&EPA
           United States
           Environmental Protection
           Agency
          Office of
          Solid Waste
          Washington, D.C 20460
EPA/530-SW-88-0009-C
April 1988
          Solid Waste
Best
Demonstrated
Available Technology
                   ^j j
(BOAT) Background
Document for
Petroleum Refining
Treatability Group
(K048, K049, K050,
K051, K052)
Proposed
           Volumes

-------
.;                         BEST DEMONSTRATED AND  AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY (BOAT)

)                                        BACKGROUND  DOCUMENT

3                                      SUPPORTING  THE PROPOSED

^                                  LAND DISPOSAL RESTRICTIONS RULE

                                                 FOR

                                         FIRST THIRD WASTES


                                              VOLUME 3

                                   PETROLEUM REFINING WASTE CODES

                                    K048, K049,  K050,  K051,  K052
                                U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency
                                        Office of Solid  Waste
                                         401 M Street, S.W.
                                       Washington,  D.C.   20460

                                       James R. Berlow,  Chief
                                    Treatment Technology Section
                                           March  18,  1988
                                 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                                 7^T^,Ubfary(pl--12J)
                                 '' west Jackson Boulevard. ]2th Floor
                                 Chicago, JL  60604-3590        ^

-------
                               TABLE OF CONTENTS


Section                                                                 Page

          EXECUTIVE SUMMARY  	    i

  1 .0     INTRODUCTION	    1-1

          1.1  Legal Background  	    1-1
               1.1.1  Requirements Under HSWA  	    1-1
               1.1.2  Schedule for Developing Restrictions 	    1-4
          1.2  Summary of Promulgated BOAT Methodology 	    1-5
               1.2.1  Waste  Treatability Groups 	    1-7
               1.2.2  Demonstrated and Available Treatment
                      Technologies 	    1-7
                      (1)  Proprietary or Patented Processes 	    1-10
                      (2)  Substantial Treatment 	    1-10
               1.2.3  Collection of Performance Data 	    1-11
                      (1)  Identification of Facilities for Site
                           Visits 	    1-12
                      (2)  Engineering Site Visit 	    1-14
                      (3)  Sampling and Analysis Plan 	    1-14
                      (4)  Sampling Visit 	    1-16
                      (5)  Onsite Engineering Report 	    1-17
               1.2.4  Hazardous Constituents Considered and
                      Selected for Regulation  	    1-17
                      (1)  Development of BOAT List 	    1-17
                      (2)  Constituent Selection Analysis 	    1-27
                      (3)  Calculation of Standards 	    1-29
               1.2.5  Compliance with Performance Standards 	    1-30
               1.2.6  Identification of BOAT 	    1-32
                      (1)  Screening of Treatment Data 	    1-32
                      (2)  Comparison of Treatment Data 	    1-33
                      (3)  Quality Assurance/Quality Control 	    1-34
               1.2.7  BOAT Treatment Standards for "Derived From"
                      and "Mixed" Wastes 	    1-36
                      (1)  Wastes from Treatment Trains
                           Generating Multiple Residues 	    1-36
                      (2)  Mixtures and Other Derived From
                           Residues 	    1-37
                      (3)  Residues from Managing Listed Wastes
                           or that Contain Listed Wastes 	    1-38
               1.2.8  Transfer of Treatment Standards 	    1-40
          1.3  Variance from the BOAT Treatment Standard 	    1-41

-------
                         TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)


Section                                                                 Page

  2.0     INDUSTRY AFFECTED AND WASTE CHARACTERIZATION 	    2-1

          2.1  Industry Affected and Process Description 	    2-2
          2.2  Waste Characterization 	    2-14
          2.3  Determination of Waste Treatability Group 	    2-14

  3.0     APPLICABLE/DEMONSTRATED TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES	    3-1

          3.1  Applicable Treatment Technologies 	    3-1
          3.2  Demonstrated Treatment Technologies 	    3-2
          3.3  Available Treatment Technologies 	    3-12
          3.4  Detailed Description of Treatment Technologies  	    3-12
               3.4.1  Incineration 	    3-13
               3.4.2  Solvent Extraction 	    3-40
               3.4.3  Sludge Filtration 	    3-50
               3.4.4  Stabilization of Metals	    3-56
               3.4.5  Hexavalent Chromium Reduction	    3-65
               3.4.6  Chemical Precipitation 	    3-72

  4.0     IDENTIFICATION OF BEST DEMONSTRATED AND AVAILABLE
          TECHNOLOGY 	    4-1

          4.1  Review of Performance Data 	    4-2
          4.2  Accuracy Correction of Performance Data 	    4-4
               4.2.1  Nonwastewaters 	    4-5
               4.2.2  Wastewaters 	    4-9
          4.3  Statistical Comparison of Performance Data  	    4-10
          4.4  BOAT for K048-K052 Wastes 	    4-12

  5.0     SELECTION OF REGULATED CONSTITUENTS 	    5-1

          5.1  BOAT List Constituents Detected in the Untreated
               Waste 	    5-2
          5.2  Constituents Detected in Untreated Waste But Not
               Considered for Regulation 	    5-4
          5.3  Constituents Selected for Regulation  	    5-7
               5.3.1  Selection of Regulated Constituents  in
                      Nonwastewater  	    5-7
               5.3.2  Selection of Regulated Constituents  in
                      Wastewater 	    5-13

-------
                         TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)


Section                                                                 Page

  6.0     CALCULATION OF TREATMENT STANDARDS 	    6-1

          6.1  Calculation of Treatment Standards for Nonwastewater
               Forms of K048-K052 	    6-3
          6.2  Calculation of Treatment Standards for Wastewater
               Forms of K048-K052 	    6-8

  7.0     CONCLUSIONS 	    7-1

  8.0     REFERENCES 	    8-1

APPENDICES

  A. 1     F VALUE DETERMINATION FOR ANOVA TEST  	    A-1

  A.2     VARIABILITY FACTOR  	    A-2

  B       MAJOR CONSTITUENT CONCENTRATION CALCULATIONS FOR
          K048-K052 	    B-1

  C       SUMMARY OF PETROLEUM REFINERY PLANT CODES  	    C-1

  D       ANALTICAL QA/QC  	    D-1

  E       STRIP CHARTS FOR THE SAMPLING EPISODE AT PLANT A,
          PRESSURE DIFFERENTIALS AND INCINERATION TEMPERATURES  	    E-1

  F       OTHER TREATMENT DATA 	    F-1

  G       ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE RESULTS  	    G-1

  H       DETECTION LIMITS FOR UNTREATED WASTES 	    H-1

  I       WASTE CHARACTERISTICS AFFECTING PERFORMANCE 	    1-1

-------
                                LIST OF TABLES


Table

 1-1      BOAT CONSTITUENT LIST 	    1-18

 2-1      FACILITIES PRODUCING K048-K052 WASTES BY STATE	    2-3

 2-2      FACILITIES PRODUCING K048-K052 WASTES BY EPA REGION 	    2-4

 2-3      GENERATION OF WASTEWATERS IN THE PETROLEUM REFINING
          INDUSTRY 	    2-9

 2-4      AVAILABLE CHARACTERIZATION DATA FOR K048 	    2-17

 2-5      AVAILABLE CHARACTERIZATION DATA FOR K049 	    2-19

 2-6      AVAILABLE CHARACTERIZATION DATA FOR K050 	    2-21

 2-7      AVAILABLE CHARACTERIZATION DATA FOR K051 	    2-23

 2-8      AVAILABLE CHARACTERIZATION DATA FOR K052 	    2-25

 3-1      TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA COLLECTED BY EPA FOR K048 AND
          K051, PLANT A - FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATION SAMPLE SET #1  .    3-86

 3-2      TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA COLLECTED BY EPA FOR K048 AND
          K051, PLANT A - FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATION SAMPLE SET #2  .    3-89

 3-3      TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA COLLECTED BY EPA FOR K048 AND
          K051, PLANT A - FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATION SAMPLE SET #3  .    3-92

 3-4      TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA COLLECTED BY EPA FOR K048 AND
          K051, PLANT A - FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATION SAMPLE SET #4  .    3-95

 3-5      TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA COLLECTED BY EPA FOR K048 AND
          K051, PLANT A - FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATION SAMPLE SET #5  .    3-98

 3-6      TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA COLLECTED BY EPA FOR K048 AND
          K051, PLANT A - FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATION SAMPLE SET #6  .    3-101

 3-7      TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA SUBMITTED BY INDUSTRY FOR
          PETROLEUM REFINING WASTES, PLANT K (REPORT 2) - SOLVENT
          EXTRACTION  	    3-104

 3-8      TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA COLLECTED BY EPA FOR K048 AND
          K051, PLANT I - STABILIZATION OF INCINERATOR ASH 	    3-113

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


Table                                                                   Page

 3-9      TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA SUBMITTED BY INDUSTRY FOR
          K049, PLANT J - MICROENCAPSULATION/POZZOLANIC
          STABILIZATION 	    3-115

 3-10     TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA SUBMITTED BY INDUSTRY FOR
          K051, PLANT J - MICROENCAPSULATION/POZZOLANIC
          STABILIZATION 	    3-116

 3-11     TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA SUBMITTED BY INDUSTRY FOR
          PETROLEUM REFINERY WASTES, PLANT J - MICROENCAPSULATION/
          POZZOLANIC STABILIZATION  	    3-117

 3-12     TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA SUBMITTED BY INDUSTRY FOR
          K051 AND K052, PLANT J - MICROENCAPSULATION/POZZOLANIC
          STABILIZATION 	    3-118

 3-13     TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA SUBMITTED BY INDUSTRY FOR
          PETROLEUM REFINERY WASTES, PLANT J - SODIUM SILICATE/
          POZZOLANIC STABILIZATION  	    3-119

 3-14     TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA SUBMITTED BY INDUSTRY FOR
          K051 AND K052, PLANT J - SODIUM SILICATE/POZZOLANIC
          STABILIZATION 	    3-120

 3-15     TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA SUBMITTED BY INDUSTRY FOR
          PETROLEUM REFINERY WASTES, PLANT J - CEMENT, FLY ASH, AND
          LIME STABILIZATION 	    3-121

 3-16     TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA SUBMITTED BY INDUSTRY FOR
          K051 AND K052, PLANT J - CEMENT, FLY ASH, AND LIME
          STABILIZATION 	    3-122

 3-17     TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA SUBMITTED BY INDUSTRY FOR
          PETROLEUM REFINERY WASTES, PLANT J - SODIUM SILICATE/
          POZZOLANIC STABILIZATION  	    3-123

 3-18     TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA SUBMITTED BY INDUSTRY FOR
          K051 AND K052, PLANT J - SODIUM SILICATE/POZZOLANIC
          STABILIZATION 	    3-124

 4-1      TREATMENT CONCENTRATIONS FOR FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATOR
          ASH CORRECTED FOR ACCURACY:  PLANT A 	    4-14

 4-2      TREATMENT CONCENTRATIONS FOR TCLP EXTRACTS OF STABILIZED
          INCINERATOR ASH CORRECTED FOR ACCURACY:  PLANT I 	    4-17

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


Table

 4-3      TREATMENT CONCENTRATIONS FOR BOAT LIST ORGANIC
          CONSTITUENTS CORRECTED FOR ACCURACY (K019 SCRUBBER
4-4


4-5


5-1

5-2
5-3
6-1

6-2

6-3

6-4

6-5

6-6

6-7

6-8

TREATMENT CONCENTRATIONS FOR BDAT LIST METAL CONSTITUENTS
CORRECTED FOR ACCURACY (K062 AND METAL-BEARING CHARAC-
TERISTIC WASTES) 	
RESULTS OF THE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TEST COMPARING
FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATION AND FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATION
FOLLOWED BY ASH STABILIZATION 	
BDAT LIST CONSTITUENTS DETECTED IN UNTREATED K048-K052
WASTES 	
BDAT LIST CONSTITUENTS CONSIDERED FOR REGULATION 	
BDAT LIST CONSTITUENTS SELECTED FOR REGULATION 	
CORRECTED TOTAL CONCENTRATION DATA FOR ORGANICS AND
INORGANICS IN FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATOR ASH 	
CORRECTED TCLP DATA FOR METALS IN STABILIZED (LIME AND FLY
ASH) INCINERATOR ASH 	
CALCULATION OF NONWASTEWATER TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR
K048 	
CALCULATION OF NONWASTEWATER TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR
K049 	
CALCULATION OF NONWASTEWATER TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR
K050 	
CALCULATION OF NONWASTEWATER TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR
K051 	
CALCULATION OF NONWASTEWATER TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR
K052 	
CALCULATION OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR
K048 	
M- IO

4-19


4-20

5-20
5-28
5-30

6-13

6-14

6-15

6-17

6-19

6-21

6-23

6-25

-------
                          LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Table
 6-9      CALCULATION OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR
          K049 	    6-26

 6-10     CALCULATION OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR
          K050 	    6-27

 6-11     CALCULATION OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR
          K051 	    6-28

 6-12     CALCULATION OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR
          K052 	    6-29

 7-1      BOAT TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR K048-K052 NONWASTEWATERS 	    7-6

 7-2      BOAT TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR K048-K052 WASTEWATERS 	    7-7

-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
2-1

2-2
3-1
3-2
3-3
3-4
3-5
3-6
3-7
3-8
3-9
3-10

FACILITIES PRODUCING K048-K052 WASTES BY STATE AND EPA
REGION 	
GENERATION OF K048, K049, K050, K051, AND K052 	
LIQUID INJECTION INCINERATOR 	
ROTARY KILN INCIERATOR 	
FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATOR 	
FIXED HEARTH INCINERATOR 	
TWO-STAGE MIXER-SETTLER EXTRACTION SYSTEM 	
EXTRACTION COLUMNS WITH NONMECHANICAL AGITATION 	
CONTINUOUS HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM REDUCTION SYSTEM 	
CONTINUOUS CHEMICAL PRECIPITATION 	
CIRCULAR CLARIFIERS 	
INCLINED PLANE SETTLER 	
Page

2-5
2-8
3-17
3-18
3-20
3-22
3-44
. 3-45
3-67
3-75
3-78
3-79

-------
                               EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

                           BOAT Treatment Standards
                        K048, K049, K050, K051 and K052
          Pursuant to the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) enacted

on November 8, 1984 and in accordance with the procedures for establishing

treatment standards under section 3004(m) of the Resource, Conservation and

Recovery Act (RCRA), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing

treatment standards for the listed wastes, K048, K049, K050, K051 and K052,

based on the performance of the treatment technologies determined by the

Agency to represent Best Demonstrated Available Technology (BDAT).  This

background document provides the detailed analyses that support this determi-

nation.



          These BDAT treatment standards represent maximum acceptable concen-

tration levels for selected hazardous constituents in the wastes or residuals

from treatment and/or recycling.  These levels are established as a prerequi-

site for land disposal of these wastes in accordance with 40 CFR Part 268

(Code of Federal Regulations).  Wastes that when generated contain the regu-

lated constituents at concentrations that do not exceed the treatment stan-

dards are not restricted from land disposal.  The Agency has chosen to set

levels for these wastes rather than designate the use of a specific treatment

technology.  The Agency believes that this allows the generators of these

wastes a greater degree of flexibility in selecting a technology or train of

technologies that can achieve these standards.

-------
          These standards become effective no later than August 8, 1988, as

described in the schedule set forth in 40 CFR 268.10.  However, because of the

lack of nationwide incineration capacity at this time, the Agency is proposing

to grant a two year nationwide variance to the effective date of the land

disposal restrictions for these wastes.



          According to 40 CFR 261.32 (hazardous wastes from specific sources)

waste codes K048, K049, K050, K051 and K052 (referred to collectively as

K048-K052) are from the petroleum refining industry and are listed as follows:


          K048:     Dissolved air flotation (DAF) float from the petroleum
                    refining industry;

          K049:     Slop oil emulsion solids from the petroleum refining
                    industry;

          K050:     Heat exchanger bundle cleaning sludge from the petroleum
                    refining industry;

          K051:     API separator sludge from the petroleum refining industry;
                    and

          K052:     Tank bottoms (leaded) from the petroleum refining
                    industry.


          Descriptions of the industry and specific processes generating these

wastes, as well as descriptions of the physical and chemical waste character-

istics, are provided in Section 2.0 of this document.  The four digit Standard

Industry Classification (SIC) code most often reported for the industry

generating this waste code is 2911 (petroleum refining).  The Agency estimates

that there are approximately 193 facilities that may generate wastes identi-

fied as K048-K052.
                                       11

-------
          The Agency has determined that K048-K052 collectively represent one



general waste treatability group with two subgroups - wastewaters and



nonwastewaters.  For the purpose of the land disposal restrictions rule,



wastewaters are defined as wastes containing less than 1$ (weight basis)



filterable solids and less than 1/5 (weight basis) total organic carbon (TOC).



Wastes not meeting this definition are classified as nonwastewaters.








          These waste treatability subgroups represent classes of wastes that



have similar physical and chemical properties within the treatability group.



EPA believes that each waste within these subgroups can be treated to the same



concentrations when similar treatment technologies are applied.  The Agency



has examined the sources of these five petroleum refining wastes, the specific



similarities in waste composition, applicable and demonstrated technologies,



and attainable treatment performance in order to support a simplified regula-



tory approach.  While the Agency has not, at this time, specifically identi-



fied additional wastes that fall into this treatability group or two sub-



groups, this does not preclude the Agency from using the treatment performance



data used to establish these standards to establish standards for other



similar wastes, in the future.  A detailed discussion of applicable and



demonstrated treatment technologies is provided in Section 3.0 of this docu-



ment.








          K048-K052, as generated, are oily sludges with moderate water



content and are typically classified as nonwastewaters.  Solid residuals from



the treatment of these oily sludges (such as incinerator ash and
                                      iii

-------
solidification residues) also fall into this classification.  K048-K052



wastewaters are generated primarily as a result of the "derived-from rule" and



the "mixture-rule" as outlined in 40 CFR 261.3 (definition of hazardous



waste).  The most common K048-K052 wastewaters are aqueous residues from



treatment (such as scrubber water and direct contact cooling waters) and



inadvertent mixtures of K048-K052 with other aqueous wastes.








          The Agency is proposing BOAT treatment standards for the two treat-



ability subgroups of K048-K052 wastes - wastewaters and nonwastewaters.  In



general, these treatment standards have been proposed for a total of seventeen



(17) organic constituents, eight (8) metal constituents and one inorganic



constituent; the Agency believes these constituents are indicators of effec-



tive treatment for all of the BOAT hazardous constituents that have been



identified as present in the individual K048-K052 wastes.  The organic con-



stituents that are proposed for regulation in one or more of these five waste



codes are: benzene, toluene, xylene, acenaphthene,  anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene,



bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, chrysene, ortho-cresol, para-cresol,  2,4-dimethyl-



phenol, di-n-butyl phthalate, fluorene, naphthalene,  phenanthrene, phenol and



pyrene.  The metals and inorganic constituents that are proposed  for regula-



tion in one or more of these waste codes are arsenic, total chromium,  copper,



lead, nickel, selenium, vanadium, zinc and cyanide.  Not all constituents are



proposed for regulation in all five waste codes,  since they were  not found in



treatable quantities in all of the untreated wastes.   A detailed  discussion of



the selection of constituents to be regulated is  presented in section 5.0 of



this document.
                                      IV

-------
          BDAT treatment standards for K048-K052 nonwastewater are proposed



based on performance data from a treatment train that consisted of full scale



fluidized bed incineration followed by ash stabilization.  Ash stabilization



was achieved using lime and fly ash as stabilization agents.  Testing was



performed on representative samples of nonwastewater K048 and K051.  The



treatment performance data were then transferred to develop standards for



nonwastewater K049, K050 and K052.  Fluidized bed incineration followed by ash



stabilization was determined to represent the best demonstrated available



technology (BDAT) based on a comparison of performance data from this



treatment train with performance data from other treatment technologies.



These included solvent extraction, thermal drying, pressure filtration, and



stabilization (without incineration).  The Agency has determined that the data



for these technologies generally indicated a lower level of performance.



However, some of the data were not used because insufficient information were



available on the quality assurance procedures performed necessary for the



Agency to statistically compare the performance.  A detailed discussion of the



identification of BDAT is presented in Section 4.0 of this document.








          BDAT organic constituent treatment standards for K048-K052 waste-



waters are proposed based on a transfer of treatment performance data for the



scrubber water residual from the incineration of K019 nonwastewater (K019 is



listed as heavy ends from the distillation of ethylene dichloride in ethylene



dichloride production).  Standards for inorganic constituents were developed



based on treatment of K062 and metal-bearing characteristic wastes from



chromium reduction, lime and sulfide precipitation and vacuum filtration.

-------
Treatment performance data were transferred on a constituent basis from either



the same constituent or, in the case of organic constituents, from constitu-



ents judged to be similar in physical and chemical properties.  A detailed



discussion of the transfer of the data is presented in section 6.0 of this



document.








          The following tables list the specific BOAT treatment standards for



wastes identified as K048, K049, K050, K051 and K052.  The Agency is setting



standards based on analysis of total constituent concentration for organic and



inorganic constituents and based on analysis of leachate for metal



constituents K048-K052 nonwastewaters.  Standards are based on analysis of



total constituent concentration for K048-K052 wastewaters.  The leachate is



obtained by use of the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) found



in Appendix I of 40 CFR Part 268.  The units for total constituent



concentration are in parts per million (mg/kg) on a weight by weight basis for



nonwastewater and in parts per million (mg/1) on a weight by volume basis for



wastewater.  The units for leachate analysis are in parts per million (mg/1)



on a weight by volume basis.
                                       vi

-------
                         BOAT TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR
                           K048-K052 NONWASTEWATERS
     Regulated Organic
        Constituents

  4.   Benzene
 43.   Toluene
215-
217.   Xylene (total)
 62.   Benzo(a)pyrene
 70.   Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthal-
        ate
 80.   Chrysene
 81.   ortho-Cresol
 82.   para-Cresol
 98.   Di-n-butyl phthalate
121.   Naphthalene
141.   Penanthrene
142.   Phenol
145.   Pyrene

      Regulated Metal
        Constituents

155.   Arsenic
159.   Chromium (total)
160.   Copper
163.   Nickel
164.   Selenium
167.   Vanadium
168.   Zinc

    Regulated Inorganic
        Constituents

169.   Cyanide
                    Total Concentration (mg/kg)
           K048      K049      K050      K051      K052

            NA       3.93       NA        NA       NA
           3.93      3.93       NA       3.93      3.93

           8.54      8.54       NA       8.54      8.54
            NA        NA       0.84       NA       NA
           4.18       NA        NA        NA       NA

           0.84      0.84       NA       0.84       NA
            NA        NA        NA        NA      0.84
            NA        NA        NA        NA      0.84
           4.18       NA        NA       4.18       NA
           0.84      0.84       NA       0.84      0.84
           0.84      0.84       NA       0.84      0.84
           0.84      0.84      0.84      0.84      0.84
            NA       1.06       NA       1.06       NA

           	TCLP (mg/1)	
           K048

           0.006
           1.68
           0.013
           0.048
           0.025
           0.18
           0.141
K049
0.006
1.68
0.013
0.048
0.025
0.18
0.141
K050

0.006
1.68
0.013
0.048
0.025
0.18
0.141
K051
                    Total Concentration (mg/kg)
K052
0.006
1.68
0.013
0.048
0.025
0.18
0.141
0.006
1.68
0.013
0.048
0.025
0.18
0.141
K048
1.48
K049
1.48
K050
1.48
K051
1.48
K052
1.48
NA - Not applicable.
     for this waste.
This constituent is not being proposed for regulation
                                       VII

-------
                                   BOAT TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR K048-K052 WASTEWATERS
                                                                  Total Concentration  (mg/1)
H-
H-
              Regulated Constituents
  4.   Benzene
 43.   Toluene
215-217.  Xylene (total)
 52.   Acenaphthene
 57.   Anthracene
 81.   ortho-Cresol
 82.   para-Cresol
 96.   2,4-dimethylphenol
109.   Fluorene
121.   Naphthalene
141.   Phenanthrene
142.   Phenol
159.   Chromium (total)
162.   Lead
169.   Zinc
K048
NA
0.007
0.007
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.20
0.037
0.40
K049
0.023
0.007
0.007
NA
0.007
NA
NA
0.007
NA
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.20
0.037
0.40
K050
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.007
0.20
0.037
0.40
K051
NA
0.007
0.007
0.007
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.20
0.037
0.40
K052
0.023
NA
0.007
NA
NA
0.007
0.007
0.007
NA
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.20
0.037
0.40
      NA -  Not  Applicable.   This  constituent is not being proposed for regulation for  this waste.

-------
                              1.   INTRODUCTION
    This section of the background document presents a summary of the
legal authority pursuant to which the BOAT treatment standards were
developed, a summary of EPA's promulgated methodology for developing
BOAT, and finally a discussion of the petition process that should be
followed to request a variance from the BOAT treatment standards.
1.1      Legal Background
1.1.1    Requirements Under HSWA
    The Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA), enacted on
November 8, 1984, and which amended the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA), impose substantial new responsibilities on
those who handle hazardous waste.  In particular, the amendments require
the Agency to promulgate regulations that restrict the land disposal of
untreated hazardous wastes.  In its enactment of HSWA, Congress stated
explicitly that "reliance on land disposal should be minimized or
eliminated, and land disposal, particularly landfill and surface
impoundment, should be the least favored method for managing hazardous
wastes" (RCRA section 1002(b)(7), 42 U.S.C. 6901(b)(7)).
    One part of the amendments specifies dates on which particular groups
of untreated hazardous wastes will be prohibited from land disposal
unless "it has been demonstrated to the Administrator, to a reasonable
degree of certainty, that there will be no migration of hazardous
constituents from the disposal unit or injection zone for as long as the
wastes remain hazardous" (RCRA section 3004(d)(l), (e)(l), (g)(5), 42
U.S.C. 6924 (d)(l), (e)(l), (g)(5)).
                                    1-1

-------
    For the purpose of the restrictions, HSWA defines land disposal "to
include, but not be limited to, any placement of ... hazardous waste in
a landfill, surface impoundment, waste pile, injection well, land
treatment facility, salt dome formation, salt bed formation, or
underground mine or cave" (RCRA section 3004(k), 42 U.S.C. 6924(k)).
Although HSWA defines land disposal to include injection wells, such
disposal of solvents, dioxins, and certain other wastes, known as the
California List wastes, is covered on a separate schedule (RCRA section
3004(f)(2), 42 U.S.C. 6924 (f)(2)).  This schedule requires that EPA
develop land disposal restrictions for deep well injection by
August 8, 1988.
    The amendments also require the Agency to set "levels or methods of
treatment, if any, which substantially diminish the toxicity of the waste
or substantially reduce the likelihood of migration of hazardous
constituents from the waste so that short-term and long-term threats to
human health and the environment are minimized" (RCRA section 3004(m)(l),
42 U.S.C. 6924 (m)(l)).  Wastes that meet treatment standards established
by EPA are not prohibited and may be land disposed.  In setting treatment
standards for listed or characteristic wastes,  EPA may establish
different standards for particular wastes within a single waste code with
differing treatability characteristics.   One such characteristic is the
physical form of the waste.   This frequently leads to different standards
for wastewaters and nonwastewaters.
                                    1-2

-------
Alternatively, EPA can establish a treatment standard that is applicable
to more than one waste code when, in EPA's judgment, all the waste can be
treated to the same concentration.  In those instances where a generator
can demonstrate that the standard promulgated for the generator's waste
cannot be achieved, the Agency also can grant a variance from a treatment
standard by revising the treatment standard for that particular waste
through rulemaking procedures.   (A further discussion of treatment
variances is provided in Section 1.3.)
    The land disposal restrictions are effective when promulgated unless
the Administrator grants a national variance and establishes a different
date  (not to exceed 2 years beyond the statutory deadline) based on "the
earliest date on which adequate  alternative treatment, recovery, or
disposal capacity which protects human health and the environment will be
available"  (RCRA section 3004(h)(2), 42 U.S.C. 6924 (h)(2)).
    If EPA  fails to set a treatment standard by the statutory deadline
for any hazardous waste in the First Third or Second Third of the
schedule (see section 1.1.2), the waste may not be disposed  in a landfill
or surface  impoundment unless the facility is in compliance  with the
minimum technological requirements specified in section 3004(o) of RCRA.
In addition, prior to disposal,  the generator must certify to the
Administrator that the availability of treatment capacity has been
investigated and it has been determined that disposal in a landfill or
surface impoundment is the only  practical alternative to treatment
currently available to the generator.  This restriction on the use of
                                    1-3

-------
landfills and surface impoundments applies until EPA sets a treatment
standard for the waste or until May 8, 1990, whichever is sooner.  If the
Agency fails to set a treatment standard for any ranked hazardous waste
by May 8, 1990, the waste is automatically prohibited from land disposal
unless the waste is placed in a land disposal unit that is the subject of
a successful "no migration" demonstration (RCRA section 3004(g), 42
U.S.C. 6924(g)).  "No migration" demonstrations are based on case-
specific petitions that show there will be no migration of hazardous
constituents from the unit for as long as the waste remains hazardous.
1.1.2    Schedule for Developing Restrictions
    Under Section 3004(g) of RCRA, EPA was required to establish a
schedule for developing treatment standards for all wastes that the
Agency had listed as hazardous by November 8, 1984.  Section 3004(g)
required that this schedule consider the intrinsic hazards and volumes
associated with each of these wastes.  The statute required EPA to set
treatment standards according to the following schedule:
    (a)  Solvents and dioxins standards must be promulgated by
         November 8, 1986;
    (b)  The "California List" must be promulgated by July 8,  1987;
    (c)  At least one-third of all listed hazardous wastes must be
         promulgated by August 8, 1988 (First Third);
    (d)  At least two-thirds of all listed hazardous wastes must be
         promulgated by June 8, 1989 (Second Third); and
    (e)  All remaining listed hazardous wastes and all hazardous wastes
         identified as of November 8, 1984, by one or more of the
         characteristics defined in 40 CFR Part 261 must  be promulgated
         by May 8, 1990 (Third Third).
                                    1-4

-------
    The statute specifically identified the solvent wastes as those
covered under waste codes F001, F002, F003, F004, and F005; it identified
the dioxin-containing hazardous wastes as those covered under waste codes
F020, F021, F022, and F023.
    Wastes collectively known as the California List wastes, defined
under Section 3004(d) of HSWA, are liquid hazardous wastes containing
metals, free cyanides, PCBs, corrosives (i.e., a pH less than or equal to
2.0), and any liquid or nonliquid hazardous waste containing halogenated
organic compounds (HOCs) above 0.1 percent by weight.  Rules for the
California List were proposed on December 11, 1986, and final rules for
PCBs, corrosives, and HOC-containing wastes were established
August 12, 1987.  In that rule, EPA elected not to establish standards
for metals.  Therefore, the statutory limits became effective.
    On May 28,  1986, EPA published a final rule (51 FR 19300) that
delineated the  specific waste codes that would be addressed by the First
Third, Second Third, and Third Third.  This schedule is incorporated  into
40 CFR 268.10,  .11, and  .12.
1.2    Summary  of Promulgated BOAT Methodology
     In a November 7, 1986, rulemaking, EPA promulgated a technology-based
approach to establishing treatment standards under section 3004(m).
Section 3004(m)  also specifies that treatment standards must "minimize"
long- and short-term threats to human health and the environment arising
from land disposal of hazardous wastes.
                                    1-5

-------
    Congress indicated in the legislative history accompanying the HSWA
that "[t]he requisite levels of [sic]  methods of treatment established by
the Agency should be the best that has been demonstrated to be
achievable," noting that the intent is "to require utilization of
available technology" and not a "process which contemplates
technology-forcing standards"  (Vol. 130 Cong. Rec. S9178 (daily ed.,
July 25, 1984)).  EPA has interpreted  this legislative history as
suggesting that Congress considered the requirement under 3004(m) to be
met by application of the best demonstrated and achievable (i.e.,
available) technology prior to land disposal of wastes or treatment
residuals.  Accordingly, EPA's treatment standards are generally based on
the performance of the best demonstrated available technology (BOAT)
identified for treatment of the hazardous constituents.  This approach
involves the identification of potential treatment systems, the
determination of whether they are demonstrated and available, and the
collection of treatment data from well-designed and well-operated systems.
    The treatment standards, according to the statute, can represent
levels or methods of treatment, if any, that substantially diminish the
toxicity of the waste or substantially reduce the likelihood of migration
of hazardous constituents.  Wherever possible, the Agency prefers to
establish BOAT treatment standards as  "levels" of treatment
(i.e., performance standards) rather than adopting an approach that would
require the use of specific treatment  "methods."  EPA believes that
concentration-based treatment levels offer the regulated community greater
                                    1-6

-------
flexibility to develop and implement compliance strategies as well as an
incentive to develop innovative technologies.
1.2.1  Waste Treatability Group
    In developing the treatment standards, EPA first characterizes the
waste(s).  As necessary, EPA may establish treatability groups for wastes
having similar physical and chemical properties.  That is, if EPA
believes that wastes represented by different waste codes could be
treated to similar concentrations using identical technologies, the
Agency combines the codes into one treatability group.  EPA generally
considers wastes to be similar when they are both generated from the same
industry and from similar processing stages.  In addition, EPA may
combine two or more separate wastes into the same treatability group when
data are available showing that the waste characteristics affecting
performance are similar or that one waste would be expected to be less
difficult to treat.
    Once the treatability groups have been established, EPA collects and
analyzes data on identified technologies used to treat the wastes in each
treatability group.  The technologies evaluated must be demonstrated on
the waste or a similar waste and must be available for use.
1.2.2    Demonstrated and Available Treatment Technologies
    Consistent with legislative history, EPA considers demonstrated
technologies to be those that are used to treat the waste of interest or
a similar waste with regard to parameters that affect treatment selection
(see November 7, 1986, 51 FR 40588).  EPA also will consider as treatment
those technologies used to separate or otherwise process chemicals and
                                    1-7

-------
other materials.  Some of these technologies clearly are applicable to
waste treatment, since the wastes are similar to raw materials processed
in industrial applications.
    For most of the waste treatability groups for which EPA will
promulgate treatment standards, EPA will identify demonstrated
technologies either through review of literature related to current waste
treatment practices or on the basis of information provided by specific
facilities currently treating the waste or similar wastes.
    In cases where the Agency does not identify any facilities treating
wastes represented by a particular waste treatability group, EPA may
transfer a finding of demonstrated treatment.  To do this,  EPA will
compare the parameters affecting treatment selection for the waste
treatability group of interest to other wastes for which demonstrated
technologies already have been determined.  The parameters  affecting
treatment selection and their use for this waste are described in
Section 3.4 of this document.  If the parameters affecting  treatment
selection are similar, then the Agency will  consider the treatment
technology also to be demonstrated for the waste of interest.   For
example, EPA considers rotary kiln incineration a demonstrated technology
for many waste codes containing hazardous organic constituents,  high
total  organic content, and high filterable solids content,  regardless of
whether any facility is currently treating these wastes.  The basis for
this determination is data found in literature and data generated by EPA
confirming the use of rotary kiln incineration on wastes having  the above
characteristics.
                                    1-8

-------
    If no commercial treatment or recovery operations are identified for
a waste or wastes with similar physical  or chemical characteristics that
affect treatment selection, the Agency will be unable to identify any
demonstrated treatment technologies for the waste, and, accordingly, the
waste will be prohibited from land disposal (unless handled in accordance
with the exemption and variance provisions of the rule).  The Agency is,
however, committed to establishing treatment standards as soon as new or
improved treatment processes are demonstrated (and available).
    Operations only available at research facilities, pilot- and bench-
scale operations will not be considered in identifying demonstrated
treatment technologies for a waste because these technologies would not
necessarily be "demonstrated."  Nevertheless, EPA may use data generated
at research facilities in assessing the performance of demonstrated
technologies.
    As discussed earlier, Congress intended that technologies used to
establish treatment standards under Section 3004(m) be not only
"demonstrated," but also available.  To decide whether demonstrated
technologies may be considered "available," the Agency determines whether
they  (1)  are commercially available and (2) substantially diminish the
toxicity  of the waste or substantially reduce the  likelihood of migration
of hazardous constituents from the waste.
    EPA will only set treatment standards based on a technology that
meets the above criteria.  Thus, the decision to classify a technology  as
"unavailable" will  have a direct impact on the treatment standard.  If
                                    1-9

-------
the best technology is unavailable, the treatment standard will be based
on the next best treatment technology determined to be available.  To the
extent that the resulting treatment standards are less stringent, greater
concentrations of hazardous constituents in the treatment residuals could
be placed in land disposal units.
    There also may be circumstances in which EPA concludes that for a
given waste none of the demonstrated treatment technologies are
"available" for purposes of establishing the 3004(m) treatment
performance standards.  Subsequently,  these wastes will be prohibited
from continued placement in or on the land unless managed in accordance
with applicable exemptions and variance provisions.   The Agency is,
however, committed to establishing new treatment standards as soon as new
or improved treatment processes become "available."
    (1)  Proprietary or Patented Processes.  If the  demonstrated
treatment technology is a proprietary or patented process that is not
generally available, EPA will  not consider the technology in its
determination of the treatment standards.   EPA will  consider proprietary
or patented processes available if it determines that the treatment
method can be purchased or licensed from the proprietor or is
commercially available treatment.  The services of the commercial
facility offering this technology often can be purchased even if the
technology itself cannot be purchased.
    (2)  Substantial Treatment.  To be considered "available," a
demonstrated treatment technology must "substantially diminish the
                                   1-10

-------
toxicity" of the waste or "substantially reduce the likelihood of
migration of hazardous constituents" from the waste in accordance with
section 3004(m).  By requiring that substantial treatment be achieved in
order to set a treatment standard, the statute ensures that all wastes
are adequately treated before being placed in or on the land and ensures
that the Agency does not require a treatment method that provides little
or no environmental benefit.  Treatment will always be deemed substantial
if it results in nondetectable levels of the hazardous constituents of
concern.  If nondetectable levels are not achieved, then a determination
of substantial treatment will be made on a case-by-case basis.  This
approach is necessary because of the difficulty of establishing a
meaningful guideline that can be applied broadly to the many wastes and
technologies to be considered.  EPA will consider the following factors
in an effort to evaluate whether a technology provides substantial
treatment on a case-by-case basis:
    (a)  Number and types of constituents treated;
    (b)  Performance (concentration of the constituents in the
         treatment residuals); and
    (c)  Percent of constituents removed.
    If none of the demonstrated treatment technologies achieve
substantial treatment of a waste, the Agency cannot establish treatment
standards for the constituents of concern in that waste.
1.2.3    Collection of Performance Data
    Performance data on the demonstrated available technologies are
evaluated by the Agency to determine whether the data are representative
                                    1-11

-------
of well-designed and well-operated treatment systems.  Only data from
well-designed and well-operated systems are included in determining
BOAT.  The data evaluation includes data already collected directly by
EPA and/or data provided by industry.  In those instances where
additional data are needed to supplement existing information, EPA
collects additional data through a sampling and analysis program.  The
principal elements of this data collection program are:  (a) identifi-
cation of facilities for site visits, (b) engineering site visit,
(c) Sampling and Analysis Plan, (d) sampling visit,  and (e) Onsite
Engineering Report.
    (1)  Identification of Facilities for Site Visits.   To identify
facilities that generate and/or treat the waste of concern, EPA uses a
number of information sources.  These include Stanford Research
Institute's Directory of Chemical  Producers, EPA's Hazardous Waste Data
Management System (HWDMS), the 1986 Treatment, Storage, Disposal  Facility
(TSDF) National Screening Survey,  and EPA's Industry Studies Data Base.
In addition, EPA contacts trade associations to inform them that the
Agency is considering visits to facilities in their industry and to
solicit assistance in identifying  facilities for EPA to consider in its
treatment sampling program.
    After identifying facilities that treat the waste,  EPA uses this
hierarchy to select sites for engineering visits: (1) generators treating
single wastes on site; (2) generators treating multiple wastes together
on site; (3) commercial treatment, storage, and disposal facilities
                                    1-12

-------
(TSDFs); and (4) EPA in-house treatment.  This hierarchy is based on two
concepts:  (1) to the extent possible, EPA should develop treatment
standards from data produced by treatment facilities handling only a
single waste, and (2) facilities that routinely treat a specific waste
have had the best opportunity to optimize design parameters.  Although
excellent treatment can occur at many facilities that are not high in
this hierarchy, EPA has adopted this approach to avoid, when possible,
ambiguities related to the mixing of wastes before and during treatment.
    When possible, the Agency will evaluate treatment technologies using
commercially operated systems.  If performance data from properly
designed and operated commercial treatment methods for a particular waste
or a waste judged to be similar are not available, EPA may use data from
research facilities operations.  Whenever research facility data are
used, EPA will explain why such data were used in the preamble and
background document and will request comments on the use of such data.
    Although EPA's data bases provide information on treatment for
individual wastes, the data bases rarely provide data that support the
selection of one facility for sampling over another.  In cases where
several  treatment sites appear to fall into the same level of the
hierarchy, EPA selects sites for visits strictly on the basis of which
facility could most expeditiously be visited and later sampled if
justified by the engineering visit.
                                    1-13

-------
    (2)  Engineering Site Visit.  Once a treatment facility has been
selected, an engineering site visit is made to confirm that a candidate
for sampling meets EPA's criteria for a well-designed facility and to
ensure that the necessary sampling points can be accessed to determine
operating parameters and treatment effectiveness.  During the visit, EPA
also confirms that the facility appears to be well operated, although the
actual operation of the treatment system during sampling is the basis for
EPA's decisions regarding proper operation of the treatment unit.  In
general,  the Agency considers a well-designed facility to be one that
contains  the unit operations necessary to treat the various hazardous
constituents of the waste as well as  to control other nonhazardous
materials in the waste that may affect treatment performance.
    In addition to ensuring that a system is reasonably well designed,
the engineering visit examines whether the facility has a way to measure
the operating parameters that affect  performance of the treatment system
during the waste treatment period.  For example, EPA may choose not to
sample a  treatment system that operates in a continuous mode, for which
an important operating parameter cannot be continuously recorded.  In
such systems, instrumentation is important in determining whether the
treatment system is operating at design values during the waste treatment
period.
    (3)  Sampling and Analysis Plan.   If after the engineering site visit
the Agency decides to sample a particular plant, the Agency will then
develop a site-specific Sampling and  Analysis Plan (SAP) according to the
Generic Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Land Disposal Restriction
                                    1-14

-------
Program ("BOAT"), EPA/530-SW-87-011.  In brief, the SAP discusses where
the Agency plans to sample, how the samples will be taken, the frequency
of sampling, the constituents .to be analyzed and the method of analysis,
operational parameters to be obtained, and specific laboratory quality
control checks on the analytical results.
    The Agency will generally produce a draft of the site-specific
Sampling and Analysis Plan within 2 to 3 weeks of the engineering visit.
The draft of the SAP is then sent to the plant for review and comment.
With few exceptions, the draft SAP should be a confirmation of data
collection activities discussed with the plant personnel during the
engineering site visit.  EPA encourages plant personnel to recommend any
modifications to the SAP that they believe will improve the quality of
the data.
    It is  important to note that sampling of a plant by EPA does not mean
that the data will be used in the development of treatment standards for
BOAT.  EPA's final decision on whether to use data from a sampled plant
depends on the actual analysis of the waste being treated and on the
operating  conditions at the time of sampling.  Although EPA would not
plan to sample a facility that was not ostensibly well-designed and
well-operated, there is no way to ensure that at the time of the sampling
the facility will not experience operating problems.  Additionally, EPA
statistically compares its test data to suitable industry-provided data,
where  available, in its determination of what data to use in developing
treatment  standards.  The methodology for comparing data  is presented
later  in this section.
                                    1-15

-------
    (Note: Facilities wishing to submit data for consideration in the
development of BOAT standards should, to the extent possible, provide
sampling information similar to that acquired by EPA.  Such facilities
should review the Generic Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Land
Disposal Restriction Program ("BOAT"), which delineates all of the
quality control and quality assurance measures associated with sampling
and analysis.  Quality assurance and quality control procedures are
summarized in Section 1.2.6 of this document.)
    (4)  Sampling Visit.  The purpose of the sampling visit is to collect
samples that characterize the performance of the treatment system and to
document the operating conditions that existed during the waste treatment
period.  At a minimum, the Agency attempts to collect sufficient samples
of the untreated waste and solid and liquid treatment residuals so that
variability in the treatment process can be accounted for in the
development of the treatment standards.  To the extent practicable, and
within safety constraints, EPA or its contractors collect all samples and
ensure that chain-of-custody procedures are conducted so that the
integrity of the data is maintained.
    In general, the samples collected during the sampling visit will have
already been specified in the SAP.   In some instances, however, EPA will
not be able to collect all planned samples because of changes in the
facility operation or plant upsets;  EPA will explain any such deviations
from  the SAP in its follow-up Onsite Engineering Report.
                                     1-16

-------
    (5)  Onsite Engineering Report.  EPA summarizes all its data
collection activities and associated analytical results for testing at a
facility in a report referred to as the Onsite Engineering Report (OER).
This report characterizes the waste(s) treated, the treated residual
concentrations, the design and operating data, and all analytical results
including methods used and accuracy results.  This report also describes
any deviations from EPA's suggested analytical methods for hazardous
wastes (Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, SW-846, Third Edition,
November 1986).
    After the Onsite Engineering Report is completed, the report is
submitted to the plant for review.  This review provides the plant with a
final opportunity to claim any information contained  in the report as
confidential.  Following the review and incorporation of comments, as
appropriate, the report is made available to the public with the
exception of any material claimed  as confidential by  the plant.
1.2.4  Hazardous Constituents Considered and Selected for Regulation
     (1)  Development of BOAT List.  The list of hazardous constituents
within the waste codes that are targeted for treatment is referred to by
the Agency as the BOAT constituent list.  This list,  provided as Table
1-1, is derived from the constituents presented in 40 CFR Part 261,
Appendix VII and Appendix VIII, as well as several ignitable constituents
used as the basis of listing wastes as F003 and F005.  These sources
provide a comprehensive list of hazardous constituents specifically
regulated under RCRA.  The BOAT list consists of those constituents that
can be analyzed using methods published in SW-846, Third Edition.
                                    1-17

-------
Table  1-1  BOAT Constituent List
BOAT
reference
no.

222
1
2
3
4
5
6.
223
7
8
9.
10.
11.
12
13.
14.
15.
16
17.
18.
19.
20.
21
22
23
24.
25
25
27.
28
29
224
225.
226
30
227
31.
214
32.
Parameter
Volatiles
Acetone
Acetonitri le
Acrolein
Acrylonitri le
Benzene
Bromodichloromethane
Bromomethane
n-Butyl alcohol
Carbon tetrachlor ide
Carbon disulfide
Chlorobenzene
2-Chloro-l,3-butadiene
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane
2-Chloroethyl vinyl ether
Chloroform
Chloromethane
3-Chloropropene
1 , 2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane
1,2-Dibromoethane
Oibromomethane
Trans -1 , 4-Dichloro-2-butene
Oichlorodif luoromethane
1 , 1-Dichloroethane
1,2-Oichloroethane
1 , 1-Dichloroethylene
Trans-1 ,2-Dichloroethene
1 ,2-Oichloropropane
Trans-1 ,3-Dichloropropene
cis-1 ,3-Oichloropropene
1 ,4-Dioxane
2-Ethoxyethanol
Ethyl acetate
Ethyl benzene
Ethyl cyanide
Ethyl ether
Ethyl methacrylate
Ethylene oxide
lodomethane
CAS no.

67-64-1
75-05-8
107-02-8
107-13-1
71-43-2
75-27-4
74-83-9
71-36-3
56-23-5
75-15-0
108-90-7
126-99-8
124-48-1
75-00-3
110-75-8
67-66-3
74-87-3
107-05-1
96-12-8
106-93-4
74-95-3
110-57-6
75-71-8
75-34-3
107-06-2
75-35-4
156-60-5
78-87-5
10061-02-6
10061-01-5
123-91-1
110-80-5
141-78-6
100-41-4
107-12-0
60-29-7
97-63-2
75-21-8
74-88-4
                1-18

-------
Table  1-1  (continued)
BOAT
reference
no.

33.
228
34
229.
35.
37
38
230.
39.
40.
41.
42
43.
44.
45
46.
47
48.
49.
231.

50
215.
216.
217

51
52.
53
54
55
56
57.
58
59.
218
60
61
62.
Parameter
Volatiles (continued)
Isobutyl alcohol
Methanol
Methyl ethyl ketone
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Methyl methacrylate
Methacrylonitri le
Methylene chloride
2-Nitropropane
Pyridine
1,1,1 , 2-Tetrachloroethane
1, 1 ,2, 2-Tetrachloroethane
Tetrachloroethene
Toluene
Tribromomethane
1,1, 1-Trichloroethane
1 ,1,2-Trichloroethane
Trichloroethene
Trichloromonof luoromethane
1 ,2,3-Tnchloropropane
1, 1,2-Tnchloro- 1,2,2- tr if luoro-
ethane
Vinyl chloride
1,2-Xylene
1.3-Xylene
1 ,4-Xy lene
Semivolat i les
Acenaphthalene
Acenaphthene
Acetophenone
2 -Acety lam inof luorene
4-Ammobipheny 1
Am 1 me
Anthracene
Aramite
Benz(a)anthracene
Benza 1 chloride
Benzenethiol
Deleted
Benzo(a)pyrene
CAS no.

78-83-1
67-56-1
78-93-3
108-10-1
80-62-6
126-98-7
75-09-2
79-46-9
110-86-1
630-20-6
79-34-6
127-18-4
108-88-3
75-25-2
71-55-6
79-00-5
79-01-6
75-69-4
96-18-4
76-13-1

75-01-4
97-47-6
108-38-3
106-44-5

208-96-8
83-32-9
96-86-2
53-96-3
92-67-1
62-53-3
120-12-7
140-57-8
56-55-3
98-87-3
108-98-5

50-32-8
          1-19

-------
Table  l-L  (continued)
BOAT
reference
no.

63
64
65.
66.
67
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76
77.
78.
79.
80.
81
82.
232.
83
84.
85
86.
87.
88.
89.
90
91
92.
93
94
95
96
97.
98.
99.
100
101
Parameter
Semivolat i les (continued)
Benzof b) f luoranthene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Benzo(k)f luoranthene
p-Benzoqumone
Bis(2-chloroethoxy (methane
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Bis(2-chloroisopropyl) ether
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether
Butyl benzyl phthalate
2- sec-Butyl -4. 6-dinitrophenol
p-Chloroani 1 me
Chlorobenzi late
p-Chloro-m-cresol
2-Chloronaphthalene
2-Chlorophenol
3-Chloropropionitr i le
Chrysene
ortho-Creso)
para-Cresol
Cyclohexanone
0 i benz ( a, h) anthracene
Dibenzo(a,e)pyrene
Dibenzo(a, i (pyrene
m-Oichlorobenzene
o-Dichlorobenzene
p-Dichlorobenzene
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine
2,4-Dichlorophenol
2.6-Dichlorophenol
Diethyl phthalate
3.3'-Qimethoxybenz \dine
p-0 1 me thy Idminoazoben^ene
3,3' -Dimethyl benz id me
2, 4-Oimethylphenol
Dimethyl phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
1,4-Dmitrobenzene
4,6-Dinitro-o-cresol
2,4-Omitrophenol
CAS no.

205-99-2
191-24-2
207-08-9
106-51-4
111-91-1
111-44-4
39638-32-9
117-81-7
101-55-3
85-68-7
88-85-7
106-47-8
510-15-6
59-50-7
91-58-7
95-57-8
542-76-7
218-01-9
95-48-7
106-44-5
108-94-1
53-70-3
192-65-4
189-55-9
541-73-1
95-50-1
106-46-7
91-94-1
120-83-2
87-65-0
84-66-2
119-90-4
60-11-7
119-93-7
105-67-9
131-11-3
84-74-2
100-25-4
534-52-1
51-28-5
           1-20

-------
Table  1-1  (continued)
BOAT
reference

102.
103
104.
105.
106
219.
107
108.
109
110.
111.
112
113
114
115
116.
117
118.
119.
120

36
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129.
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
13o.
Parameter
Semivolati les (continued)
2,4-Dinitrotoluene
2,6-Oinitrotoluene
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Di-n-propy Initrosamine
Diphenylamine
Dipheny Initrosamine
1 ,2-Diphenylhydrazine
Fluoranthene
Fluorene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorobutadiene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Hexachloroethane
Hexachlorophene
Hexachloropropene
Indeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene
Isosaf role
Methapyn lene
3-Methylcholanthrene
4,4'-Methylenebis
(2-chloroani 1 me)
Methyl methanesu Ifonate
Naphthalene
1 ,4-Naphthoqumone
1-Naphthylamme
2-Naphthylamme
p-Nitroani 1 me
Nitrobenzene
4-Nitrophenol
N-Nit rosodl -n-buty lam me
N-Nitrosodiethylamme
N-N it rosodl me thy lam me
N-Nit rosomethy let hy lamine
N-Nitrosomorphol me
N-Nitrosopiperidme
n-N itrosopyrrol id me
5-Nitro-o-toluidme
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentach loroethane
Pentach loron 1 1 robenzene
CAS no.

121-14-2
606-20-2
117-84-0
621-64-7
122-39-4
86-30-6
122-66-7
206-44-0
86-73-7
118-74-1
87-68-3
77-47-4
67-72-1
70-30-4
1888-71-7
193-39-5
120-58-1
91-80-5
56-49-5

101-14-4
66-27-3
91-20-3
130-15-4
134-32-7
91-59-8
100-01-6
98-95-3
100-02-7
924-16-3
55-18-5
62-75-9
10595-95-6
59-B9-2
100-75-4
930-55-2
99-65-8
608-93-5
76-01-7
82-68-8
          1-23

-------
Table  1-1  (continued)
BOAT
reference
no.

139.
140.
141.
142.
220.
143.
144.
145.
146.
147.
148.
149.
150.
151.
152.
153.


154.
155.
156.
157.
158
159.
221.
160.
161.
162.
163.
164
165.
166.
167.
168.

169.
170.
171.
Parameter
Semivolat i les (continued)
Pentachlorophenol
Phenacet in
Phenanthrene
Phenol
Phthalic anhydride
2-Picoline
Pronamide
Pyrene
Resorcinol
Saf role
1 ,2, 4, 5-Tetrach lorobenzene
2 , 3 , 4 , 6-Tet rach loropheno 1
1 , 2, 4-Tnch lorobenzene
2, 4, 5-Tnch loropheno 1
2,4,6-Tnchlorophenol
Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)
phosphate
Metals
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryl lium
Cadmium
Chromium (total)
Chromium (hexavalent)
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Si Iver
Tha 1 1 lum
Vanadium
Zinc
Inorqan ics
Cyanide
Fluoride
Sulf ide
CAS no.

87-86-5
62-44-2
85-01-8
108-95-2
85-44-9
109-06-8
23950-58-5
129-00-0
108-46-3
94-59-7
95-94-3
58-90-2
120-82-1
95-95-4
88-06-2

126-72-7

7440-36-0
7440-38-2
7440-39-3
7440-41-7
7440-43-9
7440-47-32
-
7440-50-8
7439-92-1
7439-97-6
7440-02-0
7782-49-2
7440-22-4
7440-28-0
7440-62-2
7440-66-6

57-12-5
16964-48-8
8496-25-8
       1-22

-------
Table  1-1  (continued)
BOAT
reference

172.
173.
174.
175
176.
177
178
179
180
1B1.
182
183
184.
1H5.
186
187
188.
189
190.
191

192.
193.
194.

195.
196.
197
198
199.

200.
201.
202
Parameter
Orqanochlonne pesticides
Aldrin
alpha-BHC
beta-BHC
delta-BHC
gamma -BHC
Chlordane
ODD
DDE
DOT
Dteldr in
Endosu Ifan I
Endosulfan II
Endnn
Endrin aldehyde
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Isodr in
Kepone
Methoxyclor
Toxaphene
Phenoxvacet ic acid herbicides
2,4-Oichlorophenoxyacet ic acid
Si Ivex
2,4,5-T
OrqanoDhosphorous insecticides
Disulfoton
Famphur
Methyl parathion
Parathion
Phorate
PCBs
Aroclor 1016
Aroclor 1221
Aroclor 1232
CAS no.

309-00-2
319-84-6
319-85-7
319-86-8
58-89-9
57-74-9
72-54-8
72-55-9
50-29-3
60-57-1
939-98-8
33213-6-5
72-20-8
7421-93-4
76-44-8
1024-57-3
465-73-6
143-50-0
72-43-5
8001-35-2

94-75-7
93-72-1
93-76-5

298-04-4
52-85-7
298-00-0
56-38-2
298-02-2

12674-11-2
11104-28-2
11141-16-5
             1-23

-------
                          Table 1-1  (continued)
BOAT
reference          Parameter                            CAS  no.
no.

               PCBs (continued)

203.           Aroclor 1242                             53469-21-9
204.           Aroclor 1248                             12672-29-6
205.           Aroclor 1254                             11097-69-1
206.           Aroclor 1260                             11096-82-5

               Dioxins and furans

207.           Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxms
208.           Hexachlorodibenzofurans
209.           Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
210            Pentachlorodibenzofurans
211             Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
212.           Tetrachlorodibenzofurans
213.    2,3.7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin             1746-01-6
                                    1-24

-------
    The initial BOAT constituent list was published in EPA's Generic
Quality Assurance Project Plan, March 1987 (EPA/530-SW-87-011).
Additional constituents will be added to the BOAT constituent list as
additional key constituents are identified for specific waste codes or as
new analytical methods are developed for hazardous constituents.  For
example, since the list was published in March 1987, eighteen additional
constituents  (hexavalent chromium, xylene (all three isomers), benzal
chloride, phthalic anhydride, ethylene oxide, acetone, n-butyl alcohol,
2-ethoxyethanol, ethyl acetate, ethyl benzene, ethyl ether, methanol,
methyl  isobutyl ketone, 2-nitropropane, l,l,2-trichloro-l,2,2-
trifluoroethane, and cyclohexanone) have been added to the list.
    Chemicals  are listed in Appendix VIII if they are shown in scientific
studies to have toxic, carcinogenic, mutagenic, or teratogenic effects on
humans  or other life-forms, and they include such substances as those
identified by  the Agency's Carcinogen Assessment Group as being
carcinogenic.  Including a constituent in Appendix VIII means that the
constituent can be cited as a basis for listing toxic wastes.
    Although  Appendix VII, Appendix VIII, and the F003 and F005
ignitables provide a comprehensive list of RCRA-regulated hazardous
constituents,  not all of the constituents can be analyzed in a complex
waste matrix.  Therefore, constituents that could not be readily analyzed
in an unknown  waste matrix were not included on the initial BOAT list.
As mentioned  above, however, the BOAT constituent list is a continuously
growing list  that does not preclude the addition of new constituents when
analytical methods are developed.
                                    1-25

-------
    There are 5 major reasons that constituents were not included on the

BOAT constituent list:

    (a)  Constituents are unstable.   Based on their chemical  structure,
         some constituents will  either decompose in water or will
         ionize.  For example, maleic anhydride will form maleic acid
         when it comes  in contact with water and copper cyanide will
         ionize to form copper and cyanide ions.  However, EPA may choose
         to regulate the decomposition or ionization products.

    (b)  EPA-approved or verified analytical methods are not available.
         Many constituents, such as  1,3,5-trinitrobenzene, are not
         measured adequately or even detected using any of EPA's
         analytical  methods published in SW-846 Third Edition.

    (c)  The constituent is a member of a chemical group designated in
         Appendix VIII  as not otherwise specified (N.O.S.).  Constituents
         listed as N.O.S., such as chlorinated phenols, are a generic
         group of some types of chemicals for which a single analytical
         procedure is not available.  The .individual members of each such
         group need to be listed to  determine whether the constituents
         can be analyzed.  For each  N.O.S. group, all those constituents
         that can be readily analyzed are included in the BOAT
         constituents list.

    (d)  Available analytical procedures are not appropriate for a
         complex waste matrix.  Some compounds, such as auramine, can be
         analyzed as a pure constituent.  However, in the presence of
         other constituents, the recommended analytical method does not
         positively identify the constituent.  The use of high pressure
         liquid chromotography (HPLC) presupposes a high expectation of
         finding the specific constituents of interest.  In using this
         procedure to screen samples, protocols would have to be
         developed on a case-specific basis to verify the identity of
         constituents present in the samples.  Therefore, HPLC is not an
         appropriate analytical procedure for complex samples containing
         unkown constituents.

    (e)  Standards for analytical instrument calibration are not
         commercially available.  For several constituents, such as
         benz(c)acridine, commercially available standards of a
         "reasonably" pure grade are not available.  The unavailability
         of a standard was determined by a review of catalogs from
         specialty chemical manufacturers.
                                    1-26

-------
    Two constituents (fluoride and sulfide) are not specifically included

in Appendices VII and VIII; however, these compounds are included on the

BOAT list as indicator constituents for compounds from Appendices VII and

VIII such as hydrogen fluoride and hydrogen sulfide, which ionize in

water.

    The BOAT constituent list presented in Table 1-1 is divided into the

following nine groups:

         Volatile organics
         Semivolatile organics
         Metals
         Other inorganics
         Organochlorine pesticides
         Phenoxyacetic acid herbicides
         Organophosphorous insecticides
         PCBs
         Dioxins and furans

The constituents were placed in these categories based on their chemical

properties.  The constituents in each group are expected to behave

similarily during treatment and are also analyzed,  with the exception of

the metals and inorganics, by using the same analytical methods.

    (2)  Constituent Selection Analysis.  The constituents that the

Agency selects for regulation in each treatability  group are,  in general,

those found in the untreated wastes at treatable concentrations.  For

certain waste codes, the target list for the untreated waste may have

been shortened (relative to analyses performed to test treatment

technologies) because of the extreme unlikelihood of the constituent

being present.
                                   1-27

-------
    In selecting constituents for regulation, the first step is to
summarize all the constituents that were found in the untreated waste at
treatable concentrations.  This process involves the use of the
statistical analysis of variance (ANOVA) test, described in Section
1.2.6, to determine if constituent reductions were significant.  The
Agency interprets a significant reduction in concentration as evidence
that the technology actually "treats" the waste.
    There are some instances where EPA may regulate constituents that are
not found in the untreated waste but are detected in the treated
residual.  This is generally the case where presence of the constituents
in the untreated waste interferes with the quantification of the
constituent of concern.  In such instances, the detection levels of the
constituent are relatively high, resulting in a finding of "not detected"
when,  in fact, the constituent is present in the waste.
    After determining which of the constituents in the untreated waste
are present at treatable concentrations, EPA develops a list of potential
constituents for regulation.  The Agency then reviews this list to
determine if any of these constituents can be excluded from regulation
because they would be controlled by regulation of other constituents in
the list.
    EPA performs this indicator analysis for two reasons:  (1)  it reduces
the analytical cost burdens on the treater and (2) it facilitates
implementation of the compliance and enforcement program.   EPA's
rationale for selection of regulated constituents for this waste code is
presented in Section 5 of this background document.
                                  1-28

-------
    (3)  Calculation of Standards.  The final step in the calculation of
the BOAT treatment standard is the multiplication of the average
treatment value by a factor referred to by the Agency as the variability
factor.  This calculation takes into account that even well-designed and
well-operated treatment systems will experience some fluctuations in
performance.  EPA expects that fluctuations will result from inherent
mechanical limitations in treatment control systems, collection of
treated samples, and analysis of these samples.  All of the above
fluctuations can be expected to occur at well-designed and well-operated
treatment facilities.  Therefore, setting treatment standards utilizing a
variability factor should be viewed not as a relaxing of 3004(m)
requirements, but rather as a function of the normal variability of the
treatment processes.  A treatment facility will have to be designed to
meet the mean achievable treatment performance level to ensure that the
performance levels remain within the limits of the treatment standard.
    The Agency calculates a variability factor for each constituent of
concern within a waste treatability group using the statistical
calculation presented in Appendix A.  The equation for calculating the
variability factor is the same as that used by EPA for the development of
numerous regulations in the Effluent Guidelines Program under the Clean
Water Act.  The variability factor establishes the instantaneous maximum
based on the 99th percentile value.
    There is an additional step in the calculation of the treatment
standards in those instances where the ANOVA analysis shows that more
                                    1-29

-------
than one technology achieves a level  of performance that represents
BOAT.  In such instances,  the BOAT treatment standard is calculated by
first averaging the mean performance value for each technology for each
constituent of concern and then multiplying that value by the highest
variability factor among the technologies considered.  This procedure
ensures that all  the BOAT technologies used as the basis for the
standards will achieve full  compliance.
1.2.5    Compliance with Performance Standards
    All the treatment standards reflect performance achieved by the Best
Demonstrated Available Technology (BOAT).  As such, compliance with these
standards only requires that the treatment level be achieved prior to
land disposal.  It does not  require the use of any particular treatment
technology.  While dilution  of the waste as a means to comply with the
standard is prohibited, wastes that are generated in such a way as to
naturally meet the standard  can be land disposed without treatment.  With
the exception of treatment standards that prohibit land disposal, all
treatment standards proposed are expressed as a concentration level.
    EPA has used both total  constituent concentration and TCLP analyses
of the treated waste as a measure of technology performance.  EPA's
rationale for when each of these analytical tests is used is explained in
the following discussion.
    For all organic constituents, EPA  is basing the treatment standards
on the total constituent concentration found in the treated waste.  EPA
based  its decision on the fact that technologies exist to destroy the
                                    1-30

-------
various organics compounds.  Accordingly, the best measure of performance
would be the extent to which the various organic compounds have been
destroyed or the total amount of constituent remaining after treatment.
(NOTE:  EPA's land disposal restrictions for solvent waste codes
F001-F005 (51 PR 40572) uses the TCLP value as a measure of performance.
At the time that EPA promulgated the treatment standards for F001-F005,
useful data were not available on total constituent concentrations in
treated residuals and, as a result, the TCLP data were considered to be
the best measure of performance.)
    For all metal constituents, EPA is using both total constituent
concentration and/or the TCLP as the basis for treatment standards.  The
total constituent concentration is being used when the technology basis
includes a metal recovery operation.  The underlying principle of metal
recovery is the reduction of the amount of metal in a waste by separating
the metal for recovery; therefore, total constituent concentration in the
treated residual is an important measure of performance for this
technology.  Additionally, EPA also believes that it is important that
any remaining metal in a treated residual waste not be in a state that is
easily Teachable; accordingly, EPA is also using the TCLP as a measure of
performance.  It is important to note that for wastes for which treatment
standards are based on a metal recovery process, the facility has to
comply with both the total constituent concentration and the TCLP prior
to land disposal.
                                    1-31

-------
    In cases where treatment standards for metals are not based on

recovery techniques but rather on stabilization,  EPA is using only the

TCLP as a measure of performance.  The Agency's rationale is that

stabilization is not meant to reduce the concentration of metal in a

waste but only to chemically minimize the ability of the metal to leach.

1.2.6    Identification of BOAT

    (1)  Screening of Treatment Data.  This section explains how the

Agency determines which of the treatment technologies represent treatment

by BOAT.  The first activity is to screen the treatment performance data

from each of the demonstrated and available technologies according to the

following criteria:

    (a)  Design and operating data associated with the treatment data
         must reflect a well-designed, well-operated system for each
         treatment data point.  (The specific design and operating
         parameters for each demonstrated technology for this waste code
         are discussed in Section 3.4 of this document.)

    (b)  Sufficient QA/QC data must be available to determine the true
         values of the data from the treated waste.  This screening
         criterion involves adjustment of treated data to take into
         account that the type value may be different from the measured
         value.  This discrepancy generally is caused by other
         constituents in the waste that can mask results or otherwise
         interfere with the analysis of the constituent of concern.

    (c)  The measure of performance must be consistent with EPA's
         approach to evaluating treatment by type of constituents (e.g.,
         total concentration data for organics, and total concentration
         and TCLP for metals in the leachate from the residual).

    In  the absence of data needed to perform the screening analysis, EPA

will make decisions on a case-by-case basis of whether to include the

data.   The factors included in this case-by-case analysis will be the
                                    1-32

-------
actual  treatment levels achieved, the availability of the treatment data
and their completeness (with respect to the above criteria), and EPA's
assessment of whether the untreated waste represents the waste code of
concern.  EPA's application of these screening criteria for this waste
code are provided in Section 4 of this background document.
    (2)  Comparison of Treatment Data.  In cases in which EPA has
treatment data from more than one technology following the screening
activity, EPA uses the statistical method known as analysis of variance
(ANOVA) to determine if one technology performs significantly better.
This statistical method (summarized in Appendix A) provides a measure of
the differences between two data sets.  If EPA finds that one technology
performs significantly better (i.e., the data sets are not homogeneous),
BOAT treatment standards are the level of performance achieved by the
best technology multiplied by the corresponding variability factor for
each regulated constituent.
    If  the differences in the data sets are not statistically
significant, the data  sets are said to be homogeneous.  Specifically, EPA
uses the analysis of variance to determine whether BOAT represents a
level of performance achieved by only one technology or represents a
level of performance achieved by more than one (or all) of the
technologies.   If the  Agency finds that the levels of performance for one
or more technologies are not statistically different, EPA averages the
performance  values achieved by each technology and then multiplies this
value by the largest variability factor associated with any of the
                                    1-33

-------
acceptable technologies.   A detailed discussion of the treatment
selection method and an example of how EPA chooses BOAT from multiple
treatment systems is provided in Section A-l.
    (3)  Quality Assurance/Quality Control.   This section presents the
principal quality assurance/quality control  (QA/QC) procedures employed
in screening and adjusting the data to be used in the calculation of
treatment standards.  Additional QA/QC procedures used in collecting and
screening data for the BOAT program are presented in EPA's Generic
Quality Assurance Project Plan for Land Disposal Restrictions Program
("BOAT") (EPA/530-SW-87-001, March 1987).
    To calculate the treatment standards for the Land Disposal
Restriction Rules, it is first necessary to determine the recovery value
for each constituent (the amount of constituent recovered after spiking,
which  is the addition of a known amount of the constituent, minus the
initial concentration in the samples divided by the amount added) for a
spike  of the treated residual.  Once the recovery value is determined,
the following procedures are used to select the appropriate percent
recovery value to adjust the analytical data:
    (a)  If duplicate spike recovery values are available for the
         constituent of interest, the data are adjusted by the lowest
         available percent recovery value (i.e., the value that will
         yield the most conservative estimate of treatment achieved).
         However, if a spike recovery value of less than 20 percent  is
         reported for a specific constituent, the data are not used  to
         set treatment standards because the Agency does not have
         sufficient confidence  in the reported value to set a national
         standard.
                                    1-34

-------
    (b)   If data are not available for a specific constituent but are
         available for an isomer,  then the spike recovery data are
         transferred from the isomer and the data are adjusted using the
         percent recovery selected according to the procedure described
         in (a)  above.

    (c)   If data are not available for a specific constituent but are
         available for a similar class of constituents (e.g., volatile
         organics, acid-extractable semivolatiles), then spike recovery
         data available for this class of constituents are transferred.
         All  spike recovery values greater than or equal to 20 percent
         for a spiked sample are averaged and the constituent
         concentration is adjusted by the average recovery value.  If
         spiked  recovery data are available for more than one sample, the
         average is calculated for each sample and the data are adjusted
         by the  lowest average value.

    (d)   If matrix spike recovery data are not available for a set of
         data to be used to calculate treatment standards, then matrix
         spike recovery data are transferred from a waste that the Agency
         believes is a similar matrix (e.g., if the data are for an ash
         from incineration, then data from other incinerator ashes could
         be used).  While EPA recognizes that transfer of matrix spike
         recovery data from a similar waste is not an exact analysis,
         this is considered the best approach for adjusting the data to
         account for the fact that most analyses do not result in
         extraction of 100 percent of the constituent.  In assessing the
         recovery data to be transferred, the procedures outlined in (a),
         (b), and (c) above are followed.

    The analytical procedures employed to generate the data used to

calculate the treatment standards are listed in Appendix D of this

document.  In cases where alternatives or equivalent procedures and/or

equipment are allowed in EPA's SW-846, Third Edition (November 1986)

methods, the specific procedures and equipment used are also documented

in this Appendix.  In addition, any deviations from the SW-846, Third

Edition, methods used to analyze the specific waste matrices are

documented.  It  is important to note that the Agency will use the methods

and procedures delineated in Appendix D to enforce the treatment
                                    1-35

-------
standards presented in Section 6 of this document.  Accordingly,
facilities should use these procedures in assessing the performance of
their treatment systems.
1.2.7  BOAT Treatment Standards for "Derived-From" and "Mixed" Wastes
    (1)  Wastes from Treatment Trains Generating Multiple Residues.  In a
number of instances, the proposed BOAT consists of a series of operations
each of which generates a waste residue.  For example, the proposed BOAT
for a certain waste code is based on solvent extraction,  steam stripping,
and activated carbon adsorption.  Each of these treatment steps generates
a waste requiring treatment -- a solvent-containing stream from solvent
extraction, a stripper overhead, and spent activated carbon.  Treatment
of these wastes may generate further residues; for instance, spent
activated carbon (if not regenerated) could be incinerated, generating an
ash and possibly a scrubber water waste.  Ultimately, additional wastes
are generated that may require land disposal.  With respect to these
wastes, the Agency wishes to emphasize the following points:
    (a)  All of the residues from treating the original  listed wastes are
         likewise considered to be the listed waste by virtue of the
         derived-from rule contained in 40 CFR Part 261.3(c)(2).  (This
         point is discussed more fully in (2) below.)  Consequently, all
         of the wastes generated in the course of treatment would be
         prohibited from land disposal unless they satisfy the treatment
         standard or meet one of the exceptions to the prohibition.
    (b)  The Agency's proposed treatment standards generally contain a
         concentration level for wastewaters and a concentration level
         for nonwastewaters.  The treatment standards apply to all of the
         wastes generated in treating the original prohibited waste.
         Thus, all solids generated from treating these wastes would have
                                    1-36

-------
         to meet the treatment standard for nonwastewaters.   All
         derived-from wastes meeting the Agency definition of wastewater
         (less than 1 percent TOC and less than 1  percent total
         filterable solids)  would have to meet the treatment standard for
         wastewaters.  EPA wishes to make clear that this approach is not
         meant to allow partial  treatment in order to comply with the
         applicable standard.

    (c)   The Agency has not performed tests, in all  cases, on every waste
         that can result from every part of the treatment train.
         However, the Agency's treatment standards are based on  treatment
         of the most concentrated form of the waste.  Consequently, the
         Agency believes that the less concentrated wastes generated in
         the course of treatment will also be able to be treated  to meet
         this value.

    (2)   Mixtures and Other Derived-From Residues.  There is a further

question as to the applicability of the BOAT treatment standards  to

residues generated not from treating the waste (as discussed above), but

from other types of management.   Examples are contaminated soil  or

leachate that is derived from managing the waste.   In these cases, the

mixture is still deemed to be the listed waste, either because of the

derived-from rule (40 CFR Part 261.3(c)(2)(i)) or the mixture rule

(40 CFR Part 261.3(a)(2)(iii) and (iv) or because the listed waste is

contained in the matrix (see, for example, 40 CFR Part 261.33(d)).  The

prohibition for the particular listed waste consequently applies  to this

type of waste.

    The Agency believes that the majority of these types of residues can

meet the treatment standards for the underlying listed wastes (with the

possible exception of contaminated soil and debris for which the  Agency

is currently investigating whether it is appropriate to establish a

separate treatability subcategorization).  For the most part, these
                                    1-37

-------
residues will be less concentrated than the original listed waste.  The
Agency's treatment standards also make a generous allowance for process
variability by assuming that all treatability values used to establish
the standard are lognormally distributed.  The waste also might be
amenable to a relatively nonvariable form of treatment technology such as
incineration.  Finally, and perhaps most important, the rules contain a
treatability variance that allows a petitioner to demonstrate that its
waste cannot be treated to the level specified in the rule (40 CFR Part
268.44(a).  This provision provides a safety valve that allows persons
with unusual waste matrices to demonstrate the appropriateness of a
different standard.  The Agency, to date, has not received any petitions
under this provision (for example, for residues contaminated with a
prohibited solvent waste), indicating, in the Agency's view, that the
existing standards are generally achievable.
    (3)  Residues from Managing Listed Wastes or that Contain Listed
         Wastes.  The Agency has been asked if and when residues from
managing hazardous wastes, such as leachate and contaminated ground
water, become subject to the land disposal prohibitions.  Although the
Agency believes this question to be settled by existing rules and
interpretative statements, to avoid any possible confusion the Agency
will address the question again.
    Residues from managing First Third wastes, listed California List
wastes, and  spent solvent and dioxin wastes are all considered to be
subject to the prohibitions for the underlying hazardous waste.  Residues
                                    1-38

-------
from managing California List wastes likewise are subject to the
California List prohibitions when the residues themselves exhibit a
characteristic of hazardous waste.  This determination stems directly
from the derived-from rule in 40 CFR Part 261.3(c)(2) or in some cases
from the fact that the waste is mixed with or otherwise contains the
listed waste.  The underlying principle stated in all of these provisions
is that listed wastes remain listed until delisted.
    The Agency's historic practice in processing delisting petitions
addressing mixing residuals has been to consider them to be the listed
waste and to require that delisting petitioners address all constituents
for which the derived-from waste (or other mixed waste) was listed.   The
language in 40 CFR Part 260.22(b) states that mixtures or derived-from
residues can be delisted provided a delisting petitioner makes a
demonstration identical to that which a delisting petitioner would make
for the underlying waste.  These residues consequently are treated as the
underlying listed waste for delisting purposes.   The statute likewise
takes this position, indicating that soil and debris that are
contaminated with listed spent solvents or dioxin wastes are subject to
the prohibition for these wastes even though these wastes are not the
originally generated waste, but rather are a residual from management
(RCRA section 3004(e)(3}).   It is EPA's view that all such residues  are
covered by the existing prohibitions and treatment standards for the
listed hazardous waste that these residues contain and from which they
are derived.
                                    1-39

-------
1.2.8    Transfer of Treatment Standards
    EPA is proposing some treatment standards that are not based on
testing of the treatment technology of the specific waste subject to the
treatment standard.   Instead,  the Agency has determined that the
constituents present in the subject waste can be treated to the same
performance levels as those observed in other wastes for which EPA has
previously developed treatment data.  EPA believes that transferring
treatment performance for use in establishing treatment standards for
untested wastes is valid technically in cases where the untested wastes
are generated from similar industries, similar processing steps, or have
similar waste characteristics affecting performance and treatment
selection.  Transfer of treatment standards to similar wastes or wastes
from similar processing steps requires little formal analysis.  However,
in the case where only the industry is similar, EPA more closely examines
the waste characteristics prior to concluding that the untested waste
constituents can be treated to levels associated with tested wastes.
    EPA undertakes a two-step analysis when determining whether wastes
generated by different processes within a single industry can be treated
to the same level of performance. First, EPA reviews the available waste
characteristic data to identify those parameters that are expected to
affect treatment selection.  EPA has identified some of the most
important constituents and other parameters needed to select the
treatment technology appropriate for a given waste.  A detailed
discussion of each analysis, including how each parameter was selected
for each waste, can be found in the background document for each waste.
                                    1-40

-------
    Second, when an individual analysis suggests that an untested waste
can be treated with the same technology as a waste for which treatment
performance data are already available, EPA analyzes a more detailed list
of constituents that represent some of the most important waste
characteristics that the Agency believes will affect the performance of
the technology.  By examining and comparing these characteristics, the
Agency determines whether the untested wastes will achieve the same level
of treatment as the tested waste.  Where the Agency determines that the
untested waste is easier to treat than the tested waste, the treatment
standards can be transferred.  A detailed discussion of this transfer
process for each waste can be found in later sections of this document.
1.3    Variance from the BOAT Treatment Standard
    The Agency recognizes that there may exist unique wastes that cannot
be treated to the level specified as the treatment standard.  In such a
case, a generator or owner/operator may submit a petition to the
Administrator requesting a variance from the treatment standard.  A
particular waste may be significantly different from the wastes
considered in establishing treatability groups because the waste contains
a more complex matrix that makes it more difficult to treat.  For
example, complex mixtures may be formed when a restricted waste is mixed
with other waste streams by spills or other forms of inadvertent mixing.
As a result, the treatability of the restricted waste may be altered such
that it cannot meet the applicable treatment standard.
    Variance petitions must demonstrate that the treatment standard
established for a given waste cannot be met.  This demonstration can be
                                   1-41

-------
made by showing that attempts to treat the waste by available
technologies were not successful or by performing appropriate analyses of
the waste, including waste characteristics affecting performance, which
demonstrate that the waste cannot be treated to the specified levels.
Variances will not be granted based solely on a showing that adequate
BOAT treatment capacity is unavailable.  (Such demonstrations can be made
according to the provisions in Part 268.5 of RCRA for case-by-case
extensions of the effective date.)  The Agency will consider granting
generic petitions provided that representative data are submitted to
support a variance for each facility covered by the petition.
    Petitioners should submit at least one copy to:
       The Administrator
       U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
       401 M Street, S.W.
       Washington, DC  20460
    An additional copy marked "Treatability Variance" should be submitted
to:
       Chief, Waste Treatment Branch
       Office of Solid Waste (WH-565)
       U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
       401 M Street, S.W.
       Washington, DC  20460
    Petitions containing confidential  information should be  sent with
only the  inner envelope marked  "Treatability Variance" and "Confidential
Business  Information" and with  the contents marked  in accordance with  the
requirements of 40 CFR Part 2 (41 FR 36902, September 1, 1976, amended by
43  FR 4000).
    The petition should contain the following  information:
                                     1-42

-------
 (1)   The petitioner's name and address.

 (2)   A statement of the petitioner's interest in the proposed action.

 (3)   The name,  address, and EPA identification number of the facility
      generating the waste, and the name  and telephone number of the
      plant contact.

 (4)   The process(es) and feed materials  generating the waste and an
      assessment of whether such process(es) or feed materials may
      produce a  waste that is not covered by the demonstration.

 (5)   A description of the waste sufficient for comparison with the
      waste considered by the Agency in developing BOAT, and an
      estimate of the average and maximum monthly and annual
      quantities of waste covered by the  demonstration. (Note:  The
      petitioner should consult the appropriate BOAT background
      document for determining the characteristics of the wastes
      considered in developing treatment  standards.)

 (6)   If the waste has been treated, a description of the system used
      for treating the waste, including the process design and
      operating  conditions.  The petition should include the reasons
      the treatment standards are not achievable and/or why the
      petitioner believes the standards are based on inappropriate
      technology for treating the waste.  (Note:  The petitioner should
      refer to the BOAT background document as guidance for
      determining the design and operating parameters that the Agency
      used in developing treatment standards.)

 (7)   A description of the alternative treatment systems examined by
      the petitioner (if any); a description of the treatment system
      deemed appropriate by the petitioner for the waste in question;
      and, as appropriate, the concentrations in the treatment
      residual or extract of the treatment residual (i.e., using the
      TCLP where appropriate for stabilized metals) that can be
      achieved by applying such treatment to the waste.

 (8)   A description of those parameters affecting treatment selection
      and waste  characteristics that affect performance, including
      results of all analyses.  (See Section 3.0 for a discussion of
      waste characteristics affecting performance that the Agency has
      identified for the technology representing BOAT.)

 (9)   The dates  of the sampling and testing.

(10)   A description of the methodologies  and equipment used to obtain
      representative samples.
                                1-43

-------
   (11)  A description of the sample handling and preparation techniques,
         including techniques used for extraction, containerization, and
         preservation of the samples.
   (12)  A description of analytical procedures used including QA/QC
         methods.
    After receiving a petition for a variance, the Administrator may
request any additional information or waste samples that may be required
to evaluate and process the petition.  Additionally, all petitioners must
certify that the information provided to the Agency is accurate under
40 CFR Part 268.4(b).
    In determining whether a variance will be granted, the Agency will
first look at the design and operation of the treatment system being
used.  If EPA determines that the technology and operation are consistent
with BOAT,  the Agency will  evaluate the waste to determine if the waste
matrix and/or physical parameters are such that the BOAT treatment
standards reflect treatment of this waste.  Essentially, this latter
analysis will concern the parameters affecting treatment selection and
waste characteristics affecting performance parameters.
    In cases where BOAT is  based on more than one technology, the
petitioner will  need to demonstrate that the treatment standard cannot be
met using any of the technologies, or that none of the technologies are
appropriate for treatment of the waste.   After the Agency has made a
determination on the petition,  the Agency's findings will be published in
the Federal  Register, followed by a 30-day period for public comment.
                                   1-44

-------
After review of the public comments, EPA will publish its final
determination in the Federal Register as an amendment to the treatment
standards in 40 CFR Part 268, Subpart D.
                                   1-45

-------
2.0       INDUSTRY AFFECTED AND WASTE CHARACTERIZATION



          As described in Section 1.0, the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amend-

ments (HSWA) specify dates when particular groups of hazardous wastes are

prohibited from land disposal.  The amendments also require the Environmental

Protection Agency to establish treatment standards for each waste that, when

met, allow that waste to be land disposed.  Wastes generated by the refining

industry are part of the first third of listed wastes to be evaluated by the

Agency.  The purpose of this section is to describe the industry affected by

the land disposal restrictions for petroleum refining wastes and to present

available characterization data for these wastes.



          Under 40 CFR 261.32 (hazardous wastes from specific sources), wastes

identified as K048, K049, K050, K051, and K052 are specifically generated by

the petroleum refining industry and are listed as follows:


          K048:     Dissolved air flotation (DAF) float from the petroleum
                    refining industry;

          K049:     Slop oil emulsion solids from the petroleum refining
                    industry;

          K050:     Heat exchanger bundle cleaning sludge from the petroleum
                    refining industry;

          K051:     API separator sludge from the petroleum refining industry;
                    and

          K052:     Tank bottoms (leaded) from the petroleum refining
                    industry.


          The Agency has determined that these wastes (K048-K052) represent a

separate waste treatability group based on their similar physical and chemical


                                      2-1

-------
characteristics.  Additionally, the Agency expects that these wastes will



typically be mixed prior to treatment.  As a result, EPA examined the specific



similarities in waste composition, applicable and demonstrated treatment



technologies, and attainable treatment performance in order to support a



single regulatory approach for all five petroleum refinery wastes.








2.1       Industry Affected and Process Description








          Under 40 CFR 261.32 (hazardous wastes from specific sources) wastes



identified as K048, K049, K050, K051, and K052 are specifically generated by



the petroleum refining industry.  The four digit standard industrial classifi-



cation (SIC) code most often reported for the petroleum refining industry is



2911.  The Agency estimates that there are approximately 193 facilities that



may produce the listed wastes K048, K049, K050, K051 and K052.  Information



from trade associations provides a geographic distribution of the number of



petroleum refineries across the United States.  Table 2-1 lists the number of



facilities by state.  Table 2-2 summarizes the number of facilities for each



EPA region.  Figure 2-1 illustrates this data geographically on a map of the



United States.








          The petroleum refining  industry consists of individual facilities



that convert crude oil into numerous  products including gasoline, kerosene,



fuel oils, lubricating oils, petrochemical feedstocks, and miscellaneous



byproducts.  Petroleum refineries range  in complexity and size from small



plants with  tens of employees  to  some of the largest industrial complexes in
                                      2-2

-------
                                         Table 2-1

                      FACILITIES PRODUCING K048-K052 WASTES BY STATE
       State
    (EPA Region)
Alabama (IV)
Alaska (X)
Arizona (IX)
Arkansas (VI)
California (IX)
Colorado (VIII)
Connecticut (I)
Delaware (III)
Washington, DC (III)
Florida (IV)
Georgia (IV)
Hawaii (IX)
Idaho (X)
Illinois (V)
Indiana (V)
Iowa (VII)
Kansas (VII)
Kentucky (IV)
Louisiana (VI)
Maine (I)
Maryland (III)
Massachusetts (I)
Michigan (V)
Minnesota (V)
Mississippi (IV)
Missouri (VII)
Number of
Facilities

     2
     6
     1
     4
    29
     2
     0
     1
     0
     1
     2
     2
     0
     7
     4
     0
     7
     2
    18
     0
     0
     0
     4
     2
     5
     0
      State
   (EPA Region)

Montana (VIII)
Nebraska (VII)
Nevada (IX)
New Hampshire (I)
New Jersey (II)
New Mexico (VI)
New York (II)
North Carolina (IV)
North Dakota (VIII)
Ohio (V)
Oklahoma (VI)
Oregon (X)
Pennsylvania (III)
Puerto Rico (II)
Rhode Island (I)
South Carolina (IV)
South Dakota (VIII)
Tennessee (IV)
Texas (VI)
Utah (VIII)
Vermont (I)
Virginia (III)
Virgin Islands (II)
Washington (X)
West Virginia (III)
Wisconsin (V)
Wyoming (VIII)
 Number of
Facilities

      5
      0
      1
      0
      6
      3
      0
      0
      2
      5
      6
      1
      8
      1
      0
      0
      0
      1
     31
      6
      0
      1
      1
      7
      2
      1
      6
Reference:  Cantrell,  Ailleen.  "Annual Refining Survey." Oil and Gas Journal.
            Vol. 83, No.  13. March 30, 1987.
                                        2-3

-------
                                         Table 2-2

                    FACILITIES PRODUCING K048-K052 WASTES BY EPA REGION
                                     Totals by Region
                                      EPA    Number of
                                    Region   Facilities

                                     I            0
                                     II           8
                                     III         12
                                     IV          13
                                     V           23
                                     VI          62
                                     VII          7
                                     VIII        21
                                     IX          33
                                     X           jjt

                                     TOTAL      193


Reference:  Cantrell,  Ailleen.   "Annual Refining Survey."  Oil and Gas Journal.
                                Vol.  83, No.  13.  March 30, 1987.
                                        2-4

-------
                      FIGURE  2-1
FACILITIES PRODUCING K048-K052 WASTES BY STAtE AND EPA REGION

-------
the United States.  A number of unit operations are used in the refining of
crude oil.  The unit operations employed at an individual refinery depend upon
the type of crude oil processed; the size, location, and age of the facility;
and the market for the petroleum products.

          The initial processing unit operation at a refinery and the only
unit operation that is used at every refinery is distillation of the crude
oil.  Distillation separates the raw material (crude oil) into several streams
with different boiling point ranges, including light gaseous streams, gaso-
line, diesel oil, furnace oil, and heavy ends.  Generally,  the different
streams are further processed to produce finished petroleum products.

          The light gaseous streams are usually burned in process heaters or
boilers to provide heat or steam for the refinery.  The heavier gaseous
products, propane and butane, are liquified and sold as products.  The gaso-
line stream is further treated at the refinery to improve its octane rating to
allow it to be burned in modern automobile engines.  Downstream unit opera-
tions such as isomerization or catalytic reforming are used to increase the
octane rating to the desired specifications.   The diesel and furnace oil
streams are processed to remove undesirable sulfur compounds.   The heavier or
higher boiling streams can either be processed into lighter products or made
into lubricating or specialty oils.   Fluid catalytic cracking units, hydrogen
cracking units,  and coking units can be used  to convert the heavier distilla-
tion products into gases, gasolines, fuel oils,  and petroleum coke.  For
production of lubricating oils, the heavy distillation products are dewaxed,
                                      2-6

-------
solvent-refined, or hydrogen-treated.  It is possible to make a wide range of



miscellaneous products at a petroleum refinery, including aromatic organic



compounds (benzene, toluene, and xylene), greases, waxes, and asphalt.  Many



additional unit operations (separation steps) are required to manufacture this



wide variety of products.








          Wastes are generated by the various operations conducted by the



refining industry.  The generation of K048-K052 is depicted in Figure 2-2.








          Wastewaters are generated throughout the refining process and are



commonly treated at wastewater treatment facilities within the refineries.



The listed wastes K048, K049, and K051 are generated as residuals from waste-



water treatment operations.  A list of unit operations typically found in the



petroleum refining industry and the types of wastewater generated by these



operations is presented in Table 2-3.  In distillation operations, steam is



sometimes injected into the columns to facilitate the separation.  The con-



densed steam forms a wastewater stream containing oil.  Steam is also used to



produce the vacuum conditions under which some unit operations are conducted.



Again, the steam condenses to form a wastewater in which oil is a contaminant.



Another source of wastewater is the water that is present in the crude oil



when it arrives at the refinery.  These sources of wastewater, along with any



cooling water that contains oil, make up most of the flow to a refinery's



wastewater treatment plant.
                                      2-7

-------
I
00

; ,
Crude oil J Crude [ ^ Process _ Tank ' ^ Refinery S&»°nd

1 distillation | ""~ units """ farm products Water

K050 K052
(Heat exchanger (Leaded tank
bundle cleaning bottoms)
1 sludge) 1 11
Oil

Q|_._ ..[I
treatment
Water Chemical nuft«n°nbalance

r - t I
	 ^ API Plate 1 Air Eaualization fc. Biol°9ical fc. Retention 	 .
^ separator ^ separators flotation ^ "• treatment Pona
	 1 T
Sanitary
, , 1 sewage


1



u
1
                K051(API Separator Sludge)
                                                                         Figure 2-2


                                                        Generation  of K048,  K049, K050. K051  and K052

-------
                                   Table 2-3

         GENERATION OF WASTEWATERS IN THE PETROLEUM REFINING INDUSTRY
Unit operation

Desalting
Fractionation:
vacuum, atmospheric
flash, distillation
Cracking: catalytic,
visbreaking, thermal,
hydrocracking

Reforming
Alkylation
 Hydrotreating
 Polymerization
 Isomerization
Function

Reduce inorganic salts and
and suspended solids in
crude to prevent fouling of
equipment; remove inorganic
impurities that poison
catalysts

Separate constituents of
crude oil
Convert heavy oil fractions
into lighter oil fractions
Convert naphthas to finished
high-octane gasoline
Convert gaseous hydrocarbons
to high-octane fuel
Saturate olefins and remove
contaminants such as sulfur,
nitrogen and oxygen compounds,
Convert olefins to high-octane
gasoline
Convert light gasoline
materials  into high-octane
isomers for fuel
Waste generated

Desalting sludge;
desalter brine
Wastewater from over-
head accumulators;
discharge from oil
sampling lines; oil
emulsions from con-
densers; barometric
condenser water

Wastewater from over-
head accumulators and
steam strippers

Wastewater from over-
head accumulators on
stripping towers.

Wastewater from over-
head accumulators in
fractionation section;
alkylation reactor;
caustic wash

Wastewater from over-
head accumulators on
fractionators and steam
strippers; sour water
stripper bottoms

Wastewater from caustic
scrubbers and pretreat-
ment washwater towers

Wastewater from leaks
and spills
                                      2-9

-------
                             Table 2-3 (continued)

         GENERATION OF WASTEWATERS IN THE PETROLEUM REFINING INDUSTRY
Unit operation

Solvent refining
and extraction of
oil stocks
Dewaxing
Coking
Aromatic
extraction
Deasphalting
Drying and
sweetening
Grease
manufacture
 Lubricating
 oil  finishing
 Hydrogen
 manufacture
Function

Obtain lube oil fractions and
aromatics from feedstocks
containing hydrocarbons and
undesirable materials

Remove wax from lube oil
stocks to produce products
with low pour points and to
recover wax for further pro-
cessing

Convert heavy oil fractions
into lighter oil fractions
and into solid petroleum coke
Recovery of benzene, toluene,
and xylene from gasoline
stocks
Separate asphalts or resins
from vacuum distillation
residuals; recover paraffinic
catalytic cracking stock from
distillation residuals

Remove sulfur compounds; im-
prove color, odor; oxidation
stability; inhibitor response;
remove water, carbon dioxide,
and other impurities

Produce wide range of lubri-
cating greases
Produce motor oils and lubri-
cating greases
 Produce hydrogen needed  for
 refining processes
Waste generated

Wastewater from bottom
of fractionation towers
Wastewater from leaks
and spills
Cutting water blowdown;
fractionation section
overhead accumulator
waters

Wastewater from over-
head accumulator on
stripping towers and
condensers

Sour water from over-
head condensers on
steam strippers; spills
Spent caustic; waste-
water from water wash-
ing of treated product;
regeneration of treat-
ing solution

Wastewater from leaks
and washing of batch
process units

Wastewater from rinses
and clay treatment;
sludge from sampling;
leaks

Wastewater from desul-
furization unit
                                       2-10

-------
                             Table 2-3 (continued)

         GENERATION OF WASTEWATERS IN THE PETROLEUM REFINING INDUSTRY
Unit operation

Storage tanks



Sulfur recovery
Blending and
packaging
Cooling water
system
Surface and
storm water
collection

Utilities
Marine  terminals
 General
 wastewaters
Function

Storage of crude oil, inter-
mediates, and final products
Removal of sulfur compounds
from hydrocarbon streams and
recovery of sulfur product

Produce and package final
products
Heat exchanger operation
Treatment of storm and
surface drainage
Steam and electricity
generation

Load and unload marine vessels
with crude oil and refined
products

Maintenance
Waste generated

Settled water and
sludge from tank
bottoms and cleaning

Spent caustics; spent
amine solution; spent
stretford solution

Wastewater from tank
wash; vessel cleaning
water

Slowdown from cooling
tower systems; once-
through cooling water

Wastewater from storm
and surface drainage
Boiler blowdown
Ballast water
Wash water; pump gland
water; leaks and spills
on every operation
 Sources:

 Jacobs Engineering Company,  Assessment  of  Hazardous Waste Management,  196?
  (Reference  3).
 Jones, H.R.  Pollution Control  (Reference  11)
 Gloyna and Ford,  Characteristics  and  Pollutional  Problems (Reference  12).
                                       2-11

-------
          Some basic wastewater treatment operations are common to most



wastewater treatment facilities within petroleum refineries.  Oil and solids



are separated from the wastewater in gravity separators.  Operations such as



air flotation can be used to further enhance oil removal from wastewater.



Aeration and biological activity are then used to reduce the organic content



of the waste, and filtration can be used to remove any suspended solids.







          Dissolved air flotation (DAF) is used by petroleum refineries for



separating suspended and colloidal materials from process wastewater.  The DAF



unit separates oily wastes and suspended solids from water by introducing tiny



air bubbles into the water.  The bubbles become attached to the oil droplets



and suspended solids that are dispersed through the wastewater.  The resultant



oil/air bubbles rise through the wastewater and collect on the water's sur-



face, where they are removed by surface-skimming devices.  The material



skimmed from the surface, referred to as "DAF float" is the listed waste K048.



Some settling of solids in the DAF unit may occur resulting in the generation



of a solids residual during unit cleanout.







          Process wastewater from refining operations is in many cases treated



in an oil/water/solids separator where the waste separates by gravity into a



multiphase mixture.  The skimmings from the primary separator generally



consist of a three-phase mixture of water, oil, and an emulsified (insepara-



ble) layer.  These skimmings are collected in a "slop oil system" where the



three phases are separated.  The emulsified layer is the listed waste K049-
                                      2-12

-------
          Heat exchangers are utilized throughout petroleum refining pro-



cesses.  Bundles (groupings of tubes) from these heat exchangers are periodi-



cally cleaned to remove deposits of scale and sludge.  Depending upon the



characteristics of the deposits, the outsides of the tube bundles may be



washed, brushed, or sandblasted, while the tube insides can be wiped, brushed,



or rodded out.  The solids or sludge resulting from this cleaning operation



forms the listed waste K050.







          API separators are used in petroleum refining operations to remove



floating oil and suspended solids from the wastewater.  In an API separator,



oily wastewater enters one end of a rectangular channel, flows through the



length of the channel, and discharges at the other end.  A sufficient resi-



dence time is provided to allow oil droplets to float and coalesce at the



surface of the wastewater.  An oil skimmer is provided near the end of the



separator to collect floating oil.  Solids that have settled out of the water



are scraped along the channel bottom to a sludge collecting hopper.  The API



separator sludge is the listed waste K051.







          Leaded petroleum products are stored in tanks after being separated



in distillation columns.  As cooling occurs, water separates from the hydro-



carbon phase and is drained into the refinery wastewater system.  Solids form



as corrosion products in the storage tank.  These solids are periodically



removed during tank cleaning, generating the listed waste K052.
                                      2-13

-------
2.2       Waste Characterization



          The approximate concentrations of major constituents comprising

K048-K052 wastes are included in the following table.  The percent concentra-

tions in the wastes were estimated using available chemical analyses.  Calcu-

lations supporting these estimates are presented in Appendix B.


                                                  Concentration
Constituent                        K048     K049     K050     K051     K052
Water                               81        50       44       60       18
Oil and grease                      12        37        7       17       12
Dirt, sand, and other solids         6        12       48       22       69
BOAT List constituents              11        11       11       11       11
     Total                         100*     100*     100*     100*     100*


BDAT List constituents (organics and inorganics) cumulatively comprise less

than one percent of each waste stream.   Tables 2-4 through 2-8 present, by

waste code, the ranges of BDAT List constituents (volatiles,  semivolatiles,

metals, and other inorganics) and other parameters identified as present in

the waste.  These data were obtained from a variety of sources including

literature, and sampling and analysis episodes.  Each waste contains mono- and

poly-nuclear aromatic compounds such as toluene, xylene, phenol, naphthalene,

phenanthrene, and pyrene.  The wastes also contain metals including arsenic,

chromium, lead, nickel, selenium, vanadium, and zinc.  Additionally, the

wastes are characterized by high concentrations of filterable solids.



2.3       Determination of Waste Treatability Group



          Fundamental to waste treatment is the concept that the type of

treatment technology used and the level of treatment achieved depend on the

                                     2-14

-------
physical and chemical characteristics of the waste.  In cases where EPA



believes that constituents present in wastes represented by different codes



can be treated to similar concentrations by using the same technologies, the



Agency combines the codes into one treatability group.  The five listed wastes



from the petroleum refining industry (K048-K052) are generated by the treat-



ment of refinery process wastewaters, from heat exchanger cleaning, and from



product storage operations.








          Based on a careful review of the generation of these wastes and all



available data characterizing these wastes, the Agency has determined that



these wastes (K048-K052) represent a separate waste treatability group, due to



the fact that all of these wastes are generated by the refining process, and



the belief that constituents present in these wastes can be treated to similar



concentrations using the same technologies.  Specifically, K049 waste (slop



oil emulsion solids) is generated by the treatment of refinery process waste-



waters as are K048 (DAF float) and K051 (API separator sludge).  K050 waste



(heat exchanger bundle cleaning sludge) is generated within a refinery by the



cleaning of heat exchangers.  Heat exchangers are used throughout the refining



process to provide the heat exchange between refinery process streams.  K052



waste (leaded tank bottoms) is generated within a refinery by the storage of



leaded petroleum products.  These refinery process wastes contain the same



types of constituents, as shown on Tables 2-2 and 2-4 through 2-8,  and are



expected to be treatable to similar levels using the same technology.








          The wastes in this treatability group are comprised of water,  oil



and grease, dirt,  sand, and other solids, and organic and metal BDAT List




                                      2-15

-------
constituents.  Typically, organic constituents present in these wastes are



mono- and poly-nuclear aromatic compounds such as toluene, xylene, phenol,



naphthalene, phenanthrene, and pyrene.  Metal constituents present in these



wastes include arsenic, chromium, lead, nickel, selenium, vanadium, and zinc.



Although the concentrations of specific constituents will vary from facility



to facility, all of the wastes contain similar levels of BOAT organics and



metals and have high filterable solids content.  Additionally, the Agency



expects that these wastes will typically be mixed and treated together in the



same treatment system.  As a result, EPA has examined the sources and charac-



teristics of the wastes, applicable technologies, and attainable treatment



performance in order to support a single regulatory approach for these five



refinery wastes.
                                      2-16

-------
                                                            Table 2-4
ro
l
                        Source of Data:
                                           AVAILABLE CHARACTERIZATION DATA FOR K048
                                                             	Untreated  waste  concentration,  (ppm)
                                           (a)
   BDAT ORGANICS

      Volatiles
21 .
226.
43.
215-
217.

62.
70.
80.
98.
109.
121 .
141 .
142 .
145.
BDAT
154.
155.
156.
157.
158.
159.
160.
161 .
162.
163.
164.
165.
167.
168.
(a)
(b)
Dichlorodifluorome thane
Ethyl benzene
To 1 uene

Xylene (total)
Semi vo 1 at i 1 es
Benzo(a)pyrene
Bis(2-ethylhexyl )ph thai ate
Chrysene
Di-n-butylph thai ate
F 1 uorene
Naphthal ene
Phenathrene
Phenol
Pyrene
METALS
Ant imony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryl 1 ium
Cadmium
Chromium (total )
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Sel enium
Si 1 ver
Vanadi um
Zinc
U.S. EPA, Amoco Onsite Engini
Jacobs Engineering Company, I
                                      <14-310
                                      <14-120
                                       22-120

                                      <14-120
                                         <20
                                      <20-59
                                      <20-22
                                       67-190
                                       31-32
                                       93-110
                                       77-86
                                         <20
                                       31-35
                                                          (b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
                                                   0.004-1.75
                                                         3.0-210
<6-7
4.9-6. 1
59-67
<0. 1
0.4-0.7
810-960
47-56
330-410
0.11-0.16
13-16
7.5-1 1
<0.9
370-460
380-450
-
0.05-10.5
-
0.0012-0.25
-
28-260 1
0.05-21 .3
2.3-1 ,250
0.07-0.89
0.025-15
0.1-4.2
0.0013-2.8
0.05-0. 15
10-1825
-
<3.0
172-349
-
<0.25
,057-3,435
-
1 .6-450
1-2
-
4-6
<0.3
-
-
                                                                            270-560
                                                                            4.9-33
                                                                              4-6
                                                                             <0.3
                                                                                         0.04-0.11  2.5-10.94

                                                                                        0.05-13.8   6.5-73
(c)  Delisting petition #386 (Reference  17).
(d)  Delisting petition #469 (Reference  20),
(e)  Delisting petition #421 (Reference  19).
(f)  Delisting petition #396 (Reference  18).
    Data are not  available for this  constituent.
                                                                                                                 Range
                                                                                                                     <14-310
                                                                                                                     <14-120
                                                                                                                      22-120

                                                                                                                     <14-120
                                             0.004-<20
                                               <20-59
                                               <20-22
                                                67-190
                                                31-32
                                                93-110
                                                77-86
                                               3.0-210
                                                31-35
                                                                                                                      <6
                                                                                                                    0.05
                                                                                                                      59
                                                                                                                  0.0012
                                                                                                                   <0. 25
                                                                                                                    0.04
                                                                                                                    0.05
                                                                                                                    0.05
                                                                                                                    0.07
                                                                                                                   0.025
                                                                                                                     0. 1
                                                                                                                  0.0013
                                                                                                                    0.05
                                                                                                                      10
                                                  •7
                                                  -10.5
                                                  -349
                                                  -0.25
                                                  -0.7
                                                  •3,435
                                                  •56
                                                  •1 ,250
                                                  -0.89
                                                  -16
                                                  -1 1
                                                  -6
                                                  -460
                                                  •1 ,825

-------
                                                          Table 2-4 (Continued)


                                                AVAILABLE CHARACTERIZATION DATA FOR K048


                                           	Untreated waste concentration, (ppm)	
                          Source of Data:     (a)            (b)          (c)          (d)        (e)          (f)        Range

     BDAT INORGANICS

     169.  Cyanide                          <0.1-1.0   0.01-1.1         -            -          -            -       0.01-1.1
     171.  Sulfide                          130-2800        -                                                         130-2800



     OTHER PARAMETERS

     Filterable solids (%)                     69
     Oil and grease content (%)                129
     Water content (%)                         819
to
 I
M
Co    (a) U.S.  EPA,  Amoco Onsite Engineering  Report, February 29, 1988 (Reference 6).
     (b) Jacobs Engineering Company,  Assessment  of Hazardous Waste Practices, 1976 (Reference 3).
     (c) Delisting  petition #386 (Reference  17).
     (d) Delisting  petition #469 (Reference  20).
     (e) Delisting  petition #421 (Reference  19).
     (f) Delisting  petition #396 (Reference  18).
     (g) Calculations in Appendix B.
         Data  are not available for this  constituent.

-------
N>
I
                                                     Table 2-5

                                     AVAILABLE CHARACTERIZATION DATA FOR K049

                                        	Untreated waste concentration,  (ppm)
                 Source of Data:

BOAT ORGANICS
      Volatiles
  4.  Benzene
  8.  Carbon disulfide
226.  Ethyl benzene
 43.  Toluene
215-
217.  Xylene (total)

      Semivolatiles
 57.  Anthracene
 62.  Benzo(a)pyrene
 70.  Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
 80.  Chrysene
 96.  2,4-dimethylphenol
121.  Naphthalene
141.  Phenanthrene
142.  Phenol
145.  Pyrene

BOAT METALS
154.  Antimony
155.  Arsenic
156.  Barium
157.  Beryllium
158.  Cadmium
159.  Chromium (total)
221.  Chromium (hexavalent)
                                            (a)
(b)
(c)
(e)
                                         0.002-0.18
                                           5.7-127
                                             7.4

                                           0.0025
                                             0.19
                                             525
95
ND
120
210
150
<40
<40
<40
40
<40
<40
87
<40
<40
<3.2
3.9
115
<0.1
<0.4
134
<0.05
ND-1600
0.15-0.96
_
240-18,000
-
ND-58
-
ND-29
ND-44
ND-3.3
160-680
ND-390
ND-8.9
33-110
ND-19
3-30
87-370
ND-0.29
0.7-4.4
150-1400
-
Range
                    476
                <2.2-9.6
                  28-54.2
                     0.35
                     28.8
                28.9-512.5
                0.02-O.9
                                                                                                 ND-1,600
                                                                                                 ND-0.96
                                                                                                    120
                                                                                                210-18,000

                                                                                                    150
                                          ND-58
                                       0.002-<40
                                          ND-<40
                                          ND-44
                                          ND-<40
                                         <40-680
                                          ND-390
                                          ND-127
                                          33-110
            ND-19
          <2.2-30
            28-370
            ND-0.35
             0.19-28.8
           28.9-1,400
           0.02-<1.9
      (a) Jacobs Engineering Company, Assessment of Hazardous Waste Practices, 1976 (Reference 3).
      (b) U.S. EPA,  Conoco Characterization Report, February 22, 1988 (Reference 13).
      (c) Delisting  petition #503  (Reference 14).
      (d) API, Refinery Solid Waste Survey, 1983 (Reference 2).
      (e) Delisting  petitions #481,#386,#530,#264,#426, and #469 (References 21, 17, 23, 24, 25, and 20).
      ND The  compound was not detected above the detection limit; the detection limit was not reported.
        - Data are not available for this constituent.

-------
I
NJ
O
                                               Table 2-5 (Continued)

                                     AVAILABLE CHARACTERIZATION DATA  FOR K049

                                    	Untreated waste concentration,  (ppm)
                    Source of Data:
       (a)
     BOAT METALS (Continued)
     160.  Copper
     161.  Lead
     162.  Mercury
     163.  Nickel
     164.  Selenium
     165.  Silver
     167.  Vanadium
     168.  Zinc

     BOAT INORGANICS
     169.  Cyanide
     170.  Fluoride
     171.  Sulfide
     OTHER PARAMETERS
     BTU content (Btu/lb)
     Filterable solids (%)
     Oil and grease content (%)
     Water content (%)
     pH (standard units)
     TOX (?)
        48
      28.1
      0.59
        50
       1.0
       0.4
        25
       250
0.000012-52.5
      1501
       128
       378
        7.4
    Negligible1
 (b)
65.3
31.9
 0.6
 9.2
<5.0
<0.6
 2.5
 142
<0.5
1.31
34.4
 (c)
28-3900
ND-32
20-86
ND-4.6

13-60
302
           (e)
   79.8
21.95-2146
   0.15
  50.62
<0.44-4.8
<0.38-<4.0
   5.56
   72.8
               Range
   48-79.8
21.95-3,900
   ND-32
  9.2-86
   ND-5.0
<0.38-<4.0
  2.5-60
 72.8-250
                           0.000012-52.5
                                  1.31
                                  34.4
     (a)  Jacobs Engineering Company,  Assessment of  Hazardous Waste Practices,  1976  (Reference 3).
     (b)  U.S.  EPA,  Conoco Characterization  Report,  February 22,  1988  (Reference  13).
     (c)  Delisting  petition #503 (Reference 14).
     (d)  API,  Refinery Solid Waste Survey,  1983 (Reference 2).
     (e)  Delisting  petitions 1481,1386,1530,1264,1126, and #469  (References 21,  17, 23, 24, 25, and 20),
     (f)  Environ Corporation,  Characterization of Listed Waste Streams  (Reference 15).
     (g)  Calculations in Appendix B.

     ND  The compound was not  detected  above  the detection limit.
      - Data are not available for this constituent.

-------
t-0
I
l-o
             Source of Data:

BOAT ORGANICS

     Semivolatiles

 62.  Benzo(a)pyrene
142.  Phenol

BOAT METALS

155.  Arsenic
157.  Beryllium
158.  Cadmium
159.  Chromium (total)
221.  Chromium (hexavalent)
160.  Copper
161.  Lead
162.  Mercury
163.  Nickel
164.  Selenium
165.  Silver
167.  Vanadium
168.  Zinc

BOAT INORGANICS

169.  Cyanide
                                                       Table 2-6

                                       AVAILABLE CHARACTERIZATION DATA FOR K050

                                       	Untreated waste concentration, (ppm)
                                         (a)
11-1,600


25-1,100
                   (b)
                      (c)
                 (d)
                                                        0.7-3.6
                                                        8-18.5
  10.2-11
 0.05-0.34
   1-1.5
  310-311

   67-75
  0.5-155
 0.14-3.6
  61-170
  2.4-52
0.0007-0.01
  0.7-50
  91-297
                                                      0.0004-3.3
  206-492
0.01-0.016

 13.7-166
                                                                                       42-226
   Range
                                                               0.7-3.6
                                                               8-18.5
  10-2.11
 0.05-0.34
  1.0-1.5
 11-1,600
 0.01-<1.0
   67-75
 0.5-1,100
 0.14-3.6
  61-170
  2.4-52
0.0007-0.01
  0.7-50
  91-297
                                                             0.0004-3.3
         (a) API,  Refinery Solid Waste Survey, 1983 (Reference 2).
         (b) Jacobs  Engineering Company, Assessment of Hazardous Wastes Practices,  1976  (Reference 3).
         (c) Delisting petition #481 (Reference 21).
         (d) Delisting petition #386 (Reference 17).
          - Data are not available for this constituent.

-------
ISJ
I
NO
Ni
                                                Table 2-6  (Continued)

                                       AVAILABLE CHARACTERIZATION DATA FOR K050
       OTHER PARAMETERS
       BTU content  (BTU/lb)                                               1,500a
       Filterable solids  (%)                                               48b
       Oil and grease  content  (%)                                           7b
       Water content (%)                                                   44b
       pH (standard units)                                                  7a
       TOX (%)                                                         Negligible3


       a Environ Corporation,  Characterization of Listed Waste Streams (Reference 15),
         Calculations  in  Appendix B.

-------
                 Table 2-7



AVAILABLE CHARACTERIZATION DATA FOR K051
                           Untreated waste concentration, (ppm)











Source of
BOAT ORGANICS
Volati les
226. Ethyl benzene
43. Toluene
215-
217. Xylene (total)
Semi vol at i 1 es
52. Acenaphthene
59. Benz(a)anthracene
62. Benzo (a)pyrene
Data: (a)


46-52
33-71

71-83

33
22-29
0.002-45
(b) (c) (d) (e)


	 	 	 	
	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	
	 	 	 	
0.002-4.5 	 	 	
70. Bis(2-ethylhexyl )phthalate 26-30 	 	 	 	






M
1
to
OJ















80. Chrysene
98. Di-n-butylphthalate
109. Fluorene
121 . Naphthalene
141. Phenanthrene
142. Phenol
145. Pyrene

BOAT METALS
154. Antimony
1 55 . Arseni c
156. Barium
157. Beryl 1 i urn
158. Cadmium
159. Chromium (total)
221. Chromium (hexavalent)
160. Copper
161. Lead
162. Mercury
163. Nickel
164. Selenium
165. Silver
167. Vanadium
168. Zinc
45-51
43-230
33-37
150-170
1 10-120
<20
62-74


9-18
5.4-9.7
72-120
<0. 1
1.3-1.7
730-1 100
22®
130-170
640-940
0.07-0.31
30-37
0.5-1 .6
1 .4
260-350
570-820
(a) U.S. EPA, Amoco Onsite Engineering Report,
(b) Jacobs Engineering Company, Assessment of





(c) Delisting petition #481
(d) Delisting petition #386
(e) Delisting petition #205
(f) Delisting petition #469
— Data are not available
(Reference 21 ).
(Reference 17).
(Reference 16) .
(Reference 20) .
	 	 	 	
	 	 	 	
	 	 	 	
	 	 	 	
	 	 	 	
3.8-156.7 	 	 	
	 	 	 	


	 	 	 	
0.1-32 	 	 <3.0
	 	 	 188-412
0.0012-0.24 	 	 	
0.024-3.0 	 	 <0.25
0.1-6790 800-3220 150-875 535-3679
	 <1.0 0.010-0.036 	
2.5-550 	 	 	
0.25-1290 2120-2480 9.5-23.3 53-173
0.04-6.2 	 	 3.0
0.25-150.4 	 	 	
0.005-7.6 	 	 2-12
0.05-3 	 	 <0.3
1-48.5 	 	 	
25-6596 	 	 	
February 29, 1988 (Reference 6).
Hazardous Waste Practices, 1976 (Reference 3).




(f) Range


	 46-52
	 33-71

	 71-83

	 33
	 22-29
	 0.002-45
	 26-30
	 45-51
	 43-230
	 33-37
	 150-170
	 110-120
	 3.8-156.7
	 62-74


	 9-18
	 0. 1-32
	 72-412
	 0.0012-0.24
	 0.024-3.0
160-740 0.1-6790
	 0.01-22®
	 2.5-550
7.7-440 0.25-2480
	 0.04-6.2
	 0.25-150.4
	 0.005-12
	 0.05-3
	 1-350
	 25-6596






for this constituent.
@ Colorimetric interference may have occurred in analysis of this sample.

-------
                                                    Table  2-7 (Continued)

                                         AVAILABLE  CHARACTERIZATION DATA  FOR K051
                                                                     Untreated waste concentration, (ppm)
                  Source of Data:      (a)            (b)	   	(c)        	(d)	       (e)         (f)          Range
BDAT ORGANICS

169. Cyanide                         0.5-1.4    0.00006-51.4          	             	            	         	     0.00006-51.4
171. Sulfide                       2,900-4,800        	             	             	            	         	      2,900-4,800

OTHER PARAMETERS

Filterable solids (%)                  229
Oil and grease content (X)              179
Water content (%}                      609


(a) U.S. EPA,Amoco Onsite Engineering Report, February 29, 1988 (Reference 6).
(b) Jacobs Engineering Company,  Assessment  of Hazardous Waste Practices, 1976 (Reference 3).
(c) Delisting petition #481 (Reference 21).
(d) Delisting petition #386 (Reference 17).
(e) Delisting petition #205 (Reference 16).
(f) Delisting petition #469 (Reference 20).
(g) Calculations In Appendix B.

 — Data are not available  for this constituent.

-------
10
I
N3
                      Source  of Data:
BOAT ORGANICS

      Volatiles
  4.  Benzene
226.  Ethyl benzene
 13.  Toluene
215-
217.  Xylene (total)

      Semivolatiles
 62.  Benz(o)pyrene
 81.  ortho-Cresol
 82.  para-Cresol
 96.  2,4-Dimethylphenol
121.  Naphthalene
141.  Phenanthrene
142.  Phenol

BOAT METALS
154.  Antimony
155.  Arsenic
156.  Barium
157.  Beryllium
158.  Cadmium
159.  Chromium (total)
160.  Copper
161.  Lead
162.  Mercury
163.  Nickel
164.  Selenium
165.  Silver
167.  Vanadium
168.  Zinc
                                                       Table 2-8

                                       AVAILABLE CHARACTERIZATION DATA FOR K052
                                     (a)
                                         650
                                       2,300
                                       6,400

                                       3,500
13
13
4.2
13
1.4
                                          111
                                          242
                                          8
                                         <0.1
                                         0.82
                                         48.8
                                          146
                                         99.4
                                          2.4
                                         97.2
                                         <100
                                         <6.0
                                         <6.0
                                         17.1
                (b)
                                                             Untreated waste concentration,  (ppm)
     (c)
   (d)
              1.0-504

            11.0-5,800
                                                                       0.02-0.4
                                                                        2.1-250
   63-525

   0.0025
   4.5-8.1
  9.0-13.7
   110-172
  158-1,421
  0.19-0.94
   235-392
  3.1-10.8
  0.05-1.7
   1.0-9.8
1,183-17,000
42-2,060
     (a)  U.S.  EPA,  Conoco Characterization  Report, February  22,  1988  (Reference  13).
     (b)  API,  Refinery Solid Waste  Survey,  1983  (Reference 2).
     (c)  Jacobs Engineering Company,  Assessment  of Hazardous Waste  Practices,  1976  (Reference  3).
     (d)  Delisting  petition #386  (Reference 17).
     — Data are not available for  this  constituent.
   Range
                                                                 650
                                                               2,300
                                                               6,400

                                                               3,500
                                   0.02-<1.8
                                      13
                                      13
                                      4.2
                                      13
                                      1.4
                                   <1.8-250
    111
  63-525
     8
0.0025-<0.1
 0.82-8.1
  1.0-504
  110-172
  11-5800
 0.19-2.4
 97.2-392
 3.1-OOO
 0.05-<6.0
  1.0-9.8
17.1-17,000

-------
                     Source of Data:

     BOAT INORGANICS

     169.   Cyanide
     170.   Fluoride
     171.   Sulfide

     OTHER PARAMETERS

     Filterable solids (%)
     Oil  and grease content (/&)
     Water content (%)
                                                  Table  2-8 (Continued)

                                        AVAILABLE  CHARACTERIZATION DATA  FOR K052
 (a)
1.89
 955
 111
 69e
 12e
 186
                                                              Untreated waste concentration,  (ppm)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Range
                                                 1.89
                                                  955
                                                  111
N>
I
     (a)  U.S.  EPA,  Conoco Characterization  Report,  February 22,  1988  (Reference  13).
     (b)  API,  Refinery Solid Waste Survey,  1983  (Reference 2).
     (c)  Jacobs" Engineering Company,  Assessment  of  Hazardous Waste  Practices,  1976  (Reference 3).
     (d)  Delisting  petition #386 (Reference 17).
     (e)  Calculations  in Appendix B.
     — Data are not available for this  constituent.

-------
3.0       APPLICABLE/DEMONSTRATED TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES








          In the previous section of this document, petroleum refining wastes



(K048-K052) were characterized and a separate waste treatability group was



established for these wastes.  In this section, treatment technologies appli-



cable for treatment of wastes in this waste group are identified.  Detailed



descriptions of the technologies that are demonstrated on these wastes or on



wastes judged to be similar are presented in this section along with available




performance data.








3.1       Applicable Treatment Technologies








          The Agency has  identified the following treatment technologies as



being applicable for nonwastewater forms of K048-K052 wastes and nonwastewater



generated from  treatment  of K048-K052:  incineration (fluidized bed and rotary



kiln), solvent  extraction, pressure filtration, thermal drying, and



stabilization.  Since K048-K052 wastes contain both organic and inorganic



hazardous constituents, applicable technologies include those which destroy or



reduce the  total amount of various organic compounds in the waste  (i.e.,



incineration, solvent extraction, pressure filtration, and thermal drying) and



those which reduce  the leachability of BOAT metals in the waste (i.e.,



stabilization).








          The Agency has  identified the following  treatment technologies as



being applicable for wastewater forms of K048-K052 and wastewater  generated
                                       3-1

-------
from the treatment of K048-K052:  biological treatment, carbon adsorption, and



chromium reduction followed by chemical precipitation, and sedimentation or



filtration.  Since these wastewaters may contain both organic and inorganic



hazardous constituents, applicable technologies include those which destroy or



reduce the total amount of various organic compounds in the treated residual



(i.e., biological treatment and carbon adsorption) and those which reduce the



concentration of BOAT metals in the treated residual (i.e., chromium reduction



and chemical precipitation.)








          The selection of treatment technologies applicable for treating BDAT



List constituents is based on current literature sources, field testing, and



data submitted by equipment manufacturers and industrial concerns.








3.2       Demonstrated Treatment Technologies








          The demonstrated technologies that the Agency has identified for



treatment of organics in nonwastewater forms of K048-K052 are incineration



(fluidized bed and rotary kiln), solvent extraction, pressure filtration, and



thermal drying.  The Agency has identified stabilization as a demonstrated



technology for the immobilization of metals in nonwastewater (incinerator ash)



generated from treatment of K048-K052.








          For metals in wastewater residuals, EPA has identified the following



demonstrated treatment train:  chromium reduction followed by lime and sulfide
                                      3-2

-------
precipitation, and vacuum filtration.  This treatment train is commonly used



for metal containing wastewaters.








          The Agency is not aware of any facilities that treat wastewater



forms of K048-K052.  Therefore, EPA has not identified any demonstrated



technologies for treatment of wastewater forms of K048-K052.








          Detailed descriptions of these technologies are included in the



following subsections.  Treatment performance data for each technology are



included in the following subsections or in Appendix F as referenced in the



text.  A key summarizing the plant codes is included in Appendix C.








          A.   Incineration.  Incineration provides for destruction of the



organics in the waste.  As described in Section  1.0, the best measure of



performance for a destruction technology is the  extent to which a constituent



is destroyed or the total amount of constituent  remaining after treatment.



Incineration generally results in the formation  of two treatment residuals:



ash and scrubber water.  Incineration is demonstrated for treatment of refin-



ery wastes from the K048-K052 treatability group.  The Agency tested a fluid-



ized bed incineration process at plant A for treatment of K048 and K051



wastes.  A more detailed discussion of incineration is presented in Section



3.4.








          Prior to incineration at plant A, DAF  float (K048) waste was mixed



with waste biological sludge, and the mixture was dewatered using two belt
                                      3-3

-------
filter presses.  To improve dewatering capabilities, a polymer solution was



added to the undewatered DAF float mixture.  The dewatering step increased the



total solids content of the waste from 30-46 percent to 79-91 percent.



Dewatered DAF float mixture and API separator sludge (K051) were separately



injected into the fluidized bed for combustion.  Combustion gases with elutri-



ated flyash entered a cyclone for particulate removal and were then treated in



a scrubber system prior to discharge to the atmosphere.  Fluidized bed incin-



erator ash was collected from the ash conveyer from the cyclone.








          Tables 3-1 through 3-6 at the end of this section present, by sample



set, the BDAT List constituents detected in the untreated (dewatered DAF float



mixture and API separator sludge) and treated (fluidized bed incinerator ash)



wastes and the operating data from the fluidized bed incinerator treatment



system.  Testing procedures used to analyze these constituents are specifi-



cally identified in the analytical quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC)



discussion of this background document (Appendix D).








          No data on the treatment of organic constituents in K048-K052



wastewater were available to the Agency.  However, the Agency determined that



combustion gas scrubber discharge water from the rotary kiln incineration of



K019 waste represents treatment of organics in wastewaters judged to be



similar to K048-K052 wastewater.  In addition, the Agency determined that



treatment performance data from the treatment of K062 and metal-bearing



characteristic wastes represent treatment of metals in wastewaters judged to



be similar to K048-K052 wastewaters.  These data are included in Section 4.0.
                                      3-4

-------
Between proposal and promulgation the Agency plans to evaluate treatment



performance data for K048-K052 wastewaters (scrubber water) from the fluidized



bed incineration of K048 at plant A.








          B.   Solvent Extraction.  Solvent extraction provides for the



separation of organics from the waste.  This technology results in the forma-



tion of two treatment residuals:  the treated waste and the extract.  Treat-



ment performance data for a solvent extraction process at plant F were submit-



ted by industry to support solvent extraction as a demonstrated technology for



treatment of K049 and K051.  Treatment performance data for a solvent extrac-



tion process at plant G were submitted to support solvent extraction as a



demonstrated technology for treatment of K048-K052.  In addition, treatment



performance data for a solvent extraction process at plant K were submitted to



support solvent extraction as a demonstrated technology for treatment of



petroleum refinery wastes (the specific waste codes treated were not



reported).  A more detailed discussion of solvent extraction is presented in



Section 3.4.








          As discussed in Section 1.0, the Agency is developing treatment



standards for organic constituents based on the total concentration in the



waste.  However, treatment performance data submitted from plants F and G did



not include total waste concentration data for the untreated wastes or for the



treated residuals.   The submitted TCLP data were not used for the development



of treatment standards.   The submitted TCLP data can be found in Sections F.5



and F.6 of Appendix F for plants F and G,  respectively.
                                      3-5

-------
          Two sets of treatment performance data (referred to as Report  1 and



Report 2) were submitted from plant K.  However, data presented in Report 1



did not include total waste concentration data for the untreated wastes or for



the treated residuals.  The submitted TCLP data were not used for the develop-



ment of treatment standards.  The TCLP data submitted in Report 1 can be found



in Section F.8 of Appendix F. Table 3-7 presents the BOAT constituents



detected in the untreated and treated wastes and the operating data for the



solvent extraction treatment system at plant K (Report 2).








          Additionally, treatment performance data for a solvent extraction



process at plant L has been submitted to support solvent extraction as a



demonstrated technology for treatment of K051.  These data became available to



the Agency too late to be used in the development of treatment standards for



the proposed rule.  These data will be considered in the development of



treatment standards for the final rule.  Data submitted from plant L can be



found in Section F.9 of Appendix F.








          C.   Pressure Filtration.  Pressure filtration provides for the



separation of liquid and solid phases of a waste.  Pressure filtration results



in the formation of two treatment residuals:  the filter cake and the fil-



trate.  Treatment performance data for a belt filter press process at plant B



were submitted by industry to support pressure filtration as a demonstrated



technology for treatment of K051.  Treatment performance data for a belt



filter press process at plant C were submitted by industry to support pressure



filtration as a demonstrated technology for treatment of petroleum refinery
                                      3-6

-------
wastes (the specific waste codes treated were not reported).  Treatment



performance data for a plate filter press process at plant D were submitted by



industry to support pressure filtration as a demonstrated technology for



treatment of a mixture of K048, K049 and K051.  In addition, treatment perfor-



mance data for a plate filter press process at plant E were submitted by



industry to support pressure filtration as a demonstrated technology for



treatment of a mixture of K051 and K052.  A more detailed discussion of



pressure filtration including belt and plate filtration is presented in



Section 3.4.








          As discussed in Section 1.0, the Agency is developing treatment



standards for organic constituents based on the total concentration in the



waste.  However, treatment performance data submitted from plants B, C, D, and



E did not include total waste concentration data for the untreated wastes or



for the treated residuals.  The submitted TCLP data were not used for the



development of treatment standards.  The submitted TCLP data can be found in



Sections F.1, F.2, F.3, and F.4 of Appendix F for plants B, C, D, and E,



respectively.







          D.   Thermal Drying.  Thermal drying provides for the separation of



organics from the waste.  Thermal drying generally results in the formation of



two treatment residuals:  the treated waste and the condensate or scrubber



water.  Treatment performance data for a thermal drying treatment system at



plant H were submitted to support thermal drying as a demonstrated technology



for treatment of petroleum refinery wastes (the specific waste codes treated
                                      3-7

-------
were not reported) and of a mixture of K051 and K052.  The unspecified petro-



leum refinery wastes that were treated by thermal drying had been previously



treated by belt filter press filtration at plant C, and the mixed K051 and



K052 had been previously treated by plate filter press filtration at plant E.








          As discussed in Section 1.0, the Agency is developing treatment



standards for organic constituents based on the total concentration in the



waste.  However, treatment performance data submitted from plant H did not



include total waste concentration data for the filter cakes or for the treated



residuals.  The submitted TCLP data were not used for the development of



treatment standards.  The submitted TCLP data from plant H can be found in



Section F.7 of Appendix F.








          E.   Stabilization.  Stabilization reduces the leachability of



metals in the wastes.  This technology results in the formation of a single



chemically or structurally stabilized treatment residual.   As discussed in



Section 1.0, the Agency is developing treatment standards for metal



constituents treated by stabilization based on the constituent concentration



in the TCLP extract.








          The Agency tested incinerator ash from treatment of K048 and K051



wastes at plant A using a stabilization process at plant I.  In addition,



treatment performance data from three stabilization processes at plant J were



submitted by industry to support stabilization as a demonstrated technology



for treatment of K048-K052 wastes.   A more detailed discussion of stabili-



zation is presented in Section 3.4.
                                      3-8

-------
          Incinerator ash from plant A was stabilized at plant I.  The stabil-



ization process involves the addition of water and binder material to the



incinerator ash followed by mixing and a cure period.  The process was run



three times using three different binders for a total of nine tests.  The



three types of binder materials used were:  portland cement, kiln dust, and a



lime and fly ash mixture.  At the end of the 28 days cure period for each



test, TCLP was performed on stabilized ash samples.  Table 3-8 presents the



analytical results for BDAT metals detected in the TCLP extracts of untreated



(incinerator ash) and treated (stabilized ash) wastes and the design and



operating data from the ash stabilization treatment system.  Testing proce-



dures used to analyze these constituents are specifically identified in the



analytical quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) discussion of this



background document (Appendix D).








          Slop oil emulsion solids (K049) and API separator sludge (K051) were



stabilized individually without prior treatment at plant J using a two-step



process.  The first step involved the addition of a proprietary chemical to



microencapsulate the organic matter.  The second step involved the addition of



pozzolanic material (e.g., fly ash, cement, and kiln dust) to solidify the



entire waste.  Table 3-9 presents the BDAT constituents detected in the



treated and untreated K049 waste from the stabilization treatment system.



Table 3-10 presents the BDAT constituents detected in the treated and



untreated K051 wastes from the stabilization treatment system.  Design and



operating data were not submitted for these stabilization processes.
                                      3-9

-------
          Filter cakes from treatment of petroleum refinery wastes (the



specific waste codes treated were not reported) at plant C and from treatment



of a mixture of K051 and K052 wastes at plant E were stabilized separately at



plant J using the same two-step process as described above.  Tables 3-11 and



3-12 present the BOAT constituents detected in the untreated (filter cakes)



and treated (stabilized filter cakes) wastes from plants C and E, respec-



tively.








          Filter cakes from plants C and E from treatment of petroleum refin-



ery wastes (the specific waste codes were not reported) and a mixture of K051



and K052, respectively, were stabilized separately at plant J using a soluble



sodium silicate/pozzolanic process.  Tables 3-13 and 3-14 present the BDAT



constituents detected in the untreated (filter cake) and treated (stabilized



filter cake) wastes from plants C and E, respectively.








          Filter cakes from plants C and E from treatment of petroleum refin-



ery wastes (the specific waste codes were not reported) and a mixture of K051



and K052, respectively, were stabilized separately at plant J using a mixture



of cement, fly ash, and lime.  Tables 3-15 and 3-16 present the BDAT consti-



tuents detected in the untreated (filter cake) and treated (stabilized filter



cake) wastes from plants C and E, respectively.








          Two thermally dried filter cakes from plant H were stabilized



separately at plant J using a soluble sodium silicate/pozzolanic process.  The



filter cakes treated at plant H were generated from plants C and E from
                                      3-10

-------
treatment of petroleum refinery wastes (the specific waste codes were not



reported) and a mixture of K051 and K052 wastes, respectively.  Tables 3-17



and 3-18 present the BOAT constituents detected in the untreated (filter



cakes) and treated (stabilized filter cakes) wastes originally from plants C



and E, respectively.








          F.   Chromium reduction followed by lime and sulfide precipitation



and vacuum filtration.  Chromium reduction reduces the concentration of



hexavalent chromium in the wastes by converting hexavalent chromium to the



trivalent state.  Lime and sulfide precipitation and vacuum filtration removes



metals from the wastewater forming a precipitate sludge.  Vacuum filtration



separates the precipitated sludge from the wastewater.  No data on the treat-



ment of hexavalent chromium or other metals in K048-K052 wastewaters were



available to the Agency.  However, the Agency determined that treatment



performance data for chromium reduction followed by lime and sulfide precipi-



tation and vacuum filtration presented in the Envirite Onsite Engineering



Report (Reference 27) represent treatment of hexavalent chromium and metals in



wastewaters judged to be similar to wastewater forms of K048-K052 wastes.



These data are included in Section 4.0.  More detailed discussions of the



chromium reduction, chemical precipitation, and filtration technologies are



presented in Section 3.4.
                                      3-11

-------
3.3       Available Treatment Technologies



          As defined in Section 1.0, an available treatment technology is one

that (1) is not a proprietary or patented process that cannot be purchased or

licensed from the proprietor (in other words, is commercially available), and

(2) substantially diminishes the toxicity of the waste or substantially

reduces the likelihood of migration of hazardous constituents from the waste.

The demonstrated technologies for treatment of nonwastewater forms of

K048-K052, incineration technologies including fluidized bed and rotary kiln,

solvent extraction, pressure filtration, thermal drying, and stabilization,

are considered to be commercially available technologies.  The demonstrated

technology for treatment of wastewater forms of K048-K052, chromium reduction

followed by lime and sulfide precipitation and vacuum filtration, is also

considered to be commercially available.



3.4       Detailed Description of Treatment Technologies



          The demonstrated treatment technologies discussed in Section 3.2 are

described in more detail in Sections 3.4.1-3.4.6, as shown below.


               Technology Description             Subsection

               Incineration                          3.4.1
               Solvent Extraction                    3.4.2
               Sludge Filtration                     3.4.3
               Stabilization                         3.4.4
               Chromium Reduction                    3.4.5
               Chemical Precipitation                3.4.6
                                      3-12

-------
3.4.1     Incineration








          This section addresses the commonly used incineration technologies:



Liquid injection, rotary kiln, fluidized bed incineration, and fixed hearth.



A discussion is provided regarding the applicability of these technologies,



the underlying principles of operation, a technology description, waste



characteristics that affect performance, and finally important design and



operating parameters.  As appropriate, the subsections are divided by type of



incineration unit.








          Applicability and Use of Incineration








          Liquid Injection








          Liquid injection is applicable to wastes that have viscosity values



sufficiently low so that the waste can be atomized in the combustion chamber.



A range of literature maximum viscosity values are reported with the low being



100 SSU and the high being 10,000 SSU.  It is important to note that viscosity



is temperature dependent so that while liquid injection may not be applicable



to a waste at ambient conditions, it may be applicable when the waste is



heated.  Other factors that affect the use of liquid injection are particle



size and the presence of suspended solids.  Both of these waste parameters can



cause plugging of the burner nozzle.
                                      3-13

-------
          Rotary Kiln/Fluidized Bed/Fixed Hearth








          These incineration technologies are applicable to a wide range of



hazardous wastes.  They can be used on wastes that contain high or low total



organic content, high or low filterable solids, various viscosity ranges, and



a range of other waste parameters.  EPA has not found these technologies to be



demonstrated on wastes that are comprised essentially of metals with low



organic concentrations.  In addition, the Agency expects that some of the high



metal content wastes may not be compatible with existing and future air



emission limits without emission controls far more extensive than currently



practiced.








          Underlying Principles of Operation








          Liquid Injection








          The basic operating principle of this incineration technology is



that incoming liquid wastes are volatilized and then additional heat is



supplied to the waste to destabilize the chemical bonds.  Once the chemical



bonds are broken, these constituents react with oxygen to form carbon dioxide



and water vapor.  The energy needed to destabilize the bonds is referred to as



the energy of activation.
                                      3-14

-------
          Rotary Kiln and Fixed Hearth








          There are two distinct principles of operation for these incinera-



tion technologies, one for each of the chambers involved.  In the primary



chamber,  energy, in the form of heat, is transferred to the waste to achieve



volatilization of the various organic waste constituents.  During this vola-



tilization process some of the organic constituents will oxidize to CC>2 and



water vapor.  In the secondary chamber, additional heat is supplied to over-



come the energy requirements needed to destabilize the chemical bonds and



allow the constituents to react with excess oxygen to form carbon dioxide and



water vapor.  The principle of operation for the secondary chamber is similar



to liquid injection.








          Fluidized Bed








          The principle of operation for this incineration technology is



somewhat different than for rotary kiln and fixed hearth incineration, in that



there is only one chamber which contains the fluidizing sand and a freeboard



section above the sand.  The purpose of the fluidized bed is to both



volatilize the waste and combust the waste.  Destruction of the waste organics



can be accomplished to a better degree in this chamber than in the primary



chamber of the rotary kiln and fixed hearth because of 1) improved heat



transfer from fluidization of the waste using forced air and 2) the fact that



the fluidization process provides sufficient oxygen and turbulence to convert



the organics to carbon dioxide and water vapor.  The freeboard generally does
                                      3-15

-------
not have an afterburner;  however, additional time is provided for conversion



of the organic constituents to carbon dioxide, water vapor, and hydrochloric



acid if chlorine is present in the waste.








          Description of Incineration Process








          Liquid Injection








          The liquid injection system is capable of incinerating a wide range



of gases and liquids.  The combustion system has a simple design with virtu-



ally no moving parts.  A burner or nozzle atomizes the liquid waste and



injects it into the combustion chamber where it burns in the presence of air



or oxygen.  A forced draft system supplies the combustion chamber with air to



provide oxygen for combustion and turbulence for mixing.  The combustion



chamber is usually a cylinder lined with refractory (i.e., heat resistant)



brick and can be fired horizontally, vertically upward, or vertically down-



ward.  Figure 3-1 illustrates a liquid injection incineration system.








          Rotary Kiln








          A rotary kiln is a slowly rotating, refractory-lined cylinder that



is mounted at a slight incline from the horizontal (see Figure 3-2).  Solid



wastes enter at the high end of the kiln, and liquid or gaseous wastes enter
                                      3-16

-------
                                                                 WATER
    AUXILIARY FUEL
MBURNER
                      AIR-
LIQUID OR GASEOUS.
  WASTE INJECTION
 »|BURNER

              PRIMARY
             COMBUSTION
              CHAMBER
AFTERBURNER
 (SECONDARY
 COMBUSTION
  CHAMBER)
 SPRAY
CHAMBER
                                                                                 GAS TO AIR
                                                                              ->• POLLUTION
                                                                                 CONTROL
                            HORIZONTALLY  FIRED
                            LIQUID  INJECTION
                            INCINERATOR
                                                    ASH
                                             WATER
                                           FIGURE 3-1
                                 UQUD INJECTION INCINERATOR

-------
                                                                 GAS TO
                                                              AIR  POLLUTION
                                                                CONTROL
                       AUXILIARY
                           FUEL
                                               AFTERBURNER
   SOLID
  WASTE
INFLUENT
   FEED
MECHANISM
                                                                     COMBUSTION
                                                                     GASES
                             LIQUID OR
                             GASEOUS
                              WASTE
                             INJECTION
                                                                  ASH
                                     FIGURE 3-2

                               ROTARY KLN NONERATOR
                                          3-18

-------
through atomizing nozzles in the kiln or afterburner section.  Rotation of the




kiln exposes the solids to the heat, vaporizes them, and allows them to




combust by mixing with air.  The rotation also causes the ash to move to the




lower end of the kiln where it can be removed.  Rotary kiln systems usually




have a secondary combustion chamber or afterburner following the kiln for




further combustion of the volatilized components of solid wastes.








          Fluidized Bed








          A fluidized bed incinerator consists of a column containing inert




particles such as sand which is referred to as the bed.  Air, driven by a




blower, enters the bottom of the bed to fluidize the sand.  Air passage




through the bed promotes rapid and uniform mixing of the injected waste




material within the fluidized bed.  The fluidized bed has an extremely high




heat capacity (approximately three times that of flue gas at the same tempera-




ture), thereby providing a large heat reservoir.  The injected waste reaches




ignition temperature quickly and transfers the heat of combustion back to the




bed.  Continued bed agitation by the fluidizing air allows larger particles to




remain suspended in the combustion zone.   (See Figure 3-3)








          Fixed Hearth Incineration








          Fixed hearth incinerators, also  called controlled air or starved air




incinerators, are another major technology used for hazardous waste  incinera-




tion.  Fixed hearth incineration is a two-stage combustion process
                                       3-19

-------
  WASTE
INJECTION
BURNER
                              FREEBOARD
                             SAND BED
                                                        GAS TO
                                                        AIR POLLUTION
                                                        CONTROL
                                                        MAKE-UP
                                                        SAND
                                                         AIR
                                ASH
                            FIGURE 3-3
                     FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATOR
                                  3-20

-------
(see Figure 3-4).  Waste is ram-fed into the first stage, or primary chamber,



and burned at less than stoichiometric conditions.  The resultant smoke and



pyrolysis products, consisting primarily of volatile hydrocarbons and carbon



monoxide, along with the normal products of combustion, pass to the secondary



chamber.  Here, additional air is injected to complete the combustion.  This



two-stage process generally yields low stack particulate and carbon monoxide



(CO) emissions.  The primary chamber combustion reactions and combustion gas



are maintained at low levels by the starved air conditions so that particulate



entrainment and carryover are minimized.








          Air Pollution Controls








          Following incineration of hazardous wastes, combustion gases are



generally further treated in an air pollution control system.  The presence of



chlorine or other halogens in the waste requires a scrubbing or absorption



step to remove HC1 and other halo-acids from the combustion gases.  Ash in the



waste is not destroyed in the combustion process.  Depending on its composi-



tion, ash will either exit as bottom ash, at the discharge end of a kiln or



hearth for example, or as particulate matter (fly ash) suspended in the



combustion gas stream.  Particulate emissions from most hazardous waste



combustion systems generally have particle diameters less than one micron and



require high efficiency collection devices to minimize air emissions.  In



addition, scrubber systems provide additional buffer against accidental



releases of incompletely destroyed waste products due to poor combustion



efficiency or combustion upsets, such as flame outs.
                                      3-21

-------
U)
I
hO
  WASTE
INJECTION
                                                         AIR
                                                                      GAS TO AIR
                                                                      POLLUTION
                                                                      CONTROL
  PRIMARY
COMBUSTION
 CHAMBER

   GRATE
                                                 SECONDARY
                                                COMBUSTION
                                                 CHAMBER
                                                                              AUXILIARY
                                                                              FUEL
                                        2-STAGE FIXED HEARTH
                                            INCINERATOR
                                    ASH
                                              RQURE3-4
                                       FIXED HEARTH INCINERATOR

-------
          Waste Characteristics Affecting Performance








          Liquid Injection








          In determining whether liquid injection is likely to achieve the



same level of performance on an untested waste as a previously tested waste,



the Agency will compare bond dissociation energies of the constituents in the



untested and tested waste.  This parameter is being used as a surrogate



indicator of activation energy which, as discussed previously, is the amount



of energy required to destabilize molecular bonds.  Other energy effects



(e.g., vibrational, the formation of intermediates, and interactions between



different molecular bonds) may have a significant influence on activation



energy.








          Because of the shortcomings of bond energies in estimating activa-



tion energy, EPA analyzed other waste characteristic parameters to determine



if these parameters would provide a better basis for transferring



treatment standards from a tested waste to an untested waste.  These param-



eters include heat of combustion, heat of formation, use of available kinetic



data to predict activation energies, and general structural class.  All of



these were rejected for reasons provided below.








          The heat of combustion only measures the difference in energy of the



products and reactants; it does not provide information on the transition



state (i.e., the energy input needed to initiate the reaction).  Heat of
                                      3-23

-------
formation is used as a predictive tool for whether reactions are likely to



proceed; however, there are a significant number of hazardous constituents for



which these data are not available.  Use of kinetic data were rejected because



these data are limited and could not be used to calculate free energy values



(AG) for the wide range of hazardous constituents to be addressed by this



rule.  Finally, EPA decided not to use structural classes because the Agency



believes that evaluation of bond dissociation energies allows for a more



direct determination of whether a constituent will be destabilized.








          Rotary Kiln/Fluidized Bed/Fixed Hearth








          Unlike liquid injection, these incineration technologies also



generate a residual ash.  Accordingly, in determining whether these technolo-



gies are likely  to achieve the same level of performance on an untested waste



as  a previously  tested waste, EPA would need to examine the waste characteris-



tics that affect volatilization of organics from the waste, as well as



destruction of the organics, once volatilized.  Relative to volatilization,



EPA will examine thermal conductivity of the entire waste and boiling point of



the various constituents.  As with liquid injection, EPA will examine bond



energies in determining whether treatment standards for scrubber water residu-



als can be  transferred from a tested waste  to an untested waste.  Below  is a



discussion  of how EPA arrived at  thermal conductivity and boiling point  as the



best method to assess volatilization of organics from the waste;
                                       3-24

-------
the discussion relative to bond energies is the same for these technologies as



for liquid injection and will not be repeated here.








          (1)  Thermal Conductivity.  Consistent with the underlying princi-



ples of incineration, a major factor with regard to whether a particular



constituent will volatilize is the transfer of heat through the waste.  In the



case of rotary kiln, fluidized bed, and fixed hearth incineration, heat is



transferred through the waste by three mechanisms:  radiation, convection, and



conduction.  For a given incinerator, heat transferred through various wastes



by radiation is more a function of the design and type of incinerator than the



waste being treated.  Accordingly, the type of waste treated will have a



minimal impact on the amount of heat transferred by radiation.  With regard to



convection, EPA also believes that the type of heat transfer will generally be



more a function of the type and design of incinerator than the waste itself.



However, EPA is examining particle size as a waste characteristic that may



significantly impact the amount of heat transferred to a waste by convection



and thus impact volatilization of the various organic compounds.  The final



type of heat transfer, conduction, is the one that EPA believes will have the



greatest impact on volatilization of organic constituents.  To measure this



characteristic, EPA will use thermal conductivity; an explanation of this



parameter, as well as how it can be measured is provided below.  Heat flow by



conduction is proportional to the temperature gradient across the material.



The proportionality constant is a property of the material and referred to as



the thermal conductivity.  (Note:  The analytical method that EPA has identi-



fied for measurement of thermal conductivity is named "Guarded, Comparative,
                                      3-25

-------
Longitudinal Heat Flow Technique"; it is described in an Appendix to this



technology section.)  In theory, thermal conductivity would always provide a



good indication of whether a constituent in an untested waste would be treated



to the same extent in the primary incinerator chamber as the same constituent



in a previously tested waste.








          In practice, thermal conductivity has some limitations in assessing



the transferability of treatment standards; however, EPA has not identified a



parameter that can provide a better indication of heat transfer characteris-



tics of a waste.  Below is a discussion of both the limitations associated



with thermal conductivity, as well as other parameters considered.








          Thermal conductivity measurements, as part of a treatability compar-



ison for two different wastes through a single incinerator,  are most meaning-



ful when applied to wastes that are homogeneous (i.e., major constituents are



essentially the same).  As wastes exhibit greater degrees of non-homogeneity



(e.g.,  significant concentration of metals in soil), then thermal conductivity



becomes less accurate in predicting treatability because the measurement



essentially reflects heat flow through regions having the greatest conductiv-



ity (i.e., the path of least resistance) and not heat flow through all parts



of the waste.








          Btu value, specific heat,  and ash content were also considered for



predicting heat transfer characteristics.  These parameters  can no better



account for non-homogeneity than thermal conductivity; additionally,  they are
                                      3-26

-------
not directly related to heat transfer characteristics.  Therefore, these



parameters do not provide a better indication of heat transfer that will occur




in any specific waste.








          (2)  Boiling Point.  Once heat is (transferred to a constituent



within a waste, then removal of this constituent from the waste will depend on



its volatility.  As a surrogate of volatility, EPA is using boiling point of



the constituent.  Compounds with lower boiling points have higher vapor



pressures and, therefore, would be more likely to vaporize.  The Agency



recognizes that this parameter does not take into consideration the impact of



other compounds in the waste on the boiling point of a constituent in a



mixture; however, the Agency is not aware of a better measure of volatility



that can easily be determined.








          Incineration Design and Operating Parameters








          Liquid Injection








          For a liquid injection unit, EPA's analysis of whether the unit is



well designed will focus on (1) the likelihood that sufficient energy is



provided to the waste to overcome the activation level for breaking molecular



bonds and (2) whether sufficient oxygen is present to convert the waste



constituents to carbon dioxide and water vapor.  The specific design param-



eters that the Agency will evaluate to assess whether these conditions are met



are:  temperature, excess oxygen, and residence time.  Below is a discussion
                                      3-27

-------
of why EPA believes these parameters to be important, as well as a discussion



of how these parameters will be monitored during operation.








          It is important to point out that, relative to the development of



land disposal restriction standards, EPA is only concerned with these design



parameters when a quench water or scrubber water residual is generated from



treatment of a particular waste.  If treatment of a particular waste in a



liquid injection unit would not generate a wastewater stream, then the Agency,



for purposes of land disposal treatment standards, would only be concerned



with the waste characteristics that affect selection of the unit, not the



above-mentioned design parameters.








          (1)  Temperature.   Temperature is important in that it provides an



indirect measure of the energy available (i.e., Btus/hr) to overcome the



activation energy of waste constituents.  As the design temperature increases,



the more likely it is that the molecular bonds will be destabilized and the



reaction completed.








          The temperature is normally controlled automatically through the use



of instrumentation which senses the temperature and automatically adjusts the



amount of fuel and/or waste  being fed.   The temperature signal transmitted to



the controller can be simultaneously transmitted to a recording device,



referred to as a strip chart, and thereby continuously recorded.  To fully



assess the operation of the  unit, it is important to know not only the exact
                                      3-28

-------
location in the incinerator that the temperature is being monitored but also



the location of the design temperature.








          (2)  Excess Oxygen.  It is important that the incinerator contain



oxygen in excess of the stoichiometric amount necessary to convert the organic



compounds to carbon dioxide and water vapor.  If insufficient oxygen is



present, then destabilized waste constituents could recombine to the same or



other BOAT list organic compounds and potentially cause the scrubber water to



contain higher concentrations of BOAT list constituents than would be the case



for a well operated unit.








          In practice, the amount of oxygen fed to the incinerator is con-



trolled by continuous sampling and analysis of the stack gas.  If the amount



of oxygen drops below the design value, then the analyzer transmits a signal



to the valve controlling the air supply and thereby increases the flow of



oxygen to the afterburner.  The analyzer simultaneously transmits a signal to



a recording device so that the amount of excess oxygen can be continuously



recorded.  Again, as with temperature, it is important to know the location



from which the combustion gas is being sampled.








          (3)  Carbon Monoxide.  Carbon monoxide is an important operating



parameter because it provides an indication of the extent to which the waste



organic constituents are being converted to CC>2 and water vapor.  As the



carbon monoxide level increases, it indicates that greater amounts of organic



waste constituents are unreacted or partially reacted.  Increased carbon
                                      3-29

-------
monoxide levels can result from insufficient excess oxygen, insufficient



turbulence in the combustion zone, or insufficient residence time
               Waste Feed Rate.  The waste feed rate is important to monitor



because it is correlated to the residence time.  The residence time is associ-



ated with a specific Btu energy value of the feed and a specific volume of



combustion gas generated.  Prior to incineration, the Btu value of the waste



is determined through the use of a laboratory device known as a bomb colorim-



eter.  The volume of combustion gas generated from the waste to be incinerated



is determined from an analysis referred to as an ultimate analysis.  This



analysis determines the amount of elemental constituents present which include



carbon, hydrogen, sulfur, oxygen, nitrogen, and halogens.  Using this analysis



plus the total amount of air added, the volume of combustion gas can be



calculated.  Having determined both the Btu content and the expected combus-



tion gas volume, the feed rate can be fixed at the desired residence time.



Continuous monitoring of the feed rate will determine whether the unit was



operated at a rate corresponding to the designed residence time.








          Rotary Kiln








          For this incineration, EPA will examine both the primary and secon-



dary chamber in evaluating the design of a particular incinerator.  Relative



to the primary chamber, EPA's assessment of design will focus on whether it is



likely that sufficient energy will be provided to the waste in order to



volatilize the waste constituents.  For the secondary chamber, analogous to
                                      3-30

-------
the sole liquid injection incineration chamber, EPA will examine the same



parameters discussed previously under "Liquid Injection."  These parameters



will not be discussed again here.








          The particular design parameters to be evaluated for the primary



chamber are:  kiln temperature, residence time, and revolutions per minute.



Below is a discussion of why EPA believes these parameters to be important, as



well as a discussion of how these parameters will be monitored during opera-



tion.








          (1)  Temperature.  The primary chamber temperature is important in



that it provides an indirect measure of the energy input:  (i.e., BTU/hr) that



is available for heating the waste.  The higher the temperature is designed to



be in a given kiln, the more likely it is that the constituents will volatil-



ize.  As discussed earlier under "Liquid Injection", temperature should be



continuously monitored and recorded.  Additionally, it is important to know



the location of the temperature sensing device in the kiln.








          (2)  Residence Time.  This parameter is important in that it affects



whether sufficient heat is transferred to a particular constituent in order



for volatilization to occur.  As the time that the waste is in the kiln is



increased, a greater quantity of heat is transferred to the hazardous waste



constituents.  The residence time will be a function of the specific configu-



ration of the rotary kiln including the length and diameter of the kiln, the



waste feed rate, and the rate of rotation.
                                      3-31

-------
          (3)  Revolutions Per Minute (RPM).  This parameter provides an



indication of the turbulence that occurs in the primary chamber of a rotary



kiln.  As the turbulence increases, the quantity of heat transferred to the



waste would also be expected to increase.  However, as the RPM value



increases, the residence time decreases resulting in a reduction of the



quantity of heat transferred to the waste.  This parameter needs to be care-



fully evaluated because it provides a balance between turbulence and residence



time.








          Fluidized Bed








          As discussed previously, in the section on "Underlying Principles of



Operation",  the primary chamber accounts for almost all of the conversion of



organic wastes to carbon dioxide,  water vapor, and acid gas if halogens are



present.  The secondary chamber will generally provide additional residence



time for thermal oxidation of the  waste constituents.   Relative to the primary



chamber, the parameters that the Agency will examine in assessing the effec-



tiveness of the design are temperature,  residence time, and bed pressure



differential.  The first two were  discussed under rotary kiln and will not be



discussed here.   The latter,  bed pressure differential, is important in that



it provides  an indication of the amount of turbulence  and,  therefore,  indi-



rectly the amount of heat supplied to the waste.   In general, as the pressure



drop increases,  both the turbulence and heat supplied  increase.  The pressure



drop through the bed should be continuously monitored  and recorded to ensure



that the design value is achieved.
                                      3-32

-------
          Fixed Hearth








          The design considerations for this incineration unit are similar to



a rotary kiln with the exception that rate of rotation (i.e., RPM) is not an



applicable design parameter.  For the primary chamber of this unit, the



parameters that the Agency will examine in assessing how well the unit is



designed are the same as discussed under rotary kiln; for the secondary



chamber (i.e., afterburner), the design and operating parameters of concern



are the same as previously discussed under "Liquid Injection."
                                      3-33

-------
Incineration References

Ackerman DG, McGaughey JF,  Wagoner,  DE,  "At Sea Incineration of
  PCB-Containing Wastes on  Board the M/T Vulcanus," USEPA, 600/7-83-024,
  April 1983.

Bonner TA, et al.,  Engineering Handbook for Hazardous Waste Incineration.
  SW-889 Prepared by Monsanto Research Corporation for U.S. EPA, NTIS PB
  81-248163.  June 1981.

Novak RG, Troxler WL, Dehnke TH, "Recovering Energy from Hazardous Waste
  Incineration," Chemical Engineer Progress 91:146 (1984).

Oppelt ET, "Incineration of Hazardous Waste"; JAPCA; Volume 37, No. 5;
  May, 1987.

Santoleri JJ, "Energy Recovery-A By-Product of Hazardous Waste Incineration
  Systems," in Proceedings  of the 15th Mid-Atlantic Industrial Waste
  Conference on Toxic and Hazardous Waste,  1983.

U.S. EPA, "Best Demonstrated Available Technology (BOAT) Background Document
  for F001-F005 Spent Solvents," Volume 1,  EPA/530-SW-86-056, November 1986.

Vogel G, et al., "Incineration and Cement Kiln Capacity for Hazardous Waste
  Treatment," in Proceedings of the 12th Annual Research Symposium.
  Incineration and Treatment of Hazardous Wastes.  Cincinnati, Ohio.
  April 1986.
                                      3-34

-------
          The comparative method of measuring thermal
conductivity has been proposed as an ASTM test method under
the name "Guarded, Comparative, Longitudinal Heat Flow
Technique".  A thermal heat flow circuit is used which is
the analog of an electrical circuit with resistances in
series.  A reference material is chosen to have a thermal
conductivity close to that estimated for the sample.
Reference standards (also known as heat meters)  having the
same cross-sectional dimensions as the sample are placed
above and below the sample.  An upper heater, a lower
heater, and a heat sink are added to the "stack" to complete
the heat flow circuit.   See Figure 1.
                           3-35

-------
   GUARD
GRADIENT.
   STACK
GRADIENT
                                r^Q
              THERMOCOUPLE
                                        CLAMP
                           UPPER STACK
                              HEATER
                                 I
                          TOP REFERENCE
                              SAMPLE
                                 I
                                 J
TESTXSAMPLE
                          j _f
                          
-------
          The temperature gradients (analogous to potential
differences) along the stack are measured with type K
(chromel/alumel) thermocouples placed at known separations.
The thermocouples are placed into holes or grooves in the
references and also in the sample whenever the sample is
thick enough to accommodate them.

          For molten samples, pastes,  greases, and other
materials that must be contained, the material is placed
into a cell consisting of a top and bottom of Pyrex 7740 and
a containment ring of marinite.  The sample is 2 inch in
diameter and .5 inch thick.  Thermocouples are not placed
into the sample but rather the temperatures measured in the
Pyrex are extrapolated to give the temperature at the top
and bottom surfaces of the sample material.  The Pyrex disks
also serve as the thermal conductivity reference material.

          The stack is clamped with a reproducible load to
insure intimate contact between the components.  In order to
produce a linear flow of heat down the stack and reduce the
amount of heat that flows radially, a guard tube is placed
around the stack and the intervening space is filled with
insulating grains or powder.  The temperature gradient in
the guard is matched to that in the stack to further reduce
radial heat flow.

          The comparative method is a steady state method of
measuring thermal conductivity.  When equilibrium is reached
the heat flux (analogous to current flow) down the stack can
be determined from the references.  The heat into the sample
is given by
Reference:  VSR-1                  3-37                 January 1988

-------
and the heat out of the sample is given by
                    Qout - Xbottom(dT/dx>bottom
where
                    X = thermal conductivity
                dT/dx = temperature gradient
and top refers to the upper reference while bottom  refers  to
the lower reference.  If the heat was confined to flow just
down the stack, then Q^n and Qout would be equal.   If  Q^n
and Qout are in reasonable agreement, the average heat flow
is calculated from
The sample thermal conductivity is then found  from
 Reference:  VSR-1               3-38                  January 1988

-------
                    ^sample = Q/

-------
3.4.2     Solvent Extraction








          Solvent extraction is a treatment technology used to remove a



constituent from a waste by mixing the waste with a solvent that is immiscible



with the waste and in which the waste constituent of concern is preferentially



soluble.  Solvent extraction is commonly called liquid extraction or liquid-



liquid extraction.  EPA also uses this term to refer to extraction of BOAT



List organics from a solid waste.  When BDAT List metals are extracted using



acids, EPA uses the term acid leaching.








          Applicability and Use of Solvent Extraction








          Theoretically, solvent extraction has broad applicability in that it



can be used for wastes that have high or low concentrations of a range of



waste characteristics including total organic carbon, filterable solids,



viscosity, and BDAT List metals content.  The key to its use is whether the



BDAT List constituents can be extracted from the waste matrix containing the



constituents of concern.  For a waste matrix with high filterable solids this



would mean that the solids could be land disposed following solvent extrac-



tion.  For a predominately liquid waste matrix with low filterable solids, the



extracted liquid (referred to as the raffinate) could be reused.  Solvent



extraction can seldom be used without additional treatment (e.g., incinera-



tion) of the extract; however, some industries may be able to recycle the



solvent stream contaminated with the BDAT List constituents back to the



process.
                                      3-40

-------
          Underlying Principles of Operation








          For solvent extraction to occur, the BOAT List constituents of



concern in the waste stream must be preferentially soluble in the solvent and



the solvent must be essentially immiscible with the waste stream.  In theory,



the degree of separation that can be achieved is provided by the selectivity



value; this value is the ratio of the equilibrium concentration of the con-



stituent in the solvent to the equilibrium concentration of the constituent in



the waste.








          The solvent and waste stream are mixed to allow mass transfer of the



constituent(s) from the waste stream to the solvent.  The solvent and waste



stream are then allowed to separate under quiescent conditions.








          The solvent solution, containing the extracted contaminant is called



the extract.  The extracted waste stream with the contaminants removed is



called the raffinate.  The simplest extraction system comprises three compo-



nents: (1) the solute, or the contaminant to be extracted; (2) the solvent;



and (3) the nonsolute portion of the waste stream.  For simple extractions,



solute passes from the waste stream to the solvent phase.  A density differ-



ence exists between the solvent and waste stream phases.  The extract can be



either the heavy phase or the light phase.
                                      3-41

-------
          Description of Solvent Extraction Process








          The simplest method of extraction is a single stage system.  The



solvent and waste stream are brought together; clean effluent and solvent are



recovered without further extraction.  The clean effluent is referred to as



the raffinate, and the solvent containing the constituents that were removed



from the waste stream are known as the extract.  The amount of solute



extracted is fixed by equilibrium relations and the quantity of solvent used.



Single stage extraction is the least effective extraction system.








          Another method of extraction is simple multistage contact extrac-



tion.  In this system, the total quantity of solvent to be used is divided



into several portions.  The waste stream is contacted with each of these



portions of fresh solvent in a series of successive steps or stages.  Raffi-



nate from the first extraction stage is contacted with fresh solvent in a



second stage, and so on.








          In countercurrent, multistage contact, fresh solvent and the waste



stream enter at opposite ends of a series of extraction stages.  Extract and



raffinate layers pass continuously and countercurrently from stage to stage



through the system.








          In order to achieve a reasonable approximation of phase equilibrium,



solvent extraction requires the intimate contacting of the phases.  Several



types of extraction systems are used for contact and separation; two of these,



mixer-settler systems and column contactors, are discussed below.
                                       3-42

-------
          (1)  Mixer-Settler Systems.  Mixer-settler systems are comprised of



a mixing chamber for phase dispersion, followed by a settling chamber for



phase separation.  The vessels may be either vertical or horizontal.  Disper-



sion in the mixing chamber occurs by pump circulation, nonmechanical in-line



mixing, air agitation, or mechanical stirring.  In a two-stage mixer-settler



system the dispersed phase separates in a horizontal settler.  The extract



from the second settler is recycled to the first settler (see Figure 3-5).



Extract properties such as density or specific constituent concentration may



be monitored to determine when the extract must be sent to solvent recovery



and fresh or regenerated solvent added to the system.  Mixer-settler systems



can handle solids or highly viscous liquids.  Design scaleup is reliable, and



mixer-settlers can handle difficult dispersion systems.  Intense agitation to



provide high rates of mass transfer can produce solvent-feed dispersions that



are difficult to separate into distinct phases.








          (2)  Column Contactors.  Packed and sieve-tray are two different



types of column contactors that do not require mechanical agitation.  Figure



3-6 presents schematics of the two types of extraction columns.








          A packed extractor contains packing materials, such as saddles,



rings, or structured packings of gauze or mesh.  Mass transfer of the solute
                                      3-43

-------
              RECYCLED  SOLVENT FROM
              RECOVERY/FRESH  SOLVENT
              MAKEUP
                                                      RAFFINATE
                        RECYCLED
                         SOLVENT
     EXTRACT
                           EXTRACT TO RECOVERY
                  FIGURE 3-5

TWO-STAGE MIXER-SETTLER EXTRACTION SYSTEM

-------
UJ
I
            SOLVENT
              LIQUID*
           INTERFACE
          SOLVENT-
            WASTE	»
                                       RAFFINATE
                           1111
                              \
                  SOLVENT
                                          PACKING
                                          SUPPORT
                                          REDISTRIBUTOR
                                       \ PACKING
                                         SUPORT
EXTRACT
                                           RAFFINATE
                                                             	
                                                          	^_j
                                                                              SOLVENT
                                                                              LIQUID
                                                                              INTERFACE
                                                                               DOWNCOMER
                                                  WASTE
                             EXTRACT
                       A. PACKED EXTRACTOR                  B.  SIEVE TRAY EXTRACTOR

                                            FIGURE 3-6

                        EXTRACTION COLUMNS WITH NONMECHANICAL AGITATION

-------
to the extract is promoted because of breakup and distortion of the dispersed



phase as it contacts the packing.








          The sieve-tray extractor is similar to a sieve-tray column used in



distillation.  Tray perforations result in the formation of liquid droplets to'



aid the mass transfer process.  The improved transfer is accomplished by the



fact that the droplets allow for more intimate contact between extract and



raffinate.








          Waste Characteristics Affecting Performance








          In determining whether solvent extraction is likely to achieve the



same level of performance on an untested waste as a previously tested waste,



the Agency will focus on the waste characteristics that provide an estimate of



the selectivity value previously described.  EPA believes that the selectivity



value can best be estimated by analytically measuring the partitioning coeffi-



cients of the waste constituents of concern and the solubility of the waste



matrix in the extraction solvent.








          Accordingly, EPA will use partitioning coefficients and solubility



of the waste matrix as surrogates for the selectivity value in making deci-



sions regarding transfer of treatment standards.
                                      3-46

-------
          Design and Operating Parameters








          EPA's analysis of whether a solvent extraction system is well



designed will focus on whether the BDAT List constituents are likely to be



effectively separated from the waste.  The particular design and operating



parameters to be evaluated are:  (1) the selection of a solvent, (2) equilib-



rium data, (3) temperature and pH, (4) mixing, and (5) settling time.








          (1)  The Selection of a Solvent.  In assessing the design of a



solvent extraction system, the most important aspect to evaluate is the



solvent used and the basis on which the particular solvent was selected.



Solvent selection is important because, as indicated previously, different



waste constituents of concern will have different solubilities in various



solvents, and it is the extent to which the waste constituents are preferen-



tially soluble in the selected solvent that determines the effectiveness of



this technology.  In addition to this information, EPA would also want to



review any empirical extraction data used to design the system.








          (2)  Equilibrium Data.  For solvent extraction systems that are



operated in a continuous mode, the extraction process will generally be



conducted using a series of equilibrium stages as discussed previously.  The



number of equilibrium stages and the associated flow rates of the waste and



solvent will be based on empirical equilibrium data.  EPA will evaluate these



data as part of assessing the design of the system. EPA would thus want to
                                      3-47

-------
know the type of mixers used and the basis for determining that this system



would provide sufficient mixing.








          (3)  Temperature and pH.  Temperature and pH changes can affect



equilibrium conditions and, consequently, the performance of the extraction



system.  Thus, EPA would attempt to monitor and record these values on a




continuous basis.








          (4)  Mixing.  For mixer-settler type extraction processes, mixing



determines the amount of contact between the two immiscible phases and,



accordingly, the degree of mass transfer of the constituents to be extracted.








          (5)  Settling Time.  For batch systems, adequate settling time must



be allowed to ensure that separation of the phases has been completed.



Accordingly, in assessing the design of a system, EPA would want to know



settling time allowed and the basis for selection.
                                       3-48

-------
Solvent Extraction References
Hanson, C.  August 26, 1968.  Solvent extraction theory, equipment,
  commercial operations, and economics.  Chem. Eng.  p. 81.

De Renzo, D.J. (editor).  1978.  Unit operations for treatment of
  hazardous industrial wastes.  Park Ridge, N.J.:  Noyes Data Corporation.

Gallacher, Lawrence V.  February 1981.  Liquid ion exchange in metal
  recovery and recycling.  3rd Conference on Advanced Pollution Control for
  the Metal Finishing Industry.  U.S. EPA 600/2-81-028.  pp. 39-41.

Hackman, E.   1978.  Toxic organic chemicals, destruction and waste
  treatment.  Park Ridge, N.J.:  Noyes Data Corporation, pp. 109-111.

Humphrey, J.L., J.A. Rocha, and J.R. Fair.  September 17,  1984.  The
  essentials of extraction.  Chemical Engineering,  pp. 76-95.

Lo, Teh C., M.H.I. Baird, and C. Manson (editors).  1983.  Handbook of
  solvent extraction.  New York, N.Y.:  John Wiley and Sons.  pp. 53-89.

Perry, R.H. and C.H. Chilton.  1973.  Chemical engineer's handbook, 5th
  edition.  New York, NY:  McGraw-Hill Book Company,  pp.  15-1 to 15-24.
                                       3-49

-------
3.4.3     Sludge Filtration








          Applicability and Use of Sludge Filtration








          Sludge filtration, also known as sludge dewatering or cake-formation



filtration, is a technology used on wastes that contain high concentrations of



suspended solids, generally higher than one percent.  The remainder of the



waste is essentially water.  Sludge filtration is applied to sludges, typi-



cally those that have settled to the bottom of clarifiers, for dewatering.



After filtration, these sludges can be dewatered to 20 to 50 percent solids.








          Underlying Principle of Operation








          The basic principle of filtration is the separation of particles



from a mixture of fluids and particles by a medium that permits the flow of



the fluid but retains the particles.  As would be expected, larger particles



are easier to separate from the fluid than smaller particles.  Extremely small



particles, in the colloidal range, may not be filtered effectively and may



appear in the treated waste.  To mitigate this problem, the wastewater should



be treated prior to filtration to modify the particle size distribution in



favor of the larger particles, by the use of appropriate precipitants, coagu-



lants, flocculants, and filter aids.  The selection of the appropriate precip-



itant or coagulant is important because it affects the particles formed.  For



example, lime neutralization usually produces larger, less gelatinous parti-



cles than does caustic soda precipitation.  For larger particles that become
                                      3-50

-------
too small to filter effectively because of poor resistance to shearing, shear

resistance can be improved by the use of coagulants and flocculants.  Also, if

pumps are used to feed the filter, shear can be minimized by designing for a

lower pump speed, or by use of a low shear type of pump.



          Description of Sludge Filtration Process



          For sludge filtration, settled sludge is either pumped through a

cloth-type filter media (such as in a plate and frame filter that allows solid

"cake" to build up on the media) or the sludge is drawn by vacuum through the

cloth media (such as on a drum or vacuum filter, which also allows the solids

to build).  In both cases the solids themselves act as a filter for subsequent

solids removal.  For a plate and frame type filter, removal of the solids is

accomplished by taking the unit off line, opening the filter and scraping the

solids off.  For the vacuum type filter, cake is removed continuously.  For a

specific sludge, the plate and frame type filter will usually produce a drier

cake than a vacuum filter.  Other types of sludge filters, such as belt

filters, are also used for effective sludge dewatering.



          Waste Characteristics Affecting Performance



          The following characteristics of the waste will affect performance

of a sludge filtration unit:


          o    size of particles,  and
          o    type of particles.
                                      3-51

-------
          (1)  Size of particles.  The smaller the particle size, the more the

particles tend to go through the filter media.  This is especially true for a

vacuum filter.  For a pressure filter (like a plate and frame), smaller

particles may require higher pressures for equivalent throughput, since the

smaller pore spaces between particles create resistance to flow.



          (2)  Type of particles.  Some solids formed during metal precipita-

tion are gelatinous in nature and cannot be dewatered well by cake-formation

filtration.  In fact, for vacuum filtration a cake may not form at all.  In

most cases solids can be made less gelatinous by use of the appropriate

coagulants and coagulant dosage prior to clarification, or after clarification

but prior to filtration.  In addition, the use of lime instead of caustic soda

in metal precipitation will reduce the formation of gelatinous solids.  Also

the addition of filter aids to a gelatinous sludge, such as lime or diatoma-

ceous earth, will help significantly.  Finally, precoating the filter with

diatomaceous earth prior to sludge filtration will assist in dewatering

gelatinous sludges.



          Design and Operating Parameters



          For sludge filtration, the following design and operating variables

affect performance:


          o    type of filter selected,
          o    size of filter selected,
          o    feed pressure, and
          o    use of coagulants or filter aids.
                                       3-52

-------
          (1)  Type of filter.  Typically, pressure type filters (such as a



plate and frame) will yield a drier cake than a vacuum type filter and will



also be more tolerant of variations in influent sludge characteristics.



Pressure type filters, however, are batch operations, so that when cake is



built up to the maximum depth physically possible (constrained by filter



geometry), or to the maximum design pressure, the filter is turned off while



the cake is removed.  A vacuum filter is a continuous device (i.e., cake



discharges continuously), but will usually be much larger than a pressure



filter with the same capacity.  A hybrid device is a belt filter, which



mechanically squeezes sludge between two continuous fabric belts.








          (2)  Size of filter.  As with in-depth filters, the larger the



filter, the greater its hydraulic capacity and the longer the filter runs



between cake discharge.








          (3)  Feed pressure.  This parameter impacts both the design pore



size of the filter and the design flow rate.  It is important that in treating



waste that the design feed pressure not be exceeded, otherwise particles may



be forced through the filter medium resulting in ineffective treatment.








          (4)  Use of coagulants.  Coagulants and filter aids may be mixed



with filter feed prior to filtration.  Their effect is particularly signifi-



cant for vacuum filtration in that it may make the difference in a vacuum



filter between no cake and a relatively dry cake.  In a pressure filter,



coagulants and filter aids will also significantly improve hydraulic capacity
                                      3-53

-------
and cake dryness.  Filter aids, such as diatomaceous earth, can be precoated



on filters (vacuum or pressure) for particularly difficult to filter sludges.



The precoat layer acts somewhat like an in-depth filter in that sludge solids



are trapped in the precoat pore spaces.  Use of precoats and most coagulants



or filter aids significantly increases the amount of sludge solids to be



disposed of.  However, polyelectrolyte coagulant usage usually does not



increase sludge volume significantly because the dosage is low.
                                       3-54

-------
Sludge Filtration References


Eckenfelder, W.W.  1985.  Wastewater Treatment, Chemical Engineering.  85:72.

Grain, Richard W.  Solids 1981.  Removal and Concentration.  In Third Confer-
ence on Advanced Pollution Control for the Metal Finishing Industry.  Cincin-
nati, Ohio.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,  pp. 56-62.

Kirk-Othmer.  1980.  Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology.  3rd ed., New York.
John Wiley and Sons, Vol. 10.

Perry, Robert H. and Cecil H. Chilton.  1973.  Chemical Engineers' Handbook.
Fifth Edition.  New York.  McGraw-Hill, Inc.  Section 19.
                                      3-55

-------
3.4.4     Stabilization of Metals








          Stabilization refers to a broad class of treatment processes that



chemically reduce the mobility of hazardous constituents in a waste.  Solidi-



fication and fixation are other terms that are sometimes used synonymously for



stabilization or to describe specific variations within the broader class of



stabilization.  Related technologies are encapsulation and thermoplastic



binding; however, EPA considers these technologies to be distinct from stabi-



lization in that the operational principles are significantly different.








          Applicability and Use of Stabilization








          Stabilization is used when a waste contains metals that will leach



from the waste when it is contacted by water.  In general, this technology is



applicable to wastes containing BDAT list metals, having a high filterable



solids content, low TOC content, and low oil and grease content.  This tech-



nology is commonly used to treat residuals generated from treatment of elec-



troplating wastewaters.  For some wastes, an alternative to stabilization is



metal recovery.







          Underlying Principles of Operation








          The basic principle underlying this technology is that stabilizing



agents and other chemicals are added to a waste in order to minimize the



amount of metal that leaches.  The reduced leachability is accomplished by the
                                       3-56

-------
formation of a lattice structure and/or chemical bonds that bind the metals to



the solid matrix and, thereby, limit the amount of metal constituents that can



be leached when water or a mild acid solution comes into contact with the



waste material.








          There are two principal stabilization processes used; these are



cement-based and lime/pozzolan-based.  A brief discussion of each is provided



below.  In both cement-based or lime/pozzolan-based techniques, the stabiliz-



ing process can be modified through the use of additives, such as silicates,



that control curing rates or enhance the properties of the solid material.








          Portland Cement-Based Process








          Portland cement is a mixture of powdered oxides of calcium, silica,



aluminum, and iron, produced by kiln burning of materials rich in calcium and



silica at high temperatures (i.e., 1400°C to 1500°C).  When the anhydrous



cement powder is mixed with water, hydration occurs and the cement begins to



set.  The chemistry involved is complex because many different reactions occur



depending on the composition of the cement mixture.








          As the cement begins to set,  a colloidal gel of indefinite composi-



tion and structure is formed.   Over a period of time, the gel swells and forms



a matrix composed of interlacing,  thin, densely-packed silicate fibrils.



Constituents present in the waste slurry (e.g.,  hydroxides and carbonates of



various heavy metals), are incorporated into the interstices of the cement
                                      3-57

-------
matrix.  The high pH of the cement mixture tends to keep metals in the form of



insoluble hydroxide and carbonate salts.  It has been hypothesized that metal



ions may also be incorporated into the crystal structure of the cement matrix,



but this hypothesis has not been verified.








          Lime/Pozzolan-Based Process








          Pozzolan, which contains finely divided, noncrystalline silica



(e.g., fly ash or components of cement kiln dust), is a material that is not



cementitious in itself, but becomes so upon the addition of lime.  Metals in



the waste are converted to silicates or hydroxides which inhibit leaching.



Additives, again, can be used to reduce permeability and thereby further



decrease leaching potential.








          Description of Stabilization Processes








          In most stabilization processes, the waste, stabilizing agent, and



other additives, if used, are mixed and then pumped to a curing vessel or area



and allowed to cure.  The actual operation (equipment requirements and process



sequencing) will depend on several factors such as the nature of the waste,



the quantity of the waste, the location of the waste in relation to the



disposal site, the particular stabilization formulation to be used, and the



curing rate.  After curing, the solid formed is recovered from the processing



equipment and shipped for final disposal.
                                       3-58

-------
          In instances where waste contained in a lagoon is to be treated, the



material should be first transferred to mixing vessels where stabilizing



agents are added.  The mixed material is then fed to a curing pad or vessel.



After curing, the solid formed is removed for disposal.  Equipment commonly



used also includes facilities to store waste and chemical additives.  Pumps



can be used to transfer liquid or light sludge wastes to the mixing pits and



pumpable uncured wastes to the curing site.  Stabilized wastes are then



removed to a final disposal site.








          Commercial concrete mixing and handling equipment generally can be



used with wastes.  Weighing conveyors, metering cement hoppers, and mixers



similar to concrete batching plants have been adapted in some operations.



Where extremely dangerous materials are being treated, remote-control and



in-drum mixing equipment, such as that used with nuclear waste, can be



employed.








          Waste Characteristics Affecting Performance








          In determining whether stabilization is likely to achieve the same



level of performance on an untested waste as on a previously tested waste, the



Agency will focus on the characteristics that inhibit the formation of either



the chemical bonds or the lattice structure.  The four characteristics EPA has



identified as affecting treatment performance are the presence of (1) fine



particulates, (2) oil and grease, (3) organic compounds, and (4) certain



inorganic compounds.
                                       3-59

-------
          (1)  Fine Particulates.  For both cement-based and lime/pozzolan-



based processes, the literature states that very fine solid materials (i.e.,



those that pass through a No. 200 mesh sieve, 74 urn particle size) can weaken



the bonding between waste particles and cement by coating the particles.  This



coating can inhibit chemical bond formation and decreases the resistance of



the material to leaching.








          (2)  Oil and Grease.  The presence of oil and grease in both cement-



based and lime/pozzolan-based systems results in the coating of waste parti-



cles and the weakening of the bonding between the particle and the stabilizing



agent.  This coating can inhibit chemical bond formation and thereby, decrease



the resistance of the material to leaching.








          (3)  Organic Compounds.  The presence of organic compounds in the



waste interferes with the chemical reactions and bond formation which inhibit



curing of the stabilized material.  This results in a stabilized waste having



decreased resistance to leaching.








          (4)  Sulfate and Chlorides.  The presence of certain inorganic



compounds will  interfere with the chemical reactions, weakening bond strength



and prolonging setting and curing time.  Sulfate and chloride compounds may



reduce the dimensional stability of the cured matrix, thereby increasing




leachability potential.
                                       3-60

-------
          Accordingly, EPA will examine these constituents when making deci-



sions regarding transfer of treatment standards based on stabilization.








          Design and Operating Parameters








          In designing a stabilization system, the principal parameters that



are important to optimize so that the amount of leachable metal constituents



is minimized are (1) selection of stabilizing agents and other additives, (2)



ratio of waste to stabilizing agents and other additives, (3) degree of



mixing, and (4) curing conditions.








          (1)  Selection of stabilizing agents and other additives.  The



stabilizing agent and additives used will determine the chemistry and struc-



ture of the stabilized material and, therefore, will affect the leachability



of the solid material.  Stabilizing agents and additives must be carefully



selected based on the chemical and physical characteristics of the waste to be



stabilized.  For example, the amount of sulfates in a waste must be considered



when a choice is being made between a lime/pozzolan and a Portland cement-



based system.








          In order to select the type of stabilizing agents and additives, the



waste should be tested in the laboratory with a variety of materials to



determine the best combination.
                                      3-61

-------
          (2)  Amount of stabilizing agents and additives.  The amount of



stabilizing agents and additives is a critical parameter in that sufficient



stabilizing materials are necessary in the mixture to bind the waste constitu-



ents of concern properly, thereby making them less susceptible to leaching.



The appropriate weight ratios of waste to stabilizing agent and other addi-



tives are established empirically by setting up a series of laboratory tests



that allow separate leachate testing of different mix ratios.  The ratio of



water to stabilizing agent (including water in waste) will also impact the



strength and leaching characteristics of the stabilized material.  Too much



water will cause low strength; too little will make mixing difficult and, more



importantly, may not allow the chemical reactions that bind the hazardous



constituents to be fully completed.








          (3)  Mixing.  The conditions of mixing include the type and duration



of mixing.  Mixing is necessary to ensure homogeneous distribution of the



waste and the stabilizing agents.  Both undermixing and overmixing are unde-



sirable.  The first condition results in a nonhomogeneous mixture; therefore,



areas will exist within the waste where waste particles are neither chemically



bonded to the stabilizing agent nor physically held within the lattice struc-



ture.  Overmixing, on the other hand, may inhibit gel formation and ion



adsorption in some stabilization systems.  As with the relative amounts of



waste, stabilizing agent, and additives within the system, optimal mixing



conditions generally are determined through laboratory tests.  During treat-



ment it is important to monitor the degree (i.e., type and duration) of mixing



to ensure that it reflects design conditions.
                                      3-62

-------
          (4)  Curing conditions.  The curing conditions include the duration



of curing and the ambient curing conditions (temperature and humidity).  The



duration of curing is a critical parameter to ensure that the waste particles



have had sufficient time in which to form stable chemical bonds and/or lattice



structures.  The time necessary for complete stabilization depends upon the



waste type and the stabilization used.  The performance of the stabilized



waste (i.e., the levels of constituents in the leachate) will be highly



dependent upon whether complete stabilization has occurred.  Higher tempera-



tures and lower humidity increase the rate of curing by increasing the rate of



evaporation of water from the solidification mixtures.  However, if tempera-



tures are too high, the evaporation rate can be excessive and result in too



little water being available for completion of the stabilization reaction.



The duration of the curing process should also be determined during the design



stage and typically will be between 7 and 28 days.
                                      3-63

-------
Stabilization References
Ajax Floor Products Corp. n.d.   Product literature:  technical data sheets,
  Hazardous Waste Disposal System.  P.O. Box 161,  Great Meadows, N.J. 07838.

Austin, G.T. 1984. Shreve's chemical process industries, 5th ed., New York:
  McGraw-Hill.

Bishop, P.L., Ransom, S.B., and Grass, D.L.  1983.  Fixation Mechanismsin
  Solidification/Stabilization of Inorganic Hazardous Wastes.  In Proceedings
  of the 38th Industrial Waste Conference, 10-12 May 1983, at Purdue
  University, West Lafayette, Indiana.

Conner, J.R.  1986.  Fixation and Solidification of Wastes.  Chemical
  Engineering.   Nov. 10, 1986.

Cullinane, M.J., Jr., Jones, L.W., and Malone, P.G.  1986.  Handbook for
  stabilization/solidification of hazardous waste.  U.S. Army Engineer
  Waterways Experiment Station.  EPA report No. 540/2-86/001.  Cincinnati,
  Ohio:  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Electric Power Research Institute. 1980. FGD sludge disposal manual, 2nd ed.
  Prepared by Michael Baker Jr., Inc. EPRI CS-1515 Project 1685-1, Palo Alto,
  California: Electric Power Research Institute.

Mishuck, E. Taylor, D.R., Telles, R. and Lubowitz, H.  1984.  Encapsulation/
  Fixation  (E/F) mechanisms.  Report No. DRXTH-TE-CR-84298.
  Prepared by S-Cubed under Contract No. DAAK11-81-C-0164.

Pojasek RB. 1979.  "Solid-Waste Disposal:  Solidification"  Chemical
  Engineering 86(17):  141-145.

USEPA.  1980.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  U.S. Army
  Engineer Waterways Experiment Station.  Guide to the disposal of chemically
  stabilized and solidified waste.  Prepared for MERL/ORD under Interagency
  Agreement No. EPA-IAG-D4-0569.  PB81-181505, Cincinnati, Ohio.
                                      3-64

-------
3.4.5     Hexavalent Chromium Reduction








          Applicability and Use of Hexavalent Chromium Reduction








          The process of hexavalent chromium (Cr+6) reduction involves conver-



sion from the hexavalent form to the trivalent form of chromium.  This tech-



nology has wide application to hexavalent chromium wastes including plating



solutions, stainless steel acid baths and rinses, "chrome conversion" coating



process rinses, and chromium pigment manufacturing wastes.  Because this



technology requires the pH to be in the acidic range, it would not be applica-



ble to a waste that contains significant amounts of cyanide or sulfide.  In



such cases, lowering of the pH can generate toxic gases such as hydrogen



cyanide or hydrogen sulfide.  It is important to note that additional treat-



ment is required to remove trivalent chromium from solution.








Underlying Principles of Operation








          The basic principle of treatment is to reduce the valence of chro-



mium in solution (in the form of chromate or dichromate ions) from the valence



state of six (+6) to the trivalent (+3) state.  "Reducing agents" used to



effect the reduction include sodium bisulfite, sodium metabisulfite, sulfur



dioxide, sodium hydrosulfide, or the ferrous form of iron.








          A typical reduction equation, using sodium sulfite as the reducing



agent, is:
                                      3-65

-------
          H2Cr207 + 3Na2S03 + (804)3 —> Cr2(S04)3 + 3Na2S04 + 4H20





The reaction is usually accomplished at pH values in the range of 2 to 3.








          At the completion of the chromium reduction step, the trivalent



chromium compounds are precipitated from solution by raising the pH to a value



exceeding about 8.  The less soluble trivalent chromium (in the form of



chromium hydroxide) is then allowed to settle from solution.  The precipita-



tion reaction is as follows:






          Cr2(S04)3 + 3Ca(OH)2 —> 2Cr(OH)3 + CaS04






          Description of Chromium Reduction Process








          The chromium reduction treatment process can be operated in a batch



or continuous mode.  A batch system will consist of a reaction tank, a mixer



to homogenize the contents of the tank, a supply of reducing agent, and a



source of acid and base for pH control.








          A continuous chromium reduction treatment system, as shown in Figure



3-7, will usually include a holding tank upstream of the reaction tank for



flow and concentration equalization.   It will also include instrumentation  to



automatically control the amount of reducing agent added and the pH of the



reaction tank.  The amount of reducing agent is controlled by the use of a



sensor called an oxidation reduction potential (ORP) cell.  The ORP sensor
                                       3-66

-------
                 REDUCING
                  AGENT
                  FEED
                 SYSTEM
 ACID
 FEED
SYSTEM
   HEXAVALENT-
     CHROMIUM
    CONTAINING
  WASTEWATER
ALKALI
 FEED
SYSTEM
 r
                          DD
                          ORP pH
                          SENSORS
                                                                             TO SETTLING
                        REDUCTION
                    PRECIPITATION
	  ELECTRICAL CONTROLS
 o
     MIXER
                                      FIGURES-/
                               CONTINUOUS HEXAVALENT
                             CHROMIUM REDUCTION SYSTEM

-------
electronically measures, in millivolts, the level to which the redox  reaction



has proceeded at any given time.  It must be noted though, that the ORP



reading is very pH dependent.  Consequently, if the pH is not maintained at a



steady value, the ORP will vary somewhat, regardless of the level of  chromate



reduction.








          Waste Characteristics Affecting Performance








          In determining whether chromium reduction can treat an untested



waste to the same level of performance as a previously tested waste,  EPA will



examine waste characteristics that affect the reaction involved with  either



lowering the pH or reducing the hexavalent chromium.   EPA believes that such



characteristics include the oil and grease content of the waste,  total dis-



solved solids, and the presence of other compounds that would undergo reduc-



tion reaction.








          (1)  Oil and Grease.  EPA believes that these compounds could



potentially interfere the oxidation-reduction reactions,  as well  as cause



monitoring problems by fouling of instrumentation (e.g.,  electrodes).   Oil and



grease concentrations can be measured by EPA Methods  9070 and 9071.








          (2)  Total Dissolved Solids.   These compounds can interfere  with the



addition of treatment chemicals into solution and possibly cause  monitoring



problems.
                                      3-68

-------
          (3)  Other Reducible Compounds.  These compounds would generally



consist of other metals in the waste.  Accordingly EPA will evaluate the  type



and concentration of other metals in the waste in evaluating transfer of



treatment performances.








          Design and Operating Parameters








          The parameters that EPA will examine in assessing the design and



operation of a chromium reduction treatment system are discussed below.








          (1)  Treated and Untreated Design Concentration.  EPA will need to



know the level of performance that the facility is designed to achieve in



order to ensure that the design is consistent with best demonstrated prac-



tices.  This parameter is important in that a system will not usually perform



better than design.  As well as knowing the treated design concentration, it



is also important to know the characteristics of the untreated waste that the



system is designed to handle.  Accordingly, EPA will obtain data on the



untreated wastes to ensure that waste characteristics fall within design



specifications.








          (2)  Reducing Agent.   The choice of a reducing agent establishes the



chemical reaction upon which the chromium reduction system is based.  The



amount of reducing agent needs  to be monitored and controlled in both batch



and continuous systems.   In batch systems, reducing agent is usually con-



trolled by analysis of the hexavalent chromium remaining in solution.   For
                                      3-69

-------
continuous systems, the ORP reading is used to monitor and control the addi-



tion of reducing agent.








          ORP will slowly change until the correct amount of reducing agent



has been added, at which point ORP will change rapidly, indicating reaction



completion.  The set point for the ORP monitor is approximately the reading



just after the rapid change has begun.  The reduction system must then be



monitored periodically to determine whether the selected setpoint needs



further adjustment.








          (3)  2H.  For batch and continuous systems, pH is an important



parameter because of its affect on the reduction reaction.  For a batch



system, it can be monitored intermittently during treatment.  For continuous



systems, the pH should be continuously monitored because of its affect on ORP.



In evaluating the design and operation of a continuous chromium reduction



system, it is important to know the pH on which the design ORP value is based,



as well as, the designed ORP value.








          (4)  Retention Time.  Retention time should be adequate to ensure



that the hexavalent chromium reduction reaction goes to completion.  In the



case of the batch reactor, the retention time is varied by adjusting treatment



time in the reaction tank.  If the process is continuous, it is important to



monitor the feed rate  to ensure that  the designed residence time is achieved.
                                       3-70

-------
Hexavalent Chromium Reduction References

Aldrich, James R.  1985.  "Effects of pH and proportioning of ferrous and
  sulfide reduction chemicals on electroplating waste treatment sludge
  production."  In Proceeding of the 39th Purdue Industrial Waste Conference,
  May 8, 9, 10, 1984.  Stoneham, MA:  Butterworth Publishers.

Cherry, Kenneth F.  1982.  Plating Waste Treatment.  Ann Arbor Science
  Publishers, Inc., Michigan.

Lanouette, Kenneth H.  1977.  "Heavy metals removal."  Chemical Engineering,
  October 17, 1977, pp. 73-80.

Patterson, James W.  1985.  Industrial Wastewater Treatment Technology, 2nd
  Ed.  Butterworth Publishers; Stoneham, MA.

Rudolfs, William.  1953.  Industrial Wastes.  Their Disposal and Treatment.
  L.E.C. Publishers Inc., Valley Stream, NY.  p. 294
                                      3-71

-------
3.4.6     Chemical Precipitation







          Applicability and Use of Chemical Precipitation







          Chemical precipitation is used when dissolved metals are to be



removed from solution.  This technology can be applied to a wide range of



wastewaters containing dissolved BOAT list metals and other metals as well.



This treatment process has been practiced widely by industrial facilities



since the 1940s.







          Underlying Principles of Operation







          The underlying principle of chemical precipitation is that metals  in



wastewater are removed by the addition of a treatment chemical that converts



the dissolved metal to a metal precipitate.  This precipitate is less soluble



than the original metal compound, and therefore settles out of solution,



leaving a lower concentration of the metal present in the solution.  The



principal chemicals used to convert soluble metal compounds to the less



soluble forms include: lime (Ca(OH>2), caustic (NaOH), sodium sulfide (Na2S),



and, to a lesser extent, soda ash (Na2C03), phosphate, and ferrous sulfide




(FeS).







          The solubility of a particular compound will depend on the extent  to



which  the electrostatic forces holding the ions of the compound together  can



be overcome.  The  solubility will change significantly with temperature;  most
                                       3-72

-------
metal compounds are more soluble as the temperature increases.  Additionally,



the solubility will be affected by the other constituents present  in a waste.



As a general rule, nitrates, chlorides, and sulfates are more soluble than



hydroxides, sulfides, carbonates, and phosphates.








          An important concept related to treatment of the soluble metal



compounds is pH.  This term provides a measure of the extent to which a



solution contains either an excess of hydrogen or hydroxide ions.  The pH



scale ranges from 0 to 14; with 0 being the most acidic, 14 representing the



highest alkalinity or hydroxide ion (OH~) content, and 7.0 being neutral.








          When hydroxide is used, as is often the case, to precipitate the



soluble metal compounds, the pH is frequently monitored to ensure that suffi-



cient treatment chemicals are added.  It is important to point out that pH is



not a good measure of treatment chemical addition for compounds other than



hydroxides; when sulfide is used, for example, facilities might use an oxida-



tion-reduction potential meter (ORP) correlation to ensure that sufficient



treatment chemical is used.








          Following conversion of the relatively soluble metal compounds to



metal precipitates, the effectiveness of chemical precipitation is a function



of the physical removal,  which usually relies on a settling process.  A



particle of a specific size, shape,  and composition will settle at a specific



velocity,  as described by Stokes1  Law.    For a batch system,  Stokes' law is a



good predictor of settling time because the pertinent particle parameters
                                      3-73

-------
remain essentially constant.  Nevertheless, in practice, settling time for a



batch system is normally determined by empirical testing.  For a continuous



system, the theory of settling is complicated by factors such as turbulence,



short-circuiting, and velocity gradients, increasing the importance of the



empirical tests.








          Description of Chemical Precipitation Process








          The equipment and instrumentation required for chemical precipita-



tion varies depending on whether the system is batch or continuous.  Both



operations are discussed below; a schematic of the continuous system is shown




in Figure 3-8.








          For a batch system, chemical precipitation requires only a feed



system for the treatment chemicals and a second tank where the waste can be



treated and allowed to settle.  When lime  is used, it is usually added to the



reaction tank in a slurry form.  In a batch system, the supernate is usually



analyzed before discharge,  thus minimizing the need for instrumentation.








          In a continuous system, additional tanks are necessary, as well as



instrumentation  to ensure that the system  is operating properly.  In this



system, the first tank that the wastewater enters is referred to as an equal-



ization tank.  This  is where  the waste can be mixed in order to provide more



uniformity, minimizing wide swings in the  type and concentration of constitu-



ents  being  sent  to the reaction tank.  It  is  important  to  reduce the
                                       3-74

-------
       WASTEWATER
       FEED  	
                   EQUALIZATION
                      TANK
                                  PUMP
OJ
I
                 ELECTRICAL CONTROLS

                 WASTEWATER FLOW


                 MIXER
1
1
<
Q



X
9
4
7

AO





TREATMENT
CHEMICAL
FEED
SYSTEM

1 ,.
ll ^
                                           d
pH
MONITOR
ATMENT
EMICAL
:EED
rSTEM


COAGULANT OR
FLOCCULANT FEED SYSTEM


EFFLUENT TO
DISCHARGE OR
SUBSEQUENT
TREATMENT
                                                                                                SLUDGE TO
                                                                                                OEWATERING
                                                      FIGURE 3-8
                                        CONTINUOUS CHEMICAL PRECIPITATION

-------
variability of the waste sent to the reaction tank because control systems



inherently are limited with regard to the maximum fluctuations that can be




managed.








          Following equalization, the waste is pumped to a reaction tank where



treatment chemicals are added; this is done automatically by using instrumen-



tation that senses the pH of the system and then pneumatically adjusts the



position of the treatment chemical feed valve such that the design pH value  is



achieved.  Both the complexity and the effectiveness of the automatic control



system will vary depending on the variation in the waste and the pH range that




is needed to properly treat the waste.








          An important aspect of the reaction tank design is that it be



well-mixed so that the waste and the treatment chemicals are both dispersed



throughout the tank,  in order to ensure commingling of the reactant and the



treatment chemicals.  In addition, effective dispersion of the treatment



chemicals throughout  the tank is necessary to properly monitor and, thereby,



control  the amount of treatment  chemicals added.







          After the waste  is reacted with the treatment chemical, it flows  to



a quiescent tank  where  the precipitate  is allowed to settle and  subsequently



be removed.  Settling can  be chemically assisted through  the use of flocculat-



ing compounds.  Flocculants  increase the particle size and density of  the



precipitated  solids,  both  of which  increase  the rate of settling.  The partic-



ular flocculating agent that will best  improve settling characteristics will



vary depending  on the particular waste;  selection of the  flocculating
                                       3-76

-------
agent is generally accomplished by performing laboratory bench tests.  Set-



tling can be conducted in a large tank by relying solely on gravity or be



mechanically assisted through the use of a circular clarifier or an inclined



separator.  Schematics of the latter two separators are shown in Figures 3-9




and 3-10.








          Filtration can be used for further removal of precipitated residuals



both in cases where the settling system is underdesigned and in cases where



the particles are difficult to settle.  Polishing filtration is discussed in a




separate technology section.








          Waste Characteristics Affecting Performance








          In determining whether chemical precipitation is likely  to achieve



the same level of performance on an untested waste as a previously tested



waste, we will examine the following waste characteristics:  (1) the concen-



tration and type of the metal(s) in the waste,  (2) the concentration of



suspended solids (TSS), (3) the concentration of dissolved solids  (TDS), (4)



whether the metal exists in the wastewater as a complex, and (5) the oil and



grease content.  These parameters either affect the chemical reaction of the



metal compound, the solubility of the metal precipitate, or the ability of the



precipitated compound to settle.








          (1)  Concentration and Type of Metals.  For most metals, there is a



specific pH at which the metal hydroxide is least soluble.  As a result, when
                                       3-77

-------
      SLUDGE
                                             INFLUENT
   CENTER FEED CLARIFIER WITH SCRAPER SLUDGE REMOVAL SUSTEM
INFLUENT
                                                        SLUDGE
              RIM FEED - CENTER TAKEOFF CLARIFIER WITH
           HYDRAULIC SUCTION  SLUDGE REMOVAL SYSTEM
                                                          INFLUENT
                                                          EFFLUENT
                                           SLUDGE
                RIM FEED - RIM TAKEOFF CLARIFIER
                         FIGURE 3-9
                    CRCULAR CLARFER8
                                3-78

-------
INFLUENT
                                                  EFFLUENT
                        RGURE3-10
                   INCLINED PLANE SETTLER
                            3-79

-------
a waste contains a mixture of many metals, it is not possible to operate a



treatment system at a single pH which is optimal for the removal of all



metals.  The extent to which this affects treatment depends on the particular



metals to be removed, and their concentrations.  An alternative can be to



operate multiple precipitations, with intermediate settling, when the optimum



pH occurs at markedly different levels for the metals present.  The individual



metals and their concentrations can be measured using EPA Method 6010.








          (2)  Concentration and type of total suspended solids (TSS).



Certain suspended solid compounds are difficult to settle because of either



their particle size or shape.  Accordingly, EPA will evaluate this character-



istic in assessing transfer of treatment performance.  Total suspended solids



can be measured by EPA Wastewater Test Method 160.2.








          (3)  Concentration of total dissolved solids (TDS).  Available



information shows that total dissolved solids can inhibit settling.  The



literature states that poor flocculation is a consequence of high TDS and



shows that higher concennntrations of total suspended solids are found in



treated residuals.  Poor flocculation can adversely affect the degree to which



precipitated particles are removed.  Total dissolved solids can be measured by



EPA Wastewater Test Method 160.1.








          (4)  Complexed metals.  Metal complexes consist of a metal ion



surrounded by a group of other inorganic or organic ions or molecules (often
                                       3-80

-------
called ligands).  In the complexed form, the metals have a greater solubility



and, therefore, may not be as effectively removed from solution by chemical



precipitation.  EPA does not have an analytical method to determine the amount



of complexed metals in the waste.  The Agency believes that the best measure



of complexed metals is to analyze for some common complexing compounds (or



complexing agents) generally found in wastewater for which analytical methods



are available.  These complexing agents include ammonia, cyanide, and EDTA.



The analytical method for cyanide is EPA Method 9010.  The method for EDTA is



ASTM Method D3113.  Ammonia can be analyzed using EPA Wastewater Test Method




350.








          (5)  Oil and grease content.  The oil and grease content of a



particular waste directly inhibits the settling of the precipitate.  Suspended



oil droplets float in water and tend to suspend particles such as chemical



precipitates that would otherwise settle out of the solution.  Even with the



use of coagulants or flocculants, the separation of the precipitate is less



effective.  Oil and grease content can be measured by EPA Method 9071.








          Design and Operating Parameters








          The parameters that EPA will evaluate when determining whether a



chemical precipitation system is well designed are: (1) design value for



treated metal concentrations, as well as other characteristics of the waste



used for design purposes (e.g., total suspended solids), (2) pH, (3) residence



time, (4) choice of treatment chemical, and (5) choice of
                                      3-81

-------
coagulant/flocculant.  Below is an explanation of why EPA believes these



parameters are important to a design analysis;  in addition, EPA explains why



other design criteria are not included in EPA's analysis.








          (1)  Treated and untreated design concentrations.  EPA pays close



attention to the treated concentration the system is designed to achieve when



determining whether to sample a particular facility.  Since the system will



seldom out-perform its design, EPA must evaluate whether the design is consis-



tent with best demonstrated practice.








          The untreated concentrations that the system is designed to treat



are important in evaluating any treatment system.  Operation of a chemical



precipitation treatment system with untreated waste concentrations in excess



of design values can easily result in poor performance.







          (2)  p_H.  The pH is important,  because it can indicate that suffi-



cient treatment chemical (e.g., lime) is added to convert the metal constitu-



ents in the untreated waste to forms that will precipitate.  The pH also



affects the solubility of metal hydroxides and sulfides, and therefore



directly impacts the effectiveness of removal.  In practice, the design pH is



determined by empirical bench testing, often referred to as "jar" testing.



The temperature at which the "jar" testing is conducted is important in that



it also affects the solubility of the metal precipitates.  Operation of a



treatment system at temperatures above the design temperature can result in



poor performance.  In assessing the operation of a chemical precipitation
                                      3-82

-------
system, EPA prefers continuous data on the pH and periodic temperature condi-



tions throughout the treatment period.








          (3)  Residence time.  The residence time is important because it



impacts the completeness of the chemical reaction to form the metal precipi-



tate and, to a greater extent, amount of precipitate that settles out of



solution.  In practice, it is determined by "jar" testing.  For continuous



systems, EPA will monitor the feed rate to ensure that the system is operated



at design conditions.  For batch systems, EPA will want information on the



design parameter used to determine sufficient settling time (e.g., total



suspended solids).








          (4)  Choice of treatment chemical.  A choice must be made as to what



type of precipitating agent (i.e., treatment chemical) will be used.  The



factor that most affects this choice is the type of metal constituents to be



treated.  Other design parameters, such as pH, residence time, and choice of



coagulant/flocculant agents, are based on the selection of the treatment



chemical.








          (5)  Choice of coagulant/flocculant.  This is important because



these compounds improve the settling rate of the precipitated metals and



allows for smaller systems (i.e., lower retention time) to achieve the same



degree of settling as a much larger system.  In practice,  the choice of the



best agent and the required amount is determined by "jar"  testing.
                                       3-83

-------
          (6)  Mixing.  The degree of mixing is a complex assessment which



includes, among other things, the energy supplied, the time the material is



mixed, and the related turbulence effects of the specific size and shape of



the tank.  EPA will, however, consider whether mixing is provided and whether



the type of mixing device is one that could be expected to achieve uniform



mixing.  For example, EPA may not use data from a chemical precipitation



treatment system where an air hose was placed in a large tank to achieve



mixing.
                                       3-84

-------
Chemical Precipitation References


Cherry, Kenneth F. 1982. Plating Waste Treatment. Ann Arbor, MI;  Ann Arbor
Science, Inc. pp 45-67.

Cushnie, George C., Jr. 1985. Electroplating Wastewater Pollution Control
Technology. Park Ridge, NJ; Noyes Publications, pp 48-62, 84-90.

Cushnie, George C., Jr. 1984. Removal of Metals from Wastewater:
Neutralization and Precipitation. Park Ridge, NJ; Noyes Publications, pp
55-97.

U.S. EPA, "Treatability Manual,"  Volume III, Technology for Control/Removal
of Pollutnats, EPA-600 /2-82-001C, January 1983.  pp 111.3.1.3-2.

Gurnham, C.F. 1955. Principles of Industrial Waste Treatment. New York;  John
Wiley and Sons, pp 224-234.

Kirk-Othmer. 1980. Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology, 3rd ed.,
"Flocculation", Vol. 10. New York;  John Wiley and Sons, pp 489-516.
                                      3-85

-------
                                       Table 3-1

             TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA COLLECTED BY EPA FOR K048 AND K051
                          PLANT A-FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATION

                                     Sample Set #1
                                         Untreated Waste
                                       K048*
                                  Concentration
    Detected BOAT                      mg/kg
    Organic Constituents               (ppm)

    VOLATILES
      4.   Benzene                       <14
     21.   Dichlorodifluoromethane       310
    226.   Ethyl benzene                  46
     38.   Methylene chloride            <70
     43.   Toluene                       120
     47.   Trichloroethene               <14
215-217.   Xylene (total)                120
    SEMIVOLATILES
     52.  Acenaphthene                  <20
     59.  Benz(a)anthracene             <20
     70.  Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate    <20
     80.  Chrysene                       22
     98.  Di-n-butyl phthalate           67
    109.  Fluorene                       31
    121.  Naphthalene                   100
    141.  Phenanthrene                   85
    145.  Pyrene                         35
     K051
Concentration
    mg/kg
    (ppm)
     48
    <70
     50
    <14
     80
     33
     29
     28
     46
    150
     33
    160
    120
     66
 Treated Waste
 Fluidized Bed
Incinerator Ash
 Concentration
      mg/kg
      (ppm)
       <2
       <2
       <2
       10
        3
       <2
       <2
     <0.2
     <0.2
     <1.0
     <0.2

     <0.2
     <0.2
     <0.2
     <0.2
    *K048 is a dewatered mixture of DAF float (K048)  and waste biosludge.
                                           3-86

-------
                                 Table 3-1 (Continued)

             TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA COLLECTED BY EPA FOR K048 AND K051
                         PLANT A - FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATION

                               Sample Set #1 (Continued)
                                   Untreated Waste
Detected BOAT Metal
and Inorganic Constituents

154.  Antimony
155.  Arsenic
156.  Barium
157.  Beryllium
158.  Cadmium
221.  Chromium (hexavalent)
159.  Chromium (total)
160.  Copper
161.  Lead
162.  Mercury
163.  Nickel
164.  Selenium
165.  Silver
167.  Vanadium
168.  Zinc

INORGANICS
169.  Total cyanide
171.  Sulfide
    K048*
Concentration
    mg/kg
    (ppm)

      <6
     6.1
      63
    <0.1
     0.6
   <0.05
     890
      52
     400
   <0.02
      13
      10
    <0.9
     430
     420
     0.7
     130
    K051
Concentration
    mg/kg
    (ppm)

       9
     8.2
     120
    <0.1
     1.6
      22
     730
     150
     940
    0.19
      36
     1.6
    <0.9
     260
     820
     0.8
    2900
   Treated Waste
   Fluidized Bed
  Incinerator Ash
Concentration
    mg/kg
    (ppm)

      16
      14
     130
    <0.1
     2.4
      21
    1400
     190
     940
   <0.02
      60
    <0.3
      <4
     690
    1000
     <50
  TCLP
  mg/L
  (ppm)

  0.06
 0.016
  0.18
<0.001
<0.003
    NA
   2.2
  0.02
 <0.05
0.0003
 <0.02
 0.033
<0.009
   2.8
 0.079
NA = Not Analyzed

* K048 is a dewatered mixture of DAF float (K048) and waste biosludge.
                                           3-87

-------
                         Table 3-1 (Continued)

     TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA COLLECTED BY EPA FOR K048 AND K051
                  PLANT A-FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATION

                       Sample Set #1 (Continued)
Design and Operating Parameters

Bed Temperature (F)+

Freeboard Temperature (F)+

API Separator Sludge Feed Rate
  (gpm)
Undewatered DAF Float Mixture
  Feed Rate (gpm)
Constriction Plate Pressure
  Differential (In. H20)+
Fluidized Bed Pressure
  Differential (In. H20) +
02 (% Volume)
CO (ppm-Volume)
C02 (% Volume)
    Nominal
Operating Range
Operating Range
During Sampling
    Episode
1200-1300
(1400 max.)
1250-1350
(1450 max.)
0-24
30-90
15-20
60-100
NA
35-800
NA
1213-1240
1240-1253
22.3
43
10.7-18.7
90.4-102.4
8.2-16.2
50-135
2.2-9.0
 +Strip charts for this parameter are included in Appendix E.

 NA Not applicable
                                      3-88

-------
                                      Table  3-2

             TREATMENT  PERFORMANCE  DATA COLLECTED  BY  EPA  FOR  K048  AND K051
                         PLANT A -  FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATION

                                     Sample  Set #2
                                      Untreated  Waste
    Detected BOAT
    Organic Constituents
    VOLATILES
      4.   Benzene
     21.   Dichlorodifluoromethane
    226.   Ethyl benzene
     38.   Methylene chloride
     43.   Toluene
     47.   Trichloroethene
215-217.   Xylene (total)

    SEMIVOLATILES
     52.   Acenaphthene
     59.   Benz(a)anthracene
                              K048*
                         Concentration
                             mg/kg
                             (ppm)
                            260
                            120
                            <70
                             22
                            <14
                            110
                            <20
                            <20
     70.
     80.
     98.
    109.
    121.
    141.
    145.
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate  <20
Chrysene
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Fluorene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
<20
74
31
110
79
31
                K051
            Concentration
               mg/kg
               (ppm)
                 46
                <70
                44
                <14
                71
<20
25
<20
47
 73
37
160
120
67
            Treated Waste
            Fluidized Bed
           Incinerator Ash
            Concentration
                 mg/kg
                 (ppm)

                <2
                <2
                <2
                <10
                <2
                <2
                <2
<0.2
<0.2

<0.2

<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
     *K048 is a dewatered mixture of DAF float (K048)  and waste biosludge.
                                           3-89

-------
                                 Table 3-2 (Continued)

             TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA COLLECTED BY EPA FOR K048 AND K051
                     PLANT A - FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATION

                               Sample Set #2 (Continued)
                                   Untreated Waste              Treated Waste
                                                                Fluidized Bed
                                 K048*            K051         Incinerator Ash
                             Concentration   Concentration   Concentration   TCLP
Detected BOAT Metal              rag/kg           rag/kg           mg/kg       mg/L
and Inorganic Constituents       (ppm)           (ppm)           (ppm)       (ppm)

METALS
154.  Antimony                     7              <6              13          0.06
155.  Arsenic                     5.4             6.7             19          0.008
156.  Barium                      67               73            160          0.24
157.  Beryllium                  <0.1            <0.1           <0.1         <0.001
158.  Cadmium                     0.7             1.3              3         <0.003
221.  Chromium (hexavalent)      <0.05           <0.05            24           NA
159.  Chromium (total)            940             860           1500           2.6
160.  Copper                      55              150            240          0.02
161.  Lead                        390             670           1100          <0.05
162.  Mercury                     0.11           0.23          <0.02        <0.0002
163.  Nickel                      14              30              74          <0.02
164.  Selenium                    9.9             1.1           <0.3          <0.02
165.  Silver                     <0.9            <0.9           <4.0         <0.009
167.  Vanadium                    450             290            730           2.5
168.  Zinc                        450             580           1100          0.086

INORGANICS
169.  Total cyanide              <0.1             0.5            0.4
171.  Sulfide                     200            3600            <50


NA  = Not analyzed

* K048  is a dewatered mixture of DAF float (K048) and waste biosludge.
                                           3-90

-------
                         Table 3-2 (Continued)

     TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA COLLECTED BY EPA FOR K048 AND K051
                    PLANT A - FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATION

                       Sample Set #2 (Continued)
Design and Operating Parameters

Bed Temperature (F)+

Freeboard Temperature (F)+

API Separator Sludge Feed Rate
  (gpm)
Undewatered DAF Float Mixture
  Feed Rate (gpm)
Constriction Plate Pressure
  Differential (In. H20)+
Fluidized Bed Pressure
  Differential (In.
02 (% Volume)
CO (ppm-Volume)
C02 (% Volume)
     Nominal
Operating Range
Operating Range
During Sampling
    Episode
1200-1300
(1400 max.)
1250-1350
(1450 max.)
0-24
30-90
15-20
60-100
NA
35-800
NA
1227-1323
1253-1293
22.3
53
8.7-18.0
91.2-104.0
9.2-16.0
80-355
2.3-8.1
 +Strip charts for this parameter are included in Appendix E.

NA = Not applicable.
                                       3-91

-------
                                      Table  3-3

             TREATMENT  PERFORMANCE  DATA  COLLECTED  BY  EPA  FOR  K048 AND K051
                         PLANT  A  -  FLUIDIZED  BED INCINERATION

                                     Sample Set #3
                                     Untreated  Waste           Treated Waste
                                                              Fluidized Bed
                                   K048*          K051         Incinerator Ash
                              Concentration    Concentration    Concentration
    Detected BOAT                 mg/kg            rag/kg            mg/kg
    Organic Constituents           (ppm)            (ppm)            (ppm)

    VOLATILES
      4.   Benzene                  <14              <14               <2
     21.   Dichlorodifluoromethane  <14              <14               <2
    226.   Ethyl benzene             33               52               <2
     38.   Methylene chloride       <70              <70              <10
     43.   Toluene                   59               42               <2
     47.   Trichloroethene          <14              <14               <2
215-217.   Xylene (total)            100               73               <2

    SEMIVOLATILES
     52.   Acenaphthene             <20              <20             <0.2
     59.   Benz(a)anthracene        <20               22             <0.2
     70.   Bis(2-ethylhexyl)
            phthalate              <20               30             <1.0
     80.   Chrysene                  21               45             <0.2
     98.   Di-n-butyl phthalate     160              200             <1.0
    109.   Fluorene                  32               35             <0.2
    121.   Naphthalene              110              150             <0.2
    141.   Phenanthrene              84              110             <0.2
    145.   Pyrene                    33               62             <0.2


     *K048 is a dewatered mixture of DAF  float (K048) and waste biosludge.
                                          3-92

-------
                                 Table 3-3 (Continued)

             TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA COLLECTED BY EPA FOR K048 AND K051
                         PLANT A - FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATION

                               Sample Set #3 (Continued)
                                    Untreated Waste
Detected BOAT Metal
and Inorganic Constituents

METALS
154.  Antimony
155.  Arsenic
156.  Barium
157.  Beryllium
158.  Cadmium
221.  Chromium (hexavalent)
159.  Chromium (total)
160.  Copper
161.  Lead
162.  Mercury
163.  Nickel
164.  Selenium
165.  Silver
167.  Vanadium
168.  Zinc

INORGANICS
169.  Total cyanide
171.  Sulfide
                                  K048*
                              Concentration
                                  mg/kg
                                  (ppm)
                                   <6
                                   5.7
                                   68

                                   o!4
                                  <0.05
                                   960
                                   56
                                   410
                                   0.12
                                   16
                                   7.5
                                  <0.9
                                   460
                                   450
                                  2300
    K051
Concentration
     mg/kg
     (ppm)
    Treated Waste
    Fluidized Bed
  Incinerator Ash
Concentration   TCLP
      18
      9.7
      100

      1.5
     <0.05
      900
      160
      790
     0.28
      35
      1.2
     < 0.5
      300
      670
     3200
     mg/kg
     (ppm)
      13
      13
      140
      0.5
       2
      23
     1300
      200
     1100
     <0.02
      51
     <0.3
      <4
      690
     1000
      <50
 mg/L
 (ppm)
 0.09
 0.022
 0.17
<0.001
<0.003
  NA
  2.1
 0.02
 <0.05
<0.0002
 <0.02
 0.085
<0.009
  3.1
 0.087
NA = Not Analyzed

* K048 is a dewatered mixture of DAF float (K048) and waste biosludge.
                                          3-93

-------
                         Table 3-3 (Continued)

     TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA COLLECTED BY EPA FOR K048 AND K051
                   PLANT A - FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATION

                       Sample Set #3 (Continued)
Design and Operating Parameters

Bed Temperature (F)+

Freeboard Temperature (F)+

API Separator Sludge Feed Rate
  (gpm)
Undewatered DAF Float Mixture
  Feed Rate (gpm)
Constriction Plate Pressure
  Differential (In. H20)+
Fluidized Bed Pressure
  Differential (In. H20)+
02 (% Volume)
CO (ppm-Volume)
C02 (% Volume)
    Nominal
Operating Range
Operating Range
During Sampling
    Episode
1200-1300
(1400 max.)
1250-1350
(1450 max.)
0-24
30-90
15-20
60-100
NA
35-800
NA
1227-1287
1253-1287
22.3-22.4
50
9.3-18.7
91.2-104.0
9.5-16.8
45-140
2.2-8.6
 +Strip charts for this parameter are included in Appendix E.

NA = Not analyzed.
                                       3-94

-------
                                       Table  3-4

             TREATMENT  PERFORMANCE  DATA COLLECTED BY EPA FOR K048 AND K051
                          PLANT  A-FLUIDIZED BED  INCINERATION

                                     Sample Set  #4
                                         Untreated Waste
                                       K048*
                                  Concentration
    Detected BOAT                      mg/kg
    Organic Constituents               (ppm)

    VOLATILES
      4.   Benzene                       <14
     21.   Dichlorodifluoromethane       <14
    226.   Ehtyl benzene                 <14
     38.   Methylene chloride            <70
     43.   Toluene                        28
     47.   Trichloroethene               <14
215-217.   Xylene (total)                 79
    SEMIVOLATILES
     52.  Acenaphthene                  <20
     59.  Benz(a)anthracene             <20
     70.  Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate     59
     80.  Chrysene                      <20
     98.  Di-n-butyl phthalate          190
    109.  Fluorene                       31
    121.  Naphthalene                    93
    141.  Phenanthrene                   77
    145.  Pyrene                         31
     K051
Concentration
    mg/kg
    (ppm)
     50
    <70
     33
    <14
     72
    <20
     23
     26
     48
    170
     35
    150
    120
     74
 Treated Waste
 Fluidized Bed
Incinerator Ash
 Concentration
      mg/kg
      (ppm)
       <2
       <2
       <2
       <2
       <2
      5.8
     <0.2
     <0.2

     <0.2

     <0.2
     <0.2
     <0.2
     <0.2
     *K048 is a dewatered mixture of DAF float (K048)  and waste biosludge.
                                         3-95

-------
                                 Table 3-4  (Continued)

             TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA COLLECTED BY EPA FOR K048 AND K051
                         PLANT A - FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATION

                               Sample Set #4 (Continued)
                                   Untreated Waste
Detected BOAT Metal
and Inorganic Constituents

METALS
154.  Antimony
155.  Arsenic
156.  Barium
157.  Beryllium
158.  Cadmium
221.  Chromium (hexavalent)
159.  Chromium (total)
160.  Copper
161.  Lead
162.  Mercury
163.  Nickel
164.  Selenium
165.  Silver
167.  Vanadium
168.  Zinc

INORGANICS
169.  Total cyanide
171.  Sulfide
    K048*
Concentration
    mg/kg
    (ppm)
    <6
   4.9
    61
  <0.1
  <0.3
 <0.05
   840
    49
   340
  0.13
    14
   8.7
  <0.9
   390
   400
  2500
  K051
Concentration
    mg/kg
    (ppm)
    15
   7.5
    92
  <0.1
   1.4
 <0.05
   960
   140
   690
  0.07
    37
   0.9
  <0.9
   320
   650
   1.4
  4800
   Treated Waste
   Fluidized Bed
  Incinerator Ash
Concentration   TCLP
    mg/kg       mg/L
    (ppm)       (ppm)
    17
    14
   180
   0.7
     2
    24
  1600
   240
  1200
 <0.02
    80
  <0.3
    <4
   790
  1100
   0.5
   <50
  0.06
 0.015
  0.25
<0.001
<0.003
   NA
   2.3
  0.02
 <0.05
0.0003
 <0.02
  0.11
<0.009
   2.7
 0.086
NA = Not Analyzed

* K048 is a dewatered mixture of DAF float (K048) and waste biosludge.
                                          3-96

-------
                         Table 3-4 (Continued)

     TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA COLLECTED BY EPA FOR K048 AND K051
                   PLANT A - FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATION

                       Sample Set #4 (Continued)
Design and Operating Parameters

Bed Temperature (F)+

Freeboard Temperature (F)+

API Separator Sludge Feed Rate
  (gpm)
Undewatered DAF Float Mixture
  Feed Rate (gpm)
Constriction Plate Pressure
  Differential (In.
Fluidized Bed Pressure
  Differential (In.
02 (% Volume)
CO (ppm-Volume)
C02 (% Volume)
    Nominal
Operating Range
Operating Range
During Sampling
    Episode
1200-1300
(1400 max.)
1250-1350
(1450 max.)
0-24
30-90
15-20
60-100
NA
35-800
NA
1200-1260
1253-1273
22.3-22.4
61
8.7-18.3
91.2-105.6
10.5-17.0
40-340
2.8-7.9
 +Strip charts for this parameter are included in Appendix E.

NA = Not applicable.
                                     3-97

-------
                                      Table 3-5

            TREATMENT  PERFORMANCE DATA COLLECTED BY EPA FOR K048  AND K051
                          PLANT  A-FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATION

                                    Sample Set #5
                                        Untreated Waste
    Detected  BOAT
    Organic Constituents
     K048*
Concentration
     mg/kg
     (ppm)
    VOLATILES
      4.   Benzene                       <14
     21.   Dichlorodifluoromethane       <14
    226.   Ethyl benzene                  41
     38.   Methylene chloride            <70
     43.   Toluene                        41
     47.   Trichloroethene               <14
215-217.   Xylene (total)                 110

    SEMIVOLATILES
     52.   Acenaphthene                  <20
     59.   Benz(a)anthracene             <20
     70.   Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate     21
     80.   Chrysene                       22
     98.   Di-n-butyl phthalate           74
    109.   Fluorene                       32
    121.   Naphthalene                    94
    141.   Phenanthrene                   83
    145.   Pyrene                         34
     K051
Concentration
    mg/kg
    (ppm)
                      49
                     <70
                      34
                     <14
                      71
                     <20
                      24
                      28
                      47
                     230
                      37
                     160
                     120
                      74
 Treated Waste
 Fluidized Bed
Incinerator Ash
 Concentration
      mg/kg
      (PPm)
                      <2
                      <2
                      <2
                      10
                      <2
                      <2
                      <2
                    <0.2
                    <0.2
                    <1.0
                    <0.2
                    <1.0
                    <0.2
                    <0.2
                    <0.2
                    <0.2
     *K048 is a dewatered mixture of DAF float (K048)  and waste biosludge.
                                          3-98

-------
                             Table 3-5  (Continued)

         TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA COLLECTED BY EPA FOR K048 AND K051
                     PLANT A - FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATION

                           Sample Set #5 (Continued)
                         	Untreated Waste	      Treated Waste
                                                            Fluidized Bed
                             K048*           K051           Incinerator Ash
                         Concentration   Concentration   Concentration   TCLP
Detected BOAT Metal          mg/kg           mg/kg           mg/kg       mg/L
and Inorganic Constituents   (ppm)           (ppm)           (ppm)       (ppm)
METALS
154.  Antimony                 <6               9              16       0.06
155.  Arsenic                 5.5             8.3              13      0.022
156.  Barium                   59             100             180       0.20
157.  Beryllium              <0.1            <0.1             0.6     <0.001
158.  Cadmium                <0.3             1.7               2     <0.003
221.  Chromium (hexavalent) <0.05           <0.05              40        NA
159.  Chromium (total)        810            1100            1600        2.4
160.  Copper                   47             170             240       0.02
161.  Lead                    330             700            1300      <0.05
162.  Mercury                0.16            0.31           <0.02     0.0003
163.  Nickel                   14              37              70      <0.02
164.  Selenium                 11             0.5            <0.3       0.12
165.  Silver                 <0.9             1.4              <4     <0.009
167.  Vanadium                370             350             830        2.9
168.  Zinc                    380             680            1100      0.079

INORGANICS
169.  Total cyanide          <0.1            <0.1            <0.1
171.  Sulfide                2800            4000             <50
NA = Not Analyzed

* K048 is a dewatered mixture of DAF float (K048) and waste biosludge.
                                      3-99

-------
                             Table 3-5 (Continued)

         TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA COLLECTED BY EPA FOR K048 AND K051
                     PLANT A - FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATION

                           Sample Set #5 (Continued)
Design and Operating Parameters

Bed Temperature (F)+

Freeboard Temperature (F)+

API Separator Sludge Feed Rate
  (gpm)
Undewatered DAF Float Mixture
  Feed Rate (gpm)
Constriction Plate Pressure
  Differential (In. H20)+
Fluidized Bed Pressure
  Differential (In.
02 (% Volume)
CO (ppm-Volume)
C02 (% Volume)
    Nominal
Operating Range
Operating Range
During Sampling
    Episode
1200-1300
(1400 max.)
1250-1350
(1450 max.)
0-24
30-90
15-20
60-100
NA
35-800
NA
1220-1253
1253-1267
22.3
53
8.7-18.7
92.8-105.6
10.8-17.3
30-910
2.8-7.5
 +Strip charts for this parameter are included in Appendix E.

NA = Not applicable.
                                     3-100

-------
                                       Table 3-6

             TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA COLLECTED BY EPA FOR K048 AND K051
                          PLANT A-FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATION

                                     Sample Set #6
                                         Untreated Waste
    Detected BOAT
    Organic Constituents

    VOLATILES
      4.   Benzene
     21.   Dichlorodifluoromethane
    226.   Ethyl benzene
     38.   Methylene chloride
     43.   Toluene
     47.   Trichloroethene
215-217.   Xylene (total)
     K048*
Concentration
     mg/kg
     (ppm)
       49
      <70
       34
    SEMIVOLATILES
     52.  Acenaphthene                  <20
     59.  Benz(a)anthracene             <20
     70.  Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate    <20
     80.  Chrysene                      <20
     98.  Di-n-butyl phthalate          130
    109.  Fluorene                       31
    121.  Naphthalene                    98
    141.  Phenanthrene                   86
    145.  Pyrene                         31
     K051
Concentration
    mg/kg
    (ppm)
     52
    <70
     71
    <14
     83
                     <20
                      25
                     <20
                      51
                      43
                      36
                     170
                     120
                      67
 Treated Waste
 Fluidized Bed
Incinerator Ash
 Concentration
      mg/kg
      (ppm)
       <2
       <2
       <2
       10
       <2
       <2
       <2
                    <0.2
                    <0.2

                    <0.2

                    <0.2
                    <0.2
                    <0.2
                    <0.2
    *K048 is a dewatered mixture of DAF float (K048)  and waste biosludge.
                                         3-101

-------
                                 Table 3-6 (Continued)

             TREATMENT  PERFORMANCE DATA COLLECTED BY EPA FOR K048 AND K051
                         PLANT A - FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATION

                               Sample Set #6 (Continued)
                                   Untreated Waste
                               K048*
                           Concentration
Detected BOAT Metal
and Inorganic Constituents
METALS
154.
155.
156.
157.
158.
221.
159.
160.
161.
162.
163.
164.
165.
167.
168.

Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium (hexavalent)
Chromium (total)
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Vanadium
Zinc
ing/kg
(ppm)

<6
5.4
61
<0.1
0.4
<0.05
830
48
350
0.14
13
11
<0.9
380
390
INORGANICS
169.  Total cyanide
171.  Sulfide
0.9
360
             K051
           Concentration
               mg/kg
               (ppm)
                                                 <6
                                                5.4
                                                 72
                                               <0.1
                                                1.2
                                              <0.05
                                                840
                                                130
                                                640
                                               0.11
                                                 26
                                                0.9
                                               <0.9
                                                280
                                                570
 0.6
3400
                 Treated Waste
               Fluidized Bed
              Incinerator Ash
Concentration
    mg/kg
                                 15
                                 16
                                180
                               <0.1
                                3.1
                                 30
                               1700
                                250
                               1100
                              <0.02
                                 73
                               <0.3
                                 <4
                                910
                               1200
     0.5
     <50
                            TCLP
                            mg/L
                            (ppm)
                            0.07
                           0.025
                            0.21
                          <0.001
                          <0.003
                             NA
                             2.1
                            0.02
                           <0.05
                         <0.0002
                            0.03
                            0.12
                          <0.009
                             3.6
                            0.11
NA = Not Analyzed

* K048 is a dewatered mixture of DAF float (K048)  and waste biosludge.
                                         3-102

-------
                           Table 3-6 (Continued)

       TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA COLLECTED BY EPA FOR K048 AND K051
                   PLANT A - FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATION

                         Sample Set #6 (Continued)
Design and Operating Parameters

Bed Temperature (F) +

Freeboard Temperature (F)+

API Separator Sludge Feed Rate
  (gpm)
Undewatered DAF Float Mixture
  Feed Rate (gpm)
Constriction Plate Pressure
  Differential (In. H20)+
Fluidized Bed Pressure
  Differential (In. H20)+
02 (% Volume)
CO (ppm-Volume)
C02 (% Volume)
    Nominal
Operating Range
Operating Range
During Sampling
    Episode
1200-1300
(1400 max.)
1250-1350
(1450 max.)
0-24
30-90
15-20
60-100
NA
35-800
NA
1220-1240
1253-1267
22.3
61
10.0-18.0
92.8-105.6
10.8-16.0
50-770
5.7-7.7
 +Strip charts for this parameter are included in Appendix E.

NA = Not applicable.
                                    3-103

-------
                                    Table 3-7
                TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA SUBMITTED BY INDUSTRY
                          FOR PETROLEUM REFINING WASTES
                     PLANT K (REPORT 2) - SOLVENT EXTRACTION
Detected BOAT Organic Constituents*

VOLATILES

  4.   Benzene
226.  Ethyl benzene
 43.  Toluene
Untreated Waste*
      TCLP
      mg/L
     (ppm)
      16
      51
      42
      9.7
      16
      20
                                                             Treated Waste
      5.7
      12
      28
      7.5
      6.8
      8.5
      22
      33
      54
      17
      24
      30
Concentration
    mg/L
   (ppm)
 TCLP
 mg/L
(ppm)
NA








<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
NA








<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
NA = Not Analyzed.

^Analyses were not performed for all BOAT list organic and metal constituents.

*The untreated waste consists of petroleum refinery wastes (the specific waste
 codes were not reported).
                                     3-104

-------
                                 Table 3-7 (Continued)
                    TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA SUBMITTED BY INDUSTRY
                              FOR PETROLEUM REFINING WASTES
                         PLANT K (REPORT 2) - SOLVENT EXTRACTION
    Detected BOAT Organic Constituentsn
    SEMIVOLATILES
215-217.  Xylene (total)
Untreated Waste*
      TCLP
      mg/L
     (ppm)
                                                                 Treated Waste
     57.  Anthracene
     16.3
      48
      62
     21.9
      30
      36
    <0.013
      1.2
     0.45
      5.2
     <0.4
Concentration
    mg/L
   (ppm)
    <0.5
     1.9
     1.3
     7.2
      3
     4.1
     2.9
     2.5
     4.2
     4.2

     NA
 TCLP
 mg/L
(ppm)
<0.05
0.071
<0.05
0.153
0.089
  132
  161
  118
  185
0.185

<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
     59.  Benzo(a)anthracene
     0.014
     0.78
     0.36
      4.6
     <0.4
      2.2
<0.7
<0.7
<0.7
<0.7
<0.7
<0.7
<0.7
0.8
<0.7
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
    NA = Not Analyzed.

    +Analyses were not performed for all BOAT list organic and metal constituents.

    *The untreated waste consists of petroleum refinery wastes (the specific waste
     codes were not reported).
                                        3-105

-------
                             Table 3-7 (Continued)

                TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA SUBMITTED BY INDUSTRY
                          FOR PETROLEUM REFINING WASTES
                     PLANT K (REPORT 2) - SOLVENT EXTRACTION

                                      Untreated Waste        Treated Waste
                                            TCLP       Concentration    TCLP
                                            mg/L           mg/L         mg/L
Detected BOAT Organic Constituents    	(ppm)	     (ppm)        (ppm)

SEMIVOLATILES (Continued)

 62.  Benzo(a)pyrene                      <0.013           <0.6        <0.01
                                           0.51            <0.6        <0.01
                                           0.21             0.6        <0.01
                                            3.5            <0.6        <0.01
                                           <0.04           <0.6        <0.01
                                            1.5            <0.6        <0.01
                                                           <0.6        <0.01
                                                           <0.6        <0.01
                                                           <0.6        <0.01
                                                           <0.6        <0.01

 70.  Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate          <0.013            1.7        <0.01
                                           <0.2            <1.6        <0.01
                                           <0.2            <1.6        <0.01
                                            <3             <1.6        <0.01
                                           <0.04           <1.6        <0.01
                                           <1.3             1.8        0.047
                                                           <1.6        <0.01
                                                           <1.6        <0.01
                                                           <1.6        <0.01

 80.  Chrysene                             0.028            NA         <0.01
                                            1.3                        <0.01
                                            0.5                        <0.01
                                            6.3                        <0.01
                                           <1.2                        <0.01
                                             3                         <0.01
                                                                       <0.01
                                                                       <0.01
                                                                       <0.01

NA = Not Analyzed.

+Analyses were not performed for all BOAT list organic and metal constituents.

*The untreated waste consists of petroleum refinery wastes (the specific waste
 codes were not reported).
                                     3-106

-------
                             Table 3-7 (Continued)

                TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA SUBMITTED BY INDUSTRY
                          FOR PETROLEUM REFINING WASTES
                     PLANT K (REPORT 2) - SOLVENT EXTRACTION
Detected BOAT Organic Constituents*

SEMIVOLATILES (Continued)

 96.  2,4-Dimethylphenol
Untreated Waste*
      TCLP
      mg/L
	(ppm)
                                                             Treated Waste
121.  Naphthalene
141.  Phenathrene
0.061
<0.3
<0.2
<3.0
<0.4
     0.47
      4.2
      2.5
      28
      3.2
      7.3
     0.25
      4.7
      2.5
      4.6
      8.9
      24
Concentration
    mg/L
   (ppm)
                      NA
     7.8
     18
     6.6
     8.5
      8
     16
     14
     18
     5.3

     NA
                             TCLP
                             mg/L
                            (ppm)
                <0.01
                <0.01
                <0.01
                <0.01
                <0.01
                <0.01
                <0.01
                <0.01
                <0.01
                            0.021
                            0.084
                            0.023
                            0.022
                            0.046
                            0.11
                            0.1
                            0.058
                            0.05
                            <0.01
                            <0.01
                            <0.01
                            <0.01
                            <0.01
                            <0.01
                            <0.01
                            <0.01
                            <0.01
NA = Not Analyzed.

+Analyses were not performed for all BOAT list organic and metal constituents.

*The untreated waste consists of petroleum refinery wastes (the specific waste
 codes were not reported).
                                     3-107

-------
                             Table 3-7 (Continued)

                TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA SUBMITTED BY INDUSTRY
                          FOR PETROLEUM REFINING WASTES
                     PLANT K (REPORT 2) - SOLVENT EXTRACTION

                                      Untreated Waste*       Treated Waste
                                            TCLP       Concentration    TCLP
                                            mg/L           mg/L         mg/L
Detected BOAT Organic Constituents*   	(ppm)	     (ppm)        (ppm)

SEMIVOLATILES (Continued)


142.  Phenol                               0.017            NA         <0.01
                                           <0.3                        <0.01
                                           <0.2                        <0.01
                                           <3.0                        <0.01
                                           <0.4                        <0.01
                                           <1.3                        <0.01
                                                                       <0.01
                                                                       <0.01
                                                                       <0.01

145.  Pyrene                               0.051            NA         <0.01
                                            1.5                        <0.01
                                           0.65                        <0.01
                                            9.4                        <0.01
                                           1.7                         <0.01
                                            4.1                        <0.01
                                                                       <0.01
                                                                       <0.01
                                                                       <0.01
NA = Not Analyzed.

+Analyses were not performed for all BOAT list organic and metal constituents.

*The untreated waste consists of petroleum refinery wastes (the specific waste
 codes were not reported).
                                     3-108

-------
                             Table 3-7 (Continued)

                TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA SUBMITTED BY INDUSTRY
                          FOR PETROLEUM REFINING WASTES
                     PLANT K (REPORT 2) - SOLVENT EXTRACTION
Detected BOAT Metal Constituents*
METALS
154.  Antimony
155.  Arsenic
156.   Barium
                                      Untreated  Waste*
                                            TCLP
                                            mg/L
                                           (ppm)
                                           NA
                                                             Treated Waste
                                           <0.03
                                           0.01
                                           <0.03
                                            BDL
                                           <0.8
                                           <0.03
                                            1.4
                                            1.8
                                            1.4
                                            5.3
                                            2.3
                                            3.4
Concentration
    mg/L
   (ppm)
                                                                        TCLP
                                                                        mg/L
                                                                       (ppm)
                  NA
                                                            15
                                                            22
                                                            19
                                                            27
                                                            22
                                                            11
                                                            10
                                                            10
                                                            18

                                                            9.8
                                                            11
                                                            10
                                                            13
                                                            8.8
                                                            12
                                                            12
                                                            10
                                                            14

                                                            810         <1
                                                            800         <1
                                                            990         <1
                                                           1,300        <1
                                                            940         1
                                                            880         <1
                                                            800         <1
                                                            760         <1
                                                           3,200        <1
NA = Not Analyzed

+Analyses were not performed for all BOAT list organic and metal constituents.

*The untreated waste consists of petroleum refinery wastes (the specific waste
 codes were not reported).

BDL = Below Detection Limit.
                0.008
                0.028
                0.022
                0.026
                0.018
                0.024
                0.024
               <0.056
               <0.006
                                     3-109

-------
                             Table 3-7 (Continued)

                TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA SUBMITTED BY INDUSTRY
                          FOR PETROLEUM REFINING WASTES
                     PLANT K (REPORT 2) - SOLVENT EXTRACTION
Detected BOAT Metal Constituents*
Untreated Waste*
      TCLP
      mg/L
     (ppm)
                                                             Treated Waste
METALS (Continued)

157. Beryllium
       NA
Concentration
    mg/L
   (ppm)
     0.2
     0.4
     0.3
     0.3
     0.4
     0.3
     0.3
     0.3
     0.3
 TCLP
 mg/L
(ppm)
  NA
158.  Cadmium
      NA
159.  Chromium (total)
NA = Not Analyzed
     0.12
      2.4
      1.7
      14
      5.9
      10
     1.3
     1.4
    <0.8
     1.0
     1.6
     1.1
 NA
     1.9

     590
     610
     650
     820
     620
     650
     570
     550
     820
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
 0.11
<0.05
^Analyses were not performed for all BOAT list organic and metal constituents.

*The untreated waste consists of petroleum refinery wastes (the specific waste
 codes were not reported).

BDL = Below detection limit; detection limit was not reported.
                                     3-110

-------
                             Table 3-7 (Continued)

                TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA SUBMITTED BY INDUSTRY
                          FOR PETROLEUM REFINING WASTES
                     PLANT K (REPORT 2) - SOLVENT EXTRACTION

                                      Untreated Waste*       Treated Waste
                                            TCLP       Concentration    TCLP
                                            mg/L           mg/L         mg/L
Detected BOAT Metal Constituents+     	(ppm)	     (ppm)        (ppm)

METALS (Continued)

161.  Lead                                  NA              31           NA
                                                            42
                                                            27
                                                            36
                                                            27
                                                            37
                                                            28
                                                            39

162.  Mercury                                NA             1.5         NA
                                                            2.2
                                                            1.8
                                                            2.1
                                                            2.0
                                                            2.5
                                                            2.1
                                                            1.0
                                                            2.0

163.  Nickel                              <0.08             58          0.8
                                           0.16             51         <0.2
                                           0.12             41         <0.2
                                           0.27             45         <0.2
                                           0.13             56          0.2
                                           <0.13            50         <0.2
                                                            43         <0.2
                                                            42          0.7
                                                            53          0.6

NA = Not Analyzed

+Analyses were not performed for all BOAT list organic and metal constituents.

*The untreated waste consists of petroleum refinery wastes (the specific waste
 codes were not reported).
                                     3-111

-------
                             Table 3-7 (Continued)

                TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA SUBMITTED BY INDUSTRY
                          FOR PETROLEUM REFINING WASTES
                     PLANT K (REPORT 2) - SOLVENT EXTRACTION

                                      Untreated Waste*       Treated Waste
                                            TCLP       Concentration    TCLP
                                            mg/L           rag/L         mg/L
Detected BOAT Metal Constituents*     	(ppm)	     (ppm)        (ppm)

METALS (Continued)

164.  Selenium                              NA             <0.4         NA
                                                           <0.4
                                                           <0.4
                                                           <0.4
                                                           <0.4
                                                            2.7
                                                            3.1
                                                            2.3
                                                            1.6
167.  Vanadium                              NA              30          NA
                                                            43
                                                            34
                                                            36
                                                            40
                                                            34
                                                            34
                                                            30
                                                            36
Design and Operating Parameters

No data were submitted.


NA = Not Analyzed

+Analyses were not performed for all BOAT list organic and metal constituents.

*The untreated waste consists of petroleum refinery wastes (the specific waste
 codes were not reported).
                                     3-112

-------
                                                        Table 3-8


                              TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA COLLECTED BY EPA FOR K048 AND K051
                                       PLANT I  - STABILIZATION OF INCINERATOR ASH
I
h->
M
U>
Treated Waste
Untreated Waste
Detected TCLP Extracts
BOAT
of K048 and
Metal K051 Inciner-
Constituents
154.
155.
156.
157.
158.
159.

221.
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
(total)
Chromium
ator Ash
0.06-0.09
0.008-0.025
0.17-0.25
0.001
<0.003

2.1-2.6

(hexavalent) NA
160.
161.
162.
163.
164.
165.
166.
167.
168.
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Vanadium
Zinc
0.02
<0.05
0.0002-0.0003
0.02-0.03
0.033-0.12
<0.009
NA
2.5-3.6
0.055-0.11
TCLP Extracts of Stabilized Fluidized Bed Incinerator Ash
Cement Binder
Run 1
mg/L
(ppm)
<0.163
<0.004
0.277
<0.001
<0.003

2.11

0.415
<0.003
<0.006
NA
<0.018
0.025
<0.006
<0.001
1.4
0.058
Run 2
mg/L
(ppm)
<0.163
<0.004
0.28
<0.001
<0.003

2.12

0.326
<0.003
<0.006
NA
<0.018
0.022
<0.006
0.009
1.21
0.047
Run 3
mg/L
(ppm)
<0.163
<0.004
0.278
<0.001
<0.003

2.16

2.47
0.015
0.011
NA
<0.018
0.024
<0.006
<0.001
1.29
0.086
Kiln
Run 1
mg/L
(ppm)
<0.163
0.005
0.203
<0.001
<0.003

1.78

0.38
<0.003
0.02
NA
<0.018
0.044
<0.006
<0.001
1.53
0.048
Dust Binder
Run 2
mg/L
(ppm)
0.178
0.005
0.2
<0.001
<0.003

1.92

0.395
<0.003
0.009
NA
<0.018
0.043
<0.006
<0.001
1.64
0.042
Run 3
mg/L
(ppm)
<0.163
0.005
0.204
<0.001
<0.003

1.87

2.13
<0.003
<0.006
NA
<0.018
0.04
<0.006
<0.001
1.56
0.031
Lime and Fly Ash
Run 1
mg/L
(ppm)
<0.163
<0.004
0.558
<0.001
<0.003

1.13

0.331
<0.003
<0.006
NA
<0.018
0.013
<0.006
<0.001
0.148
0.02
Run 2
mg/L
(ppm)
<0.163
<0.004
0.524
<0.001
<0.003

1.21

0.259
<0.003
<0.006
NA
<0.018
0.016
<0.006
<0.001
0.149
0.022
Binder
Run 3
mg/L
(ppm)
<0.163
0.006
0.599
<0.001
<0.003

1.08

0.071
0.006
<0.006
NA
<0.018
0.017
<0.006
<0.001
0.156
0.052
      NA = Not analyzed.

-------
                                            Table 3-8 (Continued)

                        TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA COLLECTED BY EPA FOR K048 AND K051
                                 PLANT I - STABILIZATION OF INCINERATOR ASH
Stabilization
Design and
Operating Parameters
Binder to Ash Ratio
Lime to Ash Ratio
Fly Ash to Ash Ratio
Water to Ash Ratio
Ambient Temperature (°C)
H; Mixture pH
4>
Cure Time (Days)
Unconfined Compressive Strength

Run 1
0.2
NP
NP
0.5
23
11.6

28
943.5
Cement
Run 2
0.2
NP
NP
0.5
23
11.5

28
921.6
Process
Kiln Dust
Run 3
0.2
NP
NP
0.5
23
11.5

28
1270
Run 1
0.2
NP
NP
0.5
19
12.1

28
222.8
Run 2
0.2
NP
NP
0.5
19.5
12.1

28
267.7
Run 3
0.2
NP
NP
0.5
20
12.1

28
241.0

Lime
Run 1
NP
0.2
0.2
0.5
19
12.0

28
565.8

and Fly
Run 2
NP
0.2
0.2
0.5
19
12.1

28
512.6

Ash
Run 3
NP
0.2
0.2
0.5
19
12.1

28
578.8
  (Ib/in*)
NP = Not applicable.

-------
                                       Table 3-9

               TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA SUBMITTED BY INDUSTRY FOR K049
                 PLANT J - MICROENCAPSULATION/POZZOLANIC STABILIZATION
    Detected BOAT Constituent

    VOLATILES
      4.  Benzene
    226.  Ethyl benzene
     43.  Toluene
215-217.  Xylene (total)

    SEMIVOLATILES
     81.  ortho-Cresol
     96.  2,4-Dimethylphenol
    121.  Naphthalene
    141.  Phenanthrene
    142.  Phenol

    METALS
    155.  Arsenic
    156.  Barium
Untreated Waste*
      TCLP
      mg/L
	(ppm)
       26
       27
       51
      101
     0.05
     0.06
     0.27
      0.1
     0.02
      BDL
      1.4
Treated Waste
    TCLP
    mg/L
    (ppm)
    0.16
    0.13
    0.66
    0.63
    0.07
    0.07
    0.22
    0.01
    0.94
    0.01
     1.4
    Design and Operating Parameters

    No data were submitted.

     *The untreated waste is slop oil emulsion solids (K049).

     +Analyses were not performed for all BDAT list organic and metal
      constituents.

    BDL - Below detection limit;  detection limit not reported.
                                         3-115

-------
                                      Table 3-10

               TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA SUBMITTED BY INDUSTRY FOR K051
                 PLANT J - MICROENCAPULATION/POZZOLANIC STABILIZATION
    Detected BOAT Constituents*

    VOLATILES
      4.   Benzene
    226.   Ethyl benzene
     43.   Toluene
215-217.   Xylene (total)

    SEMIVOLATILES
     57.   Anthracene
     59.   Benzo(a)anthracene
     62.   Benzo(a)pyrene
     80.   Chrysene
     81.   ortho-Cresol
     96.   2,4-Dimethylphenol
    121.   Naphthalene
    141.   Phenanthrene
    142.   Phenol
    145.   Pyrene

    METALS
    155.   Arsenic
    156.   Barium
    159.   Chromium (total)
Untreated Waste*
     TCLP
     mg/L
     (ppm)
     22
      8
     28
     33
      3.6
      0.49
        38
        99
        25
        25
     10.2
     <0.06
      2.4
      1.2
      0.01
      1.3
      0.89
Treated Waste
    TCLP
    mg/L
    (ppm)
    0.04
    0.11
    0.24
    0.57
   <0.005
   <0.005
   <0.005
   <0.005
    0.01
    0.01
    0.16
    0.01
    0.03
   <0.005
   <0.002
    1.9
   <0.025
    Design and Operating Parameters

    No data were submitted.

     *The untreated waste is API separator sludge (K051).

     ^Analyses were not performed for all BOAT organic and metal constituents.
                                         3-116

-------
                                  Table 3-11

TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA SUBMITTED BY INDUSTRY FOR PETROLEUM REFINERY WASTES
              PLANT J - MICROENCAPSULATION/POZZOLANIC STABILIZATION

Detected BOAT Constituents*
VOLATILES
4 . Benzene
43. Toluene
215-217. Xylene (total)
SEMIVOLATILES
121. Naphthalene
14 1. Phenanthrene
Untreated Waste*
TCLP
mg/L
(ppm)

1.3
2.2
1.8

0.1
<0.01
Treated Waste
TCLP
mg/L
(ppm)

< 0.0005
0.01
0.14

BDL
0.01
METALS
156.  Barium                                  1.0                  2.2

Design and Operating Parameters

No data were submitted.

 *The untreated waste is the filter cake from the belt filter press at plant C
  generated from treatment of petroleum refinery wastes (the specific waste
  codes were not reported).

 +Analyses were not performed for all BOAT organic and metal constituents.

BDL = Below detection limit; detection limit not reported.
                                     3-117

-------
                                  Table 3-12

      TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA SUBMITTED BY INDUSTRY FOR K051 AND K052
             PLANT J - MICROENCAPSULATION/POZZOLANIC STABILIZATION



Detected BOAT Constituents*
VOLATILES
4 . Benzene
226. Ethyl benzene
43. Toluene
215-217. Xylene (total)
SEMIVOLATILES
81. ortho-Cresol
96. 2, 4-Dimethylphenol
121. Naphthalene
141. Phenan thr ene
142. Phenol
METALS
155. Arsenic
156. Barium
Untreated Waste*
TCLP
mg/L
(ppm)

0.8
0.22
2.2
1.42

0.2
0.01
0.16
0.00**
0.1

0.00**
0.57
Treated Waste
TCLP
mg/L
(ppm)

0.01
NA
0.09
0.47

NA
NA
NA
0.22
BDL

BDL
2.0
Design and Operating Parameters

No data were submitted.

 *The untreated waste is the filter cake from the plate filter press at
  plant E generated from treatment of a mixture of K051 and K052.

**Value was reported as 0.00.

 +Analyses were not performed for all BOAT organic and metal constituents.

BDL = Below detection limit; detection limit was not reported.

NA = Not Analyzed
                                     3-118

-------
                                  Table 3-13

TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA SUBMITTED BY INDUSTRY FOR PETROLEUM REFINERY WASTES
              PLANT J - SODIUM SILICATE/POZZOLANIC STABILIZATION
                                        Untreated Waste*
                                              TCLP
                                              mg/L
                                             (ppm)
Treated Waste
     TCLP
     mg/L
    (ppm)
    Detected BOAT Constituents+

    VOLATILES
      4.   Benzene                                   1.3                0.48
     43.   Toluene                                   2.2                1.8
215-217.   Xylene (total)                             1.8                1.2

    SEMIVOLATILES
     81.   ortho-Cresol                             0.02
     96.   2,4-Dimethylphenol                       0.04
    121.   Naphthalene                               0.1                0.18

    METALS
    155.   Arsenic                                  <0.1                0.01
    156.   Barium                                   1.0                 BDL

    Design and Operating  Parameters

    No data were submitted.

    *The  untreated waste  is  the belt filter cake from plant C generated from
     treatment of unknown petroleum refinery wastes (the specific waste codes were
     not  reported).


    +Analyses were not performed for all BOAT list organic and metal constituents.
                                      3-119

-------
                                  Table 3-14

      TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA SUBMITTED BY INDUSTRY FOR K051 AND K052
              PLANT J - SODIUM SILICATE/POZZOLANIC STABILIZATION



Detected BOAT Constituents*
VOLATILES
4 . Benzene
226. Ethyl benzene
43. Toluene
215-217. Xylene (total)
SEMI VOLATILES
81. ortho-Cresol
96. 2,4-Dimethylphenol
121. Naphthalene
14 1. Phenanthrene
142. Phenol
METALS
155. Arsenic
156. Barium
Untreated Waste*
TCLP
mg/L
(ppm)

0.80
0.22
2.2
1.42

0.02
0.01
0.16
0.00**
0.1

0.00**
0.57
Treated Waste
TCLP
mg/L
(ppm)

0.79
NA
3.1
2.1

BDL++
BDL-n-
0.17
BDL
BDL++

0.00**
BDL
Design and Operating Parameters

No data were submitted.

 *The untreated waste is the plate filter cake from plant E generated from
treatment of a mixture of K051 and K052.

**Value was reported as 0.00.

 +Analyses were not performed for all BOAT list organic and metal
  constituents.

++The sum of phenols, cresols, and 2,4-dimethylphenol was below the detection
  limit.

BDL = Below detection limit; detection limit not reported.

NA = Not analyzed.
                                     3-120

-------
                                      Table 3-15

    TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA SUBMITTED BY INDUSTRY FOR PETROLEUM REFINERY WASTES
                   PLANT J - CEMENT,  FLY ASH,  AND LIME STABILIZATION
                                               Untreated Waste*     Treated Waste
                                                     TCLP                TCLP
                                                     mg/L                mg/L
    Detected BOAT Constituents*                     (ppm)	          (ppm)

    VOLATILES
      4.  Benzene                                     1.5                0.01
     43.  Toluene                                     2.5                0.13
215-217.  Xylene                                      1.8                0.39

    SEMIVOLATILES
    121.  Naphthalene                                 0.1                0.00**
    141.  Phenanthrene                                BDL                0.01

    METALS
    155.  Arsenic                                     BDL                0.02
    156.  Barium                                      1.0                1.2

    Design and Operating Parmeters

    No data were submitted.

     *The untreated waste is the belt filter cake from plant C generated from
      treatment of petroleum refinery wastes (the specific waste codes were not
      reported).

    **Value was reported as 0.00.

    +Analyses were not performed for all BDAT list organic and metal constituents.

     BDL = Below detection limit; detection limit not reported.
                                          3-121

-------
                                  Table 3-16

      TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA SUBMITTED BY INDUSTRY FOR K051 AND K052
               PLANT J - CEMENT, FLY ASH,  AND LIME STABILIZATION



Detected BOAT Constituents*
VOLATILES
4. Benzene
43 . Toluene
215-217. Xylene (total)
SEMI VOLATILES
121. Naphthalene
1 4 1 . Phenan threne
142. Phenols++
METALS
155. Arsenic
156. Barium
Untreated Waste*
TCLP
mg/L
(ppm)

0.8
2.2
1.4

0.16
0.004
0.16

0.00**
0.57
Treated Waste
TCLP
mg/L
(ppm)

0.03
0.26
0.59

0.1
0.01
0.07

0.01
1.5
Design and Operating Parameters

No data were submitted.

 *The untreated waste is the plate filter cake from plant E generated from
  treatment of a mixture of K051  and K052.

**Value was reported as  0.00.

 ^Analyses were not performed for all BOAT list organic and metal
  constituents.

++The phenol analysis is the sum of phenols, cresols, and 2,4-dimethylphenol.
                                      3-122

-------
                                  Table 3-17

TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA SUBMITTED BY INDUSTRY FOR PETROLEUM REFINERY WASTES
              PLANT J - SODIUM SILICATE/POZZOLANIC STABILIZATION
                                        Untreated Waste*
                                              TCLP
                                              mg/L
                                             (ppm)	
                                              <0.05
                                              <0.05
                                              <0.05
                                              <0.05
                                               0.89
                                               0.06
                                               0.13
                                               0.05
                                              <0.04
                                               0.57
                                               BDL
                                               0.04
Treated Waste
     TCLP
     mg/L
    (ppm)
       0.01
        NA
       0.01
       0.02
    Detected BOAT Constituents*             _

    VOLATILES
      4.  Benzene
    226.  Ethyl benzene
     43.  Toluene
215-217.  Xylene (total)

    SEMIVOLATILES
     81.  ortho-Cresol
     96.  2,4-Dimethylphenol
    141.  Phenanthrene
    142.  Phenol

    METALS
    155.  Arsenic
    156.  Barium
    158.  Cadmium
    159.  Chromium (total)

    Design and Operating Parameters

    No data were submitted.

     *The untreated waste is the thermally dried (550°F) belt filter cake from
      plant H generated from treatment of petroleum refinery wastes (the specific
      waste codes were not reported) at plant C.

     +Analyses were not performed for all BOAT list organic and metal
      constituents.

    BDL = Below detection limit; detection limit not reported.

    NA = Not analyzed.
       BDL
       BDL
       0.02
       BDL
       0.05
       0.02
                                     3-123

-------
                                  Table 3-18

      TREATMENT PERFORMANCE DATA SUBMITTED BY INDUSTRY FOR K051 AND K052
              PLANT J - SODIUM SILICATE/POZZOLANIC STABILIZATION

Detected BOAT Constituents*
VOLATILES
4 . Benzene
43 . Toluene
215-217. Xylene (total)
SEMIVOLATILES
70. Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
81. ortho-Cresol
121. Naphthalene
142. Phenol
METALS
156. Barium
158. Cadmium
Untreated Waste*
TCLP
mg/L
(ppm)

<0.025
0.03
<0.05

0.012
0.02
0.01
0.08

1.3
0.02
Treated Waste
TCLP
mg/L
(ppm)

0.00**
0.01
0.02

NA
NA
BDL
NA

0.5
BDL
Design and Operating Parameters

No data were submitted.

 *The untreated waste is the thermally dried plate filter cake from plant H
  generated from treatment of a mixture of K051  and K052 at plant E.

**Value was reported as  0.00.

 +Analyses were not performed for all BOAT organic and metal constituents.

BDL = Below detection limit; detection limit not reported.

NA = Not analyzed.
                                      3-124

-------
4.0       IDENTIFICATION OF BEST DEMONSTRATED AND AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY








          As discussed in the previous section of this document, (Section



3.0), the Agency identified five demonstrated treatment technologies to be



considered for BOAT for the nonwastewater form of the refinery waste group



(K048-K052).  The five technologies are:  incineration including fluidized bed



and rotary kiln incineration, solvent extraction, stabilization, thermal



drying, and pressure filtration.  Chromium reduction followed by lime and



sulfide precipitation and vacuum filtration is a demonstrated technology for



treating metal bearing wastewaters such as wastewater forms of refinery wastes



K048-K052.








          This section presents the rationale behind the determination of



fluidized bed incineration followed by lime and fly ash stabilization of the



incinerator ash as the proposed BOAT for nonwastewater forms of wastes



included in the refinery waste group (K048-K052).  It also presents the



rationale behind the determination of chromium reduction followed by lime and



sulfide precipitation and vacuum filtration as the proposed BOAT for metals in



wastewater forms of K048-K052.








          As described in Section 1,0, the best demonstrated and available



technology (BOAT) for treatment of these wastes is determined based on perfor-



mance data available to the Agency.  (All performance data available to the



Agency are discussed in Section 3.0)  Prior to being used to establish treat-



ment standards, performance data are screened to determine whether they
                                      4-1

-------
represent operation of a well-designed and operated system, whether sufficient



quality assurance/quality control measures were employed to ensure the accu-



racy of the data, and whether the appropriate measure of performance was used



to assess the performance of the treatment technology.  All remaining perform-



ance data are then adjusted based on recovery data in order to take into



account analytical interference associated with the chemical make-up of the



sample.  Finally, treatment data from each technology are statistically



compared (technology to technology) to determine whether any technology



performs better than the others.








4.1       Review of Performance Data








          Nonwastewaters








          The available treatment performance data for nonwastewater forms of



K048-K052, presented in Section 3.0 were reviewed and assessed to determine



whether they represent operation of a well-designed and operated system,



whether sufficient quality assurance/quality control measures were employed to



ensure the accuracy of the data, and whether appropriate measures of perform-



ance were used to assess the performance of the treatment technology.








          Data provided to the Agency on the treatment of refinery wastes



using  thermal drying and pressure filtration technologies do not represent the



appropriate measure of performance used to assess the performance of the



treatment technology and to establish treatment standards  (i.e., total
                                       4-2

-------
constituent concentration data for organics).  Since appropriate performance



data were not available for these technologies, thermal drying and pressure



filtration were not considered further in the determination of BOAT.  Some



data provided to the Agency on the treatment of refinery wastes using solvent



extraction do not represent the appropriate measure of performance (total



constituent concentration data for organics); these data were deleted.  How-



ever, other solvent extraction data provided to the Agency do represent the



appropriate measure of performance and were used in the determination of BDAT.



The Agency did not delete any of the remaining technologies in the determina-



tion of BDAT because the Agency had no reason to believe that any of the



treatment systems were not well-designed or operated or that insufficient



quality assurance/quality control measures were employed.  The treatment



performance data that remained after applying the screening methods were for



incineration, solvent extraction, and stabilization technologies.








          Wastewaters








          As discussed in Section 3.0, treatment performance data were not



available for wastewater forms of refinery wastes K048-K052.  However, the



Agency does have treatment performance data for BDAT List organics in scrubber



water residuals generated from incineration of K019.  EPA believes that



similar levels of performance for destruction of BDAT List organics can be



achieved through incineration of K048-K052.  Operating data collected during



treatment testing of K019 show that the technology was properly operated;
                                      4-3

-------
accordingly, all of the performance data for the scrubber water residual were



transferred to K048-K052.








          The Agency also has treatment performance data for BDAT List metals



in wastes that it believes are sufficiently similar to K048-K052 wastewater



residuals such that the performance data can be transferred.  The data were



collected by EPA from one facility treating K062 and metal-bearing character-



istic wastes using chromium reduction followed by lime and sulfide precipita-



tion and vacuum filtration.  Operating data collected during this treatment



performance test indicate that the technology was properly operated; accord-



ingly all of the data were transferred to K048-K052 for development of BDAT



treatment standards.








4.2       Accuracy Correction of Performance Data








          Following the review of all available treatment performance data and



the deletion of performance data, as appropriate, the remaining treatment



performance data for demonstrated and available technologies were adjusted to



account for analytical interferences associated with the chemical make-up of



the treated sample.  Generally, performance data were corrected for accuracy



as follows:  (1) a matrix spike recovery was determined, as explained below,



for each BDAT list constituent detected in the untreated or treated waste;



(2) an accuracy correction factor was determined for each of the above con-



stituents by dividing 100 by the matrix spike recovery (percent) for that



constituent; and (3) treatment performance data for each BDAT List constituent
                                      4-4

-------
detected in the untreated or treated waste were corrected by multiplying the



reported concentration of the constituent by the corresponding accuracy



correction factor.








          Matrix spike recoveries are developed by analyzing a sample of a



treated waste for a constituent and then reanalyzing the sample after the



addition of a known amount of the same constituent (i.e., spike) to the



sample.  The matrix spike recovery represents the total amount of constituent



recovered after spiking minus the initial concentration of the constituent in



the sample, and the result divided by the known amount of constituent added.








4.2.1     Nonwastewaters








          Descriptions, by technology, of how treatment performance data were



adjusted for each BDAT List constituent detected in the untreated or treated



waste are presented below.








          Fluidized Bed Incineration








          Table D-4 (presented in Appendix D of this background document)



presents matrix spike recoveries for BDAT List organic, metal, and inorganic



constituents detected in the untreated waste or the fluidized bed incinerator



ash.
                                      4-5

-------
          For most volatiles and inorganic constituents, Table D-4 shows that



the matrix spike recovery was determined from the result of one matrix spike



performed for each constituent.








          However, for constituents for which no matrix was performed, the



matrix spike recovery was derived from the average matrix spike recovery of



the appropriate group of constituents (volatile or inorganic constituents) for



which recovery data were available.  For example, no matrix spike was per-



formed for dichlorodifluoromethane; the matrix spike recovery used for this



constituent was the result obtained by averaging the matrix spike recoveries



for all volatile constituents that had recovery data.








          Duplicate matrix spikes were performed for some BOAT List semivola-



tile constituents.  If duplicate matrix spikes were performed for a semivola-



tile constituent, the matrix spike recovery used for that constituent was the



lower of the two values from the first matrix spike and the duplicate spike.








          Where a matrix spike was not performed for a semivolatile constitu-



ent, a matrix spike recovery for that constituent was based on semivolatile



constituents for which there were recovery data from the two matrix spikes.



In  these cases, the matrix spike recoveries for all semivolatiles from the



first matrix spikes were averaged.  Similarly, an average matrix spike recov-



ery was calculated for the duplicate matrix spike recoveries.  The lower of



the two average matrix spike recoveries of semivolatile constituents  was used



for any semivolatile  constituent for which no matrix spike was performed.  For
                                       4-6

-------
example, no matrix spike was performed for di-n-butyl phthalate, a base/-



neutral fraction semivolatile, in fluidized bed incinerator ash; however, the



treatment performance data for this constituent were adjusted for accuracy



using a matrix spike recovery of 67%.  This recovery was selected after



averaging the matrix spike recoveries calculated for all base/neutral fraction



semivolatiles in the first matrix spike (69%) and the duplicate spike (67%).



The lower average matrix spike recovery of 67% was selected to subsequently



calculate the accuracy correction factor for di-n-butyl phthalate.








          Where a matrix spike was not performed for a BOAT list metal in the



TCLP extract of incinerator ash and matrix spike data were available for the



extract of that BDAT list metal from a similar matrix (i.e., stabilized



incinerator ash), the analytical data were adjusted using the average matrix



spike recovery for the metal in the TCLP extracts of stabilized incinerator



ash.








          The accuracy correction factors for fluidized bed incinerator ash



data are summarized in Table D-7.  The corrected treatment concentrations for



BDAT List constituents detected in the untreated waste are presented in Table



4-1.








          Solvent Extraction








          The quality assurance/quality control information required to adjust



the data values for accuracy was not provided for plant K.  Therefore, the
                                      4-7

-------
solvent extraction treatment performance data have not been adjusted.  The



treated waste values from solvent extraction treatment are presented in Table



3-7 in section 3.0.








          Stabilization








          (a)  Plant I.  Table D-5 (Appendix D) presents the matrix spike



recoveries determined for TCLP extracts of stabilized incinerator ash for BDAT



List metals detected in the untreated or treated waste at plant I.  In the



case of the kiln dust binder, two matrix spike analyses were performed.  The



lowest percent recovery value from the two matrix spike analyses for a con-



stituent was used as the recovery factor for that constituent in the extract



from the kiln dust stabilized ash.  In cases where a matrix spike was not



performed for a BDAT List metal in the stabilized ash and matrix spike data



were available for the extract of that BDAT list metal from a similar matrix



(i.e., ash stabilized using other binders), the analytical data were adjusted



using the average matrix spike recovery for the metal in the waste stabilized



with other binders.  For example, a matrix spike was not performed for anti-



mony in cement stabilized ash; therefore, the analytical data were adjusted



using 74/J which was the average percent recovery for antimony in kiln dust



(66% and 81.5/J) and lime and fly ash (75.1/&) stabilized ashes.








          The accuracy correction factors for the stabilization data are



summarized in Table D-8.  The corrected treatment concentrations for stabi-



lized incinerator ash are presented in Table 4-2.
                                      4-8

-------
          (b)  Plant J.  The quality assurance/quality control information



required to adjust the data values for accuracy was not provided for plant J.



Therefore, the stabilization data have not been adjusted and are the same as



the treated waste values presented in Tables 3-9 through 3-18 in Section 3.0.



A review of the untreated and treated data for the stabilization tests con-



ducted at plant J did not indicate that the TCLP leachates from the treated



waste were lower than those from the untreated waste.  Therefore, these data



do not demonstrate treatment and the data were not used to determine BDAT.








4.2.2     Wastewaters








          Presented below are descriptions of how transferred treatment



performance data were adjusted for each BDAT List constituent detected in the



untreated or treated waste.








          Organics Data From K019 Scrubber Water








          The adjustment for accuracy of scrubber water data for BDAT List



organics in K019 are presented in detail in Section 4.0 of "Best Demonstrated



Available Technology (BDAT) Background Document for Chlorinated Organics



Treatability Group (K016, K018, K019, K020, K030)."








          Table 4-3 presents the corrected treatment concentrations for BDAT



list organics detected in the untreated K019 or the scrubber water.
                                      4-9

-------
          Metals Data From K062 and Metal-Bearing Characteristic Wastes








          The quality assurance/quality control information required to adjust



the data values for accuracy was not provided for the treatment of K062 and



metal-bearing characteristic wastes in the Onsite Engineering Report for



Envirite (Reference 27).  Therefore, matrix spike recoveries for BOAT list



metal constituents were transferred from the TCLP extract of residual slag



from the Onsite Engineering Report for Horsehead (Reference 28).  Table D-6



presents the matrix spike recoveries for BOAT List metal constituents that



were regulated in K048-K052 wastewater.  The matrix spike recovery used for



each constituent was the lower of the two values from the first matrix spike




and the duplicate spike.








          The accuracy correction factors for BDAT list metal constituents



that were regulated in K048-K052 wastewater are summarized in Table D-9.  The



corrected treatment concentrations for BDAT list metal constituents that were



regulated in K048-K052 wastewater are presented in Table 4-4.








4.3       Statistical Comparison of Performance Data








          In cases where EPA has treatment performance data from more  than  one




technology, EPA  uses  the statistical method known as analysis of variance



(ANOVA)  to determine  if one technology performs significantly better than



others.   In cases where a  particular treatment technology achieves  signifi-



cantly  better  performance,  that technology will be selected as  BDAT.
                                       4-10

-------
          Nonwastewaters








          To determine BOAT for nonwastewater forms of K048 and K051, EPA



performed the ANOVA test to compare three technologies:  fluidized bed incin-



eration, solvent extraction, and fluidized bed incineration followed by



stabilization.  The ANOVA test was performed using corrected treatment concen-



trations.








          First, fluidized bed incineration and solvent extraction were



compared by using the ANOVA test on the total composition data for the BOAT



List organics.  The test was only performed on total xylene and naphthalene



because for both treatment technologies, most other organic constituents were



not detected in the treated waste.  (A comparison of detection limits between



technologies would not provide an indication of which technology provides



better treatment).  The ANOVA test was also not performed on 1-methylnaph-



thalene because the constituent was not analyzed in the fluidized bed inciner-



ator ash.  The results indicate that fluidized bed incineration provides



equivalent treatment for total xylene and significantly better treatment for



naphthalene as compared with solvent extraction.  Based on these results, EPA



believes that fluidized bed incineration provides better treatment for organ-



ics than solvent extraction.  The results of the ANOVA test are presented in



Appendix G.








          Second,  fluidized bed incineration and fluidized bed incineration



followed by stabilization were compared using the ANOVA test on the TCLP
                                      4-11

-------
extract values for BDAT List metals.  All three binder stabilization systems



(cement, kiln dust, and lime and fly ash) were compared.  The ANOVA test was



not performed on beryllium, cadmium, lead, and silver because these metals



were not detected in the TCLP extract of the unstabilized incinerator ash.



The test was also not performed on hexavalent chromium and thallium because



these metals were not analyzed in the TCLP extract of the unstabilized ash.



The results of the ANOVA test are presented in Table 4-5.  The results indi-



cate that, overall, fluidized bed incineration followed by lime and fly ash



stabilization provides significantly better or equivalent treatment for most



metal constituents (except for antimony and barium) than fluidized bed incin-



eration alone or fluidized bed incineration followed by cement or kiln dust



stabilization of the incinerator ash.








          Wastewaters








          For wastewaters generated from incineration of refinery wastes



K048-K052, EPA has transferred treatment performance data for metal constitu-



ents (Section 4.1).  Therefore, the ANOVA test was not performed and chromium



reduction followed by lime and sulfide precipitation and vacuum filtration is



determined as BDAT for metals in wastewater forms of K048-K052.








4.4       BDAT for K048-K052 Wastes








          For nonwastewater forms of K048 and K051, the best demonstrated and



available technology has been determined to be fluidized bed incineration
                                      4-12

-------
followed by lime and fly ash stabilization.  Treatment standards have been



developed for metals and organics in the nonwastewater and for organics in the



wastewater residuals from this BDAT treatment train.  For metals in wastewater



residuals from treatment of K048-K052, the best demonstrated and available



technology has been determined to be chromium reduction followed by lime and



sulfide precipitation and vacuum filtration.  As discussed in Section 2.0, EPA



has determined that refinery waste group K048-K052 represents a waste treat-



ability group; therefore, since fluidized bed incineration followed by lime



and fly ash stabilization has been determined to be BDAT for nonwastewater



forms of K048 and K051 wastes, this treatment train is also BDAT for



nonwastewater forms of K049, K050, and K052.  Similarly, the treatment train,



chromium reduction followed by lime and sulfide precipitation and vacuum



filtration, is also BDAT for metals in wastewater forms of K049, K050, and



K052.
                                      4-13

-------
                                    Table 4-1

                   TREATMENT CONCENTRATIONS FOR FLUIDIZED BED
                     INCINERATOR ASH CORRECTED FOR ACCURACY:
                                     PLANT A
                                                Sample Set
      Constituent

VOLATILES
 21.  Dichlorodifluoro-
       methane
      (Concentration)

 43.  Toluene
      (Concentration)

      Xylene
      (Concentration)

SEMIVOLATILES
 59.  Benz(a)anthracene
      (Concentration)

 62.  Benzo(a)pyrene
      (Concentration)

 70.  Bis(2-ethylhexyl)
       phthalate
      (Concentration)

 80.  Chrysene
      (Concentration)

 98.  Di-n-butyl phthalate
      (Concentration)

109.  Fluorene
      (Concentration)

121.  Naphthalene
      (Concentration)

141.  Phenanthrene
      (Concentration)

145.  Pyrene
      (Concentration)
 1         2        3        4        5        6
(ppm)    (ppm)    (ppm)    (ppm)     (ppm)    (ppm)


2.60     2.60     2.60     2.60     2.60     2.60
3.75     2.50     2.50     2.50     2.50     2.50
2.60     2.60     2.60     7.53     2.60     2.60
0.30     0.30     0.30     0.30     0.30     0.30
0.30     0.30     0.30     0.30     0.30     0.30
1.49     1.49     1.49     1.49     1.49     1.49
0.30     0.30     0.30     0.30     0.30     0.30
1.49     1.49     1.49     1.49     1.49     1.49
0.30     0.30     0.30     0.30     0.30     0.30
0.30     0.30     0.30     0.30     0.30     0.30
0.30     0.30     0.30     0.30     0.30     0.30
0.38     0.38     0.38     0.38     0.38     0.38
                                     4-14

-------
                              Table 4-1 (Continued)

                   TREATMENT CONCENTRATIONS FOR FLUIDIZED BED
                     INCINERATOR ASH CORRECTED FOR ACCURACY:
                                     PLANT A
                                                Sample Set
      Constituent

METALS
154.  Antimony
      (TCLP)

155.  Arsenic
      (TCLP)

156.  Barium
      (TCLP)

157.  Beryllium
      (TCLP)

158.  Cadmium
      (TCLP)

159.  Chromium (total)
      (TCLP)

160.  Copper
      (TCLP)

161.  Lead
      (TCLP)

162.  Mercury
      (TCLP)

163.  Nickel
      (TCLP)

164.  Selenium
      (TCLP)

165.  Silver
      (TCLP)

167.  Vanadium
      (TCLP)

168.  Zinc
      (TCLP)
   123456
  (ppm)    (ppm)    (ppm)    (ppm)     (ppm)     (ppm)


  0.08     0.08     0.12     0.08     0.08     0.09


  0.01    0.006     0.02     0.01     0.02     0.02


  0.19     0.26     0.18     0.27     0.22     0.23


 0.001    0.001    0.001    0.001    0.001    0.001


 0.004    0.004    0.004    0.004    0.004    0.004


  2.76     3.26     2.63     2.89     3.01     2.63


  0.02     0.02     0.02     0.02     0.02     0.02


  0.06     0.06     0.06     0.06     0.06     0.06


0.0003   0.0002   0.0002   0.0003   0.0003   0.0002


  0.03     0.03     0.03     0.03     0.03     0.04


  0.04     0.02     0.10     0.14     0.15     0.15


 0.012    0.012    0.012    0.012    0.012    0.012


  3.63     3.24     4.02     3.50     3.76     4.67


  0.11     0.12     0.12     0.12     0.11     0.15
                                     4-15

-------
                              Table 4-1  (Continued)

                   TREATMENT CONCENTRATIONS FOR FLUIDIZED BED
                     INCINERATOR ASH CORRECTED FOR ACCURACY:
                                     PLANT A
                           	Sample Set
                             1         2        ;
      Constituent

INORGANICS

169.  Total Cyanide        0.096     0.38    0.096     0.48    0.096     0.48
      (Concentration)

171.  Sulfide                 61       61       61       61       61       61
      (Concentration)
1
(ppm)
2
(ppm)
3
(ppm)
4
(ppm)
5
(PPm)
6
(ppm)
                                     4-16

-------
                                                       Table 4-2
                                     TREATMENT CONCENTRATIONS FOR TCLP EXTRACTS OF
                              STABILIZED INCINERATOR ASH CORRECTED FOR ACCURACY:  PLANT I
I
M
^J
                               Cement Binder
Kiln Dust Binder
Lime and Fly Ash Binder
CONSTITUENT
154.
155.
156.
157.
158.
159.
221.
160.
161.
163.
164.
165.
166.
167.
168.
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
(total)
Chromium
(hexavalent)
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Vanadium
Zinc
Run 1
(ppm)
0.22
0.003
0.29
0.001
0.004
2.65
0.66
0.003
0.006
0.025
0.03
0.008
0.002
1.02
0.078
Run 2
(ppm)
0.22
0.003
0.30
0.001
0.004
2.66
0.52
0.003
0.006
0.025
0.026
0.008
0.015
1.57
0.063
Run 3
(ppm)
0.22
0.003
0.30
0.001
0.004
2.71
3.94
0.017
0.011
0.025
0.029
0.008
0.002
1.67
0.12
Run 1
(ppm)
0.25
0.004
0.22
0.001
0.004
2.37
0.37
0.004
0.026
0.027
0.059
0.008
0.002
3.49
0.068
Run 2
(ppm)
0.27
0.004
0.22
0.001
0.004
2.55
0.39
0.004
0.012
0.027
0.057
0.008
0.002
4.20
0.059
Run 3
(ppm)
0.25
0.004
0.23
0.001
0.004
2.49
2.09
0.004
0.008
0.027
0.053
0.008
0.002
3.56
0.044
Run 1
(ppm)
0.22
0.003
0.58
0.001
0.004
1.47
1.43
0.004
0.008
0.026
0.015
0.008
0.002
0.16
0.029
Run 2
(ppm)
0.22
0.003
0.54
0.001
0.004
1.58
1.12
0.004
0.008
0.026
0.019
0.008
0.002
0.16
0.032
Run 3
(ppm)
0.22
0.004
0.62
0.001
0.004
1.41
0.74
0.008
0.008
0.026
0.020
0.008
0.002
0.17
0.076

-------
                                  Table 4-3

         TREATMENT CONCENTRATIONS FOR BOAT LIST ORGANIC CONSTITUENTS
                           CORRECTED FOR ACCURACY
                             (K019 SCRUBBER WATER)
                                                 Sample Set
           Constituent

  7.   Carbon  tetrachloride
  9.   Chlorobenzene
 14.   Chloroform
 21.   Dichlorodifluoromethane
 22.   1,1-Dichloroethane
 23.   1,2-Dichloroethane
 42.   Tetrachloroethene
 43.   Toluene
 45.   1,1,1-Trichloroethane
 47.   Trichloroethene
 68.   Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
 88.   p-Dichlorobenzene
 98.   Di-n-butyl phthalate
109.   Fluorene
110.   Hexachlorobenzene
113.   Hexachloroethane
121.   Naphthalene
136.   Pentachlorobenzene
141.   Phenanthrene
148.   1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 0.006
150.   1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
1
(ppm)
0.003
0.002
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.002
0.002
0.003
0.002
0.002
0.012
0.012
0.002
0.012
0.002
0.006
0.008
2
(ppm)
0.003
0.002
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.004
0.003
0.002
0.002
0.003
0.008
0.002
0.012
0.012
0.002
0.012
0.002
0.006
0.008
3
(ppm)
0.003
0.002
0.003
0.006
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.002
0.002
0.003
0.005
0.002
0.012
0.012
0.002
0.012
0.002
0.006
0.008
4
(ppm)
0.003
0.002
0.003
0.018
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.006
0.003
0.002
0.002
0.003
0.005
0.002
0.012
0.012
0.002
0.012
0.002
0.006
0.008
5
(ppm)
0.003
0.002
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.002
0.002
0.003
0.003
0.002
0.012
0.012
0.002
0.012
0.002
0.006
0.008
6
(ppm)
0.003
0.002
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.002
0.002
0.003
0.003
0.002
0.012
0.012
0.002
0.012
0.002
0.006
0.008
                                      4-18

-------
                                                      Table 4-4


                  TREATMENT CONCENTRATIONS FOR BDAT LIST METAL CONSTITUENTS CORRECTED FOR ACCURACY
                                   (K062 AND METAL-BEARING CHARACTERISTIC WASTES)



                            	Corrected Treatment Concentration (ppm)	
    Sample Set                1       2       3       4       5       6       7       8       9      11       12


    Constituent


    159.  Chromium (total)  0.18    0.18    0.29    0.15    0.16    0.15    0.18    0.22    0.15   0.18   0.23


    162.  Lead              0.013   0.013   0.013   0.013   0.013   0.013   0.013   0.013   0.013  0.013  0.013


    169.  Zinc              0.13    0.12    0.14    1.6     0.13    0.097   0.12    0.13    0.061  0.071  0.10
 I
M

-------
                                   Table 4-5

 RESULTS OF THE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TEST COMPARING FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATION
         AND FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATION FOLLOWED BY ASH STABILIZATION
                                    Fluidized Bed Incineration Followed by Ash
                                    Stabilization Using the Following Binders*
                     Fluidized Bed
 BOAT Metals

154.   Antimony

155.   Arsenic

156.   Barium

159.   Chromium (total)

160.   Copper

163.   Nickel

164.   Selenium

167.   Vanadium

168.   Zinc
* The numbers in the table indicate the results of the statistical comparison
  (ANOVA) of treatments.   A ranking of 1  to 4 is shown for each constituent
  and treatment test where a "1" indicates the best performance and a "4"
  indicates the worst performance.   Two treatments with the same number for a
  constituent indicates that there  was no significant difference between the
  treatment effectiveness.
Fluidized Bed
Incineration
1
4
1
) 4
4
1
4
4
4
Cement
2
1
2
4
1
1
2
2
1
Kiln Dust
4
1
1
2
1
1
3
4
1
Lime and
Fly Ash
2
1
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
                                     4-20

-------
5.0       SELECTION OF REGULATED CONSTITUENTS








          This section presents the methodology and rationale for selection of



the constituents that are being proposed for regulation in wastewater and



nonwastewater forms of K048-K052 wastes.








          The Agency initially considers for regulation all constituents on



the BOAT List (see Table 1-1, Section 1.0).  Table 5-1 presents a summary of



the BOAT List constituents that were detected in untreated K048-K052.  All



BDAT List constituents that were detected in the untreated waste were further



considered for regulation in that waste, unless a constituent was deleted from



consideration for one of the following reasons:  (1) the constituent was not



present at treatable levels in the untreated wastes; or (2) the constituent



was detected in an untreated waste at treatable levels but treatment perform-



ance data demonstrating effective treatment by BDAT were unavailable for that



constituent in the waste or for a waste judged to be similar.  Table 5-2



presents constituents from the BDAT constituent list that were considered for



regulation following deletion of certain constituents for the reasons



described above.  The constituents selected for regulation in wastewater and



nonwastewater forms of K048-K052 are presented in Table 5-3.








          Not all BDAT List constituents considered for regulation and shown



on Table 5-2 were selected for regulation.  The Agency selects constituents



for regulation after consideration of the concentration of the constituent in



the untreated waste, the relative difficulty associated with achievement of
                                      5-1

-------
effective treatment of the constituent by BDAT,  and the level of control of



the constituent that can be expected through treatment required to comply with



treatment standards established for other constituents in the waste.








          The following subsections describe in  more detail the selection of



constituents proposed for regulation in K048-K052.








5.1       BDAT List Constituents Detected in the Untreated Waste








          BDAT List constituents that were detected in untreated K048-K052



were considered for regulation.  A BDAT List constituent was not considered



for regulation if:  (1) the constituent was not  detected in the untreated



waste; (2) the constituent was not analyzed in the untreated waste; or (3)



detection limits or analytical results were not  obtained for the constituent



due to analytical or accuracy problems.  The constituents that were not



considered for regulation for these reasons are  identified in Table 5-1; each



reason is explained in more detail below.  Some  constituents that were



detected in the untreated wastes were deleted from consideration for regu-



lation as discussed in Section 5.2.  The steps describing the selection of



regulated constituents are presented in Section  5.3.








          Constituents That Were Not Detected in the Untreated Waste.  Con-



stituents that were not detected in the untreated waste (labelled ND or ND* in



Table 5-1) were not considered for regulation.  Analytical detection limits



were, in most cases, practical quantification limits.  In some cases, where
                                      5-2

-------
data were submitted to the Agency by outside sources, the nature of the



detection limits and whether or not the waste was analyzed for a constituent



are unknown (labelled ND* in Table 5-1).  Since detection limits vary depend-



ing upon the nature of the waste matrix being analyzed, the detection limits



determined in the characterization of these wastes are included in Appendix H.








          Constituents That Were Not Analyzed.  Some constituents on the BOAT



List were not considered for regulation because they were not analyzed in the



untreated wastes (labelled NA, MA*, or NA** in Table 5-1).  Some constituents



were not analyzed in the untreated wastes based on the judgment that it is



extremely unlikely that the constituent would be present in the wastes (NA**).



Other constituents were not analyzed in the untreated waste because they were



not on the BOAT List of constituents at the time of analysis (NA*).  In cases



where data were submitted to the Agency by outside sources, it may not be



known if and/or why constituents were not analyzed (NA).








          Constituents For Which Analytical Results Were Not Obtained Due to



Analytical or Accuracy Problems.  Some constituents on the BDAT List were not



considered for regulation because detection limits or analytical results were



not obtained due to analytical or accuracy problems (labelled A in Table 5-1).



The analytical and accuracy problems include:  (1) laboratory QA/QC analyses



indicated inadequate recoveries and, therefore, the accuracy of the analysis



for the constituent could not be ensured; (2) a standard was not available for



the constituent and, therefore, system calibration could not be performed for
                                      5-3

-------
the constituent; and (3) colorimetric interferences occurred during analysis



for the constituent and, therefore, accurate analyses could not be performed.








5.2       Constituents Detected in Untreated Waste But Not Considered for



          Regulation








          BOAT List constituents that were detected in the untreated K048-K052



wastes were not considered for regulation if:  (1) available treatment perfor-



mance data for the constituent did not show effective treatment by BOAT; or



(2) treatment performance data were not available for the constituent; or (3)



the constituent was not present at treatable concentrations in the waste.  The



specific constituents deleted from further consideration for regulation for



these reasons are discussed below.  In addition, one constituent, dichloro-



difluoromethane, was deleted from consideration for regulation in nonwaste-



water and wastewater.  Dichlorodifluoromethane was detected in two of six



samples of untreated K048 collected by EPA from Plant A; however, the constit-



uent was also detected at a higher concentration in another waste (biosludge)



that was mixed with K048 prior to the collection of the K048 sample.  Addi-



tionally, dichlorodifluoromethane was not reported as present in K048 in other



data sources, as shown in Table 2-4.  Therefore, dichlorodifluoromethane was



not considered for regulation in K048.  BOAT List constituents that were



further considered for regulation following the deletions described in this



section are listed on Table 5-2.
                                      5-4

-------
          Nonwastewater.  BDAT List constituents that were present in an



untreated K048-K052 waste but were not effectively treated by the BDAT tech-



nology, were deleted from consideration for regulation for the nonwastewater



forms of the K048-K052 waste treatability group.  Accordingly, sulfide was not



considered for regulation in nonwastewater because the technology determined



to be BDAT for K048-K052 (fluidized bed incineration followed by lime and fly



ash stabilization) does not provide effective treatment for this constituent.



Moreover, the Agency is unaware of any demonstrated technology for treatment



of sulfide in K048-K052.








          Similarly, antimony, barium, beryllium, cadmium, lead, mercury, and



silver were not considered for regulation in nonwastewater because stabiliza-



tion of fluidized bed incinerator ash did not show effective treatment for



these constituents.  Hexavalent chromium and fluoride were not considered for



regulation in nonwastewater because they were not analyzed in both the



unstabilized and stabilized incinerator ash and therefore the effectiveness of



treatment could not be evaluated for these constituents.








          Wastewater.  Sulfide and barium were deleted from further consider-



ation for regulation in wastewaters because they were not effectively treated



by the BDAT technologies.  Sulfide was not regulated in wastewater because the



Agency is not aware of a demonstrated technology for reducing sulfide in



K048-K052 waste.  Barium was not regulated in wastewater because it is not



effectively treated by chromium reduction followed by lime and sulfide precip-



itation and vacuum filtration.
                                      5-5

-------
          Cyanide was deleted from further consideration for regulation in



wastewaters because, based on the concentration of cyanide in the untreated



wastes, EPA believes that it would not be present at treatable concentrations



in the wastewater residual.








          Some BDAT List organic constituents were deleted from consideration



for regulation in wastewater because treatment performance data are not



available for the constituents and because adequate control of the constit-



uents could not be shown based on their bond dissociation energies.  The



Agency does not currently have data on BDAT List organics in wastewater



residuals that specifically reflect treatment of K048-K052.  Therefore,



treatment performance data for BDAT List organics were transferred to



K048-K052 from data for scrubber water residuals generated from incineration




of K019.







          For organics in wastewater, determination of adequate control was



based on an evaluation of the characteristics of the constituents that would



affect performance of incineration relative to the scrubber water residual,



specifically, the estimated bond dissociation energies for the constituents.



In general, a constituent is believed to be controlled by regulation of



another constituent that has a higher bond dissociation energy.  Based on a



comparison of bond dissociation energies, it cannot be shown that benz(a)-



anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene, bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, chrysene, di-n-butyl



phthalate, and pyrene will be controlled by regulation of another constituent



and performance data are not available from K019 scrubber water for
                                      5-6

-------
transfer to these constituents.  The bond dissociation energies for these



constituents exceed the bond energies of all constituents detected in the



untreated K019.  Constituents with bond dissociation energies that exceed the



bond dissociation energies for all constituents in the transferred data were



deleted from consideration for regulation.  The Agency has collected six



scrubber water residual samples generated from incineration of K048 and is



currently analyzing these samples.  The Agency will consider these data



between proposal and promulgation in the selection of constituents for regu-



lation and in establishing final BOAT treatment standards applicable to



wastewater.








5.3       Constituents Selected for Regulation








          BDAT List constituents selected for regulation in K048-K052 are



presented in Table 5-3.  The selection of regulated constituents for nonwaste-



water is discussed in Section 5.3.1 and for wastewater in Section 5.3.2.








5.3.1     Selection of Regulated Constituents in Nonwastewater








          Regulated organic and inorganic constituents in nonwastewater were



selected from those BDAT List organic and inorganic constituents detected in



the untreated wastes that were treated by fluidized bed incineration.  Regu-



lated metal constituents were selected from those BDAT List metal constituents



detected in the untreated wastes that were treated by stabilization of ash



from fluidized bed incineration.
                                      5-7

-------
          As explained in Section 1,the Agency is not regulating all of the



constituents considered for regulation (Table 5-2) due to the costs associated



with compliance.  Table 5-3 presents the constituents selected for regulation



after consideration of:  (1) constituent concentration levels in the untreated



waste; (2) whether the constituents are adequately controlled by the regu-



lation of another constituent; and (3) the relative difficulty associated with



achieving effective treatment of the constituent by BOAT.  For organics,



determination of adequate control was based on an evaluation of the character-



istics of the constituents that would affect performance of fluidized bed



incineration, specifically, the boiling point of the constituents.  In gen-



eral, a constituent is believed to be controlled by regulation of another



constituent that has a higher boiling point.  Boiling points for all BOAT List



constituents considered for regulation are tabulated in Appendix I.  For



metals, the Agency is regulating all treated constituents because the charac-



teristics that affect the performance of stabilization do not provide for



control of other constituents.  The constituents selected for regulation are



discussed below for each waste code.
          K048
           (i)  Organic and Inorganic Constituents.  Toluene, xylene, bis(2-



 ethylhexyDphthalate, chrysene, di-n-butyl phthalate, naphthalene, phenan-



 threne, phenol, and cyanide were selected for regulation in K048 nonwaste-



 water.  Ethylbenzene, benzo(a)pyrene, fluorene, and pyrene were considered for



 regulation but were not  selected because these constituents were found at
                                      5-8

-------
lower concentrations in the untreated waste and they are believed to be



adequately controlled by incineration of other constituents which have been



selected for regulation.  This decision was based on a comparison of boiling



points of those constituents considered for regulation.  EPA believes that



ethylbenzene (bp 136°C) will be adequately controlled by regulation of xylene



(bp 140°C), bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (bp 385°C), chrysene (bp 448°C),



naphthalene (bp 218°C), phenanthrene (bp 340°C), and phenol (bp 182°C).



Benzo(a)pyrene (bp 311°C) and fluorene (bp 295°C) will be adequately con-



trolled by regulation of bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (bp 385°C), chrysene (bp



448°C), di-n-butyl phthalate (bp 340°C), and phenanthrene (bp 340°C).  Pyrene



(bp 404°C) will be adequately controlled by regulation of chrysene (bp 448°C).








          (ii)  Metal Constituents.  In addition to the organic and inorganic



constituents, all of the metal constituents further considered for regulation



(arsenic, total chromium, copper, nickel, selenium, vanadium, and zinc) were



selected for regulation in K048 nonwastewater.
          K049
          (i)  Organic and Inorganic Constituents.  Benzene, toluene, xylene,



chrysene, naphthalene, phenanthrene, phenol, pyrene, and cyanide were selected



for regulation in K049 nonwastewater.  Carbon disulfide, ethylbenzene, anthra-



cene, benzo(a)pyrene, bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, and 2,4-dimethylphenol were



considered for regulation but were not selected because these constituents



were found at lower concentrations in the untreated waste and they are
                                      5-9

-------
believed to be adequately controlled by incineration of other constituents



which have been selected for regulation.  This decision was based on a compar-



ison of boiling points of those constituents considered for regulation.  EPA



believes that carbon disulfide (bp 46°C) will be adequately controlled by



regulation of benzene (bp 80°C),  toluene (bp 111°C), xylene (bp 140°C),



chrysene (bp 448°C), naphthalene (bp 218°C), phenanthrene (bp 340°C), phenol



(bp 182°C), and pyrene (404°C).  Ethylbenzene (bp 136°C) will be adequately



controlled by regulation of xylene (bp 140°C), chrysene (bp 448°C), naphthal-



ene (bp 218°C), phenanthrene (bp 340°C), phenol (bp 182°C), and pyrene (bp



404°C).  Anthracene (bp 342°C) and bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (bp 385°C) will



be adequately controlled by regulation of chrysene (bp 448°C) and pyrene (bp



404°C).  Benzo(a)pyrene (bp 311°C) will be adequately controlled by regulation



of chrysene (bp 448°C) phenanthrene (bp 340°C), and pyrene (bp 404°C).



2,4-Dimethylphenol (bp 212°C) will be adequately controlled by regulation of



chrysene (bp 448°C), naphthalene (bp 218°C), phenanthrene (bp 340°C), and



pyrene (bp 404°C).








          (ii) Metal Constituents.  In addition to the organic and inorganic



constituents, all of the metal constituents further considered for regulation



(arsenic, chromium, copper, nickel, selenium, vanadium, and zinc) were



selected for regulation in K049 nonwastewater.
                                      5-10

-------
          K050
          (i)  Organic, Metal, and Inorganic Constituents.  All of the



organic, metal, and inorganic constituents further considered for regulation



(benzo(a)pyrene, phenol, arsenic, total chromium, copper, nickel, selenium,



vanadium, zinc, and cyanide) were selected for regulation in K050 nonwaste-




water.
          K051
          (i)  Organic and Inorganic Constituents.  Toluene, xylene, chrysene,



di-n-butyl phthalate, naphthalene, phenanthrene, phenol, pyrene, and cyanide



were selected for regulation in K051 nonwastewater.  Ethylbenzene, acenaph-



thene, benz(a)anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene, bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, and



fluorene were considered for regulation but were not selected because these



constituents were found at lower concentrations in the untreated waste and



they are believed to be adequately controlled by incineration of other con-



stituents which have been selected for regulation.  This decision was based on



a comparison of boiling points of those constituents considered for regula-



tion.  EPA believes that ethylbenzene (bp 136°C) will be adequately controlled



by regulation of xylene (bp  140°C), chrysene (bp 448°C), di-n-butyl phthalate



(bp 340°C), naphthalene (bp 218°C), phenanthrene (bp 340°C), phenol (bp



182°C), and pyrene (bp 404°C).  Acenaphthene (bp 279°C), benzo(a)pyrene (bp



311°C), and fluorene (bp 295°C) will be adequately be controlled by the



regulation of chrysene (bp 448°C), di-n-butyl phthalate (bp 340°C), phenan-



threne (bp 340°C), and pyrene (bp 404°C).  Benz(a)anthracene (bp 435°C) will



                                      5-11

-------
be adequately controlled by the regulation of chrysene (bp 448°C).  Bis(2-



ethylhexyl)phthalate (bp 385°C) will be adequately controlled by the regula-



tion of chrysene (bp 448°C) and pyrene (bp 404°C).








          (ii) Metal Constituents.   In addition to the organic and inorganic



constituents, all of the metal constituents further considered for regulation



(arsenic, total chromium, copper,  nickel, selenium, vanadium, and zinc) were



selected for regulation in K051 nonwastewater.
          K052
          (i)  Organic and Inorganic Constituents.   Toluene,  xylene, ortho-



cresol, para-cresol,  naphthalene,  phenanthrene,  phenol,  and cyanide were



selected for regulation in K052 nonwastewater.   Benzene, ethylbenzene, benzo-



(a)pyrene, and 2,4-dimethylphenol  were considered for regulation but were not



selected because these constituents were found  at lower  concentrations in the



untreated waste and they are believed to be adequately controlled by incinera-



tion of other constituents which have been selected for  regulation.  This



decision was based on a comparison of boiling points of  those constituents



considered for regulation.  EPA believes that benzene (bp 80°C)  will be



adequately controlled by the regulation of toluene  (bp 111°C),  xylene (bp



140°C), ortho-cresol  (bp 192°C), para-cresol (bp 202°C), naphthalene (bp



218°C), phenanthrene  (bp 340°C), and phenol (bp 182°C).   Ethylbenzene (bp



136°C) will be adequately controlled by regulation  of xylene  (bp 140°C),



ortho-cresol (bp 192°C), para-cresol (bp 202°C), naphthalene  (bp 218°C),



phenanthrene (bp 340°C), and phenol (bp 182°C).   Benzo(a)pyrene  (bp 311°C)



                                      5-12

-------
will be adequately controlled by the regulation of phenanthrene (bp 340°C).



2,4-Dimethylphenol (bp 212°C) will be adequately controlled by the regulation



of naphthalene (bp 218°C), and phenanthrene (bp 340°C).








          (ii)  Metal Constituents.  In addition to the organic and inorganic



constituents, all of the metal constituents further considered for regulation



(arsenic, total chromium, copper, nickel, selenium, vanadium, and zinc) were



selected for regulation in K052 nonwastewater.








5.3.2     Selection of Regulated Constituents in Wastewater








          Regulated organic constituents in wastewater were selected from the



BDAT List organic constituents detected in the untreated wastes and similar



wastes that showed treatment using incineration.  Regulated metal and  inor-



ganic constituents were selected from BDAT List metal and inorganic constitu-



ents detected in the untreated wastes and similar wastes that showed treatment



using incineration followed by wastewater treatment using chromium reduction,



lime and sulfide precipitation, and vacuum filtration.








          As explained in Section  1.0, the Agency is not regulating all of the



constituents considered for regulation (Table 5-2) due to the costs associated



with compliance.  Table 5-3 presents the constituents selected for regulation



after consideration of:   (1) constituent concentration in the untreated waste;



(2) whether the constituents are adequately controlled by the regulation of
                                      5-13

-------
another constituent; and (3) the relative difficulty associated with achieving



effective treatment of the constituent by BDAT.








          As discussed in Section 5.2, determination of adequate control for



organics in the scrubber water residual was based on the calculated bond



dissociation energies (BDE) for the constituents.  In general, a constituent



is believed to be controlled by regulation of another constituent that has a



higher bond dissociation energy.  Bond dissociation energies for all BDAT List



constituents considered for regulation are tabulated in Appendix I.








          Treatment performance data for metals in K048-K052 wastewater were



transferred from treatment of K062 and metal-bearing characteristic wastes.



The BDAT technology is chromium reduction followed by lime and sulfide precip-



itation and vacuum filtration.  For inorganics and metals, determination of



adequate control was based on an evaluation of the characteristics of the



constituents that would affect performance of the BDAT wastewater treatment



system.







          The constituents selected for regulation and the constituents con-



trolled by regulating other constituents are discussed below by waste code.
          K048
          (i)  Organic Constituents.  The organic constituents for regulation



in K048 wastewater are toluene, xylene, fluorene, naphthalene, phenanthrene,
                                      5-14

-------
and phenol.  Ethylbenzene was considered for regulation but was not selected



because it was found at lower concentrations in the untreated waste and it is



believed to be adequately controlled by incineration of other constituents



that were selected for regulation.  This decision was based on a comparison of



bond dissociation energies (BDE) of those constituents considered for regu-



lation.  EPA believes that ethylbenzene (BDE 1,920 kcal/mole) will be ade-



quately controlled by regulation of naphthalene (BDE 2,095 kcal/mole),



fluorene (BDE 2,700 kcal/mole), and phenanthrene (BDE 2,900 kcal/mole).








           (ii)  Metals and Inorganic Constituents.  Total chromium, lead, and



zinc were  selected for regulation in K048 wastewater.  Antimony, arsenic,



beryllium, cadmium, copper, mercury, nickel, selenium, silver, and vanadium



were considered for regulation but were not selected because these constitu-



ents were  found at lower concentrations in the untreated waste than other



constituents and they are believed to be adequately controlled by standards



established for total chromium, lead, and zinc.  Control is provided by the



use of chromium reduction followed by lime and sulfide precipitation and



vacuum filtration treatment.  By removing the metals present at the highest



concentrations in the untreated waste, adequate treatment will be provided for



other metals present at  treatable concentrations.
          K049
           (i)  Organic Constituents.  The organic constituents selected  for



 regulation in K049 wastewater are benzene, toluene, xylene, anthracene,
                                      5-15

-------
2,4-dimethylphenol, naphthalene, phenanthrene, and phenol.  Carbon disulfide



and ethyl benzene were considered for regulation but were not selected because



they were found at lower concentrations in the untreated waste and they are



believed to be adequately controlled by incineration of other constituents



that were selected for regulation.  This decision was based on a comparison of



bond dissociation energies (BDE) of those constituents considered for regu-



lation.  EPA believes that carbon disulfide (BDE 279 kcal/mole) will be



adequately controlled by regulation of benzene (BDE 1,320 kcal/mole), toluene



(BDE 1,235 kcal/mole), xylene (BDE 1,220 kcal/mole), anthracene (BDE 2,870



kcal/mole), 2,4-dimethylphenol (BDE 1,390 kcal/mole), naphthalene (BDE 2,095



kcal/mole), phenanthrene (BDE 2,900 kcal/mole), and phenol (BDE 1,421



kcal/mole).  Ethylbenzene (BDE 1,920 kcal/mole) will be adequately controlled



by regulation of naphthalene (BDE 2,095 kcal/mole), anthracene (BDE 2,870



kcal/mole), and phenanthrene (BDE 2,900 kcal/mole).








          (ii)  Metals and Inorganic Constituents.  Total chromium, lead, and



zinc were selected for regulation in K049 wastewater.  Antimony, arsenic,



beryllium, cadmium, hexavalent chromium, copper, mercury, nickel, selenium



silver, vanadium, and fluoride were considered for regulation but were not



selected because these constituents were found at lower concentrations in the



untreated waste than other constituents and they are believed to be adequately



controlled by standards established for total chromium, lead, and zinc.



Control is provided by the use of chromium reduction followed by lime and



sulfide precipitation and vacuum filtration treatment.  By removing the metals
                                       5-16

-------
present at the highest concentrations in the untreated waste, adequate treat-



ment will be provided for other metals present at treatable concentrations.
          K050
          (i)  Organic Constituents.  The organic constituent further



considered for regulation  (phenol) was selected  for  regulation  in K050




wastewater.







          (ii)  Metals and Inorganic Constituents.   Total  chromium,  lead, and



zinc were selected for regulation  in K050 wastewater.   Arsenic, beryllium,



cadmium, hexavalent  chromium,  copper, mercury, nickel,  selenium, silver, and



vanadium were considered  for  regulation  but  were not selected because these



constituents were found at lower concentrations  in  the  untreated waste  than



other  constituents and they are believed to  be adequately  controlled by



standards established for  total chromium, lead,  and  zinc.   Control  is provided



by  the use of chromium reduction followed by lime and sulfide precipitation



and vacuum filtration treatment.   By removing the metals present at the



highest concentrations in  the untreated  waste, adequate treatment will  be



provided for other metals  present  at treatable concentrations.
           K051
           (i)   Organic Constituents.   The organic constituents selected for



 regulation in  K051  wastewater are toluene,  xylene,  acenaphthene,  fluorene,



 naphthalene, phenanthrene,  and phenol.  Ethylbenzene was considered for




                                       5-17

-------
regulation but was not selected because it was found at lower concentrations



in the untreated waste and it is believed to be adequately controlled by



incineration of other constituents that were selected for regulation.  This



decision was based on a comparison of bond dissociation energies (BDE) of



those constituents considered for regulation.  EPA believes that ethylbenzene



(BDE 1,920 kcal/mole) will be adequately controlled by regulation of naphtha-



lene (BDE 2,095 kcal/mole), acenaphthene (BDE 2,406 kcal/mole), fluorene (BDE



2,700 kcal/mole), and phenanthrene (BDE 2,900 kcal/mole).
          (ii)  Metals and Inorganic Constituents.  Total chromium, lead, and



zinc were selected for regulation in K051 wastewater.  Antimony, arsenic,



beryllium, cadmium, hexavalent chromium, copper, mercury, nickel, selenium,



silver, and vanadium were considered for regulation but were not selected



because these constituents were found at lower concentrations in the untreated



waste than other constituents and they are believed to be adequately con-



trolled by standards established for total chromium, lead, and zinc.  Control



is provided by the use of chromium reduction followed by lime and sulfide



precipitation and vacuum filtration treatment.  By removing the metals present



at the highest concentrations in the untreated waste, adequate treatment will



be provided for other metals present at treatable concentrations.
          K052
          (i)  Organic Constituents.  The organic constituents selected for



regulation in K052 wastewater are benzene, xylene, ortho-cresol, para-cresol,



                                      5-18

-------
2,4-dimethylphenol, naphthalene, phenanthrene, and phenol.  Ethyl benzene and



toluene were considered for regulation but were not selected because they were



found at lower concentrations in the untreated waste and they are believed to



be adequately controlled by incineration of other constituents that were



selected for regulation.  This decision was based on a comparison of bond



dissociation energies (BDE) of those constituents considered for regulation.



EPA believes that ethyl benzene (BDE 1,920 kcal/mole) will be adequately



controlled by regulation of naphthalene (BDE 2,095 kcal/mole) and phenanthrene



(BDE 2,900 kcal/mole).  Toluene (BDE 1,235 kcal/mole) will be adequately



controlled by regulation of benzene (BDE 1,320 kcal/mole), 2,4-dimethylphenol



(BDE 1,390 kcal/mole), ortho-cresol (BDE 1,405 kcal/mole), para-cresol (BDE



1,405 kcal/mole), naphthalene (BDE 2,095 kcal/mole), and phenanthrene (BDE



2,900 kcal/mole).








          (ii)  Metals and Inorganic Constituents.  Total chromium, lead, and



zinc were selected for regulation in K052 wastewater.  Antimony, arsenic,



beryllium, cadmium, copper, mercury, nickel, selenium, silver, vanadium, and



fluoride were considered for regulation but were not selected because these



constituents are present at lower concentrations in the untreated waste than



other constituents and they are believed to be adequately controlled by



standards established for total chromium,  lead, and zinc.  Control is provided



by the use of chromium reduction followed by lime and sulfide precipitation



and vacuum filtration treatment.  By removing the metals present at the



highest concentrations in the untreated waste, adequate treatment will be



provided for other metals present at treatable concentrations.
                                      5-19

-------
                                   Table 5-1



         BDAT LIST CONSTITUENTS DETECTED IN UNTREATED K048-K052 WASTES
                                      K048
Volatiles
K049
K050
K051
K052
222. Acetone NA* NA* NA NA*
1 . Acetonitrile ND ND ND* ND
2. Acrolein ND ND ND* ND
3. Acrylonitrile ND ND ND* ND
4. Benzene ND D ND* ND
5. Bromodichloromethane ND ND ND* ND
6. Bromomethane ND ND ND* ND
223. n-Butyl alcohol NA* NA* NA NA*
7. Carbon tetrachloride ND ND ND* ND
8. Carbon disulfide A D ND* A
9. Chlorobenzene ND ND ND* ND
10. 2-Chloro-1,3-butadiene ND ND ND* ND
1 1 . Chlorodibromomethane ND ND ND* ND
12. Chloroethane ND ND ND* ND
13. 2-Chloroethyl vinyl ether A ND ND* A
14. Chloroform ND ND ND* ND
15. Chloromethane ND ND ND* ND
16. 3-Chloropropene ND ND ND* ND
17. 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND ND ND* ND
18. 1,2-Dibromoethane ND ND ND* ND
19. Dibromomethane ND ND ND* ND
20. trans- 1 ,4-Dichloro-2-butene ND ND ND* ND
21. Dichlorodifluoromethane D ND ND* ND
22. 1,1-Dichloroethane ND ND ND* ND
23. 1,2-Dichloroethane ND ND ND* ND
24. 1,1-Dichloroethylene ND ND ND* ND
25. trans- 1 ,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND* ND
26. 1,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND* ND
27. trans- 1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND* ND
28. cis- 1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND* ND
29. 1,4-Dioxane A ND ND* A
224. 2-Ethoxyethanol NA* NA* NA NA*
225. Ethyl acetate NA* NA* NA NA*
226. Ethyl benzene D D NA D
A - Constituent was analyzed but a detection limit or analytical
not obtained due to analytical problems.
D - Constituent was detected in the untreated waste.
NA*
ND
ND
ND
D
ND
ND
NA*
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA*
NA*
D
result was


NA - Believe that untreated waste was not analyzed for this constituent.
NA* - Untreated waste was not analyzed for this constituent because
not on the BDAT List at the time of analysis.
NA** - Untreated waste was not analyzed for this constituent due to
unlikelihood that it would be present.
ND - Constituent was not detected in the untreated waste.
it was

extreme


ND* - Believe that constituent was not detected in the untreated waste.
                                  5-20

-------
                             Table 5-1 (Continued)

         BDAT LIST CONSTITUENTS DETECTED IN UNTREATED K048-K052 WASTES

                                      K048     K049     K050     K051
Volatiles (Cont.)

 30.  Ethyl cyanide                   ND       ND       ND*      ND
227.  Ethyl ether                     NA*      NA*      NA       NA*
 31.  Ethyl methacrylate              ND       ND       ND*      ND
214.  Ethylene Oxide                  NA*      NA*      NA       NA*
 32.  lodomethane                     ND       ND       ND*      ND
 33.  Isobutyl alcohol                ND       ND       ND*      ND
228.  Methanol                        NA*      NA*      NA       NA*
 34.  Methyl ethyl ketone             ND       ND       ND*      ND
229.  Methyl isobutyl ketone          NA*      NA*      NA*      NA*
 35.  Methyl methacrylate             ND       ND       ND*      ND
 37.  Methacrylonitrile               ND       ND       ND*      ND
 38.  Methylene chloride              ND       ND       ND*      ND
230.  2-Nitropropane                  NA*      NA*      NA       NA*
 39.  Pyridine                        ND       ND       ND*      ND
 40.  1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane       ND       ND       ND*      ND
 41.  1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane       ND       ND       ND*      ND
 42.  Tetrachloroethene               ND       ND       ND*      ND
 43.  Toluene                         D        D        ND*      D
 44.  Tribromomethane                 ND       ND       ND*      ND
 45.  1,1,1-Trichloroethane           ND       ND       ND*      ND
 46.  1,1,2-Trichloroethane           ND       ND       ND*      ND
 47.  Trichloroethene                 ND       ND       ND*      ND
 48.  Trichloromonofluoromethane      ND       ND       ND*      ND
 49.  1,2,3-Trichloropropane          ND       ND       ND*      ND
231.  1,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2,-         NA*      NA*      NA       NA*
      trifluoroethane
 50.  Vinyl chloride                  ND       ND       ND*      ND
215.  1,2-Xylene                      D*       D*       ND*      D*
216.  1,3-Xylene                      D*       D*       ND*      D*
217.  1,4-Xylene                      D*       D*       ND*      D*

Semivolatiles

 51.  Acenaphthalene                  ND       ND       ND*      ND
 52.  Acenaphthene                    ND       ND       ND*      D
 53.  Acetophenone                    ND       ND       ND*      ND
                                                                         K052
                                                                         ND
                                                                         NA*
                                                                         ND
                                                                         NA*
                                                                         ND
                                                                         ND
                                                                         NA*
                                                                         ND
                                                                         NA*
                                                                         ND
                                                                         ND
                                                                         ND
                                                                         NA*
                                                                         ND
                                                                         ND
                                                                         ND
                                                                         ND
                                                                         D
                                                                         ND
                                                                         ND
                                                                         ND
                                                                         ND
                                                                         ND
                                                                         ND
                                                                         NA*

                                                                         ND
                                                                         D*
                                                                         D*
                                                                         D*
                                                                          ND
                                                                          ND
                                                                          ND
    A  -
   D
   D*
       Constituent was analyzed but a detection limit or analytical  result was
       not obtained due to analytical problems.
       Constituent was detected in the untreated waste.
       Xylene was detected in the untreated waste.   Analyses for individual
       isomers are not available.
  NA - Believe that untreated waste was not analyzed for this constituent.
 NA* - Untreated waste was not analyzed for this constituent because it was
       not on the BDAT List at the time of analysis.
NA** - Untreated waste was not analyzed for this constituent due to  extreme
       unlikelihood that it would be present.
  ND - Constituent was not detected in the untreated waste.
 ND* - Believe that constituent was not detected in the untreated waste.
                                    5-21

-------
                             Table 5-1  (Continued)



         BOAT LIST CONSTITUENTS DETECTED IN UNTREATED K048-K052 WASTES
Semivolatiles (Cont.)
                                      K048
K049
K050
K051
K052
54. 2-Acetylaminofluorene A ND ND* A
55. 4-Aminobiphenyl ND ND ND* ND
56. Aniline ND ND ND* ND
57. Anthracene ND D ND* ND
58. Aramite A A ND* A
59. Benz(a)anthracene ND ND ND* D
218. Benzal chloride NA* NA* NA NA*
60. Benzenethiol A A ND* A
62. Benzo(a)pyrene D D D D
63. Benzo(b)fluoranthene A ND ND* A
64. Benzo(ghi)perylene ND ND ND* ND
65. Benzo(k)fluoranthene ND ND ND* ND
66. p-Benzoquinone A A ND* A
67. Bis (2-chloroethoxy) ethane ND ND ND* ND
68. Bis (2-chloroethyl) ether ND ND ND* ND
69. Bis (2-chloroisopropyl) ether ND ND ND* ND
70. Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate D D ND* D
71. 4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether ND ND ND* ND
72. Butyl benzyl phthalate ND ND ND* ND
73. 2-sec-Butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol A ND ND* A
74. p-Chloroaniline ND ND ND* ND
75. Chlorobenzilate A A ND* A
76. p-Chloro-m-cresol ND ND ND* ND
77. 2-Chloronaphthalene ND ND ND* ND
78. 2-Chlorophenol ND ND ND* ND
79. 3-Chloropropionitrile A A ND* A
80. Chrysene D D ND* D
81. ortho-Cresol ND ND ND* ND
82. para-Cresol ND ND ND* ND
232. Cyclohexanone NA* NA* NA NA*
83. Dibenz( a, h) anthracene ND ND ND* ND
84. Dibenzo(a,e)pyrene A A ND* A
85. Dibenzo(a,i)pyrene A A ND* A
86. m-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND* ND
A - Constituent was analyzed but a detection limit or analytical
not obtained due to analytical problems.
D - Constituent was detected in the untreated waste.
ND
ND
ND
ND
A
ND
NA*
A
D
ND
ND
ND
A
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
A
ND
ND
ND
A
ND
D
D
NA*
ND
A
A
ND
result was


NA - Believe that untreated waste was not analyzed for this constituent.
NA* - Untreated waste was not analyzed for this constituent because
not on the BOAT List at the time of analysis.
NA** - Untreated waste was not analyzed for this constituent due to
unlikelihood that it would be present.
ND - Constituent was not detected in the untreated waste.
it was

extreme


ND* - Believe that constituent was not detected in the untreated waste.
                                      5-22

-------
                             Table 5-1  (Continued)



         BDAT LIST CONSTITUENTS DETECTED IN UNTREATED K048-K052 WASTES
                                      K048
K049
K050
Semivolatiles (Cont.)
K051
K052
87. o-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND* ND
88. p-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND* ND
89. 3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine ND ND ND* ND
90. 2,4-Dichlorophenol ND ND ND* ND
91. 2,6-Dichlorophenol ND A ND* ND
92. Diethyl phthalate ND ND ND* ND
93. 3,3'-Dimethoxybenzidine ND ND ND* ND
94. p-Dimethylaminoazobenzene ND ND ND* ND
95. 3,3'-Dimethylbenzidine A A ND* A
96. 2,4-Dimethylphenol ND D ND* ND
97. Dimethyl phthalate ND ND ND* ND
98. Di-n-butyl phthalate D ND ND* D
99. 1,4-Dinitrobenzene ND ND ND* ND
100. 4,6-Dinitro-o-cresol ND ND ND* ND
101. 2,4-Dinitrophenol ND ND ND* ND
102. 2,4-Dinitrotoluene ND ND ND* ND
103. 2,6-Dinitrotoluene ND ND ND* ND
104. Di-n-octyl phthalate ND ND ND* ND
105. Di-n-propylnitrosamine ND ND ND* ND
106. Diphenylamine/ ND ND ND* ND
diphenylnitrosamine
219. Diphenylnitrosamine NA* NA* NA NA*
107. 1,2-Diphenylhydrazine ND ND ND* ND
108. Fluoranthene ND ND ND* ND
109. Fluorene D ND ND* D
110. Hexachlorobenzene ND ND ND* ND
111. Hexachlorobutadiene ND ND ND* ND
112. Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND ND ND* ND
113. Hexachloroe thane ND ND ND* ND
114. Hexachlorophene A A ND* A
115. Hexachloropropene ND A ND* ND
116. Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene ND ND ND* ND
117. Isosafrole A ND ND* A
A - Constituent was analyzed but a detection limit or analytical
not obtained due to analytical problems.
D - Constituent was detected in the untreated waste.
ND
ND
ND
ND
A
ND
ND
ND
A
D
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND

NA*
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
A
A
ND
ND
result was


NA - Believe that untreated waste was not analyzed for this constituent.
NA* - Untreated waste was not analyzed for this constituent because
not on the BDAT List at the time of analysis.
NA** - Untreated waste was not analyzed for this constituent due to
unlikelihood that it would be present.
ND - Constituent was not detected in the untreated waste.
it was

extreme


ND* - Believe that constituent was not detected in the untreated waste.
                                     5-23

-------
                             Table 5-1  (Continued)

         BOAT LIST CONSTITUENTS DETECTED IN UNTREATED K048-K052 WASTES
                                      K048
K049
K050
K051
K052
Semivolatiles (Cont.)
118.
119.
120.

36.
121.
122.
123.
124.
125.
126.
127.
128.
129.
130.
131.
132.
133.
134.
135.
136.
137.
138.
139.
140.
141.
142.
220.
143.
144.
145.
146.
147.
Methapyrilene
3-Methylcholanthrene
4,4'-Methylenebis
(2-chloroaniline)
Methyl methanesulfonate
Naphthalene
1 ,4-Naphthoquinone
1 -Naphthylamine
2-Naphthylamine
p-Nitroaniline
Nitrobenzene
4-Nitrophenol
N-Nitrosodi-n-butylamine
N-Nitrosodiethylamine
N-Nitrosodimethylamine
N-Nitrosomethylethylamine
N-Nitrosomorpholine
N-Nitrosopiperidine
n-Nitrosopyrrolidine
5-Nitro-o-toluidine
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentachloroethane
Pnetachloronitrobenzene
Pentachlorophenol
Phenacetin
Phenanthrene
Phenol
Phthalic anhydride
2-Picoline
Pronamide
Pyrene
Resorcinol
Safrole
A
A
A

ND
D
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
A
ND
ND
ND
A
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
D
D
NA*
ND
ND
D
ND
A
A
ND
ND

A
D
A
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
A
A
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
A
A
ND
ND
ND
D
D
NA*
ND
A
D
A
ND
ND»
ND*
ND*

ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
D
NA
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
A
A
A

ND
D
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
A
ND
ND
ND
A
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
D
D
NA*
ND
ND
D
ND
A
A
ND
ND

A
D
A
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
A
A
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
A
A
ND
ND
ND
D
D
NA*
ND
A
ND
A
ND
   A - Constituent was analyzed but a detection limit or analytical result was
       not obtained due to analytical problems.
   D - Constituent was detected in the untreated waste.
  NA - Believe that untreated waste was not analyzed for this constituent.
 NA* - Untreated waste was not analyzed for this constituent because it was
       not on the BOAT List at the time of analysis.
NA** - Untreated waste was not analyzed for this constituent due to extreme
       unlikelihood that it would be present.
  ND - Constituent was not detected in the untreated waste.
 ND* - Believe that constituent was not detected in the  untreated waste.
                                     5-24

-------
                             Table 5-1  (Continued)

         BOAT LIST CONSTITUENTS DETECTED IN UNTREATED K048-K052 WASTES
Semivolatiles (Cont.)

148.  1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene
149.  2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol
150.  1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
151.  2,4,5-Trichlorophenol
152.  2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
153.  Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)
        phosphate

Metals

154.  Antimony
155.  Arsenic
156.  Barium
157.  Berryllium
158.  Cadmium
159.  Chromium (total)
221.  Chromium (hexavalent)
160.  Copper
161.  Lead
162.  Mercury
163.  Nickel
164.  Selenium
165.  Silver
166.  Thallium
167.  Vanadium
168.  Zinc

Inorganics
                                      K048
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
         K049
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
D
D
D
D
D
D
ND
D
D
D
D
D
D
ND
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
ND
D
D
         K050
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
D
ND*
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
ND*
D
D
         K051
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
ND
D
D
         K052
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
D
D
D
D
D
D
NA*
D
D
D
D
D
D
ND
D
D
169.
170.
171.
Cyanide
Fluoride
Sulfide
D
ND
D
D
D
D
D
ND*
ND*
D
ND
D
D
D
D
   A  - Constituent was analyzed but a detection limit or analytical result was
       not obtained due  to analytical problems.
   D  - Constituent was detected in the untreated waste.
  NA  - Believe  that untreated waste was not analyzed for this constituent.
 NA*  - Untreated waste was not analyzed for this constituent because it was
       not on the BOAT List at the time of analysis.
NA**  - Untreated waste was not analyzed for this constituent due to extreme
       unlikelihood that it would be present.
  ND  - Constituent was not detected in the untreated waste.
 ND*  - Believe  that constituent was not detected in the untreated waste.
                                        5-25

-------
                             Table 5-1  (Continued)

         BOAT LIST CONSTITUENTS DETECTED IN UNTREATED K048-K052 WASTES
                                      K048     KOU9     K050     K051      K052
Organochlorine Pesticides

172.  Aldrin                          NA*»     NA*»     NA       NA**      NA»*
173.  alpha-BHC                       NA**     NA*»     NA       NA»*      NA*»
174.  beta-BHC                        NA*»     NA»*     NA       NA*»      NA»*
175.  delta-BHC                       NA**     NA*»     NA       NA*»      NA»*
176.  gamma-BHC                       NA**     NA**     NA       NA»*      NA»*
177.  Chlordane                       NA**     NA»*     NA       NA**      NA»*
178.  ODD                             NA*»     NA*»     NA       NA*»      NA»»
179.  DDE                             NA**     NA»*     NA       NA*»      NA»*
180.  DDT                             NA»*     NA**     NA       NA*»      NA*»
181.  Dieldrin                        NA**     NA**     NA       NA**      NA»*
182.  Endosulfan I                    NA**     NA**     NA       NA»*      NA»»
183.  Endosulfan II                   NA»*     NA*»     NA       NA**      NA*»
184.  Endrin                          NA**     NA**     NA       NA*»      NA»»
185.  Endrin aldehyde                 NA*»     NA**     NA       NA**      NA*«
186.  Heptachlor                      NA»*     NA*»     NA    _   NA»*      NA*»
187.  Heptachlor epoxide              NA**     NA**     NA       NA**      NA»*
188.  Isodrin                         NA**     NA*»     NA       NA*»      NA**
189.  Kepone                          NA**     NA»*     NA       NA»*      NA»*
190.  Methoxychlor                    NA**     NA»*     NA       NA*»      NA»*
191.  Toxaphene                       NA**     NA»*     NA       NA*»      NA**

Phenoxyacetic Acid Herbicides

192.  2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic       NA*»     NA»*     NA       NA**      NA»*
        acid
193.  Silvex                          NA»*     NA**     NA       NA**      NA»*
194.  2,4,5-T                         NA*»     NA**     NA       NA*»      NA»*

Organophosphorus Insecticides

195.  Disulfoton                      NA*»     NA**     NA       NA**      NA»*
196.  Famphur                         NA»*     NA»*     NA       NA»*      NA»*


   A - Constituent was analyzed but a detection limit or analytical result was
       not obtained due to analytical problems.
   D - Constituent was detected in the untreated waste.
  NA - Believe that untreated waste was not analyzed for this constituent.
 NA* - Untreated waste was not analyzed for this constituent because it was
       not on the BOAT List at the time of analysis.
NA** - Untreated waste was not analyzed for this constituent due to extreme
       unlikelihood that it would be present.
  ND - Constituent was not detected in the untreated waste.
 ND* - Believe that constituent was not detected in the  untreated waste.
                                5-26

-------
                             Table 5-1  (Continued)

         BDAT LIST CONSTITUENTS DETECTED IN UNTREATED K048-K052 WASTES
Organophosphorus Insecticides (Cont.)

197.  Methyl parathion
198.  Parathion
199.  Phorate
PCBs

200.
201.
202.
203.
204.
205.
206.
      Aroclor 1016
      Aroclor 1221
      Aroclor 1232
      Aroclor 1242
      Aroclor 1248
      Aroclor 1254
      Aroclor 1260
Dioxins and Furans

207.  Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
208.  Hexachlorodibenzofuran
209.  Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
210.  Pentachlorodibenzofuran
211.  Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
212.  Tetrachlorodibenzofuran
213.  2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-
        p-dioxin
                                      K048
                                      NA*»
                                      NA**
                                      NA»*
NA*»
NA**
NA»*
NA»*
NA*»
NA»*
NA**
                                      NA»*
                                      NA*»
                                      NA*»
                                      NA**
                                      NA**
                                      NA**
                                      NA*»
                                               K049
         NA**
         NA»*
         NA*»
NA*»
NA»*
NA**
NA*»
NA»*
NA**
NA*»
         NA*»
         NA**
         NA*»
         NA**
         NA»*
         NA**
         NA*»
                  K050
         NA
         NA
         NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
         NA
         NA
         NA
         NA
         NA
         NA
         NA
                  K051
         NA*»
         NA**
         NA»*
NA»»
NA**
NA»*
NA»*
NA**
NA*»
NA»*
         NA»*
         NA»*
         NA*»
         NA*»
         NA*»
         NA»*
         NA»*
                  K052
         NA»*
         NA**
         NA**
NA*»
NA»*
NA»*
NA**
NA»*
NA»*
NA»*
         NA»*
         NA*»
         NA**
         NA**
         NA»*
         NA»*
         NA*»
   A -
       Constituent was analyzed but a detection limit or analytical result was
       not obtained due to analytical problems.
       Constituent was detected in the untreated waste.
       Believe that untreated waste was not analyzed for this constituent.
       Untreated waste was not analyzed for this constituent because it was
       not on the BDAT List at the time of analysis.
NA** - Untreated waste was not analyzed for this constituent due to extreme
       unlikelihood that it would be present.
       Constituent was not detected in the untreated waste.
       Believe that constituent was not detected in the  untreated waste.
   D
  NA
 NA*
  ND
 ND* -
                                      5-27

-------
Ul
I
00
                                                      Table 5-2


                                   BOAT LIST CONSTITUENTS CONSIDERED FOR REGULATION*
             K048
K049
                                                     NONWASTEWATER
K050
K051
K052
226.
43.

62.
70.


80.
98.

109.
121.
141.
142.
145.
155.
159.
160.
163.
164.
167.
168.
169.



Ethylbenzene
Toluene
Xylene**
Benzo(a)pyrene
Bis(2-ethyl-
hexyl)phthal-
ate
Chrysene
Di-n-butyl
phthalate
Fluorene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Phenol
Pyrene
Arsenic
Chromium( total )
Copper
Nickel
Selenium
Vanadium
Zinc
Cyanide



4.
8.

226.
43.

57.
62.
70.


80.
96.

121.
141.
142.
145.
155.
159.
160.
163.
164.
167.
168.
169.
Benzene
Carbon disul-
fide
Ethylbenzene
Toluene
Xylene**
Anthracene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Bis(2-ethyl-
hexyl) phthal-
ate
Chrysene
2,4-Dimethyl-
phenol
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Phenol
Pyrene
Arsenic
Chromium( total)
Copper
Nickel
Selenium
Vanadium
Zinc
Cyanide
62.
142.
155.
159.
160.
163.
164.
167.
168.
169.
















Benzo(a)pyrene
Phenol
Arsenic
Chromium( total)
Copper
Nickel
Selenium
Vanadium
Zinc
Cyanide
















226.
43.

52.
59.

62.
70.


80.
98.

109.
121.
141.
142.
145.
155.
159.
160.
163.
164.
167.
168.
169.
Ethylbenzene
Toluene
Xylene**
Acenaphthene
Benz(a)anthra-
cene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Bis(2-ethyl-
hexyl) phthal-
ate
Chrysene
Di-n-butyl
phthalate
Fluorene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Phenol
Pyrene
Arsenic
Chromium( total )
Copper
Nickel
Selenium
Vanadium
Zinc
Cyanide
4.
226.
43.

62.
81.
82.
96.

121.
141.
142.
155.
159.
160.
163.
164.
167.
168.
169.






Benzene
Ethylbenzene
Toluene
Xylene**
Benzo(a)pyrene
ortho-Cresol
para-Cresol
2,4-Dimethyl-
phenol
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Phenol
Arsenic
Chromium( total)
Copper
Nickel
Selenium
Vanadium
Zinc
Cyanide






      *A11 constituents on this list were detected in the untreated K048-K052 wastes and were either selected
       for regulation (as shown in Table 5-3)  or are believed to be controlled by regulation of another
       constituent.
     **Includes BOAT List constituents 1,2-xylene (#215),  1,3-xylene (#216),  and 1,4-xylene (#217).

-------
                                          Table 5-2  (Continued)

                              BOAT  LIST  CONSTITUENTS  CONSIDERED FOR  REGULATION*


                                                WASTEWATER
        K048
K049
K050
K051
K052
43.
226.

109.
121.
141.
142.
154.
155.
157.
158.
159.
160.
161.
162.
163.
164.
165.
167.
168.







Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Xylene
Fluorene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Phenol
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium ( total )
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Vanadium
Zinc







4.
8.

226.
43.

57.
96.

121.
141.
142.
155.
157.
158.
159.
221.

160.
161.
162.
163.
164.
165.
167.
168.
170.
Benzene
Carbon disul-
fide
Ethylbenzene
Toluene
Xylene
Anthracene
2,4-Dimethyl-
phenol
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Phenol
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium( total)
Chromium(hexa-
valent )
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Vanadium
Zinc
Fluoride
142.
155.
157.
158.
159.
221.

160.
161.
162.
163.
164.
165.
167.
168.












Phenol
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium( total)
Chromium
(hexavalant)
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Vanadium
Zinc












226.
43.

52.
109.
121.
141.
142.
154.
155.
157.
158.
159.
221.

160.
161.
162.
163.
164.
165.
167.
168.




Ethylbenzene
Toluene
Xylene
Acenaphthene
Fluorene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Phenol
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium( total )
Chromium
(hexavalent)
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Vanadium
Zinc




4.
226.
43.

81.
82.
96.

121.
141.
142.
154.
155.
157.
158.
159.
160.
161.
162.
163.
164.
165.
167.
168.
170.


Benzene
Ethylbenzene
Toluene
Xylene
ortho-Cresol
para-Cresol
2,4-Dimethyl-
phenol
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Phenol
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium( total )
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Vanadium
Zinc
Fluoride


 *A11 constituents on this list were detected in the untreated K048-K052 wastes and were either selected
  for regulation (as shown in Table 5-3)  or are believed to be controlled by regulation of another
  constituent.

**Includes BOAT List constituents 1,2-xylene (#215), 1,3-xylene (#216),  and 1,4-xylene (#217).

-------
                                                       Table 5-3

                                    BOAT LIST CONSTITUENTS SELECTED FOR REGULATION
                                                    NONWASTEWATER
i
u>
o
             K048
                              K049
 43.   Toluene           4.
      Xylene*          43.
 70.   Bis(2-ethyl-
        hexyDphthal-  80.
        ate           121.
 80.   Chrysene        141.
 98.   Di-n-butyl      142.
        phthalate     145.
121.   Naphthalene     155.
141.   Phenanthrene    159.
142.   Phenol          160.
155.   Arsenic         163.
159.   Chromium(total) 164.
160.   Copper          167.
163.   Nickel          168.
164.   Selenium        169.
167.   Vanadium
168.   Zinc
169.   Cyanide
Benzene          62.
Toluene         142.
Xylene*         155.
Chrysene        159.
Naphthalene     160.
Phenanthrene    163.
Phenol          164.
Pyrene          167.
Arsenic         168.
Chromium(total) 169.
Copper
Nickel
Selenium
Vanadium
Zinc
Cyanide
                        K050
                        K051
Benzo(a)pyrene   43.
Phenol
Arsenic          80.
Chromium(total)  98.
Copper
Nickel          121.
Selenium        141.
Vanadium        142.
Zinc            145.
Cyanide         155.
                159.
                160.
                163.
                164.
                167.
                168.
                169.
                        K052
Toluene          43.
Xylene*
Chrysene         81.
Di-n-butyl       82.
  phthalate     121.
Naphthalene     141.
Phenanthrene    142.
Phenol          155.
Pyrene          159.
Arsenic         160.
Chromium(total) 163.
Copper          164.
Nickel          167.
Selenium        168.
Vanadium        169.
Zinc
Cyanide
Toluene
Xylene*
ortho-Cresol
para-Cresol
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Phenol
Arsenic
Chromium(total)
Copper
Nickel
Selenium
Vanadium
Zinc
Cyanide
     "Includes BOAT List constituents 1,2-xylene (#215), 1,3-xylene (#216), and 1,4-xylene (#217).

-------
                                           Table  5-3  (Continued)




                               BOAT  LIST CONSTITUENTS  SELECTED FOR REGULATION


43.

109.
121.
141.
142.
159.
161.
168.




K048
Toluene
Xylene*
Fluorene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Phenol
Chromium( total)
Lead
Zinc





4.
43.

57.
96.

121.
141.
142.
159.
161.
168.

K049
Benzene 142.
Toluene 159.
Xylene* 16 1.
Anthracene 168.
2,4-Dimethyl-
phenol
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Phenol
Chromium( total)
Lead
Zinc
WASTEWATER
K050
Phenol 43.
Chromium (total)
Lead 52.
Zinc 109.
121.
141.
142.
159.
161.
168.



K051
Toluene
Xylene*
Acenaphthene
Fluorene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Phenol
Chromium ( total )
Lead
Zinc




4.

81.
82.
96.

121.
141.
142.
159.
161.
168.

K052
Benzene
Xylene*
ortho-Cresol
para-Cresol
2,4-Dimethyl-
phenol
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Phenol
Chromium( total )
Lead
Zinc
Includes BDAT List constituents 1,2-xylene (#215),  1,3-xylene  (#216),  and  1,4-xylene (#217).

-------
6.0       CALCULATION OF TREATMENT STANDARDS








          In Section 4.0 of this document, the best demonstrated and available




technologies for treatment of the petroleum refinery waste treatability group




(K048-K052) were chosen based on available performance data.  In Section 5.0,




the regulated constituents were selected to ensure effective treatment of the




wastes.  The purpose of Section 6.0 is to calculate treatment standards for




the proposed regulated constituents using the available treatment data from




the BOAT treatment technologies.  Included in this section is a step-by-step




discussion of the calculation of treatment standards for the nonwastewater and




wastewater forms of K048-K052 wastes.








          BOAT treatment standards for K048-K052 nonwastewater are proposed




based on performance data from a treatment train that consisted of full scale



fluidized bed incineration followed by ash stabilization.  Ash stabilization




was achieved using lime and fly ash as stabilization agents.  Testing was




performed on representative samples of nonwastewater K048 and K051.  The



treatment performance data were than transferred to develop standards for



nonwastewater K049, K050, and K052.








          BOAT organic constituent treatment standards for K048-K052 waste-



waters are proposed based on a transfer of treatment performance data for the




scrubber water residual from the incineration of K019 nonwastewater (K019 is




listed as heavy ends from the distillation of ethylene dichloride in ethylene




dichloride production.)  Standards for inorganic constituents were developed
                                      6-1

-------
based on treatment of K062 and metal-bearing characteristic wastes from



chromium reduction, lime and sulfide precipitation and vacuum filtration.



Treatment performance data were transferred on a constituent basis from either



the same constituent or, in the case of organic constituents, from constitu-



ents judged to be similar in physical and chemical properties.








          Incineration generally results in the generation of two treatment



residuals:  ash (a nonwastewater form of K048-K052) and combustion gas scrub-



ber water (a wastewater form of K048-K052).  The best measure of performance



for a destruction technology, such as incineration, is the total amount of



constituent remaining after treatment.  Therefore, proposed BDAT treatment



standards for organic constituents were calculated based on total constituent



concentration data.  Lime and fly ash stabilization reduces the leachability



of metals in the waste.  The best measure of performance for stabilization



technologies is the analyses of the toxicity characteristic leaching procedure



(TCLP) extract.  Therefore, proposed BDAT treatment standards for metals in



nonwastewater forms of K048-K052 wastes were calculated based on TCLP data.



Chromium reduction followed by lime and sulfide precipitation and vacuum



filtration is a removal technology for metals in the wastewater residual.  The



best measure of performance for a removal technology is the total amount of



constituent remaining after treatment.  Therefore, proposed BDAT treatment



standards for metals in wastewater forms of K048-K052 were calculated based on




total constituent  concentration data.
                                      6-2

-------
6.1       Calculation of Treatment Standards for Nonwastewater Forms of



          K048-K052








          K048 and K051 Wastes








          Six data sets (untreated and treated data points) for fluidized bed



incineration and three data sets for lime and fly ash stabilization were used



to calculate the nonwastewater treatment standards for K048 and K051 wastes.



Table 6-1 presents the six values of total concentration treated waste data



(organics) for fluidized bed incineration and Table 6-2 presents the three



values of TCLP treated waste data (metals) for lime and fly ash stabilization.



Values are presented for all constituents proposed for regulation in K048-K052



wastes for which treatment data are available from treatment of K048 and K051



wastes at plant A.  The concentration data presented in Tables 6-1 and 6-2



have been corrected to account for analytical recovery as described in Section




4.0.








          Nonwastewater treatment standards were calculated for each regulated



constituent for K048 and K051 as shown in Tables 6-3 and 6-6.  The following



three steps were used to calculate the treatment standards:  (1) The arithme-



tic average of the corrected treatment values for each regulated constituent



was calculated using the six data points presented in Table 6-1 for organic



constituents and the three data points presented in Table 6-2 for metal



constituents.  (2) Using these same data, a variability factor was calculated



that represents the variability inherent in performance of treatment systems,
                                      6-3

-------
collection of treated samples, and analysis of samples.  Where concentrations



in the treated waste were reported as less than or equal to the detection



limit for all the data points in the data set, variability is still expected



since the actual concentration could range from zero to the detection limit.



In these cases, the Agency assumed a lognormal distribution of data points



between the detection limit and a value 1/10 of the detection limit and



calculated a variability factor of 2.8.  (3) The treatment standard for each



regulated constituent was calculated by multiplying the arithmetic average of



the corrected treatment values by the variability factor.   The analytical



methods for analysis of each regulated constituent for K048 and K051 are



included in Tables 6-3 and 6-6.  A detailed discussion of these analytical



methods is presented in Appendix D.








          One exception from the methodology for calculation of treatment



standards for K048 and K051 wastes presented above is phenol.  Phenol was



selected for regulation for K048 and K051 wastes in Section 5.0 based on



available waste characterization data from a variety of sources; however,



phenol was not detected in the untreated K048 and K051 wastes treated at plant



A.  The Agency determined that it would be inappropriate to base treatment



standards on not detected values in the treatment residual if the constituent



was not detected in the untreated waste.  Therefore, data were transferred to



phenol from another organic constituent detected in the untreated K048 and



K051 wastes based on the boiling points of those constituents.  (Boiling point



is a waste characteristic that affects the performance of fluidized bed



incineration as discussed in detail in Section 3.4.  Appendix I presents
                                       6-4

-------
information on waste characteristics that affect performance).  The constitu-



ent with the same or the closest higher boiling point for which the Agency had



treatment data from K048 and K051 wastes at plant A was selected for transfer



of data.  The treatment standard for phenol (bp 182°C) was based on data



transferred from treatment of naphthalene (bp 218°C); the Agency expects that



phenol can be treated to concentration levels as low or lower than



naphthalene.








          K049. K050. and K052 Wastes








          Treatment performance data are not available for K049, K050, and



K052 wastes.  Therefore, the Agency is transferring data from treatment of



K048 and K051 at Plant A to K049, K050, and K052.  The calculation of treat-



ment standards for K049, K050, and K052 are presented in Tables 6-4, 6-5, and



6-7, respectively.    The transfer of such treatment data is supported by the



determination that K048-K052 wastes represent a single waste treatability



group as discussed in Section 2.0.  The determination of the waste treatabil-



ity group is based on the similarity of the composition of the untreated



wastes and the fact that all of these wastes are generated by petroleum



refineries.








          Where treatment data are available from treatment of K048 and K051



for a proposed regulated constituent in K049, K050, and K052 wastes, the data



were transferred to that constituent to calculate the treatment standard for



each waste code.  Treatment performance data were transferred in this way for
                                      6-5

-------
all regulated metals and inorganic constituents and for most regulated organic



constituents in K049, K050, and K052 wastes.








          Treatment performance data were not available from treatment of K048



and K051 at plant A for some organic constituents proposed for regulation in



K049, K050, and K052.  This is because the constituents proposed for regula-



tion for each waste code are based on available waste characterization data



from a variety of sources.  Performance data used to calculate treatment



standards are based on a performance test for K048 and K051 waste generated at



plant A.  Therefore, some regulated constituents for K049, K050, and K052



waste codes may not have been detected in the K048 and K051 wastes treated at



plant A.  The Agency believes that it is inappropriate to base treatment



standards on not detected values in the treatment residual from K048 and K051



if the constituent was not detected in the untreated waste.  In such cases,



data were transferred to that organic constituent from another organic con-



stituent detected in the untreated K048 and K051 wastes based on the boiling



points of those constituents.  (Boiling point is a waste characteristic that



affects the performance of the fluidized bed incineration as discussed in



Section 3.4.  Appendix I presents information on waste characteristics that



affect performance.)  The constituent with  the same or the closest higher



boiling point for which the Agency had treatment data from K048 and K051



wastes at plant A was selected for transfer of data.  Cases where such a



transfer of data occurred are summarized below and are noted on Tables 6-4,



6-5, and 6-7, which  show  the calculations of the treatment standards  for  K049,




K050, and  K052 waste, respectively.
                                       6-6

-------
          4.  Benzene (K049).  The treatment standard for benzene (bp 80°C)



for K049 waste is based on data transferred from treatment of toluene (bp



110°C).  Based on the discussion of waste characteristics affecting treatment



performance of fluidized bed incineration in Section 3.4, the Agency expects



that benzene can be treated to concentration levels as low or lower than




toluene.








          81.  ortho-Cresol (K052) and 82. para-Cresol (K052).  The treatment



standards for ortho-cresol (bp 192°) and para-cresol (bp 202°C) for K052 waste



are based on data transferred from treatment of naphthalene (bp 218°C).  Based



on the discussion of waste characteristics affecting treatment performance of



fluidized bed incineration in Section 3.4, the Agency expects that ortho-



cresol and  para-cresol can be treated to concentration levels as low or lower




than naphthalene.








           142.  Phenol (K049. K050. K052).  The treatment standard for phenol



(bp 182°C)  for K049, K050, and K052 wastes is based on data transferred from



treatment of naphthalene  (bp 218°C).  Based on the discussion of waste charac-



teristics affecting treatment performance of fluidized bed incineration in



Section 3.4, the Agency expects that phenol can be treated to concentration



levels as low or lower than naphthalene.
                                       6-7

-------
6.2       Calculation of Treatment Standards for Wastewater Forms of K048-K052








          Neither characterization data for wastewater forms of K048-K052 nor



treatment performance data for wastewater forms of K048-K052 were available to



the Agency.  As described in Section 5.0, constituents were selected for



regulation in wastewater forms of K048-K052 based on their presence in the



untreated nonwastewater forms of K048-K052 wastes.  This is based on the fact



that during incineration of K048-K052 nonwastewaters,  uncombusted constituents



may be stripped from the incinerator off-gases and collected in the scrubber




water.








          The Agency has no treatment performance data for K048-K052 waste-



waters; therefore, data were transferred from other sources.  Treatment stan-



dards for the organic constituents were based on treatment performance data



transferred from wastewater (scrubber water) generated by the rotary kiln



incineration of K019 waste (heavy ends from the distillation of ethylene



dichloride in ethylene dichloride production).  Treatment standards for metal



constituents were based on treatment data transferred from wastewater treat-



ment data  (chromium reduction followed by lime and sulfide precipitation and



vacuum filtration) available to the Agency for K062 and other metal-bearing



characteristic wastes (Reference 27).  The calculations of wastewater treat-



ment standards for K048-K052 wastewaters are presented in Tables 6-8 through




6-12 and are described in more detail below.








           Organic Constituents.  For organic constituents selected  for regula-



tion  in K048-K052 wastewaters that are also selected for regulation in K019



                                      6-8

-------
wastewater (such as naphthalene), the treatment data for that constituent are



transferred from K019 wastewater to K048-K052 wastewaters.  For organic con-



stituents selected for regulation in K048-K052 wastewaters that are not



selected for regulation K019 wastewater, data were transferred from a K019



wastewater constituent based on similarities in bond dissociation energy



(BDE).  The bond dissociation energies are presented for each constituent in



Appendix I.  (Bond dissociation energy is a waste characteristic affecting the



performance of incineration as discussed in detail in Section 3.4).  The



constituent with the same or the closest higher bond dissociation energy for



which the Agency had treatment data from K019 scrubber water was selected for



transfer of data.  Cases where such a transfer of data occurred are summarized



below and are noted on Tables 6-8 through 6-12 which show the calculations of



the treatment standards for each waste.








          4.  Benzene (K049 and K052).  The treatment standard for benzene



(BDE 1320 kcal/mole) for K049 and K052 wastes is based on data transferred



from treatment of 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene (BDE 1320 kcal/mole).  Based on the



discussion of waste characteristics affecting treatment performance of fluid-



ized bed incineration in Section 3.4,  the Agency expects that benzene can be



treated to concentration levels as low or lower than 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene.








          43.  Toluene (K048. K049.  K051).   The treatment standard for toluene



(BDE 1235 kcal/mole) for K048,  K049, and K051 wastes is based on data trans-



ferred from treatment of bis(2-chloroethyl)ether (BDE 1290 kcal/mole).  Based



on the discussion of waste characteristics  affecting treatment performance of



fluidized bed incineration in Section  3.4,  the Agency expects that toluene can




                                      6-9

-------
be treated to concentration levels as low or lower than bis(2-chloroethyl)-



ether.








          215-217.  Xylene (K048. K049. K051. K052).  The treatment standard



for xylene (BDE 1220 kcal/mole) for K048, K049, K051, and K052 wastes is based



on data transferred from treatment of bis(2-chloroethyl)ether (BDE 1290



kcal/mole).  Based on the discussion of waste characteristics affecting



treatment performance of fluidized bed incineration in Section 3.4, the Agency



expects that xylene can be treated to concentration levels as low or lower



than bis(2-chloroethyl) ether.








          52.  Acenaphthene (K051).  The treatment standard for acenaphthene



(BDE 2400 kcal/mole) for K051 waste is based on data transferred from treat-



ment of fluorene (BDE 2700 kcal/mole).  Based on the discussion of waste



characteristics affecting performance of fluidized bed incineration in Section



3.4, the Agency expects that acenaphthene can be treated to concentration



levels as low or lower than fluorene.








          57.  Anthracene (K049).  The treatment standard for anthracene (BDE



2870 kcal/mole) for K049 waste is based on data transferred from treatment of



phenanthrene (BDE 2900 kcal/mole).  Based on the discussion of waste charac-



teristics affecting treatment performance of fluidized bed incineration in



Section 3.4, the Agency expects that anthracene can be treated to concentra-



tion levels as low or lower than phenanthrene.
                                      6-10

-------
          81.  ortho-Cresol (K052).  The treatment standard for ortho-cresol



(BDE 1405 kcal/mole) for K052 waste is based on data transferred from treat-



ment of naphthalene (BDE 2095 kcal/mole).  Based on the discussion of waste



characteristics affecting treatment performance of fluidized bed incineration



in Section 3.4, the Agency expects that ortho-cresol can be treated to concen-



tration levels as low or lower than naphthalene.








          82.  para-Cresol (K052).  The treatment standard for para-cresol



(BDE 1405 kcal/mole) for K052 waste is based on data transferred from treat-



ment of naphthalene (BDE 2095 kcal/mole).  Based on the discussion of waste



characteristics affecting treatment performance of fluidized bed incineration



in Section 3.4, the Agency expects that para-cresol can be treated to concen-



tration levels as low or lower than naphthalene.








          96.  2.4-Dimethylphenol  (K049. K052).  The treatment standard for



2,4-dimethylphenol  (BDE  1390 kcal/mole) for K049 and K052 wastes is based on



data transferred from treatment of naphthalene  (BDE 2095 kcal/mole).  Based on



the discussion of waste  characteristics affecting treatment performance of



fluidized bed  incineration in Section 3.4, the  Agency  expects that 2,4-



dimethylphenol can  be treated to concentration  levels  as low or lower than



naphthalene.








           142.  Phenol  (K048. K049. K050. K051. K052).  The treatment standard



for phenol (BDE 1421 kcal/mole) for K048-K052 wastes is based on data trans-



ferred from  treatment of naphthalene  (BDE 2095  kcal/mole).  Based on the
                                       6-11

-------
discussion of waste characteristics affecting treatment performance of fluid-



ized bed incineration in Section 3.4, the Agency expects that phenol can be



treated to concentration levels as low or lower than naphthalene.








          Metal Constituents.  Treatment data for each metal constituent



proposed for regulation in wastewater forms of K048-K052 were transferred from



data collected by EPA from one facility treating K062 and metal-bearing



characteristic wastes (Reference 27).  These wastes were treated using chro-



mium reduction followed by lime and sulfide precipitation and vacuum filtra-



tion.  As discussed in Section 4.0, the Agency believes that the K062 and



metal-bearing characteristic wastes are sufficiently similar to K048-K052



wastewater residuals such that performance data can be transferred.








          Treatment data are available from the K062 and metal-bearing charac-



teristic wastes for the proposed regulated metals in K048-K052 wastewaters.



Because these treatment data are available, the data for each regulated metal



in K048-K052 were transferred from K062 and metal-bearing characteristic



wastes to K048-K052.
                                      6-12

-------
                                  Table  6-1

       CORRECTED TOTAL  CONCENTRATION  DATA  FOR ORGANICS  AND  INORGANICS
                      IN  FLUIDIZED  BED INCINERATOR  ASH
                                              Corrected  Concentrations
                                              in  the  Treated  Waste,  ppm
Data Set:
Constituent
Volatiles
43. Toluene
215-217. Xylene (total)
Seraivolatiles
62. Benzo(a)pyrene
70. Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
80 . Chrysene
98. Di-n-butyl phthalate
121. Naphthalene
14 1. Phenanthrene
145. Pyrene
Inorganics
1


3.75
2.60

0.30
1.49
0.30
1.49
0.30
0.30
0.38

2


2.50
2.60

0.30
1.49
0.30
1.49
0.30
0.30
0.38

3


2.50
2.60

0.30
1.49
0.30
1.49
0.30
0.30
0.38

4


2.50
7.53

0.30
1.49
0.30
1.49
0.30
0.30
0.38

5


2.50
2.60

0.30
1.49
0.30
1.49
0.30
0.30
0.38

6


2.50
2.60

0.30
1.49
0.30
1.49
0.30
0.30
0.38

169.   Cyanide                    0.096   0.38    0.096   0.48    0.096    0.48
                                      6-13

-------
                       Table 6-2

           CORRECTED TCLP DATA FOR METALS IN
     STABILIZED (LIME AND FLY ASH) INCINERATOR ASH
                Data Set
 Corrected TCLP Extracts
in the Treated Waste,  ppm
   1         2        3
    Constituent
     Metals

155.   Arsenic              0.003    0.003    0.004
159.   Chromium (total)      1.47     1.58     1.41
160.   Copper               0.004    0.004    0.008
163.   Nickel               0.026    0.026    0.026
164.   Selenium             0.015    0.019    0.020
167.   Vanadium             0.16     0.16     0.17
168.   Zinc                 0.029    0.032    0.076
                          6-14

-------
                                                  Table 6-3

                          CALCULATION OF NONWASTEWATER TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR K048
I
M
Ln
Regulated Constituent
(SW-846 Method Number)»«

Volatiles (8240)
(Total Composition)

 43.  Toluene
215-217.  Xylene (total)

Semivolatiles (8270)
(Total Composition)

 70.  Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
 80.  Chrysene
 98.  Di-n-butyl phthalate
121.  Naphthalene
141.  Phenanthrene
142.  Phenol
Inorganics (9010)
(Total Composition)

169.  Cyanide
                                 Untreated K048
                                  at Plant A*
                                  Range (ppm)
                                     22-120
                                    <14-120
<20-59
<20-22
 67-190
 93-110
 77-86
 93-170+
                                        <0.1-1.0
                                                      Arithmetic**
                                                       Average of
                                                       Corrected
                                                       Treatment
                                                      Values (ppm)
                                                          2.71
                                                          3.42
1.49
0.30
1.49
0.30
0.30
0.30
                 0.27
                           Constituent From
                           Which Treatment
                              Data Were
                             Transferred
                                 NA
                                 NA
    NA
    NA
    NA
    NA
    NA
Naphthalene
                NA
                           Variability
                           Factor (VF)
                               1.45
                               2.50
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
                   5.44
                              Treatment++
                               Standard
                            (Average x VF)
                                (ppm)
                                  3.93
                                  8.54
                                                                                                   4.18
                                                                                                   0.84
                                                                                                   4.18
                                                                                                   0.84
                                                                                                   0.84
                                                                                                   0.84
                                                                                                   1.48
 "Concentration values for the untreated waste have not been corrected for recovery.
**For detailed discussion of the analytical methods upon which these treatment standards are based,
  see Appendix D.
 •••Phenol was not detected in the untreated K048 waste; however, in other characterization data,  phenol was
  shown to be present in K048 (see Table 2-4).  The range presented is the range of naphthalene  in the
  untreated K048 and K051 waste.  Treatment performance data were transferred to phenol from naphthalene.
++The values shown on this table for arithmetic averages and treatment standards have been rounded to show
  significant figures only.
ND Not detected
NA Not applicable

-------
                                            Table 6-3 (Continued)

                          CALCULATION OF NONWASTEWATER TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR K048
Regulated Constituent
(SW-846 Method Number)**

Metals (TCLP)

155.  Arsenic (7060)
159.  Chromium (total) (6010)
160.  Copper (6010)
163.  Nickel (6010)
164.  Selenium (7740)
167.  Vanadium (6010)
168.  Zinc (6010)
Unstabilized
    Ash*
Range (ppm)
0.006-0.018
 2.64-3.26
   0.023
0.027-0.041
0.025-0.15
 3.24-4.67
0.11-0.15
Arithmetic++
 Average of
 Corrected
 Treatment
Values (ppm)
    0.003
    1.48
    0.005
    0.026
    0.018
    0.16
    0.046
Constituent From
Which Treatment
   Data Were
 Transferred
     NA
     NA
     NA
     NA
     NA
     NA
     NA
Variability
Factor (VF)
   1.69
   1.14
   2.40
   1.79
   1.38
   1.09
   3.09
 Treatment++
  Standard
(Average x VF)
    (ppm)
    0.006
    1.68
    0.013
    0.048
    0.025
    0.18
    0.141
 *TCLP extract concentrations for the untreated waste have been corrected for recovery.
**For detailed discussion of the analytical methods upon which these treatment standards are based,
  see Appendix D.
++The values shown on this table for arithmetic averages and treatment standards have been rounded  to show
  significant figures only.
NA Not applicable

-------
I
(-1
~J
                                                  Table 6-4

                          CALCULATION OF NONWASTEWATER TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR K049
Regulated Constituent
(SW-846 Method Number)1

Volatiles (8240)
(Total Composition)

  4.  Benzene
 43.  Toluene
215-217.  Xylene (total)

Semivolatiles (8270)
(Total Composition)

 80.  Chrysene
121.  Naphthalene
141.  Phenan threne
142.  Phenol
145.  Pyrene

Inorganics (9010)
(Total Composition)

169.  Cyanide
Constituent From
Which Treatment
   Data Were
  Transferred*
     Toluene
     Toluene
     Xylene
    Chrysene
   Naphthalene
  Phenanthrene
   Naphthalene
     Pyrene
     Cyanide
  Untreated
Concentration
   (ppm)**
    22-120
    22-120
   •C14-120
Arithmetic**
 Average of
 Corrected
 Treatment
Values (ppm)
   <20-51
    93-170
    77-120
    93-170
    62-74
     2.71
     2.71
     3.42
     0.30
     0.30
     0.30
     0.30
     0.38
                    0.27
Variability
Factor (VF)
   1.45
   1.45
   2.50
   2.8
   2.8
   2.8
   2.8
   2.8
                    5.44
  Treatment**
   Standard
(Average x VF)
     (ppm)
     3.93
     3.93
     8.54
     0.84
     0.84
     0.84
     0.84
     1.06
                  1.48
 For detailed discussion of the analytical methods upon which these treatment standards are based,
 see Appendix D.
 *Data were transferred from K048-K051.
**This is the untreated concentration in K048 and K051 of each constituent from which treatment data were
  transferred.
*+The values shown on this table for arithmetic averages and treatment standards have been rounded to show
  significant figures only.

-------
I
h-'
00
                                                 Table 6-4  (Continued)

                                CALCULATION OF NONWASTEWATER TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR K049
      Regulated  Constituent
      (SW-846  Method Number)
1
Metals (TCLP)
155. Arsenic
159. Chromium
160. Copper
163. Nickel
164. Selenium
167. Vanadium
168. Zinc


(total)





Constituent From
 Which Treatment
   Data Were
  Transferred*
                                         Arsenic
                                    Chromium  (total)
                                         Copper
                                         Nickel
                                        Selenium
                                        Vanadium
                                          Zinc
                            Untreated
                                                                     Arithmetic++
                                                                      Average of
                                                                      Corrected
                                                                      Treatment
                          Concentration**  Values  (ppm)
Variability
Factor (VF)
0.006-0.018
2.64-3.26
0.023
0.027-0.041
0.025-0.15
3.24-4.67
0.11-0.15
0.003
1.48
0.005
0.026
0.018
0.16
0.046
                                                             1.69
                                                             1.14
                                                             2.40
                                                             1.79
                                                             1.38
                                                             1.09
                                                             3.09
  Treatment++
   Standard
(Average x VF)
     (ppm)
                                                                    0.006
                                                                    1.68
                                                                    0.013
                                                                    0.048
                                                                    0.025
                                                                    0.18
                                                                    0.141
           detailed  discussion of the  analytical methods upon which  these  treatment  standards  are  based,
       see  Appendix  D.
       *Data  were transferred from K048-K051.
      **This  is  the  untreated concentration  in K048 and K051 of  each constituent from which  treatment data were
        transferred.
      ++The values shown on this table for arithmetic  averages and treatment standards have  been rounded  to  show
        significant  figures only.

-------
                                                  Table 6-5

                          CALCULATION OF NONWASTEWATER TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR K050
                             Constituent From
                             Which Treatment
                                Data Were
                               Transferred*
                     Untreated
                   Concentration
                      (ppm)**
Regulated Constituent
(SW-846 Method Number)1

Volatiles (8240)
(Total Composition)

(No volatile constituents are regulated for K050 wastes)
Arithmetic-M-
 Average of
 Corrected
 Treatment
Values (ppm)
               Treatment-^
                Standard
Variability  (Average x VF)
Factor (VF)  	(ppm)
I
h-»
VO
Semivolatiles (8270)
(Total Composition)

 62.  Benzo(a)pyrene
142.  Phenol
Benzo(a)pyrene
  Naphthalene
                                                 0.002-45
                                                    93-170
    0.30
    0.30
   2.8
   2.8
0.84
0.84
Inorganics (9010)
(Total Composition)

169.  Cyanide
    Cyanide
                                                                    0.27
                   5.44
                  1.48
 For detailed discussion of the analytical methods upon which these treatment standards are based,
 see Appendix D.
 *Data were transferred from K048 and K051.
**This is the untreated concentration in K048 and K051 of each constituent from which treatment data were
  transferred.
++The values shown on this table for arithmetic averages and treatment standards have been rounded to show
  significant figures only.

-------
I
o
                                                 Table  6-5  (Continued)

                               CALCULATION OF  MONWASTEWATER TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR K050
Regulated Constituent
(SW-846 Method Number)

Metals (TCLP)

155.  Arsenic
159.  Chromium (total)
160.  Copper
163.  Nickel
164.  Selenium
167.  Vanadium
168.  Zinc
                           1
Constituent From
Which Treatment
   Data Were
  Transferred*
                                        Arsenic
                                   Chromium (total)
                                        Copper
                                        Nickel
                                       Selenium
                                       Vanadium
                                         Zinc
  Untreated
Concentration
   (ppm)**
Arithmetic++
 Average of
 Corrected
 Treatment
Values (ppm)
0.006-0.018
2.64-3.26
0.023
0.027-0.041
0.025-0.15
3.24-4.67
0.11-0.15
0.003
1.48
0.005
0.026
0.018
0.16
0.046
Variability
Factor (VF)
                                                     1.69
                                                     1.14
                                                     2.40
                                                     1.79
                                                     1.38
                                                     1.09
                                                     3.09
  Treatment**
   Standard
(Average x VF)
     (ppm)
                                                 0.006
                                                 1.68
                                                 0.013
                                                 0.048
                                                 0.025
                                                 0.18
                                                 0.141
     1For detailed discussion of the analytical methods upon which these treatment standards are based,
      see Appendix D.
      *Data were transferred from K048 and K051.
     **This is the untreated concentration in K048 and K051  of each constituent from which treatment data were
       transferred.
     ++The values shown on this table for arithmetic averages and treatment standards have been rounded  to show
       significant figures only.

-------
                                                  Table 6-6
                          CALCULATION OF NONWASTEWATER TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR K051
Regulated Constituent
(SW-846 Method Number)**

Volatiles (8240)
(Total Composition)

 43.  Toluene
215-217.  Xylene (total)

Semivolatiles (8270)
(Total Composition)

 80.  Chrysene
 98.  Di-n-butyl phthalate
121.  Naphthalene
141.  Phenanthrene
142.  Phenol
145.  Pyrene

Inorganics (9010)
(Total Composition)

169.  Cyanide
Untreated K051
  at Plant A*
 Range (ppm)
Arithmetic**
 Average of
 Corrected
 Treatment
Values (ppm)
Constituent From
Which Treatment
  Data Were
  Transferred
    33-71
    71-83
    45-51
    43-230
   150-170
   110-120
    93-170+
    62-74
    2.71
    3.42
      NA
      NA
0.30
1.49
0.30
0.30
0.30
0.38
NA
NA
NA
NA
Naphthalene
NA
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
   0.5-1.4
    0.27
      NA
Variability
Factor (VF)
1.45
2.50
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
Treatment**
Standard
(Average x VF)
(ppm)
3.93
8.54
0.84
4.18
0.84
0.84
0.84
1.06
5.44
1.48
 Concentration values for the untreated waste have not been corrected for recovery.
**For detailed discussion of the analytical methods upon which these treatment standards are based,
  see Appendix D.
 *Phenol was not detected in the untreated K051 waste; however, phenol was shown in other characterization
  data to be present in K051 (see Table 2-7).   The range presented is the range of naphthalene in the
  untreated K048 and K051.  Treatment performance data were transferred to phenol from naphthalene.
++The values shown on this table for arithmetic averages and treatment standards have been rounded to show
  significant figures only.
ND Not detected
NA Not applicable

-------
                                                 Table 6-6 (Continued)

                               CALCULATION OF  NONWASTEWATER TREATMENT STANDARDS  FOR  K051
     Regulated Constituent
     (SW-846 Method Number)**

     Metals (TCLP)

     155.  Arsenic (7060)
     159.  Chromium (total) (6010)
     160.  Copper (6010)
     163.  Nickel (6010)
     164.  Selenium (7740)
     167.  Vanadium (6010)
     168.  Zinc (6010)
                                  Unstabilized
                                      Ash*
                                 Range (ppm)
 Arithmetic**
  Average of
  Corrected
  Treatment
Values (ppm)
0.006-0.018
2.64-3.26
0.023
0.027-0.041
0.025-0.15
3.24-4.67
0.11-0.15
0.003
1.48
0.005
0.026
0.018
0.16
0.046
Constituent From
Which Treatment
   Data Were
  Transferred
                                                                      NA
                                                                      NA
                                                                      NA
                                                                      NA
                                                                      NA
                                                                      NA
                                                                      NA
Variability
Factor (VF)
                                     1.69
                                     1.14
                                     2.40
                                     1.79
                                     1.38
                                     1.09
                                     3.09
  Treatment**
   Standard
(Average x VF)
    (ppm)
                                    0.006
                                    1.68
                                    0.13
                                    0.048
                                    0.025
                                    0.18
                                    0.141
I
t-0
[S3
 *TCLP extract concentrations for the untreated waste have been corrected  for  recovery.
**For detailed discussion of the analytical methods upon which these  treatment standards  are  based,
  see Appendix D.
++The values shown on this table for arithmetic averages and  treatment  standards  have  been  rounded  to  show
  significant figures only.
NA Not applicable

-------
                                                  Table 6-7

                          CALCULATION OF NONWASTEWATER TREATMENT  STANDARDS  FOR K052
Regulated Constituent
(SW-846 Method Number)1

Volatiles (8240)
(Total Composition)

 43.  Toluene
215-217.  Xylene (total)

Semivolatiles (8270)
(Total Composition)
cr*
1
fO
w


81.
82.
121.
141.
142.
o-Cresol
p-Cresol
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Phenol
Inorganics (9010)
(Total Composition)

169.  Cyanide
Constituent From
Which Treatment
   Data Were
 Transferred*
     Toluene
     Xylene
                                   Naphthalene
                                   Naphthalene
                                   Naphthalene
                                   Phenanthrene
                                   Naphthalene
    Cyanide
  Untreated
Concentration
   (ppm)**
   22-120
  <14-120
                     93-170
                     93-170
                     93-170
                     77-120
                     93-170
Arithmetic**
 Average of
 Corrected
 Treatment
Values (ppm)
    2.71
    3.42
                     0.30
                     0.30
                     0.30
                     0.30
                     0.30
Variability
Factor (VF)
    1.45
    2.50
  Treatment**
   Standard
(Average x VF)
    (ppm)
                   2.8
                   2.8
                   2.8
                   2.8
                   2.8
      3.93
      8.54
                   0.84
                   0.84
                   0.84
                   0.84
                   0.84
  0.5-1.4
    0.27
    5.44
      1.48
1For detailed discussion of the analytical methods upon which these treatment standards are based,
 see Appendix D.
 *Data were transferred from K048-K051.
**This is the untreated concentration of each constituent in K048 and K051 from which treatment data were
  transferred.
++The values shown on this table for arithmetic averages and treatment standards have been rounded to show
  significant figures only.

-------
Regulated Constituent
(SW-846 Method Number)

Metals (TCLP)

155.  Arsenic
159.  Chromium (total)
160.  Copper
163.  Nickel
164.  Selenium
167.  Vanadium
168.  Zinc
1
                                            Table 6-7 (Continued)

                          CALCULATION OF NONWASTEWATER TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR K052
  Untreated
Concentration
   (ppm)**
            0.006-0.018
             2.64-3.26
               0.023
            0.027-0.041
            0.025-0.15
             3.24-4.67
             0.11-0.15
Arithmetic**
Average of
Corrected
Treatment
Values (ppm)
0.003
1.48
0.005
0.026
0.018
0.16
0.046

Constituent From
Which Treatment
Data Were
Transferred*
Arsenic
Chromium (total)
Copper
Nickel
Selenium
Vanadium
Zinc



Treatment**

Var lability
Factor (VF)
1.69
1.14
2.40
1.79
1.38
1.09
3.09
Standard
(Average x
(ppm)
0.006
1.68
0.13
0.048
0.025
0.18
0.141

VF)








 'For detailed discussion of the analytical methods upon which these treatment standards are based,
 see Appendix D.
 *Data were transferred from K048-K051.
**This is the untreated concentration of each constituent in K048 and K051 from which treatment data were
  transferred.
++The values shown on this table for arithmetic averages and treatment standards have been rounded to show
  significant figures only.

-------
I
ho
Ln
Regulated Constituent
(SH-846 Method Number)*

Volatiles (8240)
(Total Composition)

 43.  Toluene

215-217.  Xylene (total)

Semivolatiles (8270)
(Total Composition)

109.  Fluorene
121.  Naphthalene
141.  Phenan threne
142.  Phenol

Metals
(Total Composition)

159.  Chromium (total)
        (7190)
161.  Lead (7420)
168.  Zinc (289.1)
                                                       Table 6-8

                                CALCULATION OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR K048
                                   Constituent From
                                   Which Treatment
                                      Data Were
                                     Transferred*
                  Untreated
                Concentration
                   (ppm)**
Arithmetic**
 Average of
 Corrected
 Treatment
Values (ppm)
                                  Bis(2-chloroethyl)-    280-340
                                         ether
                                  Bis(2-chloroethyl)-    280-340
                                         ether
  Fluorene
 Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
 Naphthalene
                                   Chromium  (total)     393-2581

                                         Lead          0.02-210
                                         Zinc           1.0-171
                                    0.002

                                    0.002
                                    0.19

                                    0.013
                                    0.25
               Treatment**
                Standard
Variability  (Average x VF)
Factor (VF)       (ppm)
                    2.8

                    2.8
                  0.007

                  0.007
16-22
314-470
11-21
314-470
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.002
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
                                   0.007
                                   0.007
                                   0.007
                                   0.007
                    1.09

                    2.8
                    1.62
                  0.20

                  0.037
                  0.40
       *For  detailed  discussion of  the analytical methods upon which these treatment standards are based, see
        Appendix  D.
      **This is the untreated  concentration of each constituent in the waste from which  treatment data were
        transferred.
      + Volatiles and semivolatiles were transferred from K019 wastewater (Reference 26); metals
        were transferred  from  the Envirite Report (Reference 27).
      ++The  values shown  on  this table for arithmetic averages and treatment standards have been rounded to show
        significant figures  only.

-------
I
N3
Regulated Constituent
(SW-846 Method Number)*

Volatiles (8240)
(Total Composition)

  4.  Benzene
 43.  Toluene

215-217.  Xylene (total)

Semivolatiles (8270)
(Total Composition)
Anthracene
Dimethylphenol
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Phenol
 57.
 86.
121.
141.
142.

Metals
(Total Composition)

159.  Chromium (total)
        (7190)
161.  Lead (7420)
168.  Zinc (289.1)
                                                  Table  6-9

                           CALCULATION OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT STANDARDS  FOR  K049
                              Constituent  From
                              Which Treatment
                                 Data Were
                                Transferred*
  Untreated
Concentration
   (ppm)**
     65-100
    280-340

    280-340
                           1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
                             Bis(2-chloroethyl)-
                                    ether
                             Bis(2-chloroethyl)-
                                    ether
                                Phenanthrene
                                 Naphthalene
                                 Naphthalene
                                Phenanthrene
                                 Naphthalene
                              Chromium (total)      393-2581
                                                                    Arithmetic**
                                                                     Average of
                                                                     Corrected
                                                                     Treatment
                                                                    Values (ppm)
                                                                         0.008
                                                                         0.002

                                                                         0.002
                                    Lead
                                    Zinc
  0.02-210
   1.0-171
                                                                         0.19

                                                                         0.013
                                                                         0.25
                                                                          Variability
                                                                          Factor (VF)
                                                                             2.8
                                                                             2.8

                                                                             2.8
11-21
314-470
314-470
11-21
314-470
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.002
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
  Treatment**
   Standard
(Average x VF)
     (ppm)
     0.023
     0.007

     0.007
                                                  0.007
                                                  0.007
                                                  0.007
                                                  0.007
                                                  0.007
                                                                             1.09

                                                                             2.8
                                                                             1.62
     0.20

     0.037
     0.40
 *For detailed discussion of the analytical methods upon which these treatment standards  are based,  see
  Appendix D.
**This is the untreated concentration of each constituent in the waste from which treatment data were
  transferred.
+ Volatiles and semivolatiles were transferred from K019 wastewater (Reference 26);  metals
  were transferred from the Envirite Report (Reference 27).
++The values shown on this table for arithmetic averages and treatment standards have been  rounded  to show
  significant figures only.

-------
I
N5
—I
Regulated Constituent
(SW-846 Method Number)*

Semivolatiles (8270)
(Total Composition)

142.  Phenol

Metals
(Total Composition)

159.  Chromium (total)
        (7190)
161.  Lead (7420)
168.  Zinc (289.1)
                                                      Table  6-10

                                CALCULATION OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT STANDARDS  FOR K050
                                   Constituent From
                                   Which Treatment
                                      Data Were
                                     Transferred*
                                      Naphthalene
Chromium (total)

      Lead
      Zinc
                    Untreated
                  Concentration
                     (ppm)**
                     314-470
 393-2581

0.02-210
 1.0-171
             Arithmetic**
              Average of
              Corrected
              Treatment
             Values (ppm)
                  0.002
0.19

0.013
0.25
                           Treatment**
                            Standard
            Variability  (Average x VF)
            Factor (VF)       (ppm)
               2.8
1.09

2.8
1.62
               0.007
0.20

0.037
0.40
      *For detailed discussion of the analytical methods upon which these treatment standards are based, see
       Appendix D.
     **This is the untreated concentration of each constituent in the waste from which treatment data were
       transferred.
     + Volatiles and semivolatiles were transferred from K019 wastewater (Reference 26); metals
       were transferred from the Envirite Report (Reference 27).
     ++The values shown on this table for arithmetic averages and treatment standards have been rounded to show
       significant figures only.

-------
                                                 Table 6-11

                           CALCULATION OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR K051
Regulated Constituent
(SW-846 Method Number)*
Constituent From
Which Treatment
   Data Were
  Transferred*
  Untreated
Concentration
   (ppm)««
Arithmetic**
 Average of
 Corrected
 Treatment
Values (ppm)
               Treatment**
                Standard
Variability  (Average x VF)
Factor (VF)       (ppm)
Volatiles (8240)
(Total Composition)
43. Toluene

215-217. Xylene (total)

Semivolatiles (8270)
(Total Composition)
g 52 . Acenaphthene
109. Fluorene
121. Naphthalene
14 1. Phenanthrene
142. Phenol


Bis(2-chloroethyl)-
ether
Bis (2-chloroethyl ) -
ether


Fluorene
Fluorene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Naphthalene


280-340

280-340



16-22
16-22
314-470
11-21
314-470


0.002

0.002



0.002
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.002


2.8

2.8



2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8


0.007

0.007



0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
Metals
(Total Composition)

159.  Chromium (total)
        (7190)
161.  Lead (7420)
168.  Zinc (289.1)
Chromium (total)

      Lead
      Zinc
   393-2581

  0.02-210
   1.0-171
     0.19

     0.013
     0.25
   1.09

    2.8
   1.62
0.20

0.037
0.40
 *For detailed discussion of the analytical methods upon which these treatment standards are based,  see
  Appendix D.
**This is the untreated concentration of each constituent in the waste from which treatment  data  were
  transferred.
+ Volatiles and semivolatiles were transferred from K019 wastewater (Reference 26);  metals
  were transferred from the Envirite Report (Reference 27).
++The values shown on this table for arithmetic averages and treatment standards  have been rounded to show
  significant figures only.

-------
                                                Table  6-12
                           CALCULATION  OF  WASTEWATER TREATMENT  STANDARDS  FOR  K052
Regulated Constituent
(SH-846 Method Number)*

Volatiles (8240)
(Total Composition)

 46.  Benzene
215-217.  Xylene (total)

Semivolatiles (8270)
(Total Composition)

 81.  ortho-Cresol
 82.  para-Cresol
 96.  2,4-Dimethylphenol
121.  Naphthalene
141.  Phenanthrene
142.  Phenol

Metals
(Total Composition)

159.  Chromium (total)
        (7190)
161.  Lead (7420)
168.  Zinc (289.1)
Constituent From
Which Treatment
Data Were
Transferred*
Untreated
Concentration
(ppm)**
Arithmetic**
Average of
Corrected
Treatment
Values (ppm)
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene    65-100
Bis(2-chloroethyl)-      280-340
         ether
      Naphthalene       314-470
      Naphthalene       314-470
      Naphthalene       314-470
      Naphthalene       314-470
     Phenanthrene        11-21
      Naphthalene       314-470
   Chromium (total)     393-2581

         Lead          0.02-210
         Zinc           1.0-171
0.008
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.19

0.013
0.25
                                                     Variability
                                                     Factor (VF)
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
 .8
 .8
2.8
2.8
2.
2.
1.09

2.8
1.62
                           Treatment**
                            Standard
                         (Average x VF)
                              (ppm)
               0.023
               0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
               0.20

               0.037
               0.40
 *For detailed discussion of the analytical methods upon which these treatment standards are based, see
  Appendix D.
**This is the untreated concentration of each constituent in the waste from which treatment data were
  transferred.
* Volatiles and semivolatiles were transferred from K019 wastewater (Reference 26); metals
  were transferred from the Envirite Report (Reference 27).
++The values shown on this table for arithmetic averages and treatment standards have been rounded to show
  significant figures only.

-------
7.0       CONCLUSIONS








          The Agency has proposed treatment standards for the listed refinery




waste codes K048-K052.  Standards for nonwastewater forms of these wastes are




presented in Table 7-1 and standards for wastewater forms of these wastes are




presented in Table 7-2.








          The treatment standards proposed for K048-K052 have been developed




consistent with EPA's promulgated methodology for BOAT (November 7, 1986, 51




FR 40572).  These five wastes are generated by the treatment of refinery




process wastewaters and from heat exchanger cleaning and product storage




operations.  Based on a careful review of the industry processes which gener-




ate these wastes and all available data characterizing these wastes, the




Agency has determined that these wastes (K048-K052) represent a separate waste




treatability group.  Wastes in this treatability group are comprised of water,




oil and grease, dirt, sand and other solids, and organic and metal BOAT List




constituents.








          The BDAT List constituents generally present in wastes of this




treatability group are benzene, toluene, xylene, acenaphthene, anthracene,




benzo(a)pyrene, bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, chrysene, ortho-cresol, para-




cresol, 2,4-dimethylphenol, di-n-butyl phthalate, fluorene, naphthalene,




phenanthrene, phenol, pyrene, arsenic, total chromium, copper, lead, nickel,




selenium, vanadium, zinc and cyanide.  Although the concentrations of specific




constituents will vary from facility to facility, all of the wastes are
                                      7-1

-------
expected to contain similar BDAT List organics and metals and have high



filterable solids content.  As a result, EPA has examined the sources of the



wastes, applicable technologies, and attainable treatment performance in order



to support a single regulatory approach for these five listed refinery wastes.








          Through available data bases, EPA's technology testing program, and



data submitted by industry, the Agency has identified the following demon-



strated technologies for treatment of organic constituents present in the



wastes which are part of this treatability group:  incineration technologies



including fluidized bed and rotary kiln incineration; solvent extraction;



thermal drying; and pressure filtration.  Additionally, stabilization is



demonstrated for treatment of the BDAT List metal constituents present in



nonwastewater residuals.  For metals in the wastewater residuals, EPA has



identified the following demonstrated treatment train:  chromium reduction



followed by chemical precipitation, and filtration or sedimentation.








          EPA has determined that for BDAT List organics in K048-K052 wastes,



fluidized bed incineration achieves a level of performance that represents



treatment by BDAT.  For metals  in the incinerator ash, EPA has determined that



stabilization using a lime and  fly ash binder achieves a level of performance



that represents treatment by BDAT.  For BDAT List metals in wastewater, EPA



has identified chromium reduction followed by lime and sulfide precipitation



and vacuum filtration as achieving a level of performance for metals that




represents treatment by BDAT.
                                       7-2

-------
          Regulated organic and inorganic constituents in nonwastewaters were



selected from those BOAT List organic and inorganic constituents detected in



the untreated wastes that were treated by fluidized bed incineration.  Regu-



lated metal constituents in nonwastewaters were selected from those BOAT List



metal constituents detected in the untreated wastes that were treated by



stabilization of ash from fluidized bed incineration.  Some BDAT List organic



constituents were not regulated because these constituents were believed to be



adequately controlled by regulation of other constituents.








          Regulated organic constituents in wastewater were selected from the



BDAT List organic constituents detected in the untreated wastes that show



treatment using incineration.  Regulated metal and inorganic constituents were



selected from BDAT List metal and inorganic constituents detected in the



untreated wastes and similar wastes that showed treatment using incineration



followed by wastewater treatment using chromium reduction, lime and sulfide



precipitation, and vacuum filtration.  Some BDAT List organic, metal and



inorganic constituents were not regulated because these constituents were



believed to be adequately controlled by regulation of other constituents.








          BDAT treatment standards for K048-K052 were derived from analytical



data that have been adjusted to take into account analytical interference



associated with the chemical make-up of the sample.  Subsequently, the average



adjusted concentration was multiplied by a variability factor to derive the



BDAT treatment standard.  The variability factor represents the variability



inherent in the treatment process and sampling and analytical methods.
                                      7-3

-------
Variability factors were determined by statistically calculating the variabil-



ity seen for a number of data points for a given constituent.  For constitu-



ents for which specific variability factors could not be calculated, a vari-



ability factor of 2.8 was used.








          The Agency is proposing BDAT treatment standards for the two treat-



ability subgroups of K048-K052:   wastewaters and nonwastewaters.  BDAT treat-



ment standards for K048-K052 nonwastewater are proposed based on performance



data from a treatment train that consisted of full scale fluidized bed incin-



eration followed by ash stabilization.  Ash stabilization was achieved by



using lime and fly ash as stabilization agents.  BDAT List organic constituent



treatment standards for K048-K052 wastewaters are proposed based on a transfer



of treatment performance data for the scrubber water residual from the incin-



eration of K019 nonwastewaters (K019 is listed as heavy ends from the distil-



lation of ethylene dichloride in ethylene dichloride production).  BDAT List



metal constituent treatment standards for K048-K052 wastewaters are proposed



based on transferred treatment performance data from chromium reduction, lime



and sulfide precipitation and vacuum filtration treatment of K062 and metal-



bearing characteristic wastes.








          Petroleum refining wastes K048-K052 may be land disposed if they



meet the standards at the point of disposal.  The BDAT technologies upon which



the treatment standards are based (fluidized bed incineration followed by



stabilization, and chromium reduction followed by lime and sulfide precipi-



tation and vacuum filtration) need not be specifically utilized prior to land
                                      7-4

-------
disposal,  provided that an alternate technology utilized achieves the stan-



dards.








          These standards become effective no later than August 8, 1988, as



per the schedule set forth in 40 CFR 268.10.  Due to the lack of nationwide



incineration capacity at this time, the Agency has proposed to grant a 2-year



nationwide variance to the effective date of the land disposal ban for these



wastes.  A detailed discussion of the Agency's determination that a lack of



nationwide incineration capacity exists is presented in the Capacity



Background Document which is available in the Administrative Record for this



rule.
                                      7-5

-------
                                   Table 7-1

                         BOAT TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR
                           K048-K052 NONWASTEWATERS
     Regulated Organic
        Constituents

  4.  Benzene
 43.  Toluene
215-  ,\
217.  Xylene" (total)-
 62.  Benzo(a)pyrene
 70.  Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthal-
        ate
 ,7#.  Chrysene
 81.  ortho-Cresol
 82.  para-Cresol
 98.  Di-n-butyl phthalate
121.  Naphthalene
141.  Penanthrene
142.  Phenol
145.  Pyrene

      Regulated Metal
        Constituents

155.  Arsenic
159.  Chromium (total)
160.  Copper
163.  Nickel
164.  Selenium
167.  Vanadium
168.  Zinc

    Regulated Inorganic
        Constituents

169.  Cyanide
                    Total Concentration (mg/kg)
K048
NA
3.93
8.54
NA
4.18
0.84
NA
NA
4.18
0.84
0.84
0.84
NA

K048
0.006
1.68
0.013
0.048
0.025
0.18
0.141

K048
1.48
K049
3.93
3.93
8.54
NA
NA
0.84
NA
NA
NA
0.84
0.84
0.84
1.06

K049
0.006
1.68
0.013
0.048
0.025
0.18
0.141
Total
K049
1.48
K050
NA
NA
NA
0.84
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.84
NA
TCLP (mg/1)
K050
0.006
1.68
0.013
0.048
0.025
0.18
0.141
Concentration
K050
1.48
K051
NA
3.93
8.54
NA
NA
0.84
NA
NA
4.18
0.84
0.84
0.84
1.06

K051
0.006
1.68
0.013
0.048
0.025
0.18
0.141
(mg/kg)
K051
1.48
K052
NA
3.93
8.54
NA
NA
NA
0.84
0.84
NA
0.84
0.84
0.84
NA

K052
0.006
1.68
0.013
0.048
0.025
0.18
0.141

K052
1.48
NA - Not applicable.
     for this waste.
This constituent is not being proposed for regulation
                                       7-6

-------
                                                  Table 7-2

                             BOAT TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR K048-K052 WASTEWATERS
                                                             Total Concentration (mg/1)
        Regulated Constituents
  4.  Benzene
 43.  Toluene
215-217.  Xylene (total)
 52.  Acenaphthene
 57.  Anthracene
 81.  ortho-Cresol
 82.  para-Cresol
 96.  2,4-dimethylphenol
109.  Fluorene
121.  Naphthalene
141.  Phenanthrene
142.  Phenol
159.  Chromium (total)
162.  Lead
169.  Zinc
K048
NA
0.007
0.007
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.20
0.037
0.40
K049
0.023
0.007
0.007
NA
0.007
NA
NA
0.007
NA
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.20
0.037
0.40
K050
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.007
0.20
0.037
0.40
K051
NA
0.007
0.007
0.007
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.20
0.037
0.40
K052
0.023
NA
0.007
NA
NA
0.007
0.007
0.007
NA
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.20
0.037
0.40
NA - Not Applicable.  This constituent is not being proposed for regulation for this waste.

-------
8.0       REFERENCES

1.   Jacobs Engineering Company.  Alternatives for Hazardous Waste Management
     in the Petroleum Refining Industry.  1979.

2.   American Petroleum Institute.  1983.  1982 Refinery Solid Waste Survey.
     Prepared by Environmental Resources Management, Inc.

3.   Rosenberg, D.G.  Assessment of Hazardous Waste Practices in the Petroleum
     Refining Industry.  Jacobs Engineering Company, Pasadena, CA.  June 1976.

4.   Cantrell, Ailleen.  "Annual Refining Survey."  Oil and Gas Journal.  Vol.
     85, No.  13.  March 30,  1987.

5.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Identification and Listing of
     Hazardous Waste Under RCRA, Subtitle C, Section 3001, Background Docu-
     ment.  May 1981.

6.   U.S. EPA.  Onsite Engineering Report of Treatment Technology Performance
     and Operation for Amoco Oil Company, Whiting, Indiana.  February 29,
     1988.

7.   U.S. EPA.  Onsite Engineering Report of Stabilization of Fluidized Bed
     Incineration Ash at Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
     February 19, 1988.

8.   American Petroleum Institute.  Evaluation of Treatment Technologies for
     Listed Petroleum Refinery Wastes:  Interim Report.  April 27, 1987.

9.   Sohio Oil Co.   1987.  Demonstration of a Solvent Extraction Process for
     Treating Listed Petroleum Refinery Wastes.  Submitted to U.S. EPA on June
     12, 1987.

10.  Resources Conservation  Co.  1987.  B.E.S.T. Clean Up, BOAT Performance
     Test Results.  May 19,  1987 Report Submitted to EPA.

11.  Jones, H.R.  Pollution  Control in the Petroleum Industry.  Noyes Data
     Corp., Park Ridge, NJ.  1973.

12.  Gloyna, E., and D. Ford.  The Characteristics and Pollutional Problems
     Associated with Petrochemical Wastes.  Engineering Science Inc., Austin,
     TX.  1970.

13.  USEPA.   1988.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Final Characteriza-
     tion Report of Waste Characterization for Conoco, Inc., Ponca City,
     Oklahoma.  February 22, 1988.

14.  Delisting Petition #503.
                                      8-1

-------
                      REFERENCES K048 - K052 (Continued)
15.   Environ Corporation.   Characterization of Waste Streams Listed in the 49
     CFR Section 261  Waste Profiles.   Prepared for U.S.  EPA, Office of Solid
     Waste,  Waste Identification Branch,  Characterization and Assessment
     Division.

16.   Delisting  Petition #205.

17.   Delisting  Petition #386.

18.   Delisting  Petition #396.

19.   Delisting  Petition #421.

20.   Delisting  Petition #469.

21.   Delisting  Petition #481.

22.   Askew,  M.W. et al.  "Meet Environmental Needs for Refinery Expansions."
     Hydrocarbon Processing.   October 1983.  pp 65-70.

23.   Delisting  Petition #530.

24.   Delisting  Petition #264.

25.   Delisting  Petition #426.

26.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Best Demonstrated and Available
     Technology (BOAT)  Background Document  Supporting the Proposed Land
     Disposal Restrictions Rule for First Third Wastes.   Volume 2.  Organic
     Chemicals  Waste Codes K016. K018.  K019. K020. K030.  March 18, 1988.

27.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   1986.  Onsite Engineering Report
     of Treatment Technology  Performance and Operation for Envirite Corpora-
     tion.  Prepared by Versar for Office of Solid Waste, USEPA, under Con-
     tract No.  68-01-7053. December 1986.

28.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Onsite Engineering Report for
     Horsehead  Resource Development Company for K061.  Draft Report.  March
     1988.

29.   BP Oil Company.  1987.  BP Oil Company - Alliance Refinery Petition for
     the Exclusion from Hazardous Waste Regulation of a Solid Waste Residue
     from the Solvent Extraction Treatment  of Petroleum Refining Wastes.
     Submitted to U.S.  EPA on October 28, 1987.  P.O. Box 395, Bell Chase,
     Louisiana  70037.
                                      8-2

-------
                      REFERENCES K048 - K052 (Continued)
30.  C.F. Systems Corporation.  1987.  Company literature:  C.F. Systems Units
     to Render Refinery Wastes Non-Hazardous.  March 30, 1987.

31.  Windholz, Martha, editor.  1983.  The Merck Index. 10th edition.
     Rathway, NJ:  Merck & Company.

32.  Verchueren Karel.  1983.  Handbook of Environmental Data on Organic
     Chemicals.  2nd edition,  pp. 575-576.  NY:  Van Nostrand Reinhold
     Company, Inc.

33.  Weast, R.C., editor.   1980.  CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 61st
     edition,  p. C-134.  Boca Raton, FL:  CRC Press, Inc.

34.  Dean, J.A., editor.  1979.  Lange's Handbook of Chemistry, 12th edition.
     pp. 10-118-9.  NY:  McGraw-Hill.

35.  Sanderson, R.T.  1971.   Chemical Bonds and Bond Energy.  Volume 21 in
     Physical Chemistry.  NY:  Academic Press.
                                      8-3

-------
                                APPENDIX A

A.I  F Value Determination for ANOVA Test
    As noted earlier in Section 1.0, EPA is using the statistical method
known as analysis of variance in the determination of the level of
performance that represents "best" treatment where more than one
technology is demonstrated.  This method provides a measure of the
differences between data sets.  If the differences are not statistically
significant, the data sets are said to be homogeneous.
    If the Agency found that the levels of performance for one or more
technologies are not statistically different (i.e., the data sets are
homogeneous), EPA would average the long term performance values achieved
by each technology and then multiply this value by the largest
variability factor associated with any of the acceptable technologies.
If EPA found that one technology performs significantly better (i.e., the
data sets are not homogeneous), BOAT would be the level of performance
achieved by the best technology multiplied by its variability factor.
    To determine whether any or all of the treatment performance data
sets are homogeneous using the analysis of variance method, it is
necessary to compare a calculated "F value" to what is known as a
"critical value."  (See Table A-l.)  These critical values are available
in most statistics texts (see, for example, Statistical Concepts and
Methods by Bhattacharyya and Johnson, 1977, John Wiley Publications, New
York).
    Where the F value is less than the critical value, all treatment data
sets are homogeneous.  If the F value exceeds the critical value, it is
                                   A-l

-------
necessary to perform a "pair wise F" test to determine if any of the sets
are homogeneous.  The "pair wise F" test must be done for all of the
various combinations of data sets using the same method and equation as
the general F test.
    The F value is calculated as follows:
    (i)  All data are natural logtransformed.
    (ii)  The sum of the data points for each data set is computed (T.).
    (iii)  The statistical parameter known as the sum of the squares
between data sets (SSB) is computed:
    SSB =
    where:
    k = number of treatment technologies
    n^ = number of data points for technology i
    N = number of data points for all technologies
    T.J = sum of natural logtransformed data points for each technology.
    (iv)  The sum of the squares within data sets (SSW) is computed:
•
k
X

V^

1





^





r k
I ^
1 = 1
N
t. *



         SSW
    where:
    x
                  Z   I
  k
- I
       i = the natural  logtransformed observations (j)  for treatment
      '     technology (i).
    (v)   The degrees of freedom corresponding to SSB and SSW are
calculated.  For SSB, the degree of freedom is given by k-1.  For SSW,
the degree of freedom is given by N-k.
                                     A-2

-------
    (vi)  Using the above parameters, the F value is calculated as
follows:
                                  MSB
                              F = MSW
    where:
    MSB = SSB/(k-l) and
    MSW = SSW/(N-k).
    A computational table summarizing the above parameters is shown below.

                    Computational Table for the F Value
Source
Between
Within
Degrees of
freedom
K-l
N-k
Sum of
squares
SSB
SSW
Mean square
MSB = SSB/k-1
MSW = SSW/N-k
F
MSB/MSW
    Below are three examples of the ANOVA calculation.   The first two
represent treatment by different technologies that achieve statistically
similar treatment; the last example represents a case where one
technology achieves significantly better treatment than the other
technology.
                                   A-3

-------
                    Table A-l
F Distribution at the 95 Percent Confidence Level

Denominator
degrees of
freedom 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
40
60
120
00
161 4
1851
10 13
7 71
661
5 99
559
532
5.12
496
484
475
467
460
454
449
445
441
438
435
432
430
428
426
424
423
421
420
418
4 17
408
400
392
3.84
2
1995
1900
955
694
579
5.14
4 74
446
426
4 10
398
389
381
374
368
363
359
355
352
349
347
344
342
3.40
339
337
335
334
333
332
323
3.15
307
3.00
3
2157
1916
928
659
5.41
476
435
407
386
3.71
359
349
341
334
329
324
3.20
316
313
310
307
305
303
301
299
298
296
295
2.93
292
284
2.76
2.68
2.60
Numerator degrees of freedom
456
2246
1925
912
639
5.19
453
4 12
384
363
348
336
3.26
3.18
311
306
301
296
293
290
287
284
282
280
2.78
276
274
273
271
2.70
269
2.61
253
2.45
237
2302
1930
901
626
505
439
397
3.69
3.48
3.33
3.20
3.11
303
2.96
2.90
2.85
281
2.77
274
271
268
2.66
2.64
262
260
259
257
256
255
253
245
237
229
2.21
2340
19.33
894
6 16
495
428
3.87
3.58
337
322
3.09
3.00
292
2.85
2.79
2.74
2.70
266
2.63
260
2.57
2.55
2.53
2.51
249
247
246
2.45
243
242
2.34
2.25
2.17
2.10
7
2368
19.35
889
6.09
488
421
3.79
3.50
3.29
3.14
3.01
2.91
2.83
2.76
2.71
2.66
2.61
258
2.54
2.51
2.49
2.46
244
2.42
240
2.39
2.37
2.36
2.35
2.33
2.25
2.17
2.09
2.01
8
2389
1937
885
6.04
482
415
3.73
344
323
3.07
2.95
2.85
2.77
2.70
2.64
2.59
255
251
2.48
2.45
2.42
2.40
2.37
236
2.34
232
231
2.29
2.28
2.27
2.18
2.10
2.02
1 94
9
2405
1938
881
6.00
477
4 10
368
339
3.18
302
2.90
2.80
2.71
265
259
254
249
246
242
239
237
234
232
2.30
228
2.27
225
2.24
2.22
2.21
2.12
204
1 96
1 88
                       A-4

-------
                                                        Example 1
                                                    Methylene Chloride
Steam stripping
Influent Effluent
Ug/D
1550.00
1290.00
1640.00
5100.00
1450.00
4600.00
1760.00
2400.00
4800.00
12100.00
Ug/i)
10.00
10.00
10.00
12.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
Biological treatment
In(effluent) [ln(eff luent)]2 Influent Effluent In(effluent)

2.30
2.30
2.30
2.48
2.30
2.30
2.30
2.30
2.30
2.30
Ug/1) Ug/1)
5.29 1960.00 10.00 2.30
5.29 2568.00 10.00 2.30
5.29 1817.00 10.00 2.30
6.15 1640.00 26.00 3.26
5.29 3907.00 10.00 2.30
5.29
5.29
5.29
5.29
5.29
[1n( effluent)]2

5.29
5.29
5.29
10.63
5.29





Sum:
                               23.18
                                               53.76
                                                                                       12.46
                                                                                                          31.79
Sample Size:
    10          10
Mean:
  3669
                10.2
Standard  Deviation:
  3328.67         .63
Variability Factor:
                              10
                               2.32
                                .06
                                                          2378
                                                           923.04
                 1.15
13.2
 7.15
                                                                           2.48
                                                                                        2.49
                                                                                         .43
ANOVA Calculations:
SSB
SSU =
         U-
        1=1   n,
            n,
MSB = SSB/(k-l)

MSW = SSU/(N-k)
                       f Jl
                          N
                 I.J
                      -U-l
                       1=1 [ n,  J
                                                      A-5

-------
                                     Example 1  (continued)
F   = MSB/MSW

where:
k   = number of treatment technologies

n.  = number of data points for technology i

N   = number of natural log transformed data points for all technologies
T   = sum of log transformed data points for each technology

X   = the nat.  log transformed observations (j) for treatment technology (i)
n  = 10, n  = 5. N = 15, k = 2. T  = 23.18, T  = 12.46, T = 35.64, T = 1270.21


T2 = 537.31  T2 = 155.25
        10        5

SSW = (53.76 + 31.79) -


MSB = 0.10/1 = 0.10
MSW = 0.77/13 = 0.06

F  =  °'10   =1.67
      0.06
                            1270.21
                              15
                                              0.10
                           10
                                                     0.77
                                    ANOVA Table
Degrees of
Source freedom
Between (B) 1
Uithin(W) 13

SS MS F
0.10 0.10 1.67
0.77 0.06
       The critical  value  of  the  F  test  at  the  0.05  significance  level  is 4.67.   Since
       the F  value  is  less than the critical  value,  the means are not significantly
       different  (i.e.,  they  are  homogeneous).

 Note:   All calculations were rounded  to two  decimal places.  Results may differ
        depending upon the number of decimal  places  used  in each  step of the  calculations.
                                             A-6

-------
                                                             Example  2
                                                         Trichloroethylene
jteam stripping
Influent
Ug/D
1650.00
5200.00
5000.00
1720.00
1560.00
10300.00
210.00
1600.00
204.00
160.00
Effluent
Ug/i)
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
27.00
85.00
10.00
ln(eff luent)

2.30
2.30
2.30
2.30
2.30
2.30
2.30
3.30
4.44
2.30
[In(effluent)]2

5.29
5.29
5.29
5.29
5.29
5.29
5.29
10.89
19.71
5.29
Influent
Ug/i)
200.00
224.00
134.00
150.00
484.00
163.00
182.00



Biological treatment
Effluent
(W/D
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
16.25
10.00
10.00



In(effluent)

2.30
2.30
2.30
2.30
2.79
2.30
2.30



[In(effluent)]2

5.29
5.29
5.29
5.29
7.78
5.29
5.29



Sum:
Sample Size:
     10          10
Mean:
   2760
19.2
Standard Deviation:
   3209.6        23.7

Vanabi llty Factor:
                  3.70
                                 26.14
                                 10
2.61
                  .71
                                 72.92
220
                              120.5
                                                                                10.89
                                                                2.36
                                                                                 1.53
                                                                                               16.59
                                                                                                2.37
                                                                                .19
                                                                                                                   39.52
ANOVA Calculations:
SSB =
              "l
         k
ssw =

MSB = SSB/(k-l)

MSW = SSW/(N-k)
                            N
                                  2 1
                                                           A-7

-------
                                     Example 2  (continued)
F   = MSB/MSW

where:

k   = number of treatment technologies

n   = number of data points for technology i

N   = number of data points for all technologies

T.  = sum of natural log transformed data points for each technology

X. . = the natural log transformed observations (j)  for treatment technology (i)
N,  = 10, N, = 7,  N = 17,  k = 2.  T,  = 26.14,  T  = 16.59,  T = 42.73,  T= 1825.85,
                                                                                     683.30,
T  = 275.23
      683.30

       10
                  275.23
                  _
                     7
1825.85

  17
0.25
SSW * (72.92* 39.521 .,^.30^275.23
                            10        7
                                                  4.79
MSB = 0.25/1 = 0.25

MSW = 4.79/15 = 0.32

F-lfL-0.78
    0.32
                                    ANOVA Table

Source
Between(B)
Uithin(W)
Degrees of
freedom
1
15

SS
0.25
4.79

MS F
0.25 0.78
0.32
      The critical value of the F test at the 0.05 significance level is 4.54.   Since
      the F value is less than the critical value, the means are not significantly
      different (i.e.,  they are homogeneous).
Note:  All calculations were rounded to two decimal places.   Results may differ
       depending upon the number of decimal places used in each step of the calculations.
                                             A-8

-------
                                                            Example 3
                                                          Chlorobenzene
Activated sludge followed by carbon adsorption
                                             Biological treatment
Influent
 Ug/D
Effluent
 Ug/D
In(effluent)    [ln(eff luentJr    Influent
                                          Effluent
                                           Ug/l)
                                       In(effluent)       ln[(effluent)]2
   7200.00
   6500.00
   6075.00
   3040.00
  80.00
  70.00
  35.00
  10.00
4.38
4.25
3.56
2.30
19.18
18.06
12.67
 5.29
                                9206.00
                                16646.00
                                49775.00
                                14731.00
                                3159.00
                                6756.00
                                3040.00
1083.00
 709.50
 460.00
 142.00
 603.00
 153.00
  17.00
6.99
6.56
6.13
4.96
6.40
5.03
2.83
48.86
43.03
37.58
24.60
40.96
25.30
 8.01
Sum:
Sample Size:
      4

Mean:
   5703
                 49
Standard Deviation:
   1835.4        32.24
Variability Factor:
                                 14.49
                                    55.20
                                  3.62
                    .95
                                              14759
                                                             16311.86
                  7.00
                                                                              452.5
                                                                              379.04
                                                                               15.79
                                                                                              38.90
                                                                                               5.56
                                                                                               1.42
                                                                                                                  228.34
ANOVA Calculations


SSB=    *  f7'2
        1 = 1 I  ~

ssu-    *   ='

MSB = SS8/(k-l)

HSU = SSU/(N-k)

F   = MSB/HSU
r k
1=1
N
k f
- E
-12
T,Z|
"i J
                                                          A-9

-------
                                     Example 3  (continued)
where,
k   = number of treatment technologies
n.  = number of data points for technology i

N   = number of data points for all technologies
T   = sum of natural log transformed data points  for each technology

X. . = the natural log transformed observations (j)  for treatment  technology  (i)


Nj = 4,  N2= 7,  N = 11,  k = 2,  T  = 14.49, T?  = 38.90,  T = 53.39,  T2= 2850.49,  T2  =  209.96
   = 1513.21
 2

SSB
SSW - (55.20 * 228.34)   .
                                              .  9.52
MSB = 9.52/1 = 9.52

MSW = 14.88/9 = 1.65

F = 9.52/1.65 = 5.77
                                    ANOVA Table
         Degrees of
Source    freedom
                                          SS
MS
Between (B)
Uithin(U)
1
9
9.53
14.89
9.53
1.65
5.77
      The critical value of the F test at  the 0.05 significance  level  is  5.12.   Since
      the F value is larger than the critical value,  the  means are  significantly
      different (i.e.,  they are heterogeneous).
Note:  All calculations were rounded to two decimal  places.   Results  may  differ  depending
       upon the number of decimal places used in each step of the calculations.
                                       A-10

-------
A.2.  Variability Factor
                                   _Cg9_
                              VF = Mean
    where:
     VF =   estimate of daily maximum variability factor determined from
            a sample population of daily data.
    Cgg =   Estimate of performance values for which 99 percent of the
            daily observations will be below.  Cgg is calculated using
            the following equation:  C99 = Exp(y + 2.33 Sy) where y and
            Sy are the mean and standard deviation, respectively, of the
            logtransformed data.
    Mean =  average of the individual performance values.
    EPA is establishing this figure as an instantaneous maximum because
the Agency believes that on a day-to-day basis the waste should meet the
applicable treatment standards.  In addition, establishing this
requirement makes it easier to check compliance on a single day.  The
99th percentile is appropriate because it accounts for almost all process
variability.
    In several cases, all the results from analysis of the residuals from
BOAT treatment are found at concentrations less than the detection
limit.  In such cases, all the actual concentration values are considered
unknown and hence, cannot be used  to estimate the variability factor of
the analytical results.  Below is  a description of EPA's approach for
calculating the variability factor for such cases with all concentrations
below the detection limit.
    It has been postulated as a general rule  that a lognormal
distribution  adequately describes  the variation among concentrations.
                                    A-ll

-------
Agency data shows that the treatment residual concentrations are
distributed approximately lognormally.  Therefore, the lognormal model
has been used routinely in the EPA development of numerous regulations  in
the Effluent Guidelines program and  is being  used in  the  BOAT  program.
The variability  factor  (VF) was defined as  the ratio  of the  99th
percentile  (C   )  of  the lognormal distribution to its arithmetic  mean
 (Mean).
            VF =     C99                                             (^
                    Mean
     The relationship between  the  parameters of  the  lognormal  distribution
 and the parameters of the normal  distribution created by  taking the
 natural logarithms of the lognormally-distributed concentrations  can be
 found in most mathematical  statistics texts (see for example:
 Distribution in Statistics-Volume 1  by Johnson  and  Kotz,  1970).  The mean
 of the lognormal distribution can be expressed  in terms  of the
 mean (n) and standard deviation (a)  of the normal distribution as
 follows:
          C9g    =  Exp U +  2.33a)                          (2)
          Mean   =  Exp (M +   .5a2)                          (3)
     Substituting (2) and (3)  in (1)  the variability factor can then be
 expressed in terms of a as follows:
          VF = Exp  (2.33 a -   .5a2)                          (4)
     For residuals with concentrations that are  not  all below the
 detection limit, the 99   percentile and the mean can be estimated from
 the actual analytical data and accordingly, the variability factor (VF)
                                  A-12

-------
 can  be estimated using  equation  (1).   For  residuals  with  concentrations
 that  are  below the detection  limit, the  above equations can  be  used  in
 conjunction with the  assumptions  below to  develop  a  variability factor.
 Step  1:   The  actual concentrations  follow  a  lognormal distribution.   The
 upper limit (UL) is equal  to  the  detection limit.  The lower limit  (LL)
 is assumed to be equal  to  one  tenth of the detection  limit.   This
 assumption is based on  the  fact that data  from well-designed and
 well-operated treatment  systems generally  falls within one order of
 magnitude.
 Step  2:   The  natural  logarithms of  the concentrations have a normal
 distribution  with an  upper  limit  equal to  In (UL)  and a lower limit  equal
 to In (LL).
 Step 3:   The  standard deviation (a)  of the normal  distribution is
 approximated by
    o = [(In (UL)  -  In (LL)] / [(2)(2.33)]  =  [ln(UL/LL)] / 4.66
    when LL =  (0.1)(UL)  then a =  (InlO) / 4.66 = 0.494
Step 4:   Substitution  of the value from Step  3 in  equation (4) yields  the
variability factor,  VF.
    VF =  2.8
                                 A-13

-------
                                  Appendix B
          MAJOR CONSTITUENT CONCENTRATION CALCULATIONS FOR K048-K052
K048                          % Water

 Amoco OER* (Reference 6)       15
 API, 1983 (Reference 2)       81.9
 Jacobs, 1976 (Reference 3)     82
 Petition #264 (Reference 24)   82
 BP Report ** (Reference 29)    80

             Average:          81.5
    Adjusted Average:           81
% Solids
% Oil and Grease

       14
       8.7
      12.5
       12
       15
                       12
                       12
K049                          % Water

 Conoco OER (Reference 13)      60
 API, 1983 (Reference 2)       63.1
 Jacobs, 1976 (Reference 3)     40
 Petition #481 (Reference 21)  31.9
 Petition #421 (Reference 19)   62
 BP Report (Reference 29)       47

             Average:          50.7
    Adjusted Average:           50
% Solids
% Oil and Grease

       30
      21.7
       48
      51.7
       35
       47
                      43.9
                       37
*These data represent dewatered DAF float and were not used in these
  calculations.

**Includes DAF bottoms.
                                   B-l

-------
                            Appendix B (Continued)

          MAJOR CONSTITUENT CONCENTRATION CALCULATIONS FOR K048-K052
K050                          % Water

 Petition #481 (Reference 21)  37.8
 Jacobs,  1976 (Reference 3)     53
 API, 1983 (Reference 2)       42.8

             Average:          44.5
    Adjusted Average:           44
% Solids

  52.5
   36
  55.4

   48
   48
% Oil and Grease
K051                          % Water

 Petition #426 (Reference 25)   81
 Amoco OER (Reference 6)        30
 API, 1983 (Reference 2)       67.4
 Jacobs, 1976 (Reference 3)     53
 Petition #481 (Reference 21)  51.6
 BP Report (Reference 29)       76

             Average:          59.8
    Adjusted Average:           60
% Solids

    7
   54
  21.1
  24.4
  22.3
    5

  22.3
   22
% Oil and Grease

       10
       15
      12.6
      22.6
      22.4
       19
      16.9
       17
K052                          % Water

 API, 1983 (Reference 2)       37.9
 Jacobs, 1976 (Reference 3)     0.3
 Conoco OER (Reference 13)      18

             Average:          18.7
    Adjusted Average:           18
% Solids

   59
  79.7
   70

  69.6
   69
% Oil and Grease
                                     B-2

-------
                                  Appendix C
                   SUMMARY OF PETROLEUM REFINERY PLANT CODES
Plant Code                   Plant Name

     A         Amoco Oil Company,  Whiting,  Indiana

     B                       Unknown

     C                       Unknown

     D                       Unknown

     E                       Unknown

     F                       Unknown

     G          General Refining Superfund  Site,
                      Garden City, Georgia


     H                       Unknown

     I            Waterways Experiment Station,
                     Vicksburg,  Mississippi

     J                       Unknown

     K       SOHIO Oil Alliance  Refining, Louisiana


     L                       Unknown
 Data Source

EPA Testing

API Report

API Report

API Report

API Report

API Report

Resources
Conservation
Company

API Report

EPA Testing


API Report

Standard Oil
Company

CF Systems
                                     C-l

-------
                                  APPENDIX D




                               ANALYTICAL QA/QC








          The analytical methods used for analysis of the regulated constitu-




ents identified in Section 5.0 are presented in this Appendix.  Methods are




presented for those technologies determined to be BDAT.  Table D-1 presents




the methods used for analysis of the fluidized bed incinerator ash.  Analyses




presented for organics and cyanide were performed on the fluidized bed




incinerator ash, while analyses presented for metals were performed on the




stabilized fluidized bed incinerator ash.  The methods used for analysis of




organics in the fluidized bed incinerator wastewater are presented in




Reference 26 (K019), while the methods used for analysis of metals in this




wastewater are presented in Reference 27 (Envirite).








          SW-846 methods (EPA's Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste:




Physical/Chemical Methods, SW-846) are used in most cases for determining




total constituent concentration.  Leachate concentrations were determined




using the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP), published in 51




FR 40643, November 7, 1986.








          In some instances it was necessary to deviate from the SW-846




methods.  Deviations from SW-846 methods required to analyze the fluidized bed




incinerator ash are listed in Table D-2.  SW-846 allows for the use of




alternative or equivalent procedures or equipment; these are noted in Table




D-3 for the fluidized bed incinerator ash and the stabilized ash.  These
                                      D-1

-------
alternatives or equivalents included the use of different sample preparation



methods and/or different extraction techniques to reduce matrix interferences.








          The accuracy determination for a constituent is based on the matrix



spike recovery values.  Tables D-4 and D-5 present the matrix spike recovery



data for volatile, semivolatile, and metal constituents in nonwastewater



residuals from fluidized bed incineration and fluidized bed incineration



followed by ash stabilization.  Table D-6 presents matrix spike data for metal



constituents in wastewater residuals.  Matrix spike data for organic



constituents in wastewater residuals from incineration are presented in



Reference 26 (K019).








          Duplicate matrix spikes were performed for some volatile, semi-



volatile, and metal constituents in the residuals from fluidized bed inciner-



ation and fluidized bed incineration followed by stabilization.  If duplicate



matrix spikes were performed for an organic constituent,  the matrix spike



recovery used for that constituent was the lower of the two values from the



first matrix spike and the duplicate spike.








          Where a matrix spike was not performed for an organic constituent, a



matrix spike recovery for that constituent was derived from the average matrix



spike recoveries of the appropriate constituent group (volatile or semi-



volatile) for which recovery data were available.  In these cases, the matrix



spike recoveries for  volatiles and semivolatiles from the first matrix spikes



were averaged.  Similarly, average matrix spike recoveries were calculated for
                                      D-2

-------
the duplicate matrix spike recoveries.  The lower of the two average matrix



spike recoveries of the volatile or semivolatile was used for any volatile or



semivolatile constituent for which no matrix spike was performed.  For



example, no matrix spike was performed for di-n-butyl phthalate, a base/neu-



tral fraction semivolatile in fluidized bed incinerator ash; however, the



treatment performance data for this constituent were adjusted for accuracy



using a matrix spike recovery of 67%.  This recovery was selected after



averaging the matrix spike recoveries calculated for all base/neutral fraction



semivolatiles in the first matrix spike (69$) and the duplicate spike (67%).



The lower average matrix spike recovery of 67% was selected to subsequently



calculate the accuracy correction factor for di-n-butyl phthalate.








          Where a matrix spike was not performed for a metal constituent in a



TCLP extract, a matrix spike recovery for that constituent was derived from



the average matrix spike recoveries for that metal constituent in TCLP



extracts.  For example, no matrix spike was performed for antimony in the



cement sample from the stabilized fluidized bed incinerator ash.  The percent



recovery for this constituent was 74$, which is the average of the percent



recoveries from the kiln dust sample and the fly ash sample for antimony.








          The accuracy correction factors for volatile, semivolatile and metal



constituents detected in the kiln ash and scrubber water residuals as well as



untreated K019 are summarized in Table D-7 through D-9.  Table D-7 presents



the accuracy correction factors for constituents in the fluidized bed inciner-



ator ash.  Table D-8 presents accuracy correction factors for metals in the
                                      D-3

-------
stabilized fluidized bed incinerator ash.  Table D-9 presents accuracy cor-



rection factors for metals in the fluidized bed incineration wastewater.



Accuracy correction factors for organics in fluidized bed incineration waste-



water are presented in Reference 26 (K019).  The accuracy correction factors



were determined for each constituent by dividing 100 by the matrix spike



recovery for that constituent.
                                      D-4

-------
                                   Table D-1

   ANALYTICAL METHODS FOR REGULATED CONSTITUENTS IN K048-K052 NONWASTEWATER
                          FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATION

                               Total Composition

 Regulated Constituent   Preparation Method   Analytical Method   References
 Volatiles
 43.  Toluene
215-
217.  Xylene (total)
Purge and Trap

(Method 5030)
Semivolatiles
 62.  Benzo(a)pyrene
 70.  Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
 80.  Chrysene
 98.  Di-n-butyl
       phthalate         Soxhlet Extraction
121.  Naphthalene        (Method 3540)
141.  Phenanthrene
145.  Pyrene

Inorganics
169.  Cyanide
Gas Chromatography/

Mass Spectrometry for
Volatile Organics
(Method 8240)
1
                     Gas Chromatography/
                     Mass Spectrometry for
                     Semivolatile Organics:
                     Capillary Column
                     Technique (Method 8270)

                     Colorimetric, Manual
                     (Method 9010)
 ' Environmental Protection Agency, 1986.  Test Methods for Evaluating Solid
  Waste, Third Edition, U.S. EPA, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
  Response, November, 1986.
                                      D-5

-------
                             Table D-1  (Continued)

   ANALYTICAL METHODS FOR REGULATED CONSTITUENTS IN K048-K052 NONWASTEWATER

                                 STABILIZATION

                                 TCLP Extract
 Regulated Constituent

Metals

155.  Arsenic

159.  Chromium (total)
161.  Copper
164.  Nickel
165.  Selenium

167.  Vanadium
168.  Zinc
Preparation Method   Analytical Method   References
51 Federal Register
40643, 11/7/86
Atomic Absorption, Furnace
  Technique (Method 7060)
Inductively Coupled Plasma
Atomic Emission
Spectroscopy (Method 6010)
Atomic Absorption, Furnace
  Technique (Method 7740)
Inductively Coupled Plasma
Atomic Emission
  Spectroscopy (Method 6010)
1 Environmental Protection Agency, 1986.  Test Methods for Evaluating Solid
  Waste, Third Edition, U.S. EPA, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
  Response, November, 1986.
                                      D-6

-------
                                                              Table D-2

                                                      Deviations  from SW-846
     Analysi s
                                  Method
            SW-846  Specification
                                                                                 Deviation from SW-846
                                                                                        Method
                                                                         Rationale  for  Deviation
Fluidized Bed Incineration

Semivolati1e Organic
Const i tuents
     (Total  Composition)
3540       Add  1.0  ml  of  solution
           containing  100 ug/ml  of
           the  acid surrogates  and
           200  ug/ml of  the  base/
           neutral  surrogates.
           Additional  amounts of the
           surrogates  are added if
           high concentration
           samples  are expected.
0.1 ml  of solution contain-
ing 1,000 ug/ml  of the
acid surrogates  and 2,000
ug/ml  of the base/neutral
surrogates were  added to
the samples.  The final
concentration of the
surrogates in the
extracts is the  same as
specified in SW-846.
                                   8270       The  internal  standards
                                              recommended  are
                                              1 ,4-dich1orobenzene-d4,
                                              napthalene-dg,
                                              acenaphthene-dio>
                                              phenanthrene-di o.
                                              chrysene-di2•  and
                                              pery1ene-di2-  Other
                                              compounds may be used as
                                              internal  standards  as
                                              long as the  requirements
                                              given in  Paragraph  7.3.2
                                              of  the method are met.
                                              Each compound is
                                              dissolved with a small
                                              volume of carbon
                                              disulfide and diluted
                                              to  volume with methylene
                                              chloride  so  that the
                                              final  solvent is approxi-
                                              mately 20% carbon
                                              disulfide.   Most of the
                                              compounds are also
                                              soluble in small volumes
                                              of  methanol, acetone, or
                                              toluene,  except  for
                                              pery1ene-di2-  The result-
                                              ing  solution will contain
                                              each standard at a  concen-
                                              tration of 4,000 ng/uL.
                                              Each 1-mL sample extract
                                              undergoing analysis should
                                              be  spiked with 10 uL of
                                              the  internal standard
                                              solution,  resulting in a
                                              concentration of 40 ng/uL
                                              of  each internal standard.
                                           The  preparation  of  the
                                           internal  standards  was
                                           changed  to  eliminate
                                           carbon disulfide as a
                                           solvent.  The  internal
                                           standard  concentration  was
                                           changed  to  50  ng/ul instead
                                           of 40 ng/ul.   The standards
                                           were dissolved in methylene
                                           chloride  only.  Pery1ene-di2
                                           dissolved in methylene
                                           chloride  sufficiently to
                                           yield reliable results.

-------
                                                              Table D-3

                      SPECIFIC PROCEDURES OR EQUIPMENT USED IN ANALYSIS OF  REGULATED CONSTITUENTS
                          WHEN ALTERNATIVES OR  EQUIVALENTS ARE ALLOWED IN THE SW-846 METHODS
     Ana 1ysi s
                                   SW-846
                                   Method
                                                Remark
                                          Alternatives  or  Equivalents
                                          Allowed  by  SW-846 Methods
                                Specific  Procedures
                                or  Equipment Used
 Fluidized Bed Incineration

 Volatile Organic Constituents
 (Total Composition)
5030
           Sample Aliquot:   50
           milliliters of liquid or
           2 grams of sol id
O

00
o  The purge and trap
   device to be used  is
   specified in the method
   in Fi gure 1, the
   desorber to  be used  is
   described in Figures  2
   and 3, and the packing
   materials are described
   in Section 4.10.2.  The
   method all QMS equiva-
   lents  of this equipment
   or materials to be used.

o  The method specifies
   that the trap must be at
   least  25 cm  long and
   have an inside diameter
   of at  least  0.105  in.

o  The surrogates
   recommended  are toluene-
   dB, 4-bromof1uorobenzene,
   and 1 , 2-dichloroethane-d4.
   The recommended concen-
   tration level  is 0.25 ug/
   ml .
The purge and trap
equipment,  the
desorber, and the
packing materials
used were as speci-
fied in SW-846.
                                                                          o  The length of the
                                                                             trap was 30 cm and
                                                                             and the diameter was
                                                                             0.25 cm.
                                                                                                             o  Al1  surrogates  were
                                                                                                                added at  the  concen-
                                                                                                                tration recommended
                                                                                                                 in  SW-846.

-------
                                                        Table D-3 (Continued)

                      SPECIFIC PROCEDURES OR EQUIPMENT USED  IN ANALYSIS OF REGULATED  CONSTITUENTS
                           WHEN ALTERNATIVES  OR EQUIVALENTS ARE ALLOWED IN THE SW-846  METHODS
      Analysis
 SW-846
 Method  Remark
        Alternatives  or  Equivalents
       for Equipment  or  in  Procedure
                                                                                         Specific Equipment or Procedures Used
 Fluidlzed Bed  Incineration  (Continued)
 Volat i1e Organi c
 Const 1tuents
 (Total  Composition)
 (Cont inued)
8240    Sample   o   Recommended GC/MS operating conditions:
        Prepai—
         at ion
        Method:
        5030
                                               o  Actual GC/MS operating conditions:
O
Electron energy:
Mass range:
Scan time:
                                        Initial  column temperature:
                                        Initial  column holding  time:
                                        Column temperature  program:
                                        Final  column temperature:
                                        Final  column holding  time:
                                        Injector temperature:
                                        Source temperature:
                                        Transfer line temperature:
                                        Carrier gas:
70 vols (nominal)
35-260 amu
To give 5 scans/
peak but not to
exceed 7 sec/scan

45°C
3 min
8°C/min
200°C
15 min
200-225°C
According to
manufacturer's
specificat i on
250-300°C
Hydrogen at  50
cm/sec or helium
at 30 cm/sec
Electron energy:
Mass range:
Scan time:
                                                                      Initial  column  temperature:
                                                                      Initial  column  holding  time:
                                                                      Column temperature program:
                                                                      Final  column temperature:
                                                                      Final  column holding  time:
                                                                      Injector temperature:
                                                                      Source temperature:
                                                                      Transfer line temperature:
                                                                      Carrier gas:
70 ev
35-350 amu
2 sec/scan
                                                                               10°C
                                                                               5 mi n
                                                                               6°C/min
                                                                               160°C
                                                                               20 mi n
                                                                               220°C
                                                                               250°C
                                                                               275°C
                                                                               Helium ® 30
                                                                                ml/min
                                     o  The column should  be  6-ft  x  0.1  in  I.D. glass,
                                        packed  with 1%  SP-1000  on  Cartopact B  (60/80
                                        mesh)  or an equivalent.

                                     o  Samples may be  analyzed by purge and trap
                                        technique or by direct  injection.
                                                                   o  Additional  Information  on  Actual  System Used:
                                                                      Equipment:  Finnegan  Mat  model  5100 GC/MS/DS
                                                                                  System
                                                                      Data system:  SUPERINCOSR
                                                                      Mode:   Electron  impact
                                                                      NBS library available
                                                                      Interfact  to  MS  -  Jet separator

                                                                   o  The column  used  was  a capillary VOCOL which
                                                                      is 60  meters  long  and has  an  inner diameter
                                                                      of 0.75 mm  and a 1.5 umdf.

                                                                   o  All samples were analyzed  using the purge
                                                                      and trap technique.

-------
                                                       Table  D-3 (Continued)

                      SPECIFIC PROCEDURES OR EQUIPMENT USED IN ANALYSIS OF  REGULATED CONSTITUENTS
                          WHEN ALTERNATIVES OR  EQUIVALENTS ARE ALLOWED IN THE SW-846 METHODS
     Analyses
                                   SW-846
                                   Method
                                                Remark
Alternatives or Equivalents
 Allowed by SW-846  Methods
 Specific Procedures
  or Equipment Used
 Fluidized Bed Incineration (Continued)

 Semivo1 ati1e Organic
 Const i tuents
 (Total Composition)
 I
h-1
O
                                   3540
                                              Sample Aliquot:
                                              10 grams of sol id
      The base/neutral
      surrogates  recommended
      are 2-f1uorobipheny1,
      nitrobenzene-d5,  and
      terpheny1-d4.  The
      acid surrogates
      recommended are  2-
      f1uorophenol,  2,4,6-
      tribromopheno1,  and
      phenol-d6.   Additional
      compounds may  be  used
      for surrogates.   The
      recommended concentra-
      tions for  low  medium
      concentrations  level
      samples  are 100  ug/ml
      for acid  surrogates and
      200 ug/ml for  base/
      neutral  surrogates.
      Volume of surrogates
      added may be adjusted.

      Sample grinding may be
      required  for samples
      not passing through a
      1 mm standard  sieve or
      a 1 mm opening.
   Surrogates were the
   recommended by SW-846
   with the exception
   that phenol-d5 was
   substituted for
   phenol-d6.  The
   concentrations of
   surrogates in the
   samples were 100 ug/
   ml  of acid surrogates
   and 200 ug/ml  of base/
   neutral surrogates.
o  Sample grinding  was
   was not required.

-------
                                                        Table D-3 (Continued)

                      SPECIFIC PROCEDURES OR  EQUIPMENT USED  IN ANALYSIS OF REGULATED  CONSTITUENTS
                           WHEN ALTERNATIVES OR EQUIVALENTS ARE ALLOWED IN THE SW-846  METHODS
      Analysis
                      SW-846
                      Method
                             Remark
        Alternatives  or  Equivalents
       for  Equipment  or  in  Procedure
                     Specific  Equipment  or  Procedures Used
 Fluidized  Bed  Incineration  (Continued)
 Semivolat i1e
 Organi c
 Const i tuents
 (Continued)
                     8270
Sample  o
Prepar-
at i on
Method:
3520-
Liquids
3540-
Solids
a
Recommended GC/MS  operating  conditions:
Mass range:
Scan time:
Initial  column temperature:
Initial  column holding  time:
Column temperature  program:

Final  column temperature
 hold:
Injector temperature:
Transfer line temperature:
Source temperature:
                                        Injector:

                                        Sample volume:
                                        Carrier gas:
35-500 amu
1  sec/scan
40°C
4 mi n
40-270°C at
10°C/min

270°C. (until
benzo(g,h , i )
perylene has
eluded)
250-300°C
250-300°C
According to
manufacturer's
speci f i cat i on
Grob-type, spli t
less
1-2 uL
Hydrogen at 50 cm/
sec or he 1i urn at
30 cm/sec
                                                                                          Actual GC/MS operating conditions:
Mass range:
Scan time:
Initial  column temperature:
Initial  column holding time:
Column temperature program:
Final  column temperature
 hold:
Injector temperature:
Source temperature:
Transfer line temperature:
Source temperature
Injector:

Sample volume:

Carrier gas:
35-450 amu
0.5 sec/scan
35°C
10°C min
35°C @ 10°C/min

275°C
275°C
250°C
275°C
250°C
Cool-on-column
at 35°C
0.5 ul of
sample extract
Hydrogen @ 50
cm/sec or
helium at 30
cm/sec
                                                                                        o   Additional  Information on Actual system Used:
                                                                                        o   Equipment:  Hewelett Packard 5987A GC/M5
                                                                                           (Operators  Manual Revision B)
                                                                                        o   Software  Package:  AQUARIUS NBS library
                                                                                           avai1able
                                     o  The column should be 30 m by 0.25 mm I.D.,
                                        1-um film thickness silicon-coated fused silica
                                        capillary column (J&W Scientific DB-5 or
                                        equivalent).
                                                  The column used was the J&W scientific DB-5
                                                  silica capillary column.  It is 30 meters
                                                  with a 0.32 mm capillary column inner
                                                  diameter and a 0.25 um film.

-------
                                                   Table D-3  (Continued)
                     SPECIFIC PROCEDURES  OR EQUIPMENT USED  IN ANALYSIS OF REGULATED CONSTITUENTS
                          WHEN ALTERNATIVES OR EQUIVALENTS ARE ALLOWED IN THE  SW-846 METHODS
     Analysis
                                 SW-846
                                 Method
 Remark
                             Alternatives or Equivalent
                             Allowed by SW-846 Methods
                                  Specific Procedures
                                   or Equipment Used
Fluidized Bed Incineration  (Continued)

Metal  Constituents  (TCLP)           6010
                                   7421
Equipment  Used:
ICPES-Applied  Research
Laboratories
(ARD-34000
Equipment  Used:  Perkin
Elmer 3030
o  Operate equipment  fol-
   lowing instructions
   provided by instru-
   ment's manufacturer
   For operation  with
   organic solvents,
   auxilliary argon  gas
   inlet is recommended.
                                                                             o   Operate equipment fol-
                                                                                lowing  instruction
                                                                                provided by  instrument's
                                                                                manufacturer.
                                                                             o   For  background
                                                                                correction, use either
                                                                                continous correction or
                                                                                alternatives, e.g.,
                                                                                Zeeman  correction.

                                                                             o   If samples contain  large
                                                                                amount  of organic
                                                                                material, they should be
                                                                                oxidized by conventional
                                                                                acid digestion before
                                                                                being analyzed.
o  Equipment  operated
   using procedures
   specified  in the
   ARL-34000  ICP
   Software Guide  and
   the ARL-34000
   Programmer's Guide.

o  Auxiliary  argon gas
   was not required  for
   sample matrices
   analyzed in this
   sampling episode.

o  Equipment  operated
   using procedures
   specified  in Perkin
   Elmer 3030
   Instruction Manual.

o  Background detection
   was used.   Continuous
   correct on Model  303.
                                                                   Sample preparation  was
                                                                   required  to  remove
                                                                   organics.

-------
                                                       Table  D-3
                   SPECIFIC PROCEDURES OR EQUIPMENT USED  IN ANALYSIS OF REGULATED CONSTITUENTS
                            WHEN ALTERNATIVES OR  EQUIVALENTS ARE ALLOWED IN SW-846 METHODS
     Analysis
                                 SW-846
                                 Method
                                              Remark
                                           Alternatives or Equivalents
                                           Allowed by SW-846 Methods
                              Specific Procedures
                              or Equipment  Used
Stabi1izatIon

Metals  Constituents  (TCLP)
6010
           Equipment Used:
           Perkin Elmer Plasma II
           Emission Spectrophoto-
           meter
Operate equipment
following  instructions
provided by  instru-
ment's manufacturer
                                                                            o   For operation with
                                                                               organic solvents,
                                                                               auxilliary argon gas
                                                                               inlet is recommended.
Equipment  operated
using procedures
speci f i ed  in
operation  manuals
prepared by Perkin
Elmer.

Auxiliary  argon gas
was for sample
analyses.

-------
                                                       Table D-4
                               MATRIX SPIKE RECOVERIES FOR FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATOR ASH
o
i
        Spike Constituent

     VOLATILES
  Original
Amount Found
   (ppm)
      4.  Benzene
      9.  Chlorobenzene
     21.  Dichlorodifluoromethane
     22.  1,1-Dichloroethane
     43.  Toluene
     47.  Trichloroethene
     215-
     217. Xylene (total)

          Average
        Spike Constituent

     SEMIVOLATILES
     (BASE/NEUTRAL FRACTION)

     52.  Acenaphthene
     59.  Benz(a)anthracene
     62.  Benzo(a)pyrene
     70.  Bis(2-ethylhexyl)
            phthalate
     80.  Chrysene
     87.  o-Dichlorobenzene
     <2
     <2
    ***
     <2
     <2
     <2

    «**
    <0.2
    **
    **
    *«
    <0.2
Amount
Spiked
(ppm)
  50
  50

  50
  50
  50
 Amount
Recovered
  (ppm)
   44
   23

   48
   40
   38
                                                                       Percent*
                                                                       Recovery
88
46

96
80
76
                                          77
                                                              Sample Result
Original
Amount Found
(ppm)
Amount
Spiked
(ppm)
Amount
Recovered
(ppm)
Percent*
Recovery
(%)
  10
    6.6
66
  10
    7.5
75
                                                   Duplicate Sample Result
                                                    Amount      Percent*
                                                   Recovered    Recovery
                                                     (ppm)        (%)
6.3
63
7.6
76
       "Percent recovery =  100 x (C^ - Co)/Ct, where Cj = amount recovered,  C0 = original amount found,  and Ct =
        amount spiked.
      **No matrix spike was performed for this constituent.  The percent recovery for this constituent is based on the
        lower average percent recovery of the semivolatile (base/neutral) constituents.   The lower average percent
        recovery is 67% from the duplicate sample.
     ***No matrix spike was performed for this constituent.  The percent recovery is based on the average percent
        recovery for the volatile constituent.  This value is 77/5.

-------
                                                 Table D-4 (Continued)

                               MATRIX SPIKE RECOVERIES FOR FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATOR ASH
                                                              Sample Result
U

\->
t_n
        Spike Constituent

      98. Di-n-Butyl  phthalate
      102. 2,4-Dinitrotoluene
      105. Di-N-propylnitrosamine
      109. Fluorene
      121. Naphthalene
      141. Phenanthrene
      145. Pyrene
                             Original
                           Amount  Found
                              (ppm)

                               **
                               <5.0
                               <0.5
                               **
                               x*
                               **
                               <0.2
150.  1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene    <0.5

     Average

     INORGANICS
      169. Cyanide
      171. Sulfide
                               <0.51
                               <50
Amount
Spiked
(ppm)
  50
  50
  10
  10
   0.10
   523
Amount
Recovered
(ppm)
27
35
5.8
9
Percent*
Recovery
(%)
54
70
58
90
0.104
418
                                                                          69
104
82
                     Duplicate Sample Result
                      Amount      Percent*
                     Recovered    Recovery
                       (ppm)        (%)
                       26
                       35
                        5.3
                        8.6
                          52
                          70
                          53
                          86

                          67
     **No matrix  spike was  performed for this constituent.  The percent recovery for this constituent is based
       on the lower average percent recovery of the semivolatile (base/neutral) constituents.  The lower average
       percent  recovery  is  67?  from the duplicate sample.

-------
                                                Table  D-4  (Continued)

                               MATRIX SPIKE  RECOVERIES  FOR  FLUIDIZED  BED  INCINERATOR  ASH
                                                              Sample  Result
u
                                  Original
                                Amount Found
                                   (ppm)
   Spike Constituent

METALS (TCLP EXTRACT)

154. Antimony                   +
155. Arsenic                    +
156. Barium                     +
157. Benyllium                  +
158. Cadmium                    +
159. Chromium (total)           +
221. Chromium (hexavalent)      +
160. Copper                     +
161. Lead                       +
163. Nickel                     +
164. Selenium                   +
165. Silver                     +
166. Thallium                   +
167. Vanadium                   +
168. Zinc                       +
Amount
Spiked
(ppm)
 Amount
Recovered
  (ppm)
Percent*
Recovery
   (*)
                          74
                         136
                          93
                          76
                          75
                          80
                          63
                          88
                          83
                          73
                          81
                          75
                          59
                          77
                          74
Duplicate Sample Result
 Amount      Percent*
Recovered    Recovery
  (ppm)        (%)
     +No matrix spike was performed for this constituent.   The  percent  recovery  is  the  average  percent  recovery  from
      cement,  kiln dust, and lime and fly ash TCLP extract  for  the  stabilized  ash for this  contituent.  Table  D-5
      presents the data for the percent recoveries for  cement,  kiln dust, and  lime  and  fly  ash.
 "Percent recovery = 100 x (Cj. - Co)/Ct, where
  Ct = amount spiked.
                                                       =  amount  recovered,  Co  =  original  amount  found,  and

-------
                                                  Table D-5

          MATRIX SPIKE RECOVERIES FOR THE TCLP EXTRACT FOR STABILIZED FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATOR ASH
CEMENT
I
M
^1
CONSTITUENTS (ppm)

BOAT METALS
154. Antimony
155. Arsenic
156. Barium
157. Beryllium
158. Cadmium
159. Chromium (total)
221. Chromium
     (hexavalent)
160. Copper
161. Lead
163. Nickel
164. Selenium
165. Silver
166. Thallium
167. Vanadium
168. Zinc
Cement : Run 2
Original
icunt Found
(ppm)
**
<0.004
««
*«
**
**
**
*«
<0.006
**
0.022
**
0.009
**
tt«
Amount Amount
Spiked Recovered
(ppm) (ppm)

0.1 0.136






1.0 0.994

0.05 0.064

1.0 0.612


Percent
Recovery*
(%}
74
136
93
76
75
80
63
88
99
73
84
75
61
77
74
 *Percent recovery = 100 x (Cj_ - Co)/Ct,  where Ci = amount recovered,  Co = original amount found, and
  Ct = amount spiked.
**No matrix spike was performed for this  constituent.  The percent recovery is the average of percent recoveries
  from kiln dust and lime and fly ash for this constituent.  This average is shown in the percent recovery
  column.

-------
I
(-•
00
                                                  Table D-5 (Continued)

                MATRIX SPIKE RECOVERIES FOR THE TCLP EXTRACT FOR STABILIZED FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATOR ASH
      KILN DUST
                                        Kiln Dust:  Run 1
Original
Amount
Found
CONSTITUENTS (ppm) (ppm)
BDAT
154.
155.
156.
157.
158.
159.
221.

160.
161.
163.
164.
165.
166.
167.
168.
METALS
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium (total)
Chromium
(hexavalent)
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Vanadium
Zinc

<0.163
*»
0.203
<0.001
<0.003
1.78
**

<0.003
*«
<0.018
0.044
<0.006
**
1.53
0.048
Amount
Spiked
(ppm)

1.0

1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0


1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0
1.0
Amount
Recovered
(ppm)

0.66

1.103
0.706
0.694
2.532


0.721

0.675

0.70

1.968
0.755
Percent
Recovery*
(*)

66

90
71
69
75


72

68

70

44
71
                                                                        Original
                                                                         Amount
                                                                          Found
                                                                          (ppm)
                                                Kiln Dust:  Run 3
                                              Amount     Amount     Percent
                                              Spiked    Recovered  Recovery*
                                                          (ppm)    _
<0.163
0.005
0.204
<0.001
<0.003
1.87
2.13
<0.003
<0.006
<0.018
0.04
<0.006
0.009
1.56
0.031
1.0
0.1
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.05
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.815
0.137
1.15
0.845
0.834
2.744
3.15
1.17
0.765
0.816
0.0776
0.838
0.573
2.498
0.871
82
132
91
85
83
87
102
117
77
82
75
84
56
94
84
- C0)/Ct,  where Cj = amount recovered,  Co = original amount found,  and
       *Percent recovery = 100 x
        Cfc = amount spiked.
      **No matrix spike was performed for this constituent for run 1 .

-------
                                                Table D-5 (Continued)

                MATRIX SPIKE RECOVERIES FOR THE TCLP EXTRACT FOR STABILIZED FLUIDIZED BED INCINERATOR ASH
      LIME  AND  FLY  ASH
a
CONSTITUENTS (ppm)

BOAT METALS
154. Antimony
155. Arsenic
156. Barium
157. Beryllium
158. Cadmium
159. Chromium (total)
221. Chromium (hexavalent)
160. Copper
161. Lead
163. Nickel
164. Selenium
165. Silver
166. Thallium
167. Vanadium
168. Zinc
                                                                                            Run: 3
Original
Amount
Found
(ppm)
<0.163
0.006
0.599
<0.001
<0.003
1.08
0.171
0.006
<0.006
<0.018
0.017
<0.006
<0.001
0.156
0.052

Amount
Spiked
(ppm)
* *^ r
1.0
0.1
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.05
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0

Amount
Recovered
(ppm)
0.751
0.146
1.568
0.728
0.722
1.846
0.403
0.749
0.72
0.698
0.059
0.726
0.583
1.092
0.734

Percent
Recovery*
(*)
75
140
97
73
72
77
23
74
72
70
85
73
58
94
68
       *Percent recovery = 100 x
        Ct = amount spiked.
                               - C0)/Ct,  where GI = amount recovered,  Co = original amount found,  and

-------
                                                 Table  D-6

                        MATRIX SPIKE RECOVERIES  FOR  METALS  IN WASTEWATER  RESIDUALS


                                                         Sample  Recovery
                                                                                        Duplicate  Sample  Result
Spike Constituent
159.
161.
168.
Chromium ( total )
Lead
Zinc
Original
Amount Found
(ppb)
<4.0
<5.0
2,640
Amount
Spiked
(ppb)
50
25
10,000
Amount Amount
Recovered Percent Recovery Recovered Percent Recovery*
(ppb) Hi (ppb) HI
35 70 34 68
22
12,600
88
100
19
12,400
76
98
*Percent recovery = 100 x
 Ct = amount spiked.
                                    - Co)/Ct,  where  Cj  =  amount  recovered,  Co  =  original  amount  found,  and
o

o

-------
                                  Table  D-7

           SUMMARY OF ACCURACY CORRECTION FACTORS FOR NONWASTEWATER

                         (Fluidized Bed Incineration)


                                       	Accuracy Correction  Factor*
   Constituent                         Total Concentration         TCLP
 21.   Dichlorodifluoromethane                1.30
 43.   Toluene                                1.25
      Xylene                                 1.30
 59.   Benz(a)anthracene                      1.49
 62.   Benzo(a)pyrene                         1.49
 70.   Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate             1.49
 80.   Chrysene                               1.49
 98.   Di-n-butyl phthalate                   1.49
109.   Fluorene                               1.49
121.   Naphthalene                            1.49
141.   Phenanthrene                           1.49
145.   Pyrene                                 1.89
154.   Antimony                                                     1.35
155.   Arsenic                                                      0.74
156.   Barium                                                       1.08
157.   Beryllium                                                    1.32
158.   Cadmium                                                      1.33
159.   Chromium (total)                                              1.25
160.   Copper                                                       1.14
161.   Lead                                                         1.20
163.   Nickel                                                       1.34
164.   Selenium                                                     1.23
165.   Silver                                                       1.33
167.   Vanadium                                                     1.30
168.   Zinc                                                         1.35
169.   Cyanide                                0.96
171.   Sulfide                                1.22

 *The Accuracy Correction Factor is  equal  to  1  divided  by  the Percent
  Recovery.
                                    D-21

-------
                                   Table D-8



           SUMMARY OF ACCURACY CORRECTION FACTORS FOR NONWASTEWATER



                                (Stabilization)
       Constituent








154.  Antimony



155.  Arsenic



156.  Barium



157.  Beryllium



158.  Cadmium



159.  Chromium



160.  Copper




161.  Lead



163.  Nickel



164.  Selenium



165.  Silver



167.  Vanadium



168.  Zinc
                                          Accuracy Correction Factor*
Cement
1.35
0.74
1.10
1.32
1.33
1.25
1.34
1.01
1.37
1.19
1.33
1.30
1.35
Kiln Dust
1.36
0.76
1.10
1.29
1.31
1.23
1.06
1.31
1.34
1.33
1.30
1.45
1.29
Lime and Fly Ash
1.33
0.71
1.03
1.37
1.39
1.31
1.35
1.39
1.43
1.18
1.38
1.07
1.47
*The Accuracy Correction Factor is equal to 1  divided by the Percent Recovery.
                                     D-22

-------
                                   Table D-9

        SUMMARY OF ACCURACY CORRECTION FACTORS FOR METALS IN WASTEWATER

               (Chromium Reduction Followed by Lime and Sulfide
                     Precipitation and Vacuum Filtration)


        Constituent                                Accuracy Correction Factor*

159.  Chromium (total)                                        1.4?
162.  Lead                                                    1.32
164.  Zinc                                                    1.02
*The Accuracy Correction Factor is equal to 1  divided by the Percent Recovery.
                                     D-23

-------
                        APPENDIX E








     STRIP CHARTS FOR THE SAMPLING EPISODE AT PLANT A




   PRESSURE DIFFERENTIALS AND INCINERATION TEMPERATURES
Figure E-1:  Constriction Plate and Bed Pressure Differentials





Figure E-2:  Bed and Freeboard Temperatures
                          E-1

-------
  10 am
(1/15/87)
   8 am
   6 am

Constriction
Plate
Differential
   4 am
   2 am
   12 am
 (1/14/87)
Bed:
Constriction Plate:
                                                      Sample Set  #2
                                                       Sample
                                                       Set  //I
                                                              Bed
                                                              Differential
                                                   120"H20
                                                    50"H20
                               Figure E-1

    CONSTRICTION PLATE AND BED PRESSURE DIFFERENTIALS (inches of H20)
                                   E-2

-------
                                                   •:;'H
   8 pm
(1/15/87)
   6 pm

Constriction
Plate
Differential

   4 pm
   2 pm
   12  pm
   10 am
 (1/15/87)
Bed:                 0"H20
Constriction Plate:  0"H20
                                                         li!
                                                    : j.M
                                                   ii. M
                                                   ;!],[',I  Sample Set
                                                               Bed
                                                               Dif
ferential
                                                            Sample

                                                         Set #2 (Cont.)
                                                       120"H20
                                                        50"H20
                               Figure E-1

    CONSTRICTION PLATE AND BED PRESSURE  DIFFERENTIALS (inches of H20)
                               (Continued)
                                   E-3

-------
     10 am
   (1/15/87)
      8 am
      6 am

   Constriction
   Plate
   Differential
      4 am
       2 am
      12  am
      10 pm
    (1/15/87)
Bed:
                     0"H20
Constriction Plate:  0"H20
                                  Figure E-1
                                                           Sample Set #5
                                                              Bed
                                                              Differential
                                                           Sample Set #4
120"H2<)
 50"H20
       CONSTRICTION PLATE AND BED PRESSURE DIFFERENTIALS (inches of H20)
                                 (Continued)
                                       E-4

-------
      10 pm
    (1/15/87)
       8 pm
       6 pm

    Constriction
    Plate
    Differential
       4 pm
       2 pm
      12 pm
    (1/15/87)
Bed:
Constriction Plate: 0"
                                  Figure E-1
      Bed
      Differential
                                                         Sample Set #6
    Sample

Set #5 (Cent.)
       CONSTRICTION PLATE AND BED PRESSURE DIFFERENTIALS (inches of H20)
                                 (Continued)
                                       E-5

-------
   6 pa     10
(1/14/87)   :
   4 pm
   2 pm
  12 pm
  10 am
   8 am
   6 am
(1/14/87)
                                                 Sample Set #3
                                                  Sample Set #2
                                               i;  Sample  Set  ll
           600 °F
1600 °F
                              Figure E-2

                  BED AND FREEBOARD TEMPERATURES (°F)
                                  E-6

-------
   6 am
(1/15/87)
   4 am
   2 am
Bed Temperature
  12 am

(1/15/87)
   10 pm
   8  pm

 (1/14/87)
                  "T  '/"I"'
                                                        '?,  A
      ^  A '«!• i -.1 CD
                                                      0. ;.
                   HAM • i;  "!•!  . ir.
                                     i.
                    ••!•  !' :    ' I   i   i,1
                   :   !  ;  ;   i  !   |  , j'l

                   :2;*M;  :   I. |   j   •:"
                             !   r-,!:
                        lii !  I ': i  - 1 '•'• 'li1
                        f*~K, •j;::|:,,i
                        -  •  I   ,•,,,!(
                        1  1   i  I.  !
                        'i  I   I  !.':  I-1-- -*
                           i   :  I   '
                   i: ,r,
ii.'?.M;
                 M-i/h'  !'l;  f:
                ' i , •  I '  ' I i'  !   '  ,    " !
       1   ;  •   i   •  Uis:1  '-L!-.,',.•
            •   . •   ,  i'  I.I  i  !  .1  i   I:  '
                                                           Sample Set  #4
Freeboard
Temperature
                   .:IO° ^
                   ,;,-;:. .;,. :|

                   I'1'! !  .:. •' ' '
                   P
                600 °F
                              ; i;t!d
                             M  <>'  i •'
                              i •,
                            '' i <: h'JinJ
                            ,  i' , i;'i:
                            •  i -.P:I
                                                          Sample Set #3 (Cont.)
                                    1600 °F
                                Figure E-2


                   BED  AND FREEBOARD TEMPERATURES (°F)

                               (Continued)
                                     E-7

-------
(1/15/87)


   6 pm
   4 pm
   2 pm
  12 pm
  10 am
   8 am
(1/15/87)
                                                 Sample Set #6
                                                  Samp
 le Set #5
t
3l
           600 °F
 :| Sample Set #4  (Cont.)

  *

 'I
1600  °F
                              Figure E-2
                  BED AND FREEBOARD TEMPERATURES  (°F)
                              (Continued)
                                    E-J

-------
                                  Appendix F



                             OTHER TREATMENT DATA



          Appendix F contains treatment data for K048-K052 wastes which were

not used in the development of treatment standards.  Table F-1 is an index of

all data presented in this appendix.
                                   Table F-1
                            INDEX OF TREATMENT DATA
Plant B
Plant C
Plant D
Plant E
Plant F
Plant G
Plant H
Plant K
Plant
L -
Facility

API Report
API Report
API Report
API Report
API Report
RCC Report
API Report
SOHIO Report
CF Systems Report
Section

  F.1
  F.2
  F.3
  F.4
  F.5
  F.6
  F.7
  F.8
  F.9
F-2
F-4
F-6
F-8
F-9
F-10
F-20
F-24
F-32
                                      F-1

-------
    F.1       Treatment Data for Plant B (K051)

    PRESSURE FILTRATION (BELT FILTER PRESS)

                                                                  Treated Waste
                                         Untreated  K051  Waste      Filter Cake
                                                 TCLP                 TCLP
                                                 mg/L                 mg/L
    Detected BOAT List Constituents*       	(ppm)	           (ppm)

    VOLATILES
      4.  Benzene                                   15                  0.62
    226.  Ehtyl benzene                             23                  0.18
     43.  Toluene                                   66                  1.5
215-217.  Xylene (total)                           127                  1.2


    SEMIVOLATILES
     57.  Anthracene                               1.0               <0.015
     59.  Benzo(a)anthracene                     0.61               <0.015
     62.  Benzo(a)pyrene                           0.3               <0.015
     80.  Chrysene                                 1.0               <0.015
     96.  2,4-Dimethylphenol                     <0.15                 0.03
    108.  Fluoranthene                             0.4               <0.015
    121.  Naphthalene                              4.6                0.14
    141.  Phenanthrene                             7.3               <0.015
    145.  Pyrene                                   1.6               <0.015
    METALS
    155.  Arsenic                                 0.02                 0.02
    156.  Barium                                   1.2                  0.26
    159-  Chromium                                0.15                 0.01
    161.  Lead                                    0.13                 <0.04
     +Analyses were not performed for all  BOAT list  organic and metal
      constituents.
                                         F-2

-------
Design and Operating Parameters                                Operating Range*

Sludge feed rate (gpm)                                               21.5
Dilution water feed rate (gpm)                                        3
Polymer solution concentration (wtyt)                                  1.3
Polymer solution feed rate (gpm)                                      1.5
Belt tension (psi)                                                  200
Belt speed
  Gravity section (ft/min)                                           20
  Pressure section (ft/min)                                          35

*Design values were not presented in the API report.
                                     F-3

-------
    F.2       Treatment Data for Plant C (Specific Waste Codes Not Reported)

    PRESSURE FILTRATION (BELT FILTER PRESS)

                                                                  Treated Waste
                                            Untreated Waste*       Filter Cake
                                                  TCLP                 TCLP
                                                  mg/L                 mg/L
    Detected BOAT List Constituents*        	(ppm)	           (ppm)

    VOLATILES
      4.   Benzene                                   91                  1.3
    226.   Ehtyl benzene                            100                <0.06
     43.   Toluene                                  460                  2.2
215-217.   Xylene (total)                           400                  1.8


    SEMIVOLATILES
     57.   Anthracene                                13                <0.01
     59.   Benzo(a)anthracene                       5.4                <0.01
     62.   Benzo(a)pyrene                           4.4                <0.01
     80.   Chrysene                                 8". 6                <0.01
     81.   ortho-Cresol                            <2.5                 0.02
     96.   2,4-Dimethylphenol                       BDL                 0.04
    108.   Fluoranthene                             4.9                <0.01
    121.   Naphthalene                               77                 0.1
    141.  ' Phenanthrene                             102                <0.01
    145.   Pyrene                                    17                  BDL


    METALS
    156.   Barium                                   7.7                  1.0
    159.   Chromium (total)                         3-9               <0.025
    161.   Lead                                     1.1                 <0.1


    *The untreated waste consists of petroleum refinery wastes (the specific waste
     codes were not reported).

    +Analyses were not performed for all BOAT list organic and metal constituents.

    BDL = Below detection limit.
                                          F-4

-------
Design and Operating Parameters                                Operating  Range*

Sludge feed rate (gpm)                                               61-75
Washwater feed rate (gpm)                                               100
Washwater pressure (psig)                                               96
Feed temperature (°F)                                                   85
Polymer solution concentration (wt/t)                                    1.5
Polymer solution feed rate (gph)                                   225-230
Belt tension
  Top Belt (psig)                                                       11
  Bottom Belt (psig)                                                    12
*Design values were not presented in the API report.
                                     F-5

-------
    F.3
Treatment Data for Plant D (K048. K049, K051)
    PRESSURE FILTRATION (PLATE FILTER PRESS)
    Detected BOAT List Constituents*

    VOLATILES
      4.   Benzene
    226.   Ethyl benzene
     43.   Toluene
215-217.   Xylene (total)
                              Untreated Waste*
                                    TCLP
                                    mg/L
                                   (ppm)
                                     130
                                     240
                                     360
                                     750
Treated Waste
 Filter Cake
     TCLP
      mg/L
     (ppm)
      1.9
      1.2
      4.1
      3.6
    SEMIVOLATILES
     80.  Chrysene
    121.  Naphthalene
    141.  Phenanthrene
    145.  Pyrene
                                      20
                                     310
                                      23
                                      42
    <0.01
     0.25
    <0.01
    <0.01
    METALS
    155.  Arsenic
    156.  Barium
    159.  Chromium (total)
    161.  Lead
                                   <0.07
                                     1.5
                                     1.1
                                     0.5
     0.01
     0.82
   <0.025
    *The untreated waste is a mixture of K048, K049, K051, and miscellaneous oily
     materials.

    +Analyses were not performed for all BDAT list organic and metal constituents.
                                          F-6

-------
Design and Operating Parameters                                Operating Range*

Fill time** (min)                                                       12
Filtration time (min                                                  225
Cake release time (min)                                                 20
Plate Filter Press temperature (°F)                                   145
Final Feed Pressure (psig)                                            210
Lime Dosage (% of total sludge feed)                                  2.5
Type of filter cloth                                          satin weave nylon

 *Design values were not presented in the API report.

**At sludge feed rate of 565 gpm.
                                  F-7

-------
    F.4
Treatment Data for Plant E (K051 and K052)
    PRESSURE FILTRATION (PLATE FILTER PRESS)
    Detected BDftT List Constituents*

    VOLATILES
      4.   Benzene
    226.   Ethyl benzene
     43.   Toluene
215-217.   Xylene (total)
                              Untreated Waste*
                                    TCLP
                                    mg/L
                                   (ppm)
                                     2.7
                                    0.29
                                     3.5
                                    1.71
Treated Waste
 Filter Cake
     TCLP
      mg/L
     (ppm)
    0.80
    0.22
     2.2
    1.42
    SEMIVOLATILES
     81.  ortho-Cresol
     96.  2,4-Dimethylphenol
    121.  Naphthalene
    141.  Phenanthrene
    142.  Phenol
                                    0.33
                                    0.10
                                    0.16
                                    0.01
                                    0.85
    0.02
    0.01
    0.16
    0.00
    0.10
    METALS
    155.  Arsenic                                 0.01                 0.00**
    156.  Barium                                  0.95                 0.57
    162.  Mercury                                 0.00                <0.001

    Design and Operating Parameters

    No data were submitted
     *The untreated waste consists of K051, K052 and unleaded tank bottoms.   These
      wastes were conditioned with lime before sampling.

    **Value was reported as 0.00.

     +Analyses were not performed for all BOAT list organic and metal
     constituents.
                                          F-8

-------
    F.5       Treatment Data for Plant F (K049 and K051)

    SOLVENT EXTRACTION
       Detected BOAT List Constituent+

    VOLATILES
      4.  Benzene
     43.  Toluene
215-217.  Xylene (total)
Untreated Waste*
      TCLP
      mg/L
	(ppm)
       42
      240
      320
   Treated Waste
Extracted Residual
       TCLP
       mg/L
	(ppm)	
       0.01
       0.01
       0.01
    SEMIVOLATILES
    121.  Naphthalene
    141.  Phenanthrene
       59
       75
       0.01
     <0.005
    METALS
    159.  Chromium (total)                         0.39
    161.  Lead                                     0.47

    Design and Operating Parameters

    No data were submitted


     *The untreated waste is a mixture of K049 and K051 waste.

     +Analyses were not performed for all BOAT list organic and metal
      constituents.
                          0.11
                          0.05
                                         F-9

-------
F.6       Treatment Data for Plant G (K048 - K052)
SOLVENT EXTRACTION
                                     F-10

-------
Untreated Waste
Treated Waste (solids)**


Detected Constituents
Organ i cs
80. Chrysene



* N-Nitrosodiphenylamine




* Isophorone

* 2-Methylnaphthalene




141. Phenanthrene




109. Fluorene


121. Naphthalene



142. Phenol


Total
Composition
frog/kg]

4.7
4.5
5.6
<3.0
5.6
4.8
7.5
8.3
<3.0
36
<3.0
37
22
47
50
<3.0
13
13
16
17
<3.0
3.4
4.2
<3.0
22
28
30
<3.0
4.5
<3.0


TCLP
(mg/L)

<0.01



<0.01




<0.01

<0.01
0.011



<0.01




<0.01


<0.01
0.023
0.027

<0.01
0.11
0.12
Total
Composition TCLP
(ing/kg) (mg/l)

NA <0.01



MA <0.01




NA <0.01

NA <0.01




NA <0.01




NA <0.01


NA <0.01



NA 0.035
0.041
0.040
                                                0.056
                                                0.025
                                                0.033
                                                0.013
                                                0.018
                                                0.017
   F-ll

-------
                                             Untreated Waste
                                                                              Treated Waste (solids)**
    Detected Constituents
      4. Benzene
    266. Ethyl benzene
       * Methyl-2-pentanone
     43. Toluene
Total
Composition
Ing/kg)
NA


NA







NA


NA










TCLP
(mg/l]
<0.025
0.030
0.040
0.029
0.043
<0.025





0.054
0.062
<0.05
0.14
0.19
<0.025







Total
Composition TCLP
(mg/kgj [mg/l)
NA 0.050
0.028

NA 0.052
0.060
0.054
0.096
0.120
0.140
0.059
0.042
NA 0.052
0.059

NA 0.17
0.26
0.18
0.35
0.42
0.56
0.22
0.16
0.09
0.11
     45. 1 f1f1-Trichloroethane
215-217. Xylene [total]
 NA
 NA
0.027
0.044
<0.025

 0.14
 0.19
<0.025
                                      NA
                                      NA
     87. 1,2-Dichlorobenzene
3.3
<3.0
<0.01
NA
 0.28
 0.31
 0.31
 0.51
 0.71
 0.72
 0.31
 0.21
 0.17
0.097

<0.01
                                                 F-12

-------
Untreated Waste
Treated Waste  [solids]**


Detected Constituents
108. Fluoranthene

70. Bis(2-ethylhexyl] phthalate

96. 2,4-Dimethylphenol







* 4-Methyl phenol









222. Acetone

34. Methyl ethyl ketone

47. Trichloroethene

* 2-Methyl phenol

145. Pyrene

* Triethylamine



Total
Composition TCLP
[mg/kg] [mg/l]
3.7 <0.01
<3.0
<3.0 0.13
49 <0.01
<3.0 0.081
0.11
<0.01





<3.0 0.21
0.26
<0.01







NA 0.27
<0.12
NA 0.13
<0.12
NA 0.037
<0.025
<3.0 0.010
<0.01
3.6 <0.01
<3.0
NA NA



Total
Composition TCLP
( mg/kg] (mg/l)
NA <0.01

NA <0.01

NA 0.019
0.016
0.013
0.018
0.013
0.013
0.011
0.011
NA 0.037
0.057
0.053
0.071
0.060
0.029
0.057
0.045
0.05
0.044
NA <0.12

NA <0.12

NA 0.030
<0.025
NA <0.01

<0.01

9700
7700
7400
<2000
   F-13

-------
                                        Untreated Waste
                                     Treated Waste [solids]**
Detected Constituents
   Total
Composition
  (mg/kg)
  TCLP
 (rng/l]
   Total
Composition
  (mg/kg]
 TCLP
Img/l]
PCB's
203. Aroclor 1242
 206. Aroclor 1260
    5.1
    2.7
    4.8
    2.1
    4.1
    3.9
    1.8
    3.2
    3.7
    1.3
    4.6
    4.9
    3.8
    3.4
    3.4
    1.5
    8.7
   <0.32

    3.5
    1.9
    2.9
    1.4
    1.9
    1.8
    1.5
    1.8
    1.8
    0.55
    2.3
    2.3
    2.0
    1.4
    2.2
    2.8
    2.6
    <0.64
<0.0024
    0.37
    <0.2
                                                                                        <0.0012
                                                     <0.005
                         <0.4
                <0.0005
                                             F-14

-------
                                         Untreated Waste
                                     Treated Waste [solids]**
Detected Constituents
   Total
Composition
  (mg/kg]
 TCLP
tmg/lj
   Total
Composition
  [mg/kg]
 TCLP
tmg/l]
Other constituents
170. Fluoride
   * 011 and grease
     MA
     NA
 1.3
 <0.5

  NA
                                                                             NA
                                        8700
                                       10000
                                        8900
                                        8150
                                        7760
                                        8880
                                        5830
                                        <100
                                                       NA
                                     <100
Metals
     Aluminum
                                        460
                                        340
                                        380
                                        380
                                        420
                                        330
                                        390
                                        420
                                        420
                                        470
                                        430
                                        380
                                        370
                                        380
                                        360
                                        420
                                        350
                                        <5.0
                  <0.7
                   11
                  6.1
                       2300
                  1.1
                  1.0
                  1.3
                  1.5
                  1.9
                  1.7
                  2.4
                  1.6
                  2.1
                  <0.3
156. Barium
                                       210
                                       190
                                       250
                                       260
                                       320
                                       160
                                       270
                                       370
                                       310
                                       220
                 0.01
                 0.62
                 0.13
                       140
                <0.03
                                            F-15

-------
                                        Untreated Waste
                                     Treated Waste (solids)**
Detected Constituents
   Total
Composition
  (mo/kg)
 TCLP
(mg/U
   Total
Composition       TCLP
  (mg/kg)         (mg/l)
156. Barium [continued]
    360
    200
    180
    200
    160
    230
    180
    <0.5
159. Chromium (total)
    6.2
     5
     6
     6
     7
     5
     7
     7
     7
     5
     7
     7
     6
     7
     6
     6
     5
<0.02
 0.09
 0.07
     18
     <2
<0.05
160. Copper
     23
     23
     24
     24
     24
     21
     25
     30
     27
     21
     27
     29
     26
     24
     24
     23
     24
    <0.6
<0.02
    100
     <2
<0.03
                                            F-16

-------
                                         Untreated Waste
 Treated Waste [solids]**
Detected Constituents
   * Iron
161. Lead
    * Manganese
Total
Composition
(mg/kg)
680
670
750
740
770
660
740
770
750
720
770
750
710
700
670
710
670
<5
2700
2700
4000
3100
3600
2200
3400
4300
3700
2800
4100
3300
3200
2900
2700
2900
3200
<5
5.5
4.2
5.4
4.9
5.3
4.6
5.2
5.0
4.9

TCLP
[mg/l]
<0.1
36
19















<0.04
5.1
4.2















<0.01
0.3
0.16






   Total
Composition
  (mg/kg)
                                                                            4000
   21300
     <4
     23
 TCLP
(mg/U
                  1.8
                  1.6
                  2.8
                  3.0
                  4.7
                  4.1
                  5.3
                  5.0
                  7.1
                  <0.3
 5.9
 5.2
  11
 4.2
 4.0
 4.0
 4.9
  12
 0.44
 0.43
 0.45
 0.44
 0.52
 0.49
 0.49
 0.54
 0.61
                                              F-17

-------
                                         Untreated Waste
Detected Constituents
   Total
Composition
  Img/kg]
 TCLP
(mg/l)
 Treated Waste (solids]4"*1

   Total
Composition       TCLP
  (mg/kg)        [mg/l)
   * Manganese (continued]
    4.7
    5.4
     5
    4.9
    4.5
    4.4
    4.4
    4.4
    <0.5
                                                                                         <0.03
168. Zinc
                                        310
                                        280
                                        300
                                        300
                                        320
                                        270
                                        310
                                        330
                                        310
                                        280
                                        350
                                        330
                                        320
                                        310
                                        300
                                        280
                                        300
                 <0.02
                   16
                   11
                        930
                         <2
                   22
                   21
                   22
                   22
                   25
                   25
                   26
                   30
                   33
                 <0.05
158. Cadmium
   * Calcium
    0.7
    <0.5

    740
                                                       NA
                                                       NA
                                                                             NA
                                                                             NA
                                                                                           NA
                                                                                           NA
   * Magnesium
    110
    CIO
  NA
                         NA
                                                                                           NA
162. Mercury
   <0.05
<0.001
                                        <0.001
                                     0.007
                                     0.002
                                     <0.001
                                             F-18

-------
                                       Untreated Waste
Treated Waste [solids]**
Total
Composition TCLP
Detected Constituents [mg/kg] (mg/l)
164. Selenium <4 <0.008


* Sodium 2900 NA
<5
* Strontium 2.4 NA
<0.5
167. Vanadium 2 NA
Total
Composition
(mg/kg)
<0.004
<8

NA

NA

NA

TCLP
(mg/l)
0.008
0.020
<0.04
NA

NA

NA
  * Not a BOAT constituent.

 ** Treated waste  (solids] stream  values do not necessarily correspond to the untreated
    waste stream values.

*** TCLP values of treated waste  [solids] do not necessarily correspond to the total
    composition values  presented  for  the treated waste [solids].

 NA Not analyzed
                                           F-19

-------
F.7
Treatment Data for Plant H (K048 - K052)
(a)  THERMAL DRYING (Specific Waste Codes Not Reported)
Detected BDAT List Constituents+
VOLATILES
  4.  Benzene
 43.  Toluene
                           Untreated Waste*
                                 TCLP
                                 mg/L
                                (ppm)
                                 1.1
                                 1.8
    Treated Waste
 Filter Cake Residue
         TCLP
         mg/L
 	(ppm)	
 350°F

<0.005
<0.005
550°F

<0.05
<0.05
SEMIVOLATILES
 81.  ortho-Cresol
 96.  2,4-Dimethylphenol
121.  Naphthalene
141.  Phenanthrene
142.  Phenol
METALS
155.  Arsenic
156.  Barium
159.  Chromium (total)
                                 0.02
                                 0.04
                                 0.15
                                  BDL
                                  BDL
                                  BDL
                                  1.0
                                  BDL
  BDL
  0.01
  0.13
  0.01
  0.01

 350°F

  0.01
  BDL
   0.1
 0.89
 0.06

 0.13
 0.05

550°F

<0.04
 0.57
 0.04
*The untreated waste is the filter cake from the belt filter press at plant C
 generated from treatment of petroleum refinery wastes (the specific waste
 codes were not specified).

^Analyses were not performed for all BDAT organic and metal constituents.

BDL = Below Detection Limit.
                                     F-20

-------
Design and Operating Parameters                               Operating Range*

                                                              350°F     550°F

Temperature of heat transfer fluid (°F)                        450       650
Retention time (min)                                            50      36-42


 *Design values were not presented in the API report.
                                    F-21

-------
(b)  THERMAL DRYING (K051 and K052)
Detected BOAT List Constituents*
VOLATILES
  4.  Benzene
 43.  Toluene
Untreated Waste*
      TCLP
      mg/L
     (ppm)
      0.8
      2.2
   Treated Waste
Filter Cake Residue
        TCLP
        mg/L
	(ppm)	
0.01
0.08
 550°F

<0.025
 <0.03
SEMIVOLATILES
 70.  Bis(2-ethyIhexy1)phthalate
 81.  ortho-Cresol
 96.  2,4-Dimethylphenol
121.  Naphthalene
141.  Phenanthrene
142.  Phenol
       BDL
      0.02
      0.01
      0.16
      0.00»*
       0.1
 BDL
 0.02
 0.03
 0.06
<0.01
 0.16
 0.012
  0.02
<0.005
 0.01
<0.005
  0.08
METALS
155.  Arsenic
156.  Barium
158.  Cadmium
      0.00
      0.57
       BDL
 0.01
 0.8
 BDL
  1.3
 0.02
 *The untreated waste is the filter cake from the plate filter press at plant
  E generated from treatment of K051, K052, and unleaded tank bottoms.  These
  wastes were conditioned with lime prior to filtration.

**Value was reported as 0.00.

^Analyses were not performed for all BOAT organic and metal constituents.

BDL = Below Detection Limit.
                                     F-22

-------
Design and Operating Parameters                                Operating Range*

                                                               350°F     550°F

Temperature of heat transfer fluid (°F)                         450       650
Retention time (min)                                             50      36-42
 *Design values were not presented in the API report.
                                    F-23

-------
F.8       Treatment Data for Plant K (Specific Waste Codes Not Reported)
SOLVENT EXTRACTION FOLLOWED BY STABILIZATION
                                      F-24

-------
1357g
                          Table 1  SOHIO Data
Const ituent
Vc'.U ' le Orqan;cs
Benzene









Etnyl Benzene









To:uene









Xylenes. m









Untreated Waste
TCLP
(mg/1)

16
51
42
9 7
16
20




5 7
12.
;s
7 5
6 a
8 5




22
53
54
17
24
30




1 3
27
36
12
17
20




Treated Waste
TCLP
(TOJ/I)

-0 025
<0 025
<0 025
-0 025
^0 325
-0 025
<0 025
-0 025
-0 025
<0 025
-0 025
•-0 025
^0 025
<0 025
-0 025
<0 025
<0 025
<0 025
<0 025
<0.025
-0 025
<0 025
^0 025
<0 025
<0 025
-0 025
-0 025
-0 025
-0 025
-0 025
0 056
-0 025
-0 025
-0 025
0 033

-------
1357g
                     Table  1  SOHIO Data (continued)
Untreated Waste
TCLP
Constituent (mg/1)
Volatile Oraanics (continued)
Xylenes. o'p









?ase Neutral Orcismcs
Antnracene









Benz(a)antnracene









Benio(a)pyrene










15
21.
^o
9 9
13
16.





-0 013
1.2
0.45
5.2
-0 4
-1.3




0 014
0 78
0.36
4 6
<0 4
t T
(. t.




'0 013
0.51
0 21
3.5
-0.04
1.5




Treated Waste
TCLP
(mg/ 1)

0 37
<0.025
0 046
^0 025
0 12
0 064
0.091
0 099
0 068
0 13

-0 01
<0.01
-0.01
-0 01
<0.01
-0.01
<0 01
<0 01
<0.01
-0.01
<0 01
-J 01
-0 01
-J Gl
O 01
-0 01
-0 01
-0 01
-0 Dl
<0 01
-0 01
-0 01
-0 0!
-0 01
-0 01
<0 01
-0.01
<0 01
-0 01
<0 01
                             F-26

-------
1357g
                     Table 1  SOHIO Data  (continued)
Const ituent
f\ise ' Neut rci 1 Orqanics
Nitphtna lene









Phenjnthrene









P/re-ie









Ac '3 Orqanics
2.4-Oimethy loneno'









Untreated Waste
TCLP
(mg/1)
(cent inued)
0 47
4 2
2 5
28
3 2
7 3




0 25
4 7
2 5
4.6
8 9
24




0.051
1 5
0 65
9 4
1 7
4 1





0 061
*• 0 3
<0 2
<3.
<0.4
<1 3




Treated Waste
TCLP
(mg/1)

0 85
0.021
0.084
0 023
0 022
0 046
0.11
0 10
0 058
0.050
<0 01
<0 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0 01
<0 01
<0.01
<0 01
<0 01
<0 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0 01
<0 01
<0 01
-0 01
<0 01
<0 01
-0 01
<0 01

-0 01

-------
1357g
                     Table  1  SOHIO Data  (continued)
Constituent
Acid Organic? (continued)
Phenol









Metals
Ant -.rnony







Arsenic









Barium









Untreated Waste
TCLP
(mg/1)

0.017
<0.3
<0.2
<3
<0,4
-1.3













<0 03
0.01
-0.03
<0 03
<0 8
<0 03




1.4
1 8
1 4
5.3
2 3
3 4




Treated
Total
(mg/kg)












15
15
22
19
27
22
LI
18
11
9.8
11
10
13
8 8
12
12
10
14
650
810
800
930
1.300
940
860
800
760
3,200
Waste
TCLP
(mg/1)

<0.01
<0.01
<0 01
<0 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0 01
<0 01
<0.01
<0.01









0 CIS
0 008
0.028
0 022
0 025
0 018
0 024
0 024
-0 006
<0 006
<1
<1
<1
-•1
<1
1
-1
<1
-1
*1
                            F-28

-------
U57g
                     Table  1  SOH1Q Data  (continued)
Untreated Uaste
TCLP
Constituent (mg/1)
Metd Is (continued)
Beryl 1 lunt









Cddmi urn









Chromium 0 12
2 4
1 7
14
5.9
10




Cobalt <0.02
0 04
0 06
0 02
0.04
0.02




Treated
Total
(mg/kg)

0.3
0.2
0.4
0.3
0 3
0.4
0.3
0.3
0 3
0.3
0 8
1.3
1.4
<0.8
1 0
1 6
1.1
1.9
1 2
1 9
510
590
610
650
820
620
650
570
550
820
11
24
12
12
12
18
9 7
8 7
12
12
Waste
TCLP
(mg/1)





















-0.05
<0 05
<0 05

-------
1357g
                     Table  1  SOHIO Data  (continued)
Untreated Waste Treated
Waste
Constituent
Metals (continued)
Lead








Mercury









Nickel









Selenium










TCLP Total
(mg/1) (mg/kg)

33
31
42
27
36
27
37
28
39
1 3
1 5
2 2
1.8
2.1
2 0
2.5
2 1
1.0
2 0
<0.08 51
0 16 58
0.12 51
0.27 41
0 13 45
-0 1 56
50
43
42
53
<0 4

-------
1357g
                      Tdble  1   SOHIO Data  (continued)

Waste

Const ituent
Untreated Waste

TCLP
(mg/1)
Treated

Total TCLP
(mg/kg) (mg/1)
MetjIs (continued)

Vanadium
42
30
43
34
36
40
34
34
30
36
no = indicates  not  detected
<  = following  values  are detection  limits
                             F-31

-------
F.9       Treatment Data for Plant L (K051)
SOLVENT EXTRACTION
                                     F-32

-------
    CORPORATION
March 30, 1987


CF Systems Units to Render

Refinery Wastes Non-Hazardous

The CFS Extraction Process is a solvent extraction technique which,
instead of using a typical solvent such as methylene chloride,
toluene or hexane, uses a liquefied gas such as COa, propane, or
other light hydrocarbon gas. These solvents have high solubilities for
most organic compounds that are listed as hazardous. They are also
inexpensive, non-toxic and can be relatively easily separated from
the extracted compounds. These properties, together with CF
Systems proprietary equipment design, lead to a highly effective
broadly applicable process with  low operating costs. In general, the
CF Systems units can extract over 99% of liquid hydrocarbons from
liquids and sludges having solids and hydrocarbons content in any
ratio.

PROCESS DESCRIPTION
A simplified block flow diagram is shown in Figure 1.

Sludge Excavation and Conditioning
For small pits, an open impeller sludge pump is used to slurry the
contents of the pit and pump it to the mixing and conditioning tanks.
For larger pits, a dredge will be used followed by a booster pump to
allow the slurry to be pumped from the pit to the mixing and
conditioning tanks.
The intent of the mixing/conditioning tanks is to produce a
homogeneous mixture capable of being pumped to the solvent
extraction unit. The homogeneous slurry is pumped from the mixing/
conditioning tank to the solvent extraction unit. Out of the mixing/
conditioning tanks the solids size will be adjusted or classified using
a grinder, screens and/or strainers. Particle conditioning is
necessary to ensure stable operations in the solvent extraction unit.

-------
FIGURE 1
                                                                               COMPRESSOR
                                                                   Recycled Solvents
                                          Solvents and Organics
                        Solvent
       Feed
                   EXTRACTOR
  SOLVENT
 RECOVERY
   STILL
                                     SEPARATOR
                                           Solids and Water
SOLID/LIQUID
SEPARATOR
                                                                 Water
                     Organics
                                                                               ->• Solids
                                                                                                FLOW DIAGRAM
                                                                                              PIT CLEAN-UP UNIT

-------
PROCESS DESCRIPTION (Continued)

Solvent Extraction
The solvent extraction unit has three basic parts. First, there is
extraction, followed by phase separations and finally, solvent
recovery. The solvent for this unit is a liquefied, light hydrocarbon
gas.
The phase separations are accomplished with a combination of
settling and filtrations. The water solvent separation takes place in
the decanting step after the separator.
The solvent is recovered from the solvent recovery still as the oil is
concentrated. This step uses an energy efficient vapor-
recompression cycle in which the evaporator feed pressure is
reduced and the highly volatile solvent is flashed and removed
overhead. The clean solvent vapors are recompressed. The heat
fromthjj^coj]]Łr^ssion and the compressed-gas latent heafare	
Ljge^To'vaporize the soJvenT.  &

Products
The oil product can either be recycled to the refinery operations,
used as fuel extenders or incinerated depending on its compositions
and the exigencies of each situation.
The residual solids from this unit are firm and well consolidated. The
solids will pass the paint filter test; i.e., there will  be no free liquids in
the solids.
The water product is suitable for sending to a waste water treatment
system or to a retention pond.
                            F-35

-------
PRODUCT SPECIFICATIONS AND ANALYSIS

The results of total oil and grease content of several treated refinery
solids are given in Table 1. These results give a general indication of
the ability of the CFS process to extract organics from a variety of
solids.
Detailed and extensive analysis, including the EPA's Toxicity
Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) have been carried out on
two refinery samples. Both are API Separator Bottom Sludge (EPA
Waste tt K050).
AsJ_hese results show in Table 2,  the concentration of thejoxic
organlcTanitTTietalsJn^
standard'srestablished'by'EPAlcTdater-	•	
                          TABLE 1

         Total Oil and Grease Content of Treated Solids

1 . Oil Contaminated
Refinery Soil
2. Refinery Sludge
(60% Solids)
3. API Separator Bottoms
4. Filter Cake From
Refinery Pit
Component
Feed
Residue Solids
Feed
Residue Solids
Feed
Residue Solids
Feed
Residue Solids
Oil and Grease (%)
34.3
0.6
20.0
2.6
5.0
0.2
12.0
0.5
                            F-36

-------
                               TABLE 2
                          Analytical Results for
                 API Separator Bottom Sludge Extraction
                                        API Separator Bottom Sludge #1

MATERIAL BALANCE:
Oil & Grease
Oil
Water
Solids
TOTAL METALS
Chromium
Lead
TCLP METALS
Chromium
Lead
TOTAL PURGEABLE ORGANICS
Benzene I
Ethylbenzene
Toluene
Xylene, m
Xylene, o & p
TCLP PURGEABLE ORGANICS
Benzene
Ethylbenzene
Toluene
Xylene, m
Xylene, o & p
I TOTALjPNAs AND PHENOLS
Anthracene
Chrysene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Phenols
[jCLPJPNAs AND PHENOLS
Anthracene
Chrysene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Phenols
UNITS

mg/kg
wt.%
wt.%
wt.%

mg/kg
mg/kg

mg/L
mg/L
^•""^"""""•V
^"^g/kg^
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg

mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L

mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg

mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
FEED

NA
3.1
41.7
57.4

400 (0.5)
1100(2)




5100(1100)
13000(2200)
52000 (2200)
49000 (2200)
22000 (4500)







ND (3.0)
ND (57)
50 (36)
20(18)
ND(1800)






TREATED SOLID

520 (50)
NA
NA
NA

560(1)
1300(2)

0.02 (0.01 )
0.31 (0.04)

60 (50)
130(100)
440(100) 7*6
340(100)
250(100)

ND (0.0005)
ND (0.001)
0.0027 (0.001 )
ND (0.001)
ND (0.002)

ND (0.3)
ND(0.1)
0.1 (0.07) -
0.16(0.03)
ND (3.4)

ND (0.0001)
ND (0.0002)
0.0005 (0.0002)
0.001 5 (0.0001 )
ND (0.057)
NA = Not Available
ND  = Not Detected
(  )  =  Detection Level
                                  F-37

-------
                         TABLE 2 (Continued)
                         Analytical Results for
                API Separator Bottom Sludge Extraction
                                       API Separator Bottom Sludge #2

MATERIAL BALANCE:
Oil & Grease
Oil
Water
Solids
TOTAL METALS
Chromium
Lead
TCLP METALS
Chromium
Lead
TOTAL PURGEABLE ORGANICS
Benzene
Ethylbenzene
Toluene
Xylene, m
Xylene, o & p
TCLP PURGEABLE ORGANICS
Benzene
Ethylbenzene
Toluene
Xylene, m
Xylene, o & p
TOTAL PNAs AND PHENOLS
Anthracene
Chrysene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Phenols
TCLP PNAs AND PHENOLS
Anthracene
Chrysene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Phenols
UNITS

mg/kg
wt.%
wt.%
wt.%

mg/kg
mg/kg

mg/L
mg/L

ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg

mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L

mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg

mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
FEED

NA
11.1
44.5
43.8

68(1)
110(4)



4600 (1 300)
ND (2500)
11000(2500)
42000 (2500)
14000(5100)



ND (24)
ND (656)
62 (37)
510(19)
ND(1900)


TREATED SOLID

740 (50)
NA
NA
NA

200 (3)
280(10)

0.33 (0.03)
0.2(0.1)

80 (50)
170(100)
360(100)
560(100)
720 (200)

0.0015(0.0005)
ND (0.001)
0.0032 (0.001 )
0.0014(0.001)
ND (0.002)

ND (0.04)
ND (0.3)
0.15(0.04)
0.55 (0.02)
ND(2)

ND (0.0009)
ND (0.001)
0.002 (0.002)
0.004(0.001)
ND (0.010)
NA  =  Not Available
ND  =  Not Detected
(  )  = Detection Level
                                   F-38

-------
                        Appendix G
               ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE RESULTS
Table G-1   ANOVA for solvent extraction and fluidized bed
            incineration.

Table G-2   ANOVA for fluidized bed incineration and stabilization.
                           G-1

-------
                             Table  6-1
     ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE RESULTS FOR COMPARING  FLUIDIZED  BED
INCINERATION AT PLANT A AND SOLVENT EXTRACTION AT  PLANT K  [REPORT 2]
                      Analysis  of Variance  for Xylene
Source
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total
Degrees
of freedom
1
14
15
Sum of
Squares
0.1178
5.9806
6.0984
Mean Squares
0.1178
0.4272

                                                         0.2757
                                                                    Critical
                                                                    F Value
  4.6
                      Analysis of Variance for Naphthalene


                                                        F Ratio


                                                        339.7616
Source
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total
Degrees
of freedom
1
13
14
Sum of
Squares
45.1891
1 .7289
46.9181
Mean Squares
45.1891
0.1330

Critical
F Value
  4.67
                                 G-2

-------
                                   Table G-2
           ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE RESULTS  FOR COMPARING  FLUIDIZED BED
              INCINERATION AT PLANT A AND STABILATION  AT  PLANT I
                            Analysis of Variance  for  Antimony
                            Comparison  of All  Four  Treatments
Source
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total
Degrees
of freedom
3
11
14
Sum of
Squares
3.3051
0.1381
3.4432
Mean Squares F Ratio
1.1017 87.7774
0.0126

Critical
F Value
3. 59


There is a significant difference between the four  treatments;   fluidized bed incineration
is best.
                            Analysis of Variance  for  Antimony
     Comparison of Cement,  Kiln Dust,  and Lime  and  Fly Ash Stabilization

                     Degrees       Sum of                                Critical
      Source        of freedom    Squares    Mean  Squares     F Ratio     F Value
                                                             26.4969       5.14
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total
2
6
8
0.0487
0.0053
0.0520
0.0233
0.0009

There is a significant difference between cement,  kiln  dust,  and  Lime and
fly ash stabilization treatments.
                                            G-3

-------
                            Table G-2 [Continued)
           ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE RESULTS FOR COMPARING  FLUIDIZED  BED
              INCINERATION AT PLANT A AND STABILATION  AT PLANT I
                            Analysis of Variance for Antimony
                  Comparison Between Cement end Kiln Dust  Stabilization

                     Degrees       Sun of                                Critical
      Source        of freedom    Squares     Meen Squares    F Ratio     F Value
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total
1
4
5
0.0317
0.0053
0.0370
0.0317 24.0156
0.0013

                                                                           7.71
There is a significant difference  between  the  cement stabilization and kiln dust
stabilization treatments;   cement  stabilization  treatment is better than kiln
dust stabilization treatment.
                            Analysis of  Variance  for Antimony
                  Comparison Between Cement  and Lime end Fly Ash Stabilization

Cement stabilization and lime and fly ash  stabilization cannot be compared by AN OVA
because eech data set has a standard deviation of zero.  Based on judgement, there
is no significant difference between the two treatments.
                            Analysis of Variance  for Antimony
                  Comparison Between Kiln  Dust  and Lime and Fly Ash Stabilization

                     Degrees       Sun  of                                 Critical
      Source        of freedom    Squares     Mean Squares    F Ratio     F Value
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total
1
4
5
0.0380
0.0053
0.0433
0.0380 26.7641
0.0013

                                                                           7.71
There is a significant difference  between  the  kiln  dust stabilization and lime and
fly ash stabilization treatments;   lime  and  fly  ash stabilization treatment is
better than kiln dust stabilization treatment.
                                         G-4

-------
                            Table G-2 [Continued]
           ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE  RESULTS  FOR COMPARING  FLUIDIZED BED
              INCINERATION AT  PLANT  A AND STABILATION  AT PLANT I
                            Analysis of  Variance  for Arsenic
                           Comparison of All  Four Treatments

                     Degrees       Sum of                                Critical
      Source        of freedom    Squares     Mean  Squares    F Ratio     F Value
                                                                           3.59
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total
3
11
14
6.1370 2.0457
0.8664 0.0788
7.0034
S5.9718


There is a significant difference between the four  treatments;  fluidized bed incineration
i s worst.
                            Analysis of Variance  for  Arsenic
                  Comparison Between Cement and Kiln  Dust Stabilization

Cement stabilization and kiln dust stabilization  cannot  be  compared by AN OVA
because each date set has a standard deviation  of zero.  Based on judgement! there
is no significant difference between the two treatments.
                            Analysis of Variance  for  Arsenic
            Comparison Between Cement and Lime  and  Fly  Ash Stabilization

                     Degrees       Sum of                                Critical
      Source        of freedom    Squares     Mean  Squares     F Ratio     F Value
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total
1
4
5
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000 1.0000
0.0000

                                                                           7.71
There is not a significant difference between the cement  stabilization and  lime and fly
ash stabilization treatments.
                                        G-5

-------
                            Table 6-2 (Continued]
           ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE RESULTS FOR COMPARING FLUIDIZED BED
              INCINERATION AT PLANT A AND STABILATION AT PLANT I
                            Analysis of Variance for Arsenic
            Comparison Between Kiln Dust and Lime and Fly  Ash  Stabilization

                     Degrees       Sum of                                 Critical
      Source        of freedom    Squares     Mean Squares    F Ratio      F Value
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total
1
4
5
0.0552
0.0552
0.1103
0.0552
0.0138

                                                               4.0000       7.71
There is not a significant difference  between  the  kiln  dust stabilization and lime and fly
ash stabilization treatments.
                            Analysis of  Variance for Barium
                            Comparison  of  All  Four Treatments

                     Degrees       Sum  of                                 Critical
      Source        of freedom    Squares      Mean Squares    F Ratio     F Value
  Between Groups        3          2.0377        0.6792       58.3837       3.53

  Within Groups         11          0.1280        0.0118

      Total             14         2.1656

There is a significant difference  between  the four  treatments;  Lime and fly ash
stabilization 1s worst.
                                          G-6

-------
                            TabLe G-2 (Continued]
           ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE RESULTS FOR COMPARING FLUIDIZED BED
              INCINERATION AT PLANT A AND STABILATION AT PLANT I
                            Analysis of Variance for Barium
Comparison of Fluidized Bed Incineration, Cement Stabilization,  and Kiln  Dust Stabilization

                     Degrees       Sum of                                 Critical
      Source        of freedom    Squares     Mean Squares    F  Ratio      F Value
  Between Groups        2          0.1972        0.0985         7.4507       4.2B

  Within Groups         9          0.1191        0.0132

      Total             11         0.3163

There is a significant difference between fluidized bed  Incineration,  cement stabilization,
and kiln dust stabilization treatments.
                            Analysis of Variance  for  Barium
       Comparison Between FLuidized Bed Incineration  and  Cement Stabilization

                     Degrees       Sum of                                Critical
      Source        of freedom    Squares     Mean  Squares     F Ratio     F Value
  Between Groups        1          0.0114        0.0114      13.3106       4.74

  Within Groups         7          0.0060        0.0009

      Totel             8          0.0174

There is a significant difference  between the  fluidized bed Incineration and cement
stabilization treatments;  fluidized  bed  Incineration treatment is better than
cement stabilization treatment.
                                         G-7

-------
                            Table 6-2 (Continued]
           ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE RESULTS FOR COMPARING FLUIDIZED BED
              INCINERATION AT PLANT A AND STABILATION AT  PLANT  I
                            Analysis of Variance for Barium
       Comparison Between Fluidized Bed Incineration and  Kiln  Dust Stabilization

                     Degrees       Sun of                                Critical
      Source        of freedom    Squares     Mean Squares     F Ratio     F Value
  Between Groups        1          0.0043         0.0043        2.9569       4.10

  Within Groups         10         0.0145         0.0015

      Total             11         0.0188

There is not a significant difference  between the fluidized bed incineration and kiln
dust stabilization treatments.
                            Analysis of  Variance for Barium
                    Comparison Between Cement and  Kiln Dust Stabilization

                     Degrees       Sum of                                 Critical
      Source        of freedom    Squares     Mean Squares    F Ratio     F Value
  Between Groups        1           0.1251        0.1251      1517.6621      7.71

  Within Groups         4           0.0003        0.0001

      Total             5           0.1255

There 1s a significant difference  between  the  cement  stabilization and kiln dust
stabilization treatments;   kiln dust  stabilization  treatment 1s better than cement
stabilization treatment.
                                        G-8

-------
                            Table G-2 (Continued]
           ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE RESULTS FOR COMPARING FLUIDIZED BED
              INCINERATION AT PLANT A AND STABILATION AT PLANT I
                            Analysis of Variance for Chromium (total)
                            Comparison of All Four Treatments

                     Degrees       Sun of                                 Critical
      Source        of freedom    Squares     Mean Squares     F  Ratio      F Value
  Between Groups        3          0.9069        0.3023       74.6522       3.59

  Within Groups         11         0.0445        0.0040

      Total             14         0.9514

There is a significant difference between the four treatments;  lime and fly ash
stabilization is best.
                            Analysis of Variance for  Chromium  (total)
Comparison of Fluidized Bed Incineration,  Cement Stabilization, and  Kiln Dust Stabilization

                     Degrees       Sum of                                 Critical
      Source        of freedom    Squeres      Mean Squares     F Ratio     F Value
  Between Groups        2          0.0435        0.0218       5.1559       4.26

  Within Groups         9          0.0380        0.0042

      Total             11          0.0813

There is a significant difference  between fluidized  bed incineration, cement stabilization,
and kiln dust stabilization treatments.
                                           G-9

-------
                            Table G-2 [Continued]
           ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE RESULTS FOR COMPARING FLUIDIZED BED
              INCINERATION AT PLANT A AND STABILATION AT PLANT I
                            Analysis of Variance for  Chromium  [total]
       Comparison Between Fluidized Bed Incineration  and  Cement Stabilization

                     Degrees       Sum of                                Critical
      Source        of freedom    Squares     Mean Squares     F Ratio     F Value
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total
1
7
8
0.0741
0.8984
0.3725
0.0741
0.0426

                                                              1.7385       5.59
There is not a significant difference  between  the  fluidized bed incineration and cement
stabilization treatments.
                            Analysis of  Variance for Chromium [total]
       Comparison Between Fluidized Bed  Incineration and Kiln Dust Stabilization

                     Degrees       Sum of                                 Critical
      Source        of freedom    Squares     Mean Squares    F Ratio     F Value
  Between Groups        1           0.8596        0.2596        6.8641       4.96

  Within Groups         10         0.3782        0.0378

      Total             11         0.6378

There is a significant difference  the  between fluidized bad incineration and kiln
dust stabilization treatments;   kiln dust stabilization treatment is better than
fluidized bed incineration treatment.
                                           G-10

-------
                           Table 6-2  [Continued]
           ANALYSIS  OF VARIANCE RESULTS  FOR COMPARING FLUIDIZED BED
              INCINERATION  AT  PLANT A  AND STABILATION AT PLANT I
                            Analysis  of Variance for Chromium (total)
                    Comparison Between Cement and Kiln Dust Stabilization
Source
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total
Degrees
of freedom
1
4
5
Sum of
Squa res
0.0095
0.0033
0.0128
Mean Squares
0.0095
0.0008

                                                             F Ratio
                                                             11.6573
Critical
F Value
  7.71
There is a significant  difference  between  the  cement stabilization and kiln dust
stabilization treatments;   kiln dust  stabilization treatment 1s better than cement
stabilization treatment.
                            Analysis of  Variance for Copper
                            Comparison  of  All  Four Treatments
Source
Between Groups
Within Groups
Totel
Degrees
of freedom
3
11
14
Sum of
Squares Mean Squares F Ratio
9.0755 3.0252 14.3052
2.3262 0.2115
11 .4017
Critical
F Value
3.59


There is a significant difference  between the four treatments;  fluidlzed bed Incineration
is worst.
                                           G-ll

-------
                            Table 6-2 [Continued]
           ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE RESULTS  FOR  COMPARING  FLUIDIZED BED
              INCINERATION AT PLANT A AND  STABILATION  AT PLANT I
                            Analysis of Variance  for Copper
          Comparison of Cement,  Kiln Dust,  and  Lime and Fly Ash Stabilization
Source
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total
Degrees
of freedom
2
6
8
Sum of
Squa res
0.1413
2.3262
2.4675
Mean Squares F Ratio
0.0707 0.1823
0.3877

Critical
F Value
5.14


There is not a significant difference  between  cement, kiln dust, and lime and fly
ash stabilization treatments.
                            Anelysis of Variance for Nickel
                            Comparison of  All  Four Treatments
Source
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total
Degrees
of freedom
3
11
14
Sun of
Squeres
0.0506
0.1454
0.1962
Mean Squares
0.0169
0.0132

                                                             F Ratio
                                                              1.2800
                                                     Critical
                                                     F Value
                                                       3.59
There is not a significant difference  between the four treatments.
      Source
                            Analysis  of Veriance for Selenium
                            Comparison of All Four Treatments
 Degrees
of freedom
 Sum of
Squa res
Mean Squares    F Ratio
Critical
F Value
  Between Groups        3

  Within Groups         11

      Total             14
               5.5723

               2.9624

               8.5347
               1.8574

               0.2693
                 6.8970
  3.59
There is a significant difference  between the four treatment;  fluidized bed Incineration
is worst.
                                       G-12

-------
                            Table G-2 (Continued]
           ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE RESULTS FOR COMPARING FLUIDIZED BED
              INCINERATION AT PLANT A AND STABILATION AT  PLANT  I
                            Analysis of Variance for  Selenium
          Comparison of Cement, Kiln Dust,  and Lime and  Fly  Ash Stabilization
      Source
 Degrees       Sum of                                Critical
of freedom    Squares     Mean  Squares     F Ratio     F Value
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total
2
6
8
8.0015
0.0643
S.D657
1 .0007
0.0107

                                                              93.4250
                                                       5.14
There is a significant difference  between cement,  kiln  dust, and lime and fly ash
stabilization treatments.
                            Analysis of  Variance  for  Selenium
                    Comparison Between Cement  and Kiln Dust Stabilization
Source
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total
Degrees
of freedom
1
4
5
Sum of
Squares
0.7102
0.0172
0.7274
Mean Squares F Ratio
0.710S 165.3701
0.0043

Critical
F Value
7.71


There is a significant difference  between the  cement  stabilization and kiln dust
stabilization treatments;  cement  stabilization treatment is better than kiln dust
stabilization treatment.
                                           G-13

-------
                            Table G-2 [Continued]
           ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE RESULTS FOR COMPARING  FLUIDIZED BED
              INCINERATION AT PLANT A AND STABILATION  AT PLANT I
                            Analysis of Variance  for Selenium
            Comparison Between Cement and Lime  and  Fly Ash Stabilization

                     Degrees       Sun of                                Critical
      Source        of freedom    Squares    Mean  Squares    F Ratio     F Value
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total
1
4
5
0.0009
0.0000
0.0008
0.0002 28.2647
0.0000

                                                                           7.71
There is a significant difference  between  the  cement  stabilization and lime and fly
ash stabilization treatments;  Lime  and fly  ash  stabilization treatment is better
than cement stabilization treatment.
                            Analysis of  Variance for Selenium
                  Comparison Between Kiln  Dust and Lime and Fly Ash Stabilization

                     Degrees       Sum of                                 Critical
      Source        of freedom    Squares     Mean Squares    F Ratio     F Value
                                                                           7.71
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total
1
4
5
1.9753
0.0531
2.0284
1.9753 148.8405
0.0133

There is a significant difference  between  the  kiln dust stabilization and lime and
fly ash stabilization treatments;   lime and  fly ash stabilization treatment Is
better than kiln dust stabilization treatment.
                                        G-14

-------
                            Table G-2 [Continued]
           ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE  RESULTS  FOR  COMPARING FLUIDIZED BED
              INCINERATION AT PLANT A AND STABILATION AT PLANT I
                            Analysis of  Variance  for Vanadium
                            Comparison of  All  Four Treatments
      Source
                     Degrees
                    of freedom
 Sum of
Squares
Mean Squares    F Ratio
                            Critical
                            F Value
  Between Groups        3         88.2776         7.4259       720.1425      3.59

  Within Groups         11          0.1134         0.0103

      Total             14        22.3910

There is a significant difference between  the four  treatments;   lime and fly ash
stabilization is best.
                            Analysis of Variance  for Vanadium
Comparison of Fluldized Bed Incineration,  Cement  Stabilization, and Kiln Dust Stabilization

                     Degrees       Sum of                                 Critical
      Source        of freedom    Squares      Mean Squares     F Ratio     F Value
Between Groups
Within Groups
Totel
2
9
11
9.9386
1.5682
11.5068
4.9693
0.1742

                                                              28.5188
                                          4.26
There is a significant difference between fluidized bed incineration,  cement stabilization,
and kiln dust stabilization treatments.
                                         G-15

-------
                           Table G-2 (Continued]
           ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE RESULTS TOR COMPARING FLUIDIZED BED
              INCINERATION AT PLANT A AND STABILATION AT PLANT I
                           Analysis of Variance for Vanadium
       Comparison Between  Fluidized Bed Incineration and Cement Stabilization
Source
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total
Degrees
of freedom
1
10
11
Sum of
Squa res
0.2596
0.3792
0.6378
Mean Squares F Ratio
0.2596 6.8841
0.0376

CM ti cal
F Value
4.96


There is a significant difference  between the fluidlzed bed Incineration and cement
stabilization treatments;   cement  stabilization treatment Is better than fluidlzed
bed Incineration treatment.
                            Analysis of Variance for Vanadium
       Comparison Between Fluidized Bed Incineration and Kiln Dust Stabilization
Source
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total
Degrees
of freedom
1
7
8
Sum of
Squares
0.0741
0.2984
0.3725
Mean Squares F Ratio
0.0741 1.7385
0.0426

Critical
F Value
5.59


There is not a significant difference  between the fluidlzed bed Incineration and kiln
dust stabilization treatments.
                                          G-16

-------
                            Table G-2 [Continued]
           ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE RESULTS FOR COMPARING  FLUIDIZED BED
              INCINERATION AT PLANT A AND STABILATION  AT PLANT I
                            Analysis of Variance  for  Vanadium
                    Comparison Between Cement and Kiln  Dust Stabilization
Source
Between Groups
Wi thin Groups
Total
Degrees
of freedom
1
4
5
Sum of
Squa res
0.0620
0.0200
0.0820
Mean Squares F Ratio
0.0820 12.4054
0.0050

Critical
F Value
7.71


There is a significant difference between the  cement  stabilization and kiln dust
stabilization treatments;   cement stabilization treatment Is better than kiln dust
stabilization treatment.
                            Analysis of Variance for Zinc
                            Comparison  of  All  Four Treatments
Source
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total
Degrees
of freedom
3
11
14
Sum of
Squares
2.5471
0.9274
3.4745
Mean Squares
0.8490
O.OS43

                                                             F Ratio
                                                             10.0711
Critical
F Value
  3.5S
There is a significant difference  between the  four  treatments;  fluldized bed incineration
1 s worst.
                                          G-17

-------
                            Table G-2 (Continued)
           ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE RESULTS  FOR  COMPARING  FLUIDIZED BED
              INCINERATION AT PLANT A AND STABILATION  AT PLANT I
                            Analysis  of Variance  for Zinc
          Comparison of Cement,  Kiln  Dust,  and Lime and Fly Ash Stabilization
Source
Between Groups
Wlthl n Groups
Total
Degrees
of freedom
2
6
8
Sum of
Squares
0.0026
0.0032
0.0057
Mean Squares F Ratio
0.0013 2.4124
0.0005

Critical
F Value
5.14


There is not a significant difference  between cement, kiln dust, and lime and fly ash
stabilization treatments.
                                         G-18

-------
                                  Appendix H
                     DETECTION LIMITS FOR UNTREATED WASTES
Table 6-2:     Detection limits for the dewatered DAF float
               samples - K048.

Table 3-1:     Detection limits for the slop oil emulsion solids
               samples - K049.

Table 6-7:     Detection limits for the API separator sludge
               samples - K051.

Table 3-3:     Detection limits for the leaded tank bottoms
               samples - K052.
Page

H-2


H-9


H-15


H-22
                                     H-l

-------
                                     TABLE 6-21  DETECTION LIMITS  FOR THE  DENATEREO OAF FLOAT MIXTURE SAMPLES
33
I
to
BOAT CONSTITUENT
VOLATILE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
8
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
18
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
CONSTITUENTS
Ace tonlt rile
Acroleln
Ac rylonl trite
Benzene
BmodichloroM thane
BroaiMM thane
Carbon tatrachlorlde
Carbon dlsulflde
Chlorobenzene
2-Chloro-1 ,3-butad1ene
ChlorodlbrMOMthane
Chloroa thane
2-Chloroethyl vinyl ether
Chlorofom
Chloroaa thane
3-Chloropropene
1 ,2-01bro«o-3-chloropropane
1 1 2-01 broaioe thane
DlbroBOMthane
Trana-1 ,4-d1chloro-2-butene
Dlchlorodlfluorom thane
1 ,1-Olchloroethane
1 ,2-Olchloroethane
1 ,1-Dlchloroethylena
Trana-1 ,2-dlchloroethane
1 ,2-Olchloropropane
Trans-1 ,3-dlchloropropene
cls-1 ,3-01chloropropene
1 ,4-Oloxane
Ethyl cyanide
Ethyl mthacrylate
lodoaethane
Detection
LlHlt
(PP-)
70
700
70
14
14
14
14
KB
14
14
14
14
NB
14
14
14
14
14
14
70
14
14
14
14
14
35
35
35
NA
700
14
14

-------
                               TABLE 6-2:   DETECTION  LIMITS FOR THE DEWATERED  DAF  FLOAT MIXTURE SAMPLES (Continued)
EC
OJ
BOAT CONSTITUENT
VOLATILE CONSTITUENTS (Continued)
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
48
50
**
*»
»*
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
Isobutyl alcohol
Methyl ethyl ketone
Methyl Mthacrylate
Methyl •ethanesulfonate
Methylacrylonitrile
Me thy lane chloride
Pyridine
1 §1 i1 »2-Tetrachloroethane
1,1,2,2-Tetrechloroethena
TatrachLoroe thane
Toluene
TribroMwe thane
1 ,1 ,1-THchloroethene
1 (1 ,2— Trichloroethane
Trlchloroethene
TrlchloroMonof luoromthane
1 ,2,3-Trichloropropane
Vinyl chloride
Acetone
Allyl alcohol
Ethyl benzene
Ethylene oxide
2-Haxanone
Malononitrila
4-Methy l-2-pentenone
2-Propyn-1-ol
Styrene
TrichloroMethenethiol
Vinyl acetate
Xylene (total)
Detection
L1nit
(PP")
14
70
14
100
70
70
200
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
35
14
70
NA
14
NA
70
NA
70
NA
14
NA
14
14

-------
TABLE 6-2:  DETECTION LIMITS FOR THE DWATERED OAF FLOAT MIXTURE SAMPLES (Continued)
BOAT CONSTITUENT
SBUVOLATILE
51
62
63
54
56
58
57
58
68
BO
61
Be
63
64
65
66
67
68
68
70
71
72
73
74
76
76
77
78
78
80
81
82
CONSTITUENTS
Acenap the Lena
Acanapthana
Acatopttanona
2-Acaty leal nof luorena
4-A»1nob1phenyl
Anlllna
Anthracene
Arajilta
Benz{ a) anthracene
Banzanathlol
Banzidlne
Benzol a) pyrene
Banzo(b) fluoran thane
Benzol g,h,1)pary Lane
Banzof klriuorantnena
p-BanzoquI none
B1a(2-chloroathoxy]ethane
81 a(2-chloroethyl) ether
B1 •( 2-ch lorol aop ropy I ) athe r
B1a(2-athylhaxyl)phthalate
4-BroMphany I phenyl ether
Butyl banzyl phtnelate
2-sac-Buty L-4tB-d1 nl trophenol
p-Chloroenl Una
Chlorobanzl lata
p-Chloro-m-creeol
2-Chloronaphthalene
2-Chlorophenol
3-Chloroproplonltrlle
Chrysene
ortho-Creeol
para-Cresol
Detection
Llait
(PP«)
20
20
20
NA
20
50
20
NA
20
NA
20
20
NA
50
20
NA
20
20
20
20
100
20
NA
50
NB
50
20
20
NA
20
20
20

-------
                                 TABLE 6-2:  DETECTION LIMITS FOR THE DEWATERED DAF  FLOAT MIXTURE SAMPLES (Continued)
PS
 I
Ln
BOAT CONSTITUENT
SEMIVOLATILE
83
B4
86
86
87
88
88
80
81
82
83
84
95
86
87
88
88
100
101
108
103
104
106
106
107
108
108
110
111
112
113
114
115
CONSTITUENTS (Continued)
01 benz( a ,h) anthracene
D1benzo(a,e)pyrene
01 benzol a , 1 ) py rane
a-Olchlorobenzene
D-Dlchlorobanzena
p-Olchlorobenzene
3,3'-01chlorobenz1d1ne
2, 4-01 chloro phenol
2,8-Oichlorophenol
Dlethyl phthalate
3t3'-OlMthoxybanz1d1ne
p-01 Mthy laai noazobenzene
3 ,3 '-DlMthy Ibanzidine
2.4-DlMthylphanol
DlMthy 1 phthalata
Dl-n-tutyl phthalata
1 ,4-01 nitrobenzene
4,6-Olnl tro— o-craaol
2,4-Olnltrophenol
2,4-Oini tro toluene
2,6-Dlnltrotoluene
Dl-n-octyl phthalata
Dl-n-propy Lnl troaaailna
Dlph any laalna
1 ,2-01phanylhydraz1ne
F I uo ran thane
Fluorane
Hexach lorobanzene
Haxach lo robutad 1 ane
Haxach 1 orocyc lopentadl ene
Hexach I o roe thane
Haxach loroph ane
Haxach loropropane
Detection
Limit
(PP-)
20
NA
NA
20
20
20
100
60
60
20
100
50
NA
SO
20
20
100
500
500
500
100
20
50
20
20
20
20
100
100
100
100
NA
100

-------
                             TABLE 8-2:  DETECTION LIMITS FOR THE OEWATEREO DAF FLOAT MIXTURE SAMPLES (Continued)
35
BOAT CONSTITUENT
SEMIVOLATILE
118
117
118
118
120
121
122
123
124
126
128
127
128
128
130
131
132
133
134
136
136
137
138
138
140
141
142
143
144
146
147
148
CONSTITUENTS (Continued)
Indanol 1 ,2 ,3-cd ) py pane
laoaafrola
MathapyrUene
3-Mathy Lcholanthrene
4,4'-Methylenat>iB(2-chloroani Una)
Naphthalana
1,4-Naphthoquinone
1-Naphthyla*1ne
2-Naphthylaaine
p-Mitro aniline
Nitrobenzene
4-Nltrophanol
N-Nltroeodi-n-buty lamina
N-*1troeod1ethylee)1ne
N-N1 troaodl Mthy laail ne
N-NU roacM thy lathy la«1 na
N-N1 troaoao rphol 1 na
N-Mltroaopi perl dine
N-Nltrosopyrrolldine
6-Ni t ro-o-tolul d 1 na
Pan tech lorobanzana
Pantach loroathana
Pantach loroni trobanzana
Pentachlorophenol
Phenacetln
Phananthrana
Phenol
2-Picoline
Prona«1da
Pyrana
Safrole
1 ,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene
Detection
Li ait
(PP-)
50
NA
NB
NA
NA
20
20
20
20
100
60
100
50
100
200
NA
100
100
100
NA
100
100
100
600
20
20
20
200
100
20
NB
50

-------
TABLE 6-2:  DETECTION LIMITS FOR THE DEWATERED OAF FLOAT MIXTURE SAMPLES (Continued)
BOAT CONSTITUENT
SEMIVOLATILE
148
150
161
168
•*
**
**
••
**
**
**
••
**
**
*•
**
**
METALS
164
166
15B
157
168
168
168
160
161
162
163
CONSTITUENTS (Continued)
2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol
1 r2,4-Tr1chlorobenzene
2,4,5-Trlchlorophenol
Bi4r6— Trlchloro phenol
Benzole acid
Benzyl alcohol
4-Chlorophanyl phenyl ether
Dlbenzofuran
D1benzo(a|h)pyrene
7 ,12-OlM thy lbenz( a) anthracene
alpha, alphe-D1«ethylphenethyla«1ne
laophorona
2-Methylnaphthalene
2-NltromlUne
3-Nltroanlllne
2-N1trophenol
N-N1 troaodl pheny leal ne

AntlMiny
Arsenic
Be HIM
BeryllliM
Cadalu*
ChromlUMt haxavalent
Chroulu*, total
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Detection
LI nit
(PP-)
100
50
100
100
500
50
50
20
NA
50
100
20
20
100
100
100
20
(PP»)
6
0.3
0.8
0.1
0.3
0.05
0.8
1
5
0.02
2

-------
TABLE 6-2:  DETECTION LIMITS FOR THE DEWATERED DAF FLOAT MIXTURE SAMPLES (Continued)
                                                                       Detection
BOAT CONSTITUENT                                                         L1«it
METALS (Continued)                                                           [ppn]

                                                                               0.3
                                                                               0.9
                                                                               0.2
                                                                                 2
                                                                               0.6
                                                                                20
                                                                                 6
                                                                                 1
                                                                                 3
                                                                                20
                                                                               Q aO
                                                                                29
                                                                                 B
                                                                                50

    169      TOTAL CYANIDE (ppn)                                                0.1
164
185
166
167
166
**
**
**
**
**
**
»*
»*
**
Seleniun
Silver
The I HUB
VanadiiM
Zinc
AlUNinuM
CalciUM
Cobalt
Iron
Magnesium
Manganese
Potassium
Sodium
Tin
    171      SULFIDE (POM)                                                      50
NB  = The compound was searched using an NBS library  database  of 42,000 compounds.
NA  = The standard is not available;  the compound MBS searched using  an NBS  library
      database of 42,000 compounds.
**  = This constituent Is not on the  list of constituents  in the GENERIC QUALITY
      ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN  FOR LAND DISPOSAL  RESTRICTIONS PROGRAM ("BOAT"),
      EPA/53Q-SW-B7-011, March 1987.   It Is  a ground-water monitoring constituent as
      listed in Appendix IX,  Page 26639, of  the FEDERAL REGISTER, Vol. 51, No. 142.

-------
TABLE 3-11   DETECTION  LIMITS  FOR THE SLOP OIL EMULSION SOLIDS SAMPLES - K04S
BOAT CONSTITUENT
VOLATILES
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2B
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
38
37
38
39
40
Aoatonltrlla
Acrolaln
AcrylonltrUa
Benzene
BroBodl chloroM thane
Bronoia thane
Carbon tetraehlorlde
Carbon d1sul.f1 da
Chlorobanzena
2-Chtoro-1 ,3-outadlana
Chlorodi broMoaathana
Chl oroathana
2-Chloroathyl vinyl ether
Chlorofor*
Chlorom thane
3-Chloropropene
1 (2-01 broBo-3-cnl oropropana
1 f2-01broB)oathana
DlbroaoMthana
Trana-1 ,4-dl ch I o ro-fi-outena
D1 chlorodl f luoroMthana
1 f1-01 ch I o roe thane
1 ,2-01 ohloroe thane
1, 1-01 chloroa thy lana
Trana-1 ,2-dl chl oroa thane
1 ,2-01 chloropropana
Trana-1 ,3-dlchloropropene
c1 e-1 ,3-01 chloropropana
1 ,4-01oxane
Ethyl cyanide
Ethyl a* theory late
lodoae thane
laobutyl alcohol
Methyl ethyl katona
Methyl »e theory late
Methyl •ethanaaulfonate
Methylacrylonltrlle
Me thy lane chloride
Pyrldlna
1 ,1 ,1 ,2-Tetrachloroathana
Da faction
Llalt
(PP»)
1000
1000
1000
50
50
100
50
50
50
1000
50
100
100
50
100
1000
1000
50
50
50
1000
100
50
50
50
50
50
50
2000
1000
1000
500
2000
100
1000
NO
1000
50
4000
50
                                            H-9

-------
TABLE 3-1I  DETECTION LIMITS  FOR THE SLOP OIL EMULSION SOLIDS SAMPLES - K049 (Continued)
BOAT CONSTITUENT
VOLATILES
41
42
43
44
45
48
47
48
48
50
**
**
*•
*•
*»
**
•M-
( Continued)
1 »1 ,2t2-Tetrachloroathane
Tatrachloroathana
Toluana
TrlbroaicMathana
1 ,1 ,1-Trlchloroathana
1 11 ,2-TMchloroethana
Trlchloroathana
TrlchloroMonofluoroMthana
1 ,2,3-Trlchloropropana
Vinyl chlorlda
Aoetona
Ethyl banzana
2-Haxanona
4-Methy l-2-pantanona
Sty ran a
Vinyl acatata
Xylana(total]
SEMIVOLATILES
51
52
53
54
55
58
57
58
59
80
81
82
63
64
65
68
87
68
Acanaphthalana
Aoanaphthana
Acatophanona
2-AoatylaBlnofluorana
4-A»1noto1phenyl
Anlllna
Anthracana
Araalta
Banz ( a ] anth racana
Banana thlol
Banzldlna
Banzo(a)pyrana
Banzo(b)fluoran thane
BanzoIOfht Dparylana
Banzo( k) f luoranthana
p-Banzoqulnona
B1a(2-chloroBathoxy)athana
B1i(2-chloroathyl)»thar
Datactlon
LlHlt
(PP-)
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
100
100
50
100
100
50
100
50
(PP-)
40
40
40
80
40
40
40
NA
40
NO
200
40
40
40
40
NO
40
40
                                            H-10

-------
TABLE 3-1 <  DETECTION  LIMITS  FOR THE SLOP OIL EMULSION SOLIDS SAMPLES - K048 (Contlnuad)
BOAT CONSTITUENT
SEMIVOLATILES (Contlnuad)
89
70
71
72
73
74
75
78
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
88
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
98
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
108
107
Bl8(2-chlorol80pj>opyl)athar
B1 8(2-8 thy lhaxy I ) phthalata
4-BroB)Ophanyl phanyl athar
Butyl banzyl phthalata
2-aec-Butyl-4f8-d1 nl trophenol
p-Chloroanl Una
Chlorobanzl late
p-Chloro-e>-creeol
2-Chloronaphthalane
2-Chlorophanol
3-Chloroproplonl tr1 la
Chryaana
ortho-Creeol
para-Creaol
D1benz[e,h]anthracane
D1benzo(a,e)pyrane
D1banzo(a,1]pyrane
mr-D 1 ch I o roba nz ana
o-OI chl orobenzana
p-Olchlorobanzana
3 ,3'-D1 chlorobanzl dine
2,4-Olchlorophenol
2 ,8-01 chl oro phenol
01 ethyl phthalata
3,3'-OlMthoxybanz1d1ne
p-01 Mthy laail noazobanzene
3,3'-D1»etnylbenz1d1ne
2 ,4-01 Mthy I phenol
DlMthyl phthelate
Dl-n-butyl phthalata
1 ,4-01 nl trobanzane
4,8-01 nl tro-o-creeol
2, 4-01 nltro phenol
2,4-01 n1 trotoluane
2,6-01 nl trotoluane
Dl-n-octyl phthalata
Dl-n-propylnl troaaalne
Dlphenylaeilne
1 ,2-01 phenylhydrazlna
Detection
LI Bit
(PP-)
40
40
40
40
200
40
NA
40
40
40
NA
40
40
40
40
NS
NA
40
40
40
80
40
NO
40
40
80
NO
40
40
40
200
200
200
40
40
40
40
BO
200
                                            H-ll

-------
TABLE 3-1:   DETECTION LIMITS FOR THE SLOP OIL EMULSION  SOLIDS SAMPLES - K049 (Continued)
BOAT CONSTITUENT
SEMIVOLATILES (Continued)
108
109
110
111
118
113
114
115
118
117
118
119
120
181
122
123
124
125
128
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
148
Fluoranthene
Fluorana
Hexechlorobenzene
Haxachlorobutadlana
Hexachtorocyclopantadlana
Haxachloroathana
Hexachlorophane
Haxachloropropana
IndenoM ,2,3-ed)pyrene
laoaafrola
Mathapyrllana
3-Mathylcholanthrane
4t4l-Methylanab1 e(2-chtoroan1 Una]
Naphthalene
1 ,4-Naphthoqu1none
1-Naphthylaalne
2-Naphthylaailna
p-Nltroanlllna
Nitrobenzene
4-N1trophenol
N-N1 troaodl-n-buty leal na
N-NltroaodlethyleajIne
N-N1 troaodlMthylMlna
N-N1 1 roeo»ethy lathy leal na
M-N1 troeoiorphoUna
N-NltraaopI perl dine
N-N1 troaopy rroll dl ne
5-N1 1 ro-o-tol ul dl na
Pentachlorobanzana
Pantachloroethene
Pentaohloronl trobanzene
Pantachlorophenol
Phaneeatln
Phenenthrane
Phenol
2-P1col1ne
Pronaajl de
Pyrane
Raaorclnol
Detection
LlBlIt
(PP-)
40
40
40
40
40
40
NA
NO
40
80
NS
80
80
40
NA
200
200
200
40
200
NO
NO
40
40
80
40
200
80
ND
NA
400
200
80
40
40
40
ND
40
NA
                                            H-12

-------
TABLE 3-11   DETECTION LIMITS FOB THE SLOP OIL EMULSION SOLIDS SAMPLES - K049 (Continued)
BOAT CONSTITUENT
SEMIVOLATILES { Continued)
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
**
*»
**
**
**
»»
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
METALS
154
155
156
157
158
159
181
182
183
184
185
168
187
188
189
Safrola
1 ,2,4,5-Tetrechlorobenzene
2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophanol
1 ,2,4-Trlchlorobenzene
2 ,4,5-Trlchloro phenol
2,4,8-Trlchlorophenol
TrlB(2,3-d1broM>propyl) phoaphate
Benzole acid
Benzyl alcohol
4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether
Dlbenzofuran
D1benzo(a,h)pyrane
7,12-OlMthylbenz(e)enthracene
alpha, elphe-DlMthylphene thy iBBlna
Isophorone
Malonltrlla
2-Methylnaphthelene
2-N1troan1l1na
3-N1troen1Une
2-N1trophenol
N-N1 troaodl phenyleelne

Antlanny
Arsenic
Berluej
BerylUuei
CadeluB
ChroiluB, totel
Copper
Leed
Mercury
Nickel
Selenlua
Silver
Thallium
Venedlm
21 nc
Detect 1 on
LlMlt
(PP-)
200
SO
NO
50
100
40
NO
200
40
40
40
NS
NO
NS
40
NA
40
200
200
400
40
(PP-)
3.2
2.0
0.1
0.1
0.4
0.7
0.8
5.1
0.2
1.1
5.0
0.8
1.0
0.8
0.2
                                           H-13

-------
  TABLE 3-1:  DETECTION LIMITS FOR THE  SLOP OIL EMULSION SOLIDS SAMPLES - K048 (Continued)

                                                                      Detection
BOAT CONSTITUENT                                                        LI Bit
INORGANICS                                                                  (ppari
    170      Total Cyanide                                                    0.5

    171      Fluoride                                                         1.0

    178      Sulflde                                                          0.5
NA = Analyala cannot be done by Mthod 8270  et thla  tlw due to Inadequate
     racoverlea In laboratory QA/QC anelyaea.
ND - Not detected, eatlaated detection Halt hea  not been  determined.
NS = The standard la not available; the compound  was aeerched using en NB8 library
     detabaae of 48,000 coeipounda.
++ = Total xylene la the total raault for ortho-Xylane, Mta-Xylane, end pera-Xylane
     •1th CAB nuibera 85-47-8, 108-38-3, and 108-48-3,  respectively.
•• = Thla constituent IB not on the Hat of  constituents In the GENERIC QUALITY
     ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN FOR LAND DISPOSAL  RESTRICTIONS PROGRAM  ("BOAT"],
     EPA/530-SW-B7-011, Merch 1887.  It la a ground-water  Monitoring constituent as
     listed In Appendix IX, Pege 88838, of the FEDERAL  REGISTER, Vol. 51, No. 148.
                                               H-14

-------
                                    TABLE 6-7:  DETECTION LIMITS FOR THE API SEPARATOR SLUDGE SAMPLES
EC
 I
BOAT CONSTITUENT
VOLATILE
1
2
3
4
5
B
7
B
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
CONSTITUENTS
Acetonltrlle
Acrolaln
Acrylonltrila
Banzana
BroBodlchloroM thane
Bromwethene
Carbon tetrachloride
Carbon dlsulfide
Chloro benzene
a-Chloro-1 ,3-butadiena
ChlorodtbroeioM thane
Chloroethene
2-Chloroethyl vinyl ether
Chloroform
Chloroa* thane
3-Chloro propane
1 ,8-01broa)O-3-chloro pro pane
1,2-Olbroaoethene
DlbrowNM thane
Trana-1 ,4-dichloro-2-butane
DIchlorodlfluorcMM thane
1,1-Oichloroe thane
1 ,2-0 ichloroa thane
1,1-Olchloroe thy lane
Trana-1 ,2-dlchloroe thane
1,2-Olchloropropana
Trana-1 ,3-dlchloropropene
cia-1,3-01chloropropene
1,4-Otoxana
Ethyl cyanide
Ethyl Mthacrylete
lodoan thane
Detection
LlMlt
(PP-)
70
700
70
14
14
14
14
NB
14
14
14
14
NB
14
14
14
14
14
14
70
14
14
14
14
14
35
35
35
NA
700
14
14

-------
TABLE 6-7:   DETECTION LIMITS FOR THE API  SEPARATOR SLUDGE SAMPLES  (Continued]
BOAT CONSTITUENT
VOLATILE CONSTITUENTS (Continued)
33
34
36
38
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
**
**
**
*»
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
leobutyl alcohol
Methyl ethyl ketone
Methyl •ethacrylate
Methyl •ethaneeulfonete
Methylacrylonltrile
Mathylane chloride
Pyrldlne
1 (1 11 ,2-Tetrachloroathane
1 r1 ,2 ,2-Tetrachloroathane
Tat rach loroethene
Toluene
TrlbroMOMe thane
1 ,1,1-Trlchloroethane
1 ,1 t2-Tr1chloroathane
Trlchloroethene
TrichloroBtmof luocoae thane
1 ,2,3-Trlchloropropane
Vinyl chloride
Acetone
Ally I alcohol
Ethyl benzene
Ethylene oxide
2-Hexanone
HalononUrHa
4-Methy l-8-pentanone
2-Propyn-^-ol
Styrene
TrichloroMethanethlol
Vinyl acetate
Xylene (total)
Detection
Limit
(PP-)
14
70
14
100
70
70
200
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
35
14
70
NA
14
NA
70
NA
70
NA
14
NA
14
14

-------
                                 TABLE 8-7:  DETECTION LIMITS TOR THE API SEPARATOR SLUDGE SAMPLES  (Continued)
I
I—'
—1
BOAT CONSTITUENT
8EMIVOLATILE
51
52
53
64
55
SB
57
58
53
60
B1
82
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
78
77
78
79
80
81
82
CONSTITUENTS
Acenapthalene
Ace nap thane
Acetophenone
2- AcatylMlnof luorene
4-Aatnoblphenyl
Aniline
Anthracene
Araalte
Benz(e)anthracene
Benzene thlol
Benzldlne
Banzo(a)pyrane
Banzo(b)fluoran thane
Benzo(g,h, ilperylena
Banzo(k)fluoran thane
p-BenzoquI none
B1a(2-chLoroethaxy)ethene
BU(2-chloroethy I ] ether
Bia(2-chloro1ao pro py I Jether
Bla(2-athylhexyl)phthalata
4-Braenphenyl phanyl ether
Butyl benzyl phthelata
2-aec-Buty 1-4,6-dl nl tro phenol
p-ChloroanUlna
Chlorobenzllete
p-Ch I o ro-ar-c reeo I
2-Chloronephthelene
2-Chloro phenol
3-Chloroproplonl tr He
Chryaane
ortho-Crasol
pera-Creaol
Detection
LlHlt
(PP-)
20
20
20
NA
20
50
20
NA
20
NA
20
20
NA
50
20
NA
20
20
20
20
100
20
NA
50
NB
50
20
20
NA
20
20
20

-------
                                   TABLE 6-7:  DETECTION LIMITS FDR THE API SEPARATOR SLUDGE SAMPLES (Continued)
 I
M
00
BOAT CONSTITUENT
8ENIVOLATILE
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
80
91
92
93
94
95
98
87
88
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
CONSTITUENTS (Continued)
D1banz(a,h)anthracane
Oibanzo(a,a)pyrena
D1banzo(a, Opyrene
arO 1 ch lo robanzana
o-Dtchlorobanzane
p-Dlehlorobanzana
3,3'-0
-------
TABLE 6-7:  DETECTION LIMITS FOR THE API SEPARATOR SLUDGE SAMPLES [Continued)
BOAT CONSTITUENT
SEMIVOLATILE
118
117
118
119
180
181
188
183
184
125
186
187
188
188
130
131
138
133
134
135
138
137
138
138
140
141
148
143
144
145
147
148
CONSTITUENTS (Continued)
Indeno(1l2l3-cd)pyrene
laoaafrota
Mathapyr liana
3-Nathylcholanthrane
4,4l-Mathylanab1a(2-chloraan1lina)
Naphthalene
1,4-Maphthoqulnone
1-NaphthylMina
2-NaphthylMlna
p-NltroanUlne
Nltrobanzana
4-Nitro phenol
N-N1troaod1-n-butylMlne
N-Nttroeodtethyla*ina
N-N1troaodtMthylaKlne
N-NltroaoMthylethylaaine
N-NttroaoMrphollne
N-Nltroaoptparldlna
N-Nitroao pyrrol idine
5-Nltro-o-toluldlna
Pantachlorobanzane
Pentachloroathana
Pentachloronitro benzene
Pentachloro phenol
Phenacatln
Phenanthrane
Phenol
2-P1col1na
Prone* ide
Pyrene
Safrole
1,8,4l5-Tetrachlorobenzene
Detection
L1»it
Ipp-l
50
NA
NB
NA
NA
80
20
80
20
100
50
100
50
100
200
NA
100
100
100
NA
100
100
100
500
20
20
20
200
100
20
NB
50

-------
                                   TABLE 8-7:   DETECTION  UNITS  FDR THE API  SEPARATOR SLUDGE  SAMPLES (Continued)
EB

NJ
O
BOAT CONSTITUENT
SEMIVOLATILE
148
150
161
158
*•
•*
**
»«
**
*•
**
**
«•
**
»»
••
•*
METALS
154
155
15S
157
158
159
159
160
161
162
163
CONSTITUENTS (Continued)
2,3,4,8-Tatrachloro phenol
1,2,4-Trtchlorobenzene
2,4,5-Trichloro phenol
2,4,6-Trichloro phenol
Benzole acid
Benzyl alcohol
4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether
Dtbenzofuran
D1benzo(a,h)pyrene
7,12-0 tMthylbenz (a) anthracene
alpha, alpha-Die* thy Iphana thy la«1ne
laophorona
2-Mathylnaphthalene
2-NitroanUina
3-N1troan1line
2-Nitrophanol
N-Ni troaodl phany la*ina

Antlaany
Araenic
BariuB
Barylliim
Cadaiiw
Chroailu*, hexavalent
Chnwlua), total
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Detection
Liait
(PP-)
100
50
100
100
500
50
50
20
NA
50
100
20
20
100
100
100
20
(PP-)
6
0.3
0.9
0.1
0.3
0.05
0.9
1
5
0.02
2

-------
                                 TABLE 6-7>  DETECTION LIMITS FOR THE API SEPARATOR SLUDGE SAMPLES [Continued]
                                                                                                      Detection
                            BOAT CONSTITUENT                                                            Li nit


                            METALS (Continued)                                                           [ppm]

                                                                                                           0.4
                                                                                                           0.9
                                                                                                           0.8
                                                                                                             2
                                                                                                           0.6
                                                                                                            20
                                                                                                             6
                                                                                                             1
                                                                                                             3
                                                                                                            20
,__(                                        nwiiy«*
-------
TABLE 3-3:   DETECTION LIMITS FOR THE LEADED TANK BOTTOMS SAMPLES - K052
BOAT CONSTITUENT
VOLATILE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
B
9
10
11
18
13
14
15
18
17
1B
19
80
21
88
83
84
85
86
27
88
89
30
31
38
33
34
35
38
37
38
39
40
CONSTITUENTS
Aoatonltrlla
Acrolaln
Acrylonltrlla
Banzana
Bro*od1 chloroM thane
BroMoaathana
Carbon tatrachlorlda
Carbon dlaulflda
Chlorobanzana
8-Chloro-l (3-butad1 ana
Chlorodl bro»o»athena
Chloroathana
8-Chloroathyl vinyl athar
Chloroform
Chi orom thane
3-Chloropropana
1 ,8-01 broMO-3-chloropropana
1 ,8-01 broMoathane
01 broBOM thane
Trana-1 ,4-d1 chloro-8-butana
01 chlorodl fluoro»e thane
1,1-01 chloroathana
1 ,2-01 chloroathana
1 ,1-01chloroathylana
Trana-1 ,8-dl chloroathana
1 ,2-01chloropropana
Trana-1 ,3-dlchloropropana
cl a-1 ,3-01 chloropropana
1 ,4-01oxana
Ethyl cyanlda
Ethyl Mthacrylate
lodoaathana
laobutyl alcohol
Ma thy I athyl katona
Methyl •ethacrylata
Ma thy I Mthaneaul fonata
Mathylacrylonltrlla
Ma thy I ana chlorlda
Pyrldlna
1 ,1 ,1 ,2-Tatrachloroathana
Da tec t1 on
LlHlt
(PP-)
1000
1000
1000
50
50
100
50
50
50
1000
50
100
100
50
100
1000
1000
50
50
1000
100
50
50
50
50
50
SO
50
2000
1000
1000
50
2000
100
1000
NO
1000
50
4000
50
                                            E-22

-------
TABLE 3-31   DETECTION LIMITS FOR THE LEADED TANK BOTTOMS  SAMPLES - KQB2 (Continued)
BOAT CONSTITUENT
VOLATILES
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
SO
**
**
*•
**
**
**
•H-
[Continued]
1 f1 »2|2-Tetrechloroethane
Tetrachloroe thane
Toluene
Trl broBOM thane
1 ,1 t1-Tr lento methane
1 f1 »2—Tr1 chloroethane
TMchloroethene
Trl chlorcMon of luoroaw thane
1 ,2,3-Trlchloropropane
Vinyl chloride
Acetone
Ethyl benzene
2-tiaxanona
4-Methy l-2-pentenone
Styrene
Vinyl acetate
Xylanea (total)
SEMIVOLATILES
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
SB
59
60
61
62
83
64
65
66
87
68
Ace naphthalene
Acanephthene
Acetophenone
2-Acety la»t nof luorane
4-A».1nob1phenyl
Aniline
Anthracene
ArMlte
Benz(e]anthraoene
Benzenethlol
Benzldlne
Benzo(e Ipyrene
Benzo(b]f luoranthane
Benzo(orh,1)perylene
Benzo(k]fluorenthene
p-BenzoquI none
Bta(2-chloro*ethoxy]ethana
B1e(2-chloroethyl]ether
Detection
LlMlt

50
SO
50
SO
50
50
50
50
50
100
100
50
100
100
50
100
50
(PP»)
1.8
1.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
1.8
1.8
NA
1.8
NO
9.0
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.8
NO
1.8
1.8
                                            H-23

-------
TABLE 3-3:   DETECTION LIMITS FOR THE LEADED TANK BOTTOMS SAMPLES - K052 (Continued)
BOAT CONSTITUENT
SEMIVOLATILES (Continued]
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
78
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
88
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
98
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
108
107
B1a[2-chloro1aopropy I ] ether
B1a(2-ethylhexyl]phthalata
4-Broiophenyl phanyl ether
Butyl benzyl phthelata
2-eec-6uty 1-4,8-dl nl tro phenol
p-Chloroan1 Una
Chlorobanzllata
p-Chloro-m-creaol
2-Chloro naphthalene
2-Chlorophenol
3-Chloroprop1on1tr1le
Chryaene
ortho-Creeol
pere-Creaol
D1benz(e,h)enthrecene
01 benzo(a ,e) py rena
D1benzo(a,1 Ipyrene
•-D1 chl o robe nz ana
o-OI chl orobenzane
p-D 1 ch I o r obe nz e na
3 ,3 '-01 chl oroberul dl na
2(4-01chlorophanol
2 ,8-01 chl oro phenol
01 ethyl phthelate
3 ,3 '-DlMthoxybenzl dl ne
p-01 aa thy la*1 noazobanzane
3,3'-OlMtnylbanz1d1ne
2,4-OlMthylphanol
D1 •ethyl phthalata
D1-n-butyl phthalata
1 ,4-01 nl trobanzana
4,8-01 nl tro-o-craaol
2, 4-01 nl tro phenol
2 ,4-01 nl t rotol uene
2 ,6-01 nl trotol uene
01-n-octyl ph thai eta
Dl-n-propy Inl troaaal na
D1phenylu1na
1 ,2-01 phany I hydrazl ne
Detection
L1»1t
(PP*1
1.6
1.8
1.6
1.8
9.0
1.8
NA
1.8
1.8
1.8
NA
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.8
NS
NA
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.8
NO
1.8
1.8
3.6
NO
1.8
1.8
1.8
9.0
9.0
9.0
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.8
3.B
9.0
                                           H-24

-------
TABLE 3-31  DETECTION LIMITS FOR THE LEADED TANK BOTTOMS SAMPLES - K052 [Continued]
BOAT CONSTITUWT
SEMIVOLATILES (Continued)
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
118
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
12B
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
138
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
148
147
Ruorenthene
FLuorana
Hexachlorobanzane
Haxachlorobutadl ana
Haxachlorocyclopantadlana
Haxachloroathana
Haxachlorophane
Haxachloropropana
IndanoM ,2,3-cdJpyrene
laoaafrola
Mathapyrllana
3-Methylcholenthrena
4,4l-MatnylanablB(2-chloroanU1na)
Naphthalene
1 ,4-Naphthoqu1none
1-Naphtnylantne
2-Naphthylwlna
p-NltroanUlne
Nitrobenzene
4-N1tropnenol
N-N1 traaodl-n-buty laail ne
N-NUroaodlethylaMlna
N-N1 troaodl methy la«1 na
N-N1troeo»ethy lathy lamina
N-N1tro80»orphol1ne
N-N1 troaopl parldl na
N-N1 troaopyrroll dine
5-N1 1 ro-o-tol u1 dl na
Pantachlorobanzana
Pantachloroethane
Pentachloronl trobanzane
Pentachlorophanol
Phenacatln
Phenanthrene
Phenol
8-P1col1na
Prona»1 da
Pyrana
Raaorclnol
Safrola
Detection
Llalt
(PP-)
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.8
NA
NO
1.8
3.8
NS
3.8
3.6
1.8
NA
9.0
9.0
9.0
1.8
9.0
NO
NO
1.8
1.8
3.6
1.8
9.0
3.6
NO
NA
18.0
9.0
3.8
1.8
1.8
1.8
NO
1.8
NA
9.0
                                            K-25

-------
TABLE 3-3:   DETECTION LIMITS TOR THE LEADED TANK BOTTOMS SAMPLES -  K052  (Contlnuad]
BOAT CONSTITUENT
SEMIVOLATILES [Contlnuad]
148
149
150
151
152
153
»»
**
**
**
**
*•
**
•*
**
•*
**
**
*»
*•
METALS
154
155
156
157
158
159
181 .
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
1 ,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzana
2,3|4,B-Tatrachlorophanol
1 ,2,4-Trlchlorobenzene
2f4f5-Tr1chloropnenol
2 ,4,8-Trl chlorophanol
Tr1e(2,3-<11bro»opropyl] phoephete
Benzole acid
Benzyl alcohol
4-Chlorophanyl phenyl ether
D1 banzofuran
D1benzo(a,h)pyrene
7,12-OlMthylbenz(e)enthracane
alpha,alpha-OlMthylphenethylMlne
leophorone
Malonltrlla
2-Methylnaphthelene
2-N1troen1Una
3-Nltroanlllna
2-N1tro phenol
N-N1troeod1phenylaBlne

Antimony
Arsanl c
Barium
Beryllium
CadMluH
ChroMluH, total
Copper
Leed
Mercury
Nickel
Selenluei
Silver
Thallium
Vanadl u*
21 nc
Oetectl on
L1*1t
(PP-)
3.6
NO
1.8
9.0
1.8
ND
9.0
1.8
1.8
1.8
NS
ND
NS
1.8
NA
1.8
9.0
9.0
1.8
1.8
(PP-)
3.2
2.0
0.1
0.1
0.4
0.7
0.6
5.1
0.2
1.1
100
6.0
1.0
8.0
0.2
                                             H~26

-------
  TABLE 3-31  DETECTION LIMITS FOR THE LEADED TANK BOTTOMS SAMPLES • KOBS (Continued)
                                                                      Detection
BOAT CONSTITUENT                                                        LlMlt
INORGANICS                                                                  (p|»)
    170      Total Cyan!da                                                    O.S

    171      Fluoride                                                         1.0

    172      Sulfl da                                                          0.5
NA = Analyst! cannot ba dona by Mthod  8270 at thle  t1*a dua to Inadequate
     racovarlaa In laboratory QA/OC analyaaa.
NO = Not datactad, aatlMtad datactlon  llMlt haa not baan datanstnad.
NS = The standard la not avallablai  tha co*pound was saarchad uatng an NBS library
     databaaa of 48fOOO compounds.
++ - Total xylana la tha total raault for ortho-Xylene, Mta-Xylena, and para-Xylanaf
     •1th CAS numbers 98-47-6, 108-38-3, and 108-48-3, raapaotlvaly.
** = This constituent la not on tha Hat of constituents In tha GENERIC QUALITY
     ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN  FOR LAND DISPOSAL RESTRICTIONS PROGRAM ("BOAT"),
     EPA/530-9W-87-011, March 1887.  It la a ground-water Monitoring constituent aa
     listed 1n Appendix IX,  Page 26639, of tha FEDERAL RE8ISTER, Vol. 51, No. 142.
                                             H-27

-------
                        Appendix I


        WASTE CHARACTERISTICS AFFECTING PERFORMANCE
                                                               Page

List of boiling points for constituents of interest.            1-2

List of bond dissociation energies for constituents
of interest.                                                    1-3

Calculation of thermal conductivity for waste treated
at plant A.                                                     1-4
                           1-1

-------
                          Constituent Boiling Points
          Constituent              Boiling Point (°C)     Reference Number
  4. Benzene                             80-80.1                   1
  8. Carbon disulfide                    46-46.5                   1
 21. Dichlorodifluoromethane          (-30)-(-29.8)                1
226. Ethyl benzene                       136.25                   1
 43. Toluene                            110.6-111                  1
215. 1,2-Xylene                            144                    1
216. 1,3-Xylene                           139.3                   1
217. 1,4-Xylene                          137-138                   1
 52. Acenaphthene                          279                    1
 57. Anthracene                            242                    1
 59. Benz(a)anthracene                     435                    3
 62. Benzo(a)pyrene                      310-312                   1
 70. Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate            385                    2
 80. Chrysene                              448                    1
 81. o-Cresol                            191-192                   1
 82. p-Cresol                           201.8-202                  1
 96. 2,4-Dimethylphenol                 211.5-212                  1
 98. Di-n-butyl phthalate                  340                    1
109- Fluorene                              295                    1
121. Naphthalene                        217.9-218                  1
141. Phenanthrene                          340                    1
142. Phenol                                182                    1
145. Pyrene                                404                    1
1 = Merck Index (Reference 31).

2 = Handbook of Environmental Data on Organic Chemicals (Reference 32)

3 = Handbook of Chemistry and Physics (Reference 33).
                                      1-2

-------
                              Bond Dissociation Energies
                                                                Estimated
              Constituent                                Bond Dissociation Energy
      4. Benzene                                                   1320
      8. Carbon disulfide                                           279
     21. Dichlorodifluoromethane                                    380
    226. Ethyl benzene                                             1920
     43. Toluene                                                   1235
215-217. Xylene                                                    1220
     52. Acenaphthene                                              2570
     57. Anthracene                                                2870
     59. Benz(a)anthracene                                         3580
     62. Benzo(a)pyrene                                            4030
     68. Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether                                   1290
     70. Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate                                6610
     80. Chrysene                                                  3650
     81. o-Cresol                                                  1405
     82. p-Cresol                                                  1405
     87. o-Dimethylbenzene                                         1325
     96. 2,4-Dimethylphenol                                        1390
     98. Di-n-butyl phthalate                                      4340
    109. Fluorene                                                  2700
    121. Naphthalene                                               2095
    141. Phenanthrene                                              2900
    142. Phenol                                                    1421
    145. Pyrene                                                    3240
    Sources:   Sanderson,  R.T.,  Chemical Bonds and Bond Energy (Reference  35)
              Lange's Handbook  of Chemistry (Reference 34).
              Handbook of Chemistry and Physics (Reference  33).
                                         1-3

-------
                    CALCULATION OF THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY FOR

                           WASTE TREATED AT PLANT A


Calculation of weight fractions of K048 and K051 in the total feed stream:

          From tables 4-1 through 4-6 in the Amoco OER (Reference 6) the
          average K048 and K051 waste feed rates are 53 gpm and 22.3 gpm,
          respectively.  Since these are the only feeds to the incinerator,
          the weight fractions of the wastes feed are calculated as follows:

          K048:(100) 53/ (53 + 22.3) = 71* = X K048
          K051:(100) 22/ (22.3 + 53) = 29% = X K051

Major constituent analysis:

          From sections 2.1.2 and 2.2.2 in the Amoco OER (Reference 6) the
          major constituent composition of K048 and K051 is as follows:

        Constituent                    K048 (%)             K051 (%)

          Water                          15                   30
          Oil                            14                   15
Sand, Dirt and other soils               70                   54


Major constituent composition of the total waste stream:

          The composition of the total waste stream is calculated as follows:

              % Water = (% water in K048)(X K048) + (% water in K051) (X K051)
                      = (15X0.71) + (30X.29)
                      = 20

              % Oil   = (% oil in K048)(X K048) + (% oil in K05D(X K051)
                      = (14X0.71) + (15X0.29)
                      = 14

               % Sand & Dirt
                      = (% Sand & dirt in K048)(X K048) + (% Sand & dirt in
                        K051XX K051)
                      = (70)(0.71) + (54)(.29)
                      = 66
                                    1-4

-------
                    CALCULATION OF THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY FOR

                     WASTE TREATED AT PLANT A (Continued)


Thermal conductivity (k) of major constituents:

          From Lange's Handbook of Chemistry (Reference 3*0 the thermal
          conductivities (k) for the major constituents are:
               k water = 0.329 BTU/hr ft °F
               k gasoline = 0.078 BTU/hr ft °F § 86°F
               k dry sand = 0.225 BTU/hr ft °F @ 68°F

          In the absence of thermal conductivity values for oil and wet sand
          and dirt, we have used the thermal conductivity values for gasoline
          and dry sand for the purposes of this calculation.

Calculations of the overall waste thermal conductivity:

          Using the major constituent compositions of the total waste stream
          and the thermal conductivities presented above, the calculations of
          the overall waste thermal conductivity is as follows:

               k overall = (% water) (k water) + (% oil)(k gasoline) + (% sand
                           & dirt)(k dry sand)
                         = (0.20K0.329 BTU/hr ft °F) + (0.14)(0.0?8 BTU/hr ft
                           °F) + (0.66)(0.225 BTU/hr ft °F)
                         =0.23 BTU/hr ft °F
                                      1-5

-------