PILOT-SCALE INCINERATION OF
CONTAMINATED SOILS FROM
THE DRAKE CHEMICAL SUPERFUND SITE
By
C. King, J. W. Lee," and L. R, Waterland
Acurex Corporation
Environmental Systems Division
Incineration Research Facility
Jefferson, Arkansas 72079
EPA Contract No. 68-C9-0038
Work Assignment 1-3
EPA Project Officer: R. C. Thurnau
Technical Task Manager: R. E. Mournighan
Waste Minimization, Destruction, and Disposal Research Division
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
RISK REDUCTION ENGINEERING LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CINCINNATI, OHIO 45268
-------
DISCLAIMER
The information in this document has been funded wholly or in part by the United
States Environmental Protection Agency under Contract 68-C9-0038 to Acurex Corporation. It
has been subjected to the Agency's peer and administrative review, and it has been approved for
publication as an EPA document. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not
constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
-------
FqREWORD
Today's rapidly developing and enanging technologies and industrial products and
practices frequently carry with them the increased generation of materials that, if improperly
dealt with, can threaten both public health and the environment. The U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency is charged by Congress with protecting the Nation's land, air, and water
resources. Under a mandate of national environmental laws, the agency strives to formulate and
implement actions leading to a compatible balance between human activities and the ability of
natural systems to support and nurture life. These laws direct the EPA to perform research to
define our environmental problems, measure the impacts, and search for solutions.
i
The Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory is responsible for planning, implementing,
and managing research, development, and demonstration programs to provide an authoritative,
defensible, engineering basis in support of the policies, programs, and regulations of the EPA
with respect to drinking water, wastewater, pesticides, toxic substances, solid and hazardous
wastes, and Superfund-related activities. This publication is one of the products of that research
and provides a vital communications link between the researcher and the user community.
This report describes a series of tests conducted at the EPA's Incineration Research
Facility to evaluate the incinerability of contaminated soils from the Drake Chemical Superfund
site. The evaluation focused on organic contaminant destruction and the fate of contaminant
trace metals.
For further information, please contact the Waste Minimization, Destruction and
Disposal Research Division of the Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory.
E. Timothy Oppelt, Director
Rick Reduction Engineering Laboratory
lii
-------
ABSTRACT
A series of pilot-scale incineration tests was performed at EPA's Incineration Research
Facility (IRF) to evaluate the potential of incineration as an option to treat contaminated soils
from the Drake Chemical Superfund site in Lock Haven, Pennsylvania. The soils at the Drake
site are reported to be contaminated to varying degrees with various organic constituents and
several hazardous constituent trace metals. The purpose of the test program was to evaluate the
incinerability of selected site soils in terms of the destruction of contaminant organic constituents
and the fate of contaminant trace metals. All tests were conducted in the rotary kiln incineration
system at the IRF.
Test results show that greater than 99,995 percent principal organic hazardous
constituent (POHC) destruction and removal efficiencies (DRE) can be achieved at kiln exit gas
temperatures of nominally 816°C (1,500°F) and 538°C (1,000°F). Complete soil
decontamination of semivolatile organics was achieved; however, kiln ash levels of three volatile
organic constituents remained comparable to soil levels.
Kiln ash accounted for the predominant fraction of all contaminant trace metals with
the exception of mercury, which appeared to be entirely in the flue gas discharge. The flue gas
discharge from the venturi/packed-column scrubber air pollution control system (APCS) used
accounted for a minor fraction of all contaminant trace metals, with the exception of mercury,
cadmium, and, possibly, arsenic. The scrubber liquor accounted for less than 10 percent of the
contaminant metals, with the exception of copper, and chromium and nickel in one case. Kiln
temperature in the range tested, as above, did not affect overall metal distributions in incinerator
discharges.
None of the soils tested, or the kiln ash resulting from their incineration, would be
considered a toxicity characteristic (TC) hazardous waste due to its leachable trace metal
contents. Further, no test scrubber liquor would be considered a TC hazardous waste due to
trace metal concentrations. However, lead concentrations in test scrubber liquors were at levels
near 50 percent of the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) regulatory level in
some cases. This suggests that the scrubber liquor discharge from a wet scrubber APCS could
become a TC hazardous waste in the incineration of "hot spot" lead-containing soils, or under
scrubber operation at minimum blowdown. The flyash collected at the afterburner exit
(upstream of the wet scrubber APCS) would be a TC hazardous waste due to leachable
chromium and lead concentrations, and to arsenic and cadmium concentrations in one case. This
suggests that the collected particulate from a dry ACPS (such as a fabric filter) would be a TC
hazardous waste.
IV
-------
This report was submitted in fulfillment of Contract 68-C9-0038 by Acurex
Environmental Corporation under the spons orship of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
The report covers work conducted from November 1990 to November 1991.
-------
CONTENTS
DISCLAIMER ii
FORWORD iii
ABSTRACT iv
FIGURES ix
TABLES x
1 INTRODUCTION 1
2 FACILITY DESCRIPTION, WASTE DESCRIPTION, AND TEST
CONDITIONS 3
2.1 ROTARY KILN INCINERATOR SYSTEM DESCRIPTION 3
2.1.1 Incinerator Characteristics 3
2.1.2 Air Pollution Control System 3
2.2 TEST WASTE DESCRIPTION 6
2.3 .TEST CONDITIONS 7
3 SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PROCEDURES 21
3.1 CHARACTERIZATION SAMPLE ANALYSES 21
3.2 INCINERATION TEST PROGRAM 21
3.2.1 Sampling and Analysis Procedures for All Tests 24
3.2.2 Additional Sampling and Analysis for the Inorganic-Contaminated-
Soil Tests 33
3.2.3 Additional Sampling and Analysis for the Organic-Contaminated-
. Soil Tests 37
4 TEST RESULTS 39
4.1 SITE SOIL CHARACTERIZATION SAMPLE ANALYSIS
RESULTS 39
4.2 INORGANIC-CONTAMMATED-SOIL TESTS 48
43 ORGANIC-CONTAMINATED-SOIL TESTS 58
4.4 PARTICULATE AND HC1 EMISSIONS DATA, AND KILN
ASH WASTEWATER CHARACTERIZATION ANALYSIS
RESULTS 62
4.5 WASTEWATER CHARACTERIZATION ANALYSES OF KILN
ASH SAMPLES 64
vu
-------
CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
5
6
CONCLUSIONS
QUALITY ASSURANCE
67
70
6.1 TRACE METAL ANALYSES (MERCURY EXCLUDED) 71
6.2 MERCURY ANALYSES 86
6.3 SEMrVOLAlTLE ORGANIC ANALYSES
6.4 CHLORIDE ANALYSES
REFERENCES
APPENDICES
A INCINERATOR OPERATING DATA .
90
100
102
A-l
A-2
A-3
A-4
B
C
C-l
C-2
C-3
C-4
C-5
C-6
D
D-l
D-2
D-3
103
CONTROL ROOM DATA 104
GAS TRAIN DATA . | ..... 117
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL SYSTEM DATA 130
CONTINUOUS EMISSION MONITOR DATA 137
OPERATING DATA
'LOTS ; .144
LABORATORY ANALYSIS DATA 151
PROXIMATE, ULTHflATE, AND WASTEWATER
CHARACTERIZATION SAMPLES 157
SEMrVOLATILE ORJ3ANIC, FENAC, AND PCB AND
PESTICIDE ANALYSES 168
VOLATILE ORGANIC ANALYSES 176
TRACE METAL ANALYSES (Hg EXCLUDED) 179
MERCURY ANALYSES 204
CHLORIDE ANALYSES ... 223
SAMPLING TRAIN WORKSHEETS 225
METHOD 5 WORKSHEETS
METHOD 17 TRAIN [WORKSHEETS
METHOD 5 METALS TRAIN AND METHOD 101A TRAIN
WORKSHEETS ..,
226
235
240
vui
-------
CONTENTS (CONCLUDED)
D-4 METHOD 0010 TRAIN WORKSHEETS 251
D-5 CASCADE IMPACTOR TRAIN WORKSHEETS 254
IX
-------
FIGURES
Number
1
2
3
4
Page
Schematic of the IRF rotary kiln incinerator system 4
Test sampling locations.
25
Generalized CEM gas flow schematic. 35
Afterburner exit particle size distribution 66
-------
TABLES
Number Page
1 Design characteristics of the IRF rotary kiln incinerator system 5
2 Organic constituent concentrations in organic contamination hot spot
locations (ROD data) 8
3 Organic constituent concentrations in lagoon area sediments (ROD data) . . 9
4 Trace metal concentrations in inorganic hot spot locations (ROD data) .... 10
5 Contaminant concentrations in general site soils (ROD data) 11
6 Target test conditions 12
7 Incinerator operating parameters recorded 14
8 Kiln operating conditions 15
9 Afterburner operating conditions 16
10 Air pollution control system operating conditions 18
11 Continuous emission monitor data 19
12 Target versus actual operating conditions for the Drake chemical soil tests 20
13 Soil feed and ash collected 20
14 Characterization sample analysis matrix 22
15 Semivolatile organic TCI constituent analytes 23
16 Volatile organic TCI constituent analytes 23
17 Sampling and analysis protocol for tests with inorganic-contaminated soils
(Tests 1, 2, and 3) 26
18 Sampling and analysis protocol for tests with organic-contaminated soils
(Tests 6 and 7) 32
19 Continuous emission monitors used for the tests 34
20 Multiple metals train impinger system reagents Method 5 (modified) and
Method 17 (modified) 36
XI
-------
TABLES
Number
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
(CONTINUED)
Pafe
Proximate, ultimate, total organic halogen, sulfide, cyanide, and physical test
results for characterization samples ,. 40
Characterization sample trace
Comparison of characterizatio
metal analysis results 41
n sample trace metal analysis results to
previously reported data 43
Characterization sample TCLP leachate analysis results 44
Characterization sample PCB and pesticide analysis results 45
Comparison of characterization sample semivolatile organic comtaminant
analysis results to previously reported data 46
Test sample trace metal concentrations 49
Solid sample trace metal concentrations 51
TCLP leachate trace metal concentrations 53
Solid sample trace metal fractional leach abilities 55
56
Trace metal distributions
Organic constituent PQLs
Spiked POHC DREs ...
Apparent scrubber collection efficiencies 59
Organic analysis results for feed samples 60
61
61
Volatile organic constituent concentrations in kiln ash and scrubber liquor
samples
Flue gas particulate levels
Flue gas HC1 levels
63
63
65
Afterburner exit particle size distributions 65
Wastewater characterization analyses of composite kiln ash and kiln ash
water leachate
66
Characterization sample trace metal analysis hold times 72
Xll
-------
TABLES (CONCLUDED)
Page
42 Trace metal test sample analysis hold times .......... ...... ......... 73
43 Trace metal analyses of blank samples ..... ................. . ...... 74
44 Trace metals (mercury excluded) measurement DQOs ............... . . 75
45 Trace metal measurement PQLs: objectives and achieved .............. 76
46 Trace metal analysis precision ................................... 78
47 Trace metal recoveries from standards samples ...................... 80
48 Trace metal spike recoveries from matrix spike samples ................ 81
49 Characterization sample mercury analysis hold times ... .............. . 87
50 Incineration test sample mercury analysis hold times ... .............. . 88
51 Mercury analyses of blank samples ....... , ........................ 89
52 Mercury measurement DQOs .................................... 89
53 Mercury measurement PQLs: objectives and achieved ................ 90
54 Mercury analysis precision ....... ... ........ . ................... 91
55 • Mercury recoveries from matrix spike samples ....................... 92
56 Soil characterization sample semivolatile organic extraction and analysis hold
times ............... ... ...... . . ....... ... ........ . . ........ 93
57 Test sample semivolatile organic sample extraction and analysis hold times . 94
58 Semivolatile organic constituent measurement DQOs .................. 96
59 Semivolatile organic analysis PQLs: objectives and achieved ............ 97
60 Semivolatile organic surrogate recoveries from soil characterization samples 97
61 Semivolatile organic surrogate recoveries from test samples ....... ...... 98
62 Semivolatile organic constituent recoveries from matrix spike samples ..... 99
63 Flue gas HC1 measurement precision, accuracy, and completeness objectives 101
xiu
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
One of the primary missions of the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA)
Incineration Research Facility (IRF) is to support Regional Offices in evaluations of the
potential of incineration as a treatment option for contaminated soils at Superfund sites. One
priority site is the Drake Chemical site in Lock Haven, Pennsylvania. EPA Region 3 requested
that test burns be conducted at the IRF to support evaluations of the suitability of incineration
as a treatment technology for the contaminated soils at the'site.
The Drake Chemical site, covering approximately 12.5 acres, was a chemical
manufacturing facility from 1951 to 1982.
these activities the soils at the Drake site
organic constituents and several hazardous
According to site investigation data, as a result of
are contaminated to varying degrees with various
constituent metals. With respect to ineinerability
evaluation, the primary objective was to determine whether treatment by incineration would
generate a residue that would be environmentally suitable for redeposit, without further
treatment, at the Superfund site during full-scale remediation. Therefore, one primary concern
was whether incineration could effectively destroy the organic contaminants in the soils. Equally
important was what the fate of the trace
subjected to incineration.
metals in the soil would be when the soils were
This test program was designed to evaluate the effectiveness of varying incinerator
operating conditions on organic contaminant destruction, and the effects of these varied
conditions on the distributions of the trace metals in the discharge streams. Specific questions
addressed in this test program were:
» Can rotary kiln incineration effectively destroy the organic contaminants in the
site soils?
Will the kiln ash (treated
characteristics that will allow
treatment, at the site?
soil) from incineration of the site soils have
it to be backfilled (redeposited), without further
Can the incineration treatment of the site soils be performed in compliance with
the hazardous waste incinerator performance standards?
What is the fate of the contaminant trace metals in the incineration of the site
soils? I
.1
-------
» What are the effects of incineration temperature on contaminant metal fate and
kiln ash characteristics?
This test program, as originally conceived, consisted of an initial phase of nine tests and
an optional phase of four additional tests. The results from the initial-phase testing, specifically
the toxicity characteristics exhibited by the incinerator residuals, were to guide the decision as
to whether the optional testing would be needed. A subset of the initial-phase incineration
testing was conducted at the IRF in January and February 1991. The toxicity characteristics of
all test program samples were demonstrated to be below regulatory threshold levels. These
results led to the conclusion that several of the originally-conceived initial-phase tests and the
optional testing would not be necessary to meet the stated program objectives.
Results of the test program are discussed in this report. Section 2 describes the rotary
kiln incinerator system (RKS) at the IRF, in which the incineration tests were conducted, and
the "RKS operating conditions for the tests. It also summarizes the previously reported
characteristics of the soils at the site. Section 3 outlines the sampling and analysis procedures
employed. Section 4 presents the test results. Section 5 discusses test program conclusions.
Finally, Section 6 discusses the quality assurance (QA) aspects of the test program. The
appendices provide a complete data set from which the reader can extract additional information
of interest for further study.
-------
SEJCTION 2
FACILITY DESCRIPTION, WASTE DESCRIPTION, AND TEST CONDITIONS
The IRF's RKS was used for this tesi: program. A description of the system is presented
in Section 2.1. Section 2.2 describes the composition and characteristics of the contaminated
soils tested as reported in earlier site remedial investigation reports. The test matrix and
incinerator operating conditions are discussed in Section 2.3.
SYS
2.1
ROTARY KILN INCINERATOR SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
RKS
A process schematic of the RKS! is shown in Figure 1 and the system design
characteristics are listed in Table 1. The IRF RKS consists of a rotary kiln primary combustion
chamber, a transition section, and a fired afterburner chamber. After exiting the afterburner,
flue gas flows through a quench section followed by a primary APCS. The primary APCS for
these tests consisted of the venturi/packed-cqlumn scrubber. Downstream of the primary APCS,
a backup secondary APCS, comprised of a demister, an activated-carbon adsorber, and a high-
efficiency particulate (HEPA) filter, is in place. The backup APCS is designed to ensure that
organic compound and particulate emissions to the atmosphere are negligible. The main
components of the RKS and its APCS are discussed in more detail in the following subsections.
2.1.1 Incinerator Characteristics
The rotary kiln combustion chamber has an inside diameter of 1.0 m (39-in) and is
2.49 m (8 ft 2 in) long. The chamber is lined
to an average thickness of 18.7 cm (7.375 in)
with refractory formed into a frustroconical shape
The refractory is encased in a 0.95-cm (0.375-in)
thick steel shell. Total volume of the kiln chamber, including the transition section, is 1.90 m3
(67.3 ft3). Four steel rollers support the kiln barrel. A variable-speed DC-motor coupled to a
reducing gear transmission turns the kiln. Rotation speeds can be varied from 0.2 to 1.5 rpm.
The afterburner chamber has a 0.91-m (3-ft) inside diameter, and is 3.05 m (10 ft) long.
The afterburner chamber wall is constructed of a 15.2-cm (6-in) thick layer of refractory encased
in a 0.63-cm (0.25-in) thick carbon steel shell. The volume of the afterburner chamber is 1.80 m3
(63.6 ft3).
2.12. Air Pollution Control System
For this test program, the primary APCS consisted of a venturi scrubber followed by a
packed-column scrubber in place on the RKS. The flue gas exiting the afterburner passes
through a refractory-lined transfer section and enters the quench section, where the flue gas
temperature is reduced to approximately 82°C(180°F) by direct injection of aqueous caustic
-------
QUENCH
AFTERBURNER
AIR
NATURAL
GAS,
LIQUID
FEED
TRANSFER
DUCT
SOLIDS
FEEDER
ROTARY
Kll N
WLN
ROTARY KILN
INCINERATOR
NATURAL
GAS>
LIQUID FEED
SINGLE-STAGE IONIZING
WET SCRUBBER
SCRUBBER
LIQUOR
RECIRCULAT10N
»-[o/
ID FAN
PACKED
COLUMN
SCRUBBER
VENTURI
SCRUBBER
SCRUBBER
LIQUOR
RECIRCULATION
MODULAR PRIMARY AIR
POLLUTION CONTROL
DEVICES
[~*~| DEMISTER
CARBON BED HEPA
ADSORBER FILTER
REDUNDANT AIR
POLLUTION CONTROL
SYSTEM
g
o
D
UJ
ATMOSPHERE
t
^J
STACK
ID FAN
Figure 1. Schematic of the IRF rotary kiln incinerator system.
-------
TABLE 1. DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS
SYSTEM
OF THE IRF ROTARY KILN INCINERATOR
Characteristics of the
Length
Diameter, outside
Diameter, inside
Chamber volume
Construction
Refractory
Rotation
Solids retention time
Burner
Primary fuel
Feed system:
Liquids
Sludges
Solids
Temperature (max)
Kiln Main Chamber
2.49 m (8 ft-2 in)
137 m (4 ft-6 in)
Nominal 1.00 m (3 ft-3.5 in)
1.90 m3 (673 ft3)
0.95 cm (0375 in) thick cold-rolled steel
18.7 cm (7375 in) thick high alumina castable refractory, variable depth to produce
a frustroconical effect for moving solids
Clockwise or counterclockwise, 0.2 to 1.5 rpm
1 hr (at 0.2 rpm) I
North American burner rated at 590 -kW (2.0 MMBtu/hr) with liquid feed
capability
Natural gas
Positive displacement pump via water-cooled lance
Moyno pump via front face, water-cooled lance
Metered twin-auger screw feeder or fiberpack ram feeder
1,010°C (1,850°F)
Characteristics of the
Length
Diameter, outside
Diameter, inside
Chamber volume
Construction
Refractory
Gas residence time
Burner
Primary fuel
Temperature (max)
Afterburner Chamber
3.05 m (10 ft)
1.22 m (4 ft)
0.91m (3ft)
1.80 m3 (63.6 ft3)
0.63 cm (0.25 in) thick coi
d-rolled steel
15.2 cm (6 in) thick high alumina castable refractory
1.2 to 2.5 s depending on temperature and excess air
North American Burner, rated at 590 kW (2.0 MMBtu/hr) with liquid feed
capability
Natural gas
1,2000C (2,200°F)
85 m3/min (3,000 acfm)
Characteristics of the Ionizing Wet Scrubber APCS
System capacity,
inlet gas flow
Pressure drop
Liquid flow
pH control
78°C (172°F) and 101 kPa (14.7 psia)
1.5 kPa (6 in WC)
15.1 L/min (4 gpm) at 345 kPa (50 psig)
Feedback control by NaOJH solution addition
Characteristics of the Venturi/Packed-Column Scrubber APCS
System capacity, 107 m3/min (3773 acfm) at 1,200°C (2,200°F) and 101 kPa (14.7 psia)
inlet gas flow
Pressure Drop
7.5 kPa (30 hi WC)
1.0 kPa (4 hi WC)
Venturi scrubber
Packed column
Liquid flow
Venturi scrubber
Packed column
pH control
77.2 L/min (20.4 gpm) at
60 kPa (10 psig)
116 L/min (30.6 gpm) at 69 kPa (10 psig)
Feedback control by NaOH solution addition
-------
scrubber liquor. The cooled flue gas then enters the venturi scrubber, which is fitted with an
automatically adjustable area throat. The scrubber is designed to operate at 7.5 kPa (30 in WC)
differential pressure, with a maximum liquor flowrate of 77.2 L/min (20.4 gpm). The scrubber
liquor, again an aqueous caustic solution, enters at the top of the scrubber and contacts the flue
gas to remove entrained particulates and, to some degree, acid gases.
Downstream of the venturi scrubber, the flue gas enters the packed-column scrubber,
where additional acid gas and particulate cleanup occurs. The scrubber column is packed with
5.1-cm (2-in) diameter polypropylene ballast saddles to a depth of 2.1 m (82 in). It is designed
to operate at 1.0 kPa (4 in WC) differential pressure, with a maximum liquor flowrate of
116 L/min (30.6 gpm).
Both the venturi and packed-column scrubbers receive their scrubber liquor from the
same recirculation system. This liquor is a dilute NaOH aqueous solution, the pH of which is
monitored continuously by a pH-sensor. An integral pH controller automatically meters the
amount of NaOH needed to maintain the set point pH for proper acid gas removal.
At the exit of the packed-column scrubber, a demister removes the bulk, of the
suspended liquid droplets. In a typical commercial incinerator system, the flue gas would be
vented to the atmosphere downstream of this unit. However, at the IRF, a backup APCS is in
place to further clean up the flue gas. The flue gas exiting the demister is passed through a bed
of activated carbon, to allow the vapor phase organic compounds to be adsorbed. A set of
HEPA filters designed to remove suspended particulate from the flue gas is located downstream
of the carbon bed. An induced draft fan draws and vents the treated effluent gas to the
atmosphere.
2.2 TEST WASTE DESCRIPTION
The Phase ffl record of decision (ROD) document for the Drake Chemical site1
indicates that about 252,000 yd3 of contaminated soils and sediments will be excavated and
decontaminated onsite by a transportable rotary kiln incinerator. The ROD further indicates
that these materials are contaminated with varying levels of organic compounds and several
hazardous constituent trace metals, including arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, lead, and
mercury.
For the test program, J. M. Montgomery Consulting Engineers, under contract to the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE), Omaha District Office, arranged to excavate 17 55-gal
drums of the contaminated site soils, which were then shipped to the IRF for testing. These 17
drums consisted of:
• Two drums of soil, one from each of two "organic contamination hot spots,"
denoted as locations O-l and O-2
• Two drums of lagoon sediments from locations denoted as L-l and L-2
• Seven drums of soil from the "inorganic contamination hot spots": one from each
of three locations denoted as M-l, M-2, and M-3; and two drums from locations
-------
denoted as M-4 and M-5; the second drum from each of these locations was
identified with the suffix "D" (i.e., M-4D and M-5D)
Six drums of composite soil representing general site characteristics from locations
denoted as G-l, G-2, G-3, G-4 G-5, and G-6
In addition, four drums of background soil (jdenoted as B-l, B-2, B-3, and B-4) were excavated
from a location near, though not on, the Drake Chemical site.
Tables 2 through 5 summarize the reported contaminant concentrations in these four
soil/sediment groups, as reported in the ROD. As discussed in Section 4, significant differences
exist between contaminant concentrations found in the soil samples sent to the IRF and those
reported in the ROD. In general, the excavated soEs contained lower levels of organic and
inorganic contaminants. The contaminant concentrations reported in the ROD were for soil
samples taken to a depth of only a few feet. In contrast, the soils excavated for testing were
from borings through the entire site contamination layer, i.e., down to 12 ft of depth. Thus, the
finding that contamination levels in actual sols are excavated for testing were lower than ROD
levels is not surprising. Nevertheless, this finding directly affected the direction of the test
program, and led to necessary changes from the original test plan. The actual test program
performed is discussed in Section 2.3.
Due to the lack of sufficient organic contaminants in the soil samples, it became
necessary to spike the soils from locations
benzene to 3,000 and 130 ppm, respectively.
which naphthalene and 1,4-diehlorobenzene
hazardous constituents (POHCs),
L-2 and O-2 with naphthalene and 1,4-dichloro-
These spiked soils were used for two tests, during
secame the designated surrogate principal organic
Prior to testing, the test soils were repackaged into 1.5-gal fiberpack containers for
feeding to the RKS via the fiberpack drum ram feeder in place on the system. Each plastic-bag-
lined fiberpack drum was filled with nominally 4.5 kg (10 Ib) of soil. All fiberpacks were
prepared on the morning of each test. For pe spiked soil tests, the spiking compounds were
added to each fiberpack during the packaging procedure. After charging the fiberpacks with soil,
weighed amounts of naphthalene and 1,4-diehlorobenzene (13.6 and 0.59 g, respectively) were
sprinkled over the soil. The soil/organic spike mixture was briefly stirred with a hand trowel to
mix the spiked organic compounds with the soil. Then the drum liner was closed with a plastic
tie and the lid was placed on the drum.
23
TEST CONDITIONS
As discussed earlier, the objective of the proposed test program was to evaluate the
suitability of incineration as a treatment technology for the contaminated soils at the Drake
Chemical Superfund site. Table 6 summarizes the test conditions and test soils for the originally
planned nine tests. However, analyses of the excavated soil samples revealed that several soils
contained very low concentrations of contaminants, such that conducting the originally planned
incineration testing with these soils would likely have resulted in data of limited usefulness.-
-------
TABLE 2. ORGANIC CONSTITUENT CONCENTRATIONS IN ORGANIC
CONTAMINATION HOT SPOT LOCATIONS (ROD1 data)
Compound
Sample
location O-l,
Compound
Sample
location O-2,
Xylenes 280
Chlorobenzene 250
Acetylene 5,800
Benzo(a)anthracene 42,000
Benzo(b)fluoranthene 41,000
Benzo(k)fluoranthene 29,000
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 24,000
Benzo(a)pyrene 34,000
Chiysene 52,000
Diben2o(a,h)anthracene 11,000
Fluoranthene 110,000
Indeno(l,2,3-c,d)pyrene 220,000
Naphthalene . 7,000
Phenanthrene 140,000
Pyrene 100,000
Dibenzoftiran 7,500
Fenac ' 7,000
£-Naphthylamine 11,000
Chlorobenzene 180
Di-n-butyl phthalate 9,200
Benzo(a)anthracene 4,800
1,2-Dichlorobenzene 12,000
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 3,600
Fenac 480
/8-Naphthylamine 1,500,000
-------
TABLE 3. ORGANIC CONSTITUENT CONCENTRATIONS IN LAGOON
AREA SEDIMENTS (ROD1 data)
Compound
Sample
location L-l,
Mg/kg
Compound
Sample
location L-2,
"Benzo(a)anthracene 5,000
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 6,900
Nitrobenzene 9,900
4-NitroaniIine 48,000
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 13,000
Pentachlorophenol 130,000
DDT 110,000
DDD 11,000
4-Methyl-2-Pentanone 110
Benzene 100
Toluene 710
Ethylbenzene 3,500
Xylenes 20,000
Chlorobenzene 9,100
Carbon Tetrachloride 350
Benzo(a)anthracene 100,000
Naphthalene 43,000
1,2-Dichlorobenzene 86,000
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 140,000
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 140,000
Hexachlorobutadiene 63,000
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 310,000
Fenac 1,500,000
-------
TABLE 4. TRACE METAL CONCENTRATIONS IN INORGANIC HOT SPOT LOCATIONS (ROD1 data)
TCLP
regulatory
level,
Constituent mg/L
Metals
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Lead
Mercury
Selenium
Silver
Other
Cyanide
5
100
1
5
5
0.2
1
5
—
Sample location M-l
Maximum
Soil, TCLP,
mg/kg mg/L
10 0.5
382 19.1
ND*
22 1.1
18 0.9
ND
ND
ND
ND
Sample location M-2
Maximum
Soil, TCLP,
mg/kg mg/L
8.4 0.42
195 9.75
ND
78 3.9
. 45 2.24
0.25 0.013
ND
ND
ND
Sample location M-3 Sample location M-4
Soil,
mg/kg
7.4
84
ND
18
7.4
ND
ND
ND
189
Maximum Maximum
TCLP, Soil, TCLP,
mg/L mg/kg mg/L
•
0.37 4 0.20
4.2 81 4.05
283 14.2
0.9 14 0.7
0.37 1,170 58.5
ND
ND
ND
ND
Sample location M-5
Soil,
mg/kg
483
40
83
244
290
18
ND
ND
7.7
Maximum
TCLP,
mg/L
24.2
2.0
0.42
12.2
14.5
0.9
*ND = Not detected.
-------
TABLE 5. CONTAMINANT CONCENTRATIONS IN GENERAL SITE
SOILS (ROD1 DATA)
Constituent Site
Organics, Mg/kg
Acetone
Chlorobenzene
1,4-Dichlorobenzene
1,2,4-Triehlorobenzene
Xylenes
Ethylbenzene
Toluene
Carbon disulfide
Naphthalene
Benzo(a)anthracene
Fenac
£-Naphthylamine 3
Metals, mg/kg
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Lead
Mercury
Selenium
Silver
"ND - Not detected.
Sample locations
average
90
500
930
810
5,360
650
3
5
250
2,500
1,040
8,000
5
100
7
47
47
0.5
ND
ND
G-l
210
21
ND
ND
20
1
1
1
ND
ND
140
ND
7.6
184
1.7
35
8.1
ND
ND
ND
G-2
ND"
2,000
310
980
120
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
450
ND
13
68
ND
51
37
ND
ND
ND
G-3
750
60
ND
ND
390
29
ND
ND
290
2,500
220
780
14
61
ND
61
21
ND
ND
ND
11
-------
TABLE 6. TARGET TEST CONDITIONS
Originally planned
Test
no.
1
2
3a
3b
4a
4b
5a
5b
6
7
8
9
Test
material
M-5
M-4
M-l
M-l
M-2
M-2
M-3
M-3
O-l
O-2
L-l
L-2
Kiln
temperature,
°C (°F)
816 (1,500)
816 (1,500)
816 (1,500)
982 (1,800)
816 (1,500)
982 (1,800)
816 (1,500)
982 (1,800)
816 (1,500)
816 (1,500)
816 (1,500)
816 (1,500)
Test
no.
1
2
3a
3b
Deleted
Deleted
Deleted
Deleted
6
1
Deleted
Deleted
Test
material
M-2
M-5D
O-l
O-l
L-2
O-2
Revised
Kiln
temperature,
°C (°F)
816 (1,500)
816 (1,500)
816 (1,500)
538 (1,000)
816 (1,500)
538 (1,000)
Solids
residence
time, hr
0.5
03
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.75
Organic
spited
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
For all tests:
Total waste/soil feedrate
Afterburner temperature
Kiln exit flue gas O2
Afterburner exit flue gas O2
Scrubber blowdown rate
Venturi liquor flowrate
Venturi pressure drop
Packed tower liquor flowrate
Scrubber liquor temperature
55 kg/hr (120 Ib/hr)
1,093°C (2,000°F)
11 percent
7 percent
0 L/min (0 gpm) or minimum operable
76 L/min (20 gpm)
62 kPa (25 in WC)
115 L/min (30 gpm)
49°C (120°F)
12
-------
As a result, the scope of the test program was modified to more adequately meet the
original program objectives. The modified target test conditions are indicated in Table 6. The
specific changes included:
• Deleting the originally planned test conditions 4, 5, 8, and 9
• Conducting Tests 3b and 7 with a kiln exit gas temperature of 538°C (1,000°F),
instead of the originally planned 982°C (1,800°F) and 816°C (1,500°F)
Reassigning the soil selection
set of inorganic-contaminatec
for each test, as shown in Table 6; specifically one
-soil tests (Tests 3a and 3b) were performed with
soil O-l because the O-l soil had higher trace metal contaminant levels
(particularly barium and lead) then the other M-location soils
« Spiking each soil from locations L-2 and O-2 with naphthalene and 1,4-dichloro-
benzene to 3,000 and 130 ppm, respectively, as discussed above, and using these
spiked soils for Tests 6 and 7; and designating naphthalene and 1,4-
dichlorobenzene as the surrogate POHCs
Of the five retained conditions, Tests 1, 2, 3a, and 3b were designed to study the fate
of the inorganic contaminants (trace metals). Tests 1 and 2 studied the distribution of the trace
metal contaminants throughout the incinerator system. These tests also provided information
on the concentrations of trace metals in the kiln ash and flue gas flyash TCLP leachates. These
data are important as they may affect whether additional treatment of the incinerator solid
residual streams would be needed. Tests 3a and 3b determined the effects of kiln temperature
on the trace metal concentrations in the kiln ash and scrubber blowdown streams. All these tests
were conducted with the soils in their original, as-received form.
Tests 6 and 7 were designed to study the destruction of the organic contaminants. As
discussed above, the previously reported organic contaminants were either analyzed to be absent
or present at low concentrations in actual s^il excavated for testing. Therefore, the destruction
of the spiked POHCs became the principal indicator of the effectiveness of incineration under
these test conditions. Tests 6 and 7 were performed using the spiked soils prepared as described
in Section 2.2.
The five tests were conducted from January 30 through February 7, 1991. Each test
consisted of incinerating one 55-gal drum of the contaminated soils over a 4- to 5-hr period.
Tests 3a and 3b were performed in one day, with sufficient time allowed in between sub-tests to
achieve steady-state operation at the respective target kiln exit gas temperatures of 816°C
(1,500°F) for Test 3a, and 538°C (1,000°F) 'for Test 3b. Test soils were fed to the kiln via the
fiberpack drum ram feeder system; one fiberpack was charged into the kiln every 5 min, resulting
in soil feedrates of nominally 55 kg/hr (120jlb/hr).
Throughout the test program, the incinerator operating parameters noted in Table 7
were recorded at intervals no longer than once every 15 min. Kiln ash was continuously removed
from the ash pit via an ash transfer auger system and deposited in an initially clean 55-gal drum.
After the completion of flue gas sampling for each test, soil feed was stopped. The incinerator
continued to be fired with natural gas for a period of 2 hr or until the kiln was visually clear of
13
-------
TABLE 7. INCINERATOR OPERATING PARAMETERS RECORDED
Temperature
Rotary kiln exit gas
Afterburner exit gas
Scrubber exit gas
Stack gas
Recirculating scrubber liquor
Scrubber blowdown liquor
Flowrates
Rotary kiln natural gas feed
Afterburner natural gas feed
Rotary kiln combustor air
Afterburner combustion air
Stack combustion flue gas
Venturi scrubber liquid
Packed tower scrubber liquid
Scrubber blowdown liquid
Scrubber makeup liquid
Pressures
Rotary kiln chamber
Afterburner chamber
Venturi scrubber AP
Packed tower scrubber AP
Other
Scrubber liquid pH
Cumulative synthetic waste weight fed
Rotary kiln rotation speed
ash, whichever period was longer. After this period, the incinerator burners were turned off and
the scrubber system was drained to a scrubber liquor collection tank. Scrubber liquor was
continuously sampled over this period via a tap in the drain line. The scrubber system was then
recharged with fresh makeup and the incinerator system either left off (over weekend periods),
or restarted and operated overnight firing natural gas to produce steady-state conditions for the
next planned test.
Tables 8 and 9 summarize the actual kiln and afterburner-operating conditions achieved
for each test respectively. As planned, kiln temperature was controlled for each test at the level
shown in Table 6, while afterburner temperatures for all tests were maintained at 1,096°C
(2,005 °F). Average flue gas oxygen levels at the kiln exit ranged from 13 to 17 percent
Afterburner exit oxygen levels were at about 9 percent.
Kiln rotation was set at 0.55 rpm to produce solids residence times of about 30 min,
except during Test 7, when the kiln rotation speed was reduced to 0.25 rpm to produce a longer
residence time of about 45 min.
14
-------
TABLE 8. KILN OPERATING CONDITIONS
Average
Average
Average
Average
^
m
Parameter
natural gas feed rate
scm/hr
(scfh)
kW
(kBtu/hr)
combustion air flowrate
scm/hr
(scfh)
total air flowrate
scm/hr
(scfh)
kiln draft
Pa
(in WC)
Testl
(1/30/91)
31
(1,100)
322
(1,100)
296
(10,440)
806
(28,480)
20
(0.08)
Test 2
(2/5/91)
26
(910)
267
(910)
277
(9,780)
672
(23,720)
7
(0.03)
Test 3a
(1/31/91)
25
(880)
258
(880)
265
(9,360)
791
(27,950)
10
(0.04)
Test 3b
(1/31/91)
13
(448)
131
(448)
182
(6,420)
921
(32,520)
10
(0.04)
Test 6
(2/6/91)
35
(1,220)
357
(1,220)
277
(9,780)
763
(26,930)
22
(0.09)
Test?
(2/7/91)
16
(550)
161
(550)
190
(6,720)
582
(20,540)
7
(0.03)
Exit temperature
• Average, i °C
Range,
Exit O2
Range,
OF)
°c
OF)
%
Average, %
Average
Average
waste feedrate
kg/hr
(Ib/hr)
kiln ash discharge rate
kg/hr
(Ib/hr)
826
(1,518)
779-876
(1,435-1,608)
11.5-14.8
13.3
56
(123)
40
(89)
823
(1,515)'
800-854
(1,472-1,569)
11.4-13.9
13.1
55
(122)
42
(93)
829
(1,524)
769-863
(1,417-1,585)
12.6-15.2
13.8
53
(117)
35
(78)
546
(1,015)
512-597
(955-1,107)
15.0-18.3
17.0
54
(119)
40
(87)
822
(1,512)
795-848
(1,463-1,558)
12.1-13.3
12.7
56
(123)
43
(95)
553
(1,027)
511-604
(952-1,120)
13.2-16.3
15.4
54
(118)
47
(104)
-------
TABLE 9. AFTERBURNER OPERATING CONDITIONS
Parameter
Average natural gas
Average combustion
Exit temperature
Average,
Range,
Exit O2
Range,
Average,
Exit gas flowrate
feedrate
scm/hr
(scfh)
kW
(kBtu/hr)
air flowrate
scm/hr
(scfh)
°C
(•F)
°C
(•F)
%
%
dscm/hr
(dscfh)
Testl
(1/30/91)
• 38 -
(1,350)
396
(1,350)
331
(11,700)
1,096
(2,005)
1,090-1,101
(1,994-2,014)
7.4-9.6
8.7
1,980
(70,020)
Testl
(2/5/91)
36
(1,280)
375
(1,280)
292
(10,320)
1,097
(2,006)
1,088-1,104
(1,991-2,019)
7.9-9.9
9.2
2,000
(70,680)
Test 3a
(1/31/91)
34
(1,200)
352
(1,200)
302
(10,680)
• 1,096
(2,005)
1,091-1,102
(1,996-2,015)
8.4-10.4
9.6
a
—
Test 36 '
(1/31/91)
41
(1,440)
422
(1,4.40)
229
(8,100)
1,096
(2,005)
1,087-1,106
(1,989-2,023)
8.4-10.4
9.6
_
—
Test 6
(2/6/91)
40
(1,420)
416
(1,420)
292
(10,320)
1,096
(2,005)
1,088-1,102
(1,991-2,016)
8.4-10.4
9.6
2,060
(72,600)
Test?
(2/7/91)
43
(1,520)
445
(1,520)
246
(8,700)
1,096
(2,005)
1,086-1,108
(1,987-2,027)
8.4-10.4
9.6
1,860
(65,700)
«— = Not measured.
-------
Table 10 summarizes the operating conditions of the venturi/packed-column scrubber
system, which was used throughout the test program to control acid gas and paniculate
emissions. The quench chamber received quench liquor at about 68 L/min (18 gpm) and
maintained the gas temperature at its exit (scrubber inlet) at about 77°C (170 °F). The venturi
scrubber was operated at its nominal design settings, with pressure drop maintained at about
6.2 kPa (25 in WC). Scrubber liquor flow to the venturi and packed-column scrubbers was
maintained at the nominal design rates of 76 L/min (20 gpm) and 114 L/min (30 gpm),
respectively. Except for Test 7, the heat exchanger system was used to remove heat from the
recirculating scrubber liquor and maintain the liquor temperature at about 36 °C (97 °F). During
Test 7, the liquor temperature was higher, about 78eC (172°F).
Continuous emission monitor (CEM) data are summarized in Table 11. As shown, CO
and TUHC levels were low (less than 10 ppm for CO and 2 ppm or less for TUHC) at all
locations measured. Scrubber exit flue gas
NOX levels, at 60 to 80 ppm, are typical of RKS
operation with wastes containing negligible nitrogen content.
The ranges and averages of the temperature, CEM, and scrubber pH data presented in
Tables 8 through 11 were developed for the periods of flue gas sampling, using the data
automatically recorded by a personal-computer (PC)-based data acquisition system. The values
given for the remaining parameters were derived from the control room log book data.
Transcribed operating-parameter data from the control room lop, recorded at 15-min
intervals, are given in Appendix A. Appendix B contains graphic presentations of the flue gas
temperatures and emission monitor readings at the kiln and afterburner exits. Appendix B also
contains graphic presentations of the flue ga's emission monitor readings for the scrubber exit
and stack. These data plots are based on incinerator system conditions recorded at 70-s intervals
on the data acquisition system. In addition, durations of the various flue gas sampling periods,
major events, and the cumulative amounts of ,the waste fed into the incinerator are also included
on these plots. These data provide the bas^s for assembling a complete picture of the actual
incinerator operating conditions.
Table 12 compares the target and actual test operating conditions for each test. As
shown, average kiln temperatures were within about 15°C (25°F) of target temperatures for all
tests. Kiln exit flue gas O2 levels were significantly higher than target levels, however. The
higher O2 levels experienced resulted from Ihigher-than-expeeted, and difficult-to-eontrol, air
inleakage into the kite chamber due to the inability to tightly secure a rotary kiln seal.
Afterburner exit flue gas O2 levels were highejr than target levels for the same reason. However,
the IRF experience has been that the flue!gas O2 levels tested would not have resulted in
significant differences in organic contaminant destruction or contaminant trace metal
distributions than had flue gas O2 levels been at the target conditions.
For each test, the soil fed and the
amount of soil fed into the incinerator and
test. As shown, except for Test 7, the weight
of the weight of soil fed to the kiln.
ash collected were weighed. Table 13 notes the
the corresponding weight of ash collected for each
of ash discharged was generally about 70 percent
17
-------
TABLE 10. AIR POLLUTION CONTROL SYSTEM OPERATING CONDITIONS
00
Parameter
Average quench chamber liquor flowrate
Venturi AP
Average venturi scrubber liquor flowrate
Average packed-column scrubber liquor
flowrate
Average scrubber makeup flowrate
Average scrubber liquor temperature
Scrubber liquor pH
Total test scrubber liquor collected*
Average scrubber inlet gas temperature
Average scrubber exit gas temperature
Scrubber exit gas flowrate
L/min
(gpm)
kPa
(inWC)
L/min
(gpm)
L/min
(gpm)
L/min
(gpm)
°C
Range
Average
L
(gal)
ec
°C
dscm/hr
(dsefn)
Testl
(1/30/91)
68
(18)
6.0
(24)
76
(20)
114
(30)
0
(0.0)
37
(98)
6.5-7.5
7.3
2,377
(522)
76
(169)
41
(105)
2,160
(76,140)
Test 2
(2/5/91)
68
(18)
6.7
(27)
76
(20)
114
(30)
0
(0.0)
36
(97)
8.5-8.9
8.6
2,025
(445)
76
(169)
39
(102)
2,120
(74,940)
Test 3a Test 3b Test 6
(1/31/91) (1/31/91) (2/6/91)
68
(18)
6.2
(25)
76
(20)
114
(30)
0
(0.0)
36
(97)
7.3-7.4
7.4
b
77
(170)
39
(102)
— .
68
(18)
6.5
(26)
68
(18)
114
(30)
0
(0.0)
35
(95)
7.3-7.4
7.4
2,525
(555)
76
(168)
37
(98)
_
68
(18)
6.7
(27)
72
(19)
114
(30)
0
(0.0)
' 37
(98)
7.0-7.3
7.1
1,593
(350)
77
(171)
44
(112)
2,010
(70,920)
Test?
(2/7/91)
68
(18)
6.0
(24)
76
(20)
114
(30)
7.7
(1.7)
78
(172)
7.0-7.4
7.2
1,365
(300)
81
(178)
80
(176)
1,400
(49,380)
'Scrubber system operated at zero blowdown, scrubber liquor collected after test completion.
b— = Not measured.
-------
TABLE 11. CONTINUOUS EMISSION MONITOR DATA
Parameter
Kiln exit
02
Afterburner
02
CO
CO2
TTJHC
Range, %
Average, %
exit
Range, %
Average, %
Range, ppm
Average, ppm
Range, %
Average, %
Rnnaf* nnm
Average, ppm
Scrubber exit
O2 Range, %
Average, %
CO2
NO,
Stack
02
CO
• TUHC
Range, %
Average, %
Range, ppm
Average, ppm
Range, %
Average, %
Range, ppm
Average, ppm
Range, ppm
Average, f>pm
Testl
(1/30/91)
Soil M-2
11.5-14.8
13.3
7.4-9.6
8.7
1-6
3 •
6.5-8.5
7.3
1-2
2
9.0-10.7
9.8
5.8-7,6
6.5
67-81
72
11.8-13.2
12.5
34
3
<14
Test 2
(2/5/91)
Soil M-5D
11.4-13.9
13.1
7.5-9.9
8.9
1-5
3
6.5-8.2
7.2
<1
9.1-10.9
10,0
5.8-7.4
6.5
62-74
68
11.9-13.2
12,5
3-4
4
-------
TABLE 12. TARGET VERSUS ACTUAL OPERATING CONDITIONS FOR THE DRAKE
CHEMICAL SOIL TESTS
Test
no.
1
2
3a
3b
6
7
Kiln
Afterburner
Target Actual average Actual Actual
temperature, temperature, Target O2, average O2, Target O2, average O2,
°C (°F) °C (°F) % % % %
816 (1,500) 826
816 (1,500) 823
816 (1,500) 829
538 (1,000) 546
816 (1,500) 822
538 (1,000) 553
(1,519)
(1,513)
(1,524)
(1,015)
(1,512)
(1,027)
TABLE 13. SOIL
Test
1 (1/30/91)
2 (2/5/91)
3a (1/31/91)
3b (1/31/91)
6 (2/6/91)
7 (2/7/91)
Test soil
M-2
M-5D
0-1
O-l
L-2
0-2
11.0 13.3
11.0 13.1
11.0 13.8
11.0 17.0
11.0 12.7
11.0 15.4
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
8.7
9.2
9.2
11.8
9.3
9.9
FEED AND ASH COLLECTED
Total soil
fed, kg (Ib)
240 (529)
232 (512)
112 (246)
113 (249)
240 (529)
209 (460)
Total ash collected
Weight, Fraction of
kg(lb) soil fed, %
173 (381) 72
177 (390) 76
74 (163) 66
83 (183) 73
187 (411) 78
183 (404) 88
20
-------
SECTION 3
SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PROCEDURES
As noted in Section 2.2, 17 drums of site soils were excavated for use in the test
program. Characterization samples from each of these drums were taken and analyzed to obtain
information to be used in structuring the test program ultimately performed. The characteriza-
tion sample analysis procedures performed are discussed in Section 3.1. Section 3.2 outlines the
sampling and analysis procedures employed during the incineration test program.
3.1
CHARACTERIZATION SAMPLE ANALYSES
Characterization samples of each of
the drums excavated were taken by thief sampling
at three locations in each drum's cross section, and combining these three samples to form a
single composite characterization sample fori each drum. These characterization samples were
subjected to the analysis schedules noted in Table 14. The target compound list (TCL)
semivolatile. organic analytes sought are listed in Table 15. The TLC volatile organic analytes
sought are listed in Table 16. Results of the
Section 4.1.
32 INCINERATION TEST PROGRAM
Because the objectives of Tests 1, 2
and 7, different sampling and analysis proced
characterization sample analyses are discussed in
3a, and 3b were different from those of Tests 6
ires were employed for each test group. However,
r _ J-. ^y j _ JT _-- £
several procedures were performed for all tests, including:
Obtaining a composite sample for the soil feed from each drum before the soil
was packaged into fiberpack containers
Collecting a composite kiln ash sample
I •
Collecting a composite scrubber liquor sample
Continuously measuring O2 concentrations at the kiln exit: Oj, CO, CO^ and
TUHC at the afterburner exit; Oa COa, and NOX at the scrubber exit; and CO and
TUHC at the stack
Sampling the flue gas at the stack for HC1 and particulate using a Method 5
sampling train
21
-------
TABLE 14. CHARACTERIZATION SAMPLE ANALYSIS MATRIX
Sample
Parameter
Analysis method
Each characterization
sample
O-l, O-2, and L-2 char-
acterization samples
Proximate analysis:
Ash content
Moisture content
Ultimate analysis (C, H, N, S)
Specific gravity
pH
Total organic halogen
TCL semivolatile organics
Total cyanide
Sulfide
Trace metals:
Sb, Ba, Be, Cd, Cr, Cu, Pb, Ni,
Ag, 1% Zn
As
Hg
Se
Pesticides and PCBs
TCLP extraction
Fenac
Characterization sample Trace metals:
TCLP leachates Ba, Cd, Cr, Cu, Pb, Ni, Ag, Zn
As
Hg
Se
ASTM-D-3174
ASTM-D-3173
ASTM-D-3176
ASTM-D-854
Method 9045*
Method 3540 extraction with
Method 9020 analysis*
Method 3540 extraction with
GC/FID screening
Method 9010*
Method 9030*
Method 3050 digestion with
Method 6010 analysis*
Method 3050 digestion with
Method 7060 analysis*
Method 7471 digestion and analysis*
Method 3050 digestion with
Method 7740 analysis*
Method 3540 extraction with
Method 8080 analysis*
Method 1311"
Evaporate Method 3540 extract to
dryness, redissolve hi diethyl ether,
esterify, concentrate, and analyze by
Method 8270*
Method 3010 digestion with
Method 6010 analysis'
Method 7060 digestion and analysis'
Method 7470 digestion and analysis'
Method 7740 digestion and analysis*
'SW-846.2
"40 CFR 261 Appendix .H.3
22
-------
TABLE 15. SEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC TCL CONSTITUENT ANALYTES
Benzo(a)anthracene
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Chrysene
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene
Dibenzofuran
1,2-Dichlorobenzene
1,4-Dichlorobenzene
p,p'-DDD
p,p'-DDT
Fluoranthene
Hexachlorobutadiene
Hexaehlorocyelopentadiene
Indeno(l,2,3-ed)pyrene
Naphthalene
2-Naphthylamine
4-Nitroaniline
Nitrobenzene
Pentachlorophenol
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
TABLE 16. VOLATILE ORGANIC TCL CONSTITUENT ANALYTES
Acetone
Benzene
Bromodichloromethane
Bromoform
Bromomethane
2-Butanone
Carbon disulfide
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane
Chloroform
Chloromethane
1,2-Dichloroethane
1,1-Dichloroethene
t-1,2-Dichloroethene
1,2-Dichloropropane
c-l,3-Dlchloropropane
t-l,3-Dichloropropane
Ethylbenzene
2-Hexanone
Methylene chloride
4-Methy!-2-pentanone
Styrene
l,l»l>2-Tetrachloroethane
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
Tetrachloroethene
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
1,1,2-Triehloroethane
Trichloroethene
Toluene
Vinyl acetate
Vinyl chloride
Xylenes (total)
23
-------
The above were the only sampling procedures employed for Tests 3a and 3b. In
addition to the above, the following were performed for Tests 1 and 2:
• Sampling the flue gas at the afterburner exit (i.e., upstream of the scrubber) for
particulate load and for trace metals (excluding mercury), using a Method 17
sampling train modified with multiple metals train impingers
« Determining the particle size distribution of the afterburner exit flue gas
particulate using an Anderson cascade impactor train
• Sampling the flue gas upstream and downstream of the scrubber for mercury using
a Method 101A train at each location
• Sampling the flue gas downstream of the scrubber system for particulate and trace
metals (excluding mercury) using a Method 5 sampling train modified for multiple
metals capture
In addition to the sampling performed for all tests noted above, the following was
performed for Tests 6 and 7:
• Sampling the flue gas downstream of the scrubber system for semivolatile POHCs
using a Method 0010 sampling train
Figure 2 shows the system sampling locations sampled and identifies the sampling
procedures used. Table 17 summarizes the sampling and analysis efforts performed for Tests 1,
2, 3a, and 3b. Table 18 provides a similar summary of the procedures performed for Tests 6
and 7. Further details on the sampling and analysis procedures employed are provided in
Section 3.2.1 (all tests), Section 3.2.2 (Tests 1, 2, 3a, and 3b), and Section 3.2.3 (Tests 6 and 7).
3.2.1 Sampling and Analysis Procedures for All Tests
The composite soil feed sample for each test was obtained by taking thief samples from
the shipment drum at three locations in the drum cross section just prior to packaging into the
fiberpack drums. These three samples were combined to form one composite sample. Aliquots
of each composite sample were taken for the respective analysis procedures noted in Tables 16
and 18.
Representative samples of the kiln ash corresponding to each test condition were
similarly taken by thief sampling at three locations in the ash collection drum cross section and
combining these to form one composite sample. Aliquots of each of these composite samples
were taken for the respective analysis procedures noted in Tables 17 and 18.
As noted in Section 2.3, each test was run with the scrubber liquor loop operating at
total recycle (no blowdown), with the scrubber system being drained after test completion. The
scrubber liquor sample was collected via a tap in the drain line during draining. Aliquots of this
sample were taken for the respective analysis procedures noted in Tables 17 and 18.
24
-------
>-
Kl
AFTER-
BURNER
^
QUENCH
SECTION
P*
VENTUR!
SCRUBBER
p*
PACKED
COLUMN
SCRUBBER
1
CARBON
BED
tei
IP"
HEPA
FILTER
Ul
Feed and residuals
Soil/
sludge Kiln Scrubber
Continuous monitors
Flue gas
Method 5 Cascade Method 17
with multiple Method S, impaclor, with multiple Method 0010,
Unheated metals participate particle size metals Method 101A, semivolatife
Sampling point feed ash liquor O2 CO CO2 NO, TUHC impingers and HCI distribution impingers Hg
1, Feed X
2, Ash discharge X
3, Bin exit flue p$ " "X
4. AB exit flue gas XXX X BA.B A A
5. Quench system drain X
6, Quench exit flue gas XXX A A
7. Stack gas . XX X X
Organics
B
Notes:
X = All tests,
A = Tests 1, 2.
B = Tests 6 and 7.
Figure 2, Test sampling locations.
-------
TABLE 17. SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PROTOCOL FOR TESTS WITH INORGANIC-CONTAMINATED SOILS (TESTS 1,2,3a,
ANDSb)
OS
Sample
Soil feed
Soil feed,
TCLP
leachate
Sampling
Location procedure Parameter
Soil transport drum just Thief/ Trace metals:
prior to repackaging composite Ba» Cd, Cr, Cu,
Pb, Ni, Ag, Zn
As
Se
Hg
TCLP extraction
Trace metals:
Ba, Cd, Cr, Cu,
Pb, Ni, Ag, Zn
As
Se
Hg
Analysis method
Digestion by Method 3050,
ICAP analysis by Method 6010"
Digestion by Method 3050,
GFAA analysis by Method 7060*
Digestion by Method 3050,
GFAA analysis by Method 7740*
Digestion and analysis by
Method 7471a
Method 13 11*
Digestion by Method 3010,
ICAP analysis by Method 6010*
Digestion and GFAA analysis
by Method 7060a
Digestion and GFAA analysis
by Method 7740"
Digestion and analysis by
Method 7470"
Frequency
I/test, Tests 1, 2, 3
I/test, Tests 1, 2, 3
I/test, Tests 1, 2, 3
I/test, Tests 1, 2, 3
I/test, Tests 1, 2, 3
I/test, Tests 1, 2, 3
I/test, Tests 1, 2, 3
I/test, Tests 1, 2, 3
I/test, Tests 1, 2, 3
Kiln ash
Ash drum
Thief/ Trace metals:
composite Ba, Cd, Cr, Cu,
Pb, Ni, Ag, Zn
As
Se
Digestion by Method 3050,
ICAP analysis by Method 6010*
Digestion by Method 3050,
GFAA analysis by Method 7060"
Digestion by Method 3050,
GFAA analysis by Method 7740s
I/test, Tests 1, 2,
3a,3b
I/test, Tests 1, 2,
3a,3b
I/test, Tests 1, 2,
3a,3b
'SW-846.2
bOnly one soil feed, soil feed TCLP leachate, and scrubber liquor sample analyzed for Tests 3a plus 3b.
TCLP,3
(continued)
-------
TABLE 17. (continued)
Sample Location
Kiln ash
(continued)
Sampling
procedure Parameter
Hg
Analysis method
Digestion and analysis by Method 7471"
Frequency
I/test, Tests 1, 2, 3a,
3b
TCLP extraction
ASTM water leaching
Total solids
Free liquids
PH
Total cyanide
Oil and grease
Method 1311C
ASTM D3987-85
Method 209F and total volatile solids'1
Method 9095*
Method 9045a
Method 90103
Method 9071"
I/test, Tests 1, 2, 3a,
3b
1 for test program
1 for test program
1 for test program
1 for test program
1 for test program
1 for test program
K)
Kiln ash,
TCLP
leachate
Total organic halogen
Trace metals:
Ba, Cd, Cr, Cu,
Pb, Ni, Ag» Zn
As
Method 3540 with Method 9020*
Digestion by Method 3010, ICAP analysis
by Method 6010"
Digestion and GFAA analysis by Method
7060*
1 for test program
I/test, Tests 1, 2, 3a,
3b
I/test, Tests 1, 2, 3a,
3b
*SW-846.2
TCLP.3
••Standard Methods, 16th Ed.4
(continued)
-------
TABLE 17. (continued)
to
oo
Sample Location
Kiln ash,
TCLP leachate
(continued)
Sampling
procedure
Parameter
Se
Hg
Analysis method
Digestion and GFAA analysis by
Method 774Q»
Digestion and analysis by Method 7470*
Frequency
I/test, Tests 1, 2, 3a,
3b
I/test, Tests 1, 2, 3a,
Kiln ash, water
leachate
pH
Phenolics
Cr(6+)
pH
Total organic carbon
Total organic halogen
Ammonia nitrogen
Oil and grease
Total cyanide
Chemical oxygen
demand
Total solids
Total volatile solids
Total dissolved solids
Method 9040"
Method 9065 or 9067*
Method 7197a
Method 9040*
Method 9060a
Method 9020*
Method 417 Gd
Method 9070"
Method 9010*
Method 508A4
Method 209A*
Method 209D"1
Method 209Bd
3b
1 for test program
1 for test program
1 for test program
1 for test program
1 for test program
1 for test program
1 for test program
1 for test program
1 for test program
1 for test program
1 for test program
1 for test program
1 for test program
"SW-846,2
•"Standard Methods, 16th Ed,4
(continued)
-------
TABLE 17. (continued)
Sampling
Sample Location procedure
Scrubber liquor Scrubber system Tap
drain
0
Flue gas Afterburner exit Method IT
modified for
pram nuantitv
Parameter
Trace metals: .
Ba, Cd, Cr, Cu,
Pb, Ni, Ag, Zn
As
Se
Hg
Particulate load
Trace metals:
Analysis method
Digestion by Method 3010, ICAP
analysis by Method 6010"
Digestion and GFAA analysis by
Method 7060'
Digestion and GFAA analysis by
Method 7740a
Digestion and analysis by
Method 7470"
Gravimetric
Frequency
I/test, Tests 1, 2, 3b
I/test, Tests 1, 2, 3
I/test, Tests 1, 2, 3
I/test, Tests 1, 2, 3
I/test, Tests 1 and 2
samples and
multiple metals
capture'
Ba, Cd, Cr, Cu,
Pb, Ni, Ag, Zn .
As
Se
Leachable trace
metals in
particulate
Digestion by Method 3050 (aliquot
of particulate) or 3010 (impingers),
ICAP analysis by Method 6010"
Digestion by Method 3050 (aliquot
of particulate) or 7060 (impingers),
GFAA analysis by Method 7060*
Digestion by Method 3050 (aliquot
of particulate) or 7740 (impingers),
GFAA analysis by Method 7740"
TCLP (Method 131 lc) extraction of
particulate aliquot
I/test, Tests 1 and 2
I/test, Tests 1 and 2
I/test, Tests 1 and 2
I/test, Tests 1 and 2
"SW-846.2
kOnly one soil feed, soil TCLP leachate, and scrubber liquor sample analyzed for Tests 3a plus 3b.
TCLP.3
•40 CFR 60.5
Incinerator Metals Guidance.6
(continued)
-------
TABLE 17. (continued)
Sampling
Sample Location procedure
Flue gas Afterburner
(continued) exit
(continued)
Method 101A*
GARB Method
50 lh (cascade
impactor)
W
0 Flue gas Scrubber exit Methods6
modified for
multiple metals
capture'
Parameter
Leachable
particulate Ba, Cd,
Cr, Cu, Pb, Ni, Ag,
Zn
Leachable-
particulate As .
Leachable
particulate Se
Hg
Particle size
distribution
Particulate load
Trace metals:
Ba, Cd, Cr, Cu,
Pb, Ni, Ag, Zn
Analysis method
Digestion of TCLP leachate by
Method 3010, ICAP analysis by
Method 6QUP
Digestion and GFAA analysis of
TCLP leachate by Method 7060"
Digestion and GFAA analysis of
TCLP leachate by Method 7740*
Method 101A*
Gravimetric analysis of impactor
stages (CARB Method 501)h
Method 5e
Digestion by Method 3050
(particulate) or 3010 (impingers),
ICAP analysis by Method 6010"
Frequency
I/test, Tests 1 and 2
I/test, Tests 1 and 2
I/test, Tests 1 and 2
I/test, Tests 1 and 2
I/test, Tests 1 and 2
I/test, Tests 1 and 2
I/test, Tests 1 and 2
"SW-846,2
e40 CFR 60.5
Incinerator Metals Guidance.6
«40 CFR 61,7
'CARB Method 501."
(continued)
-------
TABLE 17. (continued)
Sampling
Sample Location procedure Parameter
Flue gas Scrubber exit As
(continued) (continued)
Se
Method Hg
1Q1A*
Flue gas Stack downstream Method 5e Partieulate
of carbon
bed/HEPA filter
HC1
w
"SW-846.2
'40 CFG 60.3
HO CFR 61.7
Analysis method Frequency
Digestion by Method 3050 (partieulate) I/test, Tests 1 and 2
or 7060 (impingers), GFAA analysis by
Method 7060*
Digestion by Method 3050 (partieulate) I/test, Tests 1 and 2
or 7740 (impingers), GFAA analysis by
Method 7740*
Method 101AB I/test, Tests 1 and 2
Method 5e I/test, Tests 1, 2, 3a,
3b
Specific ion electrode analysis of I/test, Tests 1, 2, 3a,
iiiipuiger aoiunona lur u jo
* '
..
-------
TABLE 18. SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PROTOCOL FOR TESTS WITH ORGANIC-CONTAMINATED SOILS (TESTS 6 AND 7)
Sample
Location
Sampling
procedure
Parameter
Analysis method
Frequency
Soil feed Soil transport drum just Thief/
prior to repackaging composite
Kiln ash Ash drum
Scrubber Scrubber system drain
liquor
Flue gas Afterburner exit
Scrubber exit
Thief/
composite
Tap
Method 5*
Volatile organic
TCL constituents
Semivolatile organic
TCL constituents
Volatile organic
TCL constituents
Semivolatile organic
TCL constituents
Volatile organic
TCL constituents
Semivolatile organic
TCL constituents
Particulate
HC1
Method 0010* Semivolatile POHC
GC/MS analysis by Method 8240* I/test, Tests 6 and 7
Soxhlet extraction by Method 3540, I/test, Tests 6 and 7
GC/MS analysis by Method 8270*
GC/MS analysis by Method 8240* I/test, Tests 6 and 7
Soxhlet extraction by Method 3540, I/test, Tests 6 and 7
GC/MS analysis by Method 8270*
GC/MS analysis by Method 82401 I/test, Tests 6 and 7
Extraction by Method 3510, I/test, Tests 6 and 7
GC/MS analysis by Method 8270*
Method 5b I/test, Tests 6 and 7
Specific ion electrode analysis of I/test, Tests 6 and 7
impinger solutions for Cl"
Soxhlet extraction by Method 3540, I/test, Tests 6 and 7
GC/MS analysis by Method 8270*
Stack, downstream of Method 5b Particulate
carbon bed/HEPA
filter HC1
Method 5b
I/test, Tests 6 and 7
Specific ion electrode analysis of I/test, Tests 6 and 7
impinger solutions for Cl"
"SW-846.2
k5, 40 CFR 60.5
-------
*: . F-
The continuous emission monitors (CEMs) available at the IRF and the locations they
monitored during all tests are summarized in Table 19. This monitoring arrangement was
employed in all tests. Figure 3 illustrates the generalized flue gas conditioning and flow
distribution system at the IRF. Four independent systems, such as the one illustrated in
Figure 3, were in place so that appropriately conditioned sample gas from the four separate
locations sampled was routed to the monitors noted in Table 19. The CEM data were recorded
continuously on strip charts and also by an automatic data acquisition system.
Sampling of the flue gas at the stack was conducted in accordance with the standard
EPA Method 5 procedures. HCl (chloride lion) in the impinger solutions was determined by
specific ion electrode analysis. Paniculate load was determined gravimetrically.
322 Additional Sampling and Analysis for the Inorganic-Contarainated-Soil Tests
In addition to the above sampling and analysis procedures performed for all tests, test-
specific sampling and analysis efforts were performed to meet specific objectives of each test.
As discussed earlier, Tests 1, 2, 3a, and 3b were conducted with soils containing high
concentrations of inorganic contaminants. Tests 1 and 2 involved flue gas sampling. No flue gas
sampling (other than the stack Method 5 sampling for permit compliance) was performed for
Tests 3a and 3b.
For Tests 1 and 2, the sampling and analysis protocol to satisfy test objectives included:
» Sampling the flue gas at the afterburner exit (i.e., upstream of the scrubber) for
particulate and the trace metals (excluding mercury), using a modified Method 17
train with multiple metals train limpingers to collect gram quantities of afterburner
exit particulate for metals analysis
I
• Determining the particle size distribution of the afterburner exit flue gas
particulate using a cascade impactor train (e.g., Anderson cascade impactor)
« Sampling the flue gas upstream
a Method 101A train
and downstream of the scrubber for mercury using
• Sampling the flue gas downstrea m of the scrubber system for particulate and trace
metals (excluding mercury), using a Method 5 train modified for multiple metals
capture
The modified Method 17 train at the afterburner exit collected particulate in an
oversized thimble placed within the sampling probe. After obtaining the total particulate weight,
the particulate in these samples was divided into aliquots and preserved. One aliquot was
subjected to analysis for trace metals. The other aliquot was subjected to the TCLP, and the
leachate analyzed for trace metals. The analysis of the TCLP leachate of the afterburner exit
particulate was performed to gain an estimate! of the trace metal teachability characteristics of
the ash that would be collected by a dry APCS such as a fabric filter.
exit
The impingers for the afterburner
Table 20. The first impinger was initially empty,
Method 17 sampling train were as noted in
. The second, third, and fourth impingers each
33
-------
TABLE 19. CONTINUOUS EMISSION MONITORS USED FOR THE TESTS
Monitor
Location Constituent Manufacturer Model
Principle
Range
Kiln exit O,
Afterburner O2
exit
Beckman
Beckman
755
755
Paramagnetic 0-10 percent
0-25 percent
0-100 percent
Paramagnetic
CO
CO2
TUHC
Horiba
Horiba
Shimadzu
VIA 500
PIR 2000
GCMini
NDIR
NDIR
FID
0-10 percent
0-25 percent
0-100 percent
0-50 ppm
0-500 ppm
0-20 percent
0-80 percent
0-10 ppm to
0-2,000 ppm in
multiples of 2
Scrubber
exit
Stack
02
CO2
NOX
02
CO
TUHC
Teledyne
Horiba
Thermo
Electron
Teledyne
Horiba
Shimadzu
326A
PIR 2000
10 AR
326A
VIA 500
GCMini
Fuel cell
NDIR
Chemilumi-
nescent
Fuel cell
NDIR
FID
0-5 percent
0-10 percent
0-25 percent
0-20 percent
0-80 percent
0-75 ppm to
0-10,000 ppm in
multiples of 2
0-5 percent
0-10 percent
0-25 percent
0-50 ppm
0-500 ppm
0-10 ppm to
0-2,000 ppm in
multiples of 2
34
-------
r
FILTER
PUMP FILTER
HIGH
BAY
CONTROL
ROOM
VENT
HEATED FLOW
CONTROL UNIT
JU
ICE BATH/
IMPINGER
PERMA PURE
DRYER
SAMPLE
PORT
8
LU
r
_| CALIBRATION ]
\GAS J
SAMPLE GAS MANIFOLD
DISPOSABLE
ABSORPTION
4 UNITS*
HEATED
TUHC
MONITOR
Mixed Na and Ca hydroxides for
. acid gas removal
Oz
MONITOR
ROW
CONTROL
UNIT
Figure 3. Generalized
CO CO g NOx UNHEATED
MONITOR MONITOR MONITOR TUHC
MONITOR
' ' HEATED TO
I | 150 TO 1758C
CEM gas flow schematic.
35
-------
TABLE 20. MULTIPLE METALS TRAIN IMPINGER SYSTEM REAGENTS
METHOD 5 (MODIFIED) AND METHOD 17 (MODIFIED)
Impinger Number
1
2
3
4
Reagent
Empty
5% HNO3 and 10% H2O2
5% HNO3 and 10% H2O2
Silica gel
Quantity
100 mL
100 mL
750g
contained 5-percent nitric acid and 10-percent hydrogen peroxide. The fourth (last) impinger
contained silica gel. After sampling, the first, second, and third impinger contents were
combined for trace metal analysis. Because mercury was sampled using a separate Method 101A
train, the permanganate impinger often specified in the multiple metals method for mercury
capture was not used.
A cascade impactor train (California Air Resources Board [CARB] Method 501,
Reference 8) was used to extract flue gas samples from the afterburner exit duct and classify the
paniculate in the flue gas into several size ranges between about 0.3 and 10 fan. Larger
particulate was captured in an upstream "pre-cutter" cyclone separator.
Sampling for mercury in the flue gas upstream and downstream of the scrubber was
conducted with a Method 101A train. This sampling train is similar to the Method 5 train, but
with the impinger contents substituted with 4-percent potassium permanganate solution.
The Method 5 train modified for metals capture had impinger solution contents the
same as those specified for the Method 17 impinger train. This train was used to sample the
flue gas at the scrubber exit for particulate and trace metals.
Tests 3a and 3b involved soil feed, soil feed TCLP leachate, kiln ash, kiln ash TCLP
leachate, and scrubber liquor analyses only. The reduced scope of sampling and analysis sufficed
to meet the limited objectives of identifying the effects of incineration temperature on the
inorganic contaminant concentrations in the residual discharge streams, i.e., kiln ash and
scrubber liquor, and kiln ash TCLP leachate.
Soil feed, soil feed TCLP leachate, kiln ash, kiln ash TCLP leachate, and scrubber liquor-
samples were analyzed for the trace metals noted in Table 17. For Test 3, two kiln ash samples
were collected for analysis, one with the kiln operating at nominally 816°C (1,500°F) (Test 3a),
and the other with the kiln operating at nominally 538 °C (1,000 °F) (Test 3b). The two
incineration temperature conditions were run on the same day, and both kiln ash samples were
collected during the 5-hr test day. Soil feed was suspended for a 1-hr period after the first
temperature condition to allow emptying the kiln of ash and establishing steady operation at the
second temperature condition.
36
-------
For the tests with the high-inorganic-contaminant soils, the trace metals analyzed for in
feed, ash, blowdown, TCLP leachate, and flue gas samples (Tests 1 and 2 only) were arsenic,
barium, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, selenium, silver, and zinc.
Inductively coupled argon plasma (ICAP) spectroscopy (Method 6010) was used for all metals
except arsenic, mercury, and selenium. I Graphite furnace atomic absorption (GFAA)
spectroscopy was used for arsenic (Method 7060) and selenium (Method 7740) analyses. Cold
vapor atomic absorption spectroscopy (Method 7470 or 7471) was used for mercury analyses.
Digestion of solid samples for Method 6010, 7060, and 7740 analyses was by Method 3050.
Digestion of aqueous liquid samples for Method 6010 analysis was by Method 3010.
Methods 7060, 7740, and 7470 contain their own digestion procedures for aqueous sample
analysis, as does Method 7471 for solid samples.
In addition to the above sampling and analysis efforts performed to address test program
objectives, Region 3 requested that a test program composite kiln ash, the TCLP leachate of this
kiln ash, and an ASTM water leachate of this kiln ash be subjected to a battery of wastewater
characterization analyses. These procedures are also noted in Table 17.
3.2.3 Additional Sampling and Analysis for the Organic-Contaminated-Soil Tests
Following the tests with the high-in arganic-contaminant soils, the remaining two tests
were conducted with spiked-organic-contaminant soils. In order to .determine spiked POHC
destruction, these tests involved flue gas sampling. The additional sampling and analysis
procedures to satisfy the objectives of these tests included:
» Sampling the flue gas downstream of the scrubber system for semivolatile POHCs
» Analyzing the soil feed, kilr ash, and scrubber liquor for the volatile and
semivolatile TCL organic constituents —--'
Because both spiked POHCs were semivolatile organics, only flue gas semivolatile
organic sampling was performed. A Method 0010 train sampled the scrubber exit flue gas for
the semivolatile POHCs. For Tests 6 and 7, analyses of soil feed, kiln ash, and scrubber liquor
for the volatEe organic TCL constituents listed in Table 16 were performed by purge and trap
GC/MS by Method 8240. Semivolatile organic analyses of soil feed, kiln ash, and flue gas
samples for the semivolatile TCL compoundsllisted in Table 15 were performed by Method 3540
extraction and Method 8270 analysis. Only native soil, not spiked soil, samples were analyzed.
Analyses of scrubber liquor samples were performed by Method 3510 extraction and
Method 8270 analysis.
In addition to the semivolatile TCL
analyzed for. Being a chlorinated herbicide.
compounds, a known site contaminant, fenac, was
fenac required special consideration for analysis.
C4.iiui.¥.£rfWu J.WI. > JU««^uicL d> wiuwi. JUUM.iV'v* Jiws. i_riWi%JWji jiwta&iw jLwvfiA2£ wu t7f~s*»^/A4u wwiioj,v*wi uuwti iw*. umvutjaiu*
The fenac analysis procedure was as follows. The acid extract resulting from Method 3510/3540
extractions were split into two aliquots. One aliquot was combined with the base-neutral extract,
concentrated, and analyzed for the TCL semivolatile organics. The other aliquot was evaporated
to dryness, redissolved in diethylether, esterffied with boron trffluoride, concentrated, and
analyzed for fenac by Method 8270. Compound identification used the NBS/NIH/EPA mass
spectra data base.
37
-------
All semivolatile organic analyses and TCLP extractions were performed in the onsite
IRF laboratory. In addition, pH and specific gravity measurements on characterization samples
were performed in the IRF laboratory. Analyses of test samples for trace metals, with the
exception of mercury, were performed by the Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory
(EMSL) in Cincinnati, Ohio, operated under contract by Technology Applications, Inc. (TAI).
Mercury analyses were performed by Entek Laboratory in Little Rock, Arkansas. The EMSL
laboratory also performed the trace metal analyses of the characterization samples of the high-
inorganic-contaminated soils (from locations M-l, M-2, M-3, M-4, M-4D, M-5, and M-5D) and
their TCLP leachates. Analyses of characterization samples of soil from the O, L, G, and B
locations for trace metals, except mercury, and of the samples' TCLP leachates, were performed
by IT Analytical Services in Knoxville, Tennessee. Volatile organic analyses were performed by
the Acurex Corporation laboratory in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. All other
analyses (i.e., proximate, ultimate, total organic halogen) were performed by Galbraith
Laboratories in Knoxville, Tennessee.
38
-------
SECTION 4
TEST RESULTS
The results of the test program are
sois and four background soils excavated
performed with the inorganic-contaminated
results of the tests performed with the or/
discussed in this section. Section 4.1 summarizes
the results of the pretest analyses performed on the characterization samples from the 17 site
Section 4.2 discusses the results of the tests
soils (Tests 1, 2, and 3). Section 4.3 outlines the
anic-contaminated soils (Tests 6 and 7). Finally,
Section 4.4 presents the results of the flue gas particulate, HCl, and particle size distribution
measurements. Section 4.5 presents the rbsults of the various wastewater characterization
analyses performed for the composite test program kiln ash.
4.1
SITE SOIL CHARACTERIZATION
SAMPLE ANALYSIS RESULTS
As noted in Section 2.2, 17 drurr s of contaminated site soils and four drums of
uncontaminated background soils were excavated for use in the test program. Characterization
samples of each drum excavated were shipped to the IRF for pretest analyses, as discussed in
Section 3.1.
Results of the proximate, ultimate, total organic halogen, sulfide, cyanide, pH, and
specific gravity analyses of the 21 soil characterization samples are summarized in Table 21. As
shown, all soils contained moderate moisture, in the nominal 10- to 20-percent range, with the
exception of the L-l soil with 61-percent moisture and the M-3 soil with 50-percent moisture.
The background soils had negligible C, H, N, and S contents. All site soils, in contrast, had
measurable carbon contents, up to 13 percent for the O-l soil, and sulfur contents, up to
10 percent for the M-3 soil. No soil contained organic halogen, with the exception of the O-2
soil, at 2,230 mg/kg, and the B-4 background' soil, at 758 mg/kg. No soil contained cyanide, with
the exception of the L-l and L-2 soils at jl.3 and 2.1 mg/kg, respectively. Sulfide levels in
background soils ranged up to about 5 mg/kg. Several site soils contained significantly more
sulfide, up to 32 mg/kg for the G-4 soil. Background soils were mildly acidic. In contrast, all
site soils were mildly to moderately basic.
Table 22 summarizes the trace metal analysis results for the characterization samples.
The data in the table show that the general site soils were not remarkably different from the
background soils in their trace metal contents, with the exception that the G-l and G-5 soils had
elevated lead and zinc contents. The O-, L-, and M-location soils contained elevated
concentrations of one or more metals compared to the background soils. Arsenic contamination
levels were highest in the M-5 and M-5D soils; barium levels were highest in the O-l and M-2
soils; copper levels were highest in the L-l soil; lead levels were highest in the O-l and M-2 soils;
39
-------
TABLE 21. PROXIMATE, ULTIMATE, TOTAL ORGANIC HALOGEN, SULFTOE,CYANTOE,
AND PHYSICAL TEST RESULTS FOR CHARACTERIZATION SAMPLES
Test son
Parameter
Moisture, %
Ash, % dry basis
Ultimate analysis, % dry basis
C
H
N
S
Total organic halogen, nig/kg
Sulfide, mg/kg
Total cyanide, mg/kg
pH
Specific gravity
O4
17,4
77,2
12.9
<0,5
<0.5
0,9
<400
9.4
<1.0
7.9
1.5
O-2
12.4
86.5
4.6
<0.5
<0.5
0.1
2,230
6.9
<1.0
7.7
2.1
L-l
60.9
65.2
7.8
1,8
<0.5
4.3
<400
2.0
4.3
9.8
1.1
L-2
11.3
94.5
1.2
<0.5
<0.5
0,1
<400
<2.0
1.2
7.9
2.0
M-l
7.7
87.9
4.2
<0.5
<0.5
0.1
400
3.8
<1.0
8.4
2.1
M-2
23.7
85.5
5.8
<0.5
<0.5
0.1
<400
8.9
<1.0
8.3
1.7
M-3
49.7
83.2
2.2
1.0
<0.5
10.5
<400
1.6
<1.0
10.0
1.5
M-4
19.1
93.1
3.6
-------
TABLE 22. CHARACTERIZATION SAMPLE TRACE METAL ANALYSIS RESULTS
Metal concentration (mg/kg) in test soil:
Metal
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Zinc
O4
<4.0
11
203
05
1.4
21
50
483
03
16
-------
selenium and silver levels were highest in all M-location soils; and zinc levels were highest in the
O-l, M-l, M-2, and M-5D soils.
Table 23 compares the trace metal analysis results obtained for the characterization
samples analyzed with data developed during the remedial investigation (RI) and summarized
in Section 2.2. The data in Table 23 show that the characterization samples analyzed had
generally comparable trace metal contents compared to previous data, with the following
exceptions:
• Lead levels in the M-2 and G-l characterization samples were significantly higher
than previously reported
• Cadmium levels in the M-4 and M-4D characterization samples were significantly
lower than previously reported
• Arsenic, chromium, lead, and mercury levels' in the M-5 and M-5D
characterization samples were significantly lower than previously reported
All characterization samples were subjected to the TCLP, with respective leachates
analyzed for trace metals. Results are summarized in Table 24. As shown, TCLP leachate metal
concentrations were sufficiently low for all samples that none of the site soils, or the background
soils, would be considered toxicity characteristic (TC) hazardous wastes.
All characterization samples were analyzed for the semivolatile organic constituents
listed in Table 15. No semivolatile organic constituent was found in any characterization sample
at a practicable quantitation limit (PQL) of 10 mg/kg. Characterization samples were also
analyzed for the EPA Method 8080 PCBs and organochlorine pesticides. . Results are
summarized in Table 25. As shown, only the O-2, L-2, and M-2 soils contained detectable levels
of any of these contaminants. These soils contained between 0.1 and 2.8 mg/kg of p,p'-DDE,
p,p'-DDD, and/or p,p'-DDT. In addition, the O-l, O-2, and L-2 soil characterization samples
were analyzed for fenac. Fenac was found only in the O-2 and L-2 soils, which contained 11 and
55 mg/kg of fenac, respectively.
Table 26 compares the semivolatile organic and pesticide analysis results obtained for
the characterization samples analyzed with data developed during the RI and summarized in
Section 2.2. The data in Table 26 show that characterization samples of the site soils excavated
for testing in general had significantly lower levels of semivolatile organic contamination than
measured during the RI. Most notably:
• None of the polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons reported in the RI to be present
in the O-l location soil at levels from 11 to 220 mg/kg were detected in the O-l
location characterization sample at a PQL of 10 mg/kg
• /S-Naphthylamine, reported in the RI to be present in the O-2 location soil at
1,500 mg/kg was not detected in the O-2 location characterization sample at a
PQL of 10 mg/kg
42
-------
TABLE 23. COMPARISON OF CHARACTERIZATION SAMPLE TRACE METAL ANALYSIS RESULTS
TO PREVIOUSLY REPORTED DATA
Concentration, nig/kg •
Metal
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Lead
Selenium
Location M-l
Previously
reported Characterization sample
10 16
382 156
ND8 05
22 43
18 <90
ND 2,3
Silver ND 9,8
M.
u>
Concentration, mg/kg
Metal
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Lead
' Selenium
Silver
Mercury
Location M-5
Characterization sample
reported M-5 M-5D
483 43 80
40 102 83
8.3 0.3 12
244 27 26
290 <90 <90
ND 2.3 2.2
ND tO 6.6
18 <0.5
-------
TABLE 24. CHARACTERIZATION SAMPLE TCLP LEACHATE ANALYSIS RESULTS
Metal concentration (mg/L) in TCLP leachate of test soil;
Metal
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Zinc
O-l
<0.002
0.26
0.009
<0.01
0.051
0.154
<0.001
<0.02
<0,002
<0.005
9.0
O-2
<0.002
0.71
<0.005
<0.01
0.029
<0.03
< 0.001
<0.33
<0.020
<0.005
0.33
L-l
<0.002
0.74
<0.005
<0.01
0.030
<0.03
<0.001
<0.02
<0.004
<0.005
0.12
L-2
0.002
0.41
<0.005
<0.01
0.023
<0.03
<0.001
<0.02
<0.002
<0.005
3.8
Metal concentration
Mete!
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Zinc
G-l
<0.002
0.67
<0.005
<0.01
0.016
0.13
< 0.001
<0.02
<0.002
<0.005
0.78
G-2
< 0.002
0.47
< 0.005
<0.01
0.027
<0.03
<0.001
<0.02
<0.002
<0.005
0.35
G-3
<0.002
0.24
<0.005
<0.01
0.012
<0.03
<0.001
<0.02
<0,002
<0.005
0.24
G-4
<0.004
0.66
<0.01
<0.02
<0.02
<0.18
<0.001
0.067
<0.004
<0.01
0.47
M-l M-2
<0,22 <0.22
0.77 0.67
<0.001 0.009
<0.10 <0.10
<0.10 <0.10
<0.08 0.14
<0.001 <0.001
<0.10 <0.10
0.003 0.004
<1.0 <1.0
0.28 • 0.50
(mg/L) in TCLP
G-5 G4
<0,002 <0.002
0.52 0.64
<0.005 <0.005
<0.01 <0.01
0.018 0.011
<0.03 <0.03
<0.001 <0.001
<0.02 <0.02
<0.004 <0.004
<0.005 <0.005
0.92 0.11
M-3
<0.22
0.051
<0.001
<0.10
<0.10
<0.08
<0.001
<0.10
0.010
<1.0
<0.10
M-4
<0.22
0.49
0.004
<0.10
<0.10
<0.08
<0.001
<0.10
0.002
<1.0
0.32
M-4D
<0.22
0.43
0.005
<0.10
<0.10
<0.08
<0.001
<0.10
0.003
<1.0
0.24
M-5
<0.22
0.10
0.007
<0.10
<0.10
<0.08
<0.001
<0.10
0.009
<1.0
0.12
leachate of test soil:
B-l
< 0.002
0.58
<0.005
<0.01
0.024
<0.03
<0.001
<0.02
<0.004
<0.005
0.29
B-2
< 0.002
0.74
< 0.005
<0.01
0.016
<0.03
<0.001
<0.02
<0.002
<0.005
0.18
B-3
<0.002
0.76
< 0.005
<0.01
0.026
<0.03
<0.001
<0.02
<0.002
< 0.005
0.16
B-4
< 0.002
0.62
< 0.005
<0.01
0.022
<0.03
<0.001
<0.02
<0.002
< 0.005
0.17
I
1 rej
M5D levi
<0.22
0.10
0.035
<0.10
<0.10
. <0.08
<0.001
<0.10
0.008
<1.0
0.70
TCLP
regulatory
level, mg/L
5.0
100
1.0
5.0
—
5.0
0.2
—
1.0
5.0
_
TCLP
[julatory
el, mg/L
5.0
100
1.0
5.0
_•
5.0
0.2
_
1.0
5.0
—
»_ _ jy|ot a TCLP metal.
-------
TABLE 25. CHARACTERIZATION SAMPLE PCB AND PESTICIDE ANALYSIS RESULTS
Concentration, mg/kg
Analyte
p,p'-DDE
p,p'-DDD
p,p'-DDT
All others
Soil 0-2 Soil
0.16
0.11
L-2
2.8
1.8
0.18 <0.40
ND» ND
Soil M-2
0.90
0.31
0.26
ND
All other soils
<0.15
<0.30
<0.40
ND
'Not .detected at a PQL (mg/kg) of
Heptachlor 0.05
Aldrin 0.10
Heptachlor epoxide 0.10
Dieldrin 0.15
Chlordane 6.75
Toxaphene il.5
Aroclor 1242 2^5
Aroelor 1254 7.5
Aroclor 1260
.5
45
-------
TABLE 26. COMPARISON OF CHARACTERIZATION SAMPLE SEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC CONTAMINANT ANALYSIS
RESULTS TO PREVIOUSLY REPORTED DATA
Concentration, rag/1%
Location O-l
Location O-2
Location L-l
Location L*2
Compound
Previously Characterization
reported sample
Previously Characterization
reported sample
Previously Characterization
reported sample
Previously Characterization
reported sample
Benzo(a)anthracene
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Chrysene
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene
Dibenzofuran
1,2-Dichlorobenzene
1,4-Dichlorobenzene
p,p'-DDD
p,p'-DDT
Fluoranthene
Fenac
Hexachlorobutadiene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Indeno(l,2^-cd)pyrene
Naphthalene
/J-Naphthylamine
4-Nitroaniline
Nitrobenzene
Pentachlorophenol
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
42 <10
41 <10
29 <10
24 <10
34 <10
52 <10
11 <10
— * <10
— <10
— <10
- <03
- <0.4
110 <10
7.0 < 10
- <10
- <10
220 <10
7.0 <10
11 <10
- <10
— <10
— <10
140 <10
100 <10
- <10
<10
4.8 <10 5.0 <10
— < 10 — < 10
— <10 — <10
— <10 — <10
— <10 — <10
— <10 - <10
— <10 — <10
— <10 — <10
12 <10 — <10
— <10 - <10
- 0.11 11
-------
TABLE 26. (continued)
Concentration, mg/kg
Location G-l
Location G-2
Location G-3
Compound
Previously Characterization
reported sample
Previously Characterization
reported sample
Previously Characterization
reported sample
Benzo(a)anthracene
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Chrysene
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene
Dibenzofuran
1,2-Dichlorobenzene
2.5
<10
1,4-DichIorobenzene
p,p'-DDD
A p,p'-DDT
*•* Fluoranthene
Fenac
031 <10
- <03
- <0.4
— <10
0.14 N/Ak
— <10
- <03
- <0.4
— <10
0.45 N/A
— <10
- <03
- <0.4
— <10
0.22 N/A
Hexachlorobutadiene
HexachlorocyelopentadSene
Indeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene
Naphthalene
/3-Naphthylamine
4-NitroaniIlne
Nitrobenzene
Pentachloropheno!
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
l,2,4-Trichl0robenzene
2,4,6-TrichIorophenol
0.29
0.78
<10
<10
0.98
<10
*— = Not reported.
*N/A = Not analyzed.
-------
» Fenac and p.p'-DDD concentrations in the L-2 location soil characterization
samples were significantly below their concentrations reported in the RI.
Perhaps the major reason for these observations is that the RI data were for soil
samples taken to a depth of only a few feet, whereas, the characterization samples analyzed were
taken from a mixed soil boring which penetrated the expected total depth of site contamination,
much deeper than the top few feet. Evidently, the semivolatile organic contamination was
localized at the surface of the site. Dilution of surface soil with the deeper soil combined in the
site boring apparently decreased the composite location excavated sample organic concentrations,
as reflected in low characterization sample levels.
Complete analysis results for all characterization samples analyzed are given in
Appendix C.
42 INORGANIC-CONTAMINATED-SOIL TESTS
Based on the characterization sample trace metal content data discussed above, it was
decided to delete originally planned Tests 4 and 5, as discussed in Section 2, and to perform
Tests 1, 2, and 3a/3b with the M-2, M-5D, and O-l soils, respectively. The M-2 and O-l soils
had high levels of barium, lead, and zinc contamination, and the M-5D soil had the highest level
of arsenic contamination. Thus, despite the O-l soil having been excavated from a location
thought to have high organic contaminant levels, it was selected for one set of the inorganic-
contaminated-soil tests because it had generally higher levels of trace metal contaminants than
the other M-location soils.
Tests 1, 3a/3b, and 2 were completed on January 30, 31, and February 5, 1991,
respectively. Test incinerator operating conditions are discussed in Section 2.3. Table 27
provides a complete summary of the-trace metal analysis results for all test samples taken for
trace metal analysis. Complete analytical data for the test samples are given in Appendix C.
Metal concentration data for flue gas streams noted in the table often appear as ranges. This
arises from the fact that two samples from the metals sampling train were analyzed to yield the
flue gas stream concentration, a particulate filter sample, and an impinger solution sample. In
many cases, the metal was present in one sample but not detected in the other. In these cases,
the flue gas concentration is shown as a range. The lower bound of the range assumes metals
not detected in a sample were not present (zero concentration); the upper bound of the range
assumes metals not detected in a sample were present at the method PQL.
All test metals data are given in Table 27. The discussion in the following paragraphs
focus on subsets of these data.
Table 28 summarizes the trace metal concentration data from Table 27 for the soil feed
and corresponding kiln ash and afterburner exit flue gas particulate for each test. Selenium and
silver are not shown in Table 28 because these metals were not detected in any of the three soil
feed samples used for Tests 1, 2, and 3.
Comparing the data in Table 28, of the actual test soil samples, with the data in
Table 22, of pretest characterization samples, shows generally good agreement for all three soils
for all metals. The data in Table 28 also show that soil feed and resulting kiln ash metal
48
-------
TABLE 27. TEST SAMPLE TRACE METAL CONCENTRATIONS
Sample
Test 1 (1/30/91)
Soil feed (M-2), mg/kg
Soil feed TCLP leachate, mg/L
Kiln ash, mg/kg
Kiln ash TCLP leachate, mg/L
Scrubber liquor, mg/L
Afterburner exit flue gas, pg/dscm
Afterburner exit flue gas particulate, mg/kg
Afterburner exit flue gas particulate TCLP
leachate, mg/L
Scrubber exit flue gasjtg/dscm
Test 2 (2/5/91)
Soil feed (M-5D), ma/kg
* Soil feed TCLP leachate, mg/L
Kiln ash, mg/kg
Kiln ash TCLP leachate, mg/L
Scrubber liquor, mg/L
Afterburner exit flue gas, jtg/dscm
Afterburner exit flue gas particulate, mg/kg
Afterburner exit flue gas particulate TCLP
leachate, mg/L
Scrubber exit flue gas, /ig/dscm
"NA = Not analyzed.
As
16
<0.1
13
<0.1
<0.1
3.2-13.8
50
<3
6.2-46
62
<0.1
16
0.14
0.66
108
462
31
43-84
Da
167
0.44
211
<0.01
1.4
105
590
11
1.4-4.2
57
<0.01
48
<0.01
0.74
57
223
9.6
2.4-55
Cd
1.1
<0.01
1.1
<0.01
<0.01
2.2
9.5
0.4
23-6.3
2.0
0.015
1.7
<0.01
0.021
5.2
20
1.0
6.5-10.6
Cr
18
<0.03
22
<0.03
0.57
54
168
5.8
7.7-16.8
12
<0.03
9.8
<0.03
0.18
94
209
11
3.7-12.9
Cu
49
<0.01
41
<0.01
1.7
7.6
117
3.4
8.3-11.1
43
<0.01
21
<0.01
1.3
18
160
7.2
14-17
Pb
439
<0.06
403
<0.06
2.7
74
570
12
132-150
Hg
0.1
<0.002
<0.1
<0.002
<0.002
3.9-4.2
NA*
NA
9.2-93
77 03
<0.06
38
<0.06
13
88
554
20
74-93
<0.002
<0.1
< 0.002
<0.002
5.7-5.9
NA
NA
15
Ni
17
<0.03
22
<0.03
0.47
59
178
4.9
<9,1
15
<0.03
8.7
<0.03
0.13
76
110
5.9
<9.2
Se Ag
<10 <2
<0.1 <0.02
<10 <2
<0.1 <0.02
<0.1 <0.02
<2.7 0.9-3.1
<25 15
<3 <0.5
3.0-7.0 2.7-8.9
<10 <2
<0.1 <0.02
<10 <2
<0.1 <0.02
<0.1 <0;02
<1.6 <1.9
<10 <2
<3 <0.5
<73 4.7-11.4
Zn
302
0.05
234
<0.02
1.2
78
684
15
15
25L
1.5
115
<0.02
1.2
158
777
28
36
(continued)
-------
TABLE 27. (continued)
Sample
Test 3 (1/31/91)
Soil feed (O-l), mg/kg
Soil feed TCLP leachate, mg/L
Scrubber liquor, mg/L
Test 3a (829°C [1,5240F])
Kiln ash, mg/kg
Kiln ash TCLP leachate, mg/L
Test 3b (546°C [L,015°F])
Kiln ash, mg/kg
Kiln ash TCLP leachate, mg/L
TCLP regulatoiy level, mg/L
As Ba
11 194
<0.1 <0.01
<0.1 1.1
<10 199
<0.1 <0.01
<10 184
<0.1 <0.01
5.0 100
Cd
<1.0
<0.01
0.015
1.4
<0.01
<1.0
<0.01
1.0
Cr
20
<0.03'
0.24
24
<0.03
18
<0.03
5.0
Cu
35
<0.01
1.4
39
<0.01
42
<0.01
_b
Pb
443
0.06
23
345
<0.06
410
<0.06
5.0
Hg
0.2
<0.002
<0.002
<0.1
<0.002
<0,1
< 0.002
0.2
Nt
12
<0.03
0.17
23.
0.032
18
<0.03
_
Se Ag
<10 <2
<0.1 <0.02
<0.1 <0.02
<10 <2
<0.1 <0.02
<10 <2
<0.1 <0.02
1.0 5.0
Zn
272
0.07
13
192
035
299
<0.02
_
• = Not a TCLP metal.
Ul
o
-------
TABLE 28. SOLID SAMPLE 1
Sample As B
Test 1 (1/30/91)
Soil feed (M-2) 16 1(
Kiln ash 13 21
Afterburner exit flue gas 50 51
particulate
Test' 2 (2/5/91)
RACE METAL CONCENTRATIONS
Metal concentration, rag/kg
a Cd Cr
i7 1.1 18
.1 1.1 22
>0 9.5 168
Soil feed (M-5D) 62 57 2.0 12
Kiln ash 16 48 1.7 9.8
Afterburner exit flue gas 462 2^
particulate
Test 3 (1/31/91)
Soil feed (O-l) 11 11
13 20 209
•4 <1.0 20
Kiln ash, 3a <10" 199 1.4 24
, Kiln ash, 3b < 10 184 < 1.0 18
Cu
49
41
117
43
21
160
35
39
42
Pb Hg
439 0.09
403 <0.10
570 -a
77 0.34
38 <0.10
554 -
443 0.24
345 <0.10
410 -
Ni
17
22
178
15
8.7
110
12
23
18
Zn
302
234
684
251
115
777
272
192
299
a— = Mercury analyses not performed for afterburner exit flue gas samples.
concentrations were generally comparable for all metals. However, afterburner exit particulate
rnetals concentrations were significantly greater than corresponding soil feed and kiln ash
concentrations for all metals in the two tests
for analysis.
or which afterburner exit particulate was collected
Metals leave the kiln chamber and are carried into and through the afterburner chamber
via two general pathways, in particulate entrained in the combustion flue gas, or in the vapor
phase at the kiln exit gas temperature. At the kiln temperature tested in Tests 1 and 2,
nominally 824°C (1,515°F), the vapor pressure of all potentially present compounds containing
the metal noted are sufficiently low such that
metal concentrations is expected to be quite
the contribution of metal vaporization to enriched
small.
The degree of particle entrainment in combustion flue gas is most affected by particle
size and density. The finer particles in the soil/ash bed are entrained to much greater degrees
than the coarser particle fraction. The fact that afterburner exit flue gas particulate was enriched
in rnetal concentration over the parent soil incinerated, and its resulting kiln ash, suggests that
the trace metal contamination in the M-2 and M-5D soils tested was concentrated in the finer
particulate in the soil.
51
-------
These tests were performed using a wet scrubber APCS for paniculate removal. The
scrubber liquor residual stream from this incineration system configuration was analyzed.
However, other incineration systems may use dry APCS approaches, such as a fabric filter, for
particulate removal. On the order of gram quantities of the afterburner exit flue gas participate
were coEected and analyzed for the test trace metals (except mercury) as an expected analog to
the flyash collected by such dry APCSs. The data in Table 28 suggest that the flyash collected
by a fabric filter APCS, for example, will likely contain significantly higher levels of all test
program trace metals (except mercury) than the parent soil incinerated.
Tests 1,2, and 3a were performed at a kiln temperature of nominally 824°C (1,515°C).
Test 3b was performed at a lower kiln temperature of 546°C (1,015°F) to evaluate whether
variations in kiln temperature in this range affected resulting kiln ash trace metal contents. The
data in Table 28 show no significant differences in the trace metal contents of the kiln ash from
Test 3a compared to Test 3b.
The soil feed, kiln ash, and afterburner exit flue gas particulate of Tests 1 and 2, and the
soil feed and kiln ash of Tests 3a and 3b, were subjected to the TCLP, and the leachates
analyzed for trace metals. Table 29 summarizes the TCLP leachate metal concentrations, taken
from Table 27, for these samples. Comparing the soil feed leachate concentration data for test
soil samples in Table 29 with the characterization sample leachate analysis data in Table 24
shows that the test soil leachates were comparable in metal concentrations to the
characterization samples, with the following exceptions:
• The M-2 and O-l test soil leachates were significantly lower in lead than the
corresponding soil characterization sample leachates
• The O-l test soil leachate was significantly lower in zinc than the O-l soil
characterization sample leachate
The data in Table 29 show that kiln ash leachates were quite similar in metal content
to the corresponding soil leachates, with the exception that the Test 2 leachate had a significantly
lower zinc concentration than its corresponding soil. Still, no soil, or the kiln ash resulting from
its incineration in these tests, had TCLP leachate trace metal concentrations even approacliing
the TCLP regulatory levels. Thus, the kiln ashes resulting from the incineration of site soils
would npt be TC hazardous wastes based on these test data.
In contrast, the afterburner exit flue gas particulate leachate metal concentrations were
significantly higher than corresponding soil and resulting kiln ash leachate concentrations. In
fact, the afterburner exit flue gas particulate TCLP leachate concentrations of chromium and
lead exceeded their corresponding TCLP regulatory levels for both Tests 1 and 2; and the Test 2
particulate leachate was at or over the regulatory levels for arsenic and cadmium. Because the
afterburner exit flue gas particulate was collected as an analog for dry APCS (e.g., fabric filter)
coEected flyash, the data in Table 29 suggest that the coflected flyash from the incineration of
soil highly contaminated by trace metals would be a TC hazardous waste, not suitable for land
disposal without further treatment.
In addition, returning to Table 27, the scrubber liquor trace metal data show that no
scrubber liquor contained trace metal concentrations exceeding TCLP regulatory levels.
52
-------
TABLE 29. TCLP LEACHATE TRACE METAL CONCENTRATIONS
Sample
Test 1 (1/30/91)
Soil feed (M-2) leachate
Kiln ash leachate
Afterburner exit flue gas
particulate leachate
Test 2 (2/5/91)
Soil feed (M-5D) leachate
Kiln ash leachate
Afterburner exit flue gas
particulate leachate
w Test 3 (1/31/91)
Soil feed (O-l) leachate
Kiln ash 3a leachate
Kiln ash 3b leachate
TCLP regulatory level
As Ba
<0.1 0.44
<0.1 <0.01
<3 11
<0.1 <0.01
0.14 <0.01
31 9.6
<0.1 <0.01
<0.1 <0.01
<0.1 <0.01
5.0 100
Cd
<0.01
<0.01
0.4
0.015
<0.01
1.0
<0.1
<0.01
<0.01
1.0
TCLP
Cr
<0.03
<0.03
5.8
'
<0.03
<0.03
11
<0.03
<0.03
<0.03
5.0
leachate metal concentration, mg/L
Cu
<0.01
<0.01
3.4
<0.01
<0.01
7.2
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
— k
Pb
<0.06
<0.06
12
<0.06
<0.06
20
0.06
<0.06
<0.06
5.0
Hg
< 0.002
<0.002
NAa
< 0.002
< 0.002
NA
< 0.002
< 0.002
< 0.002
0.2
Ni
<0.03
<0.03
4.9
<0.03
<0.03
5.9
<0.03
0.032
<0.03
—
Se Ag
<0.1 <0.02
<0.1 <0.02
<3 <0.5
<0.1 <0.02
<0.1 <0.02
<3 <0.5
<0.1 <0.02
<0.1 <0.02
<0.1 <0.02
1.0 5.0
Zn
0.05
<0.02
15
1.5
<0.02
28
0.07
. 0.35
<0.02
—
aNA = Not analyzed.
k— = Not a TCLP metal.
-------
However, in two of three cases, lead concentrations in test scrubber liquor were nearly
50 percent of the regulatory level for lead. This suggests that the scrubber liquor discharge from
a wet APCS, generated in the incineration of "hot spot" lead-containing soils or under scrubber
operation at minimum blowdown, could be a TC hazardous waste.
Because the TCLP involves producing 20 g of leachate per gram of solid leached, the
TCLP leachate concentration in mg/L can be used to calculate the fraction of metal, in each
sample, that is "mobile," or leachable, in the procedure. For example, if all the metal in a solid
sample leached in the procedure (was 100 percent leachable), the resulting TCLP leachate metal
concentration in mg/L would be l/20th of the solid sample metal concentration in mg/kg. Tims,
the ratio of
20 • leachate concentration (mg/L)/so!id concentration (mg/kg)
represents the fraction of metal leachable in the procedure.
Table 30 summarizes the fractional teachabilities of the soil feed, resulting kiln ash, and
the afterburner exit flue gas particulate samples analyzed. The "less than" teachabilities noted
in the table arise when the leachate contained no detectable metal; the "less than" level
corresponds to the PQL of the leachate. "Less than" levels can exceed 100 percent (e.g., for
arsenic in the Test 1 afterburner exit flue gas particulate) if the PQL for the metal in the
leachate is greater than 1/20 of the solid concentration measured. No fractional teachability is
calculated when both solid sample and resulting leachate concentrations were less than
detectable.
The data in Table 30 show that the trace metal content of the soil and resulting
incineration kiln ashes was sparingly leachable. Virtually all fractional teachabilities for these
samples were less than 20 percent, and most lower. In addition, the metal teachability of the kiln
ash samples were generally comparable to the parent soil teachabilities, with the exception of the
increased arsenic teachability in the Test 2 kiln ash compared to the Test 2 soil, the decreased
barium teachability in the Test 1 kiln ash compared to the Test 1 soil, the decreased zinc
teachability in the Test 2 kiln ash compared to the Test 2 soil, and the increased zinc teachability
in the Test 3a kiln ash compared to the Test 3 soil. Further, the limited data for Test 3 suggest
that the higher incineration temperature for Test 3a (829 °C [1,524 °F]) may have increased the
kiln ash teachability of zinc compared to the lower incineration temperature for Test 3b (546 °C
[1,01S*F]).
In contrast, the data in Table 30 show that the trace metal content of the afterburner
exit flue gas particulate was quite leachable. The fractional teachabilities for the Test 1
afterburner exit flue gas particulate ranged from 32 percent, for barium, to perhaps completely
leachable (<120 percent), for arsenic. Fractional teachabilities for the Test 2 afterburner exit
flue gas particulate were even higher, ranging from 72 percent, for lead, to completely leachable,
for arsenic, cadmium, chromium, and nickel. Thus, in the incineration of the M-2 and M-5D
soils, not only are all trace metals enriched in the afterburner exit flue gas particulate, they are
also present in this particulate in a mobile, soluble form, which gives rise to the high TCLP
leachate concentrations measured.
54
-------
TABLE 30, SOLID SAMPLE TRACE METAL FRACTIONAL LEACHABILITIES
Fractionjeachable in the TCLP, %
Sample
As
Ba
Cd
Cr
Cu
Pb
Hg
Ni.
Zn
Test 1 (1/30/91)
Soil feed <12 5.3
Kite ash <15 <0.1
Afterburner exit flue gas < 120 3'
particulate
Test 2 (2/5/91)
Soil feed <3
-------
TABLE 31. TRACE METAL DISTRIBUTIONS
Distribution, % of metal fed
Sample
Test 1 (1/30/91), Soil M-2
Kiln temperature: 826"C (1,519*F) •
Kin ash
Afterburner exit flue gas
Total
Kiln ash
Scrubber exit flue gas
Scrubber liquor
Total
Test 2 (2/5/91), Soil M-5D
Kin temperature: 823°C (1,513°F)
Kiln ash
Afterburner exit flue gas
Total
Kfln ash
Scrubber exit flue gas
Scrubber liquor
Total
Test 3a (1/31/91), Soil O-l
Kfln temperature: 829°C (1,524°F)
Kiln ash
Test 3b (1/31/91), Soil O-l
Kin temperature: 546°C (I.OIS'F)
Kiln ash
Total Test 3
Kfln ash
Scrubber liquor
As
56
0.7-3
57-59
56
2-11
<6
58-73
20
6
26
20
3-5
9
32-34
(a)
(a)
(a)
(a)
Ba
90
2
92
90
<0.1
8
98
65
4
69
65
0.2-0.4
11
76
69
70
70
3
Cd
71
7
78
71
8-22
<9
79-102
65
9
74
65
12-20
9
86-94
(b)
(b)
(b)
0>)
Cr
88
11
99
88
2-4
32
122-124
61
28
89
61
1-4
13
75-78
83
69
76
7
Cu
61
0.6
62
61
1
34
96
37
2
39
37
1
26
64
75
88
82
22
Pb
66
0.6
67
66
1
6
73
38
4
42
38
4-5
14
56-57
52
68
61
3
Hg
<71
150-160
150-231
<71
350
<20
350-441
<25
68-71
68-96
<25
195-198
<6
195-229
<31
<3S
<35
<6
Ni
91
12
103
91
<2
27
118-120
45
19
64
45
<2
8
53-55
129
108
118
8
Zn
55
0.9
56
55
0.2
4
59
35
2
37
35
0.6
4
40
48
81
65
3
'Arsenic present in Test 3 soil just at the PQL, not detected in any residual sample.
'Cadmium not detected in Test 3 soil.
56
-------
second set of data notes metal distributions for kiln ash, scrubber exit flue gas, and scrubber
liquor. The "Total" row for this set of data represents the degree of mass balance closure
achieved around the conventional incineration system portion of the RKS. For this portion, the
inlet stream is again the soil feed; the outlet streams are now the kiln ash, the scrubber exit flue
gas, and the scrubber liquor.
The data in Table 31 show that mass balance closure around the combustor portion of
the RKS (kiln ash and afterburner exit flue gas as discharges) for Test 1 were in the 56- to 103-
percent range for all metals except mercury. For these metals, the kiln ash fraction predominat-
ed. In contrast, the mass balance closure for mercury around the combustor portion of the RKS
was greater than 100 percent. The kiln ash contained nondetectable mercury; the afterburner
exit flue gas measured 1.5 to 1.6 times the amount of mercury fed.
Mass balance closures around the conventional incineration system portion of the RKS
(kiln ash, scrubber exit flue gas, and scrubber iliquor as discharges) were comparable to or better
in Test 1 for all metals except mercury. Kiln ash fractions remained constant. Scrubber exit flue
gas fractions were generally in a range comparable to measured afterburner exit flue gas
fractions. However, the addition of the scrubber liquor fraction usually improved the mass
r !a
balance closures achieved. An even greater
exit flue gas, while the kiln ash and scrubber
amount of mercury was measured in the scrubber
liquor contained nondetectable mercury.
Mass balance closure results for Test 2 were generally not as close to 100 percent for
both the combustor portion and the conventional incineration portion of the RKS as they were
for Test 1. Mass balance closures around the combustor portion were in the nominal 40- to 70-
to 90-percent range for all metals except arsenic, which was 26 percent. Again, the kiln ash
contained the predominant fraction of all metals except mercury, which was only detected in the
afterburner exit and scrubber exit flue gas streams. Also again, mass balance closures achieved
around the conventional incineration system portion of the RKS were generally comparable to
or better than around the combustor portion of the system for Test 2.
The levels of mass balance closure achieved in these tests are considered good when
viewed in light of past experience in achieving trace metal mass balance closures from a variety
of combustion sources, incinerators included. [Typical mass balance closure results from this past
experience have been, at best, in the 30- to 200-percent range. The fact that most closures
achieved were less than 100 percent is expected, as some loss of metal via particulate dropout
in the afterburner, or slagging with holdup in the afterburner, is not unlikely.
As noted above, the kiln ash fraction contained the predominant amount of all metals,
except mercury, for both Tests 1 and 2. Scrubber exit flue gas fractions were generally quite low
for all metals except for mercury, cadmium,
accounted for all measured mercury for both
and possibly arsenic for both tests. The flue gas
tests. The scrubber liquor accounted for less than
about 10 percent of the amount of metal fed for all metals except chromium, copper, and nickel
in Test 1, and copper in Test 2.
The metal distribution data for Tests 3a and 3b generally support the observations from
Tests 1 and 2 discussed above. The kiln ash discharge again accounted for the predominant
fraction of each metal except mercury, which was not found in the kiln ash of either Test 3a
or 3b. Again, the scrubber liquor accounted for less than about 10 percent of the amount of
57
-------
metal fed for aH metals except copper. Comparing the Test 3a and Test 3b kiln ash fraction data
shows that decreasing the kiln temperature from 829°C (1,524°F) to 546°C (1,015°F) had no
effect on kiln ash, metal fractions, with the possible exception of increased Mln ash zinc with
decreased temperature.
Scrubber collection efficiencies for each of the metals measured in the flue gas streams
for Tests 1 and 2 can be calculated from measured concentrations in the afterburner exit flue
gas and the scrubber exit flue gas. However, despite the fact that the afterburner exit sampling
location is acceptable with respect to the ability to perform an isokinetic duct traverse, the IMF's
experience has been that flue gas metal concentrations measured at this location are generally
lower than expected. Thus, calculated scrubber collection efficiencies using measured afterburner
exit flue gas concentrations are often quite poor. In fact, for Test 1, measured scrubber exit flue
gas metals discharge rates were greater than or equal to measured afterburner exit flue gas
flowrates for all metals except barium, nickel, and zinc. For Test 2, measured scrubber exit flue
gas flowrates were greater than afterburner exit flue gas flowrates for cadmium, copper, lead, and
mercury. Consequently, calculated scrubber collection efficiencies using measurement data from
these tests for metals with greater measured scrubber exit than afterburner exit flue gas flowrates
would be 0 to negative.
Based on past experience, a better estimate of the flowrate of metals at the scrubber
inlet has been obtained by summing the flows in the two scrubber discharge streams: the
scrubber exit flue gas and the scrubber liquor. This allows an apparent scrubber collection
efficiency to be calculated as (scrubber liquor fraction)/(scrubber liquor fraction plus scrubber
exit flue gas fraction).
Table 32 summarizes the apparent scrubber collection efficiencies calculated for each
metal measured in the test program for Tests 1 and 2. The data in Table 32 show that the
venturi/packed-column scrubber system collection efficiencies were greater than about 90 percent
for barium, chromium, copper, nickel, and zinc in Test 1, and possibly chromium and nickel in
Test 2. Cadmium collection efficiencies were less than 30 to 40 percent, and mercury collection
efficiencies less than 5 percent for both tests. Lead collection efficiencies were nominally
80 percent for both tests. Arsenic collection efficiencies were between 64 and 78 percent for
Test 2, but less than 36 percent for Test 1.
43 ORGANIC-CONTAMINATED-SOIL TESTS
As noted in Section 4.1, virtually no organic contaminants were detected in
characterization samples of the site soils excavated for testing. Nevertheless, it was decided to
proceed with two organic-contaminated soil .tests to supply data to confirm effective organic
destruction by incineration. These data would be useful in demonstrating that effective
decontamination of potential organic hot spots would be possible.
Fenac was found in the O-2 and L-2 soil characterization samples at 11 and 55 mg/kg
levels, respectively. The O-2 soil characterization sample also contained detectable total organic
halogen. Thus, these two soils were selected for performing the planned organie-contaminated-
soil tests. Only two of the originally planned four organic-contaminated-soil tests were
performed, however; the originally planned Tests 8 and 9 were deleted.
58
-------
TABLE 32. APPARENT SCRUBBER COLLECTION EFFICIENCIES
Apparent scrubber
, collection efficiency, %
Metal (1
Arsenic
Barium S
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Zinc
Test 1
1/30/91)
<36
8.8-99.6
<29
90-95
98
82-84
<5
>93
94
Test 2
(2/5/91)
64-78
97-99
31-43
76-91 '
94-95
76-79
<3
>76
88
Confirmatory analyses of the L-2 and O-2 soils packaged for testing were performed for
the semivolatile and volatile organic target analytes. Results of these analyses are summarized
in Table 33. As was the case with the characterization sample analyses, the actual test soils
contained no detectable semivolatile organics. The 70 mg/kg fenac concentration measured in
the L-2 test soil compares well with the 55 mg/kg concentration measured in the L-2 pretest
characterization sample; the not-detected fenac result for the O-2 test soil at a PQL of 10 mg/kg
does not conflict with the 11 mg/kg result for the O-2 pretest characterization sample. The
results in Table 33 also indicate that both test soils contained low levels of several volatile
organics, and that the O-2 soil contained
semivolatile organics were found in the
low levels of several semivolatile organics. No
O-2 pretest characterization samples, and soil
characterization samples were not analyzed for volatile organics.
The PQLs for the target organic analytes in soil feed and other sample matrices,
corresponding to the "not detected" entries in Table 33, are given in Table 34.
Because the organic test soils contained very low levels of organic contamination, they
were spiked with naphthalene and l,4-dichlor|>benzene to the 3,000 mg/kg and 130 mg/kg levels,
respectively, as noted in Section 2.2. These two semivolatile compounds became surrogate test
POHCs.
Spiked POHC DREs achieved in the two organic tests are summarized in Table 35. As
shown, the naphthalene DRE was greater than 99.995 percent for both tests. No
1,4-dichlorobenzene was detected in the scrubber exit flue gas. The corresponding DREs
achieved for 1,4-dichlorobenzene were greater than 99.89 percent. The spiking level for
1,4-dichlorobenzene, mistakenly chosen to be
130 mg/kg, combined with the flue gas sampling
59
-------
TABLE 33. ORGANIC ANALYSIS RESULTS FOR FEED SAMPLES
Compound
Semivolatile organics:
Benzo(a)pyrene
Fluoranthene
Indeno(l,2,3-ed)pyrene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
All other semivolatile organics
Volatile organics:
2-Butanone
Chlorobenzene
Trichloroethene
' Toluene
Xylenes (total)
Concentration,
Test 6
(2/6/91)
SoilL-2
my
my
my
my
Niy
my
my
20
5.7
<0.63
0.69
<0.63
"g/fcg
Test 7
(2/7/91)
SoU O-2
11
44
24
58
43
43
ND
20
2.9
4.5
4.7
3.0
All other volatile organics
NDk
NDb
Fenac
70
*ND = Not detected. See Table 15 for target analytes and
Table 23 for PQLs.
bND - Not detected. See Table 16 for target analytes and
Table 23 for PQLs.
60
-------
TABLE 34. ORGANIC CONSTITUENT PQLs
Constituent
Semivolatile organics:
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol and Test 6:
pentachlorophenol Test 7:
All others. Test 6:
Test 7:
Volatile organics:
Acetone and carbon disulfide
Chlorodibromomethane, 2-hexanone, and
4-methyl-2-pentanone
Bromomethane, chloromethane,
chloroethane, and vinyl chloride
All others
Fenac Test 6:
Test 7:
a— = Not analyzed, no PQL applicable.
TABLE 35. SP
Parameter
Kiln temperature, °C (°F)
Soil feed:
Soil feedrate, kg/hr
Naphthalene feedrate, g/hr
1,4-Dichlorobenzene feedrate, g/t
Scrubber exit flue gas:
Rue gas flowrate, dscm/min
Naphthalene:
Concentration, /tg/dscm
Emission rate, mg/hr
DRE, %
1-4-Dichlorobenzene:
Concentration, jtg/dscm
Emission rate, mg/hr
DRE, %
PQL
Soil feed, Kiln ash,
rag/kg mg/kg
1.54 1.01
15.1 1.33
0.77 . 0.51
7.53 0.66
12.5 12.5
6.25 6.25
1.25 1.25
0.625 0.625
10.0 10.0
10.0 10.0
IKED POHC DREs
Test 6 (2/6/91)
Soil L-2
822 (1,512)
55.8
167
r 7.25
33.5
<4.05
<8.14
> 99.9951
<4.05
<8.14
> 99.888
Scrubber Flue gas,
liquor, ftg/L /tg/dscm
1.54 8.11
1.54 103
0.77 4.05
0.77 5.17
100 — a
50 —
10 -
5 —
100 20.3
100 25.6
Test 7 (2/7/91)
SoU O-2
553 (1,027)
53.5
161
6.96
23.3
<5.17
<7.23
> 99.9955
<5.17
<7.23
> 99.896
61
-------
and analysis method PQL, was too low to allow establishing a higher DRE. The lower kiln
temperature for Test 7, 553°C (1,027°F), compared to the Test 6 kiln temperature of 822°C
(1,512°F), did not result in a measurable decrease in DRE.
No other semivolatile organic was detected in flue gas samples at the PQLs listed in
Table 34. The native (not spiked) semivolatile organics in the O-2 soil were all present at levels
of less than 58 mg/kg (phenanthrene). The Test 7 flue gas semivolatile organic PQL shown in
Table 34 corresponds to a DRE of greater than 98.8 percent for a POHC present at 58 mg/kg
in the feed.
Fenac was also analyzed for in the scrubber exit flue gas sampling train samples. Fenac
was not detected in either sample at the PQLs noted in Table 34. The Test 6 PQL corresponds
to a fenac DRE of greater than 99.0 percent, based on a 70 mg/kg feed fenac concentration in
the Test 6 L-2 soil.
Kiln ash and scrubber liquor samples taken during Tests 6 and 7 were analyzed for the
semivolatile organics listed in Table 15, for the volatile organics listed in Table 16, and for fenac.
Neither test's kiln ash nor scrubber liquor contained semivolatile organics or fenac at the PQLs
noted in Table 34.
The volatile organic constituent analysis results for kiln ash and scrubber liquor are
summarized in Table 36. As shown in the table, both test's scrubber liquor contained toluene
at concentrations of 5 /tg/L (Test 6) to 6 ftg/L (Test 7), just at the method PQL. The Test 7
scrubber liquor also contained 2-butanone at 190 /*g/L. Both tests' kiln ash contained
2-butanone and toluene. In addition, the Test 7 kiln ash contained xylenes. Comparing the kiln
ash 2-butanone, toluene, and xylene concentrations with the corresponding feed concentrations
noted in Table 33 shows that they are comparable in all cases. Evidently, incineration at both
kfln temperatures was ineffective in decontaminating the test soils of these three volatile
organics. The authors can offer no explanation for this observation.
4.4 PARTICULATE AND HC1 EMISSIONS DATA, AND KILN ASH WASTEWATER
CHARACTERIZATION ANALYSIS RESULTS
In Tests 1 and 2, paniculate levels were measured at the afterburner exit, using the
Method 17 metals sampling train, and at the venturi/packed-column scrubber exit, using the
Method 5 metals sampling train. For Tests 6 and 7, participate levels were measured at the
afterburner exit using a Method 5 train. In addition, particle size distributions were measured
at the afterburner exit in Tests 1,2,6, and 7, using an Andersen cascade impactor train that also
provides a total particulate load measurement. For all tests, particulate levels were measured,
at the stack downstream of the RKS secondary APCS, using a Method 5 train. All Method 5
trains (i.e,, stack, all tests; afterburner exit, Tests 6 and 7) included impingers to collected HQ
to determine flue gas HQ levels.
The flue gas particulate load measurements at the various sampled locations for each
test are summarized in Table 37. As shown, afterburner exit flue gas particulate levels were in
the nominal range of 100 to 300 mg/dscm at 7 percent O2. Scrubber exit particulate levels were
reduced to the nominal range of 10 to 20 mg/dscm at 7 percent O2 for the two tests during which
this location was sampled. The reduction corresponds to a scrubber efficiency in the 90- to
62
-------
TABLE 36. VOLATILE ORGANIC CONSTITUENT CONCENTRATIONS IN
KILN ASH AND SCRIJBBER LIQUOR SAMPLES
Test:
Date:
Feed:
Kiln temperature, °C;
Volatile organics:
2-butanone
Toluene
Xylenes (total)
Kiln ash concentra-
tion, mg/kg
6
2/6/91
SoilL-2
822
26
0.84
<0.62
7
2/7/91
SoilO-2
553
16
8.4
0.86
Scrubber liquor
concentration, /*g/L
6
2/6/91
SoilL-2
822
<100
5
<50
7
2/7/91
Soil O-2
553
190
6
<50
TABLE 37. FLUE GAS PARTICULATE LEVELS
Flue gas participate", mg/dscm at 7% O2
Test
Afterburner exit Scrubber exit Stack
Test 1 (1/30/91)
Soil M-2
Test 2 (2/5/91)
Soil M-5D
Test 3 (1/31/91)
Soft O-2
77"
102C
319k
259C
19'
14
Test 3a
Test 3b
Test 6 (2/6/91)
Soil L-2
Test 7 (2/7/91)
Soil O-2
d
108
144C
297
272C
— 3
- 26
— 1
12
"Measured using a Method 5 particulate train except as noted.
"Measured using a high-volume Method 17 metals train.
"Measured using an Anderson cascade impactor train.
d— = Particulate sampling not performed at this location for this
test.
eMeasured using a Method 5 metals train.
63
-------
95-percent range, typical for a venturi scrubber. Stack gas participate levels ranged from 1 to
26 mg/dscm at 7 percent O2. All post-APCS levels were below the 180 mg/dscm at 7 percent
O2 hazardous waste incinerator performance standard.
Flue gas HC1 levels measured during the test program are summarized in Table 38.
Afterburner exit flue gas HC1 was 13 ppm for Test 6 (L-2 soil) and 201 ppm for Test 7 (O-2
soil). All levels were below detection limits at the stack for all tests. Corresponding system HC1
collection efficiencies were greater than 98.5 percent for Test 6, and greater than 99.8 percent
for Test 7. Interestingly, the O-2 soil, giving the highest afterburner exit flue gas HQ
concentration measured, was the soil with the highest total organic halogen content (see
Table 21).
Table 39 summarizes the afterburner particle distribution data. These same data are
shown graphically in Figure 4. The afterburner exit particulate was relatively coarse for all tests,
ranging from 92 percent greater than 12.8 pm diameter, for Test 6 with the L-2 soil, to
45 percent greater than 113 /*m, for Test 1 with the M-2 soil. The measured size distributions
resulting from the Test 2 (M-5D) soil and the Test 7 (O-2) soil were quite similar.
The observation that the afterburner exit flue gas particulate was relatively coarse does
not conflict with the suggestion in Section 4.2 that the higher afterburner exit particulate metals
concentrations compared to the corresponding soil were the result of finer soil particle
entrainment in the kiln exit flue gas. The particles entrained from the soil/ash bed into kiln exit
flue gas would consist of the finer and less dense fraction in the soil/ash bed. However, even
this finer fraction could have a relatively coarse size distribution.
4 J WASTEWATER CHARACTERIZATION ANALYSES OF KILN ASH SAMPLES
As noted in Section 3.2.2, a composite test program kiln ash, and a water leachate of this
kiln ash, were subjected to a battery of wastewater discharge characterization analyses at the
request of Region 3. Results of these analyses are summarized in Table 40. In addition, the
TCLP leachate of the composite test program kiln ash was analyzed for pH, phenols, and
hexavalent chromium. Its pH was 5.9. No phenols or hexavalent chromium were found in the
leachate at PQLs of 0.01 mg/L for both analytes.
64
-------
TABLE 38. FLUE GAS HC1 LEVELS
Parameter
Afterburner exit:
HC1 concentration, mg/dscm
ppm
HC1 emission rate, g/hr
Stack:
HCL concentration, mg/dscm
ppm
HC1 emission rate, g/hr
System HC1 collection efficiency, %
Testl
(1/30/91)
Soil M-2
a
—
_
<0.025
<0.02
<0.06
—
Test 2
(2/5/91)
Soil M-5D
_
__
__
<0.25
<0,16
<057
_
Test 3a
(1/31/91)
Soil O-l
_
—
—
<0.22
<0.15
<0.54
—
Test3b
(1/31/91)
Soil O-l
—
__
—
<0.22
<0.15
98J
Test?
(2/7/91)
Soil O-2
305
Ml
567
<0.61
<0.41
<1.05
>99.8
= Not measured.
TABLE 39. AFTERBURNER EXIT PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTIONS
Testl
(1/30/91)
Soil M-2
Particle
size,
pan
113
93
6.4
43
2.7
1.3
Cumulative
% less than
sue
55
55
50
41
19
0.6
Test 2
Soil
Particle
size,
/tin
11.7
9.7
6.6
4.5
2.9
1.4
0.9
(2/5/91)
M-5D
Cumulative
% less than
size
16.6
14.0
8.0
5.1
3.1
2.8
2.4
Test 6
(2/6/91)
Soil L-2
Particle
size,
/un
12.8
10.7
73
3.2
Cumulative
% less than
size
8.1
. 2.1
0.7
0.4
Test?
(2/7/91)
Soil O-2
Particle
size,
faa
132.
11.2
7.6
5.2
3.4
1.7
1.1
Cumulative
% less than
size
21.6
18.4
10.0
53
22
- 2.0
1.9
65
-------
©
N
C
03
(0
CO
70
50
30
20
(D
2 7
CO 7
Q.
CD
> 2
I
3
I
o
0.6
0.1
0.5
5
10
20
TABLE 40.
Particle size
Figure 4. Afterburner exit particle size distribution.
WASTEWATER CHARACTERIZATION ANALYSES OF COMPOSITE
KILN ASH AND KILN ASH WATER LEACHATE
Parameter
pH
Total organic carbon, mg/L
Total organic halogen, mg/kg
Ammonia nitrogen, mg/L
Oil and grease, mg/kg
Total cyanide, mg/kg
Chemical oxygen demand, mg/L
Total solids, %
Total volatile solids, mg/L
Total dissolved solids, mg/L
Kiln ash
11.0
a
<100
—
107
27.5
—
99.9
(no free liquid)
—
—
Kiln ash water leachate
11.0
3
153
0.24
<1
0.10
11
0.090
880
880
»_ = Not measured.
66
-------
SECTION 5
CONCLUSIONS
A series of pilot-scale incineration i:ests was performed at EPA's IRF to evaluate the
potential of incineration as an option to treat contaminated soils from the Drake Chemical
Superfund site in Lock Haven, Pennsylvania. The soils at the Drake site are contaminated to
varying degrees with various organic constituents and several hazardous constituent trace metals.
The purpose of the test program was to evaluate the incinerability of selected site soils in terms
of the destruction of contaminant organic constituents and the fate of contaminant trace metals.
The specific test objectives addressed the foEowing questions:
« Can rotary kiln incineration effectively destroy the organic contaminants in the
site soils?
Will the kiln ash and other residual discharges from incineration of the site soils
have characteristics that
treatment, at the site?
wil
allow them to be deposited, without further
• Can the incineration treatment of the site soils be performed in compliance with
the hazardous waste incinerator performance standards?
« What is the fate of the contaminant trace metals in the incineration of the site
soils?
« What are the effects of incineration temperature on contaminant metal fate and
kiln ash characteristics?
The test program consisted of a series of five tests. In each test a soil from one of five
locations at the site was incinerated. Three tests focused on the fate of contaminant trace metals
in the incineration of metal-contaminated soils. For two of these tests, a full characterization
of incinerator discharges, with respect to trace metal content and teachability, was performed.
This full characterization included incinerator flue gas sampling upstream and downstream of
the APCS, as well as kiln ash and APCS discharge sampling. The third test included
characterization of the kiln ash discharge only, although two different kiln temperatures, 829°C
(1,524°F) and 546°C (1,015°F), were tested in this third test. The remaining.two tests focused
on the destruction of organic contaminants and soil organic decontamination, and evaluated the
effect of kiln temperature, varied over nominally the same range noted above, on organic
destruction and soil decontamination.
All tests were performed in the RKS at the IRF with the venturi/packed-column
scrubber as the primary APCS, and with soils fed to the kiln via the fiberpack drum ram feed
67
-------
system. Because available site soils were only weakly contaminated by organic constituents
(contamination levels for individual organic constituents of 70 mg/kg or less), test soils were
spiked with surrogate POHCs for the organic destruction evaluation tests.
Test conclusions in terms of the above questions are as follows:
• Organic contaminants in the test soils can be destroyed to greater that
99.99 percent DRE. Naphthalene, spiked into test soils at 3,000 mg/kg for the
two organic destruction tests, was destroyed at a DRE of greater than 99.995 per-
cent. 1,4-dichlorobenzene, spiked into the test soils at 130 mg/kg for the same
two tests, was not detected in incineration flue gas; detection limits corresponded
to a DRE of greater than 99.89 percent. These DRE levels were attained at both
kiln temperatures tested, 822°C (1,512°F) and 553°C (1,027°F), although the
afterburner was operated at 1,096°C (2»005°F) for both tests. No native soil
semivolatile POHCs were detected in combustion flue gas.
• The treated soil (kiln ash) contained no detectable semivolatile organic soil
contaminant, indicating effective decontamination for this class of contaminants
at both kiln temperatures. However, the levels of three volatile organic soil
contaminants, 2-butanqne, toluene, and xylene, in kiln ash were comparable to
parent soil concentrations at both kiln temperatures, suggesting poor
decontamination effectiveness for these constituents.
• -None of the soils tested, or the kiln ash resulting from their incineration, would
be considered a TC hazardous waste due to its leachable trace metal content
• No test scrubber liquor would be considered a TC hazardous waste due to trace
metal concentrations. However, lead concentrations in test scrubber liquors were
at levels near 50 percent of the TCLP regulatory level in some cases. This
suggests that the scrubber liquor discharge from a wet scrubber APCS could
become a TC hazardous waste in the incineration of "hot spot" lead-containing
soils, or under scrubber operation at minimum blowdown.
• The flyash collected at the afterburner exit (upstream of the wet scrubber APCS)
would be a TC hazardous waste, due to leachable chromium and lead
concentrations in both metal-contaminated soils tested in the full evaluation tests,
and, additionally, to leachable arsenic and cadmium in one soil. This suggests that
the collected particulate from a dry APCS, such as a fabric filter, would be a TC
hazardous waste and could not be backfilled at the site without further treatment
or stabilization.
• Particulate levels in the flue gas at the exit of the venturi/packed-column scrubber
APCS were less than 20 mg/dsem (0.1 grains/dscf) at 7 percent Oa in compliance
with the hazardous waste incinerator performance standard of 180 mg/dscm (0.08
grains/dscf) at 7 percent O2. HC1 emissions were not detectable downstream of
the scrubber. POHC DREs of greater than 99.99 percent can be achieved, as
noted above. Thus, the hazardous waste incinerator performance standards can
be met.
68
-------
• The kiln ash discharge accounted for the predominant fraction of all trace metals
introduced in the soil feed with the exception of mercury, which appeared to be
completely accounted for in the flue gas discharges. The scrubber exit flue gas
accounted for a minor fraction of the trace metals fed with the exception of
mercury, cadmium, and possibly arsenic. The scrubber liquor accounted for less
than 10 percent of the trace metals fed with the exception of copper, and
chromium and nickel for one soil feed.
• Kiln ash trace metal concentrations were generally comparable to the
corresponding soil feed concentrations. Afterburner exit flue gas particulate metal
concentrations, however, were significantly greater.
• The trace metals in soil feed and kiln ash samples were generally sparingly
teachable. However, the trace metals in afterburner exit flue gas were highly, in
many cases completely, teachable.
• Varying kiln temperature in the range of 546°C (1,512°F) to 829°C (1,524°F)
generally had no effect on contaminant metal fate or kiln ash characteristics
Additional test conclusions include:
• Venturi/packed-column scrubber collection efficiencies were 90 to 95 percent for
overall particulate. Apparent collection efficiencies were greater than about
90 percent for barium, chromium, copper, nickel, and zinc; about 80 percent for
lead; less than 30 to 40 percent for cadmium; and variable, between 36 and
78 percent, for arsenic.
flue
Measured afterburner exit
greater than 45 percent larger
larger than 12 jam in diameter
gas particulate was quite coarse, ranging from
than 11 fim in diameter to greater than 92 percent
As discussed in Section 6, most test program QA objectives were achieved. The major
exception was the accuracy objective for the trace metal and mercury concentration
measurements as measured by matrix spike recovery. The failure to meet the trace metal and
mercury analysis accuracy objective means
generally .known to within a factor of 1.7
that the sample trace metal contents were only
(±40 percent) for mercury, and a factor of 1.5
(±33 percent) for the other test program trace metals. This is less accurate than the factor of
1.3 (±25 percent) originally desired. The test conclusions regarding trace metal distributions,
however, are still valid and defensible, although some conclusions are slightly less certain that
would have otherwise been the case.
69
-------
SECTION €
QUALITY ASSURANCE
This test program was carried out as outlined in the test plan for the program
(Reference 9). The QA aspects of the program were carried out in accordance with the quality
assurance project plan (QAPjP) (Reference 10) for the program. Except as noted, all tests were
performed in accordance with the procedures documented in the test plan and QAPjP.
All samples analyzed to obtain the data reported in this report were taken at the IRF
by members of the IRF operating staff. All samples were collected and/or recovered in
accordance with the methods appropriate to their eventual analysis.
After appropriate preservation, the samples were relinquished to the custody of the
onsite Sample Custodian. The Sample Custodian subsequently directed the splitting of samples
and their transport to the appropriate laboratories for analysis. The sample ehain-of-custody
procedures described in the QAPjP for these tests were followed without deviation. No
compromise in sample integrity occurred.
For this test program, the critical measurements identified in the QAPjP included test
sample trace metal (excluding mercury), mercury, and semivolatile organic constituent analyses,
and flue gas HC1 and particulate measurements. The QA efforts performed to ensure that data
quality is known for particulate and CEM measurements involved adherence to Reference
Method procedures and CEM manufacturers' specifications. No deviations from the QAPjP
occurred in these measurements. Hence, these measurements are not discussed in this section.
Other analyses performed in the program (i.e., proximate and ultimate analysis of composite soil
samples, various soil and kiln ash characterization analyses, and volatile organic constituent
analyses of flue gas samples) were identified in the QAPjP as not critical. Accordingly, these
analyses are not discussed in this section.
Numerous QA procedures were followed to assess the data quality of the laboratory
analytical measurements performed in the test program. These included blank sample analyses,
duplicate analyses, and matrix spike (MS) and matrix spike duplicate (MSD) sample analyses.
Method blank samples were analyzed for all sample matrices for which logical matrix blanks
could be prepared.
Results of QA procedures performed for the critical laboratory analytical measurements
are discussed, by analyte group, in the following subsections.
70
-------
6.1 TRACE METAL ANALYSES (MERCURY EXCLUDED)
Forty-two characterization soil and soil TCLP leachate samples and 39 test program
samples were analyzed for trace metals. All analyses of test program samples, and of the
characterization soil and soil TCLP leachate samples for the M-locations, were performed by
EMSL-Cincinnati. Analyses of the O, L, G, and B location characterization soil and soil TCLP
leachate samples were performed by IT Anzlytical Services in Knoxville, Tennessee.
Table 41 summarizes the sample collection and analysis dates for the trace metal
analyses of characterization samples. Table 42 provides an analogous summary for the test
program samples. As shown in the tables, ail samples were analyzed within method hold time
limits.
Table 43 summarizes the laboratory and method blank sample trace metal analysis
results. Eight laboratory blank samples and five method blank samples were analyzed. In
general, laboratory (digestion) blank samples were free of detectable test trace metals. However,
selenium was found in one laboratory blank at 3.2 /*g/L. Zinc was found in three laboratory
blanks at 13, 14, and 130 jig/L.
The TCLP extraction blank for the characterization sample TCLP extractions contained
31 pg/L of cadmium and 3.2 /*g/L of selenium. The selenium level was the same as that of the
digestion blank used for this sample, and was likely caused by the digestion blank.
The TCLP extraction blank for the incineration test samples contained barium at
410 /ig/L, copper at 280 /tg/L, and zinc at 450 fig/L. The scrubber liquor method blank also
contained zinc at 280
The flue gas metals train impinger solution method blank contained barium at 56
copper at 310 jtg/L, and zinc at 490 jig/L, The copper and zinc levels in this method blank were
comparable to the levels in the incineration test sample TCLP extraction blank. The flue gas
metals train filter blank contained barium at 230 mg/kg, chromium at 39 mg/kg, copper at
7.4 mg/kg, nickel at 12 mg/kg, and zinc at 120 mg/kg.
All metals data discussed in Sections 4.1 and 4.2 were blank-corrected using appropriate
laboratory or method blank trace metals levels.
Table 44 summarizes the trace metal measurement precision, accuracy, and complete-
ness data quality objectives (DQOs). Table 45 lists the practical quantitation limits (PQLs)
achieved for each sample matrix, and compares these to respective PQL DQOs. As shown, aU
PQL DQOs were met, with the exception of
those for selenium and arsenic.
Selenium was not found in any test program sample. Thus, the failure to achieve the
PQL DQO for selenium had no real effect on the test program conclusions. The level at which
selenium was not present in test soils was higher than originally intended. However, conclusions
regarding selenium distributions were unaffected (no conclusions were reached). The selenium
PQL achieved in TCLP leachate samples was
was a toxiciry characteristic hazardous waste due to selenium content.
71
sufficient to establish that no test program sample
-------
TABLE 41. CHARACTERIZATION SAMPLE TRACE METAL ANALYSIS HOLD TIMES
Sample
Soil feed characterization
O-l
O-2
L-l
L-2
M-l
M-2
M-3
M-4
M-4D
M-5
M-5D
G-l
G-2
G-3
G-4
G-5
G-6
B-l
B-2
B-3
B-4
Soil feed characterization
TCLP leachate
O-l
O-2
L-l
L-2
M-l
M-2
M-3
M-4
M-4D
M-5
M-5D
G-l
G-2
G-3
G-4
G-5
G-6
B-l
B-2
B-3
B-4
TCLP extraction blank
Method requirement
Collection/
preparation date
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
12/3/90
12/3/90
12/3/90
12/3/90
11/6/90
11/6/90
11/6/90
11/6/90
11/8/90
11/8/90
11/8/90
12/5/90
12/5/90
12/5/90
12/10/90
12/10/90
12/10/90
12/12/90
12/12/90
12/12/90
12/12/90
11/8/90
Analysis date
1/4/91
1/4/91
1/4/91
11/4/91
12/10/90
12/10/90
12/10/90
12/10/90
12/10/90
12/10/90
12/10/90
1/4/91
1/4/91
1/4/91
1/4/91
1/4/91
1/4/91
1/4/91
1/4/91
1/4/91
1/4/91
1/10/91
1/10/91
1/10/91
1/10/91
12/12/90
12/12/90
12/12/90
12/12/90
12/12/90
12/12/90
12/12/90
1/10/91
1/10/91
1/10/91
1/10/91
1/10/91
1/10/91
1/10/91
1/10/91
1/10/91
1/10/91
12/12/90
Analysis hold
time, days
63
63
63
63
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
63
63
63
63
63
63
63
63
63
63
38
38
38
38
36
36
36
36
34
34
34
36
36
36
31
31
31
29
29
29
29
34
ISO
72
-------
TABLE 42. TRACE METAL TEST SAMPLE ANALYSIS HOLD TIMES
Sample
Soil feed
Test 1
Test 2
TestS
Kiln ash
Test 1
Test 2
Test 3a
Test 3b
Soil feed TCLP leachate
Test 1
Test 2
TestS
Kiln ash TCLP leachate
Test 1
Test 2
Test 3a
Test 3b
Scrubber liquor
Test I
Test 2
TestS
Flue gas metals train
Afterburner exit
Test 1
Test 2
Scrubber exit
Test 1
Test 2
Method blanks
TCLP extraction fluid
Scrubber liquor makeup
Multiple metals train filter
Multiple metals trains combined
impmger charge solution
Duplicate analysis
Matrix spike
Test 1 soil feed
Spike duplicate
Test 1 kiln ash
Spike duplicate
Test 1 soil feed TCLP leachate
Spike duplicate
Test 1 kiln ash TCLP leachate
Spike duplicate
Test 1 scrubber liquor
Multiple metals train filter
Spike duplicate
Multiple metals train impinger
charge solution
Spike duplicate
Method requirement
Collection/
preparation date
I
11/28/91
2
1
/5/91
/28/91
1/30/91
2
/5/91
lj/31/91
1/31/91
2/20/91
2/20/91
2
2
; 20/91
22/91
2/22/91
2/22/91
1
2
/22/91
/30/91
/5/91
lj/31/91
1
2
1
2
3
4
/30/91
'5/91
/30/91
'5/91
'15/91
A/91
4/1/91
4/1/91
4
5
71/91
'7/91
5J7/91
5/7/91 •
5
Y7/91
5/7/91
5/7/91
5/7/91
5
77/91
5^7/91
5J/8/91
5/8/91 •
5/8/91
5
'8/91
Analysis date
3/29/91
3/29/91
3/29/91
3/29/91
3/29/91
3/29/91
3/29/91
3/29/91
3/29/91
3/29/91
3/29/91
3/29/91
3/29/91
3/29/91
3/29/91
3/29/91
3/29/91
3/29/91
3/29/91
3/29/91
3/29/91
5/13/91
5/13/91
5/13/91
5/13/91
5/13/91
6/17/91
6/17/91
6/17/91
6/17/91
6/17/91
6/17/91
6/17/91
6/17/91
6/17/91
6/17/91
6/17/91
6/17/91
6/17/91
Analysis hold
time, days
60
52
60
58
52
57
57
37
37
37
35
35
35
35
58
52
57
58
52
58
52
59
42
42
42
42
41
41
41
41
41
41
41
41
41
40
40
40
40
180
73
-------
TABLE 43. TRACE METAL ANALYSES OF BLANK SAMPLES
Concentration
Dlank sample
Laboratory blanks
3010 digestion blank, PBWJ0166/PBWJ0171, jig/L
3010 digestion blank, 11/27/90, jig/L
3010 digestion blank, 3/4/91, >g/L
3010 digestion blank, 4/11/91, pg/L
3010 digestion blank, 4/11/91, Mg/L
3050 digestion blank, PBSJ0116/J0119, /jg/L
3050 digestion blank, 11/27/90, jtg/L
3050 digestion blank, 3/3/91, jtg/L
Method blanks
TCLP extraction blank
Characierization samples, Mg/L
Test sarrjples, ng/L
Scrubber liquor blank, jig/L
Flue gas- metals train
Filter blank, mg/kg
Impinger solution blank, ng/Lb
Sb As Oa Be
a ^*% ^f\ umam
***• *>*jf*
- <220 <10 -
— <100 <10 —
- <100 <20 -
- <100 <20 -
<30 <2 <2 <1
<200 <10 <70 <10
— <100 <10 —
— <220 <10 —
- <100 410 -
- <200 <40 -
- <25 230 -
- <400 56 -
Cd Cr Cu
<5 <10 <10
<1 <100 -
<10 <30 <10
<10 <20 <20
<10 <20 <20
<5 <10 <10
<1 <40 <25
<10 <30 <10
31 <100 -
<10 <20 280
<20 <40 <40
<3 39 7.4
<10 <20 310
Pb
<30
<80
<60
«SO
<50
<30
<80
<60
<80
<50
<100
<13
<50
Ni
<20
—
<30
<20
<20
<20
<60
<30
_
<20
<40
12
<20
Se
<2
3.2
<100
<100
<100
<2
<10
<100
3.2
<100
<20
<25
<100
Ag
<5
—
<20
<20
<20
<6
<25
<20
—
<20
<40
<5
<20
TI Zn
- 13
_ _
- <20
— 130
— <20
<40 14
<100 <25
— <20
_ _
- 450
— 280
- 120
— 490
"— = Not analyzed.
bAverage of duplicate analyses.
-------
TABLE 44. TRACE METALS (MERCURY EXCLUDED) MEASUREMENT DQOs
Measurement parameter
Trace metals in waste feed
and solid residue samples
Trace metals in aqueous
liquid residue samples
Trace metals in flue gas
Measurement/analytical
method
ICAP or AA analysis
, ICAP or AA analysis
Method 5 or Method 17
Reference
SW-8463
Method 6010, 7060, or 7740
SW-846"
Method 6010, 7060, or 7740
SW-846"
Conditions
Acid digestion by
Method 3050
Digestion by Method 3010,
7060, or 7740
Digestion of particulate by
Precision
(%RSD Accuracy Completeness
or RPD) (%) (%)
25 75 to 125 80
25 75 to 125 80
30 75 to 125 80
Trace metals in TCLP
leachates of soil feed, kiln
ash, flue gas paniculate
sampling, ICAP or AA analysis Method 6010, 7060, or 7740 Method 3050 and impingers
by Method 3010, 7060, or 7740
TCLP extraction, ICAP or AA SW-S46" Extraction by Method 1311,
analysis Method 6010, 7060, or 7740 digestion by Method 3010,
7060, or 7740
25 . 75 to 125
80
"Reference 2.
-------
TABLE 45. TRACE METAL MEASUREMENT PQLs: OBJECTIVES AND ACHIEVED
Soil feed and solid residues, mg/kg
Ba
Cd
Cr
Cu
Pb
Ag
As
Se
Aqueous liquids, including TCLP leachates, jcg/L
Ba
Cd
Cr
Cu
Pb
Ag
As
Se
Flue gas, pg/dscm
Ba
Cd
Cr
Cu
Pb
Ag
As
Se
DQO
1
2
4
4
20
4
1
1
10
20
40
40
200
40
10
10
0.5
1
2
2
10
2
0.5
0.5
PQL
Achieved
1
1
3
1
6
2
10
10
10
10
30
10
60
20
100
100
0.25
0.25
0.6
0.25
1.2
0.6
2.5
3.0
76
-------
Failure to achieve the arsenic PQL DQO resulted in the inability to definitively establish
arsenic distributions among the incinerator discharge streams. Arsenic distributions could only
be stated as ranges because arsenic was not detected in many test program samples at a PQL
higher than planned. However, the degree of variation in the distribution ranges experienced
was sufficiently small that firm conclusions regarding arsenic partitioning tendencies were
possible. Further, the arsenic PQL achieved in TCLP leachate samples was sufficient to establish
that no test program sample was a toxicity characteristic hazardous waste due to arsenic content.
Trace metal measurement precision was assessed via duplicate sample analyses. Two
types of duplicate sample analyses were performed. First, as part of its own laboratory quality
control (QC) program, the EMSL laboratory analyzed a number of samples in duplicate,
including separate digestions. Second, the IRF prepared MS/MSD samples and submitted them
for analysis. Table 46 summarizes the duplicate sample analysis results, noting the relative
percent difference (RPD) for each sample/analyte pair. In Table 46, the set of duplicate
analysis results labeled "Internal duplicate analyses" corresponds to the internal sample duplicate
analyses performed by the EMSL laboratony. The set of results labeled "MS/MSD analyses"
corresponds to the MS/MSD sample sets prepared at the IRF and submitted for analysis.
The data in Table 46 show that, of 83 metal analysis RPD determinations, 66, or
80 percent, met the precision DQO of 25 percent RPD (30 percent in flue gas train samples).
As the completeness DQO for the trace metal measurements was 80 percent, the precision
DQO, as measured by duplicate sample analyses, was met.
Trace metal measurement accuracy was assessed by analyzing standards samples of
known metal concentrations, and by preparing MS and MSD samples and measuring spike
recovery. Two types of standards were analyzed: those prepared by the EMSL laboratory as
part of its own laboratory QC program (internal samples), and those formulated at the IRF using
pure reagent-grade metal salts and submitted to EMSL for analysis (external samples). In
addition, two types of MS samples were analyzed. First, as part of its own laboratory QC
program, the EMSL laboratory spiked and analyzed a number of test samples. Second, the IRF
prepared MS samples and submitted them as independent MS samples for analysis.
Table 47 summarizes the recovery data for the standards samples. The internal samples
listed in the table are those prepared in the EMSL laboratory as part of its internal QC program.
The external samples listed are those prepared at the IRF and submitted for analysis. Of the
88 individual analyses, 80, or 91 percent, met the accuracy DQO of 75 to 125 percent recovery.
Thus, the completeness DQO of 80 percent was met.
Table 48 summarizes the results of j the MS/MSD analyses. Again, two types of MS
samples were analyzed. First, as part of its own laboratory QC program, the EMSL laboratory
spiked and analyzed a number of test samples. Second, as noted above, the IRF prepared
MS/MSD samples and submitted them for analysis. The internal matrix spikes listed in Table 48
are those prepared in the EMSL laboratory
MS/MSD samples listed are those preparec
The data in Table 48 show that only
as part of its internal QC program. The external
at the IRF and submitted for separate analysis.
125 of 175 definitive spike recovery measurements,
or 71 percent, met the accuracy DQO of 75 to 125 percent recovery. As the completeness DQO
for the trace metal analyses was 80 percent, the accuracy objective for these measurements was
77
-------
TABLE 46. TRACE METAL ANALYSIS PRECISION
00
Concentration
Sample
Internal duplicate analyses
Soil M-4D characterization
Analysis, mg/kg
Duplicate analysis, mg/kg
RPD, %
Soil M-l characterization TCLP leachate
Analysis, pg/L
Duplicate analysis, ftg/L
RPD, %
Test 3 scrubber liquor
Analysis, ftg/L
Duplicate analysis, Mg/L
RPD, %
Test 3b kiln ash
Analysis, mg/kg
Duplicate analysis, mg/kg
RPD, %
Flue gas metals train imptnger solution blank
Analysis, Mg/L
Duplicate analysis, ftg/L
RPD, %
Test 1 feed matrix spike
Analysis, mg/kg
Duplicate analysis, mg/kg
RPD, %
Test 1 kiln ash matrix spike
Analysis, mg/kg
Duplicate analysis, mg/kg
RPD, %
Test 1 Teed TCLP leachate matrix spike
Analysis, Mg/L
Duplicate analysis, jtg/L
RPD. %
8 — = Not appropriate for calculation.
Sb As
<20 153
<20 15.1
-" 1.3
<220
<220
—
<100
<100
—
<10
10.1
—
<100
<100
—
49.0
61.0
22
36.0
54.7
41
290
302
4.1
Ba De
107 <10
93 <10
14 -
774
699
10
1,330
1,100
2.7
184
173
6.2
57
54
5.4
257
325
23
317
421
28
1,520
1,570
3.2
Cd
0323
0.264
20
28.5
28.5
0
15
19
24
<1
1.2
—
<10
<10
—
<3
<3
—
<1
<1
—
<10
<10
—
Cr
34.8
33.2
4.7
<100
<100
_
241
228
5,5
18.2
22.5
21
<20
<20
—
27.5
37.3
30
30.3
45.7
41
103
100
3.0
Cu
22.1
18.2
9.9
138
132
4.4
41.6
50.3
19
315
304
3.6
34.0
44.0
26
20.2
39.5
65
30
30
0
Pb
<90
<90
—
<80
<80
_
2,340
2,220
53
410
482
16
<50
<50
—
384
569
39
226
412
58
137
116
17
Ni
21.7
185
14
169
162
4.2
17.6
233
28
<20
<20
—
182
21.4
16
19,0
23.1
19
<20
<20
—
Se
4.48
3.66
20
5.89
6.65
12
<100
<100
—
<10
<10
—
<100
<100
—
303
40.5
29
20.2
28.7
35
352
328
7.1
Ag
7.69
7.75
5,9
<20
<20
—
<2
<2
—
<20
<20
—
<5
8.43
—
5.67
8.89
44
65
89
31
Tl Zn
13.1 113
12.8 110
23 2.7
1,620
1,540
6.1
299
294
1.7
461
528
14
220
566
88
146
248
52
834
111
153
DQO
25
25
25
25
30
25
25
25
(continued)
-------
TABLE 46. (continued)
Concentration
Sample
Test 1 kiln ash TCLP Icachatc matrix spike
Analysis, \ig/L
Duplicate analysis, fig/L
RPD, %
Internal MS/MSD analyses
Soil M-5D characterization
MS, mg/kg
MSD, mg/kg
RPD, %
Test 3 scrubber liquor
• MS, ,£g/L
MSD, /«g/L
RPD. %
"— = Not appropriate for calculation.
Sb As
304
279
8.6
323 590
352 634
8.6 7.2
2,010
1,880
6.7
Ba Be
1,070
1,030
3.8
598 476
533 457
11 4.1
2,980
3,010
1.0
Cd
<10
<10
—
515
503
2.4
59
58
1.7
Cr
118
104
13
463
440
5.1
505
506
0.2
Cu
<20
<20
—
512
518
1.2
1,620
1,570
3.1
Pb
114
105
8.2
538
535
0.6
2,790
2,780
0.4
Ni
<20
<20
—
466
441
5.5
624
613
1.8
Se
283
268
5.4
378
407
7.4
2,040
1,950
4.5
Ag
43
57
28
219
119
59
47
46
2.2
Tl Zn
318
267
17
769
701
9.3
2,080
2,040
1.9
DQO
25
25
25
-------
TABLE 47. TRACE METAL RECOVERIES FROM STANDARDS SAMPLES
oo
o
Spike recovery, % (DQO =
Sample
Interns! standards
3010 digestion standard, 11/27/90
3010 digestion standard, 3/4/91
3010 digestion standard, 4/11/91
3010 digestion standard, 4/11/91
3050 digestion standard, 11/27/90
3050 digestion standard, 3/3/91
External standards
TCLP leachate spiking solution
Spiked, mg/L
Recovered, mg/L
Recovery, %
Flue gas metals train probe wash spiking solution
Spiked, mg/L
Recovered, mg/L
Recovery, %
Flue gas metals train filter spiking solution
Spiked, mg/L
Recovered, mg/L
Recovery, %
Flue gas metals train impinger solution spiking
solution
Spiked, mg/L
Recovered, mg/L
Recovery, %
Soil and kiln ash spiking solution
Spiked, mg/L
Recovered, mg/L
Recovery, %
Sb As
98
105
103
104
106 117
102
40.2
39.7
99
321
247
77
34.9
27.8
80
500
447
89
309
229
74
Un
90
100
101
96
100
96
85.2
88.7
104
J74
J19
68
1380
774
56"
72.6
66.0
91
969
190
20
He Cd
-> 112
- 104
- 100
- 88
98 121
_ %
- 4.0
- IB
- 45
- 49.9
- 38.6
- 77
- 40.1
r- 31.8
- 79
- "21.1
- 18.3
- 87
- 10.1
- 7.95
_ 79
Cr Cu
99 -
104 95
101 91
113 94
109 107
93 92
Concentration
11.9 -
12.1 ~
102 -
50.0 -
373 —
75 —
418 -
322 —
77 ,—
952 -
84.7 -
89 —
97.5 -
743 -
76 -
75 to 125%)
Pb Ni
99 -
93 100
96 101
99 103
107 111
92 97
11.9
13.6
114 -
88.2 -
65.9 -
75 -
30.1 -
25.8 -
86 -
88.2 -
82.2 -
93 -
2,215 -
114 -
r _
Se Ag Zn
159 - -
113 104 103
112 104 98
109 91 111
159 31 lO-
lOS 93 100
39.9
35.9
90 - -
500 - -
398 - -
80 - -
250 - -
208 - —
Q1!
OJ ^^
10.0 - -
8.18 - -
82' _ _
199 - -
155 - -
78 •-.--.
DQO
75 to 125
75 to 125
75 to 125
75 to 125
75 to 125
*_ m JSJQJ spiked.
-------
TABLE 48. TRACE METAL SPIKE RECOVERIES FROM MATRIX SPIKE SAMPLES
Concentration
Sample Sb
Internal matrix spikes
Soil M-5D characterization
Native amount, mg/kg <20
Spiked amount, mg/kg 500
' Analyzed amount, mg/kg
MS 323
MSB 352
Recovery, %
MS 65"
MSD 70*
Soil M-l characterization TCLP leachate
Native amount, pg/L — b
Spiked amount, pg/L —
2 Analyzed amount, pg/L —
Recovery, % —
Soil M-3 characterization TCLP leachate
Native amount, jtg/L —
Spiked amount, #g/L —
Analyzed amount, pglL —
Recovery, % —
Characterization sample TCLP extraction blank
" Native amount, pg/L —
Spiked amount, j»g/L ' —
Analyzed amount, j»g/L —
Recovery, % ' —
'Assumes not detected present at zero concentration.
As
79.6
500
590
634
102
111
<220
1,000
959
96"
<220
1,000
876
88*
<200
1,000
1,060
106"
Ba Be Cd
83.0 <10 11.8
500 . 500 500
598 476 515
533 457 503
103 95* 101
90 91* 98
774 - -
1 000
1,630 - " -
86 - -
50.6 — 24.1
1,000 - 9.5
842 - 35.0
79 - 115
<10 - -
1,000 - -
857 - ' -
86* — —
Cr Cu
26.4 56.5
500 500
463 512
440 518
87 91
83 92
<100 -
ipooo
793 -
79* -
<100 -
1,000 -
768 —
77* -
<100 —
1,000 -
884 —
88* -
Pb Ni
76.0 17.6
500 500
538 466
535 441
92 90
92 85
<80 —
1,000 — —
827 -
83" -
<80 —
1,000 -
745 -
75* -
<80 —
1,000 -
932 -
Q1«
yj """""*
Se
219
500
378
407
75
81
—
—
_
13.0
15.0
24.9
79
—
—
—
—
AR Zn DQO
6.64 322
500 500
219 769
119 701
43 89 75 to 125
22 76
_ _
_ _
- - 75 to 125
— —
— —
_ _
- - 75 to 125
— —
_ _
_ _
- - 75 to 125
(continued)
'»_ = Not spiked.
-------
TABLE 48. (continued)
00
Concentration
Sample Sb
Internal matrix spikes (continued)
Tests scrubber liquor
Native amount, jig/L — *
Spiked amount, jtg/L —
Analyzed amount, pg/L
MS -
MSD . -
Recovery, %
MS -
MSD —
Test 3b kiln ash
Native amount, mg/kg - —
Spiked amount, mg/kg —
Analyzed amount, mg/kg —
Recovery, % —
Test sample TCLP extraction blank
Native amount, jig/L —
Spiked amount, /ig/L —
Analyzed amount, jtg/L — •
Recovery, % —
Test 1 TCLP leachate matrix spike
Native amount, /tg/L —
Spiked amount, /tg/L —
Analyzed amount, jtg/L —
Recovery, % —
'Assumes not detected present at zero concentration.
As
<100
2,000
2,010
1,880
101*
94*
10
400
358
87
<100
2,000
2,090
105*
304
8,000
7,210
86
Ba Be
1,120 -
2,000 -
2,980 -
3,010 -
93 ' -
95 -
179 -
400 -
432 -
63 -
407 -
2,000 - .
2,440 -
122 -
107 -
8,000 —
8,070 -
100 -
Cd
17
50
59
58
84
82
1.1
10
8.1
70
<10
50
49
98*
<10
200
165
83*
Cr
235
300
505
506
90
90
20.4
60
56.3
60
<20
300
305
102*
118
1,200
1,070.
79
Cv
1,350
300
1,620
1,570
90
73
46.0
60
70.4
41
280
300
559
93
<20
1,200
949
79"
Pb
2,280
500
2,790
2,780
102
too
446
100
450
4.0
<50
500
473
95*
114
2,000
1,790
84
Ni
166
500
624
613
92
89
20.5
100
88.9
68
<20
500
513
103*
<20
2,000
1,630
82*
Se
<100
2,000
2,040
1,950
102*
98*
<10
400
385
96*
<100
2,000
2,280
114*
283
8,000
8,260
100
A$
<20
50
47
46
94*
92*
<2
10
7.4
74s
<20
50
50
100*
43
200
207
82
Zn
1,580
500
2,080
2,040
100
92
279
100
382
103
451
500
1,000
110
318
2,000
2,170
93
DQO
75 to 125
75 to 125
75 to 125
75 to 125
(continued)
k— = Not spiked.
-------
TABLE 48. (continued)
Concentration
Sample
External matrix spikes
Test 1 soil feed
Native amount, mg/kg
Spiked amount, mg/kg
Analyzed amount, mg/kg
MS
MSD
Recovery, %
MS
MSD
Test 1 kiln ash
Native amount, mg/kg
Spiked amount, mg/kg
00 ... „
w Analyzed amount, mg/kg
MS
MSD
Recovery, %
MS
MSD
Test 1 soil feed TCLP leachate
Native amount, ftg/L
Spiked amount, pg/L
Analyzed amount, pg/L
MS
MSD
Recovery, %
MS
MSD
Sb As
-" 16.1
- 61.8
—
• - 49.0
— 61.0
53
- 73
- 12.6
- 61.S
— 36.0
- 54.7
— 38
- 68
- <100
— 402
- 290
— 302
- 72'
- 75"
Ba Be
167 -
194 -
257 -
325 -
47 -
81 -
211 -
194
317 -
421 -
55 -
108 -
407 -
852 -
1,520 -
1,570 -
131 -
137 -
Cd Cr Cu
1.1 17.9 -
2.0 19.5 -
<3 27.5 -
<3 37.3 —
- 49 -
— 100 —
1.1 22.1 -
2.0 19.5 —
<1 30.3 -
<1 45.7 —
0 42 -
0 121 —
<10 <20 —
40.1 119 —
<10 103 —
< 10 100 —
<25 87" —
<25 84' -
n
439
443
384
569
0
29
403
443
226
412
0
2.0
<50
120
137
116
114"
97"
Nl Se
<10
- 39.8
- 30.3
- 40.5
- 76"
- 102"
<10
- 39.8
- 20.2
- 28.7
- 51"
- 72"
- <100
- 399
- 352
- 328
- 88"
82'
Ag Zn
<2 -
7.9 -
<5 -
8.4 —
<63 -
106" —
<2 -
7.9 -
6.7 -
8.9 —
85" -
113" -
<20 -
83 -
65 -
89 —
78" -
107" —
DQO
75 to 125
75 to 125
75 to 125
"Assumes not detected present at zero concentration.
k— = Not spiked.
(continued)
-------
TABLE 48. (continued)
00
•Pt
Concentration
Sample Sb
External matrix spikes (continued)
Test 1 kiln ash TCLP feachate
Native amount, pg/L — b
Spiked amount, jjg/L —
Analyzed amount, pg/L
MS —
MSD -
Recovery, %
MS -
MSD -
Test 1 scrubber liquor
Native amount, pg/L —
Spiked amount, jjg/L —
Analyzed amount, pg/L —
Recovery, % —
Afterburner exit flue gas metals train filter
Native amount, mg/kg —
Spiked amount, mg/kg —
Analyzed amount, mg/kg —
Recovery, % . —
Scrubber exit flue gas metals train probe wash
Native amount, pg(L . —
Spiked amount, pg/L —
Analyzed amount, jig/L —
Recovery, % —
'Assumes not detected present at zero concentration.
As
<100
402
304
279
76'
69*
<100
660
567
86"
<25
12.7
15.6
123"
-------
TABLE 48. (continued)
Concentration
Sample Sb
External matrix spikes (continued)
Scrubber exit flue gas metals train filter
Native amount, mg/kg — k
Spiked amount, mg/kg —
Analyzed amount, mg/kg —
Recovery, % —
Scrubber exit flue gas metals train impinger
solution
Native amount, jtg/L —
Spiked amount, pg/L —
Analyzed amount, pg/L —
Recovery, % —
As
<25
11.8
9.0
76'
<100
5,000
4,900
98'
Ba
i
228
467
441
94
57
726
766
106
Be Cd
- <3
- 13.5
- 9.9
- . 73'
- <10
- 211
- 192
- 91'
Cr
39.3
142
117
82
<20
952
938
99'
Cn Pb
- <13
- 10.2
- 9.6
- 93'
- <50
- 882
- 882
- 1001
Ni Se
- <25
— 84.5
- 67.0
_ 79«
- <100
- 100
- 167
- 167*
Ag Zn
<5 -
9.9 -
7.4 -
75- -
<20 -
102 -
106 —
104' -
DQO
75 to 125
75 to 125
'Assumes not detected present at zero concentration.
00
Uj
b— = Not spiked.
-------
not met. Had the spike recovery DQO been relaxed to 65 to 135 percent recovery, however, the
objective would have been met because 142 of the 175 spike recovery measurements, or
80 percent, would have met this less stringent recovery DQO. The failure to meet the trace
metal analysis accuracy objective means that the sample metal contents were only generally
known to within a factor of about 1.5 (±35 percent). This is less accurate than the factor of 1.3
(±25 percent) originally desired. The test conclusions discussed in Sections 4 and 5, however,
are stM valid and defensible, although some conclusions are slightly less certain than would have
otherwise been the case.
63, MERCURY ANALYSES
Mercury analyses of soil characterization samples and their TCLP leachates were
performed by IT Analytical Services. A total of 42 soil characterization and soil characterization
TCLP leachate samples was analyzed for mercury, along with one TCLP extraction blank sample.
The mercury analyses of all incineration test program samples, with the exception of soil feed
and kiln ash TCLP leachate samples, were performed by Entek Laboratories in Little Rock,
Arkansas. TCLP leachate mercury analyses were performed by EMSL A total of 43 test
program samples was analyzed for mercury. This total included five method blank samples and
five matrix spike samples.
Table 49 summarizes the sample collection/preparation and analysis dates for the
mercury analyses of soil characterization and TCLP leachate samples. Table 50 provides an
analogous summary for incineration test samples. As shown in Table 49, none of the 21 soil
characterization samples was analyzed within the mercury method hold time limit of 28 days.
All soil characterization TCLP leachate samples were analyzed within the method hold time
limit. The failure to meet the method hold time limit for the soil feed characterization sample
mercury analyses had no effect on the test program conclusions because characterization samples
were analyzed for test program scoping purposes only. No test conclusions were based on
characterization sample analyses.
Table 50 shows that, of the 43 incineration test program samples, all but eight were
analyzed for mercury within the method hold time limit. Four TCLP leachate and four method
blank samples were analyzed after hold time expiration. However, it is felt that these instances
of exceeding the mercury method hold time did not affect the test conclusions. None of the
TCLP leachate samples contained detectable mercury, including those analyzed within the
method hold time limit, and also including soil characterization sample TCLP leachates. Thus,
the not-detected mercury results for samples analyzed after hold time expiration are still believed
to be accurate. Similarly, no mercury was detected in the method blank samples analyzed after
hold time expiration, another expected result.
Table 51 summarizes the results of laboratory and method blank sample mercury
analyses. Mercury was not detected in any blank sample.
Table 52 summarizes the mercury measurement precision, accuracy, and completeness
DQOs. Table 53 lists the mercury PQL DQOs and notes the PQLs achieved. As shown, all
PQL DQOs were met.
Mercury measurement precision was assessed via duplicate sample analyses. Two types
of duplicate sample analyses were performed. First, as part of its own laboratory QC program,
86
-------
TABLE 49. CHARACTERIZATION SA
Sample
Soil feed characterization
O-l
O-2
L-l
L-2
M-l
M-2
M-3
M-4
M-4D
M-5
M-5D
G-l.
G-2
G-3
G-4
G-5
G-6
B-l
B-2
B-3
B-4
Soil feed characterization TCLP leachate
O-l
O-2
L-l
L-2
M-l
M-2
M-4
M-4D
M-5
M-5D
G-l
G-2
G-3
G-4
G-5
G-6
B-l
B-2
B-3
B-4
TCLP extraction blank
Method requirement
MPLE MERCURY
Collection/
preparation date
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
12/3/90
12/3/90
12/3/90
12/3/90
11/6/90
11/6/90
11/6/90
11/8/90
11/8/90
11/8/90
12/5/90
12/5/90
12/5/90
12/10/90
12/10/90
12/10/90
12/12/90
12/12/90
12/12/90
12/12/90
11/8/90
ANALYSIS
Analysis
date
12/27/90
12/27/90
12/27/90
12/27/90
12/5/90
12/5/90
12/5/90
12/5/90
12/5/90
12/5/90
12/5/90
12/27/90
12/27/90
12/27/90
12/27/90
12/27/90
12/27/90
12/27/90
12/27/90
12/27/90
12/27/90
12/29/90
12/29/90
12/29/90
12/29/90
12/4/90
12/4/90
12/4/90
12/4/90
12/4/90
12/4/90
12/29/90
12/29/90
12/29/90
12/29/90
12/29/90
12/29/90
12/29/90
12/29/90
12/29/90
12/29/90
12/4/90
HOLD TIMES
Analysis hold
time, days
55
55
55
55
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
26
26
26
26
28
28
28
26
26
26
24
24
24
19
19
19
17
17
. 17
17
26
28
87 '
-------
TABLE 50. INCINERATION TEST SAMPLE MERCURY ANALYSIS HOLD TIMES
Sample
SoU feed
Testl
Test2
Test3
Kiln ash
Testl
Test 2
TestSa
TestSb
Soil feed TCLP leachate
Testl
Test2
Test3
Kiln ash TCLP leachate
Testl
Test 2
Test 3a
Test3b
Scrubber liquor
Testl
Testa
TestS
Afterburner exit flue gas
Method 101A train
Testl
Filter
Probe wash
First impinger
Second unpinger
Test2
Filter
Probe wash
First impinger
Second unpinger
Scrubber exit flue gas
Method 101A tram
Testl
Filter
Probe wash
First impinger
Second unpinger
Test 2
Filter
Probe wash
First impinger
Second unpinger
Method blank samples
Scrubber liquor
TCLP extraction blank
Flue gas Method 101A train
Filter
Duplicate filter
Impinger solution
Matrix spike samples
Test 1 soil feed
Test 1 Mln ash
Test 1 scrubber liquor
Rue gas Method 101A train
Filter
Impinger solution
Method requirement
Collection/ Analysis Analysis hold
preparation date date time, days
1/28/91
a/5/91
1/28/91
1/30/91
2/5/91
1/31/91
1/31/91
2/ao/9i
a/ao/9i
2/20/91
2/22/91
2/22/91
2/22/91
2/22/91
1/30/91
2/5/91
1/31/91
1/30/91
1/30/91
1/30/91
1/30/91
2/5/91
2/5/91
2/5/91
2/5/91
1/30/91
1/30/91
1/30/91
1/30/91
2/5/91
2/5/91
2/5/91
2/5/91
4/1/91
4/1/91
2/7/91
2/7/91
4/1/91
5/8/91
5/8/91
5/8/91
5/8/91
5/8/91
2/18/91
2/18/91
2/18/91
2/18/91
2/18/91
2/18/91
2/18/91
4/11/91
4/11/91
4/11/91
4/11/91
3/11/91
3/11/91
3/11/91
2/18/91
a/18/91
a/18/91
a/as/91
2/18/91
2/18/91
2/18/91
2/25/91 •
2/18/91
2/18/91
2/18/91
2/25/91
2/18/91
2/18/91
2/18/91.
2/35/91
2/18/91
2/18/91
2/18/91
5/13/91
5/13/91
3/12/91
3/12/91
4/15/91
5/B/91
5/23/91
5/a3/91
5/23/91
5/23/91
21
13
21
19
13
18
18
50
50
50
48
17
17
17
19
13
18
26
19
19
19
20
13
13
13
26
19
19
19
20
13
13
13
42
42
33
33
14
15
15
15
15
15
28
88
-------
TABLE 51. MERCURY ANALYSES OF BLANK SAMPLES
Blank sample
Mercury concen-
tration
Laboratory blanks
PBSM16/50119
Blank, 5/13/91
Method blanks
Soil characterization TCLP extraction blank
<0.1 mg/kg
Test sample TCLP extraction blank
Scrubber liquor blank
Flue gas Method 101A train
Filter blank
Duplicate filter blank
Impinger charging solution blank
00
Measurement parameter
Mercury in waste feed and
solid residue samples
Mercury in aqueous liquid
residue samples
Mercury in flue gas
Mercury in TCLP leachates
of soil feed, kiln ash, flue
gas particulate
<4jtg/L
<4 |tg/L
< 16 fig/filter
< 16 pg/filter
TABLE 52. MERCURY MEASUREMENT DQOs
Measurement/analytical
method
Cold vapor AA analysis
Cold vapor AA analysis
Method 101 A sampling
TCLP extraction, cold
vapor AA analysis
Reference
SW-846a
Method 7471
SW-846'
Method 7470
40 CFR 61
Appendix Bb
SW-846'
Method 7470
Conditions
Preparation by Method 7471
Preparation by Method 7470
Acid digestion of filter
Extraction by Method 1311,
digestion by Method 7470
Precision
(%RSD
or RPD)
25
25
30
25
Accura-
cy Completeness
(%) (%)
75 to 125 80
75 to 125 80
75 to 125 80
75 to 125 80
•Reference 2.
'Reference 7.
-------
TABLE 53. MERCURY MEASUREMENT PQLs; OBJECTIVES AND ACHIEVED
PQL
Sample matrix DQO Achieved
Soil feed and solid residues 1 mg/kg 0.1 mg/kg
Aqueous liquids, including TCLP leachates 10 jig/L 2 /*g/L
Flue gas 0.5 jtg/dscm 0.2 /ig/dscm
Entek laboratories prepared a number of MS/MSD samples for analysis. Second, the IRF
prepared MS/MSD samples and submitted them for analysis. Table 54 summarizes the duplicate
sample analysis results, noting the RPD for each sample pair.
The data in Table 54 show that all seven duplicate measurements (triplicate in one case)
met the precision DQO of 25 to 30 percent RPD or percent relative standard deviation (%RSD).
This DQO was thus met.
Mercury measurement accuracy was assessed by analyzing mercury spike recoveries from
prepared MS and MSD samples. As was the case for the other trace metals, two types of spike
samples were analyzed: those prepared at the IRF and submitted for analysis (external), and
those analyzed by Entek as part of its own laboratory QC program (internal).
Table 55 summarizes the results of the MS/MSD analyses. As indicated, of 24 recovery
measurements, only 15, or 63 percent, were within the DQO range of 75 to 125 percent recovery.
As the completeness objective for the mercury measurements was 80 percent, the accuracy DQO
was not met. Had-the accuracy DQO been 60 to 140 percent recovery, however, 22 of 24
recovery measurements, or 92 percent, would have met this less stringent recovery DQO. The
failure to meet the mercury analysis accuracy DQO means that the sample mercury contents
were only generally known to within a factor of 1.7 (±40 percent). This is less accurate than the
factor of 1.3 (±25 percent) originally desired. For all trace metals, mercury included, the test
conclusions discussed in Sections 4 and 5, however, are still valid and defensible, although some
conclusions are slightly less certain than would have otherwise been the case.
63 SEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC ANALYSES
Twenty-one soil characterization samples and 19 test program samples (including QA
samples) were analyzed for semivolatile organics. All sample extractions and extract analyses
were performed in the IRF onsite laboratories.
Table 56 summarizes the sample collection, extraction, and analysis dates for the soil
characterization samples. Table 57 provides an analogous summary for the test prop-am
samples. As shown in Table 56, aE characterization sample extraction and analysis hold times
were met. Also, as shown in Table 57, all test program samples were extracted within the
method hold time limit. In addition, except for the duplicate analysis for the Test 7 scrubber exit
flue gas, and the Method 0010 train blank samples, all of the semivolatile organic analyses were
completed within sample hold time limits. No semivolatfle organics were found in either the
90
-------
TABLE 54. MERCURY ANALYSIS PRECISION
Internal matrix spikes
Sample
Kiln ash
MS recovery, %
MSD recovery, %
MS triplicate recovery, %
,%RSD
Analysis
result
114
99
106
7.1
External matrix spikes
Analysis
Sample result
Test 1 soil feed
MS, mg/kg 2.56
MSD, mg/kg 2.32
RPD, % 98
DQO
25
Flue gas Method 101A
train impinger solution
MS recovery, %
MSD recovery, %
RPD, %
105
120
13
Test 1 kiln ash
MS, mg/kg 3.14
MSD, mg/kg 3.14
RPD, % 0 25
Test 1 scrubber liquor
MS, /ig/L 80
MSD, /tg/L 80
RPD, % 0 25
Flue gas Method 101A
train filter
MS, mg/kg 3.85
MSD, mg/kg 3.94
RPD, % 2,3 30
Flue gas Method 101A
train impinger solution
MS, /ig/L 143
MSD, /ig/L 145
RPD, % 1.4 30
91
-------
TABLE 55. MERCURY RECOVERIES FROM MATRIX SPIKE SAMPLES
Internal matrix spikes
Sample
Soil feed
Soil feed external MS
Kiln ash
MS
MSB
MS triplicate
Scrubber liquor
Scrubber liquor external MS
Flue gas Method 101 train
Filter
Second filter
Filter external MS
Impinger charging solution
Impinger solution
MS
MSD
Impinger charging solution
external MS
Spike
recovery,
. %
114
90
114
99
106
94
102
90
95
109
84
105
120
129
External matrix spikes
Sample
Test 1 soil feed
MS
MSD
Test 1 kiln ash
MS
MSD
Test 1 scrubber liquor
MS
MSD
Flue gas Method 101A
Filter
MS
MSD
Impinger solution
MS
MSD
Spike
recoveiy,
%
51
46
65
65
83
83
train:
61
62
137
139
DQO
75 to 125
DQO
75 to 125
92
-------
TABLE 56. SOIL CHARACTERIZATION SAMPLE SEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC
EXTRACTION AND ANALYSIS HOLD TIMES
Collection/
Soil sample preparation date
O-l
O-2
L-l
L-2
M-l
M-2
M-3
M-4
M-4D
M-5
M-5D
G-l
G-2
G-3
G-4
G-5
G-6
B-l
B-2
B-3
B-4
Method requirement
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90
11/2/90 '
11/2/90
Extraction Extraction bold Analysis Analysis hold
date time, days date time, days
11/4/90
11/5/90
li/5/90
11/5/90
11/4/90
11/4/90
11/4/90
11/4/90
11/6/90
11/4/90
11^6/90
11/5/90
111/5/90
lip/90
111/6/90
11/6/90
11/6/90
lip/90
lip/90
lip/90
11/7/90
2
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
4
2
4
3
3
3
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
14
11/12/90
11/13/90
12/3/90
12/3/90
11/12/90
11/13/90
11/8/90
11/8/90
11/9/90
11/12/90
ll/B/90
11/8/90
11/9/90
11/9/90
12/3/90
12/4/90
12/4/90
12/4/90
12/10/90
12/10/90
12/10/90
8
8
28
28
8
9
4
4
3
8
7
3
4
4
27
28
28
28
33
33
33
40
93
-------
TABLE 57. TEST SAMPLE SEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC SAMPLE EXTRACTION AND
ANALYSIS HOLD TIMES
Extraction Analysis
Collection/ Extraction hold time, Analysis hold time,
Sample preparation date date days date days
Soil feed
Test 6
Test?
Kiln ash
Test 6
Test?
Duplicate analysis
Scrubber liquor
Test 6
Test?
Scrubber exit flue gas
Method 0010 train
Testfi
Test?
Duplicate analysis
Method 0010 train blank
Soil feed matrix spike
Duplicate analysis
Kiln ash matrix spike
Duplicate analysis
Scrubber liquor matrix spike
Duplicate analysis
Method 0010 train matrix spike
Duplicate analysis
Method requirement
Soil feed and kiln ash
Scrubber liquor and
Method 0010 train
2/6/91
2/7/91
2/6/91
2/7/91
2/6/91
2/7/91
2/6/91
2/7/91
2/7/91
6/4/91
6/4/91
5/31/91
6/4/91
2/14/91
2/14/91
2/14/91
2/14/91
2/12/91
2/12/91
2/7/91
2/8/91
2/8/91
.6/4/91
6/4/91
5/31/91
6/4/91
8
7
8
7
6
5
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
14
7
3/15/91
3/15/91
3/15/91
3/15/91
3/15/91
3/15/91
3/15/91
3/14/91
3/15/91
5/21/91
7/15/91
6/21/91
6/21/91
6/19/91
6/19/91
6/19/91
6/19/91
6/19/91
6/19/91
29
29
29
29
29
31
31
35
35
102
157
17
17
15
15
19
19
15
15
40
40
94
-------
original Test 7 scrubber exit flue gas sample Analysis or the duplicate analysis. The Method 0010
train blank sample also had no detectable seimivolatile organics, as expected. Thus, the failure
to meet the analysis hold time limit for these two samples is not believed to have affected the
test program conclusions.
All laboratory blanks were found to contain no detectable levels of semivolatile organics.
Table 58 summarizes the semivolatile organic measurement precision, accuracy, and complete-
ness DQOs. Table 59 lists the PQLs achieved for each sample matrix. As shown, all PQL
DQOs were met.
All samples slated for semivolatile organic constituent analyses were spiked with method
surrogates prior to extraction, and surrogate [recovery was measured. Table 60 summarizes the
surrogate recoveries achieved from the soil characterization samples. Table 61 presents an
analogous summary for the test program samples. The data in Table 60 show that 66 of 89
surrogate recovery measurements from soil characterization samples, or 74 percent, were within
the surrogate-specific DQO range. The data Jin Table 61 show that 80 of 102 surrogate recovery
measurements from test program samples, cjr 78 percent, were within surrogate-specific DQO
ranges. Because the completeness DQO was 80 percent for this measurement, the accuracy
DQO, as measured by surrogate recovery, was just missed in both soil characterization and test
program samples.
However, the data in Table 61 show that, for the two test samples analyzed in duplicate,
and for the four MS/MSD sample pairs analyzed, 32 of 36 RPDs, or 89 percent, for each
surrogate analysis met the DQO of 50 percent. Because this level exceeded the completeness
DQO of 80 percent, the semivolatEe organic measurement precision DQO, as measured by
surrogate recoveries in duplicate sample analyses, was met.
Semivolatile organic constituent measurement precision and accuracy were assessed by
preparing one MS/MSD sample set for each
of the soil feed, kiln ash, scrubber liquor, and flue
gas method 0010 sample matrices, and measuring spike recovery. Table 62 summarizes the spike
recovery data obtained. The data in Table 62 show that 108 of 112 individual spike recovery
measurements, or 96 percent, were within compound-specific recovery ranges. As the
completeness DQO for this measurement was 80 percent, the measurement accuracy DQO, as
measured by spike recovery from MS/MSD samples, was met.
The data in Table 62 also show that 55 of 56 duplicate sample spike recovery RPDs, or
98 percent, were within the RPD DQO. Thus, the semivolatile organic constituent precision
DQO, as measured by spike recovery from jJlS/MSD samples, was also met.
To summarize, no detectable semivolatile organic constituents were found in any test
program sample, with the exception of the Test 7 soil feed. The semivolatEe organic constituent
measurement precision DQO was met, as me'asured by both duplicate surrogate recoveries and
matrix spike recoveries. Finally, the measurement accuracy DQO, as measured by matrix spike
compound recoveries, was met. Therefore, the borderline failure to meet the measurement
accuracy DQO, as measured by surrogate recoveries, is not believed to have affected the test
conclusions."
95
-------
TABLE 58. SEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC CONSTITUENT MEASUREMENT DQOs
Precision
Measurement/analytical (%RSD Accuracy Completeness
Measurement parameter method Reference Conditions orRPD) (%) (%)
Semivolatile organic compounds in Soxhlet extraction, SW-846" Soxhlet extraction by Method 3540 50 D to 23tf" 80
solid waste and residue samples concentration, and direct Method 8270
injection GC/MS
Semivolatile organic compounds in Liquid-liquid extraction, SW-846* Extraction by Method 3510 50 D to 230'' 80
aqueous liquid and residue samples concentration, and direct Method 8270
injection GC/MS
Semivolatile organic compounds in Method 0010 sampling, Soxhlet SW-846" ' Soxhlet extraction of Method 0010 50 D to 230^ 80
flue gas samples extraction, concentration, and Method 8270 samples by Method 3540
direct injection GC/MS
•Reference 2.
bD denotes detected; compound-specific accuracy objectives in terms of matrix spike and surrogate recovery were as specified in Tables 6 and 8 of Method 8270.
VO
O\
-------
TABLE 59. SEMIVOLAHLE ORGANIC ANALYSIS PQLs: OBJECTIVES AND ACHIEVED
Sample matrix
Soil feed and solid residues
Aqueous liquids, jtg/L
Flue gas, pg/dscm
PQL
DQO
;, mg/kg 20
200
10
Achieved
0.51 to 15.1
0.77 to 1.54
5 to 10
TABLE 60. SEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC SURROGATE RECOVERIES
FROM SOIL CHARACTERIZATION SAMPLES
Soil sample
0-1
O-2
L-l
L-2
M-l
M-2
M-3
M-4
M-4D
M-5
M-5D
G-l
G-2
G-3
G-4
G-5
G-6
B-l
B-2
B-3
B-4
DQO
2-Fluorophenol
132
171
76
67
54
58
124
152
88
104
63
183
217
278
93
77
205
95
103
77
71
21 to 100
% recovery
2,4,6-TribromophenoI Nitrobenzene-dL;
a
—
63
206
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
187
145
52
59
10 to 123
73
68
110
60
<20
56
112
176
107
141
53
93
167
181
<20
<20
107
75
132
101
119
35 to 114
2-Fluorobiphenyl
64
87
43
65
64
76
79
94
75
76
63
83
84
82
60
62
77
71
80
63
60
43 to 116
4-Terphenyl-du
77
76
31
69
72
87
88
95
74
76
95
—
113
90
67
74
73
78
74
63
52
33 to 141
"— = Coelution prevented quantitation.
97
-------
TABLE 61. SEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC SURROGATE RECOVERIES FROM TEST SAMPLES
\o
00
% recovery
Sample
Soil feed
Test 7 MS
MSD
RPD, %
Kiln ash
Test 6
Test?
Duplicate analysis
RPD, %
Test 7 MS
MSD
RPD, %
Scrubber liquor
Test 6
Test?
Test 7 MS
MSD
RPD, %
Flue gas Method 0010 train
Test 6
Test?
Duplicate analysis
RPD, %
Blank
MS
MSD
RPD, %
DQO
2-Fluorophenol
93
102
9.2
86
103
72
35
38
40
5.1
169
82
55
64
15
121
62
47
28
52
76
78
2.6
21 to 100
Phenol-ds
112
110
1.8
56
110
78
34
53
56
5,5
120
64
50
50
0
121
46
35
27
35
86
83
3.6
10 to 94
2,4,6-Tribromoplienol
52
56
7.4
86
85
62
31
85
93
9.0
213
101
115
100
14
107
101
53
62
65
95
81
16
10 to 123
Nitrobenzene-d,
76
83
8.8
74
90
52
54
45
47
4.4
145
138
71
75
5.5
139
129
97
28
72
61
64
4.8
35 to 114
2-FIuorobiphenyI
78
76
2.6
74
81
51
45
54
52
3.8
139
135
66
69
4.4
147
125
76
49
64
••57 - -
59
3.5
43 to 116
4-TerpIieny!-dH
109
121
10.4
90
95
52
59
67
70
4.4
178
150
74
67
9.9
. 148
188
111
52
70
63
63
0
33 to 141
RPD
DQO,
%
50
50
50
50
50
50
-------
TABLE 62. SEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC CONSTITUENT RECOVERIES FROM MATRIX SPIKE SAMPLES
Spike recovery, %
Test?
soil feed
Compound
Phenol
2-ChlorophenoI
1,4-DichIorobenzene
N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
4-Chloro-3-mcthyl phenol
Acenaphlhene
J§ 4-Nitrophenol
2,4-Dinitrotoluene
Pentachlorophenol
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Fluoranlhene
Pyrene
Chrysene
DQO
MS
86
77
78
84
93
82
75
78
34
72
77
84
122
84
MSD RPD,%
86
76
77
78
97
80
76
88
29
68
80 "
93
128
83 -
0
1.3
1.3
7.4
4.2
2.5
13
12
16
5.7
3.8
10
4.8
1.2
50
MS
83
72
74
103
87
105
102
100
113
106
103
103
113
90
Test?
kiln ash
MSD RPD,^
82
72
73
106
86
114
102
120
123
110
107
112
109
94
1.2
0
1.4
2.9
1.2
8.2
0
18
8.5
3.7
3.8
8.4
3.6
4.4
50
Test
scrubber
; MS
44
75
64
84
69
87
75
41
88
91
80
77
76
82
MSD
44
76
65
79
70
83
75
23
76
90
81
84
68
84
1
liquor
RPD, %
0
1.3
1.6
6.1
1.4
4.7
0
56
2.6
1.1
1.2
8.7
11
2.4
50
Method 0010 train
MS
69
71
63
73
62
78
65
90
83
77
71
73
67
74
MSD
71
69
65
71
62
74
65
60
66
74
68
70
70
76
RPD, %
2.9
2.9
3.1
2.8
0
5.3
0
40
23
4.0
4.3
4.2
4.4
2.7
50
DQO
5 to 112
23 to 134
20 to 124
D lo 230a
44 to 142
22 to 147
47 to 145
D to 132'
39 to 139
14 to 176
1 to 118
26 to 137
52 to 115
17 to 168
"D = detected.
-------
6.4 CHLORIDE ANALYSES
The impinger contents from the Method 5 particulate/HCl sampling trains were
analyzed for chloride to determine flue gas HC1 concentrations at the locations sampled. The
test plan and QAPjP specified the analyses were to have been ion chromatography, Method 300.0
(References 9 and 10). During the analysis period, however, several problems were experienced
with the ion chromatograph used, which resulted in an inability to attain acceptable instrument
calibration within the specified sample hold time limit. It was therefore decided to complete the
impinger solution chloride analyses via chloride specific ion electrode analysis so that sample
hold time limits could be met. All chloride samples were so analyzed on April 22,1991, and hold
times limits were met for all samples.
Table 63 summarizes the flue gas HC1 measurement precision, accuracy, completeness,
and PQL DQOs. The HC1PQL achieved was between 220 and 610 /jg/dscm, somewhat greater
than the PQL DQO of 10 /tg/dscm. However, the PQL achieved was sufficient to show
compliance with- the hazardous waste incinerator performance standard for HC1, so test results
were unaffected by the failure to achieve the HC1 measurement PQL DQO.
The HC1 measurement method blank analyzed contained no detectable chloride. No
MS/MSD sample set for the test program was prepared or analyzed. However, the analyses of
all the samples were completed in one day; and the pre- and post-analysis calibration with
standard solutions confirmed proper instrument response during the analysis period.
100
-------
TABLE 63. FLUE GAS HC1 MEASUREMENT PRECISION, ACCURACY, AND COMPLETENESS OBJECTIVES
Precision
Measurement/analytical (%RSD Accuracy Completeness
Measurement parameter method Reference Conditions or RPD) (%) (%)
HC1 in flue gas Method 5 sampling with EPA-600/4-84-017 Method 5 aqueous impingcrs 30 75 to 125 80
ion chromatography of Method 300.0
impinger catch
-------
REFERENCES
1. "Drake Chemical Superfund Site, Lock Haven, Pennsylvania, Incineration Treatability Study,
Scope Document for the Incineration Research Facility," prepared by James M.
Montgomery, Consulting Engineers, Walnut Creek, California, for the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Omaha District, under Contract DACW45-89-D-05Q1, October 1990.
2. Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste: Physical/Chemical Methods," EPA SW-846,3rd
ed., November 1986.
3. 40 CFR Part 261, Appendix H
4. "Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 16th Edition," APHA,
AWWA, WPCF, 1985.
5. 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A.
6. "Proposed Methods for Stack Emissions Measurement for CO, O^ THC, HC1, and Metals
at Hazardous Waste Incinerators," U.S. EPA, Office of Solid Waste, November 1989.
7. 40 CFR Part 61, Appendix B.
8. "Stationary Source Test Methods, Volume 1, Methods for Determining Compliance with
District Nonvehicular (Stationary Source) Emission Standards," State of California Air
Resources Board, Sacramento, California, March 1988.
9. "Test Plan for an Incineration Treatability Study for Contaminated Soils and Sediments
from the Drake Chemical Superfund Site, Revision 1," prepared by Acurex Corporation
under EPA Contract 68-C9-0038, November 1990.
10. "Quality Assurance Project Plan for an Incineration Study for Contaminated Soils and
Sediments from the Drake Chemical Superfund Site," prepared by Acurex Corporation
under EPA Contract 68-C9-0038, November 1990.
102
-------
AP
INCINERATOF
ENDIX A
I OPERATING DATA
103
-------
APPENDIX A-l
CONTROL ROOM DATA
104
-------
Control Room 1-30-91
Flue gai sampling (0950 -1600)
Time
950
1015
1030
1045
1100
1115
< 1130
IMS
1200
1215
1230
_ 1245^ -
n I30°
S 1315
1330
134S
1400
1415
1430
144S
1500
1515
1530
1545
1600
MIN:
MAX:
AVO:
Weight
Reading
Wane
flin)
S8S3
5733
562.0
539.5
5045
4723
430.0
3433
371.0
— 3483 —
314.5
281.0
22S.O
180.0
1463
113.0
79.0
79.0
5853
357.1
Weight Quench Quench Venturi Packed BMwn
Reading Preu. Flow Liquor Column Water
Ash 1,2,3 Flow Liquor Row Flow
flbrt hail Item) fern) (torn) from)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
8.5
283
49.0
66.0
873
— i9.o
19.0
22,0
0.0
873
25.0
50
50
SO
50
SO
50
50
50
SO
SO
SO
SO
SO
SO
50
SO
50
SO
SO
50
50
SO
SO
50
SO
SO
50
50
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
Make-up Venturi racked Kiln AB E-Ducl
Water Liquor Column Pressure Pressure Pressure
Totalizer Flow Liquor Flow .
(ea\) Item) f enrol fmw
-------
Control Room 1-30-91
Rue j>» MmpUnj{0950 -1600)
Time
950
1015
1030
1045
1100
.1115
- 1130
1145
1200
1215
1230
1245
0 1300
& 131S
1330
1345
1400
1415
1430
1445
1500
1515
1530
1545
1600
MIN:
MAX:
AVOi
Kiln
Exit
rn
1503
1512
1S24
1513
1454
1X58
1512
1501
1514
1490
1454
1538
1546
1541
1519
151<
1501
1518
1558
1558
1575
1576
1464
1502
1497
1454
1576
1514
AB Quench Scrubber
Exit Exit Exit
f*F> m fT>
2008
2010
2024
2002
2002
2010
2000
2001
2087
2011
2005
2009
2007
2010
2001
2012
2012
2003
2008
1997
2004
2001
199«
2001
2006
1996
2024
2006
171
171
171
170
169
170
169
170
169
169
168
170
170
170
167
168
169
169
169
169
169
168
168
16?
167
167
171
169
120
119
43
109
109
109
108
108
108
107
107
108
108
108
106
106
107
106
107
106
106
107
106
105
104
43
120
105
Suck Scrubber
Liquor
m rn
62
112
120
120
113
110
109
109
109
108
108
107
107
108
108
108
107
107
107
107
107
107
106
106
105
62
120
107
150
150
ISO
152
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
149
149
149
148
147
148
148
148
147
148
148
147
146
!45
14S
152
149
Aih
rn
142
145
145
146
147
144
144
144
142
147
14S
Dldwn Liquor
pH pH
6,1
62
62
62
62
62
62
63
63
63
63
63
6.4
6.4
6,5
63
63
6,5
6.5
6.5
6.5
6.5
6,5
6J
6.5
6,1
6.5
6.4
7,4
73
12
7.5
7.4
7,4
73
7.4
6.5
7.4
7.4
73
73
73
7,4
73
7.4
73
7.4
7.4
7.4
73
7.4
7,4
7.4
63
13
73
AB
0.8
Flow
fscfM
1634
1471
1249
1253
1833
1296
1220
1189
1190
1240
1257
1240
1185
1176
1190
1244
1264
1254
1211
1135
1176
1171
1299
1214
1173
1135
1833
1271
AB
Air
Flow
ftcCh)
13913
11597
11582
10752
10759
10972
10749
1075S
10800
10740
10764
10803
10812
10793
10800
10774
10781
10784
10312
10810
10791
10803
10829
10788
10782
10740
13913
10982
AB
Exit
Temp
rn
2004
2001
2005
1995
2001
2004
2000
1997
1995
2003
2001
2004
2000
2003
1990
1994
2001
1997
1999
1994
1996
1999
1999
1996
1996
1990
2005
1999
Kiln
O»
i%w
felM
1474
1475
1210
1294
1146
1148
1233
1209
1210
1209
1210
1213
1213
1213
1116
1116
1115
1116
1155
1154
11SS
1153
1173
1141
1143
1115
1475
1200
Kiln
Air
Flow
faclh)
1256S
9634
9632
9615
9625
9615
9620
9628
9609
9615
9658
9650
9674
9637
9656
9641
9651
9648
9670
9663
9633
9651
9667
9663
9648
9609
12565
9759
Kiln
Exit
Temp,
(*F)
1484
1510
1464
1510
1476
1451
1549
1551
149S
1471
1450
1484
1517
1S4S
1544
1501
1516
1478
1532
1551
1564
1537
1499
1493
1502
1450
1564
ISO?
-------
Control Room 1*31-91 A
Flue gat sampling (1000 -1230)
Tittle
1000
1015
1030
1045
1100
1115
'1130
1145
1200
1215
1230
O MIN:
^ MAX:
AVO:
Weight Weight Quench Quench Venturl Packed Bldwn Make-up Vcniuri Packed
Reading Reading Press. Plow Liquor Column Water Water Liquor Column
Waste Ash 1^3 Flow Liquor Flow Flow Totalizer Plow Liquor Plow
fibs) fibs) fpsh feom) fepm) (tora) (turn) f*al) fgpml ffu>m)
564J 0.0
555.0 0.0
S215
487.0
453.0
419.0
3855
352.0
318.0
2S45
273.0
273.0 0.0
5645 0.0
419.4 0.0
SO
50
50
SO
50
50
SO
50
SO
50
50
50
50
SO
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2938
2938
2938
2938
2938
2938
2938
2938
2938
2938
2938
2938
2938
2938
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
Kiln AB E-Duci
Pressure Pressure Pressure
(In wx.) fin w.c.) fin w.c.)
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.030
0.030
30 0.040
30
30
30
0.030
0.040
0.038
0.14
0.14
0.14
0.16
0.14
0.17
0.18
0.12
0.16
0.18
044
0.12
0.18
0.15
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
05
05
to
1.0
1 o
0.0
1.0
0.4
Venlurl
dp
(in KM:.)
25.0
25.0
25.0
25.0
25.0
25.0
24.0
24.0
24,0
24.0
23.0
23.0
25.0
245
Packed
Column
dp
finwx.)
6.5
«5
7.0
. 75
8.0
8.0
9.0
9.0
10.0
11.0
— H..O
6.5
11.0
85
-------
I
Control Room ContM 1-31-91 A
Rue gMumpiins(1000. 1230)
Time
1000
1015
1030
1045
1100
HIS
'1130
1145
1200
1215
1230
0 MIN:
00 MAX:
AVQs
Kiln
Erit
(•F)
1486
1492
1SS2
1SX2
1574 ,
1566
1524
1547
1S33
15S4
1477
1477
1574
1531
AB
Exit
m
2005
2003
2002
1999
2009
2008
2005
1998
2001
199S
2004
1995
2009
2003
Quench Scrubber
Exit Exit
rn m
169
169
170
169
170
no
171
171
170
170
169
169
171
170
103
104
104
104
104
103
103
103
103
102
102
102
104
103
Suck Scrubber Ash BMwn Liquor
Liquor pH pH
(•F) m m
96
102
104
104
10S
IDS
10S
105
105
105
104
96
105
104
97
97
93
97
97
97
97
97
96
97
97
96
97
97
15.6
15.6
J5.6
15.5
15.5
15.5
15.5
15.4
15.4
15.4
15.4
15.4
15.6
155
7.4
7.4
73
13
13
7.4
73
73
7.4
7.4
7.4
73
7.4
7.4
AB
0«»
Flow
ficIM
1163
1187
1114
1197
1165
1187
1204
1212
1209
1203
1231
1114
1231
1188
AB
Air
Flow
faclM
10454
10477
10488
10483
10504
10521
10511
10523
10516
10506
10S44
10454
10544
10503
AB
Exit
Temp
m
2004
1999
1993
2002
1998
2004
1999
1997
1998
1997
2000
1993
2004
1999
Kiln
OM
Flow
fKfh)
1138
1145
1105
1106
HOB
1109
1031
10S7
1058
1058
1058
1031
1145
1088
Kiln
Air
Flow
ficfK)
9079
9084
9100
9123
9116
9119
9139
9136
9154 •
9145
9163
9079
9163
9123
Kiln
Exit
Temp.
m
1499
1543
1553
1510
1557
1537
1498
1485
1497
1505
1479
1479
1557
1515
-------
Control Room t-31-91 B
Flue gas samp«ng(1330-1630)
Time
1300
1315
1330
1345
1400
1415
1 1430
1445
1500
1515
1530
_ 1545—
O 1600
^ 1615
MIN:
MAX:
AVO:
Weight Weight Quench Quench
Reading Reading Press. Flow
Waste Ash 1.2,3
fibs) flbsl (fan (aim)
273.0
273.0
239.5
206.0
170J
137.0
103.0
69.0
36.5
IS
13
15
1.5
IS
L5
239.5
80.8
SO
SO
so
so
50
50
50
SO
50
50
50
so —
so
50
50
50
50
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
Venturl Packed
Liquor Column
Flow Liquor Flow
(torn) fxpRil
20
20
20
20
20
20
0
20
20
20
20
" 20
20
20
0
20
18
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
Bldwn Make-up Venlurl • _ Packed
Water Water Liquor Column
Flow Totalizer Flow Liquor Flow
fepml feat) (aim) (mm)
0
0
0
0
0
, 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2938
2938
2938
2938
2938
2938
2938
2938
2938
2938
2938
2938
2938
2938
2938
2938
2938
13
13
13
13
13
13
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
13
12
13
12
29
29
30
29
29
29
39
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
39
30
Kiln AB E-Duct
Pressure Pressure Pressure
flnw.c.1 flnw-c.1 flnw^.1
0.050
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.060
0.040
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.060
0.041
0.15
0.12
0.12
0.11
0.11
0.11
0.12
0.12
0.12
0.12
0.14
0.12
0.12
0.12
0.11
0.14
0.12
1.0
3.5
5.0
5J
5,5
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.5
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
S3
4.4
Venturl
dp
finite.)
22.0
25.0
24.0
24.0
24.0
26.0
26.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
2ao
28.0
27.0
26.0
24.0
28.0
262
Packed
Column
dp
fin w.c.1
11.5
12.5
ISA
15.0
1S.O
11.5
9.5
10.0
11.0
113
--9.0
10.0
10.0
11,5
9.0
15.0
11.6
-------
Control Room Cont'd 1-31-91 B
Flue g«i umpling (1330 -1630)
Time
1300
1315
1330
1345
1400
1415
' 1430
1445
1500
1515
1530
_» 1545
i-i 1600
0 1615
MIN:
MAX:
AVO:
Kiln
Exit
m
1993
1008
1045
1020
1041
981
1053
992
1039
1005
996
1003
1008
995
981
1053
1015
AB Quench Scrubber
Exit Exit Exit
<*Fl m CF\
2013
2000
1997
2001
2001
2000
1998
2003
1996
1997
1998
2013
2012
2004
1996
2013
2002
168
166
167
167
167
167
169
169
168
168
168
168
169
167
167
169
168
102
98
97
97
97
98
99
99
98
98
98
98
99
98
97
99
98
Stick Scrubber Ash Bldwn Liquor
Liquor pH pH
(*Ft fV) f*FJ
103
103
102
99
97
96
95
96
97
98
98
97
98
97
95
102
98
96
96
95
94
94
94
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
94
95
95
15.4
15.4
15.4
153
15.3
153
153
153
15.3
153
153
15.3
153
15.3
15.3
15.4
153
7.4
7.4
73
7.4
73
. 7.4
73
7.4
7.4
7.4
7.4
7.4
7.4
7.4
73
7.4
7.4
AB
Oio
Flow
r»ciM
1387
1424
143!
1424
1476
1457
1466
1414
1443
1617
1519
1564
1490
1414
1617
1477
AB
Air
Flow •
ficfM
7804
7816
7819
7830
7838
7826
7831
7837
7837
7840
7835
7826
7826
7816
7840
7830
AB
Exit
Temp
m
1982
1995
1998
1990
1987
1988
1984
1993
1990
1996
2007
2006
1992
1984
2007
1994
Kiln
On
Flow
fcclM
483
482
481
481
474
502
556
555
555
553
588
623
622
622
474
623
551
Kiln
Air
Flow
f»cfM
7146
5945
5946
5957
5448
5960
5950
5956
5969
5965
5962
5955
5955
5948
5448
5969
5914
Kiln
Exit
Temp.
m
986
1035
1032
992
976
966
998
976
1008
999
993
1005
1003
997
966
1032
995
-------
Control Room 2-5-91
Flue gai sampling (0845 - 1430)
Weight Weight Quench Quench Venturi Packed BIdwn Make-up Venluri Packed Kiln
Reading Reading Fres*. Flow Liquor Column Water Water Liquor Column Pressure
Time Wnle Ash 1.2,3 Flow Liquor Flow Flow Totalizer Flow Liquor Flow
flbil flbsl fpsil torn) fepm) (tern) (arm) feah ftpm) (enrol dnw.c.')
845
900
915
930
94S
1000
, 1015
1030
1045
1100
1115
1130
i-* U4S
tl 1200
1215
1230
1245
1300
1315
1330
1345
1400
1415
1430
MIN:
MAX:
: AVOi
681.0
6735
643.0
609.0
576.0
542.0
508.5
475.0
442.0
4095
3755
M"
1655
1325
1215
1215
1215
1215
1215
1215
1215
6S1.0
3652
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
SO
50
50 —
SO
50
SO
so
50
SO
SO
SO
50
50
SO
SO
SO
so
so
18
18
18
IS
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
— 18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
-30-
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
• 0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
2093
2093
2093
2093
2093
2093
2093
2093
2093
2093
2093
ZOTi
2093
2093
2093
2093
2093
2093
2093
2093
2093
2093
2093
2093
2093
2093
2093
1
14
14
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
1
14
12
3
28
28
28
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
3
29
28
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.84
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.04
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0,04
0.04
0.03
0.04
0.03
AB E-Duct
Pressure Preuure
finnus.) finvu:.)
0.16
0.16
0.12
0.12
0.19
0.19
0.10
0.42
0.44
0.42
0.42
0.18
0.18
0.14
0.13
0.18
0.18
0.18
0.18
0.12
0.12
0.12
0.16
0.42
0.10
0.44
021
4.0
4.0
2.0
25
1.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.1
2.1
2.1
15
15
15
15
15
2.0
2.0
2.0
12
05
1.0
15
l&
05
4.0
1.9
Venluri Packed
dp Column
dp
fin wx.1 (In w.c.)
26.0
24.0
26.0
26.0
28.0
27.0
27,0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
28.0 •
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
26.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
28.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
24.0
28.0
26.8
8.0
8.0
85
9.0
5.0
75
&0
6.0
7.0
75
«,5
65
7.0
8.0
7.0
75
8.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
5.0
65
7.0
75
S.O
9.0
73
-------
Control Room 2-5-91 (Conl'd)
Flue git mnpttag(0845-1430)
Time
845
900
915
930
945
1000
; MIS
1030
104S
1100
1115-
1130
£ 1145
tO 1200
1215 '
1230
1245
1300
1315
1330
1345
1400
1415
1430
MIN:
MAX.*
AVO:
Klin
mi
m
1506
1471
1S3S
1501
1494
1506
1528
1521
1534
1503
1511
1512
1522
ISS6
1517
1560
IS04
1511
1496
1SI3
ISO?
1503
1505
1488
1471
1560
1513
AB Quench Scrubber
E*U Exit Brit
m m rn
2027
2006
2009
2007
2000
2003
1999
1996
2005
2003
2002
199$
1998
1998
2002
2008
2003
2004
2011
2012
2010
2009
2004
2002
1996
2027
2005
169
169
170
169
169
169
169
170
169
1«9
169
169
169
168
169
169
168
170
169
167
167
167
167
167
167
170
169
105
103
103
103
102
102
101
102
102
102
102
102
102
102
102
102
102
102
103
102
102
102
101
101
101
105
102
Stick Scrubber Ash Btdwn Uquor
Uquor pH pH
rn rn m
84
99
106
106
105
105
105
105
104
105
105
104
105
105
105
104
105
105
105
105
105
105
105
105
84
106
104
99
98
98
97
97
97
96
97
96
97
97
97
97
96
96
96
97
97
98
97
97
97
96
97
96
99
97
SS
s&
ss
ss
5,8
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
' , 5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
S.9
5.9
5.8
5.9
5.9
8.9
8.9
8,8
8.8
8.8
8,7
8.7
8.7
8.7
8.6
8.7
8.6
8.6
8.6
8.6
85
8.6
85
85
85
85
8.5
85
85
85
8.9
6,6
AB
Gin
Flow
fKlM
1215
1371
1316
1343
1323
1340
1343
1396
I3SS
1305
1310
1395
1305
1268
1484
1309
1309
1344
1341
1252
1286
1311
1313
1329
1215
1484
1328
AB
Air
Flow
f«IM
9910
9882
9908
9908
9900
9908
9SOO
9915
9908
9912
9914
9917
9908
9901
9918
9911
9903
9908
9898
9911
9939
9901
9913
9910
9882
9939
9908
AB
Exit
Temp
t^
1999
2010
2002
2002
1991
1998
2001
1998
1997
1995
1996
1996
1997
1992
1993
2000
1999
2000
2001
2004
2002
2003
200
1994
200
2010
1924
Kiln
OM
Flow
(•cm
ins
1051
1019
1022
1045
1046
1044
1047
1046
1047
1048
1080
1081
1082
1081
1081
1079
1079
1079
1113
1118
1078
1118
1187
1019
1187
1074
Kiln
Air
Flow
ficfM
9322
9321
9328
9335
9315
9342
9333
9331
9339
9337
9325
9325
9347
9330
9250
9242
9222
9227
9241
9229
9235
9230
9225
9230
9222
9347
9290
Kiln
Exit
Temp.
m
1503
1511
1514
' 1490
1526
1509
1504
1519
1491
1506
1520
1492
1524
1540
1504
1542
1537
1525
1488
1502
1495
1484
1495
1523
1484
1542
1510
-------
Control Room 2-6-91
Flue gasssmpHng(090S-1430)
Time
905
91S
930
945
1000
1015
, 1030
1045
1100
1115
1130
114«
H* 1200
tt 121S
.1230
1245
1300
13J5
1330
1345
1400
1415
1430
MIN:
MAX:
AVO:
Weight
Reading
Waste
fibs)
5745
555.0
5215
4885
4SS5
422,0
389,0
355,0
322.0
2885
2SS5
222.0
189.0
1555
1225
89.0
56.0
23.0
05
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
5745
2385
Weight Quench Quench Venturi Picked
Reading Frew. Flow Liquor Column
Ash 12,3 Flow Liquor Flow
flW fpsil (torn) (aaa) torn)
0.0
0.0
0,0
3.0
235
48.5
71.0
92,0
118.0
1415
1625
1845
2075
233.0
253.0
277.0
299.0
322,0
3205
3725
3835
3895
392.0
0.0
392.0
186.7
SO
50
50
50
50
50
50
SO
50
SO
SO
SO
so
so
50
so
50
so
so
50
50
SO
so
so
so
so
18
18
18
IS
18
IS
18
18
18
18
18
— 18
18
IS
18
18
18
IS
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
2
20
20
20
2
20
19
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
BUwn Make-up Venturi Picked Kiln AB E-Duct
Water Water Liquor Column Pressure Pressure Pressure
Flow Totalizer Flow Liquor Flow
ftrml feart torn) (mm) flnw.c.) flnw&l flnw^.l
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o-
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4799
4799
4799
4799
4799
4799
4799
4799
4799
4799
4799
— '4799
4799
4799
4799
4799
4799
4799
4799
4799
4799
4799
4799
4799
4799
4799
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
0.05
0.04
0,05
0.04
0.05
0,07
0.05
0.04
0.05
0.05
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
055
0,45
0.04
O.OS
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.04
055
0.09
024
0.24
024
022
022
022
022
028
029
029
026
028
028
028
031
029
030
0.30
0.30
031
031
0.30
030
022
031
027
0.0
0.0
0.0
25
2.8
2.8
2.8
2J
2.9
2.9
25
25
2.8
23
2.8
2.8
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
2.8
2.8
2.8
0.0
3.0
2.4
Venturi Packed
dp Column
dp
flnw£.> finw-c.)
31.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.9
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
31.0
272
3.9
3.5
35
55
6.0
6.0
65
65
65
6.5
55
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
6.5
65
65
35
65
6.0
-------
Control Room 2-6-91 (Cc=t'd)
Ru« {ti umplln j (0905 -1430)
Time
90S
915
930
945
1000
1015
; 1030
1045
1100
1115
1130
1145
1200
1215
1230
1245
1300
1315
1330
1345
1400
1415
1430
MIN:
MAX:
AVOs
Kiln
Exit
fF>
1498
1456
1461
1473
1480
1493
1465
1501
1506
ISIS
1518
1512
1528
1503
1489
1506
1505
1515
1520
14S7
1495
1498
1516
1456
1528
1498
AB Queivch Scrubber
Exit Exit Exit
2006
1999
2019
2000
2002
1999
2005
2013
2009
2006
2001
2004
1999
2002
2004
2002
2004
2009
2009
2003
2004
2004
2000
1999
2019
2004
172
173
173
172
172
172
171
172
172
171
170
171
171
171
171
171
171
171
171
171
171
171
171
170
173
171
115
117
118
112
112
112
112
113
112
112
111
112
112
112
112
111
112
112
111
111
111
111
111
111
118
112
Slack Scrubber
Liquor
f'F) f"Fl
120
121
123
122
119
119
119
119
119
119
119
118
118
118
118
118
118
118
118
118
118
118
118
118
123
119
98
99
99
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
93
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
99
98
A»h
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Btdwn Uquor
pH pH
5,9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.8
5.8
5.8
5.1
5.8
5.9
5.9
7.1
73
7.0
7.1
7.1
7.1
7.0
7.1
12
7.1
12
7.1
7.1
7.1
7.1
7.1
7.1
7.1
7.1
7.1
7.1
7.1
7.0
7.0
73
7.1
AB
Oat
Flow
1584
1715
1526
1500
1472
1473
1491
1486
1527
1552
1535
1539
1523
1480
1458
1466
1489
1512
1534
1578
1602
1581
1590
1458
1715
1531
AB
Air
Plow
faclM
11270
11248
9975
9978
9982
9998
10000
9972
9990
9985
9978
9974
9990
10010
9991
10007
10004
9979
9983
10007
9986
9991
9996
9972
11270
10100
AB
Exit
Temp
1999
1990
2009
2000
1995
1995
2001
2005
2007
2002
2003
2001
1999
1995
1994
1996
2000
2003
2000
2002
1999
1999
1997
1990
2009
2000
Kilo
O«J
Row
ftcflil
1441
1410
1258
1280
1281
1259
1323
1322
1320
1319
1318
1319
1319
1320
1320
1321
1320
1320
1375
1374
1373
1371
1258
1441
1330
ran
Air
Row
11732
10521
9823
9816
9075
9080
9091
9101 .
9091
9082
9074
9074
9079
9093
9096
9084
9094
9093
9110
9096
9115
9099
9113
9074
11732
9332
Kiln
Exit
Temp.
(V}
1541
1429
1543
1456
1495
1482
1507
1537
1511
1531
1542
1536
1540
1513
1514
1528
1554
1540
1510
1512
1502
1502
1511
1429
1554
1515
-------
Control Room 2-7-91
Flue gat sampling (0815 -1500)
Time
815
945
1000
1015
1030
1045
, 1100
1115
1130
1145
1200
' 1215—
(-> 1230
u ««
1300
1315
1330
1345
1400
1415
1430
1445
1500
Mil*
MAX*
AVO:
Weight
Reading
Waste
flto)
5325
5315
532.5
490.0
456.0
422.0
390.0
357.0
3233
290.5
257.5
—2215—
190.5
157.0
1215
4.1
58.5
24.5
3.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
532.5
233.4
Weight Quench Quench Venturi Packed Bldwn Make-up Venturi Packed
Reading Press. Flow Liquor Column Water Water Liquor Column
Ash 1,23 Flow Liquor Flow Flow Totalizer Flow Liquor Flow
fibs) fpirt ffoml (epm) fepml fcpm) feall (xnni) fepml
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.0
25
63
18.5
333
53.0
725
925
—117.0
140.0
1«25
184.0
206.0
2305
255.0
275.0
3005
3205
3335
343.0
0.0
343.0
136.9
50
SO
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
SO
so
so-
so
50
SO
50
50
50
. SO
SO
50
SO
50
SO
SO
50
18
18
18
IS
18
IS
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 .
0
0
0
175
249
249
283
316
351
385
419
453
432
491
521
561
588
621
655
690
725
758
794
829
835
864
175
864
532
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
28
29
29
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
29
28
Kiln AB E-Duct Venturi
Pressure Preisure Preuure dp
ttnwjc.) fin w.c.l flnw.c.1 finwr.l
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.03
0.03
0,04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.02
0.04
0.03
024
0.24
024
0.12
0.18
0.41
0.41
0.41
0.18
0.17 -
0.11
0.12
038
0.11
0.11
036
036
0.36
036
036
0.36
036
036
0.11
0.41
027
5.0
25
2.9
2.1
2.1
3.0
3.0
3.0
1.8
13
2.0
2.0
2.1
2.1
2.1
25
2.5
2.8
25
25
22
22
22
1.8
5.0
23
25.0
25.0
25.0
24.0
24.0
24.0
24,0
24.0
24.0
24,0
24.0
24.0
24,0
24,0
24.0
24.0
24.0
24.0
24.0
244
24.0
24.0
24,0
24.0
25.0
24,1
Picked
Column
dp
(inw.c.1
35
25
25
25
25
25
ZS
25
25
23
23 — •
2.5
23
Z5
23
23
23
25
25
25
25
23
23
2.5
33
23
-------
Control Roora 2-7-91 (Cont'd)
Flue g«i«mp«ng(081S-1500)
line
81$
945
1000
1015
1030
IMS
, 1100
1115
1130
1145
1200
1215
E 1230
C\ 124S
1300
1315
1330
134S
1400
1415
1430
1445
1500
M1N:
MAX-
AVOi
Kilo
Exk
m
921
996
99S
994
1005
999
1012
1005
1004
1025
1043
1011
1015
1056
1061
103S
1070
1057
1010
1004
1002
1001
1033
921
1070
1016
AB Quench Scnibber
Exit Exit Exit
<*Ft fFl (*p)
2002
2010
2001
201$
1996
2012
2005
1987
1991
1996
1995
2012
2010
2035
2011
2004
2002
2004
2003
2004
2002
1995
1998
1987
203S
2004
179
178
178
178
178
178
178
178
178
178
178
178
178
174
119
178
179
179
179
179
178
179
178
174
179
178
177
176
177
178
177
177
176
176
174
173
168
178
178
178
178
178
179
177
177
176
173
178
178
168
179
176
SUck Scnibber
Liquor
f*Fi nn
165
165
166
167
168
166
167
168
169
169
168
168
168
169
168
168
168
167
168
167
169
168
168
165
169
168
172
171
172
173
173
171
171
169
167
165
174
174
174
174
173
173
174
171
170
170
169
171
174
165
174
172
A»Ji
pn
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
«
Bldwn Liquor
pH pH
6,0
6,0
6,0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
5.9
5.9
5.7
5.9
5.9
5,9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.7
6.0
5.9
13
7.4
7.4
7,4
73
73
7.2
72
7.1
7.0
7.1
7.1
72
7.0
7.1
7.1
7.1
72
7.0
7,1
7.1
7.1
7.1
7.0
7.4
72
AB
du
Flow
ficfh)
1470
1481
1419
1480
1445
1452
1574
1593
1525
1549
1548
1503
1494
1432
1500
1567
1574
1643
1679
1684
1673
1611
1419
1684
1541
AB
Air
Bow
facfM
9094
9089
9094
9089
9068
9104
9118
9128
9107
9121
9133
913S
9131
9145
9143
9150
9161
9150
9152
9157
9156
9154
9068
9161 '
9126
AB
Exit
Temp
f"Fl
1999
1997
1990
1989
2001
1993
1993
1994
1987
1996
2009
1999
1991
1991
1995
1998
1999
2006
2009
1998
2000
1977
1977
2009
1996
Kiln
On
Flow
ftclM
655
658
611
609
608
640
639
638
638
637
635
634
632
631
630
630
630
630
637
637 .
637
691
608
691 -
636
Kiln
Air
Flow
fieflil
6728
6729
6275
6275
6273
6278
6280
6278
6293
6302
6291
6289
6291
6306
6313
6316
6309
6311
6321
6315
6308
6316
6273
6729
6336
Kiln
Exit
Temp.
tv\
997
999
967
1015
9S8
1006
1005
1005
1027
1040
1006
1029
998
1054
1027
1052
1056
1019
1012
1000
992
1030
958
1056
1013
-------
APPENDIX A-2
GAS TRAIN DATA
117
-------
Gas Train 1-30-91
FlueGa* Sampling (1000- 1S4S)
oo
Air Blow
Plenum Off
Time Air
(in w.c.) (In w.c.l
1000
1015
1045
1115
1145
1215
1245
131$
1345
1415
1445
1515
1545
MIN:
MAX:
AVO:
46,0
46.0
46.0
46.0
46.0
46.0
46.0
46.0
46.0
46.0
46.0
46.0
46.0
46.0
46.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Air Tolal
Static Air
Flow
(In w.c.) (in w.c.)
43.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
43.0
42.1
1.0
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
i.O
0.7
Air Kiln Kiln Sec
Temp Air Air
Flow Flow
(*F) (in w.c.) " (in w.c.)
80
80
80
80
85
80
80
80
80
80
80
80
80
85
80
3.8
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.8
3.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Gat Gas Kiln AB AB Sec
Prei Press Gas Air Air
Static Dynamic Temp Flow Flow
(psi) " (in w.c.) f*F> (in w.c.) (in w.c.)
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
3.5
2.0
2.5
3.5
2.5
2.5
2.0
3.5
2.6
0.65
0.60
0.50
0.45
0.48
0.48
0.50
0.45
0.45
0.45
0.45
0.45
0.45
0.65
0.49
4.3
3.6
3.6
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.3
3.3
4.3
3.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
-------
Gas Train Confd 1-30-91
Flue Gas Sampling (1000- 1545)
Gas Gas AB Kiln Kiln Gas Gas
Press Press Gas Pilot Atom Press Press
Time Static Dynamic Temp Air Air Static Dynamic
(psi) (in w.c.) (*F) (in w.c.) (in w.c.) (in w.c.) (in w.c.)
1000
1015
' 1045
1115
1145
1215
£ 1245
^ 1315
1345
1415
1445
1515
1545
MIN:
MAX:
AVG:
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.1
3 1
3.1
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.0
3.2
3.1
0.82
0.75
0.70
0.70
0.65
065
0.62
0.65
0.65
0.65
0.65
0.60
0.60
0.82
0.67
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
AB AB Gas
Pilot Atom Press
Air Air Static
(in w.c.) (in w.c.) (in w.c.)
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.-2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
— 5;5
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.5
5.3
8.5
8.5
8.5
8.5
8.5
8.5 —
8.5
8.5
8.5
8.5
8.5
8.5
8.5
8.5
8.5
Gas
Press
Dynamic
(in w.c.l
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.2S
-------
Gas Train 1-31-91A
Flue Gas Sampling (1010 • 1230)
Time
1010
, 1030
1100
1130
1200
1230
to
° MIN:
MAX:
AVG:
Air
Plenum
(in w.c.)
46.0
46.0
46.0
46.0
46.0
46.0
46.0
46.0
46.0
Blow
Off
Air
(in w.c.)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Air
Static
_(in w.c.)
43.0
43.0
43.6
43.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
43.0
42.7
' Total
Air
Flow
(in w.c.)
0.60
0.60
0.60
0.60
0.60
0.60
0.60
0.60
0.60
Air
Temp
cm
80
80
80
80
80
86
80.0
86.0
81.0
Kiln
Air
Flow
(in w.c.)
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
Kiln Sec
Air
Flow
(in w.c.)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Gas
Pre»
Static
(psi)
3.1
3.0
3.1
3.1
3.1
2.6
2.6
3.1
3.0
Gas
Press
Dynamic
(In w.c.)
0.45
0.40
0.45
0.40
0.40
0.30
0.30
0.45
0.40
Kiln
Gas
Temp
58
58
58
58
AB
Air
Flow
(in w.c.\_
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.2 '
3.2
3.2
ABSec
Air
Flow
_(in w.c.)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
-------
Oas Train Cont'd 1-31-91A
Flue Oas Sampling (1010- 1230)
Time
1010
, 1030
1100
1130
1200
_» 1230
MIN:
MAX:
AVO:
Oas
Press
Static
fosi)
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.2
Oas
Press
Dynamic
(in w.c.)
0.60
0.60
0.60
0.60
0.65
0.65
0.60
0.65
0.62
AB
Oas
Temp
CF)
58
58
58
58
Kiln
Pilot
Air
fin w.c.)
0.2
0.2
0.2
0,2
0,2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
Kiln
Atom
Air
(in w.c.)
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
Oas
Press
Static
(in w.c.)
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
O.S
Oas
Press
Dynamic
(in w.c.)
O.OS
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
O.OS
0.05
0.05
AB
Pilot
Air
(in w.c.)
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
AB
Atom
Air
(in w.c.)
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4,5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
Oas
Press
Static
(in w.c.)
8.5
8.5
8.5
9.0
9.0
9.0
8.5
9.0
8.8
Oas
Press
Dynamic
(In w.c.)
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.2S
0.25
0.2S
0.25
-------
Gas Train 1-31-91 B
Flue Gas Sampling (1330 -1630)
Time
1330
, 1400
1430
1500
1530
1600
1615
MIN:
MAX:
AVG:
Air Blow
Plenum Off
Air
(in w.c.) (in w.c.)
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.3
0.1
Air
Static
{in w.c.)
42.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
Total
Air
Flow
(in w.c.)
0.02
0.30
0.30
0.30
0.30
0.30
0.30
0.02
0.30
0.26
Air Kiln
Temp 'Air
Flow
(*F) (in w.c.)
88
88
88
88
88
90
90
.9
.9
.9
.9
.9
.8
.8
88 1.8
90 1.9
89 1.9
Kiln Sec
Air
Flow
(in w.c.)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Gas Oas Kiln AB AB Sec
Pres Press Gat Air Air
Static Dynamic Temp Flow Flow
(psi) fin w.c.) CF) fin w.c.) (in w.c.)
2.2
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.2
2.6
2.5
0.15
0.15
0.18
0.18
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.2
0.2
0.2
2.4
2.4
2.4
2.4
2.4
2.4
2.4
2.4
2.4
2.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0,0
0.0
0.0
-------
Gas Train Cont'd 1-31-91 B
Flue Gas Sampling (1330- 1630)
Time
1330
: , 1400
1430
1500
1530
f jCAft
5 161S
MIN:
MAXi
AVG:
Gas Gas AB Kiln Kiln Gas Gas AB AB
Press Press Gas Pilot Atom Press Press Pilot Atom
Static Dynamic Temp Air Air Static Dynamic Air Air
(psi) (in w.c.) (*F) (In w.c.) fin w.c.) (in w.c.) (in w.c.) (in w,e.) (in w.c.)
3.0.
3.0
3.0
3.1
3,1
3.1
3.0
3.1
3.1
0.75
0.75
0.78
0.76
0.80
m<
0.75
0.75
0.80
0.76
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0 2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
c c
5.5
S.5
5.5
5.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
n i
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
H nc
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
A *»
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
Gas Gas
Press Press
Static Dynamic
(in w.c.) (in w.c.)
8.9
8.9
8.9
8.9
8.9
B Q
8.9
8.9
8.9
8.9
0.28
0.28
0.28
0.28
0.28
n 9g\
0.30
0.28
0.30
0.29
-------
Gas Train 2-5-91
Flue Gas Sampling (0900 - 1430)
Time
900
930
1000
1030
1100
1130
1200
.1230
1300
1330
1400
1430
M1N:
MAX:
AVG:
Air Blow
Plenum Off
Air
(in w.c.) (in w.c.)
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Air Total
Static Air
Flow
OR w.c.) (In w.c.)
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0
41,0
41.0
41.0
41.0
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.0
0.6
0.6
Air Kiln
Temp Air
Flow
(*F) (in w.cj
90
92
92
92
92
92
92
92
92
92
92
92
90
92
92
2.9
2.9
2.9
2.9
2.9
2.9
2.9
2.9
2.9
2.9
2.9
2.9 v
2.9 >j
2.9
2.9
Kiln Sec
Air
Flow
(in w.c.)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Gas Gat Kiln
Pres Pren Gas
Static Dynamic Temp
(DsH (in w.c.) f'FV
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3,1
3.1
' '"S."t "
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
0.40
0.40
0.40
0.40
0.40
0.44
0.44
0.44
0.44
0.44
0.44
0.44
0.40
0.44
0.42
AB AB Sec
Air Air
Flow Flow
(in w.c.) (in w.c.J
3.0
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.0
3.1
3.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
-------
Gas Train 2-5-91
Flue Gas Sampling (0900- 1430)
J- ,\
8
Time
900
, 930
1000
1030
1100
1130
1200
1230
1300
1330
1400
1430
MIN:
MAX:
AVO:
Gas
Press
Static
(nsi)
3.1
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.1
3,1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
Gas
Press
Dynamic
(in w.c.)
0.60
0.65
0.65
0.65
0.65
0.67
0.65
0.65
0.65
0.65
0.65
0.65
0.60
0.67
0.65
AB Kiln
Gas Pilot
Temp Air
(*F) (in w.c.)
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0,2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
Kiln
Atom
Air
(in w.c.)
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
Gas
Press
Static
Jin w.c.)
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
Gas
Press
Dynamic
(in w.c.)
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0,05
AB
Pilot
Air
(in w.c.J
0.2
0,2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
AB
Atom
Air
(in w.cj
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
Gas
Press
Static
(in w.e.)
. S.8
8,8
8.8
8.8
8.8
8.8
8.8
8.8
8.8
8.8
8,8
8.8
8.8
8.8
8.8
Gas
Press
Dynamic
(in w.c.)
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0,3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
-------
Gas Train 2-6-91
Flue Gas Sampling (0910 - 1430)
o\
Time
910
930
1000
1030
1100
1130
1200
1230
1300
1330
1400
1430
MIN:
MAX:
AVG:
Air Blow
Plenum Off
Air
(In w.c.) (in w.c.)
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Air Total
Static Air
Flow
fin w.c.) (in w.c.)
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0
0.8
0.8
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.8
0.6
Air Kiln
Temp Air
Flow
f*F) (in w.c.)
90
90
90
92
92
92
92
92
94
94
94
94
90
94
92
3.6
3.0
2.9
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
3.6
2.9
Kiln Sec
Air
Flow
(in w.c.)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Gas Gas ' Kiln AB AB Sec
Pres Press Oas Air Air
Static Dynamic Temp Flow Flow
fpsi) fin w.c.) («F) fin w.c.) (in w.c.)
3.0
3.0
3.0
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
3.0
2.6
0.52
0.60
0.52
0.52
0.55
0.55
0.55
0.55
0.55
0.55
O.SS
0.55
0.52
0.60
0.55
3.4
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.4
3.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
-------
Gas Train 2-6-91
Flue Gas Sampling (0910- 1430)
Time
910
930
1000
1030
1100
iiau
-» 1200
-1 1230
1300
1330
1400
1430
MIN:
MAX:
AVO:
Gas Gas AB Kiln Kiln Gas
Press Press Gas Pilot Atom Press
Static Dynamic Temp Air Air Static
fpsO (in w.c.) (*F) (in w.c.) (in w.c.) (in w.c.)
3.1 0.80
3.1 0.70
3.1 0.75
3.
3.
r]
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
0.73
0.73
____ _ U«-/ -J —
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
3.1 0.70
3.1 0.80
3.1 0.75
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
Gas AB AB Gas Gas
Press Pilot Atom Press Press
Dynamic Air Air Static Dynamic
(in w.c.) (in w.c.) (in w.c.) (in w.c.) (in w.c.)
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
O.OS
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
O.OS
O.OS
0.05
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
U.Z
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
6.1
4.2
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.O
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
6.1
4.2
8.5
8.5
8.5
8.5
8.5
8.3
8.5
8.S
8.5
8.5
8.S
8.5
8.5
8.5
8.5
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
U.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0,3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
-------
Gas Train 2-7-91
Flue Gas Sampling (1000- 1500)
1— k
(0
00
Time
1000
1030
1100
1130
1200
1230
1300
1330
1400
1430
1500
MIN:
MAX:
AVQj
Air Blow
Plenum Off
Air
(in w.c.) (In w.c.)
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Air Total
Static Air
Flow
(in w.c.) (in w.c.)
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0 •
41.0
41.0
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.6
0.5
Air Kiln
Temp Air
Flow
(*F) (In w.e.)
90
90
91
91
93
91
93
93
92
92
96
90
96
92
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
Kiln Sec
Air
Flow
(in w.c.)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Gas Ga* Kiln AB AB Sec
Pres Press Gas Air Air
Static Dynamic Temp Flow Flow
(pal) (inw.c.) <'F) (in w.c.) (in w.c.)
2.6 .
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.6
3.1
3.1
3.1
2.6
3.1
2.7
0.24
0.24
0.24
0.24
0.24
0.24
0.24
0.24
0.24
0.24
0.24
0.24
0.24
0.24
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
-------
Gas Train 2-7-91
Flue Gas Sampling (1000- 1500)
Gas
Press
Time Static
1000
1030
1100
1130
1200
mo
fS woo
"° 1330
1400
1430
1500
MIN:
MAX:
AVG:
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3,1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
Gas AB Kiln
Press Gas Pilot
Dynamic Temp Air
On w.c.) ("Fl (in w.c.)
0.77
0.77
0.77
0,77
0.77
0;77
0.77
0.77
0.77
0.77
0.78
0.77
0.78
0,77
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
_ Q-2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
Kiln
Atom
Air
(in w.c.)
6.0
6.0
2.9
2.9
2.9
2.9
2.9
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
6.0
3.4
Gas Gas AB AB
Press Press Pilot Atom
Static Dynamic Air Air
(in w.c.) (in w.c,) (in w.c.) (in w.e.)
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.05
O.OS
O.OS
O.OS
0.05
0.05
O.OS
0.05
0.05
0,05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
4.1
4.1
4.1
4.1
4.1
4.1
4.1
4.1
4.1
4.1
4,1
4.1
4.1
4.1
Gas Gas
Press Press
Static Dynamic
(in w.c.) fin wx.l
8.5
8.5
8.9
8.9
8.9
8.9
8.8
8.8
8.8
8.8
8.5
8.5
8.9
8.8
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
OJ
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
-------
APPENDIX A-3
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL SYSTEM DATA
130
-------
Bay Area 1-30-91
Rue Gas Sampling (1000 -1545)
Time
1000
1015
1045
1115
1145
1215
1245
£ 1315
1345
1415
1445
1515
1545
MIN:
MAX:
AVG:
2nd
HEPA
(in w.c.)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Demister Carbon Bed 1st
Exit HEPA
(in w.c.) (in w.c.) (in w.c.)
0.5
0.5
Q.5
6.5
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.6
0.5
20.0
15.0
16.0
16.5
16.8
17.0
14.0
• 14.5
14.5
15.0
15.0
14.0
14.0
20.0
15.7
15.0
14.0
14.5
15.0
15.0
15.0
14.0
14.0
13.5
13.5
14.0
14.0
13.5
15.0
14.3
-------
Bay Area 1-31-91A
Hue Gas Sampling (1000 -1230)
to
2nd Demister Carbon Bed 1st
Time HEPA Brit HEPA
(inw.c.") Cinw.c.) (inw.c.) (inw.c.')
1010
1030
1100
1130
1200
1230
MN:
MAX:
AVG;
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.6
0.5
14.0
14.0
14.0
• 14.0
14.0
14.0
14.0
14.0
14.0
13.0
13.0
13.0
14.0
13.5
15.5
13.0
15.5
13.7
-------
Bay Area 1-31-91B
Flue Gas Sampling (1330 -1630)
Time
1300
1330
1400
1430
1500
1530
1600
8 1615
MIN:
MAX:
AVG:
2nd
HEPA
Jm w.c.)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Demister Carbon Bed
(in w.c.)
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
Exit
(in w.c.)
14.5
16.0
16.0
16.0
16.0
16.0
16.0
16.0
16.0
16.0
16.0
1st
HEPA
(in w.c.)
13.5
15.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
14.5
14.5
14.5
14.5
15.0
14.8
-------
Bay Area 2-5-91
Flue Gas Sampling (0900 -1430)
2nd Demister Carbon Bed 1st
Time HEPA Exit HEPA
/inw.c.) (inw.c.) (inw.c.) (inw.c.)
900
930
1000
1030
1100
1130
1200
1230
1300
1330
1400
1430
MIN:
MAX:
AVG:
1.0
0.5
0,5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
0.3
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
14.5
14.0
14.0
13.5
14.0
14.0
14.0
14.0
14.0
13.5
13.5
14.0
13.5
14.5
13.9
13.5
13.5
13.0
12.4
13.2
13.0
13.0
13.0
13.0
12.5
12.5
13.0
12.4
13.5
13.0
-------
Bay Area 2-6-91
Flue Gas Sampling (0910 -1430)
Time
910
930
1000
1030
1100
1130
M 1200
ft 1230
1300
1330
1400
1430
MUST:
MAX;
AVG:
2nd Demister Carbon Bed 1st
HEPA Brit HEPA
(inw.c.) (mw.c.) (inw.c.) (inw.c.)
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.02
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.00
1.00
0.50
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
8.5
9.0
9.5
10.0
9.5
9.5
9.5
9.5
10.0
9.5
9.5
9.5
8.5
10.0
9.5
7.0
7.9
8.5
8.5
8.5
8.5
8.5
8.5
9.0
8.5
8.5
8.5
7.0
9.0
8.4
-------
Bay Area 2-7-91
Hue Gas Sampling (1000 -1500)
w
o\
2nd Demister Carbon Bed 1st
Time HEPA Exit HEPA
(inw.c.) (inw.c.) (inw.c.) (inw.e.)
1000
1030
1100
1130
1200
1230
1300
1330
1400
1430
1500
MDST:
MAX:
AVG:
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
1.5
1.5
1.5
0.0
1.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5 '
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
9.0
9.0
9.0
9.5
8.5
8.7
8.7
9.0
9.0
9.0
9.2
8.5
9.5
9.0
8.0
7.5
8.0
8.0
7.5
7.5
7.5
7.5
8.0
7.5
8.0
7.5
8.0
7.7
-------
APPENDIX A-4
CONTINUOUS EMISSION MONITOR DATA
137
-------
GEM Data 1-30-91
Flue Gas Sampling (0955 -1600)
00
Time
955
1015
1030
1045
1100
1115
1130
1145
1200
1215
1230
1245
1300
1315
1330
1345
1400
1415
1430
1445
1500
1515
1530
1545
1600
MIN:
MAX:
AVO:
Kiln
O2
(%)
14.6
14.4
12.9
13,5,
14.4
14.1
13.7
13.6
13.4
14.2
14.4
12.1
13.4
13.0
13.5
13.4
13.7
13.1
13.2
12.8
13.4
13.2
14.6
13.6
13.7
12.1
14.6
13.6
AB
02
f%>
9.6
9.7
8.7
8.6
9.3
9.0
8.8
8.8
8.7
9.3
9.4
8.7
8.5
8.2
9.3
8.6
8.4
8.3
8.8
8.7
9.1
9.0
9.7
9.3
9.4
8.2
9.7
9.0
AB
CO
(ppm)
2.5
3.0
1.5
3.0
3.5
3.0
2.0
1.5
1.5
3.0
4.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
3.0
1.5
3.0
3.0
1.5
3.5
2.5
3.5
1.5
4.0
2.7
AB
CO2
(%)
6.6
6.4
7.4
7.2
7.0
7.1
7.3
7.2
7.1
6.7
6.7
?•!
7.6
7.5
7.0
7.4
7.8
7.4
7.2
7.4
7.0
7.1
7.0
6.7
6.7
6.4
7.8
7.1
AB
UTHC
fppm)
1.6
1.7
1.6
1.4
1.6
1.7
1.4
1.7
1.9
1.9
2.0
1.7
1.7
1.8
1.4
1.7
2.0
1.8
2.0
2.0
1.7
1.8
1.9
1.7
1.7
1.4
2.0
1.7
SE
O2
(%)
10.0
9.9
9.6
9.5
10.2
9.9
9.7
10.0
9,8
10.2
10.4
9.7
9.6
9.9
10.5
10.0
9.5
9.0
9.8
9.8
10.0
10.0
10.8
10.4
10.5
9.0
10.8
9.9
SE
CO2
(%)
6.2
6.1
6,7
6.6
6.2
6.4
6.5
6.3
6.4
6.0
5.8
6.4
6.7
6.4
6.1
6.4
7.0
6,8
6.4
6.7
6.4
6.4
6.1
5.9
5.9
5.8
7.0
6.4
SE
NOx
fppm)
63.0
74.3
74.0
75.5
70.0
74.3
72.0
71.5
68.5
72.8
70.5
71.8
70.0
71.3
71.8
73.0
75.0
74.8
76.5
73.0
70.3
71.5
72.0
64.5
64.3
63.0
76.5
71.4
Stack
O2
(%)
12.4
12.4
12.1
12.3
12.8
12.6
12.5
12.7
12.7
13.0
12,9
-12.7
12.7
12.4
13.0
12.6
12.2
12.1
12.4
12.5
12.8
12.6
13.1
13.0
13.1
12.1
13.1
12.6
Stack
CO
fppm)
6.0
4.5
3.0
2.8
2.6
3.2
2.9
3.5
3.3
2.8
2.8
3.2
3.2
2.9
3.1
3.0
3.3
3.1
3.3
3.1
3.3
3.2
3.6
3.3
3.3
2.6
6.0
3.3
Stack
UTHC
(ppm)
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.2
0,2
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.3
0.1
-------
CEM Data 1-31-91 A
Flue Gas Sampling (1000 - 1230)
Time
1000
1015
1030
1045
1100
1115
1130
1145
1200
1215
K* 1230
VO •
- MIN:
MAX:
AVG:
Kiln
O2
14.1
14.8
13.7
14.0
12.8
13.4
13.4
12.9
13.3
135
14.3
12.8
14.8
13.6
AB
O2
9.7
10.2
8.4
9.0
8.5
8.6
8.7
9.1
8.7
9.6
9.7
8.4
10.2
9.1
AB
CO
(ppm)
5.5
6.5
6.5
6.0
5.5
6.0
5.0
6.0
5.0
60
7.0
5.0
7.0
6.0
AB
CO2
6.6
6.6
7.5
8.1
8.2
7.7
7.9
7.2
7.8
7,1
6.9
6.6
8.2
7.5
AB
UTHC-
(ppm)
1.6
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
2.0
1.9
1.8
1.7
2.0
1.7
1.7
2.0
1.8
SE
O2
10.4
10.7
9.7
9.9
9.3
9.5
9.6
10.0
9.9
10.4
10.5
9.3
10.7
10.0
SE
CO2
6.1
6.2
6.9
7.0
7.0
7.2
7.4
6.7
6.7
63
6.2
6.2
7.4
6.8
SE
NOx
(ppm)
74.5
70.3
75.3
78.8
77.5
77.5
80.3
74.5
78.5
762 -
76.0
70.3
80.3
76.5
Stack
O2
12.8
13.4
12.4
12.8
12.0
12.6
12.8
12.5
12.3
127
12.8
12.0
13.4
12.6
Stack
CO
3.7
3.1
2.9
3.0
3.0
2.8
2.9
5.2
3.3
3 1
3.1
2.8
5.2
3.2
Stack
UTHC
(ppm)
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.2
01
0.1
0,1
0.3
0.2
-------
CEMData 1-31-91B
Flue Gas Sampling (1330 - 1630)
Time
1300
1315
1330
1345
1400
1415
1430
1445
1500
1515
1530
1545
1600
1615
1645
MIN;
MAX:
AVG*
Kiln
O2
18.6
18.3
17.6
17.1
16.6
17.6
15.8
17.2
15.9
16.9
16.8
17.0
17.1
16.9
17.0
15.8
17.6
16.9
AB
O2
11.7
11.8
11.0
10.3
9.9
10.6
9.7
10.9
9.9
10.5
9.9
10.2
10.4
10.7
10.4
9.7
11.0
10.3
AB
CO
(ppm)
8.0
8.0
8.0
6.5
8.0
8.0
6.5
7.5
8.5
7.5
7.5
8.0
8.5
8,0
8.0
6.5
8.5
7.7
AB
CO2
5.6
5.6
6.2
7.0
6.8
6.4
6.9
6.5
7.5
6.5
6.8
6.4
6.2
6.2
6.4
6.2
7.5
6.6
AB
UTHC
(ppm)
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.6
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1-7
1.8
1.7
1.5
1.5
1.8
1.7
SB
O2
12.1
12.7
12.1
11.3
11.2
11.6
10.7
11.7
10.7
11.4
10.8
10.9
11.1
11.3
11.1
10.7
12.1
11.2
SB
CO2
5.2
4.8
5.4
6.0
5.9
5.8
5.9
5.5
6.6
5.8
6.1
5.8
5.7
5.5
5.7
5.4
6.6
5.8
SB
NOx
(ppm)
109.5
89.5
88.0
78.8
75.8
77.5
82.5
71.0
73.8
79.3
85.8
87.8
87.8
83.5
85.3
71.0
88.0
81.3
Stack
O2
13.9
14.6
14.2
13.6
13.5
13.8
13.1
13.8
13.4
13.4
13.2
13.3
13.5
13.8
13.5
13.1
14.2
13.5
Stack
CO
(ppm)
3.2
3.2
3.0
3.1
3.0
3.1
2.8
3.2
2.9
3.0
3.3
2.9
3.0
2.7
3.7
2.7
3.7
3.1
Stack
UTHC
(ppm)
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.2
0.1
-------
CEM Data 2-5-91
Flue Gas Sampling (0845 -1430)
Time
845
900
915
930
945
1000
1015
1030
1045
1100
^ 1115
£ 1130
1145
1200
1215
1230
1245
1300
1315
1330
1345
1400
1415
1430
MIN:
MAX:
AVG:
Kiln
O2
13,9
13.4
13.6
13.1
13.8
12.9
13.0
13.1
13.2
13.4
13.4
13.4
13.1
13.3
13.3
13.2
13.0
13.2
13.1
12.8
12.8
12.9
13.1
13.4
12.8
13.9
13.2
AB AB
O2 CO
(%) (ppm)
10.0
8.6
9.3
8.4
9.9
8.6
8.5
8,7
8.9
...9,4.
9.0
9.0
8.8
9.4
9.3
8.8
9.0
9.2
9.1
9.1
9.4
8.9
9.0
9.8
8.4
10.0
9.1
1.5
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
2.5
2.5
3.0
3.0
3.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
4.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
4.0
2.0
3.0
3.0
LO
4.0
2.8
AB
CO2
6.3
7.7
7.5
7.7
6.5
7.4
7.4
7.7
7.1
7,2
7.6
7.4
7.5
6.7
7.4
8.0
7.7
7.0
6.8
6.7
6.6
6.9
6.8
6.4
6.3
8.0
7.2
AB
UTHC
(ppm)
0.6
0.5
0.7
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.4
0.2—
0.0
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.4
0.2
0.7
0.6
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.7
0.5
0.0
0.8
0.5
SB
O2
11.1
9.8
10.2
9.6
10.8
9.8
9.6
10,1
10.3
-9.9- —
10.4
10.1
0.8
10.4
10.1
9.7
9.8
9.9
10.0
10.8
10.9
10.6
10.6
10.6
0.8
11.1
9.8
SB
CO2
5.6
6.9
6.5
7.2
5.9
6.6
6.6
7.0
6.3
6.6
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.1
6.5
7.1
6.8
6.4
6.2
5.7
5.7
5.8
5.8
5.9
5.6
7.2
6.4
SB Stack Stack
NOx O2 CO
(ppm) (%) (ppm)
61.0
61.5
69.3
68.0
68.5
67.3
66.3
67.3
68.8
66.0
67.0
67.3
66.8
64.3
72.8
68.0
64.0
70.3,
70.0
58.3
59.S
60.3
60.5
60.8
58.3
72.8
65.6
13.4
12.4
12.8
12.6
13.0
12.4
12.4
12.4
12.6
42.8
13.2
12.6
12.6
12.8
12.6
12.5
12.3
12.4
12.5
13.0
13.0
13.0
13.0
13.2
12.3
13.4
12.7
4.7
4.6
4.1
4.3
4.0
4.1
4.2
3.8
3.7
3=8-
3.7
3.6
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
4.1
3.8
3.6
3.5
3.4,
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.4
4.7
3.9
Stack
UTHC
(ppm)
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.2
0.1
-------
CEM Data 2-6-91
Flue Gas Sampling (0905 -1430)
Time
90S
915
930
945
1000
1015
1030
1045
1100
1115
1130
1145
1200
1215
1230
1245
1300
1315
1330
1345
1400
1415
1430
MIN:
MAX:
AVO:
Kiln
O2
13.5
13.7
13.2
13.9
13.0
13.0
13.2
12.7
12.8
12.9
12.9
12.9
12.9
12.9
13.0
12.6
12.6
12.7
12.9
13.2
13.1
13.1
13.0
12.6
13.9
13.0
AB
O2
9.9
9.8
9,8
9.0
9.5
9.6
9.8
9.4
9.2
9.4
8.7
9.6
9.5
9.8
9.8
9.4
9.5
9.4
9.4
9.8
9.7
9.7
9.7
8.7
9.9
9.5
AB
CO
(ppm)
1.0
0.0
1.5
2.0
1.5
1.5
2.5
3.0
1.0
3.0
1.0
2.0
1.0
1,5
1.5
2.0
1.0
1.0
0.0
1.0
2.0
1.0
1.5
0.0
3.0
1.5
AB
CO2
6.6
6.6
6.6
7.1
7.0
6.6
7.1
6.8
7.2
7.0
7,2
6.7
7.4
6.5
6.9
7.0
6,8
6.8
6.7
6.6
6.5
6.4
6.5
6.4
7.4
6.8
AB
UTHC
(ppm)
. 0.1
0.3
0.1
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0,2
0.2
0.3
0.2
0,2
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.1
0,0
0.3
0.1
SE
O2
10.2
10.5
10.6
10.4
10.5
10.8
10,9
10.7
10,1
10.6
10.9
10.0
10.8
11.0
10.5
10.8
10.8
10.6
10.8
10.8
10.8
10,8
10.7
10.0
11.0
10.6
SE
CO2
6.4
6.1
6.2
6.2
6.5
6.2
6.2
6.1
6.3
6.0
6.0
6.3
6.2
5.8
6.1
6.1
6.8
5,9
5.9
5.8
5.7
5.8
5.8
5.7
6.8
6.1
SE
NOx
Cppm)
60.5
65.0
70.8
71.5
65.5
67.5
73.3
70.3
71.5
71.0
68.0
70,5
70.3
68.0
73.8
68.5
70.0
71.3
75.3
70.5
69.5
69.3
68.5
60.5
75,3
69.6
Stack
O2
12.2
12.2
12.1
12.2
12.7
12.5
12.6
12.4
12.3
12.3
12.5
12.3
12.4
12.6
12.6
12.5
12.3
12.2
12.4
12.6
12.4
12.6
12.5
12.1
12.7
12.4
Stack
CO
(ppm)
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.6
1.8
2.1
1.8
1.9
1.9
2.0
2.0
1.8
2.1
2.1
1.9
1.8
1.9
2.6
2.1
2.9
1.6
2.9
2.0
Stack
UTHC
(ppm)
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.1
1.0
0.2
0.2
0.1
0,2
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.2
0.0
1.0
0.2
-------
GEM Data 2-7-91
Flue Gas Sampling (0815 - 1500)
Time
815
945
1000
1015
1030
1045
1100
1115
1130
1145
_i 1200
6 1215
1230
1245
1300
1315
1330
1345
1400
1415
1430
1445
1500
MIN;
MAX:
AVO:
Kiln
O2
16,0
15.9
16,0
15.8
15.8
15,3
15.2
15.1
15.5
15.4
14,8
15.4
15.6
15.9
15.1
15.6
15.7
15,5
16.2
16.4
16.6
16.9
17.4
14.8
17.4
15.8
AB
O2
9.7
9.8
9.9
9.9
10.0
9.0
9.4
8.8
9.0
9.2
8.4
9.0
9.4
10.6
10.9
11.6
12.0
12.0
11.3
11.3
11.9
11.9
12.1
8.4
12.1
10.3
AB
CO
(ppm)
0.5
0.0
1.0
2.0
0.5
2.0
2.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
_ . , _ — — ,
2.0
3.5
1.0
2.0
2.0
1.0
1.5
1.5
1.0
2.0
1.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
3.5
1.5
AB AB
CO2 UTHC
(%) (mm)
6,6
6.5
6.4
6.8
6.7
7.2
7.4
7.5
7.2
7.0
7.3
6.8
6.1
6.3
5.7
5.6
5.4
5.8
5.7
5.3
5.3
5.2
5.2
7.7
6.4
0.1
1.2
1.2
1.3
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.3
1.4
1.7
1.9
2.1
1.6
2.0
2.1
2.1
2.1
2.0
1.7
1.5
1.7
1.7
1.6
0.1
2.1
1.6
SE
O2
10.9
11.2
11.1
10.7
11.0
10.3
10.6
10.3
10.5
10.5
9.9
10.2
10.6
10.6
10.4
10.5
10.6
10.1
10.6
10.3
10.8
10.7
10.7
9.9
11.2
10.6
SE
CO2
5.9
5.6
5.6
6.0
5.9
6.1
6.3
6.5
6.2
.. _AS _.
6.8
6.3
6.1
6.1
6.3
6.3
6.5
6.4
6.2
6.3
6.0
5.9
6.0
5.6
6.8
6.2
SE
NOx
(ppm)
61.3
61.3
63.0
60.3
59.3
58,8
59.3
55.8
57.8
63.2.
58.8
61.8
60.5
59.8
61.0
61.0
60.3
58.0
62.7
64.5
62.3
64.3
62.7
55.8
64.5
60.8
Stack Stack
O2 CO
(%) (ppm)
13.1
13.3
13.2
12.8
13.2
12.6
12.8
12.9
12.5
^12.4
12.0
12.3
12.4
12.6
12.6
12.5
12.6
12.3
12.6
12.4
12.7
12.6
12.8
12.0
13.3
12.7
4.1
2.9
2.8
3.2
3.2
3.5
2.9
2.3
2.3
_3.2_.
3.1
3.2
3.0
3.1
2.8
3.1
2.9
2.8
2.8
2.3
2.6
3.0
2.6
2.3
4.1
2.9
Stack
UTHC
(ppm)
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.2_
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0,0
0.3
0.2
-------
APPENDIX B
OPERATING DATA PLOTS
144
-------
TEST # 1 (01/30/91)
OPERATION, EVENTS AND SAMPLING
Stack 16
Scatter Exit M101A
Scatter Exit S6
9.0
4.5
15.0
7,0
1110
1090
19.0
7.5
875
510
275
Afterburner
Mterburner Exit M101A
Afterburner Brit M17 "
H
_<^^J^^AA/\M/l^/^^
afterburner OD2 (%)
—afterburner 0?(
afterburner tarp (°C)
tVW^^A^*^^^
kiln 0§
kilntaip
emulative waste fed (Kg)
11
13
15
Time of Day (Hr)
-------
i '
TEST # 2 (02/05/91)
OPERATION, EVENTS AND SAMPLING
Stack 16
Scrubber Exit M101A
Scatter Exit «6
9,0
4.5
15.0
Afterburner 1601
Afterburner Beit M101A
afterburner Exit M17 (-
_^J^j^^i^^
afterburner O>2 (*)
afterburner Cfc {%)
7.0
1110
1090
19.0
7.35
875
510
275
afterburner tarp (°C)
/v\/V^A/vV\/V%^^
kiln 02 (%)
kiln fcatp
oirulative waste fed' (Kg)
10
-------
TEST # 3A (01/31/91)
OPERATION, EVENTS, AND SAMPLING
Stack
9.0
4.5
15.0
afterburner (Xfy (%)
afterburner Oj (%)
*»•
-J
7.0
1110
afterburner tenp (CC)
1090
19.0
7.5
875
510
275
kiln Q2 <%)
kiln, tenp (°C)
emulative waste fed (Kg)
O P
i I I I
9.8
10.2
10.6
11
11.4
11.8
12.2
12.6
-------
TEST # 3B (01/31/91)
OPERATION, EVENTS AND SAMPLING
Stack VB
9.0
4.5
15.0
afterburner CDj (*)
afterburner 03 (%)
*>•
oo
7.0
1110
1090
19.0
afterburner tap
7.5
875
kiln 02 (%)
kiln tap
510
275
emulative waste fed (Kg)
i-t n
12.6
13
13.4
13.8
14.2
14.6
15
15.4
-------
TEST # 6 (02-06-91)
OPERATION, EVENTS AND SAMPLING
9.0
4.5
15.0
Afterburner Exit
Stack MB
Afterburner Exit ffi
Scrubber Esdt 0010 I
-I
^j\jTjWjJ\j^h*pj*f\Jj*J\^
afterburner 03(2 (%)
1090
19.0
7.5
875
510
275
afterburner Og (t)
afterburner tenp
\X\^f^y%AvAvA^^^
kiln 03 (%)
kiln tenp
cumdatlve waste fad (Kg)
11
13
15
-------
Ui
o
TEST # 7 (02/07/91)
OPERATION, EVENTS AND SAMPLING
Afterburner Beit M501
Stack M5
Afterburner Exit MB
ScrUter Bdt 0010 H
kiln tenp
510
275
amilatiws waste fed (Kj)
8
10
-------
APPENDIX C
LABORATORY ANALYSIS DATA
In the following reports, each sample has been assigned a sample ID number that
consists of a letter prefix, eight numbers, and usually a one or more letter suffix. The prefix
denotes the sampling location as follows:
i
• A: Sample taken in the afterburner exit flue gas
• B: Sample of the scrubber liquor
i
• E. Sample taken in the scrubber exit flue gas
i
• F: Sample of soil feeds i
• P: Pretest characterization sample of soil feeds
• Q: QA/QC sample prepared in the laboratory
• S: Sample taken in the stack;gas
• T: Sample of the kiln ash !
The first four digits of the eight-digit number represents the month and day the sample was
collected. The last four digits represent the! 24-hr clock time the sample was collected.
A suffix is often used to provide further information about the sample types. Suffixes
|
used and their meanings include: i
• BK: A blank sample
• F: The filter sample from a flue gas sampling train
151
-------
• I: An impinger sample from a flue gas sampling train. If followed by a number
or numbers, these denote which impinger sample: e.g., 1123 denotes the combined
first, second, and third impinger solutions
• MSK or SK: A matrix spike sample
• PW: The probe wash from a flue gas sampling train
• TCLP: A TCLP leachate sample
Table C-l summarizes the sample ID numbers for the pretest characterization samples
analyzed. Table C-2 summarizes the sample ID numbers for the samples collected in this
program. Table C-3 summarizes the sample ID numbers for the blank samples prepared for the
program. Table C-4 summarizes the sample ID numbers for the matrix spike samples prepared
for each analyte.
152
-------
TABLE C-l. PRETEST CHARACTERIZATION
SAMPLES ANALYZED
Sample ID
P11021431-O1
P11021430-O2
P11021442-L1
!
P11021444-L2
P11021355-M1
P11021415-M2
1
P11021417-M3
P11021356-M4
1
P11021450-M4D
P11021401-M5
1.
P11021452-M5D
I
P11021454-G1
P11Q21455-G2
P1102142'7-G3
j
P11Q21359-G4
P11021424-G5
P11021425-G6
P11021429-B1
P11021432-B2
1
P1102144^-B3
P1102144J7-B4
SoU
0-1
O-2
L-l
L-2
M-l
M-2
M-3
M-4
M-4D
M-5
M-5D
G-l
G-2
G-3
G-4
G-5
G-6
B-l
B-2
B-3
B-4
153
-------
TABLE C-2. TEST PROGRAM SAMPLES COLLECTED
Sample type
Testl
Test 2
Test3
Testfi
Test?
Soil feed
Kiln ash
Scrubber liquor
Afterburner exit:
Method 17 metals
Method I01A
Method 5 particulate, HCI
Scrubber exit:
Method 5 metals
Method 101A
Method 0010
Stack:
Method 5 particulate, HCI
F01281530-M2 F02050750-M5D F01281500-O1
F02060740-L2
T01301520-M2 T02051405-M5D 3a: T01311215-O1 T02061325-L2
3b: T01311515-O1.
B01301815-M2 B02051607-M5D B01311758-O2
A01301107M17 A02050932M17 -
A01301343101 A02051043101 -
E01301122M5 E02050953M5
E01301144101 E02050953101
F02070730-O2
T02071355-O2
B02061620-L2 B02071643-O2
A02061021M5 A02071102M5
E02061000MM5 E02071037MM5
S01301134M5 S02050958M5
3a: S01311045M5
3b: S01311345M5
S02061023M5
S02071100M5
-------
TABLE C-3, BLANK SAMPLES ANALYZED
Analyte class
Matrix
Scrubber system makeup
Metals train filter
Metals train impinger solution
Method 101A train filter
Trace metals
(excluding Hg)
Q04011000BBK
• Q04011000M5FBK
Q04011000M5IBK
Hg
Q0401100BBK
BK02071007-B2 .
Semivolatile organ ics Volatile
(including Fenac) organ ics
Q02111045TBK
m
Method 101A train impinger
solution
Method 0010 train sorbent resin
TCLP leaching solution
BK02071007-B3
Q04011500BLK
Q03151601TCLPBK Q03151601TCLPBK
Q02071435ABK
-------
TABLE C-4. MATRIX SPIKE SAMPLES ANALYZED
Analyte class
Matrix
Trace metals
(excluding Hg)
Hg
Semivolatile organics Volatile
(Including Fenac) organics
o\
Spiking solutions for preparing
external MS/MSD samples
Soil feed and kiln ash
Scrubber liquor
TCLP leachates
Metals train:
Filters
Probe wash
Impinger solution
Soil feed
Kiln ash
Scrubber liquor
Soil feed TCLP leachate
Kiln ash TCLP leachate
Metals train filter
Metals train impinger solution
Metals train probe wash
Method 101A train filter
Method 101A train impinger solution
Method 0010 train sorbent resin
Q05080830TFSK
Q05071030BSK
Q05071020TCLPSK
Q05071430FISK
Q05071040AEPWSK
Q05071530AEISK
F01281530M2SK
T01301520M2SK
B01301815M2SK
F01281530M2TCLPSK
T01301520M2TCLPSK
Q05081440AFISK
Q05081441EFISK
Q05081055AISK
Q05081100EISK
Q05081045APWSK
Q05081055EPWSK
Q05080830TFSK
Q05071030BSK
Q05071430FISK
Q05071530AEISK
F0128l53QM2SKHg
T01301520M2SKHg
B01301815SKHg
Q05081443AFISKHg
Q05081105AISKHg
F02070730MSK
T02071355MSK
BQ2071642MSK
B02071642MS
E06031200MSK
-------
APPENDIX C-l
PROXIMATE, ULTIMATE, AND WASTEWATER CHARACTERIZATION ANALYSES
157
-------
JLa/7O'ia£oii£.2., Line..
QUANTITATIVE MICROANALYSES
ORGANIC — INORGANIC
PHONE 615/546-1335 FAX 615/546-7209
MARRY W. GAL2SAITH. Px.D
CHAIRMAN CF -HE 3C*RD
KENNETH S. WCCDS
PWESiOEST
VELMA M. HUSSEiJ-
SECRGTARV-THEASliRER
DAVID J. STROM
SENIOR VICS-OSESICENT
GAIL R. HUTCHENS
EXECUTIVE VICi-=RE3!CENT
WILLIAM M. 1.CNGMIRE
VICE-FBESICENT
TECHNICAL SERVICES
Ms. Joan Bass
Acurex Corporation
Highway 65N
NCTR Bldg 45
Jefferson, Arkansas 72079
March 19, 1991
Received: February 26th
Dear Ms. Bass
Analysis of your compounds gave the following results:
Your #, Our #, Analysis,
TO2221430
Drake Ash
Kiln Ash
P-8423 pH (10% Slurry) 11.05
Total Solids 99.86 %
Cyanide 27.5 ppm
Oil &' Grease 107 ppm
Total Organic Halogen < 100 ppm
Free Liquid None detected
Drake Ash .
Kiln Ash - Water
Leachate
P-8424
Drake Ash
Kiln Ash - TCLP
Leachate
P-8425
PH
Total Solids
Total Dissolved Solids
Total Volatile Solids
Total Organic Carbon
COD
Ammonia
Cyanide
Oil & Grease
10.98
898 mg/liter
882 mg/liter
878 mg/liter
3 mg/liter
11 mg/liter
0.24 mg/liter
0.10 mg/liter
< 1 mg/liter
Total Organic Halogen 153 ppm
pH
Phenols
5.91
<0.01 mg/liter
LETTER AND SHIPMENTS BY US. MAIL — P.O. BOX 5I6IO. KNOXVILLE. TN 379SO-I6IO. OTHER CARRIERS - 2323 SYCAMORE DR. KNOXVILLE. TN 37921-I7SO
ESTABLISHED I9SO
158
-------
Ms. Joan Bass
Page 2 2
March 19,1991
•003
Your #,
P11021355 Ml
Our #, Analysis, As Received, Dry Basis
P-8426 % Moisture 7.69
% Carbon 4.23
% Hydrogen <0.5
% Nitrogen <0.5
% Sulfur 0.08
% Ash ; 87.85
Extractable Organic
Halogen 400 ppm
Sulfide 3.8 ppm
Cyanide < 1 ppm
P11021424-G5 P-8427 % Moisture 8.81
% Carbon
% Hydriogen
% Nitrogen
% Sulfur
96 Ash !
Extractable Organic
Halogen < 400 ppm
Sulfide; 20.8 ppm
Cyanide 1.0 ppm
P11021425-G6 P-8428 % Moisture 13.58
% Carbon
% Hydrogen
% Nitrogen
% Sulfur
% Ash i
I
Extract'able Organic
Halogen < 400 ppm
Sulfide j 6.9 ppm
Cyanide < 1 ppm
8.55
<0.5
<0.5
0.33
76.26
3.58
<0.5
<0.5
0.06
87.13
GALBRAITH LABORATORIES. INC.
159
-------
JOG*
Ms. Joan Bass
Page 3
March 19, 1991
Your #, Our $, Analysis, As Received, Dry Basis
P11021429 Bl P-8429 % Moisture 16.40
% Carbon <0.5
% Hydrogen <0.5
% Nitrogen <0.5
% Sulfur 0.02
%Ash 96.56
Extractable Organic
Halogen < 400 ppm
Sulfide 3.0 ppm
Cyanide < 1 ppm
P11021427-G3
P-8430
% Moisture
% Carbon
% Hydrogen
% Nitrogen
% Sulfur
% Ash
Extractable
Halogen
Sulfide
Cyanide
9.63
Organic
0.61
<0.5
<0.5
0.19
95.48
< 400 ppm
5.5 ppm
< 1 ppm
P11021430-02
P-8431
% Moisture
% Carbon
% Hydrogen
% Nitrogen
% Sulfur
% Ash
Extractable
Halogen
Sulfide
Cyanide
Organic
12.44
4.60
<0.5
<0.5
0.14
86.49
2234 ppm
6.9 ppm
< 1 ppm
GALBRAITH LABORATORIES. INC.
160
-------
Ms. Joan Bass
Page 4 .
March 19, 1991
.0Gb
Your #, Our #, Analysis,
P11021447-B4 P-8432 % Moisture
% Carbon
% Hydrogen
% Nitrogen
% Sulfur
% Ash
i
Extractable Organic
Halogen
Sulfide
Cyanide
As Received,
16.78
758 ppm
2.0 ppm
< 1 ppm
Dry Basis
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.05
96.64
P11021359-G4
P-8433
P11021455-G2
P-8434
% Moisture 16-76
% Carbon
% Hydrogen
% Nitrogen
% Sulfur
% Ash
Extractable Organic
Halogen < 400 ppm
Sulfide 32.2 ppm
Cyanide < 1 PPm
96 Moisture
% Carbon
% Hydrogen
% Nitrogen
% Sulfur
% Ash
I
Extrjactable Organic
Halogen
Sulfide
Cyanide
14.67
1.44
<0.5
<0.5
0.23
95.46
1.34
<0.5
<0.5
0.10
95.17
< 400 ppm
2.7 ppm
< 1 ppm
GALBRAITH LABORATORIES. INC.
161
-------
Ms. Joan Bass
Page 5
March 19,1991
Your I, Our #, Analysis, As Received, Dry Basis
P11021442 LI P-8435 % Moisture 60.88
% Carbon . 7.80
% Hydrogen 1.80
% Nitrogen <0.5
% Sulfur 4.2S
%Ash 65.15
Extractable Organic
Halogen < 400 ppm
Sulfide 2.0 ppm
Cyanide 4.3 ppm
P11021417 M3 P-8436 % Moisture 49.70
% Carbon
% Hydrogen
% Nitrogen
% Sulfur
% Ash
Extractable Organic
Halogen < 400 ppm
Sulfide 1.6 ppm
Cyanide < 1
2.22
1.03
<0.5
10.47
83.17
P11021450 M4D
P-8437
% Moisture
% Carbon
% Hydrogen
% Nitrogen
% Sulfur
% Ash
Extractable
Halogen
Sulfide
Cyanide
18.31
Organic
< 400 ppm
S.S ppm
< 1 ppm
2.47
<0.5
<0.5
0.14
94.03
GALBRAITH LABORATORIES, INC.
162
-------
Ms. Joan Bass
Page 6
March 19, 1991
Your #, Our f, Analvsis, As Received, Dry Basis
i
P11Q21445 B3 P-8438 % Moisture 17.05
% Carbon 0.5
% Hydrogen <0.5
% Nitrogen <0.5
% Sulfur 0.03
% Ash 96.48
Extractable Organic
Halogen < 400 ppm
Sulfide 5.4 ppm
Cyanide < 1 ppro
P11021431-01
P-8439
% Moisture
% Carbon
% Hydrogen
% Nitrogen
% Sulfur
17.35
12.89
<0.5
<0.5
0.90
77.23
Extractable
Halogen
Sulfide
Cyanide
Organic
< 400 ppm
9.4 ppm
< 1 ppm
P11021432-B2
P-8440
% Moisture
% Carbon
% Hydrogen
% Nitrogen
% Sulfur
% Ash
Extractable
Halogen
Sulfide
Cyanide
Organic
16.85
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.02
96.99
.< 400 ppm
< 2 ppm
< 1 ppm
GALBRAITH LABORATORIES. INC.
163
-------
UGG&
Ms. Joan Bass
Page 7
March 19, 1991
Your #, • Our #, Analysis, As Received,
P11021415-M2 P-8441 % Moisture 23.70
% Carbon
96 Hydrogen
% Nitrogen
% Sulfur
% Ash :
Extractable Organic
Halogen < 4°° PPm
Sulfide 8.9 ppm
Cyanide < 1 PPm
Dry Basis
5.78
<0.5
<0.5
0.13
85.49
P11021452-M5D
P-8442 % Moisture 12.42
% Carbon
% Hydrogen
96 Nitrogen
% Sulfur
% Ash
Extractable Organic
Halogen < 400 ppm
Sulfide . 10.9 ppm
Cyanide < 1
5.22
<0.5
<0.5
2.42
83.81
P11021401-M5
P-8443
% Moisture
% Carbon
% Hydrogen
% Nitrogen
% Sulfur
% Ash
Extractable
Halogen
Sulfide
Cyanide
18.39
Organic
0.79
<0.5
<0.5
0.56
95.79
< 400 ppm
12.0 ppm
< 1 ppm
GALBRAITH LABORATORIES. INC.
164
-------
Ms. Joan Bass
Page 8
March 19, 1991
Your f,
P11021454-G1
Our i, Analysis, As Received,
i
P-8444 % Moisture 23.41
% Carbon
% Hydrogen
% Nitrogen
% Sulfur
% Ash
I ' •
Extractable Organic
Halogen < 400 pom
Sutfide 14.0 ppm
Cyanide < 1 ppm
Dry Basis
8.36
0.84
-------
Project: Drake Chemical
U.S. E.P.A I.R.F. Laboratory
7re-burn Characterization Analyses
Pago 1 of 1
Method 9045 ASTH D3174 ASTM 03173
Sample pH Ash Moiature
(«) (»)
711021424
711021447
P11021445
P11021452
711021429
P11021455
P11021430
P1102142S
711021442
711021432
P110214SO
711021444
711021417
711021427
73.1021401
711021415
711021454
711021356
P110213S9
711021431
711021355
8.36
6.52
S.98
7.89
6.08
7.78
7.72
8.16
9.82
6.51
7.61
7.84
10.00
7.79
7.68
8.31
8.41
7.54
7.99
7.90
8.44
- 82
80
78
83
81
81
81
77
35
80
77
83
44
87
75
74
66
74
79
69
81
12
18
20
14
17
16
12
19
57
18
18
11
52
9
21
19
22
22
16
23
15
* ASTH D3286
Density HHV
(g/cc) (Btu/lb>
1.36
1,82
1.64
2.16
1.86
1.90
2.12
• 1.81
1.15
1.84
1.64
1.97
1.49
2.24
1.S9
1.65
1.86
2.01
1.73
1.49
2.13
b
WNC
WNC
WNC
WNC
WHC
' WNC
WNC
WNC
WNC
HHC
, WNC
WHC
WHC
WHO
HHC
WNC
WNC
WNC
WHC
WNC
WHC
Hoto a) DanaIty « cample weight/volume of water displaced
displacement was measured by water level change when sample
wa> addad to a partially filled graduated cylinder
b) WHC - Hill Hot Combust
Analynt:
Laboratory
Manager (actin'
Datet .__//
fifat
Date: /(J
-------
20 »gi 13:49 fiflLBRfllTH LflBS 615-546-7209
P.I
-L-
CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
i
P.O. BOX S161O. KNOXVILLB, TN 37930-I61O
OTHER CARRIERS • 2333 SYCAMORE DR. KNOXVILLE.TN 37921
| 6T5/540-1338
Ms. Joan Sesa
Acurax Corporation
Highway 65 N.,NCTR Bid?. 45
72079
March 20, 1991
Received: ?«b. 26tft
Kiln Ash TCLP Leachafca, Drake Ash
»H CSmndaM UnM
CatoCUnHi]
Odor or Roam Tamarann* (Unlit)
ScKffie ConduEMnc* MIcrtMihat
TiwtwjUy Ucdoon Unitt)
AcMliy (IMol) « CaCOt
AlkoUnllv m GsOOi
HordMH Total CoCOg
Total Sothk
Total Qltwl**d &UA
Taial luKntidKl Solid*
Tofol Votatll* SolMi
StnfceMi Sdkn •
Total Oiqenlc Carton (TOO
Oiualv*d Oirysui COO)
800(5«i>y>
SCO iUltlimf**
Owmieai Oxvcun OmnmJ (COO1
Ammorta fin N)
K|«ldo»il Nlrroetn
Oroonfc Ntnoo«n
Nitnrt»(o« N)
NlMlM (at N)
Phui»»>ann-0f*o (at P)
Phcaah«rv»-T S
Sulfttft fat S3
SuMht (u SC%) .
Bromld*
ChkMldt
Cyarridn
FUnrtdi
OHSi&MM
Fh«nel«
Surtxtann
Silicon
teran
C«cal SMBMUCC! loeltrla
Catllwm Baturla
Aluminum
Antimony
Arabic
Barium
Bavlttum
CcAWum
Ca'diiRi
OHomium, H*xa>aicnt <0.01
Oxanium, Total
Catott
Ceppor
Iran
Uod
LHhJum
Mognmium
Maneanta
Mmury
MalyMtnum
Nldul
Poutsbm
Stlwilwm
Sllvw
Sodium
SfraMlum
Tfn
titanium
Vanadium
Zinc
1
AN results art reported M mgflittr unless othtrwls* noted.
_Gail R. Hutchena,Exec.Vice-President
167
-------
APPENDIX C-2
SEMIVOIATILE ORGANIC, FENAC, AND PCS AND PESTICIDE ANALYSES
168
-------
Drake GhentcaI Superfund site Pre-shifuxmt Soople Characterization Analyses
page 1
Project: Drake Chemical Superfund Site
U.S. 4PA IRF
Preshlpaent Screening by GC/FID
Sanpte Ho.
Parameter / Location
PI 102-
1429
B-1
P1102-
1432
8-2
Organic Conpound* / Concentration (mg/kg)
• £ p-xylene
o-xylene
1 , 2-0 i chl orobenzene
1,4-Dichlorobenzene
1 Nitrobenzene
1,2,4-TriehlorobeiBene
Naphthalene
Hexachlorobutadiene
Hexach I orocyc I opentadiene
2,4,6-THchlorophenot
Pentachlorophenol
Phenanthrene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
' Chrysene
BenzoCbJF luoranthene
Benzo(k)Fluoranthene
Benzo(a)Pyrene
IndenoCI ,2,3-cd)Pyren«
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
BenzoCs, h, 1 Jperylene
B-naphthylainfne
p.p'-ODD
p,p"-DOT
Fenac methyl ester
Surrogate Compounds / Recovery
2-Fluorophenol
Phenol 06
2- F luorobipheny I
Nitrobenzene o5
4-Terphenyl d14
2,4,6-Tribramphenol
HD
HD
NO
ND
KD
ND
HD
ND
ND
HD
HD
HO
HO
HD
ND
ND
ND
< 10.0
HD
ND
NO
ND
ND
NO
N/A
(X)
95.4
a
70.5
74.6
77.6
187
ND
ND
HO
HO
HO
HO ,
HO
HO
NO
NO
HD
HD
NO
NO
ND
ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
ND
ND
N/A
103
8
80.0
132
73.8
145
P1102-
144S
B-3
I
I
NO i
ND .
ND '
NO
NO
HO i
ND i
ND
KD
NO |
NO '
KD -
ND ,
HO :
KD ;
ND !
ND
ND i
ND
ND
ND
ND j
HO ;
HD ;
H/A ;
I
76.S,
a
62. S
101
63.0
52,0
P1102-
1447
B-4
NO
NO
NO
ND
HD
HO
NO
NO
KD
HO
HO
HO
NO
NO
HO
HO
HD
HO
HO
HO
ND
HD
ND
ND
N/A
71.4
a
60.2
119
52.1
58.5
P1102-
1454
6-1
ND
KD
ND
HD
ND
ND
ND
NO
HO
HO
HD
< 10.0
< 10.0
< 10.0
ND
< 10.0
ND
< 10.0
ND
NO
NO
HD
ND
ND
ND
183
a
82. 5
a
93.3
a
SSKXBKXttKC
P1102-
1455
C-2
NO
NO
ND
ND
HO
HD
< 10.0
KD
HD
HD
< 10.0
< 10.0
« 10.0
< 10.0
< 10.0
HD
HD
HO
< 10.0
ND
ND
NO
HO
HO
< 10.0
217
a
83.7
167
113
a
tmmmmmmmnK
P1102-
1427
B-3
NO
ND
HO
ND
HD
ND
ND
ND
NO
HD
HO
HO
HD
NO
HD
HD
HD
NO
< 10.0
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
ND
278
a
82.4
181
90.0
a
P1102-
1359
G-4
HD
ND
ND
HO
NO
NO
HD
KD
NO
NO
HD
NO
< 10.0
ND
NO
< 10.0
ND
ND
< 10.0
NO
HD
NO
NO
ND
ND
93.1
a
60.3
< 20.0
67.0
a
caexBimes
P1102-
1424
S-S
NO
NO
ND
NO
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
HO
HO
NO
NO
ND
HD
KD
ND
ND
HD
ND
HD
HO
ND
H/A
77.1
a
61.6
< 20.0
73.5
a
P1102-
1425
fi-6
HD
HD
HD
ND
KD
HO
ND
HO
HD
HD
HD
ND
NO
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
HO
HO
HD
H/A
205
a
76.9
107
73.2
a
Nate a - Coelution prevented quantification
N/A - Not analyzed
Analyst
Date
i 169
-------
Drake Cticorical Supirfwd Site Pre-shlptwnt Saapl* Characterization Analyses
Prtihipwmt Screening by CC/FIO
Saupt* Ho.
Parameter / Location
P1102-
1442
1-1
P1102-
1444
L-2
P1102-
1431
0-1
P1102-
1430
0-2
PI 102-
1355
H-1
P1 102-
141S
M-2
P1102-
1417
H-3
«ssca£C2X
PI 102-
1356
K-4
PI 102-
1450
H-40
P1102-
1401
M-5
P1102-
14S2
H-'JD
Organic Conpoundt / Concentration (nc/kg)
• I p-xylen»
o-xylent
1 ,2-Oichlorobtmtnt
1,4-Olchlorabenxene
Nitrobenzene
1,2,4-TriehIorobttnzene
Naphthalene
' Hexichlorebutadicne
Hexadilorocvcloptntadien*
2,4.6-THchlorophenol
Pentiehloroohtnol
Phentnthrtn*
Flucnimhirvj
Pyrene
Chryiene
lenzo(b)fluoranttitne
lenzoOOFluaranthene
Smxo(a)pyrene
Indenod ,Z,3-ed)Pyrane
Dibenzo(alh}anthracene
l«nzoFluorobiphenyl
Hitrobenztne o5
4-Terphtnyl d14
2,4,6-TribroBochenol
ND
HD
ND
NO
NO
HO
NO
KD
HD
KB
HD
< 10.0
NO
ND
ND
HD
HD
HD
NO
ND
ND
ND
KD
KD
N/A
«>
75,9
a
42.9
110
30.5
63.0
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
KD
NO
ND
NO
ND
ND
NO
KD
HO
NO
ND
HD
ND
HD
ND
NO
< 10.0
< 10.0
55.0
67.0
a
£4.9
59.8
68.8
206.0
NO
HO
KD
HO
HO
ND
ND
HD
KD
NO
ND
< 10.0
KD
« 10.0
< 10.0
KD
ND
< 10.0
HD
HO
ND
NO
HD
NO
NO
132
a
64.0
72.8
77.0
a
ND
MO
KD
KD
ND '
< 10.0
KD
KD
« 10.0
KD
ND
« 10.0
« 10.0
< 10.0
NO.
< 10.0
< 10.0
< 10.0
ND
NO
NO
ND
ND
ND
NO
171
a
87.6
67.7
76.0
a
HO
KD
HO
HD
NO
HO
KD
ND
KD
KB
ND
ND
< 10.0
< 10.0
< 10.0
ND
< 10.0
< 10.0
ND
HD
ND
HD
HO
ND
N/A
54.0
a
63.7
< 20.0
71.8
a
NO
HO
HO
< 10.0
KD
ND
< 10.0
KD
« 10.0
NO
KD
« 10.0
< 10.0
< 10.0
< 10.0
< 10.0
NO
< 10.0
ND
< 10.0
ND
ND
NO
KD
N/A
57.5
a
75.8
56.5
86.9
a
s***±a:c±:±
HD
KD
HD
NO
NO
ND
' NO
HO
ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
KO
ND
< 10.0
NO •
HD
KD
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
N/A
124
a
78.5
112
87.7
*
NO
KD
HO
NO
HO
KD
KD
KO
KD
HO
HO
HD
ND
NO
HO
ND
HD
HD
NO
NO
HO
HO
KD
NO
N/A
152
a
93.5
176
95.2
a
XVS3CWX3*
KD
KD
HO
KO
KO
NO
KO
KD
HO
HO
NO
ND
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
N/A
87.6
a
75.3
107
73.5
a
ND
NO
ND
KO
ND
< 10.0
< 10.0
NO
HD
ND
ND
NO
ND
HD
NO
ND
ND
ND
KO
NO
ND
ND
ND
KD
N/A
104
a
75.7
141
76.4
a
HO
HU
HI)
Ml
Nt)
HU
HI)
NO
HU
Nil
Ml
HU
no
HD
KD
Ml
KD
KD
ND
KD
KD
ND
HO
KD
N/A
02.5
0
«.9
53.3
(5.0
a
Not* a - CottutI on prevented quantification
N/A - Hot analyzed
Analyst ,
Date
-\3-1b
170
-------
Project : Drake Cheated Superffnd Site
U.S. EPA IRF laboratory
EPA Hsthod 8030 Analyses Data
•y MeMlMt Packard 5880-ECD
POL • Practical Ouantitation Limit
«0 * Nat Detected
Sanpl* 10 Nuifcer
Sstpl* Location
Collection Oate
Extraction Oate
Analysis Oatc
Anelyte / Concentration
Tsrg»t Analytes
Keptachlor
Aldrin
Heptachlor epoxlde
p,p'-ODE
Oieldrln
p,p'-DDB
p,p*-60T
Chlordane
Tsxiphen*
Aroclor 1242
Aroclor 1254
Aroclor 1260
Sample 10 Nucber
Sample location
Collection Date
Ext ruction Oat*
Analysis Date
Anelyte / Concentration
Target Analytes
Neptschlor
Aldrin
Heptsehlor epoxide
p.p'-DDE
Dioldrln
p,p'-DDO
p,p'-DOT
Chlordans
Toxaphent
Aroclor 1242
Aroclor 1254
Aroclor 1260
mmmmmmmmmmmmm
PI 1021442
L-1
11-02-90
11-05-90
12-03-90
(mg/kg)
.............
NO
ND
ND
NO
NO
HO
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
P1 1021356
H-4
11-02-90
11-04790
11-08-90
(mg/kg)
NO
! NO
ND
NO
ND
NO
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
PI 1021444
L-2
11-02-90
11-05-90
12-03-90
(ng/kg)
ND
ND
NO
2.78
NO
1.78
m
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
P1102U50
H-4D
11-02-90
11-04-90
11-09-90
<«s/kg>
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
PI 1021431
0-1
11-02-90
11-04-90
11-12-90
(ma/kg)
!
ND
;ND
MO
NO
s NO
HO
NO
JND
!ND
ND
j DO
INO
i
P11021401
H-5
11-02-90
11-04-90
11-j 12-91
l«S/kg)
"""T™""
:ND
|ND
'no
'NO
ND
MO
*ND
'NO
TO
"ND
HO
'NO
P11021430
0-2
11-02-90
11-05-90
11-13-90
(mg/kg)
NO
HO
m
0.163
ND
0.112
0.182
ND
NO
NO
HO
ND
P1 1021452
H-50
11-02-90
11-06-90
11-13-91
(mg/kg)
NO
ND
ND
NO
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
P11021355
M-1
11-02-90
11-04-90
11-12-90
c''<^ f Laboratory Manager {,
'Date
. (.
-------
Project: Or«k» Chemical Superfund Silt
U.S. EPA IRF laboratory
EPA Method 8270 Aiulyif I Data.
By Hewlett Packard 5880/5970B MSD
POL - Practical Quantlteflon Unit
NO - Not Detected
N/A - NotAppXsibt*
• - Indicatae analyta wit not Included In calibration table. Raiponie Factor atiumed to b* 1.
b • RapHcate annlyilt
Sample ID Number
Sample Matrix / Type
Collection Data
Extraction Date
Analytla Data
Analyta / Concentration
Target Analyiaa
1 ,4-DIehlorobenzene
1 ,2,4-Tilchlorobenzene
H«xachlorobutad!en»
Mexachloroeyclopentadiane
p,p'-DDT
PenUchlorophonol
2,4,6-Trlchlorophenol
Fluoranthana
Bsnzo{a)pyrena
Chrysena
Pyrehe
Phenanlhrene
lndeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrena
1,2-Dlchlorobenzone (a)
8anz{a)anthracane {a}
Naphthalene (a)
Nitrobenzene (a)
4-Nltroan!Iine (a)
p,p'-ODD (a)
2-Naphthyl*mln* (a)
Olbenzofuran (a)
Dlbonzo(a,h)anthr«e»ne (a)
B*nzo(g,h,l)perylena (a)
Benzo(b)fluoranthena (a)
Banzo(k)fluorantbane(a)
Surrogate Compound / Recovery (%)
2-Fluorophenol
Phenol d-6
Nltrobenzana d-S
2-Fluoroblphenyl
2,4,6-Tribromophenol
4-Terphenyld-14 />
T0208132S
A«h Method
L-2 PQL
02-06-31
02-14-91
03-15-91
(mn/ko) (mo/kg)
ND 0.51
NO 0.51
ND 0.51
ND 0.51
NO 0.51
ND 1.01
NO 1.01
NO O.S1
ND 0.51
ND 0.51
ND 0.51
ND 0.51
ND 0.51
ND 0.51
NO 0.51
ND 0.51
ND 0.51
ND 0.51
NO 0.51
ND 0.51
NO . 0.51
ND O.S1
ND 0.51
ND 0.51
NO 0.51
85.9 N/A
56.9 N/A
73.5 N/A
73.6 N/A
86.0 N/A
90.1 N/A
T02071355 T02071355 (b)
Ath Alh Method
O-2 O-2 PQL
02-07-91 02-07-81
02-14-S1 02-14-91
03-1S-91 07-15-91
(mo/kg) (ma/kat (ma/ka)
ND ND 0.66
ND ND 0.66
ND NO 0.66
ND NO 0.66
ND ND 0.66
ND NO 1.33
ND ND 1.33
NO ND O.GG
NO ND 0.66
ND ND 0.66
ND NO 0.66
ND ND 0.66
NO ND 0.66
NO ND 0.66
NO NO 0.66
< POL < PQL 0.66
ND ND 0.66
NO ND 0.68
ND ND 0.66
ND ND 0.66
ND ND 0.66
ND ND 0.66
NO ND 0.66
ND ND 0.66
ND ND 0.66
103.0 72.1 N/A
110.0 78.1 N/A
89.8 51 .8 N/A
80.7 51.4 N/A
85.2 81.9 N/A
94.5 51.6 N/A
F02060740
Feed Method
L-2 PQL
02-06-91
02-14-91
03-15-91
(ma/kal Img/ka)
< PQL 0.77
< PQL 0.77
ND 0.77
< PQL 0.77
ND 0.77
NO 1.54
ND 1.54
< PQL 0.??
ND 0.77
ND 0.77
< PQL 0.77
ND 0.77
ND 0.77
< PQL 0.77
ND 0.77
< PQL 0.77
ND 0,77
ND 0.77
ND 0.77
ND 0.77
NO 0.77
NO 0.77
ND 0.77
ND 0.77
ND 0.77
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
F02070730
Feed Method
0-2 PQL
02-07-91
02-14-91
03-15-91
(mg/ka) (mo/ha)
< PQL 7.S3
43.4 7.53
ND 7.63
ND 7.53
ND 7.53
NO 15.1
ND 15.1
43.5 7.53
11.2 7.S3
ND 7.53
43.t 7.53
57.8 7.53
24.2 7.53
ND 7.53
NO 7.53
< PQL 7.53
ND 7.53
ND 7.53
ND 7.53
ND 7.53
ND 7.53
ND 7.53
. ND 7J3
ND 7.53
NO 7.53
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
Analyst.
V&l
Date It-
-------
Projoct: Drake Chemical Superfund SIM
U.S. EPA IRF Laboratory
EPA Method 8270 Analys«i Oat*
By Hewlett Packard 5880/59708 MSO
POL - Pr«otlc«! Quantllallon Umlt
ND - Not Detected
N/A- Not Applicable
* - Indicates «nalyte was not Included In calibration table. Response Factor assumed to b* t.
b • Replicate analysis
Sample ID Number
Sample Matrix /Type
Collection Data
Extraction Date
Analysis Date
Anelyle / Concentration
Target Analyles
1,4-Dlchlorobenzene
1 ,2,4-Trlchlorobenzene
Hexachlorobutadlano
Hexachlorocyclopentadlene
p.p'-DDT
Pentachlorophenol
2.4,6-Trichlorophenol
Fluoranthone
Benzo(a)pytene
Chryaene
Pyrene
Phenanthrene
lndeno(1 .2.3-cd)pyrene
1,2-Dlchlorobenzane (a)
Benz(a)anthracene (a)
Naphthalene (a)
Nitrobenzene (a)
4-NHioanillne (a)
p,p'-DDD (a)
2-Naphthylamlne (•)
Dlbenzoluran (s)
Dlbenzo(a,h)anthraoene (a)
Benzo(g,h.i)perylen» (a)
Benzo(b)lluoranthene (a)
Benzo(k)fluoranthene(a)
Surrogate Compound / Recovery (%)
2-Fluorophenol
Phenol d-E
Nitrobenzene d-5
2-Fluoroblphenyl
2,4,6-Tribromophenol
4-Terphenyl d-14
B02061620
Uquor
02*06-91
02-12-91
03-15-91
(Ufl/L)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
— ... __ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
169
120
145
139
213
178
B02071643
Uquor
02-07-91
02-12-91
03-15-91
(uart.)
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
NO
NO
— — — ND
ND
ND
NO
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
NO
ND
ND
ND
81.5
63.7
138
135
101
ISO
Method
PQL
(ug/U
.770
,770
.770
,770
,770
1.54
1,54
.-770
,770
,770
.770
,770
.770
.770
.770
.770
,770
.770
,770
.770
.770
.770
.770
.770
.770
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
E02061000MM5
Flu* Gas
02-06-91
02-07-91
03-14-91
(uq/lraln)
ND
ND
NO
ND
NO
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
121
121
139
147
107
148
E02071037MM5
Flue Oat
02-07-91
02-08-91
03-15-91
(ufi/lrain)
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
ND
NO
ND
NO
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
61.6
4S.S
129
125
101
188
E02071037MMI
Flue Oat
02-07-91
02-08-91
05-21-91
(ua/lraln)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
" ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
46.5
35,4
97.3
76.3
52.8
111
002071 435 ABK
MMS Blank
02-07-91
02*08-91
07-15-91
(un/traln)
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
ND
NO
ND
NO
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
52.3
34.7
71.9
63,5
95.1
69.8
Mtthod
PQL
(ua/lraln)
20.0
20,0
20.0
20,0
20.0
40.0
40.0
—20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20,0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Analyst
Date
-------
SemrvoMle Organic Q* RewRi'• Matrix SpIWMtttc Spike DupHcefc
U.S.EPAfRFUboratory
EPA Method 8270 Analywi Dots
By HevA>HP«kiir(J 5860/69706 MSD
Sample ID Number B02071642MSK B02071642MSKD E06031200MSK E06031200MSKO T02071355MSK T02071355MSKO F02070730MSX F02070730MSKD
Sample Mat* /Type Liquor Liquor MM5 Train MM5 Train Ash Ash Feed Feed
Mil* Spike Mat* Spike Mat* Spike Mat* Spike Matrix Spike Mat* Spike Mat* Spike Mat* Spike
Collection Date 05-31-91 05-31-91 0644-91 0644-91 0644-91 0644-91 0644-91 0644-91
Extraction Date 05-31-91 05-31-91 0644-91 0644-91 O6-04-9I 0644-91 0644-91 0644-91
Analysis Date 06-19-91 06-19-91 06-19-91 06-19-91 06-1941 06-19-91 * 0841-91 0621-91
Spike Compound /Recovery (%)
Phenol
2-Chlorophenol
1,4-Dichlotobenzene
N-nHro«odl-n-propylamln»
1 ,2,4-Trlchlorobeniene
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol
Aoenaphthene
4-NHro phenol
2,4-Dlnltrotoluene
Pentachlorophenol
Dl-n-butylphlhalete
Fluoranthena
Pyrene
Chiyiene
Surrogate Compound / Recovery (%)
2-Fkiorophenol
Phenol d-6
Nitrobenzene d-5
2-Fluoroblph«nyl
2,4,6-Tribiomophanot
4-Terpheny) d-14
44.1
74.7
63.8
83.8
69.3
86.6
74.6
41.4
86.7
91.4
79.8
77.4
78,3
62,1
55.3
50.3
71.4
86.3
1IC.O
74.2
44.3
75.7
64,9
78.8
69.8
82.6
74.8
22.6
76,4
89.8
81.2
84.3
67.8
83,7
63.6
49.9
75,4
69,4
100,0
87.3
68.8
70.6
63.4
73.4
61.7
77.5
65.0
90.0
82.6
77.4
70.7
72.5
67.3
73.9
76.2
85.7
61.3
67.7
94,9
62,9
71.1
68.7
65.1
70.6
62.0
73.7
65.2
59.5
66.3
74.2
67,6
69.6
70,0
78.1
78.0
83.0
63.8
59.2
81,2
62.9
82.8
71.8
74.3
103.0
87.2
105.0
102.0
100.0
113.0
106.0
103.0
103.0
113.0
90.1
37.7
63.3
44.5
54.0
04,8
67.3
81.6
72.4
72.6
106.0
85.7
114.0
102.0
120.0
123.0
110.0
107,0
112.0
109.0
94,1
40.1
55.8
48.6
52.1
83,0
69.8
86.3
76.9
77,8
83.6
92.9
81.5
75.2
78.1
34.4
72.4
77.3
84.0
122.0
84.0
92.8
112.0
76,3
78.2
51.8
109.0
86.0
76.0
76.7
77.8
96,9
79.8
75.5
86.2
29.1
67.6
60.1
92.5
128.0
62.9
102.0
110.0
63.0
75,5
56.3
121.0
Andy*!]
-------
Projeci: Drake Chemical Supertund Site
U.S. EPA IRF Laboratory
By Hewlett Packard 5880 FID
Sample ID Number B02061620
Sample Matrix /Type Liquor
Feed Material L-2
Collection Date 02-06-91
Extraction Date 02-13-01
Analysis Data 02-13-01
Concentration (ug/L)
Fenae {*)
Prac. Quant. Limit
Sample
100
ND
B02071643 E02061000MM5 E02071037MM5
Liquor Flue Gas Flue Gas -
O-2 L-2 0-2
02-07-91
02-14-91
02-14-91
(ug/L)
100
ND
02-00-91
02-14-91
02-14-91
(ug/iraln)
100
ND
02-07-91
02-14-91
02-14-91
(ug/traln)
100
ND
F01291520
Feed
L-2
01-29-91
05-07-91
OS-07-91
(mg/kg)
10.0
69.7
F01291S30
Feed
0-2 _....
01-29-91
05-07-91
05-07-91
(mg/kg)
10.0
ND
T02061325
Ash
L2_._.
02-00-91
05-09-91
05-09-91
(mg/kg)
10.0
ND
ND = Not Detected
Analyst
Date
-------
APPENDIX C-3
VOLATILE ORGANIC ANALYSES
176
-------
Compound Q02111M5TBK B02061 620-12 B02071M2-O2 F0206074042 F02070730-O2 T02061 325-12 TD207135SO2
Sampte Matrix Scrubber W«tw Scrubbtr Water Foad F««d Aih Aih
Amlyte /Conc«nlroflon (pg/L) Itigli) Jig/I) tvafty) (PO^O) fpgfta) k'S/Vo)
Chloromethane <
Bfomomethane <
Vinyl chloride <
Chloroefhane <
Methylene chloride <
Carton disuide <
1,1-dichloroethene <
Trans-1 ,2-dichloroethene <
1,2-dichlor oethane <
Chloroform <
2-butanone <
-1,1j1-trichloroethane— <—
Carbon tetrachlorfde <
Brornocfichlororrnetnane <
1,2,dicfiloropropan9 <
Cte-1t34fich1oropropane <
Trichloroethene <
Benzene <
Trans-1 ,3
-------
\ Surrogate Recovery
Compound
Q02111045TBK B92061620-L2 F02071642-02 F02060740-I.2 F02070730-02 102081328-1,2 T0207
1 04-1 , 2-dichloroathane
|08-toluene
|4-bromof luorobenzene
I.
[Jate sampled
jlate analyzed
1
92
87
96
02/11/91
02/21/91
1160
97
113
02/06/91
02/20/91
101
95
93
02/07/91
02/21/91
| 96
I 82
| 98
1
[02/06/91
j 02/20/91
1
I 76
1 «
1 96
1
102/07/91
j 02/21/91
1
| 88 •
| 100
| 91
1
1 02/06/91
j 02/20/91
I
| 88
| 88
j 98
1 .
j 02/07/91
j 02/21/91
1
oo
Compound
Matrix Spike Recovery (X)
B02071642MS B02071642HSD
|04-1 ,2-dichlrorethane
| 08- toluene
| 4-bronof Juorobenzene
1
1
| 1 , 1-dl chl oroethene
jchlorobenzene
(Toluene
JTrlchloroethene
| Benzene
I
67
60
85
78
46
101
97
87
92
64
93
82
42
66
92
79
-------
APPENDIX C-4
I
TRACE METAL ANALYSES (Hg EXCLUDED)
179
-------
INTERNATIONAL
TECHNOLOGY
CORPORATION SERVICES
GERTIHCATE OF ANALYSIS
Aeurex Corporation January 10, 1991
Highway 65, N. NCTR Bldg. 45
Jefferson, AR 72079
ATTN: Joan Bass .
Job Number: ACX 47309 . P.O. Number: HA
This 1s the Certificate of Analysis for the following samples:
Client Project ID: Drake Chemical
Date Received by Lab: 12/12/90
Number of Samples: Fourteen (14)
Sample Type: Soil
I* Introduction
On 12/12/90, fourteen (14) soil samples arrived at the ITAS-Knoxville, Tennessee,
laboratory from Acurex Corporation in Jefferson, Arkansas. The list of analytical
tests performed, as well as date of receipt and analysis, can be found in the
attached report.
II. Analytical Results/Hethodology
The analytical results for this report are presented by analytical test. Each set of
data will include sample identification information and the analytical results.
Please note that the data are not blank corrected and are reported on a dry weight
basis.
The samples were analyzed for the requested metals by inductively coupled plasma
spectroscopy (ICP), cold vapor atomic absorption spectroscopy (CYAA) and graphite
furnace atomic absorption spectroscopy (QFAA) based on EPA SW-846 methods 6010, 7060,
7471 and 7740.
Reviewed and Aproved:
_
Alyce/R. Moore
Laboratory Manager
Am&ncan Council ol Independent Laboratories
lr.temalicr.3! Association o! Environmental Testing laboratories
Aittencan Association (or Laboratory Accreditation
It Analytical Services. 5815 Mlddlebrook Pike, Knorville, TN 37921
180
-------
Acurex Corporation
January 10, 1991
Client Project ID: Drake Chemical
IT ANAOTICAL SERVICES
5815 MTODLEBROOK PIKE
KNOXVILLE.TN
Job Number: ACX 47309
III. Quality Control
Routine laboratory level I QC was followed.
The samples were digested on 01/04/91 for ICP and 01/04/91 for 6FAA. The samples for
mercury analysis were prepared just prior to analysis. The CVAA analysis for mercury
was performed on 12/27/90; the 6FAA analyses for arsenic and selenium were performed
on 01/04-06/91; the remaining metals were analyzed by ICP on 01/04/91. All run QC
was acceptable. Due to the high iron concentrations in the samples, all thallium
results should be suspect as false positives. No other problems were encountered.
181
-------
Acurex Corporation
January 10, 1991
Client Project ID: Drake Chemical
IT ANALYTICAL SERVICES
5815 MIDDLEBROOK PIKE
ENOXV1LL1,TN
Job Number: ACX 47309
METALS ANALYSIS
Results in mg/kg (ppm) dry weight
Sample Matrix: Soil
Client Sample ID
Lab Sample ID:
antimony
arsenic
barium
beryllium
cadmium
chromium
copper
lead
nickel
selenium
silver
thallium
zinc
mercury
: Hethod Blank P110213590-¥ PI 1021424(1 -5" P11021425
PBSJ0116/J0119 PP3861 i©J . PP3862 PP3863
3 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.1 U
0.5 U
1 U
1 U
3 U
2 U
0.2 U
0.6
4 U
1.4
0.1 U
4 U
9.8
91.2
0.8
1.0
28
45
83 ;
20
0*2 U
0.6. U
41
99.2
0.14
3 U"
20.3
106
0.8
0.8
12
59
113
14
0.4 U
0.6 U
39
141
0.1 U
4
13.6
81.9
1.1
0.6
25
20
10
22
0.5
0.6
45
112
0.19
U
U
U
U
Digestion Date: 01/04/91
Analysis Date: 01/04/91 (ICP), 12/27/90 (CVAA)
U - Compound was analyzed for but not detected. The number is the detection limit
for the sample.
182
-------
Acurex Corporation
January 10, 1991
Client Project ID: Drake Chemical
IT ANALYTICAL SERVICES
5813 MIDDLEBROOK PIKE
XNOXVILLE, TN
Job Number: ACX 47309
Client Sample ID:
Lab Sample ID:
antimony
arsenic
barium.
beryllium
cadmium
chromium
copper
lead
nickel
selenium
silver
thallium
zinc
mercury
METALS ANALYSIS
Results in mg/kg (ppm) dry weight
Sample iMatrix: Soil
P11021427&-^
PP3864
3 U
11.6
71
0.7
0.5.U
18
20
3 U
23
0.4 U
0.5 U
59
42.9
0.1 U
P110214296-/
PP3865
4 U
i 9>1
81.7
0.9
1.0
12
; 12
6
18
0.2 U
! 0.6 U
47
1 67.5
] 0.1 U
P110214300-
PP3866
4 U
16.5
83.3
0.7
0.6 U
52
93
20
80
0.2 U
0.6 U
159
130
0.12
%• P11021431
PP3867
4 U
11.4
203
0.5
1.4
21
50
483
16
0.5 U
0.6 U
47
291
0.34
Digestion Date: 01/04/91 i
Analysis Date: 01/04/91 (ICP), 12/27/90 (CVAA)
U - Compound was analyzed for but not detected. The number is the detection limit
for the sample. |
183
-------
Acurex Corporation
January 10, 1991
Client Project ID: Drake Chemical
XT ANALYTICAL SERVICES
5815 MIDDLEBROOK PIKE
KNOXVILLE.TN
Job Number: ACX 47309
METALS ANALYSIS
Results in mg/kg (ppm) dry weight
Sample Matrix: Soil
Client Sample ID
Lab Sample ID:
antimony
arsenic
barium
beryllium
cadmium
chromium
copper
lead
nickel
selenium
silver
thallium
zinc
mercury
: P11021432 6
PP3868
4 U
9.1
72.8
0.8
1.0
12
13
5
18
0.2 U
0.6 U
48
68.2
0.1 U
•*• P11021442^-/ P11021444 <-•
PP3869 PP3870
8 U
3.1
lloO
0.3
1.4 U .
21
972
21
9
0.5 U
1.4 U
11 U
46.8
0.1 U
3 U
12.3
155
0.8
0.6 U
23
30
17
26
0.2 U
0.6 U
60
79.7
0.1 U
•2 P11021445
PP3871
4
8o9
129
0.9
0.6
10
18
6
18
0.2
0.6
37
64.6
0.1
U
U
U
U
U
Digestion Date: 01/04/91
Analysis Date: 01/04/91 (ICP), 12/27/90 (CVAA)
U - Compound-was analyzed for but not detected. The number is the detection limit
for the sample.
184
-------
Acurex Corporation
January 10, 1991
Clfent Project ID: Drake Chemical.
5815 MIDDLEBROOK PIKE
KNOXVE£E,fN
Job Number: ACX 47309
METALS ANALYSIS
Results 1n rag/kg (ppra) dry weight
i
Sample Matrix: Soil
Client Sample ID:
Lab Sample ID:
antimony
arsenic
barium
beryllium
cadmium
chromium
copper
lead
nickel
selenium
silver
thallium
zinc
mercury
P11021447 6-f
PP3'872
4 i U
!
8.8
105
0.8
0.9
11
14
15
18 j
0.2 U
0.6 U
44
67 .41
0.1 U
P110214i4o-f
PP3873
4 U
14.8
132
0.3
0.6 U
13
21
324
10
0.5 U
0.6 U
31
148
0.20
P11021455
PP3874
4 U
9.9
83.2
0.5
1.0
39
19
24
16
0.2 U
0.6 U
50
71.0
0.1 U
Digestion Date: 01/04/91 |
Analysis Date: 01/04/91 (ICP), 12/27/30 (CVAA)
U - Compound was analyzed for but not detected.
for the sample. '
The number is the detection limit
185
-------
ANALYTICAL
CORPORATION. SERVICES
CERnHCATE OF ANALYSIS ^ r ^ j . a
Acurex Corporation January 18, 1991
Highway i5, N. NCTR Bldg. 45
Jefferson, AR 72079
ATTH: Joan Bass
Job Number: ACX 47355 P.O. Number: " NA
This 1s the Certificate of Analysis for the following samples:
Client Project ID: Drake Chemical
Date Received by Lab: 12/17/90
Number of Samples: Twelve (12)
Sample Type: Water
I» Introduction
On 12/17/90, twelve (12) water samples arrived at the ITAS-Knoxvllle, Tennessee,
laboratory from Acurex Corporation in Jefferson, Arkansas in support of the Drake
Chemical project. The list of analytical tests performed, as well as date of receipt
and analysis, can be found in the attached report,
H. Analytical Results/Methodology
The analytical results for this report are presented by analytical test. Each set of
data will include sample identification information and the analytical results.
Please note that the data are not blank corrected.
The samples were analyzed for the requested metals by cold vapor atomic absorption
spectroscopy (CVAA) and graphite furnace atomic absorption spectroscopy (GFAA), and
inductively coupled plasma spectroscopy (ICP) based on EPA SW-846 methods 7470, 7740,
7060 and 6010. '
Reviewed and Approved:
Alyce if. Moore
Laboratory Manager
ratones
IT Analytical Services, 5815 Middlebiook Pike. Knorville. TN 37921
186
-------
Acurex Corporation
January 18, 1991
Client Project ID: Drake Chemical
IT ANALYTICAL SERVICES
5815 M2DDLEBROOK FIKE
KNOXVILLE,TN
Job Number: ACX 47355
III. Quality Control
Routine laboratory level I QC was followed.
The samples were digested on 01/08/91 for ICP and GFAA. The samples for mercury ana-
lysis were prepared just prior to analysis. The CVAA analysis for mercury was per-
formed on 12/29/90; the GFAA analyses for arsenic and selenium were performed on
01/09 and 01/10/91; the remaining metals were analyzed by ICP on 01/10/91. All run
QC was acceptable. No problems were encountered.
187
-------
Acurex Corporation
January 18, 1991
Client Project ID: Drake Chemical
IT ANALYTICAL SERVICES
5815 MIDDLEBROOK PffiE
KNOXVILLE,TN
Job Number: ACX 47355
METALS ANALYSIS
Results 'In mg/liter (ppm)
Sample Matrix: Water
Client Sample ID:
Lab Sample ID:
arsenic
barium
cadmium
chromium
copper
lead
mercury
nickel
selenium
silver
zinc
Method Blank
PBWJ0166/PBWJ0171
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.005 U
0.010 U
0.010 U
0.030 U
NR
0.020 U
0.002 U
0.005 U
0.013
B-l
PP4318
0.002 U
0,584
0.005 U
0.010 U
0.024
0.030 U
0.001 U
0.020 U
0.004 U
0.005 U
0.300
B-2
PP4319
0.002 U
0.741
0.005 U
0.010 U
0.016
0.030 U
0.001 U
0.020 U
0.002 U
0.005 U
0.189
B-3
PP4320
0.002 U
0.762
0.005 U
0.010 U
0.026
0.030 U
0.001 U
0.020 U
0.002 U
0.005 U
0.173
B-4
PP4321
0.002 U
0.618
0.005 U
0.010 U
0.022
0.030 U
0.001 U
0.020 U
0.002 U
0.005 U
0.183
U - Compound was analyzed for but not detected. The number is the detection limit
for the sample.
NR - Not required.
Digestion Date: 01/08/91
Analysis Date: 12/29/90 (CVAA), 01/09/91 and 01/10/91 (GFAA), 01/10/91 (ICP)
188
-------
Acurex Corporation
January 18, 1991
Client Project ID: Drake Chemical
IT ANALYTICAL SERVICES
5815 MIDDLEBROOK PIKE
KNOXVILLE.TN
Job Number: ACX 473S5
METALS ANALYSIS
Results in rag/liter (ppm)
Sample Matrix: Water
Client Sample ID:
Lab Sample ID:
arsenic
barium
cadmium
chromium
copper
lead
mercury
nickel
selenium
silver
zinc
6-1
PP4324
0.002 U
0.674
0.005 U
0.010 U
0.016
0.128
0.001 U
0.020 U
0.002 U
0.005 U
0.795
' G-2
' PP4325
1 0.002 U
! 0.474
i
! 0.005 U
; 0.010 U
' 0.027
1
! 0.030 U
i
! 0.001 U
, 0.020 U
j 0.002 U
\ 0.005 U
! 0.365
G-3
PP4326
0.002 U
0.243
0.005 U
0.010 U
0.012
0.030 U
0.001 U
0.020 U
0.002 U
0.005 U
0.252
G-4
PP4477
0.004 U
0.664
0.010 U
0.020 U
0.020 U
0.177
0.001 U
0.067
0.004 U
0.010 U
0.479
G-5
PP4327
0.002 U
O.B22
0.005 U
0.010 U
0,018
0.030 U
0.001 U
0.020 U
0.004 U
0.005 U
0.932
U - Compound was analyzed for but not detected. The number is the detection limit
for the sample. !
Digestion Date: 01/08/91
Analysis Date: 12/29/90 (CVAA), 01/09/91 and 01/10/91 (GFAA), 01/10/91 (ICP)
189
-------
Acurex Corporation
January 18, 1S91
Client Project :D: Drake Chemical
5815 MEDDLEBROOK PIKE
Job Number: ACX f 73S5*r" '
Client Sample ID:
Lab Sample ID:
arsenic
barium
cadmium
chromium
copper
lead
mercury
nickel
selenium
silver
zinc
METALS
Results in nrg/Hter (ppm)
Sample Matrix: Water
G-6
PP432J
0.002 U
0.637
0.005 U
0.010 U
0.011
0.030 U
0.001 U
0.020' U
0.004 U
0.005 U
0.127
L-l
PP43J2
0.002 U
0.074
0.005 U
0.010 U
0.030
0.030 U
0.001 U
0.020 U
0.004 U
0.005 U
0.123
L-2
PP4323
0.002
0.409
0.005 U
0.010 U
0.023
0.030 U
0.001 U
Q.Q2Q U
0.002 U
0.005 U
3.82
0-1
PP4316
0.002 U
0.255
0.009
0.010 U
0.051
0.154
0.001 U
0.020 U
Oo002 U
0.005 U
9.03
0-2
PP4317.
0.002 U
0.707
0.005 U
0.010 U
0.029
0.030 U
0.001 U
0.328
0.020 U
O.OOS U
0.328
U - Compound was analyzed for but not detected. The number is the detection limit
for the sample.
f (CVAA), 01/09/91 and 01/10/91 (SFAA), 01/10/91 (ICP)
190
-------
KEUIS MIltiB IT IHKIIViU HASH jiliD 6MBUII WUCf
Wl DECEIVE!:
Iidmtotf Applications, lie,
ll/ll/iJ .
PICES timil: 2
FILE RME: WKOOI
DUES OF Mim$:12/IIJ,04tOyuO/90
CHECKED 6»:
Mil mm 12/11/96
mm: SOUS
ffilWS: SI I4i • 30SO,i010>?OiO>?t3t,??4«
DISC: CMIOU
Risults eiprtssu in i]/tg jicept Slant ind itirtard ikleli in put (119/1)
Results vi duel 01 saiplis as nttmt, Psrwnt lolstun In tuple* eu ie found m 1»t ptjt of this report.
US 10
JI-OW9I
9H0495
9H049J
91-0049?
jt-fllU9!
91-80499
91-00500
BIG. BUM
8tG, SID.
SUFI! 10
PII021355
01(2141)1
H10214H
P1 1821410
P1I02141? ~
PI1MI452
Pt102t356
DIG ILK lt-27-90
5M DIG SID 1H7-I9
mi
is/kg
il/kl
ig/k§
•9/ki
101
Dg/kg
ig/kg
US/I
19/1
ll(gi) IBMil)
8.121
1.8?
0,911
US
_. - jjj -
1.00
1.11
199
188
«
11.1
42.1
20.1
15.3
1,57-
79.i
tl.l
(10
5130
u n si
8.41? ~(98 (20
0.121 (90 (20
1,71 49S <28
0.323 (90 (26
O.M? (90 - (20 ••-•
11.1 (90 (20
0.23S (90 (20
(t (80 (200
IDiO 5350 S290
Si li 81 (r Cu li l« ig 11
2.2S 1ft <18 43.4 172 16.1 11? 9.?? -1S.1
2.29 162 (18 21.1 tl.t 21.1 11?- 7.82 (26
I.S2 2i4 (10 11.1 41,} 21.5 39? 1.24 (26
UJ 10? (tO 14.1 26.1 21.1 11] 1.19 13.1
S,l?4 ~ (15 "(tO" • S.IO ~ 13;l~~ "<$- - 4?.j ---(2~ ^(20
2.19 83.0 (10 26.4 51.5 ll.i 322 (.M (20
3.65 lit (10 37.2 23.5 20.S 121 12.2 12.1
(10 (70 (tO (40 (2$ (60 (25 (25 (100
7919 5010 4199 1440 S340 5560 5t30 1S56 0>
HI wt it dlgtstii stsndird
Dypliuti Slide Mii1|fSls
In ppt foond In solution iftir digestion)
Ul 10
91-00497
91-0049? dap
dup t B£t. MUSE
SMPIE II
FI1021450
P1102USO
IIHI n(|i)
«S/t I.IS
gg/1 i.5t
II Cd n Si Si H li Cr Cu li h Ig 11
253 S.33 720 (200 74,0 1770 (18 514 312 351 tiiO 12? 21?
220 3.91 450 (200 55.2 1410 (10 582 275 204 1(60 11? 194
t.St 29.3 37.7 « 29.4 13.9 K Ul 10.0 14.3 2.58 0.593 2.41
1C- wt calculated
WE: Oudmtt percent relative range adjusted for saiple nighti dljesttl
-------
COitMtrtt: ftctuteff ippltatfws, IK,
IMEKCHKI: H/U/fl '
MMEStW:
PKES
mi mi:
MKS OF J«Al»$I$:12/iy4,8«,OU«»
CHtCIEO 11:
Mil
MtlU:
MllltS
1ISC:
MIH1 Mil/mil mi NFUCAIE HfSUUS
(ConcMtratiois it Mb found iti solititu iftar (Hswtfou)
ii/ii/ii
SOUS
SO III - lOiUliUOil,H31,II4l
MMU
imp
JH04H
II-004H lit. set.
11-00499 tat. spk.
mil 11 vug)
P118214I2 1.II
mmwi I.K
PII02US2 l.»
ttUI As « ft Sk Si it It Cr Ci 11 A »J II
f
IS/1 Ml ill III (205 21.1 Ul (IM 214 SIS III J22J 11.4 (100
if/1 IUI S2St MM tt» ilii UN 4H« 4TII 5220 4155 W 2230 (in
SJECOVESr 102 tOt 12.4 «.S ?S,2 10) H.) 91.) il.t 85.1 M,i 42.4 SC
UJ/I 1120 5330 Silt 1130 4310 5iSO
-------
METALS ANALYSIS SI INDUCTIVELY COUPLED PLASMA MO GRAPHITE FURNACE
CONTRACTOR; Technology Applications. Inc.
DATE RECEIVED: 11/13/90 DATE REPORTED
REQUESTOR: Hournighen/GuUMn MATRIX:
PAGES REPORTED: 2 METHODS:
FILE NAME: HOW002 DISC:
DATES OF ANALYSIS:12/03,04,10,11,12/90
CHECKED BY:
Results expressed in ug/l (ppb) i
12/13/90
LEAOUTf
SW 846 • 3050.6010.7131,7740
CARROLL
LAS ID
91-00505
91-00506
91-00507
91-00508
91-00509
91-00510
91-00511
91-00512
DIG. BLANK
OIS. STO.
SAMPLE ID
P11021355TCLP
P110ZH01TCLP
P11021415TGLP
P11Q2145QTCLP ,
piio2i4irrcip
P11021452TCLP
P11021356TCLP
onoanooTCLPBic
DIG BLK 11-27-90
5 PPM DIG STO 11-27-90
As
<220
<220
<220
<220
<220
-------
METALS ANALYSIS It INDUCTIVELY COUPLED PUSH* AND GRAPHITE FURNACE
CONTRACTOR: Technology Applications, Inc.
DATE RECEIVED: 11/13/90 BATE REPORTED
REQUESTOR: MourniShan/Guzman MATRIX:
PACES REPORTS): 2 METHODS:
FILE HAKE: HCS0002 DISC:
DATES OF AHALY$tS:12/03,04,10,11,12/90
CHECKED It:
It/13/90
LEACHATE
SU 846 - J050,6010,7131,7740
CARROU.
MATRIX SPIKE RESULTS
(Concentrations in ppb)
IMPORTANT KOTE: SAMPLES UERE SPIKED AFTER DIGESTION
LAS ID
91-OOS05
91-00505 Mt. ipk.
91-00109
91-00509 Mt. ipk.
91-00512
91-00512 rat. spk.
SAMPLE IS
P11QZ13S5TCLP
P110213S5TCLP
^RECOVERY
P11021&mCLP
P11021417TCLP
XRECOVERt
Q1108110QTCLP
Q11G811QOTCLP
X8ECOVERY
AS
«2ZQ
959
95.9
«220
876
87.6
-------
METALS ANALYSIS BY INDUCTIVELY COUPLED PLASMA AND GRAPHITE FURNACE
CONTRACTOR: Technology Applications, Inc.
DATE RECEIVED: 11/13/90 ' DATE REPORTED
REQUESTOR: Mourni9han/Guzman ' MATRIX:
PAGES REPORTED: 3 METHODS:
FILE HAKE: MOSOOOZ DISC:
DATES OF ANALYSIS:12/03,04,10,11,12/90
CHECKED BY: |
Results expressed in ug/l (ppb)
12/13/90
LEACHATE
SU 846 • 3050,6010,7131,7740
CARROLL
LAB ID
91-00505
91-00506
91-00507
91-00508
91-00509
91-00510
91-00511
91-00512
DIG. BLANK
DIG. STD.
SAMPLE ID
P11021355TCLP
P11021401TCLP
P1102U1STCLP
P11021450TCLP
P11021417TCLP
P110214S2TCLP
P110213S6TCLP
Q11081100TCLPBK
DIC BLK 11-27-90
5 PPM DIG STO 11-27-90
Cu
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
4450
Mi
<100
«100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
4730
Zn
279
121
496
235
4100
703
318
178
<100
4930
AS
<1000
<1000
<1000
<1000
<1000
<1000
<1000
<1000
<1000
1550
Duplicate Sample Analysis
(Concentrations in ppb)
LAB ID
91-00505
91-00505 dup
dup X REL. RANGE
SAMPLE ID
P11021355TCLP
P11021355TCLP
Cu
: <100
<100
NC
Ni
<100
<100
NC
Zn
279
ZS5
8.99
Ag
<1000
<1000
NC
NC- not calculated
195
-------
KETALS ANALYSIS iY 1W5UCIIVELT COUPLED PLASMA AND GRAPHITE FURNACE
CONTRACTM: Technolosy Application*, Inc.
DATE KCEIVES: 11/13/90
REQUESTOR* Kournfghm/Guann
PACES REPORTED! 3
FILE NAME: MOSOOOZ
DATES OF AHALYSIS:12/03,04,10.11.12/90
CHECKED RY:
MATRIX SPIKE RESULTS
CCenctmrasion* In ppbj
IMPORTANT NOTE: SAMPLES WERE SPIKED AFTER Dl&ESTIOH
DATE
HAT* IX:
METHODS:
DISC:
12/13/90
LEACKATE
S« 846 - 3050,6010,7131,7740
CARROLL
LAB ID
91-00505
91-00505 Mt. »F*.
91-OM09
91-00509 cat. spk.
91-00512
91-00512 mat. spk.
SAMPLE ID
P110Z13SSTCLP
P1102135STCU*
»ECOVERV
PIIOZUITTCK1
P1102U17TCLP
XRECOVEHY
Q110S11QOTCLP
Q11081100TCLP
MECOVERY
Cu Mi
<100 <100
r*i , m
T&.1 76.S
<100 <100
751 TUB
75.1 70.8
<100 <100
812 841
81.2 86.1
2n Ag
279 «1000
1180 N/A
90.1 N/A
<100 <1000
860 1040
86.0 104
17S «1QQO
1160 N/A
98.2 N/A
NOTE: Spikt recoveries for elements below detectable limits «rc calculated based on • concentration of
0 ppb in the original unknown.
196
-------
«:« MO-IS §; ajiijTH-i? CC-AE PUSH
KT'CC-i!: Tews'sjf JM'.ieuiees. iat.
S*T; K-£H£B: 5i.'il'91 S 53/34/3
"WHTCf.: fturarjsit
f>.<3;3 StPOSTa: 2
fill MM: WJK84
DATB OF MAi«!S:iJ,;19,2!,29;l1
MSC«I §»:
MT£ KSK
«••:>,: '•
KFWSS: !
S3ilS.l!«!"Tf
SI f« - »»U2E.ittt.?i2S.:H5
WKH
iiitits ennittj in ig/kg for su§I« «lth nights anS tj.'l far iisinj suclss.
UB ID
91-01475
91-01477
91-01478
91-01479
91-01480
91-01481
91-01482
91-01483
91-01414
9H1485
91-014W
91-0148?
91-0148!
11-01489
91-01490
91-0H91
51-01412
11-01493
91-01494
91-01495
91-01495
91-0149?
91-81572
91-01573
91-01574
91-0157S
91-01571
91-0157?
91-01578
31-01579
91-01510
OK. ium 3010
CIS. S7I. 3010
sis. tun 3350
SIS. STO. 3050
SMPIE 10
801301815 (121
801311759 (01)
80205110? (BO)
F01251500 (01}
F020S0750 (Kfl)
F01281530 (12}
701311215 (01) 31
702051405 (ISO)
?0!301520 (K!
I01J115H (01) at
Wl301107i17H,2,3
W130110?m?!PK
I01301122»1711,2,3
i01301122lt!Pli
E02050353K1?I1,2,3
E02050953PK
«2050932I!?I1,2,3
J020S0932II17PI
E01301122II17F
EQ20!09!3R1?F
MHO 11070
1020509320
F01281S3J-H27CIP
F012I1500-01TCIP
F020!0?50H5I!?CIP
701301520-I27CIP
7B1311215-027CIP
701311515-027CLP
7020J1405-M50TCIP
M130110707UP
W20509320TCIP
DIE Bit 03/04/91
DIG S7G 03/04/91
OK ill! 03/03/91
mm 03/03/91
fit 31; VOLilI)
; 100
i 100
: too
1.01 •
1.50
1.11
1.10
1.0!
1.52
1.04 :
! 100
I 100
i too
! 1!
1 100
i «
! 100
i 100
0,458 i
0,42! !
3.874 :
1.05 ;
! Hi
i 100
, 100
• no
100
! 100
100
: 4
4
100
100
100
100
*
(.02
(.02
(.02
(2
(2
(2
(2
(2
(2
(2
(.02
(.02
0.023
(0.2
0,045
(0.2
(.02
(.02
(5
(5
14.7
(2
(.02
(.02
(.02
(.02
(.02
(.02
(.02
(.5
(.5
(.02
0.052
(.02
0.092
AS
(0.1
(0.1
0.112
10.8
(1.5
11.1
(10
15.8
12.5
(10
(0.1
(0.1
(0.1
(1
(0,1
(1
0.75?
3.12
52.9
334
50.1
4f2
(0.1
(0.1
(O.t
(0.1
(0.1
(O.t
0.138
(3
21.2
(0.1
2.10
(0.1
4,08
Bt CO Cr Cu li Pb S! Is
1.40 (.01 ftJM 1.70 0.4M 2.72 (0.1 1.49
1,13 0.015 0.241 1,38 0.159 2.34 (0.1 1.52
0.742 0.021 0.1?i 1.25 0.129 1,2! (0.1 1.41
194 (1 19.1 34.8 12.1 443 (10 272
57,1 2.00 12.1 42.7 14.7 71.7 (10 2!1
157 1.10 17.9 41. 17.4 439 <10 302
199 1.35 24.2 38. 23.2 345 (10 192
48.4 1.1? 9.81 20. 8.70 38.1 (10 115
211 1.12 22.1 41. 22.1 403 (10 234
184 (1 18.2 41. 17.5 410 (10 299
0.72? 0.015 0.423 0.159 0.475 0.359 (.01 0.799
0.021 0.013 0.050 0.026 0.052 0.2E6 (.01 0,11?
0.039 (.Of (.03 0.039 (.03 (.05 (.0! 0.211
(0,1 (0.1 (0.2 (0.1 (0.2 (.4 (1 0.113
0.055 (.01 (.03 0.041 (.03 (.05 (.01 0.430
(0.1 (0,1 (0.2 (0.1 (0.2 (.4 (1 0.210
0.4if 0,042 0.951 0.340 0.801 0.54? (.Of 1.4!
1.74 0,072 0.427 1.04 0.559 0.184 '..01 5.f?
12. < 19.9 104 78.5 8.52 1130 25.1 24!
17.4 SO.l li.5 11! (! 581 (25 341
190 9.50 111 11? 171 570 (25 5!(
223 20.0 209 110 110 554 (10 777
0.851 (.01 (.03 0.021 (.03 (.05 (O.t 0.499
0.2!? (.01 (.03 0.01? (.03 0.050 (O.t 0.524
0.231 0.015 (.03 0.019 (.03 (.01 (0.1 1.91
0.391 (.01 (.03 (.01 (.03 (.0! (0.1 0.058
0.24? (.01 (.03 0.041 0.032 (.05 (0.1 0.804
0,30? (.01 (.03 (.01 (.03 (.Oi (0.1 0.04C
0.244 (.01 (.03 0.013 (.03 (.05 (0.1 0.138
11.70.400 5.80 3,70 4.85 12.1 (3 15.8
10.0 1.03 11.1 7.48 5.93 19.? (3 28J
(.01 (.01 (.03 (.01 (.03 (.05 (£.1 (.0-
1.99 0.052 0.313 0,284 0,49! 0.4{{ 2.25 0.!<»
(.01 (.01 (.03 (.01 (.03 (.05 (0.1 (.02
3.82 0,091 0,55? 0,551 0.974 0,915 4.32 1.06
i 197
-------
Duplicate Suple Jlialjsls
(Ccacutratioas la ppi found In dijestate)
IAIIJ
11-01417
11-01477 dip
11-0141$
11-914IS dip
SAWl! ID
I01311T5I
T013tilH
T01311S1S
(MJ
(01J
(o« n
(Dt) 3d
««
dip : REl. RAISE
1.04
t.63
dup I BEL. HUGE
WUll) A}
100 (.02
100 (.02
1C
<.02
<.02
1C
As
(0.1
1C
9.110
K
la Cd
1.13 O.Oti
1.10 0.013
2.17 23.5
1,51 U1
1.89 0.013
5.75 1C
Cr
0.24t
0.221
5.54
0.119
0.24S
21.2
ft! Si
1.3! 0.153
1.32 0.152
4.44 4.23
0.433 o.tis
O.S48 0.254
1S.1 27.9
PI
2.34
2.22
5.21
4.25
5.25
15.2
§e
-------
SOUS: ' ,
1. JSrsintc, Cidtici, lead, ud Stlmigi hnt Inttrelttut correction factors applied ta then to WMiint for interference fret Ataiwi and Iron.
1. lead and Zinc results for SOLIDS suples nre irriviil at using Flue Uotic Absorption Spectroscopy.
I. Know concentmicns of digtstcd standards:
30U . nit ,
0.6S ppi: Af,U 1.9 ppi: *3,M :
0.3 pps: Cr.Ca 0.1 ppi: Cr.Ca
0.5 ppi: Hi,Pb,lB 1,0 ppi: II.Fb.Zt
Li ppi: ts,ii,Se 4.0 ppi: As,li,St \
<. Octection Ifilts of solids sujles in depesdjat oa wiftt of sufle dfftstid, dettctioi liiits of l^yid suples art depentat on initial
of liquid disested. ;
1199
-------
•007
METALS ANALYSIS BY INDUCTIVELY COUPLED PLASMA
CONTRACTOR: Ttohnctogy AppHettaif. In*.
DATE RECEIVED: 04AW91
REQUESTOa- MoumfehM
PAQE8 REPORTED: 1
FILENAME: MO99908
DATE80F ANALYSIS
CHECKED BY:
PBOJECT: j
DATE REPORTED
MATRIX:
METHODS:
DISC:
^
OW1W1
EOLK>.LK)UIO
6W048-J010.30SO.eoiO
CARROLL
WALY6I8 Mttttl
":$W 6-5-
R*wltt npratM hi ma* (ppm) tor KquM* «nd mgfkg (ppm) tor todd.
LAB 10
•1-02027
•1-02021
91-42020
91-02030
Dia. BLANK
Oia.STD.
SAMPLED
Q04011000M8FBK
O04011000M8IBK
O04011000BBK
O3181001TCLPBK
M10 OIQBLK 04/11A1
M10 OIQBTO 04/11A1
WT(9) VOL(ml)
0.408
100
60
100
100
100
Ag
<8
<03
<.04
•COZ
•C02
0.002
A*
<26
<.1
<*
<1
<1
2.08
B«
228
O.OB7
<.04
0.407
<02
S.01
Cd
O
0
Dupltat* Stmpto Aralyrit
(ConMirtrattone hi ppm In dfetttat*)
LAB ID
•1-02028
•1-02028 dup
dupWRELRANaE
•AMPLE ID
O04011000MWBK
O04011000M8IBK
VOMmO AB
100 O2
80 O4
NO
A* B*
<1 0.087
<.* 0.027
NO 4.14
Cd
-------
Mints musts n imuwiT eawifo mm
COnMCIOI:
o«« mum-.
BEWtSIOR:
MSES nnmt:
nil Mini:
NJ
O
05/n/H
Ikmritijhin
t
MH007
Hjplicitiow, Inc.
fsoJECt:
UK nnmt
Mini:
MIWDS;
DISC:
Orilt Ueiicil
M/M/M
SOLID, 110010
SB IM - 3010,3050,4010
CUttOU
OIKS OF M»tttl$:0«14,II/M
MiCKO II;
ItittlU werfeSM iff it/1 (ppi) for liquids ind ig/tj (PCI) for solid.
US 10
11*02313
fl-MU4
(H233S
1H23M
M-02J3?
(1-02138
M-OIHf ~
(HH40
(H2341
»B»42
(H234I
»H»M
M-OH4S
n-02!U
M-IH4?
«-0234l
tBIM!
OK. IUHI
DIG. SID.
SHWU )0
FOI2I1SJOII-2H
I01U1SIISII-2SI
niOllUIMflSE
MSOildiEFISI
wsuomifsi
M50J10308SI
ffosoiKttswisr"
60S0810SSEPISI
USDHOIUmsi
C050!lO!OIClfSl
COiOJlOiSHISl
usniiottfisi
OOSOIISJOAEISK
COiOHWISH
tmtitm-m
F012J15JON-2ICIPSI
I01301SION-2ICIP5I
J010 0166U 04/11/91
3010 OICSID 04/11/tl
•1(9) «9
0,4721 (S
l.OtJt 5.11
0.4852 13.!
OJ3I4 1.4}
2,14
o.ott
" 1.5!"
0.41S
4.SI
0.!S(
. O.lli
0.106
o.tsi
0.050
0.0(2
O.OiS
0.04!
(.02
0.091
IS
4t.O
U.O
(IS
(li
m
4.S4
Sl.f
i,n
w
3!.?
1.24
4.(0
44J
21.1
O.Si?
0.2(0
0.304
(.!
(.14
It
2»
211
4*1
441
in
o.m
IM
o.m
at
uj
0.5*2
O.IU
44.0
114
2.J1
1.52
i.or
(.0!
3.12
Cd
<)
(1
11.4
(.85
I.M
I.Hf
?JO
I.U!
31.4
1.11
0.4(4
o.m
11.2
31.1
«.0?3
<.01
(.01
(.01
0.091
tr
2/.S
30.1
1(5
II!
14.1
0.882
4U
0.211
IM
11. 1
0.34(
0.(JI
14.7
322
(.413
0.103
0.111 '
(.02
O.ill
Cu
34.0
20.2
(4
(4
0.050
0.044
1.031
(.0!
0.03S
0.1SS
(.02
0.041
(.02
0.070
0.121
0.030
(.02
(.1!
0.5(2
Pb
314
!U
14.J
(.55
114
0.170
!44
0.144
45.(
11.1
o.m
0.112
12.2
2S.I
2.11
0.13!
0.114
(.04
O.H7
Hi
11. J
11.0
(4
(4
0.021
(.0!
0.02!
(.02
0.047
0.042
(.02
(.02
(.09
0.03(
(.0!
(.02
(.02
(.M
1.03
SY
30.3
20.2
IH .
17.0
isi i
0.172
35.7
4.14
311
3M
5.44
8.14!
1.11
201
1.431
0.3S2
1.213
(.1 1
4.35
In
m
m
ii.S
U.I
1.517 —
1.42
U27
I.13S
.517
.Ml
.l<7
.423
.113
.4(1
.371
.134
.311
1.112
1.11
MIES: Utrii iateftwice check (or (rsenic not littiin 201 u per set hod.
Ottection liiiti for solid uiplet ire told on wight of siipie dig*st«d ind fiitil diittUtt loluie.
• iheorftitil cwKtntritiom in 3010 digested ttmdiN (pp«):
0.1 - *j, U
0.4 • Cr, CB
1.0 • Hi. fD. In
4.0 • Is, ll, S«
-------
JS «
55
a 22 2'** a ^s
2 2 !H 2 SS *? 5s
" " **' ** «• ~ — —
5 25 2 55 5 55 2
*
•s
1
s.
m
a I
ll
a a
»* S
S g
S
S S *~:
S S "t
as -t
§^- *•»
.2 S
SS 5
I
1
E
I
8
.S
2
ki*
S
202
-------
JUL 11 '91 14509 EPfl/RREL/WMDDRD/CINCINNftTI»OHIO
P. 4
mm mvtm n mmm M.
Technology Dppiicitiont, inc.
05/1S/M
COHIRSCIOR:
MIE ftiGimO;
EEQlJsSTQR!
nm RiPORTEfi: 1
F2LE mi: tiOJO;09
MTH OF «HltmS:ltt/n/U
CHiCltil! 81/:
Results expressed in tig/Kg (ppn) for solid.
PR03ECI
OUT!
OiSC;
Drake Chesical
04/I7/91
SOllt
SH 846 - 13;0,?G;fl
ChfiSOLl
US It
JHHjT
»H2JM
swu it
mmmmn
As
0.7114
15.6
8.5?
i203
-------
APPENDIX C-5
MERCURY ANALYSES
204
-------
ANALYSIS OF Hg BY COLD VAPOR
Hg DETERMINATION
DATE RECEIVED: 1 1/13/90
REQUESTER: GUSHMAN/MOURNIGHAN
TOTAL PAGES THIS REPORT: 1 i
METHOD: 7471
REVIEWED BY: J~*!T~~
ANALYST: S.K, BROWN
DATE REPORTED:12/28/90
MATRIXiSOIL
RLE NAME DRAKE002
DISC ID:RCF-HG1, 2,3
CHECKED BY:
Hg RESULTS
TAi
SAMPLE ID
91-00494 '
91-00495
91-00496
91-00497
91-00498
91-00499
91-00500
CLIENT
SAMPLE ID
1355 M1
1401 M5
1415 M2
1450 M40
1417 M3
1452 MSO
1356 4
SAMPLE
MATRIX
SOIL
SOIL
SOIL
SOSL
SOIL
SOIL
SOIL"
ANALYSIS
DATE
12/05/90
12/05/90
12/05/90
12/05/90
12/05/90
12/05/90
12/05/90
CONG
ug/g
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
-------
ANALYSIS OF H§ BY COLD VAPOR
Hg DETERMINATION
DATE RECEIVED: 11/13/90
REQUESTER' 6USHMAN/MOURNJGHAN
TOTAL PAGES THIS REPORT: 1
METHOD: 7470
REVIEWED BY: sMfT"*
ANALYST: S.K. BROWN
DATE REPORTED:12/28/90
MATRIXfTCLP
RLE NAME DRAKE001
DISC ID:RCF-HG1, 2,3
CHECKED BY:
Hg RESULTS
TAI
SAMPLE ID _
S
91-00505
91-00506
91-00507
91-00508
91-00509
91-00510
91-00511
91-00512
CLIENT
SAMPLE ID
1355
1401
1415
1450
1417
1452
1356
110QBLK
SAMPLE
MATRIX
TCLP
TCLP
TCLP
TCLP
TCLP
TCLP
TCLP
TCLP
ANALYSIS
DATE
12/04/90
12/04/90
12/04/90
12/04/90
12/04/90
12/04/90
12/04/SO
12/04/90
CONC
ug/mi
<0.008
<0.008
<0.008
<0.008
N.E.S.
<0.008
<0.008
<0.008
QUALITY CONTROL RESULTS SUMMARY
LIQUIDS
SAMPLE
91-00512
DUPLICATE
SPIKE
CONC
<0.008
<0.008
0.019
RPD
N/C
SPK
0.5
%RCVRY
95.0
N.E.S. - NOT ENOUGH SAMPLE
WC » NOT CALCULATED
206
-------
April 17, 1991
Acurex, Inc.
c/o NCTR Bldg. #45-
Jefferson, Arkansas 72079
Attn: Buddy Ross
PRIORITY POLLUTANT METALS
SAMPLE INFORMATION
I
Entek #j 91-1657
Sample ID: Q04OHSBLK
Sample Date/Time: 4/Ol'/91 (1500)
Date Received: 4/03/91
Time Received: (1411)
Date Analyzed: . 4/15/91
Time Analyzed! <1OOO>
ANALYTICAL RESULTS ,
Amount Detected MDL
Parameter ' (mg/L) tmg/L)
Mercury ND : • r^N.
Analyzed bys ' '"sPeL^ LjLvi)^—
Rodney (ul Hiams, Chemist
Reviewed by:
Thester' Sims, Manager
tnoraanic Analysis
: inlek Laboratory f«n
11701 Interstate 30 • Bldg. 1 • Sultt.lOB ° Uttlt Rock, AS 72209 (501) 4SS-1316 P.O. Box 780 * M»belv»!e, AR 72103;'
207
-------
February 19. 1991
Acurcx
C/o NCTR
BISo. * 45
Je-Merson, AR 72O79
Attni Mr. Buddy Roc*
PRIORITY POLLUTANT HETALS
SAMPLE INFORMATION
Entek *i
Sample ID:
Sample Date:
Sample Time:
Date Received:
Time Received i
&ate Analyxvd:
Time Analyxedi
Parameter
Mercury
91-OiOA
BO J 301 85-
M2
1/50/91
(1B16) •
2/18/91
(OSO'O)
2/18/91
(O930)
m«/L
ND
91-QBO7
B013117SS-
02
1/31/91.
C17S8)
2/18/fl
(0300}
2/18/91
( O930 )
ANALYTICAL
Amount De
ND
91-O6O8
SO70S1607-
N5D
2/OS/fl i
C16O7)
2/18/91
COSOO)
2/1B/91
(093O)
RfiSULIS
ftected '
u?
ND
91-OBO9
F01281S30-
H2
1/28/91
I1SSO)
2/18/91
K'BOO)
2/18/91
(O930)
/g
0.09 0.
91-OB1O
FO12B1500-
01
1/28/91
CISCO)
2/18/91
(08t>0)
2/18/91
( 0930 )
HDL MDL,
(mg/L) (wq/
24
-------
P-s»6rwa«"y 19.
Aeurex
c/o NCTR
Bldp. * 49
Jefferson, AR 72079
Attm Mr. Buddy Ro*s
PRIORITY POLLUTANT METALS
SAMPLE INFORMATION
Entek *r
Sample 10:
Sample Dates
Sample Tine}
Oat* Received;
Tim* Received:
Date Analyzed:
Tims Analyzed?
91-OSil
F02050750-
HSD
2/05/91
(07903
2/16/91
(OBOO)
2/1S/91
(O930)
91-0812
7O13O1S2O-
M2
1/30/91 !
(1S20)
2/11/91
(0600)
2/18/91 i
CO930) i
91-0813
TOJS1121601
1/31/91
U215)
2/1S/91
(OBOO)
2/18/91
(0930)
91-OS14 v
T0311 51801
1/31/91
(1515)
2/18/91
(OBOO)
2/1B/91
(O93O)
91-OB15
T02OS14OS-
MS0
2/05/91
(1405) '
2/18/91
(060O)
2/18/91
OF ANALYSIS
'/. Soi^-e Peeos'ery
Control Matrix
Duo!ie«te
EPA
SW-S46
Mercury
ND
109
(Soil Spike).
114/99/1O6
7470,71
M0 = None Detected «!1XJL)
Analyzes bys
tllJL » Method Del
» Method Detection Limit
Rodney iQflliem*, Chemist
Reviewed byi
Chester Sims, Manager
Inorganic Analysis
209
-------
February 19,
A cur ex
c/p NCTR
Bldg. # 45
AR 7207f
flttnt Mr, Buddy Rosa
PRIORITY POLLUTANT METALS
SAMPLE INFORMATION
Entek #t
Sample JDj
S*mp]e D*tet
Sample Timei
P*te Received:
Time Received;
Date An*2 y zed i
Time Analyzed:
91-oeia
E0130H44J1
1/30/91
t 31<4)
2/1S/91
coeoo)
2/18/91
C093O)
91-oai?
EO13O1144I2
1/3O/91
U144J
2/16/91
(0800)
2/18/fl
C095O)
91-0818
E04 301144-
PW
1/30/91
(1J44)
2/li/91
C0800) .
2/18/91
(O97O3
91-011?
AO1 301343-
11
1/3O/91
(1343)
2/18/91
COSOO)
2/18/9J
J 0930 J
91-082O
A01301343'
12
1/30/91
(1343)
2/18/91
{ OSOO )
2/iB/91
(093O)
ANALYTICAL RESULTS
Amount Detected
ing/L
MUL
Mercury
0.064
O.OO9
ND
0.003
ND
-------
February 19, 1991
Acurex
c/o NCTR
Bide. « 49
Oe-fterson, AR 72079
Attnt Mr. Buddy Ross
PRIORITY POLLUTANT METALS
SAMPLE INFORMATION
Entek »;
Sample ID:
Sample Date:
Sample Time:
Date Received t
Time Received:
Date Analyjed:
Time Analyzed:
VI -0823
A01301343-
PW
1/30/91
(1343)
2/18/91
(0600)
2/18/91
(0930)
91-0822
E020S09S3-
11 '
2/05/91
(0953) '
2/18/91
(0600)
2/18/V1,
(0930) i
91-0823
E02050953-
12
2/OS/91
(09S3)
2/18/91
(0800)
2/16/91
(0930)
91-0824
£02050953-
PW
2/05/91
(0953)
2/18/91
(0800)
2/18/91
(0930)
91-0625
A02051043-
11
2/08/91
(1043)
2/1B/91
( O80O )
2/18/91
(0930)
ANALYTICAL RESULTS
Amount Detected
Perimeter mg/t
Mercury ND 0.1'S6 ! NO
MD1.
(mg/L
NO 0.046
Duolicate
V. SciKe Recovery
Cesntroi rtatrix
EPA
1983
ND
110
120/105
245.1
ND • None Detected «MDD MDL » Method Detection Limit
Analyzed by:
Reviewed' by:
Rodney W^liamv, Chemist
'Chester Sims. Manager
Inorganic Analysis
211
-------
February 19, 199J
Aeurex
c/o NCTR
Bldg. * 45
Oe-f-ferson, AR 72079
Attm Mr. Buddy Rocs
Entek «t
Sample ID:
Sample Date:
Sample Tim*:
Date Received:
Time Received:
Date Analyzed:
Time Analyzed:
Parameter
Mercury
PRIORITY POLLUTANT METALS
SAMPLE INFORMATION
91-0826
A02051043-
12
2/03/91
(1043)
2/18/91
(OBOO)
2/1B/91
CO930)
91-0827
A020S1043-
13
2/05/91
(1043)
2/18/91
(OBOO)
2/18/91
(O93O)
91-OB2B
A020S1043-
PW
2/05/91
(1043)
2/18/91
(OBOO)
2/18/91
(0930)
ANALYTICAL RESULTS
Amount Detected
mg/L
MDL
(mg/L)
O.OO2
ND
O.004
-------
Date
March 6, 1991
Client Acurex Corporation Lab.
C/o NCTR Blag #45
Jefferson, AR 72079
Contact Buddy Re»»
PRIORITY!POLLUTANT METALS
SAMPLE INFORMATION
Entek *:
Sample IDi
Sample Dates
Sample Times
Oat* Receiv»d:
Time Received:
Date Analyzed!
Time Analyzed:
91-0916
A020S1043101A
2/03/91
(1043)
2/22/91
(0820)
2/25/91
(0830)
91-0917
A010301343101A
1/30/9J
(1343)
2/22/91
(0820)
2/25/91
(0830)
ANALYTICAL RESULTS
Amount Detected MDL
Parameter tug/Filter) (us/Filter)
Mercury ' ' 1.36
S.8 0.004
METHOD OF ANALYSIS
Par amet er
Mercury
ND - Mono Detected «MDL>
Analyzed byt
Reviewed bys
jL = Method Detection Limit
Rodney l/plliam», Chemist
Chester Sims, Manager
"inorganic Analysis
213
-------
Page 2
PRIORITY POLLUTANT METALS
SAMPLE INFORMATION
Entek «t 91-0918
Sample IDi E01301144101A
Sample Datei 1/30/91
Sample Timei (1144)
Date Received! 2/22/91
Time Receivedi COS2OJ
Date Analyzed! 2/25/91
Tine Analyzed! C083O)
91-0919
EO2QSO953101A
2/05/91
C0953)
2/22/91
C0820)
2/2S/91
COB3O)
Parameter
ANALYTICAL RESULTS
Amount Detected
tug/FiltsrJ
MDL
(ug/Filter?
Mwrcury
S.2
3.4
0.004
Parametvr
METHOD OF ANALYSIS
SPA
1983
NIOSH
Mercury
245.1
70B2
NO * None Detected «HDL>
Analyzed byi
Reviewed byt £.
L • Method Detection Limit
Rodney ||i 11 lams, Ch«mi*t
'Chester Simn, Manager
Inorganic Analysis
214
-------
March 14. 1991
Acurex Corn. Lab*
c/o NCTR Bldg. *4S
•Jeff arson, Arkansas
Attn: Buddy Ross
72079
PRIORITY POLLUTANT METALS
SAMPLE' INFORMATION
Entefc #t 91-09BS :
Samole ID: BKO2O71OO6F(Bl)i
Sample Date/Times 2/O7/91 (1OO6S
Date Received: 3/O1/91 ;
Time Received: (O94O) ,
Date Analyzed: 3/04/91
Time Analyzed: (1000)
91-0986
BKO2071O07(B2)
2/07/91 (10O7)
3/O1/9O
(0940)
3/12/91
(1O30)
91-O9B7
BK02O71O07(B3)
2/O7/91 C1OO7)
3/O1/91
(0940)
3/12/91
(1030)
ANALYTICAL RESULTS
Parameter
Mercury
Amount Detected
(mg/filter)
* 0.4B ug/g ' NO
MDL
(mg/f liter)
ND <0.016
Parameter
QUALITY CONTROL AND METHOD OF ANALYSIS
•/.Variance
Blank Duplicate
X Soike Recovery
Control Matrix
EPA
40 CFR
Mercury
(O986 it O987)
Mercury
(O985)
ND
-------
May 28, 1991
Acurex Corporation Lab.
e/o NCTR Bldg. #45
Jefferson, AR 72079
Attnt Charlie King
Ent«k #s
Sampl* ID:
Sample Date/Timei
Date Receivedi
Tints Received:
Data Analyzed:
Time Analyzed:
PRIORITY POLLUTANT METALS
SAMPLE INFORMATION
91-2727
QOSOB1443AFISKHg .
5/08/91 (1443)
5/14/91
(1135)
5/23/91
(1300)
Parameter
Mercury
ANALYTICAL RESULTS
Amount Detected
(ug/g)
(A) 3.BS
(B) 3.94
MDL
(Ui/g)
Method Detection Limit
Analyzed byi
Rodney
liams*, 'Chemist
Reviewed bys
Chester Sims, Manager
Inorganic Analysis
216
-------
May 2S» 1991
Acurex Corporation Lab.
c/o NCTR Bldg. #45
Jefferson, AR 72079
Attn: Charlie King
Entek *s
Sample ID:
Sample Date/Time:
Date Received*
Time Received:
Date Analyzed:
Time Analyzeds
PRIORITY .POLLUTANT HETALS
SAMPLE INFORMATION
91-272B
F012B153OM3SkHg
1/2B/91 U53O)
5/14/91 '
(1135) ;•
S/23/91 ]
(13OO)
91-2729
TO13O1520M-2SkHg
1/3O/91 (1520)
5/14/91
(1135)
5/23/91
<13OO)
Parameter
Mercury
ANALYTICAL RESULTS
Parameter
Mercury
Amount Detected
Cug/g)
(A)
(B)
2
2
.56
.32
CA>
(B)
3.
3.
14
14
MDL
(ug/g)
-------
Hay 28, 1991
Acurex Corporation Lab.
c/o NCTR Bldg. #45
Jefferaon, AR 72O79
Attn: Char11* King
Entek #t
Sample IDt
Sample Date/Time*
Date R»c«iv»ds
Time R*e*iv«d>
D»t« An»lyz«d:
Tim* An«lyz*di
PRIORITY POLLUTANT HETALS
SAMPLE INFORMATION
9i-273i
OOSOeilOSAISKHg
5/Oi/91 (14413
5/14/91
(1103)
5/23/91 .
(130O)
Parameter
Mercury
ANALYTICAL RESULTS
Amount Detected
(A) 0.143
(B) 0.145
MDL
(mg/L)
-------
May 28, 1991
Acurex Corporation Lab.
c/O NCTR Bldg. *45
Jefferson, AR 72O79
Attn: Charlie King
Entek #:
Sample IDs
Sample Date/Time:
Oats Received:
Time Received:
Date Analyzed:
Time Analyzed:
PRIORITY POLLUTANT METALS
SAMPLE INFORMATION
91-2730
B01301B13SkHg
1/30/91 (1815)
8/14/91
(1133)
S/23/91
(1300)
91-2732
Q05101015SkHg
5/1O/91 (1O15)
S/14/91
(1133)
5/23/91
(130O >
ANALYTICAL RESULTS
Parameter
Mercury
Amount Detected
|(mg/L>
(A) O.O80 (A) NO
(8) 0.08O [
MDL
(mg/L)
-------
«=R 15 *9i 15826 IPft^REUWMDDRD/'CIHCINNflTI/.OHIO
JUA'.YSIS fiF Hj BY CBU VAPOR
Kj DETERHIHItnON
ANALYST: STEPHANIE X. BROUN
DATC RECEIVED; 03/flt/M ' PATE
KQUESRhMS MURNISKM (UT»IX:TCLP
TOTAL PAMS THIS REPORT: 2
«ETK»:?t7Q
FILE HHKiRtF-HM
DISC IDlRCF-HS-A
US RESULTS
SAI7LE ID
DATE SAC.'UO
DATE REPORTED- CONC. «« U8/L
91-01572
91-01573
91""dl§'3'£
$l*8i575
W*0lt$?4
W-OiS77
91-01578
91-01579
91-01310
tmmm ••'• nmp«nooi»i»p»»»»o» ••
F01281530-H! TCLP
F012I1SOO-01 TCLP
F12030730IWB TCLP
T01301S28-B2 TCLP
T01311215-02 TCLP
T01SUJ1S-02 TCLP
TD2fl5U05-MO TCLP
AC13011070 TCLP
A020S09320 TCLP
01/21/91
01/21/91
02/05/91
• 01/30/91
01/31/91
S1/31/W
02/C5/51
01/30/91
02/05/91
Oi/11/91
04/11/91
ot/um
Ol/li/91
03/11/91
05/11/91
03/11/91
03/11/91
03/11/91
(20PB
(2PP6
NES
KES
SViUUItY OF 9A/OC RESULTS FOI Hi 1Y COLD VAPOR
SMPlt ID
91-01378
SPIKE CMC. Cue H|}
9ADPLE RESVIT SPIKE RESULT
0.2SO
<2epb
S.76 ppb
* SECOVEIY
101.3'
SAVUIO
91-01578
MWU RESULT
DUPLICATE RESULT
(2spb
ML*T!« « MFFERWCf
K/A
SARPLES SHOUlNt A '(' HAVE ABSOftSANCES SaOtf THE HINHIUH STANDARD
* CALCULATED U5IHJ SAHPLE AND SPIKE AISORBANCES
NES * NOT ENOUGH SAIIPLC
K/A « VALUES HOT APPLIMILt FOR CALC8LAT10H
220
-------
ANALYSIS OF Hg BY COLD VAPOR ;
i
He DETERIIINATION ANALYST: STEPHANIE K. BROUN
DATE RECEIVED: OJ/Ot/91 DATE REPORTEO:bi/15/9i
REflUESTER:BOB HOURNISHAN MTRIX:TCLP
TOTAL PASES THIS REPORT: 2
••••••••••••••••*••••••••••»•!
HETHOO:7«0
FILE NARE:RCF-H66
DISC ID:RCF-H6-A
CHECKED BY:
I
SUHRARY OF OA/QC RESULTS FOR H« BY COLD VAPOR
SAflPLE ID'
91-01578
91-01922 .
SAflPLE ID
91-01573
91-01922
SPIKE CONC. (us H«)
0.250
0.250
SAHPLE RESULT
<2ppb
dppb
SAflPLE RESULT
(JtJOb
-------
MERCURY ANALYSIS BY «XJ>" VAPOR ATOMIC ABSOR8ANCE
CONTRACTOR:
DATE RECEIVED:
REQUESTOR;
PAGES REPORTED:
FILE HAHE:
DATES OF AHALYSIS:05/13/91
CHECKED BY: JBV
Technology Applications, Xne.
04/09/91
Mournlghan
1
MOIHG08
PROJECT:
DATE REPORTED
MATRIX:
METHODS:
DISC:
Draka Chealcal
08/13/91
SOLID, LIQUID
SW 846 - 7470,74
CARROLL
Results expressed 1n •a/1 (ppn) for liquids and «aAg (ppei) for solid.
US SO
91-02028 ,
91-02029
9MJ2030
BLAHX
.
Duplicate Sample Ai
(Concentrations In
IA8 ID-
.41-02028
91-02028 dup
*fup S REL. RAHGE
i
SAMPLE XD
00401 1000H5FBK
Q04011000MSIBK
00401 1000BBK
Q3151601TOLP8K
BLANK OS/13/91
' 'SixWCf) ¥OLC*1) ; H}
«ES .f.
. 4 . 25 <.004
V:" • ' ' 2S <.00>
: 45 . <.004 .
100 <.004
y.'-
talysfe • • «*ysw^
ppn 1n dlgestate) - - ./^'^'';j
SAMPLE ID
00401 1000H5IBK
00401 1000MSIBK
^*;;.;¥i!S8L- J3
[fTS3.
RP,
N<
NO- not calculated
MATRIX SPIKE RESULTS.; ,
• (Concentrations 1n ppa
dlgestate)
LAB ID
91-02030 '
91-02030 Mt. $pk.
QC STO
SAMPLE XD
Q3151601TCLPBK
Q31S1601TCLP8K
».^^gi
••*'• •-••'•a
100
£-A^&««
.. <.004>-
0.0203
0.0050
x mi
101
10C
222
-------
APPENDIX C-6
|
CHLORIDE ANALYSES
|
I 223
i
-------
April 24, 1991
Subject: Chloride Analysis Results for Drake Chemical
0001
Charly:
This communication summarizes the results of chloride analyses performed on EPA
Method 5 impinger catches taken at the IRF between January 31 and February 7, 1991.
These data associated with the performance of the rotary Mln system during incineration
of the folowing: Drake Chemical
Measurements of chloride ion concentration were made with a specific ion electrode,
and calibrated at four levels which encompassed those found in the samples.
- Calibrations were at 1000 ppm, 100 ppm, 10 ppm, and 1 ppm -
Samples are identified as specified in the IRF Quality Assurance Project Plan for this test.
All values are reported as total mg HC1.
80130113411,2,3
80131104511,2,3
50131134511,2,3
S0205 11,2,3
80206 11,2,3
50207110011,2,3
A0206I1,2»3
A0207U02I1,2,3
< 0.039 mg HCl/train
< 0.38 mg Ha/train
< 0345 mg Ha/train
.< 0.380 mg HCl/train
< 0.430 mg HCl/train
< 1.005 mg HCl/train
32 mg HCl/train
488.3 mg HCl/train
224
-------
I
I
APPENDIX D
SAMPLING TRAIN WORKSHEETS
225
-------
APPENDIX D-l
METHOD S WORKSHEETS
226
-------
ISQKiNETIC RESULTS
Plant: 1ST Updated 2-13-31
Date; 1-30-91 Printed 93/27/31
Satpie Location: STACK
PAKAHETIS
Sozzle Diatetir, Actual (in)
Pitot Tube Correction Factor
Gas deter Correction Factor
Stack (Duct) gitiJiiiou (in);
ladiu (if round)
.Length (if rectangular)
Uidth (if rectangular)
Area of Stack (54 ft)
f of Satglt Points
Total Sampling Titt (tin)
Baroaetric Pressure (in Hg)
Stack Prissure (in K20)
Sas Reter Initial Reading (cu ft)
Gas ileiar Final Reading (cu ft)
Xtt Gas aatplf Volum (cu ft)
Vol of Lipid Collected (*1)
Vol of Liq t Std. Conds. (set)
Hi. of Filter Particulate (gt)
lit. of Probe Vain Particulit: (gt)
Kt sf Coabinid ^articulate (gt)
02 Concentration (by CEM)
COS Concentration (by CEitt
Pirfoned by: £
Test K»./Type: S
Start/Stop Tilt: 1
snsoi VALUE
(talc.)
N(d) 0.359
C(p) 0.84
(alpaa) 1.01
1 1
I mmiumi
|| •mmm
8(f) (1.0S991 )
* 12
(tbeta) ( 60.99)
P(b) 29.95
P(stack) 1
£21.74
638.444
V(a) ( 59.79 )
VI (0 111.92
V(v std) ( 5.22S )
0.0938
9
H(B) ( 9,9938 )
Z 12.7
I 6.3
C.KIN6
301301134ns
1134-1328
OLCULATiB RESULTS FOR SAMPLE I — S01301134HS
Isokintticity
Ketered Saiple Sas Volute (scf)
(sea)
Stack Sas Flov, std cond. (die fa)
Z I
V(t std)
VCe std)
8(s)
a
*
c
f
ltd cond. (dsci/tin)B(s) *
actual (acft)
actual (act/tin)
Particulate Loading, dry (jr/dsef)
1 71 D2(gr/dscf)
i 71 02(tg/dsct)
Particulate Etission Rite Cb/nr)
(kg/hr)
Stack 6as Hater Vapor Proportion
Kolecular Sleight of Stack oas, Dry
Vtt
Stack Pressure! absolute (in Hg)
Avtragt Stack Velocity (ft/sec)
Q(a)
8(a)
C(s std)
CCs std)
C(s std)
E(p)
E(p)
8(vo)
H(d)
N(s)
PCs)
V(s jvj)
ft
"a
9
*
«
*
*
*
s
m-
f
»•
105.0
58.S3
1.552
1418
40.2
1536
48.0
9.0010
0.0017
4
0.012
0.006
0.082
29.52
28.57
30.02
26.4
CO Concentration (by C£H)
82 Concintraiisn (by diff.)
( 81.00 )
Sauple i
Point
1
2
3
4
5
E
1
2
3
4
5
S
0
0
—
TOTSLS
dClock
Tite
(•in)
5
5
5
S
5
S
K
5
5
3
S
S
9
0
60
Velocity
Head, dP
(in K20)
0.2
0.2
0,2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.13
9.21
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0
0
2.40
Sri f ice
Heter,dH
(in K28)
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.4
0
9
•—•«'- •'*"»*
49.8000
Stack
Tap
(dtgF)
122
123
122
122
121
• 121
122
122
122
'122
122
122
9
0
«__
1463.0
6.5
Tup
in
55
74
85
87
S3
83
105
117
117
117
117
117
0
0
I17S.O
hlir
(degF)
out
61
£8
!72
:73
74
;74
78
1 81
81
85
IBS
86
i *
0
i
913.0
SiST(dP)
0.4472
0.4472
9.4472
0.4472
0.4472
0.4472
0.4359
0.4583
0.4472
0.4472
0.4472
0.4472
0.0099
0.0009
5.3663
FIELD DATA AVKMc3 F
Velocity Head
Orifice Riter Reading
Stack Tuprature
Deter Tetperatare
Root -Mean-Square dP
FOR SAHPLE I
('«)
(deg F)
(deg C)
(degF)
(degC)
(••c)
S013011S4H5
dP(avg) * 0.200
dH(avg) * 3.400
T(s avg) * 121.9
TCs avg) * 51).0
T(» avg) * S7.4
T(t avg) * 30.8
SQRT(dP) - 0.-147
227
-------
isreiNETie RESITS
Piutt 1& 'Opdatid 2-13*91
lain 1*31-91 Printed 03/27/91
Swile Location! STACX
PMUHETER
NMtli Oiuttir, Actual (in)
Pitot Titfii Correctioa Factor
Sas iteter Corrictioa Factor
Stack (Suet) giuosiou (in)i
Kadiss (if round)
Ltajik (if nctanjilir)
Bidtk. (if rectanfilir}
Aria of Stick (is. ft)
1 of Suylt Points
Total Sibling TiM (lit)
laroMtric Preisurt (in Hg)
Stack Pmiare (in H20)
Sas Keter Initial teadtaj (CD ft)
Sas Heter Final Beading (en ft)
Kit 6u SuaU VoIuM (cu ft)
V«l of Liquid Collected dl)
Vol of Liq 1 Std. Coads. (scf)
Ut. of Filter Participate (gi)
Ut. of Pr&ti Uath Particuiati (§•)
Ut of Coaoined Particuiate (gi)
02 Concentration (by CEH)
C02 Concentration (by CEH)
CO Concentration (by CEH)
X2 CoaceatratiM (by diff.)
Ptrforted byi E.HILL £/t>
Test Ho./Tvpet SOI31104S«5
Start/Step Tiiu 1045-1153
SmttOL VAUS
(calc.)
N(d) 0.359
C(p) 0.84
(alpha) 1.01
i 7
1 —
y •^•HW
A(s) U.3S901 )
1 13
(tneta) ( 65.00 )
P(U 30.05
P(stack) i
690.186
751.999
Vd) C 61.31 )
Vl(c) 93.82
V(n std) ( 4.416 )
0.0027
0
I1(p) ( 0.0027 )
Z 12.5
Z 7
Z 0
Z ( 80.50)
CALCULATED RESULTS FOR SAMPLE 1
SOI311045«5
Isakiniticity Z 1
Uttered Swpli Sas Voliut (scf) Vd std)
(set) Vd std)
Stack Sas Flov, std cud. (dsefn) 0(s)
std cond. (dsci/cin)8(s)
actual (acfa) «(a)
actual (aci/eia) B(a)
Particulate Loading, dry (gr/dicf) C(s std)
1 71 D2(gr/dtcf) C(s std)
I 71 02(tg/dtu) CCs std)
Particuiati Eiissios Sati (In/hr) £(p)
(kg/tir) E(p)
Stack Sas Uater Vapor Proportion B(vo)
IMfculaf iieigkt of Stack Sas, Dry H(d)
Uet K(s)
Stack Prissurif atsolute (in eg) PCs)
Average Stack Velocity (ft/sec) V(s avg)
98.3
60.41
1.711
1410
1S47
46.6
0.0007
0.0011
3
0.009
0.004
0.063
29.62
28.83
30.12
25.7
Suale ! dClock IVdocityi Orifice
Point ! TiM ,'Niid, iPldttir.dH
1 din) Kin JQOmin H20)
11 5 S 0.18 i 3.24
2 : 5 ; 0.19 : 3.42
3 i S ! 0.24 ! 4.32
4 ! Si 0.2 ! 3.6
5 ! 5 ! 0.19 ! 3.42
61 51 0.2 ! 3.6
1 i 5 i ' 0.19 1 3.42
2 ! 51 0.19 1 3.42
3 I 5 ! 0.2 ! 3.6
41 3 ! 0.2 ! 3.6
5 I 5 I 0.19 ! 3.42
i ! 5 ,' 0.19 i 3.42
5 ! 5 ! 0.19 ! 3.42
o : o ; o : o
~TS:=. ' ••»• !•••• *«.••«
1 " " " " f "•iiminij | «•"•«"
i" • ii »i*-iiiK 1 •iimw ii •*** | !••*• VBiiM>^WViMw.v •<•>«
TOTALS ! 65 1 2.55 ! 45.9000
Stack
Tits
(dtgF)
107
107
107
107
107
106
US
106
107
107
107
107
107
•••mm
™™***
1388.0
Sas
TUB
* in
60
79
91
99
105
108
112
114
115
116
116
116
116
0
m:maf
1347.0
Deter
(deiF)
out
56
57
59
63
65
69
76
79
ai
83
84
85
86
0
—
——
••!• ••—«•»»
943.0
sMUdp) :
0.4243
0.4359
0.4899
0.4472
.0.4359
0.4472
0.4359
0.4359
0.4472
0.4472
0.4359
0.4359
0.4359
0.0000
_
1 " ' - i
m n^ u u ti[ a i
5.7542 !
DATA AVE8A6ES FOR SAMPLE t
Velocity Head
Orifice Deter Reading
Stack Tnperature
Deter Teiperatart
8o9i-Hiaa-So,uart dP
('«)
(deg F)
(deg C)
(d«g F)
(degC)
S0131104SN5
dP(avg) = 0.19S
dH(avg) * 3.531
T(s avg) *
T(s avg) *
Td avg) =
Tte avg) *
106.3
41.5
S3.!
31.2
SffiT(dP) * 0.443
228
-------
ISKIKET1C RESULTE
Plant: IRF Updated 2*13-91
iates 1-31-91 Printed 03/27/91
Saapla Location: STACK
PAMHITB
Konle Biaeetar, Actual (in)
Pitoi Tube Correction Factor
6as Meter Correction Factor
Stack (Suet) Siecniioni (in):
Radius (if round)
Length (if rectangular)
Hidth (if rectangular)
Aria of Stack (so, ft)
i of Saeple Points
Total Saepling Tiae (ein)
Baroeetric Pressure (in Kg)
Stack Pressure (in H20)
lai Kiter Initial Reading (cu ft)
Sas Deter Final Reading (cu ft)
Het Sas Saaple Volute (cu ft)
Vol of Liquid Collected (•!)
M of Liq 1 Std. Conds. (scf)
at. of Filter Particulati (ge)
It. si Proit Visit Particuiaie (ga)
as of Coabined Particulate (ge)
02 Concentration (by CEH)
C02 Concentration (by. CO?)
CO Concentration (by CE!0
N2 Concentration (by diff,)
Ferforeed by:
Test No. /Type!
Start/Stop Tieei
SfllML VALUE
(calc.)
l(d) 0.359
C(p) 0.84
(alpoa) 1.01
1 7
I _.jiiinni»
If jioiiniii
A(s) (1.06301
1 . 12
(theta) ( 60.00
Ptb) 30.05
P(stack) 1
752.646
809.413
V(«) ( 56.77
¥l(c) 52.2
V(« std) ( 2.457
0.0017
0.32
K(p) ( 0.0217
I 13.5
I 6
Z 0
I ( 80,50
6. HILL J$l
SO'l31134S)t5
1345-1452
1
j
I
|
;
> :
i '
i
i
) ;
'•
> !
i
1 i
i
i
i
) j
MtCUiJTIB RESULTS FOR Sfl!ffL£ 1
S0131134SI5
Isokineiicity
Ketered Saeple Sas Voluee
Stack Sas Flow, std cond.
std cond.
actual
actual
Particulate Loading, dry
11 « 91.9
(scf) VU std) * !S5.30
(sea) VCi std) » 1.166
(dscfi) 0(s) » 1463
(dsca/iin)B(s) * 41,4
(Kit) B(a) •« 1611
(ace/iia) B(a) * 45.6
(gr/dscf) C(s std) * 0.0061
I 71 02(gr/dscf) C(s std) * 0.0113
I 71 62(af/dsca) C(s std) * 26
Particulate Eeisiion Rate (Ib/hr) ECp) * 0.076
(kj/hr) E(p) = C.034
Stack Gas Hater Vapor Proportion 8(vo) *
Relecular Height of Stack Sis, try HCd) *
Uet It(s) -
Stack Presiure, absolute (in Kg) PCs) >
Average Stack Velocity (ft/sec) V(s avg) -
('.043
29.50
29.01
30.12
25.1
Saaple
Point
1
2
3
4
S
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
0
0
—
—
t::::::: . _
— .
TOTALS
dCloci !
Tiee
(tin)
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
0
0
_
_
60
Velocity
Head, dP
(in H20)
0.2
0.18
0.18
0.19
0.19
0,2
0.2
0.2
0.1)
0.19
0.18
0.13
0
0
. —
•—
„, „,
—
2.2S
Orifice
Meter, dK
(in K20)
3.6
3.24
3.24
3.42
3.42
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.42
3.42
3.24
3.42
0
0
— _
— .
m,.
__
41.2200
Stack
Tea?
(degf)
102
100
100
101
101
101
100
101
99
99
100
100
0
0
—
•*"—
:.!••_•
~_
1204.0
Sas
Teip
in
73
, 92
103
108
112
115
106
120
120
120
120
120
0
0
,
Juullnn™
—
!*—
I w • II 1 i a »
1 " ' "
! 1303.0
(let
(de
i
,
M
jF)
ut
68
68
71
73
76
79
83
84
86
87
B8
89
0
0
r
L
i
52.8
SitT(dP) iFIELO DATA fiVEHAES FOR SAMPLE f - S0131134SH5
t
IVslocity Head Cwc) dP(ivg) s
«,....„!,•*
0.4472 iOrifice Deter Reading Cvc) dH(avg) *
0.4243 !
0.4243 EStack Teaperature (deg F) T(s avg) *
0.4359 ! (dig C) Its avg) -
0.435S !
0.4472 SKeter Teaperature (deg F) T(» ivg) =
0.4472 ! (deg C) T(» avg) «
0.4472 !
0.4353 :Root-Rean-Sa.uare dP ('«) SSRTCdP) «
0.4359 !
0.4243 !
0.43S9 !
o.oooo :
o.oooo :
mmmm t
mmlmm t
— *, 1
"**""" 1
5.2411 i
0.191
3.435
100.3
33.0
34.2
34.6
0.437
229
-------
ISOXIKET1C RESULTS
Plant: IEF Updated 2-13-91
DatK 2-3-91 Printid 03/27/91
Sattli location! STACX
PARAMETER
Hozile Dimtir, Actual (in)
, Pitoi Tube Corrictioo Factor
fa* Hitir Corrtctioa Factor
Stack (Ovct) limsioai (ia)i
Eadiu (if round)
lingtB (if rectangular)
Bidta (if rictangular)
Aria of Stack CM ft)
t of Saaoli Points
Total Saaslinj TiM din)
hroMtric Pmsuri (in Hg)
Start Priisure (in H20)
Sas Ma Initial Riading (cii ft)
Sas Hittr Final Reading tea ft)
Hit Sat Suple Voluat (cu ft)
Vol of Liquid Collictid di)
Val of Lin * Std. Conds. (scf)
lit. of Filtir Particulaii (gi)
at. of Probi Uasit Psrticulata (ga)
Si of Coabined Particulati (gi)
02 .Concentration (by CER)
CC2 Coacintration (by CEH)
CO Concentration (by CEH)
X2 Coacntraiion (by diff J
CALCULATED RESULTS FOR SAflPLE t
S020SOSS8H5
Pirfwied by: C.HNf
Test Ko./Typej S0205035SH5
Start/Stop Tim 0958-1108
SHIM
KM)
C(p)
(alpha)
VALUE
teak.)
0.359
0.84
' 1.01
V
«(s)
I
(ihiia)
P(i)
Vti)
VI (C)
V(» std)
(1.06901 )
12
( 60.00 )
30.04
i
31S.7SS
872.326 •
( 55.56 )
«(p)
I
I
I
I
93.68
( 4.S45 )
0.0033
0.01
( 0.0133 )
12.5
£.6
0 '
( 89.80)
IsoHniiicity X 1
Hitirid Susie Sas Voluie (scf) ¥(• std)
(set) VU std)
Stack Sas Flow, std cond. (dscfi) Q(s)
std cond. (dscB/iin)fl(s)
actual * (acfo) 0(a)
actual (aci/tia) 8(a)
Particolati Loading, dry (gr/dscf) C(s std)
1 71 02(gr/dscf) C(s std)
1 7! 02(if/dsci) C(s std)
Particuiaii Etissios Rail (Ib/hr) E(p)
(kg/hr) E(p)
Stack Sas Hater Vapor Proportion B(w)
Holtcular Iliight of Stack Sas, Ory R(d)
Bit N(s)
Stack Pressure, absolute (in Hg) P(s)
Average Stack Velocity (ft/sec) V(s avg)
101.9
54.48
1.543
1356
38.4
1568
44.4
0.0038
0.0063
14
0.044
0.020
0.079
29.56
28.SS
= 30.11
> 24.4
Supli ! dClock
Point ! Tin
I din)
i ! 5
2! 5
3 ! 5
4 ! 5
3 ! S
S ! S
1 t 5
2! S
3 ! 5
4 ! S
5 ! 5
i t 5
0 ! 0
0 ! 0
-~ l__
1
|-»»it-i»
1 "" " *" I"™"""
t
| ••"!•
— — 'J— -
TOTALS i 60
IViiocity! Orifice i Stack
Hud, oT'Hiter4dH ! Tup
(in K23)!(in H2Q) ,' (dugF)
0.16 ! 3.1 ! IOS
0.17 ! 3.3 ! 106
0.18 1 3.3 ! 106
0.18 ! 3.5 ! 106
0.18 ! 3.5 ! 106
0.13 ; 3.5 ! 106
0.17 : 3.3 : 106
0.18 i 3.5 i IOS
0.18 I 3.5 ! IOS
0.1B ! 3.5 i IOS
0.18 i 3.5 ! 105
0.18 i 3.5 ; 106
o : o i o
o i o i o
— — J— I—
1 I
«•«•»•.-• • "*""'• I™ "*""''
mimmm ( <••**• |™~"™a
mnm""r 1 ""•"•"• »""•"•
Mm,,m 1 mmmm Immmrn
2.12 i 41.2000 S 1271.0
Sas
TH?
in
87
36
110
116
119
122'
9S
123
123
124
127
127
0
0
—
™ m m u|:
"MI um
•""•"
— —
1370.0
Meter
UegF)
out
78
77
79
82
84
87
87
91
SO
93
95
95
0
0
—
-ummm
mum mm.
• »•*«•
^«-
1037.0
SKT(dP)
0.4000
0.4123
0.4243
0.4243
0.4243
0.4243
0.4123
0.4243
0.4243
0.4243
0.4243
0.4243
0.0000
0.0000
_™
taaalm
«""•
«"•«•
™— .
5.0430
F1ELS DATA AVEM6EJ FOX 8AKPLE I
Vilociiy Hiad (°BC)
Orifict Httir finding CMC)
S02050933ltS
dPlavj) « 0.177
dH(avg) * 3.433
Stack Tuptraiurt
Hitir Teipiraiuri
Koot-flcan-Squart dP (*vc)
(deg F)
(dig C)
(dig F)
(d*| C)
T(s avg)
T(s avg)
T(i avg)
Td avg)
10S.9
41.1
100.3
37.9
SBRT(dP) > 0.420
230
-------
ISfiKINETIC RESULTS
Plant: IRF Updated 2-13-91
Batil 2-5-91 Printed 03/27/91
Siiple Location: STACK
PARAMETER
Nozzle Diaaeter, Actual (in)
Pitot Tube Correction Factor
"Sat fitter Correction Factor
Stick (Duct) Oiiensiou (in):
ladiui (if round)
length (If rectangular)
Width (if rectangular)
Area of Stack (sq ft)
t of Supie Points
Total Saepling Tim din)
laroietric Pressure (in Kg)
Stack Pressure (in H20)
to Meter Initial Reading (en ft)
Sis Meter Final Reading (cu ft)
Hit Sas Siiple Voluie (cu ft)
Vol «f Liquid Collected (§1)
Vol ef Liq t Std. Conds. (scf)
Ht. of Filter Particulate (ge)
it. of Probe Uas!) Particulate (gaJ
«t of Coabined Pariiculate (31)
02 Concentration (by CO!)
012 Concentration (by CH!)
CO Concentration (by CO!)
N2 Concentration (by diff.)
Perforied by:
Test No./Type:
Start/Stop Tiie:
SYMBOL VALUE
(calc.)
N(d) 0.359
C(p) 9.84
(alpha) 1.01
1 7
I •••«
II K-«.J,J
A(s) (1.06901
1 13
(theia) ( 53.00
P(b) 30.16
P(stack) 1
873.305
934.82
V(a) ( 51.52
' VI (c) 149,58
V(« sid) ( 7.041
O.SS3S
0
«(p) ( 0.0603
I 12.45
1 6.1
Z 0
I ( 81.45
!
dlN3 CA
S02061023H5
1023-1131
, i
! '
i
]
i
i
i
)
i
) ;
i
i
i !
!
) !
, 1
!
) ,
1
1
1
) •
CALCULATED RESULTS FOR SAMPLE I — S020S1022M5
Isokineticity
Detered Supie Sas Volute
Stack Sas Flov, std cond.
std cond.
• actual
actual
Particulate Loading, dry
I 71 D2(gr/dscf) Cts std)
I 71 D2(ig/dKi) C(s std)
Particulate Eiissioo Rate (Ib/hr) E(p)
(kg/hr) E(p)
XI
(scf) Via std)
(sea) Vd std)
(dscfi) 8(s)
(dsci/iin)0(s)
(acft) 0(a)
(aci/iin) 8(a)
(fr/dscf) C(s std)
18.8
59.17
1.67S
1403
39.7
1703
48.4
0.4002
0.0003
1
0.003
0.001
Stack Eas Hater Vapor Proportion
Molecular Height of Stack Sas, Dry
Hit
Stack Pressure, absolute (in Hg)
Average Stack Velocity (ft/sec)
Satple
Point
i
2
3
i
:
s
i
2
3
4
5
6
S
0
TOTALS
dCiock
Tise
(tin)
5
S
5
S
'$
§
5
S
5
5
5
•5
S
0
: is
Velocity
Head, dP
(in H2Q)
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
(.2
0.19
0.2
0.2
0.21
0.21
0,21
0.2
0,21
0
2.63
Orifice
HetaMH
(in H:Q;
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.2
3.4
3.4
3.5
3.5
3.S
3.4
3.J
0
! 44.4300
Stack
Teep
(dtfF)
113
120
120
121
121
120
121
120
120
121
221
121
120
0
1IES.O
Sas
Teip
in
84
98
110
120
120
122
125
12S
127
128
128
128
128
0
1544.0
Hiter
(dqF)
out
I
72
75
: 80
' S3
I 84
: ss
i 9°
82
94
| 35
35
97
' 98
; o
i
1142.0
SORTCdF)
0.4472
0.4472
0.4472
0.4472
0.4472
0.4359
0.4472
0.4472
0.4533
0.4583
0.4583
0.4472
0.4183
0.0000
S.S456
FIELD DATA AVERASeS FOR SAMPLE I
Velocity Head I've)
Irifice Meter Reading (*vc)
Stack Teeperatur*
Reter Teeperatwe
Rsot-Hean-Square dP (*«)
(degF)
(de$ C)
(deg F)
(deg C)
8(vo) >
H«) *
M(s) =
P(5) =
V(s avg) -
0.106
21.47
23,25
3U3
. 2£.fi
S020S1023M5
dP(avg) = 0.202
dJi(avg) * 3.415
TCs avg) * 120.4
T(s avg) = 49.1
T(e avg) « 103.3
TCa avg) - :19.6
SKT(dP)
0,450
i 231
-------
ISOHJETIC KSU.TS
Nutl Iff Updatri
Ktn 2*7*91 Printtd
Suplt locatisat STACK
HWXEI&
2-13-31
03/27/91
Pirforud iyi C.KMS c*'
Test Uo./Typei S02071100K5
Start/Stop Tiie: 1100-1221
CALCULATED RESULTS FDR S8HPLE t
S02071100H5
Xouli Diaittir, Actaal (in)
( PItot Tubi Correction Factor
" Su Kitir Corrfctioa factor
Stack (Duct) Ditusloas (ia)s
liiiis (if roeri)
iMjth (if rectugalar)
Vidtk (if rtctanplar)
Via of Stick («i ft)
I of Saaoii Paiati
Total Siiplinj Tin din)
JaroMtric Pressure (in Kg)
Stick Prisiurt (la H2fl>
Su Rtttr Initial Readinj (cu ft)
Sat Ritir Final Reading tcu ft)
Kit 8ai Saipli VoluM tcu ft)
Voi af Liqiid Col'lictid til)
Vol of Uq I Std. tads, dcf)
Ut. of Filtir Particulati (91)
lit. at Prosi Sart Paniculate tga)
Ut of Cotaiaed rarticulati (91)
02 Coactatration (by CSH
C02 Coacmtr atlo» (by CQ1)
CO Concentration (by CBB
H2 CMcintration (by diff.)
SYRBOL
N(d)
Ctp)
(alpna)
S
L
y
VALUE
(ctlc.)
0.376
0.84
1.01
(1.
t
(thtta)
P(b)
Pdtick)
Vd)
W(c5
V(« ltd)
MCpJ
I
Z
2
Z
13
( 7S.OO )
30.34
1
335.2S7
99S.304
( £0.04)
755.44
( 35. SOS )
0.0121
0
( 0.0121 )
12.47
S.3
0'
( 81.23 )
Isokinetidty Z I
Itatered Suple 6as Volun (scf) Vd std)
(sea) V(c ltd)
Stack Gas Flov, std cond. (dscrt) 8(s)
std cond. (dtca/iin)8(i)
actual (acf«) B(a)
actual (act/tin) 8(a)
Particulatt Uadinj, dry (gr/dscf) CO std)
i 71 K(gr/dscf) Us ltd)
1 72 02(ig/dui) Cta std)
Particulatt Enissio- Rate (Ib/hr) E(p)
(k|/br) E(p)
Stack Gas Biter Vapor Proportion B(uo)
KolKttlar Iliight of Stack Su, Dry IKd)
Vit K(s)
Stack Prissuri, absolutt (in Kg) P(s)
Avtragi Stack Velocity (ft/stc) V(£ ivg)
104.9
57.91
1.S40
1008
23.3
1911
54.1
0.0932
0.0053
12
O.i}28
0.413
0.381
29.51
23.13
30.41
2'J.a
Saipli ! dClock
Point i Tim
! Uin)
1 i S
2 ! 9
3 : s
4 i S
s; s
6 S 5
i t S
2 1 5
3 ! 3
4 ; s
5! 5
6 : s
s ; s
2 : s
4 ] 6
— j__
- - 1 E t 1V =
— ~ !_
'
TOTALS ! 76
SVilocity
Htad, dP
(u KQ;
0.21
0.21
0.21
0.2
0.2
0.22
0.21
0.2
0.2
0.21
0.21
0.22
0.22
0.2
0.21
— .
'
—
3.13
Orifici
Httir,dH
(in K20)
2.1
2.1
2.1
2
2
2.2
2.1
2
2
2.1
2.1
2.2
2.2
2
2.1
_
™
31.3000
Stack 1 Sas
Ttip i Tup
tdigF) i in
S70 ! 79
170 ! 93
170 ! 113
171 : us
170 ! 117
170 ! 119
170 t 123
171 ! 12S
171 .' 124
170 ! 124
170 ! 123
171 ! 120
170 ! J22
170 ! 123
170 i 124
_ [__
;
»— .
""" ,— -
2554.0 ! 1744.0
Hittr
(digF)
out
72
73
78
79
at
84
94
Sfi
97
97
104
103
99
98
97
_ _
— -
__,
1352.0
S8RT(d!>)
0,4583
0.4383
0.4583
0.4472
0.4472
0.4690
0.4583
0.4472
0.4472
0.4583
0.4583
0.4690
0.4690
0.4472
0.4533
__
— ,
,
5.8510
FIELB DATA AVEWSES FOR
Velocity Hud
Orifice fletir Stadinj
Stack Tuptratare
Keter Tuptraturi
SMPL£ 1 -
(*«)
CK)
(dig F)
(deg C)
(deg F)
• S02071100HS
dP(jvg) =
dHdvg) <
T(s avg) *
Ut avj) «
Td »vg) s
7(i ivg) *
0.209
2.C37
170.3
75.3
103.2
39.6
Root-fliin-Squan dP Cvc)
SEKT(dP) * 0.457
232
-------
lEOKIItTnC PEKrORKMc KKK3ET AND PWT1CULATE CflLQJLATIDG
Plant: Iff Performed byi 6 HILL CK
Datei 02-4-91 Test No./Typei A02061021IB
Sucle Location: #lk.-MHBi Start/Stop Tim 1021-129
PARSIETER
(Halt Bineter, ScUul (in)
Pitot Tube Corractioi Factor
Eu Itottr Comction Factor
Stack Hist) OiMMion (in):
Ridiui (if rauid)
Length (if ncUngulir)
Kidth (if rtctanoular)
Dm of SUck ho ft)
I of Suple Points
Total Sailing Ti« bun)
BvoMtric Pmsura (in Hj)
SUck Pmsirt (in H20)
Eu Ikttr Initial teading tai ft)
Eu hittr Final Reading (a ft)
Nit Su Sanftle Voliot (cu ft)
SVICO.
Hlfl
Ctol
(alpha)
It
L
N
A(s)
*
(thita)
P(b>
Pdtack)
V(l)
VAUE
(calc.)
0.523
0.8400
1.0100
11.43
0.00
0.00
I 1951
24
( 96.00 )
30. li
-«.070
657.31
716.25
I 3.74 )
Vol of Liquid Calltcttd 111) VI(c) 1*4.3
Vol of Liq t SU. Condi, (tcf) V<» ltd) ( 6.792 )
Vt. of Filter Participate (ot) 0.0102
Kt. of Protif tath Particulate (git 0.1300
Kt of Cabined Particular (gal Dip) ( 0.1402 )
02 Concentration toy CBU
C02 Concentration (by CcM)
CO Concentration (by CEH)
1C Concentration (or diff.)
102 9.44
IC02 6.94
:co 0.0
1C ( 83.62)
Susie : dClock iVelocity
Point
1
2
3
4
5
i
7
E
7
10
j.
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
7
10
11
12
TOTALS
Tiee IKsad, dP
4
4
4
96
(in ICO)
0.93
0.08
0.08
0.08
C.03
0.08
O.OS
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.03
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.03
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
O.OE
0.08
0.08
1.92
Orifice ! Stack ! Bat Heter
Ifeter.tW
(in ICO)
2.2000
2.2000
12000
12000
12000
12000
12000
12000
12000
12000
12000
12000
12000
12000
2.2000
12000
12000
12000
12000
12000
12000
12400
2.2000
Teep i Teap (degF)
(deoF) ! in 1 out
1870.0
1870.0
1370.0
1870.0
1870.0
1870.0
1870.0
1870.0
1870.0
1870.0
1870.0
1870.0
1870.0
1870.0
1370.0
1870.0
1870.0
1370.0
1870.0
1370.0
1870.0
1870.0
1870.0
12000 ! 1870.0
22.8040 i 44880.0
105.0 ! ,E10
110.0
116.0
118.0
120.0
123.0
124.0
126.0
126.0
126.0
126.0
126.0
120.0
127.0
128.0
128.0
128.0
129.0
129.0
129.0
129.0
129.0
129.0
129.0
2980.0
K.O
:90.0
910
|95.0
93.0
58.0
100.0
101.0
1010
103.0
103.0
99.0
102.0
105.0
105.0
105.0
105.0
105.0
105.0
105.0
105.0
ios.o
105.0
2401.0
SORT(ijP)
0.2823
0.2328
0.2323
0.2828
0.2823
0.2828
0.2828
0.2828
0.2823
0.2828
0.2823
0.328
0.2828
0.2328
0.2823
0.2328
0.2828
0.2328
0.2823
0.2328
0.283
0.2828
0.2828
0.2828
6.7882 !
FIELD DATA AVERAES
Avg Velocity head (in ICO) dP(avg) • 0.080
ftvg Orifice Meter teading (in 100) dHtavg) - 1200
Avg SUck Teaperaturt (degF) T(i avg) ' 1870.0
Average heter Teaperatam (deoF) T 0.109
hoi. «., SUck Gas Dry H(d) • 29.49
Itol. «., SUck Su Hit Hit) ' 28.23
ttn Stack Pressure On Hg) P(«> • 30.1!
Avo Stack velocity (ft/tec) V(s avg) • 33.6
Icokineticity (II XI* 93.8
SUck Eu STD Vol Flo. (dscfi) Ols) > 1210
Actual SUck Eu Vol Flo» (acfe) 0(a) • 5949
Particulate Loading, drylgr/diri) Cts ltd) • 0.0390
Particulate Loadinj, 171 02(eg/dice)C(> ltd) • 108
Particulate Loading, dry ( 7 I 02 (gr/dscf), « 0.0472
0.405
Pirticulitt Eiiiiiai Rat»(lb/hr) E(o)
i 233
-------
ISflWKTte PERfOnUUICE flOKSHEET MO PABTIOMTE CflUUUTIOMS ,
Plants 1ST Perform! »yt 6.HILL X/Q-
Balei 2-7-31 ' Test Ho./Typf: ft020ni02«5
Location: A.B. Start/Stop Tit«: 1102-1315
PMUWETER
Kotile lilitttr, Actual
Unjlh (if rectangular)
Hldtb (if reetaiigilar)
Am of Siaci (*q It)
I of Siij>!i Points
Total Sapling Tiir din)
Ilroittric Pmswt (in Hg)
Stick Priiiuri (in H20)
Eat Htttr Initial finding (en (t)
611 Kitcr Finil Reading (cu (t)
Kit Gas Snplt Voluae (cu (t)
SHI80L
N(d)
C(p)
(alpha)
R
L
U
A(s)
VALUE
(calc.)
9.525
O.B490
0.3900
11.63
0.09
9.90
J.95)
I
nai SATA
flvg Velocity Held (in H20) dPU»g) - 0.065
Avg Orifice Utter Reading (in K20) dH(avg) « 2.000
Avg Stack Twperature, (degF) T(s avg) * 1851.3
Average fitter Teipenture (dcgF) Id avg) = 143.1
ftvg SflRKdP) > 0.255
CALCULATES VALUES
Utter Voluit (sU, co. ft.) Vd std) * 56.62
(theta)
P(b)
P(stack)
Vd)
24
( 9S.09 )
30.34
•fl.070
722.23
782.11
( 53.88 )
Vol of Liquid Collect id (tl) flk) 151.3 ,
Vol Of Liq I Std. Condi, (scl) V(v itd) ( 7.129 )
Ut, or Filtir P*rtk«latt («•) 0.03*8
Ut. of Prcbt Hash FarticuUtt (ji) 0.3609
Ut of Ccibinid Particulati (gi> H(p) ( 0,3348 )
02 CMCHitratton (by CEH) I 02 3.41
C02 Concentration (by OBI) I CM 7.03
CO Cwtctntraiion (by CEH) I CO 9.0
N2* Concentration (ky diff.) I H2 ( 83.55 )
Siiple
Point
1
2
3
4
S
S
7
S
3
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
S
E
7
8
S
10
11
12
TOTALS
dClock
Tiie
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
J
4
4
4
1
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
mmmmmmmm
9E
IVelocityiOrifice
IHead, dP'
lteter,dH
Uin K2<»!(in H20)
t 9.07 i
1 9.07 !
! 0.97 !
! 9.97 1
! 9.07 !
! 9.07 !
! 9,07 !
! 0,07 !
! 0.07 !
! 0.07 t
i 0.07 :
1 0.07 !
! 9.07 I
1 0.07 !
! 0.97 !
! 9.97 !
1 0.97 !
! *»9? !
! 0,07 !
! 0.97 !
! 0.97 !
! 9.07 !
: 0.07 :
! 0.07 !
• •Mil** mimmml
: i.S6 *,
2.0900
2.0090
2.0009
2.0990
2.9099
2,0000
2.0000
2.9090
2.0000
2.0000
2.0000
2.0000
2.9000
2.0090
2.9090
2.9099
2.9000
2.9990
2.9090
2.9090
2.0000
2.0000
2.0000
2.0000
48
Stack
Teip
(degF)
1855.9
1855.0
1855.9
1855.0
1855.0
1853.9
1851.0
1851.9
1851.0
1851.9
1851.9
1851.0
1851.0
1851.0
1851.0
1850.9
1851.0
1851.9
1851.0
1851.0
1851.0
1851.9
1851.0
1851.0
44445
! 6as Utter
! teip (degF)
! In ! out
I 71.0 ! 71.0
I 102.0 ! 77.0
! 102.9 ! 77.0
i 193.0 ! 78.0
! 104.9 ! 79.0
! 103.0 ! 82.0
i 113.0 i 85.0
1 116.0 i 88,0
! 116.0 ! 89. t
i 117.0 i 90.0
i 117.0 i 30.0
: ii7.o
: ii4.o
i 119.0
! 121.0
: 123.0
! 123.0
! 123.0
I 124.9
! 125.9
! 125.0
! 125.0
! 125.9
! 125.0
91.0
87.9
34.0
98.0
99.9
100.0
100.0
WI.0
103.0
103.0
103.0
103.0
103.0
L__
1 2753 1 2131
iSQKT(dP) !
: ;
! i 1
i 9.2550 !
! 9.2559 !
! 9.2559 !
S 9.2559 !
S 0.2559 1
i 9.2559 !
: 0.2550 ;
: 0.2550 :
: o.255o :
! 0.2550 t
! 0.2550 !
: 9.2550 :
: 0.2559 :
! 9.2550 !
: 0.2530 ;
! 9,1559 I
; 0.2550 :
1 9.2559 !
! 9.2550 !
1 9.2550 !
! 0.2550 i
! 9.2550 !
: 0.2550 :
! 0.2550 '.
16.118823 I
Stack Sis Miter Vapor Proportion
Hoi. lit., Stack 6as Dry
Kol. Ut., Stack 6as Met
Ais Stack Pressure (in Hj)
Avg Stack Velocity (It/sec)
IsokineHcity tt)
Stack Sas STD Vol Flw (dscfi)
Actual Stack Gas Vol Flov (acft)
Kvo) >
Bid) •
X(s) *
P(s) >
tf(s avg) «
1 1 «
S(s) *
9(a) =
Participate Loading, dry(gr/dscf> C(s std) =
Particulate Loading, m 02(io/dsc«)C(s std)
Particulate Loading, dry i 7 I 02 (gr/dscf) =
0.112
23.50
28.22
30.33
30.1
105.7
1035
5323
0.107E
237
0.1300
IPirticuUtt Eiission Ritt(lbyhr) E(p>
1.010
234
-------
APPENDIX D-2
METHOD 17 METALS TRAIN WORKSHEETS
I
235
-------
ISOXIKETIC PEPJOSHANCE WORKSHEET AND PAmCULATE CALCULATIONS
NaAt: Iff. Perfor.ed by: 6.HILL
Dale: 1-30-91 Tut No./Iype: AOI301101IH7
Siiple location: A.I. Start/Stop Tin: 1101-1523
PJUMHETER
Honlc OiHtter, Actual (in)
Pilot Tube Correction factor
$11 Miter Correction Factor .
Stick (Duct) Bilfitiions (in)i
Rid 1m tif rand)
Length Cif rectangular)
IfUth (ir rectangylar)
Aria of Stick dq ft)
I of Supli Polnti
Total Siipllng Tin din)
tirotttric Pressure (in Hg)
Stick Pressure (in H20)
Bis Utter Initial Priding (co ft)
Su Meter Final Reading 0.076
Hoi. «t., Stick fi» Dry H(« s 2$.31
Rol. HI,, Stack 6is Kit KCs) * 28.S3
Abs Stack Pressure (in Ho) P(s) = 29,94
Vol of Liquid Collected (ill VI(c) 1187.3
Vol of Lit) I Std. Condi, (scf) V(» std) ( 55.881 )
Ut. «f Filter Particulite (gt! 1.2220
Ht. of Probe Wiih Pirthulate (gi) 0,0600
Ut of Coiointd Particulate (gi) HC(5 std) 77
Particullte Loiding, dry J 7 I 02 (gr/dscf) * 0.0338
Participate Eiission P.ate(lb/hr) E(p) = 0,293
236
-------
1SUIIXET1C .•SmUKE UIQHST
Plant: IV
Haiti 92-5-S1
SaiBlf Ucatioiu jOTBUBBfl
MJMETH
Koiilt Olutter, Actaal (in)
Pitat Tiki Correction Factor
Sat Deter Cernctioi factor
Stact diet) HimioM U»)»
ladiu (if roud)
Ungtk (if nctaajslar)
lidtt (if mtaagtlif)
Are* of Stack (14 ft)
1 of Susie Poiitf
Total SaaBiiBt, Tin («ia)
lareattric Praittrt (in Kg)
Stack Frnnrs (in H29)
ias Deter Initial JJKIO? (n (t)
Eai itter Fiaal Riadio; (ci ft)
Ml iai SaaBli VoioM (ce ft)
no pMTioiun uion
hrforied ftft S
leit «a./Typtt M
Start/Stop Hit: B!
STXm M1UE
(talc.)
Md) 1.489
C!p) 9.S499
(aipta) 943S9
1 I1.S3
1 9.90
I 9.90
Ms) ( 2.3S )
1 24
(tbetaJ ( 132,09 )
F(b) 30.04
PCnxcU -4.070
211.13
1153.32
V(i) ( 34i.l3 I
. - FIBJ WT*
smu c.fr*2
*»g Vtlotity Head (in K2D)
*«9 Orifici lelir leadiii; (in K20)
t*l Stack Tii^ratsti
tr Tuptritir* UifF)
Id a»jl »
I(e »g) <
amun
9.070
1.100
1SU.O
113.S
o.as
VAUES
Sttir
(ltd, n. ft.)
Stack Sat later Vaegr Froportioo |(w)
Icl. It., Stact Sa< Cry l(d)
bl. Hi., Staci Su Dei H(«)
Mi Stick rrratre (in Hj) Id)
Vta lid) > IH.32
0.063
2J.I4
2S.31
30.03
Vol of liquid Collected (it) 71(c) 1241.5
•Vol of Liq i Std. Coadf. bcf) Tin iW) ( 3.437 )
Kt, of Filtir fariiralatt (]«) 1.7700
it. ef Frcte bib Particilitt (gt) 4.S4M
K of Csabiaed fartiniait (c^> KB! ( 6.7100 )
*i? Stack Vdocitr .
i
Suole I uciock
Point i Tiie
!
1 !
2
3
4
S
i
7
1
5
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
1
7
- 1
]
IS
11
12
TQTH.S
131
VilocittiOrifici t Stack
Held, dP!8etir,iiN; Tup
(in namin aaii! «t;n
0.07 i l,SW i 1MO.O
0.07 i l.HOO ! 1660.0
o.o7 ; i.fiooo : ISEO.O
9.07 ! !.£«50 i ISEO.O
o.o7 ; i.ioeo : IESI.O
0.07 ! l.MM ! lifO.t
0.97 ! l.HO« ! 1B50.0
0.07 : i.sooo : 11:9.9
0.07 ! l.WH ! 1850.0
9.07 i LfOOO ! 1860.0
1.07 ! 1.6000 ! 11(0.0
0.07 ; uiooB ; IBSO.O
0.07 ; i.iOM : uso.o
9.07 ; i.S9oo : IBM.O
0.97 ! l.SOW ! 1860.0
0.07 : utdoe : ISEO.O
o.o? : i.iooo : iaso.o
9.07 ; 1.CMO : IESO.O
9.07 ! 1.S009 ! 1860.0
0.07 i l.SMfl ! 18W.8
9.97 ! 1.6000 ! U60.0
0.07 ! 1.6MO i 1860.0
9.97 ! l.SOW ! 1860.0
9.97 ! 1.6000 ! 1B60.0
Su liter :S02T(dP) 1
Ttia Uefl I !
in ; Mt i :
190.0 i K-fl ! t.a£4S !
129.0 ! &0 i 0.2S4t !
134.0 ! 17.0 ! I.S4I !
ra.o ; 1011.0 ; ia« :
137.0 I 101.9 i «.2C4S i
137.0 ! 101.9 ! I.2HC i
137.0 : 102.9 : «.S4« ;
137.9 ! 194.9 i 9.2HC !
137.0 f 10S.S ! «.X« !
138.0 ! 105.0 ! 9.2C4C !
137.9 ! tell ! 0.2HC !
OI.9 : ita.0 ; ojs<5 ;
131.0 : io«.« : o.2t« :
131.0 ! 104.9 ! 9.2S4S '.
133.0 ; ios.0 : i.2S4t :
133.0 ! US.* i OJ64S 1
133.0 S 10S.O ! 9.2S4C 1
135.0 ! lOCiO t (.2S4K !
133.9 ! 19M i 9.2S4I !
133.0 ! USll ! I.2S4C !
133.0 ! 10S.O ! 9.34C !
133.0 : 106.0 I I.S4t !
133.0 : iod» : «.26«s ;
us.o ; 106.0 : o.2H( :
1.63 '.33.4000 ! 44E40.0 ! EM.O ! 247S.O ! (.3431 ',
Actual Stict Sai Vol Fin Catfi) «a>
Parlictiate loadinj, dr^gr/dicf) CEi ltd) * 0.1133
Partinlate losing, in 02 0.1335
!PaHi»latt bissira
1.210
237
-------
METHOD 17 WORKSHEET
to
w
00
Testl 01-30-91
Afterburner Exit Sample
Train Sample Gas Volume (dscf)
Flue Gas Flowrate (dsef/mln)
A01301101 Ml?
675,4
1167
Impinger liq vol. (L)
Probe Wash Hq vo). (L)
Filter + Parfcufate Wl fern)
0525
0.100
1222
Metal
Cone of
Metal In
Impinger
Blank
foo/U
Meas. Meas. Meas. Cone iBfnkCorr, Mass of Flue Gas
Cone of Cone of of Metal hi Mass of Mass of Metal fai Metal In Metal Metal
Metal in Metal in Filter + Metal In Metal In Filter Sample Concentration Flowrate
Impinger PW Particulates Impinger PW Particulates Train
fo8/U fo9/U fos/ka) (W9) (ua) fog) fog) fog/dscm) (mg/hr)
Calculation to Estimate Maximum Metal Concentrations and Emission Rates (note a)
Silver
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper '
Nickel
Lead
Selenium
Zinc
< 20
< 100
S?
< 10
< 20
315
< 20
< 50
< 100
461
< 20 <
< 100 <
727
15
423
159
476
359
< 10 <
799
20
100
21
13
SO
26
52
266
10 <
117
14700
50100
590000
9500
168000
117000
178000
570000
25000
684000
4,5
22,5
150,8
3,4
95.2
0.0
107.1
80.8
2,3
7i,1
2.0
10.0
2,1
1,3
5.0
2.6
5.2
26.6
1.0
11.7
18,0
61.2
721.0
11,6
205.3
143.0
217.5
696.5
30.6
835.8
24.5
§3.7
873.8
16.3
305,5
145.6
329,8
803.9
33.8
923.6
1,3
4.9
45.7
0.9
16.0
7.6
17.2
4ZO
1.8
48.3
2.5
9,7
90.6
1.7
31,7
15.1
34.2
83.3
3.5
95.8
Calculation to Estimate Minimum Metal Concentrations and Emission Rates (note b)
Silver
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Nickel
lead
Selenium
Zinc
Note a
b
c
0
0
727
15
423
159
476
359
0
799
0
0
21
13
50
26
52
266
0
117
14700
50100
590000
9500
168000
117000
178000
570000
0
684000
0.0
0.0
150.8
3.4
95.2
0.0
107.1
80.8
0.0
76.1
0.0
0.0
2.1
1.3
5.0
2.6
5.2
26.6
0.0
11.7
18.0
61.2
721.0
11.6
205.3
143.0
217.5
696.5
0.0
835.8
18.0
612
873.8
16.3
305.5
145.6
329.8
803.9
0.0
923.6
0.9
3,2
45.7
0.9
16.0
7.6
17.2
42.0
0.0
48.3
1.9
6.3
90.6
1.7
31.7
15.1
34.2
83.3
0.0
95.8
- Calculation assumes less than POL metals present at concentrations equal to respective PQLs.
- Calculation assumes less than POL metals to be zero, greater than PQL metal concentrations are blank corrected
- All calculations are corrected for concentrations found In fitter, probe wash or Impinger solution blanks
-------
METHOD 17 WORKSHEET
to
Test 2 02-05-91
Afterburner Exit Sample
Train Sample Gas Volume (dscl)
Flue Gas Flowrate (dscf/min)
A02050932M17
864.3
1178
Implnger liq vol. (L)
Probe Wash llq vol. (L)
Filter 4- Paniculate Wt (gm)
1.990
0.100
1.7700
Metal
Cone of
Metal In
Implnger
Blank
(Mfl/U
Meas. Meas. Meas. Cone 'Blnk Corr.
Cone of Cone of of Metal In Mass of
Metal in Metal In Filter 4- Metal in
Implnger PW Partlculates Implnger
frfS/L) ftig/U (MB/kfl) frig)
Mass of Metal In
Metal In Filter +
PW Particulales
M M
Mass of Flue Gas
Metal In Metal Metal
Sample Concentration Flowrate
Train
W 0/g/dsem) (mg/hr)
Calculation to Estimate Maximum Metal Concentrations and Emission Rates (note a)
Silver
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Nickel
Lead
Selenium
Zinc
Silver
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Nickel
Lead
Selenium
Zinc
< 20
< 100
57
< 10
< 20
315
< 20
< 50
< 100
461
*
< 20<
757
466
42
951
,340 _ .
808
547
< 10 <
1450
Calculation to
0
757
466
42
951
340
808
547
0
1450
20<
3120
1740
72
427
.1040 — -
559
884
10 <
5170
2000
462000
223000
20000
209000
.. -160000
110000
554000
10000
777000
39.8
1506.4
813.9
83.6
1892.5
49.8
1607.9
1088.5
19.9
1968,1
2.0
31 2.0
174.0
7.2
42.7
--1104.0
55.9
88.4
1.0
517.0
3.5
817.7
394.7
35.4
369.9
283.2 :
194,7
980.6
17.7
137S.3
45.3
2636.2
1382.6
126.2
2305,1
437.0
1858.5
2157.5
38,6
3860.4
1
2.4
137.8
72.3
6.6
120.5
.., 22,8-
97.2
112.8
2.0
201.9
3,7
215.6
113.1
10.3
188,5
-35,7
152.0
176.4
3.2
315,7
Estimate Minimum Metal Concentrations and Emission Rates (note b)
0
3120
1740
72
427
1040
559
884
0
5170
0
462000
223000
20000
209000
160000
110000
554000
0
777000
0.0
170.3
92.0
9.5
214.0
5.6
181.8
123.1
0.0
222.5
0.0
312.0
174.0
7,2
42.7
104.0
55.9
88.4
0,0
517,0
0.0
564,6
27Z5
24.4
255.4
195.5
134.4
677.0
0.0
849.5
0.0
1046.9
538.5
41.1
512.1
305.1
372.1
888.5
0.0
1689.0
0.0
54.7
28.2
2.1
26.8
16.0
19.5
46.5
0,0
88.3
0.0
85.6
44.0
3,4
41.9
25.0
30.4
72,7
0.0
138.1
Note a - Calculation assumes less than PQL metals present at concentrations equal to respective PQLs.
b - Calculation assumes less than PQL metals to be zero, greater than PQL metal concentrations are blank corrected
c - All calculations are corrected (or concentrations found In filter, probe wash or Implnger solution blanks
-------
APPENDIX D-3
METHOD 5 METALS TRAIN AND METHOD 101A TRAIN WORKSHEETS
240
-------
1SOKINET1C RESULTS
Plant: ttF Updated 02-20-91
Bate: 91-30-91 Printed 03/27/91
Staple Location: SCRUBBER EI1T
PARAMETER
Nozzle Disaster, Actual (in)
Pitot Tube Correction factor
6as Hetir Correction Factor
Stack (Duct) Dimensions (in):
Radius (if round)
Length (if rectangular)
Width (if rectangular)
Ar:a of Stack (sq ft)
f of Sinple Points
Total Saapling Tiie (tin)
Saroietric Pressure (in Hg)
Stack Pressure (in H20)
6as Heter Initial Reading (cu ft)
6i3 Heter Final Reading (cu ft)
Ret Sas Saiple Voluae (cu ft)
Vol of Liquid Collected (•!)
Vol of Liq t Std. Conds. (scf)
Sit. of Filter Particulate (gi)
Ut. of Probe Kaih Participate (gi)
at of Coitir.ed Particulate (gi)
02 Concentration (by CEM)
CD2 CouCiiitraiion (by CEN)
CO Concentration (by CEK)
!12 Concentration (by diff.)
Performed bys £8 HILL £#//f
Test No./Typei E01301122NETALS
Start/Stop Tiie: 1122-1445
1
SYHBOL VALUE
(calc.) :
N(d) 0.365 :
C(p) .0.84 i
(alpha) 1.01 i
1
R 7 ,
L » minim i
y —•• 1
A/e\ /« MQfif 1 !
n*3' **» yo3v* t >
i 14
(theta) ( 154.00 )
Pft) 29.95
P(siack) -6
251.437
383.904
V(») I 132.47 )
VHc) 263.07
V(v sid) ( 12.333 )
0.014
O.D2
(Up) ( 0.0240 )
1 3.35
I 6.42
Z 0
Z ( 33.73 ) !
Stack Sas Meter SBRT(dP)
Teip Teip (degF)
(degF! in out
120 106 69 0.4123
120 111 !75 0.4123
121 112 [n 0.4000
121 112 10 0.4000
120 217 84 0.4000
120 116 B6 0.4000
120 115 87 0,4000
muumttii xtiULib tuic Sflwu i — toiSQin
Isokineticity Z 1
deter ed Saiple Gas Volute (scf) Vd std)
(5CI) V(I Std)
Stack las Flow, std coad. (dscfi) 8(s)
std cond. (dsci/iin)8(s)
actual (acfi) 8(1)
actual (au/iin) B(a)
Particulate Loading, dry (gr/dscf) C(s std)
1 71 02(gr/dscf) C(s std)
1 71 02(*g/dsci) C(s std)
Particuiate Eiissicn Rate (Ib/hr) E(p)
(kg/hr) E(p)
Stack fias Hater Vapor Proportion S(uo)
Molecular Height of Stack Gas, Dry fltd)
Bet His)
Stack Pressure, absolute (in Hg) P(s)
Average Stack Velocity (ft/sec) V(s avg)
ZHfTSLS
= 9E.O
= 127.34
= 3. EOS
= 1269
= 35.9
- 1152
* 43.9
« 0.0023
* 0.0037
« 8
= 0.032
= 0.014
= 0.089
= 23.42
= 28.41
= 29.51
* 24.2
FIELD DATA AVERAGES FOR SAHPLE i — E01301122KETAL3
Velocity Head Cue) dP(avg)
Orifice Keter Reading Cue) dH(avg)
Stack Teiperature (deg F) T(s avg)
(deg C) T(s avg)
Neter Teiperature (deg F) T(i avg)
(deg C) Td avg)
= 0.2S4
= 2.623
= 120.4
= 43.1
= 98.7
« 37.0
Staple
Point
1
2
3
J
5
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
5
4
TOTALS
dCiock
Tiie
(ain)
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
21
11
11
11
154
Velocity
Head, dP
(in 820)
0.17
0.17
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.17
0.17
0.17
0.16
0.16
0.165
0.16
2.30
Orifice
Heter, dH
(in H20)
2.72
2.72
2. 56
2.5S
2.56
2.56
2.56
2.72
2.72
2.72
2.56
2.5E
2.64
2.56
36.7200
Stack
Teip
(degF!
120
120
121
121
120
120
120
120
120
120
120
121
121
121
1635.0
Sas
Teip
in
106
111
112
112
117
116
115
114
114
114
US
116
117
• 117
2536.0
Meter
(degF)
out
69
!75
'.n
'BO
•84
B6
'87
'87
as
86
86
87
87
88
1167.0
SSRT(dP)
0.4123
0.4123
0.4000
0.4000
0.4000
0.4000
0,4000
0.4123
0.4123
0.4123
0.4000
0.4000
0.4062
0.4000
5.6678
SSRT(dP) « 0.405
241
-------
ISOKIHETIC RESULTS
Plant: IRF Updated 02-14-31
Hate: 02-05-91 Printed 03/27/91
Saiple Location: SCUBBER EXIT
PARAHETER
Xozzlc Diaaeter, Actual (in)
Pilot Tui» CorrKtion Factor
* Sai Ktttr Cornction Factor
Stack (Duct) Diitnsions (in)i
Radius (if round)
Length (if rectangular)
Uidth (if rectangular)
Area of Stack (sq ft)
i of Suple Points
Total Saapling Tiie din)
3aroi«tric Pressure (in Hg)
Stack Pressure (in H20)
6as Keter Initial Reading (cu ft)
$« Nettr Final Reading (cu ft)
Net Gas Saiple Voluie (en ft)
Vol of Liquid Collected dl)
Vol of Liq z Std. Conds. (scf)
Ut. of Filter Particulate (go)
Ut. of Probe Wash Particulate (ga)
Ut of Coabir.id Particulate (ga)
02 Concentration (by COO
C02 Concentration (by CEH)
CO Concentration (by CEH)
K2 Concentration (by diff.)
f.r CALCULATED RESULTS FDR SANPLE 1 — EOZ050353HET
Perfoned by: E HILL &»"
Test Ho. /Type: E02050953HET Isokineticity Z I =
Start/Stop Tiie: 0953-1209 Neterad Saiple Sas Voluie (scf) Vd std) =
SYKBOL
H(d)
C(p)
(alpha)
R
L
U
Ktr\
HIS)
}
(theta)
P(b)
P(stack)
V(»)
VI (c)
V(n sid)
H(p)
Z
Z
z
z •
Stack
Te«p
(degF)
^mm^,,m^mm
124
124
125
125
125
124
125
VALUE
(calc.)
0.365
0.84
1
7
„
UACQA1 1
.06301 }
12
( 132.00 )
30.04
-6
383.7
523.057
( 124.36 )
75.25
( 3.542 )
0.0175
0.03
( 0.0476 )
10.12
6.53
0
( 33.30 )
Gas Deter
Teap (degF)
in out
107 77
118 83
123 89
125 34
126 %
126 38
127 99
(sen) Vd std) =
Stack Sas Flow, std cond. (dscfi) Q(s) =
std cond. (dsci/ain)Q(s) =
actual (acfi) fld) =
actual . (aci/tin) B(a) =
Particulate Loading, dry (gr/dscf) C(s std) =
( 71 02(gr/dscf) Cts std) =
8 71 02(ig/dsci> Cts std) =
Particulate Emission Rate (Ib/hr) E(p) *
(kg/hr) E(p)
Stack Sas Hater Vapor Proportion 8(vo) *
Molecular Height of Stack 6as, Dry N(d) =
Uet i1(s> =
Stack Pressure, absolute (in Hg) PCs) =
Average Stack Velocity (ft/sec) V(s avg) =
SSRI(dP) JFIELD DATA AVERAGES FOR SAMPLE t ~ E02050953.1ET
Velocity Head Cue) (f PC avg) =
0.3742 Orifice Meter Reading Cue) dH(avg) *
0.3742
0.3873 Stack Teiperature (deg F) T(s avg) -
0.4000 (deg C) T(s avg) -
0.4000
0.4000 Heter Teiperature (deg F) T(i avg) =
0.3873 (deg C) Td avg) =
100.8
116.51
3.299
1239
36.5
1488
42.1
0.0063
0.0081
19
0.070
0.032
0.030
29.46
23.12
23.60
23.2
0.154
2.838
125.2
51.8
109.5
43.1
Saiple
Point
I
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
E
TOTALS
dClock
Tiie
din)
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
132
Velocity
Head, dP
(in H20)
0.14
0.14
0.15
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.15
0.15
0.16
0.16
0.155
0.16
1.85
Orifice
ileter.dH
(in H20)
m — m m JM— » —
2.59
2.59
2.78
2.96
2.36
2.96
2.78
2.78
2.96
2.96
2.77
2.96
-mmmLM _i_ _i_
34.0500
Stack
Te«p
(degF)
^mm^,,m^ „_
124
124
125
125
125
124
125
126
126
126
126
126
»____•__•.
1502.0
Gas
Teap
in
107
118
123
125
126
126
127
127
128
123
128
123
"~~™
Jl _l_ LMJ -M
•»""•«" «••
1491.0
Heter
(degF)
out
77
83
89
34
96
38
93
S9
100
101
101
101
1138.0
SSRT(dP) !
0.3742
0.3742
0.3873
0.4000
0.4000
0.4000
0.3873
0.3373
0.4000
0.4000
0.3937
0.4000
^^ ^—
L 4,7039- f
SQP.T(dP) * 0.392
242
-------
MULTIPLE METALS TRAIN WORKSHEET
u>
Testl 01-30-91
Scrubber Exit Sample E01301122MET
Train Sample Gas Volume (dscf) 127.3
Flue Gas Flowrate (dscf/min) 1269
Impinger liq vol. (L) 0.430
Probe Wash Bq vol. (L) 0.100
Filter + Paniculate Wt (gm) 0.4201
Filler Tare Wt (gm) 0.4061
Metal
Cone of
Metal in
Impinger
Blank
(nail)
Cone of
Metal hi
Filter
Blank
(us/kg)
Meas. Meas.
Cone of Cone of
Metal in Metal in
Impinger PW
(ug/L) fcig/L)
Meas. Cone Blnk Corr. BlnkCorr. Mass of Flue Gas
of Metal in Mass of Mass of Metal in Metal hi Metal Metal
Filter + Metal in Metal in Filter + Sample Concentration Ftowrate
Particulates Impinger PW Parliculates Train
to/kg) ftifl) tog) dig) (Mfl) ftio/dscm) (mg/hr)
Calculation to Estimate Maximum Metal Concentrations and Emission Rates (note a)
Silver
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Coppec .
Nickel
Lead
Selenium
Zinc
< SO
< 100
57
< 10
< 20
315
•c 20
< 50
< 100
461
< 5000
< 25000
< 228000
< 3000
39300
_7390
12100
< 13000
< 25000
121000
23 <
< 100 <
39 <
< 10 <
< 30 <
39 : <
< 30 <
< 60 <
< 10 <
268
200 <
1000
100
100
200
^.100
200
400
100
183
5000
52900
12400
19900
104000
78600
8520
1130000
25800
245000
9.9
43.0
0.0
4.3
12.9
0.0
12.9
25.8
4.3
0.0
20.0
100.0
10.0
10.0
20.0
10.0
20.0
40.0
10.0
18.3
2.1
22.2
5.2
8.4
27.7
30.0-
0.0
474.7
10.8
63.8
32.0
165.2
15.2
22,7
60.6
40.0
32.9
540.5
25.1
7Z1
8.9
45.8
4.2
6.3
16.8
11.1
9.1
149.9
7.0
20.0
19.1
98.8
9.1
13.5
36.3
23.9
19.7
323.2
15.0
43.1
Calculation to Estimate Minimum Metal Concentrations and Emission Rates (note b)
Silver
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Nickel
Lead
Selenium
Zinc
23
0
39
0
0
39
0
0
0
268
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
183
0
52900
12400
19900
104000
78600
8520
1130000
25800
245000
9.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
18.3
0.0
22.2
S.2
8.4
27.7
30.0
0.0
474.7
10.8
53.8
9.9
22.2
5.2
8.4
27.7
30.0
0.0
474.7
10.8
72.1
2.7
6.2
1.4
2.3
7.7
8.3
0.0
131.6
3.0
20.0
5.9
13.3
3.1
5.0
16.6
17.9
6.0
283.8
6.5
43.1
Note a - Calculation assumes less than PQL metals present at concentrations equal to respective PQLs.
b - Calculation assumes less than PQL metals to be zero, greater than PQL metal concentrations are blank corrected
c - All calculations are corrected for concentrations found In filter, probe wash or Impinger solution blanks
-------
MULTIPLE METALS TRAIN WORKSHEET
Test 2 02-05-91
Scrubber Exit Sample E0205Q9S3MET
Train Sample Gas Volume (dsc() 116,5
FkiaGas Ftowrate (dscf/mhrt 1249
Impinger fc'q vol. (L) 0.345
Probe Wash Iq vol. (L) 0.100
FHter + ParUcuiatBWt(gm) 0.4228
Fitter Tare Wtfam) 0.4050
Metal
Concof
Metal In
Impinger
Blank
fog/L)
Cone of
Metal In
Filter
Blank
fog/kg)
Meas. Meas.
Cone of Cone of
Metal In Metal In
Impinger PW
Oig/L) fog/L)
Meas, Cone Blnk Corr. Blnk Com Mass of Flue Gas
of Metal In Mass of Mass of Metal in Metal In Metal Metal
Filter + Metal In Metal In Filter + Sample Concentration Flowrate
Participates Impinger PW Participates Train
6/g/kg) (MS) fog) tog) fos) foa/dscm) {mg/hr)
Calculation to Estimate Maximum Metal Concentrations and Emission Rates (note a)
Silver
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Nickel
Lead
Selenium
Zinc
< 20
< 100
67
< 10
< 20
31 S
< 20
< 50
< 100
461
< 5000
< 25000
< 228000
< 3000
39300
7390
12100
< 13000
< 25000
121000
45 <
< 100 <
59 <
< 10 <
< 30 <
41 <
< 30 <
< 60 <
< 10 <
430
200 <
1000
100
100
200
100
200 <
400
100 <
250
5000
334000
17400
50800
66600
115000
8000
581000
25000
341000
15,5
34.S
0.7
3,5
10.4
0.0
10.4
20.7
3.5
0.0
20.0
100.0
10.0
10.0
20.0
10.0
20.0
40.0
10.0
25,0
2.1
141.1
7,4
21.5
12.2
45.6
0.0
245.5
10.6
95.1
37.6
275,6
18.0
34.9
42.6
55.6
30.4
306.2
24.0
120.1
11.4
83.5
5.5
10,6
12.9
16.9
9.2
92.8
7.3
36.4
24.21
177.30
11.61
22.46
27.39
35.77
19.52
196.97
15.45
77.25
Calculation to Estimate Minimum Metal Concentrations and Emission Rates (note b)
Silver
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Nickel
Lead
Selenium
Zinc
Notea-
b-
c-
45
0
59
0
0
41
0
0
0
430
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
250
0
334000
17400
50800
66600
115000
0
581000
0
341000
19.4
0,0
0,9
0,0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0,0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
25.0
0.0
140.3
7.3
21.3
12.0
45.3
0.0
244.1
0.0
94.1
19.4
140.3
8.2
21.3
12.0
45.3
0.0
244.1
0.0
119.1
5.9
42.5
2.5
6.5
3.6
13.7
0.0
74,0
0.0
36.1
12,4
90.3
5.3
13.7
7.7
29.1
0.0
157.0
0.0
76.6
Calculation assumes less than PQL metals present at concentrations equal to respective PQLs.
Calculation assumes less than PQL metals to be zero, greater than PQL metal concentrations am blank corrected
All calculations are corrected for concentrations found in fitter, probe wash or Impfnger solution blanks
-------
ISOKINETIC RESULTS
Flint: ISf Updated 02-20-31
Date: 01-30-91 Printed 03/27/91
Saiple Location: SCRUBBER EI1T
PAMHETE8
Nozzle Biateter, Actual (in)
Pitot Tube Correction Factor
Has Meter Correction Factor
Stack (Duct) Dimensions (in)i
Rjdius (if round)
length (if rectangular)
yidth (if rectangular)
Area of Stack (sq ft)
f «f Staple Points
Total Sapling Tiae (fin)
Biroaetrk Pressure (in Hg)
Stack Pressure (in H20)
Sis Meter Initiil Reading
-------
1SDKINETIC RESULTS
Hint: IRF Updated 2-13-31
Bite: 2-5-91 Printed 03/27/9!
Suple Location: SCRUBBER EXIT
PARAHEIER
Hozzle liaieter, Actual (in)
Pitot Tube Correction Factor
6« Mir Corrtction factor
Stack (Duct) Oiiensions (in):
Radius (if round)
Length (if rectangular)
Uidth (if rectangular)
Aria of Stack dq ft)
I of Saiplc Points
Total Sampling Tiie din)
Saroictric Pressure (in Hg)
Stack Pressure (id H20)
6as Heter Initial Reading (cu ft)
Sis Utter Final Reading (cu ft)
Net Gas Saiple Voluie (cu ft)
Vol of Liquid Collected dl)
Vol of Liq « Std. Conds. (scf)
lit. of Filter Particulate (gi)
!>t. of Probe Uasii Particulate (ga)
lit of Coibinad ?:rticulate (gi)
02 Concentration (by CEH)
C02 Concentration (by CEH)
CO Concentration (by CEH)
K2 Concentration (by diff.)
CALCULATED RESULTS FOR SAHPLE i
E02050953H101A
Perfoned by: E.HILL £#'"
Test No. /Type: E02050953H101A
Start/Stop Tiie: 0953-1145
. SVHBOL VALUE
(calc.)
N(d) 0.368
C(p) 0.84
(alpha) 0.93
R 7
1 • •••
U • •••
fife) 11 OfiQOI 1
HVa/ l*« VO3V* /
i 12
(theta) ( 34.00 )
P(b) 30.04
P(stack) -6
903.399
931.305
Vd) . ( 77.31 ) ,
VI (c) 115.27
V(u std) ( 5.426 )
0
0
>1(p) ( 0.0000 )
Z 10.08
Z 6.63
Z 0
Z ( 33.29 )
Isokineticity Z I =
Hetered Saiple 6as Voluie (scf) Vd std) =
(sci) Vd std) =
Stack Sas Flow, std cond. (dscfi) Q(s) *
std cond. (dsci/iin)fi(s) =
actual (acfi) Q(a)
actual (aci/iin) 8(a) =
Particulate Loading, dry (gr/dscf) C(s std) =
i 71 02(gr/dscf) C(s std) =
B 71 02dg/dsci) C(s std) =•
Particulate Eiission Rate Ub/hr) E(p)
(kg/hr) E(p) '
Stack Sas Hater Vapor Proportion B(vo) »
Molecular Height of Stack 8asf Dry H(d)
Uet S(s)
Stack Pressure, absolute (in Hg) P(s) *
Average Stack Velocity (ft/sec) V(s avg) =
100.5
72.24
2.046
1240
35.1
1433
42.3
0.0000
0.0000
0
0.000
0.000
0.070
29.46
23.66
29.60
23.3
Suple
Point
mmmmfmm
•••••••
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
0
0
0
—
TOTALS
dClock
Tine
din)
7
•t
7
7
J
*
7
7
7
7
. 7
7
0
0
0
--W
84
Velocity
Head, dP
(in H20)
•«—•«• ••
0.14
0.14
0.14
0.15
0.16
0.16
0.15
0.15
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.16
0
0
0
1.S3
Orifice
Heter.dH
(in H20)
«••«••«•«•
2.59
2.59
2.59
2.78
2.96
2.96
2.78
2.78
2.96
2.96
2.96
2.96
0
0
0
•_•»
33.8700
Stack i Sis
Teap ! Teip
(degF) ! in
124 ! 96
124 ! 10S
125 ! 113
125 ! 124
125 ! 129
125 ! 130
125 ! 133
126 i 132
126 ! 131
126 i 130
126 ! 131
126 ! 131
o : o
o : o
o : o
— i —
1503.0 ! 14S6.0
Heter
(degF)
out
77
01
85
90
35
98
101
102
103
104
104
105
0
0
0
„„-
1145.0
SSRT(dP)
0.3742
0.3742
0.3742
0.3373
0.4000
0.4000
0.3373
6.3873
0.4000
0.4000
0.4000
0.4000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
4.6344
FIELD DATA AVERA6ES FOR SAMPLE i
Velocity Head Cvc)
Orifice Heter Reading (°uc)
Stack Teiperature
deter Teiperature
Root-Hean-Square dP
(deg F)
(deg C)
(deg F)
(deg C)
Cvc)
E02050953H101A
dP(avg) = 0.153
dH(avg) = 2.823
T(s avg) * 125.3
T(s avg) = 51.8
Td avg) = 109.6
Td avg) = 43.1
SSRT(dP) - 0.390
246
-------
ISOKINEHC PEfiFOWIANCE HOP.KSHEEI AND PARriCUlATE CALCULATIONS
Plant: IRF Perferied by! 6.HILL$&
Datt: 1-30-31 Test Hs./TyptI fl013013OHIOIA
Saiple Location: A.8. Start/Stop Tiiei 1343-1521
HHUWETER SWUM. VALUE '.
(cilc.)
Koitlt Olaietsr, Actual (in) N(d> 0.502
Pitot Tukl Correction Factor Ctp) 0,8400 :
8» Nttir Cormtisn Fictor (alpha) 0.1300 ;
Stack (Duct) Dimensions (in):
Radius (if round) I! 11.63 ;
Length (if rectangular) L 0.00
Wdth (if rectangular) V 0.00 '•
Am of Stack (sq ft) A(j) ( 2.95 ) |
I of Saiplf Points
Total Sa«pling Tiu (*in)
Baroietric Prissurt (in Kg)
Stack Pressure (in H2B)
825 Utter Initial Reading (cv ft)
6as Deter final P.tading (cu ft)
(tot Gas Saipl* Voluie (cu ft)
I 24
(thcta) ( 96,00 )
P(b) 23.95
P(stack) -0.079
178.25
236,25
Vd) ( 58.00 )
HRD DATA AVERAGES
«vg Vtlocity Head (in K2Q) oT(ava) = 0.075
Avj Orifice Keter Reading (in H20) dH(jvg) = 2.200
Avg Stack Teipiratur* (degF) T(5 1*9) « 1900.0
flverage deter Tmpiratvrt (digF) T(i avg) = 93.4
Avg St)RT(dP) » 0.274
CALCULATED VALUES
Utter Voluii (std, cu. ft.) Vd ltd) * 55.11
Stack 6as later Sapor Proportion B(vo) * 0.023
Hoi. lit., Stack Cat Dry H(d) - 23.52
Hoi. «., Stack Sai Uet H(s) = 29.25
fibs Stack Pressure (in Hg) Pis) = 23.34
Vol of Liquid Collected (it) Vl(c) 28.1
Vol of Liq ! Std. Conds. (scf) V(v std) ( 1.325 )
III. of Filter Participate (91) 0.0000
Hi. of Probe Hash Participate (gi) 0.0000
Ht of Coibined Particulate (gi) ' R(p) ( 0.0000 )
02 Concentration (by CEH) X 02 8.83
CB2 Concentration (by CEH) I CD2. 7.23
CO Concentration (by CEH) I CO 0.0
N2 Concentration (by diff.) I N2 ( 83.83 )
Av; Stack Velocity (ft/sec)
Isokintticity (I)
Stack Saf STD Vol Flow (dscfi)
V(s avg) - 32.3
1 1 * 98.7
B(s) * 1249
Actual Stack Sas Vol Flow (act*) «(*>
5711
Satple
Point
1
J
3
J
c
i
7
a
3
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
S
7
8
1
10
11-
12
dClock iVelocityidrifice
Tin iKead, dP
Kin H2D)
4 ! 0.08
4 ', 0.03
4 i 0.08
4 ! 0.08
4 : o.oa
4 ! '0.08
4 : o.oa
4 ! 0.08
4 ! 0.08
4 ! 0.08
4 ! 0.08
4 : O.OB
4 ! 0.08
4 i o.oa
4 ! 0.08
4 : o.oa
4 ! 9.08
4 ! O.OB
4 1 0.08
4 ! 0.08
4 : o.oe
4 ! 0.08
4 ! 0.08
4 i o.oa
TOTALS ! 36 ! 1.8
Heier,dH
(in H20)
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
2,2000
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
52.8
Stack ! Gas Meter
Teip ! Teip (degF)
IdsgD ! in ! out
1300.0 : 79.0 : ei.o
1900.9 ! 107.0 i 81.0
iioo.o ; loi.o ; ai.e
1900.0 : iw.o : eo.o
1900.0 ! 100,0 i 73.0
1900.9 ! 103.1! i 81.0
1300,0 ! 104.0 ! 81.0
1300.0 : 104.0 : BI.O
1300,9 ; ios.0 ; BI.O
1300.0 : 108.9 ! BI.O
1300.0 : 108.0 ! 83.0
1300.0 : io9.o : 83.0
1300.0 i 100.0 ! 76.0
1300,0 ! 110.0 i 80.9
i3oo.o : 110.0 : so'.o
1300.0 : ito.o : eo'.o
1309,9 ! 110.9 ! 89.0
i3oo.o : 112.0 : ao.o
1300.0 i 114.0 ! 82.0
1900.0 ! 114.0 i 82.0
1300.0 ! 114.0 ! 82.9
1300.0 : ii4.o : 82.0
1300,0 ! 114.0 ! 82.0
1300.0 ! 114.9 ! 82.0
... . 1.
45600 ! 2SS4 ! 1321
SSRKdP)
0.2733
0.2739
9.2733
0.2733
0.2733
0.273J
0.2731
0.2733
0.2739
0.2733
0.2739
0.2739
9.2733
0.2739
0.2739
0.2739
0.2733
0.2739
0.2739
9.2739
0.2731
0.2733
0.2739
0.2739
6.572670
Particulate Loading, dry(gr/dscf) C(s std) = 0.0000
Particviate Loading, 871 02Ug/dsct)C(s std) 0
Particulite Loading, dry I 7 I 02 (gr/dsef) « 0.0000
ParticuUtf Eiission Ritetlb/hr) E(p) = 0.000
247
-------
PERrontANCE UORKSHEET mt PDRTICIIUTE CAICULATIOHS.
S.HIU
«0205l043f1IOIA
Plantt 1RT
latet 2-5-31
Suflt locations A.I.
PAM^TEI
Noiilf Diiuttr, Actual (in) '
Pltot Tute Corriction Factor
6» NitH Corriction Factor
Stack (Duct) Siitniion (in)i
Itadiis (if round)
Length (if rKtangular)
Bldth (if rectangular)
Area ef Stack (it, ft)
1 of Stiplt Points
Total Siipling Tin din)
tirontrlc Prcsiure (in Hg)
Stack Pressure (in H20)
Cas Hetir Initial Reading (cu ft)
6» ileier Filial Reid in? (en ft)
Kit 6ai Saaple Voluie (cu It)
Perforud by: S,
Test Ho./Type: fli
Stirt/Stop Tiiei 1(
mm VALUE
(calc.)
Hid) 0.502
C(p) 0.8400
(alpha) 1.0100
8 11.63
L 0.80
U 0.00
A(s) ( 2.9S )
1 24
(thiia) ( 96.00 )
P(b) 30.04
P(stack) -«.070
584.26
644.59
Vd) ( £0.33 )
FIELD DATA AVERASES
Avg Velocity Head (in H20) dPUvg) • 0.075
Avg Orifici Itlter Reading (in H20) dHCavj) - 2.200
Avg Stack Teipirature (digF) T(s avg) « 1860.0
Average Keter Tetperature (degF) Td ivg) * 107.1
Avg SfflT(dP) •' 0.274
CM.CUUTEB VALUES
teter Vol me (std, cu. ft.) Vd ltd) « 57.24
Stick las Water Vapor Proportion 8(uo) * 0.106
No!. HI., Stack Gai Dry M(d) = 29.54
fiol. lit., Stack Gas Bet His) ' 28.32
fibs Stack Pressure (in Hg) Pis) = 30.03
Vol of Lin-Jid Collected dl) VI (c) 143.7
Vol of Liq I Std. Conds. del) V(v std) ( 6.763 )
1ft . of niter Partictilitt (g.) 0.0000
lit. of Probe Hash PirticuUti (91) 0.0000
lit of Conbinid Particdlite tgi) H(p) ( O.MOO )
02 Concentration (by CEH) I 02 9.08
£02 Coactntration ley CEH) I C02 7.26
CO Concentration (by CEH) I CO 0.0
K2 CoACUlration (by diff.) I H2 ( 83.56 )
Avg Stack Velocity (ft/sec)
Iiokimticity (I)
Stack S» STD Vol Floe (dscf.)
V(s ivg) ' 32.S
II .» 103.0
B(i) * 1174
Actual Stack Sai Vol Flov (acfi) B(a>
5745
Slip If
Point
•
2
3
*
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
S
s
7
a
5
10
U
12
TOTALS
dCIock IVelodty
Tin IHud, dP
Kin H20)
•. >•• .. • • 1. 4 mat" - 1_ • • I r
4 1 0.03
4 ! 0.08
4 ! 0.08
4 i o.oa
4 ! 0.08
4 ! 0.08
4 : 0.09
4 ! 0.08
4 ! 0.03
4 ; o.oa
4 1 0.03
4 ! 0.08
4 ! 0.08
4 ! 0.08
4 i 0.08
4 ! 0.08
4 S 0.08
4 ! 0.08
4 ! 0.08
4 ! 0.08
4 t O.OS'.
4 ! 0.08,
4 ! .0.03
4 1 $.08
96 ! 1.8
iOrifici
Htttr.dH
(in H20)
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
2,2000
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
2.2009
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
2.2000
52.8
Stack ! Sas Niter
liif ! Tup MegF)
(dtgF) ! in i out
r r • • ™ IT titr-tr | LJ—UUM i... ii 4 _L it t r_ J.JE a
1860.0 1 78.0 ! 76.0
leEo.o : 103.0 : 77.0
1860.0 ! 110.0 i 80.0
18SO.O t 114.0 ! 83.0
1860.0 ! 117.0 i 85.0
1860.0 1 121.0 ! B8.0
1SSO.O ! 121.0 ! 88.0
1860.0 ! 121.0 ! 88.0
18EO.O ! 121.0 1 90.0
1B60.0 t 123.0 ! 35.0
1560.0 ! 123.0 ! 95.0
1E60.0 ! 123.0 ! 95.0
1860.0 ! 120.0 1 90.0
1860.0 i 125.0 ! 95.0
1860.0 ! 128.0 ! 100.0
1860.0 ! 128.0 ! 101.0
18(0.0 i 128.0 ! 101.0
1860.0 ! 128.9 ! 102.0
1860.0 ! 128.0 ! 182.0
1860.0 i 128.0 ! 102.0
1860.0 ! 128.0 ! 182.0
la&o.o i i28.o : 102.0
IBEO.O ! 123.0 ! 102.0
1860.0 ! 128.0 ! 102,0
44E40 ! 2300 ! 2241
SQRTdlP) 1
0.2739
0.2739
0.2733
0.2739
8.2739
0.2739
0.2739
0.2739
0.2739
0.2739
0.2739
0.2739
0.2739
0.2739
0.2739
0.2739
0.2739
0.2739
0.273}
0.2739
0.2739
0.2739
0.2739
0.2739
S.572S70 !
Particulite Loading, dry(gr/dscf) C(s std) * 0.0000
Particular Loading, IH 02(tg/dsci)C(s std) 0
Participate Loading, dry t 7 Z 02 lgr/dsc() = 0.0000
Particulatt Etiisian R»te(Ih/hr) Eta)
0.000
248
-------
METHOD 101A WORKSHEET - MERCURY
Te>t1
Scrubber ExH E01301144 101A
Train Simple On Volume (d«c() 88,4
Flue Qia Flowrat* (diot/mln) 1249
Mix
Mln
Cono
In
Impt
("18/14
0.064
0.064
Cono
In
Imp 2
(mg/M
0.009
0.009
Cone
In
Imp 3
(mg/M
0,000
0.000
MM* Ma**
In In
Imp 1 Imp 2
(f g) fy*g)
16,00 1.26
16,00 1.26
Implnger 1 fiq vol. (L)
Implngir 2 liq vol. (L)
1mp!ngor3Uqvol. (L)
Probe W««h liq vol. (L)
Mis*
In
Imp 3
(M)
0.00
0,00
M*»*
In
AH Imp
(fB>
17.26 <
17.26
Cone of Mai*
In In
PW PW
(mg/L) (fig)
0.002 0.20
0.000 0.00
0.250
0.140
0,000
0.100
Ma** Of
Mitattn
Filter
(fB)
8.20
5,20
Ma** of
MiUJIn
Total Train
feigAraln)
22.68
22.46
FlueQa*
Metal Metal
Csno Ftowrale
Flu* Qa*
(ug/dicm) (mg/ht)
928 19.7
9.18 19J
T*tt2
Scrubber Exit E02050953 101 A
Train Sumpla Qn Volum* (d«c!) 72.2
Flu* Q*t Flowrat* (dtcf/mln) 1240
Max
Mln
Gone
In
Impl
(mo/4
0.166 <
0.166
Cono
In
Imp 2
(mo/M
0.002
0.000
Cono
In
Imp 3
(mfl/L)
0.000
0.000
Mat*
In
Imp 1
(MB)
28.06
28.09
Ma**
In
Imp 2
-------
METHOD 101A WORKSHEET - MERCURY
T*it1
AHHburnwEjdl A01301343 101A
Train Simple Om Vote m* (dtcf) 85,1
Flu* OM Flowrat* (diof/mln) 1249
Muc
Mln
Cone
In
Imp 1
(mg/L)
0.003 <
0,003
Cone of
in
Imp 2
(mo/L)
0.002
0,000
Cono ol
In
Imp 3
(mg/L)
0.000
0,000
Man
in
Impl
(mg)
0.0003
0,0003
MM*
In
Imp 2
(mg)
0.0002
0.0000
lmptng»f 1 Hqvol. (L)
ImplngtraBqvol. flj
ImplngtrS Kqvol. (y
Prob* With Hq vol. (L)
M*tl
In
imps
(mg)
0.0000
0,0000
MM*
in
Alt Imp
(mg)
0.0005 <
0,0003
Cono of
In
Pw
(mart.)
0.002
0,000
Mut
In
PW
(mg)
0.0002
0.0000
0.100
0.115
0.000
0.100
Mm of
M*MIn
Filter
fog)
8.80
5,80
Man of
Met.lln
Tola! Train
(mg/lf»ln)
0.00?
0.004
Flu* OM
Mrtal
Flowrata
Flu* QM
(mg/hf)
8.0
8,3
Toil 2
Aft«rburn*f Exit A02051043101A
Train Simpl* OM Velum* (dicf) S7.2
Flu. OH Flowrat* (dteVmln) 1 1 14
Mix
Mln
Cono
In
Imp 1
(mg/L)
0.046
0,048
Cone of
In
Imp 2
(mBrtJ
0.002 <
0.002
Cono of
in
Imp 3
(mg/L)
0.002
0,000
MtM
in
Imp 1
(mg!
0.0071
0,0071
M*n
In
Imp 2
(ms)
0.0003
0.0003
Implng*r1 He) vol. (L)
lmplng*r 2 llq vol. (L)
Implng*r31qvol, (L)
Piob9 W«»h Dq voi. (L)
MMI
In
ImpS
(mfl)
0.0004
0,0000
Man
In
AH Imp
(mg)
0.0078
0,0074
Cons of
In
PW
(mart.)
0.004
0.004
MMI
In
PW
(mgj
0.0004
0.0004
0.1 85
0.150
0.200
0.100
Mill of
Matilln
Filter
(Mg)
1.38
1.38
Man of
Mali) In
Tola! Train
(mg/tr»ln)
0.010
0.009
Flu* Oa*
M*lal
Flowrat*
Flu* QM
(mg/hr)
11,8
11.3
-------
APPENDIX D-4
METHOD 0010 TRAIN WORKSHEETS
; 251
-------
ISKIKETO RESULTS
Plant! Iff Updated 02-14-91
Bate? 02-05-91 Printed 03/27/31
Saipli Location! SCRUBBER ElIT
PARAMETER
Nonlt Otaietcr, Actual (in)
Pitot Tubt Corriction Fatter
* Sis Httir Corriction Factor
Stack (DuctI Biunsiou (in):
Radius lif round)
Length (if rectangular)
Hidth Cif rectingular)
Aril Of Stick -
Holecuiar Height of Stack Gas, Dry H(d) -
Uet (Its) =
Stack Pressure, absolute (in Kg) P(s) =
Average Stick Velocity (ft/sec) V(s avg) =
103. B
174.19
4.333
1182
33.5
1S33
43.4
0.0000
0.0000
0
0.000
0.000
0.120
23.41
28.05
2J.72
2S.3
Saiple ! dClock
Point ! Tiu
! din)
1 ! 11
2 ! 11
3 ! 11
4 : ii
5 1 11
6 ! 11
1 1 11
2 : 11
3 ! 11
4 ! 11
5 ! 11
E : 11
s : 11
4 ; 11
3 i 11
2 i 11
i ! 11
2 : 11
~— j— -
TOTALS i 138
Velocity
Head, dP
(in H203
0.16
0.16
0.15
0.15
O.iS
0.15
0.15
0.16
0.15
0.155
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.16
— •"
•..•'»•••..
2.73
Orifice
Meter, dH
(in H2Q)
2.88
2.88
2.7
2.7
2.7
2.7
2.7
2.88
2.7
2.73
2.8B
2.88
2.88
2.7
2.7
2.7
2.7
2.88
— " -
43.3500
Stack
Teig
(dtgF)
134
137
133
133
139
133
133
141
140
141
139
139
133
140
140
141
140
140
— -
2499.0
Teip
in
99
118
128
131
133
133
117
134
134
135
135
135
135
13S
135
134
135
135
2341.0
Deter
(degFi
out
78
87
94
33
103
105
104
107
107
108
108
108
108
108
108
108
108
103
....
1857=0
SflRT(dP)
0.4000
0.4000
0.3373
0.3373
0.3873
0.3873
0.3873
0.4000
6.3373
0.3937
0.4000
0.4000
0.4000
0.3B73
0.3373
0.3873
0.3873
0.40CO
....
7.0657
FIELD DATA AVERAGES FOR SAMPLE I
Velocity Head Cue)
Orifice Meier Reading £*vc)
Stack Teiperature
tteter Teaperature
Root-Hean-Square dP (*K)
Cdeg F)
(deg C)
(deg F)
(deg C)
- E02051000.1H5
dPCavg) = O.IS4
dH(a»g) * 2.775
Its avg) * 128.8
T(s avg) * 53.4
Td avg) = 115.6
Td avg) = 47.0
SBRT(dP) = 0.313
252
-------
ISOKIMET1C RESULTS
Plaits IRf Upditad 02-07-91
Date; 2-7-91 Printed 03/27/91
Saiple Location; SCRUBBER EXIT
PARAKETER
Nozzle Dimeter, Actual (in)
(Pitet Tube Correction Factor
Sas Meter Correction Factor
Stack (Duct) Oiaensions (in):
Radius (if round)
Length (if rectangular)
Uidth (if rectangular)
Area of Stack (sq ft)
i of Siiple Points
Total Sampling Tiae din)
lUrstetric Pressure (in Hg)
Stack Pressure (in H20)
Sas Reter Initial Reading (cu ft)
6as Heter Finii Raiding (cu ft)
liet ass Saaple Volute (cu ft)
Vol of Liquid Collected (•!)
Vol of Liq I Std. Conds. (scf)
Sit. of Filter Particulate (gt)
lit. of Proiii Has!) ParticuUte (ga)
«t of Coibiiiid Partkulite (gs>
02 Concentration (by CEH)
C82 Cflflcentratioii (by CEH)
CO Concentration (by C£H)
N2 Concentration (by diff.)
CALCULATED RESULTS FOR SAKPLE I — E02071037KM5
Psrforied iys E HILL 1 C KIN8 Cx/*fe
Test No.
/Type: E02071037HH5
Sttrt/Stop Tiie; 1037-1402
3YKBBL
K(d)
C(p)
(alpha)
R
L
8
A(s)
i
(thet*)
P(b)
P(stack)
V(a)
VALUE ;
(CilC.)
0.402
0.84
1.01
7
;
Oftseftf \
.VQ3V1 / •
12 :
( 200.00 ) ;
30.34
-6
167.821 i
311.961 '
( 144.14 )
isolineticity
Ketered Suple Sas Voluae (scf)
(SCI)
Stack 8as Floy, std cond. (dscfi)
Z I
V(a
Vd
std)
std)
s
*
s
CKs)
std cond. (dsca/iin)B(s) *
actual (aefi)
actual (aca/iin)
Particulate Loading, dry (gr/dscf)
1 71 D2(jr/dscf)
1 n 02dg/dsci)
Particulate Emission Rate Ub/hr)
(kg/hr)
Stack fias Hater Vapor Proportion
Molecular Height of Stack Sas, Dry
Met
Stack Pressure, absolute (in Kg)
Average Stack Velocity (ft/sec)
8U)
8(a)
C(s
C(s
C(s
E(p)
E(p)
std)
std)
std)
s
s
s
=
=
s
a
B(vo) =
H(d)
H(s)
PCs)
V(s
avg)
=
s
£
£
100.7
136.57
3.867
823
23,3
1792
50,7
0.0000
0.0000
0
0.009
0.000
0.444
29.42
24.36
22.90
27.9
VUc) 2313.3
V(v std) (103.387 )
0
0
H(p> ( C.OOOO )
10.44
( 53.28 )
Ssaple
Point
1
2
3
4
5
6
i
2
3
4
5'
6
TOTALS
dClock
Tiae
(ain)
17.5
17.5
17.S
17.5
17.5
17.5
17.5
17.5
17.5
17.S
17.5
7.5
200
Velocity
Head, dP
(in H2D)
0.16
0.18
0.18
0.17
0.17
0.17
0.17
0.18
0.18
0.17
0.17
0.17
2.07
Orifice
Heter,dH
(in H20)
1.46
i.75
1.75
1.66
1.S6
1.66
1.6S
1.75
1.71
1.66
1.66
1.6S
wiw—MmmimTnrr
20.0800
Stack
leap
Sdegf)
177
177
178
178
178
173
180
180
181
180
181
182
2151.0
Sas
Teip
in
~UMB«.«HB-»-
106
113
122
124
125
12S
127
129
130
131
132
132
— -i -m-mmrm-n
1502.0
Keter
(degF)
out
78
i "
96
100
101
104
< 104
lOfi
106
• 107
' 107
;. 107
120S.O
SQRIidP)
0.4000
0.4243
0.4243
0.4123
0.4123
0.4123
0.4123
0.4243
0.4243
0.4123
0.4123
0.4123
4.9332
FIELD 1ATA AVERAGES FOP. SAKPLE 1 - E02071037M5
Velocity Hud . (*K) dP(avg) = 0.173
Orifice Deter Reading (*vc) dH(avg) = 1.673
Stack Teiperature (deg F) Its avg) = 179.3
(deg C) T(s avg) * 81.8
Meter Tetperature (deg F) Td avg) = 112.8
(deg C) Td avg) = 44.9
Root-tan-Squari dP (%c) SBRT(dP) - 0.415
253
-------
APPENDIX D-5
CASCADE IMPACTOR TRAIN WORKSHEETS
254
-------
Drake Chemical
Cascade Imoactor Data
Plant;, IRF
Date: 1-30-91
Samole location: A,B.
Performed bys 6.HILL
Test No./Type: A01301445CASCABE
Start/Stop"Times 1445-1510
Sampling
E-tinie=
Vm=
Pfa=
Ts=
Sstat=
Tn»
Delta h=
Delta p=
Dn=
7. Isokin=
to ftCFH=
Vin(std) =
Data
25
13,91
29.95
1904
-0.07
96.3
0.8
0,08
0.468
106.2
•0.58
13.10
Stage
f
*?
3
4
5
6
7
8
Backup
Total'
Catch CffloJ
14.7 •
0.0
1.6
3.1
7.1
6.1
0.2
0.0
0
32.82
X
44.9
: o.o
': 4.9
9.4
'. 21.6
18.6
0,6
0.0
0.0
; 100.0
ClM. I
Less Than
55.1
55.1
50.3
40.8
19.2
0.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
ECD
taicrons)
11.3
9.3
6.4
4.3
2.7
1,3
0.86
0.58
0.58
"255
-------
Drake Chemical
Cascade Imnactor Data
Plants IRF
Date: 2-5-91
Saaple location:
Sampling Data
E-tiBB» 30
VDF 21.164
Pb* 30.04
Ts= 1850
Sstai= -0.07
TBF 100
Delta h= 0.75
Delta D= O.OB
Dn- 0.545
% Isokin= 106.4
lop ftCRt= 0.73
Va(std)« 20.70
A.B.
Stage
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8,
Backuo
Total
r
Catch (nig)
112.0
3.5
8.0
4.0
'2.7
0.4
0.5
3.2
0
134.3
%
83. 4!
2.6
6.0
3.0
2.0
0.3
0.4
2.4
0.0
100.0
Performed by: 6.HILL
Test Mo./TypeJ A02051007CAS
Start/Stop lias: 1007-1037
Cm. 7.
Less Than
16.6
14.0
8.0
5.1
3.1
2.8
2.4
0.0
0.0
ECD
(aicrons)
11.7
9,7
6.6
4.5
2.9
1.4
0.90
0.61
0.61.
256
-------
Drake Cheisicat
Cascade Imoactor Data
Plant; IRF
Datei 2-6-91
-Saoiple location;
Sampling Data
E-time= 35
Vt= 20,256
Pb= .30.16
Ts= 1870
Sstat= -0.07
TUP 100
Delta h= 0.8
Dalta p= 0.07
Dn= 0.565
f. Isokin= 104.7
Imp ACFM= 0,60
Va(std)= 19.91
A.B.
Stage
f
*J
3
4
t*
6 .
7
e
Backup
Total
Catch('mg)
62.0
4.1
O.f
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.3
0.0
0
67.5
i
%
91.9
; 6.1
': 1.3
0.0
; 0.3
. 0.0
: 0.4
; o.o
; 0.0
100.0
Psrfonaid bys
Test No. /Type:
Start/Stop Tiaes
Cum. I
Less Than
8.1
2.1
0.7
0.7
0.4
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
6. HILL
A02061049CAS
1049-1124
ECD
(microns)
12.9
10.7
7.3
5.0
3.2
1,6
1.00
0,68
0.68
i257
-------
Dnke Chemical
Cascade laoactor Data
Plant; IRF
Date: 2-7-91
Sanple location;
Sampling Data
E-tiw= 59
V/a* 30,001
Pb= 30.34
Ts= 1851
Sstat» -0.07
Ta= 100
Delta h= 0.75
Delta p= 0.07
Bn= 0.470
2 Isckin= . 108.0
Ino AOT1= 0.53
Va(std!= 28. &9
A.B.
Staoe
f
2
3
• 4
5
6
7
8
Backuc
Total
Catch (m)
151.1
S.3
16.2
f.O
5.9
0.4
0.2
0.0
3.7
192.8
j
78,4
3.3
8.4
4.7
3.1
0.2
0.1
0.0
1.9
100.0
Ptr faroed by;
Test to. /Type:
Start/Stop Time:
Cum. 7,
Lesi Than
21.6
18.4
10.0
5.3
2.2
2.0
1.9
1.9
. 0.0
6.HILL
A02071108CAS
1108-1207
ECD
(nicrans)
13.2
11.2
7.6
5.2
3.4
1.7
1.10
0.71
0.71
258
------- |