United States
Environmental
Protection Agency
Office of Solid Waste   Office of Air      Off ice of Research   EPA/530-SW-87-02
and Emergency Response andRadiatio      and Development    June 1987
Washington, DC 20460   Washington DC 20460 Washington, DC 20460
&EPA
Municipal Waste
Combustion Study
                Report to Congress
                  U s. Environmental P
                  Begion 5, Li^raiv \  '
                  230 S. Dearborn St. ~^

-------
                                           June  1987
      MUNICIPAL WASTE COMBUSTION STUDY:

             REPORT TO CONGRESS
                 Prepared by
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
              401 M Street S.W.
           Washington, O.C.  20460

-------
                               ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

     Many person, contributed to the comprehensive study of municipal waste
combustion.  Stephen Greene, U.S. EPA, was the EPA's coordinator for the
effort.  James D. Kilgroe was the coordinator of the EPA's Office of Research
and Development  activities.  Glynda E. Wilkins, Radian Corporation, provided
coordination and administrative assistance for the project.  Primary authors
and contributors include the following:

     Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Report to Congress - Stephen Greene
(EPA) and Glynda Wilkins (Radian   rporation)..

     Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Combustion Control of Organic
Emissions - James D. Kilgroe (EPA), W.R. Seeker (Energy and Envi\-wmental
Research Corporation), W.S. Lanier (Energy and Environmental Research
Corporation), M.P. Heep (Energy and Environmental Research Corporation).

     Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Flue Gas Cleaning Technology -
T.G. Brna (EPA)  and Charles B. Sedman  (EPA).

     Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Sampling and Analysis of Municipal
Waste Combustors - Larry Johnson (EPA) and Judith Harris  (Arthur D.  Little}.-

     Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Model Units and Cost of  Flue Gas
Cleaning Technologies  - Mike Johnston  (EPA).

     Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Assessment of Health Risks Associated
with Exposure to Municipal Waste Combustion Emissions - Bob Kellam  (EPA),
Cavid Cleverly (EPA),  Rayburn M. Morrison  (EPA), and Larry Fradkin  (EPA).

     Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Characterization  of the Municipal
Waste Combustion Industry - Rayburn M. Morrison (EPA), Gary Bockol  (Radian
Corporation) and Keith Barnett (Radian Corporation).

     Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Emission Data Base for Municipal Waste
Combustors - Peter Schindler (EPA), Steve Schliesser (Midwest Research
Institute), and Dennis Wallace (Midwest Research Institute).

     Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Recycling of Solid Waste - David
Cleverly (EPA), Karen  Fidler (Radian Corporation), and Glynda Wilkins  (Radian
Corporation).

     The EPA's Municipal Waste Combustion Work Group provided an invaluable
forum for discussion,  review, and direction in completing this study.   The
review and guidance provided by the Science Advisory Board on portions  of  the
document are also greatly appreciated.

-------
                               TABLE  OF  CONTENTS

Section                                 '                                 Page

          EXECUTIVE SUMMARY	      vi

  1       INTRODUCTION	 -       1

          1.1  PURPOSE	        1
          1.2  BACKGROUND	        2
          1.3  SCOPE	        4

  2       MUNICIPAL WASTE DISPOSAL	....	        6

          2.1  LANDFILLING	        6
          2.2  RECYCLE	        7
          2.3  COMBUSTION	        8

               2.3.1  TYPES OF COMBUSTORS	        9
               2.3.2  DESCRIPTION OF  THE INDUSTRY	       12

                    2.3.2.1  DISTRIBUTION  OF COMBUSTORS BY  TYPE	       14
                    2.3.2.2  DISTRIBUTION  OF MUNICIPAL WASTE
                             COMBUSTORS  BY LOCATION	       20
                    2,3.2.3  PROJECTIONS THROUGH  THE YEAR 2000	       25

  3       ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES	       26

          3.1  SOLID RESIDUES	       26
          Z.2  EMISSIONS TO THE ATMOSPHERE	       27

               3.2.1  PART ICULATE MATTER	       30
               3.2.2  SULFUR DIOXIDE	       33
               3.2.3  HYDROCHLORIC ACID	       35
               3.2.4  METALS	       37
               3.2.5  CDD AND CDF	       42

  4       OPTIONS FOR CONTROLLING EMISSIONS TO THE ATMOSPHERE	       51

          4.1  ORGANICS	       52

               4.1.1  COMBUSTION CONTROLS	       57
               4.1.2  FLUE GAS TREATMENT	       61

          4.2  ACID GASES	       64
          4.3  NITROGEN OXIDES	       67
          4.4  PARTICULATE MATTER	       67
          4.5  METALS	       68
          4.6  MULTI POLLUTANT CONTROL STRATEGIES	        71

-------
                         TABLE r- CONTENTS (Continued)

Section                                                                   Page

  5        IMPACTS OF POTENTIAL CONTROL STRATEGIES	       77

           5.1  ESTIMATED HEALTH RISK UNDER TWO CONTROL SCENARIOS	       77

               5.1.1  METHODOLOGY	       77

                    5.1.1.1  EMISSIONS AND CONTROL SCENARIOS	       78
                    5.1.1.2  EXPOSURE MODELING	       83
                    5.1.1.3  RISK MEASURES	       84
                    5.1.1.4  ASSUMPTIONS	       85

               5.1.2  RISKS FROM DIRECT INHALATION	       85

                    5.1.2.1  RANGES AND UNCERTAINTIES	       85
                    5.1.2.2  CANCER RISK	       90
                    5.1.2.3  NON-CARCINOGENIC EFFECTS	       92

               5.1.3  INDIRECT EXPOSURE	       93

           5.2  ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS	       94
           5.3  POSSIBLE REDUCTIONS IN IMPACTS	       96
           5.4  COSTS	       96
           5.5  COST/RISK ANALYSIS	      101

  6        SAMPLING, ANALYSIS AND MONITORING	      104

           6.1  SAMPLING	      104
           6.2  SAMPLE PREPARATION	      109
           6.3  ANALYSIS	      109
           6.4  MONITORING	      109

  7        REFERENCES	      117


APPENDIX A    DOCUMENTS PREPARED BY THE EPA'S ENVIRONMENTAL
               CRITERIA ASSESSMENT OFFICE	     A-l

APPENDIX B    LISTS OF EXISTING AND PLANNED MUNICIPAL WASTE
               COMBUSTION FACILITIES	     B-l

APPENDIX C     SUMMARY MATRICES OF EMISSIONS TEST DATA	     C-l

APPENDIX D     MUNICIPAL WASTE COMPOSITION	     D-l

APPENDIX E     EMISSION CONTROL COST TABLES	     E-l

APPENDIX F     SUMMARY OF SYMBOLS, ACRONYMS, AND ABBREVIATIONS	     F-l

APPENDIX G     LIST OF CONVERSION FACTORS	     G-l

-------
                                LIST  OF  TABLES

Table                                    •                            Page

 2-1      SUMMARY OF EXISTING MWC  FACILITIES	     15

 2-2      SUMMARY OF PLANNED MUNICIPAL WASTE  COMBUSTION
          FACILITIES	     18

 2-3      STATES WITH THE LARGEST  EXISTING  CAPACITY  TO PROCESS
          MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE	     21

 2-4      STATES WITH PLANNED GROWTH  IN  MUNICIPAL  WASTE  COMBUSTION
          CAPACITY EXCEEDING 5000  TONS PER  DAY	    24

 3-1      SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS MEASURED  FROM  THE THREE MAJOR
          CLASSES OF MUNICIPAL WASTE  COMSUSTORS	     29

 3-2      MASS BURN FACILITIES FOR WHICH HIGHEST AND LOWEST
          EMISSION LEVELS WERE MEASURED  FOR SELECTED METALS	     39

 3-3      MODULAR FACILITIES FOR WHICH HIGHEST AND LOWEST
          EMISSION LEVELS WERE MEASURED  FOR SELECTED METALS	    41

 3-5      SUMMARY OF CDD/CDF EMISSIONS FROM MUNICIPAL WASTE
          COMBUSTORS	    44

 3-6      MASS BURN FACILITIES FOR WHICH HIGHEST AND LOWEST
          STACK GAS CONCENTRATIONS WERE  MEASURED FOR SELECTED
          GROUPS OF COD AND CDF	    47

 3-7      MODULAR FACILITIES FOR WHICH HIGHEST AND LOWEST STACK
          GAS CONCENTRATIONS WERE  MEASURED  FOR  SELECTED  GROUPS
          OF COO AND CDF	     49

 4-1      RANK ORDER CORRELATION RESULTS FOR CO  vs.  CDD/CDF	      54

 4-2      GOOD COMBUSTION PRACTICES FOR  THE MINIMIZATION OF
          ORGANIC EMISSIONS FROM MUNICIPAL  WASTE
          COMBUSTORS	     59

 4-3      CONTROL EFFICIENCY DATA FOR COD	     63

 4-4      EXPECTED EFFECTIVENESS OF ACID GAS CONTROLS (% REMOVAL).     65

 4-5      CONTROL EFFICIENCY DATA FOR ACID GASES	     66

 4-6      INLET/OUTLET METAL CONCENTRATIONS FROM QUEBEC PILOT
          PLANT TESTING (ug/NnT 0 8% 02)	    70

 4-7      SUMMARY OF TESTING OF MULTIPOLLUTANT CONTROL STRATEGY
          AT QUEBEC CITY	    73

-------
                          LIST OF TABLES (Continued)

Tabl e                                                                 Page

 4-8      SUMMARY OF TESTING OF MULTIPOLLUTANT CONTROL  STRATEGY
          PERFORMED BY NIRO	     74

 4-9      COMPARISON OF PILOT-SCALE TESTS OF MULTI POLLUTANT
          CONTROL EQUIPMENT	     75

 5-1       METALS EMISSION FACTOR DATA SUMMARY	     79

 ?-2      MUNICIPAL WASTE COMBUSTION FACILITIES FROM WHICH TEST
          DATA WERE USED FOR ORGANIC EMISSION FACTORS	     80

 5-3       EMISSION CONTROLS ON EXISTING SOURCES	,	     82

 5-4       ESTIMATED CANCER RISK FROM INHALATION NATIONWIDE
          (BASELINE CONTROL SCENARIO	     86

 5-5       ESTIMATED CANCER RISK FROM INHALATION NATIONWIDE
          (CONTROLLED SCENARIO)	     87

 5-6       CONTRIBUTION OF CDD/CDF TO TOTAL ANNUAL INCIDENCE
          ESTIMATES	     88

 5-7       PROJECTED AMBIENT HC1 CONCENTRATIONS CONTRIBUTED BY
          MUNICIPAL WASTE COMBUSTORS	     95

 5-8       POSSIBLE REDUCTIONS OF HEALTH RISK AND HC1 CONCENTRATIONS
          FROM DIRECT EMISSION PATHWAYS	     97

 5-9       INCREMENTAL COST/RISK COMPARISON	     103

 6-1       STACK (FLUE GAS) SAMPLING METHODS	     106

 6-2       SUMMARY OF SAMPLE PREPARATION METHODS	     110

 6-3       ANALYSIS METHODS FOR TRACE ORGANICS AND TRACE METALS,
          APPLICABLE TO MUNICIPAL WASTE COMBUSTOR SAMPLES	     112

 6-4       CONTINUOUS MONITORING DEVICES FOR MUNICIPAL WASTE
          COMBUSTORS	     114
                                        IV

-------
                                LIST OF FIGURES

Figure                                   ',                              .^qe

 2-1      Diagram of a Modern Mass Burn Facility	      10

 2-2      Modular Combustor	      11

 2-3      Diagrams of RDF Processing and Combustion	      13

 2-4      Distribution of Existing Installed Municipal  Waste
          Combustion Capacity by ^sign Type	      16

 2-5      Distribution of Planned Municipal  Waste Combustion
          Capacity by Design Type	      19

 2-6      Regional Distribution of Existing Municipal  Waste
          Combustion Facilities	      22

 2-7      Regional Distribution of Planned Municipal Waste
          Combustion Facilities	      23

 3-1      Summary of CDD Stack Gas Emissions Test Data	      45

 3-2      Summary of CDF Stack Gas Emissions Test Data	      46


 4-1      Comparison of CDD/CDF Stack Gas Concentrations to CO
          Stack Gas Concentrations	      53

 4-2      Summary of Theories for CDD/CDF Municipal Waste
          Combustor Stack Gas		      55

 5-1      Annualized Operating Cost Estimates for Model Mass
          Burning Facilities	      100

 5-2      Annualized Operating Cost Estimates for Model Modular
          Combustor Facilities	      100

 5-3      Annualized Operating Cost Estimates for Model Refuse-
          Derived Fuel Burning Facilities	     100

-------
                              EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 INTRODUCTION

     This report to Congress is in response to Section 102 of the Hazardous
 and Solid Waste Amendments  (HSWA) of 1984.  Section 102 of HSWA requires that
 the EPA provide a report to Congress describing:
     "(i) the current data  and information available on emissions of
          polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins from resource recovery facilities
          burning municipal solid waste;
     (ii) any significant risks to human health posed by these emissions; and
    (iii) operating practices appropriate for controlling these emissions."
 The EPA has enlarged the scope of the Section 102 report to include
 additional information generated during an integrated study of Municipal
 Waste Combustion.  The integrated study resulted in this Report to Congress
 and eight technical reports.  Much of the information contained in this
 report has been extracted from the technical reports.

 MUNICIPAL WASTE COMBUSTION  IN THE UNITED STATES

     Combustion of municipal waste is an attractive waste management option
 because it reduces the volume of the waste by 70 to 90 percent.  In the face
 of shrinking landfill availability, municipal waste combustion capacity in
 the United States is expected to grow rapidly, from the current U.S. capacity
 of 45,000 tons per day to 117,000 to 252,000 tons per day by the year 2000.
This added capacity is expected to be added with nearly 200 new municipal
waste combustion facilities.
     There are currently 111 municipal waste combustion facilities in the
United States.  Figure 1 shows their geographic distribution.  Figure 2 shows
geographic locations of 210 facilities known by the EPA to be planned or
 under construction.  The maps show that municipal waste combustion facilities
 are concentrated on the East Coast with many facilities also planned for
California.

-------
  Figure 1.  Regional Distribution of Existing Municipal Waste Combustion
                              Facilities
Figure 2  Regional Distribution of Planned Municipal Waste Combustion
                             Facilities

-------
     Three main types of combustors are used for combustion of municipal
waste:  mass bur^, modular, and those that fire refuse-derived fuel  (RDF).
The first type is called "mass burn" because the waste is combusted  without
any pre-processing other than removal of items too large to go through the
feed system.  In a typical mass burn combustor, refuse is placed on  a-grate
that moves through the combustor.  Combustion air in excess of stoichiometric
amounts is supplied both below (underfire air) and above (overfire air)
grate.  Mass burn combustors are usually field-erected and range in  size from
50 to 1000 tons per day of refuse throughput-.per unit.  Many mass burn
facilities have 2 or more combustors and have site capacities of greater than
1000 tons per day.
     Modular combustors also burn waste without pre-processing, but  they are
typically shop fabricated and generally range In size from 5 to 100  tons per
day of refuse throughput.  One of the most common types of modular combustors
in the starved air or controlled air type, incorporating two combustion
chambers.   Air is supplied to the primary chamber at substoichiometric
levels.  The incomplete combustion products pass into the secondary
combustion chamber where excess air is added and combustion is completed.
Another type of modular combustor, functionally similar to larger, mass burn
units, uses excess air in the primary chamber; no additional air is added in
the secondary chamber.   The third major type burns refuse-derived fuel
(RDF).  This type of combustor burns processed waste which may vary from
shredded waste to finely divided fuel suitable for co-firing with pulverized
coal.
     The distribution of the existing U.S. waste combustion capacity  among
the three types is shown in Figure 3.  As shown, mass burn facilities  have
the largest share of U.S. capacity, 68 percent of the total.   RDF facilities
represent 23 percent of the total capacity, and modular facilities account
for 9 percent.  Although modular facilities represent a small  fraction of the
total  U.S. capacity, the number of facilities equipped with modular
facilities is greater than the number of combustion facilities  equipped with
mass burn units (56 modular facilities compared to 45 mass burn  facilities).
There are ten RDF facilities in operation.
                                      vm

-------
                                   Modular (9%)
 Mass Bum (68V.)
                                                       RDF (23%)
               Total Design Capacity * 49,000 ton* per day
      Figure 3. Distribution of Existing Installed Municipal Waste
                Combustion Capacity by Design Type
                                  Modular (3V.)
                                                  ROF(20V.)
M«M Bum 
-------
     Figure 4 shows the expected distribution of design types for planned
facilities the EPA has knowledge of.  Mas'f burn facilities are expected to
continue to dominate with 59 percent of the U.S. design capacity.  RDF
facilities are expected to account for 20 percent, and design capacity for
modular facilities is expected to account for 3 percent.

EMISSIONS AND THEIR CONTROL

     Environmental concerns have aeen raised about both solid residues and
pollutants emitted to the air frora municipal waste combustors.  Particular
concern has been raised concerning the presence of chlorinated
dibenzo-p-dioxins (CDD) and chlorinated dibenzofurans (CDF) in emissions to
the air and solid residues.
     The EPA is currently working to determine the most environmentally
acceptable methods for disposal of municipal waste combustor  solid residues!
The Agency's findings concerning residue disposal will  be published when that
work is complete.  The remainder of this Report to Congress and  the
accompanying technical reports focus on environmental effects of emissions to
the air from municipal waste combustors.
     As part of the integrated study, EPA attempted to  collect all available
data on emissions from municipal waste combustors.  From this data the EPA
established an emissions data base of almost 50 facilities from  which
emissions had been measured in documented tests.  Comparison  of  the data  from
different tests is difficult because the facilities vary widely  in design and
operating conditions, the tests were conducted with different objectives  and
different protocols, and the level of detail of the reported  data paries.
Further, the specific sampling and analysis methods were not  the same  for all
tests.   These differences make it difficult not only  to make  comparisons
among the combustors tested, but also to draw conclusions about  the entire
population of combustors.  Nevertheless, this study has used  these data  to
the extent possible to evaluate municipal waste combustion practices.

-------
     Pollutants of interest emitted from municipal we;te combustors  include
metal   acid gases (primarily HC1), organics  (including CDD  and CDF), and, in
some .ocalities, NO ,  as well.   Table  1  contains  a summary of emissions
                   ^
quantities measured from municipal  waste combustors.
     For municipal waste combustors controlling emissions involves
controlling emissions  of a whole list  of pollutants.  Moreover, application
of control technology  for one pollutant  or class  of  pollutants may affect
control of other pollutants.  Devising a control  strategy, then,  involves
consideration of control techniques for  each  of the  classes  of pollutants
present but also requires consideration  of the effects of a  selected control
technique on the entire list.
     Options for control include optimization for minimizing organic
emissions; scrubbing for acid gas control; flue gas  cooling  for  condensation
of metals and organics; high efficiency  participate  matter collection;  and
NO  control where necessary.  A control  approach  designed  to incorporate all
of these processes, thereby minimizing emissions  of  the  whole list of
pollutants would be:
          optimization of the combustion process,
          alkaline scrubbing combined with ESPs  or fabric  filters operated
          at temperatures conducive to promoting  condensation,  and
          flue gas treatment for NOX control, if necessary.
Some of the newest facilities in Europe and in the United  States have
incorporated the first two parts of this approach, and at  least one facility
in California has incorporated all three parts.   The alkaline scrubbers being
chosen for most of the new facilities are dry scrubbers.
     With a goal of optimizing combustion in mind the EPA developed a set of
combustion strategy elements termed "good combustion practices," summarized
in Table 2.  Also shown are  preliminary specifications for  each of  the
elements.  Even though these good  combustion practices are  preliminary  and
have not been verified  in field tests,  they have been included because  it is
important for permit writers and those  applying  for permits to be aware of
the conditions  that promote  achievement of complete combustion.

-------
      TABLE 1.  SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS MEASURED FROM THE THREE MAJOR CLASSES OF MUNICIPAL WASTE COMBUSTORS*

Pollutant
Part leu late matter

Sulfur dioxide
Nitrogen oxides
Carbon monoxide
Hydrogen chloride
Hydrogen fluoride
Arsenic
Beryl Hun
Cadmium
Chromium
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
TCDO
TCOF
PCOO
PCOF
Mass Burn
5.5 - 1.530 mg/Nm3
(0.002 - 0.669 gr/dscf)
0.04 - 401 ppmdv
39 - 360 ppmdv
18.5 - 1,350 ppmdv
7.5 - 477 ppmdv
0.62 - 7.2 ppmdv
0.452 - 233 ug/Nm3
0.0005 - 0.33 ug/Nm3
6.2 - 500 ug/Nm3
21 - 1.020 ug/Nm3
25 - 15.000 ug/Nm3
9-2.200 ug/Nm3
230 - 480 ug/Nm3
0.20 - 1.200 ng/Nm3
0.32 - 4.600 ng/Nm3
1.1 - 11.000 ng/Nm3
0.423 - 15.000 ng/Nm3
Modular
23 - 300 mg/Nm3
(0.012 - 0.13 gr/dscf)
61 - 124 ppmdv
260-310 ppmdv
3.2 - 67 ppmdv
160 - 1270 ppmdv
l.l - 16 ppmdv
6.1 - 119 ug/Nm3
0.096 - 0.11 ug/«m3
21 - 942 ug/Nm3
3.6-390 ug/Nm3
237 - 15.500 ug/Nm3
130 - 705 ug/Nm3
<1.92 - 553 ug/Nm3
1.0 - 43.7 ng/Nm3
12.2 - 345 ng/Nm3
63 - 1540 ng/Nm3
97 - 1810 ng/Nm3
RDF -Ft red
220 - 530 mg/Nm3
(0.096 - 0.230 gr/dscf)
55 - 188 ppmdv
263 ppmdv b
217 - 430 ppmdv
96 - 780 ppmdv
2.1 ug/Nm3 b
19 - 160 ug/Nm3
21 ug/Nm3 b
34-370 ug/Nm3
490 - 6,700 ug/Nm3
970 - 9,600 ug/Nm3
170 - 440 ug/Nm3
130 - 3.600 ug/Nm3
3.5 - 260 ng/Nm3
32-680 ng/Nm3
54 - 2,840 ng/Nm3
135 - 9.100 ng/Nm3
•See Appendix C for summary of facilities represented In emissions data for each pollutant category.
 summarized ere from full scale commercial facilities only.

 Only one test.
                                                                                                      Results

-------
                          TABLE 2.   GOOD COMBUSTION PRACTICES  FOR  THE  MINIMIZATION OF  ORGANIC

                                             EMISSIONS  FROM MUNICIPAL WASTE COMBUSTORS
          Practice
         Mass Burn
     Preliminary  T  rget
             RDF
       Preliminary Target
Design temperature at fully mtxmd height

Underftre atr control
Overft re air capacity
(not an operating  requirement)

Overfire air Injector design
Auxiliary  fuel capacity




Excess  Atr


Turndown  restrictions



Start-up  procedure*


Use of  auxiliary fuel


Oxygen  1n flue gas (continuous monitor)

CO In flue gas (continuous monitor)


Furnace temperature (continuous monitor)



 Adequate air distribution
IflOOof ,t fully mixed  height

At least four separately
adjustable plenums.  One  each
under the drying and burnout zones
and at least two separately
adjustable plenums under  the
burning zone.

401 of total air
That required for penetration
and coverage of furnace cross-
section

That required to meet start-up
temperature and 1800Of criteria
under part-load operations
6 - 12f excess oxygen (dry basis)
60 - llOt of design - lower limit
may be extended with verification
tests

On auxiliary fuel to design
temperature

On prolonged high CO or low
furnace temperature

6 - 12» dry

SO ppm on 4 hour average -
corrected to 12* tt>2

Minimum of 1600°f (mean) at fully
mixed height across furnace
 Verification test*
IflOOof at fully mixed height

As required to provide uniform
bed burning stolchlometry
                                                                                 40X of total air
That required for penetration
and coverage of furnace cross-
section

That required to meet  start-up
temperature and 1600°f criteria
under part- load operations
3-91 excess oxygen (dry basis)
80 - 110X of design -  lower limit
may be extended with verification
tests

On auxiliary fuel  to design
temperature

On prolonged high  CO or  low
furnace temperature
3 -
       dry
50 ppm oft 4 hour average -
corrected to 12X C02

Minimum of 1800°F (mean) at fully
mixed height


Verification test*
                                           Starved-alr
                                        Preliminary Target
                                      16000F at fully mixed height
                                     80S of ton", «1r


                                     That required for penetration
                                     and coverage of furnace
                                     cross-section

                                     That required to meet start-up
                                     temperature and 1800<>F criteria
                                     under part-load conditions
6 - 12% excess oxygen
(dry basts)

80 - 110S of design -  lower
limit may be extended  with
verification tests

On auxiliary fuel to design
temperature

On prolonged high CO or  low
furnace temperature

6 - 12* dry

50 pp« on 4  hour average -
corrected to 12* C0?

Minimum of ldOO°F (mean) at
fully mixed  plane (secondary
chamber)

Verification t«bt»

-------
     Recent test data obtained f*"om a new municipal  waste combustor in  Tulsa
show that low concentrations of organ  s may be achieved by optimizing
combustion conditions.  Moreover, emi sions testing  has recently begun  on
municipal waste combustors equipped with dry scrubbers combined with
particulate matter collection devices.  Recently collected test data show
generally high removal efficiencies for all pollutants except mercury,  and
even for mercury one set of pilot plant test data show higher control
efficiencies may be possible with sufficient cooling.

HEALTH RISK ANALYSIS

     The EPA performed a health risk analysis of two control scenarios.  One,
the baseline scenario, approximates the status quo in control technology,
mostly particulate matter emission control.  The second reflects uniform
application of dry alkaline scrubbing combined with  particulate matter
collection devices.  Estimated health risk under these two control scenarios
was generated for both the existing population of combustors and for those
facilities planned for construction.
     Two different expressions of health risk were generated:  aggregate
annual  incidence and maximum individual risk.  Aggregate annual incidence
values include the total number of cancer cases per year predicted by the
models in populations living within 50 kilometers of all the municipal  waste
combustors in the United States.  Maximum individual risk values are the
model's estimates of the probability that a person exposed to the highest
modeled concentration of pollutants from a municipal waste combustor will
develop cancer due to continuous exposure over a 70-year lifetime.
     The EPA's risk analysis estimated direct inhalation cancer risks
associated with maintaining the status quo in control technology for the
existing facilities and those projected for the near future.  Most of  the
estimated cancer risk is attributable to chlorinated dibenzo-para-dioxins
(COD) and chlorinated dibenzofurans  (CDF).  There remain basic questions
concerning the mechanism of carcinogenesis for these and related compounds.
The models used to estimate the plausible, upper bound  carcinogenic potency
of compounds such as CDD/CDF, implicitly assume that the substance  acts
                                       xiv

-------
directly to initiate cancer.   If,  however,  CDD/CDF  acts  as  a  promoting  agent,
as some scientists believe, to amplify the  care  'ogenic  response  of  other
direct acting carcinogens,  the present model  ma.  not  be  appropriate.  A
change of this nature in the assumption on  which the  cancer potency  estimate
is based could lead to a reduction in this  estimate.
     The ranges presented below reflect uncertainties regarding the  relative
toxicity of structurally related compounds, and  the ability to accurately
measure compounds at trace leve1-.  These estimates also reflect  assumptrons
including a conservative extrap^.ation of the results of epidemic!ogical  and
animal studies, mathematical  modeling of pollutant  dispersion, constant
emission rates based on those at tested facilities, and  constant  exposure  of
persons to pollutants for 70 years.
     The estimates of annual  incidence aggregated over the United States  and
for all pollutants modeled are 3 to 38 cases per year for the existing
combustors and 2-22 for those projected.  Estimated maximum individual  risks
(As noted above, these are for the greatest potential exposure.)  range  from
1/1000 to 1/10,000 for existing facilities and from 1/10,000  to 1/100,000 for
those projected to be built in the next few years.   Uniform application of
dry scrubbers combined with high efficiency particulate collection devices
would be expected to reduce -nnual incidence to 0.2 to 3 cases for existing
sources, and 0.3 to 1 for those projected.   Similarly, such controls would
reduce maximum individual risks to 1/10,000 to 1/100,000 for existing
facilities and 1/100,000 to 1/1,000,000 for projected facilities.
     When the risk estimates are disaggregated by design type, the component
contributed by mass burn technology used in existing facilities dominates the
risk contributed by the major design types.  However, the  risk component
contributed by RDF technology dominates in the projected facilities.
     A preliminary analysis was performed  to determine whether indirect
exposure routes due to surface deposition  of pollutants  from  municipal waste
combustors could contribute significantly  to total exposure due  to  municipal
waste combustors.  The analysis was designed to  evaluate the  combination  of
parameters that would result  in the maximum  exposure that  was still  within
the realm of plausibility.  Results  showed that  for  mercury  and  lead indirect
exposure may be a significant part of  the  total  exposure due  to  municipal
                                     xv

-------
waste.  However, no such indications were seen for nickel,  chromium,  or
formaldehyde.  Also, the modeling results showed that mdif  rt exposure to
environmentally persistent organic compounds may be compar, >\e to the direct
inhalation route of exposure.  Analysis of indirect exposure as a possible
source of health risk is continuing.

COST OF CONTROL

     The incremental cost of adding dry scrubbing to particulate matter
control (considered representative of the status quo) at municipal waste
combustors is $4 to $9 per ton of garbage combusted at mass burn units and $4
to $5 per ton for RDF-fired combustors.  The same increment for modular
combustors is $5 to $12 per ton of garbage combusted.  However, many existing
modular units are equipped with no flue gas treatment devices, so the cost
for those units would be higher, about $7 to $16 per ton.
                                     xvi

-------
                               1.  INTRODUCTION

1.1  PURPOSE

     This Report to Congress is in response to Section 102 of the Hazardous
and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984.   Section 102 of HSWA requires that
the EPA provide a report to Congress describing:
     "(i) the current data and information  available on emissions of
          polychlorinated dibenzp-p-dioxins from resource recovery
          facilities burning municipal solid waste;
     (ii) any significant risks to human health posed by these emissions;
          and
    (iii) operating practices appropriate for controlling these
          emissions."
     The request from Congress was specific in its scope, relating only to
emissions of polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins from municipal waste
combustors.   However, the EPA had been investigating numerous other aspects of
municipal waste combustion, and these other topics appeared appropriate to
include, so the Agency has enlarged the scope of the Section 102 report.  This
report summarizes the information developed during the integrated study
undertaken by the EPA to address the issues raised by Congress.  It includes
discussions of the following topics:
          equipment used for municipal waste combustion
          emissions and waste streams from municipal waste combustors
          air pollution control techniques
          cost of controls
          estimates of health risk from predicted exposure to pollutants.
Additional information on these and related topics may be found  in the
following technical documents, also issued as part of the integrated study:
          Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Emissions Data  Base for Municipal
          Waste Combustors (EPA/530-SW-87-021b)
          Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Combustion  Control  of Organic
          Emissions (EPA/530-SW-87-021c)
          Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Flue  Gas  Cleaning  Technology
          (EPA/530-SW-87-021d)
                                        1

-------
          Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Costs of Flue Gas Cleaning
          Technologies (EPA/530-SW-87-021&)
          Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Sampling and Analysis
          (EPA/530-SW-87-021f)
          Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Assessment of Health Risks-
          Associated with Exposure to Municipal Waste Combustion Emissions
          (EPA/530-SW-87-021g)
          Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Characterization of the Municipal
          Waste Combustion  Industry (EPA/530-Stf-87-021h)
          Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Recycling of Solid Waste
          (EPA/530-SW-87-021i)
Much of the information in  this Report to Congress has been extracted from
these volumes.

1.2  BACKGROUND

     Several incidents of environmental contamination by 2,3,7,8-
tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (2,3,7,8-TCDD), coupled with the realization of
its potential toxicity and  persistence, have resulted in a high level of
public awareness and concern over potential exposure of human populations to
2,3,7,8-TCDD and other chlorinated dibenzodioxins (CDD).  The most notable
incidents include the exposure of U. S. servicemen to Agent Orange
contaminated with TCDD, the industrial accident in Seveso, Italy, and the
contamination of Times Beach, Missouri.
     Low levels of CDO and  CDF (chlorinated dibenzofurans) are found
throughout the environment.  Municipal waste combustors emit CDD and CDF to
the atmosphere, thereby contributing to environmental levels, but it is
difficult to characterize their contribution to the levels found.  Municipal
waste combustors are not the only known sources from which CDD and CDF enter
the environment, nor is the atmosphere the only known route of exposure.
Other sources of environmental contamination include the production of
chlorinated phenols, a chemical process which produces 2,3,7,8-TCDD as a
byproduct.  Trace quantities of the byproduct are then carried with the
chlorinated phenols into products such as wood preservatives  and  pesticides.

-------
COD and CDF +rom production,  use and disposal  of these  materials may  enter  the
environment, for example,  through soil,  sediment,  or  fish.
     Atmospheric emissions of CDD and CDF have been measured  in stack gases
from combuition processes  other than municipal  waste  incinerators,  e.g.,
hazardous waste incinerators, wire reclamation incinerators,  secondary-copper
smelters, wood-fired boilers, sewage sludge incinerators,  hospital
incinerators, and drum and barrel furnaces.  Some recent  studies have
implicated sources in addition to those listed above, particularly  automotive
e.-Taust, in contributing to the levels of CDD and CDF found in urban  air and
                123
in human tissue.   '
     Concern -ver municipal waste combustion as a source  of CDD emissions
surfaced in 1977 when workers in the Netherlands first reported detection of
CDD and CDF in flue gas and fly ash from municipal waste  combustors in that
country.  Very soon after the initial report, CDD and CDF were reported in the
100 ppb range in fly ash from a municipal waste combustor in Switzerland.  By
1980, investigators elsewhere in Europe had also reported findings of CDD and
                                                            4
CDF in emissions and wastes from municipal waste combustors.   In the U.S.,
emission testing at Hempstead, New York, in 1979 showed CDD and CDF being
emitted to the air from the combustor stack.  At that time analytical methods
were not developed to the extent they are today and only semi-quantitatr-e
analysis was possible.  However, the detection of CDD and CDF was reinforced
by European reports of CDD and CDF measured in municipal  waste combustor stack
gases and the research published in 1978 by Dow Chemical  U.S.A.  showing trace
quantities of CDD and CDF associated with numerous combustion sources.
     In 1984, at the request of Congress, the EPA initiated an investigation
of potential contamination of the environment by 2,3,7,8-TCDD. The National
Dioxin Strategy was developed and implemented.  It included provisions for
investigative, remedial, and regulatory activities and evaluated seven types
or "tiers" of sources having decreasing expectation  of environmental
contamination.
     One part of the study,  "Tier 4" focussed on combustion sources,  including
municipal waste combustors.  Because some  testing of municipal waste
combustors previously had been performed,  only  limited testing of  those
sources was performed under  Tier 4 activities.  Tier 4 activities  were,

-------
 instead, directed towar" sources that had not been widely tested.   However,
 relying on testing previously done or planned, the Agency included emissions
 of CDD and CDF from municipal waste combustors in its considerations.   The
 Tier 4 study showed that some municipal waste combustors are relatively large
 emission sources.  The results showed wide variability suggesting  that it is
 possible to design and operate municipal waste combustors with relatively low
 CDD and CDF emissions.
     During the implementation of *he National Dioxin Strategy, Congress  -
 enacted the HSWA of 1984 which in^.uded the Section 102 requirement for a
 report about dioxin emissions from municipal waste cowbustors.

 1.3  SCOPE

     Several classes of substances are represented by the substances known or
 generally thought to be present in emissions and waste streams from municipal
 waste combustors.  Classes of chemical substances frequently discussed  include
 metals, organics, CDD and CDF, acid gases, and particulate matter.  Some of
 the substances within these classes have been evaluated for toxicity by the
 EPA; some have been designated criteria pollutants; and some have been  listed
 as hazardous air pollutants.  Other substances present generally are thought
 or suspected to exhibit toxic health effects  in some concentrations but have
 not been evaluated or listed as toxic or hazardous by the EPA.
     The various substances discussed in this report are called simply
 "pollutants."  No judgment is made or implied about their toxicity or hazard
 potential, except in the section on risk where such issues are addressed  in
detail.  Further information about the health effects of these pollutants can
 be found in a series of documents issued by EPA's Environmental Criteria
Assessment Office.   A list of these documents is included in Appendix  A.
     Nomenclature and acronyms representing some of the organic compounds
considered in this report have not been standardized and can be confusing.
Chlorinated dibenzo-para-dioxins (CDD) and chlorinated dibenzofurans  (CDF)
form two families of related compounds.  Individual compounds within the
families differ in their degree of chlorination and in the placement of their
chlorine atoms.  Homologs have the same degree of chlorination, i.e., the same

-------
number of chlorine atoms,  but the chlorine atoms are not  necessarily found in
the same substitution positions on the molecule.  For example,  tetra
chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins include all  isomers of chlorinated dibenzo-p-
dioxins having four chlorine adorns on the  molecular ring  structure.   Isomers
have a particular chlorine atom placement  specified.  For  example,  2,-3,7,8-
tetrachloro dibenzo-p-dioxin has chlorine  atoms in the positions on  the
molecular ring structure designated by the numbers 2,3,7,and 8.
     To avoid having to spell out such long chemical names repeatedly,
acronyms and symbols representing classes, homologs, and  isomers have been
developed.  In this report the following naming conventions have been adopted:
     CDD - refers to family of chlorinated dibenzo-para-dioxins.  PCDD is also
           used; it stands for polychlorinated dibenzo-para-dioxins.
     CDF - refers to family of chlorinated dibenzofurans.  PCDF is also used.
           It stands for polychlorinated dibenzofurans.
    TCDD - refers to the homolog group of tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins.
    TCDF - refers to the homolog group of tetrachlorodibenzofurans.
Other homolog groups are represented by spelling out the prefix designating
the number of chlorine atoms per molecule; e.g., penta-CDD means
pentachlorodibenzo-para-dioxin.

-------
                         2.  MUNICIPAL WASTF DISPOSAL

     Although the emphasis of this report is municipal  waste  combustion,
questions concerning environmental effects are raised  in the  context  of  the
larger questions concerning environmentally sound municipal waste management
practices.  Municipal waste is generated in the United States at an ever
increasing rate and is expected to grow from a generation rate of 130 to 160
million tons* per year in 1980 to 160 to 290 million tons per year in the year
2000.   At present, municipal waste management options are limited to direct
landfill ing of refuse, recovery and recycle of discarded materials, and
combustion of refuse combined with land disposal of residues.  The three
options are not exclusive.  For example, recycling removes materials from
refuse, but not all refuse can be recycled, so some portion remains to be
landfilled or combusted.  Also, combustion is accompanied by ash and bulky
items that must be disposed of in landfills.

2.1  LANDFILLING

     Direct landfill ing has been and currently remains the predominant waste
management option, accounting for about 85 percent by weight of the waste
collected.   About 5 percent of the waste collected in the United States was
combusted in 1984 and only about 10 percent was recovered for recycle.
     Though landfill ing currently predominates as the method of municipal
waste disposal, it is becoming less attractive.  As a result of increased
recognition of the environmental damage associated with some landfills,  state
governments have begun to close some of them.  For example, the state of New
Jersey has closed over 58 percent of its landfills since 1977 as a result of
their reaching design capacity or because of environmental enforcement
                                                                  o
actions, and only one new landfill has since opened in that state.   New York
 One ton is equal to 0.9 megagrams.  The units used in this report are mixed,
metric and English.  The use of mixed units arises from usage  in the  industry.
For example, in the United States throughput capacity is traditionally spoken
of in English units, while emissions data are quoted in metric  units.

-------
                                                             Q
City has closed 14 of its 17  landfills  over  the  past 20 years;  and
Caiifor la, New Jersey,  and Florida have  all  initiated programs to minimize
landfil'ing as a waste management  strategy.
     Environmental regulations governing  acceptable landfill design and
operation are becoming increasingly stringent at the State level, requiring
such measures as double liners, leachate  containment and monitoring.   Federal
standards for landfills are currently being  reviewed and may be strengthened.
Costs for landfill units consistent with  new standards could range  as  high  as
$45 to $150 per ton of refuse disposed   compared to costs  from survey data of
about $10 to $20 per ton for current landfills.     This  increased expense is
coupled with an ever worsening shortage of landfill  space  and  the increasing
quantities of refuse already described.  The landfill  space shortage  is
becoming acute in the populous northeastern part of the  United States.
     The closing of existing sites, the scarcity of new  landfill  sites, and
increased landfill operating costs, combined with the  increased quantities of
waste are causing waste management strategies to place more emphasis  on
recycling and combustion.  Use of these two options can  reduce the volume of
waste to be disposed of, thereby extending the life of available landfill
sites.

2.2  RECYCLE

     Renewed interest in recovery of discarded materials for recycle or reuse
has been seen across the United States, but particularly in the Northeast
where suitable landfill space  is scarce.  Most of the materials recovery in
the United States is accomplished through source separation, that is, manual
separation by the generator rather than separation from mixed refuse  in
centralized waste processing  facilities.  Thousands of source separation
programs are in operation  across the United  States including 400 to 500
curbside recycling programs.   Some states,  particularly in the Northeast,  have
made participation mandatory.    Added to the source separation  programs,
there are  some 30 to 40  centralized waste processing plants   separating
materials  from mixed refuse.   These  plants  are  producing  refuse-derived  fuels
(RDF).  One of the steps  in  producing  RDF  is removing non-combustibles from
the waste.

-------
     Centralized processing methods are becoming increasingly  sophisticated
and effectiv  at ;aparating waste materials.   A notable state-of-che-art
system operating .   Europe and in South America, the Sorain-Cecchini  process,
is an integrated recovery system that can produce paper pulp,  animal  feed,
compost, aluminum scrap, ferrous scrap, densified refuse-derived fuel, .and
pelletized polyethylene for production of sheet plastic used in garbage  bags.
Plans are currently being made for building a similar system,  the ORFA
                              14
process, in the United States.
     Methods for separation and uses for recovered materials have been
established for paper, glass, scrap ferrous metals, aluminum,  wood waste, yard
waste, and rubber.   Also, separation methods and markets for recov;red
plastics are currently the subject of rapidly advancing research.  At the
present time, technical and economic factors combine to make paper and
aluminum the most extensively recycled materials from U.S. waste.
     Recycling, while it is not expected to eliminate the interest in
combustion, is being considered more frequently as a means to  achieve
additional volume reduction above  and beyond volume reductions  achievable
using combustion.

2.3  COMBUSTION

     Combustion of municipal waste is an attractive waste management option
because it reduces the volume of the waste by 70 to 90  percent.   In the  face
of shrinking landfill availability, municipal waste combustion capacity  in the
United States is expected to grow  at an astonishing rate, significantly  faster
than the growth rate for municipal refuse generation.   From the current
combined U.S. capacity of 45,000 tons per day,  combustion capacity has been
projected to reach 117,000 to 252,000 tons per  day by  the year 2000.   This
added capacity is expected to be achieved with  the addition of nearly 200 new
facilities.6
     Modern municipal solid waste  combustors are not merely "garbage  burners."
They are sophisticated boilers that use waste as a fuel.  A significant
reduction in waste volume in conjunction with the  conversion  of chemical
energy to a useable form, such as  steam or electricity,  is  an attractive
option for many municipalities.  For these reasons many municipalities  are  now
considering waste-to-energy projects.
                                       8

-------
2.3.1  Tvoes of Combustors
     There are three ma.n cl  *ses  of facilities  used to combust municipal
refuse:  mass burn,  modular,  «md  RDF-fired  facilities.  A fourth class,
employing fluidized  bed combustors,  is  not  yet common and has not been covered
in detail in this study.   While these are the main classes, there are  •
variations within the three main  classes and there are some examples of
designs that incorporate features  of more than one class.  The first class  is
called "mass burn" because the waste is combusted without any pre-process-,",g
other than removal of items too *  ge to go through  the feed system.   A
diagram of a mass burn furnace is  shown in  Figure 2-1.  In a typical mass  burn
combustor refuse is  loaded from the storage pit  to the  feed chute.   Hydraulic
rams or pusher grate sections are used  to  push  the refuse from  the  fuel  chute
onto a grate.  Grates may be traveling, rocking, or  reciprocating,  but they
are all similar in that they are  designed  to  move waste through the combustor
and to promote complete combustion by agitation of  the  thick  fuel  bed.  (One
type of mass burn unit that has no grate at all  is  a rotary  combustor.)
Combustion air, supplied to the primary chamber in  excess  of  the
stoichiometric amount is introduced both below (underfire  air)  and above
(overfire air) the grate.  Most large,  new mass burn combustors are expected
to have wUerwall furnaces for energy recovery.  Many older facilities have
refractory-lined walls.  Ash generated in the combustion process falls into an
ash pit from which it is sent to a landfill.   Fly ash entrained by the flue
gas is collected  in a particulate matter collection device before the flue gas
enters the stack  for discharge to the atmosphere.
     Mass burn combustors are field-erected and generally range in size from
50 to  1000 tons per day of refuse feed per unit.  Many mass burn facilities
have 2 or more combustors and have site capacities of greater than 1000 tons
per day.
     Modular combustors also burn waste without pre-processing, but they  are
typically shop-fabricated and range  in size from 5 to 100 tons per day of
refuse feed per unit.  One of the most common modular combustor designs,  the
Consumat system,  is shown in Figure  2-2.   In a modular combustor like the  one
shown  in Figure 2-2 the primary chamber is fed  using a hopper and  ram feed
system.  Air is supplied to the primary chamber at  substoichiometric  levels.
This results in a lower air velocity in the primary combustion chamber  than  if

-------
                                                                           To Atmosphere
Furnace      Boiler  Superheetei   Economise!
                                      Quench Reectorf AddMi.e
                                        Acid QM     Fe#d
                                        Scrubber    Hopper
    Quench
     Pit
i
                                            Lime Slurry     Dry
                                            Mixing Tenk   Venturl
Figure 2-1.  Diagram of a Modern Mass Burn Facility
                                                                                        IE

                                                                                        5

-------
        Chwnch
         Tank
Figure 2-2.  Modular Combustor15
           (Reprinted with Permission of Environment Canada)
                                                               o.
                                                               t
                                                               CO

-------
excess air were used and minimizes entrainment of fuel  particles  and  ash  in
the flue gas.  The incomplete combustion products pass  into  the  secondary
combustion chamber where excess air is added and combustion  is completed.  The
auxiliary burner is fired if the secondary chamber temperature falls  below a
specified level.  The resulting hot gases can be passed through  a heat-
recovery boiler for energy  recovery.  Although several existing  modular
combustors do not have heat recovery, almost all new and planned  modular
combustors are expected to incorporate heat recovery.
     The modular unit described above typically is called a  controlled air  or
starved air combustor.  Another type of modular combustor uses  excess air in
the primary chamber, and no additional air is added In  the secondary chamber.
In this design the secondary chamber simply provides additional  residence time
for the completion of combustion.  This type of design  is functionally similar
to larger, mass burn units.
     A third major class of municipal waste combustor burns  refuse-derived
fuel (RDF).  Figure 2-3 shows an RDF facility.  The types of boilers used to
combust RDF can include suspension, stoker, and fluidized bed designs.  RDF
may be co-fired with a fossil fuel (usually coal), but  co-firing is not
prevalent and information generated during this study does not include
information about co-firing.
     The degree of processing of refuse to yield RDF can vary from simple
removal of bulky items accompanied by shredding to extensive processing to
produce finely divided fuel suitable for ccMFtHingMn pulverized coal-fired
boilers.  Processed municipal waste, regardless of the degree of processing
                                                                             t
performed, is broadly referred to as RDF.                                    \

2.3.2  Description of the Industry
     The population of municipal waste combustors in the United  States (both
existing and projected) is described  in terms of  1) throughput or capacity,  2)
number of facilities or combustor sites, 3) type  of combustor, and 4) location
of facilities.  Throughput or capacity may be aggregated  in  several  ways:  by
type of combustor, by number of facilities in a  state  or  region  of the
United States, or by facility or unit.  A  facility may consist of one or more
combustors.  Capacity refers to the  amount of municipal waste a  facility,
unit, or group of facilities is designed to combust.
                                        12

-------
  Slab Receiving
& Storage Are*
                         Primary
                        Shredder
                Residue  Aluminum   Heavy    Light
                                  Ferrous    Ferrous
                              RDF Combustion
Secondary
 Shredder
                                                       Air Classifier may b« reoiaced
                                                          tty Trommel Screen
                RDF
             Distributors
            Grata Surface
              Drive
              Shaft ~~-4
             Underrate
           Air Compartment
                                                       Tangantlal
                                                       Overflre Air
                                                       Sifting Screw
                                                         Conveyor
   Figure 2 - 3. Diagrams of RDF Processing and Combustion
                                        13

-------
     In this report, the existing and planned combustor populations will be
described first by typr, then by location.   In both descriptions,
distributions of the population are presented by number of facilities  and by
capacity.
                                                 *
     2.3.2.1  Distribution of combustors by type.   There  are  111  municipal
waste combustion facilities currently in operation in  the  United  States.
Table 2-1 presents a summary of these existing facilities.  They  are ground
by three design types:  mass bur '  modular, and facilities that produce  and
combust RDF.  These design types were previously described in  Section  2.3.1.
     The total  design capacity for the 111  existing municipal  waste combustion
facilities is approximately 49,000 tons per day of municipal waste input.
Table 2-1 and Figure 2-4 show the distribution of total U.S. capacity  among
the three design types.  Figure 2-4 shows that the mass burn facilities  have
the largest share of the installed U.S. capacity, 68 percent of the total.
The RDF facilities represent 23 percent of the total capacity, and modular
represent 9 percent.  Though they represent a small amount of  the total
installed capacity, the number of facilities using modular combustors to
combust municipal waste is greater than the number of mass burn facilities (56
facilities with modular combustors compared to 45 mass burn facilities).
There are only ten RDF facilities in operation.
     Table 2-1 also shows the size distribution  of municipal waste combustion
facilities in the U.S.  The majority of the facilities with modular combustors
(54 of the 56 facilities) have design capacities  of less  than 250 tons per
day.  There is no typical design capacity  for the mass burn facility.  The
data indicate that mass burn facilities are designed to meet  a variety of
capacity requirements, unlike the modular  units  which  are specifically
designed for a smaller combustion demand.  Twelve mass burn facilities have
design capacities less than 250 tons per day, 6  facilities  have capacities  in
*
 The information in this section  is a summary of  information presented  in
Reference 6, Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Characterization  of  the
Municipal Waste Combustion Industry.
                                        14

-------
TABLE 2-1.   SUMMARY OF  OUSTING MWC FACILITIES

Total
Number of

Capacity
Range
Design Type (tons per day)
Mass Burn <250
Modular
RDF
Mass Burn 250 to <500
Modular
RDF
Mass Burn 500 to <1000
Modular
RDF
Mass Burn >1000
Modular
RDF
Totals
Installed
With
Heat
Recovery
8
37
1
4
2
3
4
0
1
8
0
5
73
Facilities
Without
Heat
Recovery
4
17
0
2
0
0
11
0
0
4
0
0
38
Installed
(tons
With
Heat
Recovery
1,291
3,292
200
1,820
570
1,100
2,740
0
600
14,250
0
9,500
35,363
Capacity
per day)
Without
Heat
Recovery
748
610
0
900
0
0
7,150 "
0 "
0
4,200
0
0
13,608
                          111
48,971
                       15

-------
                                  Modular (9%)
Mass Burn (68%)
                                                     RDF (23%)
              Total Design Capacity = 49,000 tons per day
                                                               s
                                                               ao
Figure 2 • 4. Distribution of Existing Installed Municipal Waste
            Combustion Capacity by Design Type
                                16

-------
the 250 to 500 tons per day size range,  15 facilities  have  «apacities  in  the
500 to iOOC  •'ze range, and 12 facilities'have  capacities iqual  to  or  greater
than 1000 U is per day.  Five of the ten RDF facilities  are designed to
process more than 1000 tons per day of municipal  waste.
     Of the 111 existing municipal  waste combustion  facilities,  73  are"
designed with heat recovery boilers.  Thirty-nine of the 56 facilities with
modular combustors (70 percent) and all  of the  RDF facilities (53 percent)  are
designed with heat recovery boilers.  Heat recovery  boilers are  prevalent at
facilities with modular combustors, because many of these facilities  have been
built more recently than mass burn facilities,  and heat recovery boilers are
an integral part of newer designs.
     The EPA has information concerning 210 planned municipal waste combustion
facilities.  Planned facilities are those which are not yet operating, but are
either under construction, planned for construction, under negotiation,  or
have been formally proposed.  Table 2-2 presents a summary of these planned
facilities.  They are grouped by the same design types that were used to group
the existing facilities.  One hundred and eighteen of the 210 identified
planned facilities are mass burn facilities, 24 are facilities planning to
install modular combustors, and 31 are RDF facilities.  For 37 facilities,
data on the design type were either unavailable, or a design type had not been
chosen.  The total design capacity for the 210 facilities  is projected to be
approximately 190,000 tons per day, or approximately four times  the total
design capacity of existing municipal waste combustion facilities.  Some of
these planned units are in the early stages of planning.  Not all of  the
planned projects will proceed to completion.  On the other hand  additional new
municipal waste combustion projects are being considered every day.   The
ultimate capacity expected to come on line is obviously uncertain.
     Figure 2-5 shows, for planned facilities, the expected  distribution of
total U.S. capacity among the three primary design types.  The mass burn
facilities are expected to account for 59 percent of the total design
capacity.  The RDF facilities are expected to account for  20 percent, and
facilities planning to install modular combustors are expected  to  account  for
only 3 percent.  The remaining  18 percent of planned capacity includes
facilities where the design technology  is either  undecided or not  available.
All of the planned facilities  are expected  to  incorporate  energy recovery.
                                        17

-------
    TABLE 2-2.   SUMMARY OF PLANNED MUNICIPAL  WASTE  COMBUSTION  FACILITIES
Design Typee
    Design
   Capacity
    Range
(tons per day)
    Number of
Planned Facilities
     Total
Planned Capacity
 (tons per day)
Mass Burn <250
'-odul ar
RDF
DNA
Mass Burn 250 to <500
Modular
RDF
DNA
Mass Burn 500 to <1000
Modular
RDF
DNA
Mass Burn >1000
Modular
RDF
DNA
18
14
3
7
17
10
2
9
33
0
11
6
50
0
15
15
3,055
1,377
450
1,225
6,155
3,730
730
3,220
21,653
0
8,544
3,700
82,532
0
29,150
27,850
  Totals
                         210
                           193,371
 DNA indicates that data on design type are not available or the technology
 is undetermined at this time.
                                     18

-------
                                   Modular (3%)
Mass Burn (59%)
                                                   RDF (20%)
                                                 Undecided/Not Available (i8°/
               Total Design Capacity = 190,000 tons per day
                                                                 00
 Figure 2 - 5. Distribution of Planned Municipal Waste Combustion
             Capacity by Design Type
                                 19

-------
     Table 2-2 shows the expected size distribution among planned  facilities.
Fourteen of the 24 facilities with moo .ar •. nmbustors are planned  with
capacities of less than 250 tons per day.   «  a remaining ten  facilities
planning modular combustors are expected to fall  into the 250 to 500  tons per
day capacity size range.  Fifty of the 118 i.iass burn facilities are planned
with capacities equal to or greater than 1000 tons per day.   Fifteen  of  the  31
RDF facilities are planned with a capacity equal  to or greater than 1000 tons
per day.

     2.3.2.2  Distribution of Municipal Waste Combustors bv Location.*
Table 2-3 lists the states with the largest existing capacity to combust
municipal waste.  New York State has the largest existing capacity with
approximately 9,000 tons per day (at 12 facilities).  The 6 states listed  in
Table 2-3 account for a combined capacity of 32,000 tons per day,  or  nearly 66
percent of the total capacity in the United States.  The remaining 29 states
and the District of Columbia account for a combined capacity of nearly
17,000 tons per day, or 34 percent of the total capacity.  Figure  2-6 shows
the geographic distribution of municipal waste combustion facilities in the
United States.  The figure shows that municipal waste combustion  facilities
are concentrated on the east coast.  A complete list of  existing  municipal
waste combustion facilities is included in Appendix B.
     Table 2-4 lists the States with the planned  growth  in municipal  waste
combustion of greater than 5000 tons per day  capacity.   California's planned
growth in combustion capacity of approximately 43,000 tons per day (at  36
facilities) is the largest.  The 9 states  listed  in Table 2-4 account for a
combined planned capacity of approximately 150,000  tons  per  day,  or  nearly 80
percent of the planned capacity in the United States.   The remaining 34 states
account for a combined planned capacity of nearly 40,000 tons per day,  or 20
percent of the total planned capacity  for  the United  States.  Figure 2-7 shows
the distribution of planned municipal waste  combustion  facilities in the
 The information presented  in this section  is a  summary of  information
 presented in Reference 2,  Municipal Waste  Combustion  Study:   Characterization
 of the Municipal Waste Combustion Industry.

                                       20

-------
           TABLE  2-3.   STATES WITH THE LARGEST EXISTING CAPACITY TO
                         PROCESS MUNICIPAL SOLID   \STE

State
New York
Florida
Massachusetts
Ohio
Maryland
Pennsylvania
Subtotal
Remaining States
Total
Number of
Facilities
12
5
6
5
Z
3
33
78
111
Existing Capacity
(tons per day)
9,025
7,498
5,640
4,400
3,450
2,220
32,233
16,738
48,971
aRanked in descending order by capacity.

 Each of the remaining States has a total existing capacity less than
 2000 tons per day.  New Hampshire has 12 modular facilities with a total
 capacity of 517 tons per day.
                                        21

-------
r>o
ro
                  Figure 2 - 6. Regional Distribution of Existing Municipal Waste
                                    Combustion Facilities

-------
                                                                 PR
Figure 2 - 7. Regional Distribution of Planned Municipal Waste
                  Combustion Facilities

-------
           TABLE 2-4.  STATES WITH PLANNED GROWTH IN MWC CAPACITY
                        EXCEEDING 5000 TONS PER DAY3

State
California
New York
New Jersey
Pennsylvania
Florida
Massachusetts
Connecticut
Virginia
Washington
Subtotal
Remaining States
Total
Number of
Facilities
36
'23
6
26
13
11
11
4
5
149
61
210
Planned Capacity
(Tons Per Day)
42,522
22,853
23,955
18,472
14,420
10,060
8,520
8,375
5,150
154,327
39,044
193,371
Ranked in descending order by capacity.
                                     24

-------
United States.  The figure shows  increasing  activity  in municipal waste
combustion on botn the east and west coasts.  A  list  of planned municipal
waste combustion facilities known to the  EPA is  shown in Appendix B.

     2.3.2.3  Projections through the Year 2000.    Most of the facilities
identified by EPA as planned will be constructed by 1990 if  there are  not
serious delays in implementation.  The EPA has  also made projections of  the
growth of the municipal waste combustion  industry through the year  2000.
These projections are largely based on market surveys and projections  in the
increase in the generation of municipal waste.
     Market analys.'s from several sources indicates substantial  growth in the
total number and capacity of facilities out  to the year 2000;  although,  the
extent of the growth predicted varies with the different  analyses.   Estimates
indicate that over 300 facilities will be on-line and operating by that time.
The total projected capacity is expected to be between 113,000 and 260,000
tons per day by the year 2000.
     Based on the capacities of existing and planned facilities, mass burn
facilities are expected to  account  for between 60  and 70 percent of the total
projected capacity by the year 2000.  Facilities that combust RDF will
constitute between 20 and 30 percent, and facilities with modular combustors
will account  for approximately 10 percent of the total projected capacity by
the year 2000.
     The net growth in the  number of  municipal waste combustors by the year
2000 is dependent on the growth  in  the number of new facilities minus the
closing of existing facilities.  The  EPA estimates that the number of existing
facilities to be retired or closed  over the next 15  years will be small  in
number.  This projection results from the fact  that  the majority of existing
municipal waste combustors  were  built since  1970 and, therefore, will have
less than 30 years  in operation  by  the year  2000.   Some refurbishing  of
facilities currently shut down may  also occur,  adding to the projected
capacity.
 The information  in this  section  is  a  summary  of  information  presented in
    0
Reference 6, Municipal Waste  Combustion  Study:  Characterization of the
Municipal Waste Combustion  Industry.
                                       25

-------
                           3.  ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
     Converging with the shift in waste management strategies and the
resultant growth in municipal waste combustor population is rising concern
about the environmental effects of municipal waste combustion.  Environmental
concern has been raised about solid residues as well as pollutants emitted to
the atmosphere.  Particular concern exists, as mentioned previously, with the
confirmation of the presence of CDD and CDF in emissions and residues.

3.1  SOLID RESIDUES

     The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act applies to disposal of the
bottom ash and collected fly ash from municipal waste combustion facilities.
These residues generally contain metals such as lead and cadmium.
     EPA has reviewed data from the literature concerning results of EP
toxicity tests (as described in 40 CFR 261.24) on ash.  The Agency has no
information to indicate the reliability of these data.  A majority of the fly
ash tests reported indicate levels of lead or cadmium above those indicative
of EP toxicity.  Few tests of bottom ash or combined fly and bottom ash
indicate levels of metals above such levels.  EPA is in the process of
obtaining more reliable data on ash characteristics and Teachability.
     If the ash generated by a municipal waste combustion facility were to be
managed as a hazardous waste, the cost of managing that ash would be expected
to increase substantially.
     The EPA's findings concerning ash disposal will be issued as they are
completed.  Unfortunately, they were not available for  inclusion  in this
report.  Therefore, the remainder of this report and the documents  published
with it focus on potential environmental effects of emissions from  municipal
waste combustors to the atmosphere.
                                       26

-------
3.2  EMISSIONS TO THE ATMOSPHERE*

     Recently, concerns have been raised  about  emissions of pollutants to the
atmosphere from municipal  waste combustors.   As discussed  in the  Introduction,
much of this concern was over emissions of CDD  and  CDF, but other pollutants
of concern have also been cited.  As part of the integrated study of municipal
waste combustion, EPA attempted to collect as much  data on emissions from
municipal waste combustors as was available. Summary  matrixes  showing
emissions data collected by the EPA are  shown in Tables C-l and C-2  in
Appendix C.  The first summary table shows almost 50 facilities for  which  the
EPA has documented test reports to support the  test data.  The  second
compilation is of data from emission tests about which the agency has  little
supporting information.  These data include emission tests conducted in  North
America, Western Europe, and Japan.
     Comparison of the data from different tests is difficult  because  the
facilities vary widely in design and operating  conditions, the  tests were
conducted with different objectives and  different protocols,  and the level  of
detail of the reported data varies.  Further, the specific sampling and
analysis methods were not the same for all tests.  These  differences make it
difficult not only to make comparisons among combustors tested  but also  to
draw conclusions about the entire population of combustors.
     To make the most of existing emissions data, a compilation of test  data
has been assembled as a part of this effort to address environmental effects
of municipal waste combustion.  The compilation is presented in the document
titled "Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Emissions Data Base for Municipal
Waste Combustors."    Information concerning the units tested,  operating
conditions, and sampling and analytical  protocols has also been  included with
the emissions measurement data.
     The emissions data gathered to date from municipal waste combustors show
a variety of pollutants emitted from their  stacks at widely varying
concentrations.  A summary of the ranges measured for various pollutants
*The emissions data presented in this chapter are from Reference  16, Municipal
 Waste Combustion Study:  Emissions Data Base for Municipal Waste Combustors.
 All data are shown on the basis of 12% COg.

                                       27

-------
exiting the plants is shown in Table 3-1.  The da*a are shown for the three
ir;   classes of municipal waste combustion units,  mass burn, modular,  and
RL -fired.  These data were collected from about 30 full-scale facilities  for
which documented test data and sampling and analytical  methodologies were
available.  All emissions data have been normalized to 12 percent C02-
     The emissions numbers shown in Table 3-1 comprise emissions measured  from
municipal waste combustors that are equipped with widely varying control
devices.  The effects of different control devices on emissions of a given
pDllutant can be seen in widely varying stack emissions, contributing to the
wide range shown in the table.  The numbers shown do not distinguish among
control devices in use.  Existing municipal waste cowbustors are generally
equipped with particulate matter control devices only, if they are equipped
with control devices of any kind.  Virtually all existing mass burn units
(which tend to be larger) are equipped with some sort of particulate matter
collection device.  Thirty-six of 56 existing modular facilities now operating
in the U. S. (which tend to be smaller and carry over fewer  particulate
emissions because of their design) are equipped with no add-on control
devices.   However, all new, mass burn and RDF facilities and most new modular
facilities are expected to be equipped with efficient particulate matter
control devices.  Only two existing facilities currently are equipped with
scrubbers in addition to particulate matter control devices,  but many new
facilities are expected to incorporate some type of gas scrubber for control
of other pollutants.
     These control devices are being incorporated  in response to regulatory
strategies at both the Federal and State  levels.   The control of particulate
emissions from new municipal waste combustors is required by Federal
standards.  Some states, particularly those with the largest numbers of new
units, are also requiring control of a variety of  pollutants through the use
of add-on control equipment and, in some  cases,  (e.g., California and  in New
York) furnace operating requirements.
     Remembering all the previous comments on the  difficulty of  comparing the
emissions data, it may be useful to look  more closely at the emissions test
data for selected pollutants.  Looking for trends  or patterns, the  facilities
associated with the extremes of the ranges shown in Table 3-1 have  been
                                       28

-------
                                           TABLE 3-1.   SUGARY OF EMISSIONS MEASURED FROM  THE  THREE
                                                    MAJOR CLASSES  OF  MUNICIPAL  WASTE COMBUSTORS*
                              Pollatent
                                 Mass Burn
                                                                                         Modular
                                                                                                                     RDF-Fired
to
Part leu late witter          5.5 -
                          (0.002
Sulfur dloxld*               0.04
Nitrogen oxld**                39
Carbon Monoxide             16.5 <
Hydro0*n chloride             7.5
Hydrogen fluoride            0.62
Arsenic                     0.452
Beryl lluei                  0.0005
Cad»1u*                      6.2 •
Cnro»1u*                     21  -
Lead                         25  -
Mercury                       9  -
Nickel                       230 •
TCOO                        0.20 •
TCDF                        0.32 •
PCOO                        1.1  -
PCOF                       0.423 -
 1.530 wj/N*3
- 0.669 gr/d*cf)
 - 401 ppwlv
 - 380 ppwfv
- 1.350 ppwlv
 - 477 ppwlv
 - 7.2 ppwlv
 - 233 ug/N*3
 - 0.33 ug/N*3
• 500  ug/N*3
 1.020 ug/N*3
 15.000 ug/N*3
 2.200 ug/N*3
• 480  ug/N*3
• 1.200 ng/N*3
> 4.600 ng/N*3
 11.000 no/N*3
  15.000 ng/N*3
    23-300 ng/M*3
(0.012 • 0.13 gr/d»cf)
     61 -  124 ppwlv
     260-310 ppwlv
    3.2 -  67 ppwlv
   160 • 1270 ppwlv
    1.1 -  16 ppwlv
   6.1  - 119 ug/N*3
 0.096 -  0.11 ug/N*3
    21  - 942 ug/N*3
   3.6-390 ug/N*3
   237  - 15.SCO ug/N*3
   130  - 705 tig/Me3
 <1.92 - 553 ug/Na3
   1.0  - 43.7 ng/N*3
   12.2 - 345 ng/N*3
  63 - 1540 ng/N*3
  97 - 1810 ng/N*3
   220 - 530 WJ/MM3
(0.096 - 0.230 gr/dscf)
     55 - 188 ppwlv
'      263 ppwlv6
    217 - 430 ppwlv
    96-780 ppwlv
     2.1 ug/N*3 b
    19-160 ug/N*3
      21 ug/N*3 b
    34  - 370 ug/N*3
 490 - 6.700 ug/N*3
 970 - 9.600 ug/N*3
   170 - 440 ug/N*3
 130 - 3.600 ug/N*3
  3.5 - 260 ng/N*3
   32 - 680 ng/N*3
  54 - 2,840 ng/N*3
 135 - 9.100 ng/N*3
                         •See Appendix C for iu**iry of  facilities represented In Missions data for each pollutant category.  Results
                          su**ar1zed are fro* full  scale co**arc1a1 facilities only.
                          Only one test.

-------
 identified arJ are discussed in the following sections.  Supporting detail
 concerning unit types and test conditions may be found in the volume titled
 "Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Emission Data Base for Municipal Waste
 Combustors."16
      It  should be noted that the concentration ranges reported were measured
 during relatively short duration tests, usually compliance tests, performed
 under optimum conditions.  In particular, the levels at the low end of the
 ranges may not be achievable at all combustors and may not be achievable on a
 continuous basis even by the specific combustors tested.
      In  addition, the levels at the low end of the ranges have not been found
 at the same facility for all pollutants.  In some cases, achieving a low level
 of one pollutant is likely to make it more difficult to achieve a low level of
 others,  e.g., achieving low levels of organic emissions through combustion
 optimization will make it more difficult to achieve low levels of nitrogen
 oxide emissions.  Thus, the levels at the low end of the ranges are not all
 likely to be achievable at the same facility.

 3.2.1  Particulate Matter
     A benchmark against which the particulate matter concentrations measured
 in stack gases from municipal waste combustors can be compared is the NSPb of
 0.08 gr/dscf (183 mg/Nm ), established in 1971.  Also, the newly promulgated
 NSPS for industrial boilers, which would apply to units of 100 million
 Btu/hour (270 tons per day of municipal waste) or larger that generate steam,
 limits particulate emissions to 0.1 ID/million Btu (43 ng/Joule) of heat
 input, which is equivalent to about 0.04 gr/dscf (92 mg/Nm ), assuming the
 composition of waste shown in Appendix D.
     As  noted generally about all the emission test data, the range of
 particulate matter concentrations measured in combustor stack gases is large,
 especially for mass burn units, covering several orders of magnitude.  Even
 though the range is large, the measured particulate concentrations  tend to
 reflect the age of the technology in use and the type of control device in
 use.
     The lowest concentrations were measured from two relatively new units,
one equipped with a high efficiency (99.9%) electrostatic precipitator  (ESP)
                                       30

-------
and one equipped with a scrubber/fabric filter system.   The  lowest  value  for
particulate concentrations from mass burn units (5.49 mg/Nm  )  was measured  at
Unit 1 of the Baltimore, Maryland, facility,  a large, recently constructed
facility.  The Baltimore facility achieved an emission  level  of 6.2 mg/Nm  at
Unit 2 during a test program conducted by the EPA later in the same year
(1985).  Another low particulate matter concentration (9.15  mg/Nm  ) was
reported from a combustor in Wurzburg, Germany.  This new facility  is  equipped
with a dry scrubber/fabric filter.  Other facilities equipped with  ESPs  or  dry
scrubber/fabric filter combinations have reported particulate matter
concentrations in the range of 11 to 30 mg/Nm .  (Marion County, Oregon;
Tulsa, Oklahoma; Tsushima, Japan; Malmo, Sweden;  and Munich,  Germany.)
     At the high end of the range of particulate  matter concentrations,  two
refractory mass burn combustors reported high levels.  The highest
(1530 mg/Nm ) was reported from the combustor at  Mayport Naval Station in
1980.   The particulate matter emission control device in use was a
multiple-cyclone dust collector.  This type of dust collector is not as
effective as newer particulate emission control technologies.  Another high
                                                       •a
value for particulate matter concentrations (1330 mg/Nm ) was measured from
Unit 2 of the Philadelphia Northwest facility, where particulate matter
emission control is accomplished with an ESP.
     This high concentration reported from one unit of  the Philadelphia
facility may be anomalous.  The value of 1330 mg/Nm  is the  average of three
determinations of which one was extremely high.  During the  same series  of
tests, the average for Unit 1 of the same facility was  252 mg/Nm .   The other
two measurements for Unit 2 were nearer the levels measured for Unit  1.   Of
the waterwall mass burn combustors, the highest value (917 mg/Nm )  was
reported from Hampton in 1981.  The Hampton facility is equipped with an ESP
for control of particulate matter emissions.  This combustion facility has
been noted for several design and operational problems.  Those problems  are
analyzed in more detail in the volume titled,  "Municipal Waste Combustion
Study:  Combustion Control of Organic Emissions."
     Measured particulate matter  stack gas concentrations for modular units
are available from only six facilities.  The data from these  units show  a  much
narrower range of values than those measured for mass burn units.   The modular
                                       31

-------
combustors for which stack gas particulate concentration data are available
are of the starved air, Consuimt design.  Uncontrolled particulate matter
concentrations in stack gases from these units are generally lower than
uncontrolled concentrations from mass burn units because of lower air
velocities, resulting  in less carry-over of ash.  Uncontrolled particulate
concentrations measured at modular units range from 170 to 300 mg/Nm  compared
with uncontrolled concentrations of 2,200 to 8,500 mg/Nm  measured at mass
burn units.  Ultimate  stack concentrations from existing modular combustors
may be higher, however, because they generally are not equipped with
particulate matter emission control devices, while the mass burn units usually
have them.  Even so, because modular units are smaller, their total mass
emissions of particulate matter generally are lower than the totals from mass
burn facilities.  Additionally, new modular combustors are generally expected
to be equipped with particulate matter control devices.
     The low value for modular units (23 mg/Nm ) was measured at Barron
County, Wisconsin, an  ESP-controlled facility.  Another facility, the
Tuscaloosa facility, is also equipped with an ESP.  Particulate matter
concentrations measured at Tuscaloosa were HO mg/Nm  .  However, this
controlled particulate matter concentration is not considered representative
of normal levels because of noted problems with the control equipment during
the test.  The high particulate matter concentration for modular units
(300 mg/Nm ) was measured at the 90 Mg/day combustor in Dyersburg in 1982.
Testing was performed at a feed rate of 45 Mg/day, and the feed during the
test was about 30 percent industrial and 70 percent municipal waste.  The
remaining particulate matter emissions data were gathered from testing under
several different operating conditions at the Prince Edward Island combustion
facility and range from 173 to 255 mg/Nm  .  The value obtained under normal
conditions was 214 mg/Nm.  Neither Dyersburg nor the Prince Edward  Island
facility have add-on air pollution control systems.
     As with the modular units, the amount of data available for RDF-fired
units is limited.  The low particulate matter emission value for RDF units
(220 mg/Nm ) was measured at the Niagara facility.  The facility  fires
shredded waste from which ferrous metals have been removed.  Particulate
matter emissions are controlled using ESPs.  A particulate matter
                                       32

-------
concentration of 89 mg/Nm  was  measured  at  thi Hamilton-Wentworth facility  in
Ontario, Canada, during normal  load usini, only the  lower overfire air port.
This concentration was measured during one  test  run only.   Emission  test data
taken under normal conditions showed 518 mg/Nm  .  The  high  particulate matter
concentration for RDF-fired units (530 mg/Nm ) was  measured at  the Akron"
facility in 1981.   At Akron, processing of RDF  includes shredding,  air
classification, and magnetic separation. Particulate  matter emissions are
controlled by an ESP.
     The lowest uncontrolled particulate matter  concentration from  RDF-fired
facilities was measured at Malmo, Sweden.   A concentration  of 4330  mg/Nm
particulate matter was measured upstream of very efficient  control  equipment.
It should be noted that this unit is a relatively new unit  designed as  a mass
burn unit and differs from typical RDF designs.   When the  unit was  fired with
unprocessed refuse, uncontrolled particulate matter concentrations  were  4,450
mg/Nm ,  nearly the same as the RDF-fired concentration.  Controlled levels
measured while operating in the mass burn  mode were 23.2 mg/Nm .

3.2.2  Sulfur Dioxide
     The concentration of S02 measured in  stack gases from municipal waste
combustors depends directly on the amount  of sulfur in the feed.   Although it
can be highly variable, a typical value for sulfur content of municipal  waste
is about 0.12 percent, and 30-60 percent of that is converted to SO-.  The
balance remains with the bottom ash or is absorbed on fly ash.  Sulfur is
associated with such items as asphalt shingles,  tires and other miscellaneous
items in the waste feed.
     For purposes of comparison, the sulfur content of coal being burned in
the U. S. ranges from about 0.5 to about 5 percent.  If high sulfur coal were
burned in utility boilers without S02 controls,  the resulting uncontrolled
concentrations of S02 in stack gases could be as high as 3,000 ppm or higher.
Another comparison point, the 1978 NSPS for S02 emissions  from utility
boilers, allows S02 emissions concentrations of 100 to 500  ppm S02, depending
on the sulfur content of the coal.  These controlled S02 levels generally  are
higher than uncontrolled concentrations in stack gases from municipal waste
                                       33

-------
combustors, but as shown in the table, the high end of the range for mass  burn
un-us  if -omparable to the controlled level for coal-f;red utility boilers.
     AH ough the sulfur content in the waste is the ultimate determinant  and
major  cause of variability in SO- concentrations measured, the emissions test
data indicate that the control equipment in use is a major factor in the S02
concentrations measured in the combustor exhaust.  As might be expected,
combustors equipped with alkaline scrubbers tend to have lower levels of SO-
in their stack gases.  The low e1"-4 of the range of sulfur dioxide stack g^
                                 rf-.
concentrations for mass burn mm* was measured at a Japanese unit in Tsushima
in 1983.  The Tsushima facility is controlled with a Teller dry scrubber/
fabric filter system.  The SO- concentration upstream of the control system
was 12.7 ppm; the concentration measured downstream of the control system was
0.040  ppm.  The reduction across the control device represents a control
efficiency of greater than 99.7 percent.  The data reported for the
composition of the waste feed at Tsushima showed that the average sulfur
content of the waste is 0.38 percent on a wet basis.  This is comparable to
the sulfur content of municipal waste generated in North America; however, the
uncontrolled SO- concentrations are about an order of magnitude lower than
those  at any other facility tested.  Moreover, outlet SO- concentrations are
more than two orders of magnitude less than any other reported values,
including those from other facilities using dry scrubbing.  These
discrepencies make comparisons to S02 concentrations measured at other  units
questionable.  The next lowest S02 concentrations were measured at a Quebec
City pilot-scale test on a slip stream from a full-scale waterwall combustor.
The temperature of the inlet gas to a scrubber/fabric filter system was varied
during the test; the lowest concentration (4.86 ppm S02) was measured at the
lowest temperature (110°C).  The S02 concentration measured during the
pilot-scale test increased with increasing temperature up to 90.3 ppm at
200°C.   Another low S0« value, 13.5 ppm, was reported from a unit in Kure,
Japan,  equipped with two 75 Mg/day rotary combustors and an ESP followed by a
wet scrubber.  The next lowest SO- concentration, 41.5 ppm, was measured in
1986 at the Marion County unit in Brooks, Oregon.  The Marion County facility
is a new facility equipped with a dry scrubber/fabric filter system.
     The high SO- emission measurement, 401 ppm, was obtained at the
Philadelphia Northwest facility, equipped with an ESP and no additional
                                       34

-------
control devices.  This level and the other, value for Philadelphia }f 375 ppm
are inexplicauly ^ ""her than the SO- concentrations measured ••.t the other mass
burn units.  SO- c ncentrations in exhaust gases from mass burn units equipped
with ESPs or other particulate matter control  devices are about the same as
SO- concentrations measured in the inlets to the control  devices for those
combustors equipped with scrubbing systems.   This is to be expected because
ESPs do not remove S02» nor do cyclones.  These uncontrolled SO-
concentrations generally range between about 80 and 140 ppm, levels
significantly lower than controlled levels required for fossil  fuel-fired
boilers.
     Modular unit SO- concentration data compiled in the EPA's emission data
base are taken from only two facilities, Prince Edward Island (under a variety
of conditions) and Red Wing (under normal conditions).  The low value of 61
ppm was obtained under "normal" conditions at Prince Edward Island.  The
highest value obtained at Prince Edward Island of 87 ppm was measured under
low secondary chamber temperature conditions.  The highest level of  124 ppm
was achieved at the Red Wing facility under normal conditions.  The
concentrations are roughly comparable to the uncontrolled concentrations
measured for mass burn units.  A concentration of <29.3 ppm was reported  at
North Little Rock, Arkansas; however, data were not available to correct  the
reported value to a dry basis, so it cannot be compared.
     Sulfur dioxide emissions data for RDF-fired combustors are available for
only three facilities.  The low value of 55 ppm was measured in 1984 at the
Hamilton-Wentworth, Ontario facility which was equipped with an ESP  for
control of particulate matter emissions.  The high value  of 188 ppm,  was
measured at the Albany, New York facility in 1984.  Although it is difficult
to make any meaningful comparisons with this small amount of data, the  SO-
concentrations are again consistent with uncontrolled  SO- concentrations
measured at mass burn units.

3.2.3  Hydrochloric Acid
     The concentration of HC1 in stack gases from municipal waste  combustors
is related to the chlorine content of the feed.  Major chlorine  sources  in
municipal  waste are plastics and paper, materials that also provide  the
                                       35

-------
largest heating value in the waste.  By way, of comparison to the ranges shown
in Table 3-1, typical ui.-ontir lied HC1 concentrations in stack gases from
coal-burning utility boilers  ould range from about 60 ppm for average
chlorine content coal to 120 ppm for high chlorine content coal.  These HC1
concentrations considered with the previous discussion of S02 concentrations
indicate that the acid gas of primary concern with municipal waste combustors
is usually HC1, while with fossil fuel-fired boilers the primary acid specie
is usually SCL.
     The major determinant of the ultimate concentration of HC1 in stack gases
exiting a municipal waste corabustor, other than feed composition, is the
control device in use.  It is logical to expect facilities equipped with
scrubbers have significantly lower HC1 concentrations because HC1 is easily
removed with scrubbing.  This expectation is borne out by the EPA's emission
test data.
     For mass burn combustors the lowest stack gas concentration for
hydrochloric acid was measured at the Quebec City scrubber/fabric filter pilot
scale testing in 1985-1986.  The lowest HC1 concentration (3.99 ppm) was
measured at the lowest temperature (110°C) test condition.  Measured HC1
concentrations leaving the fabric filter increased with increasing temperature
to 104 ppn> at 200°C.  The next lowest HC1 concentration (7.5 ppm) was measured
at the Tsushima facility.  The lowest concentration achieved at a
commercial-scale North American facility (12 ppm) was measured during the
recent test of the Marion County facility equipped with a dry  scrubber/fabric
filter system.  The high end of the range for mass burn units  (477 ppm) was
measured upstream of air pollution control equipment at the Gallatin,
Tennessee facility in 1983.  Emission control equipment consisted of  a  cyclone
and an electrostatically assisted fabric filter, neither of which is  designed
to reduce HC1 stack gas concentrations.  Another high HC1 concentration was
measured at a new mass burn combustor in Tulsa.  Stack gas  concentrations of
402 and 421 ppm were measured downstream of an electrostatic precipitator.
This facility is notable because CDD/CDF concentrations measured  there  were
very low,  a condition attributable to optimized combustion.
     Hydrochloric acid emissions test data are available for only four  modular
facilities; all are Consumat, starved air units, and two of these modular
                                       36

-------
      facilities  are  equipped  with  post combustion controls. The low value of 160
      ppm was  measured  at  the  Dyersburg  '"cilUy .during testing in 1982.  The high
      value (1270 ppm)  was measured at the Re   Ving facility.  The second highest
      value (768) was obtained under high temperature secondary chamber conditions
      at Prince Edward  Island.   Under "normal"  conditions at Prince Edward Island
      716 ppm  HC1 was measured in the stack gas.  The Barren County facility
      reported an intermediate concentration of 460 ppm.  The Red Wing HC1
      concentration  is  noticeably higher.
           None of the  available HC1  emissions  data for RDF-fired combustors were
      obtained from measurements downstream of  acid gas control devices; therefore,
      they essentially  represent uncontrolled HC1 stack gas concentrations.  The
      lowest level of HC1  concentration  (96 ppm) from an RDF unit was measured at
      Wright Patterson  Air Force Base in 1982.  The combustor there is an 11,000
      MJ/hr boiler designed to burn coal.  During the test the boiler was fired with
      densified RDF.  Particulate matter emission control equipment at the Wright
      Patterson facility consists of a multicyclone followed by an ESP.  The high"
      value of 780 ppm  was reported in 1983 from a combustor in Malmo, Sweden.  The
      Malmo facility  was designed as a mass burn unit.  These emissions were
      measured during a test in which RDF was fired in the combustor designed to
      fire unprocessed  waste.  Although this plant is equipped with a cyclone/dry
      scrubber/ESP/fabric  filter combination which should control HC1 emissions,  the
      measurement reported was upstream  of the  control device, representing  an
      uncontrolled HC1  stack gas concentration. Other HC1 concentrations measured
      from RDF-fired  plants range from 350 ppm  measured at the Albany facility  to
      450 ppm  measured  at  the  Akron facility  in 1981.  These values  are  typical  of
      the expected range of uncontrolled HC1  stack gas concentrations.

      3.2.4 Metals
           Metals and metallic compounds are  found distributed  throughout municipal
      refuse,  not just  associated with large  metallic  objects.   Many metals, such as
      silver,  chromium, lead,  tin,  and zinc,  are used  in  metallic surface coatings,
      galvanizing, and  solders. These metals may volatilize during  the combustion
      process.   PJUitjc^objects contain  metallic compounds  (cadmium,  in particular)
~~*   as stabilizers  and other additives.  Metals,  such  as  cadmium,  chromium,  and
                                             37

-------
lead, are also found in inks and paints associated with paper,  fabric,  and
plastic substrates.  Discarded batteries are sourc   of mercury,  nickel,  and
cadmium.  Metals and metallic compounds may change phases or may form new
metallic compounds, but they are not destroyed in the combustion process.  The
metals and metallic compounds will leave the combustor in the stack gas er  in
the ash residues.  Operating temperature affects metals emissions by affecting
the partitioning between phases.  Thus one would expect stack gas
concentrations of metals to be related to feed concentration and operating
conditions.  But the data also tend to show a strong effect of control
devices.
     Table 3-2 shows the facilities associated with the extremes of the
concentration ranges for a few selected metals measured in stack gases from
mass burn combustors.  As the table shows, the Quebec City facility is
associated with the low end of the range for the four metals shown.  As
mentioned before, the Quebec City data were generated just recently on a slip
stream from a full-scale combustor.  A dry scrubber/fabric filter system was
tested at several fabric filter operating temperatures, thus, the ranges shown
for Quebec.  The Malmo, Wurzburg, and Munich facilities are all equipped with
dry scrubbers.  The Kure facility, however, is equipped with an ESP/wet
scrubber combination.    While the scrubber-equipped combustors show lower
metals concentrations in the stack gases, the data also indicate that ESPs may
be operated as effective control devices for some metals.  For example,
arsenic concentrations measured downstream of the ESP at Baltimore were
          3
6.29 ug/Nm ; this represents 97 percent reduction in the uncontrolled level  of
240 ug/Nm .  The Baltimore facility's ESP also achieved 99 percent reduction
of chromium.  The controlled concentration levels measured at Baltimore  are
higher than those measured at facilities equipped with scrubbers, but they are
lower than those measured at other ESP-equipped facilities.
     The high end of the range of stack gas concentrations at mass burn  units
for these selected metals is associated with the Hampton and Braintree
facilities.  The Hampton facility, as previously noted, has  been notable for
several design and operational problems.  Those problems are discussed  in  more
detail in the report titled "Municipal Waste Combustion Study:   Combustion
Control of Organic Emissions."    Like Hampton, the  Braintree  system was
equipped with an ESP for particulate removal.
                                       38

-------





Z
>— i
co
co
i— i
Z
LU
co co
* ^
_i jjj
O
Z O
< UJ
t- o
co LU
T LU
3 co
^^
31> lj»
1-1 Q
X LU
g|
U. UJ
CO
UJ LU
•-I Of.
K LU
H* CO
U -1
< LU
u_ >
LU

CO
CM
m
LU
£


1^.
-If
J<



= !-
^ri
Ji>



f§
i=
10 i
ft
u. Z


?~ O
— ** *
if1
V)
S
sK
• if
• s |>
• y **
-I
u
f!
1?
41
?f
U
5»
14.

i

- - — •






m o urt o o T
jq o £ o o , . ,
^ O» CN



^
. S 2.
§ Si ig S
*> •• c e w •»
! II 11 1



O -o • w wo o - t> « e


3
o
^S r 2
»8*5
X
A
>»
A
»
>.

•
A
C
4^
i
i
t

\

|
I
> .
i
ej|
U
1
|

I
£
1
S
1
9
fM
i
4«
•
•
1
ij
jl

1
«>
1
*

«v
•
f
J=
'-
=
:
1

M

«
i
» ~

iw
f
<^
e
a.
•
9
^
c

M
X
•
4V
*
X
Ml
i
•
e
^
1 i
? J
— o
J 1
39

-------
     Conclusions drawn from these data must be drawn with caution.   A serious
complicating factor involved in the metals emissions data may prevent de  :nite
conclusions from being drawn.  Sampling and analytical  methods used duri  g  the
testing reported here were not constant.  In some emissions tests only metals
in the form of participate matter were measured.  In other tests both
particulate matter and the condensibles were analyzed for metals.  Moreover,
sampling and analytical techniques used for measuring metals in either or both
phases differed among the emissions tests, as shown in the table.  The
complications these differences introduce are clear.  While it is unlikely
that the differences in the metals concentrations reported are due totally to
different sampling and analytical protocols, the contributions to the
differences are unknown.  The EPA is investigating the issue of data
comparability.
     The data for mercury concentrations  in combustor stack gases, with the
exception of the Quebec City data, do not show outstanding control with the
use of either ESPs or scrubber/fabric filter systems.  Mercury concentrations
measured at inlet and outlet to scrubber/fabric filter systems at Malmo and
Tsushima show only 30 to 40 percent reduction, while ESP data showed  no
control.  Metallic mercury is generally thought to volatilize, so control
might be accomplished through cooling and condensation.  Research  in  Germany
                                                                       18
has also indicated a possible chemical reaction with alkaline sorbents.
Moreover, the data gathered at Quebec under varying temperature conditions
indicate that it may be possible to optimize mercury control through  cooling.
This is a subject of continuing study.  With respect to mercury, it  should
also be noted that the high end of the range of stack gas concentrations for
mass burn facilities is an order of magnitude higher than such concentrations
measured at other facilities.
     Metals emissions data are available  for only five modular units,  Prince
Edward Island, Dyersburg, Barren County,  Tuscaloosa and Red Wing;  all  are
Consumat systems. Three (Barron County, Tuscaloosa and Red Wing) are  equipped
with particulate matter control devices.  Those facilities reporting  the
highest and lowest concentrations for the four metals being discussed here are
shown in Table 3-3.  The table shows that the stack test data from Dyersburg
showed the lowest of the mercury concentrations.  This concentration is  lower
                                       40

-------
              TABLF 3-3.   MODULAR FACILITIES  FOR  WHICH HIGHEST  ANf)  LOWEST
                    EMISSION  LEVELS  WERE MEASURED  FOR  SELECTED METALS
        Facilities Shotting
        LOB Concentrations
                                                 Sampling
                                                   and
                                   Emission     Analytical  Facilities Shoving
                                 Concentration     Method   High Concentrations
 Sampling
   and
Analytical   Emission
  Method  Concentration
As
Cd
Pb
Hg
Prince Edward Island*
Barren Count yb
Barren Countyb
Dyersburga
6.09 ug/N*3
21 ug/N*3
240 ug/N«3
130 ug/N*3
d Oyersburg*
Prince Edward Island*
Prince Edward Island*
e Prince Edward Island*
c
d
d
d
116 ug/Nm3
942 ug/N*3
15,500 ug/Nm3
705 ug/Nm3
•Both phases analyzed.

''Unknown which  phases were analyzed.

cArsen1c concentrations were measured by EPA Method 108.   The  filter and solids contained In the O.I N NaOH
 rinse of the front half of the sailing train were analyzed by atonic absorption.  The Implngers and
 0.1 N NaOH rinse were analyzed by  atoxic absorption.

dSample train similar to that of Method 5.  First two  Implngers contain 5 percent aqua regla.  third Implnger
 contained 2X KMn04 1n IQ* H2S04.   Analysis generally  by  direct current plasma Mission spectrometry.
•Volatile trace elements trapped  In  liquid Imptnger train  which contains H
 amnnluM persulfate In the fo
 (manual  cold  vapor technique)
                                                                           
-------
than concentr?cions measured at some of the .mass burn units equipped with
alkaline -crubbers.  Barren County reported the lowest measured concentrations
for lead and cadmium.  Prince Edward Island's stack test data were lowest for
arsenic; the highest arsenic concentration was reported from Dyersburg.   The
highest cadmium and lead concentrations were measured at Prince Edward Island.
The high cadmium concentration was measured under "normal" conditions.  The
high lead concentration was measured during a test run of a long feed cycle,
but a similarly high concentration (14,400 ug/Nm ) was measured under "normal"
conditions.  The highest mercury concentration (705 ug/Nm ) was also measured
at Prince Edward Island under "nornal" conditions.
     Metals data for two plants designed to fire RDF were available for
comparison.  The Albany and Akron facilities were both equipped with ESPs for
particulate matter control.  The metals analyses for Akron and Albany included
both particulate matter and condensibles.  Test data from the Albany facility
showed stack gas concentrations an order of magnitude lower for arsenic,
cadmium, and lead, than levels measured at the Akron facility.  The mercury
concentrations measured at Akron were somewhat lower, however.  With only two
units, it is hard to draw any firm conclusions.  However, there is no
indication that these units exhibit significant differences from the mass burn
units in metals stack gas concentrations.  The Mai mo plant, a new mass burn
unit fired with RDF, reported mercury and lead concentrations upstream of the
control device similar to the concentrations reported for the Akron facility.
But the cadmium emission:
those measured at Akron.
But the cadmium emissions measured at Maimo were higher (488 ug/Nm } than
3.2.5  CDD and CDF
     As pointed out in the beginning of Section 3.2, the test data  available
for CDD and CDF were not gathered with a statistically designed  sampling plan
for the industry, and the data assembled in this study are averages of test
data from diverse facilities.  Nevertheless, for purposes of this report
these data are the best available to characterize potential emissions of CDO
and CDF from municipal waste combustors.
     The variability associated with measured CDD and CDF stack  gas
concentrations is the most noticeable observation about the emissions data.
                                       42

-------
These data have been sur-.uarized in Table 374 and graphically in Figures  3-1
and 3-2.  As shown, th* stack gas concentrations of COD cover several  orders
of magnitude, showing the largest range for mass burn facilities for which
there are the most data points.  Another indication from the test data
assembled by EPA is that alkaline scrubbing systems combined with fabric
filters are effective at reducing CDD/CDF concentrations in stack gas.  As
shown in Table 3-4 and in Figures 3-1 and 3-2 and in the data summarized in
the volume titled "Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Emission Data Base for
Kunicipal Waste Combustors,1   those facilities equipped with alkaline
scrubbers tend toward the lower end of the range of CDD concentrations.
However, the data shown tor facilities without alkaline scrubbers include some
older units, while the units with alkaline scrubbers are all fairly new.
     Table 3-5 shows which mass burn facilities are associated with the end
points of the ranges shown for stack gas concentrations of selected CDD and
CDF.  As the table shows, the ranges cover five orders of magnitude.  Marion_
County data were the lowest for four of the six classes shown in the table.
Those measured at Quebec City and Wurzburg were the lowest for the other two.
The Marion County combustion facility is a new facility, also equipped with a
dry scrubber/fabric filter system.  The Wurzburg facility is also equipped
with an alkaline scrubber/fabric filter system.  Both the Marion County and
Wurzburg facilities are of Martin design.  It should be noted that the Quebec
City test data are pilot plant data, and it is not clear how the test results
can be extrapolated to the population of full-scale combustors.
     These low values show that alkaline scrubber/fabric filter control
systems can effect good control of organic compounds like CDD and CDF.  Low
levels have also been achieved without a scrubber.  Recently obtained data
from Tulsa show that low concentrations might also be expected  from municipal
waste combustors with good combustion.  The Tulsa facility  is  a new mass burn
waterwall combustion facility. Particulate matter emissions  are controlled by
ESPs, but no additional control equipment  is  in  use.   It  is  currently unclear
what contribution ESPs may make with respect  to  control of  organic  emissions,
but most ESPs are run at temperatures high enough that  little  organic control
                                        43

-------
                TABLE 3-4.   SUMMAR'  JF  CDO/CDF  EMISSIONS FROM
                         MUNICIPAI  WASTE  COMBUSTORS
                                                       Emissions, ng/Nm .
                                                       at  12 percent CO,
Facil ity
Chicago NWC
Hampton (1981)
Hampton (1983)
Hampton (1984)
Tulsa
North Andover
Saugus
Umea (Fall)

Umea (Spring) .
Marion County (DS)
Quebec (DI)



Quebec (SO)

Wurzburg (DS)
Philadelphia (NW1)
Philadelphia (NW2)
Cattaraugus
Red Wing
Prince Edward Island



Albany
Hamilton Wentworth





Wright Patterson
Test Condition*
Normal
Nc ., 1
No ,dl
Normal
Normal
Normal
Normal
Normal
Low temperature
Normal
Normal
110
125
140
200
140
140 & R
Normal
Normal
Normal
Normal
Normal
Normal
Long
High
Low
Normal
F/None
F/Low back
F/Back
F/Back, low front
H/None
H/Low back
Normal
CDO/CDF
258
16,800
9,630
25,500
34.4
348
580
501
745
492
1.55
2.65
BD
1.03
7.61
BD
1.33
49.9
11,300
5,620
258
3,310
395
428
195
413
578
9,230
10,900
12,000
20,900
14,100
11,500
228
i.
TCDD
°.39
800
214
1,160
1.61
8.38
31.9
51.6
64.8
<12
0.195
BD
BD
BD
BD
BD
0.0639
1.91
378
365
8.1
43.7
3.05
5.09
1.02
3.05
19.9
590
560
570
3,500
1,200
700
3.47
aTest conditions defined in Reference 9, Municipal Waste Combustion Study
 Emission Data Base for Municipal Waste Combustors.

 BD * Below detection limit.

cNo Penta CDD or Penta CDF measured.  Values for CDD/CDF biased low.
 Values not corrected to 12 percent CO*.
                                        44

-------
• No Control
• ESP Only
A Dry Scrubbing
x Other
            10,000
             1,000-
     -a
     8
100-
     z
     o>

     co
     c
     o
     '35
     —

     LU
               10
1.0-
              0.1-
             0.01
                                  1
                  2,3,7,8
                   TCDD
           PCDD  2,3,7,8
                 TCDO
PCDD 2,3,7,8 PCDD
      TCDD
CM
O
                      TCDD
                    Mass Burn
                     TCDD
                    Modular
         TCDD
          RDF
   Figure 3-1.  Summary of CDD Stack Gas Emissions Test Data.

-------
• No Control

• ESP Only

A Dry Scrubbing

x Other
10,000 -
       O
       O
       

        •S

        V)
        c
        O
        "55
        w


        in
              1,000-
  100-
   10-
   1.0-
                0.1-
                0.01
                                         I
                    2,3,7,8  PCOF 2,3,7,8  PCDF 2,3,7,8  PCOF

                     TCDF I       TCDF I       TCOF I

                         TCDF        TCDF        TCDF

                       Mass Burn      Modular        RDF
                                                        fM
                                                        O
                                                        r^

                                                        s
        Figure 3-2. Summary of CDF Stack   is Emissions Test  Data.


                                  46

-------
                    TABLE 3-5.  MASS BURN FACILITIES FOR WHICH HIGHEST AND LOWEST STACK GAS

                        CONCENTRATIONS WERE MEASURED FOR SELECTED GROUPS OF CDD AND CDF

Number of . Fadllty(s) Showing Concentration Faclllty(s) Showing Concentration
Pollutant Facilities Low Concentration (ng/Nm ) High Concentration ' 'Nm )
2,3,7,8-TCDD 8
TCDD 9
2,3,7,8-TCDF 7
TCDF 9
CDD 10
CDF 10
Wurzburg
Marlon County
Marlon County
Marlon County
Quebec City (140° and
Recycle) a
Quebec City (110°)a
Marlon County
Marlon County
Quebec City (140° and
Recycle)4
0.016
0.20
0.17
0.32
0.13
0.165
1.13
0.423
0.947
Hampton (1982) 63
Hampton (1984) 1,200
Hampton (1984) 450
Hampton (1981) 4,600
Hampton (1984) 11,000
Hampton (1984) 15,000
aThese data are from a pilot scale test of a dry scrubber/fabric filter system.  The control  equipment  1n  use
 under ordinary circumstances 1s an ESP.

^Number of facilities for which documented test data available.

-------
would be expected.  Con-  itra*ions of COD and CDF were measured at Tulsa as
follows:
          TCDD                     1.61 ng/Nm3
          PCDD                    18.9  ng/Nm3
          TCDF                     7.31 ng/Nm3
          PCDF                    15.5  ng/Nm3
These values are the lowest CDD/CDF values in the emissions data base for mass
burn facilities not using alkaline scrubbers.  Moreover, because the ESP is
not thought to contribute a significant amount of organic control, the
concentrations measured are thought to result from relying on optimized
combustion only.  Note  that these concentrations are similar to those measured
at Wurzburg, a facility equipped with a dry scrubber/fabric filter system.
     The combustion facility at Hampton was associated with each of the upper
bounds of these classes of dioxins and furans.  As mentioned previously, that
unit is equipped with an  ESP and has known design and operational problems.
More information about  the Hampton facility may be found in the volume titled
"Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Combustion Control of Organic
Emissions."
     There are only a few modular units for which the stack gas concentrations
of CDO and CDF can be compared.  In general, the concentrations measured  at
the modular units fall  in the mid-range.  They are higher than those measured
at facilities equipped  with alkaline scrubbers, but lower than the high values
measured at mass burn units.  The modular facilities represented  in the data
base are equipped with  Consumat combustors.  Two of them are equipped with
ESPs.  The high and low values for some of the classes of CDD and CDF are
shown in Table 3-6.  As the table shows, Prince Edward  Island dominates the
low end of the ranges,  the Red Wing facility dominates the high end.  The low
values reported for Prince Edward Island were measured under high secondary
chamber temperature conditions.
     The range for RDF-fired facilities is very large, even though there  are
only 3 or 4 facilities  available for analysis.  This makes looking for  trends
or drawing conclusions  particularly difficult.  The low end of the range  of
TCDD concentrations shown was measured at Wright Patterson Air Force Base.
The high concentration was measured at Akron.  The concentrations measured for
                                       48

-------
VO
                                  TABLE 3-6.  MODULAR FACILITIES  FOR WHICH HIGHEST AND LOWEST
                                       STACK GAS CONCENTRATIONS MERE MEASURED FOR SELECTED
                                                       GROUPS OF COD AND CDF

Pollutant
1COO
TCDF
COO
COT
Facility Shoving Concontratlon Facility Shoving Concentration
Low Concontratlon (ng/htr) High Concentration (ng/ltar)
Prlnco Edward Island 1.0* Rod King • 44
Prlnco Edward Island 12* Rod King 350
Prlnco Edward Island 63* Rod Ming 1500
Prlnco Edward Island 97 • Rod King 1000
                     Sloasurod undor high secondary chsoftor toaporaturos

-------
TCDF again were lower at the Wright Patterson facility {32 ng/Nm ) and higher
at the Akron facility (680 ng/Nm ).  For PCD,..  ste'k gas concentration data
were available for a few additional units.  As bet ,e, the low end of the
range (54 ng/Nm ) was measured at Wright Patterson, but for this class of
compounds, the high value (2,840 ng/Nm ) was measured at the Hamilton- •
Wentworth facility under normal load with both back overfire air ports in
operation.  Consistent with the other classes of COD and CDF, the low value in
the emission data base for PCDF concentration was measured at the Wright
Patterson facility.  The high value of 9,100 ng/Nm  was again measured at
Hamilton-Wentworth under normal load with both back overfire air ports in
operation.  All of the ROF-fired facilities tested are equipped with ESPs.
                                       50

-------
            4.  OPTIONS FOR CONTROLLING EMISSIONS TO THE /  10SP"ERE

     The pollutants shown in the summary emissions table (Table 3-1)  include
several major classes of substances for which control  may be  possible:
particulate matter, organics, acid gases, metals, and NO .  There are
                                                        ^
basically two^apjproaches _tg_control 1 i ng emissions from municipal  waste
combustors.  One approach is to alter the combustion process  to reduce
emissions, sometimes called combusJijpJXjLOJitroJ .   The other is adding  pollution
control equipment to clean the combustion gases.   This approach may be  called
                         flue gas cleaning, or flue gas treatment.  These two
approaches are not exclusive, and are often used together for a comprehensive
control strategy.
     For municipal waste combustors the control problem involves a slate of
pollutants.  Moreover, application of control technology for one pollutant or
class of pollutants may have positive or negative effects on control of other-
pollutants.  For example, enhanced combustion should reduce the emissions of
other organic pollutants in addition to COD and CDF.  Moreover, alkaline
scrubbers, when combined with particulate control devices, can reduce not only
acid gases but also some organic species and volatile metals.  On the other
hand, maximizing the combustion efficiency may  Increase the potential to form
NO .  Devising a control strategy, then, involves consideration of control
  ^
techniques for each of the classes of pollutants present, but also requires
consideration of the effects of a selected control technique on the whole list
of pollutants.
     In addition to considering positive and negative effects of air pollution
control equipment on different air pollutants, another important consideration
concerns cross-media effects.  Some pollutants, notably metals, may be
captured and prevented from being emitted to the atmosphere, but they are not
destroyed.  Increased capture means that the ash residues contain more metals.
     The following sections describe available control techniques for each
pollutant class.  Then optimum strategies for controlling the whole list of
                                       51

-------
pollutants from the stack gases of municipal  'waste combustors are cr  Mde-ed.
More complete discussions of combustion optimization and flue gas treatme
may be found in two volumes:  "Municipal Waste Combustion Study:   Combustion
                        ;ion<
                        ,,19
Control  of Organic Emissions    and "Municipal  Waste Combustion  Study:   Fl-ue
Gas Cleaning Technology.

4.1  ORGANICS

     The municipal waste combustion process essentially is designed to convert
organic materials to CO- and water.  Nonetheless, some organic materials are
emitted.   The presence of organics in the exhaust gas is a sign of incomplete
combustion.  Incomplete combustion can also be indicated by high levels of CO,
so one would expect high levels of CO to be accompanied by high levels of
organics.
     This expectation is validated by a simple look at CDO/CDF concentrationsr
particular group of organic compounds, versus CO concentrations measured in
stack gases from municipal waste combustors.  Figure 4-1 shows average CDD/CDF
and CO data gathered in the course of this study.  Keeping in mind that these
data represent averages of tests made using different methods from different
types of combustors, using different types of control equipment, and noting
that the variability is large, regression analysis is not advisable.
Moreover, the data used are not adequate to establish a functional
relationship between variables.  Nevertheless, the trend toward higher CDD/CDF
emissions with higher CO emissions is clearly evident.  Further validation of
trends between CDD/CDF and CO concentrations is  seen in Table 4-1 which
summarizes Spearman Rank Order Correlation results, a statistical test for
monotonic relationships.  This analysis is not a rigorous analysis for
statistical correlation and, therefore, caution  should be used in drawing
conclusions.  However, the graph and the Spearman Rank Order Analyses indicate
that, in general, high CDD/CDF are associated with high CO concentrations and
low CDD/CDF concentrations are associated with low CO concentrations.
     Several theories have been postulated concerning ways that organic
compounds, including CDD and CDF, may appear in  stack gases from municipal
waste combustors.  The best supported theories for the formation of CDD/CDF
                             17
are summarized in Figure 4-2.
                                       52

-------
         10,000
      _  1000
       (Of
      o
      o
      £
      CM
      z
      "Sb
      m
      n

      01
      u_
      Q
      O
      O
      a
      o
           100
10 -
          1.0 -
          0.1
             10
                                         o  o
                                      • Man Burn/ESP
                                      • Man Burr/Dry Scrubber
                                      A Modular
                                      O RDF-Fired
               100           1000

            Average CO Concentration (ppm)
Figure 4 • 1. Comparison of CDD/CDF Stack Gas Concentrations to
            CO Stack Gas Concentrations
                                     53

-------
        TABLE 4-1.  RANK ORDER CORRELATION,RESULTS FOR CO vs.  CDD/CDF

Combustor Type
Mass burn
Modular
RDF-fired
Total
No. of Tests
14
6
7
25
rs
0.52a
-0.4:
0.07
0.69b
r  = Spearman's rank order correlation coefficient.
aA positive relationship is indicated at the 0.05 level  of significance.
 A positive relationship is indicated at the 0.001 level  of significance.
                                    54

-------
I.   CDD in Refuse
                                            X Combustion \
                                            V     Zone    /
            Cl
                                          Unreacted
                                          CDD/CDF
  Evidence: Occasional CDD/CDF contamination in refuse

II. Formation from Related Chlorinated Precursors

                 Chlorophenois
                                                Cl
           Cl
      Cl
                    PCB
  Evidence: CDD/CDF on soot from PCB fires
          Lab and bench studies of PCB, Chlorinated Benzene and Chlorinated Phenols yielded CDD/CDF

HI. Formation from Organics and Chlorine Donor
                  PVC  (    i     Chlorine donor
                  Lignin j    ^    NaCL,HCI,CI2
                        CDD/CDF
  Evidence: Lab scale tests of vegetable matter, wood, lignin, coal with chlorine source yielded CDD/CDF

IV. Solid Phase Fly Ash Reaction
Precursor

 -f-    Cl Donor
                                            Low
                                            Temp
                                                                  CDD
   Evidence: Lab scale demonstrating potential for ash catalysis reactions of CDD's to other homologues
                                                                                  8
                                                                                  r^.
                                                                                  3
        Figure 4 - 2.  Summary of Theories for CDD/CDF Municipal Waste
                      Combustor Stack Gas
                                              55

-------
     The  first possible mechanism shown in Figure 4-2 involves breakthrough of
unreacted organic species preseni. in the refuse.  A second theory involves the
reaction  of organic precursors  in the waste.  For example, relatively simple
reactions can convert chlorophenols and polychlorinated biphenyls to CDD/CDF.
These precursors can be in the  refuse and can be produced by pyrolysis in
oxygen-starved zones.
     A third mechanism involves the synthesis of CDD/CDF from a variety of
organics  and a chlorine donor.  Again, the simplest mechanisms involve those
species that are structurally related to CDD/CDF; however, a full spectrum of
plausible combustion intermediate chemistry could be proposed to lead to
precursors and eventually to CDD/CDF.
     The  final possible mechanism shown involves catalyzed reactions of
organic precursors escaping the combustion zone on fly ash particles at low
temperatures.  These hypothesized mechanisms can be broadly classed into three
main ways that organics may appear in the exit gases from combustors:
     o    Lack of destruction of organics originally present in the feed
          refuse,
     o    Conversion of precursors present in the feed or formed in the
          combustion processes  to organic compounds emitted from the stack,
          and
     o    Lack of destruction of precursors in the combustion system and
          conversion of the precursors to other organic substances
          downstream of the combustion zone at low temperatures.
     While it is not certain which, if any, of these basic mechanisms
dominates, all three basic formation mechanisms would be minimized by
achieving complete combustion, thereby converting all organic species to C02-
     Thermodynamic considerations indicate that under excess air conditions
and temperatures characteristic of municipal waste combustors, there is no
theoretical barrier to achieving essentially zero emission levels for these
species.      In spite of this, emission measurements have shown the presence
of significant quantities of organic species in exit gases from some municipal
waste combustors.  Existence of these species (either in the flame or in the
exhaust)  iQdjc_3ie_s_a failure in the combustion process caused by insufficjLejvt
mixing and characterized by escape of local fuel-rich pocketsjvfjgas.  This
perplexing formation may be more easily understood when the heterogeneity of

                                       56

-------
municipal refuse is considered.   The collection of discarded materials  known
•s municipal refuse forms a highly variable,  heterogeneous fuel  containing
items of all sizes and shapes,  composed of all  sorts  of materials.   Solid
pieces of the waste may volatilize and/or pyrolyze unevenly, causing fuel-rich
pockets of gas to form in the furnace.   If these fuel-rich pockets  are  not'
sufficiently mixed with air, incomplete combustion will result and  organic
materials may be emitted to the atmosphere.
     However, theoretical kinetic and equilibrium considerations indicate that
the destruction of organic species can be rapidly achieved in the presence of
sufficient oxygen at elevated temperatures.  '     Therefore, control of
organic emissions requires development of a combustion control strategy that
ensures that all organic materials, down to the molecular level, are exposed
to enough air and to a high enough temperature for enough time to destroy
them.
     Conditions within the municipal waste combustor that would satisfy the
above goals are:
     o    Mixing of fuel and air to prevent the existence of fuel-rich
          pockets in the combustion gases,
     o    Sufficiently high temperatures in the presence of sufficient
          oxygen for destruction of organic species,  and
     o    Prevention of quench zones or low temperature pathways that would
          allow partially reacted or unreacted fuel from exiting the
          combustion zone of the furnace.

4.1.1  Combustion Controls*
     To achieve the thorough combustion required to minimize emissions of
organic species, manufacturers of municipal waste combustion equipment are
paying a great deal of attention to three combustion parameters:  time,
temperature, and mixing (turbulence).  However, the simplistic view of
optimization of combustion by the "three Ts" (time, temperature and
*The information presented in this section is a summary of information
 presented in Reference 17, Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Combustion
 Control of Organic Emissions.
                                       57

-------
turb'^ence) is not directly valid in this context.  For evample,  the gas phase
residence   ,me should not be considered solely a neceisa»y reaction time,  but
should also be considered a mixing time.  Time is required for air and
intermediates to mix, but once mixed at sufficient temperature,  the
destruction reaction takes place virtually instantaneously.  There is no need
to hold the mixed gases at this temperature for a longer time.  Further,
turbulence on its own is not sufficient to ensure the necessary mixing.  Two
separate, highly turbulent stream tubes in the furnace will not mix despite
their high turbulence level unless they come into contact.  Thus, mixing of
the furnace gases with air requires that the turbulent jet? be dispersed
throughout the combustion gases.  Finally, the definition of a mean
temperature must be made with the minimum required temperature and expected
variability around the mean in mind.
     With the goal of complete combustion in mind the EPA has developed a set
of combustion strategy elements termed "good combustion practices."
These control strategy elements are summarized in Table 4-2 for mass burn,
modular and RDF units, respectively.  Also shown are preliminary
specifications for each of the elements.
     Detailed information concerning the selection of each of these
preliminary specifications is presented in the volume titled "Municipal Waste
Combustion Study:  Combustion Control of Organic Emissions."     In general,
they were derived from theory and expert opinion.  They have been reviewed by
EPA; trade and professional organizations such as the American Society  of
Mechanical Engineers and the American Boiler Manufacturers Association, and
others.
     Several cautionary notes are associated with these specifications.
First, these recommendations are preliminary and have not  been verified in
field tests.  There are no test data that explicitly show  the effects of these
practices on emissions.  Moreover, as with any general principles, the
specific designs of individual systems must be considered.  In particular,
several combustion systems, such as the mass burn refractory technologies of
Volund and Enercon/Vicon and the mass burn rotary technology of  Westinghouse/
O'Connor incorporate differences from the typical of the practices described
in Table 4-2.  For such systems, parameters such as "fully mixed height" will
have to be defined based on technology-specific engineering analysis rather
                                       58

-------
           TABLE  4-2.   GOOD  COMBUSTION PRACTICES FOR  THE  MINIMIZATION OF ORGANIC  EMISSIONS  FROM  MUNICIPAL  WASTE COMBUSTORS
en
«O
                   Practice
                                                     Mass Burn
                                                 Prellninary Target
                                                    RDF
                                             Preliminary  Target
         Design temperature at fully Mixed height

         Underflre air control
         Overfire air capacity
         (not an operating requirement)

         Overftre air Injector design
Auxiliary fuel capacity




Excess Air


Turndown restrictions



Start-up procedures


Use of auxiliary fuel


Oxygen In flue gas (continuous eonItor)

CO In flue gas (continuous Monitor)


Furnace temperature (continuous Monitor)



Adequate air distribution
                                             18000f at fully nixed height

                                             At  least four separately
                                             adjustable plenums.  One each
                                             under the drying and burnout zones
                                             and at least two separately
                                             adjustable plenum under the
                                             burning >one.

                                             401 of total air
That required for  penetration
and coverage of  furnace cross-
section

That required to eeet  start-up
temperature and  IdOOOf criteria
under part-load  operations
                                      18000F at fully Mixed  height

                                      As required to provide uniform
                                      bed burning stolchloMetry
                                                                                          40f of  total air
That required for penetration
and coverage of furnace cross-
section
                           j
That required to Meet start  ..p
temperature and 18000F criteria
under part-load operations
                                                      6  -  12* excess oxygen (dry basts)       9-91 excess oxygen (dry basis)
                                                      80  -  110S of design - lower ItMlt
                                                      My be extended with verification
                                                      tests

                                                      On  auxiliary fuel to design
                                                      temperature

                                                      On  prolonged high 00 or low
                                                      furnace temperature
6 -
                                                             dry
                                                      SO ppn on 4 hour average -
                                                      corrected to 12* CO.

                                                      MlnlMUM of iaOO°F (Mean) at fully
                                                      Mixed  height across furnace
                                                      Verification test*
00 - 1101 of design - lower  Melt
May be extended with verification
tests

On auxiliary fuel  to design
temperature

On prolonged high  00 or  low
furnace temperature

3 - M dry

50 ppM on 4 hour average -
corrected to 12* CO?

MlnlMUM of iaOO°F  (e»an) at  fully
Mixed height
                                                                                            Verification test1
                                            Starved-alr
                                         Preliminary Target
                                      18000F at fully nixed  height
                                                                            80S of total  air
That required for penetration
and coverage of furnace
cross-section

That required to Meet start-up
temperature and 1800°F criteria
under part-load conditions
6 - 121 excess oxygen
(dry basis)

80 - 110* of design - lower
limit May be extended with
verification tests

On auxiliary fuel  to design
temperature

On prolonged high  CO or  low
furnace temperature

6-121 dry

50 ppM on 4 hour average -
corrected to 12k CO->

MlnlMUM of 1800°F  (Mean) a
fully Mixed plane  (secondary
chanter)

Verification test*
          •See  text    Section 4 and "Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Combustion Control  of Organic Enlsslons." Chapter 9.

-------
than on the general one-nv  )r r le suggested for traditional  mass burn
systems.  However, it is import,  t for permit writers and those applying for
permits to be aware of the conditions that promote achievement of complete
combustion.  Those planning to construct municipal waste combustion facilities
should also be aware of good combustion practices and their implications for
design practices.  For example, one implication of turndown restrictions is
design for fairly constant load.  Sizing for a fairly constant load becomes a
critical part of the design,  and load leveling constraints may increase the
benefits of designs using multiple combustion units, for example.
     Of course, the final determinant of the performance of each system is the
measured level of trace organics emitted.  Whether these levels indicate
acceptable performance will depend on emission levels established in the
facility's permits, state standards or guidance, and any federal guidance or
regulation that may be established in the future.
     Recent test data obtained from the new municipal waste combustor in Tulsa.
show that low concentrations of organics may be achieved by optimizing
combustion conditions even though the design and operating conditions cannot
be directly related to the preliminary targets in Table 4-2.   Although no post
combustion control devices were installed specifically for removal of organic
species, the organic concentrations are lower than those measured in any
similarly equipped facility,  indicating thorough optimization of the
combustion process.  The only lower values for mass burn units in the EPA's
Emissions Data Base were measured in units equipped with alkaline
scrubber/fabric filter systems, as discussed in the section on CDD and CDF
emissions.  In fact, the concentrations of TCDD, TCDF, PCDD,  and PCDF were on
the same order but lower than the concentrations measured at the Wurzburg
facility which is equipped with a dry scrubber/fabric filter system.
     Another illustration of the possibility of decreasing organic emissions
through combustion optimization is the municipal waste combustor in Quebec.
In Quebec, an older facility was modified to reflect current low emission
design philosophy.  Concentrations of CDD and CDF were measured before and
                                   21
after the modifications as follows:
                              Before                   After
     CDD                 800 - 3980 ng/Nm3        12 - 205 ng/Nm3
     CDF                 100 - 1100 ng/Nm3        49 - 336 ng/Nm3

                                       60

-------
These data are preliminary and corrected to 12% CO-.   These  data  indicate  the
possibility of using a combination of com'  :tion system design  and operational
tuning to significantly reduce CDD and CDl  emissions.   However, the specific
changes appropriate for a specific facility and the likely effectiveness of
those changes in reducing organic emissions must be determined  on a
case-by-case basis.
     An important factor in operation of an optimally  designed  and tuned
municipal waste combustor in a continuously optimized  manner is operator
training.  The Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM)
and the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) have developed a
training course for resource recovery facility operators.  NESCAUM plans to
offer the course in the fall of 1987.  In addition, NESCAUM  is  working with
ASME to develop a fonnaJ^c^rjdiUiion^^          training  and certification
of operators of resource recovery facilities,  to be administered  by ASME.+
Certification of operators has now been included in the requirements for
operating permits in Connecticut, New Jersey,  New York, and  Vermont.

4.1.2  Flue Gas Treatment*
     The previous discussion has dealt exclusively with destruction of organic
materials to minimize organic emissions through design and operation of the
combustion process.  Control of organic emissions may also be accomplished
through post combustion control techniques.  In fact,  the secondary combustion
chambers on many modular combustors can be thought of as afterburners.
Although no conventional mass burn facilities employing afterburners have been
identified, this type of control device might be used to control  organic
emissions.  Direct flame afterburners operating at 2,000°F for a 1.0 second
residence time have demonstrated the ability to achieve greater than
4.
 Thomas Allen, Associate Director of the Division of Air, New York Department
 of Environmental Conservation, is the Acting Chairman of the ASME
 Accreditation Committee.  Arlene Spadafino, a Director in ASME's Codes and
 Standards Division, may be contacted for further information at
 (212) 705-7030.
information presented in this section is summarized from Reference 19,
 Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Flue Gas Cleaning Technology.
                                       61

-------
 98 percent destruction of hazardous wastes,  eve"  for  chlorinated
          22 23
 organics.   '
      Recent tests have indicated that  alkaline  scrubt ng  systems  can  achieve
 significant control  of organic emissions.  There  are  several different types
 of alkaline scrubbers and the terminology  describing  them can  be  confusing.
 In the United States scrubbers have been classified as either  wet or  dry,
 depending  on  whether the cleaned flue  gas  leaving the scrubbing system is
 saturated.   Using this classification,  a wet scrubbing system  emits a
 saturated  gas,  while a dry scrubber has a  gaseous effluent which  is
 unsaturated.   Scrubber terminology  in  other  countries often  includes
 "semi-dry"  or "wet/dry"  and "dry" scrubber.   The  terms "semi-dry" and
 "wet/dry"  apply to a spray dryer and fabric  filter or ESP system  in which the
 sorbent enters  the spray dryer as a slurry or solution and the cleaned flue
 gas  leaves  the  particulate collector unsaturated.  The terms "dry scrubber" or
 "dry injection",  as  often used in the  same countries,  refer  to a  dry  powdered^
 sorbent being injected into the flue gas upstream of  the  particulate
 collector.   In  the United States, scrubbing  systems using either  spray drying
 or dry injection  of  sorbent upstream of particulate collectors are commonly
 called "dry"  scrubbers.
      The mechanism of organic pol'ijtant capture by alkaline  scrubbers is not
 clear.   It  is likely that condensation  and capture in the physical form of
 particulates  or aerosols is an important mechanism, but chemical  reaction with
 caustic reagents  is  also a possibility.  To  take  advantage of  these collection
 phenomena,  a  control  strategy could include  steps to  lower the flue gas
 temperature,  subject it  to caustic  sorbents,  and  collect  the particles with an
 efficient particle collector.   Combinations  of equipment  would be required to
 implement this  strategy;  spray drying  combined with an ESP or  spray drying
 combined with a fabric filter would be  the probable choice.  A few data are
 available showing  the effectiveness of  the combination of alkaline scrubbing
 with a  fabric filter  for control of ODD. Data showing the effectiveness of an
 alkaline scrubber  with an ESP are more  limited.   Data from two sets of pilot
 plant  tests are shown  in  Table  4-3.  The combination  of alkaline  scrubbing
with fabric filtration also may  be  used to control emissions of acid  gases and
metals.  This cooperative effect is  discussed more fully  in the section on
multipollutant control strategies.
                                       62

-------
                 TABLE 4-3.  CONTROL EFFICIENCY DATA FOR CDD
                                                              Efficiency
Spray Dryer + ESP2
reported by manufacturer
                    48 - 89*
Spray Dryer + Fabric Fi1ter24
tested by manufacturer
High T
Low T
52 - 93*
97 - 99.8*
Spray Dryer + Fabric Filter
Environment Canada
                           25
                    >99.9
Dry Injection + Fabric Filter
Environment Canada
                             25
200°C
110° - 140°C
99.4
>99.9
*Range for different homologs.
                                        63

-------
4.2  ACID GASES*

     Control of acid gases (HC1, HF and SO-) requires  Drubbing or devices for
gas/liquid or gas/solid contact.  Water alone is a reasonably effective
sorbent for very reactive acid gases such as HC1 and HF, but an alkali sorbent
is necessary for substantial SO- control.
     Effective acid gas control is possible with dry, semi-dry and wet
scrubbers.  HC1 and HF are relatively easy to control, while SO- control  is
favored by wet or semi-dry system-* ith lower flue gas temperatures.  Alkaline
scrubbing systems combined with particulate capture devices may be used to
control other pollutants such as some organic species and metals.  This
synergy is discussed more fully in the section on multipollutant control
strategies.  Spray drying or semi-dry injection of sorbent is more effective
than dry injection of sorbent.  The most effective control of acid gases is by
wet alkali scrubbers, but wet scrubbing produces waste water that must be
treated.
     Combination dry, semi-dry scrubbers may control acid gases more
effectively than once-through spray drying and may be similar in effectiveness
to spray drying with recycle.  Combination wet-dry systems may be the most
effective system for acid gas control but are increasingly complex.  Table 4-4
summarizes the scrubber options for acid gas control and shows expected
control efficiencies.  It should be noted that any of these techniques may be
enhanced by the use of more reactive sorbents or by operation at more
favorable temperatures.  Table 4-5 shows acid gas control efficiency data
included in the EPA's Emissions Data Base.  These data  are supported with
emission test reports (Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Emission Data Base
for Municipal Waste Combustors).
*Information presented in this section  is summarized from Reference  19,
 Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Flue Gas Cleaning Technology.
                                       64

-------
     TABLE 4-4.  EXPECTED EFFECTIVENESS OF ACID GAS CONTROLS (% P *OVAL)19
Control System
Dry Sorbent Injection + Fabric Filter3
Dry Sorbent Injection + Fluid Bed
Reactor/ESPD
Spray Dryer - ESP
(Recycle)0
Spray Dryer Baghouse
(Recycle)0
Spray Dryer + Dcy Sorbent Injection +
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber6
Dry/Wet Scrubber6 'f
aT - 160 - 180°C. T is the temperature
bT - 230°C

HC1
80
90
95+
(95+)
95+
(95+)
95+
95+
95+
at the exit

Pollutant
HF S02
98 50
99 60
99 50 - 70
(99) (70 - 90).
99 70 - 90
(99) (80 - 95)
99 90+
99 90+
99 90+
of the control device.

CT - 140 - 160°C

dT - 200°C

eT » 40 - 50°C


 Consists of a spray dryer which atomizes spent scrubber liquor from two
 venturi scrubbers, one for HC1 control and the other for SO- control, to
 dispose of liquid wastes.  The venturi scrubbers are in series and follow the
 particulate control device which is just downstream of the spray dryer.  This
 system, by proper selections of feed stream compositions to the Venturis, can
 also be used for NO  control.


                                      65

-------
TABLE 4-5.  CONTROL EFFICIENCY DATA FOR ACID GASES16
                                           Control Efficiency (%}
Facility
Gallatin
Kure
Quebec

Tsushima
Munich
Mai mo
Control Device
Cyclone/fabric filter
ESP/water scrubber
Dry injection/fabric filter
110°C
125°C
140°C
200°C
Spray dryer/ fabric filter
140°C
140°C with recycle
Spray dryer/dry injection/fabric filter
(Teller system)
Dry scrubber/ESP
Cyclone/dry scrubber/ESP/fabric filter
HC1

79
99
98
93
77
91
91
98
9b
72
HF S02
0
68 87
96
92
78
23
67
60
48 99.7


                           66

-------
4.3  NJ.ROGEN OXIDES

     Control  of nitrogen oxides may be accomplished  through  post-combustion
flue gas treatment processes.   Selective catalytic reduction (SCR)  is  the  most
advanced process.  In the selective catalytic reduction  process  NO   is reduced
                                                                 ^
to nitrogen and water vapor with the addition of ammonia in  the  presence of  a
catalyst.  Although not specifically applied to municipal  waste  combustion,
SCR is being applied to sludge combustors in Japan and the technology  is
expected to be readily transferable.
     Impurities such as HC1 and metals degrade the SCR catalyst, so municipal
waste cunbustor gases are typically subjected to cleaning processes before
they contact the special ^itaniurn-based honeycomb catalyst system.   Design
data show 80 to 90 percent reduction of NO , but performance data are
                                          A
unavailable.
     Another NO  control system, thermal DeNO , involves injection of ammonia
               A                             A
in the upper furnace to achieve selective reduction  of NOX-  This system is
currently installed on at least one municipal waste  combustor in California.
The effects of thermal DeNO  systems on other pollutants in the flue gas from
                           ^
municipal waste combustors have not been established.

4.4  PARTICULATE MATTER*

     Control of particulate matter emissions is currently practiced to  a large
extent among existing municipal waste combustors.  Electrostatic precipitators
(ESPs), fabric filters, and wet scrubbers are all systems used  to control
particulate matter emissions.  Newer units are equipped with ESPs and fabric
filters.  Modern ESPs can achieve very  high removal  efficiencies for
particulate matter  (>99%).  There are currently nearly 40 U.S.  municipal waste
combustion facilities equipped with ESPs, some of which are combined  with
other flue gas treatment technologies.  Also, a trend can be seen toward
higher particulate matter collection efficiencies with newer installations.

"Information presented  in this  section  is summarized  from Reference 19,
 Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Flue Gas Cleaning Technology.
                                        67

-------
     Fabric filters have not generally been applied directly to flue gas from
municipal waste combustors, but they have been used as sorbent collectors and
secondary reactors for dry and semi-dry scrubbers.  Three reasons that fabric
filters have-not Jaeen appliedjJirectly to municipal waste combustor flue gas
are:  (1)  attack by acid gases upon fabric, (2) fabric~BTTndTng by ^sticky"
particles, and (3) baghouse fires caused by unstable combustion and carryover
of sparks into the flue.  Electrostatic precipitators and wet scrubbers are
somewhat more forgiving of these phenomena and have generally been preferred.
   «                                             ^-^•"^^i—"™^™™^^^^^^^^" ™ —
However, upstream scrubbing of acid gases with sorbent accumulation on fabric
materials can address the problems mentioned above, so that fabric filters
become an attractive choice for control of particulate matter emissions.
Fabric filters used in this way with upstream sorbent  injection are capable of
particulate matter control to concentrations of less than 0.02 gr/dscf.
     Wet scrubbers are not likely to be applied to municipal waste combustors
for__£ontro1 of particulate matter^emissions in the future.  Although wet
scrubbers account for nearly one-fifth of existing particulate matter control
systems in the United States, they hayedisadvantages which are likely to
eliminate them from future selection.  First, used alone, without additional
particulate matter controls, they are not as effective in controlling
particulate matter as other control equipment.  It is  unlikely that wet
scrubbers can meet current or future particulate matter  emission requirements
without very high pressure losses accompanied by erosion and increased
maintenance requirements.  Second, wet scrubbers will  absorb acid gases
including HC1 and, if they are not designed to handle  the accumulating acids,
will have significant operating problems.
     Efficient particulate matter capture devices also provide enhanced
capture of other pollutants in the flue gas in solid or  aerosol form,
e.g., metals and large organic molecules.  These captured materials then
become part of the ash residue from the process.

4.5  METALS

     Effective control of particles and low flue gas temperatures are major
factors in the control of metals emissions.  Sorbents  are not suspected  of
                                       68

-------
 playing a major role.  Nevertheless, scrubber, systems combined with
 participate control devices have achieved effective metals removal  because
 they cool the incoming flue gas.  Hetals and metallic compounds enter the
 combustor in the solid waste material and are not destroyed in the  combustion
 process, although they may change phase or react to form other metallic
 compounds.  Because they are not destroyed, they must leave the combustion
 process in the bottom ash, fly ash, or stack gas.  Metals and metallic
 compounds carried by the flue gas  «-ter particulate matter collectors as
 solids, liquids, and vapors, and as the flue gas cools, the vapor portion
 converts to collectible solid" and liquids.
      Based on theoretical vapor pressure considerations, reduction of flue gas
 temperatures to below 200°C (392°F) in combination with high efficiency
 particulate collection should result in 99 percent reduction of metals, except
 for mercury (Hg), arsenates (AsO^)  , and selenium (SeO- and Seg).   Increased
 reduction in concentrations of these compounds occurs as temperatures are
\ increasingly lowered.
      Recently collected metals data from a pi lot-scale test in Quebec are
 summarized in Table 4-6.  The inlet and outlet concentrations data show that
 the alkaline scrubber/fabric filter system effected greater than 99.9% removal
 efficiency for all metals except mercury.  The collection efficiency for
 mercury ranged from 91 to 97 percent except for the high temperature (209°C)
 test in which a negative control efficiency was measured.  Environment Canada
 characterized this result as indicative of no mercury removal.  It is also
 important to note that measurements of metals in the ash residues showed that
                                                                     25
 the solids collected by the fabric filter were enriched with metals.    The
 fabric filter solids contained by far the highest concentration and the
 highest quantities of total metals.
      In other tests, metals control efficiency data show 95-98 percent control
 or greater for heavy metals except mercury.  Seventy-five to 85 percent
 control of mercury vapor has been reported with a spray dryer combined with  a
 baghouse; 35 to 45 percent control has been reported with a spray dryer plus
 ESP.
                                        69

-------
        TABLE 4-6.  INLET/OUTLET METAL JONCENTRATIONS FROM QUEBEC PILOT
                       PLANT TESTING (ug/Nra3 0 8% 02)25
                                  Drv Injection
Sorav Drver
       140°C
Metal
Zinc
(Zn)
Cadmium
(Cd)
Lead
(Pb)
Chromium
(Cr)
Nickel
(Ni)
Arsenic
(As)
Antimony
(Sb)
Mercury
(Hg)
Location
Inlet
Outlet
Inlet
Outlet
Inlet
Outlet
Inlet
Outlet
Inlet
Outlet
Inlet
Outlet
Inlet
Outlet
Inlet
Outlet
110°Ca
99,000
7
1,300
0.4
41,000
4
3,100
0.4
1,000
1.3
150
0.02
2,000
0.2
440
40
125°Ca
108,000
.5
1,300
0.4
44,000
3
1,900
0.4
1,800
0.4
100
0.04
800
0.4
480
13
140GC
93,000
6
1,500
ND
34,000
5
2,000
1
1,300
0.7
130
0.04
1,000
0.6
320
20
>200°C
91,000
10
1,000
0.6
35,000
6
1,900
0.5
800
2
80
0.07
1,500
0.5
450b
610
140°C
77,000
5
1,200
NO
36,000
1
1,400
0.2
700
1.3
110
0.04
1,000
0.3
190
10
+Recycle
88,000
6
1,100
NO
34,000
6
1,700
0.7
2,500
2
130
0.03
2,200
0.6
360
19
Note:  Concentrations rounded off for simplicity.
NO - Not detected
aBased on one test run, except for mercury, which is based on two test runs.
 Negative control efficiency; no capture of mercury occurred.
                                       70

-------
4 6  MULT I POLLUTANT CONTROL STRATEGIES

     In devising a control strategy for fflinimizlng emissions to the atmosphere
from municipal waste combustors, a starting place is alteration of design .or
operating practices that may cause or exacerbate pollutant formation;  i.e.,
combustion controls.  With the potential for pollutant formation in the
process minimized, the next logical step would be the use of post combustion
flue gas cleaning equipment to remove remaining pollutants from the flue
gases.  However, this straightforward approach is complicated because the
control problem consists of many different polluta,,ts emitted together, so the
effects of the various control options on other pollutants must be considered.
     In the previous discussion on control options, the potential for
minimizing organic emissions through a combustion optimization strategy was
presented.  The combustion strategy may do little for the control of other
pollutants, however.  In fact, while combustion optimization is expected to   -
have little impact on acid gases and particulate matter, it may increase
emissions of NOX and some metals.
     The preliminary combustion control strategy is probably most incompatible
with NO  emissions minimization.  High-temperature, well -mixed, excess air
       ^
conditions favor the formation of NO  from both thermal fixation of molecular
nitrogen and the conversion of fuel nitrogen.  Traditionally, NOX emissions
from municipal waste combustors have not been controlled, and the need to
control NO  emissions has been confined to fairly localized areas.  As
previously pointed out, NOX emissions can be reduced by flue gas cleaning
processes.  It is not clear what effect NO  control systems may have on  other
                                          A
pollutants, but they are not expected to provide significant removal potential
for other pollutants.
     Metal concentrations in uncontrolled stack gases may also  be  exacerbated
by the recommended combustion  strategy.  The^jvaxtitiioning of metalsjamong
                                 phase  depends on  the temperature  and  oxygen
levels experienced by the metal -bearing refuse.  For example,  higher air
velocities through the bed will  increase  the entrainment  of  particles.   Also,
changes in stoichiometry for proper air distribution will  influence the
vaporization of volatile metals.  And, temperature  increases favor the
vaporization of volatile metals.  As  in the case with  NOX control, metal
emissions may also be removed  in  flue gas cleaning  processes.
                                       71

-------
     Hi-h efficiency participate collection devices, such as ESPs and fabric
filters, hav  the potential for collection of metals and organics that exist
in the stack gases in particulate or aerosol form.  Furthermore, when combined
with cooling to promote condensation, this collection potential is further
enhanced.  Adding to these possible processing steps, the use of alkali
sorbents enhances the collection still further by increasing the potential for
collecting organic materials such as COD and CDF and acid gases.
     An approach to minimizing a w*-"le list of emissions to the atmosphere  •
from municipal waste combustors woufd be:
          optimization of the combustion process,
          flue gas treatment using alkaline scrubbers in conjunction with ESPs
          or fabric filters at a temperature conducive to promoting
          condensation, and
          flue gas treatment for NO  control, if necessary.
                                   A
With respect to cooling the stack gases, there are practical limits with the
use of ESPs alone.  Very low exit temperatures may not be feasible without
additional gas conditioning because of acid condensation and corrosion
problems.  To operate with low exit gas temperatures, it may be necessary to
use an alkaline scrubber upstream of an ESP.
     Testing of control equipment designed for multipollutant control  is now
beginning and results are just becoming available.  Tables 4-7, 4-8 and 4-9
contain summary results of such emissions testing.  The first table is a very
simplified representation of an extensive series of tests performed by
Environment Canada at Quebec.  Tests were performed at a pilot plant by
testing control device efficiency on a slip stream from a commercial-scale
municipal waste combustor.  Tests were run at several flue gas temperatures on
two scrubbing systems, dry lime injection/fabric filter and lime spray dryer/
fabric filter.  In general, high removal efficiencies were seen in both
systems for all pollutants of concern, but cooling of the flue gas below 200°C
was seen as key to the control of hydrogen chloride, sulfur dioxide, and
mercury.
                                       72

-------
       TABLE 4-7.  'UMK'RY OF TESTING OF MULIIPOLLUTANT CONTROL  STRATEG,
                               AT QUEBEC CITY25
                                                Range of Removal
     Pollutant                               Efficiencies Measured  (%)
PCDD                                              99.4 to > 99.9
PCDF                                              99.3 to > 99.9
Chlorobenzenes                                    62a to > 99
Polychlorinated biphenyls                         54a to > 99
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons                  79  to > 99
Chlorophenols                                     56a to 99
Zinc                                              > 99.9
Cadmium                                           > 99.9
Lead                                              > 99.9
Chromium                                          > 99.9
Nickel                                             > 99.9
Arsenic                                           > 99.9
Antimony                                          > 99.9
Mercury                                           Oa to 97
Hydrogen Chloride                                 77a to 98
Sulfur dioxide                                    29a to 96

Measured at highest test temperature (209°C)
 Measured in recycle test.
                                          73

-------
       TABLE 4-8.  SUMMARY 0,  TEST NG OF MULT1POLLUTANT CONTROL STRATEGY
                               PERFUMED BY NIRO26
     Pollutant
Emissions Data
Particulate matter
HC1
HF
so2
so3
Cd
Hg
Dioxins/furans
5 to 10 mg/Nnr
5 to 15 mg/Nm3
0.3 mg/Nra3
20 to 70 mg/Nm3
1 mg/Nm3
0.01 to 0.03 mg/Nm3
0.03 to 0.1 mg/Nm3
90 to 99% removal
                                       74

-------
TABLE 4-9.  COMPARISON OF PIL  -SW £ TESTS OF MULT I POLLUTANT



                     CONTROL EQUIPK-.1T18
                                  Pollutant Removal Efficiency
Pollutant
Hga
Pb
Cd
As
Particulate Matter
CDD
CDF
aVapor only
bAt 110°C
Spray
35
65
95
93
dryer/ESP
- 40%
- 75%
- 97%
- 98%
>99%
48
64


- 89%
- 85%


Spray dryer/
fabric filter
75 - 85%
95 - 98%
95 - 97%
95-98%.
>99%
>99%b
>99%b


                                75

-------
     The second table contains data provided by Niro atomizer on their spray
dryer combined with a "dust collector."    Table 4-^ sh' 's results of
pilot-scale testing of a spray dryer/ESP system and a s-,- ay dryer fabric
              18
filter system.    Results of additional tests of these multipollutant control
systems are now being released and will provide additional information with
which they may be evaluated.
                                       76

-------
                  5.   IMPACTS OF POTENTIAL CONTROL  STRATEGIES

     A major concern voiced by the public in  communities  where  nut.   ipal
combustors are being considered is the heaHh risk  from emissions of
pollutants to the atmosphere.  In the following analysis,  health  risks  due  to
direct inhalation of pollutants and due to other indirect exposure  routes are
discussed for the existing and the projected  future combustor populations,
under two different levels of pollution control. Costs and other effects are
also considered.

5.1  ESTIMATED HEALTH RISK UNDER TWO CONTROL  SCENARIOS

     The risk analysis seeks to answer the questions of what are  the health
risks associated with municipal waste combustion, and how might they be
reduced by applying emission controls?  To address  these  questions, EPA
analyzed exposures to pollutants directly emitted to the  atmosphere from
municipal waste combustors and indirect exposures from deposited  pollutants.
Health risks from carcinogens and non-carcinogens were considered.   And, to
capture the risk from municipal waste combustors as they  exist  today and as
they may exist in the future, the risk analysis was extended to the projected
population.  Thus, the analysis consists of many parts defined  by route of
exposure, combustor population, emission control scenario, and  the type of
health effect being considered.  Results of these risk analysis elements were
generated for several organic pollutants (COD, CDF, chlorophenols,
chlorobenzenes, formaldehyde, polychlorinated biphenyls,  polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons) and for inorganic pollutants (arsenic, beryllium, mercury, lead,
cadmium, and hexavalent chromium, and hydrochloric  acid).

5.1.1  Methodology
     The methodology for performing this complex analysis  is described  in
detail in  "Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Assessment of Health  Risks
                                                       27
Associated with Municipal Waste Combustion Emissions."     In its evaluation
                                       77

-------
of the potential health risks from combustion sources,  EPA traditional!^ has
focused on air emissions from the source and on the carcinogenic risks from
direct inhalation of predicted ambient air concentrations of pollutants.  Tht
risk analysis for municipal waste combustors represents an expansion of the
analytical scope to include consideration of multiple exposure pathways,  .
carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic risks posed to humans, and potential adverse
effects to the natural environment.

5.1.1.1  Emissions and Control Scenarios.  The risk analysis was constructed
to include existing and projected combustors under a baseline control scenario
and a controlled scenario.  The baseline scenario was designed to reflect the
status quo in add-on control technology (ESPs), while the controlled scenario
was designed to reflect uniform application of dry scrubbing combined with
very efficient particulate collection devices.  In terms of combustion
efficiency the models assumed existing units under both control scenarios
would have combustion efficiencies reflective of currently operating
combustors.  The projected population, however, was assumed to incorporate
very efficient combustion under both control scenarios.
     The existing and projected populations of combustors used in the risk
analysis are described in "Municipal Waste Combustion Stuay:  Characterization
of the Municipal Waste Combustion Industry."   Since the risk analysis and the
development of the emissions data base proceeded in parallel, emissions
estimates were developed from test data compiled and presented in a publicly
released draft of the volume titled "Municipal Waste Combustion Study:
Emission Data Base for Municipal Waste Combustors. (January 1987)"    Tables
5-1 and 5-2 indicate from which units test data were derived.  Details about
the facilities tested and testing procedures used to generate the emissions
test data also may be found in the EPA's Emissions Data Base  '   .  For each
pollutant, emissions data from the facilities listed in the tables were
averaged to obtain an overall emission factor.
     As the tables show, for some pollutants the emissions estimates  are based
on very little data, especially for the organic pollutants.  Another
observation from Table 5-2 is the different lists of facilities chosen  to
represent existing and planned facilities.  An attempt was made to use  the
most appropriate data to represent emissions from different types of

                                       78

-------
TABLE 5-1.  METALS EMISSION FACTOR DATA SUMMARY
POUUTAMT
METALS
Arsenic
Beryl 1 Ilia
CaMlun
Chro»'u»
LMd
Mercury
Nickel
FACILITY TYPE
MB Water Wall
MB Refractory
RDF
Modular
MB Water Wall
MB Refractory
ROF
Modular
MB Water fall
MB Refractory
RDF
Modular
MB Vater Wall
MB Refractory
ROF
Modular
MB vater Vail
MB Refractory
ROF
Modular
MB Vater Mil
MB Refractory
ROF
Modular
MB Vater Mil
MB Refractory
ROF
Nodular
MK FACILITIES TESTED
Baltlwre. Bralntree, Haapton, Munich* Murzfeurg
TM*MM
Akron. Albany
Tuecaloosa. Oyeriburg^ Prince Eduard Island
Bralntree. Hampton. Tulsa. Munich
TtushlM
Albany
Dyerafeurg
Bralntree. Haopton, Munich. Malao, Vurzvurg
Vaanlngton. Alexandria. Nicosia. TauanlM
Albany
Dyertburg, Prince EdMrd IslMd
Balttaore. Bralntree. Haaeton, Munich. Vurzburg
WatMngton. Alexandria. Nicosia. TaushlM
Akron. Albany
Oyeroburg. Prince Eduard Island
Bralntree. Maaaton* Tulaa. Munich. Malen. Vurtturg
Washington. Alexandria. Nicosia. Tsushlas
Akron. Albany
Oyersburg. Prince Eduard Island
Bralntree. HaapTim T«l»a, Mtlao
TsushlM
•kron. Albany
Oyersburg. Prince EdMrd Island
Hasten. Munich. Vuriturg
Washington. Alexandria. Nicosia. TsushlM
Akron. Albany
Oyersburg. Prince Edward Island
                     79

-------
TABLE 5-2.  MUNICIPAL WASTE COMBUSTION FACILITIES FROM WHICH  TEST DATA WERE
                       USED FOR ORGANIC EMISSION  FACTORS
EXISTING MC
1 M»C Tested
1 Man Burn
Non Heat Recovery
6 Mas* Burn
Meat Recovery





6 Modular



5 RDF




fWUKTHJ Me
7 Mm Burn





5 RDF



6 Modular



COO/CDF fl(a)P PCS
Philadelphia Ml Haapton Heapton

Quebec Haapton Chicago Ml
Saugus Haapton
Chicago
Peek Mil
TulM
Haapton
N. Andover
PEI. Oyersburg Cattarauguf PEI
N. Little Rock Cattaraugus
Mayport. One Ida
Cattaraugus
Sieru Albany Albany
Akron S»ani
•right Patterson
Albany
Niagara Falli

•urxburg Haapton Chicago Ml
N. Andover
Saugus
Peek skill
TulM
Marlon Co.
Seam* Albany Albany
Akron Seant1
•right Patterson
Albany
Niagara Falls
PEI. Oyers»erg Cattaraugus PEI
N. Little Mock Cattarangvs
Mayport. Owe lea
•
fonatldehyde Chlorobenzenes Chlorophenols
Haapton Chicago Ml Chicago Ml
Poeksklll Haapton Haapton
Haapton Chicago Ml Chicago Ml
Peek skill Haapton Haapton





Dyersburg PEI PEI
Cattaraugus


Albany Vrlght Patterson Vrlght Patterson
Akron Siaru Snani
Niagara Falls



Peek*m Chicago Ml Chicago NH





Albany "right Patterson Vrlght Patterson
Akron Searu* S»ani
Niagara Falls


Oyerskerg PEI PEI
Cattaraugus

*A«jMtte4 to reflect J
•sel f Icattees.
                                          80

-------
combustors and for different "cenarios.   Some of the existing facilities,  for
example Hampton (mass birn), may not represent performance levels  expected of
new facilities.  Test data from this facility were,  therefore,  excluded when
computing average emission factors for COO and CDF  for the projected
population of mass burn heat recovery facilities.   For some other  organic  -
pollutants, for example B(a)P,  there were no state-of-the-art data available,
so the data from Hampton were used, even though they may not be considered
representative of new facilities.  The paucity of data introduces  considerable
uncertainty, because there is significant variation among emissions measured
at different facilities.  The variability is due in part to differences in
feed materials and design and operating characteristics of municipal waste
combustors and air pollution control equipment.
     Control efficiencies for the baseline and controlled scenarios were
developed as follows.  For the existing combustor population, the  baseline
scenario organic emissions estimates are reflective of uniform use of ESPs
because test data were collected from ESP-controlled units.  A variety of
particulate matter emission controls, however, are  actually used at existing
facilities.  (See Table 5-3.)  The baseline scenario for existing  units
incorporates particulate matter and metals control  efficiencies reflective of
actual particulate matter control devices in use.  The controlled  scenario for
existing combustors was constructed by assuming 99.5% control of particulate
matter emissions, including metals, and 95 percent  control of organic
emissions.  HC1 emissions were assumed controlled by 90 percent, and S02 was
assumed controlled by 70 to 90 percent.  These control levels reflect the
efficiencies achieved by the combination of dry scrubbers and fabric filters
tested at pilot-scale facilities by Environment Canada and others.  (See
                                                                19
Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Flue Gas Cleaning Technology.  )
     For the projected population, control efficiencies for the baseline
scenario were assumed to be 20 percent for organics and 99 percent  for
particulate matter and metals, reflecting application of particulate matter
controls only.  This is a conservative assumption for organics because many
planned facilities are expected to incorporate dry scrubbers, as  in the
controlled scenario.  Little data are available on the performance  of  ESPs
alone in controlling organics.  However, preliminary results from recent  tests
indicate a range of 0 to 50 percent for control of CDD and CDF, and data  from
                                       81

-------
                                 TABLE  5-3.   EMISSION CONTROLS  ON  EXISTING SOURCES
        TECHNOLOGY
       (I FACILITIES)
     COMBUSTION
      CONTROLS

   GOOD/FAIR/POOR
   FLUE GAS TREATMENT CONTROLS
                                                  WET               FABRIC
                                               SCRUBBER     ESP      FILTER    DS/FF   OTHER   NONE
CD
fN>
      MASS  BURN
        (45)
      REFUSE
      DERIVED  FUEL
        (10)
     Good-Poor
Many older units are
deficient In design*
operation, and
maintenance
Not well understood
33
      MODULAR
        (56)
      Good-Fair
- starved air
- secondary combustion
10
3     36

-------
earlier tests at the Chicago NW facility indicated  approximately  20 percent
cor   ol of chlorophenols.  In consideration of thtse limited  data points,
20 percent control was assumed.  Particulate matter control of 99 percent
efficiency reflects the performance of a modern ESP.  However, it is possible
that some facilities way consider control devices designed to meet current
standards of 95% for municipal waste combustors or  about 97 to 98 percent  for
industrial boilers.  No control of HC1 by ESPs was  assumed.
     Control efficiencies for the controlled scenario were assumed to be the
same as for the existing facility population:  99.5 percent for particulate
matter including metals, 95 percent for organics, and 90 percent  control of
HC1  and 70 to 90 percent control of sulfur oxides.   This scenario is
reflective of uniform application of dry scrubbers  and particulate matter
control devices to the entire population.

5.1.1.2  Exposure Modeling.  Exposure potential due to the direct inhalation -
                                                  28
route was modeled using EPA's Human Exposure Model   , which links a dispersion
model and population data to estimate exposure levels.  Deposition of
                                              29
pollutants was modeled using the ISC-ST model.    The Terrestrial Food Chain,
Surface Runoff, Groundwater and Dermal Exposure models have been developed to
analyze possible human exposure associated with indirect exposure pathways for
the deposited emissions.  Potential exposure to terrestrial and aquatic
organisms exposed to deposited municipal waste combustion emissions have also
been addressed in the indirect exposure modeling.
     The actual locations and sizes of the facilities were used to model
direct inhalation exposure from the existing population.  For the projected
facilities, two different sets of model  facilities were used to project
maximum individual risks and annual incidence.
     Maximum individual risk estimates were obtained  from modeling  3000 ton
per day mass-burn, 3000 ton per day RDF, and 250 ton  per day modular units.
These units were located in urban and suburban areas  and represent  large
planned facilities.  From these results, the maximum  modeled  individual
lifetime risk was estimated for projected  facilities.
     To estimate annual  incidence from  projected sources,  risk estimates  were
obtained using average-sized model  plants  of  1000  ton per  day mass-burn and
1500 ton per day RDF facilities, each located  in hypothetical  urban and
                                        83

-------
suburba* ""oca^ions.  The average values for the urban and suburban estimates
were then SCL  d up in proportion to the capacity projected for each type of
technology in 1993.  Risk estimates were also obtained froir a 250 ton per day
modular facility in two setsn-rural locations, and a similar procedure was .used
to scale up the estimates.
     Given the complexities involved in modeling both the environmental fate
and transport of specific emitted chemicals and the multiple routes of
indirect human exposure to specific chemicals, it is currently not practical
to analyze the indirect exposure due to every existing or planned municipal
waste combustor.  The analysis instead was designed to test th^ hypothesis of
whether indirect exposure routes could contribute significantly to the total
exposure due to municipal waste combustors.  To examine this possibility,
reasonable worst case estimates of long-term indirect exposure were compared
against reference levels for health effects.  These reference levels are based
on either carcinogenic risk or "Risk Reference Doses" (RfDs).  The methodology
used to analyze indirect exposures evaluated a facility using technologies
thought to be representative of those being planned, but under reasonable
worst-case environmental conditions in which hydrogeological and
meteorological factors combine to enhance the opportunity for exposure.  The
methodology also evaluated a facility thought to represent worst-case
emissions from existing facilities.  The methodology evaluated long term
deposition and included exposure scenarios over 30 years and over 100 years.

5.1.1.3  Risk Measures.  Two types of health risk were addressed: carcinogenic
health effects and non-carcinogenic health effects.  Unit risk factors
representing the lifetime (70 year) upper limit estimate of cancer risk for an
individual continuously exposed to 1 ug/m  of a particular pollutant over 70
years, developed by EPA's Carcinogen Assessment Group were used to estimate
the risk of cancer.  Cancer risks have been expressed both in terms of annual
cancer incidence to the entire exposed population, and risk to a hypothetical
individual or subpopulation exposed to the highest modeled ambient levels of
each pollutant in the nation - the maximum individual lifetime cancer  risk.
Risks from exposure to carcinogens were considered additive in conformance
with EPA guidelines.  Non-carcinogenic health effects were evaluated by
comparison with concentrations predicted in the environment to established
Risk Reference Dose values for the pollutants.

                                       84

-------
5.1.1.4  Assumption     Ii the previous methodology discussion  several
uncertainties and assump  ons have been noted.   In addition, there are  a  few
other points to note about the risk analysis.   Risk estimates  are based on
calculations incorporating a cancer potency estimate and exposure estimate.
The estimate of cancer potency is based on a conservative extrapolation of-  the
results of epidemiological studies and studies  with laboratory animals.  The
exposure estimate is based on mathematical models of pollutant dispersion.
While both of these approaches are traditionally used in risk  calculations,
each incorporates uncertainties and assumptions.
     Emissions have been modeled as a constant  rate over long  periods of time.
Implicit in this assumption is that average emission levels are equal to those
found in the reported tests; therefore, these estimates do not reflect what
may occur during start-up, shutdown, or upset conditions.  Furthermore, the
risk estimates for direct inhalation assume that persons are continually
exposed to pollutants for 70 years, and that the population is constant and  -
fixed.

5.1.2  Risks from Direct Inhalation
     The risk estimates from direct inhalation  exposure are shown in
Tables 5 4 through 5-6.   Tables 5-4 and 5-5 show cancer risk estimates for
the direct inhalation route of exposure, disaggregated into risk estimated
from metals and organics.  Table 5-4 shows risk under the baseline control
scenario, while Table 5-5 shows risk under the  controlled scenario, as
discussed in Section 5.1.1.  Table 5-6 shows the contribution  to risk made by
the individual species modeled.

5.1.2.1  Ranges and Uncertainties.  The risk ranges shown in the tables
reflect several areas of uncertainty in the analysis.  First,  recovery of
CDD/CDF from the Modified Method 5 stack sampling trains in some cases has
been reported to be as low as 10 percent.  Thus, actual emission levels could
be higher than reported emissions by an order of magnitude.  However,  recovery
has also been reported to be significantly higher.  The ranges shown
incorporate recovery levels of 10 to 100 percent to account for  variation in
sampling methods.
                                       85

-------
CO
                                                                                                                e
                                   TABLE  5-4.  ESTIMATED CANCER RISK  FROM INHALATION NATIONWIDE
                                                               (Basel1n« Scenario)

Organ Ics
b
Metals Combined
Ann. Incld. c Max. Ind1v.d
Existing SoyrCM < !**•£!
Mass Burn (Non-heat)
Mass Burn (Heat Rec)
RDF
Modular
f
EXISTING TOTAL
Mass Burn (Heat Rec)
RDF
Modular
f
PROJECTED TOTAL
f
COMBINED TOTAL


1-30 10'4 -
.2-4 10'4 -
.1-3 10"5 -
.oooa-.oi io~* -

2-40 10"4 -
.3-7 10"6 -
.a - 10 io~5 -
.04 - .9 10"* -

1 - 20 IO"5 -

3-60 10"4 -

ID'3
ID'3
ID'3
ID'4

ID'3
ID'5
ID'4
ID'5

ID'4

ID"3
Ann. Incld.

.2
.04
.2
.01

.5
.3
.1
.01

.4

.9
Max. Indiv. Ann. Incld.

10"5 1 - 30
10"4 .2-4
10"5 .3-3
10"4 .01 - .02

10"4 2-40
10"6 .6-7
10~7 .9 - 10
10"* .05 - .9

10"6 2-20

10~4 4-60
Max. Indtv.

io-4-
Hf4-
10"5 -
io-4-

10 -
10-*-
10-5-
lo-6-

lO'5-

io-4-

10"3
IO"3
io-3
ID'4

ID'3
ID'5
ID'4
10'S

io'4

ID"3

                *CDO. cMorophenols. cklorobw»en««> fomaldehyde. PCS. PAH.  Risk ranges for organtcs result fro* assumptions about
                .the carcinogenic Ity of pollutants classes  and the recovery efficiency for COO/CDF  tn stack tests.
                ^Arsenic, beryl HIM, cad*1un> chroalu* 46
                 Annual Incidence Is the Modeled number of  cancer cases per year  In populations within SO k« of all Municipal waste
                .coattustors In the U.S.
                aMaxlMi Individual risk Is the eodeled probability that a person exposed to the highest Modeled concentration of
                 oollutants fro* a Municipal waste co«bustor will develop cancer over his or her 70-year llfespan.
                ^Rounded to one significant figure.  See text for assumptions Involved In producing these estimates.
                 Totals do not add due to  rounding.

-------
                              TABLE  5-5.   ESTIMATED CANCER RISK FROM INHALATION NATIONWIDE
                                                        (Controlled Scenario)
00


Existing SfiUrC.ll (19*5)
Mass Burn (Non-neat)
Mass Burn (Heat Rec)
RDF
Modular
g
EXISTING TOTAL
Projected Sources (1993)
Mass Burn (Heat Rec)
RDF
Modular
9
PROJECTED TOTAL
9
COMBINED TOTAL


Organ tcs
Ann. Inc1d.d Max. Indlv.*

.08-2 10-5 . lfl-4
.01 - .3 10"5 - 10"4
.01 - .2 10"* - 10"5
<. 00001 10"7 - 10"6
.1-3 10"5 - 10"4

.02-.4 10"7 - 10"*
.05 - .9 10~* - 10"5
.001-. 04 10"7 - 10"*
.07-1 10"7 - 10"*
.2-4 «f5 - 10"4


Met«lsb
Ann. lucid. Max. Indlv.

.05 10"*
.01 10"*
.03 10"*
.001 10"*
.1

.2 10"*
.04 10"*
.001 10~*
.2 10"*
.3 10"*


Combined
Ann. Incld. Max. Indlv.

.1-2 10"5 - 10"4
.02 - .3 10"5 - 10~4
.04 - .2 10"* • 10"5
.001 10"*
.2-3 10~5 - 10"4

.2 - .6 10~*
.09 - .9 10"* - 10*5
.01 - .03 10"*
.3-1 10"*
.5-4 10"5 - 10"4


               *COOs.  chloropnenols> chlorooenzenes.  formaldehyde*  PCS. PAH.  Risk ranges for organic* result fro* assumptions about
                the carcinogenicIty of pollutant classes and the recovery efficiency for COO/CDF In stack tests.
               "Arsenic,  beryllium. cad»1ue>. chromium +€
               CVM control organic* «1th ESP, 95S with OS/FF
               "Annual Incidence Is the modeled number of cancer cases per year In population HltMn 50 km of all municipal
                vaste combustors In the U.S.
               *Max1mum Individual risk Is the modeled probability  that a person exposed to  the highest modeled concentration of
               .pollutants from a municipal uaste combustor will develop cancer over his or  her 70-year llfespan.
                Rounded to one significant figure.  See text for assumptions Involved In producing these estimates.
               ^Totals do not add due to rounding.

-------
 TABLE 5-6.   CONTRIBUTION OF  INDIVIDUAL  POLLUTANTS TO THE ESTIMATED  CANCER RISK
Pollutant
rr Chlorinated dioxins and
dlbenzofurans
Chlorophenols
Chlorobenzenes
Formaldehyde
_, Polycyllc aromatic
— 7 hydrocarbons
f- Polychlorlnated blphenyls
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium46
Rounded Total ic
Existing MMC
Annual Cancer 1
Incidence
2 to 40
0.0001 to 0.0003
0.009 to 0.02
0.009
0.01 to 0.6
0.02
0.2
0.02
0.2
0.2
2 to 40
Existing MMC
Haxlmum Individual
Risk Range0
10"6 to 10"3
IO"9 to 10"8
10"7 to 10"6
io-8
10"7 to 10~5
IO"8 to 10"5
10"7 to 10"4
10"9 to 10"6
10"* to 10"4
10"7 to 10"4
IO"6 to 10"3
Projected MMC
Annual Cancer
Incidence
0.8 to 20
0.0001 to 0.0003
0.004 to 0.01
0.02
0.05 to 3.0
0.2
0.1
0.001
0.2
0.1
2 to 20
Projected MNC
Maximum
Individual.
Risk Range"
10"* to 10"4
10"l° to ID'9
10"9 to 10"7
10"8 to 10'7
lo"7 to lo"5
ID'9 to ID"6
10"8 to 10"7
10"U to 10"8
10'7 to 10"6
10"7 to 10"6
10*6 to 10"4
*The ranges In annual  cancer Incidence reflect the assumptions made  regarding the potential  carcinogenictty

                                                                                      the evaluation of
.of classes of organic compounds.
 The ranges In maximum Individual  lifetime cancer risk reflect differences In emissions and
 emissions from MMC technologies within the existing and proposed categories.
 Rounded to one significant figure.  Totals do not add due to rounding.

-------
     Second, a basic inconsistency exists between emission factors data and
toxicity data, both of which are needed to estimate risk.   Emission  data are
available for mixtures or classes of organic compounds.   However,  Uxicity
data have been developed with respect to human exposure  for individual  organic
compounds.  Furthermore, toxicity data are not available for all  compounds
within a class.  Nevertheless, scientists generally agree that structurally
related compounds may exhibit similar toxic effects.   Therefore,  some
assumptions are necessary to relate the emissions data to the risk measures
and to account for the potential toxicity of various  compounds in a mixture.
In the case of COD/CDF, a method involving toxic equivalency factors (TEF) was
used to convert emissions of a mixture of CDD and CDF congeners to equivalent
quantities of a single compound, 2,3,7,8-TCDD.  The method for conversion,
using weighting factors based on relative toxicities, was adopted by EPA as  an
interim procedure (52 FR 11749).  It is described more fully in "Interim
Procedures for Estimating Risks Associated with Exposure to Mixtures of
Chlorinated Dibenzo-p-dioxins and Dibenzofurans (CDD and CDF)."
     To apply the TEF to CDD/CDF emissions, another discrepancy between
emissions data and toxicity data remained to be overcome.  TEF are isomer
specific, but most emissions data are in terms of homologs.  Emission tests  on
a few facilities have reported data on the emission levels of specific
isomers.  When TEF calculations based on isomer-specific data are compared to
calculations based on homologs for those facilities,  the calculations based  on
homologs are higher by a factor of 3 to 7.  These limited data suggest that
risk estimates based only on homolog-specific data may overstate the actual
risk by a factor of 3 to 7.  Although it is unclear whether this same pattern
would hold for those facilities for which only homolog-specific data are
available, the ranges shown for CDD/CDF have incorporated these factors of
3 to 7.
     Additional inconsistencies between emissions data and toxicity data  exist
for other organics.  For the classes of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAH), chlorobenzenes, and chlorophenols unit risk factors have been
established only for specific compounds within each classes:  benzo(a)pyrene
(a specific PAH), hexachlorobenzene, and trichlorophenol.  However, emission
data are available only for the class as a whole.  Therefore, ranges were
                                       89

-------
formed based on assumptions of the relative carcinogenicity of each class
compared to the carcinogenicity of the individual  compounds.  Using
chlorobenzenes as an example, the high risk estimate represents the assumption
that all chlorobenzenes have cancer potencies equal  to that of
hexachlorobenzene, which is 43 percent of the mixture.  The low estimate is
based on the assumption that only hexachlorobenzene (of the chlorobenzenes)  is
associated with any risk of cancer.
     The range of risk estimates from direct inhalation of formaldehyde is
shown to reflect the uncertainty surrounding which tumors caused in laboratory
animals by exposure to formaldehyde are indicative of formaldehyde's potential
cor causing cancer in humans.  The low estimate is based on the assumption
that only some of the tumors in animals are indicative of formaldehyde's
potential for causing cancer in humans, and the high estimate is based on the
assumption that all of the tumors are indicative of formaldehyde's potential
for causing cancer in humans.
     Still another area of uncertainty has not been incorporated in the risk
ranges shown.  A significant portion (80 percent or more) of the organic stack
gases emitted from MWC have not been identified and quantified.  Although some
portion of the mixture may be carcinogenic, the carcinogenic fraction, its
composition, and its potency remain unknown.  If the unspeciated organics had
a carcinogenic potency equivalent to the average potency of those compounds
evaluated, even excluding CDO/COF, the contribution to the annual incidence
estimates could be appreciable.  However, there is no information to quantify
this potential source of risk.

5.1.2.2  Cancer Risk.  Looking at the direct inhalation cancer risk summary
shown in Tables 5-4 and 5-5, it is apparent that most of the cancer risk  is
attributable to organics.  Table 5-6 shows further that virtually all of  the
total risk from existing facilities, and most of the risk from projected
facilities is attributable to CDD/CDF emissions.  Thus, COD/CDF dominate  the
estimated total cancer risk due to direct inhalation of pollutants from
municipal waste combustors.
     Several potentially carcinogenic metals (arsenic, beryllium, cadmium,
chromium) are emitted from municipal waste combustors in trace quantities.
                                       90

-------
Under reasonable worst case assumptions,  the nationwide  inhalation  cancer risk
associated with these emissions is estimated to  be  0.5 cases  per  year (annual
incidence) for existing sources and 0.4 annual  incidence from the projected
population of municipal waste combustors.  Maximum  individual  lifetime cancer
                                        -4      -7
risk for the trace metals ranges from 10   to 10   for existing facilities.and
10   to 10    for the projected population of combustors.
     With the exception of CDD and COP the organic  carcinogens studied
(chlorobenzenes, chlorophenols, formaldehyde, PAH,  PCB)  are estimated to pose
cancer risks similar to the trace metals: 0.05-0.7  annual  incidence and 10
      Q
to 10   maximum individual risk from existing sources and 0.2 to  3.0 annual
                -5      -9
incidence and 10   to 10   maximum individual risk  from  the projected
facilities.
     As is evident from Table 4, most of the estimated cancer risk is
                                 <^_	,    ^   --   	—	
attributable to the class of CDD/CDF, measured as the equivalent  to
2,3,7,8-TCDD  .  There remain basic questions concerning the mechanism of
carcinogenesis for dioxins and related compounds.  The models used to estimate
the plausible, upper bound carcinogenic potency of compounds such as dioxin,
implicitly assume that the substance acts directly to initiate cancer.   If,
however, dioxin acts as a promoting agent, as some scientists believe, to
amplify the carcinogenic response of other direct acting carcinogens, the
present model may not be appropriate.  A change of this nature in the
assumption on which the cancer potency estimate is based could lead to a
reduction in this estimate.
     The inhalation risk estimates indicate that mass burn municipal waste
combustors, and especially mass burn combustors that do not incorporateheat
r^j^/jexy^_joj]linate^ the cancer risk from existing facilities, but RDF units
contribute more than half of the higher predicted cancer incidence from
projected sources.
     As noted above, however, CDD/CDF risks dominate those attributable  to
other pollutants.  The conclusions about the categories of sources
contributing the most to risk, therefore, reflect assumptions about CDD/CDF
emission factors for these categories of sources.  CDD/CDF emission estimates
from mass-burn facilities without heat recovery were based on tests  from only
one facility, the Philadelphia-NW facility.  It  is impossible to determine
                                       91

-------
whether emissions fr- this facility are representative of those from other
such facilities.  Facilities without heat recovery, are generally older than
facilities with heat recovery, so there may be a real basis for the difference
in the estimated emissions.
     Similarly, the incidence estimates for existing mass-burn facilities is
influenced by the emission levels found at the Hampton, VA facility, which are
much higher than those found at other mass-burn facilities with heat recovery.
Without further tests, one cannot ...tersrine the extent to which other
facilities may have emissions as high as Hampton's.  As noted above, the
emissions from Hampton were excluded in calculating the average emission
factor for planned facilities because the known operational problems at
Hampton make it non-representative of planned facilities.
     Finally, the risk attributable to planned RDF facilities is influenced by
the inclusion of emission data from the SWARU facility (Hamilton, Ontario).
SWARU's emissions are significantly higher than those of other RDF facilitiesr
and SWARU had known operational problems at the time the tests were performed
(which modifications have recently attempted to correct).  There are
insufficient emission data for RDF facilities, however, to determine whether
these known problems with SWARU make its emission data unsuitable for use in
estimating emissions from new RDF facilities.  To reflect the knowledge of the
problems encountered at SWARU, the emission factor for SWARU used in
estimating emissions from new facilities was adjusted based on engineering
judgment,  to reflect the expected improvements through recent modifications.

5.1.2.3  Non-carcinogenic Effects.  The EPA also evaluated the potential
adverse, but non-carcinogenic, health effects associated with inhalation of
lead and mercury emissions from municipal waste combustors.  Comparisons were
made between the predicted maximum modeled ambient air concentrations and the
existing ambient air quality standard for lead.  Comparisons were also made
with a guideline for long-term ambient levels of mercury developed in setting
the national emission standards for mercury (Review of National Emission
Standards for Mercury, OAQPS, EPA-450/3-84-014b).  The modeling results
predicted no long-term concentrations above the ambient lead standard of
1.5 ug/m .  Similarly, modeling predicted no long-term concentrations of
mercury in excess of the guideline of 1 ug/m  under baseline conditions.
                                       92

-------
5.1.3  Indirect Exposure
     The indirect exposure analysis was designed to test the hypothesis of
whether indirect exposure routes could contribute significantly to the total
exposure to municipal waste combustion emissions.  The analysis evaluated both
cancer and non-cancer risk.  Cancer risks are estimated from the combination
of exposure and carcinogenic potency factors.  For non-carcinogens, exposured
are compared to the threshold levels corresponding to "Risk Reference Doses"
(RfDs).  RfDs are based on thresholds for effects and have uncertainty factors
included.  The indirect exposure analysis complements the traditional direct
exposure analysis by adding consideration of ingestion and dermal contact of
deposited air emissions.
     Several important notes should be made about the indirect exposure
analysis.  First, the methodology for modeling Indirect exposure to pollutants
emitted to the atmosphere has been reviewed by the Science Advisory Board.  At
this time, however, the Board's comments on the methodology have not been
fully incorporated.  Furthermore, chemical fate parameter data selected for
use in the model were found in the published literature, but they have not
been peer reviewed for this use.  Because of the preliminary nature of the
methodology and assumptions, the EPA feels that the resits cannot be
interpretated quantitatively at this time.
     Perhaps most critically, because the objective of the analysis was to
determine whether indirect exposures could contribute significantly to the
total  exposure due to municipal waste combustors, the analysis used
conservative, potentially worst-case, assumptions about the individuals to be
studied.   It was Impossible to model every possible combination of variables
in estimating exposure due to Indirect routes, so the analysis sought that set
of parameters that defined the worst, but still plausible exposure case.  The
analysis looked at a hypothetical farm family that obtained most of their food
supply from the area of maximum deposition of pollutants emitted from the
stacks of municipal waste combustors, and whose children ingested 0.5 grams of
dirt per day.  This family was assumed to live just outside the estimated
boundary (200 meters, or about one-tenth of a mile) of the modeled combustion
facility.  The preliminary conclusions must be interpreted in  light of this
worst-case scenario.  The general population exposure would be expected  to be
less,  probably significantly less.
                                       93

-------
     Subject to the above assumptions and jncertainties, the preliminary
analysis indicates that indirect exposure may'be comparable to direct
inhalation for some environmentally persistent organic carcinogens.   Indirect
exposures to lead and mercury also appear to warrant further analysis.   As
noted above, these conclusions may si«ply be reflective of the conservatism of
the exposure scenario.
     The preliminary analysis also served to indicate that indirect exposures
to some pollutants were not of significant concern.  The analysis found that
indirect exposure to nickel, chromium (+6),  beryllium, and formaldehyde would
not approach reference levels under the scenarios and time frames modeled.
     Analysis of the indirect exposure routes and further development of the
data and methodology are continuing.  This additional work will be necessary
before the methodology can be used with confidence to evaluate risks from
indirect exposure.

5.2  ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS

     Among the pollutants found in stack gases from municipal waste combustors
are acid gases, the major acid specie of concern being  hydrochloric acid, HC1.
Short-term and long-term modeled concentrations of HC1  surrounding existing
and projected sources are shown in Table 5-7.  Emissions factors used to
estimate HC1 emissions from municipal waste combustors were calculated from
the data contained in "Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Emission Data Base
for Municipal Waste Combustors."    The  average of emissions values reported
were used for annual average predictions.  To estimate  long term ambient HC1
concentrations around municipal waste combustors, the Human Exposure Model was
run for all existing units and for the model units used to represent the
planned population.  Maximum emission values were used  for the short-term
modeling.  Since the  emissions data reported are averages over several hours
and several test runs, the maximum value is a conservative choice for a
short-term emission factor.  The resulting ranges of maximum ambient
concentrations are shown in Table 5-7.
     The estimated ambient concentrations were then compared to a level
                                             3 34
associated with corrosion of metals, 3.0 ug/m ,   and to an 8-hour threshold
                                       94

-------
                TABLE 5-7.  PROJECTED AMBIENT HC1  C'(NCENTRATIONS
                    CONTRIBUTED BY MUNICIPAL WASTE COMBUSTORS
SOURCES
CONTROL
 LEVEL
TOTAL ANNUAL
 EMISSIONS
    (Mg)
   RANGE OF
   PREDICTED
ANNUAL AVERAGE
    MAXIMUM
     CONC,
    (ug/ra3)
RANGE OF
PREDICTED
 1-HOUR
 MAXIMUM
  CONC.
 (ug/nT)
            Baseline
               44,900
                   .1-68
                      64 - 2,500
EXISTING
 SOURCES
            Controlled
                4,490
                   .01 - 7
                       6  - 250
PROJECTED
 SOURCES
            Baseline
            Controlled
              194,400
               19,400
                    .7 -
                    .07  - 9
                      110  -  170
                       11  -  17
                                        95

-------
limit val-ie (TLV) for workers, 7000 ug/m .     The comparisons s.iowed that
short-term (1-r  T) maximum concentrations  do' not exceed the TLV,  but the
majority of the existing municipal waste combustors, under the baseline
scenario, would be expected to exceed the materials damage level.   The
modeling results for the projected facilities under the baseline scenario •
showed that short-term concentrations may exceed the 3.0 ug/m  level for the
larger mass burn and RDF units and for all  sizes of modular units, depending
on location and meteorological data.

5.3  POSSIBLE REDUCTIONS IN IMPACTS

     Reductions in predicted carcinogenic health risks and in concentrations
of hydrochloric acid achievable through uniform application of dry scrubbers
combined with particulate control devices is summarized in Table 5-8.  As the
table shows, maximum individual lifetime risk is predicted to be reduced by an
order of magnitude, and annual incidence is predicted to be reduced
substantially.  Reductions of approximately 90 percent can also be seen  in
predicted hydrochloric acid concentrations.
     Finally, health risk through indirect exposure routes would also be
expected to be reduced; although, the extent of the potential reduction  cannot
be reliably estimated at this time.
     As noted in Chapter 4, additional reductions in organic emissions may be
achievable through combustion optimization.  At this time there is
insufficient information to determine the expected reduction in emissions and
health risk achievable through this approach.

5.4  COSTS

     The capital and annualized operating costs associated with controlling
municipal waste combustor emissions have been estimated as described  in  the
volume titled "Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Costs of Flue Gas Cleaning
Technologies."    Tabular summaries of capital costs and annualized operating
costs for new and existing units  are  included in this volume  in Appendix E.
                                       96

-------
                                TABLE 5-8.   POSSIBLE  REDUCTIONS OF HEALTH RISK AND HC1 CONCENTRATIONS
                                                         FROM DIRECT EMISSION PATHWAYS
                                                                        st Ing Sourc
                                                                                                             Projected So..rr««
                                                         Mass Burn          ROf         Modular       Mass Burn     RDF         Modular
                           Baseline Estleated Cancer         1-34         0.3  -  2.7     0.01 - 0.02     0.6-7       1-14     0.05 - 0.*
                             Incidence*

                           Reduction Achievable Under      0.6 - 32       0.3  -  2.5     0.01 - 0.02     0.4 - 6      0.9 - 13     0.04 - 0.8
                             Controlled Scenario*
                           Baseline Estimated            10-< - 10~3    10'5  -  10~3    10"* -  10~*   W6 -  10~5   10~5 - lo~*   10~* -  10~5
-*<                          MaxlHM Individual
                            Ltfettew Risk

                           Reduction Achievable Under         1              1              1             11            1
                            Controlled Scenario (orders
                            of Magnitude)


                           Baseline Estimated                          0.1  - 68                                 0.7  - M
                            MaxlMW Long-Tera HC1
                            Concentration (ug/*3)

                           Reductions Achievable Under
                            Controlled Scenario                         0.09 - 61                                0.6  - 79

                           *Rounded to precision necessary to Illustrate potential reduction  In annual  Incidence.

-------
     A model plant approach was -tsed in the sizing and costing of the emission
control systems.  Due to differences   . the waste feed characteristics,
combustion parameters, and emissions, separate cost estimates were required
for mass burning, modular, and refuse-derived fuel (RDF) combustors.  Control
equipment systems for which costs were evaluated included ESPs, spray
dryer/ESPs, and spray dryer/fabric filters.
     Capital and annualized operating costs were developed in August 1986
dollars using the cost information received from a number of air pollution
control equipment manufacturers for various flue gas flow rates and design
capacities.  Capital cost estimates were developed for 25 percent excess
combustor capacity and were increased by an additional 20 percent to account
for contingencies.  They include the cost of the control system and auxiliary
equipment.(i.e., ductwork and I.D. fan).  In addition, a credit was included
in the calculations of the capital costs for those control systems which
include spray dryers to account for the reduction in capital cost for a stack.
that does not require acid-resistant lining.
     The increase in capital cost for control equipment at new facilities with
the addition of spray drying ranges from 50 to 500 percent.  The lower end of
the range is for the mass burn and RDF model facilities while the higher value
is for modular facilities.  Spray dryer/fabric filter systems require 0.5 to
5.5 percent less capital than spray dryer/ESP systems for 1,000 ton per day
and larger mass burn and RDF model facility sizes at the 0.03 gr/dscf
particulate matter emission level; the savings become 5 to 8 percent at the
0.01 gr/dscf level.  For the modular model facilities, spray dryer/fabric
filter systems require an additional 30 percent of capital as compared to a
similarly designed spray dryer/ESP system.
     Annualized operating cost estimates for control equipment at new
facilities incorporate assumptions of 8,000 operating hours per year, 20 years
of equipment life for ESPs, and 15 years of equipment life for spray dryers
combined with fabric filters and for spray dryers combined with ESPs.
Maintenance costs were assumed to be 2 percent of the total capital cost, the
waste disposal cost was assumed to be $15/ton, and taxes and insurance were
estimated to be 4 percent of the total capital cost.
                                       98

-------
     Indirect operating costs (i.e.,  primarily repayment  of capital)  are more
significant than direct operating costs in eath  c the annualized operating
cost estimates for new facilities.  Indirect coi-s represent from 60  to 80
percent of the total annualized cost of operating the emission control  systems
for new mass burn and modular facilities.   The Indirect operating costs are
slightly lower (55 to 70 percent of the total  annualized  operating cost) for
the RDF facilities.
     The waste disposal cost is the major component of the direct operating
costs.  Waste disposal costs represent from 25 ta 40 percent of the total
direct cost of particulate matter emission control systems (ESPs) for mass
burn facilities.  Waste disposal cost for particulate matter control  only for
RDF facilities is 50 to 60 percent of the direct operating costs.  The waste
disposal cost associated with spray dryer/ESP and spray dryer/fabric filter
systems are 15 to 30 percent for mass burn facilities and approximately 40
percent for RDF facilities.  The waste disposal cost is insignificant for
modular facilities due to the small quantities of particulate matter
generated.  Obviously, these control costs depend to a large extent on
landfill costs.
     Figures 5-1 through 5-3 present the annualized operating cost estimates
for the emission control systems for new model plants in terms of dollars per
ton of refuse burned.  All figures indicate that the relative costs of
operating the emission control systems decrease as the facility sizes
increase.  Also, as the particulate matter emission control levels become more
stringent, the annualized operating costs increase.  The additional cost of
spray drying compared to PM control alone is $4 to $9 per ton of waste burned
for mass burn facilities.  For the RDF model plants, the addition of spray
dryers accounts for an additional $4 to $5 per ton.  The corresponding cost
for the model modular facilities is $5 to $12 per ton of waste burned.
     The spray dryer/ESP system is generally slightly more costly to operate
than the spray dryer/fabric filter system, based on the information presented
in Figures 5-1, 5-2, and 5-3.  The exceptions are mass burn model plants at
the 0.03 gr/dscf outlet particulate matter loading and the modular model
plants.
                                       99

-------
15-
1 12-

"Z
I 9-
— 6-
= 3-

1
s
fe
s
s
s
I
Is

I
c
^
$

^ c

s
s
V
s
i
>
1
•> 1 $
1
i


1
n
s
s fTP
Ij
: • :
r


| ESP
Q SD/ESP

^3 '•'•

Hi
lil

^ '" v^ "^
•
^\ 8000 hrs/yr operation
August 1986 dollars
Des gn Capacity (tpd)/Outlet Loading (gr/dscf)
Figure 5-1. Annualized Operating Cost Estimates for
Model Mass Burning Facilities

16-

u-
•o
2 12-
c
J 10-
 I
N
S

S
5
^
-i
S

p
J
I
r*
f

• r
i
a


i




Ncf>v <$ ' fi'

| ESP
Q SD/ESP

S SD/FF


J
3

O^ 8000 hrs/yr operation
August 1986 dollars
Des gn Capacity (tpd)/Outlet Loading (gr/dscf)
Figure 5-2. Annualized Operating Cost Estimates for
Model Modular Combustor Facilities

10-
•o a-
0
u?
! 4.
o
O
5 2-
0-




A
I
^

^


I
1,
«_

1

N^ -^
| ESP
-i Q SD/ESP
?
1
: ^ SD/FF
^N 8000 hrs/yr operation
August 1986 dollars
Design Capacity (tpd)/Outlet Loading (gr/dscf)
Figure 5-3. Annualized Operating Cost Estimates for
Model Refuse-Derived Fuel Burning Facilities
                                    o
                                    oo
100

-------
     Capital cost estimates for control  equipment at existing n> ncipal  waste
combustion facilities must take into account the additional  expense
retrofitting additional control equipment into an existing control  system.
For example, the capital cost for a spray dryer/ESP system at an existing
massburn or RDF facility with a highly efficient ESP currently in place  would
be estimated on the basis of the spray dryer cost times a retrofit factor
of 1.4.  Similarly, the retrofit factor for estimating the cost of a spray
drver/fabric filter at an existing massburn or RDF facility with a wet
scrubber or a less efficient ESP in place would be 1.8.  Finally, the capital
cost of retrofit combustion improvements at an existing facility is estimated
to be $6.5 million per 1000 tons per day capacity.  Operating costs or savings
can not be determined on a general basis.  These retrofit factors are based on
extremely limited data and are highly uncertain, especially in view of the
site-specific nature of retrofits.
     The emission control systems costed for existing municipal waste
combustion facilities were designed to provide particulate matter control only
or both acid gas and particulate matter control.  For existing mass burn and
RDF facilities the control systems evaluated included a spray dryer system
retrofit to facilities with a highly efficient ESP in place and a spray
dryer/fabric filter system retrofit to facilities with a wet scrubber or less
efficient ESP currently in place.  The majority of existing modular facilities
are uncontrolled.  Therefore, ESPs and spray dryer combined with ESPs were
evaluated for modular facilities.
     The cost for modification of one existing combustor and retrofit of a new
particulate matter control device at Quebec City was slightly less than
$1.5 million.  This cost included a computerized process control system
designed to operate four combustors at the facility.

5.5  COST/RISK ANALYSIS

     The previous discussion has presented the health risk estimates  expected
from municipal waste combustors under two different control  scenarios and
reductions in risk that might be achieved through uniform application of
alkaline scrubbers combined with particulate matter emissions control.  This
                                       101

-------
was followed by an analysis of monetary costs of the two levels of control: 1)
ESPs and 2) spray dryers combined with ESP or fabric filter particulate
controls.
     This section seeks to weigh costs and risk reductions and other benefits
achievable.  Table 5-9 is a direct comparison of the incremental cost of the
stringent control case with cancer risk due to direct inhalation that could be
reduced through application of stringent control measures, both calculated for
the entire U.S.
                                  ^-*-
     Direct inhalation cancer risk reduction is one of several benefits that
would accrue through the uniform addition of alkaline scrubbers to the
baseline particulate matter control technology.  Emissions to the air of HC1,
particulate matter, and volatile organic compounds (VOC) would also be
reduced.  Furthermore, exposure through indirect routes would also be reduced,
including exposure to non-carcinogens.  Although these additional benefits are
not accounted for quantitatively in the cost/risk comparison quotients
presented in Table 5-9, they are, nonetheless, real benefits which must be
considered.
                                       102

-------
                                  TABLE  5-9.   INCREMENTAL  COST/RISK  COMPARISON
                                        Mass Burn
           EXISTING SOURCES

                RDF
                                                                    Modular
                                                                                                      PROJECTED  SOURCES
                                          Mass Burn
                                                                                                   RDF
                                                                                                              Modular
                                                                                                                            TOTAL
DIRECT INHALATION EXPOSURE:

  Baseline Cancer Incidence  (annual)

  Incidence Reduction Obtainable
   Through Controlled Scenario

  Maximum Individual  Lifetime Risk
  (baseline scenario)
   1-34
0.3 - 2.7    0.01 - .02
  0.8 - 32    0.3 - 2.5    0.01 - .02
                                          0 .6 -  7
                            0.4 - 6
                                            1 - 14
                            0.9 - 13
                                          0.05 - 0.9
0.04 - 0.9
                                                                                    1.7 - 31
                                                                                    1.3 - 29
10"4 - 10"3    10"5 - 10"3  10"6 - 10"4   10"6 - 10"5     10~5 - 10"4   10"6 - 10"5    10"6 - 10"4
INCREMENTAL COST OF CONTROL:
  (•II lion S)
  65 - 127
  29-45
4.6 - 23
                                                                                    201
                                                            62
                                                                                                                  17
                                                                                                                              260
COST EFFECTIVENESS
  (nillion $/cancer case avoided)
 2.7 -  160
  11 - 150    230-2300
                                         34  -  503
                             4.8 - 69
                                                                                                              19 - 425
                                                                                  9.7 -215
'Rounded to precision necessary  to  facilitate cost/risk comparison.
 Does not consider benefits resulting from reduced emissions of mercury, HC1, partlculate matter,  or  volatile organic compounds;  nor
 reduction In potential  Indirect exposure.
""Difference between annual Ized cost of 2 control scenarios.

-------
                    6.  SAMPLING, ANALYSIS AND MONITORING*

     One of the most rapidly developing areas within the overall subject of
municipal waste combustion  is sampling, analysis, and monitoring of municipal
waste combustor emissions and waste streams.  In the analytical chemistry
field alone, the state of the art has moved rapidly from semi-quantitative for
selected isomers of CDD and CDF  in the late 1970s to quantitative
determination of all CDD and CDF isomers today.  In this section a brief
summary of sampling, analytical  and monitoring methods is offered.  More
detail may be found in "Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Sampling and
                                        32
Analysis of Municipal Waste Combustors."

6.1  SAMPLING

     Stack testing at municipal  waste combustors has been carried out for a
variety of air pollutants 1n several categories, including:

     o    Criteria pollutants (particulate matter, CO, SO , NO  , lead)
     o    Acid gases (HC1, HF)
     o    Metals (Cr, Cd, As, Hg, Ni, Be, etc.)
     o    Organics (CDD, CDF, and others)

Characterization and leachate testing has also been carried out for ash
residues.
     For both flue gas and bottom ash sampling a difficulty arises in
obtaining representative samples.  For example, flue gas sampling may be
complicated by uneven flow conditions and by high particulate matter and acid
gas loadings that clog or corrode conventional sampling equipment.
Other problems may be encountered in sampling bottom ash which may include
bulky items, such as metal containers.
*Information presented in this section is summarized from Reference 32,
 Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Sampling and Analysis of Municipal Waste
 Combustors.
                                       104

-------
     Table 6-1 lists EPA-approved stack sampling methods  for various
pollutants.  Most of these methods have been subjected to extensive
development and validation procedures.   Moreover, a number of these methods
have been employed in recent municipal  waste combustion sampling and  analysis
programs.
     The EPA Method 5 type train has been the principal method for stack
sampling of criteria pollutants, acid gases, metals, and semi-volatile
organics, including COD, CDF, and PAH,  chlorobenzenes and chlorophenols.  The
Modified Method 5 train incorporates a condenser section and a module filled
with solid sorbent between the exit of the filter and the entrance to the
first impinger.  It should be noted that testing is underway to verify
recoveries of organic compounds using this modified train.  New developments
are occurring rapidly and should be monitored closely.
     The number of sampling trains and sample runs required for stack sampling
of a municipal waste combustor depends on the list of pollutants specified foe
quantification and the accuracy and precision with which concentrations must
be measured.  Quantitative results for an extensive list of pollutants may
require multiple determinations of the same chemical specie and, generally
speaking, no more than 2 to 3 species can be determined from one train.  The
situation is further complicated by physical limitations due to restricted
space in the stack sampling area and the number of sampling ports available in
one plane.  Even if ports are available, the logistics of running more than
two trains can be complicated.  These physical limitations limit the number of
trains that can be run simultaneously.   For example, for a recent EPA test of
a municipal waste combustor, stack gases were to be sampled by manual methods
in three separate runs for CDD/CDF, HC1, Pb, Cd, Cr, Ni, and particulate
matter.  SO- and 02 were measured with continuous emissions monitors.
Sampling for this list of pollutants required four separate trains.  For
statistically significant data at least triplicate measurements per species
were required, resulting in a total of 12 separate runs.  The site specific
considerations of a circular duct with two sampling ports and an actual
sampling time of 4 to 6 hours for each run, based on expected concentrations
in the stack, restricted the test program to 2 runs a  day for a total of  six
sampling days.
                                        105

-------
                                  TABLE 6-1.  STACK (FLUE GAS) SAMPLING METHODS
    Pollutant
               Principle
           Comment
                                                                                                 Reference
Criteria and Conventional Parameters
Participate
Sulfur
Oxides
Carbon
Monoxide
Nitrogen
Oxides
Isok1net1c collection of a 1 hr. sample
on glass fiber filter at 120± 14°C.
Train Includes:  T-controlled probe*
optional cyclones* heated filter*
1mp1ngers» flow control and gas volume
metering system.

Visual determination of opacity

Instrumental measurement of opacity
(optical density)

Collection In Isopropanol (SO-) and
hydrogen peroxide (S0~) Implngers of
M5-type train.

Integrated gas bag or direct Interface
via air-cooled condenser.
Collection In evacuated flask
containing sulfurlc acid and hydrogen
peroxide.
Designed to meet 0.08 gr/SCF
standard.  Probably valid
down to 0.01 gr/SCF.
 EPA Meth. 5
Not reliable for quantifica-
tion at 0.03 gr/SCR or below.

Low ppm to percent
Water vapor* carbon dioxide
are Interferences; need
silica gel* ascarlte traps to
remove.
20-1000 ppm

Grab sample (not
time-Integrated)
ppm levels
Does not measure NO
                                                                                                EPA Meth.  9
EPA Meth. 6,8
EPA Meth. 10
EPA Meth.  7,7A

-------
                           TABLE 6-1.  STACK  (FLUE GAS) SAMPLING METHODS (Continued)
      Pollutant
               Principle
           Comment
                                   Reference
  Hydrochloric
  Add

  Hydrogen
  Fluoride
Collection In aqueous NaOH Implngers In
M5-type train.

Collection on paper or membrane (not;
glass fiber) filter and aqueous
Implngers In M5-type train.
ppm to percent range.
Low ppm range.
                                     (18)


                                 EPA Meth.  13B
  Trace Metals

  General


i—i
2 Lead
MS or SASS train* glass fiber filter
and nitric acid or ammonium persulfate
Implngers

Collection on glass fiber filter and
nitric acid Implngers In M5-type train.
ppb to ppm levels
j _    /\ "»f~ »*J
rr~ *•— rr—
Is  _ 0.75
of stack gas
                                      (18)
                                 EPA Meth.  12
  Mercury



  Arsenic


  Beryllium
Collection  In Iodine monochlorlde or
acidic permanganate Implngers In
M5-type train.

Collection  on glass fiber filter and
aqueous Implngers In MS-type train.

Collection  on mllllpore AA filter and
aqueous Implngers 1n MS-type train.
Probe must be glass- or
quartz-lined.
ppm levels. Other reagents
also possible.
Probe must be glass or
quartz-11ned.
                                 EPA  Meth.  101



                                 EPA  Meth.  108


                                 EPA  Meth.  104

-------
                          TABLE  6-1.   STACK  (FLUE GAS)  SAMPLING METHODS  (Continued)
        Pollutant
               Principle
                                                     Comment
                                                                                                    Reference
    Trace Organics

    Specific Volatile
    organIcs
Collection on Tenax-GC
1 LPM for 20 minutes.
                        and charcoal  at
    Semi-volatile       MS train modified  to  Include XAD-2 trap
    organ1cs,  Including for organic collection  between  filter
    dloxlns*  furans     and Implngers.

                        5-fold scale up  of MM5  system.
ppb-ppm 1evels;mult1ple
species

ppb-ppm levels; multiple
species
                                          sub-ppb levels for
                                          dloxlns/furans If dedicated
                                          sample
VOST


 MM5




SASS
£   Vinyl  chloride
00
    Formaldehyde
Integrated gas bag
                                          0.1-50 ppm
Collection on DNPH-coated so r bent or In   ppm levels
aqueous DNPH Implngers.
                                 EPA Meth.  106
   Gaseous Hydro-
   carbons*  total

   Gaseous Hydro-
   carbons*  total
Integrated bag sample or direct
Interface

Evacuated stainless steel or aluminum
tank behind chilled condensate trap.
                                          ppm levels
                                 EPA Meth.  18


                                 EPA Meth.  25

-------
6.2  SAMPLE PREPARATION

     Stack samples taken from municipal waste combustors must be converted
into a matrix which is compatible with the analytical  methods needed.
Table 6-2 summarizes sample preparation procedures commonly used for municipal
waste combustor stack samples.
     In some cases (e.g., analysis of chloride in caustic impinger solutions)
the required sample preparation may be minimal.  In other case (e.g. analysis
of CDDs/CDFs in a Modified Method 5 stack gas sample)  preparation procedures
may be complex, requiring multiple extraction, concentration, and clean-up
steps.  (See Table 6-2.)
     The use of surrogate or standard addition methods is recommended as a
check on losses in sample preparation procedures.  Additions should be made
prior to sample preparation.

6.3  ANALYSIS

     Analytical methods are available for most chemical species likely to be
selected for quantification in emissions and effluents from municipal waste
combustors.  Table 6-3 shows analytical methods for organics and metals that
may be specified in testing requirements.

6.4  MONITORING

     Continuous monitoring at municipal waste combustors may be carried out
for:
                    temperature
                    opacity
                    CO, CO-, NO  , SOg concentration
                    HC1 concentration
                    total hydrocarbon concentration
                                        109

-------
                      TABLE 6-2.   SUMMARY OF SAMPLE  PREPARATION METHODS
   MSW
Combustor
 Stream
    Sample
     Type
    For
  Analysis
     of
Preparation
 Procedure
Stack Gas
Flue Gas
Bottom Ash and Fly Ash
MS, MMS or SASS

- probe wash
- filter

-probe wash
- filter
- Implnger
  solutions

- probe wash
- filter
- sorbent nodule
                           - condensate
                            VOST
                            - sorbent cartridges
- condensate



MS, MMS. SASS  '

VOST

Composite Grab
                                                       Partlculate
                                                       Metals
                                                       Semivolatile organIcs
                            Semivolatile
                            Volatile organIcs
                                                       Volatile organIcs
(same as  for stack gas)
                                                       Metals
                        Olsslcate to constant weight
                        Standard addition to split
                        samples.  Digest In acidic
                        oxidizing medium.
                        Add surrogate.  Soxhlet
                        extract with CH-Cl,.
                        Concentrate.  CTean-up
                        as necessary.

                        Add surrogate Liquid-liquid
                        extract at pH 2 and pH 11
                        with CHJC1-.  Concentrate.
                        Clean-up as necessary.
                        Spike with Internal standard.
                        Thermally desorb onto
                        analytical trap.  Desorb this
                        trap Into QC/MS.

                        Spike with Internal standard.
                        Purge onto analytical trap.
                        Desorb Into QC/MS.
                        Standard addition to split
                        samples.  Digest In acidic
                        medium In Parr bomb.

-------

-------
              TABLE 6-2.   SUMMARY  OF SAMPLE  PREPARATION  METHODS   (Continued)
HSM
Combustor
Stream
Sample
Type
For
Analysis
of
Preparation
Procedure
          Semi-volatile organlcs   Add  surrogate.  Soxhlet
               extract with CH-C1-.
               Concentrate.  Ciean-up as
               necessary.

Liquid Effluents    Composite Grab  Metals     Standard addition to split
               samples. Digest  In  acidic,
               oxidizing medium.

          Volatile Organlcs   Spike  with  Internal standard.
               Purge Into  analytical trap.
               Desorb Into GC/MS.

          Semi volatile Organlcs    Add  surrogate.  Liquid
               extract at  pH 2 and pH 11
               with CH-CK.  Concentrate.
               Clean-up as necessary.
Waste Feed     Composite Grab      Grind or mill to reduce
               particle size.  Take
               subsamples.

          Metals

          Semlvolatlle Organlcs    Same as for ash samples.

          Volatile9 Organlcs  Spike with Internal standard.
               Dilute In reagent water or
               polyethylene glycol In purge
               cell.   Purge, trap and desorb
               Into GC/MS.
Reference:   Miller,  N.C., R.W. James and W.R. Dlckson,  "Evaluated  Methodology for the Analysis of Residual
  Waste, "Report prepared under EPA Contract No. 68-02-1685 (December  1980).

-------
       TABLE 6-3.  ANALYSIS METHODS FOR TRACE ORGANICS  AND TRACE  METALS,
                      APPLICABLE TO MUNICIPAL WASTE  COMBUSTOR SAMPLES
          Species
          Method
Volatile Organics
Semivolatile Organics
Dioxins/Furans
Metals
Pack column GC/MS;  full  mass range
scanning 20-260 amu.

Capillary column GC/MS;  full mass
range scanning 40-500 amu.

Capillary column GC/MS;  selected ion
monitoring.

Flame (high levels) or furnace (low
levels) AAS.

Inductively coupled plasma
spectroscopy  (not for mercury, lead,
arsenic)
                                        112

-------
 Possible continuous monitoring devices for measuring these variables and gas
 concentrations  in municipal waste combustol" stack gases are summarized in
 Table 6-4.  Most pollutants are measured using an extractive method where the
 flue gas is withdrawn from the stack, transferred in a heat traced line to
 ground-level to an instrument trailer where the flue gas is conditioned'to
 remove moisture and then split for analysis by individual instruments.
 Particulates and temperature are two parameters which are usually measured
 in-situ.
     Continuous temperature measurements in combustor flue or stack gases are
 generally accomplished by using thermocouples.  The thermocouples must be
 shielded from radiation and protected against mechanical damage and corrosion
 by shielding inside a ceramic or metal protection tube or in a thermowell.
     Continuous monitoring of particulate material is generally accomplished
 using an in situ opacity meter.  Typically, these devices measure changes in
 optical density, 00 (percent transmittance), due to scattering and/or
 adsorption of light by particulates that are present, but their performance is
 affected by particle size distribution, the particulate  shape, particle
 composition, the system's temperature, the presence or absence of water
 droplets and the configuration of the stack.  Also, commercially available
 opacity meters  for stack monitoring may be uncertain by  a factor of two or
 more at particulate loadings below 0.03 gr/scf.  The lack of measurement
 specificity  of the instrument may render opacity monitors  less reliable  at
 municipal waste combustors than at other stationary sources, since waste  feed
 is highly variable, emission levels and compositions may vary significantly
 over time.
     SCL, NO  and HC1 concentrations can be measured using  instruments  based
 on several different principles.  Perhaps the most common detection principle
 used by continuous analyzers for stack gases is nondispersive infrared  (NOIR).
The principal advantages of NOIR based instrumentation  is the fact  that  it is
comparatively low in cost and that the technology is applicable to  a  wide
variety of pollutant species.  Also, instruments are relatively rugged  and
commercially available systems have been in use in field monitoring situations
for many years.  Problems that are associated with this  detection principal
are that other chemical species will absorb similar signature wavelengths of
                                       113

-------
   TABLE 6-4.   CONTINUOUS  MONITORING DEVICES FOR MUNICIPAL WASTE COMBUSTORS
     Temperature

     Opacity

     CO concentration


     Oxygen Concentration3
     S0« Concentration
     NOX Concentration*
     HC1 Concentration*
     Total Hydrocarbon Concentration*
Thermocouple

Opacity meter

Nondispersive Infrared
Polarographic

Polarographic
Electrocatalytic
Paramagnetic

Nondispersive Infrared
Nondispersive Ultraviolet
Polarographic

Nondispersive Infrared (NO)
Nondispersive Ultraviolet  (NO-)
Polarographic (NO)
Chemiluminscent

Nondispersive Infrared
Polarographic

Flame  ionization detector
Infrared detection
Catalytic  combustion  detector
Thermal conductivity  detector
aUsing an extractive method.
                                      114

-------
 infrared  light,  and  the  fact that optical systems needed to produce, transmit,
 and  receive  the  generated  infrared light may degrade due to contact with the
 sample  gas.
      Non-dispersive  ultraviolet analyzers have an important advantage over
 NDIR analyzers in that in  the NDUV analyzers water vapor is not an
 interference, as water does not absorb light in the ultraviolet region of the
 spectrum.  As is the case  with most extractive monitoring techniques, however,
 particulates which will  absorb or scatter generated light must be removed from
 the  sample gas stream.
      Numerous pollutant  species of potential interest at municipal waste
 combustors may be measured continuously using polarographic analyzers.  The
 polarographic analyzers  offer several advantages over other analyzers,
 including multi-pollutant  capability, fast response and simplicity of
 operation.  Principle disadvantages of this technique are that parts of the
 system must be replaced  or rejuvenated periodically, and the instrument must
 be frequently calibrated because the response deteriorates with use.
      Oxygen may be measured continuously using electrocatalytic analyzers and
 paramagnetic oxygen analyzers.  Chemiluminescence may be used for Inorganic
 pollutants, most notably nitrous oxide and ozone.
      Hydrocarbons may be monitored continuously with a flame ionization
 detector  (FID) or an infrared detection (IRD).  These detectors are relatively
 rugged and are quite sensitive to hydrocarbons.  Response factors are
 generally lower for organics that incorporate functional groups such as
 halides, hydroxyl, carbonyl, carboxylate.  The photoionization detector  (PID)
 is applicable to many organic categories, but experience with this detector as
 a continuous monitor is  more limited.  There is some evidence that maintenance
 is more of an issue with PID than with FID or IR Instruments.
      The electron capture  detector (ECD), which has high sensitivity  and
 selectivity for halogenated organics under laboratory conditions,  is  not
 rugged enough for routine  continuous monitoring in the field.  Also,  because
 these detectors contain  radioactive materials, NRC permitting regulations
govern their installation  and use.  The Hall detector, also specific  for
halogenated species, has been used at hazardous waste incineration  sites,  but
with difficulty.
                                        115

-------
     Catalytic combustion (hot wire) and thermal conductivity detectors are
also used for continuous monitoring of organics.  However, most commercially
available instruments based on these principles are generally designed for
gases and vapors.  A few low-level instruments suitable for municipal waste
combustor monitoring are available, however.
     Monitoring of specific organic compounds, rather than total organics,
require that chromatographic separation be accomplished prior to detection.
Instrumental monitors that interface a gas chrpmatograph to an FID or PID are
commercially available.  These operate in a semi-continuous basis, since the
chromatographic separation imposes a cycle time of (typically) 5-30 minutes
between measurements.  GC/FIO or GC/PID analyzers are vulnerable to false
positive interferences because the retention time is an imperfect means of
compound identification.
     Instruments based on more selective detection principles (e.g., GC/MS or
GC/FTIR) are beyond the present state-of-the-art for stack monitoring, except
in research installations.  Instruments using these detectors may be
sufficiently expensive to install and demanding to operate that they are not
suitable for routine continuous monitoring.  Most require more stringent
control of temperature, humidity and power supply than is likely to be
practiced at an operating municipal waste combustion plant.
     Continuous monitoring requires close attention to calibration and other
quality assurance measures.  These topics and additional  information on
monitoring of stack gases at municipal waste combustors are covered  in
"Municipal  Waste Combustion Study:  Sampling and Analysis of Municipal Waste
            32
Combustion."
                                        116

-------
                                 7.  REFERENCES

1.   Ballschmiter, et. al.   Automobile Exhauses Versus Municipal-Waste
     Incineration as Sources of the Polychloro-Dibenzodioxins (PCDD)  and
     Furans (PCDF) found in the environment.  Chemosphere Vol.  15,  No.  7.   pp.
     901-915.  1986.

2.   Ballschmiter, K. and H. Buchert.  Polychloratibenzofurans  (PCDF) and
     -Dioxins (PCDD) as Part of the General Pollution in Environmental  Samples
     of Urban Areas.  Chemosphere.  Vol 15., Nos. 9-12.  pp.  1923-1926."  1986.

3.   Ballschmiter, K. et. al.  C.  jrrence and Absence of
     Polychlorodibenzofurans ana   olychlorodibenzodioxins in Fly Ash from
     Municipal Incinerators.  Chemosphere.  Vol 12, No. 4/5.   pp. 584-594.
     1983.

4.   Barnes, Donald F. "Dioxins" Production from Combustion of Biomass and
     Waste.  Presented at Symposium on Energy from Biomass and Wastes VII.
     Lake Buena Vista, Florida.  January 24-18, 1983.

5.   The Trace Chemistries of Fire-A Source of and Routes for the Entry of
     Chlorinated Dioxins into the  Environment.  The Chlorinated Dioxin Task ^
     Force, The Michigan Division, Dow Chemical U.S.A., 1978.

6.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Municipal Waste Combustion Study:
     Characterization of the Municipal Waste Combustion Industry.
     EPA/530-SW-87-021h.  Prepared by Radian Corporation, June 1987.

7.   Franklin Associates, LTD.  Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in
     the United States, 1960 to 2000.  Final Report.  EPA Contract No.
     68-01-7037, WA 349.  July 11, 1986.

8.   New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection  - Division of Waste
     Management.  Progress in Waste Management • A Solution to New Jersey's
     Garbage Dilemma.  March 1986.

9.   Garbage:  A 413,000 Ton-A-Day-Dilemma, Inform Reports.  5(3):1-4.
     May-June 1985.

10.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Survey of selected firms in the
     Commercial Hazardous Waste Management  Industry:  1984 Update.   Final
     Report.  Prepared by ICF Incorporated.  September  30, 1985.

11.  Johnson, Charles A. and C.L.  Pettit.   The 1986 Tip Fee Survey Documenting
     Rising Prices.  Waste Age.  March 1987.  pp. 61-64.

12.  Hertzberg, Richard.  New Directions  in Solid Waste and Recycling.
     Biocycle.  Volume 27, January 1986.   pp.  22-26.

13.  Update:  Resource Recovery Activities  Report.  Waste Age.   16
     (11):99-183.  November 1985.


                                       117

-------
14.  Introduction to the ORFA Process and  ORFA  Corporation  of America.
     September 1986.  Cherry Hill,  NJ.

15.  Concord Scientific Corporation.   National  Incinerator  Testing  &
     Evaluation Program.  P.E.I.   Testing  Program.   Prepared for  Environmental
     Canada.  July 1985.

16.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Municipal  Waste Combustion  Study:
     Emissions Data Base for Municipal  Waste Combustors.   EPA/530-SW-87-021b.
     Prepared by Midwest Research Institute. June  1987.

     Seeker, W.R., W.S. Lanier, and M.P.  Heep.   Municipal  Waste Combustion
     Study:  Combustion Control of Organic Emissions.   EPA/530-SW-87-021c.
     June 1987.

18.  Acurex Corporation.  Assessment of Flue Gas Cleaning Technology for
     Municipal Waste Combustion.   Final Report.  EPA Contract  No. 68-02-3993,
     Work Assignment 11031.  Prepared for Environmental Protection Agency,
     Research Triangle Park, NC.   September 1986.

19.  Brna, Theodore G., and Charles B. Sedman.   Municipal Waste Combustion
     Study:  Flue Gas Cleaning Technology.  EPA/530-SW-87-021d.  U.S.
     Environmental Protection Agency, Research  Triangle Park,  NC.
     June 22, 1987.

20.  Kramlich, J.C., M.P. Heap, W.R. Seeker, and G.S. Samuel son.  Flame Mode
     Destruction of Hazardous Waste Compounds in 20th Symposium
     (International) on Combustion.

21.  Finkelstein, A. e_£ il.  Presentation by Environmental Canada at Municipal
     Solid Waste Incineration Research and Planning Meeting.   Durham, NC.
     December 9-11, 1986.

22.  Federal Register 48:48932 (October 21, 1983).   Standards of Performance
     for New Stationary Sources:  VOC Emissions from the SOCMI Air Oxidation
     Unit Processes.

23.  Trenholm, A., P. Gorman, and F. Jungclaus.  Performance Evaluation of
     Full-Scale Hazardous Waste Incinerators.  3 Volumes.  PB 85 1296528, PB
     85 129518, PB 85 129531.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
     Cincinnati, OH.  November 1984.

24.  Nielsen, K.K., J.T. Moellers and S. Rasmussen.  Reduction of Dioxins and
     Furans by Spray Dryer Absorption from  Incinerator Flue Gas.  Presented at
     Dioxin 85, Bayreuth, W. Germany.  September 19, 1985.

25.  Environment Canada.  The National Incinerator Testing and Evaluation
     Program.  Air Pollution Control Technology.  Summary  Report.  Report EPS
     3/UP/2.  September 1986.

26.  Moller, J. Thousig, K. Kragh Nielsen,  and E. Jons.  New Developments in
     Spray Dryer Absorption of Household  Incinerator Flue  Gas.   Presented at
     International Recycling Congress.  Berlin.  October 29-31,  1986.

                                       118

-------
27.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Municipal Waste Combustion Study:
     Assessment of Health Risks Associated with Municipal Waste Combustion
     Emissions.  EPA/530-SW-87-021g.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
     Research Triangle Park, NC.  June 1987.

28.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  User's Manual for the Human
     Exposure Model (HEM).  EPA-450/5-86-001.  Research Triangle Park, NC.
     June 1986.

29.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Industrial Source Complex (ISC)
     Dispersion Model User's Guide - Second Edition.  EPA-450/4-86-005a.
     Research Triangle Park, NC.  June 1986.

30.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Interim Procedures for Estimating
     Risks Associated with Exposures to Mixtures of Chlorinated Dibenzodioxins
     and -Dibenzofurans (CDD and CDF).  EPA-625/3-87-012, March 1987.

31.  Johnston, Michael.  Municipal Waste Combustion Study:  Costs of Flue Gas
     Cleaning Technologies.  EPA/530-SW-87-021e.  U.S. Environmental
     Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC.  June 1987.

32.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Municipal Waste Combustion  Study,:
     Sampling and Analysis of Municipal Waste Combustors.  EPA/530-SW-87-021f.
     Prepared by Arthur D. Little, Inc.  June 1987.

33.  Jamgochian, Carol L., Winton E. Kelly, and Donna J. Holder.  Revised
     Sampling and Analytical Plan for the Marion County  Solid Waste-To-Energy
     Facility Boiler Outlet.  Salem, Oregon.  EPA Contract No. 68-02-4338.
     Prepared for Environmental Protection, Research Triangle Park, NC.
     September 1986.

34.  Telecon.  Kellam, Bob, Section Chief.  U.S. Environmental Protection
     Agency, with Joanne Wiersma, Section Chief, Texas Air Control  Board.
     June 1987.

35.  American Conference of Government Industrial Hygienists.  Threshold  Limit
     Values and Biological Exposure Indices for 1986-1987.
     ISBN:0-936712-69-4.  Cincinnati, Ohio.

36.  Telecon.  Johnston, Mike,  EPA:OAQPS with Abe Finklestein, Environment
     Canada.  February 24, 1987.  Conversation about modifications  at Quebec
     City.

37.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Municipal Waste Combustion Study:
     Emissions Data Base for Municipal Waste Combustors.  Review  Draft.  EPA
     Contract No. 68-02-3817.   Prepared by Midwest  Research  Institute.
     January 1987.
                                        119

-------
                 APPENDIX A

DOCUMENTS PREPARED BY THE EPA'S ENVIRONMENTAL
         CRITERIA ASSESSMENT OFFICE

-------
                                  INTRODUCTION
      The  following documents were prepared hy the Office of Health  and
 Environmental  Assessment  for the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
.These documents  are of three types:  Air Quality Criteria Documents,  Health
 Assessment  Documents, and Health Issue Assessments.  Brief descriptions  of
 these document types follow:

          Air  Quality Criteria Documents (AQCD) are the primary
          source of information used by EPA decision makers in
          setting or revising the National Ambient Air Quality
          Criteria Standards.  These documents are evaluations of
          the  available scientific  literature on the health and
          welfare effects of criteria pollutants.  Criteria documents
          are  mandated by the Clean Air Act and are revised at
          5-year intervals, as directed by the Act.

          Health Assessment Documents (HAD) are comprehensive
          evaluations of  health data, including carcinogenicity,
          mutagenicity, and other effects due to exposure to particular
          chemicals or compounds.   These documents serve as the
          scientific data base for  establishing relationships
          between ambient air concentrations and potential health
          risks  and are used to determine the possible listing of
          hazardous air pollutants  under Sections 111 and 112 of
          the  Clean Air Act.

          Health Issue Assessments  (HIA) are an initial  review of
          the  scientific  literature concerning the most  important
          health effects  associated with a given chemical substance.
          These  assessments may be  published as is, or developed
          into a comprehensive health assessment document  if evidence
          suggests that significant health effects may be associated
          with environmental exposures to a specific substance.
                                      A-l

-------
ECAO DOCUMENTS
Document Ti tie
Acrolein
Acrylonitrile
Arsenic
Asbestos
Be ryl 1 i urn
Butadiene, 1,3-
CFC-113
Cadmium
Cadmium-Updated Mutagenicity
and Carcinogenicity
Assessment
Carbon Monoxide
Carbon Monoxide-Revised
Evaluation of Health
Effects
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chlorinated Benzenes
Chloroform
Chloroprene
Chromium
Copper
Coke Oven Emissions
Oibenzofurans
Hi ox ins
Epichlorohydrin
Ethyl ene Di chloride
Document
Type
HAD
HAD
HAD
H •*
HAD
HAD
HAD
HAD
HAD Addendum
AQCD
AQCD Addendum
HAD
HAD
HAD
HIA
HAD
HIA
HAD
HAD
HAD
HAD
HAD
EPA Number
(600/)*
8-86-014A
8-82-007F
8-83-021F
-. 8-84-003F
8-84-025B
8-85-004F
8-82-002F
8-81-023
8-83-025F
8-79-022
8-83-033F
8-82-001F
8-84-01 5F
8-84-004F
8-85-011F
8-83-014F
8-87-001F
8-82-003F
8-86 -01 8A
8-84-014F
8-83-032F
8-84-006F
NT IS Number
(PB-)
87-139960/AS
84-149152
84-190891
86-242864
86-183944
86-125507/AS
84-118843
82-115163
85-243533
81-244840
85-103471
85-124196
85-150332
86-105004
86-197662
85-115905
87-137733
84-170182
86-221256
86-122546
85-132363
86-122702
    A-2

-------
ECAO DOCUMENTS
Document Title
Ethyl ene Oxide
Hexachl orocycl opentadi ene
Hydrocarbons
Hydrogen Sul fide
Lead (4 volumes)
Manganese
Mercury
Methyl Chloroform
Methyl ene Chloride
Methyl ene Chloride-
Updated Carcinogenicity
Assessment
Nickel
Nitrogen Oxides
Ozone (5 volumes)
Polycyclic Organic Matter
Particulate Matter/
Sul fur Oxides
Particulate Matter/
Sulfur Oxides - Assessment
of Newly Available Health
Effects Information
Phenol
Phosgene
Propylene Oxide
TetrochI oroethyl ene
Document
Type
HAD
HAD
AQCD
HAD
AQCD
HAD
HIA
HAD
HAD
HAD Addendum
HAD
AQCD
AQCD
HAD
AQCD
AXD Addendum
HIA
HAD
HIA
HAD
EPA Number
(600/)*
8-84-009F
8-84-001F
8-81-022
8-86-026A
8-83-028F
8-83-013F
8-84-019F
8-82-003F
8-82-004F
8-82-004FF
8-83-012FF
8-82-026F
8-84-020F
9-79-008
8-82-029F
8-86-020A
8-86-003F
8-86-022A
8-86-00 7F
8-82-005F
NTIS Number
(PB-)
86-102597
85-124915
82-136516
87-117420
87-142378
84-229954
85-123925
84-183565
85-191559/AS
86-123742
86-23212
83-163337
87-142949
82-186792
84-156777
86-221249
86-178076
87-147039/AS
Not yet avail a
85-249704
   A-3

-------
                  AVAILABILITY OF ECAO DOCUMENTS (Continued)
 Document  Ti tie
Document
  Type
EPA Number
  (600/)*
NT IS Number
   (PB-)
TetrocM oroethyl ene-
  Updated Carcinogenicity
  Assessment

Toluene

Tn'chl oroethyl ene

Vinylidene Chloride
HAD Addendum

HAD

HAD

HAD
8-82-005FA

8-82-008F

8-82-006F

8-83-031F
86-174489

84-100056

85-249696

86-100641
* Key:
     A * First External Review Draft
     B * Second External Review Draft
     F * Final
     FA « Addendum Review Draft
     FF * Addendum Final
FOR INFORMATION ON DOCUMENT AVAILABILITY CONTACT:

NATIONAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION SERVICE
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
5285 PORT ROYAL ROAD
SPRINGFIELD, VIRGINIA  22161
703/487-4650

CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH INFORMATION
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
26 WEST ST. CLAIR STREET
CINCINNATI, OHIO  45268
513/569-7562  (FTS: 684-7562)
                                     A-4

-------
              APPENDIX B

LISTS OF EXISTING AND PLANNED MUNICIPAL
      WASTE COMBUSTION FACILITIES

-------
                                                       i-a
(C

i o -O»*XC      *   o o  9
3-1     — —    <     r-   .   
_ in     me    i     «   £     *•<      —•         e
a *      —          T^I»            =     —
6*     n tt          A^     IP        i^f*>^


                                        M     i

                                            s     *
                       SSfr
                                              I

                                               T(

                                               R
                                                  3
                  o

                  3
                     s
                     •M
                     5
                                                                                                            CD
                                                                                                ^J C
        fO N-   i— tarf    ^>    «—  »~
                                                                                                1=
                                                                                                            oo

                                                                                                            o
                                                                                                            3D
                                                                                                            O
                                                                                                            m
                                                                                                            •30
                                                                                                            m
                                                                                                            o

                                                                                                            CD
                                                                                                            -<

                                                                                                            OO
       O   00   X*
       ta»   m (T»   M* •_•


       3         22
                                oooo  ««
                                                   o o o o  oono   oo
                                                                                   o    o o
                                                                         33
                                5235
                                «A O O *A
                             5    --5255  555ft   25
                             o    -H o trt tA  tfl w» L« o   no
                                                  -t   -* -^
                                             -t     O -H
           ee
           ii
                                                   7>=
-------
 OJ

 c
 c
 o
o
cr

oo
UJ
0

a

«£

UJ
I—
CO

o
Lul
ac
UJ
o
OC
O

00
00
GO
   II
   *i
   £|
   H- Q

,^e-
              0.  u
                                       ,   «
                                       tn   m
U.   U.

O   O
^   H-


5   5
UJ   U

3   5

                                                                  •
                                                              O   "s.
                                                              H-   O
                                                              8  t
                                                                              5  8
                                                                              £  u
G
                                                                                        VI fcfl O trt trt < <
                                                                                        t t * t *~ * *
                                                                                        2 Z I— Z Z aJ uw
                                                                          <<>'«Qr^iAf!

                                                                                *
                                                       CM S   -«
                                                                  IMMJ.
                                                         «<  e
                                                         in  •
                                                        o
                                                  . —  <•>:
                  »C^~«CC»-
                  e — ££*5kM
                  •*-• oiuf^a*'
                  > ^ — «rf u •— .a *
                        ~    ** m   ow  «   •«•   w   •— wo>
                         • £C9£   U9  lfeC>lAC*«JCv(J9(
                        - £ 5 5 Ol   o«    >.oaxo»-^   J
                                                                           SI
                                                                               -
                                                                              ^^o,::
                                                                                a a. L. —
                                                                                         t
                                                                                     °
                                          5"3S — — u— «t.
                                          	 -z«o»ea:
                                                     B-2

-------
03
TABLE B-l.
LOCATION
CITY
C*nt«r
Palvstln*
Haxahachla
Ogo»n
Portsmouth
Norfolk (Navy Station)
Haapton
Harrlsonburg
Galax
Sale*
Nnport Ne»s (Ft. Eustls)
BclUngham
Balllnghaai
Sh«boygan
Haukcsna
Barron County
Madison
EXISTING FACILITIES ORDERED BY STATE AND
TOTAL

STATE TYPE RECOVERY
TX
TX
TX
UT
VA
VA
VA
VA
VA
VA
VA
HA
HA
HI
HI
HI
HI
MI/SA
MI/SA
MI/SA
MB/OF
MB/OF
MB/OF
MB/OF
MB/OF
MB/RC
MI/SA
MI/SA
MI/EA
MI/SA
MB/OF
MB/OF
MI/SA
RDf/C
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
t flf f
9 Ur i
COMBUST ORS
1
1
2
3
2
2
2
2
1
4
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
PLANT
*A0Af* I TV
,HrK 1 1 Y
(TPOI
36
28
50
450
160
360
200
100
56
100
35
100
100
240
175
80
400

TYPE OF
CONTROL (S)
NONE
HS
HS
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
ESP
BAG
NONE
NONE
NONE
NONE
HS
ESP
ESP
ESP/C
DESIGN TYPE (Continued)

STARTUP
DATE
1985
NA
1982
NA
1971
1967
1980
1982
NA
1970
1980
1986
1986
NA
1971
1986
1979

REFERENCES
STATE OF TEXAS

CITY CURRENTS 10/86





CITY CURRENTS 10/86




STATE OF WISCONSIN

STATE Of WISCONSIN
CITY CURRENTS 10/86
                                      KEY

                      COMBUSTOR TYPES:
                         MI/SA - MODULAR COMBUSTOR HITH STARVED AIR
                         MI/EA • MODULAR COMBUSTOR HITH EXCESS AIR (VICON)
                         ROf   • REFUSE DERIVED FUEL FIRED IN DEDICATED BOILER
                         ROF/C • REFUSE DERIVED FUEL/COAL COFIRING
                         MB/OF - MASS BURN HI TH OVERFEED STOKER
                         MB/RC - MASS BURN IN ROTARY COMBUSTOR

                      TYPES OF CONTROLS:
                           C   • CYCLONE
                           ESP - ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR
                           HS  • HET SCRUBBER
                           OS  - DRY SCRUBBER
                           VHS - VENTURI HET SCRUBBER
                           BAG * BAGHOUSE
                           EGB - ELECTROSTATIC GRAVEL BED

                           NA  • DATA NOT AVAILABLE OR TECHNOLOGY UNDECIDED

-------
TABLE B-2.  PLANNED  FACILITIES ORDERED BY STATE AND DESIGN TYPE
                              TOTAL
LOCATION
CITY
JUNEAU
HUNTSVIllE
FAYETTEVILLE
SAN DIEGO (SANDER)
DOWNEY
LOS ANGELES CO. (PUENTE HILLS E)
LOS ANGELES CO. (PUENTE HILLS H)
SAN MARCOS (SAN DIEGO CO.)
LOS ANGELES CO. ISPADRA)
CITY OF COMMERCE (LOS ANGELES CO.)
UK1AH
IRH1NDALE
V1SALIA
BRISBANE
SOUTH GATE (LOS ANGELES)
FRESNO COUNTY
SANTA CLARA
STANISLAUS COUNTY
GARDE NA
LONG BEACH. STAGE 1
LONG BEACH. STAGE II
LANCER (LOS ANGELES)
NILMINCTON
VENTURA COUNTY
SANGER
FREMONT '
PLEASANT ON
SANTA CRUZ
ALAMEDA
RIVERSIDE
LOS GATOS
SACRAMENTO COUNTY
CONCORD
REDWOOD (SAN FRANCISCO)
SAN BERNARDINO
M1LIIKEN LANDFILL
A2USA
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY (RICHMOND)
COMFTON
NEW MIL FORD
MIDDLE TOWN
BRIDGEPORT
WATERBURY
BRISTOL
PRESTON
HAUINGFORD
NEW HAVEN
DANPURY
STRATFORD

STATE
AK
AL
AR
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CT
CT
CT
CT
CT
CT
CT
PT
I* I
CT


TYPE
MI/SA
MB/OF
MB/OF
MB/OF
MB/OF
MB/OF
MB/OF
MB/OF
MB/OF
MB/OF
MB/OF
MB/OF
MB/OF
MB/OF
MB/OF
MB/OF
MB/OF
MB/OF
MB/OF
MB/OF
MB/OF
MB/OF
MB/RC
MB/RC
MB/RC
MI/EA
MI/SA
NA
NA
NA
RDF
RDF
RDF
ROF
RDF
RDF
RDF
ROF
RDF
MB/OF
MB/OF
MB/OF
MB/OF
MB/OF
MB/OF
MI/EA
MI/SA
NA
NA

1^ AT
nt ft 1
RECOVERY
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES

PI ANT
CAPACITY
(TPO)
70
690
ISO
2250
200
2000
2000
1672
1000
300
100
3000
350
1500
375
600
400
800
1200
920
1350
1600
2000
1000
500
480
100
175
1600
1500
200
700
900
3850
1600
1600
2000
900
1800
750
230
2250
360
650
600
420
450
450
360


STARTUP
DATE
NA
1989
NA
1989
NA
NA
NA
1989
NA
1987
1987
1989
1990
NA
1990
NA
NA
1989
1991
1988
NA
1989
1988
NA
1987
1989
NA
NA
1989
1990
HA
NA
1989
NA
1989
NA
1989
1989
NA
HA
1989
1988
1989
1988
1990
1988
1989
1990
1989


STATUS
CODE
3
4
3
2
3
2
2
4
1
4
2
3
1
1
1
3
3
4
3
4
3
3
4
0
2
4
2
1
2
1
5
1
1
3
3
2

0
4


CONTROL
STATUS
NA
NA
NA
HA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
HA
NA
HA
NA
NA
NA
HA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
HA
NA
HA
NA
NA
NA
NA
DS/BG
DS/BG
NA
DS/BG
NA
DS/BG
DS/BG
NA
NA


REFERENCES
McILVANE 5/86. HASTE AGE 11/86
CITY CURRENTS. 10/86
McILVANE 5/86, HASTE AGE 11/86
CI1Y CURRENTS 10/86
McILVANE 5/86
HASTE AGE
CHMB
CITY CURRENTS 10/86
CHMB
CITY CURRENTS 10/86
CITY CURRENTS 10/86
McILVANE 5/86
SCAMD SUBMITTAL

McILVANE 5/86
U.S. EPA
McILVANE 5/86
CITY CURRENTS 10/86
U.S. EPA
HASTE AGE
SCAMD SUBMITTAL
U.S. EPA
McILVANE 5/86
U.S. EPA
McILVANE 5/86
CITY CURRENTS 10/86
McILVANE 5/86
FRANKLIN
McILVANE 5/86
SCAMD SUBMITTAL
EPA REGION IV
SCAMD SUBMITTAL
CHMB
McILVANE 5/86, HASTE AGE 11/86
CHMB
McllVANE 5/86
HASTE AGE
HASTE AGE
HASTE TO ENERGY
McILVANE 5/86
CITY CURRENTS 10/86
EPA REGION VII SUBM1TTAL
CITY CURRENTS 10/86
SCAMO SUHMimi
CITY CURRENTS 10/86
McllVANE 5/86
FRANKLIN
CITY CURRENTS 10/86


-------
                                5-8
                                                                       03
                                                                       I
                                                                       ro
                 SSSf 555?
                                                                 3!
                                                                 r" i
                                                    mwTt\F»>^mrn
                                                   l
                                                                       00
                                                                 II
 I  S
                                                                        o
                                                                        o
                                           iwirffmW'fl^^'^t
   GO  O O
>  .  .

-4  90>
a-
                  — o  oo«*QO&o   eeo>>>>o>c
                    S  SS""$$?$   SSS      S S
                          mm    3                 5
                          ss    ?                 ?
                           9
I  is
«
i5
                                                                        3
                                                                        C
                                                                        ft
                                                                        Q.

-------
                  •o
                  <3J
                  O
                         g
                         *
                                                  8
                                        2    22   2  ?
                                         CD 00 00 CO « CO




                                         222222s
                  a

                  a

                  «c
                  U-
                  cc
 I-
 52
                                                    9  99999999  9  9
                            IM e o o o o
          8OpQ

          VQ^
                                                                         9  99999
S
                                                                           OOO«/tOOOOOO
                  i—*

                  O
                        I Ul

                        !?
                  «c
                  _j
                  o.
                  CVJ
                   I

                  CO
                  CD
§

I
                                                  t &
                                                'i^°5sc8
                                                : 3 i- r u S z
                                                i J J q u - >K x
                                               a.

                                              -5
                                                                         — t/»
                                                                         >• UJ

                                                                         £$
                                                                     : —  ** • «
                                                                 .
                                                                 O»-'
                                                                 O X -
                                                                         i ^ •    O ffl  VI :
                                                                         i _ O Z  v S •— x a. :
                                                                         : ? o O  < «j  Q I
          * r * ^ S z ~  «  5 c
       1 X CL | S o •
-------
c
o
 CM


 CO
              ecc
                                   sestt  ere  t
                                                            I

                                                            2
I!
                                          1

                                           X

                                           W
?* SsisiSS  3
O 141 0-- » B  B
1/1

O    ||

O    p v»


     (/>

!^    «§


S    S°



«    II
     (O
o
UJ    t
ty  _j H- r^ —
fj^  ^ Z O Q

      "~ '                                       «





     	                     !-^^^^^;^^v^^^vvv:^>^vv^v^v^vv>iv>^>^v>^




5    I    	      	«-„*„«.

u.    p   $ffiiijijjjf^§fijfiiff$stiiififzi;;555SSiiiii5iif

O    o
                -5
                      IP
                      I B v>
                                 -ii
                               I  >-  ^
                               >"***—  ]

                               fipl5i
                               3 S o z :
                                           t- a  >•
                                           32  5
                                         i  i
          j«^
          [ i a.
           O —
          )H»^
            Sio
            —
                       — Z O OC K I
            Ijg^ 3»^wiijiitm,j%
                              B-7

-------
                              TABLE  B-2.   PLANNED  FACILITIES  ORDERED BY STATE  AND DESIGN  TYPE  (Continued)
CD
 i
CD
LOCATION
CITY
CORPUS CHRIST I
GAL VEST ON
GRAND PRAIRIE (IRVING)
ALEXANDRIA/ ARLINGTON
FAIRFAX COUNTY
PETERSBURG
PORTSMOUTH
RUTLAND
LYNOONVILLE
SPOKANE COUNTY
SNOHOMISH COUNTY
SKAGET COUNTY
KING COUNTY
TACONA

STATE
n
TX
TX
VA
VA
VA
VA
VT
VT
MA
•A
HA
HA
HA
COMBUSTOR
TYPE
NA
MA
NA
MB/OF
NA
RDF
ROf/C
NI/EA
NA
MB/OF
MB/OF
MB/RC
NA
RDF
HEAT
RECOVERY
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
TOTAL
PLANT
CAPACITY STARTUP STATUS CONTROL
(TPO> DATE CODE STATUS
SSO NA
I NA NcILVANE 5/86,
200 1992 3 NA Nell VANE S/86,
700-800 NA
975 1967
3000 1990
2400 1986
2000 1967
240 1987
NA NcILVANE 5/86.
NA CITY CURRENTS
NA NcILVANE 5/86
NA CITY CURRENTS
NA CITY CURRENTS
ESP CITY CURRENTS
200 NA 3 NA NcILVANE 5/86,
REFERENCES
HASTE AGE
HASTE AGE
HASTE AGE
10/86

10/86
10/86
10/86
HASTE AGE

11/86
11/86
11/86





11/86
1000 1990 2 NA NcILVANE S/86
1500 1992
NA HASTE TO ENERGY 9/25/85
ISO 1988 2 NA HASTE AGE
2000 1993
1 NA EPA REGION X


500 1988 4 NA FRANKLIN
                                      KEY
                 COMBUSTOR TYPES)
                   Ml/SA   MODULAR CONBUSTOR HITH STARVED AIR
                   MI/EA   MODULAR COMBUSTOR HITH EXCESS AIR (VICON)
                   RDF     REFUSE DERIVED FUEL FIRED IN DEDICATED BOILER
                   RDF/C   REFUSE DERIVED FUEL/COAL COFIR1NG
                   MB/OF   MASS BURN HITH OVERFEED STOKER
                   MB/RC   MASS BURN IN ROTARY CONBUSTOR
                   NA      DATA NOT AVAILABLE OR TECHNOLOGY UNDECIDED

                 STATUS CODE:
                   0   STATUS UNKNOHN
                   1   EARLY PLANNING STAGES
                   2   PERMITTING STAGES
                   3   CONTRACT AHARDED
                   4   CONSTRUCTION UNDERHAY OR EXPECTED SOON
                   S   TESTING STAGES

                 CONTROL STATUS!
                   BH  - BAGHOUSE
                   S   - HATER SCRUBBER
                   ESP • ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR
                   AG  - ACID GAS CONROL
                   OS  • DRY SCRUBBER

-------
                                  APPENDIX C*

                    SUMMARY MATRICES OF EMISSIONS TEST DATA
*The information presented in this appendix is from Reference 16, Municipal
 Waste Combustion Study:  Emissions Data Base for Municipal Waste Combustors,

-------
TABLE C-l.  OVERVIEW OF EMISSION DATA  BASE
Faci 1 i ty name
Mass burn3
Waterwal ID
ESPC
Bal t (more
Braintree
Ch i cago
Hampton (1981)
Hampton (1982)
Hampton (1983)
Hampton (1984)
Peek ski II (4/85)
Tulsa (Unit 1)
Tulsa (Unit 2)
CYC/FF
Gal latin
ESP/WS
Kure
SD/ESP
Munich
CYC/DI/ESP/FF
Mai mo
WSH/DI/FF
Quebec
Quebec
Quebec
Quebec
Wurzburg
SO/FF
Marion County
Quebec
Quebec
Refractory
ESP
Philadelphia (NW1)
Philadelphia (NW2)
CYC/ESP
Washington, O.C.
CYC
Mayport
MS
Alexandria
N ! cos i a
SO/FF
Tsushima
EG8
Pittsfield
Starved air
No controls
Cattaraugus County
Dyersburg
N. Little Rock
Prince Edward Island
Prince Edward Island
Prince Edward Island
Prince Edward Island
ESP
Tuscaloosa
Test Cr i ter i a
condition pollutants



Norma 1 d
Normal
Normal
Normal
Normal
Normal
Normal
Normal
Normal
Normal

Normal

Normal

MSW only*

Normal

no*
125'
MOf
200f
Normal

Normal
1409
140 4 Rn


Normal
Normal

Normal
I
MSM/waste oil*

Normal
Normal

Normal
Experimental-!


Normal
Normal
Normal
Normal
Long1*
High1
Low1"

Normal



X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X

X

X

X

X
X
X
X
X

X
X
X


X
X



X




X




X
X
X
X
X
X

X
Acid
gases






X
X



X
X

X

X

X

X

X
X
X
X
X

X
X
X


X
X



X




X




X

X
X
X
X


Metals



X
X
X

X



X
X

X

X

X

X

X
X
X .
X
X

X
X
X





X



X
X

X




X
X
X
X
X
X

X
Organ ics





X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X









X
X
X
X -
X

X
X
X


X
X



X





X


X
X

X
X
X
X


                                                    (continued)

-------
                 TABLE C-l.   OVERVIEW  OF EMISSION DATA BASE  (Continued)
Fac i 1 i ty name
RDF f i red
ESP
Akron
Albany
Hami 1 ton-Wentworth
Hami 1 ton-Wentworth
Hami 1 ton-Wentworth
Hami 1 ton -Went worth
Hami I ton-Wentworth
Hami 1 ton-Wentworth
CYC/ESP
Wright Pat. AFB
Wright Pat. AFB
CYC/DI/ESP/FF
Mai mo
Test
condition


Normal
Normal
F/Nonen
F/Low back0
F/Backp
F/Back, low
front**
H/Noner
H/Low '-icks

Norma
Dense RDFr

ROFU
Cr i ter i a
pollutants


X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X




X
Acid
gases


X
X








X

X
Metals Organ ics


X x
X X
X
X
X
X
X
- <

X


X
?Type of incinerator design.
^"ype of furnace.
°Emission control device(s)  as follows:   CYC * Cyclone; Dl - dry sortaent injection; SO =
 spray dryer; EG8 * electrostatic granular  bed;  ESP  * electrostatic precipitator; FF * fabric
 .filter; WS » wet scrubber;  and WSH » water spray  humidifier.
 Unit operated under normal  conditions during tests.
*Unit burned MSM only during tests.
 Gases entering the fabric filter were at the temperature specified in *C. .
^Normal operations:  gases entering the fabric filter were at  140'C and normal lime feed ra*e
 was used.
"Sorbent recycle was used.  Gases entering  the fabric filter were at 140*C.
 '.Unit burned HSW and waste oil during tests.
rjUnit under normal conditions during experimental  test program.
 Unit operated under longer feed cycle to decrease demand on the tractor operator during
 tests.
 Unit operated with high secondary chamber  temperature during  tests.
mUnit operated with low secondary chamber temperatures during  tests.
nUnit operated under full load with no overfire  air.
°Unit operated under full load with only lower back  overfire air ports open.
pUnit operated under full load with both back overfire air ports open.
qUnit operated under full load with both back and  lower front  overfire air ports open.
rUnit operated under half load with no overfire  air.
'Unit operated under half load with only lower back  overfire air ports open.
 Unit burned densified RDF during tests.
uUnit burned RDF during tests.

-------
         •TABLE  C-2.   OVERVIEW OF  SUPPLEMENTARY  EMISSION  DATA  BASE
Fac iIi ty name
                                      Test condftion
                             Metals
             Organics
Mass burn
  WaterwaI I/ESP
    Avesto
    Iserlohn
    MVA Lausanne
    MVA Munich
    Montreal (1982)
    Montreal (1983)
    Quebec (1981)
    Umea (1984)
    Umea (1985)
    Zur i ch/Josephstrasse

  Waterwa11/ESP/DS
    Hamburg/StapeIfeId
    MVA-I  Borsigstrasse
    MVA-II  StelIinger M.

  Waterwa11/OS/ESP/FF
    Ma I mo

  Waterwall/DS/FF
    Avg Borsigstrasse

  Waterwa11
    Issy-les-Moulineaux
    Saint-ouen

  Ref ractory/SPRAY/ESP
    Toronto I
Normal
Normal
Normal
Normal
Normal
Normal
Normal
Normal
Normal
Normal
Normal
Normal
Normal
Normal
Normal
Normal
Normal
Normal
X
X
                 X
                 X
                 X
Refractory/ESP
Brasschaat
Hare I beke
L i nkop i ng
Stuttgart
Zaanstad
Refractory
Beveren
Milan 1
Milan II
Starved air
None
Lake COM! Chan
CS/ESP
Schio
Schio
Fluid bed
FF
Eskjo

Normal
Normal
Normal
Normal
Normal

Normal
Normal
Normal


Normal

Normal9
Unprocessed


Normal

X
X
X
X
X

X
X
X


X

X
X


X
aWaste separated to produce compost  is termed processed.  This is the normal  operating
 condition for this facility.

-------
        APPENDIX D





MUNICIPAL WASTE COMPOSITION

-------
                 TABLE D-l.   ASSUMED  MSW  COMPOSITION

Species
Carbon
Hydrogen
Sulfur
Nitrogen
Chlorine
Ash
Oxygen
Moisture
Weight Percent
26.73
3.60
0.12
0.17
0.12
22.38
19.74
27.14
Higher Heating Value
4500 Btu/lb.

-------
         APPENDIX E





EMISSION CONTROL COST TABLES

-------
            TABLE  E-l.
 SUMMARY  OF
SYSTEMS FOR
($l,OOOs  1n
                        ESTIMATED  CAPITAL  COSTS OF EMISSION  CONTROL
                        NEW MODEL  MUNICIPAL  WASTE  COMBUSTOR  FACILITIES6
                        August 1986  based  on  8,000 hrs/yr operation)
                    Mass burnlna Model facilities
                                                            Modular Model facilities
 PM emission
 level  *ft«r
  control.
 nr/dscf  at
  121 CO,
                                                                           Refusa-dar1ved fuel
                                                                                     LLLlfti -
  250 tod
 caoacttv
(Modal No.
1)
  1.000 tpd
   caoacttv
(Model No.  2)
  3,000 tpd
   caoacltv
(Model No. 3)
   100 tpd
   caoacttv
(Model No. 4)
            250 tpd
           caoacttv
         (Model No.
                                                   5)
                                                       400 tpd
                                                       capacity
                                                    (Model No. 6)
                                                                           l.SOO tpd
                                                                            capacity
                                                                          (Model No. 7)
  3.000 tpd
   capac 11 v
(Model No.8)
  0.03
  0.02
  0.01
Soray  Dryer/
£ SE-SjiiBiT
   0.03
   0.02
   0.01
Spray  Dryer/
1,549
1.951
2,252
4,108
4,589
4.668
    3,900
    4.693
    5,$21
    9.352
    10.246
    10.916
                  10.230
                  11,830
                  14.105
                  23.197
                  24.468
                  26.641
  341
  447
  487
1.426
1.516
1.564
                 695
                 645
                 929
               2.420
               2.526
               2,646
                                          1.020
                                          1.194
                                          I  114
                                          3.149
                                          3.469
                                          3,609
                                                                    6,919
                                                                    8.293
                                                                    9.193
                                                                   14,413
                                                                   15,972
                                                                   16.539
                                                                                             12.006
                                                                                             14.24S
                                                                                             15.881
                                                                                            25.91 7
                                                                                            27,423
                                                                                            28.069
0.03
0.02
0.01
4.242
4.242
4.421
8, 90S
6.905
9.463
21,691
21,691
23. 197
1,960
1,960
2,020
3.176
3.176
3.296
4,179
4.179
4.779
13.170
13,170
13.989
22.042
22,402
23. 119
*The caoltal cost estimates wara  develooed for control  systens at 125  percent of actual size and  Include  a 20 percent
 contlnoencv factor.
'Sprav  drver desloned  for 90 and  70 percent  control of HC1  and SO^.  respectively.

-------
       TABLE  E-2.
                      SUMMARY  OF  ESTIMATED  ANNUALI2ED OPERATING COSTS  OF EMISSION
                    CONTROL  SYSTEMS  FOR  NEW  MODEL  MUNICIPAL WASTE  COMBUSTOR FACILITIES
                     (SlfOOOs  In  August  1986  based  on 8.000 hrs/yr  operation)
f'M emission
level  After
 control.
nr/d&cf «t
 US CO,
                   N»»* Bur«l«a *odel
                                     :ll ltle»
                                            Modular  e>bdel
                                                                          I Itle*
                                                                                          Refuse-derived «u»l
                                                                                                 UtJUtlBi
  250 tpd
  c«p«c Itv
(Model No.
                        11
  1.000 tpd
  c«««cltv
(Model No. 21
  3.000 tpd
  ceo«cItv
(Model No. 31
                                                      100 tpd
                                                      ceo«Cltv
                                                   (Model No. 41
   250 tpd
  c«eecltv
(Model NO.
          51
  400 tpd
  c«o«cItv
(Model No. 61
  1000 tpd
   c«p«c I ty
(Model No.  7)
  3.000 tpd
  ctftc I Iy
(Model No.81
  0.0)
  0.02
  0.01

Snrty Orver/
  0.0)
  0.02
  0.01

Sprty Oryer/
                  370
                  443
                  499
                1.061
                1.156
                1.212
                  921
                1.067
                1.220
                2.529
                2.706
                2.839
                2.449
                2,744
                3.163
                6.SIS
                6.771
                7.198
                  90
                  110
                  117
                  360
                  396
                  408
    162
    190
    206
    645
    666
    691
     229
     261
     26)
     858
     925
     949
   1.86S
   2,1 18
   2.284
   4.278
   4,6)2
   4,700
   3.348
   3,761
   4.063
   _>.876
   8,1/6
   8,SOS
0.0)
0.02
0.01
l.HS
I.MS
1.150
2.S49
2.549
2.661
6.5)6
6.540
6.638
496
496
510
825
825
•49
1.110
1.110
1.229
4.198
4,199
4,362
7,442
7.444
7.637
*Spr»v drver detloned (or 90 «nd 70 percent control of MCI  «nd SO^.  respectively.

-------
         TABLE  E-3.   SUMMARY OF  ESTIMATED CAPITAL  COSTS OF  EMISSION COMTROL  SYSTEMS FOR
                   EXISTING  MODEL  REFRACTORY  MUNICIPAL  WASTE  COMBUSTOR  FACILITIES
                        (SlOOOs In  August 1986 based  on  6,500  hrs/yr operation)
    Control Dovtc*
	Mass Burn	1  I—Modular--1
   200 tpd        4SO tpd       600 tpd         7SO tpd        1200 tpd        100 tpd
  capacity       capacity       capacity        capacity        capacity       capacity
 (Mod*! No. 1)   (Mod*! No. 2)   (Mod*! No. 3)     (Mod*! No. 4)    (Mode! Mo. 5)    Modal No. 6)
ESP SystM*

Dry Scrubber Systwa

Dry Scrubb*r/ESP SystM *'b

Dry Scrubber /Fabric FllUr
 SystM a'b
   6.335
11,346
                                 6. DOS
                                11.062
                               6.879
12,726
               10.32S
                                             18.745
                                                                              526
                                                                              2.619
*0.02 gr/dscf corr*ct*d to 12 p«rc*nt CO^.

°90 and 70 p*rc*nt reduction of HC1 and S02, r«sf«ctlw*ly.

-------
   TABLE  E-4.   SUMMARY OF  ESTIMATED  ANNUALIZED OPERATING COSTS OF EMISSION CONTROL  SYSTEMS  FOR
                    EXISTING  MODEL REFRACTORY MUNICIPAL  WASTE COMBUSTOR FACILITIES
                         (SlOOOs  In August 1986 based  on  6,500 hrs/yr operation)
    Control Device
I	Mass Burn	
200 tons/day    450 tons/day    600 tons/day      750 tons/day
  capacity       capacity        capacity        capacity
(Model No. 1)   (Mod*I No. 2)   (Model No. 3)     (Model No. 4)
                                                                                                   1
                                                                                        1200 tons/day   100 tons/day
                                                                                         capacity       capacity
                                                                                        (Mode) No. 5)   (Model  No. 6)
Esp Syste»*

Dry Scrubber Syste* b

Dry Scrubber/ESP Syste» *'b

Dry Scrubber/Fabric Filter
 System X75
   1.478
2.686
                                 1,669
2.692
                              1,941
3,124
                              2,884
                                                               4.597
                                                                               123
                                                                                645
*0.02 gr/dscf corrected to 12 percent O>2.

b90 and 70 percent reduction of HC1 and SO-, respectively.

-------
                    TABLE  E-5.   SUMMARY  OF  ESTIMATED CAPITAL COSTS  OF  EMISSION  CONTROt  SYSTEMS
                            FOR  MODEL  EXISTING WATERWALL  MJNICIPAL WASTE COMBUSTOR FACILITIES
                                 (SlOOOs  In August 1986 based  on  6,500 hrs/yr  operation)
                I	Ha*» Burn	II	ModuUi	II	RDF	I
                  200 tpd     400 tpd     1000 tpd      2200 tpd     100 tpd    200 tpd       300 tpd    1000 tpd     2200 tpd      3000 tpd
                 capacity     capacity    capacity      capacity    capacity    capacity     capacity    capacity     capacity     capacity
 Control Device  (Hod*! No.l) (Model Mo.2)  (Model Mo.3)  (Mod*I Mo.4> (Modal Mo.5) (Mod*! Mo.6) (Model Mo.7)  (Model Mo.6)  (Model No.9)  (Model  No.10)
ESP Syste»*

Dry Scrubber
 Syste»b

Dry Scrubber
 ISP Syst*»*'b

Dry Scrubber/
 Fabric Filter
3.063
4.544
                  S.997
8.S39
9,901
                       18.690
                                                487
                                                           763
                                                          999
                                   14.353
10.202
                                                                                            12.926
                                                                                                         19.492
                                               2.S51
                                              3,853
                                              4.865
                                                     25,307
                                                                                19.189
                                                                                                              22.090
                                                                                                                           34.058
*0.02 gr/dscf corrected to 12 percent (X>2.

b90 and 70 percent reduction of HC1 and S02, respectively.

-------
            TABLE  E-6.   SUMMARY OF  ESTIMATED  ANNUALIZED OPERATING COSTS OF  EMISSION  CONTkUl
                           FOR MODEL EXISTING WATERWALL MUNICIPAL WASTE  COMBUSTOR  FACILITIES
                                ($1000s in August 1986  based on  6,500 hrs/yr  operation)
               I	MMS Burn		I I	Modular	1 I	ROf			1
                 200 tpd     400 tpd     1000 tpd     2200 tpd      100 tpd    200 tpd      300 tpd     1000 tpd     2200 tpd      3000 tpd
                capacity     capacity    capacity     capacity     capacity    capacity    capacity     capacity     capacity     capacity
Control  D«vlc«  (Model Ho.l) (Nodal No.2> (Model Mo.3)  (Model No.4) (Model No.S) (Model No.6) (Model Mo.7) (Mod*) Mo.8)  (Model No.9)  (Modal No.10)
ESP Systeei* ll5
Dry Scrubber
Systa»b 810 1.222 2.724 4.27B
Dry Scrubber/
ESP Syste.4'5 "8
Dry Scrubber/
fabric Filter
Syiteei*'" 1.399 2.030 4.506 6.543
177 224
3., " 4.S74 6.3SO
884 1.124
4.676 6.458 9.SS8
*0.02 gr/dscf corrected to 12 percent O>2.

b90 and 70 percent reduction of HCl and S02. respectively.

-------
           APPENDIX F

SUMMARY OF SYMBOLS, ACRONYMS, AND
          ABBREVIATIONS

-------
     TABLE F-l.  SUMMARY OF SYMBOLS,  ACRONYMS,  AND  ABBREVIATIONS

Symbol                                       Meaning

As                                           Arsenic
BaP                                          Benzo(a)pyrene
Be                                           Beryl 1i urn
Cd                                           Cadmium
CDD                                          Chlorinated dibenzo-para-
                                             dioxins
CDF                                          Chlorinated dibenzo  furans
CO                                           Carbon monoxide
C02                                          Carbon dioxide
Cr                                           Chromium
ESP                                          Electrostatic precipitator
HC1                                          Hydrogen chloride
HF                                           Hydrogen fluoride
Hg                                           Mercury
Ni                                           Nickel
NO                                           Nitrogen oxides
  A
NSPS                                         New source performance
                                               standards
02                                           Oxygen
Pb                                           Lead
PCB                                          Polychlorinated biphenyl
PCDD                                         Polychlorinated dibenzo-p-
                                             dioxins

-------
TABLE F-l.   SUMMARY OF SYMBOLS,  ACRONYMS,  AND ABBREVIATIONS (Continued)
 PCDF                                         Polychlorinated dibenro-
                                              furans
 ppb                                          Parts per billion
 RfO                                          Risk Reference Dose
 RDF                                          Refuse-derived fuel
 SASS                                         Source assessment  sampling
                                              system
 SCR                                          Selective catalytic
                                              reduction
 S02                               .           Sulfur dioxide
 TCDD                                         Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
 TEF                                          Toxic equivalency  factor
 TCDF                                         Tetrachlorodibenzofurans
 TPD                                          Tons per day

-------
        APPENDIX G





LIST OF CONVERSION FACTORS

-------
                    TABLE G-l.  LIST OF CONVERSION FACTORS

Multiply
mg/Nm3 a
m
m /min
m/s
kg/h
kPa
1pm
kg/Mg



By
4.37 x 10"4
10.76*
35.31
3.281
2.205
4.0
0.264
2.0
Temperature conversion equations
°F - (9/5)*°C + 32
°C - (5/9)*(°F - 32)
To obtain
gr/dscfb
ft2
ft3/min
ft/s
Ib/h
in. of H20
gal/min
Ib/ton



aNormal conditions on a dry basis are 1 atm and 20 C.
 Dry standard conditions are 1 atm and 68°C.

-------