United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Industrial Environmental
Research Laboratory
Cincinnati OH 45268
.Si."/
Research and Development
EP A-600/S2-84-132 Nov. 1984
&ERA Project Summary
Evaluation of Hazardous Waste
Incineration in a Lime Kiln:
Rockwell Lime Company
D. R. Day, L. A. Cox, and R. E. Mournighan
During a one-week test burn, hazard-
ous waste was used as supplemental
fuel and co-fired with petroleum coke in
a lime kiln in eastern Wisconsin.
Detailed sampling and analysis was
conducted on the stack gas for principal
organic hazardous constituents (POHCs).
particulates, paniculate metals, HCI,
SO2, NOx, CO, and THC and on process
streams for metals and chlorine. POHCs
were also analyzed in the waste fuel.
Sampling was conducted during three
baseline and five waste fuel test burn
days. Results show average destruction
and removal efficiencies (DREs) greater
than 99.99% for each POHC and little
change in pollutant emissions from
baseline to waste fuel test conditions.
In addition, material balance results
show that 95% of chlorine enters the
process from the limestone feed and the
chlorine exits the kiln in the baghouse
dust and lime product at 61 % and 38%,
respectively.
This Project Summary was developed
by EPA's Industrial Environmental
Research Laboratory. Cincinnati, OH.
to announce key findings of the research
project that is fully documented in a
separate report of the same title (see
Project Report ordering information at
back).
Introduction
Cofiring hazardous wastes in high-
temperature industrial processes is an
attractive alternative to incineration,
because it makes use of the heat content
of the waste. Many cofiring devices,
which include cement and dolomite kilns,
glass furnaces, steel furnaces, and some
industrial boilers, provide temperatures
and residence times similar to those
required for incinerators dedicated to
hazardous wastes. In addition to the
savings derived from the heat value,
using existent equipment saves the
capital required to build a separate
incinerator and may thus provide an
environmentally acceptable alternative to
conventional hazardous waste disposal.
Because of their high energy use, lime
kilns are an excellent example of this
concept. Such kilns typically operate at
temperatures over 1093°C (2000°F), have
gas residence times exceeding 1.5
seconds, and have a highly turbulent
combustion zone. However, the need
exists for data that show the effect of
cofiring hazardous waste on the emissions
from the lime process.
The State of Wisconsin Department of
Natural Resources (DNR) and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
Region V, issued a temporary permit to
Rockwell Lime Company to conduct a
hazardous waste test burn. This test
would allow the burning of hazardous
liquid waste as supplemental fuel along
with petroleum coke. The waste fuel
would replace natural gas as a fuel
component.
Through a contract with the Industrial
Environmental Research Laboratory,
Cincinnati, OH (lERL-Ci), Monsanto Re-
search Corporation (MRC) performed the
sampling and analysis of stack gases and
process samples during the test burn
conducted at the Rockwell Lime Company
in Rockwood, Wisconsin.
The primary objectives of the sampling
and analysis were to (1) determine the
effects of cofiring petroleum coke and
hazardous waste OP the emissions from
-------
the kiln, (2) determine the fate of the
principal organic hazardous constituents
(POHCs) and determine destruction and
removal efficiencies (DREs), (3) determine
the fate of chlorine and trace metals in
the kiln process, (4) determine the
concentration of SOa, NOX, particulates,
HCI, metals, total hydrocarbons, and
carbon monoxide in the stack gas at
baseline and waste fuel test burn
conditions, and (5) evaluate kiln operation
during hazardous waste fuel burning
conditions. This testing provides the
Wisconsin DNR and EPA Region V with
the data necessary to determine whether
a permit can be issued to Rockwell Lime
Company to burn hazardous waste. The
testing also will provide the EPA-ORD
with additional data in their research on
the incineration of hazardous waste and
the environmental problems associated
with incineration.
Facility and Process
Description
The Rockwell Lime Company's lime kiln
in Rockwood, Wisconsin, approximately
10 miles north of Manitowoc, produces
lime at approximately 1.3x106kg(1,430
tons) per week, which varies based upon
product demand. The process involves
heating limestone to approximately
1,100°C (2,000°F) in a horizontal rotary
kiln. Calcining is achieved by interfacing
the hot gases with the limestone, which
drives off the C02 from the limestone,
leaving the lime product (CaO).
The kiln, with refractory linings, is 2.4
m (8 ft) in diameter and 67.1 m (220 ft)
long. The kiln rotates at approximately
Natural Gas m
Supply
Petroleum Coke—^*..
Supply |
Primary
Air
Screw Conveyor
one revolution per minute and has a
gentle slope to allow material to pass
through by gravity. It also has a counter-
current flow pattern, that is, solids travel
in one direction and hot gases and dust
emissions travel in the opposite direction,
as shown in Figure 1. Limestone is fed
into the upper end of the kiln at approxi-
mately 15,440 kg/hr (34,000 Ib/hr). At
the opposite end of the kiln, a mixture of
coal and natural gas is burned at
approximately 1,450 kg/hr (3,200 Ib/hr)
and 142 mVhr (5,000 ftVhr) to provide a
heat input of approximately 14,700 kw
(50 million Btu/hr) or approximately 6.5
million Btu/ton of lime product. As the
limestone feed travels down the inclined
rotating kiln, it passes through various
temperature zones, and the hot gases
calcine the limestone into the lime
product. The product is produced at
approximately 7,720 kg/hr (17,000
Ib/hr). After transformation in the kiln,
the lime product is air cooled and either
directly stored in silos or hydrated prior to
storage.
Primary air mixed with the gas, coke,
and secondary (heated) air from the lime
product cooler is fed to the kiln to provide
oxygen for the combustion of the coke
and natural gas (or waste fuel). The kiln
exhaust gases pass through a series of
large radiator coolers that cool the gases
before they enter the baghouse; this
removes particulates and SOa from the
gas stream. The gases then pass through
the induced draft fans and out the stack at
approximately 200°C (392°F) and 5.5
m/s (18 ft/s). The collected dust is stored
in a silo and mixed with water to
granulate. Some of the dust is sold and
Limestone
Fe.ed \Exhaust
Stack
Klln ^°'
Dust
Air
the remainder is disposed of in the
quarry. No dust is reinjected into the kiln.
During baseline conditions, a blended
combination of petroleum coke and
natural gas was used to fire the kiln.
During the waste fuel runs, a temporary
1-inch diameter stainless steel pipe was
placed on the burner pipe with its nozzle
pointed into the flame, and the waste fuel
and petroleum coke were fed unblended
to fire the kiln.
The hazardous waste fuel was trucked
to the site and stored in a 5,000-gallon
tanker between kilns 1 and 2 near the
burner end. The diaphram-type waste
fuel pump, located next to the tanker,
pumped fuel through the stainless steel
pipe to the flame. Air was added to the
pipe to supply oxygen for combustion and
to cool the pipe.
The waste fuel consisted primarily of
lacquer thinner solvents, alcohols, still
bottoms, paint wastes, and a small
fraction of chlorinated hydrocarbons
(0.4%). Tetrachloroethylene and tri-
chloroethylene were spiked to the waste
fuel before the test to bring the total
chlorine content to approximately 3.0%,
which would allow easier evaluation of
the destruction of the chlorinated species.
During test conditions, the waste fuel
ranged from 8% to 36% of the Btu input to
the kiln, and petroleum coke ranged from
64% to 90%. Comparatively, under
baseline conditions, the petroleum coke
averaged 90% and the natural gas
averaged 10% of the Btu input to the kiln.
Experimental Program
Table 1 summarizes the test program.
Measured pollutants in the stack gas
Radiators
Exhaust
Gases
I.D. Fans
\ ~\
•*•
Baghouse
(8 Modules)
NXXXXXX/
Dust
to Storage
Silo
Lime
Product
Figure 1. Schematic diagram of lime kiln process.
2
-------
include POHCs (tetrachloroethylene
(PERC), trichloroethylene (TCE), methylene
chloride (MeCI2), 1,1,1-trichloroethane
(CH3CCI3), methyl ethyl ketone (MEK), and
toluene), paniculate matter, particulate
trace metals, hydrogen chloride, sulfur
dioxide, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide,
total hydrocarbons, and oxygen. In
addition, the distribution of metals and
chlorine was measured in all of the
process input and output streams. Waste
fuel, coke, baghouse dust, and lime
product samples were submitted for
sulfur analyses. Coke samples were
analyzed for ash and Btu content. Waste
fuel samples also were analyzed for
POHCs and Btu content.
Sampling was conducted under baseline
conditions (i.e., no waste fuel burned) on
April 15, 29, and 30. Sampling at waste
fuel conditions (i.e., waste fuel burned)
was conducted from May 2 to May 6. A
Quality Assurance (QA/QC) Project Plan
was reviewed and approved prior to the
test program. A full description of the
QA/QC results involving replicates,
blanks, spikes, and standards is provided
in the full report.
Results and Discussion
Waste Fuel
A detailed summary of the waste fuel
composition for two waste fuel samples
collected is shown in Table 2. Tables 3
and 4 show the concentration of each
POHC and other properties for the five
waste fuel samples (one sample per day,
Runs 4-8).
POHC Destruction and
Removal Efficiencies
The complex combustion chemistry for
organic materials is perplexing when a
Table 1. Summary
Parameter
of Rockwell Lime Kiln Sampling and Analytical Program
Sampling method Analytical method
Stack Gas
POHCs*
Particulate matter
Metals on
particulate
Hydrogen chloride
Carbon dioxide
and oxygen
Nitrogen oxides
Sulfur dioxide
Carbon monoxide
Volatile organic sampling
train (VOST)
EPA Method 5
EPA Method 5
Impinger absorption in
0.5 M NaoAc (back half
of EPA Method 5)
EPA Method 3
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
CC/MS, thermal desorption
and SIM
EPA Methods
ICP
Specific ion electrode
Fyrite
Chemiluminescence photo-
metric analyzer
Pulsed fluorescence
TECO analyzer
Infrared-EPA Method 10
Total hydrocarbons
Oxygen
Waste fuel
POHCs
Metals
Chlorine, sulfur
Btu content
Baghouse dust
Metals
Chlorine, sulfur
Lime product
Metals
Chlorine, sulfur
Dry limestone feed
Metals
Chlorine
Primary fuel coke
Metals
Chlorine, sulfur
Btu content
Continuous
Continuous
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
— composite
— composite
— composite
-~ composite
-~ composite
— composite
— composite
— composite
— composite
— • composite
— composite
— composite
— composite
Flame ionization detector
Teledyne's micro-fuel cell
GC/MS
ICP
ASTM D240-64
ASTM D482-IP4
ICP
XRF
ICP
XRF
ICP
XRF
ICP
XRF
ASTM D240-64
broad range of organic compounds in a
liquid waste are burned. On a weight
basis, most of the organic carbon in the
waste is oxidized to COa in the combustion
process, but trace amounts of organic
chemicals survive oxidation and are only
partially reacted. Accordingly, the test
burn investigated the amount of destruc-
tion of the organic compounds in the
hazardous waste.
The ORE for an incineration/air pollu-
tion control system is defined by the
following equation:
DRF= Win'w°u'(inn)
W,n
(1)
where DRE=destruction and removal
efficiency, %
W,n = mass feed rate of principal
organic hazardous constit-
uent(s) (POHCs) fed to the
incinerator
Wout = mass emission rate of prin-
cipal organic hazardous
constituent(s) (POHCs) to
the atmosphere (as mea-
sured in stack prior to dis-
charge).
ORE calculations are based on combined
efficiencies of the destruction of the
POHC in the incinerator or the lime kiln
and the removal of the POHC from the gas
stream in the air pollution control system.
The presence of POHCs in solid discharges
from the air pollution control devices is
not accounted for in the ORE calculation
as currently defined by EPA. RCRA, Part
264, Subpart 0 regulations for hazardous
waste incinerators require a ORE of
99.99% for all principal organic hazardous
constituents of a waste during trial burns
unless it can be demonstrated that a
higher or lower ORE is more appropriate
based on human health criteria. Specifi-
cation of the POHCs in a waste is subject
to best engineering judgment, considering
the toxicity, thermal stability, and quantity
of each organic waste constituent. ORE
requirements in the Subpart 0 regulations
do not apply to metals or other noncom-
bustible materials.
Toluene, MEK. Pare, and TCE were
present in high concentration for organic
compounds (see Table 2). Spikes of Perc
and TCE were added to the waste fuel
prior to the test burn to obtain the higher
concentrations. Perc, TCE, methylene
chloride, and 1,1,1-trichloroethane were
selected because the chlorinated hydro-
carbons are, in general, difficult to
destroy thermally. All six of the com-
*Tetrachloroethylene. trichloroethylene, methylene chloride,
ketone, and toluene.
1,1,1-triehloroethane. methyl ethyl
-------
30
10-
Methylene Chloride
30
8 20<
3
10-
Trichloroethylene
30-
20
10
1234
Number of Nines ORE
Methylethyl Ketone
30-
10-
12345
Number of Nines ORE
Tetrachloroethylene
/ 2 3 4 5
Number of Nines ORE
30 4 1.1,1 Trichloroethane
12345
Number of Nines ORE
10
I
12345
Number of Nines ORE
Figure 2. Destruction and removal efficiencies.
30-
| 20-
"5
"6
tj 10-
Toluene
1 2 3. 4 5
Number of Nines ORE
pounds except methylene chloride were
found in the top twenty constituents of
the waste fuel. All six compounds are
listed as hazardous in RCRA Part 261,
Appendix VIII.
Approximately six VOST sampling runs
were made each day (Runs 1 -8). Destruc-
tion and removal efficiencies, calculated
for waste fuel runs 4-8, are summarized
in Figure 2.
In general, DREs ranged from 99.60%
to >99.999% for all compounds and
averaged 99.9989%. Only four runs had
DREs less than 99.99%; three of these
were for methylene chloride, the fourth
for 1,1,1-trichloroethane.
DREs for methylene chloride (MeCI2)
ranged from 99.60% to <99.999% and
averaged 99.983% ± 0.15% (95% con-
fidence limits).
Methyl ethyl ketone (MEK) had an
average ORE of 99.999% ± 0.0002% (95%
confidence limit) and ranged from 99.998%
to greater than 99.999%. These high
destruction efficiencies were consistent
throughout the test runs.
DREs for 1,1,1-trichloroethane (CH3
CCI3) ranged from 99.989% to 99.999%
and averaged 99.997% ± 0.004% (95%
confidence limits). Only Run No. 4E had a
ORE less than 99.99%.
DREs for trichloroethylene (TCE) were
greater than 99.999% for all runs. TCE
was spiked to the waste fuel prior to
testing to increase its concentration and
allow easier detection of TCE in the stack
gas. Spiking of TCE to concentrations
greater than approximately 1.3% by
volume was not possible due to permit
requirements which specified a maximum
of 3.0% by volume for chlorine.
DREs for tetrachloroethylene (Perc)
also were greater than 99.99% for all
runs. Like TCE, Perc was spiked to the
waste fuel to the maximum allowable
concentration described in the test burn
permit prior to the test.
Toluene was the POHC of highest
concentration in the waste fuel (average
11.6% by weight). DREs for toluene were
above 99.999% for all runs. Data for
toluene was very consistent during all
waste fuel test runs.
Stack Samples
Results for stack conditions and
paniculate, hydrogen chloride, sulfur
dioxide, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide,
and total hydrocarbon emissions for
baseline and waste fuel runs are sum-
marized in Table 5. The overall stack rate
averaged 917 mVmin (32,420 ftVmin)
and the dry stack rate averaged 487
dscm/min (17,210 dscf/min). As evi-
denced by the high standard deviations
the CO and, to a lesser degree, the S02
fluctuated. Minor kiln upsets (i.e., coke
feed chute cleaning, clumps of coke
falling to kiln, change in process condi-
tions) created high CO excursions. An
increase in SOz by —200 ppm, followed by
a reduction in NOX by ~50 ppm and a
subsequent increase in CO by ~500 ppm
occurred quite often over a 15 minute
period. These trends are expected when a
lower intensity flame occurs (or kiln
upset). However, as revealed by Figure 2,
the kiln upsets had little or no effect on
the ORE results.
Chlorine, Sulfur and Metals
Balance
Chlorine and sulfur material balances
are summarized for baseline and waste
fuel conditions in Table 6. The majority of
chlorine (for either baseline or waste fuel
conditions) enters the kiln in the limestone
feed and exits the kiln in the lime
product and baghouse dust. Sulfur (for
either baseline or waste fuel conditions)
enters the kiln in the petroleum coke and
exits the kiln distributed in the lime
product (—9%), baghouse dust (—27%),
and stack gas (—64%).
-------
Typical metals material balance is
shown in Table 7. There was no difference
for baseline and waste fuel conditions for
distribution of metals in the kiln process.
As shown in Table 7, the majority of mass
entering the kiln is contributed by the
limestone feed, except for zinc. The mass
exiting the kiln is distributed between the
lime product and baghouse dust.
Baseline vs. Waste Fuel and
Kiln Operation
Emissions were evaluated under
baseline and waste fuel conditions. For
Table 2. Results of Capillary GC/MS Analysis of Major Components of Waste Fuels
Concentration,
wt%
Waste fuel component
Acetone
Methyl ethyl ketone (MEK) (POHC)
1, 1 ,1 -Trichloroethane CH3 CCI3 (POHCi
1 -Butanol
Trichloroethylene TCE (POHC)
2-Ethoxyethanol
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Toluene (POHC)
Tetrachloroethylene (PercJ (POHC)
Butyl acetone
Ethylbenzene
Xylene (isomer No. 1)
Xylene (isomer No. 2)
2-Butoxyethyanol
2-Ethoxyethyl acetate
Ca-Benzene (isomer No. 1)
Cs-Benzene (isomer No. 2)
C 10- Alkane
Alkane >Ca
Alkane
Cn- Alkane
2-Cyclohexen-1 -one or 3,5,5-Trimethyl (isomer)
Alkane >C6
Number
4'
0.23
2.48
0.24
0.32
1.73
0.85
1.06
11.0
2.17
0.27
1.42
4.92
1.43
1.99
5.91
0.28
0.46
0.80
0.24
0.14
1.26
0.15
0.27
Number
7"
0.22
3.17
0.22
0.37
2.16
0.92
1.16
12.5
2.49
0.32
1.58
5.58
1.60
2.07
6.37
0.32
0.57
0.94
0.28
0.18
1.48
0.18
0.24
aAver age of split sample.
Table 3. Concentration of POHCs
Run
No.
4
5
6
7b
7°
8
POHCs concentration, wt %*
MeClz
0.101
0.097
0.106
0.120
0.120
0.116
MEK
2.48
2.75
2.48
3.17
3.17
2.59
CH3 CC/3
0.238
0.239
0.228
0.216
0.216
0.282
TCE
1.73
1.64
1.78
2.16
2.16
1.89
Perc
2.17
2.02
2.05
2.49
2.49
2.56
Toluene
10.97
10.55
10.95
12.50
12.50
12.90
*No waste fuel burned on baseline runs 1 -3.
"Runs 7A-7C.
cRuns 7D-7F.
the pollutants listed in Table 5, HCI, NO*
and THC showed a significant difference
in stack emissions under baseline and
waste fuel conditions. For the POHCs,
only methylene chloride and toluene
showed an increase from baseline to
waste fuel conditions. All remaining
POHCs showed no significant difference
in baseline vs. waste fuel emissions.
As described previously, the kiln
operation fluctuated as indicated by CO
and SO2 emission variations during
waste fuel burning. Kiln fluctuations
were caused by several factors, including
non-constant fuel rates, product rushes,
clumps of coke fed to kiln accidentally,
and operator inexperience with burning
waste fuel. The fluctuation resulted in
occasional kiln 02 increases and stack
gas SOa decreases that caused a poorer
quality lime product most likely due to
excess sulfur. The following items were
identified as ways to improve kiln
operation under waste fuel conditions:
• Change waste fuel burner configura-
tion such that at low waste fuel rates
the waste fuel is mixed with the coke
to maintain a flame.
• Decrease the fan speed (i.e., reduce
the draft) to lower the 02 in the kiln,
thus lowering the sulfur in the product
and increasing the sulfur in the stack.
Conclusions
Constant achievement of at least
99.99% ORE was demonstrated for each
POHC (MeCI2, MEK, CH3 CCI3, TCE, Perc,
and toluene) in the lime kiln process.
Emissions of pollutants were deter-
mined and ranged as follows: particulates
0.7-1.4 kg/hr; HCI 0.04-0.26 kg/hr; S02
123-2,100 ppm; NO, 280-550 ppm; THC
1.5-10 ppm; and CO 10-5,000 ppm.
Except for HCI, NOX, THC, MeCI2, and
toluene, emissions for pollutants were
statistically not different for baseline and
waste fuel conditions.
Typically, sulfur enters the kiln in the
petroleum coke and exits the kiln distri-
Table4. Waste Fuel Conditions
Run
number*
4
5
6
7
8
Chlorine
content,
% (vol.)
3.14
2.66
3.04
3.05
3.51
Sulfur
content,
%
0.10
0.08
0.065
0.06
0.11
PCB
concentration,
ppm
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Heat
value,
Btu/lb
12,301
12,084
12,267
13,612
14.064
Specific
gravity,
g/cc
1.031
1.042
1.035
0.986
0.971
Feed rate,
gal/min
0.76
1.21
2.05
0.78"
2.90"
2.88
Mass rate.
g/min
2,990
4,770
8,020
2,910
10,820
10,590
*No ivsste fuel burned during Run Nos. 1, 2, and 3.
*Runs 7A-7C.
cRuns 7D-7F.
-------
TableS. Average Stack Emissions
Baseline
Waste fuel
Standard
Parameter and unit
Stack rate, rrf/min
Stack velocity, m/sec
Particulates
mg/dscm
kg/hr
HCI, ppm
SOi, ppm
NOx, ppm
CO. ppm
THC, ppm
Range Average
805 - 975
5.0 - 6.0
24.0 - 35.0
0.66- 1.1
0. 74 - 3.9
123 - 730
306 - 460
10 - 4,900
6.7 - 12.7
917
5.7
28.7
0.9
2.0
553
386
477
8.2
deviation Range
76
0.4
4.7
0.2
1.4
110
49
966
1.9
791 - 938
4.9 - 5.8
24.9-48.7
0.68 - 1.4
2.5 - 6.0
183 - 1.924
288 - 552
10 - 4,540
1.5 - 10.0
Average
847
5.2
35.3
1.0
4.4
596
446
599
3.5
Standard
deviation
52
0.3
8.0
0.3
1.2
240
64
1.409
1.1
Table 6. Chlorine and Sulfur Material Balance
Run
number Coke
Chlorine
Baseline * 4
Waste fuef 5
Sulfur
Baseline* 100
Waste fuef 99
* Average values of baseline
Percent to kiln
Waste Limestone
fuel feed
0 96
2 93
0 NA
1 NA
Runs 1-3.
Total
mass in.
kg/hr
23
21
59
54
Lime
product
47
34
8
10
Percent from kiln
Baghouse Stack
dust gas
52 1
65 1
29 63
25 65
Total
mass out.
kg/hr
13
20
91
70
Material
balance
closure.
%
55
105
73
77
b Average values of waste fuel Runs 4-8.
Table 7. Typical Rockwell Lime Metals Material Balance*
Metal Coke
Be 10
Ca 1
Cr 1
Fe 1
Mg <1
Ni 20
Pb 14
In 5
Percent to kiln
(by wtj
Waste Limestone
fuel feed
0 90
<1 99
<1 98
<1 99
0 99
<1 80
6 80
53 42
Total
mass in.
9/hr
25
3x106
811
13,160
2 x 106
660
<500
170
Lime
product
75
93
75
83
90
74
55
41
Percent from kiln
(bywt)
Baghouse Stack
dust gas
25 0
7 <1
25 <7
77 <7
70 <7
26 <1
45 <1
58 1
Total
mass out.
g/hr
16
3x 70s
700
73,300
2x 70s
460
<450
100
Percent
closure
64
1OO
86
1O1
700
70
90
58
* Average values for Runs 1-8.
buted in the lime product, baghouse dust,
and stack gas.
Typically, a metal enters the kiln in the
limestone feed and exits the kiln in the
lime product and baghouse dust.
The kiln operation fluctuated resulting
in an occasionally lower-quality lime
product. Improving the burner system,
reducing draft (and % 02), and allowing
operators sufficient time to run the
system may minimize fluctuations and
improve product quality.
•&U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1984/559-11 I/I 0732
-------
D. R. Day and L A. Cox are with Monsanto Research Corporation, Dayton, OH
45407; ft. E. Mournighan (also the EPA Project Officer, see below) is with the
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH 45268.
The complete report, entitled "Evaluation of Hazardous Waste Incineration in a
Lime Kiln: Rockwell Lime Company," (Order No. PB 84-230 044; Cost: $ 16.00,
subject to change) will be available only from:
National Technical Information Service
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, VA 22161
Telephone: 703-487-4650
The EPA Project Officer can be contacted at:
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, OH 45268
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Center for Environmental Research
Information
Cincinnati OH 45268
BULK RATE
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
EPA
PERMIT No. G-35
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300
------- |