United States
                    Environmental Protection
                    Agency
 Risk Reduction
 Engineering Laboratory
 Cincinnati, OH 45268
                    Research and Development
 EPA/600/SR-93//036  April 1993
1&EPA       Project  Summary
                     Pilot-Scale Incineration of
                     Contaminated  Soil from the
                     Chemical  Insecticide  Corporation
                     Superfund Site
                    A. Siag, D.J. Fournier, Jr., and L.R. Waterland
                      A detailed test program was per-
                    formed at the U.S. Environmental Pro-
                    tection Agency's (EPA's) Incineration
                    Research Facility (IRF) to define the
                    Incineration characteristics of contami-
                    nated  soil  from the Chemical  Insecti-
                    cide Corporation (CIC) Superfund site
                    in Edison Township, NJ.  The soils at
                    the site are highly contaminated with
                    organochlorine pesticides and trace
                    metals. The major metal contaminant,
                    arsenic, Is present in site soils at lev-
                    els up to 8,000 mg/kg. The purpose of
                    these tests was to evaluate the inciner-
                    ability of these soils  in terms of the
                    destruction and removal efficiency
                    (ORE) for  organochlorine pesticides
                    (chlordane and p,p'-DDT), the fate of
                    arsenic in terms of the system removal
                    efficiency (RE), and the fate of other
                    contaminant trace metals. Four incin-
                    eration tests were completed in the IRF
                    rotary kiln  incineration system (RKS),
                    which was equipped with a high-effi-
                    ciency scrubber system, a Calvert Flux
                    Force/Condensation scrubber*. In three
                    of the four tests, soil alone was fed to
                    the kiln of the RKS. In the fourth test,
                    lime was blended with the soil to evalu-
                    ate whether arsenic RE was affected.
                    All tests were performed at a kiln exit
                    gas temperature of approximately 982°C
                    (1,800°F) and an afterburner exit gas
                    temperature of 1,204°C (2,200°F). The
                    Calvert scrubber was operated  at a
                    pressure drop of approximately 12 kPa
                    (50 in. WC).
                    * Mention of trade names or commercial products does
                     not constitute endorsement or recommendation for
                     use.
  Incineration under the conditions
tested resulted in the elimination of the
soil pesticide contaminants. No pesti-
cide contaminants were present in the
scrubber exit flue gas with correspond-
ing DREs of at least 99.9916% for p,p'-
DDT. Arsenic REs of 99.99%  can be
achieved with the Calvert scrubber un-
der the conditions tested feeding soil
alone. Adding lime to the soil  did not
measurably improve arsenic RE. Trace
metal  concentrations in  the  toxicity
characteristic  leaching  procedure
(TCLP) leachates of both untreated soil
and kiln ash (treated soil) were signifi-
cantly below corresponding toxicity
characteristic (TC) regulatory levels for
all metals except arsenic. Soil leachate
arsenic concentrations were 40% to
50% of the regulatory level. Kiln ash
leachate arsenic concentrations  were
near or above arsenic's TC regulatory
level. Adding lime to the soil  signifi-
cantly reduced both the soil and the
resulting kiln ash TCLP  leachate ar-
senic  concentrations. Nominally 70%
of the arsenic  measured in the incin-
erator discharges was in the kiln ash in
all of the tests in which soil alone was
fed; about  30% was  in the scrubber
liquor. The  kiln ash arsenic fraction in-
creased to about  90% in  the  test in
which lime was added to the soil; about
10% was in the scrubber liquor. Scrub-
ber exit flue gas accounted for a negli-
gible fraction of the arsenic discharged
in all  tests. Paniculate levels at the
Calvert scrubber exit were nominally
10 to 20 mg/dscm at 7% O  well below
the hazardous waste incinerator per-
                                                                    Printed on Recycled Pape;

-------
 formance standard of 180 mg/dscm  at
 7% O2. Calvert scrubber apparent HCI
 collection efficiencies were 99.95%  or
 greater, which is above the hazardous
 waste incinerator performance standard
 of 99.9%.
   Test results suggest that conven-
 tional rotary kiln incineration in a unit
 equipped with a high-efficiency scrub-
 ber system such as the Calvert system
 would be an appropriate treatment tech-
 nology for site soils: elimination of the
 contaminant organochlorine pesticides
 and greater than 99.99-% organic con-
 taminant DREs were achieved; arsenic
 REs of  greater than 99.96% were
 achieved; and the hazardous waste in-
 cinerator particulate  and  HCI  perfor-
 mance standards were easily achieved.
 The treated soil may be a TC hazard-
 ous waste  for soils with  arsenic con-
 centrations in the range of those of the
 soil tested. Adding  lime to the soil be-
 fore incineration, however, can  signifi-
 cantly  reduce the  teachability  of the
 kiln ash arsenic in the TCLP test.
   This Project Summary was developed
 by EPA's Risk Reduction  Engineering
 Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH, to announce
 key findings of  the  research project
 that is fully documented In a separate
 report  of the  same title  (see Project
 Report ordering Information at back).

 Introduction
   One of the primary missions of the IRF
 is to support EPA's  Regional  Offices  in
 evaluating the potential of incineration as
 a treatment option for contaminated soils
 at Superfund sites. CIC is a priority site  in
 Edison Township,  NJ.  EPA  Region 2 re-
 quested that test burns be  conducted  at
 the IRF to support an evaluation of the
 suitability  of incineration as a treatment
 technology for the contaminated soils  at
 the CIC site.  Region 2 was specifically
 interested in whether flue gas  emissions
 of arsenic could be  limited  to less than
 0.04% of the  amount  of arsenic in the
 highly arsenic-contaminated soil fed to the
 incinerator.
  The CIC site was formerly used to manu-
 facture pesticide products. The results of
 the remedial investigation  and feasibility
 study (RI/FS) show that the soils at the
 site are highly  contaminated  by  orga-
 nochlorine pesticides and arsenic. Dioxin
 (i.e., 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin)
 has also been found at concentrations up
to 1.8ng/kg (ppb) in some soil samples
collected during the RI/FS. Thermal treat-
 ment has previously  been demonstrated
to be an  effective means of destroying
pesticides, dioxin, and other organic com-
 pounds. The  finding of  high  concentra-
 tions of arsenic in the soils at the CIC site
 has raised the question of whether a ther-
 mal treatment unit  treating soil from the
 site,  and operating  under conditions ca-
 pable of attaining  a 99.9999-%  ORE for
 dioxin and a 99.99-% ORE for other or-
 ganic contaminants, can also  reduce ar-
 senic concentrations to acceptable levels
 in the stack emissions. Therefore, this in-
 cineration  test program  focused on the
 ability of an incineration system to control
 the arsenic emissions to levels  acceptable
 to the EPA, while operating at incineration
 conditions  sufficient to destroy dioxin and
 other organic  materials to the  prescribed
 ORE.
   The test program  was designed to de-
 velop the data to support feasibility study
 (FS) efforts in  evaluating  incineration as a
 possible remedial alternative. The specific
 objectives of the test program were
   •  To confirm the  ability of conventional
     rotary kiln  incineration  to  destroy
     organochlorine pesticide contaminants
     in the  soil, as measured  by  their
     absence in the treated soil (kiln ash)
     discharge
   •  To confirm the ability of a conventional
     rotary  kiln incinerator, with  a high-
     efficiency scrubber, to achieve  an
     arsenic RE of 99.96% under operating
     conditions   associated   with   a
     99.9999% dioxin ORE, where RE  is
     defined as
        = 100 (1-
flue gas emission  rate
       feedrate
  A series of four incineration tests was
performed  using the IRF's  RKS with the
Calvert Flux Force/Condensation scrub-
ber for air pollution control. In three of the
tests, raw  soil alone was packaged into
1.5-gal fiberpacks and fed to the RKS kiln
via the system's ram feeder. In the fourth
test, raw soil was mixed with lime at  a
blend ratio of 0.5 kg of lime per 10 kg of
soil before  being packaged.

Test Program

Test Facility
  All tests were performed in the IRF RKS.
A process  schematic of the RKS  is pro-
vided in Figure 1. The RKS consists of  a
rotary kiln primary combustor followed by
an  afterburner chamber.  Downstream  of
the afterburner,  the combustion  gas  is
quenched and then the gas flows through
a primary  air pollution  control  system
(APCS).  A high-efficiency wet scrubber
system  consisting  of the  Calvert Flux
Force/Condensation scrubber pilot plant
 was used for these tests. Downstream of
 the primary  APCS, a secondary backup
 APCS consisting of a carbon bed absorber
 and a high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA)
 filter is in place.
   The Calvert scrubber system consisted
 of a condenser/absorber section, a Calvert
 Collision scrubber, two entrainment sepa-
 rators, a wet electrostatic preciprtator (de-
 signed to provide the final stage of par-
 ticulate removal), a caustic injection sys-
 tem, and an induced-draft (ID)  fan (Fig-
 ure 2). The IRF RKS quench chamber and
 heat exchanger systems were  used in-
 stead of the quench chamber and cooling
 tower  usually installed with  the Calvert
 pilot unit. The Calvert scrubber liquor was
 recirculated through the facility  heat  ex-
 changer for scrubber liquor cooling. The
 key operating parameter of the  scrubber
 system, pressure drop, was maintained at
 12 kPa (50 in. WC), as recommended by
 Calvert Environmental, the scrubber's ven-
 dor. Pressure drop was controlled by a
 variable-speed drive on the ID fan.

 Test Soil Description
   The CIC site was formerly used to manu-
 facture a variety of pesticides for commer-
 cial and military applications, including a
 wide range of insecticides, fungicides, ro-
 denticides, and  herbicides. One specific
 product, 2,4,5-trichlorophenoxyacetic acid
 (2,4,5-T), might have  contained dioxin as
 a byproduct.  Pesticide manufacturing ac-
 tivities, with associated process-water stor-
 age lagoons, and poor housekeeping led
 to the widespread chemical contamination
 of this site.
  The RI/FS  showed  that site soils were
 contaminated with the pesticides  p,p'-DDT,
 p,p'-DDD, p.p'-DDE, a-BHC, y-BHC, and
 chlordane; the herbicides 2,4-D, 2,4,5-T,
 and Silvex; and the trace metals arsenic,
 cadmium, chromium,  lead,  and  mercury.
 Arsenic levels as high as 8,000 mg/kg were
 found. Dioxin was found in some site soil
 samples at a maximum concentration of
 1.8 |ig/kg.
  Four drums of soil were excavated from
 the CIC site in February 1991  for this test
 program. Composite characterization
 samples were taken for pretest  analysis.
 The results showed that soil  with an ar-
 senic content of about  900 mg/kg was
 available for testing. This same soil was
 also contaminated  with  an average  of
 2 mg/kg  of p,p'-DDD;  3 mg/kg  of p,p'-
 DDE; 26 mg/kg of p,p'-DDT; and 9 mg/kg
of chlordane.
  Before testing, the test soil was pack-
aged  into 1.5-gal plastic-bag-lined fiber-
pack containers for feeding  to  the  RKS
via the ram feeder in place on the system.
Each fiberpack was filled with 4.5 kg (10 Ib)

-------
' Calvert Scrubber
• System
\

1 [*






1
i
i
1
^ •

1
i Single -Stage Ionizing
1 Wet Scrubber
I r^^i^r^ ^\
1 t^\r*x^. 	 r

	 U
*T

X
X
4 1
lY T *
Quench. A Scrubber Liquor
>\ 1 i 1 Recirculation
Afterburner
"
/wr
A/aftvra/ 1 1 S
^as' 	 J=& Afterburner , So//cfe I . hr7~
L/qu/c/ ^ — J Feeder 1 ^fl
Feed i i 	 7 II"
' > II] II rW~^ Main 1 	 I
Transfer Duct ^ III II 1 l&^Burnerl \d~~~ ~^>~
fAsh J JILjdli LP 1 1 LJ >: 1
II Oj— I /A 1 .4 ^r I 1'nnffiri
1 o//7 | / II v of nun
j 1 Scrubber
/ Natural Gas, i

/£
yzl.
1 	
M
A
"^v
^
r~r
V

1

1-
p
.J







^1-
XI
<
HJ, , ,
1
1
'
1
1
I ,
- 1 '-p
1 '
1


1 °
1 A
Packed
Column |
Scrubber
1
1
|

I
flofary Liquid Feed ' Scrubber Liquor '
K//V7 i Recirculation
1
1
1
1 1
Rotary Kiln \ Modular Primary Air I
Incinerator Pollution Control
\ Devices


1
                                                                                                            Atmosphere
                                                                                       Carbon Bed  HEPA
                                                                                       Adsorber    Filter
                                                                                         Redundant Air
                                                                                         Pollution Control
                                                                                            System
       7.  Schematic of the IRF rotary kiln incineration system.
of soil, its plastic bag was secured with a
wire tie,  and then the fiberpack's lid was
secured.

Test Conditions
  The test series was  designed specifi-
cally to determine whether incineration can
attain a 99.96% RE for arsenic under op-
erating  parameters  associated with  a
99.9999-% dioxin ORE. The kiln chamber,
afterburner chamber, and ARCS operat-
ing parameters were  held nominally con-
stant  throughout the test  program. The
target incinerator operating conditions for
each test are given in Table 1.
Sampling and Analysis
  The scope of the sampling efforts un-
dertaken during this test program is  illus-
trated and the sampling locations are iden-
tified in Figure 3. The sampling effort com-
  pleted during each test consisted of:
    •  Obtaining  a composite sample of the
      soil feed from each drum before the
      soil was packaged into the fiberpack
      containers.
Table 1.  Target Incinerator Test and Operating Conditions
        Kiln exit gas temperature
        Afterburner exit gas temperature
        Kiln exit O2 level
        Afterburner exit O2level
        Kiln solids residence time
        Total waste soil feedrate
        Calvert scrubber pressure drop
        Scrubber liquor temperature
        Scrubber liquor blowdown rate
982°C (1,800°F)
1,204°C (2,200°F)
10%
7.9%
O.Shr
55kg(120lb)
12.4 kPa (50 in. WC)
66°C (150°F)
0 to 2 L/min (0 to 0.5 gpm)

-------
                 From IRF
                   Heat
                 Exchanger
                                                                        IRF
                                                                     Secondary
                                                                       APCS
           To IRF
           Heat
         Exchanger

            To
          Quench
           Sump

           To
        Slowdown
         Storage   ^—'
           Tank

 Figure 2.  Schematic of the Calvert scrubber system.
                                    Wet
                                 Electrostatic
                                 Precipitator
   •  Collecting a composite sample of the
     kiln ash.
   •  Collecting a composite sample of the
     scrubber liquor.
   •  Continuously  measuring O2 levels in
     the kiln exit and afterburner exit flue
     gases; O2,  CO, CO2, and  NOx levels
     at the scrubber exit; and O2, CO, and
     CO2 levels at  the stack.
   •  Sampling  flue  gas at the scrubber
     system   exit for  organochlorine
     pesticides,  arsenic,  and  particulate
     and HCI.
   •  Sampling at the stack downstream of
     the secondary ARCS for arsenic and
     particulate and HCI.
   Aliquots of  the  soil feed and kiln ash
sample for each  test were subjected  to
the TCLP. The  soil  feed, soil feed TCLP
leachate, kiln  ash,  and  scrubber liquor
sample for each  test was analyzed  for
organochlorine pesticides  and  the  trace
metals  arsenic, barium, cadmium,  chro-
mium, lead, mercury, selenium, and  sil-
ver.  The kiln  ash  TCLP leachate sample
for each test  was  analyzed for the above
trace metals.  Flue gas  sampling  train
samples were analyzed for this sampled
analyte.
                                            Table 2.  Organochlorine Pesticide Analysis Results
                                                  Concentration
Sample
                            Chlordane  a-BHC    y-BHC  p,p'-DDE  p,p'-DDD p,p'-DDT
Test 1 (8/6/91)
Soil feed, mg/kg
Soil feed TCLP leachate, pg/L
Kiln ash, mg/kg
Scrubber liquor, \ig/L
Scrubber exit flue gas, \ng/dscm

14
<10
<0.10
<1.0
<0.33

<2.0
8.3
<0.02
<0.20
<0.066

<2.0
2.3
<0.02
<0.20
<0.066

5.5
<2.0
<0.02
<0.20
<0.066

7.3
<2.0
<0.02
<0.20
<0.066

65
<2.0
<0.02
<0.02
0.10
Test 2 (8/8/91 )
  Soil feed, mg/kg                17      <2.0      <2.0     6.7       7.3       92
  Soil feed TCLP leachate, iig/L     <10     4.4       <2.0     <2.0      2.6       <20
  Kiln ash, mg/kg                 <0. 10    <0.02     <0.02    <0.02     <0.02     <002
  Scrubber liquor, pg/L            <1.0     <0.20     <0.20    <0.20     <0.20     <0.20
  Scrubber exit flue gas, \ig/dscm   <0.30    <0.060    <0.060   <0.060    <0.060    <0.060

Test 3 (8/1 3/91)
  Soil feed, mg/kg                <10     <2.0      <2.0     3.4       4.3       41
  Soil feed TCLP leachate, pg/L     <10     3.6       <2.0     <2.0      <2.0      <20
  Kiln ash, mg/kg                 <0. 10    <0.02     <0.02    <0.02     <0.02     <002
  Scrubber liquor, \ig/L            <1.0     <0.20     <0.20    <0.20     <0.20     <0 20
  Scrubber exit flue gas, \ig/dscm   <0.31    <0.061    <0.061   <0.061    <0.061    <0.061

Test 4 (8/1 5/91)
  Soil feed, mg/kg                13      <2.0      <2.0     4.8       64       46
  Soil feed TCLP leachate, \ig/L     <10     <2.0      <2.0     <2.0      <2.0      <2.0
  Kiln ash, mg/kg                 <0. 10    <0.02     <0.02    <0.02     <0.02     <002
  Scrubber liquor, \ig/L            <1.0     <0.20     <0.20    <0.20     <0.20     <0 20
  Scrubber exit flue gas, \ig/dscm   <0.31    <0.062    <0.062   <0.062    <0.062    0.077

TCLP regulatory level, \ig/L        30      _a        400
                                            a_ = Has no TCLP regulatory level.

-------
Kiln




i — >

After-
Burner

— P .-•»•


Quench
Section



Calvert
Scrubber





Carbon
Bed



HEPA
Filter

>( ID
I Fan
^ — -»
Sampling
point Soil feed Kiln ash
1 X
2 X
3
4
5
6
7
Calvert
scrubber
liquor
X
Continuous
flue gas
monitoring
X
X
X
X
Method 0010
(organochlorine
pesticides)
X
Method 108
(arsenic)
X
X
Methods
(paniculate
andHCI)
X
X
 Figure 3.  Sampling matrix.
Test Results
   Results from the test program performed
are discussed in the subsections that fol-
low. Test results  are grouped by analyte
class.

Organochlorine Pesticides
Analysis Results
   Table 2 summarizes the  results of the
organochlorine pesticide analyses. The
data indicate that the soil feed contained
between <10 and 17 mg/kg of chlordane;
between 3.4 and  6.7 mg/kg of p,p'-DDE;
between 4.3 and  7.3 mg/kg of p,p'-DDD;
and between  41  and  92 mg/kg of  p,p'-
DDT. None  of these soil  contaminants,
however, was found in any of the  feed
TCLP leachate, kiln ash, or scrubber li-
quor samples. Low levels of p,p'-DDT were
found in the  scrubber exit flue gas in two
of the four tests, although no other pesti-
cide analyte  was found.
   Table 3 summarizes the  lower bound
degree  of  pesticide  decontamination
achieved corresponding to  the kiln ash
practical  quantitation  limits (PQLs) and
identifies the upper  bound fraction of the
amount  of each  pesticide  introduced  in
the incinerator feed  that could have been
present  in the  kiln ash discharge in each
test. The data show that no  more  than
0.62% of the chlordane, 0.44% of the p,p'-
DDE, 0.34% of the p.p'-DDD, or 0.04% of
the p,p'-DDT fed to  the incinerator could
have been discharged in  the  kiln  ash.
Thus, the decontamination  effectiveness
of incineration under the conditions tested
was at least 99.38% for chlordane; 99.56%
 Table 3.  Organochlorine Pesticide Decontamination Effectiveness
    Parameter
                          Chlordane
p,p'-DDE
                                                     p.p'-DDD
p,p'-DDT
Test 1 (8/6/91)
Soil feed
Concentration, mg/kg
Amount fed, g
Kiln ash
Concentration, mg/kg
Amount discharged, mg
Fraction of amount fed, %
Test 2 (8/8/91)
Soil feed
Concentration, mg/kg
Amount fed, g
Kiln ash
Concentration, mg/kg
Amount discharged, mg
Fraction of amount fed, %
Test 3 (8/13/91)
Soil feed
Concentration, mg/kg
Amount fed, g
Kiln ash
Concentration, mg/kg
Amount discharged, mg
Fraction of amount fed, %
Test 4 (8/1 '5/91)
Soil feed
Concentration, mg/kg
Amount fed, g
Kiln ash
Concentration, mg/kg
Amount discharged, mg
Fraction of amount fed, %


14
3.03

<0. 1
< 16
<0.54


17
3.73

<0. 1
< 17
<0.47


<10
<2.1

<0. 1
< 16
_a


13
2.78

<0. 1
< 17
<0.62


5.5
1.17

<0.02
<3.3
<0.28


6.7
1.45

<0.02
<3.5
<0.24


3.4
0.71

<0.02
<3.1
<0.44


4.8
1.07

<0.02
<3.4
<0.32


7.3
1.55

<0.02
<3.3
<0.21


7.3
1.59

<0.02
<3.5
<0.22


4.3
0.92

<0.02
<3.1
<0.34


6.4
1.42

<0.02
<3.4
<0.24


65
14.0

<0.02
<3.3
<0.02


92
19.9

<0.02
<3.5
<0.02


41
8.77

<0.02
<3.1
<0.04


46
10.1

<0.02
<3.4
<0.03
a_ = Not applicable because not detected in the feed.

-------
 Table 4. Organochlorine Pesticide DREs

      Parameter                Chlordane
                                           p,p'-DDE     p.p'-DDD     p,p'-DDT
 Test 1 (8/6/91)
   Pesticide feedrate, mg/hr         791
   Scrubber exit flue gas emission    <990
   rate, \ig/hr
   ORE, %                       >99.87

 Test 2 (8/8/91)
   Pesticide feedrate, mg/hr         951
   Scrubber exit flue gas emission    <860
   rate, u.g/hr
  ORE, %

 Test 3 (8/13/91)
  Pesticide feedrate, mg/hr
>99.910
<540
  Scrubber exit flue gas emission    <890
  rate, \ig/hr
  ORE, %                       a
 Test 4 (8/15/91)
  Pesticide feedrate, mg/hr
712
  Scrubber exit flue gas emission    <880
   rate, \ig/hr
  ORE, %
>99.88
             305
             <200

             >99.934
371
<170

>99.954
             183
             <180

             >99.901
275
<180

>99.935
            405
            <200

            >99.951
405
<170

>99.958
            234
            <180

            >99.923
366
<180

>99.951
             3,640
             306

             99.9916
5,100
<170

>99.9967
            2,240
            <180

            >99.9920
2,600
219

99.9916
 a_ = Not applicable because not detected in the feed.
 for p,p'-DDE; 99.66% for p.p'-DDD; and
 99.96% for p.p'-DDT.
   Table 4 summarizes the organochlorine
 pesticide DREs achieved for the tests as
 measured  at the  scrubber system  exit.
 For the two tests in which p.p'-DDT was
 detected in  the scrubber exit flue gas
 (Tests 1  and 4), the  ORE achieved was
 99.9916%. This exceeds the 99.99-% prin-
 cipal  organic  hazardous  constituent
 (POHC) ORE requirement in the hazard-
 ous waste  incinerator performance stan-
 dard. The lower bound DREs  achieved for
 p.p'-DDT in Tests 2 and 3 based on the
 flue gas emission stream  PQL were also
 greater than 99.99%. Lower bound DREs
 based on the flue  gas emission stream
 measurement  PQLs  were greater than
 99.87% for chlordane, 99.901% for p,p'-
 DDE, and 99.923% for p.p'-DDD. The ex-
 pectation is that all three  of  these com-
 pounds were  destroyed at greater than
 99.99% ORE;  however,  method  PQLs
 were too high to unambiguously establish
 this when these compounds were present
 at the lower concentrations  in the soil feed.
 The data in Tables 3 and 4 also show that
 adding lime to the  test soil in Test 4 had
 no effect on the effectiveness of incinera-
tion in decontaminating the soil or on the
 DREs  for the  organochlorine  pesticide
compounds.
           Arsenic and Other Trace Metal
           Distributions
             Tables summarizes the  arsenic con-
           centrations  measured  and  the  resulting
           feedrates and flue gas emission  rates for
           the four tests performed. The arsenic  RE
           achieved for Test 1 at the scrubber exit,
           99.89%, was  less  than the target of
           99.96%.  This result was obtained  on a
           quick-turnaround laboratory analysis.
           Based on this result, Test 4 was performed
           with lime blended with the soil to  evaluate
           whether lime addition affected arsenic RE.

           Table 5. Arsenic Removal Efficiencies
   In contrast to the Test 1 experience, the
 arsenic  REs  measured at the scrubber
 exit in Tests 2 and 3 were 99.990% and
 99.991%,  respectively, greater than  the
 target 99.96%. The authors have no ex-
 planation for the order of magnitude higher
 scrubber exit arsenic emission  rate expe-
 rienced in Test 1 compared to Tests 2 and
 3. The 99.991 -% scrubber exit arsenic RE
 in Test 4, in which lime was added to the
 soil, was comparable to the REs in Tests 2
 and 3.
   Table  6 summarizes the  concentrations
 of all eight of the test metals  in the soil
 feed  and in  each of the  incinerator dis-
 charge streams analyzed.  The  table also
 notes  the  soil feed and kiln  ash TCLP
 leachate metal concentrations for each
 test, and the  TCLP regulatory  levels for
 each TCLP metal determined. Comparing
 feed soil leachate, kiln ash  leachate, and
 scrubber liquor metals  concentrations  to
 the TCLP regulatory levels  shows that no
 regulatory  level was exceeded for any
 metal except arsenic. No feed  soil would
 be an arsenic TC hazardous waste. How-
 ever, the Test 1 kiln ash was a TC haz-
 ardous waste for arsenic, and the Tests 2
 and  3 kiln ash leachates  contained  ar-
 senic levels near the regulatory limit. The
 arsenic concentrations  in TCLP  leachates
 of both the feed soil and the kiln ash for
 Test 4 were reduced from the levels mea-
 sured in  the other three tests.  This sug-
 gests that  adding  lime, as  was done  in
 Test 4, renders the arsenic  less  teachable
from both the soil and  the resulting kiln
ash.
  Table 7 summarizes the trace  metal dis-
tributions among the incinerator  discharge
streams,  expressed  as   fractions
(in percent) of the amount of each metal
Test 1
tter (8/6/91)
Test 2
(8/8/91)
Test3
(8/13/91)
Test 4
(8/15/91)
           Soil
             Feedrate, kg/hr                 55.7         55.5         54.2
             Arsenic concentration, mg/kg      1,040        1,040        794
             Arsenic feedrate, g/hr            57.9         57.7         43.0
           Scrubber exit flue gas
             Flowrate, dscm/min              49.8         47.6         48.6
             Arsenic concentration, u.g/dscm    22.1         2.04         1.38
             Arsenic emission rate, mg/hr      66.0         5.82         4.02

             RE> %                         99.89        99.9899      99 9907
           Stack gas
             Flowrate, dscm/min              67.4         65.2         63.6
             Arsenic concentration, \ng/dscm    1.14         0.93         1.12
             Arsenic emission rate, mg/hr      4.61         3.64         4.27
                                                                  57.0
                                                                  803
                                                                  45.8

                                                                  48.4
                                                                  1.43
                                                                  4.15

                                                                  99.9909

                                                                  63.2
                                                                  1.16
                                                                  4.40
                                            RE,%
                                                                        99.9920
                                                                                     99.9937
                                                                                                 99.9900
                                                                                                             99.9903

-------
 Table 6.  Trace Metals Analysis Results
     Sample
As
Ba
Cd
                                  Cr
                                  Pb
                                  Hg
                                                                    Se
Test 1 (8/6/91)
Soil feed, mg/kg
Soil feed TCLP leachate, mg/L
Kiln ash, mg/kg
Kiln ash TCLP leachate, mg/L
Scrubber liquor, mg/L
Test 2 (8/8/91)
Soil feed, mg/kg
Soil feed TCLP leachate, mg/L
Kiln ash, mg/kg
Kiln ash TCLP leachate, mg/L
Scrubber liquor, mg/L
Test 3 (8/1 3/91)
Soil feed, mg/kg
Soil feed TCLP leachate, mg/L
Kiln ash, mg/kg
Kiln ash TCLP leachate, mg/L
Scrubber liquor, mg/L
Test 4 (8/1 5/91)
Soil feed, mg/kg
Soil feed TCLP leachate, mg/L
Kiln ash, mg/kg
Kiln ash TCLP leachate, mg/L
Scrubber liquor, mg/L
TCLP regulatory level, mg/L

1.040
2.2
653
5.8
8.5

1,040
2.2
619
3.8
12

794
2.5
619
4.1
10

803
0.11
1,100
1.2
6.0
5.0

56
0.89
60
0.76
0.16

66
0.57
60
0.70
0.23

48
0.80
64
0.78
0.21

43
0.18
74
0.12
0.26
100
fed to the incinerator for each test for all
metals analyzed, except arsenic which will
be discussed  separately.  The  data in
Table 7 show that the kiln ash discharge
accounted  for  most  of the barium and
lead fed in all tests. The  scrubber liquor
accounted  for about  a factor of 10 less
(i.e., 10%) of the  amount of barium and
lead fed than the  kiln ash. The  kiln ash
also accounted for the predominant frac-
tion of chromium fed in all tests, although
the scrubber liquor accounted for higher
relative fractions of chromium. The behav-
ior of cadmium was apparently  inconsis-
tent from test to test. The  addition of lime
to the  soil, as done in Test 4, apparently
did not affect metals distributions to kiln
ash or scrubber liquor within the variability
of the data in Table 7. No  mercury was
found in any kiln  ash or  scrubber liquor
sample. The "less  than" fractions  noted in
Table 7 correspond  to sample  analysis
PQLs. Most or all of the mercury fed likely
escaped the  incineration system via the
scrubber exit flue gas.
  Arsenic distributions are summarized in
Table 8 with the addition of the  scrubber
exit flue gas discharge stream sampled.
The data show that the arsenic distribu-
tions were quite similar in Tests 1 through
3 in  which soil alone was fed.  Between
42% and  49%  of the  arsenic  fed was
1.7
0.009
0.50
0.005
0.054
1.1
0.012
0.42
0.005
0.023
0.86
0.012
0.68
0.005
0.017
0.97
<0.005
0.85
<0.005
0.011
1.0
16
<0.007
9.7
< 0.007
0.15
19
<0.007
11
< 0.007
0.089
17
<0.007
11
<0.007
0.064
13
<0.007
14
<0.007
0.057
5.0
120
0.086
74
0.28
0.23
118
0.079
58
0.088
0.27
104
0.083
61
0.095
0.29
86
0.049
83
0.036
0.23
5.0
10
<0.002
< 1.0
< 0.002
0.007
5.8
<0.002
< 1.0
< 0.002
<0.002
5.4
<0.002
<1.0
<0.002
<0.002
6.2
<0.002
< 1.0
<0.002
<0.002
0.2
< 11
0.066
<12
0.059
<0.13
<11
0.057
16
0.065
<0.13
<11
0.063
1.5
0.062
0.14
15
0.058
<11
0.083
<0.13
1.0
<0.44
<0.005
<0.45
< 0.005
0.01
<0.44
<0.005
<0.45
< 0.005
<0.005
<0.43
<0.005
<0.46
<0.005
<0.005
<0.48
<0.005
<0.44
<0.005
<0.005
5.0
         accounted for in the kiln ash (treated soil)
         discharge. About  20% was  collected in
         the scrubber  liquor. With lime added to
         the soil (Test 4), the scrubber liquor frac-
         tion decreased to 13% of the amount fed,
         and the kiln ash fraction increased to 91%
         of the amount fed. The scrubber  exit flue
                                        gas arsenic fraction was low, 0.1% or
                                        less, in all four tests.
                                           A clearer picture of the variation in rela-
                                        tive arsenic distributions  with  incinerator
                                        operation is possible when  the data in
                                        Table 8 are normalized by the  total mass
                                        balance closure  achieved. Table 9 sum-
          Table 7.  Trace Metal Distributions
                                          Metal distribution, % of metal fed
Sample
Test 1 (8/6/91)
Kiln ash
Scrubber liquor
Total
Test 2 (8/8/91)
Kiln ash
Scrubber liquor
Total
Test 3 (8/1 3/91)
Kiln ash
Scrubber liquor
Total
Test 4 (8/1 5/91)
Kiln ash
Scrubber liquor
Total
Ba

71
6
77

63
6
69

84
7
91

115
10
125
Cd

20
69
89

27
36
63

50
34
84

59
19
78
Cr

40
19
59

42
8
50

40
7
47

69
7
76
Pb

41
4
45

34
4
38

37
5
42

64
5
69
Hg

<7
<1
<8

<12
<1
<13

<12
<1
< 13

<11
<1
<12

-------
 Table 8.  Arsenic Distributions
                              Arsenic distribution, % of arsenic ted
  Sample
 Testl
(8/6/91)
 Test 2
(8/8/91)
 Tests
(8/13/91)
 Test 4
(8/15/91)
Kiln ash                  42
Scrubber liquor            18
Scrubber exit flue gas       0.1

Total                     60
               42
               19
               0.01

               61
              49
              22
              0.01

              71
               91
               13
               0.01

               104
 Table 9.  Normalized Arsenic Distributions

                             Arsenic distribution, % of arsenic measured
Sample
Kiln ash
Scrubber liquor
Scrubber exit flue gas
Total
Apparent scrubber
Testl
(8/6/91)
70.2
29.6
0.17
100
99.44
Test 2
(8/8/91)
68.3
31.7
0.01
100
99.953
Test3
(8/13/91)
69.3
30.7
0.01
100
99.963
                                                               Test 4
                                                               (8/15/91)

                                                               87.8
                                                               12.2
                                                               0.01

                                                               100

                                                               99.937
collection efficiency
marizes the test arsenic distribution data
in this form.  The distribution fractions in
Table 9 have been normalized to the total
amount of arsenic measured  in all  the
discharge streams analyzed. Thus, these
normalized values represent fractions that
would  have resulted  had mass balance
closure in each test been 100%. Use of
distribution fractions  normalized in this
manner allows clearer data  interpretation
because variable mass balance closure is
eliminated as a source of test-to-test data
variability. In other words, given that vari-
able and less than perfect mass balance
closure is invariably experienced, the use
of normalized distributions is a best at-
tempt to quantify metal partitioning phe-
nomena.
  The normalized distributions in Table 9
clearly show that about 70% of the  ar-
senic accounted for was discharged in the
kiln ash, or treated soil, in the three tests
feeding soil alone (Tests 1  through  3).
About 30% of the arsenic measured was
accounted for in the scrubber system li-
quor. A small fraction of the arsenic mea-
sured was accounted for by the scrubber
exit flue gas. However, with lime added in
Test 4, the kiln ash arsenic fraction  in-
creased to 88% and the scrubber liquor
arsenic fraction decreased to about  12%.
                    The scrubber exit flue gas arsenic fraction
                    remained negligible. Clearly, the addition
                    of  lime to the  soil  stabilized the arsenic,
                    tending to keep it in the kiln ash.
                      The apparent arsenic scrubber collec-
                    tion efficiencies  for these  tests are also
                    given  in Table 9, where apparent scrub-
                    ber collection efficiency is defined as

                              Scrubber liquor fraction
                           Scrubber liquor fraction
                           +scrubber exit flue gas fraction
                      The data show that the Calvert scrub-
                    ber system  achieved  an  average  of
                    99.95% arsenic  collection  in  Tests 2
                    through 4.  The apparent  collection effi-
                    ciency  in Test 1  was lower  at  99.44%.
                    However, the Test 1 result is suspected to
                    be an outlier.

                    Paniculate and HCI Emissions
                      Flue  gas particulate levels measured at
                    the Calvert scrubber exit ranged from 9 to
                    19 mg/dscm (corrected to 7% O2). These
                    levels would  represent  the  stack  emis-
                    sions of a typical incinerator equipped with
                    a Calvert scrubber. These levels are sub-
                    stantially below the 180  mg/dscm (at 7%
                    O2) hazardous waste incinerator perfor-
                    mance  standard. Apparent scrubber sys-
                    tem collection efficiencies  calculated  us-
ing the chlorine feedrates and  measured
emission  rates were 99.95%,  or slightly
higher, in all tests. These levels exceed
the 99-%  collection efficiency required by
the hazardous waste incineration perfor-
mance standards.

Conclusions
  Test program  data confirm that  incin-
eration under the conditions tested resulted
in the elimination of the soil pesticide con-
taminants. No  pesticide  was detected in
any kiln ash (treated soil) sample.  Based
on method PQLs, the decontamination ef-
fectiveness demonstrated was at least
99.38% for chlordane,  99.56% for p.p'-
DDE,  99.66% for p,p'-DDD, and 99.96%
for  p,p'-DDT. In addition, pesticide DREs
of at  least 99.9916% were achieved for
p,p'-DDT. None of the other pesticide con-
taminants was detected in  the scrubber
exit flue  gas,  with  lower  bound  DREs,
corresponding  to method PQLs, ranging
from at least 99.87% for chlordane to at
least 99.92% for p,p'-DDD.
  Arsenic REs of 99.99% were achieved
with the Calvert scrubber under the condi-
tions tested feeding soil alone. Adding lime
to the soil did not  measurably improve
arsenic RE.
  Trace metal concentrations  in  TCLP
leachates of both untreated soil and kiln
ash (treated soil) were significantly below
corresponding TC regulatory levels for all
metals except  arsenic.  Soil leachate ar-
senic concentrations were 40% to 50% of
the regulatory level. Kiln  ash leachate ar-
senic concentrations were near or above
arsenic's TC regulatory level, suggesting
that treated soil could or would be a TC
hazardous waste. Adding lime to the soil
can significantly  lower both the soil and
resulting incineration kiln ash leachate ar-
senic concentrations.
  Nominally 70% of the arsenic measured
in the incinerator discharge was in the kiln
ash of all tests in which soil  alone was
fed; about 30%  was in  the scrubber  li-
quor;  and a negligible fraction  was in the
scrubber exit flue gas. In the test in which
lime was  added to  the  soil, the kiln ash
arsenic fraction increased to about 90%;
about  10%  was  in  the  scrubber  liquor;
and a negligible fraction was in the  scrub-
ber exit flue gas The  Calvert  scrubber
apparent arsenic  collection efficiency was
nominally  99.95% and was not affected
by lime addition.  Particulate levels  at the
Calvert scrubber exit were nominally 10 to
20 mg/dscm at 7% O2, well below the haz-
ardous waste  incinerator  performance
standard of 180 mg/dscm at 7% O2. Calvert
scrubber apparent HCI collection efficien-
cies were 99.95% or greater,  above the
                                                              8

-------
hazardous waste incinerator performance
standard of 99%.
  In summary, test results  suggest that
conventional  rotary kiln incineration  in a
unit equipped with a high-efficiency scrub-
ber system, such as the Calvert system
tested, would be an appropriate treatment.
Elimination of contaminant organochlorine
pesticides from the soil and destruction of
the contaminant at a ORE of 99.99% were
achieved. Arsenic  REs of  greater than
99.96% were achieved in the system with
the Calvert scrubber in normal operation.
The hazardous waste incinerator particu-
late and HCI performance standards were
easily achieved.
  Incineration treatment of  soils with ar-
senic concentrations in the range of  the
concentrations  of the  soil  tested may re-
sult in the treated soil  being  a TC hazard-
ous  waste. However,  adding lime to  soil
before incineration can significantly reduce
the teachability of the kiln ash arsenic in
the TCLP test.
  The full report was submitted in fulfill-
ment of Contract No. 68-C9-0038, Work
Assignment 2-1, by Acurex Environmental
Corporation under the sponsorship of the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
                                                                                       •U.S. Government Printing Office: 1993 — 750-071/60228

-------

-------

-------
A. Siag, S.J. Fournier, Jr., and LR. Waterland are with Acurex Environmental
  Corporation, Jefferson, AR 72079.
R.C. Thurnau is the EPA Project Officer (see below). H.O. Wall was the
  Technical Project Monitor for the test program
The complete report, entitled "Pilot-Scale Incineration of Contaminated Soil
    from the Chemical Insecticide Corporation Superfund Site," (Order No.
    PB93-155968; Cost: $27.00, subject to change) will be available only
    from:
       National Technical Information Service
       5285 Port Royal Road
       Springfield,  VA22161
        Telephone:  703-487-4650
The EPA Project Officer can be contacted at:
       Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
       U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
       Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
 United States
 Environmental Protection Agency
 Center for Environmental Research Information
 Cincinnati, OH 45268

 Official Business
 Penalty for Private Use
 $300
      BULK RATE
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
         EPA
   PERMIT No. G-35
 EPA/600/SR-93/036

-------