   at  4°C.   in  a  glass  bottle  with  a
Teflon-lined cap.

Figure 3.3-2 illustrates  the flow of the residue  sample into the analytical
system.  The three  solid  fractions from the  test  burns  were weighed and the
weight summed to estimate the percentage of  sample volatilized:

                                              Wp   WF   Wp
            Percent Sample Volatilized = (1 -  p *  ^       ) x  100
                                                    WS
                 Where     WB = Weight of bottom residue
                           Wp = Weight of fly  ash
                           Wp = Weight of filter particulates
                           W. = Weight of original  sample
                                      3-4

-------
                      HEATED AREA
TEMPERATURE SENSOR
                 RECIRCULATION PUMP

                          THERMOMETERS
                       ORIFICE
  THERMOMETER

L_ ^FILTER HOLDER
         SORBENT
          TRAP
                                          IMPINGERS  'ICE BATH

                                        PAS9_ VALVE
                                              MAIN VALVE
THERMOMETER

    CHECK VALVE
                                DRY GAS   AIR-TIGHT
                                 METER      PUMP
                                                                 VACUUM LINE
                                  FIGURE 3.3-1
                              SAMPLE TRAIN

-------
PHYSICAL
 TESTS
INORGANIC
  TESTS
                                  1
ORGANIC
 TESTS
                                                  PARTICULATES
                                                      i
                                                   WEIGHTED
                                                    COMBINE
                                                     WITH
                                                     XAD-2
                                                    EXTRACT
                                                      I
                                                    ANALYZE
                        Figure 3.3-2
         SOLID  RESIDUE  COLLECTION  FLOW CHART

-------
The  bottom  ash and fly ash were combined and  homogenized.  Allquots  of  this
residue were  taken for the various  chemical and physical analyses  required
to determine the distinction efficiency of the POHCs.

The  particulate filter was  weighed and  combined with  the  XAD-2 resin  for
extraction and analysis.

Table 3.3-1 describes  the  types of sorbent and  impinger solutions that  were
used to  trap  organic and  inorganic  products from the  incineration.   Figure
3.3-3 depicts the sampling train.

After  a test  run,  the sorbents  and  impinger  fractions,  as  well as  the
condensate  when   applicable,   were   transferred  to   glass   bottles   with
Teflon-lined caps for storage at about 4°C.

3.A  OPERATING PROCEDURES

The  following  sections outline  operational  considerations  for the  soil,
sludge, and liquid tests.

3.A.I  Soil Tests

The typical operation sequence  for the bench-scale  soil sample testing is as
follows:
       o  Weigh out appropriate sample size (200-500 grams ±0.5 grams).

       o  Place the  sample  in  the  kiln  barrel  and  bolt the  barrel halves
          together.

       o  Place the kiln barrel into the  furnace and attach the thermocouple
          and gas connections.

       o  Set the  secondary  furnace temperature  and allow it  to reach test
          condition temperature before proceeding.
                                      3-5

-------
                                  TABLE 3.3-1
                         GAS SAMPLE COLLECTION MATRIX
Compound
 Class
   Sorbent
Impinger
Water
 Trap*
Volatile Organics
Tenax/Charcoal
                      Test
Semivolatile Organics   XAD-2


Volatile Metals




Acid Compounds


Cyanide


Basic Compounds
                    Silver Catalyzed

                    Ammonia Persulfate


                    0.1 NaOH


                    0.1 NaOH


                    0.1 HC1
                      Test


                      Test




                      Test


                      Test


                      Test
*A water trap will be utilized when the test sample is sludge or liquid.
 (See text.)
2306E

-------
GAS FLOW.
         FILTER
                        CONDENSER
                   CONDENSATE
                     TRAP
TENAX/CHARCOAL
    TRAP
                                  IMPINGERS
                                   XAO-2
                   FIGURE 3.3-3
          MODIFIED SAMPLING TRAIN
        FOR HIGH  MOISTURE SAMPLES
                                           VACUUM
                                            PUMP

-------
o  Switch on the evacuation exhaust pump.

o  Establish carrier gas flow at the desired blend and  flow  rate.

o  Start temperature ramp on primary furnace.

o  After  reaching  the  desired   test  temperature  on   the   primary
   furnace,   maintain  desired  test  conditions  for  one  hour  before
   starting shutdown procedures.

o  Turn  primary  furnace off  and  stop  barrel  rotation,   but  continue
   gas flow.

o  After  primary furnace  has  cooled  to  400°C,  turn off  secondary
   furnace.

o  Divert gas from sampling train and remove collected samples.

o  After primary  furnace has cooled to near room temperature, remove
   kiln barrel and disassemble.

o  Remove residual sample from barrel.

o  Disassemble fly ash collection system and remove fly ash.

o  During   the   course  of   the  system   operation,   the  following
   parameters were monitored and recorded:  N2, CO,,, and  02 flow
   rates of primary and  secondary gasses,  temperature of the  rotating
   kiln  gas,  fly ash separation  system  exit gas,  secondary  furnace
   and cooling  section  exit  gas, particulate sample  isothermal box,
   and impinger  isothermal box. The  sample train flow meter  pressure
   differential also was monitored.
                               3-6

-------
                 4.0  BENCH-SCALE INCINERATION TEST  CONDITIONS
 4.1  SELECTED VARIABLES

 The  bench-scale test matrix was developed recognizing  the  typical operating
 parameters  for  hazardous waste  incinerators capable of  handling  chemically
 contaminated  solids.   These parameters are  residence time,  temperature,  and
 oxygen  level  necessary in the  combustion  process for complete destruction of
 organics.

 4.1.1   Time Parameters

 The  residence time  of  the waste  materials in the primary burner was selected
 on  the  assumption  that  a  full-scale  incineration  system should  be  able to
 vaporize all  organics  associated with Basin F  soils or overburden materials
 within  an  hour.  Therefore,  the residence  time for the primary  burner was
 limited to  a  maximum  of  one  hour  operation  at  the  selected  operating
 temperature(s).

 The  variation in residence  time in the secondary burner, however, was based
 upon values  in  hazardous waste  incineration literature.   The minimum value
 of 2 seconds appears in virtually all scientific and engineering publications
 concerning  hazardous waste  incineration, and  was  consistent  with  the  data
 presented (Frankel  et al., 1983) for commercially operated afterburners.

 The  5-second  value  appears near the  upper end  of  the  scale (Bonner et  al.,
 1981).

4.1.2   Temperature  Parameters

The  temperature  parameters  in  the   primary  and  secondary  chambers  were
selected based  on the limitation  of  the available laboratory equipment  and
the general operating practices  for the incineration of hazardous  wastes.
                                      4-1

-------
 The primary  chamber  (Linder  furnace)  used in  the  bench-scale setup  can
 operate  at the maximum temperature of  1000°C.  The  typical operating ranges
 for the  rotary kiln, fluid bed, and multiple hearth furnace are:

       Rotary kiln          820°C - 1600°C
       Fluidized bed        450°C -  980°C
       Multiple hearth      660°C - 1000°C

 Based  on the above assumptions, the operating  temperatures selected for the
 primary  burner were:   650°C,  800°C, and 900°C.   (Note:   For safety reasons,
 the  Linder furnace was not operated at the peak value of 1000°C).

 The  first temperature  in the  secondary burner at 900°C  which is consistent
 with   the minimum   afterburner  temperature  (Frankel  et  al.,  1984)  for
 afterburners associated with rotary kilns.

 The  maximum  temperature  in  the afterburner,  1,200°C, represented a practical
 upper  limit  of  the  bench-scale  equipment.   Further,   it  is  a  midrange
 temperature for afterburners as (Frankel et al., 1984).

 A  third  temperature,  650°C,  has  been chosen  as a  minimum  value  for test
 purposes.  This  temperature is consistent with the  low  end of values shown
 for  afterburners.    Further,  it  is at the  low  end of  temperatures where
 99.99 percent  ORE  for hazardous  organics  is  achieved  (Dellinger  et al.,
 1984).

The third  temperature  provided a matrix of  six points for the establishment
of  time  and temperature  requirements  to  incinerate the  soils.   The  matrix
appears as:

                      	Temperature
       Time

       2 seconds
       5 seconds
Minimum
650°C
650°C
Intermediate
900°C
900°C
Maximum
1,200°C
1,200°C
                                      4-2

-------
 4.1.3  Oxygen Concentration

 Oxygen concentration determines the  level  of excess air  that  is optimal in
 firing the  supplementary  fuel.   Oxygen  concentration  was  varied in  the
 carrier gas as a  means  of making the  bench-scale  tests most representative
 of the postflame oxidation regions as  well  as  the  pyrolysis region.  Oxygen
 concentration influences  not  only  the temperatures  achieved  in  the  flame
 (see,   for  example,  Babcock  and  Wilcox,  1978,  for  a correlation  between
 excess CL  and  flame  temperature),  but  also  influences  the  degree  of
 combustion completeness and the minimization of PIC formation.

 The  research  previously  cited  demonstrates  (Kramlich et al., 1984) that PICs
 are  minimized and  DREs are maximized with excess air in the 30 to 40 percent
 range.  Below and  above  that  range,  PICs increase in dramatic quantities, as
 is shown in Figure 4.1-1.

 The  minimum   concentration  of  0_   in  the  exhaust  gas  was   selected  at
 5.4  percent,   corresponding  to   the  apparent  optimal  value   shown  in
 Figure  4.1-1.  This  level was set for the carrier gas in the experiment.

 The  maximum  concentration of 0.  in  the exhaust gas was  set at 7.0 percent,
 corresponding  to  common  firing  practices  of  many  combustion  systems.
 Further, this  representation of 50 percent excess air represented a practical
 upper  limit  beyond which  ORE  levels of 99.99  percent  could not be expected
 (see,  for example, Figure 4.1-1).

 4.2  ANALYTICAL PARAMETERS MONITORED

 The  analytical parameters monitored  to measure the destruction efficiency of
 each test bum were  twenty-two (22)  semivolatile organic compounds that are
 target  compounds for all RMA field  investigation  programs (Ebasco, 1986b).
 However, only  ten  semivolatile compounds (Aldrin, Dieldrin, Endrin, Isodrin,
DCPO, DBCP, CPMS,  CPMSO,  CPMS02 and  Supona)  were detected in the  overburden
 sample  through baseline  analyses  (see Table  2.4-4).  These  ten  compounds
were selected  as  PHOCs.   The analytical method employed for feed  sample was
                                      4-3

-------
^2000
ft
o
I/t
0)

5 1500

S
o
1000

-------
gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC/MS) at full scan, while for better
sensitivity GC/MS Selective Ion Monitoring (SIM) mode was used for residue
and off-gas samples.
-------
5.0 TEST RESULTS
5.1 SUMMARY

Initially, 25 test burns were conducted on overburden and surrogate samples.
Six test burns were aborted due to equipment malfunction. Three of the test
burns were conducted on surrogate compounds to demonstrate the efficiency of
the sampling trains. The remaining test burns were successfully completed;
Table 5.1-1 presents the test matrix for these 16 successful runs.

Analyses for the 10 selected POHCs indicated complete (more that 99.99
percent) destruction of organics associated with Basin F overburden material
at most of the test conditions. Further evaluation of selected runs for
PICs resulted in the selection of preliminary optimum combustion conditions
for the complete destruction of organics. Two additional test burns of
overburden sample were conducted at these optimum conditions and upon
evaluation of identified PICs in off-gases from these two optimization test
runs, the optimum combustion conditions were selected for a full-scale
incineration system concept design.

5.2 FEED SAMPLE ANALYSES

The feed sample (overburden from Basin F) for each test burn was analyzed
for 22 semi-volatile organic compounds (target compounds) by GC/MS full scan
analytical method as certified by USATHAMA. Appendix A contains the
analytical results as reported by the laboratory (Hittman-Ebasco), while
Appendix B contains the chemical structure of each of the 22 compounds.

A summary of results of the feed sample analyses is presented in Table 5.2-1.
The table identifies parameters that were reported to have concentrations
higher than their respective analytical detection limit. The parameters
identified in Table 5.2-1 are Aldrin, Dieldrin, Endrin, Isodrin, DCPD, DBCP,
CPMSO, CPMSO- and Supona.
5-1
2306E
-------
TABLE 5.1-1
TEST MATRIX
Test
Run
2
3
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
17
18
19
20
Temp «C
in
Primary
Burner
900
900
900
650
900
650
900
900
650
900
900
650
650
650
800
800
Tenp *C
in
Secondary
Burner
1200
900
1200
650
900
1200
900
1200
650
900
1200
650
650
900
900
900
Detention
Time (min)
in Primary
Burner
At Operating
Temo.
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
30
60
30
15
Detention
Time (sec)
in Secondary
Burner
2
2
5
5
5
5
5
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
5
2
0? Level
in
Secondary
Burner
7X
7X
7X
7X
7X
5.4X
5.4X
5.4X
7X
5.4X
5.4X
5.4X
5.4X
5.4X
7X
7X
Type of
Feed in
Primary
Burner
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Remarks
Good
Good
Good
Good
Repeat of Run 4; Good
Good
Good
Good
Good
Good
Good
Good
Good
Good
Test conditions for a
fluidized bed
Test conditions for a
fluidized bed
-------
TABLE 5.2-1

FEED SAHPLE (ug/gm)
Ttst Run
1
2
3
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
17
18
19
20
Aldrin
AborUd
2200
2100
1700
2400
2300
1900
2300
1700
3600
3700
2300
3600
3100
3500
3900
3700
Dltldrln

1800
1600
1200
1600
1800
1400
1800
1000
1800
1800
1100
1600
1500
1600
1800
2800
Endrin

310
350
240
310
330
260
340
170
300
320
200
390
370
400
500
610
Isodrin