EPA/540/2-89/006
SUPERFUND TREATABILITY
CLEARINGHOUSE
Document Reference:
Roy F. Weston, Inc. "Incineration Test of Explosives Contaminated Soils at Savanna
Army Depot Activity, Savanna, Illinois." Prepared for USATHMA. Approximately 200 pp.
April 1984.
EPA LIBRARY NUMBER:
Superfund Treatability Clearinghouse - EURP
-------
SUPERFUND TREATABILITY CLEARINGHOUSE ABSTRACT
Treatment Process: Thermal Treatment - Rotary Kiln
Media: Soil/generic
Document Reference: Roy F. Veston, Inc. "Incineration Test of
Explosives Contaminated Soils at Savanna Army Depot
Activity, Savanna, Illinois." Prepared for
USATHMA. Approximately 200 pp. April 1984.
Document Type: Contractor/Vendor Treatability Study
Contact: Wayne Sisk
U.S. DOD/USATHAMA
Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21010-5401
301-671-2054
Site Name: Savanna Army Depot (NPL - Federal facility)
Location of Test: Savanna, IL
BACKGROUND; The primary objective of these tests was to demonstrate the
effectiveness of incineration as a decontamination method for explosives
contaminated sails. A pilot-scale rotary kiln incinerator, manufactured by
ThermAll, Inc., was used to treat both sandy and clayey soils which had
been contaminated by wastewater from explosives production and demili-
tarization. The test was performed at Savanna Army Depot Activity (SADA),
Illinois, the sandy soils came from SADA and the clayey soils were shipped
in from the Louisiana Army Ammunition Plant (LAAP), Louisiana.
OPERATIONAL INFORMATION; The feed soil TNT concentrations ranged from
88,100 ppm to 406,000 ppm. The SADA soil was purposely excavated from more
concentrated regions of the lagoon so that a higher destruction removal
efficiency (ORE) could be achieved. There were 19 daily tests completed in
20 consecutive days. After the initial run at 500 Ib/hr. and 800°F,
elevated levels of explosives were detected in the ash, fabric filter ash,
and flue gas. Therefore, subsequent runs were conducted on feed rates no
higher than 400 Ib/hr. and afterburner temperatures no lower than 1200°F.
Each run was with approximately 1000 pounds of soil. Primary chamber
temperatures of greater than 1400°F were not required.
In addition to these trial burns 25,000 pounds of soil were treated in
a six day steady-state production run. This run was at 400 Ib/hr, a
primary chamber temperature of 1400°F and secondary chamber temperature of
1800 F. These conditions had consistently demonstrated complete
destruction of explosives in the stack gas and kiln ash and successfully
disposed of all excavated test materials.
PERFORMANCE; The soil residence times could not be measured in the field,
so they were estimated from the ash production rate. The residence time
averaged 83 minutes for the SADA runs and 72 minutes for the LAAP runs.
TNT concentrations in the soil ash ranged from 2.55 to 26.9 ppm. Only
RDX and TNB were detected on one occasion, each as a residual explosive or
3/89-3 Document Number: EURP
NOTE: Quality assurance of data may not be appropriate for all uses.
-------
a combustion by-product in the ash. Ash residues were not hazardous due
the characteristics of EP Toxicity or reactivity.
The document concludes that this incineration system is transportable
and can operate under a wide range of conditions. It also demonstrated
that ash residues are non-hazardous and stack emissions measured were in
compliance with all Federal and state regulations.
QA/QC procedures are included in the report and detailed in an
appendix.
to
CONTAMINANTS;
Analytical data is provided in the treatability study report.
breakdown of the contaminants by treatability group was:
The
Treatability Group
W06-Nitrated Aromatics
& Aliphatics
CAS Number
135-HMX
121-82-4
99-35-4
118-96-7
25154-54-5
T99-55-8
Contaminants
1,3,5,7-Tetranitro-
octahydro-
1,3,5,7-tetracyclo-
octane (HMX)
Hexahydro-1,3,5-trinitro-
1,3,5-triazine (RDX)
Trini trobenzene
Trinitrotoluene (TNT)
Dini trobenzene
2-Amino-4,6-dini trotoluene
3/89-3 Document Number: EURP
NOTE: Quality assurance of data may not be appropriate for all uses.
-------
- AT-
DRXTH-TE-CR-84277
Installation Restoration General
Environmental Technology Development
FINAL REPORT
Task 2.
Incineration Test of
Explosives Contaminated Soils At
Savanna Army Depot Activity,
Savanna, Illinois
John W. Noland, P.E.
John R. Marks
Peter J. Marks
April 1984
Distribution Unlimited. Approved for Public Release
Prepared for
U.S. ARMY TOXIC AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AGENCY
Aberdeen Proving Ground (Edgewood Area), Maryland 21010
Roy F Weston, Inc.
West Chester
Pennsylvania 19380
DESIGNERS V y CONSULTANTS
-------
The views, opinions, and/or findings contained in this report
are those of the authors and should not be construed as an of-
ficial Department of the Army position, policy, or decision un-
less designated by other documentation.
9
3
-------
UNCLASSIFIED
SECURITY CLASSIFICATION Of THIS PAGE (Wtttn Dm* Entttmd)
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE
READ INSTRUCTIONS
BEFORE COMPLETING FORM
1. REPORT NUMBER
DRXTH-TE-CR-84277
2. GOVT ACCESSION NO.
J. RECIPIENT'S CATALOG NUMBER
4. TITLE(muisubmit) Installation Restoration Gen-
eral Environmental Technology Development.
Task 2. Incineration Test of Explosives
Contaminated Soils at Savanna Army Depot
Activity, Savanna, Illinois
S. TYPE Or REPORT * PERIOD COVERED
Final Report-September
1982-January 1984
*. PERFORMING ORQ. REPORT NUMBER
«. CONTRACT OR GRANT HUMBERTS
DAAK 11-82-C-0017
John W. Noland, P.E.
John R. Marks
Peter J. Marks
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
Weston Way
West Chester, PA 19380
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT. PROJECT, TASK
AREA « WORK UNIT NUMBERS
11. CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS
U.S. Army Toxic & Hazardous Materials Agncy
Aberdeen Proving Ground
Edgewood Area, MD 21010
U. REPORT DATE
January 1984
IS. NUMBER OF PAGES
14. MONITORING AGENCY NAME • AOORESSC/f tffferanf fro* Cantrolltnt OIHeu)
-------
1KCUBITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAOKfWfcai D*t»
19. Key Words (Cont'd)
Fabric Filter
Trial Burn
Stack Testing
Principal Organic Hazardous Constituent (POHC)
Destruction and Removal Efficiency (ORE)
SECURITY CLASSIFICATION Of THIS PAGEfWh*" Data Enf«r»O
-------
CONTENTS
Page
List of Illustrations vi
List of Tables viii
Paragraph 1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background 1
1.2 Project objectives 1
1.3 Criteria for a successful project ... 2
1.4 Report organization 2
2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4
2.1 Incineration equipment/test site
selection 5
2.2 Soil characterization/reactivity
testing 8
2.3 Development of detailed test plan/
safety plan 8
2.4 Environmental permitting 12-
2.5 Evaluation of materials handling
procedures 12
2.6 Incineration testing 12
3 TEST SITE 15
4 CHARACTERISTICS OF EXPLOSIVES CONTAMI-
NATED SOILS 20
5 DESCRIPTION OF THE INCINERATION TEST
EQUIPMENT 26
5.1 Soil feed system 26
5.2 Primary combustion chamber (Rotary kiln) 26
5.3 Secondary combustion chamber
(Afterburner) 30
5.4 Heat exchanger (Waste heat boiler). . . 31
5.5 Fabric filter collector 31
5.6 Induced draft fan and stack 31
6 EXPERIMENTAL VARIABLES 32
6.1 Test variables to be controlled and
held constant 32
6.1.1 Sediment preparation 32
6.1.2 Kiln rotation rate 34
6.1.3 Fuel consumption 34
6.2 Test variables held constant at
various levels 35
6.2.1 Incinerator feed rate 35
6.2.2 Primary kiln temperature 36
6.2.3 Secondary chamber temperature 3o
lii
4554A
-------
CONTENTS
6.3 Test variables allowed to vary
randomly 37
6.3.1 Soil feed composition 37
6.3.2 Kiln ash residence time 37
6.3.3 Flue gas residence time 37
6.3.4 Percent excess air 37
6.3.5 Fuel input rate 37
6.4 Response variables. 38
7 PRESENTATION OF TEST BURN DATA 39
7.1 Summary of test burn data 39
7.2 Presentation of data and calculation
procedures 39
7.2.1 Emission testing periods 39
7.2.2 Actual soil feed rate and ash
production data 39
7.2.3 Estimated primary chamber ash
residence times 44
7.2.4 Estimated secondary chamber flue gas
residence time 47
7.2.5 Explosives concentrations in the soil
feed, ash residues, and stack gas . . 47
7.2.6 Fabric filter particulate loadings,
control efficiencies, and particle
size distribution data 53
7.2.7 Stack emissions data for gaseous
pollutants 53
7.2.8 EP toxicity testing data for the ash
residues 53
7.3 Physical observations 61
7.3.1 Soil/ash appearance and density .... 61
7.3.2 Combustion observations 62
7.3.3 Steady-state production run 65
7.3.4 Industrial hygiene observations .... 66
7.3.5 Miscellaneous observations 68
8 COMPARISON OF TEST BURN RESULTS 69
8.1 Federal regulatory issues 69
8.1.1 Background 69
8.1.2 Applicability of the incineration
standards to the incineration of
explosives contaminated soil 72
8.1.3 Implications of exemption from the
incineration standards 74
8.1.4 Implications of not being exempted
from the incineration standards ... 77
iv
4554A
-------
CONTENTS
8.2 State and local regulatory issues ... 82
8.2.1 Particulates 83
8.2.2 Carbon monoxide 83
8.2.3 Oxides of nitrogen 83
8.2.4 Oxides of sulfur and halogenated
compounds 83
9 ANALYSIS OF RESULTS AND DEVELOPMENT
OF INCINERATOR DESIGN CRITERIA 84
9.1 Analytical technique 84
9.2 Destruction and removal efficiency of
explosives 84
9.3 Environmental impact of the incinera-
tion of explosives contaminated soils 88
9.3.1 Carbon monoxide (CO) 88
9.3.2 Oxides of nitrogen (NOX) 89
9.3.3 Particulates 96
9.4 Incinerator design variables affecting
system economics 96
9.4.1 Kiln ash production rate 96
9.4.2 Soil heating value 98
9.4.3 Fuel burn rate 98
9.5 Summary of optimum incinerator design
criteria 103
10 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 105
10.1 Conclusions 105
10.2 Recommendations 107
11 REFERENCES 109
APPENDIX A INCINERATION TEST BURN DATA
SUMMARY TABLES
APPENDIX B ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES
APPENDIX C FEDERAL REGISTER HAZARDOUS
WASTE REFERENCES
APPENDIX D MOLECULAR STRUCTURE OF THE
EXPLOSIVES
APPENDIX E DOCUMENT DISTRIBUTION LIST
4554A
-------
ILLUSTRATIONS
FIGURE 1 Project schedule ............. 6
2 overall view of the IECS incineration
test equipment installed at the
Savanna Army Depot Activity ...... 7
3 Front view of the ThermAll, Inc. rotary
kiln incinerator ............ 7
4 Test plan analytical approach ...... ID
5 Incineration test schematic diagram ... 11
6 Location map of Savanna Army Depot
Activity ................ 16
7 Plot plan of Savanna Army Depot Activity
with incinerator test site identified . 17
8 Location map of lagoons and incinerator
test site ............... 18
9 Cutaway sectional view of the ThermAll
10 Equipment layout ............. 28
11 Photograph of the feed system in
operation ............... 29
12 Average material balance for nine test
burns on SADA soil ........... 40
13 Average material balance for nine test
burns on LAAP soil ........... 41
14 Particulate size distribution for SADA
fabric filter ash composite sample for
all runs ................ 55
15 Particulate size distribution for LAA?
fabric filter ash composite sample for
all runs ................ 56
16 Inside view of the primary chamber
midway through the IECS program .... 64
17 Carbon monoxide concentration in kiln
exhaust based on soil feed rate .... 90
18 Carbon monoxide concentration in kiln
exhaust based on soil feed rate .... 91
19 Probability of residuals based on the
system model equation for carbon
monoxide in the kiln exhaust gas. ... 92
20 NOX mass emission rate in stack gas
based on TNT concentration in the soil
feed .................. 94
VI
4554A
-------
ILLUSTRATIONS
21 Probability of residuals based on the
system model equation for NOX in the
stack gas 95
22 Projection of particulate mass loading
at the fabric filter inlet based on
kiln ash production rate 97
23 Soil heating value based on volatile
concentration ..... 99
24 Probability of residuals based on the
system model equation for soil heating
value 100
25 Propane burn rate based on kiln tempera-
ture and soil heating value 101
26 Probability of residuals based on the
system model equation for propane burn
rate 102
vii
4554A
-------
TABLES
TABLE i Acronyms and Abbreviations x
1 Characteristics of explosives contami-
nated soils 9
2 Definition of test matrices and summary
of controlled process variables .... 13
3 Savanna Army Depot Activity soil
analysis 22
4 Louisiana Army Ammunition Plant soil
analysis 24
5 summary of the experimental variables
for the IECS test burn 33
6 summary of actual emission testing
periods and propane fuel consumption
(Excludes pre-test warm-up and post-
test cool-down) 42
7 Summary of actual soil feed rates and ash
production data 43
8 summary of estimated primary chamber ash
residence times for the SADA runs ... 45
9 Summary of estimated primary chamber ash
residence times for the LAAP runs ... 46
10 Summary of estimated secondary chamber
flue gas residence times 48
11 Explosives concentrations in the feed
soil 50
12 Explosives concentrations in the kiln ash 51
13 Explosives concentrations in the fabric
filter ash 52
14 Summary of fabric filter particulate
loadings and control efficiencies ... 54
15 Summary of stack emission data for HC1,
SC>2, and NOX 57
16 Summary of stack emission data for hydro-
carbons and carbon monoxide 58
17 Summary of EP toxicity testing data for
the primary chamber ash 59
18 Summary of EP toxicity testing data for
the fabric filter ash 60
19 Summary of significant amendments to the
regulations for hazardous waste incin-
erators 71
20 Summary of concentrations of Appendix
VIII hazardous constituents in the SADA
and LAAP soils 73
vnx
-------
TABLES
21 Summary of explosives concentrations in
the Savanna feed soil, detection limits
of explosives in stack gas and the
respective DRE's 79
22 Summary of explosives concentrations in
the Louisiana feed soil, detection
limits of explosives in the stack gas
and the respective DRE's 80
23 Evaluated input and response variables
using statistical techniques 85
ix
4554A
-------
TABLE i. ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
ABL
acf(m)
2-Amino
ANOVA
APE
As
Ba
Btu
C
cd
Cl
CFR
CO
C02
Cr
Cu
dBA
DNB
DNT
DRE
dscf(m)
EPA
EP Toxicity
F
ft3
Allegany Ballistics Laboratory
actual cubic feet (per minute)
2-Amino-4,6 Dinitrotoluene
analysis of variance
Ammunition Peculiar Equipment
arsenic
barium
British thermal unit
carbon
cadmium
chlorine
Code of Federal Regulations
carbon monoxide
carbon dioxide
chromium
copper
decibels, A scale
1,3-Dinitrobenzene
2,6- or 2,4-Dinitrotoluene
Destruction and Removal Efficiency
dry standard cubic feet (per minute)
Environmental Protection Agency
Extraction Procedure Toxicity
Fahrenheit
cubic feet
9
GEP
H
HC
HC1
Hg
HHV
HMX
IECS
- gram
- Good Engineering Practice
- Hydrogen
- hydrocarbon
- hydrogen chloride
- mercury
- Higher Heating Value
- 1,3,5,7-Tetranitro-Octahydro-l,3,5,7-Tetracyclo-
octane
- Incineration of Explosives Contaminated Soils
4554A
-------
TABLE i. (continued)
LAAP - Louisiana Army Ammunition Plant
Ib - pound (mass)
L - liter
mg - milligram
min - minute
N - nitrogen
NB - nitrobenzene
NOX - oxides of nitrogen
Pb - lead
POHC - Principal Organic Hazardous Constituent
pph - pounds per hour
ppm - parts per million (volume, weight)
RCRA - Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
RDX - l,3,5-Trinitro-Hexahydro-l,3,5-Triazine
S - sulfur
SADA - Savanna Army Depot Activity
scf(m) - standard cubic feet (per minute)
SCR - Silicon Controlled Rectifier
Se - selenium
sec - second
SC>2 - sulfur dioxide
tetryl - tetranitromethylaniline
TNB - 1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene
TNT - 2,4,6-Trinitrotoluene
ug - microgram
USATHAMA - U.S. Army Toxic and Hazardous Materials Agency
Zn - zinc
4554A
XI
-------
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background. Large quantities of wastewater are gener-
ated during the manufacturing of explosives and propellants;
the loading, assembly, and packing of munitions; as well as de-
militarization and washout operations. These wastewaters (re-
ferred to as "red water" or "pink water" due to their character-
istic color) contain varying concentrations of explosives.
Standard practice in the past has been to dispose of these
wastewaters in settling lagoons at various U.S. Army installa-
tions. Althougn current practice provides for in-plant treatment
of these wastewaters. the inactive settling lagoons at numerous
U.S. Army installations are a source of potential groundwater
contamination.
The U.S. Army Toxic and Hazardous Materials Agency
(USATHAMA) is currently evaluating a number of potential remedi-
al action options for future implementation. One option has
emerged as the most promising in the near term (i.e., for in-
stallations requiring remedial action within the next five
years). This option is excavation of the soils, followed by
thermal processing in a rotary kiln incinerator. The U.S. Army
routinely incinerates pure explosives and propellants; however.
previous to this project this technology was undemonstrated on
explosives contaminated soils.
1.2 Project objectives. The objectives of the Incineration
of Explosives Contaminated Soils (IECS) project were as follows:
(a) The primary objective of these tests was to demonstrate
the effectiveness of incineration as a decontamina-
tion method for explosives contaminated soils.
(b) The secondary objectives of the project were to:
- Develop a data case and appropriate correlations
for designing and predicting the performance of
tne incinerator as a decontamination method.
- Determine the fate of the explosives and metals in
the contaminated soils during/after incineration.
- Measure pollutant levels in the stack gas to deter-
mine the air pollution control devices that would
be required for incinerators that may De used in
the future to incinerate explosives contaminated
soils.
4523A
-------
1.3 Criteria for a successful project. The primary objec-
tive of the project is to demonstrate the effectiveness of in-
cineration as a decontamination method for soils which poten-
tially contain concentrations of explosives and associated prod-
ucts of decomposition. Successful demonstration of this qoal re-
quires demonstration of the following:
(a) Destruction removal efficiency (DRE) of greater than
99.99 percent of explosives in the stack emissions
based on the explosives concentrations in the feed
soil.
(b) Thermal treatment of the contaminated soils such that
the ash residues are not hazardous due to the charac-
teristic of reactivity (as defined in Title 40 CFR,
Part 261, Section 261.23).
(c) Thermal treatment of the contaminated soils such that
the ash residues are not hazardous due to the charac-
teristic of EP toxicity (as defined in Title 40 CFR,
Part 261, Section 261.24).
1.4 Report organization. The information contained within
this report is organized into 11 sections as follows:
Section Title
1 Introduction
2 Executive Summary
3 Test Site
4 Characteristics of Explosives Contaminated Soils
5 Description of the Incineration Test Equipment
6 Experimental Variables
7 Presentation of Test Burn Data
8 Comparison of Test Burn Results to Regulatory Criteria
9 Analysis of Results and Development of Incinerator
Design Criteria
10 Conclusions/Recommendations
11 References
4523A
-------
The appendices provide additional data and analysis. Ap-
pendix A provides a detailed summary of the data collected dur-
inq each of the 19 incineration test burns in a mass balance
format. Appendix B provides a detailed description of the ana-
lytical approach utilized to evaluate the test burn results and
to develop simple linear equations for desiqninq and predictinq
the performance of the incinerator as a full-scale remedial ac-
tion alternative. Appendix C provides referenced sections from
the Federal Register reqardinq hazardous waste requlations. Ap-
pendix D provides the molecular structure, preferred nomencla-
ture, and chemical formula for each of the explosives discussed
in this report.
4523A
-------
2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In August 1982, USATHAMA commissioned Roy F. Weston, Inc.
(WESTON) to develop and implement a program to demonstrate the
effectiveness of rotary kiln incineration in decontaminating ex-
plosives contaminated soils. This program was an unqualified
success as demonstrated by the following results:
(a) It was demonstrated that a "transportable" incineration
system could be disassembled, transported approxi-
mately 1,000 miles, be reassembled, and fully opera-
tional within two weeks.
(b) Nineteen days of formal trial burn testing were com-
pleted within 20 consecutive calendar days with no
lost time due to equipment failure.
(c) An additional six days of operation were performed at
steady-state conditions with no downtime due to
equipment failure or malfunction.
(d) Comparing the mass of explosives measured in the ash
residues and the stack gas to the mass of explosives
in the soil feed, the following destruction and re-
moval efficiences were demonstrated:
- Greater than 99.99 percent destruction efficiency
in the kiln ash.
- Greater than 99.9999 percent destruction efficiency
in the fabric filter ash.
- No explosives detected in the stack gas which re-
sults in an overall destruction and removal effi-
ciency (DRE) of 100 percent.
(e) Stack emissions were in compliance with all Federal,
state, and local regulations including:
- Sulfur dioxide (SC>2)
- Hydrogen chloride (HCl)
- Oxides of nitrogen (NOX)
- Carbon monoxide (CO)
- Particulates
(f) Ash residues were not hazardous from the standpoint of
EP toxicity or reactivity. Application has been
filedl with the Illinois EPA to allow land
application of the asn residues at the Savanna Army
Depot Activity.
4523A
-------
Simply stated, the TECS proqram demonstrated that explosives
contaminated soils can be excavated, thermally decontaminated,
and the ash residues landfilled on-site in a safe and environ-
mentally acceptable manner.
The IECS proqram consisted of seven tasks:
(a) Task 1 - Incineration Equipment/Test Site Selection
(b) Task 2 - Soil Characterization/Reactivity Testing
(c) Task 3 - Development of Detailed Test Plan/Safety Plan
(d) Task 4 - Environmental Permitting
(e) Task 5 - Evaluation of Materials Handling Procedures
(f) Task 6 - incineration Testing
(q) Task 7 - Evaluation of Results
The IECS Project Schedule is presented in Figure 1. The fol-
lowing subsections summarize the objectives and results of the
first six tasks.
2.1 Incineration equipment/test site selection. After a
comprehensive survey of rotary kiln manufacturers to determine
the availability of appropriately sized test units, ThermAll,
Inc. of Peapack, New Jersey was selected as the incinerator sub-
contractor for the project. A major innovation of this project
was the decision to use a "transportable" incinerator (i.e.,
equipment disassembled, loaded on trucks, shipped to the test
site, and reassembled) as opposed to a "mobile" incinerator
(i.e., truck mounted) or shipment of the contaminated soils to a
commercial facility.
The test site selected was Savanna Army Depot Activity in
Savanna, Illinois which provided the following advantages:
(a) Remote location well isolated from populated areas.
(b) Close proximity to contaminated soils.
(c) Well controlled access and security.
Figure 2 provides an overall view of the installed inciner-
ation system at the Savanna Army Depot Activity. Figure 3 is a
photograph of the front of the ThermAll, Inc. rotary kiln incin-
erator showing the soil feed system in the foreground.
4523A
-------
1 Incineration Equipment/
Test Site Selection
2 Soil Characterizations/
Reactivity Testing
U.S. Army Review
3 Development of Detailed
Test Plan/Safety Plan
4 Environmental Permitting
- Federal
-State
5 Evaluation of Materials
Handling Procedures
6 Incineration Testing .
7 Evaluation of Results
FIGURE 1 PROJECT SCHEDULE
-------
FIGURE 2 OVERALL VIEW OF THE IECS INCINERATION TEST EQUIPMENT
INSTALLED AT THE SAVANNA ARMY DEPOT ACTIVITY
FIGURE 3 FRONT VIEW OF THE THERMALL, INC.
ROTARY KILN INCINERATOR
-------
2.2 Soil characterization/reactivity testing. In order to
maximize the usefulness of the results of the project, USATHAMA
decided to test contaminated lagoon soils from two separate in-
stallations with widely varying characteristics (see Table 1) .
The two installations selected provided ranqes of soil charac-
teristics typical of most other U.S. Army installations.
The contaminated lagoon soils are hazardous because they ex-
hibit the characteristic of reactivity (i.e., potential for det-
onation or explosion). Testing conducted at Allegany Ballistics
Laboratory (ABL) in Cumberland, Maryland confirmed that the la-
goon soils are reactive and that special precautions must be
taken in developing materials handling procedures and equipment
design.
2.3 Development of detailed test plan/safety plan. In order
to provide for meaningful evaluation of the incineration test
results, a test plan2 was developed which included a syste-
matic analytical approach to the defined problem. The approach
WESTON followed throughout the completion of the program is de-
picted on Figure 4. The nine steps of the analytical approach
can be categorized as pre-experimental (steps 1 through 5), ex-
perimental (step 6), and the analysis and conclusions. The pre-
experimental and experimental steps are addressed in Sections 3
through 6, while the remaining steos are addressed in Sections 7
through 10.
An important activity in the development of the test plan
was the selection of key parameters (input variables) to be con-
trolled and held at various levels during testing. These key
parameters were:
(a) Soil feed rate.
(b) Temperature in the primary combustion chamber.
(c) Temperature in the secondary combustion chamber.
These key parameters were selected since they directly re-
late to the economics of incineration (i.e., how much can be
burned, how quickly can it be burned, and how much fuel is re-
quired?) .
Other test variables were held constant to the extent possi-
ble. Test variables that could not be held constant were meas-
ured during the test as illustrated in the test plan schematic
diagram (Figure 5).
4523A
-------
TABLE 1. CHARACTERISTICS OF EXPLOSIVES CONTAMINATED SOILS
Description
Savanna Army Depot
Activity (SADA)
Louisiana Army
Ammunition Plant
(LAAP)
Soil Matrix
Moisture Content2
Ash Content
(as received)
Explosives Content1
(dry basis)
- TNT
- RDX
- HMX
- Other
- Total Explosives
Heating Value
(as received)
Sand
12 - 26%
44 - 83%
9 - 41%
<0.02%
Not Detected
<0.03
9 - 41%
50 - 2,400 Btu/lb
Clay
25 - 30%
54 - 66%
b - 14%
3 - 10%
0.6 - 1.4%
<0.06%
10 - 22%
600 - 1,200 Btu/lb
^Molecular structure of TNT, RDX, HMX, and other relevant ex-
plosives are provided in Appendix D.
^Moisture content for soils are based on samples taken from the
soil prior to feeding into the incinerator.
4523A
-------
Problem
Definition
i
Input Variable
Identification
Response Variable
Identification
I
Conceptual Model
Development
I
Design of
Experiment
Incineration
Testing
Analysis of
Experimental Data
1
Conceptual Model
Verification
I
Conclusions
FIGURE 4 TEST PLAN ANALYTICAL APPROACH
10
-------
Sediment •
Fuel —
Air
% Explosives
% C,H,N,S,CI
% Moisture
% Voladles
% Ash
% Metals
Heating Value
Total Weight
% Oi, CO,. CO, HC. NO..
Explosives, Particulates. Metals, SO?
% O2, COz, CO, HC.
Explosives. Particulates, Metals, HCI
Heat
Exchanger
Secondary
Chamber
•Fuel
-Air
Rotary Kiln
% O?. CO,, CO. HC.
Explosives
Fabric
Filter
©
Stack
Particulates - % Explosives
% C.H.N.S.CI
% Metals
Total Weight
EP Toxicity
Key
Tl - Temperature Instrument
Fl - Flow Instrument
PI - Pressure Instrument
% Explosives
% C.H.N.S.CI
% Metals
Total Weight
EP Toxicity Testing
FIGURE 5 INCINERATION TEST SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM
-------
From the outset, USATHAMA assigned personnel safety the
highest priority for this project. In this regard, a detailed
site plan and safety submission-* were developed and reviewed
and approved by the Department of Defense Explosives Safety
Board.
2.4 Environmental permitting. Recognizing the importance
of Federal and state environmental concerns, the IECS project
was structured to be fully responsive to the requirements of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the
Illinois Air Pollution and Hazardous Waste Management Regula-
tions. As shown in the project schedule, the environmental per-
mitting4 was an extremely rigorous and time-consuming process.
2.5 Evaluation of materials handling procedures. The pri-
mary objective of this task was to evaluate, design, and imple-
ment materials handling procedures that emphasized personnel and
environmental safety. There were four major goals:
(a) Minimize personnel contact with the lagoon soils.
(b) Avoid confining the lagoon soils (which could lead to
detonation).
(c) Avoid any initiating forces (i.e., friction, heating
under confinement, etc.).
(d) Contain any spills and minimize contamination of clean
areas.
The test plan^ was developed assuming the use of a screw
conveyor to feed the contaminated soils into the incinerator.
However, subsequent soil reactivity testing at ABL led to can-
cellation of the screw conveyor due to safety considerations.
A soils handling protocol and a bucket feed system were de-
signed specifically for this test program which met all of the
test objectives and safety requirements. During the course of
the test program, the feed system cycled over 4,000 times with-
out a single failure.
2.6 Incineration testing. The incineration testing com-
menced on 19 September 1983. Nineteen daily tests were completed
in 20 consecutive calendar days with no time lost due either to
incineration or sampling equipment failure. Table 2 provides a
summary of the test dates and controlled process variables for
each of the 19 test runs. Since explosives contaminated soils
had never been incinerated previously, a preliminary test run
(Test Run No. 1) was conducted at the proposed maximum soil feed
rate (500 pounds per hour) and the proposed minimum primary kiln
12
4523A
-------
TABLE 2. DEFINITION OF TEST MATRICES AND SUMMARY
OF CONTROLLED PROCESS VARIABLES
Test
run
number
1
3
15
2
5
8
4
10
14
12
7
19
17
13
16
6
9
11
18
Test Matrix
date number
9/19
9/21
10/4
9/20
' 9/23
9/27
9/22
9/29
10/3
10/1
9/26
10/8
10/6
10/2
10/5
9/24
9/28
9/30
10/7
0-1
1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
1-5
1-6
1-7
1-8
1-9
2-1
2-2
2-3
2-4
2-5
2-6
2-7
2-8
2-9
Soil
feed rate
(Ib/hr)
500
300
350
400
300
350
400
300
350
400
300
350
400
300
350
400
300
350
400
Primary kiln
temperature
800
1,200
1,200
1.200
1.400
1,400
1.400
1,600
1,600
1.600
1.200
1.200
1.200
1.400
1.400
1.400
1.600
1,600
1,600
Secondary
chamber
temperature (°F)
1,400
1,600
1,600
1.600
1.800
1.800
1.800
2.000
2,000
2.000
1.600
1,600
1.600
1,800
1.800
1.800
2,000
2,000
2,000
Soil
type
(A or B)1
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
l Type 'A' is SADA lagoon soil.
Soil Type 'B1 is LAAP laqoon soil.
-------
temperature (800°F) to determine whether explosives break-
through would be detectable in the stack gas. Explosives were
not detected in the stack gas; however, low concentrations of
explosives were detected in the primary kiln ash (6.48 ppm), in
the fabric filter ash (26.27 ppm), and in the flue gas entering
the secondary chamber (195.9 ppm). Therefore, all subsequent
tests were run at lower soil feed rates and higher primary kiln
temperatures to ensure that no explosives would be released to
the environment.
After the formal testing was completed on 8 October 1983,
an additional 25,000 pounds of lagoon soils were incinerated
from 10 to 15 October 1983 (64 actual hours of processing soil).
The objectives of burning the additional lagoon soils were two-
fold:
(a) Thermally treat all lagoon soils that had been excavat-
ed but not required during the formal testing.
(b) Determine the operational characteristics of the incin-
erator system under a longer term, steady-state pro-
duction mode of operation.
14
4523A
-------
3. TEST SITE
The incineration test was conducted at the Savanna Army De-
pot Activity (SADA) which is located near Savanna, Illinois. The
location of SADA is identified on the map represented in Figure
6. The incinerator test site is shown in Figure 7. The relation-
snip between the lagoons from which the soil was excavated and
the incinerator test site is shown in Figure 8.
The selection of the test site was somewhat predicated by
the selection of contaminated soils that were to be incinerated.
The options evaluated included:
(a) Testing at SADA which would require manifesting the
LAAP soils.
(b) Testing at LAAP which would require manifesting the
SADA soils.
(c) Testing at another U.S. Army installation which would
require manifesting both soils.
(d) Testing at a commercial incineration facility which
would also require manifesting both soils.
Performing the incineration test burn at SADA using a tempo-
rary, transportable incinerator was the selected option for the
following reasons:
(a) Based on discussions with the Illinois EPA and EPA, Re-
gion V, both agencies indicated that they would be
more receptive to approving a temporary, short-term
trial burn on-site rather than revising the permit
for an existing facility to allow burning of explo-
sives contaminated lagoon soils.
(b) There was less probability of adverse public reaction/
public hearings if the material was burned on-site
in a temporary incinerator rather than at a commer-
cial facility.
(c) The government would potentially be exposed to a higher
degree of liability by performing the test off-site
at a subcontractor's facility.
(d) The government would have less control of the safety
procedures by performing the test off-site.
(e) Additional handling, transportation, and storage of the
lagoon soils would be required by performing the test
off-site which increases the potential risk regard-
ing safety of personnel and equipment.
15
4523A
-------
I- Waddams „ . ..
Grove , Lena Cederviiu
III. J«| Mfftfffff"
•• i/rVKSSVi
German Sevwrd •
Savanna Army
Depot Activity
I Mount ^ . Harper
avanna V Carroll »Lanark
r * j •^ •
46 Stratford |v Daysville
JohnOetre I10
Milledgeville ;
^Morrison ^lin
n
EWndg, JPirtt¥ltw
Davenfqrt
•
-. Tampico V
Yorktown &£>
k 5 ^- VI
12 *Z -
Deer -^
3Grove
'Normanly ^^^
FIGURE; e LOCATION MAP OF SAVANNA ARMY DEPOT ACTIVITY
-------
Lock and
0*mNo12
FIGURE 7 PLOT PLAN OF SAVANNA ARMY DEPOT ACTIVITY
WITH INCINERATOR TEST SITE IDENTIFIED
-------
I-
-------
(f) Performing the test Durn on-site with a transportable
unit more closely simulates the full-scale remedial
incineration option and mm azes future environmen-
tal permitting if this remedial action option is im-
plemented.
4523A
-------
4. CHARACTERISTICS OF EXPLOSIVES CONTAMINATED SOIL
In the 19 May 1980 Federal Register, page 33123, K044
(wastewater treatment sludges from the manufacturing and proc-
essing of explosives) is listed as a hazardous waste because it
exhibits the characteristic of reactivity. The characteristic
of reactivity is defined in 40 CFR 261.23 as exhioiting any of
the following properties:
(a) Normally unstable and readily undergoes violent change
witnout detonating.
(b) Reacts violently with water.
(c) Forms potentially explosive mixtures with water.
(d) When mixed with water, generates toxic gases, vapors,
or fumes in a quantity sufficient to present a danger
to human health or the environment.
(e) A cyanide- or sulfide-bearing waste which, when exposed
to pH conditions between 2 and 12.5, can generate
toxic gases, vapors, or fumes in a quantity suffi-
cient to present a danger to numan health or the en-
vironment.
(f) Capable of detonation or explosive reaction if subject-
ed to a strong initiating source or if heated under
confinement.
(g) Readily capable of detonation or explosive decomposi-
tion or reaction at standard temperature and pres-
sure.
(h) A forbidden explosive as defined in 49 CFR 173.51, or a
Class A explosive as defined in 49 CFR 173.53, or a
Class B explosive as defined in 49 CFR 173.88.
The lagoon soils also contain explosives and products of ex-
plosives decomposition that are specifically listed in 40 CFK
261, Appendix VIII, as hazardous constituents. These Appendix
VIII nazardous constituents could potentially include the fol-
lowing:
(a) Dinitrobenzene (DNB)
(b) 2,4-Dinitrotoluene (2,4-DNT)
(c) 2,6-Dinitrotoluene (2,6-DNT)
(d) Nitrobenzene (NB)
(e) Trinitrobenzene (TNB)
2U
4523A
-------
In order to qain as much meaningful information from the
IECS testing program as is practical and to allow proper sta-
tistical interpretation of the results, it was decided that the
entire series of test runs would be replicated using a soil from
another U.S. Army installation with properties and characteris-
tics widely varying from those of the SADA soil. The Louisiana
Army Ammunition Plant (LAAP) was selected as the second source
of contaminated soils. Table 3 provides the SADA soil analyses
oased on composite sampling conducted during 10 separate incin-
erator test burns. Table 4 provides comparative data for the
LAAP soil based on composite sampling conducted during nine
separate incinerator test burns. Data for the individual test
burns are provided in Appendix A.
As shown in Tables 3 and 4 these two soils provide widely
varying ranges of properties. Typically, the SADA soil is a
drier, sandy soil with higher TNT concentrations out little or
no HMX or RDX, whereas the LAAP soil is typically a more con-
sistent, moist, clay-oased soil with relatively higher IMX and
RDX concentrations, and slightly higher metals content.
2L
4WJA
-------
TABLE 3. SAVANNA ARMY DEPOT ACTIVITY SOIL ANALYSIS
Total Analysis
Parameter
Moisture, %
Ash, % as received
Ash, % dry basis
Heating Value, Btu/lb as received
Range
11.7 -
44.5 -
60.5 -
ND2 -
of values
26.3
82.5
95.6
2.J64
Detection
limit1
...
. —
50
Elemental Analysis (Dry Weight Basis)
Parameter
Sulfur, %
Carbon. %
Hydrogen, %
Nitrogen, %
Total Chlorine, %
Range
ND
2.68 -
0.28 -
1.01 -
ND -
of values
12.70
0.79
6.03
0.12
Detection
limit
0.01
...
0.01
Heavy Metals Content (Dry Weight Basis)
Parameter
Range of values
Detection
limit
Barium (Ba), pom
Cadmium (Cd), pom
Chromium (Cr), ppm
Coooer (Cu), com
Lead (Pb), pom
Zinc (Zn), com
Arsenic (As), pom
Selenium (Se), oom
Mercury (Hg), ppm
17 -
ND
ND -
ND -
16 -
32 -
ND
ND
ND
29
13
30
100
160
3.9
5.9
10.4
5.7
5.0
0.5
22
4523A
-------
TABLE 3. (CONTINUED)
Explosives Analysis (Dry Weight Basis)
Parameter
2,4 , 6-Tr initrotoluene (TNT), ppm
HMX3, ppm
RDX3 , pom
1 ,3 ,5-Trinitrobenzene (TNB) , ppm
1,3-Dinitrobenzene (DNB), com
Nitrobenzene (NB) , pom
2-Amino-4,6-Dinitrotoluene
(2-Amino) , ppm
2,6-Dinitrotoluene (2,6-DNT), ppm
2,4-Dinitrotoluene (2,4-DNT) , ppm
Ranqe
88,100
NO
28.6
yo.7
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
of values
- 406,000
-145
- 256
- 35.1
- 27.9
Detection
limit
15. y
___
7.39
5.26
3.64
5.03
5.20
iDetection limit listed only tor parameters not detected.
2ND - Not detected (i.e., sample concentration below tne detec-
tion limit).
3Refer to Appendix 0 for the structures of &4X and RDX.
23
4523A
-------
TABLE 4. LOUISIANA ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT SOIL ANALYSIS
Total Analysis
Parameter
Range of values
Detection
limit1
Moisture, % 25.1 - 29.5
Ash, % as received 54.3 - 66.0
Ash, % dry basis 77.1 - 88.1
Heatinq Value, Btu/lb as received 582 - 1,172
Elemental Analysis (Dry Weiqht Basis)
Parameter
Sulfur, %
Carbon, %
Hydrogen, %
Nitrogen, %
Total Chlorine, %
Range of values
ND2
5.08
0 .66
2.52
ND
- O.U1
- 7.66
- 1.05
- 6.72
- 0.37
Detection
limit
0.01
___
___
0.01
Heavy Metals Content (Dry Weight Basis)
Parameter
Barium (Ba) , ppm
Cadmium (Cd) , pom
Chromium (Cr), ppm
Copper (Cu) . ppm
Lead ( PD ) , ppm
Zinc (Zn) , ppm
Arsenic (As), ppm
Selenium (Se), ppm
Mercury (Hg) , ppm
Range
ya -
ND -
17 -
42 -
100 -
140 -
ND
ND
2. 2 -
of values
150
13
23
65
160
310
3.4
Detection
limit
___
j.y
__ »
_ _ _
— — —
_ _ _
5.7
5.0
•• W MB
4523A
-------
TABLE 4. (CONTINUED)
Explosives Analysis (Dry Weight Basis)
Parameter
2.4 , 6-Trinitrotoluene (TNT), pom
HMX3, DDtn
RDX3 , pom
1 ,3 ,5-Trinitrobenzene (TNB) , ppm
1 ,3-Dinitrobenzene (DNB) , ppm
Nitrobenzene (NB) , ppm
2-Amino-4 ,6-Dinitrotoluene
(2-Amino) , opm
2,6-Dinitrotoluene (2,6-DNT), ppm
2,4-Dinitrotoluene (2,4-DNT), ppm
Ranqe of
55,100
5,740
33,100
. 57.0
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
values
- 142,000
- 13,500
- 96.500
139
22. 4
588
Detection
limit
« >• •
___
— _
7.39
5.26
3.64
5.03
5.20
^•Detection limit listed only tor parameters not detected.
^ND - Not detected (i.e., sample concentration below the de-
tection limit).
3Refer to Appendix D for the structures of HMX and RDX.
4523A
-------
5. DESCRIPTION OF THE INCINERATION TEST EQUIPMENT
WESTON evaluated 44 potential incinerator equipment suppli-
ers located in 16 states, and selected ThermAll, Inc. of Pea-
pack, New Jersey as the recommended incineration equipment sub-
contractor. A layout of the ThermAll incineration equipment is
illustrated in Figures 9 and 10. As shown in Figure 10, the sys-
tem components include the following:
(a) Soil Feed System
(b) Primary Combustion Chamber (Rotary Kiln)
(c) Secondary Combustion Chamber (Afterburner)
(d) Heat Exchanger
(e) Fabric Filter Collector
(f) Induced Draft Fan and Stack
5.1 Soil feed system. The soil feed system selected and
designed for this test consisted of a pneumatic ram feeder uti-
lizing a standard 12 quart galvanized steel mop pail to contain
the contaminated soil (see Figure 9). This system was selected
4-i-»^ £/~il "Irtu-inn »-aao/-»nc*
cne contaminated son ise<
for the following reasons:
(a) Traditional feed systems (e.g., screw feeders, ram
feeders, etc.) would expose the contaminated soil to
frictional forces and/or confinement which was unac-
ceptable from an explosives safety perspective.
(b) The mop pail provided a convenient container for exca-
vating the soils, transporting the soils to the site,
and loading into and unloading from the feed system
with minimum potential for personnel contact or
spillage resulting in contamination of clean areas.
Figure 11 is a photograph taken inside of the primary cham-
ber showing the feed system in operation. The design of materi-
als handling and incinerator feed systems for a full-scale reme-
dial action project is the subject of other on-going USATHAMA
studies and will not be addressed in this report.
5.2 Primary combustion chamber (rotary kiln). The primary
combustionchamberIsarotatablerefractory-lined cylinder
which is mounted at a slight incline to the horizontal. The
chamber size is approximately 4.5 feet outside diameter by 8.5
feet in length. Tne rotation of the chamber was variable via a
Silicon Controlled Rectifier (SCR) drive between 0 and 4 rpm.
Facing the feed end of the primary chamber, the Kiln rotated in
a counter-clockwise direction so that the freshly fed soil ro-
tated directly into the flame (see Figure 11).
26
4523A
-------
FIGURE 9 CUTAWAY SECTIONAL VIEW OF THE THERMALL INCINERATOR
-------
Ash
Residue
Ash
Residue
Dump
Stack
Sediment
Feed
Item
A
-------
FIGURE 11 PHOTOGRAPH OF THE FEED SYSTEM IN OPERATION
-------
The chamber volume of 75 cubic feet is further complemented
by the end panel volume of 15 cubic feet for an actual combus-
tion volume of 90 cubic feet. Primary combustion chamber temper-
atures were variable and determined by the heat content of the
soil as well as a modulating propane-fired burner mounted on the
front panel of the kiln.
In order to maintain a specific processing temperature, the
burner automatically fired or remained in low-fire mode if the
temperature could be maintained by the soil alone. The burner is
rated at 1.5 million Btu per hour. Air seals are permanently
fixed on the rear of the kiln and are variable on the front of
the kiln so that a wide range of excess air capability was
available. Normal kiln temperature ranges are between 800°F
and 1,900°F.
The end panel is a stationary refractory-lined structure
which connects the primary combustion chamber (rotary kiln) to
both the ash discharge and the secondary combustion chamber.
The lower section of the panel has an 18-inch by 25-inch
opening which allows the ash generated in the kiln to automati-
cally discharge to a DOT-approved 55-gallon drum ash receptacle.
Ash drum removal occurred periodically during the test runs and
allowed continuous feeding of the system without stopping for
ash removal. The upper section of the end panel connects to the
secondary combustion chamber.
5.3 Secondary combustion chamber (afterburner). The sec-
ondary combustion chamber is a stationary refractory-lined cyl-
inder connected to the primary combustion chamber via the end
panel. The chamber houses a second modulating propane-fired
burner which was controlled by a thermocouple located in the
discharge duct of the chamber. The burner is positioned in the
entry to the chamber in a tangential arrangement so that the
waste gases discharged from the end panel passed through the
flame and provided additional turbulence to these gases. The
chamber is lined with high alumina refractory, allowing tempera-
tures of UP to 3,000°F. The chamber volume is approximately
90 cubic feet, and residence time, depending on gas tempera-
tures, varied between 1.0 and 2.0 seconds. As with the primary
combustion chamber, the burner provided 1.5 million Btu per hour
at full fire.
30
4523A
-------
5.4 Heat exchanger (waste heat boiler) . The flue gases
discharged from the secondary combustion chamber were directed,
via refractory-lined duct work, to a heat exchanger. The heat
exchanger was utilized to recover the waste heat in the flue gas
in the form of low-pressure steam and, more importantly, in so
doing reduced the flue gas temperature to 300 to 350°F. Thus,
the flue gas was cooled without the use of dilution air and/or
quench water. The lowering of flue gas temperature and corre-
sponding flue gas volume protected the fabric filter bags and
allowed the downstream ductwork and equipment to be of reduced
size and capital cost. The waste heat boiler is of the three-
pass fire tube design.
5.5 Fabric filter collector. Particulate matter was con-
trolled by a fabric filter manufactured by Micro Pulse. It con-
tains 64 "Huyglas" (glass and Teflon) bags 10 feet long by 4.5
inches in diameter. The bags were precoated with CaC03, pulse
jet cleaned, and designed for 99-percent control down to a par-
ticle diameter of 0.5 urn. The bag material was capable of with-
standing 500°F peak temperature and a sustained maximum tem-
perature of 425°F. The inlet temperature was maintained at a
minimum of 300°F to avoid acid dew-point problems.
5.6 Induced draft fan and stack. Following the fabric fil-
ter, the gas passed through an induced draft fan (with a maximum
flow rate of 2,800 acfm), a damper, and then to a 24-foot tall
by 12-inch diameter unlined stack. The duct work leaving the
heat exchanger contained a motorized damper which was electri-
cally driven from the draft signal generated in the end panel.
Thus, draft was automatically maintained throughout the system
operation.
A dump stack was provided immediately upstream of the heat
exchanger in case emergency bypass was required. Upon loss of
system electrical power, the dump stack opened to provide natu-
ral draft to evacuate the hot gases from the incinerator. This
is not a normal mode of operation and incinerator shutdown pro-
cedures would commence immediately.
31
4523A
-------
6. EXPERIMENTAL VARIABLES
In order to properly design and implement any field test,
important questions must be answered so that the data obtained
during the experiment can be evaluated and meaningful results
obtained. These questions are:
(a) What are the experimental variables for the test?
(b) Which test variables can be easily controlled and held
constant throughout the tests?
(c) Which test variables are most critical to the analysis
and can be controlled and held constant at various
levels throughout the tests?
(d) Which test variables are impractical to control and
must be allowed to vary randomly throughout the
tests?
(e) What are the response variables (i.e., the measurements
that will be made throughout the tests)?
This section of the report provides a summary of the ap-
proach taken to answer these questions. Table 5 provides a sum-
mary of the experimental variables for the IECS test burn pro-
gram. The following subsections describe each of the experiment-
al variables listed in Table 5.
6.1 Test variables to be controlled and held constant.
6.1.1 Soil preparation. It was important to establish a
consistent soil preparation procedure so that variooility in the
manner in which the soil was removed from the lagoons and han-
dled prior to introduction into the feed system did not bias the
results of the incineration tests.
6.1.1.1 Preparation of the SADA soils. There are six la-
goons located at SADA (four lower lagoons and two upper la-
goons). The SADA soil for the IECS test burns was excavated
from the upper lagoons (specifically Lagoon No. 5) for the
following reasons:
(a) The explosives concentrations are higher in the upper
lagoons.
(b) There is less susceptibility for standing water in the
upper lagoons, a condition which would impede excava-
tion of the soils.
(c) There is less deoris (i.e., leaves, sticks, rocks,
etc.) in the soil from the upper lagoons, which im-
proves the materials nandling cnaracteristics.
32
4523A
-------
TABLE 5. SUMMARY OF THE EXPERIMENTAL VARIABLES
FOR THE IECS TEST BURN
Test Variables to be Controlled and Held Constant
Soil Preparation
Kiln Rotation Rate
Fuel Composition
Test Variables Held Constant at Various Levels
Incinerator Feed Rate
Primary Chamber Temperature
Secondary Chamber Temperature
Test Variables Allowed to Vary Randomly
Soil Feed Composition
Kiln Ash Residence Time
Flue Gas Residence Time
Percent Excess Air
Fuel Input Rate
Response Variable Measurements to be Made
Ash Residue Analyses
- Primary Chamber
- Fabric Filter
Flue Gas Analyses
- Before Secondary Chamber
- Before Fabric Filter
- Stack
33
4523A
-------
The SADA soil was excavated manually using plastic shovels.
Prior to excavation, the soil was surveyed with a magnetometer
to detect any metal objects/unexploded ordnance. The soil was
loaded directly into the 12-quart mop pails and transported to
the incineration test site in the back of a pick-up truck that
had a specially designed "egg crate" wooden frame that held 30
buckets securely. At the incineration test site, the buckets
were stored on plastic sheeting and covered with plastic until
loaded into the feed system. The soil was excavated daily for
the following day's test.
The soil feed rate was determined by weighing each individu-
al bucket before and after feeding to obtain an actual net
weight of soil fed. A sample was taken from each individual
bucket prior to weighing. The feed samples were then combined to
form a composite sample for each run.
6.1.1.2 Preparation of the LAAP soils. The LAAP soils were
excavated by LAAP personnel, manifested, and transported to the
incineration test site in DOT-approved, 55-gallon drums with
plastic liners. Fifty drums of soils were manifested and shipped
simultaneously and were unloaded on wooden pallets in the upper
lagoon area.
The LAAP arums were individually dumped into a galvanized
steel tank by a fork lift with a specially designed lifting
harness. The LAAP soils were manually loaded into 12-quart mop
pails using aluminum scoops. All metal objects (i.e., ammunition
box hinges, flashlight batteries, etc.) were removed. The LAAP
soils were transported to the incineration test site and fed to
the incinerator in the same manner described for the SADA soils.
6.1.2 Kiln rotation rate. The kiln rotation rate was an
important factor in establishing the soils residence time within
the primary combustion chamber. This parameter was held at a
constant value of approximately four revolutions per hour for
all of the test runs. This corresponded to an ash residence time
in the primary chamber of approximately 50 minutes to 2 hours.
6.1.3 Fuel composition. The fuel for the burners in the
primary and secondary combustion chambers was propane. The pro-
pane was stored at the test site in four propane storage tanks
provided by Thermogas. The propane had a heating value of 21,560
Btu per pound or approximately 2,500 Btu per cubic foot.
34
4523A
-------
6.2 Test variables held constant at various levels. Three
variables were selected as the most important factors in evalu-
ating the economic feasibility of incineration of explosives
contaminated soils. These variables were incinerator feed rate
and primary and secondary chamber temperatuers. These factors
directly related to the length of time necessary to decontami-
nate a fixed quantity of soil and the projected fuel consump-
tion. Therefore, the test runs included three separate levels
for each of these three variables. A summary of the test dates
and controlled process variables for each of the 19 test runs
was provided in Table 2. The following subsections discuss the
level and operating ranges for these three variables.
6.2.1 incinerator feed rate. The test plan2 was devel-
oped assuming the use of a screw conveyor to feed the contami-
nated soils into the incinerator. However, subsequent soil reac-
tivity/sensitivity testing at ABL led to cancellation of the
screw conveyor due to safety considerations. Feed rates of up
to 800 pounds per hour were proposed for the screw conveyor
feed system since it would meter the soil into the primary
chamber in a consistent fashion. However, with the bucket feed
system used for the IECS test runs, the feed rate had to be
reduced since the material was bulk loaded at 2- to 3-minute
intervals. A maximum of 500 pounds per hour was proposed.
Since explosives contaminated soils had never been inciner-
ated previously, a preliminary test run (Test Run No.0-1) was
conducted on 19 September 1983 at the proposed maximum soil feed
rate (5UO pounds per hour) and the proposed minimum primary kiln
temperature (800°F) to determine whether explosives break-
through would be detectable in the stack gas. No explosives were
detected in the stack gas; however, the following adverse re-
sults did occur:
(a) Explosives were detected in the kiln ash (6.48 ppm).
(b) Explosives were detected in the fabric filter ash
(26.27 ppm).
(c) Explosives were detected in the flue gas entering the
secondary chamber (195.9 ppm).
(d) Based on physical observations the soil did not appear
to burn well (see Subsection 7.5.3).
(e) The kiln ash was black with large "clinkers" up to 6
inches in diameter.
(f) The ash had a strong ammonia smell.
35
4523A
-------
For these reasons it was decided that all subsequent runs
would be conducted at feed rates no higher than 400 pounds per
hour and primary chamber temperatures no lower than 1,200°F
to ensure that further contamination of downstream equipment
(i.e., waste heat boiler, fabric filter, etc.) would be mini-
mized and to ensure that no explosives would be released to the
atmosphere. Therefore, the feed rates selected for evaluation
were 300, 350, and 400 pounds per hour.
6.2.2 Primary chamber temperature. Primary chamber temper-
atures could be varied between 800°F and 1,900°F. However,
due to the discussion presented in Subsection 6.2.1, the poten-
tially high moisture content of the soil, the fact that previous
studies have shown that explosives volatilize at relatively low
temperatures, and the presence of the afterburner downstream,
the kiln temperatures selected for evaluation were 1,200°F,
1,400°F, and 1,600°F. Additionally, these temperatures
would be practical for future full-scale remedial action proj-
ects.
6.2.3 Secondary chamber temperature. The secondary chamber
burner limited operation to a maximum of 2,200°F. The second-
ary chamber temperatures selected for evaluation were
1,600°F, 1,800°F, and 2,000°F. For the IECS test program
it was established that for all test runs the secondary chamber
would be operated at 400°F above the primary chamber tempera-
ture. This decision was made for the following reasons:
(a) Introduction of a fourth controlled variable would in-
crease the .number of matrix runs required from 18
(i.e., kiln temperature - three levels, soil feed
rate - three levels, and soil type - two levels) to
54 which would be impractical.
(b) Variation of the secondary chamber temperature inde-
pendent of the Kiln temperature is not practical
since the afterburner cannot be operated at a lower
temperature than the kiln without cooling the gas,
and the maximum amount of incremental temperature in-
crease is limited by the capacity of the secondary
burner.
(c) Industrial practice with rotary kiln incinerators has
shown that operation of the secondary chamber at ap-
proximately 200 to 400QF above the kiln tempera-
ture provides for cost-effective supplementary fuel
utilization consistent with effective destruction of
flue gas contaminants (i.e., carbon monoxide and hy-
drocarbons) .
36
4523A
-------
6.3 Test variables allowed to vary randomly.
6.3.1 Soil feed composition. The explosives, moisture,
and metals concentrations in the soils were the "as received"
levels and no attempt was made to adjust these variables. Two
distinctively different types of soils were tested from two sep-
arate Army installations. The characteristics of the soils were
presented in Section 4.
6.3.2 Kiln ash residence time. The kiln ash residence time
was a function of incinerator feed rate, kiln rotation rate, the
ash density, and the angle of repose of the material. Since the
kiln rotation rate was held relatively constant at four revolu-
tions per hour, the primary factors affecting kiln ash residence
time was ash characteristics (i.e., density and angle of repose)
and feed rate. As shown in Subsection 7.2.3, tne kiln ash resi-
dence time varied from 54 to 114 minutes for the SADA test runs
and from 49 to i20 minutes for the LAAP test runs.
6.3.3 Flue gas residence time. The flue gas residence time
within the secondary chamber was a function of fuel burn rate,
amount of organics oxidized from the soil, the soil moisture
content, the amount of excess air, and the secondary combustion
chamber temperature and volume. As shown in Subsection 7.2.4,
the flue gas residence times in the secondary combustion chamber
varied from 1.0 to 2.0 seconds.
6.3.4 Percent excess air. The percent excess air is a
measure of the amount of additional oxygen available above and
beyond the amount required for stoichiometric combustion of the
fuel and oxidation of the organics in the sediment. Due to the
high degree of variability of organics content of the soil
(i.e., explosives concentration), no attempt was made to main-
tain constant excess air levels. However, to ensure an adequate
supply of combustion air to oxidize the explosives in the soil
and the flue gas, excess air rates of 100 to over 200 percent
were provided in the primary combustion chamber. Excess flow
rates in the flue gas leaving the secondary combustion chamber
were approximately 100 percent.
6.3.5 Fuel input rate. Tne fuel input rate was a function
of the heat content of the soil (i.e., explosives concentra-
tion), the moisture content of the soil, the air flowrate, heat
losses, and the selected primary and secondary combustion cham-
ber temperatures. Once the incinerator reached steady-state con-
ditions, the primary and secondary chamber burners modulated, as
37
4523A
-------
required, to automatically maintain the temperature set points.
Total fuel input rates varied from 500 to 1,300 cubic feet per
hour of propane during the test runs.
6.4 Response variables. The response variables are the
various ash residue and flue gas analyses as shown in Figure 5.
The detailed sampling and analysis techniques employed were pre-
sented in a previous document5 and will not be repeated in
this report.
There was only one deviation from the referenced sampling
and analysis plan5. The on-site total hydrocarbon analyses
were performed on aliquots of the integrated gas samples col-
lected in the EPA Method 3 sampling trains rather than on the
explosives/hydrocarbon train bag samples as originally planned.
This procedure change was necessitated because the bag samples
from the explosives/hydrocarbon trains picked-up acetonitrile
vapors (from sample recovery activities) which interferred with
the determination of total hydrocarbons.
Acetonitrile was confirmed in the bag samples from the ex-
plosives/hydrocarbons trains which were sent to WESTON's West
Chester, Pennsylvania laboratories. No other deviations from the
sampling/testing and analysis plan were necessary.
38
4523A
-------
7. PRESENTATION OF TEST BURN DATA
7.1 Summary of test burn data. The test burn dates and
controlled process variables (i.e., soil feed rate and primary
and secondary chamber temperatures) were summarized in Table 2.
Figures 12 and 13 provide the average data for the nine test
burns on SADA soil (Test Matrix Nos. 1-1 to 1-9) and the nine
test burns on LAAP soil (Test Matrix Nos. 2-1 to 2-9), respec-
tively. These figures summarize the data in a material balance
format and provide a complete summary of the composition of the
feed and waste streams and the flue gas sampling results. An in-
dividual material balance diagram for each of the 18 test burns
summarized in Figures 12 and 13, as well as the preliminary test
burn (Test Matrix No. 0-1) is provided in Appendix A.
7.2 Presentation of data and calculation procedures.
7.2.1 Emission testing periods. Table 6 summarizes the ac-
tual emission testing periods and propane fuel consumption of
the primary and secondary burners. The emission testing periods
shown on Table 6 do not include the pre-test warm-up and post-
test cool-down time. The pre-test warm-up took up to 3 hours de-
pending on the required kiln temperature. Once the desired oper-
ating conditions were achieved and soil feed commenced, equi-
librium conditions were maintained for 60 minutes prior to
starting the emission testing. As shown in Table 6, the duration
of the actual emission testing ranged from approximately 2 to 3
hours. After the emission testing was completed, the soil feed
was discontinued and equilibrium conditions were maintained for
an additional bO minutes to ensure that the ash in the kiln was
properly processed. The post-test cool-down took up to 3 hours
to ensure that the temperature of the refractory was reduced
gradually.
The propane burn rate data presented in Table 6 was calcu-
lated based on the gas meter readings at the start and finish of
the emission test period. The propane burn rate is for both the
primary and secondary burners combined. The heating value of the
propane was 21,560 Btu per pound or approximately 2,500 Btu per
standard cubic foot.
7.2.2 Actual soil feed rate and ash production data. The
actual soil feed weights and the respective total kiln and fab-
ric filter ash weights are listed in Table 7 for each of the
test burns. The average soil feed rate for each test was calcu-
lated by dividing the total soil fed by the total time soil was
fed. Although these average feed rates do not account for in-
stantaneous feeding surges (i.e., one bucket of soil every 2 to
39
4523A
-------
Stream Number 12345
Description
Carbon (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen (Ib/hr)
Oxygen (Ib/hr)
Nitrogen (Ib/hr)
Sulfur (Ib/hr)
Chlorine (Ib/hr)
Moisture (Ib/hr)
Ash (Ib/hr)
Explosives - TNT (Ib/hr)
RDX (Ib/hr)
HMX (Ib/hr)
Other (Ib/hr)
Heavy Metals - Ba (Ib/hr)
Cd (Ib/hr)
Cr (Ib/hr)
Cu (Ib/hr)
Pb (Ib/hr)
Zn (Ib/hr)
As (Ib/hr)
Hg (Ib/hr)
Air (Ib/hr)
C0» (Ib/hr)
Water Vapor (Ib/hr)
Propane (Ib/hr)
Paniculate (Ib/hr)
Carbon Monoxide (Ib/hr)
Oxides ol Nilrogen (Ib/hr)
Sullur Dioxide (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen Chloride (Ib/hr)
Hydrocarbons (Ib/hr)
Total Mass Flow Rate (Ib/hr)
Average Temperature ( F)
Average Volumetric Flow Rate (dsclm)
Heating Value (Btu/lb)
Combustion
Air
(Total)
_
.
.
_
.
.
-
-
-
.
.
-
-
.
.
.
4.3672
-
575
.
,
.
4,424.7
60
9705
Fuel
(Total)
.
.
-
-
.
-
.
.
.
-
1066
.
.
.
1066
60
156
21.560
Soil
Feed
214
148
.
940
ND
0089
595
2069
572
0019
ND
0050
7 1 x 10 3
ND ,
1 4 x 10 3
2 5 x 10 3
0013
0021
ND
ND
3561
60
846
Kiln
Ash
122 1
0063
-
034
0042
0042
2082
4 1 x 10J
1.2x10-«
ND
ND
29 x 10 3
ND
ND
ND 1
3.2 x 10 3
40 x 10 3
ND
ND
-
.
-
-
_
2099
1.453
0
Secondary
Chamber
Inlet
-
-
13%'
81 5%'
-
-
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
-
5.5%'
NM
801ppmv*
NM
NM
NM
6 4ppmv*
NM*
1.453
NM*
-
6
Fabric
Filter
Inlet
-
-
5396
3.4348
-
-
-
ND
ND
ND
NO
38x10-*
4.1 x 10 5
7.9 x 10 *
1 9 x 10-*
2.3 x 10 3
21 x 103
4.8 x 10 5
3.9 x 10s
-
4268
m n
2.08
0.077
NM
NM
7 2 x 10 *
0.14
4,677 5
302
978
-
7
Fabric
Filter
Ash
0.031
00027
-
0018
00030
00023
-
422
7 8 x 10"s
ND
30 x 10s
9.9 x 10 *
3.5 x 10-*
2.4 x 10'5
6 8 x 10s
1 7 x 10J
95x10^
1.1 x 10°
4.0 x 10-*
8.6 x 10 s
-
*
-
-
.
-
,
428
192
•
0
8
Slack
Exhausl
-
6735
3,8563
•
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
ND
1 8 x 10 s
4223
2/2 8
49 x 10 '
075
300
0039
NM
2 7 x 10 J
5,228 0
192
1.100
,
•#:
For IECS Incineration Tett Burn
At Savanna Army Depot Activity (SADA)
Savanni. Illinois
W"V.» «rti dj£sf Nl"*^"''*"5*1"' *w *«'••'• '"*•
FIGURE It AVERAGE MATERIAL BALANCE FOR
NINE TEST BURNS ON SADA SOIL
*"* None rn*a<**»* D....-4 •*.-««
°*> 1/3/84 2281-01-02 MB-OOOt
MolM:
NO - Not Detected • - Flue gat volumetric flow rat* was not measured t(»i* secondary chamber into! since itofctnetic condition* could not be
VIM - Not Measured achieved Values are presented ts volumetric percentages or ppm's on a volume or weight basis
-------
Stream Number 123 4 5678
Description
Carbon (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen (Ib/hr)
Oxygen (Ib/hr)
Nitrogen (Ib/hr)
Sulfur (Ib/hr)
Chlorine (Ib/hr)
Moisture (Ib/hr)
Ash (Ib/hr)
Explosives - TNT (Ib/hr)
RDX (Ib/hr)
HMX (Ib/hr)
Other (Ib/hr)
Heavy Metals - Ba (Ib/hr)
Cd (Ib/hr)
Cr (Ib/hr)
Cu (Ib/hr)
Pb (Ib/hr)
Zn (Ib/hr)
As (Ib/hr)
Hg (Ib/hr)
Air (Ib/hr)
CO» (Ib/hr)
Water Vapor (Ib/hr)
Propane (Ib/hr)
Paniculate (Ib/hr)
Carbon Monoxide (Ib/hr)
Oxides of Nitrogen (Ib/hr)
Sulfur Dioxide (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen Chloride (Ib/hr)
Hydrocarbons (Ib/hr)
Total Mass Flow Rate (Ib/hr)
Average Temperature ( F)
Average Volumetric Flow Rate (dsclm)
Heating Value (Btu/lb)
Combustion
Air
(Total)
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
-
-
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
4.3903
.
.
4,448 1
60
976
Fuel
(Total)
-
-
-
-
-
.
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
-
121.7
-
_
_
.
_
121 7
60
17.8
21,560
Soil
Feed
157
206
101
0.015
018
965
1895
214
13.1
21
0096
0029
84x10-'
5 3 x 10 3
0013
034
0058
ND
7 4 x 10-4
-
.
-
-
.
.
_
3509
60
-
890
Kiln
Ash
096
0085
049
ND
047
2109
2 3 x Ifr3
ND
ND
ND
0026
4 7 x 10«
23 x 10 3
7.0 x 10 3
0019
0028
1 1 x Ifr3
8.5 x 10*
-
-
-
.
-
.
2130
1.451
-
0
Secondary
Chamber
Inlet
-
-
132V
820%'
.
.
.
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
48V
126%'
NM
68.8ppmv*
NM
NM
NM
0 6ppmv'
NM*
1.451
NM*
Fabric
Filter
Inlet
.
-
5274
3,425.6
-
-
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.6X10-4
6.1 X10*
44x 10*
1 2 x 10^
9.8 x 10"4
1.2x103
3.6 x 10 *
1.4x10*
-
4246
328 7
1.37
ND
NM
NM
0.016
0.040
4,707.7
301
973
-
Fabric
Filter
Ash
0020
00018
0.0062
0.0018
00009
-
439
ND
ND
ND
ND
3.3 x 10"«
2.8 x 10 *
57x10*
1 4 x 10-*
1 1 x 10 3
1 2 x 10 3
64x10*
24x10*
-
- '
-
-
.
-
-
4.42
194
-
0
Stack
Exhaust
-
-
6650
3.852 8
.
-
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
ND
2 1 x 10-1
-
405.6
3228
4 0 x 10 3
ND
16
0069
NM
8.0 x 10-4
5,247.9
194
1,095
-
c
II
For IECS Incineration Test Burn
At Savanna Army Depot Activity (SADA)
Savanna. Illinois
\ V Yj ^ C"l M?KV ^* j**Sr CHESTER PENNSYLVANIA 19380
XSO*t**\^/ CONIUttOTI
FIGURE 13 AVERAGE MATERIAL BALANCE FOR
NINE TEST BURNS ON LAAP SOIL
S<" None P.O|«CINumO«. D..«,ng NumMf
°-» 1/3/84 2281-01-02 MB 0002
Motee:
ND - Not Detected • -Fluegasvolumetricflowratewasnolmeasuredatthesecondarychamberinletsinceisokineticconditionscouldnolbe
NM - Not Measured achieved Values are presented as volumetric percentages or ppm's on a volume or weight basis
-------
TABLE 6. SUMMARY OF ACTUAL, EMISSION TESTING PERIODS
AND PROPANE FUEL CONSUMPTION
(EXCLUDES PRE-TEST WARM-UP AND POST-TEST COOL-DOWN)
Matrix
number
0-1
1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
1-5
1-6
1-7
1-8
1-9
2-1
2-2
2-3
2-4
2-5
2-6
2-7
2-8
2-9
Test
date
9/19
9/21
10/4
9/20
9/23
9/27
9/22
9/29
10/3
10/1
9/26
10/8
10/6
10/2
10/5
9/24
9/28
9/30
10/7
Emission
testing
start
time
13:15
10:45
9:30
10:45
12:50
10:15
10:15
10:50
11:29
10:15
11:31
8:45
9:45
9:04
9:45
11:42
11:00
10:15
10:30
Emission
testing
stop
time
16:30
13:10
11:45
13:30
15:06
12:42
12:44
13:15
13:59
12:35
13:57
11:00
12:00
11:15
12:00
14:15
13 :27
12:30
12:34
Emission
test
duration
(hr)
3.25
2.42
2.25
2.75
2.27
2.45
2.48
2.42
2.50
2.33
2.43
2.25
2.25
2.18
2.25
2.55
2.45
2.25
2.07
Propane burn
rate during
emission testing
(ft3/hr)
481.6
904.7
941.3
714.3
982.4
723.2
924.8
986.9
1151.6
1083.4
846.2
944.1
997.2
1130.1
1156.7
954.8
1086.3
1211.9
1282.6
42
4523A
-------
TABLE 7. SUMMARY OF ACTUAL SOIL FEED RATES
AND ASH PRODUCTION DATA
TOTAL AMOUNT
MATRIX
NUMBER
0-1
1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
1-5
1-6
1-7
1-8
1-9
2-1
2-2
2-3
2-4
2-5
2-6
2-7
2-8
2-9
OF SOIL FED
(Ibs)
2,338.5
1,015.5
1,156.5
1,533.5
1,129.0
1,128.5
1,367.0
1,011.5
1,182.5
1,249.0
968.5
1,127.0
1,362.5
969.5
1,134.0
1,413.0
961.0
1,419.5
1,640.5
TOTAL TIME
SOIL FED
(hrs)
4.53
3.
3.
3.
,17
30
,60
3.75
3.17
3.37
3.47
3.35
3.08
17
65
40
20
3.25
3.40
3.17
4.03
4.07
AVERAGE SOIL
FEED RATE
(Ibs/hr)
5.15.9
320.
350.
426.0
301.1
356.3
406.0
291.8
353.0
405.1
305.8
308.8
400.7
303.0
348.9
415.6
303.4
352.0
403.4
TOTAL PRIMARY
CHAMBER ASH
(Ibs)
743
680
902
1,050
754
392
880
345
733
615
438
700
961
560
817
787
495
792
1,125
TOTAL FABRIC
FILTER ASH'1*
(Ibs)
18.0
10.5
18.5
13.5
14.5
11.0
16.5
14.0
16.0
15.0
14.5
17.5
16.0
14.0
21.0
14.5
12.0
12.0
17.0
TOTAL AVERAGE
PERCENT ASH BY
WEIGHT (%)
32.5
68.0
79.6
69.4
68.1
35.7
65.6
35.5
63.3
50.4
46.7
63.7
71.7
59.2
73.9
56.7
52.8
56.6
69.6
(1)
On the final day of testing an additional 116 Ibs of ash was removed from the
fabric filter. This ash was distributed equally among all of the daily total
fabric filter ash weights.
-------
3 minutes) , they are representative due to the relatively long
residence time of the ash in the kiln. The calculated average
feed rates are used in Section 9 to analyze the data, as well as
similarly calculated kiln and fabric filter ash discharge rates.
The inconsistency of ash removal from the fabric filter is
evidenced by the amount of ash (116 pounds or 10 times the actu-
al daily fabric filter ash discharged) removed during the dis-
manteling of the system. This ash was distributed equally among
all of the daily fabric filter ash weights. Due to the potential
error associated with this assumption, fabric filter ash weights
were not used in the computerized analysis in Section 9. In-
stead, the particulate loadings (in grains per standard cubic
foot) from the gas sampling location upstream of the fabric fil-
ter were used.
7.2.3 Estimated primary chamber ash residence times. The
estimated primary chamber ash residence times for each of the
test burns on SADA soils are presented in Table 8 and similarly
for the test burns on LAAP soils in Table 9. Ash residence time
could not be directly measured in the field. Therefore, the fol-
lowing procedure was established to estimate ash residence time.
(a) The time that the first ash drum was removed (t^) was
recorded, as well as the time that soil feed
commenced (to) .
(b) The empty ash drum was weighed before the test and the
filled ash drum was weighed again after it was re-
moved to determine the net ash weight (m^).
(c) The height of the ash in the drum was measured to de-
termine the volume of ash in the drum (V^).
(d) The ash density was estimated by dividing the net
weight of ash in the drum by the volume of ash in
the drum (mj/Vi ) •
(e) The volumetric ash production rate was determined by
the following equation:
m.
V =
-------
TABLE 8. SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED PRIMARY CHAMBER
ASH RESIDENCE TIMES FOR THE SADA RUNS
Matrix
number
0-1
1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
1-5
1-6
1-7
1-8
1-9
1.
V = (M
X
Time
start
feed
fco
12:05
10 : 00
08:40
09:33
11:23
09:32
09:20
09:30
10:25
09:024
-------
TABLE 9. SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED PRIMARY CHAMBER ASH
RESIDENCE TIMES FOR THE LAAP RUNS
Time
Matrix start
number feed
2-1
2-2
2-3
2-4
2-5
2-6
2-7
2-8
2-9
1.
V -
2vk =
3
fco
10:
07:
08:
08:
08:
10:
10:
09:
09:
(MT) +
L
(V) x
>
45
354
444
20
444
58
16
30
30<
r
-
First
Total drum
time weight
v*
2
2
2
3
2
2
2
2
3
0(hr) -
.83
.42
.77
.42
.70
.20
.82
.58
.50
. where: M^,
(Vi)
tT
Vlb)
150
290
5065
247
4725
223
245
310
7206
= total
= total
First
drum
volume
•j
V.(ftJ)
3.30
4.84
10. 345
5.72
10. 565
4.62
5.06
7.04
15. 846
primary
time so
Ash
density
Mi Ib
V~~ * 3^
vi ft"*
45.5
59. 94
48. 94'5
43.2
44. 74'5
48.3
48.4
44.0
45. 56
Ash
produc- Ash Ash
tion in residence
rate kiln2 time3
' ft3
V (~)
3.04
3.20
5.78
4.05
5.62
4.79
3.23
4.46
6.08
chamber ash, Ib
il fed. hr
(Table
•»
vft >
5.3
2.9
5.7
8.1
4.6
5.9
4.0
4.5
5.4
(Table A-l)
A-l)
TR(min)
105
54
59
120
49
74
74
61
53
T =(_k)x (60
\;;
'Test 1-9 includes 28 minutes of feeding background sand (132 Ib total) which effects
ash density.
-------
(g) The ash residence time in the kiln (TR) was deter-
mined by the following equation:
V
T - ( —) x (60 mini
TR - (7 ) x IbU ££-)
As shown in Tables 8 and 9, the kiln ash densities were
quite different for the two types of soil. The SADA primary kiln
ash density was generally in the range of 80 to 90 pounds per
cubic foot, whereas the LAAP primary kiln ash density was gen-
erally in the range of 40 to 50 pounds per cubic foot. The foot-
notes in Tables 8 and 9 point out specific test runs in which
uncontaminated background sand was fed during the pre-test warm-
up to minimize the adherence of ash to the kiln refractory. This
is discussed more thoroughly in Subsection 1.3.
The volume of ash in the kiln was also quite different for
the two types of soil. Since the kiln rotation was held constant
for all tests at approximately four revolutions per hour and
since the feed rates and kiln temperatures were essentially rep-
licated for the two soils, the differences in the volume of ash
in the kiln (i.e., generally 2 to 4 cubic feet for the SADA kiln
ash compared to 4 to 8 cubic feet for the LAAP kiln ash) is most
likely due to the difference in the "angle of repose" of the two
types of ash. The differences between the two types of kiln ash
are discussed more thoroughly in Subsection 7.3.1.
The kiln ash residence times, on the other hand, were com-
parable for the two types of ash. The residence times varied
from 54 minutes to 114 minutes fqr the SADA kiln asn and from
53 minutes to 120 minutes for the LAAP kiln ash.
7.2.4 Estimated secondary chamber flue gas residence time.
The estimated secondary chamber flue gas residence times for
each of the test burns are summarized in Table 10. As shown in
Table 10, the secondary chamber flue gas residence times ranged
from 1.1 to 2.0 seconds. These estimated flue gas residences
times are based on the secondary chamber volume of 90 cubic
feet, and do not include any credit for the flue gas residence
time in the primary chamber, the end panel, or the refractory-
lined ductwork upstream of the waste heat boiler.
7.2.5 Explosives concentrations in the soil feed, ash resi-
dues, and stack gas. Prior to development of the test plan^,
soil core samples and grab samples had been taken from each of
the six SADA lagoons as part of the Task order 1 effort. The
core samples were either 5 or 1.5 feet in depth and explosives
concentration analyses were performed on samples taken at 6-inch
intervals throughout the depth of each core sample.
47
4523A
-------
TABLE 10. SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED SECONDARY CHAMBER
FLUE GAS RESIDENCE TIMES
*>•
OD
Matrix
number
0-1
1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
1-5
1-6
1-7
1-8
1-9
2-1
2-2
2-3
2-4
2-5
2-6
2-7
2-b
2-9
Secondary
temperature
'(set point)
1,400
1,600
1,600
1,600
1,800
1,800
1,800
2,000
2,000
2,000
1,600
1,600
1,600
1,800
1,800
1,800
2,000
2,000
2,000
Chanber
(°F)
(average
actual)
1,390
1,700*
1,575
1,600
1,800
1,790
1,730
1,980
1,980
1,980
1,580
1,580
1,580
1,800
1,780
1,780
1,960
1,980
1,980
Flue gas flowrate at
secondary chamber Secondary chamber
outlet residence time
(scfm) (acfm) (sec)
783
883
1,192
875
908
825
875
1,017
1,015
1,075
850
1,000
1,083
1,042
1,058
867
858
958
1,042
2,733
3,599
4,577
3,401
3,872
3,502
3,616
4,682
4,673
4,949
3,272
3,849
4,168
4,443
4,472
3,664
3,918
4,410
4,797
2.0
1.5
1.2
1.6
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.2
1.2
1.1
1.7
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.2
1.5
1.4
1.2
1.1
-------
The TNT concentrations found in the core samples ranged from
200,000 ppm (20 percent) to less than 24 ppm (the detection lim-
it). The core and grab samples demonstrated in general that:
(a) The explosives concentrations tended to be highest in
the top 6 inches of soil.
(t) The explosive concentrations in the top 6 inches di-
minished with distance from the point where the
wastewater had entered the lagoon.
For these reasons, it was decided that the SADA soil would
be excavated from lagoon No. 5 in the vicinity where the waste-
water had entered the lagoon and to a depth not to exceed ap-
proximately 4 to 6 inches. This decision was made to maximize
the explosive concentrations in the feed soil so that an explo-
sives DRE of 99.99 percent could potentially be demonstrated
within the detection limits of the stack sampling equipment. As
a result, the TNT concentrations in the composite feed samples
from the SADA runs were much higher than those found in the core
samples. As shown in Table 11, they ranged from 406,000 ppm
(40.6 percent) to 88,100 ppm (8.81 percent). Other explosives in
the SADA soil were negligible by comparison.
The LAAP soil, on the other hand, had quite substantial con-
centrations of RDX and HMX, as well as TNT as shown in Table 11.
Other explosives in the LAAP soil were negligible by comparison.
Table 12 summarizes the concentrations of explosives in the
kiln ash. In general, the only explosives detected in the kiln
ash were very low concentrations of TNT ranging from not detect-
ed to less than 30 ppm.
Table 13 summarizes the concentrations of explosives in the
fabric filter ash. The data in Table 13 should not be analyzed
on a run-by-run basis. A compressed air, pulse-jet cleaning cy-
cle was performed on the fabric filter bags before and after
each test run, and the ash that was dislodged from the bags was
removed from the collection hopper, weighed, .ind analyzed. How-
ever, there was no assurance that the ash removed irom the hop-
per directly corresponded to the respective test run. As de-
scribed previously in Subsection 6.2.1, explosives breakthrough
occurred during the preliminary Test Run No. 0-1 which is sup-
ported by the data in Table 13. Chronologically, the next three
test runs were matrix Nos. 1-3, 1-1, and 1-6. Each of these runs
had similar, gradually decreasing levels of explosives which in-
dicate that the fabric filter bags were most likely contaminated
49
4523A
-------
TABLE 11. EXPLOSIVES CONCENTRATIONS IN THE FEED SOIL
Explosives concentrations* (ppm, dry weight basis)
o
Matrix
number HMX
RDX
TNB
DNB
NB
2-Amino
TNT
2,6-DNT 2,4-DNT
0-1
1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
1-5
1-6
1-7
1-8
1-9
2-1
2-2
2-3
2-4
2-5
2-6
2-7
2-8
2-9
Detec-
tion
limits
ND2
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
11,000
13,500
6,180
7,210
7,060
6i790
8,300
5,740
8,260
15.9
64.
28.
60.
49.
37.
84.
46.
145
58.
69.
67,300
96,500
43,600
45,400
40,000
35,400
51,700
33,100
51,800
12.
6
6
9
1
8
2
9
2
8
2
113
94.
131
117
90.
256
110
253
128
156
155
90.
94.
67.
57.
88.
139
72.
99.
26.
8
7
1
3
7
0
2
8
1
1
ND
ND
11.2
ND
5.50
35.1
14.3
32.4
8.42
29.2
16.0
9.78
ND
22.4
16.8
12.9
ND
12.2
21.7
7.39
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
5.26
ND
ND
ND
ND
4.95
ND
ND
27.9
ND
ND
ND
588
142
411
189
173
265
459
208
3.64
*
136,000
99,500
150,000
115,000
88,100
264,000
121,000
406,000
228,000
263,000
142,000
108,000
59,700
98,500
60,600
81,100
92,500
61,200
55,100
24.0
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
5.03
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
5.20
^Molecular structure of explosives is presented in Appendix D.
2ND - Not detected.
-------
TABLE 12. EXPLOSIVES CONCENTRATIONS IN THE KILN ASH
Explosives concentrations1 (ppm, dry weight basis)
Matrix
number
U-l
1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
1-b
1-b
1-7
1-b
1-9
2-1
2-2
2-3
2-4
2-b
2-6
2-7
2-8
2-9
Detec-
tion
limits
HMX RDX TNB DNB NB 2-Amino
ND2
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.27
ND
5.21
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
U997
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
2.47
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
2.U9
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.591
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
U.421
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
U .291
TNT 2,6-DNT 2,4-DNT
6.48
ND
2.65
8.78
ND
3.44
ND
ND
2.55
ND
6.58
19.3
26.9
17.6
4.88
ND
8.78
13.1
ND
1.92
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
U.4U2
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
U.416
1Molecuiar structure of explosives is presented in Appendix D.
2ND - Not detected.
51
4523A
-------
TABLE 13. EXPLOSIVES CONCENTRATIONS IN THE FABRIC FILTER ASH
Explosives concentrations1 (ppm, dry weight basis)
Matrix
number
0-1
1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
1-5
1-6
1-7
1-8
1-9
2-1
2-2
2-3
2-4
2-5
2-6
2-7
2-8
2-9
Detec-
tion
limits
HMX
4.30
1.30
ND
ND
ND
5.02
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.61
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.27
RDX
1.22
ND
ND
1.57
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0977
TNB
11.1
4.07
ND
5.17
2.52
2.25
4.32
ND
2.43
ND
3.66
ND
ND
ND
ND
2.37
ND
2.27
ND
2.09
DNB
0.896
0.832
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.854
ND
ND
ND
0.726
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.591
NB 2-Amino
3.55
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.421
ND2
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.291
TNT 2,
5.20
2.08
2.65
2.62
ND
ND
1.94
ND
155
ND
ND
4.24
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.92
6-DNT 2.4-DNT
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.402
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.416
^Molecular structure of explosives is presented in Appendix D.
2ND - Not detected.
52
4523A
-------
with explosives during Test Run No. U-i and may have continued
to contaminate subsequent test run ash samples.
No explosives were detected in the stack gas during any ot
the test burns, including the preliminary Test Run No. U-i. The
estimation ot explosives destruction and removal efticiency is
presented in Subsection b.2.4.2.
/.2.b Fabric tiiter particuiate loadings, control efficien-
cies, and particle size distribution data. The fabric filter
particuiate loadings and control efficiencies are summarized in
Table 14 tor each test run. The fabric filter control efficien-
cies ranged from 99.1 to 99.9 percent with an average efficiency
ot 99.6 percent. The consistently high removal efficiency was
turther evidenced by the lack ot a visible stack plume.
The fabric tiiter particuiate size distributions tor the
SADA and LAAP test runs are presented in Figures 14 and 15, re-
spectively. As shown in Figures 14 and 15, the size distribu-
tions tor the two types ot fabric tiiter ash are almost identi-
cal. The general size distribution data applicable to both ash
types are summarized below.
Particle diameter, microns Weight percent within range
U - 5 Negligible
5 - 1U 2 percent
ID - bU b percent
bU - 1UU 2U percent
>1UU 7U percent
7.2.7 Stack emissions data tor gaseous pollutants. The
stack emissions data tor hydrogen chloride (HCi), sulfur dioxide
(SO^;, and oxides ot nitrogen (NOX) are summarized in Table
lb. The stack emissions data for hydrocarbons and carbon monox-
ide (CO) are summarized in Table 16. No significant differences
are apparent between the two soil types in the magnitude of the
values. No stack emissions ot heavy metals were detected except
tor mercury which did not exceed b x 1U~4 pounds per hour tor
any ot the test burns.
/.2.b EP toxicity testing data tor the ash residues. The
results ot the extraction procedure (EP) toxicity testing data
tor the kiln ash and the tabric tiiter ash are presented in Ta-
bles i/ and ib, respectively. In most instances, either no heavy
metals were detected or the maximum possible metal concentration
(in the ash) was below the EP toxicity threshold limit and the
test was not conducted. Regardless ot soil type or the levels of
other test variables, the EP toxicity threshold limits were not
exceeded.
53
4b2JA
-------
TABLE 14. SUMMARY OF FABRIC FILTER PARTICIPATE LOADINGS
AND CONTROL EFFICIENCIES
FABRIC FILTER PARTICIPATE LOADINGS
MATRIX
NUMBER
0-1
1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
1-5
1-6
1-7
1-8
1-9
2-1
2-2
2-3
2-4
2-5
2-6
2-7
2-8
2-9
INLET
(grains/dscf)
0.080
0.170
0.420
0.170
0.290
0.085
0.360
0.190
0.260
0.200
0.091
0.260
0.240
0.130
0.140
0.220
0.160
0.091
0.130
OUTLET
(grains/dscf)
0.00054
0.00048
0.00053
0.00042
0.00067
0.00069
0.00044
0.00051
0.00066
0.00026
0.00071
0.00018
0.00035
0.00024
0.00066
0.00072
0.00063
0.00033
0.00014
INLET
(Ib/hr)
0.54
1.30
4.30
1
2
30
30
0.60
2.70
1.70
2.60
1.90
0.66
2.20
2.20
1.20
1.30
1.60
1.20
0.77
1.20
OUTLET
(Ib/hr)
0.0045
0.0045
0.0058
0.0037
0.0061
0.0056
0.0040
0.0048
0.0067
0.0026
0.0060
0.0018
0.0035
0.0024
0.0063
0.0063
0.0055
0.0031
0.0014
FABRIC FILTER CONTROL
EFFICIENCY* ** <%)
99.2
99.7
99.9
99,
99,
99,
99,
99,
99,
99.9
99.1
99.9
99.8
99.8
99.5
99.6
99.5
99.6
99.9
"(l)Fabric filter control efficiency is calculated based upon inlet and outlet
particulate loadings expressed in Ib/hr.
-------
100
90
80
70
50
M
0)
o> 40
«
* 30
20
10
1000
Diameter in Microns
Note: Assumed Ash Specific Gravity = 1.0
FIGURE 14 PARTICULATE SIZE DISTRIBUTION FOR SADA FABRIC
FILTER ASH COMPOSITE SAMPLE FOR ALL RUNS
-------
50
100
500
1000
Diameter in Microns
Note: Assumed Ash Specific Gravity =1.0
FIGURE 15 PARTICULATE SIZE DISTRIBUTION FOR LAAP FABRIC
FILTER ASH COMPOSITE SAMPLE FOR ALL RUNS
-------
TABLE 15. SUMMARY OF STACK EMISSION DATA
FOR HC1. S02. AND NOX
MATRIX
NUMBER
0-1
HCL
GASEOUS STACK EMISSIONS
S02
NOX
ppm/v
7.2
1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
1-5
1-6
1-7
1-8
1-9
2-1
2-2
2-3
2-4
2-5
2-6
2-7
2-8
2-9
1.3
0.86
1.2
1.1
1.4
1.2
1.6
1.7
1.3
1.6
2.9
3.3
2.2
2.8
1.8
3.4
3.3
4.2
Ib/hr
0.0320
0.0064
0.0058
0.0059
0.0057
0.0065
0.0061
0.0094
0.0110
0.0078
0.0077
0.0160
0.0210
0.0130
0.0170
0.0088
0.0170
0.0190
0.0250
ppm/v
1.3
2.3
2.7
1.6
3.3
5.3
2.7
4.2
4.5
5.2
3.9
3. 3
6.2
6.4
7.2
7.5
6.9
6.3
10.0
Ib/hr
0.013
0.025
0.034
0.017
0.034
0.050
0.028
0.046
0.053
0.060
0.039
0.037
0.070
0.075
0.080
0.076
0.069
0.069
0.110
ppm/v
530
220
300
240
270
450
380
600
390
500
190
240
140
180
200
230
210
220
130
Ib/hr
3.6
1.7
2.7
1.8
2.0
3.1
2.9
4.8
3.4
4.2
1.3
1.9
1.1
1.4
1.6
1.7
2.3
1.7
1.0
-------
TABLE 16. SUMMARY OF STACK EMISSION DATA
FOR HYDROCARBONS AND CARBON MONOXIDE
HYDROCARBONS (ppm as CHj)
MATRIX
0-1
1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
1-5
1-6
1-7
1-8
1-9
2-1
2-2
2-3
2-4
2-5
2-6
2-7
2-8
2-9
2tection Limits:
SECONDARY
CHAMBER INLET
4
46
ND
ND
ND
7
5
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
5
NE
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
2
FABRIC
FILTER INLET
(1)
ND* '
525
ND
ND
Np
3
16
ND
ND
ND
2
ND
ND
128
20
ND
ND
ND
ND
2
CARBON MONOXIDE (ppir)
SECONDARY
STACK CHAMBER INLET
ND 1050
6 122
ND 126
ND 240
ND 16
3 140
ND 5
ND 13
ND 20
ND 39
ND 174
ND 160
ND 220
3 5
ND 14
ND 31
ND 5
ND 5
ND 5
FABRIC
FILTER OUTLET STACK
75 83
ND ND
5 5
ND ND
ND ND
46 41
ND ND
7 7
18 14
90 77
ND ND
ND ND
ND ND
ND ND
ND ND
ND ND
5 ND
ND ND
ND ND
(1IND - Not Detected
-------
TABLE 17. SUMMARY OF EP TOXICITY TESTING DATA
FOR THE PRIMARY CHAMBER ASH
MATRIX
NUMBER
0-1
1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
1-5
1-6
1-7
1-8
1-9
2-1
2-2
2-3
2-4
2-5
2-6
2-7
2-8
2-9
Detection Limits:
EP Toxicity Threshold Limits;
METALS IN PRIMARY CHAMBER ASH EP TOXICITY LEACHATE (mq/LY
Ba
0.28
0.21
0.21
0.26
0.22
0.38
0.47
0.31
0.22
1.10
0.28
0.27
0.02
100
Cd
ND<2)
ND
ND
0.05
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.14
0.05
1.0
Cr
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.05
5.0
Pt>
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.5
5.0
As
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.014
ND
ND
0.033
0.019
0.010
5.0
be
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.010
1.0
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.004
0.0005
0.2
(1
Indicates that sample was not analyzed for metals in the leachate because the contaminant
limits could not be exceeded based upon the analysis of total metals in the sample.
not-,
-------
TABLE IB. SUMMARY OF EP TOXICITY TESTING DATA
FOR THE FABRIC FILTER ASH
MATRIX
NUMBER
0-1
1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
1-5
1-6
1-7
1-8
1-9
2-1
2-2
2-3
2-4
2-5
2-6
2-7
2-8
2-9
Detection Limits:
EP Toxicity Threshold Limits:
METALS IN FABRIC FILTER ASH EP TOXICITY LEACHATE (mg/L)
(1)
Ba
0.22
0.22
0.23
0.24
0.25
0.25
0.24
0.27
Cd
ND<2)
ND
0.11
ND
ND
0.06
ND
0.07
Cr
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Pb
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
As
ND
ND
0.054
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.034
Se
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
H2
ND
0.002
0.002
0.004
0.002
0.005
ND
0.003
0.23
0.20
0.02
100
0..10
0.14
0.05
1.0
ND
ND
0.05
5.0
ND
0.019
ND
0.5
5.0
0.031
0.010
5.0
ND
0.010
1.0
0.003
0.21
0.22
0.24
0.22
0.23
0.23
0.28
0.05
0.12
0.12
0.12
0.16
ND
0.10
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.020
0.042
0.041
0.019
0.110
ND
0.016
ND
0..012
0.010
0.030
0.014
ND
ND
0.006
0.003
0.002
0.004
0.002
0.004
0.003
0.011 0.003
0.0005
0.2
(D—Indicates that sample was not analyzed for metals in the leachate because the contaminant
limits could not be exceeded based upon the analysis of total metals in the sample.
(2) ND - Not Detected
-------
7.3 Pnysical observations. The objective of this section
is to provide firsthand observations regarding parameters that
are somewhat difficult to quantify and reduce to numerical
terms. These physical observations include the following:
(a) Soil/ash appearance and density.
(b) Combustion observations.
(c) Steady-state production run.
(d) Industrial hygiene observations.
(e) Miscellaneous observations.
7.3.1 Soil/ash appearance and density. The SADA soil, al-
though excavated as the top 4 to 6 inches of an approximately
300-square foot area of a single lagoon, was widely variable in
appearance. The soil was excavated from the area immediately ad-
jacent to the influent stand pipe which was identified as having
the highest explosives concentrations within the lagoon. The
soil ranged from light tan to dark reddish-brown in color. The
texture ranged from loose sand to packed silt. One area of the
lagoon had a subsurface layer of soil that was somewhat unique.
The soil was a light tan dry powder (like talcum) that would not
wet (floats on water) and when exposed to sunlight for approxi-
mately 10 minutes changed color to light yellow. Once disturbed,
the soil again appeared light tan. The soil seemed to be sensi-
tive to sunlight (perhaps ultraviolet).
The LAAP soil, by comparison, was much more consistent in
appearance. The soil in the drums varied from densely packed
clay to clay mixed with sand and free water. The soil was dark
reddish-brown in color and was very tightly compacted within the
drums.
The density of the SADA and LAAP soils and respective pri-
mary kiln ashes was estimated in the tield by weighing fixed
volumes of each material. The SADA soil ranged from 80 to 120
pounds per cubic foot and the LAAP soil ranged from 90 to 105
pounds per cubic foot. A representative density for either soil
is approximately 100 pounds per cubic foot. It is suspected that
if the LAAP soil were freshly excavated the density would be
lower due to a higher moisture content.
The SADA primary kiln ash was also quite variable. The ash
ranged from "salt and pepper" colored sand, to a mixture of sand
and small "clinkers" (friable clumps less than 2 inches in diam-
eter), to one test run in which the ash was black with large
clinkers up to 6 inches in diameter (Test Run 0-1). The SADA
ash density averaged approximately 85 pounds per cubic foot.
61
4523A
-------
The LAAP primary kiln ash was again more consistent by com-
parison. The ash was light reddish-brown to black in color and
was composed almost exclusively of small friable clinkers 1 to
4 inches in diameter. The clinkers were extremely porous and the
resulting ash density averaged approximately 45 pounds per cubic
foot.
7.3.2 Combustion observations. The following comments re-
late to observations made during the various test burns relative
to the combustion process within the primary chamber.
(a) On 16 September 1983 a preliminary test run was per-
formed on SADA soil at the following conditions:
Feed Rate - 400 Ib/hr
Primary Chamber Temperature = 1,600°F
Secondary Chamber Temperature = 2,000°F
During this preliminary run (i.e., gas sampling was
not conducted) the soil appeared to burn very well.
There was no noticeable increase in primary kiln tem-
perature once feeding commenced, which suggests that
the heat content of the soil was sufficient to offset
the increased heat load to evaporate the moisture in
the soil. The flame was bright orange with no detect-
able smoke. At one point the unit shut down due to a
high boiler feed-water level which resulted in a
temporary loss of the induced draft fan. Under this
condition, black smoke was emitted from the combus-
tion air ports at the front of the incinerator. Upon
start-up and with the burners off but with the in-
duced draft fan on, the soil burned with a violent
flame. This suggests that some of the combustibles in
the soil require sufficient oxygen to properly com-
bust. The ash from this run was fine sand, light in
color, and with no noticeable odor. This observation
led to a basic change in approach. Prior to this it
was anticipated that the incinerator would most ap-
propriately be operated as a dryer to first drive off
the high moisture content of the soil and then to
"roast" the soil to volatilize and destroy the explo-
sives. Under these conditions, high excess air rates
in the primary chamber would not be critical. Howev-
er, this observation supported the fact that the unit
should be operated as an incinerator with high excess
air rates to ensure complete combustion of the organ-
ics.
62
4523A
-------
(b) On 19 September 1983 Test Run "Matrix No. 0-1 was per-
formed on SADA soil at the following conditions:
Feed Rate = 500 Ib/hr
Primary Chamber Temperature = 800°F
Secondary Chamber Temperature = 1,200°F
As described previously, this run was conducted at
the proposed "worst-case" conditions of maximum feed
rate and minimum temperature to basically challenge
the system and determine if explosives breakthrough
would occur. During this run the soil did not appear
to burn well. The soil contributed significantly to
the heat input and as a result the burners modulated
at a very "low-fire" position during this burn. The
ash was black with large clinkers up to 6 inches in
diameter. The ash had a strong ammonia smell.
(c) On 21 September 1983 a "doughnut" of feed soil/ash
started accumulating in the front of the primary
chamber as shown in Figure 16. This circumferential
ring of friable material recurred periodically
throughout the testing program (most predominantly
with the LAAP soil). This buildup of material did not
impede the combustion process; however, it was of
concern due to mass balance considerations and was
periodically removed during incinerator cool down.
The material was easily removed and could easily be
remedied by installing a scraper bar for future ap-
plications. It was also found that feeding background
sand prior to feeding the LAAP soil minimized forma-
tion of the doughnut.
(d) As observed through the combustion air ports in the
front of the incinerator, the LAAP soil had a ten-
dency to expand as the moisture and combustibles were
vaporized from the soil. This "popcorn" effect re-
sulted in the relatively low density ash discussed
earlier and, instead of the typical 50 percent volume
reduction experienced with the SADA soil, no volume
reduction, and up to a 40 percent volume increase was
experienced with the LAAP soil.
63
4523A
-------
FIGURE 16 INSIDE VIEW OF THE PRIMARY CHAMBER
MIDWAY THROUGH THE IECS PROGRAM (NOTE THE FORMATION OF
THE "DOUGHNUT" AT THE FRONT OF THE KILN)
-------
(e) In general, for the system tested, the following ob-
servations can be made tor processing both SADA and
LAAP soils:
- operation of the primary kiln at 1,400°F seemed
to be an optimum condition. At 1,600°F there
were more problems with smoking/flaming buckets
coming out of the feed system. At 1,200°F there
seemed to be a higher propensity for doughnut for-
mation. However, both of the problems could be
easily remedied in a future full-scale system.
- Operation above 400 pounds per hour soil feed rate
appeared to be a problem due to material fall-back
into the front-end panel (which could be remedied
by slight redesign or a continuous versus a bulk
feed system) and due to shorter ash residence time
(which could be remedied by a longer primary cham-
ber or alternative kiln rotation rates).
7.3.3 Steady-state production run. After the formal test-
ing was completed on 8 October 1983, an additional 25,000 pounds
of LAAP soils were incinerated from 10 to 15 October 1983 (64
actual hours of incinerating soils). The objectives of burning
the additional soils were twofold:
(a) Thermally treat all LAAP soil that had been excavated
and manifested to the Savanna Army Depot Activity but
not required during the formal testing.
(b) Determine the operational characteristics of the incin-
erator system under a longer term, steady-state pro-
duction mode of operation.
The operational parameters during this steady-state run were
as follows:
Feed Rate = 400 ib/hr
Primary Chamber Temperature = l,400Op
Secondary Chamber Temperature = l,bOO°p
Complete destruction of explosives had been consistently
demonstrated in the stack gas, as well as in the kiln ash resi-
dues at these conditions. For this reason these conditions were
proposed to and approved by the Illinois EPA for continuation of
the test burn program without any further requirement for stack
testing.
65
4523A
-------
During this 5.5 day run, two shifts of operators allowed an
operating span of up to 20 hours including warm-up and cool down
and an actual processing time of up to 15 hours per day.
The incineration equipment performed flawlessly during this
extended run with no downtime due to mechanical failure. Two in-
stances did occur that required reprocessing of primary kiln ash
drums collected:
(a) On 10 October 1983 the second ash drum pulled was smok-
ing (purple/pink smoke). One of the smoldering clink-
ers was broken open ana there was red clay inside
which started smoking heavily when exposed to the
air. Further investigation revealed that the feed
soil bucket weights were too heavy resulting in an
average feed rate of 540 pounds per hour rather than
40U pounds per hour. The bucket weights were correct-
ed and the first two drums of ash were reprocessed.
Subsequent ash drums were normal (i.e., no smoke).
(b) On 11 October 1983 the second ash drum pulled was again
smoking. The smoke was generally white in color with
traces of pink and purple. The ammonia smell was
strong enough to break through the respirator car-
tridges. Further investigation revealed that the kiln
rotation was improperly set. The kiln was making one
revolution every 8 minutes rather than every 15 min-
utes. The kiln rotation rate was reset and the first
two ash drums were reprocessed. Subsequent ash drums
were normal.
These two incidents, both of which effectively reduced the
asn residence time within the primary chamber, appeared to have
resulted in incomplete combustion of the explosives in the soil.
This suggests a strong correlation between ash residence time
and explosives destruction efficiency in the primary chamber
ash.
7.3.4 Industrial hygiene observations. The purpose of this
subsection is not to detail all the safety precautions that were
taken on this project. These precautions were discussed thor-
oughly in the site plan and safety submission.3 This subsec-
tion will address additional safety precautions instituted in
the field in response to observations made during the IECS test-
ing program. These observations and precautions are as follows:
(a) A noise survey of the incineration test site revealed
that the noise levels in the vicinity of the inciner-
ator and the induced draft fan exceeded 85 dbA with a
66
4523A
-------
maximum reading on the stack sampling platform (di-
rectly above the induced draft fan) of 98 dbA. The
85 dbA contour line very closely paralleled the pe-
rimeter of the concrete pad. Therefore, hearing pro-
tection was required for all personnel on the con-
crete pad.
(b) During the initial pretest burn (16 September 1983),
the incinerator operator detected a strong odor (like
burnt matches or fireworks) from the buckets he re-
moved from the feeder access hatch. He further no-
ticed an irritation in his throat. At this point a
full-face respirator* was established as standard op-
erating practice for the incinerator operator on the
feed platform. This operator subsequently had symp-
toms similar to sunburn (i.e., dry skin, irritation)
on his entire face. He has fair skin and to some ex-
tent this may have been due to irritation from the
full-face respirator. He also developed a small open
sore below his lower lip the following day. The sun-
burn feeling and open sore persisted for the next
four days although no additional exposure occurred.
On the fourth day he developed a severe headache ac-
companied by stomach upset (which is very atypical
for this individual).
(c) Another incinerator operator complained of experiencing
nausea at night and headaches that persisted through-
out the day. He further explained that he had a cold
and symptoms may not be directly related to his expo-
sure.
(d) One member of the soil excavation team complained of a
rash ("sunburn-like") under his hat band. He was
wearing a baseball cap. He threw the hat away and the
rash subsided.
(e) One of the operators (who was relatively fair skinned)
reported that his skin had a yellowish cast, that his
lips were noticeably purple, and that he frequently
had a bitter taste in his mouth.
*Respirator Model No.: MSA Ultra Twin Respirator Face Piece
(471286). Cartridge Model No.: GMC-H (464027). Designed for
acids, dust, fumes, organics, radionuclides.
67
4523A
-------
(f) One of the individuals who handed the buckets to the
operators complained of a sKin rash/irritation on his
forearms. The sores appear like mosquito bites, scab
over, and eventually dry up. One of the operators
complained of a similar irritation. Subsequently, all
individuals handling the feed soil and empty buckets
were instructed to wear full-length disposable cover-
alls, gauntlet style plastic gloves with disposable
liners, and respirators.
It should be pointed out that all of the above observations
took place during the first week of operations and no subsequent
incidences occurred during the remaining three weeks of the test
program.
7.3.5 Miscellaneous observations. One additional observa-
tion was noteworthy and does not readily fit into any of the
previous categories. It was observed that the moisture which
collected on the clean underside of the plastic sheeting cover-
ing the buckets of feed soil was "pinkish" in color. This pink
coloration is a direct indication of the presence of TNT in the
water droplets. It appears that a portion of the TNT in tne feed
soil vaporized and condensed on the plastic along with the mois-
ture that vaporized and condensed.
68
4523A
-------
8. COMPARISON OF TEST BURN RESULTS TO REGULATORY CRITERIA
8.1 Federal regulatory issues.* The objective of this sec-
tion of the report is to address three critical questions re-
garding Federal regulatory issues based on the characteristics
of explosives contaminated soils (Section 4) and the test burn
results (Section 7). These three key questions are:
(a) Is the incineration of explosives contaminated soils
subject to regulation under 40 CFR Part 264,
Subpart 0 - Incinerators?
(b) If exempted from all requirements of, 40 CFR Part 264,
Subpart Of except Sections 264.341 (Waste
Analysis) and 264.351 (Closure), what are the
implications?
(c) If not exempt from regulation under 40 CFR Part 264,
Subpart 0, what are the implications?
8.1.1 Background. The solid waste disposal act, as amended
by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, requires
EPA to establish a national regulatory program to ensure that
hazardous wastes are managed in a manner which does not endanger
human health or the environment from the time they are created
until their eventual destruction or final disposition (i.e.,
"cradle-to-grave"). To this end, EPA published initial regula-
tions governing hazardous waste incineration on 19 May 1980 and
subsequently amended those regulations on 23 January 1981 and 24
June 1982.
The initial 19 May 1980 regulations provided a first step in
meeting the requirements of RCRA. Appendix VIII of those regula-
tions specified certain chemical substances, when present in a
waste, could serve as a basis for designating the waste as haz-
ardous. Part 261 of the regulations identified four characteris-
tics of hazardous waste to be used by persons handling solid
waste to determine if that waste is hazardous (i.e., ignitabili-
ty, corrosivity, reactivity, and EP toxicity). In addition, it
lists 85 process wastes (e.g., K044 - wastewater treatment
sludges from the manufacturing and processing of explosives; and
K047 - pink/red water from TNT operations), as hazardous wastes
and approximately 400 chemicals as hazardous wastes if they are
discarded. The 19 May 1980 regulations (Part 265) also included
some general requirements for the operation of existing inciner-
ation facilities during interim status (the period after an
owner or operator originally applies for a permit, but prior to
final approval).
*Appendix C provides referenced sections from the Federal Regis-
ter.
69
4523A
-------
EPA 23 January 1981 regulations specifically identified the
inforiuation necessary to complete a Part B application for an
incinerator including test burn requirements. These regulations
also specified three requirements regarding incinerator perform-
ance :
(a) Principal organic hazardous constituents (POHC's) des-
ignated in each waste must be destroyed and/or re-
moved to an efficiency (ORE) of 99.99 percent.
(b) Particulate emissions must not exceed 180 milligrams
per dry standard cubic meter corrected to 12 percent
carbon dioxide in the stack gas.
(c) Gaseous hydrogen chloride (HCl) resulting from combus-
tion of wastes containing more than 0.5 percent chlo-
rine must be reduced by 99 percent.
In addition to the incinerator performance standards (Sec-
tion 264.3), this regulation also addressed the following:
(a) Applicability (Section 264.340).
(b) Waste analysis (Section 264.341).
(c) Principal organic hazardous constituents (Section
264.342).
(d) New wastes: trial burns or permit modifications (Sec-
tion 264.344).
(e) Operating requirements (Section 264.345).
(f) Monitoring and inspections (Section 264.347).
(g) Closure (section 264.351).
In response to public comment and a public hearing and tech-
nical assistance conference in Cincinnati, Ohio on 21 and 22
April 1981, EPA determined that modification of certain subpart
0 regulations would enhance their technical feasibility and re-
duce the cost of compliance, while maintaining adequate protec-
tion of human health and the environment. The EPA formally
promulgated the amended regulations on 24 June 1982. The sig-
nificant amendments to the 23 January 1981 regulation are sum-
marized in Table 19. The 24 June 1982 regulations specifically
addressed the issue of incineration of reactive wastes and the
applicability of the regulation as discussed in the following
section.
70
4523A
-------
TABLE 19. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT AMENDMENTS TO THE REGULATIONS
FOR HAZARDOUS WASTE INCINERATORS
Section
23 January 1981 requlation
Amended requlation
264.340* Exempted wastes: 1) listed iqnitables
and 2) those failinq the test for iq-
nitability, when shown to contain no
Appendix VIII substances.
264.343(b) Performance standard for HC1 emissions:
if waste input exceeds 0.5 percent
chloride, then remove 99 percent of
stack qas HCl.
Exempted wastes; 1) listed iqnitables, corro-
sives, and/or selected reactiyes and 2) those
failinq the tests for iqnitability, cprrosivTty,
and/or selected reactivity characteristics, when
shown to contain no or insignificant levels of
Appendix VIII substances.
Performance standard for HCl emissions: if stack
emissions exceed 1.8 kq HCl/hr, then control
emissions so that they do not exceed the larqer
of the followinq: 1) 1.8 kq HCl/hr, or 2) 1 per-
cent of the HCl in the stack qas.
264.343 (c)
264.344
264.345
122.27
Performance standard for particulate Performance standard for particulate emissions:
emissions: emissions may not exceed emissions may not exceed 180 mq/DSCM when cor-
180 mq/DSCM when corrected to 12 percent rected to 50 percent excess air or as otherwise
carbon dioxide. specified in the permit.
No provisions for permits to new incin-
erators.
Air feed rate to be designated as an
operatinq requirement.
1. New facilities must have final RCRA
permit prior to construction.
2. Requirement to monitor hazardous
combustion byproducts durinq trial
burn.
Allows for four-phase permit for new incinera-
tors: Phase 1: "Shake-down" phase; Phase 2:
Trial burn; Phase 3: "Follow-up" phase; Phase 4:
Permanent operation phase.
Indicator of combustion qas velocity to be des-
iqnated as an operatinq requirement.
1. New facilities submit Part B of the permit
application and required information for trial
burn plan simultaneously. Permit is issued
after opportunity for public hearinq.
2. Deleted.
3. Waste analysis requirements for trial 3. Lanquaqe clarification.
burn plan.
*Equivalent chanqes have been made in the correspondinq section of Part 265 (Interim Status Stand-
ards) .
-------
8.1.2 Applicability of the incineration standards to the
incineration of explosives contaminated soils. A solid waste
becomes a "hazardous waste" subject to regulation under Subtitle
C of RCRA in one of two ways:
(a) The waste fails one or more of EPA's characteristic
tests for ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, or
Extraction Procedure (EP) toxicity.
(b) The waste contains hazardous constituents listed in Ap-
pendix VIII and has been specifically listed as haz-
ardous by EPA.
In the 24 June 1982 regulations 40 CFR Part 264, Section
264.340, EPA decided to automatically exempt all wastes which
are hazardous solely due to the characteristic of reactivity as
described by Secton 261.23 (a)(l), (2), (3), (6), (7), and (8)
(see Section 4, page 20). Wastes having the reactivity charac-
teristics described by Section 261.23 (a)(4) and (5) are not ex-
empted since they may emit toxic gases and vapors (such as cyan-
ide) upon reaction. The amendment specifies that reactive
wastes, if exempted, must not be burned in the presence of any
other hazardous waste, since the reactive wastes (by definition)
are capable of explosion or violent reaction that could poten-
tially disperse other toxic substances present into the environ-
ment. Therefore, if the reactive waste in question contains de-
tectable concentrations of Appendix VIII constituents it cannot
be automatically exempted. However, the regulation does provide
that qualified reactive wastes that contain low concentrations
(i.e., less than 100 to 1,000 ppm) of some Appendix VIII con-
stituents may be exempted if the Regional Administrator finds
that the exemption will not result in a potential threat to hu-
man health and the environment.
TNT, RDX, and HMX, which were the major organic contaminants
in the SADA and LAAP soils, are not listed in Appendix VIII as
hazardous constituents. The Appendix VIII constituents tnat
were detected in the soils were in extremely low concentrations
as shown in Table 20. Therefore, it appears that applicability
of the incineration standards to the incineration of explosives
contaminated soil will be based on the judgment of the respec-
tive EPA Regional Administrator. Four factors combine to make
an extremely strong case that the Regional Administrator would
exempt explosives contaminated soils from regulation under all
except Sections 264.341 (Waste Analysis) and 264.351 (Closure).
These four factors are:
(a) The explosives contaminated soils, when mixed with
water, do not generate toxic gases and they are not
cyanide- or sulfide-bearing wastes.
72
4523A
-------
TABLE 20. SUMMARY OF CONCENTRATIONS OF APPENDIX VIII HAZARDOUS
CONSTITUENTS IN THE SADA AND LAAP SOILS
Appendix VIII
hazardous constituent
1, 3, 5-Trini trobenzene (TNB)
1.3-Dinitrobenzene (DNB)
Nitrobenzene (NB)
2,6-Dinitrotoluene (2,6-DNT)
2,4-Dinitrotoluene (2,4-DNT)
Mean
148.
15.
ND
ND
ND
Concentration
SADA soil
Ranqe
5 90.7 - 256
1 ND1 - 35.1
ND
ND
ND
(ppm -
LAAP
Mean
95.9
12.4
ND
ND
ND
dry weiqht
soil
Ranqe
basis)
Detection
limits
57.0 - 139 26.1
ND
ND
ND
ND
22.4 7.39
5.26
5.03
5.20
- Not detected.
-------
(b) The concentrations of Appendix VIII constituents are
extremely low.
(c) No other hazardous wastes would be incinerated simul-
taneously with the explosives contaminated soils.
(d) The incineration site would most likely be at a remote
U.S. Army location which would further limit poten-
tial hazards to the general public.
8.1.3 implications of exemption from the incineration
standards. Applicants seeking exemption under Section 264.340
must submit sufficient waste analysis data with Part B of the
permit application to document levels of all hazardous constitu-
ents listed in Appendix VIII which would reasonably be found in
the waste. When setting the conditions of the permit, the Re-
gional Administrator will determine whether an exemption should
be granted for incineration of the reactive waste based on a re-
view of the waste analysis data. If the exemption is granted,
the applicant will be exempt from the following sections:
Section No. Title
264.342 Principal organic hazardous constituents
(POHC's).
264.343 Performance standards.
264.344 New wastes: trial burns or permit modi-
fications.
264.345 Operating requirements.
264.347 Monitoring and inspections.
The implications of exemption from these regulations are ex-
plained in Subsection 8.1.4.
The only remaining applicable regulation is Section 264.251
(Closure). At closure, the owner or operator must remove all
hazardous waste and hazardous waste residues (i.e., kiln and
fabric filter ash) from the incineration site. All ash residues
from the incineration of hazardous wastes are classified as haz-
ardous wastes unless it is demonstrated in accordance with 40
CFR Part 261, Section 261.3(d) that the residue is not a hazard-
ous waste.
74
4523A
-------
The implications of Section 264.251 (Closure) could be sub-
stantial since every pound of explosive contaminated soil which
is incinerated generates approximately 0.3 to 0.7 pounds of ash
residue. Generally over 96 to 98 percent of the residue is dis-
charged in the form of kiln ash, while the remaining ash is col-
lected in the fabric filter. Further, due to the lower relative
density of the kiln ash compared to the feed soil (particularly
for the LAAP soil), the actual volume reduction ranges from ap-
proximately 50 percent to a slight volume increase. Should the
ashes be classified as hazardous waste, then costly additional
treatment techniques or special disposal methods will be neces-
sary. Otherwise, the ash residues would be permanently land-
filled in an area preferably near the incineration site.
The results of the ash analyses conducted during the IECS
test program indicate a strong case for delisting the ash since,
in accordance with 40 CFR Part 261, Section 261.3(d)(l), the ash
residues do not exhibit any of the characteristics of a hazard-
ous waste identified in 40 CFR Part 261, Subpart C (i.e., ig-
nitability, corrosivity, reactivity, or EP toxicity). The fol-
lowing subsections compare the results of the ash analyses to
criteria for each of these characteristics of hazardous waste.
8.1.3.1 Ignitability. A solid waste exhibits the charac-
teristic of ignitability if, when ignited, it burns so vigorous-
ly and persistently that it creates a hazard. It is reasonable
to expect the ash residues to not be ignitable by virtue of:
(a) The thermal processing conditions that the ashes were
subjected to during the incineration process.
(b) The undetectable heating value of the ashes.
8.1.3.2 Corrosivity. A solid waste exhibits the character-
istic of corrosivity if, as an aqueous solution, it has a pH
less than or equal to 2.0 or greater than or equal to 12.5.
Composite samples of the SADA and LAAP kiln ash and fabric fil-
ter ash residues had pH values that ranged from 7.4 to 7.7.
Therefore, the ash residues do not exhibit the characteristic of
corrosivity.
8.1.3.3 Reactivity. The eight criteria for designating a
solid waste as hazardous were presented previously in Section 4.
75
4523A
-------
Based on the data generated during the testing program, it is
reasonable to assume that the ash residues are not reactive and
exhibit none of the eight criteria as explained below:
Criteria
(1) Instability
(2) and (3) Reaction with Water
(4) and (5) Generation of Toxic
Gases
(6) and (7) Explosive Reaction
(8) Forbidden Explosives
Observations
The ash residues were handled
throughout the testing and
were physically and chemically
stable when subjected to the
recommended operating condi-
tions.
The residues were in contact
with water during sample prep-
aration and analysis and
showed no signs of adverse re-
action.
The ash residues are not cya-
nide- or sulfide-bearing
wastes, and when mixed with
water do not generate toxic
gases, vapors, or fumes.
The extremely low levels of
total explosives in the ash
residues (i.e., not detected
to les:> than 30 ppm) are in-
sufficient to support combus-
tion or promulgation of deton-
ation when subjected to ini-
tiating sources or if heated
under confinement.
The ash residues are not clas-
sified as forbidden explosives
as defined in 49 CFR 173.51,
or a Class A explosive as de-
fined in 49 CFR 173.53, or a
Class B explosive as defined
in 49 CFR 173.88.
76
4523A
-------
8.1.3.4 EP toxicity. Tne results of the EP toxicity test-
ing tor the kiln ash and fabric filter ash for each test run are
presented in Tables A-9 and A-10, respectively. As shown in
these tables, concentrations of all contaminants in the leachate
were far below tne maximum threshold concentrations. Therefore,
the ash residues clearly do not exhibit the characteristic of EP
toxicity.
8.1.4 Implications of not being exempted from the incinera-
tion standards. If the respective EPA Regional Administrator
does not grant exemption under 40 CFR Part 264, Section 264.340,
additional requirements must be met above and beyond those dis-
cussed in Suosection 8.1.3. These additional requirements are
discussed in the following subsections.
8.1.4.1 Principal organic hazardous constituents (section
264.342). As specified in 40 CFR Part 264, Section
264.342(b) (1), one or more PuHC's must be specified from the
list of hazardous constituents listed in Part 261, Appendix
VIII, for each waste to be burned. The selection of POHC is
based on the relative degree of difficulty of incineration and
on the concentration or mass in the soil feed.
The explosives that are in the soils in relatively high con-
centrations (i.e., TNT, RDX, HMX) are not listed in Part 261,
Appendix VIII and, therefore, cannot be designated as POHC's.
The hazardous constituents that are present in the soils (i.e.,
TNB and DNB) are only present in extremely low concentrations
(i.e., not detected to less than 300 ppm as shown in Table 20).
The preamble to the 24 June 1982 amendments (Federal Register
Vol. 47, No. 122, page 27530) provides guidelines for selecting
POHC's. These guidelines establish 100 ppm as an absolute lower
limit beyond which determination of a 99.99 percent destruction
removal efficiency (ORE) will be difficult to verify, and fur-
ther recommends 1,000 ppm as a more reasonable minimum concen-
tration in the waste feed. Therefore, short of artificially
spiking the feed soils with higher concentrations of TNB and
DNB, selection of a POHC may pose a significant obstacle.
77
4523A
-------
8.1.4.2 Performance standards (section 264.343). An incin-
erator burning hazardous waste must be designed and operated to
meet the following three performance standards:
• Destruction Removal Efficiency (ORE)
The incinerator must achieve a DRE of 99.99 percent for each
POHC designated in its permit for each waste feed. DRE is de-
termined for each POHC from the following equation:
(w — w \
DRE . (Wi" W°ut) x 100%
Win
Where:
win = mass feed rate of one POHC in the waste
stream feeding the incinerator
wout = mass emission rate of the same POHC present in
the exhaust emissions prior to release to the
atmosphere
In other words, credit is given for removal of the POHC in
the kiln and fabric filter ash residues, as well as destruction
of the POHC in the incineration process.
During the IECS test programs, no explosives (i.e., TNT,
RDX, HMX, as well as the Appendix VIII constituents) were de-
tected in the stack exhaust emissions to the atmosphere. There-
fore, in accordance with the guidelines provided in the previ-
ously referenced preamble to the 24 June 1982 amendments (page
27350), if the POHC is not detected in the stack exhaust, at-
tainment of 100 percent destruction and removal will be assumed
for that POHC. However, taking a much more conservative ap-
proach (i.e., assuming that explosives concentrations might be
at or just oelow the detection limits) the calculated DRE's for
each test run are presented in Taoles 21 and 22. However, these
DRE's are for TNT, RDX, and HMX since these were the only con-
taminants in sufficient concentration in the feed to allow esti-
mation of DRE. As shown in Tables 21 and 22, even using this
overly conservative approach, DRE's of 99.99 percent were
achieved in most cases. Failure to achieve 99.99 percent only
resulted from lower explosive concentration in the waste feed
relative to the detection limit in the stack exhaust.
78
4523A
-------
TABLE 21. SUMMARY OF EXPLOSIVE CONCENTRATIONS IN THE SAVANNA
FEED SOIL, DETECTION LIMITS OF EXPLOSIVE IN STACK GAS
AND THE RESPECTIVE ORE'S
Matrix TNT concentration, lo/hr
number In soil feedIn stack qaslWorst case
0-1 58.285 ND > 99.996
1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
1-5
1-6
1-7
1-8
1-9
27.028
45.490
41.309
23.424
71.770
43.084
87.224
68.170
88.429
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
> 99.995
> 99.995
> 99.996
> 99.992
> 99.997
> 99.994
> 99.997
> 99.996
> 99.997
ND - Not detected. Detection limits ranged from 0.0018 and
0.0026 for the various runs.
case ORE - No explosives were detected in the stack
gases. Percent destruction and removal effi-
ciency (DRE) is based on the detection limit
of TNT in the stack qas. Actual DRE's will be
higher than the values shown.
79
4523A
-------
TABLE 22. SUMMARY OF EXPLOSIVES CONCENTRATIONS IN THE LOUISIANA FEED SOIL,
DETECTION LIMITS OF EXPLOSIVES IN THE STACK GAS AND THE RESPECTIVE ORE'S
TNT concentration (Ib/hr)
Matrix
number
2-1
2-2
2-3
2-4
2-5
2-6
2-7
2-8
2-9
In soil
feed
30.614
24.213
17.917
21.310
15.519
14.605
19.814
15.619
16.248
In stack
qasl
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Worst case
ORE2
> 99.993
> 99.993
> 99.988
> 99.991
> 99.986
> 99.993
> 99.989
> 99.985
> 99.986
RDX concentration
In soil
feed
14.509
21.635
13.086
9.822
10.244
10.740
11.074
8.447
15.275
In stack
qas1
ND ;
ND )
ND ^
ND 2
ND >
ND 2
ND >
ND >
ND >
(Ib/hr)
Worst case
DRE2
> 99.993
> 99.996
> 99.992
» 99.989
- 99.988
» 99.992
» 99.990
> 99.986
> 99.992
HMX concentration (Ib/hr)
In soil
feed
2.372
3.026
1.855
1.559
1.808
2.060
1.778
1.465
2.436
In stack
qas1
ND :
ND :
ND ;
ND :
ND ;
ND
ND :
ND :
ND
Worst case
DRE2
> 99.941
> 99.964
> 99.925
> 99.917
> 99.917
> 99.942
> 99.921
> 99.898
> 99.938
- Not detected. Detection limits ranqed from 0.00082 to 0.0024 for the various runs.
2Worst case DRE - No explosives were detected in the stack qases. Percent destruction and removal
efficiency (DRE) is based on detection limits of explosives in stack qas. Actual
DRE's will be hiqher than the values shown.
-------
• Hydrogen Chloride Control
Since analysis of all feed samples for both SADA and LAAP
soils indicated total chlorine concentrations of less than 0.5
percent and since total hydrogen chloride (HC1) emissions were
substantially below 1.8 kilograms per hour (4 pounds per hour),
HCl control was not required.
• Particulate Control
Particulate emissions are limited to 180 milligrams per dry
standard cubic meter (0.08 grains per dry standard cubic foot)
when corrected for proper excess air levels. The results of all
test runs were at least two orders of magnitude lower than the
permissible emission limits due to the excellent control effi-
ciency of the fabric filter.
In summary, the trial burns demonstrated consistent compli-
ance with the performance standards.
8.1.4.3 New wastes: trial burns or permit modifications
(section 264.344). Clearly, the results -f the IECS Test Pro-
gram should exempt the U.S. Army from any further trial burn re-
quirements unless the waste analysis of the explosives contami-
nated soils is significantly different than the SADA or LAAP
soils.
8.1.4.4 Operating requirements (section 264.345) and moni-
toring and inspections (section 264.347). In order to comply
with the operating and monitoring requirements specified, it ap-
pears that only two additional pieces of instrumentation would
L>e required to supplement the incineration equipment and con-
trols supplied by ThermAll, Inc. for the IECS test program:
(a) A device for continuously measuring combustion gas ve-
locity.
(b) A device for continuously measuring carbon monoxide at
the stack.
The 23 January 1981 amendments specified the continuous
measurement of combustion air flow rate. However, it is imprac-
tical to measure air feed rate for a rotary kiln which does not
employ a forced draft system (which lends itself to measurement
of air feed rate). Instead, air is drawn into the kiln at many
points, and actual air feed rate is impossible to monitor. The
24 June 1982 amendments address this problem and allow the use
of other appropriate indicators of combustion gas flow rate for
rotary kilns, suitable indicators such as induced draft fan am-
perage or exhaust gas velocity are specified.
81
4523A
-------
The continuous monitoring of carbon monoxide will provide an
excellent indicator of combustion efficiency and will ensure
complete destruction of all detectable explosives in the exhaust
gases. It is well documented that the oxidation of carbon mon-
oxide to carbon dioxide is the rate limiting step in most af-
terburners.^ Generally, the time required for all of the
steps involved in the oxidation of hydrocarbons to carbon monox-
ide is less than one-tenth of that which is required for the
carbon monoxide to carbon dioxide conversion. Since explosives
exhibit no reluctance to oxidize, it is reasonable to assume
that the carbon monoxide-to-carbon dioxide step will be the key
criteria for proper uesign of the secondary chamber.
Review of the raw sampling data for Test Run No. 0-1 reveals
supporting evidence that the known relationship between carbon
monoxide and hydrocarbons can be applied to the incineration of
explosives contaminated soils. As the combustion gases entered
the secondary chamber the DRE for TNT was in excess of 99 per-
cent although the CO concentration was over 1,000 ppm. At the
inlet to the fabric filter, no TNT was detected in the flue gas
(i.e. DRE = 100 percent) and the CO was reduced to 75 ppm. The
oxidation rate of the explosives, therefore, was significantly
higher than the oxidation rate for CO. During subsequent runs
at higher combustion chamber temperatures and lower feed rates,
no explosives were detected in the flue gas at any sampling lo-
cations, including the inlet to the secondary chamber. CO lev-
els were consistently lower also, but always detectable at the
secondary chamber inlet. As a result, two observations can be
made:
(a) It appears that destruction of CO and not explosives
will be the limiting criteria for design and opera-
tion of the secondary combustion chamber.
(b) It appears that monitoring CO will provide a dependable
and cost-effective way to ensure proper combustion of
explosives as well as CO.
8.2 State and local regulatory issues. State and local
regulations must be evaluated on a site-specific basis. Howev-
er, some general comments can be made. Most states have direct-
ly adopted the Federal hazardous waste management regulations
into their statutes. Therefore, if their program is Federally
approved, the requirements discussed in subsection 8.1 may be
administered either jointly between the state and the Regional
82
4523A
-------
EPA office or exclusively by the state agency. Concerning cri-
teria (nonhazardous) pollutants, the typical areas of concern
are:
(a) Particulates
(b) Carbon monoxide
(c) Oxides of nitrogen
(d) Oxides of sulfur
(e) Halogenated compounds
8.2.1 Particulates. Typically, the state would require
ing the hazardous waste incinerator performance standard of
180 milligrams per dry standard cubic meter (0.08 grains per dry
dard cubic foot) unless other state or local regulations
standard cubic foot) unless other state or local regulations
were more stringent. However, with fabric filter control of
particulate emissions, any state or local regulation could be
met.
8.2.2 Carbon monoxide. Typical state emission limits for
carbon monoxide emissions from combustion processes are approxi-
mately 500 ppm on a volume basis. For the IECS test program no
stack measurements of CO exceeded 85 ppm.
8.2.3 Oxides of nitrogen. Few if any states have specific
mass emission limitations that would be applicable to this type
of source. However, all states have ambient air quality stand-
ards for the maximum allowable concentrations of oxides of ni-
trogen measured at offsite locations (i.e., outside of the prop-
erty boundaries) due to source operations. Most states will re-
quire a modeling analysis to demonstrate that the NOv, as
well as other applicable ambient air quality standards, will not
be exceeded. Assuming the installation of a GEP (good engineer-
ing practice) height stack, this should not pose any problem.
8.2.4 Oxides of sulfur and halogenated compounds. Although
regulated, due to the low concentrations of sulfur and chlorine,
mass emissions of oxides of sulfur or halogenated compounds are
not anticipated to pose any problems.
83
4523A
-------
9. ANALYSIS OF RESULTS AND DEVELOPMENT OF INCINERATOR DE-
SIGN CRITERIA
y.l Analytical technique. In the early stages of the IECS
project atestplan^wasdeveloped which identified key proc-
ess variables and established a matrix of test conditions (rep-
licated for two different soil types). This experimental design
was selected to allow statistical evaluation of the test burn
data. Two statistical analyses of variance (ANOVA) techniques
were utilized in the analysis of the test burn data:
(a) Forward and backward stepping multiple regression
analyses.8
(b) Two-way balanced factorial analysis.9
The analytical approach is detailed in Appendix B. The ob-
jective of the analytical approach was to apply the two tech-
niques listed above to combinations of the data base input and
response variables listed in Table 23 to develop simple linear
equations10 of the type:
y = b
bn xn
Where:
Y
b,
response variable
intercept
regression coefficient
input or controlled variables
residuals
The key response variables of interest are:
(a)
(b)
(c)
Destruction and removal efficiency (DRE) of explosives.
Environmental impact of incineration of explosives con-
taminated soils (i.e., CO, NOX, and particulates) .
Incinerator design variables affecting system economics
(i.e., kiln ash production rate, soil heating value,
and auxiliary fuel burn rate).
9.2
of
9.2 Destruction and removal efficiency ut eAyj.usj.vci3. ««
explosives were detected in the stack gas for any of the 19 test
burns. Therefore, statistical analysis is not required to deduce
that for the range of incinerator operating variables tested
(i.e., soil feed rates as high as 500 pounds per hour and pri-
low as 8000F and
burns. Therefore, statistical
for the range of incinerator
rates as high as 500 pounds per
mary and secondary chamber temperatures as low as
l,2000p, respectively) a DRE of 100 percent can be
based on stack emissions.
Since no explosives were
expected
detected,
84
4523A
-------
TABLE 23. EVALUATED INPUT AND RESPONSE VARIABLES
USING STATISTICAL TECHNIQUES
Soil Input Variables
• Soil type (SADA or LAAP)
• Moisture content (ppmw and Ib/hr1)
• Ash content (pomw and Ib/hr1)
• Volatiles (Domw and Ib/hr1)
• Explosives (pomw and Ib/hr, dry basis)
- IMX
- RDX
- TNT
- TNB
- DNB
- 2-Amino^
- Total explosives
• Elemental analysis (pomw. dry basis)
- Sulfur
- Carbon
- Hydrogen
- Nitroqen
- Chlorine
• Metals analysis (ppmw, dry basis)
- Barium
- Cadmium
- Chromium
- Copper
- Lead
- Zinc
- Mercury
• Soil heating value (Btu/lb)1
85
4523A
-------
TABLE 23. (Continued)
System Operating Input Variables
• Kiln temperature (°F)
• After burner temperature (°F)
• Soil feed rate (Ib/hr)
• Excess air (%)
• Afterburner residence time (seconds)
• Kiln ash residence time (minutes)
• Combustion qas flow rate (scfh and Ib/hr)
• Fuel burn rate (scfh)
System Response Variables
• Ash production rates
- Kiln ash (Ib/hr)
- Fabric filter ash (Ib/hr)
• Particulate loadings
- Fabric filter inlet (qrains/scf)
- Fabric filter inlet (Ib/hr)
• Explosives
- TNT in kiln ash (ppmw)
- Total explosives in kiln ash (ppmw)
- Total explosives in kiln ash (Ib/hr)
- Total explosives in fabric filter ash (oomw)
- Total explosives in fabric filter ash (Ib/hr)
• Metals in kiln ash (opmw, dry basis)
- Barium
- Copper
- Lead
- Zinc
86
4523A
-------
TABLE 23. (Continued)
• Metals in fabric filter ash (Domw, dry basis)
- Barium
- Copper
- Lead
- Zinc
• CO at inlet to after burner
• Stack qas air pollutants
- HC1 (pptnv)
- HC1 (Ib/hr)
- SO2 (PPmv)
- S02 (Ib/hr)
- NOx (PPmv)
- NOX (Ib/hr)
• Destruction and removal efficiencies of explosives
• Soil heatinq value (Btu/lb)
• Fuel burn rate (scfh)
received basis.
2Includes tetryl, since tetryl and 2-amino are indistinquisha-
ble on chroma toqraphs.
87
4523A
-------
it is impossible to develop correlations to predict estimated
DRE's at soil feed rates higher than 500 pounds per hour or at
kiln temperatures below 800°F and afterburner temperatures
below 1,200°F.
Explosives were detected in the combustion gases leaving the
primary chamber for one test burn (i.e., 195.9 ppm for Test Run
No. 0-1). Explosives were not detected at this sampling loca-
tion for any other test runs. Therefore, it can be deduced that
as long as the kiln is operated at 1,200°F or higher and soil
feed rates 400 pounds per hour or lower, an afterburner is not
required to destroy explosives in the combustion gases.
No significant correlations could be found to predict the
low-level concentrations of explosives in the kiln ash. It is
suspected that the reason for this is the fact that the explo-
sives concentrations in the kiln ash were below or close to the
detection limits.
The fabric filter ash explosives concentration data were not
analyzed since the fabric filter was obviously contaminated dur-
ing Test Run No. 0-1 and subsequent test run ash samples contin-
ued to reflect this initial contamination.
9.3 Environmental impact of the incineration of explosives
contaminated soils.
9.3.1 Carbon monoxide (CO). No attempt was made to develop
correlations to predict the CO concentrations measured at the
stack or at the fabric filter inlet since 14 of the 19 test runs
had CO concentrations at or below the detection limit of 5 ppm
for each of the two sampling locations. The CO concentrations
for the other five test runs ranged from only 7 to 90 ppm com-
pared to the Illinois EPA limitation of 500 ppm.
The CO concentrations measured at the kiln outlet were ana-
lyzed. The relationship between carbon monoxide concentration
and the destruction and removal of explosives in the primary
kiln exhaust gas has previously been established in Subsection
B.I.4.4. It has also been stated that the CO level in the kiln
gas may be a critical system design parameter in terms of indi-
cating the DRE of explosives, meeting stack emissions standards,
88
4523A
-------
and the requirement of auxiliary thermal treatment of the pri-
mary kiln exhaust gas. Statistical evaluation and the litera-
ture^ indicate that a relationship exists between the kiln
operating temperature and soil feed rate in predicting the CO
concentration in the kiln exhaust gas. Of course, these two var-
iables are not the only parameters which affect the system's re-
sponse of CO. However, they do represent a major contribution.
The kiln exhaust gas flow rate (i.e., flue gas residence time)
would be another logical contributor, but was not available for
analysis since isokinetic conditions could not be achieved in
the short duct between the primary and secondary chambers. Since
the gas flow rate at the fabric filter inlet (which should be
proportional to kiln exhaust gas flow rate) was available, and
was included in the analysis and did not contribute significant-
ly, it was assumed that the kiln exhaust gas flow rate was not a
significant contributor within the range evaluated.
Figure 17 shows that based on the mean values of each set of
raw data points for soil feed rate and kiln temperature (Test
Run Nos. 0-1 and 1-5 excluded as data outliers), the CO concen-
tration is constant and very low above kiln temperatures of
1,400°F regardless of feed rate. This leads to the expansion
of the statistical equation to values outside of the tested
range as shown by Figure 18. These curves are based on the
equation:
CO = 1,252 - 1.22 (Tk) + 1.26 (Ms)
Where: CO = CO concentration in kiln exhaust gas (ppmv)
T|< = kiln temperature (°F)
Ms = soil feed rate (Ib/hr)
The equation is significant both in terms of contribution
and probability of correctness. (Refer to Appendix B for an ex-
planation of statistical analyses and terminology.) Curiously,
the concentration of explosives and elemental carbon in the
soil did not seem to be response-related variables in the
model. Therefore, the accuracy of the model is questionable at
very low concentrations of these constituents.
The probability of residuals in the equation is depicted by
Figure 19. For the range of variables on which the equation is
based, it is 90 percent probable that the predicted value will
be within the range of _+ 150 ppm. At the higher kiln tempera-
tures the margin of error is drastically reduced since the raw
data are within those levels.
9.3.2 Oxides of nitrogen (NOX). The NOx concentration
in the stack gas is also an important criteria since the explo-
sives in the soils are nitrogen-based compounds and considerable
89
4523A
-------
240
o>
_3
o
Q.
0.
O
O
100
120 '
0
1200
1400
1000
300 PPH
350 PPH
400 PPH
Kiln
Temperature, F
FIGURE 17 CARBON MONOXIDE CONCENTRATION IN KILN EXHAUST
BASED ON SOIL FC€DRATE
-------
0>
0.
Q.
6
O
200 PPH
400 PPH
600 PPH
800 PPH
Kiln Temperature
Degrees Fahrenheit
FIGURE 18 CARBON MONOXIDE CONCENTRATION IN KILN EXHAUST
BASED ON SOIL FEED RATE
-------
160
a.
a.
o>
5
'x
o
c
o
1
(0
O
o
12
(0
TJ
'55
0
-60
-II
-160
i — i
i i
.01
20 40 60 80
Probability (%)
88
88.88
FIGURE 19 PROBABILITY OF RESIDUALS BASED ON THE SYSTEM MODEL EQUATION
FOR CARBON MONOXIDE IN THE KILN EXHAUST GAS
-------
regulatory focus from the state perspective will be directed at
evaluating the potential increases in ambient NOx concentra-
tions at surrounding off-site locations. The system equation
very closely correlated NOx mass emission rates in the stack
gas to two parameters.
(a) Explosive (TNT) concentration in the feed soil.
(b) Soil feed rate.
Intuitively, one might expect a strong correlation between
thermal NOx formation and kiln and afterburner operating tem-
peratures. However, the key factor affecting thermal NOx for-
mation is flame temperature, not combustion chamber temperature.
Thermal NOx was controlled to low levels for all runs by con-
trolling the excess air supplied to the burner nozzles. A stoi-
chiometric propane flame (i.e., "zero" excess air) temperature
is approximately 3,000°F resulting in relatively high thermal
NOx formation. Whereas, by providing 10 percent excess air to
the burner nozzles, (the set point for the IECS test program)
flame temperatures are decreased to approximately 2,200°F,
thereby substantially reducing thermal NOx formation.
Figure 20 illustrates the relationship between NOx
emissions in the stack gas and feed soil TNT content and feed
rate. The curves in Figure 20 are described by the following
equation:
M
Where:
MNOX
TNTA
M,
N0x = 0.74 + 0.0004 (TNT)(MS)
NOx mass rate in the stack gas (Ib/hr)
TNT concentration in percent (i.e., for 20%
enter "20")
soil feed rate (Ib/hr)
As shown in Figure 20, NOX emissions increase with in-
creasing soil feed rate and increasing TNT concentration. Figure
21 presents the probability of residuals in the above equation.
Figure 21 illustrates that for the range of variables on which
the model is based, it is 90 percent probable that the predicted
value will be within the range of + 0.5 pounds per hour.
93
4523A
-------
12 '
3
O
k.
0)
Q.
in
TJ
c
O
a.
a>
I
x
O
9
200
T"
400
T"
600
10% TNT in Soil
20% TNT in Soil
30% TNT in Soil
40% TNT in Soil
Soil Feedrate
Pounds Per Hour
FIGURE 20 NOXMASS EMISSION RATE IN STACK GAS BASED ON TNT
CONCENTRATION IN THE SOIL FEED
-------
X
O
o
v>
a
ut
a>
DC
0.S
0.0
0.4
0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.0
-0.8
.01
20 40 00
Probability (%)
FIGURE 21 PROBABILITY OF RESIDUALS BASED ON THE SYSTEM MODEL
EQUATION FOR NOX IN THE STACK GAS
-------
9.3.3 Particulates. No attempt was made to develop corre-
lations to predict particulate loading in the stack gas since
the fabric filter consistently reduced particulate emissions two
orders of magnitude lower than required to meet the Illinois EPA
regulations or the Federal hazardous waste incinerator regula-
tions. However, if the particulate loading at the inlet of the
fabric filter is known in conjunction with the particulate siz-
ing distribution, key sizing parameters tor the fabric filter
(i.e., air-to-cloth ratio, frequency of cleaning, pressure
drop, etc.) can be optimized. The particulate size distributions
for the SADA and LAAP fabric filter ash were presented in Fig-
ures 14 and 15, respectively. Figure 22 presents the relation-
ship between the fabric filter inlet particulate loading and the
kiln ash production rate based on a least-squares analysis. Fig-
ure 22 includes a "scatter plot" of 18 test runs (Test Run No.
0-1 was excluded), and shows a general trend of increasing par-
ticulate loading at the fabric filter inlet with increasing kiln
ash production rate. Although the data are not strongly corre-
lated and, as shown in the scatter plot, variations of + 10 to
50 percent are common, it can be stated that the kiln ash-to-fly
ash ratio is within the range of 25:1 to 60:1,
9.4 Incinerator design variables affecting system econom-
ics.
9.4.1 Kiln ash production rate. The total ash production
rate is an important variable in estimating the ash residue dis-
posal costs. The kiln ash production rate is an important varia-
ble in establishing the design basis for ash removal, heat re-
covery, storage, and disposal systems.
No attempt was made to develop correlations to predict kiln
ash production rate since total ash production rate is equiva-
lent to the amount of ash in the feed soil. The kiln ash can be
estimated by simply subtracting the estimated fly ash (i.e., ash
in combustion gases going to the fabric filter) from the total
ash in the soil feed. As shown in Subsection 9.3.3, the fly ash
ranges from approximately 2 to 4 percent of the total ash, re-
sulting in kiln ash values ranging from 98 to 96 percent.
9b
4523A
-------
6.6
6.6
O)
c
T»
8
0)
O
r
c
«
.0
CD
4.6
3.6
a
2.6
100 160
Kiin Ash Production Rate (Ib/hr)
260
FIGURE 22 PROJECTION OF PARTICULATE MASS LOADING AT THE FABRIC
FILTER INLET BASED ON KILN ASH PRODUCTION RATE
-------
9.4.2 Soil heating value. The heating value of the soil is
an important variable in estimating fuel consumption, burner de-
sign, and heat release rates within the primary chamber. Figure
23 presents the projected soil heating value based on the per-
cent elemental carbon and percent volatiles in the feed soil.
The curves in Figure 23 are described by the following equation:
HHVS = -554 + 126 (% C) + 47 (% VM)
Where: HHVS = higher heating value of the soil (Btu/lb,
dry basis)
% C = elemental carbon in the soil in percent
% VM = volatile matter in the soil in percent
Figure 24 presents the probability of residuals in the above
equation. Figure 24 illustrates that for the range of variables
on which the model is based, it is 90 percent probable that the
predicted value will be within the range of ± 200 Btu per pound.
9.4.3 Fuel burn rate. Figure 25 closely correlates overall
propane fuel consumption for the test burns based on the kiln
temperature (assuming the afterburner temperature is 400°F
higher), the soil heating value, the soil feed rate, total sys-
tem air flowrate, and the percent ash in the soil. As shown in
Figure 25, the propane burn rate decreases as kiln temperature
decreases and as soil feed rate increases. The curves in Figure
25 are given by the following equation:
» °-21 (MA> + °-77 (40° + Tk> ~ °-24 (HHVs>
- 0.52 (Ms) - 9.0 (% ash) - 303
Where: QC^HR = Pr°Pane burn rate (scfh)
MA = total system air flow rate (assumed 4,692
lb/hr)*
Tfc = kiln temperature (°F: assumes after-
burner is 400°F higher)
HHVS = higher heating value of the soil (assumed
868 Btu/lb, dry basis)*
Ms « soil feed rate (Ib/nr)
% ash = ash in the soil in percent (assumed 55.9%)*
Figure 26 presents the probability of residuals in the above
equation. Figure 26 illustrates that for the range of variables
on which the model is based, it is 90 percent probable that the
predicted value will be within Lhe ranye oi _+ 7U a<:th of [Jto-
pane.
*Based on the average air flow rate, heating value, and percent
ash in the soil for the 18 SADA and LAAP test runs summarized
in Figures 13 and 14.
98
4523A
-------
TJ
3
o
CL
k_
0>
0_
0)
O)
c
o>
a>
g>
x
1200
I
2.6
I
7.6
I
12.6
7 Percent
14 Percent
21 Percent
Percent Elemental Carbon in Soil
FIGURE 23 SOIL HEATING VALUE BASED ON VOLATILE CONCENTRATION
-------
O)
ra
o>
1!
If
5>
TO
"Si
«
cc
•IM
.tl
Probability (%)
FIGURE 24 PROBABILITY OF RESIDUALS BASED ON THE SYSTEM
MODEL EQUATION FOR SOIL HIGHER HEATING VALUE
-------
1600
1200
D
O
I
^
0>
Q.
O
X)
D
O
o>
600
300
200Lb/Hr
400Lb/Hr
600Lb/Hr
800Lb/Hr
I
1200
Kiln
Temperature, F
I
1600
FIGURE 25 PROPANE BURN RATE BASED ON KILN TEMPERATURE
AND SOIL HEATING VALUE
-------
.c
"o
0)
CO
tr
c
CO
0)
c
CO
ex
o
o
in
CD
•g
CO
0)
QC
100
80
60
40
0
-20
-40
-60
.01
20 40 60 80
Probability (%)
88.88
FIGURE 26 PROBABILITY OF RESIDUALS BASED ON THE SYSTEM MODEL
EQUATION FOR PROPANE BURN RATE
-------
9.5 summary of optimum incinerator design criteria. As a
result of the analysis of the data generated during the IECS
testing program, the following guidelines for optimum incinera-
tor design have been developed:
(a) Soil feed rate. Based on the feed system tested and the
physical dimensions of the kiln, soil feed rates
above 400 pounds per hour cannot be recommended.
Higher feed rates appear to be practical as long as
the kiln design (i.e., kiln diameter, length, slope,
and speed of rotation) provides kiln ash residence
times in the range of 1 to 2 hours. For larger units
a "continuous" rather than "bulk" feed system would
be preferable due to lower instantaneous heat release
rates when the soil is fed. Soil moisture content
should be minimized to reduce fuel consumption.
(b) Kiln temperature. Based strictly on explosives destruc-
tion, kiln temperatures as low as 800°F are ac-
ceptable as long as an afterburner temperature of at
least 1,200°F is maintained. However, operation of
the kiln below 1,200°F cannot be recommended be-
cause of poor kiln ash quality (i.e., large clinkers
and ammonia smell). If the kiln temperature is main-
tained at a minimum of i,400°F, an afterburner is
not required for the control of any pollutants in-
cluding explosives and CO. There is no justification
for operating tne kiln above 1,400°F with or with-
out an afterburner.
(c) Afterburner temperature. If an afterburner is provided,
there is no justification for operation above
l,400op and combustion gas residence times in ex-
cess of 1 to 2 seconds. Destruction of CO in the com-
bustion gases and not explosives is the most limiting
criteria for design of the afterburner.
(d) Burner design. Location of the kiln burner such that
the soil rotates directly into the flame after being
fed was a positive feature of the incinerator design.
Co-current firing (i.e., burner and soil feed at the
same end of the kiln) was also a positive feature
which essentially eliminates the requirement for an
afterburner.
Tne kiln burner heat input rate and turndown ratio
should be designed to accommodate a feed soil with a
heating value of 0 to 2,500 Btu per pound with mois-
ture contents as high as 30 percent. The secondary
burner (if required) should not be required to pro-
vide more than 20(jop temperature increase above
the kiln temperature. However, a higher design heat
1U3
4523A
-------
input rate may De practical to allow timely preheat
of the refractory.
(e) Excess air. The induced draft fan and combustion air
inlet ports should De designed to provide 100 to 200
percent excess air in the primary chamber and up to
100 percent excess air in the secondary chamber.
(f) Kiln ash collection/heat recovery. During the IECS
testing program, the kiln ash samples were collected
from four separate depths within each ash drum imme-
diately after the drum was removed from the ashpit.
The not ash sample was composited, placed in a metal
can, and cooled by placing in a water bath. There-
fore, this sampling technique did not take credit for
further degradation of explosives that would most
likely have resulted due to long residence times of
the kiln ash in the drums at elevated temperatures
during gradual cool down. This sampling technique
closely approximates a full-scale kiln ash removal
system incorporating a planetary cooler (or similar
heat tranfer method) to preheat the combustion air or
waste heat boiler feed water.
(g) Heat recovery. A heat recovery system (i.e., heat ex-
changer or waste heat boiler) with a design heat re-
covery efficiency of approximately 80 percent is re-
quired to cool the incinerator combustion gases prior
to entering the fabric filter.
(n) Particulate control. A fabric filter is required for
particulate control. Based on the inlet loading and
particle size distribution, a pulse-jet cleaned out-
side collector is recommended with a design air-to-
cloth ratio of 5:1.
(i) Equipment size limitations. Tne use of a "transporta-
ble" incinerator appears to De extremely advantageous
for future remedial action projects. Therefore, indi-
vidual component design (e.g., rotary kiln) should
take into consideration size limitations for truck
and/or rail shipment.
1U4
4523A
-------
10. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
10.1 Conclusions. The IECS project demonstrated the fol-
lowing:
(a) A "transportable" incineration system can be disassem-
bled, loaded on trucks, transported approximately
1,000 miles, and be reassembled and fully operational
within 2 weeks.
(b) The explosives contaminated soils can be excavated,
transported to the incineration site, fed into the
incinerator, and thermally decontaminated in a safe
and environmentally acceptable manner.
(c) Comparing the mass of explosives measured in the ash
residues and the stack gas to the mass of explosives
in the soil feed, the following destruction and re-
moval efficiencies were demonstrated:
- Greater than 99.99 percent destruction efficiency
in the kiln ash.
- Greater than 99.9999 percent destruction efficiency
in the fabric filter ash.
- No explosives detected in the stack gas, which re-
sults in an overall destruction and removal effi-
ciency (DRE) of 100 percent.
(d) Stack emissions were in compliance with all Federal,
state, and local regulations including:
- Sulfur dioxide (302)
- Hydrogen chloride (HCl)
- Oxides of nitrogen
- Carbon monoxide (CO)
- Particulates
(e) Ash residues were not hazardous due to the characteris-
tics of EP toxicity or reactivity. Application has
been filed! with the Illinois EPA to allow land
application of the ash residues at the Savanna Army
Depot Activity.
(f) The incineration system demonstrated the capability of
safe and reliable operation over a wide range of op-
erating conditions, including a longer-term, steady-
state production mode of operation.
105
4523A
-------
Comparison of the IECS project results to the applicable
Federal regulatory criteria demonstrated the following:
(a) It appears that the explosives contaminated soils are
exempt from selected sections of the Federal hazard-
ous waste incineration standards (40 CFR, Part 264).
However, tinal judgment on this exemption will rest
with the respective EPA Regional Administrator. Four
factors combine to make an extremely strong case that
the EPA regional administrators would approve this
exemption:
- The explosives contaminated soils, when mixed with
water, do not generate toxic gases and they are not
cyanide- or sulfide-bearing wastes.
- The concentrations of 40 CFR, Part 261 - Appendix
VIII hazardous constituents are extremely low.
- No other hazardous wastes would be incinerated sim-
ultaneously with the explosives contaminated soils.
- The incineration site would most likely oe a remote
U.S. Army location which would further limit poten-
tial hazards to the general puolic.
(b) For future full-scale remedial action projects waste
analysis data must be submitted with the Part B per-
mit application for the project. If the above-de-
scribed exemption is granted, the implications would
be as follows:
- A formal trial burn would not be required.
- The incinerator would not be required to meet in-
cinerator performance standards (including the
99.99 percent ORE requirement).
- The incinerator would be exempt from all Federal
operating, monitoring, and inspection requirements.
All ash residues would be classified as hazardous
wastes; however, the IECS project results clearly
demonstrate that delisting of the ash residues should
be a straightforward process, assuming the ash passes
the EP toxicity test.
(c) If the above exemption is not granted, the implications
would be as follows:
- Clearly, the results of the IECS test program
should exempt the U.S. Army from any further trial
burn requirements unless the waste analysis of the
explosives contaminated soils is significantly dif-
ferent than the SADA or LAAP soils.
106
4523A
-------
- The IECS test results demonstrated consistent com-
pliance with all incinerator performance standards.
- It appears that only two additional pieces of in-
strumentation would be required to supplement the
incineration equipment and controls supplied by
ThermAll, Inc. for the IECS test program: 1) a de-
vice for continuously measuring combustion gas ve-
locity, and 2) a device for continuously measuring
carbon monoxide at the stack.*
In summary, if the exemption is not granted the per-
mitting and reporting requirements will most likely
be more rigorous and time consuming; however, compli-
ance with the regulations would not be problematic.
In the early stages of the IECS project a test plan2 was
developed which identified key process variables and established
a matrix of test conditions (replicated for two different soil
types). This experimental design was selected to allow statisti-
cal evaluation of the test burn data. As a result, significant
simple linear models were developed which accurately predict in-
cinerator air pollutant emission criteria, as well as important
incinerator design parameters (e.g., ash production rates, soil
heating value, and supplemental fuel burn rate).
A pneumatic ram feeder utilizing a standard 12-quart galvan-
ized mop pail to contain the contaminated soil was selected and
designed specifically for this testing program. Traditional feed
systems (e.g., screw conveyors, ram feeders, etc.) were unac-
ceptable due to the potential explosive hazards associated with
frictional forces and/or confinement. The bucket feed system met
all of the test objectives and proved to be very safe and re-
liable. During the course of the testing program, the feed sys-
tem cycled over 4,000 times without a single failure. However,
it is anticipated that the bucket feed system will not be suit-
able for full-scale remedial action projects due to the dis-
advantages of limited feed rates (due to the required cycle
times) and of being relatively labor intensive.
10.2 Recommendations. The success of the IECS testing pro-
gram (i.e.~no explosives detected in the combustion gases en-
tering the secondary chamber and stack CO and particulate emis-
sions orders of magnitude below the regulatory limits) suggests
that certain system/process modifications should be evaluated to
*This device may serve a dual role since the IECS test data in-
dicate that CO monitoring will provide a dependable and cost-
effective way to ensure proper combustion of explosives, as
well as CO.
107
4523A
-------
optimize cost effectiveness, while at tne same time meeting all
environmental goals. The evaluation of system/process modifica-
tions should include:
(a) Reduce the temperature of the secondary chamber to re-
duce fuel usage.
(b) Reduce the secondary chamber volume (i.e., flue gas
residence time) to reduce capital costs.
(c) Reduce the excess air supplied to both the primary and
secondary chambers to reduce fuel costs and fan power
costs.
(d) Potentially eliminate the secondary chamber and:
- Monitor CO at the kiln outlet.
- Increase the kiln flue gas residence time.
- Increase the Kiln temperature.
(e) Increase the soil feed rate to the kiln to improve
overall economics and potentially increase the kiln
volume to provide adequate ash residence time.
(f) Increase the air-to-cloth ratio in the fabric filter
(i.e., reduce size of unit) to reduce capital costs.
(g) Evaluate the feasibility of retrofitting the U.S. Army
APE-1236 deactivation furnaces for thermally treating
explosives contaminated soils.
(h) Evaluate the feasibility of transporting the explosives
contaminated soils to a commercial incineration fa-
cility for thermal treatment.
The evaluation of the above system/process modifications
will be the objective of Phase II of the IECS project (Task or-
der No. 7).
108
4523A
-------
11. REFERENCES
1. Letter from Mr. Arlen J. Dahlman to Mr. Bharat Mathur
in reference to results of the IECS Testing Program,
dated 12 January 1984.
2. Roy F. Weston, inc., Test Plan for an Incineration Test
of Explosives Contaminated Sediments at Savanna, Illi-
nois, USATHAMA Contract No. DAAK11-82-C-0017, Task Or-
der No. 2, March 1983.
3. Roy F. Weston, Inc., Safety Plan for an Incineration
Test of Explosives Contaminated Sediments at The Sa-
vanna Army Depot Activity, USATHAMA Contract No.
DAAK11-82-C-0017, Task order No. 2, March 1983.
4. Roy F. Weston, Inc., Permit Application for an Inciner-
ation Test of Explosives Contaminated Sediments at Sa-
vanna, Illinois, USATHAMA Contract No. DAAK11-82-C-
0017, Task order No. 2, February 1983.
5. Roy F. Weston, Inc., Sampling and Analysis Plan for an
Incineration Test of Explosives Contaminated Sediments
at the Savanna Army Depot Activity, USATHAMA Contract
No. DAAK11-82-C-0017, Task Order No. 2, March 1983.
6. Robert C. Weast, Ph.D., CRC Handbook of Chemistry and
Physics, 58th Edition, ~CRCPress,Inc.,Cleveland,
Ohio, 1977.
7. R.W. Rocke, et al., Afterburner Systems Study, Shell
Development Company, Emeryville, California, August
1972.
8. Users Manual, Statistics; Multiple Linear Regression,
Plot 50 - 4050D04,Tektronix,Inc.,Beaverton, Oregon,
July 1982.
9. Users Manual, Statistics; Analysis of Variance, Plot
50 - 4050D03, Tektronix, Inc. Beaverton, Oregon, August
1982.
109
4523A
-------
APPENDIX A
INCINERATION TEST BURN DATA SUMMARY TABLES
-------
Description
Carbon (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen (Ib/hr)
O«ygen (Ib/hr)
Nitrogen (Ib/hr)
Sultur (Ib/hr)
Chlorine (Ib/hr)
Moisture (Ib/hr)
Ash (Ib/hr)
Explosives - TNT (Ib/hr)
RDX (Ib/hr)
HMX (Ib/hr)
Other (Ib/hr)
Heavy Metals • Ba (Ib/hr)
Cd (Ib/hr)
Cr (Ib/hr)
Cu (Ib/hr)
Pb (Ib/hr)
Zn (Ib/hr)
As (Ib/hr)
Hg (Ib/hr)
Air (Ib/hr)
CO) (Ib/hr)
Water Vapor (Ib/hr)
Propane (Ib/hr)
Paniculate (Ib/hr)
Carbon Monoxide (Ib/hr)
Oxides of Nitrogen (Ib/hr)
Sullur Dioxide (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen Chloride (Ib/hr)
Hydrocarbons (Ib/hr)
Total Mass Flow Rate (Ib/hr)
Average Temperature ( F)
Average Volumetric Flow Rate (dscfm)
Heating Value (Blu/lb)
Combustion
Air
(Total)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
3.274 9
-
431
-
.
-
-
-
3.3180
60
7373
Fuel
(Total)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
549
-
-
.
-
54.9
60
8.0
21.560
Soil
Feed
1847
1 54 1
728
ND
009
874
3427
583
003
ND
005
0.009
ND
ND
NO
0008
0017
ND
ND
-
-
-
-
-
.
-
5159
60
-
95
Kiln
Ash
571
015
1 8
ND
ND
1563
0001
ND
ND
ND
0004
ND
ND
NO
0004
0007
ND
ND
-
-
.
-
1640
1*3
0
Secondary
Chamber
Inlet
156%'
802%*
.
.
-
1B2.4ppmw'
5.7ppmw*
5 2ppmw'
2 6ppmw'
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
-
4.2%'
9.3%'
-
NM
1 .OSOppmv'
NM
NM
NM
4.0ppmv'
NM*
883
NM-
-
Fabric
Filler
Inlet
581 2
2.6868
.
-
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
6 1 x 10 5
5.5 x 10-«
29x10*
56x105
2.4 x 10^
3.9 x 10-1
ND
ND
-
2366
2194
-
0.54
0.251
NM
NM
0032
ND
3.724.8
267
783
-
Fabric
Filter
Ash
023
001
.
009
002
001
.
361
2 1 x 10 s
48 x 10*
1 7 x 10 5
62x105
7 1 x 10 "
40x105
22x10-*
3.9 x 10-1
24x103
2 2 x 10 3
9.1 x 105
2 1 x 10*
-
-
-
-
.
-
-
-
3.97
185
-
0
Stack
Exhaust
.
7026
3,281 4
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
ND
55x10-«
2751
2342
-
4.5 x 10 3
0338
36
0.013
NM
ND
4.4973
185
950
i r\/\
• ^v^
*
^ ^^
1.0 Sm_J^ ^S\^ '/
CvJ^^'J
v\. ^(j^y^
For IECS Incineration Test Burn
At Savanna Army Depot Activity (SADA)
Savanna. Illinois
\Y V J *f ?1 mWitfW M IwtSI CHESTER PENNSYLVANIA 1UaO
\ A /I "rS. « KktlUI K |PHONE 215 N2 3030
OC»0»«W^^^/OaN*utTWfTI
FIGURE A-1 MATERIAL BALANCE FOR
0-1 TEST BURN ON SADA SOIL
Sc»t None PiotKINumtt* D»«wnflMufl*«i
D'" 1/3/84 2281-01-02 MB-0003
Jjd^a*
VV1W>
40 - Not Detected • -Flu«9«i»olum«lfic no* f»lew»3nolm»*suf»clal me secondsry chamber mleUinceisokineliccofidilionjcoukl not b«
NM - Not Measured achieved Values are presented » volumetric percentages or ppm s on a volume or weight basis
-------
Stream Number 123 4 5678
Description
Carbon (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen (Ib/hr)
Oxygen (Ib/hr)
Nitrogen (Ib/hr)
Sulfur (Ib/hr)
Chlorine (Ib/hr)
Moisture (Ib/hr)
Ash (Ib/hr)
Explosives • TNT (Ib/hr)
RDX (Ib/hr)
HMX (Ib/hr)
Other (Ib/hr)
Heavy Metals Ba (Ib/hr)
Cd (Ib/hr)
Cr (Ib/hr)
Cu (Ib/hr)
Pb (Ib/hr)
Zn (Ib/hr)
As (Ib/hr)
Hg (Ib/hr)
Air (Ib/hr)
CO? (Ib/hr)
Water Vapor (Ib/hr)
Propane (Ib/hr)
Paniculate (Ib/hr)
Carbon Monoxide (Ib/hr)
Oxides ol Nitrogen (Ib/hr)
Sulfur Dioxide (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen Chloride (Ib/hr)
Hydrocarbons (Ib/hr)
Total Mass Flow Rate (Ib/hr)
Average Temperature (°F)
Average Volumetric Flow Rate (dscfm)
Heating Value (Btu/lb)
Combustion
Air
(Total)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
3,921.2
-
516
-
3,972 6
60
8828
-
Fuel
(Total)
-
-
-
-
-
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
103.1
-
-
-
-
1031
60
15.1
21,560
Soil
Feed
1253
098
505
ND
0054
494
2256
2699
0008
ND
0026
0007
ND
ND
ND
0005
0010
ND
ND
-
-
-
-
-
.
-
-
3207
60
-
<50
Kiln
Ash
105
009
062
ND
009
-
2131
ND
0001
ND
ND
0004
ND
0002
ND
0005
0008
ND
ND
-
-
-
-
-
-
_
-
-
2150
1.278
-
0
Secondary
Chamber
Inlet
-
-
13 BV
820%'
-
-
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
4.2%'
7.6V
NM
122ppmv'
NM
NM
NM
46ppmV
NM-
1.278
NM-
Fabric
Filter
Inlet
-
-
4957
3.1191
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
2.7 x 10-4
1.3 x 10s
5.9 x 10-*
1.1 xlO-4
3.1 x 10-*
5.9 x 10-1
ND
ND
3438
220.6
1.3
ND
NM
NM
6.4 x 10^
1.13
4.181.6
293
883
-
Fabric
Filter
Ash
005
36x 103
0016
53 x 10 3
2.6 x 10 3
324
69 x 10*
ND
43x10*
1 6 x 10 5
4.3 x 10-1
2.0x105
86 x 10s
1.9x10-*
96x10-"
1 2 x 10 3
2.0 x 10 5
3.6 x 10"«
.
-
.
-
-
-
-
-
3.31
172
-
0
Slack
Exhaust
-
674 1
3.726 5
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
ND
79x10'
.
4024
244.0
-
45 x 10 3
ND
1 7
0.025
NM
0016
5,0487
172
1,067
i i\
! O
•#
"31 *^
10 /»»_y'>x. _^\^ 'y
^+& )^<^f^ y\
r\ &/(\ **// T
^X. ^ jlfyr J®
For IECS Incineration Test Burn
At Savanna Army Depot Activity (SADA)
Savanna. Illinois
XYVj *f ?1 atmtfW M 1 WEST CKSTEH PtNNSVLVANIA HMO
\ A A ^vil rKEa K I**"01* *'s»»wo
MM^raV^jV rnm*i*m
FIGURE A-2 MATERIAL BALANCE FOR
1-1 TEST BURN ON SADA SOIL
V** None >*'0!«ct NulTCMf r>«w,nfl N«n*««
"*" 1/3/84 228101-02 I MB-OOM
NQIVV!
ND - Not Detected • . Fluegasvolumetrictlowratewasnotrneasuredatlhesecondarychamberinlelsinceisokinelicconditionscouldnotbe
NM - Not Measured achieved Values are presented as volumetric percentages or ppm's on a volume or weight basis
-------
I
u.
Stream Number 123 45678
Description
Carbon (lb/hr)
Hydrogen (lb/hr)
Oxygen (lb/hr)
Nitrogen (lb/hr)
Sulfur (lb/hr)
Chlorine (lb/hr)
Moisture (lb/hr)
Ash (lb/hr)
Explosives - TNT (lb/hr)
RDX (lb/hr)
HMX (lb/hr)
Other (lb/hr)
Heavy Metals - Ba (lb/hr)
Cd (lb/hr)
Cr (lb/hr)
Cu (lb/hr)
Pb (lb/hr)
Zn (lb/hr)
As (lb/hr)
Hg (lb/hr)
Air (lb/hr)
COi (lb/hr)
Water Vapor (lb/hr)
Propane (lb/hr)
Paniculate (lb/hr)
Carbon Monoxide (lb/hr)
Oxides of Nitrogen (lb/hr)
Sulfur Dioxide (lb/hr)
Hydrogen Chloride (lb/hr)
Hydrocarbons (lb/hr)
Total Mass Flow Rate llb/hr)
Average Temperature ( F)
Average Volumetric Flow Rale (dsctm)
Healing Value (Blu/lb)
Combustion
Air
(Total)
-
-
-
-
-
.
-
-
-
5,371 4
707
-
.
5,4421
60
1.2094
Fuel
(Total)
-
-
.
-
-
-
-
1073
1073
60
157
21.560
Soil
Feed
1691
1.24
-
794
ND
0061
474
2314
4547
0018
ND
0043
0008
ND
ND
ND
0007
0012
ND
ND
3505
60
573
Kiln
Ash
1 72
011
ND
ND
ND
-
271 2
0001
ND
NO
ND
0005
ND
ND
ND
0004
0007
ND
ND
-
2730
1.178
0
Secondary
Chamber
Inlet
-
151V
812V
-
.
.
.
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
37V
NM
126ppmv'
NM
NM
NM
ND
NM'
1,178
NM'
Fabric
Filter
Inlet
.
-
779.6
4,148.7
-
-
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
69x10"
5 1 x 10 5
15x10"
27x10-*
1 5 x 10 3
2 1 x 10 3
7 8 x 10 5
34 x 10-6
-
4080
43
0025
NM
NM
58x103
ND
5,626 9
306
1.192
-
Fabric
Filter
Ash
0017
0002
0040
0001
0002
-
555
1.1 x 10-*
ND
ND
ND
3 1 x 10"
3 4 x 10 5
56 x 10 5
1 5x10"
1 7 x 10 3
1 2 x 10 3
79x 10s
1 1 x 10'5
-
.
561
208
-
0
Stack
Exhaust
.
-
835.9
4,514.8
-
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
ND
1 6 x 10 5
-
3975
OCQ O
5 8 x 10 3
0027
27
0034
NM
ND
6.010.8
208
1.283
k
For IECS Incineration Test Burn
Al Savanna Army Depot Activity (SADA)
Savanna. Illinois
\X^XAS\^f°^s:' "
FIGURE A-3 MATERIAL BALANCE FOR
1-2 TEST BURN ON SADA SOIL
s'" None P.O-C.N*™.. o....™,^™.,
°™ 1/3/84 2281-0102 MB-UUU3
ND - Nol Delected • Fiuegasvolumeiricllowraiewunoimeasuredatihesecondarychambennleisinceisokineliecondilionscouklnolbe
NM - Nol Measured achieved Values are presented as volumetric percentages or ppm's on a volume or weight bans
-------
Stream Number 123 4 5678
Description
Carbon (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen (Ib/hr)
Oxygen (Ib/hr)
Nitrogen (Ib/hr)
Sulfur (Ib/hr)
Chlorine (Ib/hr)
Moisture (Ib/hr)
Ash (Ib/hr)
Explosives - TNT (Ib/hr)
RDX (Ib/hr)
HMX (Ib/hr)
Other (Ib/hr)
Heavy Metals Ba (Ib/hr)
Cd (Ib/hr)
Cr (Ib/hr)
Cu (Ib/hr)
Pb (Ib/hr)
Zn (Ib/hr)
As (Ib/hr)
Hg (Ib/hr)
Air (Ib/hr)
CO? (Ib/hr)
Water Vapor (Ib/hr)
Propane (Ib/hr)
Paniculate (Ib/hr)
Carbon Monoxide (Ib/hr)
Oxides of Nitrogen (Ib/hr)
Sullur Dioxide (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen Chloride (Ib/hr)
Hydrocarbons (Ib/hr)
Total Mass Flow Rate (Ib/hr)
Average Temperature ("F)
Average Volumetric Flow Rate (dsclm)
Heating Value (Btu/lb)
Combustion
Air
(Total)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
3.8804
-
51.1
-
-
-
.
-
-
-
3,931.5
60
873.7
-
Fuel
(Total)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
81.4
-
.
-
-
-
81.4
60
11.9
21.560
Soil
Feed
1532
1 19
654
ND
0036
665
2950
4134
0016
ND
0042
0006
ND
ND
ND
0006
0.013
ND
ND
-
-
-
-
.
-
-
-
4260
60
-
112
Kiln
Ash
079
ND
061
ND
ND
2906
0003
ND
ND
ND
0006
ND
ND
ND
0005
0011
ND
ND
-
-
-
-
2920
1,263
0
Secondary
Chamber
Inlet
-
126*'
81.8V
-
-
-
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
56%'
96%'
-
NM
240ppmv>
NM
NM
NM
ND
NM'
1,263
NM-
-
Fabric
Filter
Inlet
4998
3.0689
-
-
-
ND
NO
ND
ND
32x10-"
1.8xia5
73x10*
1.5x10-"
38x10-"
84x10-"
ND
4.6 x 10*
-
364.2
2127
-
1.3
ND
NM
NM
5.9 X 10J
ND
4,146.9
284
875
-
Fabric
Filter
Ash
0.017
0002
-
0016
0002
0001
-
3.71
98x10*
5.9 x 10*
ND
1.9x10*
53x10-"
2.6 x 10'*
1.2 x 10-"
2.4 x 10-"
1.3 x 10 3
1.5x103
2.3 x 10*
5.6 x 10*
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
-
375
162
-
0
Stack
Exhaust
6784
3,6330
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
ND
15x10*
3647
2295
-
3.7 x 10 3
ND
18
0.017
NM
ND
4,9074
162
1.042
c
k
For IECS Incineration Test Burn
At Savanna Army Depot Activity (SADA)
Savanna. Illinois
YY V A •( Cl mnKS NJwtst ctcsrcR PENNSYLVANIA 113*0
FIGURE A-4 MATERIAL BALANCE FOR
1-3 TEST BURN ON SADA SOIL
Cil* Non6 °'*C^ ""^
°~ 1/3/84 2281-01 02 I MB-0006
fc«-«
IVUIVB.
ND • Not Detected • - Fluegasvolumetrict1owralewasnolmeasuredatthesecondarychamberinletsinceisol(ineticconditionscouldnotbe
NM - Not Measured achieved Values are presented as volumetric percentages or ppm's on a volume or weight basis
-------
Description
Carbon (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen (ib/hr]
Oxygen (Ib/hr)
Nitrogen (Ib/hr]
Sulfur (Ib/hr]
Chlorine (ib/hr]
Moisture (Ib/hr]
Ash (Ib/hr)
Explosives - TNT (Ib/hr]
HDX (Ib/hr)
HMX (Ib/hr)
Other (Ib/hr)
Heavy Metals - Ba (Ib/hr)
Cd (Ib/hr)
Cr (Ib/hr)
Cu (Ib/hr)
Pb (Ib/hr)
Zn (Ib/hr)
As (Ib/hr)
Hg (Ib/hr)
Air (Ib/hr)
CO» (Ib/hr)
Water Vapor (Ib/hr)
Propane (Ib/hr)
Paniculate (Ib/hr)
Carbon Monoxide (Ib/hr)
Oxides ol Nitrogen (Ib/hr)
Sulfur Dioxide (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen Chloride (Ib/hr)
Hydrocarbons (Ib/hr)
Total Mass Flow Rate (Ib/hr)
Average Temperature (°F)
Average Volumetric Flow Rale (dsclm)
Heating Value (Btu/lb)
Combustion
Air
(Total)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
4,024 1
530
-
-
-
-
-
-
4.077.1
60
906.0
-
Fuel
(Total)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
112.0
-
-
-
-
-
-
112.0
60
16.4
21,560
Soil
Feed
712
074
268
ND
032
353
2315
2342
0.010
ND
0.027
0008
ND
ND
ND
0.004
0.009
ND
ND
-
-
-
-
-
.
-
-
-
301.1
60
-
<50
Kiln
Ash
263
012
-
109
ND
006
-
197 1
ND
ND
ND
ND
0004
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-
-
-
-
.
-
-
-
201.0
1.488
-
0
Secondary
Chamber
Inlet
127V
820%'
-
-
ND
ND
NO
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
-
53V
9.5V
-
NM
16ppmv*
NM
NM
NM
ND
NM*
1.488
NM*
-
Fabric
Filler
Inlet
.
_
5056
3,2094
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
35X10-1
1.5> 10s
60 x 10s
9.3 x 10 5
3.1 x 10-4
5.3 x 10-1
ND
ND
-
3598
2121
-
23
ND
NM
NM
5.7 x 10 '
ND
4.289.2
296
908
-
Fabric
Filter
Ash
0029
0002
0014
0003
39 x 10^
,
382
ND
ND
ND
9 8 x 1041
38x10-"
1.5 x 10s
62 x 10s
1 2x 10-*
5.0 x 10-4
6.6 x 10-4
5 4 x 10 5
2 7 x 10-«
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
-
.
3.87
184
.
0
Stack
Exhaust
.
6580
3.677 7
.
.
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
ND
1 3 x 10-6
329.6
2209
-
6.1 x 10-J
ND
2.0
0.034
NM
ND
4,8882
184
1,042
-
c
For IECS Incineration Test Burn
At Savanna Army Depot Activity (SADA)
Savanna. Illinois
\ V Vj *T C"I • IK? N IWESI CKSTEH PENNSYLVANIA ineo
C»«1«J\_/00«*I«0.
FKMJREA-S MATERIAL BALANCE FOR
1-4 TEST BURN ON SAOA SOIL
"•" 1/3/84 228101-02 MB-0007
ND • Not Detected • - Flue gas volumetric (low rate was not measured at the secondary chamber inlet since isokinelic conditions could not be
NM - Not Measured achieved Values are presented as volumetric percentages or ppm's on a volume or weight basis
-------
>
CTl
Stream Number 123 4 5678
Description
Carbon (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen (Ib/hr)
Oxygen (Ib/hr)
Nitrogen (Ib/hr)
Sullur (Ib/hr)
Chlorine (Ib/hr)
Moisture (Ib/hr)
Ash (Ib/hr)
Explosives - TNT (Ib/hr)
RDX (Ib/hr)
HMX (Ib/hr)
Other (Ib/hr)
Heavy Metals - Ba (Ib/hr)
Cd (Ib/hr)
Cr (Ib/hr)
Cu (Ib/hr)
Pb (Ib/hr)
Zn (Ib/hr)
As (Ib/hr)
Hg (Ib/hr)
Air (Ib/hr)
CO> (Ib/hr)
Water Vapor (Ib/hr)
Propane (Ib/hr)
Paniculate (Ib/hr)
Carbon Monoxide (Ib/hr)
Oxides of Nitrogen (Ib/hr)
Sullur Dioxide (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen Chloride (Ib/hr)
Hydrocarbons (Ib/hr)
Total Mass Flow Rate (Ib/hr)
Average Temperature C'F)
Average Volumetric Flow Rate (dsclm)
Heating Value (Btu/lb)
Combustion
Air
(Total)
-
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
3.6552
48,1
.
.
.
.
-
.
3.703 3
60
8230
-
Fuel
(Total)
-
-
.
-
-
.
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
82.4
-
.
_
-
.
824
60
12.1
21.560
Soil
Feed
3262
206
-
1421
ND
0109
847
1508
71 70
0023
ND
0.079
0.005
ND
0002
0.004
0018
0.019
ND
ND
-
-
.
-
.
_
-
-
.
356.3
60
-
1.602
Kiln
Ash
128
001
009
001
ND
1226
43 x 10 «
ND
ND
NO
0002
ND
ND
0.001
0.008
0.006
ND
ND
-
-
-
_
-
-
.
1240
1,435
-
0
Secondary
Chamber
Inlet
-
12.6%'
816%'
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
-
5.8%'
nfltU*
NM
140ppmv*
NM
NM
NM
70ppmv
NM*
1,435
NM*
-
Fabric
Filter
Inlet
-
-
4629
2,863 7
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
7.0 x 10^
3.8 x 10 s
4.3 x 10*
1.8x 10-1
2.4 x 103
1.6x10"'
ND
9.5 x 10*
-
398.5
060
0.162
NM
NM
6.5 x 10 -'
0006
4,018.0
289
825
-
Fabric
Filter
Ash
0056
0002
0018
0007
0007
338
ND
ND
1 7 x 10 s
78X10"6
29 x 10-1
2 2 x 10 5
59 x 10s
1 7 x 10"1
87x10'
I.Ox 10'
2.7 x 10 5
2.4 x 10 5
-
•
-
-
.
3.47
186
0
Slack
Exhaust
-
571 8
3.2843
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
ND
2.9 x 10 5
-
3931
5 6 x 10 3
0165
31
0.050
NM
0007
4.526 1
186
942
-
i i\x\
•#
'» ^•z-/^ ^.s^ •y.,
s® \&®
*r ^rn\
£^^£$)
^S. S^^l^fr* jQ>
For IECS Incineration Test Burn
At Savanna Army Depot Activity (SAO*)
Savanna. Illinois
WT i 9 f-i •MKw N IWEST ctcstER ctNNsrivANi* iwao
\ An ^\V JVSXu lCJPMOf* *I5<8J 303°
FIGURE A-« MATERIAL BALANCE FOR
1-5 TEST BURN ON SADA SOIL
{CM None PnnclNunUt Dji-nogNuini*
B>" 1/3/84 2281-01-02 Mb-uuu*
j^.* —
IvWSJ.
4D - Not Detected •• Flue gas volumetric now rate was not measured II Vie secondary chamber inlet since isokmetic conditions could not be
MM - Not Measured achieved Values are presented as volumetric percentages or ppm's on a volume or weight basis
-------
Description
Cartoon (to/hr]
Hydrogen (Ib/hr]
Oxygen (Ib/hr]
Nitrogen (Ib/hr]
Sulfur (Ib/hr)
Chlorine (Ib/hr]
Moisture (Ib/hr)
Ash (ib/hr)
Explosives - TNT (Ib/hr)
RDX (Ib/hr)
HMX (Jb/hr)
Other (Ib/hr)
Heavy Melals - Ba (Ib/hr)
Cd |lb/hr)
Cr |lb/hr)
Cu (Ib/hr)
Pb (Ib/hr)
Zn (Ib/hr)
As (Ib/hr)
Hg (Ib/hr)
Air (Ib/hr)
CO» (Ib/hr)
Water Vapor (Ib/hr)
Propane (ib/hr)
Paniculate (ib/hr)
Carbon Monoxide (Ib/hr)
Oxides o» Nitrogen (Ib/hr)
Sulfur Dioxide (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen Chloride (Ib/hr)
Hydrocarbons (Ib/hr)
Total Mas* Flow Rale (Ib/hr)
Average Temperature (°F)
Average Volumetric Flow Rale (dsclm)
Healing Value (Btu/lb)
1 2 3 4 5678
Combustion
Air
(Total)
•
-
-
-
-
-
•
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
3.8669
-
509
-
.
.
.
.
3.9178
60
870.6
-
Fuel
(Total)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
•
-
-
-
-
-
-
1064
.
.
-
.
1054
60
154
21.560
Soil
Feed
1249
1 10
516
ND
NO
503
2938
4304
0017
ND
0044
0009
NO
NO
ND
0006
0011
NO
NO
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
406.0
60
-
<50
Kiln
Ash
204
023
-
070
042
010
2575
NO
NO
NO
ND
0006
ND
ND
ND
0003
0006
ND
ND
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
-
-
.
2610
1,496
-
0
Secondary
Chamber
Inlet
-
123V
81 7V
.
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
-
60V
107%'
-
NM
SOppmv'
NM
NM
NM
SOppmv'
NM'
1.496
NM*
-
Fabric
Filler
Inlet
.
,
4656
3.1025
.
.
.
ND
ND
NO
NO
38 x 10-«
1.6x10*
61 x 10s
1 1 x W
30x10^
5 4 x 10-1
ND
ND
-
3583
2391
-
2.7
ND
NM
NM
6 1 x 10 •'
0.034
4.168.2
294
875
-
Fabric
Filler
Ash
0043
0004
49 x 10 4
0004
0002
.
485
95x10*
NO
NO
2 5 x 10s
48x10-"
2.0 x 10 5
78 x 10s
19x10^
74 x 10-"
93 x 104
29x 10 5
ND
-
-
-
.
.
-
-
-
490
173
-
0
Stack
Exhaust
~
6428
3,7032
.
.
ND
NO
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
ND
1 1 x 10*
-
3748
2574
4 0 x 10 3
ND
29
0028
NM
NO
4,981.1
173
1,050
-
t i\x\
#
'* <<-y^ ^/*\> -y ,
J3 \/0T®
^^r .Xjfi)
J?^>^J
^\^\^^
Foe IECS IncimrMnn Tnl Burn
At Savanna Army Depot Acdvity (SAOA)
Scvwirw. Nknon
\V Vj «f Cl mK? ^M*151 CKSTEH «NNSYIV«*A 1KMO
\ A A *^\ il nirKa K i1^*** z«s«j3o»
FKMMEA-7 MATERIAL BALANCE FOR
1-« TEST BURN ON MOA SOIL
Sc** None *o»aNu«*«f D**«M«NUII*«
"~ )/3/»4 2281-01-02 1 MB-OOOB
•^•a^hA*
NO - Not Detected •.FhMO«i«oluniMiicllo«raMw«imilniM*ur^M*t«McomtafychambwinMiinc«i«okinMccoi«Mion«couMn<)llM
NM - Not Measured »ctu**a VMu«i •'• prcMnMd •« volumMnc p«rc«nl«g«s o. ppm • on * vo»um« or w«ghl bMi*.
-------
Stream Number 123 4 5678
Description
Carbon (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen (Ib/hr)
Oxygen (Ib/hr)
Nitrogen (Ib/hr)
Sullur (Ib/hr)
Chlorine (Ib/hr)
Moisture (Ib/hr)
Ash (Ib/hr)
Explosives - TNT (Ib/hr)
RDX (Ib/hr)
HMX (Ib/hr)
Other (Ib/hr)
Heavy Metals • Ba (Ib/hr)
Cd (Ib/hr)
Cr (Ib/hr)
Cu (Ib/hr)
Pb (Ib/hr)
Zn (Ib/hr)
As (Ib/hr)
Hg (Ib/hr)
Air (Ib/hr)
CO? (Ib/hr)
Water Vapor (Ib/hr)
Propane (Ib/hr)
Paniculate (Ib/hr)
Carbon Monoxide (Ib/hr)
Oxides ol Nitrogen (Ib/hr)
Sullur Dioxide (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen Chloride (Ib/hr)
Hydrocarbons (Ib/hr)
Total Mass Flow Rate (Ib/hr)
Average Temperature (°F)
Average Volumetric Flow Rate (dsclm)
Heating Value (Btu/lb)
Combustion
Air
(Total)
-
-
.
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
4.568.3
en o
-
.
_
-
.
_
4,628.5
60
1,028.6
-
Fuel
(Total)
-
-
-
-
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
112.5
-
-
.
.
-
.
112.5
60
16.4
21.560
Soil
Feed
2728
1 70
1295
ND
004
770
8545
8721
0031
ND
0067
0005
ND
0003
0006
0021
0034
ND
ND
-
-
.
-
.
-
-
-
2918
60
-
2,364
Kiln
Ash
037
007
ND
ND
ND
9856
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
•
-
.
99.0
1,643
0
Secondary
Chamber
Inlet
-
120%'
812%'
-
-
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
-
6.8%'
19 4*i."
NM
13ppmv*
NM
NM
NM
ND
NM'
1,643
NM'
-
Fabric
Filter
Inlet
5261
3.5698
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
20x10-"
4 8 x 10 5
7 1 x 10 s
24x10-*
4.0 x 10 3
3 3 x 10 3
8 1 x 10 5
ND
-
4914
144 Q
1 7
0030
NM
NM
94 x 10 3
NO
4.933.8
316
1.017
-
Fabric
Filler
Ash
0017
0.003
0037
0002
0002
-
397
ND
ND
ND
ND
2 1 x 10^
2 1 x 10 5
4 0 x 10 5
1 2 x 10-*
1 1 x 10 3
85 x 10-*
3 2 x 10 5
13x105
-
-
.
-
-
-
-
4.03
212
-
0
Stack
Exhaust
-
6453
3.9047
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
ND
5 2 x 10 5
-
4963
•\y\ n
4.8 x 10 3
0033
48
0046
NM
ND
5.374.2
212
1.117
-
i r\/\
c
k
For IECS Incineration Test Burn
Al Savanna Army Depot Activity (SADA)
Savanna. Illinois
Wf Yj 4 ^1 llBffff ^ ("tSr Ct«STEB. PENNSYLVANIA 1«3BO
^i^-r^/SSKrT^^" """**
FIGURE A-i MATERIAL BALANCE FOR
1-7 TEST BURN ON SADA SOIL
Sen* None Proi«ct NufltMr 0»»wi«g Nwwfcw
°« ,,3,84 2281-01-02 1 MB-0010
TOIW>
MD - Not Detected • -Flue gas volumelnc flow rslewas not measured «l»ie secondary chamber inlel since isohineticcondilion» could not be
MM - Not Measured achieved Values are presented as volumetric percentages or ppm's on a volume or weight basis
-------
Stream Number 123 4 5678
Description
Carbon (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen (Ib/hr)
Oxygen (Ib/hr)
Nitrogen (Ib/hr)
Sulfur (Ib/hr)
Chlorine (Ib/hr)
Moistuie (Ib/hr)
Ash (Ib/hr)
Explosives - TNT (Ib/hr;
RDX (Ib/hr)
HMX (Ib/hr)
Other (Ib/hr)
Heavy Metals Ba (Ib/hr)
Cd (Ib/hi)
Cr (Ib/hr)
Cu (Ib/hr)
Pb (Ib/hr)
Zn (Ib/hr)
As (Ib/hr)
Hg (Ib/hr)
Air (Ib/hr)
CO? (Ib/hr)
Water Vapor (Ib/hr)
Propane (Ib/hr)
Paniculate (Ib/hr)
Carbon Monoxide (Ib/hr)
Oxides of Nitrogen (Ib/hr)
Sulfur Dioxide (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen Chloride (Ib/hr)
Hydrocarbons (Ib/hr)
Total Mass Flow Rate (Ib/hr)
Average Temperature C'F]
Average Volumetric Flow Rate (dsctm)
Healing Value (Btu/lb)
Combustion
Air
(Total)
-
-
-
-
5.2024
5,2709
60
1.1713
-
Fuel
(Total)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
131.3
_
-
,
131.3
60
192
21,560
Soil
Feed
2533
161
1049
ND
ND
540
193.3
6817
0.017
ND
0.041
0007
NO
0004
0004
0022
0030
ND
ND
353.0
60
1,088
Kiln
Ash
022
ND
004
ND
007
2187
56x10^
ND
ND
ND
NO
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-
-
-
-
.
-
-
_
2190
1,653
0
Secondary
Chamber
Inlet
12 IV
81 6%'
-
ND
ND
NO
NO
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
-
6.3%'
m ot*ct NO*** *— *-ft w-ntw
°"* 1/3/84 2281-01-02 MB-0011
Motor
ND - Not Detected • . FluegasvolumelricWowralewasnoimeasuredatmesecondarychambermletsmceisokmeticconditionscouldnolbe
NM - Not Measured achieved Values are presented as volumetric percentages or ppm s on a volume or weignl basis
-------
o
Stream Number 123 4 5678
Description
Carbon (Ib/hr
Hydrogen (Ib/hr
Oxygen (Ib/hr
Nitrogen (Ib/hr
Sullur (Ib/hr
Chlorine (Ib/hr
Moisture (Ib/hr]
Ash (Ib/hr)
Explosives - TNT (Ib/hr)
HDX (Ib/hr)
HMX (Ib/hr)
Other (Ib/hi)
Heavy Metals - Ba (Ib/hr)
Cd (Ib/hr)
Cr (Ib/hr)
Cu (Ib/hr)
Pb (Ib/hr)
Zn (Ib/hr)
As (Ib/hr)
Hg (Ib/hr)
Air (Ib/hr)
CO? (Ib/hr)
Water Vapor (Ib/hr)
Propane (Ib/hr)
Paniculate (Ib/hr)
Carbon Monoxide (Ib/hr)
Oxides of Nitrogen (Ib/hr)
Sullur Dioxide (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen Chloride (Ib/hr)
Hydrocarbons (Ib/hr)
Tola! Mass Flow Rate (Ib/hr)
Average Temperature f-F)
Average Volumetric Flow Rate (dscfm)
Heating Value (Btu/lb)
Combustion
Air
(Total)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
4.789 4
631
-
-
-
-
-
-
4.852.5
60
1,076.3
-
Fuel
(Total)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
123.5
-
-
-
-
-
123.5
60
18.1
21,560
Soil
Feed
3733
232
1686
ND
ND
685
191 4
8853
0023
ND
0062
0009
ND
0003
0006
0.024
0.040
ND
ND
-
-
-
-
-
4051
60
1,874
Kiln
Ash
052
ND
-
012
ND
ND
1984
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-
-
-
-
-
1990
1.644
0
Secondary
Chamber
Inlet
134%'
806%'
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
-
6.0%*
10.4%'
NM
39ppmv*
NM
NM
NM
ND
NM*
1,644
NM*
-
Fabric
Filter
Inlet
.
5563
3,7563
.
ND
ND
ND
ND
22x10"*
8.9 x 10 5
9.1 x 10 5.
28x10"*
59 x 10 3
52x103
1.4 x 10"4
ND
-
5484
3188
-
1.9
0413
NM
NM
7.8 x 10 3
ND
5.182.1
318
1,075
-
Fabric
Filter
Ash
0017
0001
0017
0001
ND
483
ND
ND
ND
ND
1 7 x 10 4
26x105
3 7 x 10 5
1 2 x 104
1.3x 103
1 3 x 10 3
58x105
5.8 x 10*
.
-
-
.
.
-
-
-
487
214
-
0
Stack
Exhaust
6838
4.1276
.
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
ND
3 7 x 10 5
541 9
311 3
-
2.6 x 10 3
0390
42
006
NM
ND
5.669.3
214
1,183
-
1
C
k
For IECS Incineration Test Burn
Al Savanna Army Depot Activity (SAOA)
Savanna. Illinois
\4y(S^|rcTj|lkJ PHONE 2150)23000
MMNBM ^^^^ COMUlTMfTI
FIGURE A-10 MATERIAL BALANCE FOR
1-1 TEST BURN ON SADA SOIL
5C"* NOO6 prOt*Kl NumtMX Driwwte NutntMr
D™ ,/3/84 2281-01-02 1 MB-0012
ND - Not Detected • - Flue gas volumetric flow rale was not measured at lt\e secondary chamber inlet since isokmelic conditions could not be
NM • Not Measured achieved Values are presented as volumetric percentages or ppm's on a volume or weight baxt
-------
Stream Number , 23 4 * * ?' R
Description
Carbon (|b/nr
Hydrogen (ib/hr
Oxygen (ib/hr
Nitrogen (ib/hr
Sullur (ib/hr
Chlorine (ib/hr
Moisture (Ib/hr
Ash (Ib/hr
Explosives - TNT (Ib/hr;
HDX (Ib/hr]
HMX (ib/hr;
Other (Ib/hr]
Heavy Metals • Ba (Ib/hr]
Cd (Ib/hr)
Cr (Ib/hr]
Cu (Ib/hr)
Pb (Ib/hr]
Zn (Ib/hr)
As (Ib/hr)
Hg (Ib/hr)
Air (Ib/hr)
CO) (Ib/hr)
Waler Vapor (Ib/hr)
Propane (Ib/hr)
Paniculate (Ib/hr)
Carbon Monoxide (Ib/hr)
Oxides of Nitrogen (Ib/hr)
Sullur Dioxide (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen Chloride (Ib/hr)
Hydrocarbons (Ib/hr)
Total Mass Flow Rate (Ib/hr)
Average Temperature (°F)
Average Volumetric Flow Rate (dscfm)
Heating Value (Btu/lb)
Combustion
Air
(Total)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
3.781 0
498
-
•
-
-
-
-
3,8308
60
8513
Fuel
(Total)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
•
96.5
-
-
-
-
965
60
14.1
21,560
Soil
Feed
1370
1 74
-
1086
ND
004
904
141 4
3059
1450
237
0037
0026
ND
0004
0014
0034
0067
ND
0001
-
-
-
-
3058
60
1,138
Kiln
Ash
083
008
022
ND
006
1367
9 1 x 10^
ND
ND
34 x 10-1
0019
0001
0003
0007
0022
0044
0001
ND
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1380
1.266
.
0
Secondary
Chamber
Inlet
135%'
81 5%'
-
_
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
-
50%'
122%*
-
NM
174ppmv'
NM
NM
NM
ND
NM*
1,266
NM*
Fabric
Filter
Inlet
4856
2,9852
.
ND
ND
ND
ND
85 x 10 5
29 x 10s
2 3 x 10 5
75x105
3 1 x 104
52X10-4
ND
ND
-
3481
2755
066
ND
NM
NM
7.7 x 10 3
0004
4.0951
285
850
-
Fabric
Filter
Ash
0056
0003
0013
0007
ND
449
ND
ND
7.4 x 10-«
2 0 x 10s
1 1 x 103
64x 105
1 7 x 10"1
28x10*
2 1 x 103
2 7 x 10 3
1 1 x 10-*
1 0 x 10*
.
.
-
.
457
183
.
0
Stack
Exhaust
.
6558
34641
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
ND
7 1 x 10 s
3340
2842
-
60 x 10 3
ND
13
0.039
NM
ND
4,739 4
183
992
-
i iv.
5 >rl
*
GL) L J
/o/«t_^7x ^\^^y
^3^^^]
^^^ xX/f^*"11 J®
For IECS Incineration Test Burn
At Savanna Army Depot Activity (SAOA)
Savanna. Illinois
\V Vj ^ fl •TJTitffl1 .M IwESI CKSIER PENNSYLVANIA I9MO
\A_fl«*vN|WfcGi_KJ PMONE Ji5s823a30
OCAOMM ^^^J CONMJirjWTI
FIGURE A-11 MATERIAL BALANCE FOR
2-1 TEST BURN ON LAAP SOIL
-------
Stream Number 123 4 5678
Description
Carbon (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen (Ib/hr)
Oxygen (Ib/hr)
Nitrogen (Ib/hr)
Sulfur (Ib/hr)
Chlorine (Ib/hr)
Moisture (Ib/hr)
Ash (Ib/hr)
Explosives - TNT (Ib/hr)
RDX (Ib/hr)
HMX (Ib/hr)
Other (Ib/hr)
Heavy Metals - Ba (Ib/hr)
Cd (Ib/hr)
Cr (Ib/hr)
Cu (Ib/hr)
Pb (Ib/hr)
Zn (Ib/hr)
As (Ib/hr)
Hg (Ib/hr)
Air (Ib/hr)
CO? (Ib/hr)
Water Vapor (Ib/hr)
Propane (Ib/hr)
Paniculate (Ib/hr)
Carbon Monoxide (Ib/hr)
Oxides ol Nitrogen (Ib/hr)
Sullur Dioxide (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen Chloride (Ib/hr)
Hydrocarbons (Ib/hr)
Total Mass Flow Rate (Ib/hr)
Average Temperature (r'F)
Average Volumetric Flow Rate (dscfm)
Heating Value (Btu/lb)
Combustion
Air
(Total)
-
-
_
-
.
_
-
.
.
.
-
-
-
.
4.4810
-
-
-
.
4.540.0
60
1.008.9
-
Fuel
(Total)
-
-
.
-
_
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
107.6
-
.
.
-
-
.
107.6
60
15.7
21.560
Soil
Feed
17 17
235
1507
ND
ND
846
1404
2421
2164
303
0154
0022
ND
0.004
0.011
0.029
0063
ND
0.001
-
-
-
.
_
-
306.8
60
-
964
Kiln
Ash
1 40
013
065
ND
006
1896
0004
ND
ND
ND
0031
0.001
0004
0007
0029
0036
0.003
ND
-
-
-
-
-
1920
1.233
0
Secondary
Chamber
Inlet
152%'
81.4%'
-
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
-
34%'
NM
160ppmv*
NM
NM
NM
ND
NM*
1,233
NM*
-
Fabric
Filter
Inlet
614.9
3.492 9
-
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
4 5 x 10 <
6 5 x 10s
9 5 x 10 5
2 6 x 10J
7.5 x 10 4
1.2x 10'
ND
2 6 x 10 5
-
375.8
22
ND
NM
NM
0.016
ND
4.764.4
292
1,000
-
Fabric
Filter
Ash
0015
0002
0020
0001
0001
-
475
20x 10s
ND
ND
ND
2 2 x 10-1
27 x 10 5
29 x 10 5
1 0 x 10 -4
8 1 x 10^
8.1 x 10^
5 7 x 10 5
45x10*
-
•
-
-
-
.
-
-
4.79
183
-
0
Stack
Exhaust
-
7828
3.954 4
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
ND
2 1 x 10-*
3435
1.8 x 10-'
ND
19
0.037
NM
ND
5.359.0
183
1,133
k l\
R PV~
t \,^^
c
k
"> 4_^ ./*s -
/*},/£
C\ r/^\\ >^
^^f^
>
For IECS Incineration Test Burn
At Savanna Army Depot Activity (SADA)
Savanna, Illinois
\Vr7 *¥ Cl •fiaCT N IWEST C«STEB PENN
\ A A SV\I IvEa K. 1?"°^ z15«2:Kno
FIGURE A-12 MATERIAL BALANCE FOR
2-2 TEST BURN ON LAAP SOU
5t" None PionclNgi*«. Ot.«.njN»
D" ,/3/M 228) 01 02 1 M
>YLVANIA 19380
B-OOU
ID - Not Detected •• Flue gas volumetric How rate was not measured al ih< secondary chamber inlet since isokinelic conditions could not be
-------
Description
Carbon (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen (Ib/hr)
Oxygen (Ib/hr)
Nitrogen (Ib/hr)
Sulfur (Ib/hr)
Chlorine (Ib/hr)
Moisture (Ib/hr)
Ash (Ib/hr)
Explosives - TNT (Ib/hr)
RDX (Ib/hr)
HMX (Ib/hr)
Other (Ib/hr)
Heavy Metals Ba (Ib/hr)
Cd (Ib/hr)
Cr (Ib/hi)
Cu (Ib/hr)
Pb (Ib/hr)
Zn (Ib/hr)
As (Ib/hr)
Hg (Ib/hr)
Air (Ib/hr)
CO* (Ib/hr)
Water Vapor (Ib/hr)
Propane (Ib/hr)
Paniculate (Ib/hr)
Carbon Monoxide (Ib/hr)
Oxides ol Nitrogen (Ib/hr)
Sullur Dioxide (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen Chloride (Ib/hr)
Hydrocarbons (Ib/hr)
Total Mass Flow Rate (Ib/hr)
Average Temperature (°F)
Average Volumetric Flow Rate (dscfm)
Heating Value (Btu/lb)
Combustion
Air
(Total)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
4,8902
•
64.4
-
-
-
-
.
4,9546
60
1.101.0
Fuel
(Total)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
-
113.7
-
-
-
.
1137
60
16.6
21,560
Soil
Feed
1525
213
-
88
003
006
1005
2408
1792
1309
186
0071
0033
NO
0006
0014
0048
0054
NO
0001
-
-
-
-
-
-
400.7
60
-
562
Kiln
Ash
207
014
1 53
ND
ND
2791
0008
ND
ND
ND
0027
0002
0006
0008
0037
0037
0005
0001
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
2830
1,241
-
0
Secondary
Chamber
Inlet
-
-
155%'
81 5%'
-
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
-
30V
11 5%*
-
NM
220ppmv°
NM
NM
NM
5 Oppmv*
NM-
1.241
NM1
-
Fabric
Filler
Inlet
-
661 2
3.795 3
.
ND
ND
ND
ND
3.5 x 10^
5.6 x 10s
9.2 x 10 5
2.3 x W
88 x 10-4
1.1 x 103
6.5 x 10'5
7.4 x 10 s
-
4000
3273
-
2.2
ND
NM
NM
0.021
ND
5,1860
300
1.083
-
Fabric
Filter
Ash
0021
0003
ND
0001
0001
468
ND
ND
ND
ND
24x 10«
2.8 x 10 5
4.1 x 10 5
1 1 x 104
99x 10«
94 x 10 «
7.5 x 10 5
ND
-
-
-
-
4.71
193
-
0
Stack
Exhaust
.
7710
4,1282
.
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
ND
30 x 10-4
-
363.9
3107
35x103
ND
1.1
0070
NM
ND
5,5750
193
1,175
-
1 ^
! >C>
<£
r2i L J
10 X«i_^7\ ^^\^- ""/
X^VC^I'
^Xx. j-f^^y^
For IECS Incineration Test Burn
At Savanna Army Depot Activity (SADA)
Savanna. Illinois
\V V i 4 Cl llZ M^ M IwESt CHESTER PENNSYLVANIA 193*0
\ A A *T\ 11 IvXQ K |PHONE 2'5 692 3030
OU01MIW \^X COMULTAMTS
FIGURE A-13 MATERIAL BALANCE FOR
2-3 TEST BURN ON LAAP SOIL
Sea* None Proud Numb*. Dowmg Nunfc*
D<" 1/3/84 2281-01-02 MBKXJia
•otet:
•JD • Not Detected • - Flue gas volumetric How rate was not measured ai the secondary chamber inlet since isokinetic conditions could not be
MM - Not Measured achieved Values are presented as volumetric percentages or ppm's on a volume or weight basis
-------
1
Stream Number 123 4 5678
Description
Carbon (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen (Ib/hr)
Oxygen (Ib/hr)
Nitrogen (Ib/hr)
Sullur (Ib/hr)
Chlorine (Ib/hr)
Moisture (Ib/hr)
Ash (Ib/hr)
Exploswrfs - TNT (Ib/hr)
ROX (Ib/hr)
HMX (Ib/hr)
Other (Ib/hr)
Heavy Metals - Ba (Ib/hr)
Cd (Ib/hr)
Cr (Ib/hr)
Cu (Ib/hr)
Pb (Ib/hr)
Zn (Ib/hr)
As (Ib/hr)
Hg (Ib/hr)
Air (Ib/hr)
CO? (Ib/hr)
Water Vapor (Ib/hr)
Propane (Ib/hr)
Paniculate (Ib/hr)
Carbon Monoxide (Ib/hr)
Oxides ol Nitrogen (Ib/hr)
Sullur Dioxide (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen Chloride (Ib/hr)
Hydrocarbons (Ib/hr)
Total Mass Flow Rate (Ib/hr)
Average Temperature (rjF)
Average Volumetric Flow Rate (dscfm)
Heating Value (Btu/lb)
Combustion
Air
(Total)
-
-
-
.
-
-
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
4,712.8
-
621
.
-
-
.
4,774 9
60
1.061.1
-
Fuel
(Total)
-
-
-
-
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
128.8
-
.
-
-
.
1288
60
18.8
21.560
Soil
Feed
1525
1 88
-
725
002
004
867
1589
2131
9.82
156
0108
0032
0001
0005
0013
0.026
0.058
ND
0.001
-
-
-
-
-
.
.
-
-
3030
60
-
1,013
Kiln
Ash
067
0.09
-
ND
ND
210
-
172.1
0003
ND
ND
ND
0.007
ND
ND
0005
0005
0005
ND
ND
-
-
-
-
-
.
-
.
1750
1,473
-
0
Secondary
Chamber
Inlet
-
-
12.1V
828V
-
-
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
-
5.1V
120V
-
NM
Sppmv*
NM
NM
NM
ND
NM*
1,473
NM*
-
Fabric
Filter
Inlet
-
-
5542
3.661 7
-
-
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
9.1 x 10s
7 9 x 10 5
2.9 x 10 s
1.1 x 10-1
9.6 x 10^
1 7 x 10 3
6 3 x 10 5
4.5 x 10-"
-
475.4
3389
-
1.2
ND
NM
NM
0.013
0.325
5,031.7
308
1,042
-
Fabric
Filter
Ash
0018
0002
.
0.003
0001
0001
-
436
ND
ND
ND
ND
1 3x 10-4
ND
2 7 x 10s
1.1 x 104
7.4 x 10^
83 x 10^
4 2 x 10 5
88x10*
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
-
-
.
4.38
207
-
0
Stack
Exhaust
-
691 5
4,1207
-
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
ND
18x10-*
-
4322
331 1
-
24 x 10^
ND
1 4
0075
NM
0.009
5.577.0
207
1.167
-
$ r\/\
• ^^
<£
JGL> L J
1.0 r^jr** ^^\^ ^/
/*£ )/<*& y\
p\ &/\\ °&// T
^s. S^tife/k
For IECS Incineration Test Burn
At Savanna Army Depot Activity (SADA)
Savanna. Illinois
\\ Vi *f O mjff NlWEST CKCSTER. PENNSYLVANIA IKWO
YAl/1 T\ ll_WHLl_KjPHOf* Z'i'8K3ra0
FIGURE A- 14 MATERIAL BALANCE FOR
2-4 TEST BURN ON LAAP SOIL
5c*M None P«l«e1 **««*•» D»w*i«gNmi*««
°"t 1/3/84 22Bt-01-02 1 MB-0016
Hot**:
10 - Not Detected • -piuegaivolumetricflowralewasnolmeasuredatlhcsecondarychamberinletsinceisoliineticcondiiiontcouldnotbe
MM - Not Measured achieved Values are presented as volumetric percentages or ppm's on a volume or weight basis
-------
I
r—'
Ul
Description
Carbon (Ib/hr
Hydrogen (Ib/hr
Oxygen (Ib/hr)
Nitrogen (Ib/hr
Sulfur (Ib/hr
Chlorine (Ib/hr
Moisture (Ib/hr;
Ash (Ib/hr;
E«plosives TNT (Ib/hr)
RDX (Ib/hrj
HMX (Ib/hr)
Other (Ib/hr]
Heavy Melais Ba (Ib/hr)
Cd (Ib/hr)
Ci (Ib/hr)
Cu (Ib/hr)
Pb |lb/hr)
Zn (Ib/hr)
As (Ib/hr)
Hg (Ib/hr)
Air (Ib/hr)
CO; (Ib/hr)
Water Vapor (Ib/hr)
Propane (Ib/hr)
Paniculate (Ib/hr)
Carbon Monoxide (Ib/hr)
Oxides ol Nitrogen (Ib/hr)
Sulfur Dioxide (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen Chloride (Ib/hr)
Hydrocarbons (Ib/hr)
Total Mass Flow Rate (Ib/hr)
Average Temperature ( F)
Average Volumetric Flow Rate (dsclm)
Heating Value (Btu/lb)
Combustion
Air
(Total)
-
-
4.8168
634
-
-
-
4.8802
60
1.0845
-
Fuel
(Total)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1319
-
-
1319
60
193
21,560
Soil
Feed
1386
1 92
732
003
0102
928
2051
1552
1024
1.81
0067
0025
0001
0006
0012
0031
0049
ND
0001
-
-
-
3489
60
-
729
Kiln
Ash
1 48
015
-
028
ND
ND
2489
0001
ND
ND
ND
0105
ND
0004
0009
0025
0068
0002
ND
-
-
-
-
-
2510
1,451
0
Secondary
Chamber
Inlet
136V
823%'
-
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
4 IV
124V
-
NM
14ppmv'
NM
NM
NM
ND
NM*
1,451
NM'
Fabric
Filter
Inlet
_
5630
3,728 3
.
ND
ND
ND
ND
72x 10s
4 5 x 10 5
2 4 x 10 5
69 x 10s
55 x 10-«
80x 10"
ND
1 2 x 10 5
4687
3486
1 3
ND
NM
NM
0017
0052
5,110.0
308
1,058
-
Fabric
Filter
Ash
0024
0001
0016
0003
0002
641
ND
ND
ND
ND
4 6 x 10 -'
6 2 x 10 5
90x 10s
2 2 x 10 "
27x 103
25x 103
1 5 x 10«
36 x 10s
-
-
-
-
-
646
201
0
Stack
Exhaust
6708
4,020 9
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
ND
2 3 x 10 4
.
4458
3365
63x10-'
ND
16
0080
NM
ND
5,475 7
201
1,142
-
t r\/\
• ^y^
c
•£
ICU LL J
lOftn^/^ ^S^\* /
J& \&®
^s — -*^£?)
K^Q<^)j
^xT i?C^?/t)
For (ECS Incineration Test Burn
At Savanna Army Depot Activity (SAOA)
Savanna. Illinois
\Y Vj ^ f~l nff/tffl .M 1 WEST CHESTER PENNSYLVANIA 19380
\A_^iaV\lnjjjaK|PMON£ 2'5M23030
OfSUMNS X^|J^X COMULTMfTS
FIGURE A-1S MATERIAL BALANCE FOR
2-5 TEST BURN ON LAAP SOIL
ScJH None P'0(«cl HulMMl D
-------
1
Stream Number 123 4 5678
Description
Carbon (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen (Ib/hr)
Oxygen (Ib/hr)
Nitrogen (Ib/hr)
Sulfur (Ib/hr)
Chlorine (Ib/hr)
Moisture (Ib/hr)
Ash (Ib/hr)
Explosives - TNT (Ib/hr)
RDX (Ib/hr)
HMX (Ib/hr)
Other (Ib/hr)
Heavy Metals - Ba (Ib/hr)
Cd (Ib/hr)
Cr (Ib/hr)
Cu (Ib/hr)
Pb (Ib/hr)
Zn (Ib/hr)
As (Ib/hr)
Hg (Ib/hr)
Air (Ib/hr)
CO? (Ib/hr)
Water Vapor (Ib/hr)
Propane (Ib/hr)
Paniculate (Ib/hr)
Carbon Monoxide (Ib/hr)
Oxides of Nitrogen (Ib/hr)
Sulfur Dioxide (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen Chloride (Ib/hr)
Hydrocarbons (Ib/hr)
Total Mass Flow Rate (Ib/hr)
Average Temperature (°F)
Average Volumetric Flow Rate (dscfm)
Heating Value (Btu/lb)
Combustion
Air
(Total)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
3,823 3
en A
-
.
-
.
3,873 7
60
860.8
-
Fuel
(Total)
.
-
-
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
108.8
-
.
-
-
.
108.8
60
15.9
21.560
Soil
Feed
t602
20
765
003
1 12
112.2
2389
2461
1074
206
0083
0036
0001
0007
0018
0049
0.064
ND
0.001
•
-
-
.
-
-
-
415.6
60
-
750
Kiln
Ash
060
002
051
ND
005
2297
ND
ND
ND
ND
0030
0001
0004
0013
0035
0.039
ND
ND
-
-
-
-
-
-
2310
1,454
0
Secondary
Chamber
Inlet
120%'
82 2V
-
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
-
5.8%*
NM
31ppmv"
NM
NM
NM
ND
NM'
1,454
NM*
-
Fabric
Filter
Inlet
-
-
537.3
3.0390
-
-
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
2.4 x 10-*
4.2 x 10 5
5.2 x 10 »
1.1 x 10""
6.3 x 10-4
1,1 xlO'3
ND
5.6 x 10-«
-
302.5
1.6
ND
NM
NM
8.8 x 10 3
ND
4,167.1
296
867
-
Fabric
Filter
Ash
0023
0004
0006
0003
0002
-
422
ND
ND
ND
1 0 x 10 5
3.1x 10-"
1.7 x 10 5
4.7 x 10 *
1.1 x 10^
5 1 x 10-1
6.8 x 10~«
3.0 x 10 5
2.4 x 10 5
-
•
-
-
-
-
-
.
4.26
179
-
0
Slack
Exhaust
.
6577
3,611 2
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
ND
6 4 x 10 s
-
324.5
3008
6.3 x 10 3
ND
1 7
0.076
NM
ND
4,896.0
179
1,025
-
i ^
I ^
*
J^W. >. sS
1.0 r**_J^ ^X^X^ /
£v^j?^J
^\ R£Y^/M)
For IECS Incineration Test Burn
At Savanna Army Depot Activity (SAOA)
Savanna, Illinois
\V Yj 4 ?1 •TnTliVr X|w€Si CHESTER P£NNSTI.V»NIA 19360
\ A A TS.ll IVrUu ll |P"W* 215 au 3030
FIGURE A- 16 MATERIAL BALANCE FOR
2-9 TEST BURN ON LAAP SOIL
*"" None "'""•" '*""*•' On**gtu»*
°« ,/3/84 2281-0102 MB-0018
Xoter
40 - Not Detected • . Flue gas volumetric flow rale was not measured at the secondary chamber inlet since isokinetic conditions could not be
HM - Not Measured achieved Values are presented as volumetric percentages or ppm's on a volume or weight basis
-------
1
Stream Number 123 4 5678
Description
Carbon (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen (Ib/hr)
Oxygen (Ib/hr)
Nitrogen (Ib/hr)
Sullur (Ib/hr)
Chlorine (Ib/hr)
Moisture (Ib/hr)
Ash (Ib/hr)
Explosives - TNT (Ib/hr)
RDX (Ib/hr)
HMX (Ib/hr)
Other (Ib/hr)
Heavy Metals • Ba (Ib/hr)
Cd (Ib/hr)
Cr (lb/hi(
Cu (Ib/hr)
Pb (Ib/hr)
Zn (Ib/hr)
As (Ib/hr)
Hg (Ib/hr)
Air (Ib/hr)
COi (Ib/hr)
Water Vapor (Ib/hr)
Propane (Ib/hr)
Paniculate (Ib/hr)
Carbon Monoxide (Ib/hr)
Oxides ol Nitrogen (Ib/hr)
Sullur Dioxide (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen Chloride (Ib/hr)
Hydrocarbons (Ib/hr)
Total Mass Flow Rate (Ib/hr)
Average Temperature (°F)
Average Volumetric Flow Rate (dscfm)
Heating Value (Btu/lb)
Combustion
Air
(Total)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
3.893 7
-
.
.
3,945.0
60
8767
-
Fuel
(Total)
-
-
-
-
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1238
-
.
.
-
-
_
1238
60
181
21.560
Soil
Feed
1513
188
999
ND
019
894
-1540
1980
1106
1 78
0.066
0026
ND
0005
0013
0028
0056
ND
4 7 x 10-4
-
.
303.4
60
-
1,172
Kiln
Ash
048
ND
ND
ND
101
1545
0001
ND
ND
ND
0008
ND
ND
0004
0007
0006
ND
ND
-
-
-
_
-
.
1560
1.656
-
0
Secondary
Chamber
Inlet
-
-
11 8%'
822«V
-
-
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
-
6.0%'
10 cat-
NM
S.Oppmv*
NM
NM
NM
ND
NM*
1,656
NM*
-
Fabric
Filter
Inlet
-
4105
3.0275
-
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.1 x 10-4
5 1 x 10 5
3 4 x 10 5
9.7 x 10s
1 8 x 10 3
1 1 x 10 3
2.5 x 10 5
ND
-
4377
OQQ 1
1.2
0018
NM
NM
0.017
ND
4.216.2
298
858
-
Fabric
Filter
Ash
0020
0002
-
0002
0002
0002
-
376
ND
ND
ND
ND
2 8 x 10-4
2 6 x 10 5
5 7 x 10 5
1.4x 10-*
1 1 x 10 3
1 1 x 10 3
4.5 x 10 s
2.5 x 10 5
-
'
-
.
-
-
-
3.79
194
0
Stack
Exhaust
5579
3,555 7
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
ND
1 2 x 10-4
-
4345
341 6
5.5 x 10-3
ND
23
0.069
NM
ND
4,8921
194
1,008
h
i^ w
sS^ ^f~Ci\
For IECS Incineration Test Burn
At Savanna Army Depot Activity (SADA)
W"Vj d^Xl flSSS? Ml^Sl'cMESTEH reNNSYLVANIA IS3SO
VA^-f^j ^UVjJjtJLKJrEtEf M'SMB* *n°
ouaMMX^/nx*"'*""
FIGURE A-17 MATERIAL BALANCE FOR
2-7 TEST BURN ON LAAP SOIL
5c« N,,,,, *,o*cii*,««. D..^,NUM^
°*» 1/3/84 2281-01-02 MB-0019
MolM:
MD - Not Detected • -Fiuegasvolumelricnowralewasnolmeasuredatmesecondarychamberinletsinceisokineticcondilionscouldnotbe
MM - Not Measured achieved Values are presented as volumetric percentages or ppm's on a volume or weight basis
-------
1
1
Stream Number 123 4 5678
Description
Carbon (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen (Ib/hr)
Oxygen (Ib/hr)
Nitrogen (Ib/hr)
Sulfur (Ib/hr)
Chlorine (Ib/hr)
Moisture (Ib/hr)
Ash (Ib/hr)
Explosives - TNT (Ib/hr)
RDX (Ib/hr)
HMX (Ib/hr)
Other (Ib/hr)
Heavy Metals - Ba (Ib/hr)
Cd (Ib/hr)
Cr (Ib/hr)
Cu (Ib/hr)
Pb (Ib/hr)
Zn (Ib/hr)
As (Ib/hr)
Hg (Ib/hr)
Air (Ib/hr)
CO; (fb/hr)
Water Vapor (Ib/hr)
Propane (Ib/hr)
Paniculate (Ib/hr)
Carbon Monoxide (Ib/hr)
Oxides of Nitrogen (Ib/hr)
Sulfur Dioxide (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen Chloride (Ib/hr)
Hydrocarbons (Ib/hr)
Total Mass Flow Rate (Ib/hr)
Average Temperature (°F)
Average Volumetric Flow Rate (dsclm)
Heating Value (Btu/to)
Combustion
Air
(Total)
-
-
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
4.325 1
-
57.0
-
-
.
-
-
4.382.1
60
973.8
-
Fuel
(Total)
-
-
.
-
-
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
138.2
-
-
-
-
.
1382
60
20.2
21.560
Soil
Feed
1402
192 H
746
ND
010
966
2061
1563
845
147
0.139
0.027
0.003
0005
0.011
0026
0.036
ND
0.001
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
3520
60
-
807
Kiln
Ash
028
008
026
ND
004
1963
0.003
ND
ND
ND
0006
NO
NO
0004
ND
0.005
ND
ND
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
197.0
1.642
-
0
Secondary
Chamber
Inlet
-
118%'
822"
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
-
6.0V
14.0V
-
NM
S.Oppmv'
NM
NM
NM
ND
NM*
1.642
NM*
-
Fabric
Filter
Inlet
4351
3.4018
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
1 2 x 10 5
6.0 x 10 s
1.9 x 10 5
6.8 x 10 5
1.3x103
1.2x103
6.9 x 10s
ND
-
4889
348.7
-
0.77
ND
NM
NM
0.019
ND
4.675.3
308
958
-
Fabric
Filler
Ash
0007
0001
0003
0001
ND
297
ND
ND
ND
68 x 10*
1 4x 10"*
20 x 10s
33 x 10 5
95 x 10s
89 x 10'
8.3 x 10"*
3.6 x 10 s
1.0x 10s
-
-
-
-
.
-
.
2.98
203
-
0
Stack
Exhaust
.
5677
3.8300
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
ND
1 8 x 10-4
-
4961
3537
-
3.1 x 10 3
ND
1 7
0.069
NM
ND
5.2493
203
1.083
-
h
For IECS Incineration Test Burn
Al Savanna Army Depot Activity (SADA)
Savanna. Illinois
\ V Vj ^ Cl BfflKW N|WESI CHESIEB PENNSYLVANIA I9MO
FIGURE A-U MATERIAL BALANCE FOR
i-t TEST BURN ON LAAP SOIL
*"* None «MI«M»*» O,..^NU^«
6*t* 1/3/84 2281-01-02 MB-ODZO
a— «
WWS3.
4D - Not Detected • . Flue gas volumetric How rale was not measured al tie secondary chamber inlet since isokmetic conditions could not be
^M - Not Measured achieved Values are presented as volumetric percentages or ppm's on a volume or weight basis
-------
Stream Number 123 4 5678
Description
Carbon (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen (Ib/hr)
Oxygen (Ib/hr)
Nitrogen (Ib/hr)
Sullur (Ib/hr)
Chlorine (Ib/hr)
Moisture (Ib/hr)
Ash (Ib/hr)
Explosives - TNT (Ib/hr)
RDX (Ib/hr)
HMX (Ib/hr)
Other (Ib/hr)
Heavy Metals - Ba (Ib/hr)
Cd (Ib/hr)
Cr (Ib/hr)
Cu (Ib/hr)
Pb (Ib/hr)
Zn (Ib/hr)
As (Ib/hr)
Hg (Ib/hr)
Air (Ib/hr)
CO? (Ib/hr)
Water Vapor (Ib/hr)
Propane (Ib/hr]
Paniculate (Ib/hr)
Carbon Monoxide (Ib/hr;
Oxides ol Nitrogen (Ib/hr)
Sullur Dioxide (Ib/hr)
Hydrogen Chloride (Ib/hr)
Hydrocarbons (Ib/hr)
Total Mass Flow Rate (Ib/hr;
Average Temperature C'F
Average Volumetric Flow Rate (dscfm)
Heating Value (Btu/lb)
Combustion
Air
(Total)
.
.
.
-
-
-
4,759 3
-
62 7
.
4,8220
60
1,071.6
-
Fuel
(Total)
.
.
-
-
1462
.
• -
-
1462
60
214
21,560
Soil
Feed
1824
247
1426
003
ND
1088
2254
1623
1526
243
0097
0030
0001
0007
0015
0038
0059
ND
0001
.
-
4034
60
858
Kiln
Ash
086
017
1 49
ND
ND
-
2734
ND
ND
ND
ND
0009
ND
ND
0005
0010
0008
ND
ND
-
.
-
_
2760
1.641
-
0
Secondary
Chamber
Inlet
-
132V
820%'
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
48%'
-
NM
S.Oppmv'
NM
NM
NM
Kin
NM*
1641
NM*
-
Fabric
Filter
Inlet
-
-
4881
3.692 8
-
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
2 4 x 10 5
1 2 x 10-4
2 6 x 10 5
84 x 10s
1 6 x 10 3
1 9 x 10 3
98 x 10s
3 2 x 10*
-
5174
OQC 1
1.2
ND
NM
NM
0.025
315
1.042
-
Fabric
Filter
Ash
-
-
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
1 6 x 10«
26x105
3.3 x 10s
92 x 10s
75 x 10-*
7 5 x 10-1
63 x 10 5
1 3 x 10 s
-
-
-
-
-
418
204
-
0
Stack
Exhaust
6282
3.9730
ND
ND
ND
ND
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
ND
4 9 x 10-1
4698
QTC C
1 4 x 10 3
ND
1 0
011
NM
ND
54487
204
1,125
-
e
h
For IECS Incineration Test Burn
At Savanna Army Depot Activity (SAOA)
\\f\fl *f f-t al.mfX 1 IWESI CHESTCR PENNSYLVANIA 193*0
nr uatfnt \^^/ COMULTMITB
FIGURE A-19 MATERIAL BALANCE FOR
2-9 TEST BURN ON LAAP SOIL
«<« None "«"•«—• o™-,*—
6"* 1/3/84 2281-01-02 MB-OUiM
Not**
ND - Not Detected • - Flue gas volumetric flow rale was nol measured at the secondary chamber inlet since isokinetic conditions could not be
NM - Not Measured achieved Values are presented as volumetric percentages or ppm's on a volume or weight basis
-------
APPENDIX B
ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES
-------
APPENDIX B
ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES
The two analysis techniques applied to tne raw data base
were multiple linear regression and balanced two-way factorial.
B.I Two-way factorial. The balanced two-way factorial re-
quires a balanced matrix of the controlled variables, in this
case soil feed rate and kiln temperature (afterburner tempera-
ture was controlled, but was directly related to kiln tempera-
ture), and equal observations in each cell. A 3 by 3 matrix was
developed for the trial burns with two observations in each
cell - the SADA soil and the LAAP soil. The raw test data were
analyzed using a Tektronix 4054 microcomputer and associated
plot-50 analysis software.8'1* The critical result of this
analysis was the relationship of CO, soil feed rate, and kiln
temperature. Additionally, the system software allowed the iden-
tification of data outliers.
An important consideration of any data set is the repeata-
bility of the data and the identification of outliers. A common
means of designating repeatability is fitting the data into a
"box and whisker" plot which graphically snows the median, in-
terquartile range*, extremes and symmetry of variable values.
Refer to Figures B-l through B-23 at the end of this appendix.
Tne program categorized the data values at the ends of the
distribution into three groups:
(a) Tnose values within 1.5 Q-spreads of the upper or low-
er quartile. The two outermost of these values define
the ends of the whiskers and are called adjacent val-
ues.
(b) Those values between 1.5 and 3 Q-spreads from the upper
or lower quartile, called outside values. Each out-
side value is represented on the Plot by a cross.
(c) Those values more than 3 Q-soreads from the upper or
lower quartile, called far outside values. Each far
outside value is represented on the plot by a square.
*The length of the box - the interquartile range - is called the
Q-spread.
B-l-
4554A
-------
The relatively few identified outside and far outside values
demonstrate:
(a) Consistency of soil preparation.
(b) Even distribution of constituents in the soil in the
areas from which the feed was collected.
(c) High confidence in the sampling and analysis.
B.2 Multiple regression. The multiple regression analysis
reduces the data to a linear equation as discussed in Section y,
which can be used to predict important response variables. The
use ot stepwise analysis allows the determination of regression
coefficients, while interactively specifying the system equa-
tions via addition or deletion of singular variables.
As with any statistical tool, there are limitations of the
multiple regression technique; however, these limitations can be
overcome as discussed in the following subsections.
In the case ot a nonlinear relationship between the input
variables and the response variable, the alternative procedures
include:
(a) Reduce the span of the analysis of the response varia-
ble until an acceptable correlation is found.
(b) Transform the response variable, e.g.,
LN(Y) = a + bnXn
(c) Weigh each of the input variables, e.g.,
Y = a + b^^x^ + b-2^2x2 + ••• + bnwnxn
(d) Use multiple regression as the initial iterative step
followed by analysis DV a different technique to fin-
alize the correlation.
(e) Utilize the linear relationship in an estimation capac-
ity recognizing there may be variance from the true
relationship.
In order to determine the exact relationship between the
vanaoles over a useful span, the second, third, and fourth pro-
cedures would have to oe employed following each of a series of
trial operations similar to the test recently completed. This
would oe very costly and time consuming, and is impractical for
this analysis.
A correlation which minimizes the variance from the true re-
lationship could be developed using the second, third, and
fourth procedures to analyze tne data recorded from the complet-
ed test. Althougn this procedure could extract some otherwise
indistinguishable relationsnips trooi the data, it would oe very
time consuming and is also not witnin the scope ot this project.
B-2
4554A
-------
The method generally accepted as the initial iterative step
is a combination ot the first and fifth procedures, whereby a
basic correlation would be developed followed by the determina-
tion of its useful span. This data analysis is based on this
method.
One advantage of multiple regression is the ability to sim-
ultaneously analyze unlimited numbers of input variables. When
computers are used to perform the analysis the number of input
variables may be limited by the software or hardware of the com-
puter. WESTON has utilized software and hardware which can ana-
lyze all of the test variables simultaneously. A Tektronix 4054
microcomputer and its associated olot-5U statistics: Multiple
Linear Regression software package** was utilized to perform
the computations necessary for the iterative steps.
It should be noted, however, that the number of calculations
required to solve the equations used in the analysis increases
factorlally as each additional variable is included in the anal-
ysis. Computer time should oe a consideration when deciding the
number of input variables to be analyzed.
As the number of input variaoles increases, so does the
orobaoility of coincidence (i.e., an input variable may not ac-
tually be correlated to the response variable other than by co-
incidence). While only additional testing can prove correlation
by coincidence, this factor can be discounted based on scientif-
ic judgment and adjustment to the response parameters.
B.3 Final solution. Application of ootn the two-way factor-
ial and multiple regression packages yielded identification of
outliers, ANOVA taoles, regression tables, plots of residuals,
and summary of successive significance of input variables.
The ANOVA table includes the following information*:
(a) SS - The sum of squares of the deviations.
(b) MS - The mean square, which is SS/df.
(c) df - Degress of freedom.
(d) F - The value of the F statistic, such that
F = (Regression SS/df)/(Residual SS/df).
*A glossary of statistical terms is provided in Table B-l at the
end ot this appendix.
B-3
4554A
-------
(e) Pr>F - The probability that a value of a random vana-
Dle navinq the F-distribution takes on a value qreat-
er than the value of F. A value less than 0.1 indi-
cates significance ot the F statistic and, conse-
quently, the overall system equations. Statisticians
normally associate a Pr > F value ot less than 0.05
with a very significant hypothesis.
(f) R-square - The coefficient of determination, which
gives a measure ot the linear association between the
dependent variable and the set of independent varia-
bles. The R-square value indicates the significance
of the model (or variable) where 1.0 equals 100 per-
cent.
(g) Rbar-square - An adjustment to R-square for its tenden-
cy to increase as the number of independent variables
increases. The adjustment is
1 - (( 2res2/(n-p))/{ 1(Yj-Y)2/(n-i))
(h) Root of Residual MS - The square root of the residual
mean square.
The regression table includes the following information for
each variable coefficient in the regression equation:
(a) Estimate - The estimated value of the coefficient.
(b) Standard Error - The standard error of the regression
coefficient estimates.
(c) t - Tne value of the t-statistic, which is, for each
estimate:
Estimate/Standard Error.
(d) Pr>ABS(t) - The probability tnat the absolute value of
a random variable having the t-distribution takes on
a value greater than the absolute value of t. A
value of Pr>ABS(t) of less than 0.1 indicates sig-
nificance ot the t-static and, consequently, the es-
timated value ot the coefficient. Statisticians nor-
mally associate a Pr>ABS(t) value of less than 0.05
with a very significant hypothesis.
The value of the Durbin-Watson statistic can be used to test
whether the residuals are uncorrelated.
The plot of residuals indicates the difference between the
measured values and the fitted values in qraohical form, obser-
vations for which tne residual is qreater than one standard de-
viation are labeled on the Plot.
B-4
4554A
-------
For each iterative step, both the forward and backward step-
ping techniques are applied. The forward stepping analysis al-
lows the statistician to select a variable to be added to the
model, or the Tektronix 4054 will automatically select the vari-
able which is most significant of those remaining, and add it to
the model. The forward stepping technique determines the margin-
al contribution of each variable added. The backward stepping
technique includes all of the selected variables to determine
interrelationships between the input variables and to calculate
an overall system equation.
The iteration process was continued until significant and
practical system equations were developed. System equations
were rejected if:
(a) The probability that the hypothesized equation was not
correct exceeded 10 percent (Pr>F was not less than
0.1) .
(b) The significance of the equation did not approach 90
percent (R-square did not approach 0.9) or too many
variables were required to reach this level.
(c) Separation of observations by soil type was required.
(d) The range of response variables for wnich a correlation
could be developed was too small.
(e) Transformation of the data was required.
Input variables were eliminated from the system equations
based on:
(a) Insignificant marginal contribution to the model deter-
mined by the R-squared value computed during the for-
ward stepping process.
(b) A high prooaoility that the hypothesized variable coef-
ficient was not correct as determined by the analysis
ot the t statistic ot the regression table (Pr>
ABS(t) ) .
(c) Scientific and intuitive reasoning suggesting alterna-
tive correlations between the input variable in ques-
tion and the response variable.
(d) Tne coefficient of the input variable was corrective.
Tne system model is a set of simple linear equations which
describe certain system parameters and enaole the projection of
responses to be calculated based on measureable input data. The
use of the system model can vary from a basis for an environ-
mental permit application to becoming an aid tor system design
or ultimately a dynamic model. The intended use of the system
B-5
4554A
-------
equations tor the purposes of this report is the projection of
system requirements to aid in future technical and economic
feasibility analyses of incineration as a decontamination method
for explosives contaminated soils as well as system design.
B-6
4554A
-------
TABLE B-l. GLOSSARY OF STATISTICAL TERMINOLOGY
Adjacent value - The furthest data value from tne median that is
still within 1.5 Q-spreads of the upper or lower quartile.
ANOVA table - Analysis of Variance table. The ANOVA table pro-
vides a useful summary of calculations about variability. It
contains sums of squares and mean square estimates of the two
sources of variability (regression and residuals) and their re-
spective degrees of freedom, the value of the F-statistic, R-
square, Rbar-square. and Pr F.
Censored data - Data falling outside the interval of
measurement.
Dependent variable - The variable to be described in terms of
others in the regression model.
Far outside value - A data value lying more than 3 Q-spreads be-
yond the upper or lower quartile.
Fitted values - Values of the dependent variable calculated from
tne regression equation and existing values of the independent
variables in the model.
Independent variable - A variable used, possibly in conjunction
with other variables, to describe a given dependent variable.
Least squares - The least-squares method is a method of line-
titting that determines parameter values to minimize the sum of
squares of the deviations (lengths of the vertical line seg-
ments) from the observed data points to the line.
Mean - The arithmetic average of a column of data.
Median - The middle value in an ordered column of data; that is,
the data value half way between the top and bottom.
Missing-data value - A numeric constant used as a place holder
for data missing from the data set.
Mode - The value that occurs most often in a data set.
Model - A statistical equation that expresses the supposed
(often only approximate) functional relation oetween variables.
B-7
4b54A
-------
TABLE B-l. (Continued)
ODservation - A row of aata in a data file.
Outliers - A pair of values beinq plotted is an outlier it tne
value for one of tne variaoles falls outside a specified number
of standard deviations from its mean. (Outliers for an index
Plot are defined only on tne variaole for the y axis.) More gen-
erally, any discrepant value.
Outside value - A data value Ivinq between 1.5 and 3 Q-spreads
beyond the upper or lower quart lie.
Pr>ABS(t) - The probability that the absolute value of a random
variable havinq the tne t distribution takes on a value greater
than the value of the t statistic calculated as part of tne re-
gression table.
Pr> F - The probability that a random variable naving the F dis-
tribution takes on a value greater than the value of the F sta-
tistic calculated as part of the ANOVA table.
Predicted value - The value of the dependent variable calculated
from the regression equation and new values of the independent
variables in the model.
Prooability Plot - Values of a variable Plotted on a probability
scale. The horizontal scale refers to percentages of the proba-
bility distribution. Tne vertical scale, an ordinary arithmetic
scale, is for the variable. The degree to which the data lies on
a straignt line indicates the closeness of fit of the sample
distribution to the tneoretical distribution.
U-spread - The distance between the quartiles.
Raw data - The set of data values read from a data file and used
directly by an algorithm, as opposed to a set of data read from
a data file and manipulated oy transformations before being
used.
Regression coefficient - The coefficients of the equation used
in a regression model.
Regression table - A table that provides a summary of regression
calculations. It contains parameter estimates, the standard er-
ror of the estimates, the value of the t statistic, the t proba-
bility, and the mean and standard deviation of the dependent
variable.
B-8
4554A
-------
TABLE B-l. (Continued)
Residuals - The difference between the actual values and the
fitted values of the dependent variable (see definition for e).
Resistant line - A line fitted through the data by resistant
techniques rather than by least squares. The resistant line is
less sensitive to the effects of outliers, especially when the
outliers are near the extremes of the data.
Response variaole - Another name for a dependent variable.
Scatter plot - A scatter plot is a graphical display showing how
two variaoles are related to eacn other.
Standard deviation - The square root of the variance.
Standard error of the mean - The standard deviation of a set of
sample means.
Variance - The average of the sum of the squares of the devia-
tion of each observation from the mean of tne variable.
B-y
4554A
-------
800000
o>
o
0)
cr
W
5
I
o
•&
2
0)
u
600000
400000
200000
1
Moisture
Ash
Volatiles
FIGURE B-1 SOIL MOISTURE, ASH, AND VOLATILES CONCENTRATION
-------
500000 r
400000
-
'(fl
E
Q.
O
c
0}
O
c
O
O
300000 -
Z00000
HMX
RDX
TNT
TNB
ONB
2-Amino Total
FIGURE B-2 EXPLOSIVE CONCENTRATIONS IN SOIL FEED
-------
160000
100000
Q.
C
o
ro
o
c
o
O
O0000
H
N
Cl
FIGURE B-3 SOIL FEED ELEMENTAL CONCENTRATIONS
-------
Concentrations (ppmw, Dry Basis)
IN)
IB
r-
s
—I
o
c
3)
m
09
o
a.
• I
m
m
0
X
m
<
3
5
m
•H
r-
O
O
Z
o
m
z
3)
H
o
z
o
•^
o
c
TJ
CT
N
(O
03
!
H
!
L . J
T 1
il I
n !
i
-------
Heating Value (Btu/lb, As Received)
o
c
oo
m
09
in
en
3
ro
ro
en
§
-I
X
m
Q. —
O
m
CO
en
s
CO
-------
300 r
OBS 1
250
o
'^
03
O
O
O
55
0)
o
.a
OBS 3
200
c
a>
o
o
X
LU
150
100
OBS 18
Kiln
FIGURE B-6 PRIMARY CHAMBER EXCESS AIR
-------
2r
in
T>
O
O
u
0)
cc
(0
re
O
1.6
1.4
1.2
DBS 1
DBS 8
Secondary
Chamber
FIGURE B-7 FLUE GAS RESIDENCE TIME IN THE SECONDARY CHAMBER
-------
1400
088 18
1200
1000
cr
c
h.
3
CD
"35
800
OBS 4
600
OBS 1
400
Propane
FIGURE B-8 PROPANE FUEL CONSUMPTION
-------
76000 r
70000
£
o
OL
Q)
o
o
'^
o5
_3
O
65000 -
60000 •
66000
50000
46000
00S 3
OBS 1
Stack
Gas
FIGURE B-9 STACK GAS VOLUMETRIC FLOW RATE
-------
6600 r
5000 -
.c
^
.a
o
V)
en
CO
4600 -
4000
OBS 3
3600 Stack
Gas
OBS t
FIGURE B-10 STACK GAS MASS FLOWRATE
-------
100r
80
60
0>
<5
0)
0)
LL
M
(O
(0
40
20
0L
HMX
RDX
TNT
TNB
DNB 2-Amino Total
FIGURE B-11 MASS RATE OF EXPLOSIVES IN SOIL FEED
-------
200 r
DBS 8
DBS 6
160 -
in
0)
OBS I
o>
E
o>
u
0>
TJ
'
100
tr
50
OBS 13
0
Kiln
FIGURE B-12 ASH RESIDENCE TIME IN THE PRIMARY CHAMBER
-------
300 r
200 -
Ifl
o>
CO
CC
O
ts
•o
o
£
.c
<
0U
100 - -fc-
Kiln
Fabric
Filter
FIGURE 8-13 ASH PRODUCTION RATES
-------
0.5r
OBS 3
0.4
o
tn
in
c
2
O
c
o
c
o
o
0
3
O
CO
Q.
0.3
9.2
0.1
OBS 1
01- Fabric
Filter
Inlet
FIGURE B-14 PARTICULATE CONCENTRATION IN FLUE GAS ENTERING FABRIC FILTER
-------
6r
OBS 3
4-
3-
01
c
CD
O
0>
3
O
^
m
o.
OB8 7
OBS I
L Fabric
Filter
Inlet
FIGURE B-15
PARTICULATE MASS LANDING IN FLUE
GAS ENTERING FABRIC FILTER
-------
200
r
OT
'
a
o
0)
u
o
O
a
x
UJ
160
60
Fabric
Filter
Ash
FIGURE B-16 TOTAL EXPLOSIVE CONCENTRATIONS IN THE SYSTEM ASH RESIDUES
-------
0.008
0.006 r
o>
«
cr
M
W
CO
V
'55
^
o.
x
111
0.004 -
0.002
Kiln
Ash
Fabric
Filter
Ash
FIGURE B-17 EXPLOSIVE MASS RATES IN SYSTEM ASH RESIDUES
-------
600
400
CO
'«
&
$
E
a.
o
o
c
o
O
(0
a>
300
200
100
0
Ba
Cu
Pb
2n
FIGURE B-18 HEAVY METAL CONCENTRATIONS IN KILN ASH
-------
600-
05
E
Q.
(O
o
O
O
O
2
0)
>.
(0
0)
X
400
2001-
0
Ba
Cu
Pb
Zn
FIGURE B-19 HEAVY METAL CONCENTRATIONS IN FABRIC FILTER ASH
-------
1200 r
1000
800
Q.
O
u
c
O
O
600
400
200
0
CO
NO,
FIGURE B-20
CARBON MONOXIDE AND OXIDES OF NITROGEN
CONCENTRATION IN THE STACK GAS
-------
IB-
Q.
a
o
I
a>
o
o
O
6-
2-
0
HCI
SO2
FIGURE B-21
HYDROGEN CHLORIDE AND SULFUR DIOXIDE
CONCENTRATION IN THE STACK GAS
-------
•c-
I
§
«
-------
o
c
3)
m
CD
ISJ
w
O
X
6
m
(/>
O
•n
31
O
O
m
z
Mass Emissions Rate (Ib/hr)
o>
01
01
3)
nt
z
H
m
8
00
CO
O
^
o
-------
APPENDIX C
FEDERAL REGISTER HAZARDOUS WASTE REFERENCES
-------
40 CFR. PART 261
IDENTIFICATION AND LISTING OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
SECTIONS 261.1 - 261.33
AND
PART 2bl. APPENDIX VIII
iy MAY
4554A
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 45. No. 98 / Monday. May 19. 1980 / Rules and Regulations
33119
PART 261—IDENTIFICATION AND
USTING OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
Subpart A—General
SK.
281.1 Purpose and scope.
2817 Definition of (olid waste.
281.3 Definition of hazardous waste.
281.4 Exclusions.
281.5 Special requirements for hazardous
waste produced by small quantity
generators.
281.6 Special requirements for hazardous
waste which is used, re-used, recycled or
reclaimed.
Subpart B—Criteria for Identifying the
Characteristics of "•-•"•••"« Waste and for
Dating Hazardous Wastes
201.10 Criteria for identifying the
characteristics of hazardous wastes.
281.11 Criteria for listing hazardous waste.
Subpart C—Characteristics of Hazardous
Waste
General.
Characteristic of ignitability.
Characteristic of corrosivity.
Characteristic of reactivity.
Characteristic of EP toxidty.
281.20
281.21
281.22
281.23
281.24
Subpart O-Usts of Hazardous Wastes
261.30 General.
281.31 Hazardous wastes from non-specific
sources.
281.32 Hazardous wastes from specific
sources.
281.33 Discarded commercial chemical
products and associated off-spectflcation
materials, containers and spill residues.
Appendices
Appendix I—Representative Sampling
Methods
Appendix U—EP Toxidty Test Procedures
Appendix tO—Chemical Analysis Test
Methods
Appendix IV—(Reserved for Radioactive
Waste Test Methods]
Appendix V—[Reserved for Infectious Waste
Treatment Specifications)
Appendix VI—(Reserved for Etiologic
Agents]
Appendix VII—Basis for Listing
Appendix VIII—Hazardous Constituents
Authority: Sees. 1006. 2002(a). 3001. and
3002 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act. as
amended by the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act of 1976. as amended (42 U.S.C.
6905. 6912. 6921 and 6922).
Subpart A—General
{ 261.1 Purpose and scop*.
(a) This Part identifies those solid
wastes which are subject to regulation
as hazardous wastes under Parts 282
through 265 and Parts 122 through 124 of
this Chapter and which are subject to
the notification requirements of Section
3010 of RCRA. In this Part:
(1) Subpart A defines the terms "solid
waste" and "hazardous waste,"
identifies those wastes which are
excluded from regulation under Parts
262 through 265 and 122 through 124 and
establishes special management
requirements for hazardous waste
produced by small quantity generators
and hazardous waste which is used, re-
used, recycled or reclaimed.
(2) Subpart B sets forth the criteria
used by EPA to identify characteristics
of hazardous waste and to list particular
hazardous wastes.
(3) Subpart C identifies characteristics
of hazardous waste.
(4) Subpart D lists particular
hazardous wastes.
(b) This Part identifies only some of
the materials which are hazardous
wastes under Sections 3007 and 7003 of
RCRA. A material which is not a
hazardous waste identified in this part
is still a hazardous waste for purposes
of those sections if:
(1) In the case of Section 3007. EPA
has reason to believe that the material
may be a hazardous waste within the
meaning of Section 1004(5) of RCRA.
(2) In the case of Section 7003, the
statutory elements are established.
1261.2 Definition of solid waste.
(a) A solid waste is any garbage.
refuse, sludge or any other waste
material which is not excluded under
f 281.4{a).
(b) An "other waste material" is any
solid, liquid, semi-solid or contained
gaseous material, resulting from
industrial, commercial, mining or
agricultural operations, or from
community activities which:
(1) Is discarded or is being
accumulated, stored or physically.
chemically or biologically treated prior
to being discarded: or
(2) Has served its ongtnal intended
use and sometimes is discarded; or
(3) Is a manufacunng or mining by-
product and sometimes is discarded.
(c) A material is "discarded" if it is
abandoned (and not used, re-used.
reclaimed or recycled) by being:
(1) Disposed of: or
(2) Burned or incinerated, except
where the material is being burned as a
fuel for the purpose of recovering usable
energy, or
(3) Physically, chemically, or
biologically treated (other than burned
or incinerated) in lieu of or prior to being
disposed of.
(d) A material is "disposed of if it is
discharged, deposited, injected, dumped.
spilled, leaked or placed into or on any
land or water so that such material or
any constituent thereof may enter the
environment or be emitted into the air or
discharged into ground or surface
waters.
(e) A "manufacturing or mining by-
product" is a material that is not one of
the primary products of a particular
manufacturing or mining operation, is a
secondary and incidental product of the
particular operation and would not be
solely and separately manufactured or
mined by the particular manufacturing
or mining operation. The term does not
•include an intermediate manufacturing
or mining product which results from
one of the steps in a manufacturing or
mining process and is typically
processed through the next step of the
process within a short time.
1261.3 Definition of hazardous waste.
(a) A solid waste, as defined in
i 281.2, is a hazardous waste if:
(1) It is not excluded from regulation
as a hazardous waste under i 281.4(b);
and
(2) It meets any of the following
criteria:
(i) It ia listed in Subpart D and has not
been excluded from the lists in Subpart
D under || 200-20 and 280.22 of this
Chapter.
(ii) It ia a mixture of aolid waste and
one or more hazardous wastes listed in
Subpart D and has not been excluded
from this paragraph under If 260.20 and
28032. of this Chapter.
(iii) It exhibits any of the
characteristics of hazardous waste
identified in Subpart C.
(b) A solid waste which is not
excluded from regulation under
paragraph (a)(l) of this section becomes
a hazardous waste when any of the
following events occur
(1) In the case of a waste listed in
Subpart D, when the waste first meets
the listing description set forth in
Subpart D.
(2) In the case of a mixture of solid
waste and one or more listed hazardous
wastes, when a hazardous waste listed
C-l
-------
33120 Federal Register / Vol. 45, No. 98 / Monday. May 19. 1980 / Rules and Regulations
in Subpart D is first added to the solid
waste.
(3) in the case of any other waste
(including a waste mixture), when the
waste exhibits any of the characteristics
identified in Subpart C.
(c) Unless and until it meets the
criteria of paragraph (d):
(1) A hazardous waste will remain a
hazardous waste.
(2) Any solid waste generated from
the treatment storage or disposal of a
hazardous waste, including any sludge,
spill residue, ash. emission control dust
or leachate (but not including
precipitation run-off), is a hazardous
waste.
(d) Any solid waste described in
paragraph (c) of this section is not a
hazardous waste if it meets the
following criteria:
(1) In the case of any solid waste, it
does not exhibit any of the
characteristics of hazardous waste
identified in Subpart C.
(2) In the case of a waste which is a
listed waste under Subpart D, contains a
waste listed under Subpart D or is
derived from a waste listed in Subpart
D. it also has been excluded from
paragraph (c) under J§ 260.20 and 260.22
of this Chapter.
}261.4 EidutkMM.
(a) Materials which are not solid
wastes. The following materials are not
solid wastes for the purpose of this Part:
(1) (i) Domestic sewage; and
(ii) Any mixture of domestic sewage
and other wastes that passes through a
sewer system to a publicly-owned
treatment works for treatment.
"Domestic sewage" means untreated
sanitary wastes that pass through a
sewer system.
(2) Industrial wastewater discharges
that are point source discharges subject
to regulation under Section 402 of the
Clean Water Act. as amended.
[Comment: This exclusion applies only
to the actual point source discharge. It
does not exclude industrial wastewaters
while they are being collected, stored or
treated before discharge, nor does it
exclude sludges that are generated by
industrial wastewater treatment.]
(3) Irrigation return flows.
(4) Source, special nuclear or by-
product material as defined by the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954. as amended.
42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.
(5) Materials subjected to in-situ
mining techniques which are not
removed from the ground as part of the
extraction process.
(b) So]id wastes which are not
hazardous wastes. The following solid
wastes are not hazardous wastes:
(1) Household waste, including
household waste that has been
collected, transported, stored, treated.
disposed, recovered (e.g.. refuse-derived
fuel) or reused. "Household waste"
means any waste matenal (including
garbage, trash and sanitary wastes in
septic tanks) derived from households
(including single and multiple
residences, hotels and motels.)
(2) Solid wastes generated by any of
the following and which are returned to
the soils as fertilizers:
(i) The growing and harvesting of
agricultural crops.
(ii) The raising of animals, including
animal manures.
(3) Mining overburden relumed to the
mine site.
(4) Fly ash waste, bottom ash waste,
slag waste, and flue gas emission
control waste generated primarily from
the combustion of coal or other fossil
fuels.
(5) Drilling fluids, produced waters.
and ether wastes associated with the
exploration, development, or production
of crude oil, natural gas or geothermal
energy.
{261.5 Special requirements for
hazardous wastt generated by small
quantity generator*.
(a) Except as otherwise provided in
this section, if a person generates, in a
calendar month, a total of less than 1000
kilograms of hazardous wastes, those
wastes are not subject to regulation
under Parts 262 through 265 and Parts
122 through 124 of this Chapter, and the
notification requirements of Section 3010
of RCRA.
(b) If a person whose waste has been
excluded from regulation under
paragraph (a) of this Section
accumulates hazardous wastes in
quantities greater than 1000 kilograms.
those accumulated wastes are subject to
regulation under Parts 262 through 265
and Parts 122 through 124 of this
Chapter, and the notification
requirements of Section 3010 of RCRA.
(c) If a person generates in a calendar
month or accumulates at any time any of
the following hazardous wastes in
quantities greater than set forth below,
those wastes are subject to regulation
under Parts 262 through 265 and Parts
122 through 124 of this Chapter, and the
notification requirements of Section 3010
of RCRA:
(1) One kilogram of any commercial
product or manufacturing chemical
intermediate having the generic name
listed in 5 261.33(e).
(2) One kilogram of any off-
specification commercial chemical
product or manufacturing chemical
intermediate which, if it met
specifications, would have the generic
name listed in $ 261.33(e).
(3) Any containers identified in
5 261.33(c) that are larger than 20 liters
in capacity;
(4) 10 kilograms of inner liners from
containers identified under $ 261.33(c):
(5) 100 kilograms of any residue or
contaminated soil, water or other debris
resulting from the cleanup of a spill, into
or on any land or water, of any
commercial chemical product or
manufacturing chemical intermediate
having the generic name listed in
S 261.33(e).
(d) In order for hazardous waste to be
excluded from regulation under this
section, the generator must comply with
J 262.11 of this Chapter. He must also
either treat or dispose of the waste in an
on-site facility, or ensure delivery to an
off-site treatment, storage or disposal
facility, either of which is:
(1) Permitted by EPA under Part 122 of
this Chapter, or by a State with a
hazardous waste management program
authorized under Part 123 of this
Chapter
(2) In interim status under Parts 122
and 265 of this Chapter or,
(3) Permitted, licensed, or registered
by a State to manage municipal or
industrial solid waste.
(e) Hazardous waste subject to the
reduced requirements of this section
may be mixed with non-hazardous
waste and remain subject to these
reduced requirements even though the
resultant mixture exceeds the quantity
limitations identified in this section,
unless the mixture meets any of the
characteristics of hazardous waste
identified in Subpart C.
{ 261.6 Special requirements tor
hazardous waste which Is used, re-used,
recycled or reclaimed.
(a) Except as otherwise provided in
paragraph (b) of this section, a
hazardous waste which meets either of
the following criteria is not subject to
regulation under Parts 262 through 265
or Parts 122 through 124 of this Chapter
and is not subject to the notification
requirements of Section 3010 of RCRA
until such time as the Administrator
promulgates regulations to the contrary:
(1) It is being beneficially used or re-
used or legitimately recycled or
reclaimed.
(2) It is being accumulated, stored or
physically, chemically or biologically
treated prior to beneficial use or re-use
or legitimate recycling or reclamation.
(b) A hazardous waste which is a
sludge, or which is listed in Subpart D.
or which contains one or more
hazardous wastes listed in Subpart D.
and which is transported or stored prior
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 45. No. 98 / Monday. May 19. 1980 / Rules and Regulations
33121
to being used, re-used, recycled or
reclaimed is subject to the following
requirements with respect to such
transportation or storage:
(1) Notification requirements under
Section 3010 RCRA.
(2) Part 262 of this Chapter.
(3) Part 263 of this Chapter.
(4) Subpnrts A. B. C, D and E of Part
2(>4 of this Chnpter.
(5) Suliparts A. B. C. D. E, G, H, I. J
and L of Part 265 of this Chapter.
(6) Parts 122 and 124 of this Chapter.
with respect to storage facilities.
Subpart B—Criteria for Identifying the
Characteristics of Hazardous Waste
and for Listing Hazardous Waste
§ 261.10 CriteriJ for Identifying the
characteristics of hazardous wast*.
(a) The Administrator shall identify
and define a characteristic of hazardous
waste in Subpart C only upon
determining that:
(1) A solid waste that exhibits the
characteristic may:
(i) Cause, or significantly contribute
to. an increase in mortality or an
increase in serious irreversible, or
incapacitating reversible, illness: or
(11) Pose a substantial present or
potential hazard to human health or the
environment when it is improperly
treated, stored, transported, disposed of
or otherwise managed: and
(2) The characteristic can be:
(i) Measured by an available
standardized test method which is
reasonably within the capability of
generators of solid waste or pnvate
sector laboratories that are available to
serve generators of solid waste: or
(ii) Reasonably detected by generators
of solid waste through their knowledge
of their waste.
{261.11 Criteria lor listing hazardous
WS*t«.
(a) The Administrator shall list a solid
waste as a hazardous waste only upon
determining that the solid waste meets
one of the following criteria:
(1) It exhibits any of the
characteristics of hazardous waste
identified in Subpart C.
(2) It has been found to be fatal to
humans in low doses or. in the absence
of data on human toxicity, it has been
shown in studies to have an oral LD SO
toxicity (rat) of less than 50 milligrams
per kilogram, an inhalation LC 50
toxicity (rat) of less than 2 milligrams
per liter, or a dermal LD 50 toxicity
(rabbit) of less than 200 milligrams per
kilogram or is otherwise capable of
causing or significantly contributing to
anjncrease in serious irreversible, or
incapacitating reversible, illness. (Waste
listed in accordance with these criteria
will be designated Acute Hazardous
Waste.)
(3) It contains any of the toxic
constituents listed in Appendix VIII
unless, after considering any of the
following factors, the Administrator
concludes that the waste is not capable
of posing a substantial present or
potential hazard to human health or the
environment when improperly treated.
stored, transported or disposed of. or
otherwise managed:
(i) The nature of the toxicity presented
by the constituent.
(ii) The concentration of the
constituent in the waste.
(iii) The potential of the constituent or
any toxic degradation product of the
constituent to migrate from the waste
into the environment under the types of
improper management considered in
paragraph (a)(3)(vii) of this section.
(iv) The persistence of the constituent
or any toxic degradation product of the
constituent.
(v) The potential for the constituent or
any toxic degradation product of the
constituent to degrade into non-harmful
constituents and the rate of degradation.
(vi) The degree to which the
constituent or any degradation product
of the constituent bioaccumulates in
ecosystems.
(vii) The plausible types of improper
management to which the waste could
be subjected.
(viii) The quantities of the waste
generated at individual generation sites
or on a regional or national basis.
(ix) The nature and severity of the
human health and environmental
damage that has occurred as a result of
the improper management of wastes
containing the constituent.
(x) Action taken by other
governmental agencies or regulatory
programs based on the health or
environmental hazard posed by the
waste or waste constituent.
(xi) Such other factors as may be
appropriate,
Substances will be listed on Appendix
VIII only if they have been shown in
scientific studies to have toxic.
carcinogenic, mutagenic or teratogenic
effects on humans or other life forms.
(Wastes listed in accordance with
these criteria will be designated Toxic
wastes.)
(b) The Administrator may list classes
or types of solid waste as hazardous
waste if he has reason to believe that
individual wastes, within the class or
type of waste, typically or frequently are
hazardous under the definition of
hazardous waste found in Section
1004(5) of the Act.
(c) The Administrator will use the
criteria for listing specified in this
section to establish the exclusion limits
referred to in { 261.5(c).
Subpart C—Characteristics of
Hazardous Waste
{261 JO GwteraL
(a) A solid waste, as defined in
{ 281.2. which is not excluded from
regulation as a hazardous waste under
i 261.4(b), is a hazardous waste if it
exhibits any of the characteristics
identified in this Subpart.
[Comment: i 262.11 of this Chapter sets
forth the generator's responsibility to
determine whether his waste exhibits
one or more of the characteristics
identified in this Subpart]
(b) A hazardous waste which is
identified by a characteristic in this
subpart but is not listed as a hazardous
waste in Subpart D. is assigned the EPA
Hazardous Waste Number set forth in
the respective characteristic in this
Subpart. This number must be used in
complying with the notification
requirements of Section 3010 of the Act
and certain recordkeeping and reporting
requirements under Parts 282 through
285 and Part 122 of this Chapter.
(c) For purposes of this Subpart. the
Administrator will consider a sample
obtained using any of the applicable
sampling methods specified in Appendix
I to be a representative sample within
the meaning of Part 280 of this Chapter.
[Comment: Since the Appendix I
sampling methods are not being formally
adopted by the Administrator, a person
who desires to employ an alternative
sampling method is not required to
demonstrate the equivalency of his -
method under the procedures set forth in
ii 260JO and 280.21.]
f 2*1.21 Characteristic of (onttabHNy.
(a) A solid waste exhibits the
characteristic of ignitability if a
representative sample of the waste has
any of the following properties:
(1) It is a liquid, other than an aqueous
solution containing less than 24 percent
alcohol by volume, and has a flash point
less than 60'C (140'F). as determined by
a Pensky-Martens Closed Cup Tester.
using the test method specified m ASTM
Standard D-ea-79. or a Setaflash Closed
Cup Tester, using the test method
specified in ASTM standard D-3278-78,
or as determined by an equivalent test
method approved by the Administrator
under the procedures set forth in
ii 280.20 and 260.21.'
1 ASTM Standards arc available from ASTM.
1W8 Mac* Slml Philadelphia. PA 1*103
-------
33122 Federal Register / Vol. 45, No. 98 / Monday. May 19. I960 / Rules and Regulations
(2) It is not a liquid and is capable.
under standard temperature and
pressure, of causing fire through friction,
absorption of moisture or spontaneous
chemical changes and. when ignited.
bums so vigorously and persistently that
is creates a hazard.
(3) It is an ignitable compressed gas as
defined in 49 CFR 173.300 and as
determined by the test methods
described in that regulation or
equivalent test methods approved by the
Administrator under {§ 260JO and
260.21.
(4) It is an oxidizer as defined in 49
CFR 173.151.
(b) A solid waste that exhibits the
characteristic of ignitability. but is not
listrd as o hazardous waste in Subpart
0. has the EPA Hazardous Waste
Number of D001.
S 261.22 Characteristic of corrosMty.
(a) A solid waste exhibits the
characteristic of corrosivity if a
representative sample of the waste has
either of the following properties:
(1) It is aqueous and has a pH less
than or equal to 2 or greater than or
equal to 12.5. as determined by a pH
meter using either the test method
specified in the "Test Methods for the
Evaluation of Solid Waste. Physical/
Chemical Methods" * (also described in
"Methods for Analysis of Water and
Wastes" EPA 600/4-79-020, March
1979). or an equivalent test method
approved by the Administrator under
the procedures set forth in ii 260.20 and
260.21.
(2) It is a liquid and corrodes steel
(SAE 1020) at a rate greater than 6.35
mm (0.250 inch) per year at a test
temperature of 55*C (130*F) as
determined by the test method specified
in NACE (National Association of
Corrosion Engineers) Standard TM-O1-
69 ' as standardized in "Test Method*
for the Evaluation of Solid Waste.
Physical/Chemical Methods." or an
equivalent test method approved by the
Administrator under the procedures set
forth in {5 260.20 and 260.21.
(b) A solid waste that exhibits the
characteristic of corrosivity. but it not
listed as a hazardous waste in Subpart
D. has the EPA Hazardous Waste
Number of D002.
'Thit document ii available from Solid Watte
Information. VS. Environmental Protection Agency.
2B W. SL Clav Street. Cincinnati. Ohio 4SJ88.
'The NACE Standard Ii available from the
National Aaaoeiation of Common Engineer*. P.O.
Bon 986. Katy. Teui 77450.
§ 261.23 Characteristic of reactivity.
(a) A solid waste exhibits the
characteristic of reactivity if a
representative sample of the waste has
any of the following properties:
(1) It is normally unstable and readily
undergoes violent change without
detonating.
(2) It reacts violently with water.
(3) It forms potentially explosive
mixtures with water.
(4) When mixed with water, it
generates toxic gases, vapors or fumes
in a quantity sufficient to present a
danger to human health or the
environment.
(5) It is a cyanide or sulfide bearing
waste which, when exposed to pH
•conditions between 2 and 12.5, can
generate toxic gases, vapors or fumes in
a quantity sufficient to present a danger
to human health or the environment.
(6) It is capable of detonation or
explosive reaction if it is subjected to a
strong initiating source or if heated
under confinement.
(7) It is readily capable of detonation
or explosive decomposition or reaction
at standard temperature and pressure.
(8) It is a forbidden explosive as
defined in 49 CFR 173.51. or a Class A
explosive as defined in 49 CFR 173.53 or
a Class B explosive as defined in 49 CFR
173.88.
(b) A solid waste that exhibits the
characteristic of reactivity, but is not
listed as a hazardous waste in Subpart
D. has the EPA Hazardous Waste
Number of D003.
{ 281.24 Characteristic of EP Toiletry.
(a) A solid waste exhibits the
characteristic of EP toxicity if.' using the
test methods described in Appendix II
or equivalent methods approved by the
Administrator under the procedures set
forth in » 260.20 and 260.21. the extract
from a representative sample of the
waste contains any of the contaminants
listed in Table I at a concentration equal
to or greater than the respective value
given in that Table. Where the waste
contains less than 0.5 percent filterable
solids, the waste itself, after filtering, is
considered to be the extract for the
purposes of this section.
(b) A solid waste that exhibits the
characteristic of EP toxicity, but is not
listed as a hazardous waste in Subpart
D. has the EPA Hazardous Waste
Number specified in Table I which
corresponds to the toxic contaminant
causing it to be hazardous.
Table) I.—Maximum Concentration el
Contaminanta for Characteristic ol EP Toilclty—
Continue*)
EM
nua/oou*
Conunwwm
Uanmuni
concanvaton
pe.Me/1
0004
DOM
000*
0007
DOM
000*
ooio_
DOM
DOI2
0013
DOM
D01S
O016
0017
Banum..
Chromum
Lead-.
Mercury
Seknum _
S»Mr
Enon (1 .2J.4.10 10-
1.4.4a.S.6.7.t.ta-
ocUnydro-1 « anno endo-
S.t-a*n»tri»no najnttiauna
jndana(1i3.4.5.6-
naiacnkvocycionavane
r (1.1.1-
Tncrtoro-ZJ-ba (p-
nweraypfwoyOaeieoal
.... Touonana K^HJA.
Tacrncal cNonmed
i. 67-e» percent
2.4-0. {2.4-
eod)
.— 2.4.S-TP S*vn (2.43-
SO
1000
10
SO
SO
0.2
10
so
002
04
100
OS
100
1.0
Subpart D—Lists of Hazardous Wastes
} 261 JO General.
(a) A solid waste is a hazardous
waste if it is listed in this Subpart
unless it has been excluded from this list
under ii 260.20 and 260.22.
(b) The Administrator will indicate his
basis for listing the classes or types of
wastes listed in this Subpart by
employing one or more of the following
Hazard Codes:
Cortoewe Wane .
EPTo
Acute Haaraoua Mfaatt...
01
(Q
("I
IE)
M
(T)
Appendix VTJ identifies the constituent
which caused the Administrator to list
the waste as an EP Toxic Waste (E) or
Toxic Waste (T) in J5 261.31 and 261.32.
(c) Each hazardous waste listed in this
Subpart is assigned an EPA Hazardous
Waste Number which precedes the
name of the waste. This number must be
used in complying with the notification
requirements of Section 3010 of the Act
and certain recordkeeping and reporting
requirements under Parts 262 through
285 and Part 122 of this Chapter.
(d) Certain of the hazardous wastes
listed in { 261.31 or { 261.32 have
exclusion limits that refer to
i 261.5(c)(5).
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 45, No. 98 / Monday, May 19, 1980 / Rules and Regulations 33123
{ 261.31 Hazardous waste from nonspecific sources.
Mduatry and EPA
huardou* waaM No.
Gananc
rani
POOS
COM
P007
POM _.
Hna
PDin
PDIZ
ma
KIM
F01S... .
FOI6
5261.32 Hazardous wa:
mduaky and EPA
hazankxa •ana No
Kara
K005
K006
K007
Kooe
Grganc Cnamcatt
KOOB ....
KOtO
K01Z .
K013
K014 ...
KOIS
K016 _
KOI 7
K018 .
K019 . ..
K020 _
KOJ1
K022 .
K023
K02S .
K026
KOJ7
' , M.
K03S
term
K034
Koas
KM7
Kiyja
K042 _. .
KCUJ
K04S
KO47
Pakohun Ratano;
K04S . .... .... _.
K049
KOSO . .....
KOSt _
KM!
KOi.1
HAianJou* wacta
la»aUauiUa. and Via crtonnalad nuonxarbon*. and Hudgaa Iram via racovary ol VMM aohantt n aagraaang oparationa
boaoim kern Via raowary ol Viaaa aotvanb)
and Via MM bocmrai Iram Vta racovary of ttiaaa aorvaota. m
PlttnQ bat1 aludpaa frnm Vw bottom of pUtmg batfia from aiaoopiattng oparaaona
Pa»iaiaiad air po*u»on control aorubbar atudgaa from COM
Salbottomi from tha Oa.rtslat.on of bamyf chtonda
Haatty anda from ttaclnnaaon ft atfvyi chtonda pvuductwv ..
Aquaouf apant anamony cataryat vast* tram fhjororrwmana* productton .
Otaakaiaon bottom (an from tha producfron of phano'/aoaiona from cumana ... .
PaalaHiuii bottoma from Via praducvon of rMrobaruana by Via mcrabon of baruana . ....
Waaia from Via product afcaam atnppar n via producaon of 1,1.i-»vi^oroa«r.ana .... -
FT) (•iKlKli aaJli uniaiatailii In liinpiii >nn nni'ir aiu LILUIIJ.IIL tuti
***•••• iaii' anri arriatf -ratwr ffrrm Vt* ctitunnafcon of cycsopamad>ar.i tn vta produckon of cnJordana
Ttal tuninrr« *~\u" IIII.JIILJ ~"i(*rvj.^^ *v*r*anw\ tna prod»rton M ,u.ji.n^.
THiali ilii •••knaiBl BfeihkaM kuH Via oiju*i»*afi t* i**>*tai£j\
Wim kOT V» .»a>-T8 arrt an»P^ o« Pf««» prooucw .
Maavyaneaoi aiatitn laailun kom Via aaautco o( lakaLAmaoaigana «i tia produoan o< t.4 >-T
PM/rad avjkv kam TNT unatiuu«» ..
Oaaotoad a* loiaton (DAT) toat kom Via pakotaun mArang ndMky
Slop o< amaann aoadi kom Via pakotaum ratang nlutlry .....
Haat aicliangar bwS« claaiwig aJudga kom Vw pei/oi«urn rartrwio nduvky
API aapaian akjdga kom Via pakoiaum ratnng muavy _
Tank bottom* QllJatl kom via pakohun ralnng noxntry . . . .. .. ._
drama Ibkol ••maw graiud by k« (oummg kjujlaonnat ol Via ia«lfia> lannng and knatwig nduaky na> pulp/cnrama ian/>au>i/
Haxard cod*
33333333333 ?>3 3 3 3
3 33333 J
Haunt coda
3 33333 3333 3333333333333 3333333333333333333333 3333333 3
3 33
/mono lan/caian/wi tn»n r^un/v.1 mvt no lmi'i«»juai nou«t>-*ia-biua and
-------
33124 Federal Register / Vol. 45. No. 98 / Monday. May 19. 1980 / Rules and Regulations
{ 261.32 Hazardous wast* from specific sotrrc**. —Continued
industry and EPA
haiantoua wuta No
HWarOOUl wMI*
KO&4
K064 .
KOS6
K067.
Chroma (blua) ahavnoa ganaiaiad by t« loHuoig aJbcawgonaa ol Xa •MOW tanrang and maring ndmvr na> pmp/cftoria lan'nMm/
•w man, har aa>a'aran« lan/nttan/awt knah. raun/Mt kraah. no baamrmuM. •mugh-«w4ilua and ahaatng
Bulkng du« aanaialad by tta Mowng aubcataopnM ol tia iMtnaf tanrang and knahms muatnr nM pulp/onrorna ian/ratan/«« man.
HM aM/ohroma tan/ralan/M kraan. nMan/iMt Knah. no baamhovM. and nougn-i»«iua
Siiiin atiaaia^a ytmina by tia >*i»nj aubcauoorw ol r» iMBiar lannng and knaMig nduaay ha> puk>'onronn aubcawgonaa ol I* laaihar lanrang and knarang ndM*y ha> puip/ohrama un/
«l
Iran and Skw>
Kneo
KM) ... .
KQf?
Knca
Pivnary Coppar K064
KQAA
UM7
-^^^^ j ^^. ifMg
Aimona
"*
•tMl
miiiiln* i .. ...
» .. TO
TO
_ _. (C T)
TO
n .. ... . TO
•M TO
ro
TO
TO
(T)
JW1.33 Ob)card«d Commtmial ClMtnlcal
Products, Off-Sp«clf)eatton Sp«ct«ji,
ConUln«rm, and Spin RaaMuM TlMraot.
The following materials or items are
hazardous wastes if and when they are
discarded or intended to be discarded:
(a) Any commercial chemical product.
or manufacturing chemical intermediate
having the generic name listed in
paragraphs (e) or (f) of this section.
(b) Any off-specification commercial
chemical product or manufacturing
chemical intermediate which, if it met
specifications, would have the generic
name listed in paragraphs (e) or (f) of
this section.
(c) Any container or inner liner
removed from a container that has been
used to hold any commercial chemical
product or manufacturing chemical
intermediate having the generic name
listed in paragraph (e) of this section.
unless:
(1) The container or inner liner has
been triple rinsed using a solvent
capable of removing the commercial
chemical product or manufacturing
chemical intermediate:
(2) The container or inner liner has
been cleaned by another method that
has been shown in the scientific
literature, or by tests conducted by the
generator, to achieve equivalent
removal; or
(3) In the case of a container, the inner
liner that prevented contact of the
commercial chemical product or
manufacturing chemical intermediate
with the container, has been removed.
(d) Any residue or contaminated soil.
water or other debris resulting from the
cleanup of a spill, into or on any land or
water, of any commercial chemical
product or manufacturing chemical
intermediate having the generic name
listed in paragraphs (e) or (f) of this
Section.
(Comment: The phrase "commercial
chemical product or manufacturing
chemical intermediate having the
generic name listed in ..." refers to a
chemical substance which is
manufactured or formulated for
commercial or manufacturing use. It
does not refer to a material, such as a
manufacturing process waste, that
contains any of the substances listed in
paragraphs (e) or (f) Where a
manufacturing process waste is deemed
to be a hazardous waste because it
contains a substance listed in
paragraphs (e) or (f). such waste will be
listed in either f S 261.31 or 261.32 or will
be identified as a hazardous waste by
the characteristics set forth in Subpart C
of this Part]
(e) The commercial chemical products
or manufacturing chemical
intermediates, referred to in paragraphs
(a) through (d) of this section, are
identified as acute hazardous wastes
(H) and are subject to the small quantity
exclusion defined in 1201.5(c). These
wastes and their corresponding EPA
Hazardous Waste Numbers are:
—Continued
lOSOaaaPOU
10J1 a*a POS7
POOL
•COS.
•003..
*4jakji
AcroMt
Aoan
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 45. No. 98 / Monday. May 19. 19BO / Rules and Regulations 33125
HUl
was
P03I
P032
P033
P037
P039
PO41
P042
POO
PO44
PO45
P046
P047
P04»
PO49
POSO
POSI
POSJ
POS3
POS4.
PO5S-
POS6
=O57
»O58
>OS9
•060
m
•062
063
064
vdous Subilance '
• No
Cyanogen
Cyanogen brontoe
Cyanogen ilnuKle
Cyctooan Me POSO
O-CONMePOOl
DETHMOR Ma POOI
OETMNEL Ma POOt
DFPMaPO43
Dcyanooan IM PO31
DietUm
OIELDREX Ma PQ37
Dwtnyianana
00-Oieinvl-S42-a*ylta}-2-«attnona-O-
4 8-Onnto-o-creeoi and aato
DiNOSEB aM P020
CHNOSEBE Ma P02o
Dnullolon Ma POM
ONBPMaPQiO
DOLOO MOUSE CEREAL Ma P10»
DOW GENERAL aM PO20
DOW GENERAL WEED KILLER Ma PO20
DOW SELECTIVE WEED KILLER aM PO20
DOWOOE G aM POM
DYANACJOE Ma POM
EASTERN STATES OUCODE aM POOI
ELGETOL Ma POM
. Endoadtan
. Endnn
Epnavhme Ma PO4J
FASCO FASCRAT POWDER Ma POOI
FEMMAMaPOtl
Fame cyanda
. Fluome
. .. 2-F1uoraaoMamda
Fluaraaaaac add. aodMn aM
FOLOOOI-M aM P07i
FOLOOOL M Ma P07i
FOSFERNO M SO Ma P071
FRATOL MePOSf
F Jmnele ol manuy aM FOBS
FUNQJTOX OR Ma POM
FUSSOF Ma POST
GALLOTOX Ma POM
GEARPHOS Ma W1
GERUTOX Ma P020
KeptacMoi
tfiatana
dnwnanel a*a» M, POSO
HOST AQUICK aM POM
HOSTAOWK Ma POM
ILIOXOL Ma POST
iNOCOMaPOZS
INSECTOPHENE Ma POSO
laodnnaMPOeo
laocyanc aod. maty attar
KILOSEB aM P020
KOP-THIOOAN Ma POSO
KWIK-KIL Ma P1O1
KWIKSAN Ma POM
KUMAOCR Ma POOI
KVPf ARIN Ma POOI
LCY1OSAN aM POM
UOUIPHENE Ma POM
waste No
P06S
POM
POM
POT1 ...
P074
P075
P076 .. .
P077..
P07* ... .
«*>
PO»I
POM
P00?
poae
P069
P0»1 ...
POM
POK ....
POM. .
POK..
POM
POB7...
POM .
POM
PlOO
P101
Substance '
MALIK SM POSO
MAREVAN see POOI
MAR-FRIN tecPOOt
MARTIN 0 MAR.CHIS u« POOI
MEGATOX IM POOS
Marcury Ufranala
MERSOLITE IM P0«2
MET ACID SO Ml P07I
METAPHOR Me P071
METAPHOS aM P07I
METASOL X Ma POM
METHYL-E COS M* P071
M«m^ iftocyvuw ••« P064
Methyl pavamnn
MOLf DEATH »M PlM
MOUSE -NOTS M« P109
MOUSE -RIO M« P106
MOUSE-TOX •«• P100
N»t*.X cymmJ*
Macotww and Mfti
Nftnc ond*
^Niuoanhn*
Nitroo*n dtonb*
MvoQCtn iMf/ondt
NYLMERATE aM POM
OCTALOX aM P037
OCTANMaP092
enda
OMPAaMPOtS
OMPAC1OE aaa POts
OMPAXMePOeS
PANORAM 0-31 aM POST
PANTHERINE Ma P007
PANWARFM aM POOI
Pannon
PCPaMPDtO
PENNCAP.M Ma P071
PENOXYL CARBON N Ma PO4<
PaoucMurupneoaie aM POM
PEWTA-KILL aM POM
PGMTASOL Me POM
PENWAHMaPOM
PERM03E aM POM
PERMAOUAAO Ma POM
PERMATOX aM POM
PERMITE Ma POM
PESTOX III Ma PO«S
PHENMAO aaa POM
PMENOTAN Ma P020
Pt»nyi dEMoraanma
Phanyi nwcapun aM POM
Pnanyknarcwy aoaiaia
PHILIPS 1M1 Ma POO*
PNIX aM POM
Pnotaie
Pnoigan*
Proeonjne
PtKHOioroVwK aod. O.O-dmaoiyi aatar. 0 ami
pn»V) a*wr aM P07I
PiED PIPER MOUSE SEED Ma PlO*
Pouuun cyanda
Pouuwn a*x> cyarada
PREMERGE aM POTO
Propargyl etcoftol aM P102
ha^aroout Subsunoe '
waste No
P102 2-Prooyn-l-ol
PROTHROMAOIN SM P00<
OUCKSAM Me P092
OUINTOX M< P037
RAT AND MICE BAIT Ma POOI
BAT. A- WAY aM POOI
SAT-8-QOM M* POOI
RAT-O-CIDE 12 aM POOI
RAT-GUARD Ma POOt
RAT-KILL Ma POOI
RAT-MIX aM POOt
RATS-NO-MORE aM POOI
RAT-OLA aM POOI
RATOREX M> POOI
RAT-TOOL aM POOt
RO-OETH Ma POOI
RO-DEX aM PlO*
SANTOPHEN aw POBO
SANTOPHEN 20 aM POM
SCHRADAN Ma POK
P103 tjalannuM
P104 S*MV Cyanda
SMITE aM P10S
SPARICMaPO20
SPRAV-TROL BRAND ROOEN-TROL Ma POOI
SPURGE Ma POM
PlOS Sodumaade
Soduni coumaojn aM POOI
P108 .. Sodun cyanda
Sodum Ikwoaoalate Me POS*
SOLFARIN Ma POOI
SOLFOBLACK 88 Me P0*«
SUeTEXMaPQ20
SYSTAMMaPOW
TEKWAISA Ma P071
TEMIK aM POTO
TERM-t-TROL aM POM
P1IO. . Tavaatnyi laad
TETROSULFUR BLACK PB Ma PO*«
TFTROSULPHUR PBR aM PO4f
Pti3 . ThaiacoBJda
Ttjafcjm peroude Ma PI 13
PII4 Thalfcmn manna
Pits Tftanom (l) euKau
THIFOR aM POB2
THIMUL Me POM
TMOOAN aM POSO
THIOFOR aM POSO
TWOMUL Ma POSO
TVHONCX Me POSO
THOPMENTT aM POT1
ThjoaKar tonal aM POSO
P11T Tnanm
THOMPSON'S WOOD FIX IM POM
TIOVELMaPOSO
TWIN UGMT RAT AWAY Me POOI
USAF RH-* Ma POM
USAF EK-4MO IM P002
Pi it . Vanade aorl. ammomxn »en
Pi 20 vinadun panonoa
VOFATOX aM P07I
WANAOU Ma Pi 20
WARCOUMIN aM POOI
WARFARIN SODIUM aM POOI
WARFOOE aaa POOI
WOFOTOX aM POT;
YANOCKMaPOST
YASOKNCCK Ma POM
ZlARNIKaMPOM
PI21. . .. Za« cyanda
P122 Znc phdacMW (M T)
ZOOCOUMARIN aM POOI
' The Agancy raudad ttOM «ada nan wtwy. n wu
aware an omaaen o" a *ada name doM not nxyy mai tr»
(•••UMimer na oananc name
r-1
-------
33126 Federal Register / Vol. 45. No. 98 / Monday. May 19. 1980 / Rules and Regulations
(0 The commercial chemical products
or manufacturing chemical
intermediates, referred to in paragraphs
(a), (b) and (d) of this section, are
identified as toxic wastes (T) unless
otherwise designated and are subiect to
the small quantity exclusion defined in
i 261.5 (a) and fb). These wastes and
their corresponding EPA Hazardous
Waste Numbers are:
Haurdoua
Wait* No
UOOl
U002
UOO3
U004
UOOS
UOOS .
U007
U008. ....
AAFaaaUOOS
Aoataldanyda
Aoatona (1)
Acamma (i.T)
Ocmapfuncnn
Acalyl oMonM (C.T)
AoaiyMna wnohkxida aaa U209
Aoaiyiaiia mcMono» aaa U22»
Aeryte aoo (I)
AEROTHENE TT aaa \O»
3-Anwto-SHP«oaiaindaphanyD-1K-17.4-lnaioM.
ny*maaaaU01i
IXn
DO 12..
U013
UOM.
U01S
1X16
1X17
UOI8
U019
U020
U021
U022
U023
U024
U024
U0»
UQ27
U02C
U029
U030
U031 .
UO32
U033
U034.
1X35
1X36
U037..
U03B
U039
U040
U041
U042
U043
U044
U045
U049
UOM
UOS1
UOS2.
0043
UOM
U04S
UOS«
U057
UOSe
(nyOiu«»iiiaunit)B-ina«io«i>-S-inat>iyicart>amaia
umtZ**.*) pyrrelolU-a) ndma-4. 7-dena
laaiao
Anarafl)
Ainmna
*manria
Baralclaondxa
Banzai eNonda
Banz(*)anv*aoana
Baniana
BanzanaauHon* cMonda (C.R)
BanMna
i.2-Banziaoit>azom-3-ona. t.t
Baruolalanmraoana aaa U01«
Banmltlpynna
BanzoxcnkMa (C^.T)
Baj<2-chioioa»io»»>iia«iai»
M* U202
N N.Bial2-chlon>a*iy()-2-napninylamn*
B«(2-ainylna«yi) pmnalaia
Bromomathana
4-Bromopnanyl phanyl ahar
n-eutyl atofiol 0)
Carboac aoo aaa U1U
Carbon lanownM aaa U211
Carbonyl nuono.
CMora/
CMorarnbudl
CNorobanxana
O*>
I0*on>2>apoiypropana
CMLOROETHENE NU H* U22t
CMoroMhyl «nyl Mw
CNorotorm (I.T)
CMoronwhana aT)
CHoromanyl maXyi i
Ci 230*0 aaaU073
Cfauu
CraaoM
. Cmonaidanvaa
. Oaaytcaod
. Cumana
CyanoriMnana aaa 11003
Cyoonaiana (I)
Cyoonaianona (I)
Cyoopnoapnamda
DOO
Huaidoua
WatiaNo
U061
U062
U063
U064
UMS
UOM
U067
DOT
Oiauta
O*>an>o(a.h)ar6romo-3-cnloropropan»
IJO*romoatnao«
OtmiM
UOM
Indanod ^.3-od)pyrana
Koeuiyi ucofa
Hwiraoul
wait* No
U141
U142
U143
U144
U145 ..
U14« .
U147 .
U14«..
U149 .
U1SO .
U1S1...
UIU
UIS3.
U1M.
U1SS...
UtM..
U1S7.
U1M
UIS9
uieo.
uiai...
U162...
uiea .
uiw..
U1M .
Ul«7...
uiee .
U169 .
U170
0171...
UI72...
UI73..
U174...
U17S...
U17«...
U1T7...
UI7«...
U179
uieo .
UU1 ..
U1S2.
Ul*3
Ult4
U1B5
uiee .
U»S7 .
UtM
UIM.
U190
UI91
Ut92
UI93
U194
UIM
U197.
U200
U201
U202
U203
U204 .
U20S
U2M
U207.
U20*
U209
U210.
U211
U212
U213
U214
U21i
U2ie
U217
U*1i
U719
U220 .
U221
(022
ItoutroM
Kapona
Laiioearpra
La
Laadi
Laadi
lunc annyanda
Maiacnydwnda
MEK
aaa U190
Marauy
aaa U1S4
iaaaU2M
via aaa U1M
4.4' MaBiylana toa (2i»)
Many) aan* kalona (MEK) (I.T)
Man* «n* kaMna panma f«)
Man* ooMa aaa U1M
M*^yl MObUt^rf (wMDFV
Man* manacr*a» (R.T)
Mnomyon C aaa U010
1
1J>
2-Kaprnnrlamna
Nnrobanzana (I.T)
Nnobanzol aaa U169
N N»oao n an*uraa
N Nan*, ii niani*ii
l.l^J-Ti
Tadacfaoroanana
Ta*acMoroam*ana aaa U210
Ta»a»ia
2.3 4.e.Ta*acNoropnanol
Tacanydrokran (I)
ThMaxn (I) aoauat
Thalun (I) earbonata
Thaaun (1) eMonda
Thafcjn (I) rama
Thnaoa*
Thoin*
Tekiana
Ti
0-Ti
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 45. No. 98 / Monday. May 19, 1980 / Rules and Regulations 33127
Sublime*1
U223 ToTi
U232 2.4.$-Tr«Marapniiio>yioMc *ad
«Dha. •«»•• TnchBniiokMn* w* U023
Tfll-CXENE M* U2ZI
U235 TnK2.3-OOuMI •
-------
Part 261, App. VIII
TIM. 40-Prot.etlon *l Environment Chapter l-Environmental Protection Agency
Part 261. App. VIII
EPA
•tuwa
out
«*9W
No
K019
K020
K.021
K022
K0»
K024
K02S
xon
K027
K02»
K029
K030
K03I
KM?
,"} K033
I KOM
(-• K035
Hmrdow contlrluwil* for which Mad
Elhyton. fehlond.. i.i.i-inchk)ro.man», 1.1.2-
kKhfcxoalriana. latracMoroatnanai (112 Z-la-
tracltforoMhan. and 1.1.1.2Kirachloroadiana)
tnchkxoamylan.. latrachkxoMhylana. carbon
IMrichlorid*. chloroform, vmyl cMorida. vtny*-
OwMchtond.
EPA
huard-
out
will.
NO
KOS5
HuardoiM conwitiwnii for which Inud
. 1.1,1 Inch4oro.lhan.. 112-
»ichloro.mana. lafracMoroalhana* (1,U.Ma-
kacMoroMhan* and 1,1.1.2 MracnJoroatiana)
n*. totrachtoroaffiylana. carbon
. chtorolorm. vinyl cntortda, *»*-
danachlond.
Anwiony. carbon MracMonda. chtmaluim
rfwnoi. tan (porrcychc irommc
Phmakc anhydnd*. mafaic •nhydrfd*
Phmalic anhydnda. 1.4-naphmooulr.ona
M«. onkobwmn*. 2.4 dmrololuana
ParaWahyda. pyndmM. 2>cohna
Toluan. rjnocyanaia. ttkian«-2. 4-dtomina
I.I.I (ncfHoro.th.rt.. »inyl chkmda
I !.2-<*cMor0M(Mn.. I.I.MncMonMOMn*.
yhton. cHond*. cMorotorm
hnKhlorotxitadtan.. h
1.1.1.2 lt*«chlorot*
Whytm cfcMorU*
vinyl
H«»chlorocyclopMitMMn«
H*iKhlo>ocyclapwitadton«
|Cr«)«oi.. chrrMn.. rMphtMww.
nuorwtthm.
•»»«Ki(T.2.3-cd| pvrow.
KOM Tokjana. phoaphorudrHauic and
K037
KOM
KOM
K040
K041
K04J
KOO
K044 .
KO4S
K04«.
K047.
K044)
K04I
KOM
KOSI .
KOM
K080
K081
KOU
KOM
H07I
K073
KOM
Toli»n.. pho»phorod>hloJt «nd phmphocoX
. to»mmriy.»«,
phoiphorolf**: **)
PnoipnoruJENulc and pnoaphaotilult
atlara
r*y**- **?*"***•• I********** mi
Touphana
2.4-dkMoropnanal. 2.&dtehtorophanol, 2.«.S-»leh-
>»••*!•. ..J
NA
NA
laad
HA
Mnl cnramkim. laad.
chtomlMm. laad
.
aovDant dmmkim
laad
Mm. laad
P»*noltc compounds ar-
H«a»alani chromium, laad. cadmium
Ha*avalant chromium, laad
Haiavatont chromUm. laad, cadmium
Mareury
CNomtonn. eaiton laaacMmlOa,
K066
KOtr
KOM
KOM
KOM
KOM
K0»7
KOM
KOM
KIM
K101
KI02
K103
K104
K10S
KIM
Bmtnt. <*chtorobaru«n«. InchlorotMnzwim I.
»*cMorobaniana«. pwHtcMorobaniana. nan-
achkyobwiiwi., banzyl chlond.
Laad. haiavatant chromum
Phanol. naphthalm.
PMrujkc anhydnd.. maltw anhydnd.
Phlhakc anhydnd.
1.1.2-Mchloro.lhana. 1,1,1.2-tatrachloroMhana
1.1.2.2-tolrachlaro.lhan.
1.2-dchloroalhana. 1.1.1-Mchkxo.lhan. 1 12-
Irtcnloroalhana
Chtardana. haptachtor
Tmaphana
2-4-**j°'«>pn»nol. 2.4.6-lnchloroprMnol
Mwavafcjnl chromum. lt«d, cadmium
Arwrtc
ATMMC
. An*na. mkubantana. phanylwiadlamin.
Artfcna. banian*, dlptwnylamin*. nHrotMniana
pnanylanarJamlria
Banian*. rnonochtorooMuan*. dichlorotiannnn
2.4.S.HchJoroph*nol
M«cury
a«V
. , aiaeioua
•na. mcMo«o^haiia. tataailuiuaiiylaiia. dMv
. 1.1.2.2-totacnloroatMna
nNrotMntant. pnanylaria-
'. corrosmty. or rMCtnnty
(46 PR 4«19. Jan. 10. 1981. as amended at 40
FR 27477. May 20. 1981]
APPENDIX VIH-HAZARDODS
CONSTITUENTS
Acetonltrlle (Ethanenltrlle)
Acetophenone (Ethanone. 1-phenyl)
3-(alpha-Acetonylbenzyl)-4-
hydroxycoumarin and salts (Warfarin)
2-Acetylamlnofluorene (Acetamlde N-(OH-
nuoren-2-yl)-)
Acetyl chloride (Ethanoyl chloride)
1 Acetyl 2 thlourea (Acetamlde. N-(amln-
othloxomethyl)-)
Acroleln (2-Propenal)
Acrylamlde (2-Propenamlde)
Acrylonltrlle (2-Propenenltrlle)
Aflatoxlns
Aldrln (1.2.3.4.10.10 Hexachloro-
1.4,4a,5,8,8a,8b-hexahydro-endo.exo-
1.4:8.8 Olmethanonaphthalene)
Allyl alcohol (3 Propen-1-ol)
Aluminum phosphide
4 Amlnoblphenyl (tl.l-Blphenyl) 4 amlne)
••Amlno l,la.2.8.8a.8b-hexahydro 8-
(hydroxymethyl)-8a-methoxy-5-methyl-
carbamate azlrlnot2,3:3,41pyrrolo[1.3-
a)lndole-4.7-dlone. (eater) (Mltomycln C)
methyl]-ua,2.8.8a.8b-
hexahydro-8amethoxy-6-methy-)
5-(Amlnomethyl)-3-lsoxacolol (3(2H)-Isoxa-
5? ,; ••(*mln<>«nethyl)-) 4-Amlnopyrl-
dlne (4-Pyrldlnamlne)
Amltrole (1H 1,2.4 Trlazol-3 amlne)
Aniline (Benzenamlne)
Antimony and compounds. N.O.S.*
Aramlte (Sulfurous acid. 2-chloroethyl-, 2-
(4-(l.l-dlmethylethyl)phenoxyM-
methylethyl ester)
Arsenic and compounds. N.O.S.*
Arsenic acid (Orthoaraenlc acid)
Arsenic pentoxlde (Arsenic (V) oxide)
Arsenic trtoxlde (Arsenic (III) oxide)
Auramlne (Benzenamlne. 4.4'-
carbonlmldoylblalN.N-Dlmethyl-. mono-
hydrochlorlde)
Azaserlne (I^Serlne. dlazoaceUte (eater))
Barium and compounds. N.O.S.*
Barium cyanide
Benztclacridine (3.4 Benracridlne)
Ben«[a]anthracene (1,2-Benzanthracene)
Benzene (Cyclohexatrlene)
BenEeneanonlc acid (Arsonlc acid, phenyl-)
Benzene, dlchloromethyl- (Benzal chloride)
Benzenethlol (Thlophenol)
Benzldlne (11.1 -Blphenyl J-4.4 dlamlne)
Beneo(b}nuoranthene (2.3-Benzonuoranth-
ene)
Benzoljlfluoranthene (7.8-Benzofluorantri-
ene)
Benzotalpyrene (3.4-Benzopyrene)
p-Benzoqulnone (1.4-Cyclohexadlenedlone)
Benzotrlchlorlde (Benzene, trlchloromethyl-
)
Benzyl chloride (Benzene, (chloromethyl)-)
Beryllium and compounds. N.O.S.*
Bls(3-chloroethoxy)metriane (Ethane. 1.1
(mettiylenebls(oxy )}bls( 2-chloro- ] >
Bls(3-chloroethyl> ether (Ethane. 1.1
oxybls(2-chloro-]>
N.N-Bls( 2-chloroethyl) 2 naphthylamlne
(Chlornaphazlne)
Bls(2-chlorolsopropyl) ether (Propane. 2.2'-
oxybls(2-chloro-l)
Bls(chloromethyl) ether (Methane.
oxybls(chloro-l)
Bts(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (1.2-
Benzenedlcarboxyllc acid. bU<2-ethyl-
hexyl) ester)
Bromoacetone (2-Propanone, 1-bromo-)
Bromomethane (Methyl bromide)
4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether (Benzene, 1-
bromo-4 -phenoxy -)
Bruclne (Strychnldln-10-one, 2,3-dlmethoxy-
)
2-Butanone peroxide (Methyl ethyl ketone.
peroxide)
Butyl benzyl phthalate (1.2-
Benzenedlcarboxyllc acid, butyl phenyl-
methyl ester)
2-sec-Butyl-4.6-dlnltrophenol (DNBP)
(Phenol. 2.4-dlnltro-e < 1 methylpropyl))
Cadmium and compounds, N.O.S.*
Calcium chromate (Chromic acid, calcium
salt)
•The abbreviation N.O.8. (not otherwise
specified) signifies those members of the
••neral class not specifically listed by name
Calcium cyanide
Carbon dlsulflde (Carbon bisulfide)
Carbon oxyfluorlde (Carbonyl fluoride)
Chloral (Acetaldehyde. trlchloro-l
Chlorambucll (Butanolc acid. 4 (bls(2
chloroethyDamlnolbenzene-)
Chlordane (alpha and gamma Isomers) (4.7-
Methanolndan. 1.2.4.5,8,7,8,8-ocUchloro-
3.4.7,7a-tetrahydro-) (alpha and gamma
Isomers)
Chlorinated benzenes. N.O.S.*
Chlorinated ethane. N.O.S.*
Chlorinated fluorocarbons. N.O.5.*
Chlorinated naphthalene. tl.Ol}.'
Chlorinated phenol. N.O.S.*
ChloroaceUldehyde (AcetaJdehyde. chJoro-)
Chloroalkyl ethers. N.O.S.*
p-Chloroanlllne (Benzenamlne. 4-ch)oro-)
Chlorobenzene (Benzene, chloro-)
Chlorobenzllate (Benzeneacetlc acid. 4-
chloro~alpha-(4-chlorophenyl)-alpha-
hydroxy-, ethyl ester)
p-Chloro-m-cresol (Phenol. 4amlno]-tetrs-
hydro-, 2-oxlde)
Daunomycln (5.12-Naphthacenedlone, (IS-
cls)-8-acetyl-10-((3-amlno-2,3.«-trldeoxy)-
alpha-L-lyxo-hexopyranosyltoxv •> 8.8.10-
tetrahydro-6.8.11-trlhydroxj «y ->
-------
ODD (Dlchlorodlphenyldlchloroethane)
(Ethane. 1,1 -dlchloro 2.2 bls
Dlbenzola.hlpyrene (1.2.5.6-Dlbenzpyrene)
Dlbenzola.llpyrene (1.2.7,8-Dlbenzpyrene)
1.2-Dlbromo-3-chloropropane (Propane, 1.2-
dlbromo-3-chloro-)
1.2-Dlbromoethane (Ethylene dlbromlde)
Dlbromomethane (Methylene bromide)
Dl-n-butyl phthalate (1.2
Benzenedlcarboxyllc acid, dlbutyl ester)
o-Dlchlorobenzene (Benzene. l.J-dlchloro-)
m-Dlchlorobenzene (Benzene. 1.3-dlchloro-)
p-Dlchlorobenzene (Benzene. 1.4-dlchloro-)
Dlchlorobenzene, N.O.S.* (Benzene.
dlchloro-, N OS •>
3.3-Dlchlorobenzldlne (U.r Blphenyl]-4.4 •
dlamlne. 3.3 -dlchloro-)
'" 1.4 Dlchloro 2 butene (2 Butene. 1,4-dlch-
1 loro-)
""" Dlchlorodinuoromethane (Methane, dlch-
r" lorodinuoro-)
1.1-Dlchloroethane (Ethylldene dlchlorlde)
1,2-Dlchloroethane (Ethylene dlchlorlde)
trans-1.2-Dlchloroethene (1.2-Dlchloroethy-
lene)
Dlchloroethylene. N.O.S.* (Ethene. dlch-
loro-. N.O.8.*)
1,1 Dlchloroethylene (Ethene. 1.1-dlchloro-)
Dlchloromethane (Methylene chloride)
2.4 Dlchlorophenol (Phenol. 2.4-dlchloro-)
2.6 Dlchlorophenol (Phenol. 2.8-dlchloro )
2.4 Dlchlorophenoxyacetlc acid (2,4-D). tall*
and eaten (Acetic acid, 2.4-dlchlorophen-
oxy-. talu and e*tera)
Dlchlorophenylaralne (Phenyl dlchloroar-
sine)
Olchloropropane. tt.OS.' (Propane, dlch-
loro-. N.O.8.*>
1.2-Dlchloropropane (Propylene dlchlorlde)
Dlchloropropanol. N.O.S.* (Propanol. dlch-
loro-. N.O.8.*)
Dlchloropropene. N.O.8.* (Propene. dlch-
loro-. N.O.8.*)
1.3-Dlchloropropene (1-Propene. 1,3-dlch-
loro-)
Dleldrln (1.2.3.4.10.10 hexachloro-8.7 epoxy-
1.4,4a,5.8.7.8.8a-octa-hydro-endo.exo-
1.4:5.8 Dlmethanonaphthalene)
1.2 3.4-Dlepoxybutane (2.2 Bloxlrane)
Dlelhylarslne (Aralne. dlethyl-)
N.N Dlethylhydrazlne (Hydrazlne, 1.2-
dlethyl)
O.O-Dlethyl S-methyl ester of phosphoro
dlthlolc acid (Phosphorodlthlolc acid.
O.O-dlethyl S-methyl ester
O.O-Dlethylphosphorlc acid. O-p-nltro-
phenyl ester (Phosphoric acid, dlethyl p-
nltrophenyl ester)
Dlethyl phthalate (1.2 Benzenedlcarboxyllc
acid, dlethyl ester)
O.O-Dlethyl O-2-pyrazlnyl phosphoroth-
loate (Phosphorothlolc acid. O.O-dlethyl
O-pyrazlnyl ester
Dlethylstllbesterol (4.4J Stllbenedlol.
alpha.alpha-dlethyl. blstdlhydrogen phos-
phate, (£)-)
Dlhydroaafrole (Benzene. 1.2-methylene-
dloxy-4-propyl-)
3.4-Dlhydroxy-alpha-(methylamlno)methyl
benzyl alcohol (1.2-Benzenedlol. 4-ll-hy-
droxy-2-(methylamlno)ethyl]-)
Dllaopropylfluorophosphate (DFP) (Phos-
phoronuorldlc acid. bUO-methylethyl)
eater)
Dlmethoate (Phosphorodlthlolc acid. O.O-
dlmethyl 8-(2-(methylamlno)-2-oxoethyl)
eater
3.3 Dlmethoxybenzldlne (Il.r Blphenyl]
4.4 dlamlne. 3-3 -dlmethoxy )
p-Dlmethylamlnoazobenzene (Benzenamlne.
N.N-dlmethyl-4-(phenylazo)->
7.12-DlmethylbenzCa)anthracene (1.2-Ben-
zanthracene. 7,12-dlmethyl )
3,3-Dlmethylbenzldlne ([1.1 Blphenyl] 4.4'-
dlamlne. 3.3 -dimethyl )
Dlmethylcarbamoyl chloride (Carbamoyl
chloride, dimethyl-)
1.1-Dlmethylhydrazlne (Hydrazlne. 1.1 dl
methyl-)
1.2-Dlmethylhydrazlne (Hydrazlne. 1.2 di-
methyl-)
3,3-Dlmethyl-l-(methylthlo)-2-butanone, O-
[(methylamlno) carbonylloxlme (Thlo-
fanox)
alpha.alpha-Dlmethylphenethylamlne (Eth-
anamlne. l.l-dlmelhyl-2-phenyl-)
2.4-Dlmethylphenol (Phenol. 2,4-dlmethyl )
Dimethyl phthalate (1.2-
Benzenedlcarboxyllc acid, dimethyl ester)
Dimethyl sulfate (Sullurlc acid, dimethyl
ester)
Dlnltroberaene. N.O.8.* (Benzene, dlnltro-.
N.OA*)
4,8 Dlnltro-o
-------
Naphthalene
1,4-Naphl loquuione (1,4-Naphthalene-
dlone)
1 -.• aphthylamlne (alpha-Naph thylamlne)
2-Naphthylamlne (beta-Naph thylamlne)
l-Naphthyl-2-thlourea (Thlourea. 1-naphth-
alenyl-)
Nickel and compound!. N.O.S.*
Nickel carbonyl (Nickel tetracarbonyl)
Nickel cyanide (Nickel (II) cyanide)
Nicotine and salU (Pyrtdine. (8>-3-(l-
methyl-2-pyrrolldlnyl)-, and salts)
Nitric oxide (Nitrogen (ID oxide)
p-Nltroanlllne (Benzenamlne. 4-nltro-)
Nltrobenzlne (Benzene, nltro-)
Nitrogen dioxide (Nitrogen (IV) oxide)
Nitrogen mustard and hydrochlorlde salt
(Ethanamlne. 2-chloro-. N-(J-chloroethyl)-
N-methyl-. and hydrochlorlde salt)
Nitrogen mustard N-Oxlde and hydrochlo-
rlde salt (Ethanamlne. 2-chloro-. N-(2-
chloroethyl)-N-methyl-. and hydrochlo-
rlde salt)
Nitroglycerine (1.2.3-Propanetrlol. trlnl-
trate)
4 Nltrophenol (Phenol. 4-nltro-)
4-Nltroqulnollne-l-oxlde (Qulnollne. 4-nltro-
1-oxide-)
Nltrosamlne. N.O.S.*
N-Nltrosodl-n-butylamlne (1-Butanamlne.
N butyl N nit rose-)
N-Nltrosodlethanolamlne (Ethanol. 2.2-
(nltrosolmlno )bls-)
N-Nltrosodlethylamlne (Ethanamlne. N-
ethyl-N-nltroso-)
N-Nltrosodlmethylamlne (Dlmethylnltrosa-
mine)
N-Nltroso-N-ethylurea (Carbamide. N-ethyl-
N-nltroso-)
N-Nltrosomethylethylamlne (Ethanamlne.
N methyl Nnltroso-)
N-Nltroso-N-methylurea (Carbamide. N-
methyl-N-n(troso-)
N-Nltroso-N-methylurethane (Carbamlc
acid, methylnltroso-. ethyl eater)
N-Nltrosomethylvlnylamlne (Ethenamlne,
N methyl-N-nltroso-)
N-Nltrosomorphollne (Morphollne. N-nl-
troso-)
N-Nllrosonomlcotlne (Nornlcotlne. N-
nltroso-)
N-Nltrosoplperldlne (Pyrldlne, hexahydro-,
Nnltroso-)
Nltrosopyrrolldlne (Pyrrole, tetrahydro-. N-
nltroso-)
N-Nltrosoaarcoslne (Sarcoslne. N-nltroso-)
S-Nltro-o-toluldlne (Benzenamlne. 2-methyl-
5 nltro-)
Octamethylpyrophosphoramlde (Dlphoa-
phoramlde. octamethyl-)
Osmium tetroxlde (Osmium (VIII) oxide)
7 Oxablcyclo(2.2.1)heptane 2.3-dlcarboxyllc
acld(Endothal)
Paraldehyde (1.3.5 Trloxane. 2.4.0 trl
methyl-)
Parathlon (Phosphorothlolc acid. O.O-
dlethylO-'" iltrophenyl) ester
Pentachlorobenzene (Benzene, pentachloro)
Pentachloroethane (Ethane, pentachloro-)
Pentachloronltrobenzene (PCNB) (Benzene.
pentachloronltro-)
Pentachlorophenol (Phenol, pentachloro-)
Phenacetln (Acetamlde. N-(4-ethoxy-
phenyl)-)
Phenol (Benzene, hydroxy-)
Phenylenedlamlne (Benzenedlamlne)
Phenylmercury acetate (Mercury, acetato-
phenyl-)
N-Phenylthlourea (Thlourea, phenyl-)
Phosgene (Carbonyl chloride)
Phosphlne (Hydrogen phosphide)
Phosphorodlthlolc acid. O,O dlethyl 8-
((ethylthto)methyll ester (Phorate)
Phosphorothlolc acid. O.O-dlmethyl O-tp-
((dlmethy lamlno)su)f onyl )pheny I) ester
(Famphur)
Phthallc acid esters. N.O.8.* (Benzene. 1.2-
dlcarboxyllc acid, esters. N.O.8.*)
Phthallc anhydride (1.2-
Benzenedlcarboxyllc acid anhydride)
2 Plcollne (Pyrldlne. 2 methyl-)
Polychlorlnated blphenyl, N.O.S.*
Potassium cyanide
Potassium silver cyanide (Argentate(l-). dl-
cyano-. potassium)
Pronamlde (3.5 Dlchloro-N< 1.1 dimethyl 2
propynyl )benzamlde)
1.3-Propane sultone (1.2-Oxathlolane. 2.2-
dloxlde)
n-Propylamlne (1-Propanamlne)
Propylthlouracll
(Undecamethylenedlamlne. N.N'-bls(2-
chlorobenzyl)-. dlhydrochlorlde)
2-Propyn-l-ol (Propargyl alcohol)
Pyrldlne
Reserplne (Yohlmban-10-carboxyllc acid.
11,17-dlmethoxy 18 1(3.4.5-
trlmethoxybenzoyl)oxy]-, methyl ester)
Resorclnol (1,3-Benzenedlol)
Saccharin and salts (1.2-Benzolsothlazolln-3-
one. 1.1-dloxlde. and salts)
Saf role (Benzene. 1,2-methylenedloxy-4-
allyl-)
Selenlous acid (Selenium dioxide)
Selenium and compounds. N.O.S.*
Selenium sulftde (Sulfur selenlde)
Selenourea (CarbarnImldoselenolc acid)
Sliver and compounds. N.O.S.*
Silver cyanide
Sodium cyanide
Streptozotocln (D-Olucopyranose. 2-deoxy-
2-(3 methyl-3-nltrosoureldo) )
Strontium sulflde
Strychnine and salts (Strychnldln-10-one.
and salts)
1,2.4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene (Benzene.
1.2.4.5 tetrachloro-)
2.3,7,8-Tetrachlorodlbenzo-p-dloxln (TCOD)
(Dlbenzo-p-dloxln. 2.3.7,8-tetrachloro-)
Tetrachloroethane. N.O.8.* (Ethane, te-
trachloro-. N.O.8.*)
1.1.1,2 Tetrachloretnane (Ethane, 1.1.1.2 te-
trachloro-)
1.1.2,2 Tetrachlorethane (Ethane. 1.1.2.2 te
trach(oro-)
Tetrachloroethane (Ethene. 1,1.2.2 tetrach
lore-)
Tetrachloromethane (Carbon tetrachlorfde)
2.3.4.6.-Tetrachlorophenol (Phenol. 2.3.4.6-
tetrachloro )
Tetraethyldlthlopyrophosphate (Dlthlopyr-
ophosphorlc acid, tetraethyl-ester)
Tetraethyl lead (Plumbane. tetraethyl-)
Tetraethylpyrophosphate (Pyrophosphorlc
aclde. tetraethyl ester)
Tetranltromethane (Methane, tetranltro-)
Thallium and compounds. N.O.S.*
Thalllc oxide (Thallium (III) oxide)
Thallium (I) acetate (Acetic acid, thallium
(I) salt)
Thallium (I) carbonate (Carbonic acid, dlth-
alllum(I)salt)
Thallium (I) chloride
Thallium (I) nitrate (Nitric acid, thallium
(I) salt)
Thallium selenlte
Thallium (I) sulfate (Sulfurlc acid, thallium
(I)salt)
Thloacetamlde (Ethanelhloamlde)
Thlosemlcarbazlde
(Hydrazlnecarbothloamlde)
Thlourea (Carbamide thlo >
Thluram (Bls(dlmethylthlocarbamoyl) dl-
sulflde)
Toluene (Benzene, methyl-)
Toluenedlamlne (Dlamlnotoluene)
o-Toluldlne hydrochlorlde (Benzenamlne. 2-
methyl-, hydrochlorlde)
Tolylene dllsocyanate (Benzene. 1.3-dlbo-
cyanatomethyl-)
Toxaphene (Camphene. octachloro-)
Trlbromomethane (Bromoform)
1.2.4-Trlchlorobenzene (Benzene. 1,2.4-trlch-
loro-)
1,1,1-Trlchloroethane (Methyl chloroform)
1.1.2-Trtchloroethane (Ethane. 1.1,2-trtch-
loro )
Trlchloroethene (Trlchloroethylene)
Trlchloromethanethlol (Methanethlol.
trlchloro-)
Trlchloromonofluoromethane (Methane,
trlchlorofluoro-)
2,4,5-Trlchlorophenol (Phenol. 2,4.5-trlch-
loro-)
2.4.6 Trlchlorophenol (Phenol, 2.4.8-trtch-
loro-)
2.4.5-TrlchlorophenoJcyacetlc acid (2.4.5-T)
(Acetic acid. 2,4.5-trlchlorophenoxy-)
2.4.5-Trlchlorophenoxyproplonlc acid (2.4.5-
TP) (Sllvex) (Proplonolc acid. 2-(2.4.5-
trlchlorophenoxy)-)
Trlchloropropane. N.O.8.* (Propane, trlch-
loro-. N.O.S.*)
1.2.3 Trlchloropropane (Propane. 1,2,3-trlch-
loro-)
O.O.O-Trlethyl phosphorothloate (Phos-
phorothlolc acid. O.O.O-trlethyl ester)
sym-Trlnltrobenzene (L ..ene. l.35(nnl
tro-)
Trls(l-azridinyl) phosphlne sulfide (Phos
phlne sulflde. trlsd azlrldlnyl I
Tris(2.3 dlbromopropyl) phosphate ( 1 Pro-
panol, 2.3 dlbromo-. phosphate)
Trypan blue (2.7-Naphthalenedlsulfonir
acid. 3.3 -[(3,3 -dlmethyld.l blphen>l)
4.4 -dlyl)bls(azo)lbls(5-amlno 4 hydroxy .
tetrasodlum salt)
Uracll mustard (Uracll 5 -lbls(2-
chloroethy 1 )amlno 1 - )
Vanadlc acid, ammonium salt (ammonium
vanadate)
Vanadium pentoxlde (Vanadium (V) oxide)
Vinyl chloride (Ethene. chloro-)
Zinc cyanide
Zinc phosphide
(46 FR 27477. May 20. 1981: 46 FR 29708.
June 3. 19811
PART 262— STANDARDS APPLICABLE
TO GENERATORS OF HAZARDOUS
WASTE
Subp«r1 A — General
Sec.
262.10 Purpose, scope, and applicability.
262.11 Hazardous waste determination
262.12 EPA Identification numbers.
Subparl B — Th« Manlfoit
262.20 General requirements.
262.21 Required Information.
262.22 Number of copies.
262.23 Use of the manifest.
Sub|Mrt C — Pr*-Trontp«rl R*qvlr*in*nti
262.30 Packaging.
262.31 Labeling.
262.32 Marking.
262.33 Placarding.
262.34 Accumulation time.
SvhfMrt 0—*»eor4k»»plng mn4 Icpcrtlng
262.40 Recordkeeplng.
282.41 Annual reporting.
242.42 Exception reporting.
262.4] Additional reporting.
202.50 International shipments.
262.51 Farmers.
ATFEHDIX— FOKM— AniftrAL RCFORT (EPA
FORM 8700-13)
AUTHORITY: Sees. 1006. 2002. 3002. 3003.
3004. and 3005. Solid Waste Disposal Act. as
amended by the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act of 1976. as amended. (RCRA).
(42 U.S.C. 6905. 6912. 6922. 0923. 0924. 0933).
-------
40 CFR, PART 264
STANDARD FOR OWNERS AND OPERATORS OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
TREATMENT. STORAGE, AND DISPOSAL FACILITIES
SUBPART O - INCINERATORS
SECTIONS 264.340 - 264.347
24 JUNE iy82
4554A
-------
PART 264— STANDARDS FOR
OWNERS AND OPERATORS OF
HAZARDOUS WASTE TREATMENT,
STORAGE, AND DISPOSAL
FACILITIES
Subpart O—Incinerators
t. The authority citation for Part 284
reads as follows:
Authority: Sections 1006. 2002(a). and 3004
of the Solid WdSie Disposal Act. ai amended
by the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act. as amended (42 U.S.C. 6905. 6912(a) and
6924).
-------
27532 Federal Register / Vol. 47. No. 122 / Thursday. June 24. 1982 / Rules and Regulations
2. Section 264.340 is amended by
revising paragraph (b). redcsignating
and revising paragraph (c) as paragraph
(d). and adding new paragraph (c) to
read as follows:
§264.340 Applicability.
* • • * •
(b) After consideration of the waste
analysis included with Part B of the
permit application, the Regional
Administrator, in establishing the permit
conditions, must exempt the applicant
from all requirements of this Subpart
except { 264.341 (Waste analysis) and
§ 264.351 (Closure).
(1) If the Regional Administrator finds
that the waste to be burned is:
(i) Listed as a hazardous waste in Part
261. Subpart 0. of this Chapter solely
because it is ignitable (Hazard Code I).
corrosive (Hazard Code C), or both; or
(ii) Listed as a hazardous waste in
Part 261. Subpart D. of this Chapter
solely because it is reactive (Hazard
Code R) for characteristics other than
those listed in § 261.23)(a) (4) and (5).
and will not be burned when other
hazardous wastes are present in the
combustion zone; or
(tii) A hazardous waste solely because
it possesses the characteristic of
ignitability, corrosivity. or both, as
determined by the test for
characteristics of hazardous wastes
under Part 261. Subpart C, of this
Chapter, or
(iv) A hazardous waste solely because
it possesses any of the reactivity
characteristics described by § 261.23(a)
(1). (2). (3). (6). (7). and (8) of this
Chapter, and will not be burned when
other hazardous wastes are present in
the combustion zone: and
(2) If the waste analysis shows that
the waste contains none of the
hazardous constituents listed in Part
261. Appendix VIII. of this Chapter.
which would reasonably be expected to
be in the waste.
(c) if the waste to be burned is one
which is described by paragraphs
(b)(l)(i). (b)(l)(ii). (b)(l)(iii). or (b)(l)(iv)
of this Section and contains insignificant
concentrations of the hazardous
constituents listed in Part 261. Appendix
VIII. of this Chapter, then the Regional
Administrator may. in establishing
permit conditions, exempt the applicant
from all requirements of this Subpart.
except { 264.341 (Waste analysis) and
§ 264.351 (Closure), after consideration
of the waste analysis included with Part
B of the permit application, unless the
Regional Administrator finds that the
waste will pose a threat to human health
and the environment when burned in an
incinerator.
(d) The owner or operator of an
incinerator may conduct trial burns
subject only to the requirements of
{ 122.27(b) of this Chapter (Short term
and incinerator permits).
3. Section 264.341 is amended by
revising paragraph (a) as follows:
{264.341 Waste analysis.
(a) As a portion of the trial burn plan
required by { 122.27(b) of this Chapter.
or with Part B of the permit application.
the owner or operator must have
included an analysis of the waste feed
sufficient to provide all information
required by i 122.27(b)(2) or 122.25(b)(5)
of this Chapter. Owners or operator* of
new hazardous waste incinerators must
provide the information required by
§ 122.27(b)(3) or 122.25(b)(5) of this
Chapter to the greatest extent possible.
4. Section 264.343 is amended by
revising paragraphs (b) and (c) to read
as follows:
{ 264.343 Performance standards.
• • • • •
(b) An incinerator burning hazardous
waste and producing stack emissions of
more than 1.8 kilograms per hour (4
pounds per hour) of hydrogen chloride
(HC1) must control HC1 emissions such
that the rate of emission is no greater
than the larger of either 1.8 kilograms
per hour or 1% of the HC1 in the stack
gas prior to entering any pollution
control equipment.
(c) An incinerator burning hazardous
waste must not emit particulate matter
in excess of 180 milligrams per dry
standard cubic meter (0.08 grains per
dry standard cubic foot) when corrected
for the amount of oxygen in the stack
gas according to the formula:
14
21-Y
Where P, is the corrected concentration
of particulate matter. PB is the measured
concentration of particulate matter, and
Y is the measured concentration of
oxygen in the stack gas. using the Orsat
method for oxygen analysis of dry flue
gas, presented in Part 60. Appendix A
(Method 3). of this Chapter. This
correction procedure is to be used by all
hazardous waste incinerators except
those operating under conditions of
oxygen enrichment. For these facilities.
the Regional Administrator will select
an appropriate correction procedure, to
be specified in the facility permit.
5. Section 264.344 is amended by
revising the title and adding new
paragraph (c) as follows:
{ 264.344 Hazardous waste incinerator
permits.
• • • • •
(c) The permit for a new hazardous
waste incinerator must establish
appropriate conditions for each of the
applicable requirements of this Subpart.
including but not limited to allowable
waste feeds and operating conditions
necessary to meet the requirements of
I 264.345, sufficient to comply with the
following standards:
(1) For the period beginning with
initial introduction of hazardous waste
to the incinerator and ending with
initiation of the trial burn, and only for
the minimum time required to establish
operating conditions required in
paragraph (c)(2) of this Section, not to
exceed a duration of 720 hours operating
time for treatment of hazardous waste.
the operating requirements must be
those most likely to ensure compliance
with the performance standards of
J 264.343, based on the Regional
Administrator's engineering judgment.
The Regional Administrator may extend
the duration of this period once for up to
720 additional hours when good cause
for the extension is demonstrated by the
applicant.
(2) For the duration of the trial burn,
the operating requirements must be
sufficient to demonstrate compliance
with the performance standards of
{ 264.343 and must be in accordance
with the approved trial burn plan;
(3) For the period immediately
following completion of the trial bum.
and only for the minimum period
sufficient to allow sample analysis, data
computation, and submission of the tn.d
burn results by the applicant, and
review of the trial burn results and
modification of the facility permit by the
Regional Administrator, the operating
requirements must be those most likely
to ensure compliance with the
performance standards of { 264.343,
based on the Regional Administrator's
engineering judgement.
(4) For the remaining duration of the
permit, the operating requirements must
be those demonstrated, in a trial burn or
by alternative data specified in
$'l22.25(b)(5)(iii) of this Chapter, as
sufficient to ensure compliance with the
performance standards of § 2C4.343.
6. Section 264.345 is amended by
revising paragraph (b)(4) and (c) to read
as follows:
•
S 264.345 Operating requirements.
• • • • •
(b)• ' •
(4) An appropriate indicator of
combustion gas velocity;
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 47. No. 122 / Thursday. June 24. 1982 / Rules and Regulations 27533
(c) During start-up and shut-down of
an incinerator, hazardous waste (except
wastes exempted in accordance with
] :&4.340) must not be fed into the
incinerator unless the incinerator is
operating within the conditions of
operation (temperature, air feed rate.
etc.) specified in the permit
• « • • *
7. Section 264.347 is amended by
revising paragraphs (a)(l) and (b).
redesignating paragraph (c) as
paragraph (d). and adding new
paragraph (c) as follows:
$264.347 Monitoring and Inspections.
(a)'• '
(1) Combustion temperature, waste
feed rate, and the indicator of
combustion gas velocity specified in the
facility permit must be monitored on a
continuous basts.
• • • * •
(b) The incinerator and associated
equipment (pumps, valves, conveyors.
pipes, etc.) must be subjected to
thorough visual inspection, at least
daily, for leaks, spills, fugitive
emissions, and signs of tampering.
(c) The emergency waste feed cutoff
s>stem and associated alarms must be
tested at least weekly to verify
operabihty, unless the applicant
demonstrates to the Regional
Administrator that weekly inspections
will unduly restrict or upset operations
and that less frequent inspection will be
adequate. At a minimum, operational
testing must be conducted at least
monthly.
(d) This monitoring and inspection
data must be recorded and the records
must be placed in the operating log
required by § 264.73.
-------
40 CFR, PART 264
STANDARD FOR OWNERS AND OPERATORS OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
TREATMENT. STORAGE. AND DISPOSAL FACILITIES
SUBPART 0 - INCINERATION
SECTIONS 264.10 - 264.351
23 JANUARY 1981
4554A
-------
7678 Federal Register / Vol. 46. No. 15 / Friday, January 23. 1981 / Rules and Regulations
PART 284— STANDARDS FOR
OWNERS AND OPERATORS OF
HAZARDOUS WASTE TREATMENT,
STORAGE, AND DISPOSAL
FACILITIES
1. In I 284.10. paragraph (b) is revised
to read as follows:
§2*4.10 AppHcabMly.
* * * • *
(b) Section 264.18(b) is applicable only
to facilities subject to regulation under
Part 264. Subparts L J. K. L. and O.
2. In | 264.13. paragraph (b)(6) is
revised to read as follows:
{264.13 General wacte analysis.
(6) Where applicable, the methods
which will be used to meet the
additional waste analysis requirements
for specific waste management methods
as specified in || 284.17 and 284.341.
*****
3. In ! 264.15. paragraph (b)(4) is
revised to read as follows:
! 264.15 General Inspection requirements.
* • • • •
(b)"*
(4) The frequency of inspection may
vary for the items on the schedule. '
However, it should be based on the rate
of possible deterioration of the
equipment and the probability of an
environmental or human health incident
if the deterioration or malfunction of
any operator error goes undetected
between inspections. Anas subject to
spills, such as loading and unloading
areas, must be inspected daily when in
use. At a minimum, the inspection
schedule must include the ty»f •"'ft
frequencies called for in 1 1 264.174,
284.194. 264.228, 28C2S4, and 264.347,
where applicable.
• • • • •
4. In i 264^3, paragraph (b) is
amended by revising paragraph (b)(3),
adding new paragraph (b)(6), and
redesignating paragraph (b)(6) and (b](7)
as (b)(7) and (b)(8) respectively revised
to read as follows:
1264.73 Operating Record.
• • • • • •
fb)***
(3) Records and results of waste
analyses performed as specified in
li 264.13. 264.17, and 264.341;
• • • • •
(6) Monitoring, testing, or analytical
data where required by 1 264.347;
(7) For off-site facilities, notices to
generators as specified in § 264.12(b);
and
(8) All closure cost estimates under
§ 264.142. and, for disposal facilities, all
post-closure cost estimates under
| 264.144.
*****
5. In i 264.112, paragraph (a) and
paragraph (a)(l) are revised to read as
follows:
{264.112 Closure plan; amendment of
plan.
(a) The owner or operator of a
hazardous waste management facility
must have a written closure plan. The
plan must be submitted with the permit
application, in accordance with
§ 122.28(a)(13) of this Chapter, and
approved by the Regional Administrator
as part of the permit issuance
proceeding under Part 124 of this
Chapter. In accordance with j 122,29 of
this Chapter, the approved closure plan
will become a condition of any RCRA
permit The Regional Administrator's
decision must assure that that approved
closure plan is consistent with
il 264.111. 264.113. 264.114. 264.115 and
the applicable requirements of
U 264.178. 264.197. 264.228, 264.258, and
264.351. A copy of the approved plan
and all revisions to the plan must be
kept at the facility until closure is
completed and certified in accordance
with i 264.115. The plan must identify
steps necessary to completely or
partially close the facility at any point
during its intended operating life and to
completely close the facility at the end
of its intended operating life. The
closure plan must include, at least
(1) A description of how and when the
facility will be partially dosed if
applicable, and finally closed. The
description must identify the maximum
extent of the operation which will be
unclosed during the life of the facility,
and bow the requirements of || 204.111.
264.113,264.114,264.115. and the
applicable closure requirements of
II 264.178,264.197,264^28.264.258, and
264.351 will be met'
• * * * *
6. In 1284.142. paragraph (a) is
revised to read as follows:
1264.142 Cost estimate for facftty
(a) The owner or operator must have a
written estimate of the cost of closing
the facility in accordance with the
requirements in || 264.111-204.115 and
applicable closure requirements in
II 264.178, 264.197. 264.228, 264.258, and
264.351. The owner or operator must
keep this estimate, and all subsequent
estimates required in this Section, at the
facility. The estimate must equal the
cost of closure at the point in the
facility's operating life when the extent
and manner of its operation would make
closure the most expensive, as indicated
by its closure plan (see § 264.112(a)].
[Comment- For example, the closure
cost estimate for a particular landfill
may be for the cost of closure when its
active disposal operations extend over
20 acres, if at all other times these
operations extend over less than 20
acres. The estimate would not include
costs of partial closures that the closure
plan schedules before or after the time
of maximum closure cost.]
• • • • •
7. In 40 CFR Part 264. Subpart O is
added to read as follows:
Subpart O Incinerators
SM.
264.340 Applicability.
204 J41 Waste analysis.
264.342 Principal organic hazardous
constituents (POHCs).
264.343 Performance standard*.
264.344 New wastes: Trial burns or permit
modifications.
264.345 Operating requirements.
264.346 [Reserved]
284.347 Monitoring and inspections.
264J48-264J50 [Reserved]
264.331 Closure.
264.352-264.999 [Reserved]
Subpart O—Incinerators
{264J40 AppttcabHtty.
(a) The regulations in this Subpart
apply to owners and operators of
'facilities that incinerate hazardous
waste, except as | 264.1 provides
otherwise.
(b) If the Regional Administrator
finds, after an examination of the waste
analysis included with Part B of the
applicants permit application, that the
waste to be burned:
(1) Is either (i) listed as a hazardous
waste in Part 261, Subpart D. of this
Chapter only because it is ignitable
(Hazard Code I) or, (il) that the waste
has been tested against the
characteristics of hazardous waste
under Part 261. Subpart C of this
Chapter and that it meets only the
ignitability characteristic and
(2) That the waste analysis included
with Part B of the permit application
includes none of the hazardous
constituents listed in Part 281, Appendb
vnt
then die Regional Administrator may. in
establishing the permit conditions,
exempt the applicant from all
requirements of this Subpart except
i 264.341 (Waste Analysis) and
I 264.351 (Closure).
C-17
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 4G. No. 15 / Friday. January 23. 1931 / Rules and Regulations 7G79
(c) The owner or operator of an
incinerator may conduct trial burns.
subject only to the requirements of
1122.27(b) of this Chapter (Trial Burn
Permits).
§ 264.341 Waste analysis.
(a) As a portion of a trial burn plan
required by 5 122.27(b) of this Chapter,
or with Part B of his permit application,
the owner or operator must have
included an analysis of his waste feed
sufficient to provide all information
required by § 122.27(b)(2) or
§ 122.25(b)(5) of this Chapter.
(b) Throughout normal operation the
owner or operator must conduct
sufficient waste analysis to verify that
waste feed to the incinerator is within
the physical and chemical composition
limits specified in his permit (under
S 264.345(b]).
{264.342 Principal organic hazardous
constituents (POHCs).
(a] Principal Organic Hazardous
Constituents (POHCs) in the waste feed
must be treated to the extent required
by the performance standard of
§ 264.343.
(b)(l) One or more POHCs will be
specified in the facility's permit from
among those constituents listed in Part
261. Appendix VIII of this Chapter, for
each waste feed to be burned. This
specification will be based on the
degree of difficulty of incineration of the
organic constituents in the waste and on
their concentration or mass in the waste
feed, considering the results of waste
analyses and trial bums or alternative
data submitted with Part B of the
facility's permit application. Organic
constituents which represent the
greatest degree of difficulty of
incineration will be those most likely to
be designated as POHCs. Constituents
are more likely to be designated as
POHCs if they are present in large
quantities or concentrations in the
waste.
(2) Trial POHCs will be designated for
performance of trial bums in accordance
with the procedure specified in
§ 122.27(b) of this Chapter for obtaining
trial bum permits.
§ 264.343 Performance standards.
An incinerator burning hazardous
waste must be designed, constructed.
and maintained so that, when operated
in accordance with operating
requirements specified under { 204.345.
it will meet the following performance
standards:
(a) An incinerator burning hazardous
waste must achieve a destruction and
removal efficiency (ORE) of 99.99% for
each principal organic hazardous
consliiucnl (POHC) designated (under
5 2W.3-1C) in iis permit for rach waste
feed. DRE is determined for each POHC
from the following equation:
DRE - (win - wout) x 100%
Tn
Where:
WB = Maj» feed rate of one principal
organic hazardous constituent (POHC) in
the waste stream feeding the incinerator,
and
Wm = Mms emission rate of the Mine
POHC present in exhaust emissions prior
to release to the atmosphere.
(b) An incinerator burning hazardous
waste containing more than 0.5%
chlorine must remove 99% of the
hydrogen chloride from the exhaust gas.
(c) An incinerator burning hazardous
waste must not emit participate matter
exceeding 160 milligrams per dry
standard cubic meter (0.08 grains per
dry standard cubic foot) when corrected
for 12% COi, using the procedures
presented in the Clean Air Act
regulations, "Standards of Performance
for Incinerators". 40 CFR 60.50,
Subpart E,
(d) For purposes of permit
enforcement, compliance with the
operating requirements specified in the
permit (under § 264.345) will be regarded
as compliance with this Section.
However, evidence that compliance
with those permit conditions is
insufficient to ensure compliance with
the performance requirements of this
Section may be "information" justifying
modification, revocation, or reissuance
of a permit under $ 122.15 of this
Chapter.
1264.344 New ws*te«: trial bums or
permit modifications).
(a) The owner or operator of a
hazardous waste incinerator may burn
only wastes specified in his permit and
only under operating conditions
specified for those wastes under
$ 204.345. except:
(1) In approved trial burns under
{ 122.27(b) of this Chapter, or
(2) Under exemptions created by
$ 204.340.
(b) Other hazardous wastes may be
burned only after operating conditions
have been specified in a new permit or a
permit modification as applicable.
Operating requirements for new wastes
may be be based on either trial bum
results or alternative data included with
Part D of a permit application under
1122.23lb)(5) of this Chapter.
§ 264.345 Operating requirements.
(a) An incincra'or must be operated in
accordance with operating requirements
specified in the permit. These will be
specified on a case-by-case basis as
those demonstrated (in a trial bum or in
alternative data a* specified in
{ 264.344[b) and included with Part B of
a facility's permit application) to be
sufficient to comply with the
performance standards of { 264.343.
(b) Each set of operating requirements
will specify the composition of the
waste feed (including acceptable
variations in the physical or chemical
properties of the waste feed which will
not affect compliance with the
performance requirement of ( 264.343) to
which the operating requirements apply.
For each such waste feed, the permit
will specify acceptable operating limits
including the following conditions:
(1) Carbon monoxide (CO) level in the
stack exhaust gas;
(2) Waste feed rate;
(3) Combustion temperature;
(4) Air feed rate to the combustion
system;
(5) Allowable variations in incinerator
system design or operating procedures;
and
(6) Such other operating requirements
as are necessary to ensure that the
performance standards of { 264.343 are
met.
(c) During start-up and shut-down of
an incinerator, hazardous waste (except
ignitable waste exempted in accordance
with 5 264.340) must not be fed into the
incinerator unless the incinerator is
operating within the conditions of
operation (temperature, air feed rate,
etc.) specified in the permit.
(d) Fugitive emissions from the
combustion zone must be controlled by:
(1) Keeping the combustion zone
totally sealed against fugitive emissions:
or
(2) Maintaining a combustion zone
pressure lower than atmospheric
pressure; or
(3) An alternate means of control
demonstrated (with Part B of the permit
application) to provide fugitive
emissions control equivalent to
maintenance of combustion zone
pressure lower than atmospheric
pressure.
(e) An incinerator must be operated
with a functioning system to
automatically cut off waste feed to the
incinerator when operating conditions
deviate from limits established under
paragraph (a) of this Section.
(f) An incinerator must cease
operation when changes in waste feed.
C-18
-------
7CBO
Federal Register / Vol. 46, No: 15 / Friday, January 23. 1981 / Rules and Regulations
incinerator design, or operating
conditions exceed limits designated in
its permit.
$264.346 [Reserved]
{264.347 Monitoring and Inspections.
(a] The owner or operator must
conduct as a minimum, the following
monitoring while incinerating hazardous
waste:
(1) Combustion temperature, waste
feed rate, and air feed rate must be
monitored on a continuous basis.
(2) CO must be monitored on a
continuous basis at a point in the
incinerator downstream of the
combustion zone and prior to release to
the-atmosphere.
(3) Upqn request by the Regional
Administrator, sampling and analysis of
the waste and exhaust emissions must
be conducted to verify that the operating
requirements established in the permit
achieve the performance standards of
§ 264.343.
(b) The incinerator and associated
equipment (pumps, valves, conveyors,
pipes, etc.) must be completely
inspected at least daily for leaks, spills,
and fugitive emissions. All emergency
waste feed cut-off controls and system
alarms must be checked daily to verify
proper operation.
(c) This monitoring and inspection
data must be recorded and the records
must be placed in the operating log
required by § 264.73.
§J 264J49-264.350 [Reserved)
§26051 Closure.
At closure the owner or operator must
remove all hazardous waste and
hazardous waste residues (including.
but not limited to, ash, scrubber waters,
and scrubber sludges) from the
incinerator site.
[Comment At closure, as throughout
the operating period, unless the owner
or operator can demonstrate, in
accordance with | 281 3(d) of this
Chapter, that the residue removed from
the incinerator is not a hazardous waste.
the owner or operator becomes a
generator of hazardous waste and must
manage it in accordance with applicable
requirements of Parts 262-266 of this
Chapter.]
H26OS2-264JM (Reserved]
PART 265-IHTERIM STATUS
STANDARDS FOR OWNERS AND
OPERATORS OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
TREATMENT, STORAGE, AND
DISPOSAL FACILITIES
1. In | 285.73. paragraph (b)(3) is
revised to read as follows:
§ 265.73 Operating record.
(3) Records and results of waste-
analysis and trial tests performed as
specified in §§ 265.13. 265.193. 265.225,
265.252. 265.273, 265.341. 265.375. and
265.402;
*****
2. 40 CFR Part 265. Subpart O, is
revised to read as follows:
Subpart O Incinerators
Sac
265.340 Applicability.
265.341 Waste analysis.
265.342-265.344 [Reserved]
265.345 General operating requirements.
265.346 [Reserved]
285.347 Monitoring and inspection.
2a5.34ft-265.350 [Reserved]
285451 Closure.
265.352-285.389 [Reserved]
{26&340 Applicability.
(a) The regulations in this Subpart
apply to owners or operators of facilities
that treat hazardous waste in
incinerators, except as § 265.1 and
paragraph (b) of this Section provide
otherwise.
(b) Incineration of wastes which:
(1) Meet only the ignitability
characteristic under Part 261, Subpart C.
of this Chapter, or
(2) Are listed to Part 261, Subpart D. of
this Chapter for ignitability only
(Hazard Code I).
are exempted from the requirements of
this Subpart except 9 265.351. if the
owner or operator can document that
the waste feed would not reasonably be
expected to contain constituents listed
in Part 261. Appendix VED of this
Chapter. Such documentation must be in
writing and must be kept at the facility.
12*1341 Waste analysis.
In addition to the waste analyses
^required by I 265.13, the owner or
operator must sufficiently analyze any
waste which he has not previously
burned in his incinerator to enable him
to establish steady state (normal)
operating conditions (including waste
and auxiliary fuel feed and air flow) and
to determine the type of pollutants
which might be emitted. At a minimum,
the analysis must determine:
(a) Heating value of the waste;
(b) Halogen content and sulfur content
in the waste: and
(c) Concentrations in the waste of
lead and mercury, unless the owner or
operator has written, documented data
that show that the element is not
present
[Comment A* required by | 265.73,
the owner or operator must place the
results from each waste analysis, or the
documented information, in the
operating record of the facility.]
§§ 265.342-265.344 [Reserved]
§ 265.345 General operating requirements.
During start-up and shut-down of an
incinerator, the owner or operator must
not feed hazardous waste unless the
incinerator is at steady state (normal)
conditions of operation, including steady
state operating temperature and air
flow.
§285.346 [Reserved]
{ 265.347 Monitoring and Inspections.
The owner or operator must conduct
as a minimum, the following monitoring
and inspections when incinerating
hazardous waste:
(a) Existing instruments which relate
to combustion and emission control
must be monitored at least every 15
minutes. Appropriate corrections to
maintain steady state combustion
conditions must be made immediately
either automatically or by the operator.
Instruments which relate to combustion
and emission control would normally
include those measuring waste feed.
auxiliary fuel feed, air flow, incinerator
temperature, scrubber flow, scrubber
pH, and relevant level controls.
(b) The stack plume (emissions) must
be observed visually at least hourly for
normal appearance (color and opacity).
The operator must immediately make
any indicated corrections necessary to
return visible emissions to their normal
appearance.
(c) The complete incinerator and
associated equipment (pumps, valves.
conveyors, pipes, etc.) must be inspectec
at least daily for leaks, spills, and
fugitive emissions, and all emergency
shutdown controls and system alarms
must be checked to assure proper
operation.
H26&34a-26SJSO [Reserved]
{26U51 Closure.
At closure, the owner or operator
must remove all hazardous waste and
hazardous waste residues (including but
not limited to ash, scrubber waters, and
scrubber sludges) from the incinerator.
[Comment: At closure, as throughout
the operating period, unless the owner
or operator can demonstrate, in
accordance with | 281.3(4) of this
Chapter, that the residue removed from
his incinerator is not a hazardous waste
the owner or operator becomes a
generator of hazardous waste and must
manage it in accordance with all
applicable requirements of Parts 262-264
of this Chapter.] _
-------
APPENDIX D
MOLECULAR STRUCTURE OF THE EXPLOSIVES
-------
CH2
TNT
C/HsNaOe
N02
2,4,6 Trinitrotoluene
NO2
NB
C«H5NO2
Nitrobenzene
CH3
|
N
O2N
C«H8NaO.
HMX
2-Amino
NO2
1 ,3,5,7-Tetranitro-Octahydro-1 ,3,5,7-Tetracyclooctane
NOj
2-Amino-4,6 Dinitrotoluene
NO:
CH3
CaHeNeOa
RDX
2,6 DNT
NO2
1 ,3,5-Trinitro, Hexahydro-1 ,3,5-Triazine
2,6-Dinitrotoluene
NOa
CH3
TNB
2,4 DNT
CTHeN2O4
1 ,3,5-Trinitrobenzene
NO3
2,4-Dinitrotoluene
NO*
NCb
CH3-N
DNB
CrHsNsOs
1,3-Oinitrobenzene
NOa
Tetranitromethylaniline
TABLE D-1 MOLECULAR STRUCTURE OF EXPLOSIVES
D-l
-------
APPENDIX E
DOCUMENT DISTRIBUTION LIST
-------
DOCUMENT DISTRIBUTION LIST
Defense Technical Information Center 12 copies
Cameron Station
Alexandria, Virginia 22314
Defense Logistics Studies Information Exchange 2 copies
U.S. Army Logistics Management Center
Ft. Lee, Virginia 23801
DRXTH-ES 2 copies
E-l
4554A
------- |