S-EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Municipal Environmental Research
Laboratory
Cincinnati OH 45268
Research and Development
EPA-600/D-84-054 Feb. 1984
ENVIRONMENTAL
RESEARCH BRIEF
Trial Burn Testing of the EPA-ORD Mobile Incineration System
Ralph J. Lovell, Richard A. Miller, and Charles Pfrommer, Jr.
This summary describes the initial trial burn testing of the
mobile incineration system that was developed through
the EPA Office of Research and Development for
destroying organic hazardous materials at spills and
abandoned landfill sites. The trial burn test program
consisted of a series of five tests designed to evaluate the
system's ability to destroy selected hazardous organic
materials while controlling the emissions of HCI, partic-
ulate matter, and organics according to the requirements
of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), the Re-
source Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), and the
State of New Jersey. The results of the trial burn
provided the information needed to obtain operating
permits for the incineration system at many of the
hazardous material sites that plague the nation.
Introduction
Continuing discoveries of abandoned hazardous material
waste sites have placed increased pressure on the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to find long-term
solutions to this problem. Technology such as high-
temperature thermal incineration currently exists to destroy
many of the wastes, but problems associated with siting
and the public uncertainty about incineration have mini-
mized its use. A promising means of using incineration
technology is through a mobile system that is brought to a
waste site, used to destroy the hazardous material, and
then removed from the site. The unit's mobility enables the
liquid or solid hazardous materials to be destroyed onsite.
Thus local problems are solved by avoiding creation of a
permanent site to which other wastes will be brought and
by eliminating transportation of wastes through the com-
munity, which is frequently a major objection of the local
citizens.
Since incineration of hazardous materials is controlled by
State and Federal regulations, a trial burn plan was
developed to demonstrate the Mobile Incineration System's
compliance with the regulations and to provide a basis for
obtaining State and Federal permits. This plan was
approved by the permitting agencies, and the trial burn
tests were conducted in three test phases from September
1982 through January 1983 at the Municipal Environ-
mental Research Laboratory's Oil and Hazardous Materials
Spills (OHMS) Branch in Edison, New Jersey. The tests
evaluated the ability of the Mobile Incineration System to
destroy carbon tetrachloride (CCU), di-, tri-, and tetra-
chlorobenzenes (TCBs), and polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs) while controlling the emissions of HCI and particu-
late matter. The trial burn consisted of 25 test runs, during
which the incinerator's operating conditions were moni-
tored and an extensive sampling and analytical program
was conducted to measure gaseous, liquid, and solid
discharges. All test runs were conducted with the appropri-
ate State and Federal observers onsite to ensure that the
incineration system was operated safely and according to
the conditions of the trial burn permits.
Procedures
The trial burn plan was developed according to the
requirements of the Federal Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA), the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA), and the New Jersey Department of Environmental
Protection (NJDEP) Administrative Code (NJAC). In addition
to satisfying these requirements, the investigators de-
veloped a series of step-by-step test procedures to provide
maximum opportunity for safely detecting potential prob-
lems in the system's performance. This approach was
designed to minimize the risk of any undesirable exposures
of emissions.
The trial burn plan consisted of five tests—one that used
clean diesel fuel oil and four that used different synthetic
waste materials. A baseline test for paniculate and organic
-------
emissions was conducted while burning clean diesel fuel in
both the primary (rotary kiln) and secondary combustion
chambers. The data from the diesel fuel test provided
background emission data for comparison with other tests.
During the second test, the particulate removal efficiency of
the air pollution control (APC) equipment was measured by
feeding a mixture of finely ground iron oxide (Fe2C>3) and
clean diesel fuel into the rotary kiln. The particulate matter
content of the stack gases was measured to verify the
effectiveness of the APC equipment in removing particulate
matter.
The third test was designed to demonstrate the destruction
and removal efficiency (ORE) of organic compounds regu-
lated by RCRA. The compounds chosen—carbon tetra-
chloride and o-dichlorobenzene—were blended with diesel
fuel and burned in the rotary kiln. These compounds were
chosen because they are considered to be very refractory
(difficult to incinerate) according to EPA's ranking of
incinerability of RCRA-regulated compounds. The combus-
tion of these compounds also generated hydrochloric acid
(HCI), which afforded the opportunity to evaluate the APC
equipment for removing HCI from the combustion gases.
The fourth test category consisted of two tests during which
different mixtures of PCB (as Askarel*) in diesel fuel were
burned. The particular Askarel used is a mixture of Aroclor
1260 (a typical PCB), trichlorobenzenes, and tetrachloro-
benzenes, and it was mixed with diesel fuel to generate two
different concentrations of synthetic wastes that were fed
into the rotary kiln. The concentration of Askarel was 11%
by weight in the diesel fuel during one test and 39% in the
other.
According to EPA requirements, all organic ORE tests were
run in triplicate. Additional particulate removal tests based
on NJDEP requirements were also run in triplicate for each
of the test feed conditions. Table 1 summarizes the trial
burn tests and the feed mixtures used.
Results
The test results from the trial burn can be readily understood
by evaluating five principal performance criteria: (1) particu-
late removal efficiency, (2) HCI removal efficiency, (3)
organic ORE, (4) wastewater quality, and (5) ambient air
quality. The first three criteria define the major emissions
from the stack of the mobile incinerator. These criteria, in
addition to wastewater quality, were closely monitored to
ensure compliance with State and Federal regulations. The
fifth criterion, ambient air quality, is importantfrom a socio-
political point of vie wand is of concern to the citizens in the
local community. Each of these performance criteria will be
presented separately to provide an organized view of the
test results.
Particulate Removal Efficiency
The removal of particulate matter from the combustion flue
gas is accomplished in the APC equipment. Particulate
matter is generated from the solids, ash, and heavy metals
present in liquid wastes incinerated in the rotary kiln. The
*Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute
endorsement or recommendation by EPA or IT Corp.
synthetic organic wastes incinerated during the trial burn
were clean liquids free from heavy metals and significant
quantities of ash. Thus a test mixture of iron oxide powder
and diesel fuel was prepared for determining the particulate
removal efficiency of the APC equipment. Iron oxide was
chosen because of its availability in the specific particle size
range desired for the test (0.4 to 0.9 yum). The concentration
of iron oxide in test mixtures ranged from 0.8 to 1.6 wt %.
The results of the three test runs appear in Table 2. The
particulate removal efficiency exceeded 90% for all test
runs. The results also confirm that the APC section, where
the primary sub-micron particulate removal device is the
Cleanable High Efficiency Air Filter (CHEAP), was able to
control the particulate emission rate to within the level set
by the regulations (180 mg/dscm according to RCRA). In
fact, in Table 2, the particulate emission rate corrected to
7% 02 in the stack was well below the allowable emission
rate.
Particulate emission rates were measured for the other test
mixtures even though the mixtures were composed of clean
components. The emission rates for the other test runs
ranged from 6.3 to 80.2 mg/dscm (corrected to 7% Oj),
which was also well below the allowable emission rate.
HCI Removal Efficiency
The release of acid gases (primarily HCI) from the combus-
tion of chlorinated organics is regulated by RCRA. Test 3 of
the trial burn used a test mixture rich in organochlorine
compounds to quantify the capacity of the APC equipment
to remove high levels of HCI from the combustion gases.
The HCI removal efficiency and corresponding stack
emissions were also measured during Tests 4 and 5 when
PCBs were fed to the incinerator, since the feedstocks also
had the potential to produce significant quantities of HCI.
The results of these tests appear in Table 3 and indicate that
the regulatory criteria were met during all trial burn test
runs. RCRA restricts HCI emissions to 4 Ib/hr or 99%
removal of that generated, whichever is greater.
.Organic Destruction Efficiency
The efficient destruction of hazardous organic compounds
is the primary function of the Mobile Incineration System.
Thus the measurement and demonstration of the ORE was
the major reason for conducting the trial burn. The
compunds selected were carbon tetrachloride, di-, tri-, and
tetra-chlorobenzenes, and PCBs.
The ORE results for these compounds (Tests 3, 4, and 5) are
illustrated inTable4.The RCRA-required ORE for hazardous
organic compounds such as CCU and TCBs is 99.99%. This
RCRA requirement was exceeded during all nine test runs
by approximately 10 to 100 times. The results shown in
Table 4 do not indicate limits of the incinerator's ability to
destroy hazardous organics; rather, in all cases they reflect
the limits of our ability to sample and analyze ultra-trace
quantities of organics in the stack gas. Most of the stack
samples (72 of 93) did not contain enough material to
identify and quantitate the test organics, so the quantities
used to calculate DREs were level-of-detection values and
not necessarily actual emission values. Note that achieving
a ORE in excess of 99.99% becomes excessively costly and
may serve no useful purpose in terms of the general public
health and welfare. The analyst's ability to quantitate
-------
c:-'., -VP,A
Table 1.
Test
No.
1
2
3
4
5
Trial Burn Test Summary
Phase
No.
1
2
2
3
3
Feed
Material"
Diesel fuel
1.2% Fe203 c
98.8% Diesel fuel
21.4% CCU"
49. 7% Diesel fuel
1 1 .4% Askare f
88.6% Diesel fuel
39.3% Askare/'
60. 7% Diesel fuel
Number
of Runs
2DRE"
2 Paniculate
3 Paniculate
3 DRE
3 Paniculate
3 DRE
3 Paniculate
3 DRE
3 Paniculate
Test Purpose
Baseline performance
Paniculate removal
efficiency of A PC
Destruction of RCRA
organic; HCI removal
efficiency of A PC
Destruction of PCB
(TSCA); HCI removal
efficiency of A PC
Destruction of PCB;
HCI removal
efficiency of APC
"A II compositions are reported on a wt/wt basis.
^Destruction and removal efficiency of principal organics.
°lron oxide.
*Carbon tetrachloride or tetrachloromethane.
"Ortho-dichlorobenzene or 1,2-dichlorobenzene.
'58.9%Aroc/or 1260, 35.0% trichlorobenzenes, 6.1% tetrachlorobenzenes.
Table 2. Summary of Paniculate Removal Results for Test 2 Table 4. Summary of Organic Destruction Results
Test Number and Date
Item
Waste feed:
Fe2O3 (Ib/hr)
Stack:
Flowrate (dscfm)
Fe203 (Ib/hr)
FezOi removal
efficiency (%)
Total paniculate matter"
fmg/m3)
2E
10/21/82
1.66
4016
0.145
91.2
23.7
"Corrected to 50% excess air (7% O^J in
2G
1 0/22/82
2.60
3940
0.100
96.2
25.8
21
1 0/23/82
3.31
4113
0.157
95.3
16.7
accordance with RCRA.
Item
Waste feed (Ib/hr):
CCU"
DiCIB"
TriCIB*
TetraCIBa
PCB"
Stack gas (Ib/hr):
CCU"
DiCIB"
TriCIB"
TetradBd
PCB"
DRE (%):
CCU"
DiCIB"
TriC/B*
Tetrads"
PCB"
Test 3
A verage
70.1
94.9
...
<3.2x10~5
2.4x1 0 5
...
>99. 99995
99.99998
...
Test 4
A verage
...
8.43
1.40
14.6
...
<1.4x10~5
<8.8x10~e
<2.8x10 5
>99.9998
>99.9994
>99.9998
TestS
Average
...
33.2
6.4
50.0
...
<2.1x10~5
<8.8x10~e
<4.3x10~5
...
>99.99993
>99.9998
>99.99991
Table 3.
Summary of HCI Removal Results
Item
Waste feed:
HCI in feed" (Ib/hr)
Stack:
HCI emission (Ib/hr)
Removal efficiency (%)
HCI concentration (ppmj
Test 3
A verage
88.97
0.040
99.96
1.6
Test 4
A verage
15.27
0.002
99.98
0.13
TestS
A verage
52.83
0.003
99.99
0.18
"Based on chlorine content of test feed (refer to Table 1 for waste
feed composition).
"Carbon tetrachloride.
"O-d/ch/orobenzene.
c Trichlorobenzenes.
d Tetrachlorobenzenes.
"Polychlorinated biphenyls (Aroclor 1260).
increasingly lower levels of chemicals should not result in a
demand that the treatment equipment be redesigned to
demonstrate a level of performance that meets or exceeds
the most recently achievable limit of detection.
Another measure of the performance of the incineration
system is the combustion efficiency or the ratio of the
-------
concentrations of carbon monoxide (CO) to carbon dioxide
(COa) according to the formula:
Con.oustion efficiency = 100% x [CO2]/([C02MCO])
The required performance level under this criterion,
according to TSCA, is 99.9%. The concentration of CO
during the trial burn tests was so low—less than 1 ppm—
that it was lower than the detection level of either of the two
gas monitors (nondispersive infrared and gas chroma-
tography) installed to measure it. The low CO concentration
raised the combustion efficiency above 99.999%, or 100
times better than the required performance.
Wastewater Quality
The wastewater from the ARC section of the incineration
system was monitored for total organic carbon, pH,
temperature, total dissolved and suspended solids, petro-
leum hydrocarbons, volatile organics, and test organic
compounds. The results of hourly, daily, and weekly
sampling and analyses of the wastewater are summarized
in Table 5. The average concentration of the test organics in
the wastewater was lower than 20 pq/L (ppb) during the
entire trial burn. The main contaminants in the wastewater
were dissolved salts from the neutralization of acid gases
(HCI and S02) by the scrubbing solution (sodium bicar-
bonate).
Ambient Air Quality
The personnel and site monitoring programs consisted of
the collect ion of air samples in the immediate vicinity of the
Mobile Incineration System and around the test site to
determine the impact of the stack gas and fugitive
emissions on air quality. Data from the personnel monitor-
ing stations indicated low levels of tri- and tetra-chloro-
benzenes (<0.1 mg/m3) near the waste feed tank and
rotary kiln. The concentration of chlorobenzenes detected is
much lower than the level considered to be an industrial
hygiene hazard. No evidence of PCBs was found in any
personnel monitoring samples.
In the site monitoring program, ambient air samples were
collected 0.3 to 1.0 km downwind from the incinerator
stack. No measurable quantitites of chlorobenzenes or
PCBs were found. The detection level was 0.1 /ug/m3 for
both tri- and tetra-chlorobenzene and 1.0 /yg/m3 for PCBs
(as Aroclor 1 260). These data demonstrate that the mobile
incineration system does not adversely affect the quality of
air in the local community.
Conclusions
The trial burn was conducted to verify that the Mobile
Incineration System could achieve compliance with Federal
and State (New Jersey) regulations governing the incinera-
tion of hazardous and toxic substances. During the trial
burn tests the incineration system achieved over 99.99%
destruction of synthetic wastes at feed rates of up to 70
Ib/hr of carbon tetrachloride, 95 Ib/hr of chlorinated
benzene, and 50 Ib/hr of PCB (as Aroclor 1260). The
system's control and monitoring instrumentation was
demonstrated to be capable of maintaining the required
levels of performance.
The results of the trial burn confirmed that the air pollution
control section of the Mobile Incineration System removed
HCI (over 99%) and paniculate matter (to less than 180
mg/m3 corrected) in accordance with the requirement of
State and Federal regulations. An ambient air monitoring
program, conducted during the trial burn, verified pre-trial
burn EPA air modeling which indicated that the quality of
the air in the local community would not be adversely
affected by the incinerator emissions.
The results of the trial burn tests demonstrate that the
Mobile Incineration System is capable of meeting and
exceeding all applicable Federal regulations. The large
quantity of data collected and analyzed (over 10,000 pages
of log sheets, chromatograms, calibrations, and results
tables) clearly support the conclusion that the EPA Mobile
Incineration System is a complete and efficient hazardous
material destruction process.
Table 5. Summary of Wastewater Analyses
Parameter
Daily flow
(gal /day), average
Total organic
carbon (mg/L), average
Temperature range
pH range
Petroleum hydrocarbons
9/12/82
4,298
155
52-82
7.5-10
<1.0
10/18/82
4,962
16
36-75
b.5-11
<1.0
Test Week
10/25/82
5,141
7
58-72
7-9.5
<1.0
1/4/83
5,613
13
32-67
8.5-9
2.6
1/10/83
9,211
20
26-57
7.5-8.5
1.5
(mg/L), average
Total dissolved solids
(mg/L), average
Total suspended solids
(mg/L), average
Volatile organics
(vg/L). average
17,600
338
86-99
14,000
65
133
20,500
68
3,360
55
12,900
36
10
"Not measured.
-------
This overview of the trial burn results represents only a
small fraction of the total data collected and generated.
Voluminous test data were collected in order to identify the
performance capability of the Mobile Incineration System
at design operating conditions. Evaluation of the data
indicates that under these conditions, the system meets or
exceeds all performance criteria established by State and
Federal regulations. From this viewpoint, thetrialburn was
a success and the Mobile Incineration System should be
considered an optimum technical solution for many of the
organic hazardous waste disposal problems now facing the
Nation.
Recommendations
The trial burn program described in this summary was
limited to the testing of organic liquids. To use the Mobile
Incineration System over the entire range of hazardous
wastes, the unit must be able to detoxify solid hazardous
materials such as PCB- and dioxin-contaminated soils. An
additional trial burn program will be required to provide the
data necessary to obtain State and Federal permits for
handling solids. A test program should be designed to test
worst-case waste feed materials so that the need for
additional testing in the future will be minimized or
eliminated.
The operating conditions used during the trial burn were
those for which the Mobile Incineration System was
designed and those required in theTSCAfor incineration of
PCBs. The high combust ion efficiencies and DREs achieved
indicate that these conditions are more than adequate to
meet the RCRA requirements both for organic DREs and for
paniculate matter and HCI emission limitations. Considera-
tion should be given to changing the opera ting conditions to
allow a higher processing rate of RCRA-regulated hazard-
ous materials as long as regulated performance criteria are
met. A higher processing rate for hazardous material and a
lower diesel fuel consumption rate would substantially
reduce the cost of using the Mobile Incineration System to
destroy hazardous wastes.
The work described in this summary was performed by the
EPA Environmental Emergency Response Unit (EERU)
under EPA Contract No. 68-03-3069.
R. J. Lovell, R. A. Miller, and C. Pfrommer, Jr., are with IT
Corporation, Operating Contractor of the EERU.
J. E. Brugger and J. J. Yezzi, Jr., are EPA Project Officers.
The EPA Project Officers can be contacted at:
Oil and Hazardous Materials Spills Branch
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory—
Cincinnati
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Edison, NJ 08837
ft U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1984-759-015/7312
------- |