United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Municipal Environmental Research
Laboratory
Cincinnati OH 45268
Research and Development
EPA-600/S2-81-231 Jan. 1982
Project Summary
Barrel and Drum
Reconditioning
Industry Assessment
C. J. Touhill and Stephen C. James
An industry assessment was made
of drum reconditioning process char-
acteristics and the current status of
pollutant generation and disposal.
Typical industry practice for washing
and burning processes for recondi-
tioning are described along with
operating and design criteria for
individual unit operations. Processing
procedures that influence product
quality and environmental pollutant
generation are discussed. Pollutant
loadings are defined in terms of
sources and pathways, major pollutant
parameters, and generation and dis-
position modes. Current status of
pollution control practice is defined in
terms of processes and equipment,
operating procedures, disposal prac-
tices, removal efficiencies, and costs.
This Project Summary was devel-
oped by EPA's Municipal Environ-
mental Research Laboratory, Cincin-
nati, 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
For many people, the spent 208-L(55-
gal) steel drum has become the symbol
of toxic and hazardous wastes. Even
though drum reconditioning is intended
to support environmentally desirable
goals of recycle, reuse, and safe disposal
of used drums, popular equating of
drums and hazards focuses adverse
attention upon the industry. The U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
recognizes the useful service performed
by reconditioners, but also is alert to
potential problems the industry may
encounter in meeting high standards of
environmental quality. Because of this
awareness, EPA contracted for the
following information:
• to define representative practice
for barrel and drum reconditioning
by washing and burning.
• to determine the environmental
impact of reconditioning processes.
• to recommend procedures for
designing, optimizing, and retro-
fitting reconditioning facilities to
meet rigorous environmental
standards.
• to determine the capabilities of the
reconditioning industry to process
pesticide and toxic chemical con-
tainers safely.
The project is being conducted in
three parts. In the first, current status of
the industry is evaluated in terms of
state-of-the-art practices for both
reconditioning and pollution control. In
the second part, three reconditioning
sites were selected for sampling and
analysis to define more closely pollutant
sources and pathways. The final phase
is the development of recommendations
for design modifications, process
optimization, and retrofitting recondi-
tioning processes.
Five sources of information were
used to prepare the first-phase report:
publicly available literature, transcripts
of National Barrel and Drum Association
-------
(NABADA) forums on reconditioning
problems and techniques, proceedings
of four International Conferences on
Steel Drums, responses to a question-
aire sent by NABADA to its membership,
and visits to 11 drum reconditioning
plants.
Industry Overview
During 1979, about 250 recondi-
tioners processed more than 41 million
steel drums. More than 95% were 208-
L (55-gal) drums; most of the rest were
114-L (30 gal). About two-thirds of the
drums are reconditioned at washing
plants processing tight head drums. The
remainder, open head drums, are
burned in drum reclamation furnaces.
Facilities that only wash drums account
for 39% of reconditioning plants; 18%
only burn; 43% do both.
NABADA members represent only
48% of the reconditioning plants in the
country, but they process more than
90% of all washed drums and more than
97% of those burned. For non-NABADA
reconditioning facilities, 70% recondition
• for service and resale, and 30% are
users who process only their own
drums. More than half (52%) of the
drums washed are on a service of
laundry basis; 45% are for resale. By
comparison, only about one-third of the
drums burned are on a service basis;
62% are resold.
For many years, the annual ratio of
new drums produced to reconditioned
has been nearly 1 to 1. Additionally, the
ratio of new tight to open head drums (4
to 1) has not changed over the past 10 to
12 years. Trends, however, show an
increase in drum thickness. For
example, in 1969, 18-gage or heavier
drums comprised 64.3% of those
manufactured that year. In March 1980,
that percentage had fallen to 41.4. This
reduces the pool of potentially recon-
ditionable drums because thinner
drums are less able to withstand the
rigors of transportation and recondi-
tioning processes.
The prime users of new drums are the
oil and petroleum and the industrial
chemical industries. For reconditioned
drums, these two industries and the
paint industry are the main users. A
high percentage of oil and petroleum
drums are used and recycled. Because a
low percentage of chemical drums are
reused, it is not surprising that drums
containing spent industrial chemicals or
chemical residuals comprise a signif-
icant number of drums found at aban-
doned hazardous waste disposal sites.
Reconditioning Processes
Steel drums are processed by washing
or burning. Because tight head drums
almost always are washed, recondi-
tioners frequently refer to washing
facilities as tight head plants. Con-
versely, open head drums are processed
almost exclusively by burning; hence
burning operations often are called
open head plants.
Washing Process
Most drum washing is done with
strong hot caustic solution. Despite
common use of this technique, no tight
head reconditioning plants are the
same. Certainly there are many simi-
larities, but for maintenance or en-
hancement of environmental quality
standards, each plant must be evaluated
separately.
In a washing plant, the following
operations generally are employed.
After screening and draining upon
receipt, drums are preflushed using a
strong hot caustic solution. Subse-
quently, they proceed to a submerged
caustic washing tank. When drum
contents are difficult to remove using
caustic alone, chains are put into the
drum along with caustic, and the drum
is tumbled to dislodge adhering mate-
rials. If drum contents cannot be
removed by chaining or are cleaned only
with great difficulty, the drum heads are
cut off, thus converting them to open
heads, and they are sent to a burning
plant. About one-third of washing
plants remove rust using hydrochloric
acid washes. Tight head drums then are
rinsed, dedented, shot blasted, leak
tested, and painted.
Burning Process
At most burning plants, drums are
inspected upon receipt, and those
containing residues beyond plant cri-
terion for emptiness and those con-
taining unacceptable materials are
returned to the shipper along with
damaged drums. Some reconditioners
drain the drums before burning to
reduce temperature excursions due to
materials in the drum. Others believe
that the best way to get rid of the
residuals in the drum is to burn them
directly.
Some furnaces have water sprays or
steam injection at the inlet opening to
prevent flashbacks and possible operator
injury. Others have built-in distance
barriers to reduce operator exposure to
flashbacks.
Conveyor belts move drums through
the furnace at an average rate of from 6
to 8 per minute. Average residence time
is 6.6 min. Mean furnace temperature is
675°C (1250°F). All drum reclamation
furnaces use afterburners to control air
emissions. Afterburners are on all the
time at more than .80% of burning
plants. Afterburners operate 95% of the
time considering an average of all
plants. Average temperature and resi-
dence time for afterburners is 810°C
(1490°F) and 0.5 sec. The state of
California requires reconditioners who
burn pesticide drums to operate after-
burners at 900°C (1650°F) using a 0.5
sec. residence time.
When drums exit the furnace, they
are either air-cooled or are water
quenched. About 40% of burning plants
have the capability to quench, but not all
use it all the time. Some only operate
the water quencher when smoky drums
are being burned or when there is a
visible emission from the drum outlet
opening. After cooling, open head
drums are shot blasted, dedented, leak
tested, lined, and painted.
Natural gas is the preferred furnace
fuel. Where it is unavailable or un-
economical. No. 2 oil is recommended.
Operating Procedures (
Most reconditioners have established
procedures for drum receiving and
storage, and nearly two-thirds have oil
recovery systems. At a typical plant,
about 22,700 L (6,000 gal) of oil are
recovered monthly.
About 5.4% of drums bound for
reconditioning eventually are discarded.
The bulk of these are sold for scrap.
Almost all reconditioners refuse to
accept drums containing certain mate-
rials. Pesticides are refused by 83% of
reconditioners. Other drums frequently
refused are those formerly containing
ink and those containing adhesives. The
industry processes over 200,000 used
pesticide drums per year, although
there is some uncertainty in this figure.
Most are burned, but a few plants do
wash significant numbers of pesticide
drums. Even though the industry claims
that few facilities accept pesticide
drums, most plants have such drums
scattered within their inventories.
Plants that process pesticide drums
on a regular basis use special handling
and processing procedures. Reported
results indicate that burning (using
afterburners at 900°C or 1650°F)
effectively detoxifies most pesticide
drums. Additionally, in washing plants,^
-------
phosphorus and nitrogen-containing
pesticides lend themselves to detoxi-
fication by alkaline hydrolysis.
Pollutant Loadings
The project emphasized liquid and
solid wastes in terms of pollutant
sources and pathways. Previous in-
vestigations indicated that air emissions
presented little problem in drum recon-
ditioning.
Most washing facilities either recycle
and reuse caustic and rinse waters or
discharge effluents into public sewerage
systems. Nearly 20% of washing plants
claim to have completely closed cycle or
"zero discharge" systems. About half of
all plants (including those that burn),
claim to discharge some water into
public sewers. Only 10% are direct
dischargers after treatment. Mean flow
for a typical facility is 56,800 L/day
(15,000 gal/day). Because such a high
percentage of plants discharge to
sewers, water quality limitations for
such discharges become very important.
Reconditioning wastewater is charac-
terized by high pH, COD, BOO, and
solids values. There is wide variability in
wastewaters depending upon the types
of drums processed. There is some
evidence of hazardous organics in small
concentrations in some reconditioning
wastewater.
The biggest problem facing recon-
ditioners is the need to provide safe,
economical, and environmentally ac-
ceptable means for residuals manage-
ment. Evolving solid and hazardous
waste management regulations are
expected to have major effect on the
industry. Landfilling has been and
continues to be the predominant method
for residue disposal. Use of incineration
is increasing and will continue to at an
accelerated rate as the impact of RCRA
regulations are felt.
On the average, drums received by
reconditioners contain 2.5 L (0.65 gal)
or 2.5 kg (5.4 Ib) of residues. Caustic
sludges have high pH, COD, BOD, and
oil and grease washing solutions, but in
far greater amounts.
Preseritly, surface runoff at recon-
ditioning facilities is not being handled
to any extent.
Pollution Control Practice
and Costs
Major potential alternatives for air
pollution control at drum reclamation
furnaces are: (1) direct combustion in
Jhe 650°C (1200°F) to 900°C (1650°F)
temperature range with an afterburner
residence time of 0.3 to 0.7 sec.; (2)
catalytic oxidation in the 315°C (600 °F)
to 510°C (950°F) range; (3) sorption
using activated carbon, silica gel, or
other materials; and (4) scrubber
systems. Worldwide, the direct com-
bustion and afterburner method is the
one most frequently used. Other meth-
ods usually are adjuncts to this primary
method.
All U.S. reconditioning drum furnaces
have afterburners to consume particu-
lates and organics not burned in the
furnace main chamber. About 37% of
drum burning facilities use air pollution
control equipment and techniques in
addition to afterburners. Typically,
equipment includes scrubbers, packed
towers, baghouses, and dust collectors.
Some methods used to optimize existing
equipment are automatic ducts to
regulate air flow, and entry and exit air
curtains for better and more efficient
combustion.
For washing plants, about 55% have
or have under construction their own
wastewater treatment plants. Water
pollution control equipment being used
includes caustic filters, vacuum drying
systems, oil/water separators, screens
for gross particle removal, dissolved air
flotation units, flocculation/sedimenta-
tion units, coalescing plate separators
for oil removal, oil skimmers (often the
endless belt or rope type), and packaged
wastewater treatment systems.
Many reconditioners fabricate their
own pollution control systems as
opposed to using commercially available
products. Operating procedures such as
preflushing, stream segregation, and
cascading water use are important
adjuncts to pollution control equipment.
The 1980 price for reconditioned tight
and open head drums is about $12.00;
the cost for pollution controls associated
with their cleaning is about $0.38 for
washing and $0.35 for burning.
Environmental Assessment
The three facilities selected for
testing were: (1) a large drum washing
plant that recycles most of its caustic
washing and rinsing solutions; (2) a
large burning and washing plant that is
representative of typical practice; and
(3) a large washing plant that handles
substantial volumes of pesticide con-
tainers.
Generally, results of the sampling and
analysis program confirmed typical
ranges of pollutants found in previous
evaluations of the industry. Two ex-
ceptions were:
(1) Higher concentrations of organic
compounds, particularly priority
pollutants, were evident in aque-
ous waste streams.
(2) Lower metals concentrations, for
most elements, were found in
aqueous waste streams.
Based upon regulatory standards,
results of the sampling and analysis test
program indicated the following probable
methods of pollutant control for the
principal waste streams of concern:
(1) incinerator particulate emis-
sions - operational controls
(2) incinerator organic emissions -
operational controls
(3) incinerator metals emissions -
operational controls
and/or bag house filters
(4) caustic washing solutions -
treatment and reuse
(5) rinse water - treatment and
reuse
(6) quench water - treatment and
reuse or mixing with other liquid
streams
(7) stormwater runoff - housekeep-
ing, drainage control, treatment
and direct discharge
(8) leak tester water - discharge to
public sewers
(9) incinerator ash - landfill (con-
ventional or secured)
(10) caustic sludge - treatment and
either incineration or landfill
(conventional or secured)
(11) drum drainage - treatment and
either incineration or landfill
(conventional or secured)
Pollution Control Needs and
Optimization Methods
It was determined that implementation
of regulations promulgated in conjunc-
tion with the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) could have a
positive impact upon drum recondi-
tioners under the following circum-
stances: (1) if .the industry refuses to
accept drums that formerly contained
materials listed by name in 40 CFR
261.33 (e) that have not been triple
rinsed by an appropriate solvent (2) if
the industry refuses to accept drums
containing residues of hazardous wastes
(other than 261.33 (e) materials) in
quantities greater than 1 inch; and (3) if
reconditioners avoid storing accumu-
lated sludge or containers of hazardous
wastes for more than 90 days, and if this
-------
sludge or containers are not burned,
buried, or treated at the reconditioning
site.
The following identifies specific areas
for upgrading and optimizing pollution
control at drum reconditioning plants:
• Operational and management pro-
cedures
- receiving
- storage
- draining
- waste stream segregation
- water conservation
- housekeeping
- waste heat utililzation
• Pesticide container processing
- drums triple-rinsed before ac-
ceptance
- storage in separate area
- compliance with specified safety
procedures
• Air emissions
- operation in accordance with
NABADA guidelines
- minimum operational tempera-
ture of 1200°F
- minimum residencetimeofAsec
- afterburner temperature of
1400°F with 0.5 sec residence
time
- special operating conditions for
pesticide drums
- use of baghouse to control trace
metal emissions
• Liquid waste streams
- segregate all liquid waste streams
- treated rinse water should be
used to make up losses in caustic
solutions
- source of quench water should
be treated rinse water
- management of stormwater run-
off
- proper drum storage to include
berms and dikes for stormwater
runoff collection
- proper sludge handling
• Solid residues
- testing to determine if solids are
hazardous
- operation control to reduce
sludge volume
- proper sludge disposal
- proper handling of incinerator
ash
- processing of recovered oil
- treatment of hazardous waste
drum drainage
Research and Development
Research and development needs
identified as a result of this program are:
(1) Evaluate whether incinerator
particulates, trace metal, and
organic emissions- can be con-
trolled effectively using opera-
tional procedures, e.g., rigorous
temperature control, elevated
temperatures, variable conveyor
speeds, drum spacing, and drum
mixing.
(2) Develop better filtration systems
for preparing caustic washing
solutions for reuse.
(3) Determine the feasibility of ultra-
filtration for use in processing
rinse water for reuse.
(4) Develop a strategy for cascading
water uses (from higher to lower
quality needs).
(5) Evaluate the potential of good
housekeeping and drum storage
yard management procedures for
minimizing contamination of
stormwater runoff.
(6) Develop better processes for
caustic and rinse water sludge
dewatering.
(7) Evaluate procedures for disposing
of non-hazardous sludges and
residues, including oily waste
recovery, and sludge burning and
drying methods.
C. J. Touhill is with Touhill, Shuckrow and Associates. Inc., Pittsburgh. PA
15237; and the EPA author Stephen C. James (also the EPA Project Officer.
see below) is with the Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory, Cin-
cinnati. OH 45268.
This Project Summary covers two reports, entitled:
"Barrel and Drum Reconditioning Industry Status Profile," (Order No. PB
82-113 382; Cost: $15.00)
"Drum Reconditioning Process Optimization," (Order No. PB 82-113 374;
Cost: $9.00)
The above reports are available only from: (prices subject to change)
National Technical Information Service
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, VA 22161
Telephone: 703-487-4650
The EPA Project Officer can be contacted at:
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, OH 45268
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Center for Environmental Research
Information
Cincinnati OH 45268
Postage and
Fees Paid
Environmental
Protection
Agency
EPA 335
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300
RETURN POSTAQE GUARANTEED
ENvIR?PRUTECTION AGENCY
CHICAGO IL 60604
•ft U S GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE; 1982 — 559-017/7439
------- |