UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
-/-
OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR
August 15, 1996 SCIENCE ADVISORY BOARD
EPA-SAB-EEC-96-004 /
Honorable Carol M. Browner
Administrator Chic^o, !L
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
Subject: Review of the Waste Incineration Research Program
Dear Ms. Browner:
At the request of the Office of Research and Development (ORD), the Waste
Incineration Subcommittee of the Environmental Engineering Committee (EEC) of the
Science Advisory Board reviewed the Agency's Waste Incineration Research Program.
The Subcommittee met September 11-13, 1995 at the National Risk Management
Research Laboratory (NRMRL), Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division, Re-
search Triangle Park, North Carolina. The EEC approved the Subcommittee's report
May 21, 1996 and the Executive Committee approved this report June 25, 1996.
The research had been conducted by the Air and Energy Engineering Research
Laboratory and the Risk Reduction Research Laboratory which are now consolidated
into the National Risk Management Research Laboratory. The charge for the review
was to:
a) Review the importance of the issues identified for work in the future,
namely formation, control, and monitoring of products of incomplete
combustion (PICs), including dioxins, metal transformation and control;
and waste combustion and emission characterization. Review the inte-
gration of this research with any existing research programs.
b) Review the integration of the program in terms of past work and plans for
future work which will address the issues stated above and obtain the
needed research information.
c) Evaluate the effectiveness of in-house research on meeting short-term
and long-term issues and needs.
Reeyctod/R*eyelabl«
Printed on paper that cental
at toatt 75% recycled (bar
r\ C^ Printed on paper that contain*
-------
Combustion is a major part of society. We are dependent upon combustion
processes for a variety of reasons, including power generation, transportation, waste
destruction (incineration), and in some cases heating. Therefore, understanding the
emissions from these systems could result in actions that reduce emissions and in
effect reduce adverse health effects. The Subcommittee considers this to be an
important factor in recommending that the research continue in an integrated fashion to
address the ever-increasing complexity of combustion issues, including those dealing
with incineration of wastes.
The key findings and recommendations of the Subcommittee, based on the
above statement and review of the projects, are:
a) The Subcommittee concluded that the EPA laboratory has world-class
facilities and the Agency staff has a demonstrated record of productivity
and accomplishment, which has earned the respect of their peers^
However, the low research and development to capital equipment budget
ratio implies that people and ideas are secondary to instrumentation.
Although research goals for the funded projects are being adequately
addressed, they represent short-term projects and this leads to a lack of
coherent, focused research to address the complex problems.
b) The Subcommittee finds that the program lacks a formal strategic plan.
The program also lacks emphasis on the role of incineration in pollution
prevention. Two areas that could be addressed are changes in technol-
ogy to reduce reliance on end-of-pipe control technology and segregat-
ing the waste stream to isolate, and perhaps pretreat, constituents known
to have negative impact on the emissions from combustion and incinera-
tion systems. The Subcommittee recommends that the Agency develop a
strategic plan which should incorporate the role of incineration and
combustion in pollution prevention.
c) The issues the laboratory is addressing are important and the research
projects are obtaining the needed information. The laboratory has
successfully collaborated with some outside investigators, and the Sub-
committee believes this interaction should be expanded because collabo-
ration provide both .research groups with the opportunity to do
important research neither could do alone. This was evident by the
strengths of the projects which contained some collaboration.
d) Because of the dependence of society on combustion, combustion
research should be a core research program.
-------
e) Although the importance of incineration will vary under different policies,
maintaining core competency allows the Agency to address unanticipated
future problems using an existing base of expertise and science.
To be a core research program, funding must be provided to the labora-
tory to operate as such. Otherwise, marketing to obtain funds outside of
EPA may result in a lack of integration in the program. This integration is
necessary to address long-term and emerging issues.
f) The research appears to be meeting the short term needs (as evidenced
by the interactions with Office of Solid Waste) and most of them will
address the long-term combustion related challenges that the Agency is
faced with.
In summary, the Subcommittee felt that the laboratory's equipment, facilities and
capability are an asset to the Agency, and that it needs to develop a strategic plan, set
priorities and follow them.
The Subcommittee appreciates the opportunity to review this program, and looks
forward to a written response to its recommendations for the combustion research
program.
Sincerely,
Dr. Genevieve M. Matanoski, Chair
Executive Committee
Dr. IshwarTvlurarka, Chair
Environmental Engineering Committee
ENCLOSURE
Ann LightyChair
Waste Incineration Subcommittee
-------
NOTICE
This report has been written as part of the activities of the Science Advisory
Board, a public advisory group providing extramural scientific information and advice to
the Administrator and other officials of the Environmental Protection Agency. The
Board is structured to provide balanced, expert assessment of scientific matters related
to problems facing the Agency. This report has not been reviewed for approval by the
Agency and, hence, the contents of this report do not necessarily represent the views
and policies of the Environmental Protection Agency, nor of other agencies in the
Executive Branch of the Federal government, nor does mention of trade names or
commercial products constitute a recommendation for use.
-------
ABSTRACT
The Waste Incineration Subcommittee of the Science Advisory Board reviewed
EPA's waste incineration research program. The Subcommittee was asked to: a)
review the importance of the issues identified for work in the future, namely formation,
control, and monitoring of products of incomplete combustion (PICs), including dioxins,
metal transformation and control; and waste combustion and emission characterization.
Review the integration of this research with any existing research programs; b) review
the integration of the program in terms of past work and plans for future work which will
address the issues stated above and obtain the needed research information; and c)
evaluate the effectiveness of in-house research on meeting short-term and long-term
issues and needs.
The major findings and recommendations of the Subcommittee are: a) The
issues the laboratory is addressing are important and the research projects are
obtaining the needed information. While the laboratory has interacted with some
outside investigators, the Subcommittee believes this interaction should be expanded
because collaborations provide strengths in areas where the laboratory does not
necessarily have expertise. This was evident by the strengths of the projects which
contained some collaboration, b) To be a core research program, funding must be
provided to the laboratory to operate as such. It appears as though the marketing to
obtain funds outside of EPA resulted in a lack of integration in the program. This
integration is necessary to address long-term and emerging issues. The Subcommittee
recommends that the laboratory develop a strategic plan which will help determine
criteria for judging the projects which are underway (however, this can only occur if
operated as a core program). In addition, the strategic planning should incorporate the
role of incineration and combustion in pollution prevention, c) The issues appear to be
meeting the short term needs (as evidenced by the interactions with Office of Solid
Waste) and most of them will address the long-term combustion related challenges that
the Agency is faced with, d) Although the importance of incineration will vary under
different policies, combustion and incineration research should remain part of the
Agency's core research program because of the dependence of society on combustion.
Maintaining core competency allows the Agency to address unanticipated future
problems using an existing base of expertise and science.
Keywords: combustion, incineration, waste, PICs, metals
-------
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Science Advisory Board
Environmental Engineering Committee
Waste Incineration Subcommittee
CHAIR
Dr. Jo Ann Lighty, Department of Chemical and Fuels Engineering, University of Utah,
Salt Lake City, UT
MEMBERS
Dr. Robert B. Pojasek, Cambridge Environmental, Inc., Cambridge, MA
CONSULTANTS
Dr. Barry Dellinger, University of Dayton Research Institute, Dayton, OH
Dr. Nina Bergan French, SKY+, Oakland, CA
Dr. Tom Lester, University of Kentucky, Engineering, Lexington, KY
Dr. Rolf Hartung, School of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Ml
Dr. Wm. Randall Seeker, Energy & Environmental Research Corp., Irvine, CA
SCIENCE ADVISORY BOARD STAFF
Mrs. Kathleen W. Conway, Designated Federal Official, U.S. EPA, Science Advisory
Board (1400), 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460
Mrs. Dorothy M. Clark, Staff Secretary, U.S. EPA, Science Advisory Board (1400), 401
M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460
-------
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Science Advisory Board
Environmental Engineering Committee
CHAIR
Dr. Ishwar P. Murarka, Environmental and Health Sciences Business Unit,
Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA
MEMBERS
Dr. Calvin C. Chien, Corporate Remediation, E. I. duPont Company, Wilmington, DE
Dr. Hilary I. Inyang, Dept of Civil Engineering, University of Massachusetts, Lowell, MA
Dr. James H. Johnson, Jr., School of Engineering, Howard University, Washington, DC
Dr. Wayne Kachel, MELE Associates, Brooks AFB, San Antonio, TX
Dr. Jo Ann Lighty, Department of Chemical and Fuels Engineering, University of Utah,
Salt Lake City, UT
Dr. James W. Mercer, GeoTrans, Inc., Sterling, VA
Dr. Frederick G. Pohland, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA
Dr. Robert B. Pojasek, Cambridge Environmental, Inc.,Cambridge, MA
Ms. Lynne Preslo, Technical Programs, Earth Tech, Berkeley, CA
Dr. Wm. Randall Seeker, Energy & Environmental Research Corp., Irvine, CA
Science Advisory Board Staff
Mrs. Kathleen W. Conway, Designated Federal Official, U.S. EPA, Science Advisory
Board (1400), 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460
Mrs. Dorothy M. Clark, Staff Secretary, U.S. EPA, Science Advisory Board (1400), 401
M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460
IV
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
2. INTRODUCTION 4
2.1 Background and History of the Research Program 4
2.2 The Review and Charge 5
3. GENERAL EVALUATION 6
3.1 Response to the Charge 6
3.2 Rationale and Justification for a Core Competency 6
3.3 Positive Outcomes of a Core Competency 9
3.4 Need for a Strategic Plan 9
4. EVALUATION OF PROJECTS 11
4.1 PIC Formation and Control . 11
4.1.1 Development of a PIC Target Analyte List 11
4.1.2 Characterization of Secondary Combustion Chamber Performance
and Development of Failure Mode Diagnostics 12.
4.1.3 Formation and Control of Chlorinated Dioxins and Furans in
Combustion Systems and Modeling of PCD and PCF Congener
Profiles from MWC 13
4.1.4 Destruction of CFC's and Other Chlorinated Wastes 14
4.1.5 Bioassay Characterization of Incineration Emissions 15
4.1.6 Monitoring and Control of PICs from Incinerators 15
4.1.7 Mixing Characterization of Transient Puffs in a Rotary Kiln
Incinerator 16
4.2 Understanding Metal Transformations and Determining Metal Control .. 16
4.2.1 Metal Aerosol Formation and High Temperature Control by the
Sorbents 16
4.2.2 Chromium Partitioning in Incineration Environments 17
4.2.3 Volatile Metal Control: Mercury 18
4.3 Multifuel Combustion 18
4.4 Incineration Research Facility (IRF) 18
5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 19
APPENDIX A - DOCUMENTS REVIEWED A -1
APPENDIX B - ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS B -1
REFERENCES CITED R -1
-------
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On September 11 through 13, 1995, the Waste Incineration Subcommittee met
at EPA's National Risk Management Research Laboratory's (NRMRL), Air Pollution
Prevention and Control Division (APPCD) to review the hazardous and municipal waste
combustion program. The charge was to:
a) Review the importance of issues identified for work in the future, namely
the formation, control, and monitoring of products of incomplete combus-
tion (PICS), including dioxins; metal transformation and control; and,
waste combustion and emission characterization;
b) Review the integration of the program within the Agency in terms of past
work and future work which will address the issues stated above and
obtain the needed research information. In addition, review the integra-
tion of this research with any existing research programs within other
federal agencies, academics, and/or government laboratories.
c) Evaluate the effectiveness of the in-house research on meeting the short- .
term and long-term issues and needs of the program offices and the
agency.
Combustion is an integral part of society. From energy generation to waste
disposal, combustion and incineration processes are significant in today's civilization.
For example, in the United States, which uses coal chiefly for smelting iron ore and
generating electricity, coal production grew 15 percent between 1980 and 1988 and
China, which uses coal in both homes and in industry, expects to increase its coal use
by 40% over eight years (Brown et al., 1993). Along with the benefits of combustion,
there are possible adverse effects. In order to balance the benefits and adverse
effects, it is important that research be conducted to develop answers/results which will
reduce adverse effects and increase benefits. For this reason, the work at the labora-
tory is extremely important and should be regarded by the Agency as a core compe-
tency area.
In Future Issues in Environmental Engineering (USEPA, 1995a), the SAB's
Environmental Engineering Committee defined core competencies as, "the essential
and distinct scientific and technical capabilities that enable EPA to fulfill its current and
future missions. Having core competencies supports EPA's ability to approach
regulations in an integrated, efficient, cost-effective and harmonized manner and to
address multi-pollutant and multi-media problems with the limited resources that will
likely be available to the Agency." Regarding combustion research, including incinera-
tion, as a core competency will maintain a base of expertise and scientific knowledge
which will allow the Agency to address unanticipated problems. The
1
-------
Subcommittee finds that several factors limit the development of a core competency in
combustion:
a) The base research support is small. Additional support comes from a
variety of sources (or "customers") both within and outside the Agency
(such as the Illinois Clean Coal Institute and the Department of Energy's
(DOE) National Renewable Energy Laboratory). While the outside
sources provide funding needed for research, their missions may differ
from EPA's with the result that the research funded may not meet ERA'S
needs as closely as if EPA had funded the research. The presenters
discussed a large number of activities which were in support of the
program offices. While these functions are valuable, the emphasis on
short-term projects and this also leads toward a lack of a coherent,
focused research to address the complex problems.
b) The limitations of the budget have forced the staff to become entrepre-
neurs and sales people who market outside the Agency for funding. This
marketing has resulted in a research program which is sometimes fo-
cused on the needs of several funding sources. Potentially, this could
cause the program not to focus primarily on EPA's or the public's needs.
c) The financial support for collaborative efforts with outside researchers is
small. The APPCD should be encouraged to participate in truly collabora-
tive research in which EPA and the collaborators are equal partners
because collaborative efforts allow both research groups to do important
work neither could do alone.
The general findings and recommendations of the Subcommittee are:
a) The issues the laboratory is addressing are important and most of the
projects were of value. The research being conducted was high quality;
the engineering research staff is exceptionally capable. The combination
of outstanding facilities, equipment, and a demonstrated record of accom-
plishment attests to the capabilities.
b) The research group should foster more interaction with other researchers
as opposed to contracts under direct supervision by EPA personnel or
independent grant research at universities. The interaction should be
truly collaborative research projects where both parties are involved from
concept through to completion of the work. Collaboration is important
because it allows both research groups to conduct important research
neither could do alone.
-------
c) The research group should formalize their strategic plan to help deter-
mine criteria for judging the projects which are underway. In addition, the
strategic planning should incorporate the role of incineration and combus-
tion in pollution prevention. The current program lacks a pollution preven-
tion component. Prevention can be addressed in two areas: i) changes in
technology (for example, low-NOx burners) to reduce the reliance on end-
of-pipe control technology; and ii) segregating the waste stream to isolate,
and perhaps pretreat, constituents that are known to have a negative
impact on the emissions from combustion and incineration systems. The
impact of the effect of changing waste streams, a result of waste
minimization and pollution prevention activities, needs to be investigated
with regard to its potential impact on the emissions from these systems.
d) The Agency should consider the combustion program, of which waste
incineration is a part, as a "core competency" and support it as such.
Although the importance of incineration will vary under different policies,
combustion and incineration research should remain part of the Agency's
core research program because of the dependence of society on combus-
tion. Providing the necessary funding will allow this group to continue to
meet these long-term needs as well as the short-term needs of the
Agency.
e) The SAB's Research Strategies Advisory Committee (RSAC) should look
at the low research & development to capital equipment budget ratio and
determine if the present ratios are acceptable to enable the program to
continue with viable projects and equipment.
-------
2. INTRODUCTION
2.1 Background and History of the Research Program
The Air and Energy Engineering Research Laboratory, Combustion Research
Branch (CRB) has provided fundamental and applied combustion research since the
1960s (USEPA, 1984). During this time the emphasis was placed on the control of
nitrogen oxides using combustion modifications. In 1983, CRB was asked to provide
fundamental research support to the Hazardous Waste Engineering Research Labora-
tory. At this time, several combustors were upgraded and/or built to perform the
necessary studies. In June 1988, the laboratory stopped work to obtain a RCRA permit
for the facilities. This was received in November 1989. In 1986, CRB was funded to
perform field tests on numerous Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Combustors to support
the development of regulations for these systems by the Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards (OAQPS). From 1987 until 1992, field data were obtained and it was
decided to build a new multi-fuel combustor to perform in-house tests. This unit was
completed in 1995.
At the present, facilities include: rotary kiln incinerator simulator, package boiler
simulator; commercial package boiler; horizontal tunnel furnace; dual-stage fluidized
bed combustor; Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Permitted Air
Pollution Control System; and, the Multi-fuel Stoker Combustor Research Facility. The
laboratory has also developed methods for dioxin analysis and has numerous analytical
capabilities. With these tools, the laboratory has developed the capability to investi-
gate a variety of combustion and incineration issues, but they have not yet adequately
applied these capabilities.
The engineering research staff of APPCD's Air Pollution Technology Branch is
exceptionally capable. The combination of outstanding facilities, equipment, and a
demonstrated record of accomplishment qualifies this laboratory to be a first class
research facility. The Subcommittee recognizes their contribution to the field of
combustion, as demonstrated by: a) 139 technical papers; b) over a dozen patents; c)
nine EPA Scientific and Technological Achievement Awards (including a Level I award
and multiple awards at Level II); d) EPA Gold, Silver, and Bronze medals; e) the PHS
Meritorious Service Medal; and f) the Fitzhugh Green Award (for demonstrating
outstanding leadership skills and-ability in creatively devising and implementing-major
programs overseas). The group has contributed to several important air pollution
issues; specifically, the early work from CRB contributed to the understanding of NOx
control strategies and has improved our ability to utilize high nitrogen fuels within clean
air regulations. The group is to be commended for their accomplishments to the EPA
and society.
-------
With the reorganization of the Office of Research and Development (ORD), the
Air and Energy Engineering Research Laboratory (AEERL) was merged with other
laboratories to become part of the National Risk Management Research Laboratory.
The function of this new laboratory is to perform "research and technology transfer to
prevent, mitigate, and control pollution."
2.2 The Review and Charge
On September 11-13, 1995, the Waste Incineration Subcommittee met at the
National Risk Management Research Laboratory's (NRMRL), Air Pollution Prevention
and Control Division (APPCD) to review the hazardous and municipal waste combus-
tion programs. The Subcommittee was charged to:
a) Review the importance of issues identified for work in the future, namely
the formation, control, and monitoring of PICs, including dioxins; metal
transformation and control; and, waste combustion and emission charac-
terization;
b) Review the integration of the program within the Agency in terms of past
work and future work which will address the issues stated above and
obtain the needed research information. In addition, review the integra-
tion of this research with any existing research programs within other
federal agencies, academics, and/or government laboratories.
c) Evaluate the effectiveness of the in-house research on meeting the short-
term and long-term issues and needs of the program offices and the
agency.
A full listing of the review documents can be found in Appendix A.
-------
3. GENERAL EVALUATION
3.1 Response to the Charge
In response to the charge, the Subcommittee felt that the issues identified were
important for work in the future. The projects presented, for the most part, addressed
the same issues stated above and will obtain the needed research information. The
laboratory has obtained outside funding from a variety of sources; while this funding
has been useful in some cases to address issues, it has also resulted in a lack of
integration in the program. A recommendation for formalization of a strategic plan
follows. The laboratory has collaborated with other researchers in the area, but this
collaboration has been minimal. It is evident from the project review, that in the cases
where there was collaboration, it was extremely useful in obtaining expertise that the
laboratory did not have. The laboratory has responded to the needs of the program
offices in a variety of projects; however, these projects are often short-term in nature
and the laboratory is having difficulty maintaining the base funding necessary to
maintain a core competency which would enable it to address more long-term issues
and needs.
The issue of core competency is discussed further below and an evaluation of
each project as it responds to the charge is given in Section 4.
3.2 Rationale and Justification for a Core Competency
The Subcommittee views the EPA Incineration Research Program as an
important resource for understanding and controlling pollution. The program extends
beyond incineration (the combustion of wastes) since the capabilities can be applied to
all combustion of fuels. This capability is significant in an age where combustion is so
much a part of our society-from electricity generation to transportation and the
production of goods. Since combustion is so much a part of our society, there must be
a balance between the benefits of the processes versus adverse affects. For this
reason, combustion research cannot be ignored, but must be performed to understand
and reduce emissions. Since the EPA has a mission to protect the environment by
identifying sources and methods of pollution control, a portion of EPA's research
program should be devoted to combustion-type research; specifically, this charge falls
upon the APPCD (as discussed previously).
Two previous Science Advisory Board (SAB) reports have identified the needs
for core competencies. The SAB's 1988 Report, Future Risk (USEPA, 1988) makes ten
major recommendations to the Agency. The first recommendation is that the EPA
should focus on preventing the generation of pollution. The second recommendation is
that EPA should implement long-term research programs in areas where it has unique
-------
responsibilities and capabilities.1 This report further identifies candidate core research
areas, including combustion and thermal destruction. The second report, the Environ-
mental Engineering Committee's Future Issues in Environmental Engineering (USEPA,
1995a), is part of the cross-SAB futures project which produced Beyond the Horizon:
Protecting the Future with Foresight (USEPA, 1995b). While this 1995 report does not
identify candidate core competency areas, it defines core competencies and their
benefits as "...the essential and distinct scientific and technical capabilities that enable
EPA to fulfill its current and future missions. Having core competencies supports EPA's
ability to approach regulations in an integrated, efficient, cost-effective and harmonized
manner and to address multi-pollutant and multi-media problems with the limited
resources that will likely be available to the Agency."
In order to define and maintain a "core competency" in combustion research this
group will need to anticipate the longer term needs and structure their program to
address both the short- and long-term time horizons. The emphasis on long-term
research is critical; short-term, regulatory office-driven research will not provide
sustainable competence. Some trends can already be identified, such as:
a) Fuels and wastes will become more complex and compositions of these
streams will change. While coal is a complex fuel, there is a move to use
the energy from more complex heterogeneous fuels such as waste
materials, biomass, etc. In addition, as industry increases its waste
minimization effectiveness, the composition of the combustible hazardous
waste stream will change. In parallel, as municipal recycling increases,
the composition of the solid waste stream will also change.
'selected Quotes from SAB Reports
The SAB's 1988 report, Future Risk (USEPA, 1988) makes ten major recommendations to the Agency (page 5). The first is:
"EPA should shift the focus of its environmental protection strategy from end-of-pipe controls to preventing the generation of
pollution. EPA should use a hierarchy of policy tools that support national efforts to 1) minimize the amount of wastes
generated; 2) recycle or reuse the wastes that are generated; 3) control the wastes that cannot be recycled or reused; and 4)
minimize human and environmental exposures to any remaining wastes."
The second is:
"To support this new strategy, EPA should plan, implement, and sustain a long-term research program. In conjunction with
EPA's program offices and the external scientific community, EPA's Office of Research and Development should develop
basic core research programs in areas where it has unique responsibilities and capabilities.
The SAB's 1995 report, Beyond the Horizon: Protecting the Future with Foresight (USEPA, 1995b) was supported by studies
of the SAB's standing committees. The Environmental Engineering Committee's Future Issues in Environmental Engineering (USEPA,
1995a) stated (page 2):
"Core competencies are the essential and distinct scientific and technical capabilities that enable an organization to fulfill its
current and future missions. In the future the Agency will be under increasing pressure to address more efficiently multimedia
pollutants from all sources."
Future Issues in Environmental Engineering (USEPA, 1995a) does not identify candidate competency areas, but it does identify the
following objectives for a solid core research program (page D-2):
"1) drive pollutant reduction technology to the limit of technical and economic feasibility; 2) develop the capability to predict the
amount of all pollutants present in the effluent streams of all sources; 3) promote pollution prevention and the development of
low pollutant technology for existing and new advanced systems; and 4) provide a science and technology base for regulations."
-------
b) The number of types of pollutants of interest will increase and the concen-
tration levels of interest will be lower. For example, PAH (polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbons) and particulate matter are of increasing interest.
c) As more pollutants at lower concentrations become a concern, there will
be a need for continuous performance assurance techniques. Through
the integration of available continuous emissions monitors and full system
performance monitoring and controls, performance assurance of minimal
emissions can be found without continuously monitoring all pollutants.
The laboratory has previously identified the need for core competency in
combustion (USEPA, 1984), which says: "The Agency can provide a leadership role by
formulating and executing a core research program that will solve environmental
problems associated with all types of combustion systems, fuels and wastes well into
the next century." The Subcommittee concluded that the program was not supported
within the Agency as a core competency by noting several limiting factors, namely:
a) The base research support is small and largely limited to base salaries
and capital equipment. Support comes from a variety of sources both
within and outside of the Agency. The presenters discussed a large
number of direct and important assistance activities supplied to OAQPS
and Office of Solid Waste (OSW) in developing and implementing new
standards for combustion systems. These activities include: the Report to
Congress on MWCs; comparative tests on continuous emissions moni-
tors; direct work on dioxin control and PICS; serving on numerous working
groups on regulation development and implementation. These functions
are a valuable resource for the program offices; however, they are short-
term activities. For this group to maintain a core competency, they wilf
need to anticipate longer-term needs and structure their program to
address both time horizons. The current budget does not maintain the
competency and action should be taken to change this course.
b) To compensate for the lack of consistent Agency support, the research
staff has had to become entrepreneurs and sales people. In some cases,
search for support outside the Agency further splinters and dilutes re-
search.
c) As a result of the lack of funding, the use of outside expertise is limited.
The support for outside research is small. The APPCD should be encour-
aged to participate in truly collaborative research in which both parties are
equal through cooperative agreements or other mechanisms. The APCD
should act as both an intellectual as well as a financial partner in the
research.
8
-------
As the EPA Office of Research and Development drafts their long-term strategic
plan, the Subcommittee urges them to consider the importance of core competencies in
this area, and to secure the means to continue this research2.
3.3 Positive Outcomes of a Core Competency
By developing a core competency, the Agency can meet short-term Agency
goals. Core competencies allow EPA to access tremendous expertise for short-term
regulatory and enforcement issues. The benefits of this access are threefold. First,
the public benefits from the best technologies protecting their environment. Second,
the EPA gains credibility from regulations that are science-based and enforcement that
is informed. And third, industry benefits by access to advanced technology that allows
them to operate more efficiently. Core competency research provides a cornerstone for
capabilities such as predictive modeling and coherent risk management strategies.
Compared to other combustion research programs, the EPA research program's
charter is unique. In contrast to strictly fundamental, curiosityrdriven initiatives, the
EPA program is focused on understanding formation, prevention, and control of
pollutants from combustion sources. The EPA program spans fundamental studies on
the origin and identity of pollutants, to engineering studies of how pollutants are
formed, and on to more applied studies of how to control pollutants. The research
program is unique because it combines expertise in fundamental combustion, including
reacting mechanisms, with expertise and applications in pollution control. Given proper
funding, the program can stay unique and unbiased by not focusing on industry-specific
or fuel-specific projects.
The research program also serves as a nucleus for long-term research, where
EPA can work side-by-side with other combustion researchers. The laboratory has
made some effort toward creative collaborations with University faculty and National
Laboratory staff; however, the Subcommittee would like to see this interaction fostered
even further to take advantage of others' expertise. As stated previously, the collabora-
tions should be truly "collaborative" where the interactions are a two-way dialog
between researchers from concept through execution of the research.
3.4 Need for a Strategic Plan
The Subcommittee recommends that EPA should internally re-evaluate the
combustion research on a project-by-project basis and identify the tactical and strategic
elements in this program. Strategic planning may also help set priorities between
fundamental and applied research and technology development leading to patents and
As this report was being completed, the ORO finalized their Strategic Research Plan (USEPA, 1996a). The SAB's Research
Strategies Advisory Committee (RSAC) reviewed the Plan and produced a report on that review (USEPA, 1996b)
-------
licensed technologies. The laboratory should include pollution prevention because
there are some pollution prevention aspects to the incineration process and fundamen-
tal and applied research is needed in this area.
As the laboratory re-organization is completed, it may be helpful to evaluate
projects against well-defined criteria. Such criteria might include: a) technical merit of
projects; b) relationship to program and laboratory missions; c) impact of the project; d)
political mood of the topic; e) customer(s) served by the project; and f) the program's
unique contribution (what is the research program's unique advantage compared to
other combustion researchers?)
On a lesser note, the Subcommittee found it difficult to adapt to the research
program's convention of stating budgets in terms of only contract and .purchase dollars.
Budgets do not include EPA staff and management salaries, overhead, and capital
equipment. Because all the project costs are not assigned to a project, it is difficult to
compare EPA's incineration research budget to other research programs. The Sub-
committee found that there appeared to be a disproportional low R&D to capital
equipment ratio in the research program budget. The Subcommittee does not wish to
jeopardize capital budgets; however, we recommend that this issue be brought directly
to the Science Advisory Board's Research Strategy Advisory Committee to see if this is
an effective use of funds.
10
-------
4. EVALUATION OF PROJECTS
As discussed in the presentation by Dr. Hugh McKinnon, Associate Director for
Health at the National Risk Management Research Laboratory, the laboratories are
aligned with a risk assessment/risk management approach. The program issues
identified by the laboratory can be divided into the following:
a) PIC formation and control (including dioxins)
b) Metal transformation and control
c) Combustion of multi-fuels
The issues identified are in alignment with the approach discussed by Dr. McKinnon
and the charge (see section 3.0). The Subcommittee found that the issues were
indeed important. The following is, in answer to the charge, a discussion of the
projects discussed and how they address the resolution of the issues, the integration of
the research with other research programs, and the effectiveness of meeting short-term
and long-term issues and needs.
4.1 PIC Formation and Control
Seven projects were presented in this area. Clearly this area is of importance to
both the Agency and the public. Dr. McKinnon's indicated that some key risk-based
considerations for incineration technology research should be researched, including
emissions during startup, shutdown and upset conditions. The projects addressed
these needs and some responded directly to Office of Solid Waste (OSW) regulatory
development needs. Some collaboration with other investigators was presented;
however, this was limited.
4.1.1 Development of a PIC Target Analyte List
This project is an OSW initiative and funded by OSW. The OSW objective was
to arrive at a single, comprehensive list of PICS to be analyzed Jn each hazardous
waste incinerator trial burn. The list was to be based on results of a pilot scale test of a
single mixture of 14 organic compounds in no. 2 fuel oil. Although the research
protocol is appropriate, it is limited in that it does not recognize that incinerator
emissions depend on the composition of the waste feed. Since the PIC analyte list that
will result from these tests will be applied to all incinerators regardless of their feed, the
approach is limiting. The research has shown that inclusion of brominated wastes
results in a disproportionate number of brominated PICs. Clearly, if brominated wastes
were not included, brominated PICs would not be present and, probably, more chlori-
nated PICs would be observed. This is an important research result which is not totally
11
-------
explainable via gas-phase combustion. Brominated compounds are thermally fragile
and not expected to survive the high-temperature zones of the incinerator. It may imply
that surface catalyzed displacement of chlorine by bromine is occurring in cooler,
downstream zones of the incinerator. This point is developed further in the discussion
of the CFC combustion project.
A better approach would be to develop a standard mixture of chemicals to spike
into every incinerator during a trial burn. The feed components could be developed to
a) be sensitive to each failure mode of incineration (i.e. thermal failure,
mixing failure, post-combustion formation);
b) represent different pathways of formation by different classes of chemi-
cals; and
c) address uncertainties in PIC formation based on our current knowledge.
The project does represent the need to develop a combustion "core compe-
tency". Without the existing facilities and capable personnel the laboratory could not
have responded as quickly to OSW's needs.
4.1.2 Characterization of Secondary Combustion Chamber Performance and
Development of Failure Mode Diagnostics
This is a joint project between researchers at the Northeast Hazardous Sub-
stance Research Center (NEHSRC) and the EPA. In this project, NEHSRC research-
ers are attempting to develop kinetic codes to model EPA's pilot-scale rotary kiln data.
The project is very ambitious, some might say overly ambitious, as it is not clear that
the state-of-the-art in combustion modeling is such that success is likely. However, this
is an important step in the right direction and addresses an important need to identify
mixing within secondary combustion chambers; further understanding of this mixing
could reduce the emissions of PICs.
The results are significant in that they may have identified important deficiencies
in our understanding of incineration. Modeling and experimental results differed by as
much as 12 orders of magnitude under oxygen rich conditions and 6 orders of magni-
tude for oxygen starved conditions. The differences were primarily attributed to lack of
fuel-air mixing and a lack of the ability to properly treat mixing in the model. However,
mixing frequency calculations only account for a maximum of 2-3 orders of magnitude
discrepancy. Since the kinetic models give reasonable agreement with flow reactor
data, this may imply that the failure of the model is due to temperature effects as
opposed to deficiencies in the mechanistic/kinetic or micromixing aspects of the model.
12
-------
Thus, the Subcommittee suggests that the researchers turn their attention
toward better defining the macroscale temperature profile in the combustor as well as
microscopic temperature distributions. It is not clear at this point whether the discrep-
ancies are due to insufficient or incorrect experimental temperature measurements or
temperature fluctuations due to mixing and energy transfer on the microscale. Possibly
a modification of the mixing modeling approach to calculate temperature distributions
due to mixing could be developed to address this issue. It is unlikely that parameters
other than temperature could cause the large discrepancies observed in the modeling
and experimental results. Also, the Subcommittee concluded that the project could
benefit from using more fundamental approach as in 4.1.7.
4.1.3 Formation and Control of Chlorinated Dioxins and Furans in Combustion
Systems and Modeling of PCD and PCF Congener Profiles from MWC
These projects apply a classical engineering approach to determining the source
and mechanisms of dioxins in combustion systems. Originally the work addressed
municipal wastes, but more recently has addressed cement kiln combustion of hazard-
ous wastes. In this approach, various suspected dioxin precursors are burned in a
down-fired burner and allowed to react with various suspected precursors in a down
stream cool zone.
The experimental work has yielded valuable data on the role of gas-phase
reactions, catalytic surfaces, copper, and chlorine on the yields of dioxins in combus-
tion systems. It represents some of the best engineering science work performed by
EPA. However, the work to this point has not been fundamental enough to delineate
the actual chemical/physical mechanism of formation. Because the actual mechanisms
of dioxin formation are so poorly understood, it is still highly questionable if pilot scale
data can be reliably applied to full scale systems. Consequently, the parametric
statistical modeling of the data is not as highly rated. If the mechanisms were known,
then the limits and bounds of the model could be applied correctly. Without such
knowledge, these empirical fits may lead to entirely inappropriate conclusions.
This discussion is not meant to imply that full-scale testing to derive even more
empirical data would be more appropriate. In fact, the variability in full-scale perfor-
mance is unlikely to result in any meaningful data at all.
In light of the recent dioxin reassessment and combustion strategy, EPA's
research in this area is under funded. EPA should form a dioxin combustion research
task force to immediately address critical dioxin issues, especially the mechanism of
formation and prevention strategies. The troika of environmental research entails study
of the origin, mechanism, and control of pollution. The origin, through numerous field
tests, is well determined and does not therefore deserve significant further study.
Several end-of-pipe control strategies have been identified including carbon filtration
13
-------
and reducing the temperatures of Electric Static Precipitators (ESP). These methods
are reasonably well-proven but costly and should not be further pursued by EPA
researchers. In addition, carbon filtration results in a transfer from a gas stream to a
solid waste. Instead, the task force should focus on the mechanism of formation and
developing methods for in-process prevention. A three to five year effort with substan-
tial funding would be reasonable given the magnitude and complexity of this problem.
Again, this project demonstrated the value of a core competency in combustion
by responding to the needs of OSW in a timely manner. This work has been used by
OSW in defining some components of the Waste Minimization and Combustion
Strategy and the Dioxin Reassessment.
4.1.4 Destruction of CFC's and Other Chlorinated Wastes
This project addressed the destruction of CFCs by controlled incineration.
Rather serendipitously, very important results were obtained, as very high yields of
PCDD/PCDF were observed (23.8 ug/dscm) when CFC 12 was burned in a refractory
lined combustor which had been previously used to conduct test burns on a copper
containing waste. Subsequent studies did not result in yields approaching these levels;
however, they did reveal the significant role of copper in increasing observed yields.
The most important result is that chlorinated dioxins were observed at all. Gas-
phase chemistry and kinetics suggests that the chlorine should be eliminated first from
the organics and largely fluorinated PICs would be observed since carbon-chlorine
bonds are weaker than carbon-fluorine bonds. The explanation of these results may lie
in the realm of surface induced reactions. It is well documented that HF, F2, and
fluorinated organics etch silica. The etching is caused by the reaction of F with the
hydrogen on the silica surfaces. Thus it would appear that fluorine may be removed
from the organic at the same time that the organic is chemisorbed to the surface. This
surface chemisorption can then lead to further reaction and dioxin formation, especially
in the presence of copper or copper chlorides.
In combination with the chlorinated and brominated hydrocarbon data in the PIC
analyte study, these data suggest that the trends in normal gas phase chemistry may
be reversed by surface catalysis, the explanation being that bonds of Br, Cl and F with
silanol groups are progressively stronger than with organic carbon groups. This is an
important phenomena deserving of further study. Fundamental studies are needed that
might best be carried out on very small gas phase and surface catalysis reactors where
the confounding effects of large scale combustors are absent.
14
-------
4.1.5 Bioassay Characterization of Incineration Emissions
This project compares the mutagenicity and carcinogenicity of various types of
combustion effluents. Both the Ames test and the mouse papilloma tests are relatively
simple and inexpensive evaluations of limited aspects of mutagenicity and of tumorige-
nicity, respectively. While the Ames test suggests that there are no major differences
in combustion emissions and that incinerators are on the low end of the test scale, the
Ames test is not very sensitive for chlorinated hydrocarbons. If chlorinated hydrocar-
bons could be considered, the results of the present test series might be different.
More importantly, it has been amply demonstrated that the mutagenic potency as
measured in the Ames test does not correlate with carcinogenic potency as measured
in conventional life-time bioassays for carcinogenicity. The mouse papilloma assay
has much more applicability to the present problem, but even this methodology is not
generally recognized as being definitive. Studies on the potential biological effects of
combustion products require a great deal of further investigation to allow definitive
conclusions.
The Subcommittee recognizes that there are no direct bioassay data on the
carcinogenicity of combustion products, even though this information is very important
for the risk management of incineration and combustion processes. The Subcommittee
also recognizes that direct bioassays of combustion products are technically extremely
difficult. Nevertheless, the Subcommittee urges the Agency to pay more attention to
the development of experimental data for the best scientifically defensible risk assess-
ments for combustion and incineration products.
4.1.6 Monitoring and Control of PICs from Incinerators
Two portions of this project were discussed. The first was the development of an
on-line GC for use in emission testing instead of the routine VOST analysis. With the
on-line GC, researchers hope to obtain real-time analysis of 20 VOCs with 45 minute
sample turnaround time. The unit was included as part of the joint DOE/EPA CEM
testing program at the Incineration Research Facility. The results of this program were
not presented. The development of continuous or near-continuous monitors is clearly
important in the determination of what's coming out of the stack at any given time.
However, the Subcommittee felt that, while the development of the on-line GC met the
Agency's needs and could poteatially be a useful tool, the laboratory now needs to
compare this technology to other.mass spectrometry technologies.
The second part of this project dealt with using artificial intelligence to control
transient organics from hazardous waste incinerators. The investigators are applying
fuzzy logic controls to reduce transients; this is done by injection of oxygen into the
secondary combustion chamber. The funding for this project came from internal
laboratory funds which are used as a method of "trying out" ideas from the scientists. It
15
-------
is worthwhile to test these ideas and to encourage those involved to maintain a creative
edge. The reduction of emissions from combustors and incinerators is certainly an
important issue and the laboratory has submitted a proposal with Midwest Research
Institute, the University of Kentucky, and Acurex Company to NSF to develop this work.
Even technically promising programs such as this one need to be carefully evaluated
within the strategic plan of the laboratory.
4.1.7 Mixing Characterization of Transient Puffs in a Rotary Kiln Incinerator
This project was a collaborative effort with the University of Arizona, Sandia
National Laboratory, and EPA. The project focused on the understanding of the
transient mixing in the gas phase of waste materials in the primary combustor zone of a
rotary kiln. The approach was to use a cold flow physical model (built on the same
scale as the EPA rotary kiln simulator) and then predict the average concentration and
concentration fluctuation profiles using multiple computer simulations based on
Kerstein's Linear Eddy Model Approach. These predictions were compared to the
experimental data and used to investigate the mixing of the kiln.
The Subcommittee found that this project represented good collaborative effort
with others and leveraging of funds. The approach takes the fundamental research of
others and uses it to meet a goal of the laboratory (reduction of transient puffs in
incinerators). In contrast with the project looking at mixing in the afterburner, this
project is fundamentally based and therefore has the probability of application to full-
scale systems.
4.2 Understanding Metal Transformations and Determining Metal Control
The research which has been conducted has attempted to understand metal
transformations and the effects of certain parameters on the behavior and fate of metal
aerosol. The investigators have used sorbents to control the metal emissions at high
temperatures. Specifically, cadmium and lead have been studied. In a second project,
the research has attempted to identify the" partitioning of chromium to chrome (VI).
Finally, the effectiveness of sorbents for mercury control is also being studied. This
area is also of importance to the Agency. For the most part the projects are obtaining
needed research information. Some collaboration was demonstrated but it was limited
and integration with others could be expanded. Projects are meeting short-term needs.
4.2.1 Metal Aerosol Formation and High Temperature Control by the Sorbents
This work has been done in collaboration with the University of Arizona, MIT,
and the University of Cincinnati. The issue of metal transformation is certainly one that
is important to hazardous waste incineration and other combustion sources any time a
metal-bearing material is burned. Metal compounds tend to contribute to risk assess-
16
-------
ment and frequently are the most important compounds besides dioxins. The conclu-
sions have been that toxic metals can be removed from the submicron fraction through
the interaction with sorbents and two high temperature mechanisms have been
identified. The effect of chlorine has also been studied. The future work will concen-
trate on understanding the interactions with other metals (besides lead and cadmium)
and the effects of metal mixtures and other interfering elements, such as chlorine and
sulfur. Model development and process scale up are also anticipated.
The work has lead to some significant mechanistic results which can be used in
determining the interaction of metals with certain sorbent components; however, while
investigating the control of toxic metals emissions is clearly a mission.of this branch
some effort to also obtain fundamental information would be useful and is needed. The
research should be directed to include the investigation of the mechanisms and kinetics
of reactions in combustion systems. In addition, the sorbent research should consider
that the use of sorbents simply transfers the metals problem from a gas-phase to a
solid-phase. A future direction of the research should look at the disposal options for
the sorbents and the leachability of the metals from the sorbents (some of this work has
already taken place).
As a general comment, the Subcommittee noted that the laboratory has the
necessary equipment for conducting this type of research and is highly qualified. They
have clearly positioned themselves in terms of experimental capability and capable
researchers to be one of the leaders in the area of aerosol formation research.
4.2.2 Chromium Partitioning in Incineration Environments
This project was a result of direct support to OSW. The objectives were to
explore the behavior of chromium (Cr) in combustion environments and examine Cr
speciation as a function of chlorine and sulfur concentration and initial Cr valence.
This work is extremely important in support of OSW for the Waste Minimization and
Combustion Strategy. Presently, RCRA requires all the Cr to be assumed to be Cr(VI).
Based on this assumption, Cr emissions often drive health risk assessments. The
conclusions found that without chlorine, 2% or less of the total Cr existed as Cr (VI). In
the presence of Cl, this increased to between 5-8% of the total. Given this result, the
consideration of all the chrome to be Cr (VI) is questionable.
i
The results of this project clearly support OSW's needs for the Waste
Minimization and Combustion Strategy. Again, if the laboratory had not developed the
needed competency in this area, the work could not have been completed in such a
timely manner for OSW.
17
-------
4.2.3 Volatile Metal Control: Mercury
This project is investigating the control of mercury using sorbents. Three bench
top reactors have been developed for elemental mercury, HgO, and HgCI2. Future
work will examine the reactivity, characterization, and regenerability of carbons; mass
transport and kinetic limitations; and lime-based sorbents. There is ongoing develop-
ment of an on-line monitor for oxidized mercury species.
The mercury projects are important, especially with regard to MSW combustion.
The Energy and Environmental Research Center (EERC) in North Dakota has a large
center in Air Toxics and is presently examining sorbent capture of mercury and
analytical techniques. While their focus is more toward pilot scale, the extent of
interaction between the two groups was not apparent. The Subcommittee encourages
that the investigators interact with this group.
4.3 Multifile! Combustion
The laboratory presented the need for a multi-fuel combustor and the details of
the design. The system has been installed and is presently in the shake down stages.
As stated previously, one way that pollution prevention might impact incineration issues
is that as industry and the public increase their waste minimization effectiveness, the
composition of combustible hazardous waste streams will change. These changes may
impact the current emissions that are expected from MSW combustion systems. The
Subcommittee feels that the research is worthwhile and the facility will be useful;
however, since the laboratory does not have a strategic plan and a base source of
funding for the facility, it is questionable what the research direction might be. The
Subcommittee recommends that a carefully thought out research plan be drawn up
which fits the strategic plan of the laboratory.
4.4 Incineration Research Facility (IRF)
Two projects were presented from the IRF--The Comparative Evaluation of
Continuous Emission Monitors and Low Temperature Desorption in a Direct-Fired Kiln.
The results from the first project were not presented, because it is still under way. The
results of the second project were presented and discussed. The tests were completed
to determine the effect of treatment temperature, treatment time, bed depth, solids
agitation, and moisture content on the evolution of hydrocarbons and metals. The
Subcommittee felt that the results were useful and should be used in conjunction with a
model to more fully understand some of the heat transfer effects which were shown.
Because the IRF is being closed, the Subcommittee did not see that further
detailed comments would be of use.
18
-------
5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The Subcommittee felt that the laboratory has the equipment, facilities, and
capabilities to be an asset to the Agency. The issues which they are investigating are
timely and important. However, due to the limitations described in section 3.1, the
program's strategic direction must be narrowed by developing a strategic plan and
setting priorities. Given the budget limitations, it is no longer sufficient to be a world
class facility in terms of productivity, relevance, timeliness, and quality. Consideration
must also be given to narrowing the program to what EPA can uniquely do with its
facilities. Each project should be re-evaluated with criteria which will meet the strategic
needs of the laboratory versus just responding to a funding source's needs.
The Subcommittee's major recommendations were:
a) The group should foster more interaction with other researchers . This
interaction should be in the form of collaborative research projects where
both EPA and outside scientists are involved from development of the
concept through to completion of the work. Collaboration is important
because it can strengthen areas where the laboratory does not have
expertise. No one research group can have all the expertise and facilities
relevant to combustion. Collaborative efforts are important because they
make it possible for both groups to do research that neither could do
alone.
b) The group should formalize their strategic plan to help determine criteria
for judging the projects which are underway. In addition, the strategic
planning should incorporate the role of incineration and combustion in
pollution prevention. Prevention can be addressed in two areas: i)
changes in technology to reduce the reliance on end-of-pipe control
technology, and ii) segregating the waste stream to isolate, and perhaps
pretreat, constituents that are known to have a negative impact on the
emissions from combustion and incineration systems. The impact of the
effect of changing waste streams, a result of waste minimization and
pollution prevention activities, needs to be investigated with regard to its
potential impact on the emissions from these systems.
c) The Agency should consider the combustion program as a "core compe-
tency" and support it as one. Although the importance of incineration will
vary under different policies, combustion and incineration research should
remain part of the Agency's core research program because of the
dependence of society on combustion. Necessary funding will allow this
group to continue to meet these long-term as well as short-term needs of
the Agency.
19
-------
d) The SAB Research Strategies Advisory Committee (RSAC) should look at
the low R&D to capital equipment budget ratio and determine if the
present ratios are acceptable to enable the program to continue with
viable projects as well as obtain the necessary equipment.
20
-------
APPENDIX A - DOCUMENTS REVIEWED
1. Letter from Dr. Hall to Subcommittee of August 28, with enclosures:
A. Agenda
B. Incineration Program Background
C. Relevant Bibliography
D. 14 Papers by RTP Laboratory Scientists
E. Eight CVs for RTP Laboratory Scientists
2. Letter from Dr. Thurnau to Subcommittee of August 30, with enclosures
A. IRF: Incineration Research Facility (EPA-600/M-89/027, November 1989)
B. Operations and Research at the U.S. EPA Incineration Research Facility:
Annual Report for FY93 (EPA/600/R-94/091, June 1994)
C. Operations and Research at the U.S. EPA Incineration Research Facility:
Annual Report for FY94 (EPA/600/R-95/071, June 1995)
3. Handout by the Laboratory provided at the meeting including agenda, roster
(with some errors) and copies of overheads used by EPA speakers in their
presentation. This roster gives an incorrect address for Dr. French and incor-
rectly identifies Dr. Costner, a public commentator, as an invited participant.
4. Preliminary written public comments from Pat Costner dated August 26, 1995
(8:21 a.m.)
5. "One-page" Project Description, August 1, 1995
6. Materials distributed September 12:
A. Gas Phase Mixing of Transient Organics (punched for inclusion into
notebook, #5 above.
B. Compilation of MWC Dioxin Data, OAQPS, July 27, 1995
C. Dioxin Emissions-Effect of Chlorine/Time/Temperature Relationships at
300 degrees C, Joseph J. Santoleri
D. Continuous Emissions Monitoring Demonstration Program, Dan Burns
E. Effect of Staged Combustion on PIC and Potential Dioxin Production
During Chlorocarbon Combustion, Tai-Gyu Lee and others
F. Effect of High-Levels of S02 Emissions on the Analysis of Polycyclic
Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) from Coal-Fired Utilities, Hani S. Karam
G Effect of High-Levels of S02 Emissions on the Analysis of Chlorinated
Dibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDDs) and Chlorinated Dibenzofurans (PCDFs)from
Air Emission Sources, Hani S. Karam
H Copies of the overheads of Brian K. Gullett
I. Incineration Program Resources FY90-96, punched for inclusion in the
binder, provided at the request of the Subcommittee
7. Materials handed out September 13: Copies of overheads used by Bob Thurnau
in his presentation.
8. Memorandum from Robert Thurnau, "Peer Review Publications Relative to the
SAB Evaluation," October 3, 1995
A-1
-------
9. Memorandum from Blair Martin, "Background Information for SAB Review of
APPCD Incineration Program," October 12, 1995
A-2
-------
APPENDIX B - ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
AEERL
APPCD
Al
Br
GEM
CFC
Cl
Cr
CRB
DOD
DOE
EEC
EERC
ESP
F2
HF
IRF
MSW
MWC
NEHSRC
NRMRL
NSF
OAQPS
ORD
OSW
PAH
PCD
PCDD/PCDF
PCF
PIC
PM
RCRA
VOC
VOST
Air and Energy Engineering Research Laboratory
Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division
artificial intelligence
bromine
continuous emission monitor
chlorofluorocarbon
chlorine
chromium
Combustion Research Branch
Department of Defense
Department of Energy
Environmental Engineering Committee
Energy and Environmental Research Center in North Dakota
Electrostatic Precipitators
Fluorine
Hydrogen Fluoride
Incineration Research Facility
Municipal Solid Waste
Municipal Waste Combustor
Northeast Hazardous Substance Research Center
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
National Science Foundation
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Office of Research and Development
Office of Solid Waste
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon
polychlorinated dioxin
chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin/furan
polychlorinated furan
product of incomplete combustion
particulate matter
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
volatile organic hydrocarbon
volatile organic sampling train
B-1
-------
REFERENCES CITED
Brown, Lester R., Hal Hane, and Ed Ayres. 1993. Vital Signs. W.W. Norton and Company.
USEPA. 1984. Development of a Core Combustion Research Plan (EPA-600/R-92-084). US
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Wash-
ington, DC.
USEPA. 1988. Future Risk (SAB-EC-88-40). US Environmental Protection Agency, Science
Advisory Board, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 1990. Reducing Risk (SAB-EC-90-021). US Environmental Protection Agency, Science
Advisory Board, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 1995a. Future Issues in Environmental Engineering (EPA-SAB-EEC-95-004). US
Environmental Protection Agency, Science Advisory Board, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 1995b. Beyond the Horizon: Protecting the Future with Foresight (EPA-SAB-EC-95-007).
US Environmental Protection Agency, Science Advisory Board, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 1996a. Strategic Plan for the Office of Research and Development.
(EPA/600R-96/059, May 1996. US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Research and Development, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 1996b. Review of the Strategic Plan for the Office of Research and Development by the
Research Strategies Advisory Committee (RSAC) of the Science Advisory
Board. (EPA-SAB-RSAC-LTR-96-004), US Environmental Protection Agency,
Science Advisory Board Washington, DC.
R-1
-------
DISTRIBUTION LIST
The Administrator
Deputy Administrator
Regional Administrators, Regions 1-10
Assistant Administrators
Directors, Office of Research and Development Laboratories
Director, Office of Air and Radiation
Director, Office of Atmospheric and Indoor Air Programs
Director, Office of Policy Analysis and Review
Director, Office of Environmental Processes and Effects Research
Director, Office of Policy Analysis
Director, Climate Change Division
EPA Headquarters Library
EPA Regional Libraries
National Technical Information Service
Congressional Research Service
Library of Congress
------- |