United States Solid Waste and EPA530-R-97-037e
Environmental Protection Emergency Response NTIS: PB97-177 463
Agency (5305W) June 1992
&EPA Background Document
for Capacity Analysis
for Newly Listed
Wastes and Hazardous
Debris to Support 40
CFR 268 Land Disposal
Restrictions (Final Rule)
Volume 5:
Appendix D - Category 1
Facilities for the F037 and
F038 Capacity Analysis
Printed on paper that contains at lest 20 percent postconsumer fiber
-------
CD2F-
Background Document for Capacity Analysis for
Newly Listed Wastes and Hazardous Debris to
Support 40 CFR 26S Land Disposal Restrictions
(Final Rule)
2 a.
Volume 5: Appendix D - Category 1 Facilities
for the F037 and F038 Capacity Analysis
Q
to
Tl
O
O
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Solid Waste
401 M Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
c3
CO
June 1992
UJ
-------
APPENDIX D
CATKCORY 1 FACILITIES
D.I Incsrvlew Cuide
D.2 Recent Infonaacion Obtained from Refinery Visits
Q.3 Recent Information Subaitted by Category 1 Facilities
[Sot«: Some Category 1 facilities have declared their information
confidential. This information is in the RCRA CBI docket.i
O
O
U)
CO
—i
-------
D.I Interview Gui«!«
"* 2. : * °
— ^ "" B —
<» ^ - _ ^n
a. a — »
" 2 a7
5 i "
1 n
n
O
O
UJ
'BaX
C3I
CO
un
-------
STATE:
COMPA.NT:
ADDRESS:
FOJ: ro.v) WASTE c \P\CITV VNALVSIS •• REFINERY
~ * —• a"
i E " •>
= -= z^z
- = ^3
"^ " 51 ""*
I -
CONTACT:
POSITION:
REFERENCE;
DATE:
CALLER:
I'flONE Vl'MBER:
(FAX NUMBER):
TIME:
EXTENSION:
- CBI claims?
• Fill out responses to attached interview eu:Je
- Need ;o fax m for ma lion to contain penon?
• Items contact will send:
• Miscellaneous notes:
o
a
O
O
U)
1
On
-------
FC37 AND F03S CU£S"ONS
We have developed a preliminary series of questions to aid in our understanding of how the new
F037 and F03fl waste listing and proposed land ban will affect refineries. These questions
involve not only F037 and F03S wastes, but expand :o KCX3-KC52 and TC wastes, discuss past
and fjture waste water treatment facility modificatiens, on site treatment, etc.. in order for us to
get an understanding of the whole picture and how everything interrelates, in addition to gaining
an overall understanding of the issues, we want to discover any unique problems or treatability
issues that refineries may have associated with these wastes. Please complete the questions
below on separate pieces of paper and mail to Ms Jo-Ann 3assi (U.S. EPA) before June 1, 1991.
I.O Waste Water Treatment Facility
i.i « what is your currant configuration (scnematic) ?
l.l • How segregated Is your system, stormwater vs. process water?
'•3 * What modifications have been made in the last 5 years?
1.4 • What were tne driving forces behind these modifications?
l,T • What future modifications are planned?
i-fc • What are the driving forces behind these modifications?
1.7 . HOW haw the K048-K05Z TC and F037/F038 rulings and land bans affected the
facility in terms of modifications, operation, capacity, etc.?
2.o K048-K052 and TC Wastes
2.1 • What is yogr estimated rate of generation and land disposal of K048-K052 and TC
wastes?
2.i- • How do you currently treat, recycle or dispose of these wastes and are there any
foreseeable changes in the treatment, recycling or disposal?
z-3 • How have the waste generation rates changed wrth the hazardous waste ruling and
land ban?
o
o
N)
TJ
O
O
C3
GO
—i
—I
-------
«
^•" • Have tnere teen ary ^istream or waste water treatment faelity operating c.-anggs
to reduce '.he amount of these wastes generated and how effective are tr.ese
changes?
Z.f • Will ihe proposed FC27 and F039 land ban affect the amount of these wastes
produced?
2-t • How much of these wastes are stockpiled in containers or surface ^rrpcupdrrerus?
2.1 • What are the chemical and physical characteristics of the currency generated and
stockpiled wastes (ie. a-9 they dewatered, do they have significant otu value. etc.;7
1-1 * How will these characteristics change wr.h any planned facility modifications and
operating changes?
2.1 • What quantity of your secondary treatment waste, such as sludge from the
aggressive biological uvti, is categorized as TC waste?
3.0 F037and FOMWasies
3-1 • is there a current estimate of the amount of F037 and F038 wastes generated?
3-2- • Is there an estimate of t* amount of F037 and F038 wastes stockpiled in containers
or surface impoundmerts?
3-3 • What are you currency domg with the stockpiled waste and what are your future
plans?
3.4 * Wtwt are the chemical and physical characteristics of both the currently generated
and ttw stockpiled wa*w?
3.5* • What is your current treatment, recycle or disposal method and how will this change .
with the land ban?
34 • What are the capacrt** of these treatment, recycle and disposal methods in
relationship to F037 arxJ F038 wastes?
n
o
-n
o
o
CQ
CQ
-------
3.7
3.S
M.o General
H.I
Are there any planned changes, either physical or operational, to deal wnn the ;ard
ban and how will these changes affect K048-K052 waste generation?
Is it possible to reduce F037/F038 or K04fl-KOS2 wastes by putting more ol a icaa
on ihe aggressive biological units?
What are your offsite treatment options and are the unique features cf your waste
that would limit the treatability options?
What modifications have seen done or are planned upstream to reduce ;he amount
of waste generated in the waste water treatment facility (eg. pretreatrrem, scurce
control, segregation, etc.)?
Will the B'.F rulings affect any of the current disposal options, onsite, captive or
commercial?
a a. .- n
• o *" —
n - .1
e 9- «
n
o
to
•n
o
OJ
H'.f • Is th&re a preference on producing F037/F038 wastes or K048-K052 wastes in terms
of handling or disposal?
4.5" • What is the frequency of deanout for the various waste water treatment units (eg.
API. OAF, storage tank, surface impoundments, etc.) ?
While some of these question* are very specific, we realize mat initially not ail of the exact
quantities, etc. will be available. The main purpose of trie questions is to get an overall
understanding, to get a feel tor how much planning is taking place, how much data is available.
and what are the unique problems that the refineries will encounter.
CD
GO
—i
UO
-------
3- ~ ~
? ~ Z
D.2 R«c«nt lafonuticn obtained from Refinery Visits
The refineries visited by E?A are listed below.
• Chevron (El SegM-do. CA)
• L'ltrasar (Vilaingeon, CA)
• Aooco (Vhiting, IN)
(Texas CUv, TX)
. 3. _ n
O « -
"
n
CO
CD
-------
F037 AS2 FD33 '.'ASTE CAPACITY ANALYSIS:
DATA "SE AND TRACKING SHEET
Refinery: Chevron - EL 5*;.ir.'J.o Rpfir.ery
Stare: California
s
Data scurces
. _S Petroleum refinery vlsils/voluntar1' -submission
_x National Survey of Hazardous Vaste Treatment. Storage. disposal,
and Recycling Facilities CTSDS survey)
_ National Survey c: Ha:arc!e-_;s '.Taste Generators
_ Biennial report/s:.\:a ropcrrir.g requirements
_ " California ha:ardo.i -aste c.:.i:a base
x pecroliua r« finery T of '-et sludge from holding tanks, and IAF units (assuming
reported daily quantities are generated 365 days/year).
Chevron El Segundo reports no other F wastes than those identified
above.
*—^N
CD1
CQ
• I
QO
-------
MEMORANDUM
EL SEGUNDO REFINERY
May 23. 1991
FOT7 & F038 Waste I»UM
Mr. Bob Goeltz & James Hsu;
ICF Kaiser Engineers
Listed below are our responses to your list of questions regarding Refinery F Wistes:
Wj\STE WATER TREATMENT FACILITY
• What is your current corfigurazcn (schematic) ?
See attached schematic.
* How segregated is your system, stormwater vs. process -water?
We have rwo systems: one handles process contacted wastewater and the other handles water that
has not had contact with any process streams. They do not meet until after treatment is complete.
• Wha modifications have betn made i* the last 5 yean?
We have added new storage tanks for wastewater. These units are used in the event the water
does not meet the effluent standards in our NPDES permit. The treated water is then rerumed to
these tanks for further treatment before discharge. Three new lAFs have been installed, one treats:
the water from the desalten at the crude units and the other two treat water before discharge under
our NPDES permit (it joins mother unit already in this service).
• What were the driving forces beted that modifications?
NPDES permit compliance.
• What funtre modifications art planned?
None.
• Wkuare the driving forces beMnd these modifications?
K/'A
• How navt K, TC and F rulings and Land Bans affected the facility in terms of modifications,
operations, cmdiy. tic.?
We have made change* to our operation to provide more segregation between our systems that
produce K and F waste.
K AND TC BASTES
* W)ta it yow-esmnaedrau of generate and land disposal efK
-------
Mr. Bob Coeltz & limes Hsu F037 & F038 Waste [ss-es 2
ICF Kaiser Engineers
We do not produce any continuous scrams of TC waste. We expect thai sorae in '.ermine m sources
will produce TC waste (i.e. spills, tint cleaning sludge. filters), but we do not have estimates
available for this generation.
• How do you currently mat. recycle or dispose of these wastes and are ihere any fortsetzbie
changes in the treaonent, recycling or disposal?
We currently feed about 200 BPD of K wasie :o our Coker using the Mobil Oily Sludge Coking
process. The remaining K waste is dewatered using a centrifuge or filter press and then fed to
TDU. The solids from TDU reset the landban standards for the organic*. but fail for nickel md
cyanides. As a result, the solids are sent off- site for neutralization and stabilization prior to
disposal.
TC waste is currently sent off-site for disposal. We expect that after we improve the operation of
TDU, we may have enough capacity to feed sludges or contaminated sod thai fails the benzene TC
limit We would expect that any benzene contaminated material processed at TDU would piss the
TC limit and would then be considered non-hazardous.
• How hme the HOW generation rates changed with the hazardous waste ruling snd Land Ban?
The total generation of sludges generated from pur wastewater system has not changed since the
land ban went into effect. However, we are taking steps to make sure that sludges that are not K
waste do not mix with K waste SITCMZJ to minimize the generation of K waste.
• Have there been any upstream or waste water ireaffnent facility operating changes x> reduce the
amount of these waiter generated?
See above.
• Will the new F Waste Lard Ban affect the amount of these wastes produced?
We expect that we will have improved the operation of TDU by the time the F waste land ban goes
into effect, so thai there will be capacity to feed F waste. This will reduce the amount of F waste to
disposal by 65%
• Haw much of these wastes are stockpiled in containers or surface impoundments?
Since F waste and TC waste go directly to disposal, none of ihii material is stockpiled. Since our
K waste is fed to TDU, the amount of material stored oo-site vanes depending on the current
generation of K waste and the feed rate of TDU.
• What are the chemical and physical characteristics of the currently generaud and stockpiled
wastes fie. are they dewatend, do they have significant btu value, etc.)?
The K waste which ii fed to TDU hat been dewttcred (-33% solids). Testing has shown the
material has a low BTU vilue between 1000 and 2000 BTU/lb.
• How will these characteristics change with any planned'facility modifications and operating
changes?
No change U txptcted.
• Are any of your secondary treameni waste, such as sludge from the aggressive biological
units, categoriied as TC waste ?
No. The btomau from our activated sludge unit has been tested and is noo-hazardous.
Q
ro
- j
o
o
CD
GO
CO
Uj
• Is then a current estimate of the amount of F Wastes generated?
Our current generation of F waste is roughly 700 barrels per day which results in about 7 tons per
-------
Mr. Bob Goeltz & James rfsu
ICF Kaiser Engineer*
F037 & F038 Waste Issues
• /J f^ei-e a* estimate of ihe amount of F Wastes stockpiled in containers or surface
impoundments?
We are noc stockpiling any F waste.
• What are you currently doing with the stockpiled waste an* what ore youfftoure plans *
N7A.
• Whet are the chemical and physical characteristics of both the currently generated and
stockpiled wastes?
N7A.
• '.Vhat is your current moment, recycle or disposal method and haw will this change with the
land ban?
F «ute is currently dewatered and then sent out for land disposal. By the time the F waste land
ban goes into effect, we expect then will be capacity at TDU to feed F waste.
• What are the capacities of these treatment, recycle and disposal methods in relationship to
F Waste?
After the cuneni operating problems at TDU are solved, we expect the TDU feed capacity to be
approximately 9000 tons per year which will keep up with our F and K waste generation which is
estimated at 6300 tons per year.
• Are there any planned changes, either physical or operational, to deal with the land ban and
haw witt these changes affect K Wane generation?
We are looting at various operahocul changes in our Effluent Treatment Plant that may reduce the
amount of F waste generation.
• /; ir possible to reduce F orK Wastes by putting more of a load on the aggressive biological
anus?
No, the aggressive biological treatment unit (our Effluent Treatment Plant) is already fully loaded.
Also, the state of California does ooc allow the treatment or disposal of listed waste in a wastewater
treatment unit without a Hazardous Waste Treatment permit which the Refinery does not have.
GENERAL
• What are yot^offsitetTvatrniM options a^ art there unique features cf your waste thcu^^
limit the notability options?
la our investigation of off-sic treatment options as an alternative to our TDU. we have found that
our K waste has too low of a BTU value to be accepted by cement m«« Incineration is the only
other treatment option we have researched. In general, we have found very limited incineration
capacity available. Flu several of the incinerators can only accept waste in small containers
(drums or boxct) which requires repackaging of all our waste. As a contingency plan, we have
active profiles for incineration at the Pen Arthur incinerator. However, we would be limited on the
amount we «wld imp due to the high moisture content of our cake. We were instructed that we
would have to go through an additional drying step on our cake to send large volumes of our waste
»the incinerator.
• What modifications have been done or are planned upstream to reduce the amount of waste
generated in the waste water naomi facility (eg. pretreaonent, source control, segregation, etc.)?
The Refinery has made extensive efforts in the past to reduce the amount of wastes entering the
drainage systems and to insure our waste streams are properly segregated,
• Will the BIF rulings affect any of the current disposal options, onsiu. captive or commercial?
No.
a. a. _
• 3 "
2 O.
n
»OT4
w
K)
O
C3
CQ
GO
-------
Mr. Bob Goelti & Jan>:s Hsu
ICF FOiiser Engineers
F037 & F038 Waste Issues
• h there a preference on prodjcixg F Waste or K Waste in terms of handling or dispciai?
F Waste is preferred over K Waste ixcause the land bans are not in effect for F Wisws yet
• What is the frequency ofcle&iout for the \arious *osie water treatment units (eg. .\Pt, DAF.
iterate tank, turface impounds, etc.)? ,
Float from IAf DAF uniu and the forebay ire generated on a continuous Run as *ell as slop oil
emulsion from the recovered oil system. Sludges from the waste water tanks and API separators
are each cleaned out about once a year.
3 3 I
•^2.|»
= ~ "J *
S'-l
c* ;i _ ;•»
5 a J
ro
CO
co
un
-------
-
-
, **
f C"
-^
- < ,
' 0
•<
az
>a
>2
. Of-
£2
A ag
*2 P.
a z _
£a 5
<» «
. ga I
&2
^ all
' *R
• aS
Mb.
£•
2
a.
s
VJ
*
\
.
*
a
•*
n
II
i ,
*->
I
IS
8 «
'i
t
•5.
>
"^ "S
*A
T>,
\*
•o
|Jt
is
^
j i
U
<
irf
Z
<
H
!
CiI C
t3
s
^
-<
H
t
i
E
f
> |
^ '
> 3
^
a. 9
•a g-g,
^1^. 85
* 23
0 Bff'
!«'
a
1
Is
i
s
^
j
g
N
1
I
u
i
!
-
u
a o
1 2 2
1 i !
a 2
H
i
B "?
1 ^
I
~-l ?
!!|1
^
•
jilt
1 i
i
! i
2
i
JT
— ^
3
!!
««
«
i
T
%
V
r*
r CiXj
r ^^
^
!7
^
e*
^
5
u
i
•s.
•*
<
(V
H
di
S
•
J
'
.
3-
>.
9
a
«
j k
3
i
A
i_
p
i i
:
.3 ft
M*
f
1
»
- a
i i
i *
t L
I
*
!|i
.*
sn
Zj 1
3 * / li
i±iE
II
t
^
?*>
-^
,-j
^ JL^,a n
<. s : ?J
s ijuii
- ._* -^
t ^
kj
i ^
! 2
M
^_i Cd
i<
« y JL
35
3 2
„ ||
•q i
^ f*
^-,
•t?
»— ^nit
L
U
n
<
^
z
^
<
a a. _ s*
• 5 " _
Is*
CD
CQ
CD
cn
-------
.
-
~5
•••<
-u
.^J
a:
•-•>> o
iS
OH
pJ-C
rr, jv
C*«
W S
Hw
So
j|»
jjj S
H £
WJ
< «H
%
a*5
Q o
gu,
•§
3
-S
S3
'
^
t
^
EU
S
It
1
J
if
L
<
s
S
1
L
£
k
*
I
a
g
I
3 £
3«j
o
<
<
*"
M
(3
5
Z
4
4
<
!
(
5
0
1
>
J
a
'
b
ii
1 L
j
i
2
3 S
A J
^ J
J
O w
:>C
>
'
3
J
i
5
s
?
•
j
I
i
a
r™
£
J
i
*
a
}
!
c
^»«J J
311
«
£ t
! 3
j
L
I 1
^
1
|^l
3
u
5w*
1
A
I
i
L
I
*
k -
7J
_>
V
<
!
?•
s
J
**•
*2
&
1
t
I
3
•o
«
>-,
2
1
^ k
a
i
_T
n
Ll
^
t
i
•5
> i
i
»3*-
i^
?
a
r<^
,'/!
^
i 5
S •
| Q
i «
E <
55 A
1 5
,.
- 2
" S
•>,
^ A
^^
^
|
J
11
„
^
™
w
o
•z.
H
g
£
t'
— i
» A
3*
k .
W
^
^
r«
b,
•<
l?
T -1 S
a a -
O
o
NJ
CQ
CQ
-------
r
3
3
Refinery:
State:
F037 ADD P038 WAST* CAPACITY ANALYSIS!
DATA DSC AND TRACK I HO SKKET
Ultranar - Wilmington Refinery
California
Data sources available:
_x Petroleum refinery visits/voluntary submission
jc National Survey of Hazardous Uasce Treatment, Storage, Disposal,
and Recycling Facilities (TSDR survey)
_ National Survey of Hazardous Waste Generators
...... Biennial report/state reporting requirements
x California hazardous vnste data base
_x Petroleum refinery data base (PRDB)
_ No-migration petitions
Basis for F037 and F038 vaste
EPA used data provided by Ultranar (Uilnlngton refinery) because it was
che most recent and the only source that describes F037 and F038 waste
generation and management. Other sources were used only in comparison
with the refinery's data submission.
F037 and F038 vaste estimates:
F037/8 (routine) - 50 tons/year from PPI and IAF units, and from sewer
cleanouts .
F037 - 383 tons/yr. from periodic clean out of Junction box.
Ultramar reports no other F unites than those identified above.
o
a
O
o
00
-------
Ultramar Attendees:
EPA Attendees:
REFINERY DESCRIPTION
TRIP REPORT1
ULTRAMAR REFINERY VISIT (5/24/91)
Les Norton
Steve Faichncjy
Willy Nakahara
Jo-Ann Bassi (OSW)
Bob Coeltz (ICF Inc.)
James Hsu (ICF Inc.)
Ml
2S
The Ultramar refinery In Ui1mIngton, California, previously owned by
Champion, Is the only refinery in the United States owned by Ultramar, a
British eonpany. The refinery produces primarily gasoline, processing up to
69 thousand barrels of crude oil per day. The crude refining area was built
in 1950.* and the refinery's octane processing area was built In 1960. The
facility reports an average water outfall of 850 thousand gallons per day.
The facility has reduced the source of sludges by paving and by
segregation of non-contact process water streaas fron contact vastewater •
streams in the last five years.
Plans for future modifications include:
* Increasing surge capacity and primary effluent quality.
• More recycling of non-contact waters back to processing.
• Keeping dirt out of the system. By paving, Ultranar expects that
wcste sludge generation would decrease by 10 percent.
• Retrofitting the basin to reduce vapors.
According to Ultramar, existing and future regulations concerned with
water quality hav* resulted in generation of more sludge. The wastewater
treatment sludge ruling will not change current petroleum refining waste
generation rates.
WASTESATER TREATMEHT SYSTEM
Exhibit 1 presents a simplified wastewattr treatment flow diagram
showing wastewater treatment sludge generation for the Ultramar Wilmington
O
S
Tj
o
o
1 This report provides a general description of a particular petroleum
refinery, and then discusses the refinery's wastewater treatment system,
generation of KOA8-K052, F037, and F038 wastes, and vaste management
practices. This report has been developed based on observations by EPA (with
support from ICF Inc.}, and has been supplemented by information provided by
the refinery.
CO
1
-------
r
"" Refinery.
>*<
Non-process contacted vasCewaters (containing only about 5-15 ppm oil
— and grease but/ having a high total solids concent), including boiler blowdown,
( stripped sour water, cooling cower blovdown. and other screams, are created in
a DAF unit. The DAF floac. K048, containing 5X solids, is sent to the KOSC
_ (Mobil Oil Sludge Coking) unit.
'' Process contacted wastevacers, which are approximately 15-25! oil and 5-
10X solids, pass through a treatment train which includes a diversion box, a.
"^ parallel plate interceptor (PPI), IAF units, and tankage. The PPI generates a
a sludge which Is senc to the HOSC process (approximately 10X solids). The oil
layer is sent to the desalter/coker uastevater treataenc train, and the water
Tl layer froo the PPI is sent to an IAF unit. The IAF float, F037, is sent to
j the MOSC unit.
„ Treated water froa both process contacted and non-contacted screaas is
delivered to an air flotation unit lump before being recycled as utility vater
'••' or-diverted to the forebay to cha county sewer.
~~ Desalter water, coker vastewater streans, and crude and slop tank
drainage (which is not particularly "dirty"), go through a series of tanks
before being centrifuged to break the oil/water/solids emulsion. Sludges from
— the centrifuge, an F038 waste containing about 20? solids, are sent to KOSC
processing. Oil is recovered by means sit a second PPI, and the water froo
chis separation process is finally delivered to the previously mentioned
diversion box that receives process contacted waters as . The PPI separator
sludge, an F037 waste, is sent to the KOSC unit.
PETROLEUM REFINIKC WASTE CEKEUTIOM
Non-process contacted wastewater float generated in the DAF unit is
generally about SX solids. The parallel plate interceptor sludge (F037) from
• . process contacted vastevaters U approximately 101 solids. Sludges from the
•centrifuge treating desalter vater are about 202 solids. These floats and
sludges generated in wasteirater treataent are dewatered co 201 solids in a
, - centrifuge before being fed to the HOSC process. Approximately 6 tons/week
(312 cons/year) of sludge are sent Co MOSC processing (222 CA waste). ' The
"•• HOSC can handle no Bore than 81 solids in the feed streaa.
Air flotation units and tankage also generate some sludges.
does not have an estimate for the generation of these sludges.
Ultramar
Ultramar reports chat all K wastes (DAF and IAF float, and
oil/water/solids sludges) generated since 1988 and F wastes generated since
1989 are fed to the Mobil Oily Sludge Coking (HOSC) process. The KOSC process
currently treats about 1.750 barrels per nonth of sludge, which is only about
SOX of capacity.
In the past, the typical generation rate of vascewater treatment sludges
totalled on average about 800 eons per year. In 1986, 301 cons of K048. 217
tons of K051, and 1194 tons of "oily sewer sludge* (now F037-F036) was
generated. The high generation rate of sludge that year was due Co a cleanouc
operation. In 1987, 723 Cons of K04B. 369 tons of KOS1. and 49 cons of "oily
3 -2.
2*
O
O
to
*Tl
O
O
-------
if
5
t«
11
• j
sever sludge* was generated.
cons in 1968.
Generation of "oily sewer sludge* amounted to
F wastes generated from sever cleanouc are similar to Che PPI separator
sludge. Petroleun refining vastes generated ac this facility contain no
chromium or lead, However, because Ultramar uses hydrofluoric acid
alkylation, some fluorine is present in the waste.
The diversion box is cleaned out as needed. Ultramar estimated that
1,500 barrels of sludge (F037) are generated from each cleanout.
WASTE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
The facility accepts no offsite wastes. K. TC. and F wastes are all •
delivered to the MOSC process. Ultramar keeps the solids content of the KOSC
feed at less than 8 percent. The coka produced contains no more than 0.51
ash. Junction boxes and suops around refinery processes are cleaned out with
a hydroblast vacuum truck and put into temporary storage and subsequently used
in the cokers. If a volume of greater than 1000 barrels is generated, then a
contractor with portable treatment capabilities'(e.g., filter press,
centrifuge) is called to treat the excess waste and send it off-site Cor
disposal.
The IAF units tend to be more efficient Chan DAT units. Both types of
unite are cleaned out once or twice a year.
Ultramar commented that ceaent kilns in California (Labec systems
designs wa» mentioned) appear to show interest only in liquid wastes.
o
1
o
o
U)
-------
r
ULTRAMAR HAZARDOUS WASTE SUMMARY
w
AFU FLOAT
API SLUDGE
',1
K wastes
"Oily Sewers"
F037.F038
ft
• if
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
301 tons -,
723 tons ' .
-0- • '!,,'-N
•0- . .VKV_ t>M
-0- ', \&
• O
1 194 tons ~
49 tons ^
46 tons \ 7V
-0- f,lM ''
-0- /fciG-'
217 tons' ^
369 tons .-
-0-"* '
-0- -iA5>t
*o-
plL^I. 6f£tj.
o
Mobil Oil Sludge Coking Process - 1.750 barrels per month.
HazWasSum
o
o
-------
.. - - -
" " " " -' '
-<*
o
o
O
s
C3
. I
-------
a-? 2
& •— M •
2-cFaS.
•» o a ro
S585s
S'siS
CX ft Mt W
o
o
to
o
o
00
UD
-------
3 = 8* S
i o
O
o
o
C3
UP
un'
-------
r
F037 AND F038 WASTE CAPACITY ANALYSIS:
DATA USE AND TRACKING SHEET
1
1
M
LI
' *
I 4
Refinery: Amoco •
State: Indiana
ng Refinery
Data sources available:
_jt Petroleum refinery visiis/voluntary submission
x National Survey of Hazardous Vastc Treatment, Storage, Disposal,
and Recycling Facilities (TSDR survey)
National Survey of Hazardous Waste Generators
__ Biennial report/state reporting requirements
California hazardous vnste data base
_£ Petroleum refinery data base (PRDB)
_ No-migration petitions
gasjs for F037 and F038 wasteestirantion:
EPA used data provided by Amoco (Uniting Refinery) because it uas the
nost recent and the only source that describes F037 and F038 waste
generation and managenent. Other sources were used only in comparison
with the refinery's data submission.
FQ37 and .FS3.8.,w»>t« estimates:
F038 (routine) - 405 cons/year from a grit chamber used to remove solids
from wascewater influent to the primary treatment.
Episodic F037 sludges are generated in tvo stormwater surge tanks (10.5
million gallons each). These tanks were installed a year ago and have
never been cleaned out; therefore, Che amount of F037 sludges generated
is not known.
.«« e - O
-."•JT" ->
P.-is
(k (^ ft* M
o
o
o
o
C3
-------
r
TRIP REPORT1
AMOCO VHXTINC REFINERY VISIT (5/9/91)
Aaoco Attendees: Dave Kalet
Julie Murphy
Robyn Stephens
EPA Attendees: • Jo-Ann Bassl (OSW)
Bob Coeltz (ICF Inc.)
James Hsu (ICF Inc.)
Gary Light (ICF Inc.)
REFINERY DESCRIPTION
Amoco's Whiting refinery, builc in the late 1380's, Is an integrated
facility (i.e., it produces gasoline, lube, coke, etc.) processing up to 350
thousand barrels of crude oil per day, drawing up to 160 Billion gallons of
process water per day from Lake Michigan (mostly for noncontact cooling), and
has a.water outfall of IS to 25 million gallons per day to the lake (and up to
100 Billion gallons when it rains). The refinery comprises a crude processing
section, a refining and occane building section, and a vastewater treatment
plant.
VASTEVATE& TREATKENT SYSTEM _
Exhibit 1 presents che wastewater treatment flow diagram at the Whiting
refinery. In the refinery, process wastewaters (i.e., contact and noncontact
water*) and stonrwaters collect In a common sever system that drains to the
wastewater treatment plane.2 Large pieces of oil-contaminated debris are
removed froa the wastevater by a bar screen as it enters the treatment plant.
Next, a hydrocyclone grit chamber removes particulars (e.g., sand) remaining
in the wastewater. The grit chamber sludge (F038) is currently sent off site
for land disposal. Storsuatcrs exceeding the grit chamber and downstream API
separators capacities are diverted to stornwater surge tanks for.storage and
subsequent treatment. Crlt chamber water effluent enters API separators where
olli water, and solids undergo gravity separation. The oil is removed, placed
1 This report provides n general description of a particular petroleum
refinery, and then discusses the refinery's wastetfater treatment system,
generation of K048-K052. F037, and F038 wastes, and waste management
practices. This report his been developed based on observations by EPA (with
support froa ICF Inc.), and has been supplemented by information provided by
the refinery,
2 The vastewater treatment plant also accepts ballast water, water
bottoms froa terminals, vater froa an underground cavern used to store
propane, and wastewater from .1 nearby Amoco petrochemical plant.
O
o
to
o
o
U)
•W-J'
V *.&*'£&'
-------
.1
in tanks, and eventually returned to crude processing. Solids form the API
separator sludge (KOS1). which Is removed froa che separator by scrapers, sent
to belt presses for dewatering, and created In a fluidized-bed incinerator.
Residues from incineration, still carrying the petroleum refining waste codes,
are trucked off-site for stabilization before landfilling. The water phase
fron the API separator is discharged to stormwater surge tanks vhere it mixes
with diverted stormwaters. Since oil and solids are part of diverted
stormvaters, and are not completely removed fron Che API separator effluent
water, gravity settling occurs In the stormwater surge tanks, and forms a
sludge (which Day be F037). Stornwater surge tanks drain to two-stage OAF
units that use flocculants and dissolved air to form an oily DAF float (K048),
which is skinned off, nixed and devatered with the API separator sludge, and
treated in the incinerator. Vastewater fron the DAF units is pumped to
activated sludge units. The resulting water is then either used as fire
water, or is sent to clarifiers and filters, and finally discharged to Lake
Michigan via a NPDES permit or Is used as cooling water. Activated sludge
unit blowdown and filter backwash are pumped back to DAF units for oil
removal. Aaoco reports that the wastewater treatment system recovers
approximately 500 barrels of oil per day.
PETROLEUM REFINING WASTE CEHEBATIOS •
Amoco Uhitln.g estimates generation of API separator sludge (KOS1) to be
1,800 gallons per day (2,700 com per year), and DAF float (K048) to be 43.200
gallons per day (65,700 tons per year). Amoco indicates that the largest
contributors to solids in K048 and K051 wastes are dirt washed into the
severs, and precipitation of hardness (calcium carbonate) resulting from
caustic addition to sewer and activated sludge units. An on-site fluidlzed-
bed incinerator treats K048 and K051 wastes and generates approximately 3,000
tons of Incineration residues (scrubber solids) per year.
The grit chamber generates between 100 to ISO yards of F038 sludge per
year (approximately 135 to 203 tons per year). This .sladge has the appearance
of dirty sand and will occasionally contain some asphalt. This sludge is
currently trucked co an off-site landfill, but will likely be sent to off-site
treatment (e.g., Incineration) once the F037 and F038 LDR takes effect.
Because of the LDX, Amoco will send oil/water separator sludges (F037),
generated in the refinery from.periodic cleanoucs, to the grit chamber. Amoco
estimates these cleanouts will increase, the generation of grit chamber sludge
Co 300 yards per year (approximately 405 tons per year).
F037 sludges may be generated in the two stornwater surge tanks (10.5
million gallons each). These tanks were installed a year ago and have never
been cleaned out; therefore, the amount of F037 sludges generated is not
known.
'
8
to
o
o
LO
CO
,J
-------
HASTE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES '
As seen Exhibit 2, KOSt waste sludge from Che API separator is pumped
into a desludge holding tank where decant oil is recycled back Co API.
separators. Thickened K051 sludge from the Holding tank is mixed with K048
sludges (containing 7. percent solids) from the DAF unit, and pumped to belt
presses for dewatering prior to treatment in the fluidized-bed incinerator.
The resulting cake contains between 15 to 20 percent .solids and has an average
heating value of 3,000 Btu 'per pound. The filtrate undergoes oil/water '
separation to recycle oil back to API separators. :
The fluidized-bed incinerator, rated at 82 Mbtu per hour, was operated
on a two month on/two month off basis to burn belt press cake, spent caustic,
and other liquid hazardous and nonhazardous wastes. Recently the incineration
campaign has been extended to treat these wastes because'difficulties in
operating the incinerator's THC monitors has frequently caused the incinerator
to trip off. Amoco does not expect to treat grit chamber sludge (F03S) in the
incinerator because solids ir. the sludge have shown to cause excessive wear in
the incinerator feed system; therefore, the sludge will continue to be sent
off-site for treatment and disposal. The incinerator has enough capacity to
treat all wastes generated on site, but does hot have additional capacity to
treat off-site wastes. Exhibit 2 shows Whitings waste incineration system.
In case of a major incinerator fro 1lure, the need arises for vaste
treatment alternatives. Thus far ABOCO Whiting has only considered-sending
petroleum refining wastes off site for incineration because other alternatives
(i.e.,' sending wastes to cokers and cement kilns, and using solvent
extraction! are not viable. Amoco cannot use refinery cokers to recycle
petroleum refining wastes because the cokers are not located on site;1
therefore the coking exemption does not apply. The use of petroleum refining
waste as fuel for cement kilns ia not viable because Amoco is concerned about
the potential liability associated with waste residues iii cement being
interpreted as land placement constituting disposal. Amoco has not researched
the potential of reducing KCW8-K052, F037, and F038 wastes by> putting more
load on activated sludge units because the current EPA position on scouring,
and the recent correction to the primary sludge rule, replacing "treated" with
"generated" suggests that the nlxture rule would cause the biological sludge
to become a listed hazardous waste. Amoco examined solvent extraction
technologies (CF Systems and B.E.S.T), but does not consider solvent
extraction versatile enough to handle all the different refinery wastes chat
vary in composition. Amoco has tasked its WasteTech subsidiary to develop and
examine emerging technologies for treating or recycling petroleum refining
vastes. ' •
3 The refinery actually h.is five different facility identification
numbers. Cokers are located ai a part of the refinery that has a different
facility identification nuaber Chan the wastewater treatment plant.
o
o
o
-------
r
In che last five years, Che refinery has made significant modifications
Chat impact the generation of petroleum refining wastes. In late 1989 and
early 1990, Amoco installed che grit chamber, and was motivated by hazardous
waste regulations to replace a surface impoundment with tvo stormwater surge
tanks. The grit chamber project improved the operations of moving equipment
in the API separators, reduced the production of hazardous waste API sludge,
and extended the-operating life of the incinerator feed delivery system by
removing sand from the feed. The plant also reduced the amount of precipitate
in the wastewater, which ends up in sludges, by controlling the mixing of
caustic into sewers and activated sludge units so that wascewater pH does go
above 9. Amoco*s refinery modifications and good housekeeping practices
coubine to reduce previous generation of API separator sludge wastes by 33
percent.
. Amoco Whiting is investigating the replacement of API separators and DAF
units with comparable above ground equipment (i.e., plate interceptors).
Though API separators and CAT units are considered tanks, Amoco is concerned
that, 1C the tank exemption no longer applies, it may be impractical to prove
that they are not leaking and releasing hazardous waste. A secondary DAF
unit, dedicated for activated sludge unit blowdown, -is also being engineered.
Further projects under consideration are segregating the sewer system at a
estimated cost of $140 Billion.
S
I Si
o
CD
-------
EXHIBIT 1
Amoco Oil Company Whiting Refinery
Wastewater Treatment Plant Waters Flows
Oil
-1
J
Process
Water"
Oil/Water
Separators
Dewatering,
Tanks, and.
Incineration
DAF Float
Clarifiad
Scrubber
Water
Activated
Sludge Plant
Slowdown &
FiRer
Backwash
Wat*r
Storm Surge
Tanks
Dissolved
Air
Flotation
'Activated
Sludge
Plant
Final
Filters
Diagram Includes current piping, not „.
flow. Not all bypasses or chemical Final CTtlUent
addition are shown.
RBS 8/10/90
Oil Recycle
To Refinery
Cooling
Tower
Make-Up
Fire Water
Recycle
Lake
Water
See Additional Diagram.
•Oewatering. Tank* and Incineration*
*
o
D
to
O
o
-------
r
EXHIBIT 2
s
s
I
; s" »
rx zo-z
~
8
to
^Tj
O
O
UQ
-------
Answers to Refinery Question Concerning F, TC, and K Wastes
USEPA/ICF Visit - May 9, 1991
Amoco Oil Company - Whiting, Indiana
Wastewater Treatment Facility
What is your current configuration?
See attached process flow diagram
How segregated is your system, stormwater vs. process water?
The only segregated siormwater system in the refinery exists in a
large tankfield and undeveloped area at the extreme southwest section
of the property. These stormwater outfalls are separate from the
process water and non-contact cooling water outfalls. All refinery
stormwater and most tankfield stormwater is collected and treated via
the process sewer.
What modifications have been made during the last 5 years?
The grit chamber was put into service in early 1990. The stormwater
surge tanks were put into* service in late 1989, replacing a surface
impoundment. An inground tank, No. 5 Separator, which stored API
separator sludge, was closed. The API separators are now directly
desludged into 569 tank. Sludge from 569 tank is now mixed with
DAF float and dewatered/deoiled before incineration.
What were the driving forces behind these modifications?
The grit chamber project was implemented to (1) .improve the
operating factor of moving equipment in the API separators, (2)
reduce the production of hazardous waste API sludge, (3) remove
sand from incinerator feed, and (4) allow for the direct removal of
API sludge to 569 tank as required with the closure of No. 5
Separator.
The stormwater surge tanks project was implemented to replace the
surface impoundment and improve the environmental condition of the
facility.
No. 5. Separator was closed because it was impractical to install
secondary containment.
5 5-" a
a* Zaz
•• o a5-0
sisSg
S«siS
a. a ~.u
If!
Eoff
o
s
O
o
-------
What future modifications are planned?
We are investigating the replacement of the API separators and the
DAF unit with comparable above ground equipment. Though these
devices are recognized as WWTP tanks, there is concern that it may
be impractical to prove they are not leaking, releasing hazardous
waste. A second, separate DAF unit, dedicated for activated sludge
plant blowdown, is also being engineered. Modifications to the
activated sludge plant's caustic injection system is also being pursued.
What are the driving forces behind these modifications?
We feel that the WWTP tank exemption may not exist for very long.
The Benzene NESHAP for wastewaters is also a driving force. The
caustic injection project should reduce hardness precipitation, DAF
float production, and incinerator solids .which end up as incinerator,
scrubber solids
How have the K, TC and F rulings and land bans affected the facility
in terms of modifications, operation, capacity?
The new K and TC regulations required modification the RCRA
permit to include these waste codes. Grit from the grit chamber will
now be disposed-of as hazardous waste. Though there is conflicting
TCLP data on the nickel content, the scrubber solids from the
incinerator are stabilized off site prior to disposal.
I"
e - a
*
•» o 2 JO
O
a
to
O
O
K and TC Wastes
What is your estimated rate of generation and land disposal of K and
TC wastes?
Since September, 1990, approximately 200 cubic yards of new DOI8
sludges have been land disposed. Most of this has been from the
cleaning of a crude tank and some has been from hydrocarbon spills.
K wastes are produced at about 30 GPM year round. Disposal of FBI
residual solids vary from 1700 to 3000 cubic years.
How do you currently treat, recycle or dispose of these wastes and are
there any Foreseeable changes in the treatment, recycling or disposal?
D018 sludges arc now stored in roll of boxes. Free liquids are
-------
removed in an attempt to deoil and remove benzene. This is not
always successful, depending on the sludge matrix. This practice may
be jeopardized under the upcoming Benzene NESHAP. Amoco Oil
Company is currently investigating new technologies to better ensure
hydrocarbon recovery and recycling. K wastes are stored, pressed to
remove oil/water and treated in the incinerator. Changes in treatment
will reflect changes in incinerator regulations. They could vary from
different stack gas treatments or replacement of incineration with
another process.
+
How have the waste generation rates changed with the hazardous waste
ruling and land ban?
The TC rule has increased the amount of wastes which are hazardous.
The land ban regulations have not affected K waste production.
Production of scrubber solids has reduced steadily over the last-few
years because of improvements in caustic addition to the sewer and
activated sludge plant. However, DAF production has remained
relatively constant, not significantly affecting incinerator run time.
API sludge generation has-also been reduced, but this is due to the
grit chamber which now produces primary sludge. TC waste
production is expected to increase with Benzene NESHAP.
Have there been any upstream or waste water treatment facility
operating changes to reduce the amount of these wastes generated?
The refinery has continued its training and education of operators to
pay attention to housekeeping practices, closer control on caustic
recycling, reduction of sand losses to the sewer, attention for
hydrocarbon leaks, and quick maintenance on leaks.
Will the new F waste land ban affect the amount of these wastes
produced?
No, as steps to minimize primary sludge production have already been
implemented.
How much of these wastes are stockpiled in containers or surface
impoundments?
No wastes are stockpiled in containers or surface impoundments.
Some TC wastes and grit chamber solids are stored for 90 days at the
f ss
rl-5
S JTO
"
.0. O. jj. •«
•8"-
o
s
hd
o
O
cart
i
UQ
un
-------
Lakefront or the refinery awaiting disposal. Some samples may also
be found in the permitted hazardous waste storage building at the
Lakefront. K wastes are routinely stored in permitted tanks prior to
treatment.
How will these characteristics change with any planned facility
modifications and operating changes?
Implementation of hydrocarbon recovery and recycling technologies
for sludges should reduce the D018 production from tank cleanings
and hydrocarbon spills. However, technology limitations may not
allow for hydrocarbon recovery of all DOI8 wastes.
Are any of your secondary treatment waste, such as sludge from the
aggressive biological units, categorized as TC wastes?
Testing to date indicates no.
F Waste
Is there a current estimate of the amount of F wastes generated?
Generation is expected to be between 150 - 300 yards per year.
Is there an estimate of F wastes stockpiled in containers or surface
impoundments?
No F wastes are stockpiled in containers or surface impoundments.
What are you currently doing with the stockpiled waste and what are
your future plans?
There are no stockpiled F wastes. If we generate F wastes in the
refinery, they will be transported to the Lakefront for treatment in the
Grit Chamber.
What are the chemical and physical characteristics of both the currently
generated and the stockpiled wastes? .
Grit from the grit chamber appears as dirty sand. It occasionally will
contain some asphalt. Tests show it does not exhibit a hazardous
characteristic. It has not been compared to levels found in EPA's
data used to make the F listings, but is believed to be lower in
concentration of constituents of concern because it is so dissimilar to
* (» f*
* if -** 2
(i " •• _ tn
o
o
to
o
o
OJ
,f~'-~~!\
0
CD
oi
-------
API sludge and DAF float.
What is your current treatment, recycle or disposal method and how
will this change with the land ban?
Grit and primary sludge wilt be land disposed. When a primary
sludge land ban is created, the grit will most probably be taken off
site for treatment, if necessary. The incentives to -modify the
incinerator or install other treatment technologies for such a small
stream are not sufficient to support such projects.
jr
What are the capacities of these treatment, recycle and disposal methods
in relationship to F wastes?
The treatment capacity of the incinerator for F waste is zero. The off
site capacity is not known.
Are there any planned changes, other physical or operational, to deal
with the land band and bow will these changes affect K generation?
No changes are planned. Affects to K waste generation are not
expected. „
Is it possible to reduce F or K wastes by putting more of a load on the
aggressive biological units?
This has not been researched from a technical standpoint. However,
the current EPA position on scouring, and the recent correction to the
primary sludge rule, replacing "treated" with "generated" would
indicate that the mixture rule would cause the biological sludge to
become listed hazardous waste.
General
What are your offsite treatment options and are there unique features
of your waste that would limit the treatability options?
In case the need arises for offsite treatment, such as from a major
incinerator failure, off site treatment would be incineration.
Pumpability and BTU value would limit treatment throughput.
Availability of haulers, trucks and containers would also be
questionable.
a* -"'
' f ;)r
:••
o
O
to
o
o
UQ
-- J
-------
What modifications have been done or are planned upstream to reduce
the amount of waste generated in the wastewater treatment facility (eg.
pretreatment, source control, segregation, etc._?
Items which have been previously mentioned include reducing solids
loss to the sewer and improving caustic addition to the activated
sludge plant. Reducing oil and water losses are an ongoing effort.
Future projects under consideration are segregating the sewer system.
Will the BIF rulings affect any of the current disposal options, onsite,
captive or-commercial?
The BIF rule alone is not expected to change any current operations.
However, it along with any new rulings on used motor oil could
affect its recycling in the Whiting Refinery.
Is there a preference on producing F wastes or K wastes in terms of
handling or disposal? x
The Whiting Refinery has no onsite treatment capabilities currently
for F wastes. If a landban standard is adopted, it may require off site
treatment. Systems are in place for K wastes currently, but are
difficult to operate.
What is the frequency of cleanout for various wastewater treatment
units?
API separators are dcsludged continuously. Shutdown and inspection
of separators and the DAF occur as necessary. Separators are usually
done yearly and DAF units when sludge deposits interfere with
operation. Tanks arc emptied every incinerator run.
• r"
if
1*1
8-
to
O
o
OJ
-------
r
li
3
!l
Amoco Oil Company Whiting Refinery
Wastewater Treatment Plant Water Flows
Water
Oil
Bar
Screen
v/
Chamber
Recovered
Oil
R>3?
off"* '
API Sludge
KO*I
Oil/Water
Separators
Dewatering,
Tanks, and.
Incineration
Water
Storm Surge
Tanks
DAFRoti
Clarified
.Scrubber
I Water.
Activated
Sludge Plant
Slowdown &
Filter
Backwash
Dissolved
Air
-Flotation g)
Activated
Sludge
Plant
Final
Filters
Diagram includes current piping, not „.
'flow. Not «H bypasses or chemical Final EfflUCnt
addition are shown.
RBS 8/10/90
Oil Recycle
To Refinery
Cooling
Tower
Make-Up
Fire Water
Recycle
Lake
Water
*
See Additional Diagram,
•Oewatering, Tanks and Incineration*
* - >*
»
o
g
o
o
OJ
-------
r
i -
-
O
I
c
'3
c
•o
(0
«T
,
O)
•z
I
oc
O)
IS
JO
Q.
I
•ik
o
O
o
o
o
i
i
-
"Si?
sa
~' ta
O
O
O
O
-------
. t
u
23 --„
r- roK ""
ootrio
4lAr«-O
T-o
R
g
88S28.83.SS8
IA o O O ** in •«•• o o IA
§000^000000
l— ooo^OOOfOkntAO ^
. y r» *oTw S
g£ 888S882KS8 a. SSS^SSSSSS a. 888888tSSS
«-*" ""fSm **k "~ ~
|u 88S2888SSS u
P>- 8SS28SSSSS >-
8SS8S8S3S3 - 888Sg8SSS8
o^ 888S88SSS8
lAOviA«~OOfw <
** £ «"^ . £
O
|| «^JQOV,X^<
s S8SS88SSSi= s RS§a^KSRS8 s SSSSSStSSS
•Is ««~«-«-Sd^
8881S88SSS8
j ^ iu IA o o o v^inKiO o o uj
31
•3'
•B'
«. r. fVI . * *f Q O r- •— » O r» • t •(«
*^ 00 ^00*^ *^ 000 000
S«St5 ••&_>. SoSf I ii
^£2£^^.<^ua
^S5l'5^iS3S
cn«S — ^ i. « L._
•Eea-iZM«-
-------
"
S to
in o> Ql co in
8 S S 8 S S
d d d d d d
*1» us ra o o
o •» K K "
5
u)
ii lilt
d d do
gg illf
3 £ odd0
oo-o
Uf
•n>
K U) «n K
«M » •«• 01
- d d -'
liliil
II
I U U
• 1 1?
O
D
to
o
o
C3
U3
-------
it
SmNranN N.NKO
n 10 o e> •-;•-•- q
W o v- d d ib d o d a>
SI 8 8 8 S88 8 8 g g
3
i«^u>n«-o u> to ui »-
5 " °' °" °
O O Q O O Q O O O
y«^ Q CO f^ CO
* T- d W d
d d d 06
ssssss §§§g
in in in <-
odd
•{ £ O O O O O O o O O O
! E S «o d d d d «e riddd
•• O ^^ O o O ^9 O O O O O
Q.7 OOO.U>OO O O O O
<3 »-*•«-- *<
•S CJ *• O lOIOlAv*
|^ 5 '" dcid
U_ ^? ONOOOO .OOOCM
.
III!
^ o o o o a , v- in IA ^«,
ujinuid^-iri ddduj
888S88 £SSS
ui in in d <- in dddK
tn in in n ^ in in in in «
5 d d d -
oooooo ooom
ggg.Sgg C:ggg
in o in d •- in d d d «
« T- in in in in r>
3 doe-
o o o o o o ooo«
fO> ^wwwwo «^r m u? c^
|S «°g°'':«S «°°g
838
in o in in T- in in in in in
10 d d d d csi
_« o
ex. S.
< f?
o o n o o
o
E O
a o
5 •o «•
oP < ca o UN
O. Q. — »
• 81s1
e 2-x
o
d
to
•n
o
o
-------
r
g0f 88SSSS
35f ^^go--5
^ d d intauio^iri
888288
in' ri tj d •- in
S88S
^ d d «
— d d oi
ff
»- in
d
8SJQSQ
in in in o
o o d ^
m o e n
^ 10
09 o o n
s 888S88
J^ in u> in d T^ ui
dddr-
O
3 SSSSgg !
£ i/iiriiridT-iri odd —
M-
in in in o ^ in
in tn in n
odd —
o o o o o o o o o o
Ssf
S w «n n T- 10
in m in n
odd ^
S
in
o o o o o o o o o
0_| 8.88588
—' 51 5. inooo«-in
O
o
to
*fl
o
o
8SSS
3SSS88
8
O O ID IO M O
-5 o *•
_ y o o in o> o o
CL 'Sk ^ "
Otts 888888
^3 t u>2§«'-->
in »- »> in
d xi
N o o r»
u
S ^2 8
Ife-
8 g
13
Sfi
o 10 r> — in
in in in «o
d d d ^
oiooooo noaia
«• w *J
Jlifli
< B 3 S W P
u || J
< O O 6
in o to r> r- in
d
o o o « 6 o
*~ d
888^88
m o v o »- in
8888
— d d «b
zs momn^tn inmmo
Stj «- d d d-
3 go o -
n
M U
5 .*
< S
o o
•* f~ o o
E 5 Z £ i
< m _i Z '
>,u
-------
jplVMBW
in in in 6 —
in in CD
666 —
3
s
s<
gggggg s s s
in «r> uj o *^ in odd
u> u> «S e> W
666-
SO O O O O o O O
o o O o o ui *o 10
in in in d — in odd
-1
J
2 _i
<0
in m in in — m ininmn
ill
O.JT ^" ' o o o m o o o o o o
E °
^^ O O O ^* O O f*« O Q O
• O» OOOQOO ^lOiftCQ
£ .lOiduioT^u) odd—'
u>iowim«-io tnu)u)n
^ g . 6.cSd^.
5 o o o o o o OOOCB
i
poo *• in o
o — «i odd
§88
^
ti
in in in n — in in in m n
TJ 6 b e> ^
o
o o o o o o o o o
o o o — o p *- in in co
in 10 ui 6 — iri 666 —
§ in in in in in m o in in in
= oj ei cv - m m in in o
^ d o d ^
O O ^^ O O O O O O O
ssgggg s s s g
« R g'«* ~ ->" « «* d S
I ill I
?f!ls
o. a. » »
n
o
to
o
8
I _
in in o
d — uj — d d r-;
m in m u> — in in in in n
666-
in m u>
o CM m — o o — o a r-
£• E
S fei
< m
||
< CD o o
in o in n — 10 inuiutn
«- t 666-
o
a. '
s ggSSSS SSSS
« u» » « 6 - iri -don
•5.2
IS
— jn
e> "rt
II
in in in n — in mininn
". 666 —
u. S1 o in « o o o noooo
21"* -" ri
il
I 111
< a o o
-------
SSS
888388
ui oj CM o ^ in
in in in o in in
CM
CM CM CM in CM CM
in in in r> T- in
SSSS
— o a K
in in in n
o o o <-
o 01 CM a> o
t- so o
o
o - T • *~ e ° 8
o _ I || 8 8 8. | S |S|
s- j2 in *n u> o in in intninw
D- = CM rj CM in CM ni CM CM CM CM
< 3 N
— _i ingiog»-in in in in co
o o o T-
^•»
O O O CO O O O> O O (O
*" o *"
o o o ^~ o o t^ooo
uiuitrio^io ooo«->
loiomoinu) ouimio
fjcMCsiinoitt OMCSICM
N *-
lowwin^io 10; in tf> w
5 o o o »-
o
= x ?ftz
fllfl
O
a
to
O O O O O O OOOO
SSS2SS ^
i in
oooooo o o o o
883rC88 ? S S 8
uicoT*dT*ui ~r*do^
•- »* rt
O
O
388S83
8888
in m >n o to m
CM 04 CM in CM CM
in o in in r- m
o
in in in n
d d d r^
a.
<
o o CM T- o o o o o in
*o o o o ^- o o
5S2S
»^ d d a>
I 888g88 8888
11
tl 2
11
« «» T- O
•- r> «-
d
™ £ o *fl
co H . < d O
tu
E 2
to oc
2£
M n
11
m m in in <- ui in ui 10 «
E.J 9 dd«i^
883^38 3SS3
in oi en d r-" in r^ d d o»
8883
in in in in T- m m in in «
*? d d d ^
u. S" o -ooto
g. g 0 I ll
I 33 I^H ImOO
C3
cn
-------
r
88388 S8S8
in V d «• u> »- o o o
888588
in 10 d ~ u> ~ d d o
oS
-3 10
888588
in ir> ui d ^ in
<-; in u> c>
d d d t-I
in in
N N
in m in in *- m in in in c»
°. odd —
o
in u> in m »-
in in in n
d d d T^
o IP m r» o o N o o 0
t\ O> Q O O O O O w- IO IO W
" S 4 m m to
d d d i-1
oooo
SSS8
«i d d K
8
to
o
o
8 in in in
« c* en
10 in in m »- in iouu>co
E J 3 d d d ^
^ Q O
_ ° ON«^OO - O O K
< g *" d d *"
5i
,,s 838388 2SSS
ii y .**»•< ••••
%
O I*
ii S
8 in in in
d CM N
in in in u) — in in m in n
d d d W
r o o v
u)
i?i ifii
Ig^ o u> in »- u>
d
in in «
d d W
s? °!38S
o o n o o
888233
in d d d «• «n
SSS8
d d d i-
§in m u>
CO N N
m in •- m inioion
°. d d d -:
ooonoo t»- o o —
l>» T- O> »-
£• E o § § 3
1 5 f < S O 6
-------
Qol 333233 38SS
< > -«5> uiddd^iri . ~ d d w>
0*6 "2 **
O u. S* 8 8 S p p S in S n> p
< < S uidddr-in ^ d d wj
U- 5 motnoinm omtnin
< = CM K CM U> Pi CM O CM Ot CM
Q 2 CM o o inoom
S o
oooo-oo ^inuir)
iriiriiridi^in ddd«-
II
i
333S33 8
in •- in >o
d d
m m n
ob—
o o o o o oooo
88338 SS88
ooovin wooco
o0f 3 8 8 e S S 2 8 8 S
g5| riS^o"--" -ddoi
ou.f 838338 3883
jjgf ujcS5*':"i «*«*«**
»- &
O 1
So
mininoinin owinui
CM in«-in m in in «
°. o do -
CM a o o
M »
^. OOOIMOO N- o o o
Q ra oooopp >^ininn
jS* iriujiriP^u) d d d ^
«
333233 3333
T- m in in in i
odd
ooooeo o o o o
888888 8888
uiKov^v^ui <*i o W d
o ' «o
O
s
o
o
o M
5
s
•5.«
i o
V) a u.
|| g
14
e js
S s
o o
Z S
3S3S!
01 CM
>- in m 10 in n
d d d ^
o O o in o O o o o to
CM n fy ft
*~ d
Ou« 888^88 SSS58
-i<£ in o o o »- in <-oou>
ft 0 ? *" 2
3
in o in
. in
Q d
S«- in m w> in n
d d d -
T- O O
d
c? £• 6 o 6 I =
§ S g o = 5 S o « £
< m -j S eo i- . < CD o o
E| 333833 8333
< 3 N -
ininoin»-m — in in p>
-i in p • d d r^
Q «. .
in' o
r» n *~ • rf
s 338^83 2SS3
« ui o> — d ^ in ^ddV
il
oi
2
3333
u> in in in >- m in in in n
d d o ^»
tn
*" -a
W« U-ff O«0-r"
-------
r
.it
, ,1
til
3
it
o in in p p o r<.ininu>
in«-cMOT-in ^ddc*i
O
^888
^ d d eo
O =
SQ
888888 8888
in*nin«-^m uiininn
d d d d ^
tu.5
g|
CM Cvl
o o o r- o o n
§O O O ^& O f^ O O O
ooooo ^ininc>
in in in d ^ in d d d •-'
_ S m m in o in in ominm
25 CM CM M »- CM CM OCMCMC4
"1
in in u> CM <- m inininm
i ft S d d d ^
d
3 e> o o o o o o o o o
yof gggggg 8888
<>ci in id in ^ ^ in *r d r^ d
** ' 5» co co
U J? o p o en o o v u> p p
d_-i in d d d —' in •* d ~ d
S a. ? *~ «o eo
O «( E, C7 in
5:1 888888 8888
< ;£ CM CM CM CM CM
moon^u) »- u» uj co
E- ««5 dd-
r*
o 00*00 ^r Q r> o
CL =• jc o o en
3 CL -^ 22 w °*
TJ < *? CO CO X
u -a 888388 ^888
^ S ^ ininiridr^ui dddr^
in m in o m m
CM CM CM in CM CM
m in IA n •-
d
8888
in m m co
d d d *-
o o o o o o oooo
r£W
Mi&.
* ft '
Is
o
O
to
o
o
v .
gggggg
•»-°g —«
O _
•J Q.
888^88
8888
•w d — d
.1 g
<*> .2
1« 3
-o
JII
= CM
o o u) u>
10 o «i CM
< o
v* in in CT
60'-
CO "0 mm
888288
~ d d -v
888888 8888
CM »-
m — *- m inminn
O — PJ «- O
N «*
o ^ o o
.a -o § S 1
Ifil
IIsI
-. "ggsr10
$Q d
_™ O CO O U> O O
E S co en >-
<| co^
0,3 888S88
3 i i .niriirid^M
g2|
^I 888888
O 3 N
888
r- in co
d d d i-1
n o o >-
*H:
8 £"§
C 5 « .
< m O i
C3
UD
-------
r
§
5
I §
II
2 o
So
•C" P
X
O
i
s
8
1 !•
i
o •« „
1=
is!
O
o
to
o
o
C3
-------
r
6-L8
SAMPLE
!D
RUN .*:
RUN 3
_ PUN 1
RUN 5
- RUN 6
BLANK
AMOCO
PROJECT # 1?B9
WASTE C.'ARACTERIZATICN ANftLVSIS
WASTE TYPE : PAF CLOAT
ANALYSIS
HEATING
'/. TOTAL V. DENSITY VALUE FLfiSH
'30LIDS MOISTURE '/. ASH (g/ml) (BTU/lb) POINT
POHC
2.13
6.82
8.09
6.a
8.64
9.25
0.01
MO ANALYSIS FOR T'-ESE PARAMETERS
O
a
NJ
Tj
O
O
DUPLICATE ANALYSIS
HEATING
SAMPLE '/. TOTAL ','. DENSITY VALUE FLASH
'D SOLIDS lOISTUfVe •; ASH (a/ml) iBTU/l&> , POINT POHC
PUN i PL-?
P'JN 2 PUP
i='UN T. PUP 7.51 NO ANALYSIS FOR THESE PARAMETERS
PUN 4 OOP
RUN 5 DUP
FUN 6 OUP
C3
UD
-------
6-21
* o 2s
so
.
I jr
III
•t
•it
. z ^ CV 0?
N -J ts en <» m fr
,Q| -Nm^UlvDQ
S! =21
S
x R
!«l
55
Sa
Oi
Oi
-------
r
F037 AXD MSB KASTK CAPACITY ANALYSIS:
DATA USB AND TRACKING SHEET
Refinery: Amoco - Texas City Refinery
State: Texas
Data sources available:
__x Petroleum refinery visits/voluntary submission
_x National Survey of Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage, Disposal,
and Recycling Facilities (TSDR survey)
National Survey of Hazardous Waste Generators
Biennial rsport/state reporting requirements
California hazardous waste data base
_x Petroleum refinery data base (PRDB)
x No-migration petitions
_x Comments frost proposed rule
Organic TC Survey
Basis for F037 and F038 vaste estimation:
EPA used data provided by Amoco (Texas City Refinery) because it was the
most recent and the only source that describes F037 and F028 waste
generation and management. Other sources vere used only in comparison
with the refinery's data submission.
F037 and F038 waste estimates:
FQ38 (routine) — 10.400 tons/year of dewatered cake estimated by EPA
based on large-refinery volume reduction of 80 percent by dewatering,
using reported vet sludge volume of 52,000 tons/year generated as DAF
bottoms.
F037 (one-time) - 200,000 tons/year from cleanout of stormwater and
equalization basins. Amoco plans to replace stormwater and equalization
basins with above-ground storage tanks.
Amoco Texas City reports no other F wastes than those Identified above.
According to more recent Information from the comments to the proposed
rule, this facility indicated that it would generate the following quantities
of surface impoundment sludges during the indicated time periods:
sjg
n » »I»
a. a »• °*
'if!
o
o
to
O
O
-------
r
,4
• 3
*
i '-t
F037/8 (surface inpouhdraents) - 0 tons (7/9Z - 12/92)
F037/8 (surface Impoundnents) - 0 tons (1/93 - 12/93)
F037/8 (surface impoundments) - 0 tons (1/94 - 12/94)
F037 (routine) - 85.000 tons/yr. ' .
F038 (routine) - 52.000 tons/yr.
The assumption used previously concerning devatering of F038 (i.e., 801) was
then applied to these new F037 and F038 volumes.
it*.
Tfi
, -&f
, •>
o
D
to
o
o
UJ
-------
•IMP
J
3
Anoco Attendees:
EPA Attendees:
TRIP REPORT1
AMOCO TEXAS CITY REFINERY VISIT (9/22/91)
Carole Engelder
Dave Kalec
Jo-Ann Bassi
-------
I t
I *
three DAF units.
Since oil and solids are p/irt of the diverted stormwaters, and are noc
completely removed from the API atpnrocor effluent water, gravity settling
occurs in both the storir-'ater storage impoundments and equalization basins,
and forms stormwater storage and equalization sludges (F037). These sludges
are. removed (as 'the units are donned) and sent to an off-site Amoco land
treatment facility near the refinery.
DAF units employ floeculnnta and dissolved air to form an oily DAF float
(K04B), which is skimmed off. nixed nnd dewatered with the API separator
sludgx. 'and recycled to the coke is. Small particles are emulsified in-the DAF
float while larger oil.-contaratnatcd particles settle to form DAF bottoms
(F038). "Hits sludge is nixed and dewatered with the API separator sludge and
DAF float, -and used in the cokcra. DAF unit effluent wacer is transferred to
'another equalization basin uherc gravity seeding forms an equalization sludge
(F037). Plans'are being studied to close and replace this unit with an above-
ground tank. AC that-time, the F037 sludge would be removed and sent off site
to the Amoco land treatment facilities or to treatment.2 Vastevater from the
equalization basin is pumped to activated sludge units, then to clarifiers and
filters, and finally discharged via A NPDES permit. Amoco reports that the
wastewater treatment system recovers Approximately 1,500 barrels of oil per
day.
O
O
O
U)
PETROLEUM REFINING WASTE GENERATION
Amoco Texas City estimates9 that generation of API. separator sludge
(K051) ranges fron 8,000 to 15,500 wet tons* per year, and DAF float (K048)
ranges front 32.000 to 120,000 wet tons per year. The trend at the refinery is
Coward an increase in K048 generation and decrease in K051 generation. Amoco
attributes the high variability in K04B generation to variability in the types
of crude processed, and to the presence of emulsion-forming substances, such
as CaF (generated in HF alkylatlon), that decrease oil/water/solids separation
efficiency in the DAF unit. Amoco has observed that a decrease in .generation
of K051 corresponds to an increase in generation of DAF bottoms (F038), and
vice versa. Therefore, there la also considerable variability in the
generation of DAF bottoms, vhlch la estimated at 13,000 to 91,000 wet tons per
year. Despite Chese variations, Amoco's combined generation of DAF float and
bottoms remains relatively constant at 106,000 to 133,000 wet tons per year.
2 The F037 sludge will be sent to land treatment facility if closure of
the equalization basin occurs before the F037/F03S LDR becomes effective.
Otherwise, the sludge will be sent to treatment.
1 Waste generation estimates bused on 1987 to 1990 data.
* Amoco reports wastes.in wet tons, which contain approximately 80
percent water.
t _
-------
F037 sludges from Che stormwater storage impoundments and equalization
basins (i.e.. equalization basins for API separator effluent and DAF unit
effluent) are generated from clean out of these units. Amoco 's recent clean
out of stormwater storage impoundments generated 205,000 tons of wet sludge.
No data are available on the amount of FOJ7 sludge that would be generated
from closure of the remaining storrcvater impoundment and two equalization
basins; a conservative estimate would put the quantity over 200.000 tons.
F037 sludges may also be generated in the unit oil/water separators.
However, these sludges are cleaned out periodically by. vacuum trucks and
discharged to API separators, and arc. therefore, accounted Cor in K051 and
K048 waste volumes.
Other hazardous wastes generated at the refinery include 50 to 230 vet
tons per year of heat exchanger cleaning solids (K050) , which is sent to the
.cokers, and 5,000 to 172,000 tons of soil contaminated with K048-KOS2, F037,
F038 or D018 wastes managed at the land treatment facility. The refinery
accepts no off -site petroleum refining wastes for treatment or recycling.
o
o
WASTE KAriACKKENT PRACTICES
Exhibit 3 presents a block Uiagras of the refinery's was'te management
practices. K048, K050, K051, and F038 vasce sludges are transported to heated
storage, gravity thickening, and conditioning prior to filtration. The
resulting sludge contains 20 to 30 percent solids.9 Plate and frame presses
filter oil and water froa the sludge to produce a cake containing
approximately 60 percent solids and a heat content ranging from SO to 1.000
Btu/lo. The filtrate undergoes oil/vater separation to recycle oil back to
crudo processing. Prior to November 8, 1990, when the K048-K052 land disposal
restriction (LDR) became effective, the filter cake (containing K048, K051,
and F038) vas sent to the nearby Amoco land treatment facililty. The K048-
KOS2 LDR prompted the refinery to install the capacity to recycle, petroleum
refining wastes to their cokers and avoid the cost and liability associated
with land disposing petroleum refining wastes. The refinery/ has .three coking
units, configured with two drums per unit. Two units accept petroleum
refining wastes for producing fuel grade coke. The third unit produces anode
grade coke. The waste recycling system was designed by Amoco and was brought
on line in October 1990. In using the cokers. the filter cake is mixed with a
hydrocarbon to fora a slurry containing 10 percent solids, and is injected
into the cokers. Amoco designed to process to increase the coke ash content
by no more than three percent when recycling petroleum refining wastes, but
Araoco reports that the actual increase in coke ash content is well below three
percent. ,
Amoco had start-up problems with the waste recycling system, which
resulted in an accumulation of filter cake. At one point in January 1991,
Solids may comprise up to 20 percent filter aid.
o
o
U)
—J
-------
Amoco counted a backlog of 60 roll-off boxes storing filter cake designated
for cokers, Amoco contacted Chera Waste Managecent and Rollins for hazardous
waste incineration service, but found that they could only accommodate one to
two roll-off boxes per week. The backlog, which required the facility to
petition the Texas Water Commission for a 90-day storage extension is
gradually being worked off by correcting the start-up problems, re feeding the
filter cake to the coking system, and sending roll-off boxes to incinerators.
Exhibit 4 presents the methods used to manage the filter cake backlog. Amoco
expects that by the tine the F037/F038 LDR becoir.es effective in October 1992
nose petroleum refining wastes (i.e., K068. KOS1, F037, and F038) would be
recycle to the cokers.b
• • The use of petroleum refining waste as fuel for cement kilns was not-
considered as a viable option when coker start-up problems occurred because
Amoco is concerned about the potential liability associated with waste
residues in cement being interpreted as land placement constituting disposal.
Furthermore, fluoride, phosphates, and a high ash content in refinery's wastes
preclude the use of Rhone-Foulenc's sludge incineration capacity.
Amoco is in the process of closing one remaining stormwater storage
impoundment and two equalization basins, and replacing then with above-ground
tanks because of hazardous waste regulations. Above-ground tanks would have
similar sludge accumulation rates to~those in impoundments and equalization
basins, but uncertainty in the cleanout frequency presents difficulties in
estimating periodic removal of F037 sludges from tanks.
The refinery is.considering plans in the next two to six years to
segregate process wascewater and stormwater flows. This modification will
eliminate a significant amount of water and dirt chat passes through the
wastevater treatment system, and will result in a major reduction in the
amount of petroleum refining wastes generated.
o
a
O
o
* If the next stomvater impoundment or equalization basin cleanout
occurs prior to the F037/F038 LOR. Amoco indicated that the F037 sludge
generated would be sent to Amoco's land treatment facility.
-------
y
n
Amoco Ol Company
uM Ctty, TOM 77S32
409-945- 101 1
7 June 1991
Mr. James Hsu
ICF
9300 Lee Highway
Fairfax, Virginia 22031-1207
AIRBILL NO.: 8515501761
for Voluntary In formation .on Refining Wastes
Attached are responses to the questions solicited by Ms. J. Bassi of the EPA Office of
Solid Waste in her letter dated 13 May 1991, requesting voluntary information on
petroleum refining wastes. Amoco Oil Company is pleased to give this data to assist (he
EPA in developing land disposal restrictions for F037 and F038 primary sludges.
If you have questions or need clarification on this information or any gathered during
your site visit 22 May 1991, please feel free to contact me at 409/945-1196.
Yours truly,
Carole L. Engelder, PhD, PE
Waste Minimization Coordinator
Attachment
Ms. 7. Bassi
n
o-
o
o
U)
-------
m
Voluntary Information on Petroleum Refining Wastes
Amoco Oil Company -- Texas City Refinery
?' —
s
«
Treatment Facility
1. What is your current configuration?
A flow-diagram of the current wastcwater configuration is shown in Figure 1, with an
aerial diagram of the facility in Figure 2. Wastcwater from twenty- five process units and
stormwaier from all areas of the refinery flow hydrogcologically to one of three main
API separators. During storm events, excess flow is diverted by lift station pumps to
stormwater storage in both surface impoundments and an aboveground storage tank.
Wastewater flow from the three API separators and stormwater worked out of storage
(depending oh downstream activated sludge plant capacity) pass through an equalization
impoundment on the way to dissolved air flotation (DAF). The refinery currently
operates three DAF units in parallel. After DAF treatment, the wastewater flows into
another part of the equalization basin, then through mixed-media pressure prefilters, and
into the activated sludge plant. Following aeration and clarification, the wastewater is
filtered again in mixed-media pressure final filters and discharged into a canal leading to
Galveston Bay. ~
Solid waste generated during wastewater treatment is managed according to the flow
diagram given in Figure 3. The wastewater treatment sludges generated in the API
separators and DAF units is pumped to heated storage and gravity thickening tanks where
oil/water is decanted. The sludges are mixed and conditioned before filtration in a plate-
and-frame filler press. The filter cake produced from the filter press is currently
reslurried with a refinery hydrocarbon and pumped to the coker complex for conversion
to fuel and oil products. Not shown in the figure, biosludge or sludge .wasted from the
activated sludge plant to maintain a steady-state bacterial population, is pumped to the
refinery land treatment facility.
2. How segregated Is your system?
Currently, the refinery sewer system in not segregated; process unit wastewater and
refinery stormwater is commingled.
B. o. — »
• o « _
Hi
O
O
to
o
o
Uj
1
' . • .. ff
-------
3. What modifications have been made in the last 5 yean?
In 1936-87, several upgrades and modifications were made to the wastewaier treatment
facility. A third DAF unit was put on line, an additional mixed-media pressure preftlter
"was added, and a sludge deoiling unit (SOU) was constructed. The SOU was designed
for refinery sludge dewatering and oil recovery and consists of plate-and-frame pressure
filters. In 1989, a 750,000 barrel aboveground stormwater storage tank was built and in
1990, sludge coker injection facilities were designed and constructed.
4. What were the driving forces behind these modifications?
DAF capacity was increased to improve wastewater treatment facility operation. The
SDU was added to recover additional valuable oil from the wastewater treatment sludges.
The stormwater tank was built in response to a need for more storage capacity and
improved stormwater management. The sludge coking system was designed in
anticipation of the K048-KOS2 land ban.
5. What future modifications an planned? •
Amoco Oil Company is planning several major modifications in the near future: sewer
segregation, additional aboveground stormwater storage capacity, aboveground
equalization to replace the existing equalization basin/surface impoundment, and covering
all treatment units on the primary side excavated sludge treatment.
6. What are the driving forces behind these modifications?
Primary sludge, TC, and benzene NESHAP rules.
7. How have the K-Iist, TC, and F-list rulings and land baas affected the facility in terms
of modifications, operation, capacity, etc? >
These rulings added incentive for development of a company-wide waste minimization
program for Amoco Oil and the assignment of a facility Coordinator with dudes exclusive
to waste minimization efforts a the Texas City refinery. The K048-K052 land ban, as
mentioned previously, led to the design and construction of a sludge coking process.
-
• ?*"S
O * - ^ W
*f"ff
e*2
S §"
§ - &
o
o:
to
O
O
U)
ULJ
-------
«.«w»
,1
K04&-K052 and TC Wastes
1. What is estimated generation and land disposal rate of K04S-KOS2 and TC wastes?
Generation ranges for hazardous refinery wastes over the past four years is given in
Table 1. Also shown is the current management technique for each stream. During
1987-1990, no waste identified as K049, slop oil emulsion solids was generated. The
refinery does not produce teaded gasoline, so no K052 waste was generated during that
time period either. All K-list wastes are currently managed by either on-site recycling to
the fuel-grade cokers, or to off-site commercial incineration.
Over thirty waste streams failing the TCLP has been identified, so far, including soils,
sludges, and aqueous waste streams. Their generation rates and current management
techoiquei are also given in Table 1. Generation of TC contaminated soils is dependent
on construction and clean-up activities within the refinery. Although these may be one-
time generations, much of this activity is planned at the refinery in the future.
2. How do you currently treat, recycle, or dispose of these wastes and are there any
foreseeable changes?
(See previous question and Table 1.) The refinery is actively pursuing additional
recycling options for the hazardous sludges as alternatives to off-site incineration, the
current back-up option to sludge coking. -These include raw material replacement at a
cement kiln, although the state government in Texas may make it difficult to keep our
wastes in Texas through permit moratoriums.
•» o y o
*
o
a
to
O
o
3. How have the waste generation rates changed with the hazardous waste ruling and land
ban? .
Generation rate of K-tist and TC hazardous wastes has neither increased nor decreased
since the November 1990 land ban on third-third wastes.
4. Have there been any upstream or wastewnter treatment facility operating changes to
reduce the amount of these wastes generated and how effective are these changes?
Upstream source reduction measures have been implemented to prevent solids entering
the sewer, especially during storm events, such as street sweeping and area drain
retrofitting. It was estimated that 2000 wet tons of hazardous sludge was prevented
through these activities'. Upstream operating changes include increased clean-out
frequency of the HF Alkyiation Unit Calcium Fluoride sludge tank, which prevented an
estimated 9770 wet tons of hazardous sludge formation".
C3]
UQ
Uj
Oj
-------
fit
5. Will the proposed F037 and F038 land ban affect the amount of these wastes produced?
Referring to Table 1, DAF bonotns sludge is already managed with K-list wastes. Some
of the TC sludges that are currently land treated,, originate from sewer system cleaning
and would be considered primary sludges subject to land ban.
;»o
•* s
6. How much of these wastes are stored in containers or surface impoundments?
Since the November 1990 land ban on K-list wastes, filter cake not able to be recycled
on-site to the coking complex or sent off-site for commercial incineration {in both -cases
due to limited actual operating capacities) has been stored at the refinery in lined and
covered roll-off boxes. Atone point, early in 1991, as many as 60 roll-off boxes
containing approximately IS wet tons each of filter cake were stored on-site due to lack
of coHng aad incineration capacity. By mid-May 1991, eleven boxes of filter cake
remained in storage on-site. Figure 4 illustrates the status of all filter cake dropped into
storage boxes between 11/8/90 and 5/21/91. Slightly over half were able to be worked
back into the sludge coking process, while one-third found commercial incineration
capacity. Ten percent remained in storage on May 21.
7. What are the chemical and physical characteristics of the currently generated and
stockpiled wastes?
Raw refinery sludges are generally 10-20%-inert solids, 10-20% oil, and 60-80% water.
The filter fat* generated at the refinery is approximately 50-60% solids, 5-10% oil, and
30-40% water. Net heating value of the filter cake ranges from less than 50 BTU/ib to
500 BTU/lb.
8
to
o
o
OJ
8. How will these characteristics change with any planned facility modifications and
operating changes?
Planned modifications within the refinery are expected to change the total quantity of
wastes generated rather than altering the general chemical or physical characteristics.
9. What quantity of your secondary treatment waste, such as sludge from the aggressive
biological units, is categorized as TC waste?
To date waste activated sludge has not failed the TCLP, and therefore is not expected to
be categorized as a TC waste.
UQ
Uj
Uj
-. :J
-------
F037 and F038 Wastes
g 5s
1. Is there a current estimate of the amount of P037 and F038 wastes generated? .
See Table 1. DAF bottoms, considered a primary sludge, have ranged from 13,000 to
91,000 wet tons/year between 1987 and 1990. (Note that during this time period, sludge
from the DAF units I/loot and bottoms combined! ranged 70.000 - 160,000 wet
tons/year.) Primary sludges from equalisation and stormwater storage ranged from a
year when no dredging or clean-out occurred to 205,000 wet tons/year. Primary sludges
from process unit oil/water separators and sewer pumping lift stations are removed by
vacuum truck and taken to one of the main AT' separators, where the quantities are
already considered as K048 or K051. '
Hi
2, Is there an estimate of the amount of F037 and P03S wastes stored in containers or
surface impoundments? . ,
Other than the DAF bottoms contained in the filter cake, no primary sludges are being .
stored in the refinery. For an estimate of the sludge contained in surface impoundments
due to the nature and function of the unit, see the previous question.
What is your current treatment, recycle, or disposal method and how will this change
with the land ban?
Referring to Table 1, DAF bottoms are currently managed with the already land banned
K-list wastes. Sludges generated from equalization and stormwater storage are being
dewatered/deoiled and sent to the refinery's land treatment facility for ultimate treatment
and disposal. After the primary sludge land ban, these sludges will either be recycled to
the refinery coker or incinerate! off-site. Primary sludges from process unit oil/wafer
separators and sewer pumping lift stations is trucked to the wastewater treatment facility
and managed along with the K-tist wastes.
4. What are the capacities of these treatment, recycle, and disposal methods In relationship
to F037 and F03S wastes?
The sludge coking process is limited by a permit capacity of SO dry tons/day of solids in
the resluny stream, or approximately 120,000 - 150,000 wet tons/year of hazardous
sludge3. Current operating capacity is only 22 dry tons/day, though, or approximately
50,000 - 65,000 wet tons/year of sludge. The K-list and DAF bottoms sludges can
probably be handled on-site with continued optimization of the sludge coking process, but
excess quantities of equalization and stormwater sludge will probably have to be sent off-
site.
8
to
o
o
UD
UU
•JC
-------
5. Are there any planned changes, either physical or operational, to deal with the land ban
and how these changes affect K048-K052 waste generation?
Current plans include evaluation of alternate recycling technologies, such as cement kilns.
From a technical feasibility standpoint, cement kilns appear to adequately treat these
types of wastes; however, concern exists over the liabilities associated with utilizing kilns
when the cement product was manufactured using a listed waste and then applied to the
land. The regulatory status would be clear if the agency ruled that such use docs not
constitute disposal.
rlf
*
» ««
• ? — » 2
-------
W*V?
2. What modifications have been done or are planned upstream to reduce the amount of
waste generated in the wastewaler treatment facility.
Sewer segregation will decrease solids entering (he process wastewater from soil erosion.
Ill
C taut *±
ii!f
3. Will the BFF rulings affect any of the current disposal options, onsite, captive or
commercial?
With the BTU minimum dropped from the rule, it should theoretically be easier to reuse
. our filter cairn in cement manufacturing.
4. Is there a preference on producing P037/P038 wastes or K048-K052 wastes in terms of
bundling or disposal?
Until the land ban, primary sludges can be treated and disposed at the refinery land
treatment facility,
5. What is the frequency of cleanout for the various wastewater treatment units?
The main API separators are cleaned of bottoms sludge approximately twice a year.
o
o
to
O
O
U)
Additions! fp
I ~
1. Will th: Stale of Texas permit moratorium impact national capacity?
Cement kilns and other facilities in Texas not already permitted to accept hazardous
refinery wastes should probably not be included in the national capacity calculation for
F037-F03S and TC wastes, since a moratorium on new permits is in place in Texas.
2. Can storage boxes of K048-KQ51 filter cake be sent to a commercial incinerator site for
storage to avoid exceeding the 90-day limit at the refinery?
No. Chemical Waste Management has refused to accept waste until capacity is
imminently available in their incinerator and we are unaware of any commercial storage
facility willing to accept roll-off boxes.
CD!
UJ
en
-------
References
1. ' 1990 Hazardous Waste Minimization Report' to the Texas Water Commission,
24 January 1991.
1. "Amendment to Coter Complex Permit No. R-2315" to the Texas Air Control Board,
7 March 1990.
•• o
o
o
to
o
o
10
ca
UQ
uu
-------
r
2 1
1 I
* t
i 3
|-3
-1 <
u
i
§g
•a •—
5 o
II
a a
§ §§
I 5"Ji
S S3
II
• O i i O
;••?
^
I
00 OS O —
a
e
3
a -
s
f
CTI e
« •
«S'
•^ «*»
I
53
>,
£
z
V)
i:
lii! II
111"
S
A ,
o
o
to
^Tj
O
o
UQ
CQ
J
-------
Id
S
U
O. o. _ C"
'SJf
• ft "
iifr
o
.0
o
o
-------
r.
Figure 3. Solid Waste Management
Amoco Oil Company — Texas City Refinery
ffff
gsa
o. a. — •«
ll
WWT Sludge
T
Heated Storage and
Gravity Thickening
Mixing and Conditioning
I.
Filter Press
I
Filter Cake Reslurry
Coker Injection
i
Fuel Product
•n4
Oil Product
Oil R*cov«ry
Oil R«cov»ry
S5S-
O
a
to
o
o
OJ
. i
-c
-------
c
o
V >»
X *-
00
CD co
03
M— X
9.T
oc
«
05
u. o
r= E
_
a. a. «. ?
• 0 » .-
8*2
:':
25S1
n
I
O
O.
a>
10
O
o
"» •
00
M
s
o
oa
.2
UQ
-------
Jlf
fiif
*
2 jo
*
D.3 Recent Information Subaitted by Category 1 Facilities1
The refineries that submitted recent Information are listed below.
Hunt Refining (Tuscaloota, AL)
Cross Oil and Refining (Snackover. AR)
Lion Oil (El Dorado. AR)
Chevron (El Segundo. CA)
Ultranar (Uilnington, CA)
Marathon (Robinson, IL)
Shell Oil (Wood River. IL)
Amoco (Whiting, IL)
Total (Arkansas City. KS)
BP Oil (Belle Chasse, LA)
Exxon (Baton Rouge. LA)
Murphy Oil (Keraux, LA)
Total (Alaa, HI)
Chevron (Pascagoula, MS)
BP Oil (Llna, OH)
BP Oil (Marcus Hook, FA)
Aatoco (Texas City, TX)
Chevron (Fort Arthur, TX)
El Paso Refining (El Paio,
Exxon (Baytown, TX)
Shell Oil (Deer Park, TX)
Shell Oil (Odessa, TX)
BP Oil (Ferndale, UA)
Shell Oil (Anacortes, U'A)
Texaco (Anacortes, UA)
Quaker State (Newell, UV)
o
o
to
o
o
OJ
TX)
1 Two Category 1 facilities have declared cheir submissions confidential
business Information (CBI) and therefore their submissions are in the RCRA CBI
docket.
-------
P037 ADO r038 HASTE CAPACITY ANALYSIS:
DATA US! AMD TRACKING SHEET
Refinery: Hunt Refining - Tuscaloosa Refinery.
State: Alabama
Data sources available:
_x Petroleum refinery visits/voluntary submission
_x National Survey of Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage. Disposal,
and Recycling Facilities (TSDR survey)
National Survey of Hazardous Waste Generators
Biennial report/state reporting requirements
California hazardous vaste data.base
Petroleum refinery data base (FRDB)
No-migration petitions
Comments from proposed rule
_x Organic Toxicity Survey "*
Basis for F037 and F038 waste estimation:
EPA used data provided by Hunt Refinery because it was the most recent
and the only source that describes F037 and F038 waste generation and
management. Other sources were used only in comparison with the
refinery's data submission.
F037 and F038 waste estimates:
F037 (one-time) - 5,900 tons from closure of surface impoundments.
These Impoundments vill be replaced by tanks, which would generate F037
sludges when cleaned out once every two to five -years.
Hunt Refining reports no other F wastes than those identified above.
According to more recent information from the TC survey, this facility
indicated that It would generate the following quantities of surface
impoundment sludges, during the indicated Cirae periods:
F037/8 (surface lapoundments) - 0 tons (7/92 - 12/92)
F037/8 (surface izpoundaents) - 2070 tons (1/93 - 12/93)
F037/8 (surface iapoundnents) - 0 tons (1/94 - 12/94)
"
g-x *o>z
•» o 2 ro
o
o
o
o
-------
HC.VT REFINING
Hum Refining '•' June 5.1991,3:30 PM
PO Box 1850
Tuscaloosa, AL 35403-1850
REFINERY DESCRIPTION
The Hunt Refinery in Tuscaloosa, Alabama is an integrated facility (i.e., it produces gasoline.
diesel fuel, asphalt, etc.) processing 28,000 barrets of erode oil per day, and recycling 9.000 barrels of heavy
crude to the coker (45,000 barrels/day crude capacity, according to the Annual Refining Survey in ihe Oil'
and Gas Journal published March 18.1991). Total area covered by the facility is in the neighborhood of
150-175 acres. The refinery was built in 1946: the wastewater treatment plant was built in 1975. and
upgraded to an activated sludge system classification by aeration in 1981.
WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
In the past, the facility was permitted for a land treatment unit to handle biosludge bottoms and
K04& After the implementation of the K04S-K052 land ban, the facility could no longer land farm the
K048, and instead utilized the Mobil OU-slodge coking process to recycle the K048 sludge (the coker had
been built in 1981).
The treatment train includes DAF followed by activated sludge biotreaimcnt followed by
Clarification. Dairy btowdown from the DAF unit (which is an FQ38 waste) goes to surface impoundment
#1, which already contains FD37-RB8 waste. Surface impoundment #2 would probably also contain both
FD37 and F038, due to CPI separator sludges it receives. Some oil is skimmed off the surface
impoundments and returned to be processed along with etude. There are two accumulation tanks used 10
recycle K048 to the coker (K048 is batch loaded since not very much is accumulated on a daily basts). Any
water drawn off the accumulation tanks goes back to the WWTP for treatment.
Since the 1986 TSDR Survey was conducted, some other modifications have been made, including
rerouting the clarifier sludge to the feed stream into the activated sludge unit At the end of 1989, the
Hunt Refining Company decided to cease leaded gas production, therefore K052 is no longer generated.
Alt leaded lanla were taken out of service, cleaned, and tanks are now considered unleaded. Chem Waste
Management in Emelle, AL received those leaded tank bottoms in the past.
PETROLEUM REFINING WASTE GENERATION '
The facility currently generates approximately 4^00-5.000 barrels (after settling out of
waterMcwateriflg) of K048 annually. These wastes are approximately 90% water. Zero K052 is generated
because Kant Refining stopped making leaded jasolinc-
The facility anticipates that it will generate 386 torutycar of F037-RB8, based on results of
sampling and soundings, how long the impoundments have been there, and other parameters. Testing of
'P037 and F038 revealed the presence of about 1S-22 of the Appendix VIII constituents (40 CFR Part 261).
The sludges in surface impoundments *1 and #2. which have a thick, oily consistency, are estimated to
have densities of 100 Ib/tu ft and 65 IWcn ft respectively. Surface impoundment #1 is about 15 years old:
surface impoundment #2 is about 9.5 years old. Using different assumptions as a means of calculating
sludge generation or build-up suggest that the sludge in the two impoundments that would be generated
with the one-time cleaning may be in the neighborhood of 4.825-5,900 tons, but the volumes could actually
be much higher or much lower.
2s?
O
a
to
"Tj
O
O
U)
CD]
-JC
-------
Hunt Refining has identified some streams thai may fail the TCLP, but they are trying 10
segregate them. The benzene level in a stream entering one of the surface impoundments that feeds the
wastewater treatment plant (output of wastewaier from surface impoundment to WWTP totalling 274.S
tons$ear) has at times exceeded the standard, and due to the mixing rule, the entire content of the surface
impoundment would be regulated.
WASTE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
The new F037-F038 ruling will have a drastic impact On the refinery. The facility is in the
decision-making process where sludge handling is concerned. The full four years time span would be
highly desirable, and probably necessary.
At this time, the facility is uncertain as 10 how the land ban will affect the amount of wastes
generated. The same amount may be produced, and this may depend on nature of the crude and degree of
stormwater separation achievable. The facility will be taking the two surface impoundments out of service
and replacing them with tanks (possibly using a combination of 40,000 barrel tanks and an 80.000 barrel
tank to allow tank cleaning without interruption of wastcwater treatment). The estimated cost for this
change is several million dollars. The facility is currently in the process of trying to determine where to
place the tanks. These tanks will generate a F037 sludge that wilt collect at the bottom and wilt
occasionally have to be cleaned from toe tank, but it is unknown as to how much or how often. After they
clean the surface impoundments, they may be able to better estimate the rate of generation. Hunt
Refining has submitted a closure plan for the surface impoundment #2 to Region IV and anticipate thai
they will have (bur yean to close. The closure plan for surface impoundment #1 will be submitted in
October of 1991.
In the past, waste sludge from the #1 clariGer was mixed with KD48 wastes and landfarmed, due to
the valuable nutrient contest (primarily ammonia, phosphorus) which aids biodegradation. Biosludge was
alw sent to the landfana for the same reason. The #2 clarifjer bottoms are blended on a continual basis
with the KD4S, making all of it a listed waste. The facility is looking at separating these streams, and this
is mentioned in die landfana closure plan. Biosludge adds no value to coker feed whereas it was
beneficial to the Uniform, but the facility does not currently have a landfann for that waste. On March 6.
1991, a delay of landfann closure was requested. Once approved, the facility intends to begin making the
process and equipment changes necessary to segregate the streams and land/arm the biowaste.
Hunt Refining is looking for ways to achieve more wastestream. segregation, including segregation
of stormwaiers. Pan of the closure activities for surface impoundment #2 includes further segregation to
ease the need for storage. The biggest need for storage space is for stormwater. The majority of
stormwaier that falls on storage areas in the west pan of the facility is drained through a NPDES
permitted firewalls and goes to the river. According to the 1986 TSDR, this amounts to 169.354,000
gallons annually: All the stormwater that fans otto the processing section of the facility goes to
wastewaier treatment.
It is hoped that the one-time generation of F037-F038 from the one-time cleaning of the surface
impoundments and F038 from tanks aa be recycled to the coker. If this proves to be workable, sludge
from future tank cleanings (after the STt have been replaced by tanks) will also be recycled to the coker.
The fact that it is 10-15% oa will make il desirable for recovery in the coker. perhaps saving a million
dollars. Although for the large pan the faculty does not have a choice, it may be easier to treat K048 than
RB7-F038 in the coker. because it is not as viscous (the KJM8 being mostly water). The oily silt produced
by the stormwater and process wastewater is 'messy to deal with*, and these F wastes may have to be
blended wjitt fuel oil before being recycled in toe coker. The facility will probably do away with CPI
separators when they build the tank. Lm RB8 should be generated if CPI separators are eliminated. The
CPb are no longer used very much; they are not welt suited for the oily streams.
Hunt Refining has contracted with ,CH2M Hill to discuss possible modifications.
I!!
<* " — m
« 5" "
S-XZ»Z
" * q
3 a
O
a
to
o
o
3
C3
en
-------
*
I --
In
A
15
^
!»n *£
IrJ f i
^£3
is ¥" I
go ^3^
* ^. <^ *
I "ly^T^u' ^:«/j^^j \^H
000661
ir
.•
2 " ».
n a. n
n
a
to
O
O
-------
r
JUi- 12 ."91
nunr S£r
3
.
5
3 ui
g g
o o
3
RO
u. IL
o o
a £
MI *•
u.
UJ
cc
z
X
K
QC
g
mi
W]
5°
1
n
S!
I
30UVH08IQ
83QdN
'U3AIU 3H
m
I
f
-°-
" a s » P
b O. ». »
•SJf
« S "
o
o
10
o
o
—J
«« TOTRL PPGE.CB2 »•
-------
r
F037 AND FOJ8 VASTE CAPACITY ANALYSIS:
DATA USE AND TRACKING SHEET
*3
Refinery: Cross Oil - Snackover Refinery
State: Arkansas
0
Pata sources available:
_£ Petroleum refinery visits/voluntary submission
_X National Survey of Hazardous Waste Treatment. Storage. Disposal,
and Recycling Facilities (TSDR survey)
National Survey of Hazardous Waste Generators
Biennial report/state reporting requirements
California hazardous uasce data base
_X Petroleum refinery data base (PRDB)
No-migration petitions
Basis for FQ37 and f038 waste estimation:
EPA used data provided by Cross Oil (Saackover Refinery) because it was
the most recent and the only source that describes F037 and F038 waste
generation and management. Other sources were used only in comparison
with the refinery's data submission.
O
5
o
o
F037 and fpg8 waste estimates:
F037 (routine) - 25 tons/year fron cleanout of the sewers, surge tank,
and clarifiers.
F037 (one-time) - 1 ton generated fron closure of stormwater retention
ponds. These ponds will be replaced .by tanks, which will be cleaned out
every two to five years; therefore, the F037 sludge would not be
generated continuously.
Cross Oil does not appear to generate any F036 wastes.
-------
r
Cross Oil and Refining
End of East 6ih
Smackover, AR 71762
REFINERY DESCRIPTION
Cross Oil and Refining in Smackover, Arkansas is a refinery that produces primarily lube oils, and
has the capacity to process 6.770 barrels of erode oil per day according to the Annual Refining Survey in
the Ofl and Gas Journal published March 18,1991. The faulty produces no gasoline. The refinery is 68
years old, and the total area covered by the facility is 70 acres.
WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
Since 1986, tome modifications to the wastewater treatment plant have been nude. The five-acre
collection and retention pond has been eliminated from the treatment train; the only input to the pond is
stormwater. In the place of the retention pond, a 500,000 gallon surge tank (equipped with a collection
bath) win be used. In addition, the facility has added another clarifier in front of the DAF unit. The
driving force behind these modifications was the F037-F03S waste listing. The changes due to the sludge
rulings have made it more difficult for the facility to handle swings in process wastewater output; in the
past, tke retention pond handled the swings.
Future pitas include changing the NPDES discharge point, as indicated in a new permit Cross Oil
is in the process of receiving.
All process wastewater systems are now segregated from stormwater systems. .
PETROLEUM REFINING WASTE GENERATION _
Current production rates of K wastes are:
K048
KD49
K050
KD51
K052 Olfcyr
One-time deanings generate approximately 2£00 lb
-------
sir
WASTE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
K wastes are generated in the OAF unit, which is guessiimaied 10 require cleaning on a yearly
basis, and in the API separator, which may require cleaning several times per year. The darifiers in front
of the DAF units are periodically batch cleaned approximately on * weekly basis, generating FD37 waste.
Cross Oil now ships K wastes to ChemWaste Management for incineration after dewaiering onsite.
F037-F038 wastes will accumulate ia the 500.000 gallon storage tank and darifiers, and will have to
periodically be cleaned out These wastes vill also be shipped to ChemWaste Management. The BEF
rulings will not affect management options.
There are no changes planned ai far as treatment is concerned, except that the company is
working on reducing the phenol content so the wastes on be landfilled. It appears,that one of the water
•treatment chemicals that is added as a Cocking agent is contributing to the problem. Waste sludge from
the facility is atypical in that there are onry two constituents that cause it to require treatment before
landfllling..
At present FD37-F038 wastes are less expensive to manage than K048-K052 wastes since they are
not yet banned tram landfills,
At this time the facility has no plans to remove sludges from the collection and retention pond.
The facility does not think thai it Is possible to reduce FD37-F038 or K04S-KOJ2 wastes by pulling
more of a load on the aggressive biological units. ~
o
d
to
o
o
UJ
-------
3
o
a
to
o
o
OJ
-------
I"
•» o 2 J
t
n
d
to
o
o
-------
3
CONTACT:
PHONE NUMBER:
CALLER:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
PHONE UW FOR F037 AND F038 CAPACITY ANALYSIS
E. J. Doherty (Cross Oil, Smackover, AR)
(501) 725-3611
James Hsu
9/12/91
Statxis of Jjzpoundaencs
« o S ffO
Ill
O
d
to
O
O
un
uu
-------
r
FOJ7 AKD F038 WASTE CAPACITY ANALYSIS:
DATA USE AND TRACKING SHEET
.
f ss
Refinery: Lion - £1 Dorado Refinery
State: Arkansas
Data sources available:
. x FeCroleua refinery visits/voluntary submission
_2 National Survey of Hazardous Waste Treatment. Storage. Disposal,
and Recycling Facilities (TSDR survty)
HaCional Survey of Hazardous Waste Generators
Biennial report/state reporting requirements
California hazardous waste data base
Petroleun refinery data base (FRDB)
No-uigration petitions
Basis for F037 and F03S vaste estimation?
EPA used data provided by Lion Oil (EL Dorado Refinery) because it was
the most recent and the only source that describes F037 and F038 waste
generation and oanagenent. Other sources were used only in conparison
with the refinery's data submission.
0. ft _ »
• 2 " —
gag
SS5
i> ™ o
O
O
to
o
o
F037 and F038 vaste «stlaates:
F037/8 (routine) - 600 cons/year from the equalization basin and sewer
cleanouts.
-------
r
LION OIL
1000 McHenry St.
El Dorado, AR 71730
REFINERY DESCRIPTION
The Lion Oil refinery in B Dorado. Arkansas is an integrated facility (t«., it produces gasoline,
asphalt, eic) processing 48.000 barrels of erode oil per day. according to the Annual Refining Survey in
the Oil and Gas Journal published March 18,1991. The tout land area of the facility is 391 acres. The
refinery was built in the 1920's, and the wastewater treatment System has been in operation since 1977.
WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
Exhibit 1 presents Uie wasiewater treatment flow diagram at the Lion Oil refinery as submitted in
(be TSDR survey In 1986. Since then, some modifications have been made. The storage impoundments
were closed out in 1988. A filter press (generating a filter cake) was added to handle K wastes. "The
equalization basin was replaced with tank*, put into service in April, to handle dry weather process flow.
The facility has three stonnwater outfalls, and one WWTP outfall.
PETROLEUM REFINING WASTE GENERATION
The toul estimated rate of generation of K04? to K05Z is 1.000 tons^ear (470.000 G ROW and
128.003 gallons of K051, according to the 1986 TSDR). The facility generates the same amount of K
waste* as ii did in the past.
Every time the facility cleans a tank, there is a good chance F waste may be generated.
There is no current estimate of F037 and FOJ8 wastes generated, but if one were to just 'pick a
number", ii might be on the order Of several hundred tons per year. The company does not yet have a feel
for the rate of generation of HB8 Croat the equalization tank, which may require cleaning once every
couple of years, if the sludges from the closed storage impoundment were to be removed in future, this
would also generate RB7. An estimate of one-lime wastes residing in Sis, etc., that would be regulated as
huardous if moved, would be 50,000-100,000 tons.
There is no preference as to production of K or F wastes, save for the fact thai f wastes are not
yet land banned.
There is no waste "stockpiled* per se, but sludges cleaned from ditches, sewers, links, and sumps
wOJ generate a lot of waste, and the facOiry does DO) really know bow much will be generated until
cleaning is begun.
The secondary treatment waste from aggressive biological units is not a TC waste, but it is a listed
K waste by the state of AR because filtrate is returned to the WWTP and the state interprets this to be a
mixed waste (although, the US EPA does not consider it as such).
WASTE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
The facility refinery, dewaters the K wasie in a niter press, reavers some oil from the filtrate,
sends the filtrate water to the wastewaier treatment plant, and sends the filter cake to a recycler. The
recyder. Marine Shale and Aggregates, buns ihe wastes in a kiln.
o
s
o
o
UQ
ur
un
-------
i/
1-4
In addition to the filter press, sone paving has been employed to keep dirt out of the sewers and
thus lessen the volumes of K wastes generated. In order to further reduce volume, to meet the land ban,
(and) to lessen the economic impact, ihe facility B considering installing a dryer for the filler cake.
The various wastewaler treatment iaakj (e.g.. DAF, equalization Tanks, slop oil tanks) are cleaned
once every couple of years.
f wastes will be mixed with K waste and also he sent 10 Marine Shale lo be burned. In order to
handle the F wastes, the facility may have to run two shifts (rather than ihe current one eight-hour/day -
shift). Toe Btu content (1400 Btu/lb) of UK K and F wastes is not high enough for cement kilns. If Lion
Oil decided to install the proposed drier. Btu content would be raised (but not to the required 5,000
Btu/lb for cement kilns). Characteristics of the currently generated and stockpiled wastes are similar to
the K wastes, which pass TCLP.
. Treating to meet the land ban requirement has been considered. The problem is labs can't analyze
down to land ban standards due to oil aad grease content (Le., the detection limits are higher than the
land ban Standards). Lion Oil thinks they axM treat to meet the standards, but can't prove that they
could do so.
The facility is currently in the process of obtaining a Pan B post-closure permit work plan 10
address the problem of residual waste sluifes that will be generated from one-time cleaning. .In the past,
dry weather flow generated some wastes tiat «itl probably need to be removed. The volumes generated in
this cleaning are not known.
The facility is in the process of segregating sewage waters in order to decrease volumes of F and K
wastes generated. Measures they are taking to reduce F and K waste generation include paving roads,
keeping sand blast out of sewer system, and general improvement in housekeeping practices.
Offcite treatment options are limited. The wastes do not meet the Btu requirements for cement
kilos. In addition. Boiler and Industrial Ftveace (BIF) rulings may possibly affect the available capacity.
Contractors they have contacted, such as Cbem Waste Management and Rollins, are either running at full
capacity or the equipment is not operating properly. The cost of off-site incineration is prohibitive as well;
the 'red tape* required for oa-site uttioerauon keeps it from being worth the
"
'a -si. 2
!*».•„ 8
a o. *- M
• O ** i-t
'
SSJT
O
a
to
o
o
CD]
UQ
un
en
-------
r
F*ON LI OH OIL
i'W^
Oo/v On. '
III
'•< ?fti
e ? «•
» S "
8
o
o
ca
-—i
-------
4.H.H11 1911*
•. t
..00 14 5'-)
'«ri;
VHV
2ro
o
a
to
O
O
UQ
LH
CO
-------
LI.OH oil. tier.
TAH.££ SZHSMATIC A/!?. ^
* ?-« 2
n n S ^. m.
8
to
***
o
o
LH
-------
man LION on. tit.
/w* foo* en.
Oft, ,*?&?•/
.- j .VQ. / -
#£ 60600 21 IT*
"
-a = «2
358-8
s«s:s
a
-------
««M»S»
0014*3
MW (SLOP G't. SOC./QS)
FACILITY SCH&MAT/C A/o. /
• — a
£ 7ts
- £••
• ?-."»
o
o
K)
o
o
cn
-------
r
sire. DISPOSAL*
o SSO
GASC. .
BL£NS.
7fcA//<
A/0-/9
LSADSO
6ASQ.
STOXAGS
NO. 2s
ro ptpeune SALS.S
0 -
enws)
tMlPOvrJOM€.NT
TO TKOCK RACK SAL€S
.-/ A/ =.*: r
D£TA!L£2 SCXZ.VAT.'C A'o. —
c AX* c errors
M** ,Vo. !£-?€
o
a
O
o
U3
-------
r
!**
£ S3
-(SI&PQILSCUOS)
TO r
Z./OA' C.'L
D = TAILED SCHS.WTIC i\'o.2
o
to
o
o
U)
uo
en
-------
..S
PHONE LOG FOR F037 AMD F03B CAPACITY ANALYSIS
CONTACT: Chuck Hammock (Lion Oil. El Dorado, AR)
PHONE NUMBER: (501) 862-6111
CALLER: James Hsu
DATE: 9/12/91
SUBJECT: Status of impoundments
Kr. Hatweck indicated that the refinery has submitted a workplan for a Part E
post-closure permit to address waste sludges that will be generated from a
one-tiao cleaning of the impoundment. They replaced the iapoundaent with
tanks. Mr. Hamock indicated that waste, sludge* probably accumulate in the
tanks. He also Indicated that they will be closing a diversion pond and
replacing it with tanks. He does not have an estimate of wastes sludges
quantities from diversion pond clean out.
o
o
tx>
hrl
O
O
cn
-------
2
F037 AND FOM WASTE CAPACITY ANALYSIS:
DATA USE AND TRACKING SHEET
Refinery: Marathon Fetroleua - Robinson Refinery
State: Illinois
Data sources available:
_X Petroleum refinery visits/voluntary submission
_X National Survey of Hazardous UasCe Treatment. Storage, Disposal,
and Recycling Facilities (TSDR survey)
_ National Survey of Hazardous Waste Generators
. _ Biennial report/state reporting requirements
_ California hazardous vaste data base
_25 Petroleum refinery data base (PRDB)
_2 No -migration petitions
Basis ,for F037 and F038 vaste estimation:
EFA used data provided by Marathon Petroleum (Robinson Refinery) because
it vas the most recent and the only source thac describes F037 and F038
wast* generation and management. Other sources were used only in
comparison with the refinery's data submission.
F037 and F038 waste gsr^natej:
SS Ji
-------
ti
3
at
If
OIL COMPANY
ILLINOIS REFINING DIVISION
ENVIRONMENTAL DEPARTMENT
ROBINSON, ILLINOIS 62454
PHONE (618) 544-2121
TELEFAX (618) 544-8116.
ALT. 544-2735
&ROUTINE
QURGENT, DELIVER IMMEDIATELY
DATE/TIME'
TO-
COMPANYi
TELEFAX NUMBERi 703-jZ/8-.266?
FROM*
tV» a/* transmitting ,£_ pages irKiuding^this cover page
If transmission is incompletv, ceil (618) Stt-2121, Ext. S3t, or Ext.
CDMMENTSi
.fit
If
o
d
O
O
CD
en
en
-------
•91-39-07 13!36 MOC_ROBINSON_ENUIRO
F037/F038 Questions
(1.0) Waste Water Treatment Facility
1.1 Stt «tUch»d schematic.
1.2 Sewers are conblned.
1.3 All process waters rerouted to Inlet to API separator.
1.4 F037/F038 regulations.
1.5 Replace existing activated Kludge system with above grade
tankage.
1.6 TCLP regulations.
1.7 K04B-K052 waste stream* are now shipped off-site for
Incineration, prior treatment was conducted on-slte at the
land trtataent facility.
(2.0) K048-K052 and TC Hastes
—
2.1 K048-K052 generation rate 1s ZWTton per year and TC waste
1s > 10,000 ton par year.
2.2 K-Vasts stream are Incinerated off-site and TC wastes are
applied to en-s1te lend treatmnt facility. BOAT treatment
system will b« Incorporated Into our system.
2.3 None
2.« None
2.5 None
2.6 None
2.7 Watte Generated are dewatered and low Btu value.
2.8 Unknown at this tine.
2.9 None
(3.0) F037 and F038 Waste*
3.1 < SO ton per year.-^-J.. ; "•--• ••'.••-'.
3.2 None
3.3 N.A.
3.4 -—
3,5 On-aUe land treatment, land faan will require off-site
disposal.
3.6 Capacity Available.
3.7 N.A.
3.8 No
(4.0) General
4.1 Incineration
4.2 Source Control
4.3 Unknown
4.4 No
4,5 0*2 tines per year.
P. 062
*
o
a
o
o
U)
-------
.1
*?
i i
* * "
s|
as
SB
£z
ut
ai
c
i
>••
«•
a
C
&
*
^
'2
3
"
1
t
!?
d
s
IBWJDCRAl i
MUTUCNI 1
(
J.
|i
'
|;
* -v
g?
li
ig
,
•>.
(i)
• *
* *. "** .•
i
"
'
N.
a
oe
SE
P
I
o
•": f* '/
\
gs
• 5?l
ali
a
CAST UKX FAI
CONTROIUO
MAIKACC
AND STORM
' HUNOFf
•.'•....«w
• .. _ / • •*
•'» i »\ '.
a
I?* a
•» o 2?
, m*. **
*" •-»
HI
O
o
to
o
o
u>
uo
en
GO
-------
•
•^
•<»
ii
3
*
Marathon
Oil Company
Illinois Refining Division
Robinson. Illinois 62454
Telephone 618/S44-2121
t-ir*
:a|-s
p -. S JJ >-.
* » - » 0
(I *• •» llft m
July 9. 1991
Ms. Mary Compton
1CF Corporation
9300 Let Highway
Fairfax, VA 22031-1207
RE: F037/F038 Questionnaire
Dear Ms. Compton:
Pleas* find enclosed the completed questionnaire regarding
F037/F038.
Sincerely,
David R. Saad
Environmental Coordinator
DRSrckm
Enclosure
cc: File
A subsidiary of USX Corporation
c«-
(3 -• ^
I I
n
o
to
•n
o
o
OJ
en
to.
-------
r
(1.0)
5
(2.0)
(3.0)
(4.0)
F037/F038 Questions
Haste Water Treatment Facility
1.1 See attached schematic.
1.2 Sewers are combined.
1.3 All process waters rerouted to Inlet to API separator.
1.4 F037/F038 regulations.
1.5 Replace existing activated sludge system with above grade
tankage.
1.6 TCLP regulations.
1.7 K048-K052 waste streams are now shipped off-site for
incineration, prior treatment was conducted on-site at the
land treatment facility.
K048-K052 and TC Wastes
2.1 K048-K052 generation rate 1s ZOO ton per year and TC.waste
1s > 10,000 ton per year.
2.2 K-Waste streams are Incinerated off-site and TC wastes are
applied to on-site land treatment facility. BOAT treatment
system will be incorporated Into our system.
2.3 None
2.4 None
2.5 None
2.6 None
2.7 Haste Generated are dewatered and low Btu value.
2.8 Unknown at this time.
2.9 None
F037 and F038 Wastes
iUlifl
O
s
o
o
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
< 50 ton per year.
None
N.A.
On-site land treatment, land ban will require off-site
disposal.
Capacity Available.
N.A.
No
General
4.1 'Incineration
4.2 Source Control
4.3 Unknown
4.4 No
4.5 0-2 times per year.
-------
'•I
15
^
5S
Is
OB
« o 2 ro
filfi
o
o
to
"tj
o
o
C^
1
-------
F037 AKO F038 WASTE CAPACITY ANALYSIS:
DATA USE AND TRACKING SHEET
tf <»
Refinery:
State:
Shell Oil
Illinois
Voo
-------
r
J
1
PHONE IOC FOR F037 AND F038 CAPACITT ANALYSIS
CONTACT: . Eric Peterson/Jay Rankin (Shell Oil, Uood River, IL)
PHONE NUMBER: (618) 254-7371
CALLER: Janes Hsu
DATE: 9/6/91 and 9/17/91
SUBJECT: F037/8 waste generation and management
The refinery's vastewater treatment system comprises the following units:
Neutralization -- Bar screen -- CPI separators -- DAP units -- Diversion tank
-- equalization pond -- trickling filter -- activated sludge -- secondary
clarification -- sludge thickener -• lagoons -- SPDES outfall
The CPI separators generate an F037 waste, which is removed at 30
gallons/ainute. This waste is dewatered using a plate and frame filter press
resulting in filter cake consisting of £0 percent solids. The dry weight of
the filter caked is 2 to 3 tons/day. The estimated maxima heating value of
the cake is approximately 2,500 btu/lb.
The equalization pond was put in service m 1955, and was cleaned in 1987.
This cleaning generated approximately 13,000 tons. The equalization pond will
be replaced by tankage in the future.
Shell Oil, wood River, does not have an estimation of how much F wastes would
be generated fron sewer cleanout.
Currently F wastes are devatered and sent off site to a hazardous waste
'landfill. Once the F waste land ban becomes effective, the F wastes would be
sent off site for incineration.
ir
:ff.£iS
fr £t> **. M
o
a
to
o
o
UJ
UU
-------
r
Refinery:
State:
F037 AKD F03B WASTE CAPACITY ANALYSIS:
DATA USE AND TRACKING SHEET
Total Pecroleua - Arkansas City
Kansas
Data sources available:
_S Petroleum refinery visits/voluntary submission
_jj National Survey of Hazardous Uaste Treatment, Storage, Disposal,
and Recycling Facilities (TSDR survey)
National Survey of Hazardous Uaste Generators
^_ Biennial report/state reporting requirements
California-hazardous waste data base
_2 Petroleum refinery data base (PROB)
No-oigration petitions
Basis for F037 arid F03B waste estimation:
EPA used data provided by Total Petroleum (Arkansas City, KS) because it
vas th« most recent and the only source that describes F037 and F038
uaste generation and management. Other sources were used only in
comparison with the refinery's data submission.
F037 and F03B waste estimates:
In Total Petroleum's voluntary submission, they did not have an estimate
of F037 and F038 vaste generation; however, their schematic shovs that
an IAF unic is in operation. Assuming they included the F03B sludge
from the IAF unit In their total combined K waste generation of 400 to •
500 tons/year, then continuous F038 waste generation from the IAF unit
can be estimated at 250 Cons/year. This estimate is obtained by
assuming the IAF unit generates as much F038 waste as the DAF unit
generates K048 wastes. It does not appear from the schematic that any
other F waste generation occurs.'
o
a
to
o
o
U)
i _
1
-------
^
3
Information Guideline Interview
Total Petroleum, Inc
MOOS. M St.
Arkansas City, Kansas 67(X)5-3568
(316) 442-5100
July 5,1991, 2:15 pm
Conversation with Patricia Morgan. Environmental Specialist
Conducted by Mary Compton
Land Area: 300 acres
Refinery Afe: 74 yean
1.0 Waste Water Treatment Facility
1.1 What is your current configuration (schematic)?
To be sent.
1.2 How segregated is your system, slormwater vs. process water?
50% or the stormwater joes to storrowater drainage, 50% goes to process water drainage; 100% of
process water goes to process water drainage.
1J What modifications have been made in the last 5 years?
In 1988 a drainage ditch was built and sealed with cement so that the storm water now goes
directly to the outfalL Levelling and surveying of surfaces are continuous activities in an effort to
segregate the stonnwater. Cementing Is taking place within units to get rid of din in
somarmnated materials. Three of the ponds (including aerated units 3a and 3b) were cleaned and
closed two hazardous waste surface impoundments in 1986. Ponds la and ib were cleaned as was
pan of oxidation pond i Pond 3 was separated into ponds 3a and 3b, Aeration was added to 3a
to insure active biological treatment. A surge control unk was installed before pond 3 to catch oil
surges before they enter the system.
1.4 What were the driving forces behind these modifications?
An effort to reduce the amount of water going to the API and, for financial reasons, an effort to
generate less K wastes.
1.S What future modifications are planned?
The cementing of the units and road grading and levelling will continue. Lift pumps will be added
at the lower units to pump stonnwater to the siorrawaier ponds. A general waste minimization
policy is being implemented at the plant.
1.6 What are the driving forces behind these modifications?
To reduce the load on the API and to reduce the expense to the facility of treating hazardous
waste.
1.7 How nave the K048-KOS2. TC and F037/F038 rulings and land bans affected the facility in
terms of modifications, operation, capacity, etc?
III
I****
Kill
o
a
to
o
s
crj
en
-------
Class 1 and 3 modifications were, required for the RCRA permit as pond 3 contains TC wastes. A
centrifuge was previously used lo dewater the wasies. Now a Tiller press is used on site (or
dewatering and the wastes are sent off sile for incineration. The K wastes are currently being
incinerated and other options (such as recycling to a cement kiln) are being explored. The
lagoons were cleaned prior to the effective date o! the land ban so that these wastes could be land
treated.. Aeration was added to the 3a lagoon and in extra aerator was added in case of down
time on the first so that this unit would be considered aggressive biological treatment.
10 K048-KQ52 and TC Wastes
2.1 What is your estimated rate of generation and land disposal of K048-K052 and TC wastes?
None are land disposed. Approximately 400-500 tons of these wastes combined are generated.
The TC wastes are only a small portion of this number as only one source of TC wastes exists.
22 How do you currently treat, recycle, or dispose of tbese wastes and are there any
foreseeable changes in the treatment, recycling, or disposal?.
The wastes were sent through a centrifuge for de-oiling and de-watering. However, because they
were still fairly high in water content a filter pressing step was added and the wastes are sent off
site for incineration.
23
How have the waste generation rates changed with the hazardous waste ruling and land
ban?
• They have not changed and the assumption is that they will remain the same. Although filtering
reduces the volume of the wastes, the addition of the filter aid negates this reduction. Waste
minimization efforts have reduced waste volfllhe but the listing of additional wastes has resulted in
no net change in waste generation.
2.4 Have there been any upstream or waste water treatment facility operating changes to
reduce the amount of these wastes generated and how effective are these changes?
Zero-sample draw valves have been added and are very effective as they have a continuous purging.
system, eliminating the need lo flush ihe valves prior to taking a sample. Efforts are being made
(o dry-clean the units whenever possible to remove uncontaminated sand and debris prior to
washing with water. The sludge control tank was added to help keep oil out of the ponds and
reduce the amount of benzene. '
15
No.
2.6
Will the proposed F037 and F038 land ban affect the amount of these wastes produced?
How much of these wastes are stockpiled in containers or surface impoundments?
All Of it is in surface impoundments, not in containers. An estimate of the relevant quantity is
not available. Since the impoundments were cleaned fast summer the amount is probably
relatively small
2.7 . What are the chemical and physical characteristics of the currently generated and
stockpiled wastes (ie,, are the)- dewalered, do they have significant btu value, etc.')?
According to the TC test, these wastes are not hazardous. The pond bottoms are not classified as
TC.wastes. The btu value fluctuates, but for the FC07 and P038 wastes, the btu value is less than
*
«-° 2
" — — ta
a. — w
il
o
o
to
T1
O
o
UD
cn
-------
r
*(*****-*•
J
3
I
••*
IM
I »
3.0
5000.
2.8 Mow will these characteristics change with any planned facility modifications and
operating changes?
The answer 10 ibis question is not dear ai this point in lime.
FD37 and FD38 Wastes ,
3.1 Is there a current estimate of the amount of F037 and F038 wastes generated?
No.
3.2
No.
Is there an estimate of the amount of F037 and F038 wastes stockpiled tit containers or
surface impoundments?
33 What are you currently doing with the stockpiled waste and what are your future plans?
There are apparently no stockpiled F037 and F038 wastes.
3.4 What are the chemical and physical characteristics of both the currently generated and the
stockpiled wastes?
According to previous tests, none of the wastes are hazardous by TCLP.
3.5 What is your current treatment, recycle,lnd disposal methods in relationship to F037 and
FD38 wastes?
In the past all of these wastes were treated and land fanned. In the future they will be incinerated
oUsiie.
3.6
What are the capacities of these treatment, recycle and disposal methods in relationship to
F037 and F9J8 wastes?
4.0
The answer to this is not dear at this point. It appears that there could be shortcomings in
treatment capacity.
3.7 Are (here any planned cnanges, either physical or operational, to deal wjin the land ban
and how wilt these changes affect K048-K052 waste generation?
Physical changes include conuneing enit segregation, cementing the units, and roadgrading.
Operational changes include completing installation of the Zero-sample draw valves and recycling
the samples taken and putting them back into the system for treatment.
3.8 Is it possible to reduce F037/RD8 or K04S-K032 wastes by pulling more of a load on the
aggressive biological units?
J"robab)y not.
General
4.1 What are your offciie treatment options and are there unique features of your waste that
O
d
to
"Tl
O
O
1
-------
II
3
3
•a"
would limit the trcatability options?
The only offsite option cnrrenily is incineration, which is limited by the btu value, which must be
less than 5000. Recycling to a cement kiln may be an option, but it requires a btu value of at least
5000. .
4.2 What modifications have been done or are planned upstream (o reduce the amount fo
waste generated in the waste water treatment facility (e.g., pretreaiment, source control.
segregation, etc.}?
Sec response to section 3,7.
4.3 Will the BIF rulings affect any of the current disposal options, onsite. captive, or
commercial?
No. but if the cement kiln option is exercised, there could be some effect.
4.4 Is there a preference on producing FD37/P03S wastes or K04&KOS2 wastes in icrms of
handling or disposal?
No. The facility is not generating any F037/P03S wastes.
4.5 What is the frequency of cleanoui for the various waste water treatment units (e.g., API,
DAF, storage tank, surface impoundments, etc)?
The API and IAF units are cleaned annually. Tanks used in conjunction with these are cleaned
annually when possible and, otherwise, as needed. The hazardous waste tanks are cleaned
annually for their certification inspection? The surface impoundments are cleaned as needed,
which is seldom.
iffl
e
•"
•
o
-------
MaTCK*
TOTAL
T otfll
Inc.
IJOa SOUTH II (TIICT
ARKANSAS CTTT. KANSAS S7OOS
MAIUHC AOQUCSS:
'O (OX SST
ARKANSAS CITY. KAMIA* ITDOS
July 8, 1991
*l*
5*
o 2 JO
ff«
3
MS. Mary Compton s
ICF Incorporated
Office 471
9300 Lee Highway
Fairfax, VA 22031
Dear Ms. Compton,,
Enclosed is the information you requested during our conver-
sation on July 3, 1991 to complete the F037/F038 questionnaire.
Included for the Total Petroleum, Inc. Arkansas City Refinery
are: 1) Refinery Water Flow Schematic and 2} Waste Minimization
Policy.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call.
Thank you.
o
a.
K>
O-
O
UJ
Sincerely,
TOTAL PETROLEUM, INC.
P. Oi> TTOC/tA
P. A. Morgan (\
Chief Chemist
cc: PAL
C3
UQ
uo
-------
Ill
£5i
TOTAL PETROLEUM, INC.
Arkansas City, KS Facility
December 4, 1990
WASTE MINIMIZATION POLICY
I. OBJECTIVES
A. Compliance with RCRA regulations mandating that every
generator of hazardous waste "have a program in place
to reduce the volume and toxicity of waste generated
to the extent that is economically practical."
B. Economic benefits.by reducing waste treatment and dis-
posal costs, raw material purchases, and other operat-
ing costs may be realized.
C. Reduce potential environmental liabilities
C. Protect the public health and the environment
£. Improved public image
^ ^ £ j S
*> ** ** M. W
&&•*••
• srir
o
s
o
•o
CO
CD
-------
r
II. ORGANIZATION
'4
'4
Although all employees will be involved in TPI's waste
minimization program, the program will be overseen and
administered by a program task force. The task force
will consist of the following personnel or department
representatives on a volunteer or individual depart-
ment selection basis.
i. Refinery Manager
2. Manager of Operations
3. Operations
4. Process Engineer
5. Project Engineer
6. Laboratory
7. Maintenance __
8. Safety
9. Environmental
o
§
o
s
III. GOALS AND INCENTIVES
'At a minimum, the waste minimization program task force
will meet annually to establish realistic goals for the
following year. Accurate production and.waste figures
will be mandatory to determine goals and to track the
program's success. All waste reduction efforts will
be thoroughly documented and be measured on a pound
waste/1000 barrel feed basis. More frequent meetings
of the task force will be conducted to assess the suc-
cess or identify any problems associated with the waste
minimization program.
The most effective waste minimization program will
require the input and participation of all employees.
Various incentives to promote cooperation, communica-
tion, and motivation will be examined.
-------
r
n
y
IV. ANNUAL ASSESSMENT
A. Before goals can be established, a thorough assessment
of the facility's waste streams oust be made. The as-
sessment will identify and characterize the individual
waste streams, the processes involved in generating the
streamsi the amounts generated, the inputs and outputs
of the different processes, and whether the waste is
classified as hazardous or not and if it is hazardous,
the characteristic!a) which make it hazardous. Where
feasible, flow diagrams arid material balances will be
employed to assist the assessment phase.
9. During the assessment phase it will become apparent
to the task force which waste stream(s) should be
given priority with consideration of the following:
1. Compliance with current and future regulations,
2. Costs of waste management.
3. Potential environmental and safety liability.
4. Quantity of waste. _
5. Hazardous properties of waste.
6. Ease of implementation.
7. Potential for removing bottlenecks in production or
waste treatment.
8. Potential recovery of valuable by-products.
9. Costa associated with potential waste minimization
projects.
t
.
' 8 Isr
O
O
O
O
-------
fit
The third phase of the annual assessment will involve
generating waste minimization options. Much of the re-r
quisite knowledge will come from on-the-job experience
and education. However, other sources of background
information such as published literature, equipment,
vendors, consultants, and plant engineers and operators
will prove useful.
Some generic waste minimization options to be consid-
ered include:
1. Substitution of less hazardous raw materials of
production.
2. More efficient technology and equipment.
3. Optimization of production operations and proce-
dures.
4. In-pl'ant recycling.
5. Changing plant practices to generate less hazardous
wasteuater. ~
f
= <
-------
- V. FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
A. A technical evaluation of the proposed options is
necessary to determine which if any of the options are
"" '. compatible with the facility's operations and physical
-t constraints and if the option(s) will work. A ranking
of the various options in relation to technical feasi-
-) bility will then be performed helping to aid in the
,,} identification of the most desirable options.
.... B. The options will also undergo an economic evaluation.
'•! The economic evaluation will consider capital and
'** operating costs and 'any potential saving*. Also,
adjustment* for environmental and safety risks and
"1 liabilities will be considered.
'-rt .'•..:••
C. At the conclusion of the feasibility analysis, the task
— force will make a determination of the technical
and economic feasibility of the various waste minimi-
zation options proposed. If'the benefits outweigh the
costs then a particular, option will be chosen to be im-
plemented. '...'.
VI. IMPLEHENTATION .
A. Funding must be obtained 'for the chosen option.
B. Options that do not require any additional equipment
will be implemented as soon as possible.
C. Follow-up evaluations on the performance of the chosen
option will be conducted periodically. ,
D. Will be an ongoing program.
E. New production processes .will be subjected to the as-
sessment, technical, and economic feasibility phases
before construction begins.
•o
o
10
o
o
CQ
-------
#«HK3St
„
WCLL WATCH ~^"V ' ^ •
7*0,000 0PM ^ ^
sotto. nrruiiM FHQM"^. fc
I B*
v*r
STORM
WATER
COOLING
TOWERS
(5)
PUMP
JACKET
COOUNO
BOILERS
(»)
BAIIVB
FEED
WATER
TREATMENT
LAB
2,BOO OPD
29.900 flPO
B5.OOO OPD
4BS.6OO OPD BLOWDI
^
I2.OOO OPD
. — r-—^"
f*^^
i
• •.000 OPO BLOWOC
^^ 1-1 n ik, •-- ^^
^l\
i
•••0,000 OPD fc
^^r^
1.500 OPD
n
•*.. •»
s
a
i
IV»N
»X.
— x
^
3
»wn <
J
-^
t
ill
lib'
T '**' 0
» =r2.m
: o-2
io|
a
to
•
O"
u>
(P^Ta
tS''
*•"•!
LJ"I
wu
GO
•
•
, J
-------
r
ill!
X **
o
s
^rj
O
O
-------
fWWCW
53
3 " »")
o. &»••
a
8
to
o'
o
—J
-------
ififl
'
a —
D * ™ ^. m
o. a -. »
O
o
to
o-
O'
CQ
-------
B*WN:»
STEAM
65,000 OPO
ROCESS WATER
> : — ^
SOUK
WATER
STRIPPER
«• » •'»
DESAtT&ft!
•oopm
_ TOTAL: «oi
O
o
O
O
U)
...-J
-------
U
0*0
s
o
o
to
O
o
CD
uo
-------
f
.1
*»
u
'~9\
MKMTt
fir
o
s
Tl
O
O
U)
car
ua
-------
r
38
• I
T
•»
u
a a, — ••
'III
1st
•-*
o
o
o
K^IB AS •NO1IMI
M.L.
OWN
CHIC.
TOTAL
Total Petrol«um. Inc. Arkansas City. Kans,
REFINERY WATER FLOW
DAWN.
MEYEH
B_fT
itni'ST
OAfI
B*rr
tOCATlflK
NONE
SHT. t
•R"
1
-wm
UQ
hj
-------
r
* i
i —
j
"
PfloteVi
"
P&VM/J*1f
QUESTIONNAIRE A GENERAL FACILITY INFORMATION .PAGE 30
otea
HC-
e /O
C HW
v-r
Lfivtt*lL.U
5"5
• »< jg A ,
c r1«
5§;
2«-r
n
s
>TJ
o
o
OJ
wu
\ .
-------
*li
««i
M
o • s^n
a°kffsr
• OH*
O —. (I
O '
s C**
2
•^
"^
"
:. 2 2 ±
"* ~
8
o
o
UJ
U3
LQ
-------
r
>' -ar
'— r-
U
fit
e
UD
UD
LH
-------
r
F037 AMD F038 WASTE CAPACITY ANALYSIS:
DATA USE AND TRACKING SHEET
Refinery: BP Oil - Alliance Refinery, Belle Chasse
State: Louisiana
gss
Data sources available:
_x Petroleum refinery visits/voluntary submission
_x National Survey of Hazardous Waste Treatment. Storage, Disposal,
and Recycling Facilities (TSDR survey)
Rational Survey of Hazardous Waste Generators
_x Biennial report/state reporting requirements
California hazardous waste data base
. _a Petroleum refinery data base (PRDB)
_2 No-migration petitions
Basts for F037 and F038 vaste estimation:
EPA used data provided by BP Oil (Alliance Refinery) because .it was the
nost recent and the only source that describes F037 and F038 waste
generation and nanageaent. Other sources were used only in comparison
With the refinery's data submission.
C e
• §
o
a
O
O
F037 and F038 waste estimates:
F037 (routine) - 1,000 tons/year from cleanout of sewer and equalization
ponds. '
F037 (one-cine) - 10,000 cons from closure of stormwater/process water
impoundments, which had not been cleaned for about five years. The
impoundments will be replaced by tanks, which will be cleaned out every
tvo co five years; therefore, the F037 sludge would not be generated
continuously.
BP Oil Alliance does not anticipate generating F038 wastes.
-------
r
7028 : 7- >-»' : I'-HM : SP OIL K569-
ic?. INC :•
ni IP OIL
»o mitt
yieinm.1 MTM »*a«
tot
mm er mm
rax HOI -7*3-
nunon wi
or MOM i
ri
UULUUXK9 COTB.fMB
rot nonvi
X»L
i .
WOl
raunnn 101 i*et\ tu-*
O
s
hcj
O
O
UQ
— f
-------
3w=Xfrox Ttl*»o:t* 7C20 • 7- i-il ; e:;2*J ;
ff IT= 7- g.|l : '
PM7 AND FC39 QueOTIONa
vn nm OMWPM • pmunnvy ttrai of qwti^ont to •» m >*
t£?
eflhMt'
9 s 9
-x a*
s
§
o
s
-------
. SP c:. "-SEC- ::F. IN: ;a
;cr. ix," or OIL nwj.iVo
u
*" • Hi«th*rtB^n«fiyup«CMmww«t»irttr«Mftnwntfialnyopifitriflcfano«»
to ft*»» tw tmount of «WM WORM emrdrt majjow tftattw «* mm
If • W« «W propeitd FMT »nd' FOaa Ivxl t-n «ffiet tf»
pndund? Vt 5
•vi-
• HowmucnotOWMWMttivtiwcKplMini
• Whrt M » otwmM end phy»to*i ehMCMrttttw of Iht our/»my «*rw«>*d *n •• »ttimwMimnefimtffiowto(Knindnx»w«tMitockpBMlieenW^
].? • Whttmyettoiiv^«^iiVtlrii«loei^^w^i.«ndwMnyeurtuftjrt
MM m *• ctwnfed Md phy«M
Wh« fe yiu ewi^ fcumrri. noyob or dtooitl m*^
««h th« Urd b«it /Ur
«t «« MfMOWM Of ttUM
rwaonmip n roar mo Kae wumt
dtpaul mtmofit M
5~ff* 2
M
o
a
to
hrj
O
o
UQ
to
LQ
-------
«*IJtt*l
HAT Br.'Xirsx Tt.icopitr *02« : 7- e-fli : 8:23An :
JOT IT' 7- 8-« ; Man i
ar
yi • Mff«ntnrptB«^ehingM.t«wpftyiWerofMrrtenii,iotlMiwnvMHra
banM hewwltwMehttONiflMtKMfrNMS w*ft
it • peMM lo nduei TO7/raa or K04MOK HMM 6y puang mort or • IOM
Uft
WhM «t y«w rfllU VtdmiW PpBoni Md am th* unioui Murti of your wwa
I or«n phmntd uptlnimta nduet m MXMM
ccptn of
O
O
to
o
O
AH, DAP, mnn art,
• ••«• o« •»•• quMto* «• *•? apMNs, M M!M «Ml InWtfy net al ol 0«
Mo. m ta MMb*. Ifw ntn pupen a(.«w qualiia ta M g* «
ynd««itindhOk to giti Mtarhow much pWnina to takhg plaoa, how much (Mali
•ndmhtlMv
-------
-I
-1
I
-.1
*
•I
3'
- I
- I
«
B 5 M «
o
s
O
o
OJ
s •: •SK: -=5!
-to
Jtido:»-s;
-------
r
F037 AMD F038 WASTE CAPACITY ANALYSIS:
DATA USE AND TRACKING SHEET
Refinery; Exxon - Baton Rouge Refinery
State: Louisiana
Data sources available:
_S Petroleum refinery visits/voluntary submission
_& National Survey of Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage, Disposal.
and Recycling Facilities (TSDR survey)
National Survey of Hazardous Waste Generators
.jt Siennial report/state reporting requirements
California hazardous vaste data base
_S Petroleum refinery data base (PRDB)
Ho-nigration petitions
Easts for F037 and F038 waste estimation:
EPA used data provided by Exxon (Baton Rouge Refinery) because it was
the most recent and the only source that describes F037 and F038 vaste
generation and manageaent. Other sources were used only in comparison
with the refinery's data submission.
F037 and FQ38 waste estimates:
F037 (routine) - 6.000 tons/year of devatered cake from an average
annual clean out of 32,500 tons of sludge froa Impoundments.
F037 (one-tine) - 30.000 tons in catch basins.
0
o
o
10
o
o
-------
JU*-2~-19Si 13; 12 PBCM S-:.-CH SS.
1
*t
a
COMPANY USA
FACSIMILE
TRANSMISSION FORM
iNc21|<99l
PAGES TO FOLLOW
PLEASE CALL
covea
"If
1»l
?l"5
»*« ?**
«» o 2ffo
si^s
s»sis
^g-s
8fs
f O
y « v
n
o
to
o
o
u>
TO8 Mp.tlAMESHsu
1C F- INC.
WTURK OftKIKU: TES
IF YES, NAKl MO ROOK
ROBERT
EXXQN CMPAW USA.
i Itel 656-5049
MtP<:ut
KtCHllff
4
-------
r
9
MPANY USA
• NOUSTCn.tlXXTnSl.2tW
June 27.1991
By Pax
Mr. Jamwt Hsu
iCF.lne.
930O LM Highway
Fairfax, Virginia 22031
Dear Mr. Hsu: '
Enclosed are tha completed F037 and F038 questionnaires for fha Exxon Baytown and
Baton flcjuge refinartas.
Pl«asa call ma at (713) 656-5049 if you hava any questions.
Vary truly yours.
Robert M. Nolan
o
o
to
o
o
"""I
C5!
-C
-------
. t!.*mit~Sr
!
JU4-26-1991 13'
WASTE WATER
DOCN ISO IfC BOTOI FCUE TO
Exxon Baton Rouge Refinery
3ESE£677 P. 82
tWtaf ft ro«r eunat eenOguntfen?
SM ttt«ch»d
•«BO Roupt
»«*•*
N« dtnHfetm mo««e«lcn« in tht latt I ytwi.
N/A
eonttterino tp8i dhtreh
snd itofntwctef te$f9Qvt>Ofl
NiSHAPS «ntf TC witttwttW.
«nd prim«rrf!v0Q* oonc«m» «nd irwttiUno tMmnt Mrtpptr for
TC, Wnwy Shirfot tod BMONW NS8HAP8 ru**.
Pert A p*rmh* htvt bten fiM on «urfac« knpotndmtm* tfut to TC/Pricrwy $mtfgt rales.
fMkwry Is punwing wort tggr*$*iv« dtw*teifn0/tftoiliflfl
KD4B-K and TC
Itott of o^nrrton for K w
utimtttd to be 1 TOfc vnt ton«/yr (20-2Bk diwaterad
ortoBOATtrtMmomerneycrina. For TC teW
. •ntoImddtepOMl. Refinery prooM* w«tt*w«ttra •«
ewrtotfy TC hBontow •nd* in ownaovo' to KPOES trMOiMRt tyttom Impoundment*. TWs
v«lumoi>«etlinitidtota13mHonton*/vMr. Until feeXtiM to oompfywWiBenxtnt
NeSHAP8ra9uMonoMvon4netntfdem«r«tr«t«tf»yDwieff«eth«(y mduoe beraetM
below .8 ppm. meet WMtnrtten mat be ;ne«»^#d M TC Keurfoue wntet.
Mudgn awtfmrtteivd ons>tr, oT« are racovwod for !«finlng end remeWng toRd* «rt eem
for ofMt* ditpeeti 1^., tondfll. Indowetion or cwnem bin*, etc pending iludf*
Jj*i—Al.
o 2 j o
S«-S
sr»iS
A *- <*
O « -
c &2
C -* •*
o
u
10
O
O
U>
-------
JlH-36-1991
F-:-CN •::. WISA T
P04H US* IN: BPTTtM SQUQE TO
P.34
3SSG6677 P. 83
It*
Alt
a- 2
B* Z^Z
•* aS« °
J2 n ** " M
"J
J
wwtt
flgftf MM Ifl* MflMftM MHft IV*VM4 IVXt
tan?
tontnten ntM htv» net chang^ •wbmtmictty. Agsmitvo dowattring/diolllna I*
ntfudno velum* Mtn etflto. -CondnginB w tvriuttt optlora luch w Mtvtnt «xtr»ctioo,
th«nr«l wwtmtm and othtr *Jv»ncwJ tMhnolegl ** to fgrtfiw wlue* tftepowltorw.
ndbet 4»m*mt of (ftw* wntMftntntftf tf* *#w
•on vorion to ita wnr
«n« oontimiing to tv^uct*
sMflM from MfK«lmp9un«Mmiiavt not tunduTChnardoui. fnknracrf
TCwMtMintinkafl»(t>nltWmt}i»7tkw«ttant (SM dtwiaratf tons). Cttlmntdlth
Htu *>«t tont of K040 utd K0»1 wastn to 1 8-20k tent Ok devratmd tanrt,
on Mv flftMitaf M^pAfitof cAMCfcMfef Of6>t tiftmwfgtiHntta tM
,
Aa gtMrtttt hv«hu wann «r» hiflft !«i wtt«f contint wHh no tignfficwrt btu vtK*.
wH gignWemtly ntfUM vdgmt» to ba rantpttf. Btu vikM of dew»w«d
mttfritte nwy or m«y net mwtf 5k.
sr
WPW WBr cVAttl tinWCttnMwV CRflAfV IMw IV^pMNlWw ftO^Vy AMBnnDMWRv ttt9
MqdHtertcnt meh a btravw NE8HAP8 facMtiw m^ « wetJy ratfuM votttOt
eenMtttMrrts: tht •Iu40c wBI, hewtw, «tB b« en «ny miwtel. Btu vmh* m«y ta radgc«d.
but DOt QUIIlUlMu
Nona. §r*ttvaUVtte~iw»9t~«how it tfon net M TC.
F037 tnd FO38 WASTES
Y«, •peronmMHy 30-3BK wtt kv«itu tens (We dow
trnpaundmcnt and rtfbwy MWW syattm catch ta«in*.
on*) to thi turfict
2-a
Eon
d
O
O
C3
-------
.'•jh-"-:r51 13: U
jw-!6-:99i 12:41 PCM
uea INC BBTCN ROJQE
36566677 P. 04
I'!'-
tt «•« *t astfcatf* of fftawicuif off037ta4?OU wtstK i»c*pfcrf*t ocntafeaa or
XMm cytpouffi
Yea. about 30k wtt iMtoi tew (6* ««w»tarad toa»l in a surtaca Iropowvimarrt and catch
basin* an) en additional 10-50* wtt hv*ftu tonHUk dawatacad tcn« ewnjinwJ in ttw
NPOS8 ««vtr «y«um.
nimntfy »w»d In Mrfte* impowndmm. NPDE5 trMtmfot«ytrtm tank. *tf
Mwtrs. Currtmty pUnrtng to *»4C« lmixK«Jm»m »nd dwn out of »me •twtr» prior to
ttfldbtn,
ttoelipitdwittmt
Wattt* an currtntfy eocttvined in tha aurfwt hnpountfmtm and sawar baains, !t i*
baaioaSy an eBy atudge eoncwmtion whh lew btu vaiua. Cumntty gtnantad waiti li
dww*«K««and aanc to orhhaiMrffltmattriali* 80-70* aofida. Metarial btu vilut may
or may iwt RMMt Gk/lb.
Currant mathod ia to ao^raMivtiy tfawatar, daeil tnd fandffl. Wfth landban. waata may
undacgc firttwr aggrtsiivt dawatafing prior to offato treat»n»nt
t»*tt
Currvtt eapcdty t» OmKad w oortraK dawatarinQ aarvtoaa. Cmrantly aaataalns additional
tachnalogy aueh aa ttannal daaorpdon/trvatnwn, aoivant extmctica ate.
Cutvantly
• 9f 9ptfftrOft9ff * O wMr WftR V99 Jlffv aMlf
wMMMatnnfeff?
diwratartng/daollina tadvwto0^a and additional
upatratm watt* mWmJiatJen praetfcaa such aa aaMrar aaaragatfon and arotioh control.
Primary aMga tendban wM not affact IC04HCOB2 Qamration, howavar, traatnwnt and
diapoaaJ option* for *F* waataa may and up balng NmiMd to a«mt t» thoaa w« now use f or
*K" wastw, which may raduca cspawty avalabb for *K* waata atraems.
Bloloajcal ttwarant may ba an afftctiva tachndogy to traat tha onjanio conttituanb) of
ttaa waataa. *nw aggrtntv* bMooJcat units, howavar, ara not dasfrnad to managa tha
addWenat toflda ajaaoeiatad wHh tfiaaa wattat. Addttiohaly. currant regutationa do not
allow a eaftyovar of Bstad wastva into downstraacn untw without RCftA ragulating tha
antin NPOES iiaaUnant train.
a &
' 8
2
o
O
O
-------
•1
j
y
AH-96-1991 12*42 PSCM
U9fi INC BSTtN ROUE
36565677 P.BS
Primary Option la to aand ^ggrwrrt
f« fttu v«Ii» wwtM w «mer« tftw •* • finl.
K04»4M8t wMtn M BWMtad at apKHIo point tourets tnd wwt« htixfling JteilWtt
•rteurrcntfystt up to h«id)aOWMvvMte*trMm$ttihoM location*. Ifthenwnaway
totNftthag«wrtonof P087ff03« wute« to thtwpcinti.lt wotfd fadtatt handing.
IHM * Mt *»ou*»*y «/
Fmo^itney n«M on tna unit plot ptan, bnnny on an wnuai bati*.
.Ml
3-< Z&Z
•• o 2 jr o
0.
O
a
to
o
o
UJ
C3
CO
-------
r
JlW-21-1991 VIS R5EJ1 BOON iSR IK BOTCH RQUZ TO
36S666T7 P.B6
o
D
to
o
o
OJ
CD
UQ
-------
PHOSE LOG FOR F037 AND F038 CAPACITY ANALYSIS
CONTACT: Robert Nolan (Exxon: Houston, TX; Baytown, TX; and Bacon
Rouge. LA)
\
PHONE NUMBER: (713) 656-5049
CALLER: James Hsu
DATE- 9/10/91
SUBJECT: The use of cokers and thermal dryers Co recycle petroleum
wastes
Mr. Nolan indicated that the Baycovm refinery does not recycle petroleum
wastes using its on-site gasifying coker because the technology co recycle
petroleum wastes using this type of coker is not yet available. The Baton
Rouge refinery cannot recycle petroleum wastes using its on-site coker because
addition of wastes to their anode-grade coke would degrade its purity.
The Baytown refinery had operated a first-generation thermal dryer, but
discontinued the use of the dryer because of safety and operational problems.
Mr. Nolan mentioned thst on several occasions oxygen leaked into the dryer and
caused explosions. He indicated that major redesign of the dryer would be
needed to overcone the problems.
The Baton Rouge refinery is operating a new thermal dryer on a trial basis.
The operation has also encountered several problems (e.g., feed becomes tacky
during drying; heat transfer problems; and cooling problems with the
residuals). The vendor is redesigning the thermal dryer.to overcome these
problems. The dryer at Baton Rouge is rated to process 50 tons/day of wastes,
but is currently capable of processing 35 tons/day.
Mr. Nolan indicated that DAT floats (K068), which has a relatively high water'
content (average 82 percent vater), i« easily processed in the dryer.
However, API separator sludges, which contain less water (average 65 percent
water), is mechanically more difficult to process. Primary sludges (F037 and
F038), which are similar to API separator sludges, would also be more
difficult to process u^ing the thermal dryer.
The thermal dryers are classified as recycling/recovery units and are exempt
from hazardous waste permitting. The most time consuming activities for
starting up a dryer is to construct a concrete pad to support the dryer and to
obtain an air permit.
Exxon's objective in using .thermal drying is to reduce waste volumes rather
than neet BDAT standards. Since the operation of thermal dryers have not yet
Exxon's expectations, the company has not ruled out other vaste recycling
technologies, such as solvent extraction and thermal distillation. •
Mr. Nolan also indicated the surface impoundments in Baytown and Baton Rouge
r
tf
?*!!!
e. a. -. JT
* S " s-
?
o
o
to
O
O
-------
i —
would be dredged before the F vaste land ban. There arc no future plans to
elose these stornvater inpoundaen;& since they are an Integral part of the
wasteuater treatment process. Hovever, Exxon is planning to segregate these
storavater impoundments so that they will receive only vet weather flows.
•J
O
o
to
O
O
U)
-------
F037 AND F038 WASTE CAPACITY ANALYSIS:
DATA USE AND TRACKING SHEET
ss
Refinery: Murphy Oil - Meraux Refinery
State: Louisiana
Data sources available:
_X Petroleum refinery visits/voluntary submission
x National Survey of Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage. Disposal.
and Recycling Facilities (TSDR survey)
National -Survey of Hazardouo Waste Generators
, Biennial report/state reporting requirements
California hazardous waste data base
_S Petroleum refinery data b«»« (PRDB)
No-migration petitions
Basts for F037 and F038 uaste
-------
MURPHY OIL USA, INC.
2500 E St Bernard Highway
Menus, LA 70075 .
REFINERY DESCRIPTION
Murphy Oil in Mereaux. LA is • refinery thu produces primarily gasoline, kerosene, #6 oil, etc.,
processing 97,000 barrels of crude oil per day, according to the Annual Refining Survey in the Oil and Gas
Journal published March 18,1991. Toe refinery site is 70 years old (Murphy Oil acquired it in the 1960's).
The total area covered by the facility is 564 acres.
WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
Since 1986, some modifications to the wasicwater treatment pUnt have been made. The driving
force behind these modifications was the legislation of HD37-F038 and TC wastes. In the past, the stream
from API separator was sent to the equalization baste first, but it has been rerouted directly to the units
to avoid PQ37-HB8 waste generation.
Murphy is considering replacing the API separator with a modern covered CPi separator. The
cover would preclude volatile emissions, «nd the existing API unit cannot be covered. The same volumes
of waste would be generated in the API or CPL
The Surge Basin does not receive dry weather Dow, and therefore Murphy Oil believes it to be
exempt.
PETROLEUM REFINING WASTE GENERATION
K waste {eneration currently totals to 2000-2200 tonsftear. The elimination of the equalization
basin wOl lessen generation of F wastes. However, when the basin is taken ont of the treatment train, this
win have IB aflea on the stream catering the DAF units. The resulting impact on the K048 waste
generation is not yet known, but is anticipated that KD48 waste generation will increase significantly.
The BKfliqr has not yet treated or disposed of any F037-FBJ8 wastes. Dredging from the units that
would possibly be generators of F wastes was highly infrequent la the past. If the equalization basin and
surge basin had to be cleaned, it is estimated they might generate 400 tons and 1,000 tons of sludge,
respectively.
WASTE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
K048-KD52 wastes were first disposed on a landfium, which is now closed. Then they were sent to
CbemWaste Management Currently, doe to BDAT, they are recycled to a commercial otttiie cement kiln.
The equalization basin and surge basin would typically be cleaned once every six years at most
The facility does not have any frmmiHwl wastes to manage. The wastewater treatment units (e.g. API,
DAF) that would generate K wastes were also very Infrequently cleaned.
Most changes thai would affect F or K waste generation at the Murpby Oil facility in Mereaux are
stffl in the planning stage. No further wasiewater system modifications or upstream modifications affecting
F and K waste generation have been initiated. There as no preference in terms of handling or disposal of
F or K wastes,
A Waste Reduction Program is submitted annually.
**»
n
o
to
o
o
-------
«..•;.->•'-•*
1
1
1
1
I
"
-
£* - ^
a _n
Eoff
8
to
o
o
-------
-
-«
-
- „ Bl
o
o
to
-------
5!
F037 AND F038 WASTE CAPACITY ANALYSIS:
DATA USE AND TRACKING SHEET
Refinery:
State:
Total Petroleun
Michigan
f.la.3 Refinery
Data sources available:
_X Petroleum refinery visits/voluntary submission
_x National Survey of Hazardous Uaste Treatment. Storage, Disposal.
and Recycling Facilities (TSDR survey)
National Survey of Hazardous Waste Generators
Biennial report/state reporting requirements
California hazardous waste data base
_J£ Petroleum refinery data base (PRDB)
_ No-migration petitions
Basis for F037 and F038 waste estimation^
EPA used data provided by Total Petroleun (Alma Refinery) because it was
the nost recent and the only source that describes F037 and F038 waste '
generation and management. Other sources were, used only in comparison
with the refinery's data submission.
F037andF038 waste estimates:
Even chough Total Petroleun has ah 1AF unit in operation, they do not
report any generation of F038 wastes because the sludge is returned to
the API separator where it reports as either the K051 sludge or the oil
layer that is recovered in the slop oil system.
Total petroleum reports no F037 waste generation from the equalization
pond because vigorous areation in the pond prevents settling of
particulates.
o
o
to
T!
O
o
i
-------
r
F037/F038 WASTE CAPACITY ANALYSIS - REFINERY INTERVIEW
STATE:
]
«*
ADDRESS:
CONTACT: "%&-&
POSITION:
REFERENCE:
DATE: feifO
£>OfV -^
TIME:
EXTENSION:
sp
—
£"» ~ „.
tt **• ••
—
~ „. w
• CBI claims?
- Fill out responses to »iuched inierview guide
- Need 10 fax information to contact person?
• Items contact will send:
- Miscellaneous, notes:
o
o
O
o
U)
I
CD
I .
-------
F037 AND F038 QUESTIONS
-
sr tt
We have developed a preliminary series of questions to aid in our understanding of how the new
F037 and F038 waste fisting and proposed land ban will affect refineries. These questions
involve not only F037 and F038 wastes, but expand to K04e-K052 and TC wastes, discuss past
and future waste water treatment tacffity modifications, on site treatment, etc., in order for us to
get an understanding of the whole picture and how everything interrelates. In addition to gaining
an overall understanding of the issues, we want, to discover any unique problems or treatability
issues that refineries may have associated with these wastes. Please complete the questions
below on separate pieces of paper and mail to Ms. Jo-Ann Bassl (U.S. EPA) before June 1. 1991.
10 Waste Water Treatment Facility '
'•' • What b your current configuration {schematic} ?
2.0
2.3
How segregated to your system, stormwaler vs. process water?
What modification* have been made in^the last 5 years?
CUB- T"Aje-a-v^itja-''^*v\_s f., i
What were the driving forces behind these modificatfona?
What future modifications are planned?
„„-(.«••- w.tt>
--' *"• *
WhatwetheoYh^twcwbermdff^modrfkaltons?
How nave the KM8-KOS2. TC and F037/F033 rulings and land bans affected the
faeBty In terms of modMcattons. operation, capacity, etc.? , -. .,.,
~ .XXt-Au**- C'.'*-.-""-1! - &&-tc,_..-hr- iVaJ-^'t J'-''-w -7'
What k your estimated rate of generation and land disposal of K048-KDS2 andTC
waste*?
-------
2.f
2-f
tt
Have there been any upstream or waste water treatment facility operating changes
to reduce the amount of these wastes generated and how effective are these
changes? r •:•«-
,>»—I iYvtl-i-v"s~ »-*C-*V
How much of these wastes are stockpiled in containers or surface impoundments?
What are the chemical and physical characteristics of the currently generated and
stockpiled wastes fie. are they dewatered, do they have significant btu value, etc.)?
iVjs, MVJL* 0>--.«< -aOU-d O,f«_-^.L-+»^<— (if CSiUCt
How whrftese ch'an&er^bcs change' wfth'any planned facility modifications and
operating changes?
2.\ • What quantity of your secondary treatment waste, such as sludge from the
aggressive biological units, is categorized as TC waste?
• 3.0 F037 and TOM Wastes
3.1 • is there a current estimate of the amount of F037 and F038 wastes generated?
3-2- • Is there an^estimate of tf»amoUn'ftilrF037 and F036 wastes stocVpiledSn containers
or surface impoundments? _ , -v_
3-3 • What are you currently doing with the stockpiled waste and what are your future
Wfwt are the chemical and physical characteristics of both the currently generated
and the stockpied wastes?
3.;
What is your current treatment recycle or disposal method and how will this change
with the land ban? - •r'_A>j^\34-*Ov^- o?*.sr- er- i-£...i— j^'.."^^^
What are the capacities of these treatment recycle and disposal methods in
relationship to F037 and F038 wastes?
"If
•a >«
e Z.~
i1!
„ «< &Ar
" a = ? P
?="
3
ES|
O
S
o
o
U)
'-O
-------
o 2 t
"* *
•» o to
3.1
3.S
4.0 General
H-3
H.M
Are there any planned changes, either physical or operational, to deal with the land
ban and how will these changes affect KQ48-K052 waste generation?
\\£~<\£_ . •
Is it possible to reduce F037/F038 or K048-K052 wastes by putting more of a load
on the aggressive biological units?
What are your offstte treatment options and are the unique features of your waste
that would limit the testability options? •
•
_
W^"!.\_ Vu-Li-< *- •=>*•» •J>i->- /oi-ot r
What moarfications have been done or are planned upstream to reduce the amount
of waste generated In the waste water treatment facility (eg. pretreatment, source
control, segregation, etc.)? 4r^ •i=-a-is.iv..4>.oJ3.' finJfirc e. ti
-------
r
* u. lt-
« UJ
J C
sou run
s
d
M
ur£
RcFtNERY fUCL
0
fi
0,
w
^
5'
x
i
»- 4
l
1!
PURCHASED
NORMAL
BUTANE
5
i
v
^
t
8
-
§
S
5
tf
ALKVLATIO4
L
\
s
h.
«
7]
5
i
«
55
V!
ii
3
9
0
?
1
>.
&
s
3 O
< i
'i
GASOLINE
{
I
s
1
1
s
1
<
!
1
RES.'i.AR IEAC:0
?
'
s
•'
r
J
in
5
Is
L
:
cz
LI-
• 1
— i
1
i
|
_J
IA
Z05 SOLVENT
KEROSENES
x
&
w
a
ID
i
1C
U
r
«|i
I?
i
i
tf
V
U
e
i
3
UJ
<
J
i.
55
1
VI
o
J
o
.1
rv
g
DISTILLATE
BLENDING
(J
i
^^M
o
u
IP
ft
Ii
^—
n
1
—
in
5 u
J
r
i 1
Sp
J*tft
luOU
|
IS
$
$
5?
UJ
S5
lif
O
•O
10
o
o
u>
C3
•"U
-------
,r
<;
'
-:? i
-- i
T.
71 1A
f . •
LtJ
<
I
.. ! & r*
!f^ J WJ-:
i;E "^;
)••« 5.. :•
:
L
Iff-
8
O
O
Oj
i.
-------
r
fc L s£
(•} !bi 1 I
M 1 _•-_«•»
_
ft P. M. M
" 8 " B-
o
d
to
o
o
u>
(JU
i
-------
PTAV. "PeTROL-BOPl ACMA MICH. WAfcTC FLOW 0^44QjQ
SYSTEM * I
WATCR
IAF
MH
"INDUCED
FLOTATION
To
NPt >
API
WT
EMULSION
BRCAPHNCi
ANO
o«ty
sep
ZO WT
xasi
enm.
etc
TO
Reuse
now.
. on.
VOUUMC
41 WT
_.
I K041
OFF sire
TANK
* I
sitr
* ? — » 2
(I ™ •• — . IB
a o. -«
Sit
8
Ni
o
o
..J
-------
OTAL PCTROCEUM
I 6E"NeRAt_
FLOW
* I
0^4489
M H W ATCff KfTU»ff
Dooz
N J GC.TION
WELL
4 O
SLCt.rHtt.flt.
C(-C.AMIN«
0607 -
S2 - 12
- I
;N
I A
OFF SITE
o
a
O
O
CO
C3
Oi
un
-------
F
i
F037 ACT F038 VASTE CAPACITY ANALYSIS:
DATA USE AND TRACKING SHEET
i -.
Refinery: Chevron - Pascagoula Refinery
Scace: Mississippi
Data sources available:
_H Petroleum refinery visits/voluntary submission
_3S National Survey, of Hazardous tfaste Treatment, Scorage. Disposal,
and. Recycling Facilities (TSDR sunrey)
_ National Survey of Hazardous tfaste Generators
_ • Biennial report/state reporting requirements
_ California hazarded waste data base*
_2S Petroleum refinery data base (PRDB)
_ No-nigration petitions
for F037
st Imatton:
EPA used data provided by Chevron (Pascagoula refinery) because it was
the no*t recent and the only source that describes F037 and F038 vaste
generation and nanagettent. Other sources were used only in comparison
vith the refinery's data submission.
i
o
o
i «
F037 and F038 waste estinates:
f037/8 (routine) - 1,000 tons/year fron CPI and IAF units, and from
sewer eleanouts.
Chevron reports no other F wastes than those identified above.
C3
cm
-------
r
TO:
DATE:
NAME:
COMPANY:
CITY:
FAX*
NAME:
PHONE:
A FAX FROIfc
Chevron U.&A. Inc.
P.O. Box 1300
Pascsgouta. MS 39566-1300
FAX #(601) 938-4230
or
CTN 938-4230
Pascafloula Refinery
' Number of P«g«a (including covei):
. MESSAGE:
/&ter-
Confim>atk>n # (601) 638*4202 or 4228
/
o
O
1
O
S
-------
'.; 4:3*4:30 :
Pa»c«goul«, Ms.
June 21, i79i
M». Mary Compton
ICF Incorporated •
Reeponee to FO37 and F03S Questionnaire
1.0 'Maeff Hater Treatment facility
1.1 Mhat ia youc current eonf inuration"'
See Schematic.
segregated it veuc s vet em. ctormwater
_ .
Storm water and precmmt watar are totally t»gr«g*tod.
1.3 What modification* hava bg»p maijff ifl. ^ftf
• •
•
Thr»« curfac* lmpouncJ«»nt» w*r« r»cnov»d from ••rvie»|a
•tar«M«t*r ditch warn cl*an*
-------
2.0 K048-KOS2 and T£ Hastes
2.1 a hat is vour e«tm>ated rate of peneratjpn ana land
disposal of KO4B-KOS2 and TC 'wastes? 2^2 How fia you currently
trea^. reeveljt or dispose of these waaty and are there any
foreseeable changes; in the treatment, recycling or disposal?
K043 is recycled in a closed loop system. Rate of
generation is 17,000 tons per year. K049 and KOS1 are
recycled in the Mobil Oil Sludge Coking (MOSC) system.
Approximately BOO tons are recycled • KOS2 is generated at
approximately 100 tons per year and is sent off -site to a
Subtitle C facility. Approximately 200 tons of KOSO is
handled in the MOSC system or the waste water treatment
system. Approximately 1300 tans of TC sludges are generated
per year and are handled In MOSC.
2.3 How have the Haste generation- rates changed nith the
hazardous waste ral/no ang land ban?
TC has increased hazardous waste classification by 1700
tons per year.
2 . f Have there fcfiejl any uostreaun gc:-»ia«t» M«1;er treatment
facility operating chances to reduce |hc amount; pj these
nastes oeneratcd and hop effective arq these changes?
Me have discontinued use of ««ndb«g« to veal sewer drains
during maintenance work and have gone to mats and Hater
filled bags.
2.5 mil the, proposed F037 and FO38 land Ban affect 1^hj»
amount gf. theee wastes produced?
Proposed land ban for FO37 and F038 Mill not affect the
amount of TC or K-liated waste* produced. <
.-."
SM
O
B
O
O
CO
How much of thete waitus zrjc ctockoiled in. centainer
PP surface i m pound men t «7
None.
Mha? 2.B How
change MiJ^ any planned facll ttv •
.
modi f i
Does not apply.
and operating changes?
Zjyg Mhat quantity Qf_ ypur aecong'arv treatmen Jfc waste, such
a£. sladoe f roq> the anoreBSive^ biological unite. i«
cateaorizeif as TQ naste">
"tone.
-------
*;!• AH :r-3A
III
3.0 FO37 4Qd, FO3B
3.J. |s there a. current estimate
FO3B wastes generated?
Approximately 1000 ton* per year.
the •mount el FQ?7 and
« o 2,0
IK52
•ill
an estimate p_f. thg amount al F037 and. F03B
washes stockpiled in contalngrK g£. surfaca impffundBiente?
We do not believe that we have any «ludg*» in our surface
impoundment* that meet th« qualifications for F037 and F03B.
•' ?j? Unat frj vpu currently flp^nfl tiilil tilft etockoilBd waste
and what are yoop future plans?
_ Mha^ apf fehu chemical and physical ffharaetgrlstiea el
both the currently generated and the etoe)tpil»d masses?
RAM Kludge.
3.3 Hhat if yeur current trgatment. recycle gf, disposal
method and ho* Mill this cfiano* irith the land ban?
Huch of the F057 end F038 waste* will be recycled in the
MOSC sv*t««. Some fflay be possible candidates for a fuel
blending program in a properly permitted off-site industrial
.furnace. When land ban sets constituent limits on the
organic*, any off-site treatment/disposal will probably be
through incineration in a Subtitle C facility.
2a& tiH4£ are- the capacities of these treatment, recycle.
4DJt disposal methods in. relationship tg. F037 an.fl FO3B wastes?
The M06C system was originally sized for the K-listed
wastes with some additional capacity for characteristic
wastes. The inclusion of Toxlcity Characteristic and
F037/F03Q Haste will tax the system to its limit. Any excess
will have to be treated and/or disposed in a subtitle C
facility. -Recycle priorities will b« based in part on the
cost of treatment and disposal in off-site facilities.
Are there- any planned changes, either physical or
tq da«l with thf land ban and bow will
o
o
to
Hfl
O
o
U)
changes affect KQ4B-K03S waste generation?
No plans have been formulated at this time.
3.8 if. ii. possible ifl reduce FO37/FO5B Qr. KO4H-KO32
feX putting mora of £ load gn. the aporeasive biological units?
NO.
CD
CD
-------
4.0 GeneraI
4.J Mhat are vour off»ite treatment options and arf there
unique features of vour w«ate that *ou^d 1 imit the
traatabiJitv ootiena?
Solidification/encapsulation prior to laodfilling, fuel
blending if BTU value i* high enough in A property permitted
off-site industrial furnace". There are no unique feature* of
our w*«tP» that Mould limit the treatability option*.
rl
sx z»z
M o 2«"O
3-§"S2
•!-»§
n "» S^in
o. a, -.»
•*
4.2 Mhat modif ieation« haye heart done si arg plannad
up«tream to reduce the amount of xaate nengrated ic. tf;
water treatment facility tea, ore treatment, source control .
segregation, etc. 1?
Segregation has already been effected. We are working
toward source control wherever possible.
4.J Mill th» B^f ruling* affect any of the current di«po«al
option*. on*lte. captive or commercial?
BIF rulings may .increase the cost of fuel blending as an
alternative to incineration.
4.4 la there a_ prafgreoo on nrodueira FO37/FO3B xantga or
K046-KC52 Ha«te^ ^n. terms of hand 1 ino gr disposal?
Nona .
O
o
o
o
OJ
Hh«t i* the -f ranuanrv of cl»«nout for- the various xa«te
xater treatment unit* tea. ftP^. PflF. storage tank, surf »f»
impoundmentp. ate . >?
Cleanout is dependent on operational parameters. K048 is
recycled continuoualy. API* areschedulvd to be cleaned., at
a minimum, quarterly. ' '
-------
r
u.
DC
I
O
a
CO
?»
s*Ǥ
P £1 ft n t?
!a^M
o
d
to
O
O
OJ
-------
wmrw
F037 AND F03B WASTE CAPACITY ANALYSIS:
DATA USE AND TRACKING SHEET
o
Refinery: BP Oil - Lima Refinery
State: Ohio
Data sources available:
_X Petroleum refinery visits/voluntary submission
_£ National Survey of Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage, Disposal.
and Recycling Facilities (TSDR survey)
_ National Survey of Hazardous Waste Generators
_1_ Biennial report/state reporting requirements
_ California hazardous vaite data base
_2 Petroleum refinery data base (PRDB)
_ No-migration petitions
e ?
• S
o
o
to
Basts for F037 and FOI8 vascc estimation*:
EPA used data provided by BP Oil (Lima Refinery) because it was the nose
recent and the only source that describes F037 and F038 waste generation
and management. Other sources were used only in comparison with the
refinery's data subnission.
F037 and F038 waste estimates:
P037 (routine) - 3,600 tons/year from stornvater/process water
impoundments, which will close with' waste in place. The F037 sludges
would then be generated in tanks .
F037 (one-time) - 10,000 tons from closure of stormwater/process water
impoundments , which had not been cleaned for about two years.
BP Oil Lima does not anticipate generating F038 wastes.
CD
uu
-------
r
i :NT BYiXtrox Ttlicopiir 7021 '• 6-20-91 ; |:2BPH i
iH22627*0-
n
3
BP OIL
UNA REFINERY
1160 SOUTH KETCALF STREET
LIKA, OHIO 45604
DATE: Jyi» gQt
TO:
Coanta
ICf. Incomoritad
FROH:
BP OH - HM C«fln«rv
Tottl pigu being »tnt (Including thtt pige)
7032182669:1 1
If,th«r; Is • preblM i»nh thli ftx, pluu eont*et LeAnn Ktson,
(419) 226-2386 (ftx phew nu-fctr (419) 226-2740).
•• **
•r^j-B
o. o._!T
• o «-
i*s
O
o
to
>fl
o
O
-------
. SENT BY;xtrcx Ttl»caoi
-------
SENT BYJXerox Ttliecpl«r 7021 ! S-2G-91 I *:28PK
41822627*0-
7032162669;* 3
1.0 Vaste Vater Treatment Facility
1.1 See attached
1.2 Storawater and process water are currently conblned.
i
1.3 Modifications to the sewer systee) 1n the last five years
t
'' A. Installation of a 54* - 60* diversion line froa the Korth sewer to
; Prleary Pond (see attached).
! ' • .
114 Driving forces behind these Bonifications
• - Reaoval of one stomrater/process water Ispoundlng pond prior to the
• TC rule taking effect
1)5
i
i
I
• Lower VOC emissions
- Envlronewital awareness by B? (proactive approach)
Future codifications
A. Twin 2fH gal off-spec tanks are currently under construction and
should be coMtssloned this fall.
B. Close Prlawry and C Ponds - replace with tankage and/or OTR
lepoundemtSi then reeave both ponds fn» service. ,
Driving Forces
A. NESHAP/Benzena Regs
B. TC Rule/Primary Sludge
1.7 A.
8.
K04S-52 land disposal restrictions nave Increased disposal costs for
these wastes. The operation associated with the preparation of the
Mterlal for disposal Is anre t1s» consmlng and costs tore as well.
TC rule - Increased costs associated with the davelopnant of closure
plans for the two lapoundswntt that are required to be reeoved fro*
service by 3/94. The replacement units will require significant
capital expenditures for construction - also, swst find a suitable
site of adequate site for construction of new unit.
S tf
t
O
a
o
O
Uj.
en
-------
4MMP?t
_SiNT 3w:x«r«x T«ticosi«r 7021 ! 6-20-S1 ! i:29P« : 4192262740- 703218286918 *
-2-
C. F037/38 • Preparation of a Cltis 2 Per»1t Modification - this effort
will be required for the two Impounding ponds already destined to be
closed under the TC rule • duplication of effort due to overlap of
rulings.
2.0 K048-52 and TC Wastes
2.2 Rate of Generation
K048-K-S2
w/o Sludge Dryer • 11-12 tons/day
or 4H tons/yr
w Sludge Dryer
5-6 tons/day
or 2N tons/yr
TC
Nfsc. Dnns • 30 tons/yr
Fitter Clays- 75-150 tons/yr
8
KJ
O
o
2.2
i
2.3
2.4
KOU-52 wastes net ilnlm heating value criteria of 9,000 BTU/».
Belt press cake Is blended with oil Into a heavy waste oil awtrlx and Is
sent to a ceswnt kiln for resource recovery as a supplemental fuel.
TC wattes are sent to disposal facilities for incineration or to be fuel
blended. Do not typically landfill unless no other choice.
Haste generation rates have not changed with the hazardous waste ruling
and land ban. Vhen the sludge dryer 1s operational, the belt press cake
should be reduced SOS (estimated). With the sludge dryer operational,
this will allow the refinery to pursue a broker to handle the dried belt
press cake as a product, not a hazardous waste subject to regulation;
under a recently granted coker exception by OCPA.
TC waste generation rates have Increased due to the TC Rule regulating
two surface Impoundments as hazardous waste management units. These
wastes, however, are treited at the wastewater treitaent piint.
Upstream or wastewater treatatnt facility operating changes to reduce
the aieount of these waste generated: • >
• Elimination of the coke pile
Coke was previously stored on the ground prior to being
(89) loaded for sMp«ant (ZO-ZSX reduction In K-wastes generated)
- troluwn staging on a concrete pad
Previously stored on the ground prior to handling
(90) (10-I5X reduction in ((-waste generation)
uu
—i
-------
SENT BY:Xirex Tdmoitr 7021 : 8-20-H : *:J9PH
41B22S2?iO-
1032162861:* 5
-3-
2.5 Proposed F037/38 land ban Mill not affect the Mount of these wastes
produced. Evan though the origin of these wastes art fro« essentially
the saw process, they currently can be handled differently, I.e.,
K-wastes nave LDRs and F037/38 do not. Also, the K-wastes do not test
hazardous for lead or chroaw under TCLP even though they are listed
hazardous for these constituents; therefore any and all wastes should be
subject only to TC regs and handled accordingly.
.« e Ss-o
38-2
a o.
St
2.6 X-wastes • 500 tons currently 1n Inventory at the Haste Pile Building
TC tastes .
• H1sc. druu awaiting analytical results (not significant)
- 30,000 yd3 of stabilized sludge 1n 0-Pond (needs to be tested
for TCLP).
2.7 K-Hastas • ran through a belt press (sludge dryer not In operation yet)
- 5,000 + BTU/f before drying process
Again, they do not test hazardous for lead or chroae analysis and to
date shows TC hazardous for two other constituents.
- Stabllfeed waste in D-Pond has been dewatered
- Doubtful as to significant heating value
- Still to be tested for TCLP
2.8 Installation of a segregated NESHAP/Beniene sewer wy reduce TC
characteristic noted 1n K-wastes (needs to be looked at) and will lower
benzene loading to TC regulated surface l^wundMnts.
2.9 Mo quantity of sludge froa the aggressive biological units Is
categorized as TC waste.
3.0 FOJ7 and F038 Hastes
3.1 Current estlntod aaeunt of generation
lit Iriin
ww^^^wra
-f-tee-
As noted In Part A
?ttm\
,(o)
O
D
to
o
O
8Vi
-------
SENT BY!X«rox T«ltcopi«r 7021 ! B-20-»l '• *!33PM !
41822627*0-
7032182669:« 8
IK
,->
i
sj
•t
-4-
3.2 There i* no amount of those wastes stockpiled In containers or surface
impoundments. Above estimates ire for the TC reguUted impoundments
thit also fall under Primary Sludge regs.
Question is —» How will these regs affect closed impoundments?
I.e., Are they subject to TC ind/or Primary Sludge?
3.3 There ere no stockpiled wastes, but the wastes that accumulate In these
impoundments prior to their reaoval from service will be closed In place
through risk assessment,
8
3.4 No information on pond bottom sludges subsequent to TC rule effective
i date.
31$ Currently, these wastes would be stabll Ized/tostod/sent to a Class I
landfill since no LDR$, but our Intent Is to risk assess by in-sltu
: closure.
3;6 No Information available regarding capacities for methods of treatment,
recycle, or disposal for these wastes to my knowledge.
3L7 The same upstream changes for K-wastes Impact the generation of these
wtxte*. The origin Is the samet 1t is more a function of where the
wastes are collected. The key 1s keeping the sewer loading of solids to
a minimum.
l
3^8 Most K-wastes will test hazardous due to the oily constituents.
Biological treatment has shown to be an effective means of treating
these compounds. Allowing more otty particulate pass through upstream
, process units could potentially reduce K-wastos and not have an adverse
i impact on wastewater.
410 General
t
4'.1 In general, fuel blending Is proving to be a successful disposal option
' for K-wastes. Not certain why F037 and 038 are regulated. Is 1t
benzene? Are these wastes subject to TC regs as well?
4i2 Source Control
i
• Elimination of coke pile •
• Trolumen staging 1ri a concrete bay
- N£SHAP/Benzene imr
CD
UD
-------
SENT BY!X*rox TtlicoDier 7025 : 8-20-91 : *:30PH ;
418Z2827«0-
7032182889:• 7 ~
3 BIF Mill have no lipact. If BIF IneorperaUt currtnt kHn, thin t ujor
4 4
4 S
nthlnk of K-wasto MnagMwnt 1s nitded.
Prtftr to call It F037/38 virtus K-wistt slnci thtr* trt no LOR*. Mm
LDRt tn final Iztd for F037/38 wittts. It Mkit no dtffortnct u both
«v frw thi sot systM and not HkiTy that «1thtr falls TCLP (at Itatt
not what th«y art llittd for).
Clianout frtqumcy - not on a sat schadula
operation or for Mlnttnanct activities.
rtqufrtd for tff 1e!tnt
6/20/Bl
f
* "
o
a
o
o
u>
1
-C
-------
r
BY!X«rox Tl!t«P3i«r 7021 1 8-20-S1
1192252740-
70321826B9!« 8
r j /,
I f Xx
I
O
O
to
-C
-------
ScNT BY:x»rox Tilicopiir 7021 : 6-20-91 : 4I31PM i
4182262740-
703216288B:« I -
£53
o
s
-------
r
J
3
OJ
(XI
5fc X
Id
U £
|»
* 5
«1
Q£
-O I-
^g
^3
01 ^
Q S
^"s
»?3
^S"
1?E
£s"5
«**«
-*Ks
S •* 3 5 M
s'^iS
a A M.O
'XT
efr'S
.«i'
"•«
ra
o
g
O
o
U)
Uj
-------
: ift
t CO
CO
o
CXJ
y
cJ
U
c/o
CO
0
(u
in
en
c
Oi
U
<5 5
"p c
CU «
-
*0°
-
z
CJ
" >-CD
> i
o:
m en
F"0
UJ
z
2
u
.u
LJ
C3
ON
s.
g °
I
Q_
-------
r
I
i -
I
3t §
u §
+* a-
a 5
E i.*
QJ S
U« •
wo g
«.l '
O 9
ftj tt
-i g
4* a
Qt §
a §
i
,
I1
^
s
3
'
/
*—
M
U
;
36
L
1ft
P1
M
|S
«
2s
^
£*»
»t.
J
i
2
5
i
^
2
t
.f,
&
•,
i
-»
.
1
•o
J
L*i
t*.
J
* I
S
1
3
ll
1
i
2
I
2
]
•
{
r
k rf
1
4
i
*
ei
M
I
is'
f>
l|
.
$
•i!
ii
J
t
1
]5j
|||
.
.
-_
|
2
i
j
I
||
!! k
^ li
i,
*
2
i
•
B-'!* 1
* 1 1 i
*5r
IJj SJ
C %
5
*
;1
55
I"
c ~ £'
if
3s
• ?
(i ™
a a i
s
23$
O
S
o
o
I
un
-------
r
PHOM LOC FOR F037 AND F038 CAPACITY ANALYSIS
CONTACT: Gary Vonderembse (B? Oil. Lioa. OH)
PHONE 8UHBER: (419) 226*2744
CALLER: James Hsu
DATE: 8/19/91
SUBJECT: F037/8 waste generation and management
Voluntary information cubmite«d to EFA reports 166 tons of F waste generation
In surface impoundments. This amount was underestimated and should be
replaced by the following estimation:
BP Oil I-iiM estimates that 3,400 tons/yr of F037 sludge accumulates in
their impoundments. These impoundments, which vill close in 1994, have
not bean cleaned out for about 2 years; therefore, if the impoundments
are dredged prior to the land ban in 1992 will have accumulated 3 years
of sludge, which amounts to a clean out quantity of 10,000 tons.
•« o £ ro
f»!la
»"•»«.»
?fJif
8
to
o
o
OJ
en
-------
• ••MB
Refinery:
State:
F037 AND F038 WASTE CAPACITY ANALYSIS:
DATA USE AND TRACKING SHEET
Chevron - Cincinnati Refinery
Ohio
e 5
crStT*
" - 2
g-x zo.z
*• a S • 9
SSS
Data sources available:
_jj Petroleun refinery visits/voluntary subnission
_S National Survey of Hazardous Waste Treatment. Storage, Disposal.
and Recycling Facilities (TSDR survey)
National Survey of Hazardous Waste Generators
• Biennial report/state reporting requireaents
California hazardous waste data base
JS Fetroleua refinery data base (PRDB)
_ No-aigration .petitions
Basis for F037 and F038 uaste estimation:
EPA used data provided by Chevron (Cincinnati Refinery) because it was
Che nose recent and the only cource that describes F037 and F038 waste
generation.and nanageaenC. Other sources v«re used only in comparison
with the refinery's daca lubnicslon.
F037 and F038 wast* estimates:
So F wastes are generated at the Chevron Cincinnati Refinery because the
facility has shutdown.
o
a
Ni
O
o
—J
-------
r
OU>
•*
o
of
O v \
4r>
co \ (
flu* "b
*•*.-•«
'IJ*
« § "
Is!
O
s
>TJ
o
o
CD
CQ
-------
r
i
Refinery:
Scate:
F037 AND F03B WASTZ CAPACITY ANALYSIS:
DATA OSB AMD TRACKING SHEET
BP Oil - Marcus Hook Refinery
Pennsylvania
Mi*«
S**-3
£S »» A M *?
Data sources available:
_x Petroleum refinery visits/voluntary submission
_x National Survey of Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage, Disposal,
and Recycling Facilities (TSDR survey)
National Survey of Hazardous Waste Generators
_x Biennial report/state reporting requirements
California hazardous waste data base
_x Petroleum refinery data base (PRDB)
__ No-migration petitions
_x Comments form proposed rule
_ Organic TC Survey
ft
Si
o
o
to
^n
o
o
Basis for F037 and F038 waste estimation:
EPA used data provided by BP Oil (Marcus Hook Refinery) because it was
the most recent and the only .source that describes F037 and F038 waste
generation and management. Other sources were used only in comparison
with the refinery's data submission.
F037 and FO38 waste estimates:
F038 (routine) - 200 tons/yr of sludge generated from primary filters.
F038 (one-time) - 9,400 tons fron closure of a surface impoundment. The
surface inpoundment will be replaced by holding tanks, however, these
tanks are cleaned out every tvo to five years, and thus, the tank
cleanout sludge would be generated periodically.
BP Oil reports no other F wastes than those identified above.
According to more recent Information from the comments to the proposed
rule, this facility indicated that it would generate the following quantities
of surface impoundment sludges during the indicated time periods:
^.c
-------
6229
IIES
SEW BY:
6-13-91 : 23:53 :
Iff. INC.-
C&O03
•••MM
412 281 5220;* 3/ S
F037 AND FOW QUESTIONS
Wa htv* davafopad • ftaflmlnary »«Ui or qu*«Vort* to aid h our undemanding of ftowma raw
POT and F039 wa*ta Siting and propoatd land ban wtt altoa r«finar/«». Thaw quartern
Involva flot orty POar and FOM waiUa. but a»pand to K044-KOK and TC waatta. dl«euaa put
art Mure waato wafer (rtctrrwrt (adHty modtncitlORt, on sha traatmant. tta. in ordar tor us to
ytt an undaraUAdBi^ of tfn wHol* plciura and now mfymtng lntafr«lat«a. In addKlon to gaining
an ov»*«n undanrtindlng ot tttt lasuav, wi want to dlacowr «ny unlqu* ptobtama or twMMHy
toauaa ttMl rtflrMrfaa may Mva ataoolitad wtm ttMM wasna.
• What ia your curtam oonOgundton (aehamado) ?
• Howaao/aflatadlay«ur«yatam.a(orRnimiMVf.proc«««t
Cv*Pk(iA4I 4%aX1*****V**1 aw"^ ^*Vi>C4l| *f« — f«'~j -v—ti *^-w «•*./-«« -
.Wr frwj*.--Jt« ••.•*-. XWy4«,K«f r
-------
r
tA
I
f»!!l
*£.*?
» s "
5 - a
O
a
o
O
U)
ca
Lf»
-------
Iff
, INC.* 412 281 5220:* 4/ 5
«•••••
- ^. m
o. — »
HCV* th«r« OMKI «ny vpatrtMn or WMW witcr vtatiTWflt ftteilit/ OparitMfl elwigtii
to racun ttw wnaunt or tftaaa wwtM gcrwatad and now «ff»cllvt ira turn
• Will flu propeM ctwnlcti and ptiyifc*! oh»r«tfftfl«1tiJ» or Ow eurrinfly gimrctod end
*y1tf«vr«l«rtd, do tfi«y hew Hgnffieant bu vilu*.
o.<-J ct» *«*(• A»V
vrtfl «ny pttnrifd Mcftty nxxitOcatloni and
quanty of your MoarKtaiy treaanant wuu. weti aa rludg« from fh«
•ggrtxlvt Metogicaf uttfK, la eatogortead «a TC www? U)"atl" <*'-**» '-, -"
f «* Pf
to m«f« a outmit »rtnat* cf tm amount rt F.(»7 and
M ih«a art aatltnata of KM amount of F037 and «X» *•**• aiootpUad in eon««*Mr«
W.MJrtaca Impoundmama? J-aC "•'">* .j-w— • •' «« /=•«'* ^'-.'i*
»«- «» ffri+A* ;_ /^x— •> *"-4 .
• What «* you ogmnfy (tglfko vrfth tht rtx*
o
o
LO
un
-------
06/17x01 13:06 -O412 281 6229
6-14-31: 0:00:
Iff. INC.-
412 281 5220;? fi/ 5
i»8
•f i
J :
AM ttMrt «ny ptevwd efeng««, «Ww phystwJ or opamilonti, to aen wWi tn* und
- ban ifldhwr w« HIM* oh«r»e« tff«t W48-KOS2 w««« gawnrtortf •*"' «••'"
fo' «.H-««.j»f- £s s««J/«y>« f«'x K..i»^^._f wAfVx-*-"
M K poMM« lo rnduo* fOir/PQM w K049-KOS2 w**j«» by putting mot* of • loM
A/o.
Oft**
n
Whtt wtv«ufo«itt*«f«ittm«n|oplloniinclir»«wunJqi)«i««iuft«pj your wait*
ttut would Bmft ttw trMUMWy «p«kiiw?
WMflioMo«Uaiiihm»b««n4ont«rv«ptenri«dup«v«4wiiorMiio«tit«nount*
o* twctt g«MnM h
««i*r traotmwtt ficWy (tg.
<4-.i
WO tfw if ruing* «fltMtiitO. DM into DurpoM of dw quMtlaiw » to fitt tn ovtna
uixMfittndki^ to flit • fM hr f»** mwoh pUnnino to Wdng ptoo«. hw* rmjoh«»u«v«»w«.
and wf««t «* •» uniqu* probiMM nut th» r««MriM wii «i««mir.
o
o
Uj
-------
r
PHONE LOG FOR F037 AND F038 CAPACITY ANALYSIS
CONTACT: Colin Franks (BP Oil, Marcus Hook, PA)
PHONE NUMBER: (215) 499-7023
CALLER: Janes Hsu
DATE: 9/12/91
SUBJECT: F waste generation and status of impoundments
Mr. Franks indicated that their primary filter generates 200 tons of F038
vastes per year. This facility originally planned to dredge, close and
replace their surface Inpoundaenc with tanks prior to the F waste land ban.
However, they now indicate that this plan has been rescheduled until the
spring of 1993.
8
to
o
o
OJ
ca
-------
>
F037 AND F038 WASTE CAPACITY ANALYSIS:
DATA USE AND TRACKING SHEET
Refinery: Chevron - Philadelphia Refinery
State: Pennsylvania
Data sources available: x
_B Petroleum refinery visits/voluntary submission
_X National Survey of Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage, disposal,
and Recycling Facilities (TSDR survey)
_ national Survey of Hazardous Waste Generators
_ Biennial report/state reporting requirements
_^_ California hazardous vaste data base
_2 Petroleum refinery data base (PRDB)
_ No-migration petitions
-*
•* o 2 a- o
sir
Basis {qr^fOB? and F038 waste estlnatlon: —
EPA used data provided by Chevron (Philadelphia Refinery) because it was
the most recent and the only source that describes F037 and F038 waste
generation and nanagement. Other sources were used only in comparison
with the refinery's data submission.
F037 and F038 waste estimates:
F037 (routine) - 500 tons/year from sever cleanouts.
Chevron Philadelphia expects the F037 wastes to be treated in an on-site
incinerator.
Chevron Philadelphia does not anticipate generating either one-time F037
sludges (no inpoundaents) or any F038 wastes.
o
s
o
o
OJ
CD
LH
^ ;
-------
r
Chevron
Chevron U.S.A. Inc.
PC. Boi ."408. Pfiaaoslpha. PA 191G1
0 8 MoHm
I"
Jfi
I5*s«
•» a s. * P
June 21, 1991
3
it
ICF Incorporated
Four Gateway center
15th Floor
Pittsburgh, PA. 15222
Attention: Mr. Kunal Banerjee
Dear Mr. Banerjee:
Keenest for voluntary information
Oa Petroleum Refinery Wastes
EPA I.D. Kb. PADO<9791098
In response to EPA's request for information on Petroleum Refinery
Hastes, we are pleased to provide the following information.
' Wast;cvater Treatment Facility
o What is your current configuration (schematic)?
See Figure I.
o How segregated is your system, stormwater vs. process water?
Non-segregated system.
o What modifications have been made in the last 5 years?
Increased stormvater surge capacity, modified flow pattern
through separators and surge tankage, enhanced slop oil
recovery capability, eliminated 2 separators , and modified
separators to allow removal of one half for cleaning.
o What were the driving forces behind these aodifications?
Reduce NFDES exceedences and increase reliability of ffWTP
operation.
o what future modifications are planned?
upgrade sewer system to HSPfl as required by Benzene Waste
Heshap, cover roughing filters and vent to a control device,
and vent separators to a control device.
o what are the driving, forces behind these aodifications?
Benzene Waste Heshap Regulations.
o Row have the K048-K052, TC and F037/F038 rulings and land bans
affected the facility in terms of modifications, operation,
capacity, etc.?
Mo modifications or changes in operating procedures are
anticipated.
o
o
o
UJ
CD
cn
-------
D48-K052 and TC Hastes
•
What Is your estimated rate of generation and land disposal of
K048-K052 and TC wastes?
Generated - 8,500 Tons/Year
Land Disposed - 4,000 Tons/Year of which 2,500 Tons are
incinerator Ash from on-site Incineration.
How do you currently treat, recycle, or -dispose of these
wastes and are there foreseeable changes in the treatment,
recycling or disposal?
a. K049 - Hot generated, X050 - Treatment at the on-site
Wastevater Treatment Plant, xosi - on-site incineration,
£052 and TC wastes - Treatment and disposal off-site.
b. A Class XX permit modification has been submitted to EPA
requesting approval for the treatment of K049-K052, ros?
and TC wastes through the on-site Sludge incinerator.
Modifications are planned to the incinerator that will
accommodate all pnmpable materials. All unpumpable wastes
(i.e.. Catalysts, refractory/ etc.) will still require
off-site treatment and disposal.
How have the waste generation rates changed with the hazardous
waste ruling and land ban?
Ho changes in wasts generation rates but significant, increase
in proportion of waste classified as hazardous waste due to
the TC regulation. A waste minimisation program has been in
place at the Refinery sinee 1987.
Have there been any upstream or wastewater treatment facility
operating changes to 'reduce the amount of these wastes
generated and how effective are these changes?
Source control limits the quantity and types of materials
discharged to the sewer system. Xinimal effectiveness in
reducing waste generation rates.
Hill the proposed F037 and F038 land ban affect the amount of
these wastes produced?
Mo.
How much of these wastes are stockpiled in containers or
surface impoundments? ,
Zero stockpiled - in containers^ There axe no surface
impoundments at the refinery.
What are the chemical and physical characteristics of the
currently generated and stockpiled wastes (i.e., are they
dewatered, do they have significant BTU value, etc.)?
Physical characteristic* I sludge type materials, 10-15%
solids, not dewatered.
Chemical character is ticas
"-* 2
BTU/Lb.
pB
Flash Point
Men Reactive
2.0 or < 12.S
> 140 "F
o
S
O
o
OJ
en
i
-------
rt
How will these characteristics change with any planned
facility modifications and operating changes?
Ho changes are expected.
What quantity of your secondary treatment waste, such as
sludge from the aggressive biological units, is categorized as
TC waste?
Zero.
Ffl?7 and F038 Wastes
la there a current estimate of the amount of F037 and F038
wastes generated?
F037 - 500 Tons/Year, P038 - zero.
Is there an estimate of the amount of F037 and F038 wastes .
stockpiled in containers or surface impoundments?
Zero.
What are you currently doing with the stockpiled waste and
what are your future plans?
zero stockpiled.
what are the chemical and physical characteristics of both the
currently generated and the stockpiled wastes?
see typical lab analysis attached.
What is .your current treatment, recycle or disposal method and
how will this.change with the land ban?
Materials ax* currently shipped off-site for disposal in
landfill. With En approval of our permit modification,
materials will be treated through the on-site Incinerator.
What are the capacities of these treatment, recycle and
disposal methods in relationship to F037 and F038 wastes?
A permit modification has been submitted to BPA requesting
approval to treat 100% of the 7037 wastes througl} our on-site
Incinerator.
Are there any planned changes, either physical or operational,
to deal with the land ban and how will these changes affect
K048-XOS2 waste generation?
Modifications to the on-site Sludge Incinerator will allow for
the on-site treatment of all X049-KOS2 wastes. The volume of
these waste requiring off-site treatment/disposal will
decrease.
Is it possible to reduce F037/F038 or K048-K052 wastes by
putting more of a load on the aggressive biological units?
Ho.
f SB
as
* o S a- o
c »8
Hi '
O
S
o
o
U)
GO
i
-------
r
General
o What are your off-site treatment options and are the unique
features of your waste that would limit the treatability
options?
a. Off-site treatment options include Incineration and
Solvent Extraction followed by Stabilisation for metals.
Treatment standards and Land Baa dates nave not yet been
established for TC wastes or 7037/7038 vaates.
b. Certain waste streams (i.e./ catalysts, refractory, etc.)
are'unpumpable.
s
o What modifications have been done or are planned upstreaa to
reduce the amount of waste generated in the wastewater
treatment facility (e.g., pretreataent, source control,
segregation, etc.)?
Source control, sealed sewers in benzene areas (Bensene waste
NE8HAP).
o Will the BXF rulings affect any of the current disposal
options, on-site, captive or commercial?
Kay limit our option of using certain waste oils as fuels at
our Boilerhouse.
o Is there a preference on producing F037/F038 wastes or K048-
X052 vaste in terms of handling or disposal?
Ho preference.
o What is the frequency of cleanout for the various wastewater
treatment units (e.g., API, DAP, storage tank, surface
impoundments, etc.
A?I separators are cleaned at 2-year intervals and storage
tanks at 10-year intervals.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please
contact our Mr. Mike Manigly (Environmental Specialist - Waste) at
(215) 339-7466.
Very truly yours,
E. V. Schneider
Supervisor - Environmental
KTH/ssr
attachment
l«fc.-
.» o 2 _• o
till*
a ™ •* ~. w
*f
5«.
sss
O
u
to
o
o
-------
r
OHM Corporation
4»4 GtrdfiuM* Corp.
USA
^ An A.TM.
IIMM«M(M«(1
. tw
"> EAJ
TOT RE6UIATORY
TOf BOXAQION VOtATCZS
nenna
&.,
BlV/fc
S^McvS
tew
Tral
SM4X7C
S4C7C
5^
e -S
£ sr IS
H;».
»5H§
* « -« SL
9 a «• „. »
a a. »*««
' *:>
Sg =
• g5!
8
o
s
an
-------
ETC
jl j » e«rtil«e«t»«n e«rp.
oitrasu 101 toiias AM IIUOCEI
ClJtnt; CKEVIM U.S.*., ItC.
IMRI* 10: SOT SIBC
tttVtTj
»rcui«roit
5.0
100
KM
JS-f/i
.000^ Bf/t
Jtlvw
tiro
MM/MM
MtO/4410
lOtO/MIO
)eio/Mi«
M10/M10
U1*/Mld
t«t«i
r*t«i
*nctt*ttr
^•t/M
tto M/t.
HMTtVt
Ml«te«/tt
>«««*« C
I«10/*0td
N10
tOH
If!
SSHI
J»i
O
s
o
o
C3
cn
-------
-E-T C
•wifinniital fmtiitf
t Ccrilf lutlM C«rp.
LAUflU OlSrOML fOI SOLIDS AM IlUOCfS
CllVtO* U.S.*.. IIC.
iMplt 101 (VI tlDC
0«CM;
IMOI* ViA*rt 110234
>»Mle
U»t . ,IU «fn Tl. Cm n» »rp trt Oft ctf Cfv
M**tn| • ttnf U__ mltTt »kn*t ICtw) ,2 ,1 l KtMl .1 ,J •
T.t«(
!•*«««•
•••Bll** Stllffd*
f* TMI
rim* Mint |C1M«4 Ci«)
n ltHCTIQt MIIIVfllATtL
•MM* I ofo»«o/i
L*t/i
i «t/i
L "I/I
t *0/t
> "(/I
> •*/!
It/I
> •*/«
> *f/l
[ Bt/l
; •«/ 1
; *>f/ 1
. •*'•
i t/i
. t/i
'. **rt
; t/l *
10
10
«/A
,,,.e a.M.e
'W*F n-iw»
0.5
1.0 '
100
».B
7.J
0.$
o.r
0.7
0.)
0.2
rt
0.11
0.13
0.}
1.0
2.0
100
s.o
400 .
2.0
200
uto
tut
u«o
(2«0
UM
UM
U40
U«0
(240
(240
«270
(270
(270
(270
(270
(270
an
(270
(270
1270
M70
fit
»i»r
a"*?01*
S?*!§
ir«5»-
•HI-
.» o
. 55S
o
o
bJ
o
o
-------
FIGURE I
NO. 1 WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
137 Oesalter Water
Process
Water
Sewer
Fina Effluent
Roughing
niters
Centrifuge -^
^ / / and
Oxidation] [Oxidation
Tank / \ Tank
Primary
Clarifiers
Process Water Sewer
2-5 Zo.
O
s
o
o
OetS.1990
. I
CD
cn
uu
ii
-------
r
i
F037 AND F038 WASTE CAPACITY ANALYSIS:
DATA USE AND TRACKING SHEET
Refinery: Chevron - Port Arthur Refinery
State: Texas
Data sources available:
_x, Petroleun refinery visits/voluntary submission
_5 National Survey of Hazardous Waste Treatnent, Storage, Disposal.
and Recycling Facilities (TSDR survey)
National Survey of Hazardous Waste Generators
Biennial report/state reporting requirements
California hazardous waste data base
_g Petroleum refinery data base (PROS)
No-migration petitions
Basis for F037 and F038 waste estimation:
EPA used data provided by Chevron (Fort Arthur Refinery) because it was
the most recent and the only source that describes F037 and F038 waste •
generation and nanagenent. Other^ources were used only in comparison
with the refinery's data submission.
•" aa-P
3n» 2
5 * *• J?
• if _o 0
It * -• _ BJ
. I't
o
u
to
O
o
UJ
F037 and F038 waste estimates:
Routine F037 vaste generation is from sewer cleanouts. Chevron did not
know the estimated sewer cleanout quantity; therefore, based on sewer
cleanout calculations, EPA estimated the sludge generation to be .2,500
tons/year. These calculations, which are the sane as those.used for
several Category 2 refineries (see Appendix B), are as follows: •
(121.000 tons/year total K waste generation1}/^21.000,000 gallons/day
wastewater flow) - O.OOS76 solids loading of refinery
(0.00576) x (3.000 acres facility surface area) x (143.7 tons/(yr/acre)
(for solids loading of 1.0 calculated fron known refinery) - 2.500
tons/yr.
Other than the F037 wast* fron sewer cleanouts,' Chevron Port Arthur does.
not appear to generate any other F037 and F03S wastes.
1 Based on information provided in the TSDR Survey submitted by Chevron,
Port Arthur.
en
-------
r
F037/8 (surface inspoundraencs) - 0 tons (7/92 - 12/92)
F037/8 (surface inpoundnencs) - 5,364 tons (1/93 - 12/93)
F037/8 (surface iitpounditents) - 0 tons (1/94 - 12/94)
3
3
o
s
Tl
O
O
-------
Chevron
Chevron U.S.A. Inc.
P.O Bo» 701, Pen Artlw.TX77B41
July 11, 1991
QUESTIONNAIRE ON F037 AND F038 WASTES
iltf
• ?"«
n " - ..
a - - "•
Sol
Mr. James Hsu
ICF Incorporated
9300 Lee Highway
Fairfax, Virginia
Dear Hr. Hsu:
22031-1207
In response to Ms. Jo-Ann Bassi's (U.S.EPA) request dated June 12, 1991, we submit to
you the following answers to the questionnaire regarding our refinery F Wastes:
1.0 Hastewatcr Treatment Facility
1.1 What is your current configuration (schematic)? See the attached flow
diagram entitled "Vastewater Treating."
1.2 How segregated is your system, stonnwater vs. process water?
Partially segregated. Approximately 4.5 MGD treated wastewater and
16.5 MGD stormwater. Proposed plans are to totally segregate
wastewater and stonnwater in three years.
1.3 What modifications have been made in the last five years?
A. Constructed a new 5,000 GPH clarifier. (S1.7MM)
B. Installed baffles 1n the oxidation ponds to reduce channelling.
C. Added an aeration system to surface drainage and new outfall.
(J2.0MM)
0. Constructed an aeration and biological treatment system to the
wastewater drainage4 system. (Hastewater is a nix of process
wastewater and surface drainage). (S2.0KM)
E. Changed cooling water treatment from a chrornate to a phosphate
treating system.
F. Put in operation an ammonia stripping system to remove the ammonia
from the wastewater system. (S2.1MM)
G. Installed a water draw collection system for all tanks.
§
o
o
UJ
en
CTf
-------
Mr. James Hsu
ICF Incorporated
-2-
Jujy. 11, 1991
H. Implemented a "Source Control" program which Includes a department
of employees who review problem areas in the refinery and seek out
solutions.
I. Installed a C02 injection system in front of the Bio Treatment
Unit to control pH at the No. 2 Storm Surge Sasin.
J. Constructed curbs, slabs, drainage systems, etc., in response to
the F wastes Primary Sludge Regulation.. ($5.OHM)
1.4 What were the driving forces behind these modifications? NESHAP
Regulations, TCLP Regulations and Primary Sludge Listing Regulations.
l.S What future modifications are planned?
A. Segregate the stormater and wastewater system.
B. Construct a new activated sludge unit.
1.6 What are the driving forces behind these modifications? NESHAP, TCLP
and. Primary Sludge Regulations.
1.7 How have K, TC and F Rulings and Land Bans affected -the facility in
terms of modifications, operations, capacity, etc.?
A. Implemented control of all wastewaters.
Ef. Increased manpower to comply with the regulations and added a
"Source Control" department,
C. Proceeded with a three-year project to segregate wastewater and
stormwater.
0. Increased capacity of the wastewater treatment facility to handle
the additional volumes.
E. Operational costs have and will have a significant increase.
F. Requirement to obtain a RCRA permit.
2.0 KQ46 - KOS2 and TC Wastes
2.1 What is your estimated rate of generation and land disposal of K048 -
K052 and TC wastes? In 1990, K wastes were 7,700 cubic yards.
2.2 How do you currently treat, recycle, or dispose of these wastes and are
their any foreseeable changes in the treatment, recycling or disposal?
Some K wastes are dewatered and incinerated and the remaining are
processed through the HOSC system. Plans are being proposed for a
thermal treatment unit. Presently a contractor is mechanically sepa-
_. frfc
£ ?B
»
a, 0..-. •
* X sf
r=
o
s
Tj
O
o
CD
cn
-------
M«V*
Mr. James Hsu
ICF Incorporated
-3-
July 11, 1991 _
I"
rating the water, recovering the oil, and incinerating the remaining
solids of some of our K wastes. . .
2.3 How have the waste generation rates changed with the hazardous waste
ruling and land ban? The wastewater and process water have become
hazardous wastes streams requiring control to comply with the new
regulations. The amount of wastes generated is the same although the
amount of hazardous waste has Increased due to the TC and Primary
Sludge Regulations.
2.4 Have there been any upstream or wastewater treatment facility
operating changes to reduce the amount of these wastes generated and
how effective are these changes? The amount of total wastes generated
remains approximately the same. See 1.3 above. An increase in hazard-
ous wastes have occurred due to new regulations. A "Source Control"
department and Primary Sludge Project have been implemented.
2.5 Will the proposed F037 and F038 land ban affect the amount of these
wastes produced? No. ,
2.6 How much of these wastes are —stockpiled in containers or surface
impoundments? Presently the f wastes are not stockpiled.
2.7 Hhat are the chemical and physical characteristics of the currently
generated and stockpiled wastes (I.e. are they dewatered, do they have
significant BTU value, etc.)? Currently generated wastes are
dewatered and sent to landfill or Incinerated. The BTU value is very
low.
2.8 How will these characteristics change with any planned facility
modifications and operating changes? No change is expected.
2.9 What quantity of your secondary treatment waste, such as sludge from
the aggressive 'biological units Is categorized as TC waste? None.
3.0 F037 and F038 Hastes
._«.•*
3.1 Is there a current estimate .of the amount of F037 and F038 wastes
generated? In 1990, 46,00(7 tons of Middle Layer— Emulsion which
resulted in 3,700 tons ofcoke after dewatering, _71. "tons of API
Separator Sludge after dewatering, 160 tons of Exchanger Cleaning
Sludge after dewatering. *..:«•
3.2 Is there an estimate of the amount of F037 and F038 wastes stockpiled
in containers or surface impoundments? No F wastes are stockpiled.
3.3 What are you doing with the stockpiled waste and what are your future
plans? N.A.
o
o
K)
o
o
U)
C3
cn
CO
-------
r
Mr. James Hsu
ICF Incorporated
-4-
11, 1991
t s o
3
3.4 What are the chemical and physical characteristics of both the
currently generated and the stockpiled wastes? N.A.
3,5 What 1s your current treatment, recycle or disposal method and how
will this change with the land ban?
Methods used are:
A. Centrifuge and incinerate (F and K wastes)
B. Recycle through MOSC system (K wastes)
A change due to the land ban is not expected.
A thermal treating unit is proposed for the future.
3.6 What are the capacities of these treatment, recycle and disposal
methods in relationship to F037 and F038 wastes? MOSC 1s 100 bbls/day
{K Wastes) Centrifuge is 10,000 bbls/day (F and K Wastes)
3.7 Are there any planned changes either physical or operational to deal
with the land ban and how will these changes affect K048 - K052 waste
generation? No definite plans other than possibly a thermal treating
unit on site.
3.8 Is It possible to reduce F037-F038 or K048-K052 wastes by putting
more of a load on the aggressive biological units? No. Presently,
the units are close to capacity and additional volumes might constitute
•scouring."
4.0 General
4.1 What are your off site treatment options and are the unique features of
your waste that would limit the treatabllity options?
A. Fuel blending
8. Centrifuge and Incinerate
4.2 What modifications have been done or are planned upstream to reduce
the amount of waste generated in the wastewater treatment facility
(e.g. pretreatment, source control, segregation, etc.)?
A. Segregation of wastewaters within the next three years.
B. Completed modifications are:
1. fteclrculattng sampling systems.
2. A Source Control department
3. Installed sour water ammonia stripper.
§:?
Ill
o
d
to
o
o
cn
-------
r
>)r. James Hsu
ICF Incorporated
-5-
Jujy 11, 1991
* o 2 a- o
4. Reduce water usage when possible.
S. Tank water draw collection system for a1! tanks.
4.3 Will the 6IF rulings affect any of the current disposal options
onsite, captive or cooroerclal? No.
4.3 Will the B1F rulings affect any of the current disposal options
onsite, captive or comnercial? No.
4.3 Is there a preference on producing F037-F038 or K048-K052 wastes In
terns of handling or disposal? The F wastes can now be landfilled
and the K wastes can not.
4.5 What 1s the frequency of cleanout for the various wastewater treatment
units (e.g. API, OAF, storage tank, surface impoundments, etc.)?
API Is approximately every' 2 to 3 years.
DAF 1s about daily-
Dirty water sumps about dally.
Tanks 1912 and 1913 - approximately every 2 to 3 years.
If you have any questions regarding thlf response, please contact E. H. Rader at
(409) 985-1681.
I
o
o-
1. L. Textor
Supervisor, Utilities
and Environmental Section
£HR:1j
Attachment
-------
r
. i.
-$
5
!?
*«
!'
!i
4
I
II
b
d
*10
OIVM
. -g.
8 a1
o
D
o
o
CD!
—i
: J
-------
r
F037 AND F038 WASTE CAPACITY ANALYSIS:
DATA USE AMD TRACKING SHEET
Refinery: El Paso Refinery
State: . Texas
Data sources available:
;*^ _s Petroleum refinery visits/voluntary suboission
_5 National Survey of Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage, Disposal,
rt and Recycling Facilities (TSDR survey)
__ National Survey of Hazardous Waste Generators
'.'' „£ Biennial report/state reporting requirements
_^ __ California hazardous waste data base
_X Petroieun refinery data base (FRDB)
"* __ No-migration petitions
. & •*• i
2 " j
e <>••
i*
8
to
o
O'
Bails for F037 and F038 waste estlpat;(,qn:
E?A used data provided by Cha El Paso Refinery because it was the most
recent and the only source that describes F037 and F038 waste generation
and nanageoenc. Ocber sources were used only in comparison with the
refinery's data submission.
F03l7,,and F03B waste estimates:
F037/8 (routine) - 65 tons/year from cleanout of sewers and tanks.
The £1 Paso Refinery reports no other F waste than that identified
above.
«..*!
-------
r
3.
y
i
FO37.AUP F035"
. Q:
'-.'; A;
FAOUTV
is V0u/e C^X^EAJT doMFi OujfJ AND UlSCJH AX'S 62) TD A
SVSTE.M STB/«MW/»TE/£ v/s.
API.
: A*
.i Q'.
! A:
SYSTEM IS *J01- SEGitEfiATED AT ALL,
Muter MOD, PICA no AJS HAVE. OEEW Mrtoe /fcfTh£z/«sr 5
ALL O/*EW rowps HAVE. OEEU ^EMOVEP. Two su*6E
A WEUTRAi.fZj»T)0*J SVSTEJ^, AfJP A
KECiAcutATiOAJ -SVSTFM HAl/E. 6EFW (WSTT^UED. A fot.tMEf.tS
APT>BI> "TO tuASTFO/ATC*. TO ElOHAJ^CE Ori>
.1 A*
LCAKA«E C«MUC£K.(US IMC ACT*
:|<3i:
lj A'.
^
:. Q:
At*. CMlSSrOMS AWT)
• .
OF THE AJEWJ F WASTE i-ia-nws J.EP TO *EMov/*t or
•
. OTHEA MoPiPicA-nous WE*E *Eau««££> TO
MECT fonu LIMITS AFTt/e Sujtae /"OAJTW
WOI>IPICATJOA« A«e
*WSTJTKTJON> AWP
STREAMS ro3sioi_e AfX. SEPA^ATD*
WHAT Atte.
»«< z
A o a =• o
•*"•!?" S
es<ȣ ~
• if — * Q
n ™ •• «~ I"
o
a
to
O
O
-------
n
'ls
.-.<3l'. Hoto
*UU««3 f i-ANB 6A/US AFFECTPD
- —j.._ 3>Ec*eA3ET>._Fi£xfaii.iTY _ Aw-p-iwcxEAses
ll
-it—
1J.CK WHAT is..ESTIMATE*-*ATE
AWD.LAWP £> IS/" 03 At.
il .. .. OF
U
fle
---11-Qi
-CHAWGER U/JTH THE
MASS SEEW /iEI>UC.EI>
COST-
-GE*JEieATED
*!?*
g
8
to
O
o
UJ
I
-------
. Q:
~ .. THE AMOUA/r
... A.1 Wo. ....
t
•* '.. Q'. .HOuJ MUCH. OJ= THE^E WASTES
ARE. THE OiEM iCA/. AWD l°«yS'[CAj_
AFTE.CT
—I A'... K- WASTES- AieE.;DEifATE/esi},..(?e'Me'jeAu-Y HAVE
..; &TUL.. l/ALUE
tfASTES (^St*AU-y.7>o AJCTT
^._ ......
tuijj._THE»£.CriA«.AcrErjeisncs CHAAXJE WITH AA/Y
Q:.
|.A:
!.o -AJOT .
Of=lSECOA*>I>A»
. L A;. KJowE is STOC».
AOifJS u-MTVt
If!
•» o 2 ff o
«
23?
O
o
to
o
o
—f
LTi
-------
f
* o S 5- o
.6?.'
A*£ THE -CHEMICAL AAJP /"HVS/CA-L
Cu«*£/s/n.Y
J3TU.
- PASTES ___ .
OE
is
METHOD AWU
:i A!
.uJ|i_L,-TMlS .CHAWG£_UJIT» .
. A AJJ> . .t^ WDP* U~_TD M EEt!
:1 Q: U/HAT A*E_THe:. CAPACITIES OP
WASTES
,j &AfJ AWI> .HOUJ-
i| A'^0 I'lAWWED -CHAAJGCS, \»O //W^ACT-OAJ -K WASTE
A.:
IT jOo5SlSLe._Tt)_«BDutE-F 0<. K. WASTES. 5X_ Perm MS
FE'A*TV«ES_C>F PASTEL. THAT L»MlTr.-ne.EAT"fl8'i/TV OPnoMS ..
A.'
..-
«3X
HrAvy
co»-nnEA/r. jw SOME MJASJ Ei.
!s|-
O
o
o
to
cn
-------
.JO,' tUHAT MODjF/CATlO/vS.HAVE fiEEW "PO/VE tfjC A/tE
OPSTREAM TO ie£i>lX.E-7"H-E AMOUNT o/=- WAST
j ; / M TH E U>ASTE^ATC/e_ 7TZ.EA TAw EXTT FAC 1 1 1 TV
j;A: Su^SE /°ONn>S HAVE-.e&eM I^EMOVEP, A
I: SYSTEM AMX_/3A£T)A;1_.. ^ECYCL-E . SYSTE-M
. .EXTENSIVE. SOURCE i3>e»jnF(cAT7o/v
A: VES"
-.-'•••• '
Q'. 3~S _TH£KE._A-/'*£FEVeeAJCE. 0A->-ft€OE>OC/AX. F.UJftSTES .o£
A; Mo. -. _., :-._ -.. — .•—_.'.
IS .THE—F/^E.G^JEA-'CY- OF. CJ-CAUOUT.. FOK. VAJC'IOUS
AS
.... TAW!** !\W-.fAF.ltJ6
. Si.
— •» 2
s. „. m
'
f S.
o
•O
to
o
O
UJ
-------
r
a
•a
P037 Mm P038 WASTE CAPACITY ANALYSIS:
DATA USE AND TRACKING SHEET
Refinery: Exxon - Baytovn Refinery
State: Texas '
Data sources available:
^x Petroleum refinery visits/voluntary submission
_x National Survey of Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage, Disposal,
and Recycling Facilities (TSDR survey) • .
National Survey of Hazardous Waste Generators
_x Biennial report/state reporting requirements
California hazardous waste data base
_x Petroleum refinery data base (PRDBJ
. x No-migration petitions
Comments fron proposed rule • '
x Organic TC Survey
Basisfor F037 and F038 waste estimation:
EPA used data provided by Exxon (Baytown Refinery) because it was the
most recent and the.only source that describes F037 and F038 waste
generation and management. Other sources were used only in comparison
with the refinery's data submission.
F037 and F038 waste estimates: '
F037. (routine) - 10,000 tons/year from surface impoundments and
separators; another 2,000 tons/year from sewer cleanouts.
F037 (one-time) - SO.000 tons/year stockpiled in stormwater
impoundments; A3,000 tons/year stockpiled in refinery severs.
According to more recent information from the TC survey, this facility
indicated that it would generate cho following quantities of surface
impoundment sludges during the indicated time periods:
F037/8 (surface impoundments) - 95,563 tons (7/92 - 12/92)
F037/8 (surface' impoundments) - 95,000 tons (1/93 - 12/93)
o
a
to
>n
o
o-
-------
r
F037/8 (surface impoundments) -
F037 (routine) - 2.000 tons/yr.
0 tons (1/94 - 12/94)
S jr O
8
O
o
' • I
C3
-j
-------
r
Refinery:
State:
7037 AMD «38 WAST* CAPACITY ANALYSIS:
DATA DSC AND TRACKING SHUT
BP Oil • Feradale Refinery
Washington
Data sources available:
_x Petroleum refinery visits/voluntary submission
_x National Survey of Hazardous Waste Treatment. Storage, Disposal,
and Recycling Facilities (TSDR survey)
National Survey of Hazardous Waste Generators
_ Biennial report/state reporting requirements
u California hazardous waste data base
_x Pecroleua refinery data base (PRfiB)
_X No-migration petitions -
__ Comments from proposed rule —
_S Organic 1C Survey
Basis for F037 and F038 vaste estimation: , .
EPA used data provided by BF Oil (Ferndale Refinery) because ic was the
most recent and the only source that describes F037 and F038 waste
generation and management. Other sources were used only in comparison
with the.refinery's data submission.
F037 and F038 waste estimates:
F037 (one-time) - 6,000 tons from clean out (5,500 tons from surge
basins and SOO froa impoundment). The surge basins will be replaced by
tanks, which will be cleaned out every cvo to five years; therefore, the
F037 sludge would no; be generated continuously.
BP Oil Ferndale does not anticipate generating F038 wastes.
According to more recent information from the TC survey, this facility
indicated that it would generate the following quantities of surface
Impoundment sludges during the indicated time periods: •
F037/8 (surface impoundments) - 1,040 tons (7/92 - 12/92)
Ill
!*f?H
F037/8 (surface inpoundnents) -
0 tons (1/93 - 12/93)
c »
« §"
o
o
to
o
o
U)
-------
F037/8 (surface Impoundments) - 0 tons (1/94 - 12/94)
-
-•» 2
• I
3 -
O
o
to
o
o
U)
C3
CO
-------
r
3
3
3
3
PHONE LOG FOR F037 AND F038 CAPACITY ANALYSIS
CONTACT: Dick Breaer (BP OH. Ferndale, WA)
PHONE NUMBER: (206) 384-8243
CALLER: James Hsu
DATE: 9/12/91
SUBJECT: Status of surface impoundments
Inpoundnents at Che refinery are to be cleaned out and replaced with tanks in
the next few years. Hovever, it la not feasible to clean out the Impoundments
before 1992, because the refinery ta not ready to stop refining operations to
accommodate clean out of the impoundments.
8
o
o
-------
r
js 9:
1-.T KE
J
I
I*.
i
I;
i i
>t
.
SI..
F037/T038 fc-ASII CAPACITT ASAlXSIS - - IZ
« on
ae oil
STATE;
CQHZAkT:
ABBKESS:
comet: Dick
posmmr:
-«.«
fiafliwry
P.O. Box 8
PBQSE
1-204-364-8243
SEEBUSCE: Kla iad»r*oa, =«
-------
* *«**«
KE
^ JO.l
OIL,
TO37
F038 GOESHOSS
(T* turn G*r«lop«d * pralialaaxv »«ri«» o£ quudons to aid la cur
uadaxceaadiag of hov dia nav TO/31 aad F038 vuca lijclag jad proposad leal ben
will jiffacc nficariM. QUM guaadein inralva ooc calj FW7 cad F038
vu-ca*, bttc czpaad to D44-0>32 ud 1C v«c««. di»eu«» poac cod tasus* vuct
V«CM: nuawne fieilley •a4t£iciciansr oa »it» trutacnt. «cc.. la, order £er
u> to (*c «n md*nc*adlag e£ tfa» vtol* plccur*
^iipmiiii»lM vac to discover auj" »oiqc» problus or tr**ribilley t»«n«» tb»t rvfiuiica
»«y be** uaociBtcd vttta tlma macu.
o
s
l.t
1.2
Choc is jour CULIBUL.
SM «.CC4uti>»d.
Hov mgncwad If yoor •JVCKI, stom ¥»c*nn. prDcvn* «r»t«rf
lbaz« era
ollj
: a. *tan *nmr cad tva prouu
d ta» ptunelic
Ho B«jor
1.4
1.3
drirlag forea* b«hind
Boc
ClXbCQpB VOdLCvG&tiO
th* nazt few
ths following vlll eccar:
buliu •will ")>• r«pl»c*d rtch ehr«« *eor*g» twta.
- Hi* op«a AFC wit vill «ir*i«r b« ctmnd or rcpUecd wich *
eov«z*d wale.
- Tb» OAT isilci will b* r*pUe«d vith. ladneod Air Floudoa ualcs.
- DM blo-era*c«r» vlll probably b* eonnd ad to* •ffluuc clr
will b* *«oe eo *u BceiTtcad uzbea (C1C) talc or co « vapor
1.6
• S*ala will ba iarcallad on *«v«r aubela cormn.
. «r« the drtTtag force* btbicd cawa a»dt21ea,cloiul
HESEAP baoxBaa rola Bxi by tba 1C nil*.
-------
;j.oo
an
:CF JCE
a 001
t.7 Sow hen th» K04S-K032, TC 4nd F037-F038 rulings aad land boas afftetad
ch» facility la t«a« of Dodi£ic*don*. cpaT«loa, capacity, ere.?
| _
1C (aad HESHtf) caasad eha facility changa*. Ih« C «nd f
Juse -^-Tittit ho* eha m*±»rt»l is haadlad.
2.0
2.1
-MM? Tr ?ut»
» yoor
04 TC nacmla chaajpa In to* craatDaut. racycliag or dlcpoaalT
o
o
o
LO
it.
Is raatrietad Co
. Oaaal Uaate
vlthfa ttutlz
eaaa oa
2.3
USA. Pus B pvmie.
aod prMMd th« cbtdc* s« dut th« 10000 bbl «£ taol K vista
is 1990 wu rwlacad to 736 bbl. Thia ptMMd eak*
ctunfed vidi ths> haurdaiu vest*
Ear hm tiw *s«t« g«o>r*rion
cad. lead bat
1h* 9XM**d ok* h
tb* «tz*«B of u»w
« inch »«U«r ««!»••. utd such !*•* oil.
eaaltccat s^etm* For
pl*. In 1989, •. £Uld scadj m» p«rfomad for tba
Star* 0«p£. of EeoLaxr •• P«^t of a, Bo-1* cca
b« doa» by ynaataft cbaa hot ««e*C vuUO( ttw eaka. in t*»
, tfa* poopl* «t Eeolosj hroifl tr; tfaa ao-oigr*.cioa pacicion
ca d*eid« if « o«v fiald saitff la nqulzod.
en
-------
oe 18
ICF KE
I?!
» OU,
, to.
Z.4
Bar* thara b«*n my u?straam or
cbaofaa t» raduca tha neune of
ara ch*»e
vtttr tTMtaaac facility o?«rattng
(•eatacad and bov **ficciv«
Tea, tfaaca ha* b«an «oaa aauUloa braikiag aaiczaaa of th* BUTT.
UJT»« UK bbL uaks «ak> «ee\ttulxt*d K048 unit*, ttl* i« lurAd-nly d«v*t«r»4 aad allerad Co
•«p«r«C*. tb* oil pb«M t« r*cycl»d ta tfaa'cat cxcckar *p«rmcers ae ch« bcuodurj- o£
procmu tnit, bat cfait ejtton vu prohibitively cxpcndra, u
at tht ODTT, ;rw>lag tlu sludg* r*due«B tiw
th» SOt oil wpOttaa U r.dac«d to A 12Z ell c*k«.
2.S Will cha prope*«4 T037 rf«e«
ch«r«ec»ri«tlca of ttw eurr«atljr
. do
, «ce?)
oka La 12Z ell. ad hu in«u£fl£t«at BTtT -vmlu* ,to
u « hncdotu »»«• fu»l (IljdLt 1* 3500 MO/11). Drying
c«ka would <"**'-*— tiM BTU
2.8 HowvlU
~>^***>'»^x««Tit *~* «.p»i «t-t»sg ebancmc?
if a* fata
pl»nn»d facility
!• r*pUe*d vitfa coto ,
•MttdouiLy. Al*«. oil
t* •xometxd fciB a fcreicuUr vurei , c«a b« added back la to
1nrr»i«a it* heads* T»!U«.
2.9
of your *Bcocdax7 tctanuat vuca, «och «s
biologic*! tnita, 1* utacoclud u TC vacta?
froa tt«
KOB», it tvu ca
-------
r
-2t tl
ICF KE
WOU,
3,0
3.1 !• tha» » cuzr»ne »«eis*c* of elui
genarxtad?
of F037 ud F038
tt* bulk of th« f VUM vill con* £raa th» rurg* baaln boctomj.
trrvblnuA Z mat fjamt* . .»bould ba.&bcrue_£f.TB elm* tbcc of aha
"
F038
Abouc 500 tan*.
3.3 BIM.C «e« yea cuzreatly dolnj with th» «todcpll«d
9.2 !• dm* a «rctm«c« o£ ti« uiauae of Ft) 37
«ont«±ti«t» or «ur£«o«
Ic vlU b« Und ftzwd tatil this Is no lou«»r illovtd. After
ti»c tc will ben co bt ahifpcd offiit* to to. incln§r»cor. It
could «!M b* u«i la th* b^urdooi fuel ptvgam.. this lJ
f iiiliff^rt*^ 111! ^ buc rtsulxftt A
3.4 Bh*c 4E» titi* rhanfril cad pbymlul ch*r«et«rti=tc« of both th» esxrtaciy
g»t»rjr«d cad tiui caeetyLLa vucu?
tc luw no «i(nl£tc«BC JTff valu* wtebeuz pruslag «ad diylag. Ic
I* Bendy diet, dUr, Mad, p«bbl«s nd rutt vlth TUJ llttl* oil.
3.5 Ch«r is TOUT cuxnat mctavnc, neyel* or di*po*U. a«chod. in
to F037 ad F038 «uta»?
Lead faxvlBf. One* dut Und b*a catiM Into efface tad If ' tb> no
Bt|z»clea petition 1* not fnac*d. thu* v**eu will brr» ce b«
3.6 Vbafc «• cfaa op»elel»» o£ eb«««
la r>1irf
-------
u* »e
:j 01
:CF
.» e 2 t O
a ou, r*n4ii*, to.
3.8
Is Ic possible to ndssa F037/F03I or CO&J-K032 vistas by putting
of « load on tJia aggr«*iT* biological imicj?
Ho. All sludgu «x» produced upsmsa of ch« bio units. Th«
inpaUtxs: an£ ptivps: cskft A bf.cizi£ j*u* yh* *£ficioo^y of ?*+ bijo
uait* drop off if r&* upimaa unit* don't rvnor* «n«rugi of the
•olid*.
4.0
4.1
4.2
4.3 BUI tli* BIT ruLta^ «£f*et 07 of-efe* cm.T»at 'dispoMl option*, on»it«.
C«ptiT» OZ CCIMII'Ctllf
Bo.
4.4 Is tbtt* a pr*f«mc« ea pcodaciaf F037/T03I VUCM in t«aa of
4£O VIHUt OfftijCtt t^TSTTiSUff OptiOUV CBd SJTB C&A IBicVM fAA£tt7&S Of
«ue» thae «eo]4 llale th* erucabilicr epdons}
kilft.
turn b*«a oooo or tr* plsnattf upsenuut eo rcdaca tha
. of maco t»nari'»i1 in dia vuic* vacar truaMac facility («g.
pr»tr«»ta«nr. fooru control, iBfrcgadoa, recr)
. It wu too
«x» pr«f«rabl« imrtl th* l«nd b«a COM* into «£f«ct.
Oth»rirt»», no. It Ic bcxd «o uadanewd v!^ liad tr»*o««nt «
poorly epuud; wby «w It lia^od tog«tb*r vith
«ero«» tha country ta ha*"" **•
enrwr«llT
_
o. a .- «
' S !T
8 is
O
o
to
o
o
U)
Bb*c !• tb» fnqowKT- «f clua ouc for tba
(«g. in, DiT, ctenf* uak, »arf«e»
wuc* mtar
. •«.)
8b*c of tiMM *n clwowd ooe "-r-illy Th« API «ad DA7 units a«y
. go tvo TMMTB tMx da*. Tb» siirg* 'buin* ir* vwy l*«i«, ead >o
•z* <-T«»n»d tbeot: wrw-f IS 7U nduitaadlaf. to j«C • fo«l for bow auch
^^- r« th« unlqiu
-------
F037 AND FOBB WASTE CAPACITY ANALYSIS:
DATA USB AND TRACKING SHEET
Refinery: Shell Oil - Anacortes Refinery
State: Washington
Data sources available:
_x Petroleum refinery visits/voluntary submission
_x National Survey of Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage. Disposal,
and Recycling Facilities (TSDR survey)
National Survey of Hazardous Waste Generators
Biennial report/state reporting requirements
California hazardous vaste data base .
_x Petroleum refinery data base (FRDB)
_x No-migration petitions
Comments form proposed rule
_x Organic TC Survey
Basis for F037 and F038 waste estimation:
EPA used data provided by Shell Oil (Anacortes Refinery) because it was
the most recent and the only source that describes F037 and F038 waste
generation and management. Other sources were used only in comparison
with the refinery's data submission.
F037 and FQ38 waste estimates:
F037 (routine) -'125 tons/year from gravity clarifiers and sewer
cleanouts. (100 tons/year from sever cleanout and 25 tons/year from
elarifiers).
F037 (one-time) - 200 tons from closure of a diversion impoundment. The
Impoundment will be replaced by a tank, which will be cleaned out every
two to five years; therefore, the F037 sludge would not be generated
continuously. (Shell Oil expects that F037 sludge generation in the
tank would be less than 200 tons).
Shell Oil Anacortes does not anticipate generating F038 wastes.
According to more recent information from the 1C survey, this facility
indicated that it would generate the following quantities of surface
'•.
-------
r
inpoundment rludgcs during the Indicated time periods:
F037/8 (surface Impoundments) - 0 Cons (7/92 - 12/92)
F037/8 (surface Impoundments) - 0 cons (1/93 - 12/93)
F037/B (surface impoundments) - 0 cons (1/96 - 12/96)
F037 (routine) - 192 tons/yr.
jrt
•is
o
o
NJ
O
O
cn
..&
-------
O30S
ICF CE
a ooi
s
-5
i - ICF KAISER
ENGINEERS
A&susszt's ram
CZXT/8UII
10.
ma.
not
ao.
n.
nurxano* 943.4*40
g-y-fV
lalrfax.
o
o
to
O
o
9S4.17M
-MttJL ^3jS
UJSSS
C3
«-O
-------
r
0« 07 Jl 10:41 TJSO« titi
KF 5E
£002
F037/T038 CASTE CAZAdl? AStLTSIS -- 1ZFDJE1T
STATE;
CffiffAHT:
A2Kt£SS:
COBZACX:
Sh.ll Oil
SHell Oil Conpoj
March Poinc Ro*4
, Bi. 98221
SdEca.
EBDHE BTHBIS:
1-20S-293-1S18
1-20S-293-9190
CALLOL:
Oa AmUwou, Wub. Sttta tape, of Eaelesy, ladusezUl S.ctioa
6/6/91 tUflt: 3:20 - 6:10 pa p.t:
JToaM CtzeSSIOS: 5D9-9W-2U7
• A •^ *" --
a <• 5 m
o. a. M.M
8
to
o
o
-------
r
09-07
10:41
3141
KF IE
a 003
shall OU, laaoortaa HI. cent.
I feud a copy of t&a tacarvlav tocaa to Ed acd advtsad tia caac l£ deaind,
chm lafoxaaclon would ba eon*ida;ad CBI. H* did me iadlcaca th*e this vas
aaeacsaxy. I will follow op CO aafca. sure.
POJ7 AMD f036 QDZS11USB
*-*t
bta
iura doTalopad « pnllnlnaxjr cariM of quaatioiu to «id la our
d«Mtn41ac of bow cb* ww F037 aid F038 v**e» lifting end pra;o<«d
<£f*et r»fla«ri«». 1KM* qoanioas inrolv* not only C037 and 7038
•*, bat «xg«nd to KMS-K05Z md.TC vaiccs, di«eta» p«st «od fucur*
maaMae £»e titty •odt£tucLoa«. oa *lta nrMCaaoc, «cc., in ordst fox
o§ co gat Ml und«r«t«a4tnj of ch« viola ptecura «n4 how avarytiicg
Iacarr«l«tM. In addltian ce ftlnfng «a erarall uadcncodlag of tha Isiuu.
•w* wme so dUecmr «sf nnlqua pcoblau or treatabliiejr is«ue> thic r«fln»riei
nqr hn* ««aeei«tad wtdi cHaaa wuca* .
o
d
to
1.1
1.2
1.3
Uhat
Sa*
JMIT currant:
aftjurtttcc?
How ««|t»fK*d is jour tjmeea, scost w»car v«. procait
Scam wmcar aamc eollacrlttn la (aparaea £r«M dsa procaii tawac.
Vhac »odif tc*tlen« lie** baaa s«da Is tb* Luc 5
o
o
u>
K wa>-£aa uaad CO ba Laid f«r»ed: tba alndg* wu
-------
08-07.81 111:42
KE
tatii an, kurort** a. eon:
1.6 Sh»t *£• a*
KZSHAP and TC.
1.7
b«hlnd ttuts» modifications?
How hn» the M48-XQ3J. 1C «=d F037-F038 «lts«« «nd land baas tf fiend
tU futility In saeu of Mdtf tcaelonj , operation. capacity. »tc.T
r«go
Co laad
CffiCLl tniJic«ti«
ceaftuiag. Ic 1* h*rd Co uateracud c
faclllcle*. You c«a'C landfara
a davlr&ble.
lead b«n «<
T»C
2.0 ICPtf*
2.L
oh«t t« your
tod rc
of g»c»ricion tad Itwl dlnos«l of K04l-r052
«x* eh* ««a««tloc. wa±»r». K vuui «r» f«ae to
Irtkut ittttnontor. TC v«*t*« «i« noc cridnd ••
co tfa» on§ic« laad
1C
f«rX
051 IM tbm only
p*rlsd
2.2
do
C«a«r*nd «tr»«a. ch« rue occur
eurmtly BUC, rtcytl. or
-------
******
oe/07
»43 S143
ICF EE
shall on, »— - — *— u, coat.
2.4 Here there beca any up»tr««i or *uca vatar creeoune ftcLUcj operating
cbangea t» reduc* the eaounc of tfcaae wucw generated acd hew effective
are
S«a 2.3
2.5 nil tta f>ropo««d 1037 «nd F038 land bafl affect the •oauae of che»«
produced?.
F *Ut»« «otlelp«.ced M» £raa cmr eluaiagc. T!ur»
b4*ia «Iwa4 of th» API •*p«r»cor. >o no categorized u tc vmete?
t£e
buia Is ootduj«rdcro» by TO?.
3.0
3.1 !• tbu« « emiene eetictce of ttae aaa«&e of F037 end F038 vuce*
..
-------
r
io.4i t»so»
icr IE
Joo«_
£5
a <•
Oil, lnaocnrt*a ta, coac.
3.2 I« thara 01 aatloaea of et« aaaiat eS F037 and ?038 vaacaa atockalU din
coatalnan or atirfacai . ^^
Thar* la oo» diwalM poad that vlll bav. to b* cloaed. do«ura «tll
probably guarata a oaa eia. «aoimc of t v«*c.. Tha poad ta uauallr
dry, buc tba clar Miitr coacaisa COM oil. (' .
V?ei.
3.3 - Chae ar* yoa currently dotaf rtsh. tfaa •taelcpll*d vaxta aad what aza jaat
flitiig* plaaaf •
Hut poad will b* elaaa cloa«i by the a&d of 1993.
3.4 %at ac* tha rta*i,cil aad phyaleal charaecarlrdea of both tba curranely
|. _M — *- - _- * «^ ^ A '
.tb* pood elasur* vlll gtaaraM aocM oil eonEaiolac macarlal, but
is "111 not tzfct»r EC ruin ( < 0.5 ppn BawcMM). QIB F nata
from tb* a«w i* MBrfjr Uka and will pcebibly cricc«r TC ruUa.
3.5 Ihac la jour cnrraae tnaaMat, racycla or dlapotal Bathed In
raTartonahip ta 1037 aad F01I vucuT
^ It Is cnrrancly land ecsa*d aa daacribad aaxliar. Hhan tha
baa CBM» Into a££act It vlll ba aaat to tb» ioctaazator.
3.6 tbat ax* tha capaeitlw ot chaia erMnact, raeyela or dlapoaal aadioda
la ~i.»«~.».«r ta FD37 aad WJ8 vmataaf
3.7. a£* thar* aa?
«ltfat±*Uad
rhmfaa, altbar pbyvtcal or opoxmcioiua., te daal
aad bov «1U ch*>* ebn^M «££*ee K044.EOS2 we*
tlon.
plaaaad, areapt to «tep land
Ko chant* la K «ut»
3.« !• it powlbl* to indue* I037/T03I or KJM-KOS2 w-taa by puctlaK norm
c£ a load on O* aotMatm biological uaitst
L vaataa ar* Moatly laadr, faarc •«nr1«t aad tiara la not aucb
ttat * bio vole caa do. tt»y ar* cunmtly TnoHag ae a •lurry raaetoz,
but doa-e knov If It woold Mat craataaac
MJ^.-
- a =» P
it
O
d
O
O
•i '
UO
J
-------
r
08/07. «L 10:43 tJJ«« »41 31O
ICF
ace? __
on, iMoaztu w, cone.
4.0
4.1 flint *r« TOOT off«lt» cxiufaaae option* u>4 «r« clw unisja* f*at»e«« of
JDOT vut* chit would llalt tb* truubility epclon*?
of
In the
•earea cancxol, »»gr»ff«clon, etc?)
m to
f«eiliey
hn* tn««tt«ead Mare* eoatzel rcdccttens — ••• section 1.
of di« ccrr«ac dlipecal opetoia, outc*.
4.3 Bill &• BIT xnUag «££«et
fttpti-™ «r i1 HIM 1 1 til?
Jfa
4.4 la
go«« Co tb«*« cjp«j of •ual.t*.
« pr*£«xac« on prrxbielng FOJ7/T03J
4,5
In ctru of
clMoouc voa't b« bandLsd with. eb» API
la tiba fcwjo«j
-------
F
£33
o
o
to
o
o
OJ
C3
UO
-------
r
4 TV!»t*-^
F037 AMD P03B WASTt CAPACITY ANALYSIS:
DATA USB AND TRACKING SHEET
» Z
•» o 2 jf o
•J
n
Refinery: Texaco * Anacortes
State: Washington
Data sources available:
_jj Petroleum refinery visits/voluntary submission
_x National Survey of Hazardous Uasce Treatment, Storage. Disposal,
and Recycling Facilities (TSDR survey)
National Survey of Hazardous Waste Generators
Biennial report/state reporting requirements
California hazardous waste data base
_x Petroleum refinery data base (FRDB)
x No-migration petitions
_x Conments Corn proposed rule —
Organic TC Survey
Basisfor F037and F038 waste estimation:
EPA used data provided by Texaco (Anacortes Refinery) because it was the
most recent and the only source that describes F037 and F038 waste
generation and management. Other sources were used only in comparison
with the refinery's data submission.
F037 and F038 waste estimates:
F037 (routine) - 3,000 tons/year from sewer and equalization tank
(install by 1992) cleanout.
F037 (one-time) — 25,000 tons from closure of stormwater/process water
Impoundments, and equalization baslti (to be closed by 1992).
Texaco Anacortes does not anticipate generating F038 wastes.
According to more recent information from the comments to the proposed
rule, this facility indicated that it would generate the following quantities
of surface Impoundment sludges during the Indicated time periods:
F037/8 (surface Impoundments) - 0 tons (7/92 - 12/92)
sj
n
O
o
to
hd
o
o
u>
CD
WO
LO
-------
I' _
F037/8 (surface impoundments) - 0 cons (1/93 - 12/93)
F037/8 (surface iopoundncnts) - 0 tons (1/94 - 12/94)
isi
Si8£~
S*»i8
a o. ^«
8
o
o
U)
_J
-------
US 13-91 10:J» OSOt Hi S14J
ICF IE
ir
iCF KAISER
ENGINEERS
19 KJL.-M* ZNG.NCCXI me
Ml MntLUMS B1.VO. ATM FU>S»
niZCOlT (301) 9O-J14S
(30«) 943-MM
2 r o
' 81s-
cm/sun
•rmrrrvr yQf
o
a-
N)
O
O
u>
ftrac
s ronx HO.
CKUUB HO.
sns
QiS
mi OOBTOII or.
USES
CXKUIBXB6 COTD. UCE)
man ?ACSS
-------
r
ICF
STAIE:
COH?WK:
•»
S-293-06IS
OOSTACX:
DiXE:
.*.--•«
!«
.Ill
-
8
to
o
o
U)
-------
r
04 !)•>! 10: S» ft"* 9*3 JUJ
UP KE
12 00 2
F037/F038 HASTE OLZACXIT A3AIXSIS -- RETISBIY
ST4IE:
COHTASV:
Taxjico
ADDSISS: T«uco, USA.
P.O. Box 622
CQStfcCX: V«m
nSXIZQV: Saslor
9(221
BU3CER:
FAX MOHBE&:
S4f»CT tad Bultii. Dope.
ROTXEHCE: KU
DATE: 6/11/91
Stuum* J<
1-20S-2J3-06M
1-206-293-L5J4
.Depe. of Ecology. Xa4u*trl*l Scecioa
8:45-8:30 AM, PST
HHSSICH: 509-94<-2ii7
NOM
- Sf««d to fee laforaatio
- Ic«ma contact vill
tn coauee p«r»onT Sent c"P7 of lnc*rvi«*
J. 8uil cor«c
sch«a«tlc
«nd
O
o
O
OJ
CD
UU
-------
11:00
OJOS I4J 1143
ICF KE
a 003
S*kaco, loaeortaa MA
F037 AKD F038 QUISTIOSS
Ve bara davalopad a prallalsary sarlaa of qua* dons to aid In our
undaraeaadinc •* bow cba nav FJ37 aad ITJ38 vaata Uctiag and propoaad land ban
will affiact zm£lBariaa. Tbaaa qca*cloa« Involve not only F037 and F03I
vaaeaa. but axpaad to KD4B-KOS2 «ai TC vuua. dLiciuB puc cud fucar* v«iu
vatar erutwac fielliqr aodtfltaclona, on *Lce tr«*tB«nt, «cc., in order for
U* CO g*C tO. tautermr^nAItt^ of thff vtwl* ptcttll* md heir CrTClJT Lhillf
inc«rr«LftU*. In Addition to g«fTifn| «n overall und«r«oa«,
v« wane to discover may unlqu* proOl«a» or treitiJaUlty Icmw* that r«flaarte»
Q»y hava «s»oci*ted with cfacx* vucac.
Tr**ri"*gg FaelUrr
§*» ^
£ff
a?»E» "
O " •• ^ Bl
a a «.«
:
l.l Slut Is joor current configuxmcionf
SM
8
1.2 How
t( your «7*CMt, item. v*t«r TS. proeau vacarf
Own ara tan *avir cyitvu. the ptocvst i«v«r talca* pzoeau
vanca mcar and ateca wuar rvaoff from procau tato and avidi It
to tfa» bio CT*C*OI. thar* 1* a »«p*r»t« «tora vater smr foe tha
r*«t of tha itom wear runoff. TMa 1_» »«or to » boldlog pood
and is dlsehargod wlti txaasad proeaaa water.
1.3 Chat BoOtfLcabiooa hcva baaa Bad* ia tha Lut S
No aajox
What vac* tba
Soc
fore** babiad thasa aodlflcadoM?
!
1.5 What futura oodlfieaetons ara platoiad?
By April 1992. tfca follo^cf «1U ba tnacallad:
- Iba CJ«0 oxarflo* bade* irlll b« raplacad by tm 80.000 bbl.
ti7iV». Xbaaa batin* eartancly taka off tut n.tar, or waear that
it la «xe*H of tha bio «y»t*a capacity.
- Iba aquallxatlon bajln vtll ba raplaead by m 20.000 bbl. eank.
• Zb* AS! cad OAF «oiu will ba cowrad. A third DAF unit vlll
ba ia»tallad. Haw aarteera «ad eUxlflar* •vllL ba added.
- Iba aaracion pood and aatcllny pond* will b« raaorad ficea
Mrvfea.
- Iba outfall puap< vtll be cbangad, and dlffusacc will ba
lutallad ac ch* dock.
-------
11:00 tJ509 HI SHI
1CF IDE
2 CO 4 *-•
"
I'.S 'Shee are the drlvtnj forces behind ch«sa eodlf tensions ?
1.7
2.0
2.1
2.:
2.*
frfTM. DCV perfoxaaacs (esadardc. SFDZS.
How have t±* £0*4-15032. 1C «od K»37-?038 ruling *ad i-™< bus aff«ce*4
the fsrtiltr la tear- of modification* . operation, capacity, ere'. 7
Cattl BOW, all K vasos ••r* Isad f cnud, vith ch« eaccepciea of
sloe oil «BiLsloas and OAF QJMC. Tb« lucEar swo go co di* cofcar.
Ho«t: of efal* i* omr (Olac ta tb» cok«r (kboae 200 T/>r) . *FI
bottoas vtll ben to b« s«oc offsic* co so. laebwrmcor.
TC: casks vLLL nor b* tts*d Co bald effcue r*x»x sad for
Ibo e£flc*nt yl«nt v&ccc is fc«"'^™«-. so
e r «
.
b*cos»s a v**C* v»t*r czaAeaanC voilz. tics ep«T4C«rs will
bcv* co b» trmlaad sad eerclfl«d.
»rvd TC g<«e*»
O
u
to
^Tj
O
O
Bhat it your estiaated 'race of (tnaratioa sad laad disposal of E048-KD52
sad TC vsseas? —
(Quantities la Tons)
BW (CAT float)
X049 (Slop oil
xoso (SET
051 <»»I
K052 (Pb Sk
., * eo
How do you currently Crest, recycle or dispose of These vutes sad are
chore cay foreseeable: casnc*s In the ereetaeac, recyellag er dlsyosair
The DAT fleet end slop oil had been laad fsaed. DAT float ii
also seas to tie oakez. Currently, sludge sichse foe* to die .
eoker or is pressed eai sscfc co aa iacioersxae IB Nortb Cazoliae.
IMf^
0
> 0
1.4.
317.2
32.0
1989
15.0
S0.2
14.0
917.3
0
1990
231*
714
2
76
0
1901
9*
-700
-10
-450
-10
HOT h«.v« tba vasts j*a«MClon rscu changed irlth tha t"t*r-i'~M
nillna; and lead ban?
ben nat
tiia mcfcod of
vuca
hss.
chara been ay upttran er vase* vater tseataaoe faclllcy
ehsage* CO zedaee cha «»oear of these wastes gtaereted sad bov
chtngtsT '
-------
r
09.13 91
O5C9 Hi
ICF KE
2.6 Hov nueh of th*s« vast** *r» «toclcpU«cl la container* or surfite
T»»co,
Ml
2.5 ttlll th* propoc*d F037 asd F03B lend boa *ff«c: the Mount of th«e«
vaaeas produced?
Only la the cnwa that ei«y h*v« ba«n reclaulfied frou non-
HUM.
2.7 Chit «r» tb» cb«aieAL «o* pty«ic*l chmracterlatle* of cha currsntly
g*ner*eod
-------
r
11:01
9301 H) JI4J
ICF IX
xtxaco, fta*oert*« fa
3.4
Ace ir« th* ch«alc*l cad pbjciul cfaarteteritrics of both the currmelv
Od th«
It Ic th« sa« « th» API battm*. Ic la huvlaz th«T> w«e«r.
«bouc SOX ub md und, 201 oil tnd lurry crmadu, «
in C*l*CiM*faXp Co F037 «nd F03S mutxc?
Zb* l«ad Cam em luiudl* 1,0,000 con* of oil per ytur.
••diode
Ar« cb«c* *af planed clunges, elchtr physical or optxacimul, co d«tl
vith tb« Uod ben aad faov rtll dw«« ebnfH t££*et K0i8-K052 vtxcm
3.S
3.6
3.7
c*n raduca to* load on Cta API unit, «g. by cleaning
oat tibw mtx* an. m. roacian but*, putting tad bags in tba •
procaat mumf to balp tba telidc nttla out. «nt«p up ch* dirt on
dw vrococc Q&i>tfl radwr ^Vfn vajSbi It into ttu aovor, •TM< icaap1 ^^^
eolnr *elld» oat of ti» t*v»r.
3.8 !• it po««lil« to rwbc« F037/T038 or K048-KOS2 n«tu by pattinf
of a load on th» aggresaiv* biological units f
Bo.
4.0 &m«r.I
4-1 Bbat cr* your oCfsita tr«at«*BC opcioaa and what an dw unique f«ator*>
of your vaata Uiat would' limit tba
Th«
Ic to a
4.2 Boat Bodlflcatlotti bcv» bean dona or ara placnad upstraa* to radnea tba
of n*ta cuaaratad lo d>« ttaata nacar craataaoc facility («g.
ol, »«graj*tlon. ace?)
option* en ca pru« «ad z«4uea ti» wue*, tbcn s«ad
' or iaelaanacac. Thar« shoaid IM oo llniu .
4.3 VU1 t-ba nil ruling aff.ct
or
of tb* current dicpoial option! , onaite,
9
to
o
o
j
-------
r
OM3.-9I 11:02
5H3
ICF KE
BOOT
Xacaea, laacoxtaa xx
4.4 I< there a preference on producing F037/T038 vastat la earns o£
or dlxpocalT
Cuxreccly, Ic i* preferable to generate F VMM because you can
•till Land farm It.
la general, It Ic hard to see hov laetnerieloa c*a be preferable
CD land faming - bo* can a* Ing up charcoal In cne practtag *c«p,
shipping tha prasaad eak« clear across tha councry, chan
. iBctoaradna; Ic iiith no produce racavvrj ba eha baccar
alunaclva?
* *
•• o 2 jr o
a. a -.«•
i* tha £r« elaaaad avary thr«a aoacha, cha DAT.
two year*, rank* ara conclnuoualy drltaad and sludge la
£ abouc av«7 otbar J»ar. X* for ponda, rha orarflov
baatn is claaaed rrary tl» antha. buc tbasa arm to be rapLtead by
eatdci. Slap oil amlslon la aaoc dally eo eba eekar. Tba ba«c
axehaagoca ara elaaaad during mra«rouoda, aboat arary 5 years or
laas.
Hbile teiM of tbaaa qQasdom «ra Tuy spaelJTlc, va realize that: Initially DOC
all of eba axaftt
-------
08-15.31 11:02 0S«« »4J SHJ
LCCOICH
SUBJKT
[CF KE
DISSOLVED >UR
FIOATION UNITS
EOUAItZATlON
I iASN I
200,000 CU FT
1
API
rt— |
! !
,
I j
*•-".
ACUftD
IAGOCN
aaxooocuir
ABUTtS* CUWTERS
a,080 cu rr
OffiM 0VBWJSW
TORIUUOBAV
OVERFLOW
_^j BASN
f* 300.000 CU R
OVEWLOW
BASN
-* 500.000 CU FT
OCAM WATCH
FUME
104000 CU FT
CHLORWATCS
1000 l£/tAY
STORM
WATER
1
SK 11/18/88
ss
.
• 5
Ui
o
s
o
o
U)
C3
UO
-------
r
J
3
F037 AKO F03B WASTE CAPACITY ANALYSIS:
DATA BSE ASD TRACKING SHEET
f ss
Refinery: Quaker State - Newell Refinery
State: West Virginia
Data sources available:
x Petroleum refinery visits/voluntary submission
x National Survey of Hazardous Waste Treatment. Storage. Disposal,
and Recycling Facilities (TSDR survey)
National Survey of Hazardous Waste Generators
Biennial report/state report ing requirements
__ California hazardous waste data base .
x Petroleum refinery data base (PRDB)
_ No-migration petitions
Basis for F037 and F038 waste estimation:
EPA used data provided by Quaker State (KcKean Refinery) because it vac
Che nose recent and the only source that describes F037 and F038 waste
generation and management. Other sources were used only in comparison
with the refinery's data submission.
F037 and F038 waste estimates:
F037 (routine) — 100 tons/year is from sewer cleanouts.
Other than the F037 waste from sewer cleanouts, Quaker State does not
appear'to generate any other F037 and F038 wastes.
n
s
O
O
X
i' tji.
-------
67x2^91 13-56 O412 281 5220
I WES
SSI sy:x(pox Telecopier rc»; 7-2H1: 1M7 :
W6767030-
2)002 _
corn unu
741 I (114) 676-7030
O
o
ts)
O
O
UJ
ruuuis DtLtTBt m mumx ?AfiB(8)
MXZl
TOTAL man or riant
«^.1..x<«t ClXlf
IMTOUUTIOT
nan mnaa or ssmnt
IF TOO CO ROT fttCEZTZ ALL T8Z PACtS TRDTCATt!)
»lf »SZ CALl *f)«T»F» >T
KCHBCT LTSTCD
J
-------
***»;*
87-24/91 13--S7 0412 231 5220
ires
ScRT BYKirw Tlltwlfr 7020 : 1-2H1 : UM1 I
W876703IH
412 211 5220!! 2
•° « ">
II?
•
waate la auitabl* for fuela blandlng. The KOSl baa
ne Btu conttnt and the K04ft baa • vary lew fitu that variaa widaly
batvaan ahlpntnta. Neither wast* ia atorad or atookpiked oaalta.
Th« KOfil it dawatared at fenaratlon to a aolidg content of
approx. SOX. Tbt K04I J* about UX vater. l/nfortunattly, our
Inatnarator can not bantfl* bulk aolida In other than drut
o ^-
»!
cu*ntiUei>. There la BA eoonoiic Incentive to dewatar tba HO 48
for 'aide-door lociRaratiea and •* hecltat* to awlteh froa a
T30.
Moo* of our aeeeadarr treatment waate ia charactariatte.
FOJfl Vaatae
Ka eatUata 100 tona/yaar of FOST 4 P03S. Nona of thia waata
!• itookpllad, On ftatratioa, uiually during naintanaaoa or
elaaa-aut, the «lud*a trill ba dawaterad and diapeied of. Any oil
raoovarad will ba re*ehari»d to our uaita. In fanaral, th* waat«
will ba 40X aolida after d«vat£rla«. neo-iinitabJa,non-raaativ«,
and non- TCI.P toxjo. j(OMt of thia waata will ba ludfillad until
a land ban* Aftarwarda, w» will probably hav« it incinaratad
ratfardleaa of aiaiMl oontaainant It vela.
Aialni w« do not expaet K048 4 K061 volunaa to cbanfa dua
to th* F03T/F038 ruliafa. Wo could bowevar »Haiaate our K04S
atraaa by ditcontlauinf dlaaolvad air flotation. Tho effect on
naoondarr traatsant would ba baraly aotieaabl*.
*• prafar ineinaration far our "X" waatva. Therefora th*«v
waatta, having no •coaealo/fu*! valua, will eontlaua to ba
inoinermt'wd aa lor>< aa w* oan aooaaa oapaoitr* K« poliol«a bava
baan davtlopad l&-bouaa conoarninf the F037/F038 p«ndinf *ara
inforvation. Ira htvt ae prafaranoa rafardinr "K" va *F" vaatcc.Wa
do aot baljeva nodiflcatlona upatraai to tba API'a will
AifnifictnUr reduce voluaaa. At praaant wa elaan the API'a «e«i-
annuallr and tha DAF Float Accumulation taaka avtrr 8 waaka.
Uflita eontainlnf POJ7/»03i will ba elaanad aa naadad.
O
d
to
O
O
OJ
•y
-------
13;66
5228
IIES
Bees
SMI 8Y!Xir«
f 7C20 : 1-2H1 : U:1J :
9U8767030«
07/16/91 «!B9
281 S220II 3
»
- a £ • °
S " • 2
£:•<»•« X
* ? _» 2
, 75 «or«§ oonniit of roads and und»v«lop«d
y fields draining into tho uncont&ainattd nwtr eyitea,
Aftvr the API separator* , our treatment seheM inoludtf dual
lvad Air Flotation Units, biological treatnent *ia extended
attrition. «»nd filtration (2-unit«), *nd hydrogen peroxidt
dlilnfectlon. ?ht> taod fDtratloa and peroxide dlsinfsotJen were
added Just over 0 rears Mo for NPDC6 pei-altting. There are no
current plans to alter our treetaent configuration.
Tha K04S-XOS2 and TCLP rtilinfs hnv* not affected operation.
our wastes are not characteristic under the new test procedures
and we h«va been incinerating these w««te« si nee IBM. Please
note however that •«»» scheduling prebl«e,s for incineration »f«
now beihg eneountftreO due to shortfall* in cap»»ltr> We are
unsure how »unh P037 - F03B will be generated under the new
nilinga. However, we expect these waste* to be non-charaoteriatic
ae well .
Ktua - K082 and TC Wastes
Our K04* - X05t waste* aneunt. t.o approx. 250 tons/year and
should refinin so for th« forseeable future. Again, these wastes
are incinerated and hav« b««n for ease tim*. t'ndev tbe new
toxiea.tr para«eterit wo expect to generate another 100 tons /rear
under 0018 (gasoline contaminated wastes). Tbe D016 will be
incinerated or landfilled li*»*d on concentration und voluse of
each generated aaount.
Our *K" wejites are cosprieed of upprox. 90X OAF Float and
o
s
TJ
o
o
1
UJ
-------
r
thP»o
ta *u
t« Ii
Uttl
«oly
or
"
to •!<»» «««r*tlon of th».»
B«W content. ObvlouBly w»
ilh etud. .«ppJl.«
Extiniitd Put 3,
iitd FIJI
M. il
not «l»h
«. have
If!
8
to
o
o
------- |