United States Environmental Protection Agency Hazardous Waste Engineering Research Laboratory Cincinnati OH 45268 Research and Development EPA/600/S2-86/121 May 1987 £EPA Project Summary Pilot-Scale Incineration Test Burn of TCDD-Contaminated Trichlorophenol Production Waste R. W. Ross, II, T. H. Backhouse, R. H. Vocque, J. W. Lee, and L. R. Waterland A series of three tests to evaluate the incinerability of the toluene stillbot- toms waste from trichlorophenol pro- duction previously generated by the Vertac Chemical Company were per- formed in the Combustion Research Fa- cility (CRF) rotary kiln incineration sys- tem. This waste contained 37 ppm 2,3,7,8-TCDD as its principal organic hazardous constituent (POHC). Flue gas 2,3,7,8-TCDD levels were less than de- tectable at all locations sampled. Corre- sponding incinerator destruction and removal efficiencies (DREs) were greater than 99.9997 percent, based on individual sampling train analyses. By analyzing combined extracts from four simultaneous sampling trains, it was concluded that 2,3,7,8-TCDD DRE was indeed greater than 99.9999 percent. These results suggest that incineration of the Vertac waste is capable of achieving the required DRE and should be considered a treatment option for this waste. This Project Summary was devel- oped by ERA'S Hazardous Waste Engi- neering Research Laboratory, Cincin- nati, OH, to announce key findings of the research project that is fully docu- mented in a separate report of the same title (see Project Report ordering infor- mation at back). Introduction A primary function of the U.S. Envi- ronmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Combustion Research Facility (CRF) is to perform incineration testing of trou- blesome hazardous wastes to support decisions regarding whether incinera- tion is a proper waste treatment and dis- posal option. Waste contaminated with 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (2,3,7,8-TCDD or dioxin) is one class of such wastes. An example of a well-documented, highly dioxin-contaminated waste is the toluene stillbottoms from trichlorophe- nol production previously generated and currently being stored, pending a decision regarding appropriate treat- ment and disposal, at the Vertac Chemi- cal Company in Jacksonville, Arkansas. The generator is currently considering onsite incineration in a mobile incinera- tor system for disposal of this waste and wishes to have a permit for a trial burn. The primary objective of the tests re- ported herein was to evaluate the incin- erability of the Vertac toluene stillbot- toms waste by determining whether 99.9999 percent DRE could be achieved as required by current regulations. Re- sults of these incineration tests could in turn be used to support any subsequent permit decision. All tests were performed in the CRF rotary kiln incineration system. The test program consisted of a total of four trial burns performed in September 1985. These trial burns consisted of the fol- lowing: • A blank burn with the incinerator fired with auxiliary fuel (propane) to establish background emission levels of pollutants of concern ------- • A miniburn of short duration (4 hours) with waste fired at nomi- nally 17 kg/hr (38 Ib/hr) to demon- strate the ability to feed and incin- erate the waste and to gain experience with the sampling pro- tocols specified • Two full waste test burns of nomi- nally 10-hour duration with the waste fired at about 10 and 18 kg/hr (22 and 39 Ib/hr) to specifically ad- dress the test objectives Facility Description, Waste Characterization, and System Operation The rotary kiln incineration system at the CRF consists of a rotary kiln primary combustion chamber, a fired after- burner, and a primary air pollution con- trol system consisting of a venturi scrubber, wetted elbow, and packed tower scrubber. In addition, a backup air pollution control system (APCD) con- sisting of a carbon-bed absorber and a HEPA filter is in place. The primary APCD might be considered reflective of what might exist in an actual commer- cial or industrial incinerator. The backup system is in place to ensure that organic pollutant and paniculate emissions to the atmosphere are negligible. A sche- matic of the system is given in Figure 1. For these tests, waste was introduced at the feed face through the front face lance with a diaphragm-type pump, while auxiliary fuel (propane) was fired through a burner located at the transfer duct end of the kiln. The afterburner was also fired with auxiliary fuel. Table 1 summarizes the nominal in- cinerator operating conditions for each of the tests performed. For all four, propane was fired in the kiln and the afterburner to maintain the kiln at about 1800°F and the afterburner at about 2000°F. This corresponded to heat in- puts of about 260 to 350 kW (0.9 to 1.2 x 106 Btu/hr) in the kiln and about 470 to 560 kW (1.6 to 1.9 x 106 Btu/hr) in the afterburner for all four tests. The amount of waste fed into the kiln was monitored by recording the changes in the waste container weight reading. The feedrates fluctuated over a wide range with mean rates of 17 kg/hr (38 Ib/hr) on September 9; 10 kg/hr (22 Ib/hr) on September 20; and 18 kg/hr (39 Ib/hr) on September 21, 1985. System residence times were calcu- lated based on volumetric flowrate measurements using a helium tracer system and the assumption that the kiln and afterburner chamber temperatures were isothermal and equal to the single point measurement noted in Table 1. The calculated residence time in the kiln main chamber was 5.7 sec for the blank burn, 5.3 sec for the miniburn, and 4.9 and 6.0 sec for the two still bottoms waste full burns. Residence times in the afterburner were 2.1, 1.9, 1.8, and 2.3 sec for the respective tests. The generic composition of the tol- uene stillbottoms waste based on previ- ous data developed by the Vertac Chemical Company and the physical characteristics of the waste based on analysis performed on a sample of the waste at the CRF are given in Table 2. The waste was also analyzed for organic and trace element priority pollutants. Results of these analyses are given in Table 3. Specific analyses for the Princi- pal Organic Hazardous Constituent (POHC) in the waste, 2,3,7,8-TCDD, showed that it contained 37 ppm of this compound. Significant problems were experi- enced in attaining and maintaining waste feed throughout the test pro- gram. Specific problems included con- tinued feed lance clogging, which was caused by carbon buildup (coking of the waste material), in the lance, pump check valve seal failure, and the ability to pump waste. The feed lance clogging problem was solved by cofeeding water with the waste so that when the lance clogged it would heat and vaporize the water, thereby, clearing the clog. Feed line clogging and check valve seal stick- ing were temporarily solved by cleaning all feed line components with solvent (toluene). However, in retrospect the choice of a diaphragm pump for this waste was inappropriate. The waste was waxy and very viscous at room temperature. Only at about 95°C (200°F) would it flow sufficiently to be consid- ered pumpable. Hot water heating coils were immersed in the waste for these tests, however, pumping problems per- sisted. Perhaps a pump of another de- sign, such as a progressive cavity pump, would have provided better serv- ice. Sampling and Analysis Protocol The combustion gas generated dur- ing each test was monitored at various locations in the system for CO, C02, 02, NOX, total hydrocarbon (THC), HCI, par- ticulate, and trace semivolatile organic compounds, most importantly 2,3,7,8- TCDD. Additionally, grab samples we obtained of the waste feed, the scrubb system blowdown liquid, and the a collected in the ash pit during the tes Ambient air sampling, both in the hi) bay incinerator room and in the outsit vicinity of the CRF, was also performs Figure 2 summarizes the sampling loc tions and types of samples obtained. Waste samples were analyzed f 2,3,7,8-TCDD by dilution, cleanup, ar high resolution gas chromatograph low resolution mass spectromet (HRGC/LRMS); for the halogenatt volatile organic priority pollutants by c lution, purge and trap GC/electron ca ture detector (ECD); for the semivolati organic priority pollutants by dilutio cleanup, and HRGC/LRMS in accor ance with Method 8270; and for the pi ority pollutant trace elements by ac digestion and atomic absorption tecl niques. Kiln ash and blowdown water san pies were analyzed for polychlorinate dibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDDs) and pol' chlorinated dibenzofurans (PCDFs) i chlorine substitution 4 through 8, ar for 2,3,7,8-TCDD by benzene extractioi extract concentration and cleanup, an HRGC/HRMS. Blowdown water samples were als analyzed for the halogenated volatil organic priority pollutants by purge an trap GC/ECD; for the semivolatile o ganic priority pollutants by benzene e: traction, extract concentration, an HRGC/LRMS; and for the priority polli tant trace elements by atomic absorj tion. Modified Method 5 (MM5) train san pies were benzene extracted, extracl for all train components combined, cor centrated, and subjected to extrac cleanup procedures. These extracl were then analyzed for 2,3,7,8-TCDD b HRGC/LRMS. In addition, extracts fc the four simultaneous MM5 trains ope ated downstream of the scrubber sy; tem for the two full-burn tests wer combined and analyzed for 2,3,7,{ TCDD. The samples from this area of th system, the "virtual stack" or "E-duct1 are very important since these data wi be used to design future systems. Test Results Levels of 02, C02, CO, and NOX in th flue gas at the afterburner exit and i the stack for the four tests performe are summarized in Table 4. As showr all tests were performed at high exces air; flue gas O2 was in the 10 to 17 pei ------- Venturi Inlet Duct Propane Transfer Duct Propane Cyclone Packed Tower Separator Scrubber Burner No. 2 Burner (TAsh No. 1 II Bin Retire ulation 0 . ... Pump *eclrculat,on Sanitary Sewer -» Chemical Sewer Figure 1. Simplified rotary kiln system schematic. Slowdown Blowdown Tank Tank No. 1 No. 2 Table 1. Incinerator System Operating Conditions Kiln operation Propane heat input, kW (106 Btu/hr) Waste feedrate, kg/hr llb/hr) Waste heat input, kW (106 Btu/hr) Exit gas temperature, °C <°f) Background burn (9/4/85 0950 to 1940) Range Average 260 to 290 280 (0.9 to 1.0) (0.95) 0 0 0 0 950 (1750) Miniburn (9/9/85 0945 to 1520) Range 180 to 290 (0.6 to 1.0) 8 to 23 (18 to 50) 37 to 101 (0. 13 to 0.35) Average 220 (0.72) 17 (38) 77 (0.26) 990 (1820) First full burn (9/20/85 1030 to 2230) Range 320 to 440 (1.1 to 1.5) Oto25 (0 to 56) Oto 114 (0 to 0.39) Average 384 (1.3) 10 (22) 44 (0.15) 980 (1800) Second full burn (9/21/85 1735 to 2330) Range 290 to 350 (1.0 to 1.2) 2.7 to 40 (6 to 87) 12 to 180 (0.04 to 0.60) Average 330 (1.1) 18 (39) 80 (0.27) 990 (1810) Nominal residence time sec8 Afterburner operation Propane heat input, kW <106 Btu/hr) 470 to 500 (1.6 to 1.7) 5.7 480 (1.64) 440 to 500 (1.5 to 1.7) 5.3 470 (1.6) 500 to 590 (1.7 to 2.0) 4.9 560 (1.9) 500 to 560 (1.7 to 1.9) 6.0 520 (1.8) ------- Table 1. (continued) Exit gas temperature, °C m Background burn (9/4/85 0950 to 1940) Range Average 1120 (2040) Miniburn (9/9/85 0945 to 1520) Range Average 1120 (2050) First full burn (9/20/85 1030 to 2230) Range Average 1110 (2030) Second full burn (9/21/85 1735 to 2330) Range Averagi 111 (203C Nominal residence time seca APCD operation System water makeup rate, Umin (gpm) System blowdown rate, Umin (gpm) Scrubber liquor pH 12 to 17 (3.2 to 4.4) 6.8 to 9.1 (1.8 to 2.4) 8.4 to 8.5 2.1 15 (4.0) 8.2 (2.2) 8.5 10 to 19 (2.7 to 4.9) 4.9 to 8.3 (1.3 to 2.2) 8.0 to 8.7 1.9 15 (3.9) 7.2 1.9 9.5 to 30 (2.5 to 7.8) 3.4 to 13 (0.9 to 3.4) 8.2 8.0 to 8.6 1.8 21 (5.5) 8.7 (2.3) 8.2 6.8 to 23 (1.8 to 6.0) 4.5 to 11 (1.2 to 2.8) 6.8 to 8.8 2. (4.2 8. (2.3 8.. Venturi pressure drop, kPa (in. WC) Venturi exit gas temperature, °C <°F) Packed tower pressure drop, kPa (in. WC) Packed tower exit gas temper- ature, °C (°F) 10.7 to 10.9 (43 to 44) 0.35 to 0.50 (1.4 to 2.0) 10.7 (43) 79 (174) 0.44 (1.8) 78 (172) 8.2 to 10.0 (33 to 40) 0.30 to 0.50 (1.2 to 2.0) 9.5 (38) 80 (176) 0.40 1.6 78 (173) 7.5 to 10.0 (30 to 40) 0.47 to 1.3 (1.9 to 5.2) 8.6 (35) 81 (178) 1.0 (4.1) 80 (176) 7.0 to 9.7 (28 to 39) 0.35 to 1.3 (1.4 to 5.4) 8. (34 8. (18C 0.8. (3.4 8 (176 'Residence times based on volumetric flows calculated using the helium tracer system data. Table 2. Stillbottoms Waste Generic Composition and Physical Characteristics Compound Methanol Toluene Dichlorobenzenes Trichlorobenzenes 2,4,5-trichloroanisole Na-trichlorophenol Dichloromethoxybenzene 2,4,5-T, Na salt Parameter Bulk density, g/ml Loss on drying, percent Ash Heating value, MJ/kg (Btu/lb) Concentration (percent) 1 8 1.5 1.5 56 7 16 7 Value (Percent) 1.37 13.2 5.1 16.11 (6945) cent range in the afterburner exit and in the 13 to 17 percent range in the stack. CO emissions were always low, <10 ppm, as were NOX levels, <30 ppm. The missing data noted in Table 4 illustrate another problem experienced during the tests, that of continuous monitor failure. Although the CRF has two com- plete monitoring systems (02, CO2, CO, and NOX), during these tests only one of each set of instruments was working and even some of these working instru- ments would periodically fail. Table 4 also noted the HCI emission rates for those tests for which these rates were measured. For the miniburn, the HCI emission rate was 0.45 kg/hr as measured by the continuous HCI moni- tor at the E-duct; for the September 20 full burn the HCI emission rate was 0.25 kg/hr as measured both by the HCI mon- itor and by the MM5 trains operated at the E-duct. Both of these are less than the CRF permit level of 0.5 kg/hr. Table 5 summarizes the participate and 2,3,7,8-TCDD emission levels meas- ured at various locations in the inciner- ator system for each of the tests. As shown in the table and as expected, paniculate levels at both the kiln and afterburner exit were quite low during the background burn with propane fuel alone. Flue gas paniculate levels for the tests with waste feed were highly vari- able and ranged from several to several hundred mg/dscm. Paniculate levels at the virtual stack were indicated to be as high as 340 mg/dscm for one test. Dui to technical factors and since the 0 monitor at this location was not operal ing properly at the time of the test, accu rate figures, corrected to 7 percent 0; cannot be derived from the raw date Since results are uncertain, further wor on measurement of particulate emis sions from dioxin-contaminated wast is needed. Particulate emissions at the stack syj tern (after the High Efficiency Particulat Filter) were also indicated as bein much higher than anticipated. The va ues are 5 to 15 times higher than desig values and are therefore suspect. If the are as high as indicated, further test in is needed to determine the nature an source of the particulate. Flue gas levels of 2,3,7,8-TCDD wer less than method detection limits at a locations for all tests. These levels coi respond to the DRE values noted i Table 5 for the tests with waste feec Two sets of DRE values are noted in th table for the E-duct and stack location; These correspond to two differer measures of flue gas flowrate. One c these was based on a helium tracer ir jection system; the other was based o ------- Rotary Kiln I Afterburner Venturi Scrubber/ Wetted Elbow Packed Tower Scrubber I Carbon Bed Filter HEPA Filter (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (61 (7> (8) Test Sample No. of Parameter Points Methodology Duration Samples C02 02 CO /vo, HCI THC Semivolatile organics including 2,3.7.8-TCDD Waste Kiln ash Scrubber blowdown 3.4.8 3.4.8 3.4.8 3,4,8 6 6,7 3,4.6,8 1 2 /VO//? Zirconium oxide sensor NDIR Chemiluminescence Color/metric Flame ionization detector MM5 Grab Grab Grab Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous" 10 hours (7 dscm) (250 dscfj 8 composites after entire burn series 8 composites after entire burn series 2 at test pt 3 2 at test pt 4 4 at test pt 6 2 at test pt 8 3 8 'The two test points were monitored by one instrument on a 5-min time-sharing basis. Figure 2. Summary of the general sampling protocol. Table 3. Composition of the Stillbottoms Waste Component Concentration3 (ppm, wt) Detection limit (ppm, wt) Volatile organic priority pollutants Methylene chloride 1,1-dichloroethylene 1,1-dichloroethane t- 1,2-dichloroethylene Chloroform 1,2-dichloroethane 1,1,1-trichloroethane Carbon tetrachloride Bromochloromethane 1,2-dichloropropylene t- 1,3-dichloropropylene Trichloroethylene Benzene 1,1,2-trichloroethane Bromoform Tetrachloroethylene + tetrachloroethane Chlorobenzene Toluene 277 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 159,000 42 42 70 84 42 42 70 42 84 42 42 na 42 70 84 42 the MM5 train velocity measurements. The data in Table 5 suggest that 2,3,7,8- TCDD ORE was generally greater than 99.9997 percent in the virtual stack which would likely correspond to the stack of an actual hazardous waste in- cinerator. Method detection limits did not allow unambiguously establishing that greater than 99.9999 percent ORE was achieved either at the virtual stack or at the system stack. Therefore, the ex- tracts from the four MM5 trains oper- ated at the virtual stack for the two full-burn tests were combined and rean- alyzed in an attempt to achieve better detection limits. Calculated 2,3,7,8- TCDD levels for the virtual stack and corresponding 2,3,7,8-TCDD DREs based on the combined extract analyses for the second full burn (9/21/86) are given in Table 6. Data for the second full ------- Table 3. {continued} Component Concentration3 (ppm, wt) Detection limit {ppm, wt) Semivolatile organic priority pollutants 1,2-dichlorobenzene 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene All other base/neutral semivolatile priority pollutants 1,2-dichlorophenol 4-chloro-3-methylphenol 2,4,6-trichlorophenol 2,4-dinitrophenol 4-nitrophenol 2-methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol Pentachlorophenol All other acid semivolatile priority pollutants Trace Elements 2,690 3,410 NO 159 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND aND denotes not detected at the detection limit noted. Table 4. Emission Monitor and HCI Emission Rate Data Parameters Background burn 9/4/85 Minibum 9/9/86 First full burn 9/20/85 Afterburner exit: O2 (percent) CO2 (percent) CO (ppm) NOX (ppm) E-ducf. HCI (kg/hr) Continuous Analyzer MM5 train Stack: O2 (percent) CO2 (percent) CO (ppm) NOX (ppm) 75 8 30 12 7 10 4 17 7 20 0.45 18 3 30 10 0.25 0.25 500 600 300 300 500 500 500 100 Antimony, Sb Arsenic, As Beryllium, Be Cadmium, Cd Chromium, Cr Copper, Cu Lead, Pb Mercury, Hg Nickel, Ni Selenium, Se Silver, Ag Thallium, Tl Zinc, Zn ND ND ND ND ND ND 4 ND ND ND ND ND ND 2 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 Second full burn 9/21/85 17 4 20 13 8 — Denotes monitor not operating or measurement not made. burn clearly show that greater the 99.9999 percent DRE was achieved. Tf extracts for the first full burn wei spiked with an order of magnituc higher level of recovery standard the deemed appropriate by the offsite labi ratory that originally analyzed the inc vidual train extracts. Consequent! method detection limits correspondir to ng/dscm of flue gas were not any be ter than the individual train analys data summarized in Table 5. The kiln ash and the scrubber blo\ down water from this entire test serii were analyzed for PCDDs and PCDF chlorine substitution 4 through 8. Tl kiln ash samples were devoid of PCOE and PCDF to detection limits rangir from 3 to 40 ppt as shown in Table Similarly, the data in Table 8 show th scrubber blowdown samples were d void of all PCDDs and PCDFs exce octa-CDDs which were present at 0.( ppt. This is not surprising since oct CDDs are relatively common in enviro mental samples. The scrubber blowdown was also a alyzed for the organic and trace eleme priority pollutants. Results are summ riz'ed in Table 9. As shown, no organ priority pollutant was present in tt blowdown at levels greater than 10 pp In addition, none of the trace elemen were present at concentrations whi< would cause the blowdown water to t considered EP (Extraction Procedur toxic. Based on all analytical data, tr blowdown would not be considered hazardous waste. Conclusions A series of incineration experimen was performed with the Vertac Chenr cal Company's toluene stillbottorr waste from trichlorophenol productio This waste is one of the more we known of the dioxin-contaminate wastes presently in existence. Sample of the waste tested in this study coi tained an average of 37 ppm 2,3,7; TCDD (37 u,g/g). Three incineration tests were pe formed during September 1985. A were performed in the CRF rotary kil incineration system with waste feedral nominally 20 kg/hr. With regard to the principal objei tives of these tests, the following can b concluded: • 2,3,7,8-TCDD DRE based on th combined extracts from the foi MM5 trains at the virtual stack wa greater than 99.9999 percent fc ------- Table 5. Paniculate and 2,3,7,8-TCDD Emissions and 2,3,7,8-TCDD ORE Paniculate emissions Date and Test location Background burn 9/4/85 Kiln exit: Train 1 Train 2 Afterburner Train 1 exit: Train 2 E-duct: Top train Bottom train Left train Right train Stack: East train South train Miniburn 9/9/85 Kiln exit: Train 1 Train 2 Afterburner Train 1 exit: Train 2 Full burn 9/20/85 Kiln exit: Train 1 Train 2 Average Afterburner Train 1 exit: Train 2 E-duct: Top train Bottom train Left train Right train Average Stack: East train South train Average Full burn 9/21/85 Kiln exit: Train 1 Train 2 Afterburner Train 1 exit: Train 2 Average E-duct: Top train Bottom train Left train Right train Stack: East train South train Average (mg/dscm as measured) 0.28 0.50 0.83 3.4 __b b —b b 2.3 0.4 463 175 585 2,030 2.71 1.46 2.09 371 266 564 291 251 343 38.4 56.0 47.2 753 1,940 154 199 176 <0.1S 2.3 10.8 <0.13 72.6 208 140 (mg/dscm 2,3,7,8-TCDD corrected to emissions 7 percent O2a) (ng/dscm) <0.95 <0.36 1.9 <1.7 7.9 <0.43 <0.18 <0.24 <0.31 <0.31 8.1 <0.21 1.4 <0. 10 <0.74 <1.4 <13 <11 <0.55 <0.17 <3.8 <1.3 <0.43 <0.51 <2.5 <0.55 <2.3 <1.5 <6.4 <21 <3.9 <2.8 <1.9 <2.0 <2.2 <0.76 132 < 1.5 378 < 1.6 255 2,3,7,8-TCDD ORE (percent) Based on helium tracer >99.99995 >99.99991 >99.9984 >99.9986 >99.99992 >99.99998 >99.99903 >99.99967 >99.99982 >99.99979 >99.99896 >99.99977 >99.99907 >99.99945 >99.99964 >99.99988 <99.99956 >99.99969 >99.99969 <99.99967 >99.99864 >99.99988 >99.99975 09.99973 Based on flue gas velocity >99.99987 >99.99985 >99.99925 >99.99983 >99.99916 >99.99951 >99.99974 O9.99973 >99.99970 >99.999897 >99.99974 >99.99973 aO->meter not functioning properly. Figures, when given, are estimates. bNo filters were used in the E-duct trains for this test. °Evidence of a significant sampling train leak was discovered after sampling was complete. Data were considered invalid for paniculate measurements. ------- Table 6. 2,3,7,8-TCDD Emissions and ORE Based on Combined E-Duct Train Extracts 2,3,7,8-TCDD ORE Test date Full bum 9/21/86 2,3,7,8-TCDD emissions (ng/dscm) <0.066 Based on helium tracer >99.999989 Based on flue gas velocity >99.999991 Table 7. Levels of PCDD and PCDF in Kiln Ash Samples Concentration" (ppt)b Analyte 2,3,7,8-TCDD TCDDs-CDD Penta-CDDs Hexa-CDDs Hepta-CDDs Octa-CDDs 2,3,7,8-TCDF TCDFs Penta-CDFs Hexa-CDFs Hepta-CDFs Octa-CDFs Sample 1 (13) (13) (28) (7.4) (14) (44) (7.0) (7.0) (11) (4.6) (12) (33) Sample 2 (10) (10) (6.5) (4.5) (6.3) (18) (16) (16J (2.7) (2.8) (6.2) (21) Sample 3 (5.6) (5.6) (4.2) (5.0) (3.4) (15) (7.1) (7.1) (1.7) (3.1) (3.4) (15) Sample 4 (28) (28) (16) (37) (8.4) 235 (10) (10) (6.4) (7.4) (8.4) (40) 'Numbers in parentheses denote analyte not detected to the detection limit noted in parenthe- ses. b1 ppt = 1 pg/g. one test. For the other tests method detection limits preventec quantitating that better thar 99.9998 percent ORE was achieved • Accurate determination of particu late emissions at the virtual stacl and system stack was not achieved Further research is needed to ob tain data on the amount, nature anc source of paniculate emission: from these sources. • HCI emissions in the virtual stacl ranged from 0.2 to 0.45 kg/hr These were below the CRF Part E limit of 0.5 kg/hr. The above conclusions suggest thai incineration should be considered a vi able disposal method for this stillbot toms waste, that is if appropriate safe guards are employed. The data in this study confirm that an incinerator oper ating under proper conditions car achieve greater than 99.9999 percen ORE for 2,3,7,8-TCDD with HCI emis sions below the regulatory limit. Table 8. Priority Pollutant Composition of the Scrubber Slowdown Water Concentration' (ppt)b Analyte 2,3,7,8-TCDD TCDDs-CDD Penta-CDDs Hexa-CDDs Hepta-CDDs Octa-CDDs 2,3,7,8-TCDF TCDFs Penta-CDFs Hexa-CDFs Hepta-CDFs Octa-CDFs Sample 1 (0.005) (0.06) (0.04) (0.03) (0.02) 0.07 (0.02) (0.1) (0.02) (0.02) (0.1) (0.1) Sample 1 duplicate (0.02) (0.08) (0.05) (0.04) (0.04) 0.04 (0.01) (0.07) (0.02) (0.06) (0.02) (0.08) Sample 2 (0.02) (0.09) (0.04) (0.04) (0.03) 0.07 (0.02) (0.1) (0.07) (0.06) (0.03) (0.06) Sample 2 duplicate (0.04) (0.09) (0.02) (0.03) (0.05) 0.07 (0.02) (0.06) (0.03) (0.06) (0.03) (0.04) 'Numbers in parentheses denote analyte not detected to the detection limit noted in parenthe- ses. b1 ppt = 1 pg/ml. ------- Table 9. Priority Pollutant Composition of the Scrubber Slowdown Water Detection Component Volatile organic priority pollutants Methylene chloride 1, 1-dichloroethylene 1, 1-dichloroethane t- 1,2-dichloroethylene Chloroform 1,2-dichloroethane 1, 1, 1-trichloroethane Carbon tetrachloride Bromodichloromethane 1,2-dichloropropylene t- 1,3-dichloropropylene Trichloroethylene Benzene 1, 1,2-trichloroethane Bromoform Tetrachloroethylene + tetrachlorethane Chlorobenzene Concentration (ppb, wt)a ND ND 6.1 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND limit (ppb, wt) 12.6 2.6 2.6 2.6 4.2 5.0 2.6 2.6 4.2 2.6 5.0 2.6 2.6 6.8 4.2 5.0 12.6 Semivolatile organic priority pollutants All base/neutral semivolatile priority ND pollutants 4-chloro-3-methylphenol ND 2,4,6-trichloropehenol ND 2,4-dinitrophenol ND 4-nitrophenol ND 2-methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol ND Pentachlorophenol ND All other acid semivolatile priority ND pollutants 50 30 30 50 50 50 10 Trace elements Antimony, Ab Arsenic, As Beryllium, Be Cadmium, Cd Chromium, Cr Copper, Cu Lead, Pb Mercury, Hg Nickel, Ni Selenium, Se Silver, Ag Thallium, Tl Zinc, Zn (ppm, wt) ND ND ND ND ND 4" 1» ND 1» ND ND ND ND (ppm, wt) 2 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 EP toxicity concentration limit (ppm) — 5 — 7 5 — 5 0.2 — 1 5 — — aND denotes not detected; duplicate samples analyzed. bFound in only one sample; not detected in the others. ------- R. W. Ross, II. T. H. Backhouse, R. H. Vocque, J. W. Lee, and L R. Water/and are with Acurex Corporation, Jefferson, AR 72079. R. A. Carries is the EPA Project Officer (see below). The complete report, entitled "Pilot-Scale Incineration Test Burn of TCDD- Contaminated TrichlorophenolProduction Waste,"(OrderNo. PB87-145835/ AS; Cost: $13.95, 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: Hazardous Waste Engineering Research Laboratory U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Cincinnati, OH 45268 10 ------- ------- TJ =;• ^ S _» 0) ?• ® M^" 2 * c CO TJ ' Da 1! -. o O3 I 4k 01 M O> 00 S TJ CO m H =imm£ 9 S5i » 5 ------- |