innovative Alternative Treatment
and Recycling Demonstration Project
for the
On-Site Treatment of Hazardous Wastes
from Automotive Repairs
FINAL REPORT
Prepared for
Alternative Technology Section
Toxic Substances Control Division i
California Department of Health Services
and the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Prepared by
Wesley M. Toy, P.E.
Consulting Engineer
18805 Cox Ave., Suite 120
Saratoga, CA 95070
(408) 374-4579
June 1988
-------
Innovative Alternative Treatment
and Recycling Demonstration Project
for the
On-Site Treatment of Hazardous Wastes
from Automotive Repairs
FINAL REPORT
Prepared for
Alternative Technology Section
Toxic Substances Control Division
California Department of Health Services
and the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Prepared by
Wesley M. Toy, P.E.
Consulting Engineer
18805 Cox Ave., Suite 120
Saratoga, CA 95070
(408) 374-4579
June 1988
-------
Abstract
This report identifies equipment to promote on-site waste
minimization in the automobile repair industry. It includes
hazardous waste evaporation tests, chemical analyses of
wastes, and develops operating characteristics for hazardous
waste volume reduction equipment. The study investigates the
proper and appropriate use of evaporative volume reduction
equipment for the on-site evaporation of hazardous aqueous
waste chemicals. These waste chemicals come from parts
washing equipment commonly used in this industry.
The results show that electric resistance heat can be used to
dehydrate a hazardous liquid waste to a dry solid for disposal
at a Class 1 landfill. Volume reduction of up to 10 to 1 were
measured. The typical evaporation rate was 3.2 gph. Costs
for ranged from $0.22 to $0.32 per gallon of waste treated.
The economic payback period for the evaporator was 12 months
when processing 60 gallons of aqueous waste per month.
-------
Acknowledgements
The Contractor acknowledges the support of David Leu, Jan
Radimsky, Kim Wilhelm and Robert Ludwig at the Alternative
Technology Section of the California Department of Health
Services and Harry Freeman with the Hazardous Waste
Engineering Research Lab of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. The Contractor is grateful for the contributions to
this report by Ray M. Hybarger, Marvin E. Curtis, and Mel K.
Carter. Steven Lambrecht is acknowledged for his support
during the testing phases of the contract.
This report was submitted in fulfillment of Contract No. 86-
T0024 by Wesley M. Toy, P.E. under the sponsorship of the
Department of Health Services. The work was completed as of
June 10, 1988.
Disclaimer
The statements and conclusions of this
report are those of the Contractor and
not necessarily those of the State of
California. The mention of commercial
products, their source or their use in
connection with material reported herein
is not to be construed as either an
actual or implied endorsement of such
products.
ii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE
ABSTRACT i
TABLE OF CONTENTS iii
APPENDICES V
TABLES vi
FINAL REPORT
CHAPTER
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 1
2 RECOMMENDATIONS
2 .1 General 4
2 . 2 Equipment Operation 4
3 INTRODUCTION
3.1 Scope of Study 6
3.2 Equipment Description 6
3. 3 Impact of the Technology 7
3.4 Limitations of Study 8
3.5 QA/QC Activities 8
4 DESCRIPTION OF TESTS PERFORMED
4.1 Sources of Waste, Test Site & Variances 9
4.2 Test Procedures and Approach to Analysis
4.2.1 General - 10
4.2.2 Equipment Performance 10
4.2.3 Waste Characterization 11
4.2.4 Analytical Methods 14
5 DEMONSTRATION PROJECT RESULTS
5.1 Equipment Operating Characteristics .... 15
5.2 Equipment Performance Summary 16
5.3 Equipment Test Results
5.3.1 General 16
5.3.2 Waste Volume Reduction 16
5.3.3 Heat Transfer Characteristics .... 19
5.3.4 Comparison with Effluent Stds. ... 20
5.3.5 Comparison with Hazardous Waste Std 20
5.3.6 Vapor Condensate Analysis 20
5.3.7 Types & Range of Treatable Wastes 21
5.3.8 Volume Reduction Limits 21
5.4 Process Economics 22
iii
-------
ADVANTAGES, DISADVANTAGES, AND TECHNOLOGY
ALTERNATIVES
6 .1 General 24
6.2 Advantages and Disadvantages 24
6.2.1 Advantages 25
6.2.2 Disadvantages 26
6.3 Alternative Methods of Waste Control ... 26
REFERENCES 28
GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS 29
iv
-------
APPENDICES
Appendix 1
Appendix 2
Appendix 3,
Appendix 4
Appendix 5
Appendix 6
Appendix 7
PAGE
Product Literature
EVAP-85, Waste Concentrator A- 1
Test Procedures A- 3
Evaluation Charts - EVAP-85
3A. Temperature vs. Time A- 8
3B. Solution Weight vs. Time A- 9
3C. Liquid Height vs. Time A-10
3D. Overall Heat Transf. Coeff.,U. A-ll
3E. Heat Flux vs. delta T or Time. A-12
3F. Electrical Efficiency vs. Time A-13
3G. Solution Weight vs. b.point.el A-14
Recorded Test Data A-15
Chemical Analyses of Hazardous Waste
Samples - Laboratory Report from Carter
Analytical Labs,Inc., A-23
Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS)
Caustic Based Cleaner A-29
Detergent Based Cleaner A-31
Vendor Literature
Pressure Cleaning Chamber (Jet Spray
Washer) A-33
Hot Tank A-34
QA/QC Activities A-35
-------
TABLES
PAGE
Table 4-1 Process Measurements and Data Recorded 11
Table 4-2 Process Samples Obtained 12
Table 4-3 Chemical Analyses Performed 13
Table 5-1 Evaluation Results Summary 17
Table 5-2 Chem.Anal.of Hazardous Waste Samples .. 18
Table 5-3 Roller Wash Waste Water Analysis 21
Table 5-4 Volume Reduction Limits 22
Table 5-5 Economic Payback Analysis 23
-------
CHAPTER 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
1.1 General
This study evaluates equipment used for the on-site evaporation
of aqueous hazardous wastes from automotive repair shops. The
study identifies innovative waste reduction technology which
can reduce the total volume of hazardous waste generated for
off-site treatment and disposal. The equipment evaluated is
the EVAP-85 manufactured by Equipment Manufacturing Co. of El
Monte, California. The EVAP-85 is a self-contained hazardous
waste evaporator. The unit is designed for the on-site
evaporation of aqueous hazardous chemical wastes produced from
automotive parts washers used in many automotive repair shops.
1.2 Background and Volumetric Reduction Capability
Significant quantities of waste caustic and detergent-based
wash solutions are produced monthly in the automotive repair
industry. These wastes pose a significant hazard if disposed
of improperly. The EVAP-85 reduces the volume of these liquid
wastes initially by a factor of from 3 to 10. The residue from
volume reduction is concentrated further to a dry solid. This
solid is suitable for disposal at a Class 1 landfill. Volume
reduction to a dry solid makes this method of waste processing
useful for some applications.
1.3 Equipment Operation
The waste evaporator treats up to 85 gallons of a hazardous
waste high in heavy metals. It uses electrical resistance
heating to vaporize water. The vapor vents to the atmosphere.
A thermostat shuts the unit off when the bottom temperature
reaches a preset limit. The residue then cools to room
temperature and solidifies. It is removed manually for
hazardous waste disposal.
-------
1.4 Tests Performed, and Results
A series of 3 tests with waste solutions and 2 calibration
tests with water were performed. Equipment performance was
evaluated by determining volume reduction, calculating heat
transfer characteristics, electrical efficiency. Chemical
analyses on the raw and treated waste were also performed. The
operating costs to treat each waste were determined. The
economic payback time for use of the evaporator in a typical
automotive repair operation was determined.
The results show that the evaporator operated at a nearly
constant evaporation rate of 3.2 gph over the full cycle. The
degree of waste reduction was primarily determined by the
percentage of dissolved solids in the initial waste. The more
typical wastes encountered on-site at automotive repair shops
could be reduced in volume by a 10 to 1 factor. For the more
concentrated waste, volume reduction was limited to 3 to 1.
Results of heat transfer calculations show overall heat
transfer coefficients in the 160 to 180 BTU/hr.ft2.o
F range.
They decreased substantially to 60 to 80 BTU/hr. f t2. °F for the
concentrated waste at the end of the run.
Chemical analyses of the raw waste showed major excesses in oil
content, heavy metal concentrations and pH. This would classify
the material as a hazardous waste. Chemical analyses of the
solid waste concentrate showed exceptionally high leachable
lead and copper compounds. The levels would require disposal
at a Class 1 landfill.
Operating costs were determined to be between $:22 and $.32 per
gal treated. The equipment produced a payback time of 12
months for a typical repair shop processing 60 gal per month.
1.5 Conclusions
The EVAP-85 is capable of significant hazardous waste volume
reductions of up to 10 to 1. The device is most suited for
automotive repair shops which generate less than 60 gallons of
hazardous waste per month. The EVAP-85 is most suited to waste
types having high heavy metal contaminants with dissolved
solids and low free oils each below 5% by weight.
The EVAP-85 performed well to stabilize heavy metal species in
the concentrated solid residue . Seven heavy metal species Cr,
Pb, Zn, As, Ba, Cu, and Cd were detected in the raw waste among
others present. Their concentrations exceeded municipal
statutory limits for discharge to the sanitary sewer. The dry
solid waste residue was analyzed. Analyses showed that only
two of these heavy metal species, Pb and Cu, exceeded the
solubility tests requiring disposal at a Class 1 landfill.
Uncertainties in the analytical methods show high but
questionable results with Hg.
-------
The ability of the EVAP-85 to treat liquid wastes with high
solids content or a. high concentration of free oil is
restricted. The temperature sensing device which signals that
the concentration cycle is complete does not compensate for
these two factors. High oil content can have an oil layer >1"
thick on the wastewater. This can cause the bottom temperature
to rise to the shut-off point with relatively little volume
reduction occurring. To allow the equipment to function
properly the free oil layer must be manually skimmed. This can
be done with the skim pipe mounted internally, or by other
means.
With a thermostat set for low solids content high solids
presently are only partially treatable. This is because either
settling of suspended solids or concentration of dissolved
solids will cause the thermostat to shut off power. Volume
reduction of only 46* were obtained with the thermocouple
setting suitable for the lower solids content. This compares
to 68* and 80* for higher settings. Manual removal of the
final solid residue from high solids content wastes was
difficult due to the depth of the EVAP-85 of 27 inches, and the
depth of the residue at 3 to 4 inches.
Chapter 2 will provide recommendations to minimize the
limitations listed above. For waste quantities greater than
120 gallons per month having high solids and oil content, other
batch chemical treatment methods are more appropriate.
No operating hazard to personnel were observed. The side walls
of the EVAP-85 were insulated, limiting the outer exposed
surface temperature to less than 112°F. Tnis is acceptable for
personnel safety. The top surface is uninsulated and was
recorded in the range of 140°F to 190°F. This temperature can
be a burn hazard to personnel. However, because the top
surface is inaccessible, it is not an operating hazard to
normal personnel activity. The vapor exhausts at a height
which clears nearby personnel. The waste concentrate is
extremely hot at 230°F It should be allowed to cool to a safe
temperature prior to handling and disposal.
-------
CHAPTER 2
RECOMMENDATIONS
2.1 General
These recommendations encourage the proper and appropriate use
of the EVAP-85. The waste evaporator demonstrated substantial
reductions in waste volume in an on-site application.
The frequent, weekly operation of the evaporator in conjunction
with a parts washer accomplishes two compatible goals. First,
the wash solution of the parts washer is kept low in dissolved
solids for better cleaning. Second, hazardous liquid wastes
are treated on an ongoing basis at a low solids content and
reduced to a solid waste.
This evaporator is more suited to treat small quantities of
waste, between 60 to 120 gallons per month. Larger quantities
require more operator labor which may not be compatible with
the priorities of the automotive repair shop. For larger
quantities equipment service contractors offer a suitable
alternative.
2.2 Equipment Operation
Removal of the solid residue from the evaporator is very
difficult when more than an inch of residue remains. This unit
needs means of draining the concentrate directly to a disposal
drum prior to solidifying, would be desirable.
As previously mentioned, there is an inappropriate shutoff
point of the thermostat for wastes with high amounts of
dissolved solids. The obvious solution would be an alternate
higher set point for those wastes. The recommendations
presented above would suggest an alternative. Wastes with high
solids are an inappropriate material to be treated using this
evaporator. The recommended approach would modify the service
for parts washers. The weekly service described above avoids
the generation of high dissolved solids wastes. Secondly, for
high suspended solids, the waste solution can be agitated
manually or mechanically to improve heat transfer. This
procedure would avoid the high shut off temperatures that are
undesirable due to safety reasons.
-------
A dual thermostat setting provided at 400°F can allow
processing wastes with higher solids content. A setting at
400°F would not exceed the guidelines set by Underwriters Lab
(UL) which requires a listing for values greater than 419°F.
In either case, repositioning of the thermocouple sensor for
intimate contact with the bottom plate is highly recommended.
The thermocouple can be screwed to a fitting welded directly to
the bottom plate. The point of attachment should be insulated
and enclosed to avoid measuring the radiant heat from the
heating elements.
-------
CHAPTER 3
INTRODUCTION
3.1 Scope of Study
This study characterizes and evaluates the performance of
hazardous waste volume reduction equipment for the on-site
evaporation of automotive repair wastes. This study identifies
control technology which can be readily developed and applied
to specific industry problems.
The equipment evaluated is used to concentrate aqueous
automotive repair wastes on-site by evaporation. Typical
volume reductions range up to 10 to 1. A series of three waste
characterization tests and two baseline tests with water were
conducted. The evaluation characterizes equipment heat
transfer and waste reduction capabilities. Chemical analyses
are performed to provide material balance and the residual
solid waste leachability characteristics. The results are
compared with regulatory limits requiring disposal at a Class 1
disposal site. In addition the process economics to operate
automotive parts washers with and without waste concentration
are presented.
3.2 Equipment Description
The equipment evaluated is the EVAP-85 or Water Eater
manufactured by Equipment Manufacturing Co. of El Monte, CA.
The EVAP-85 has been in production for two years. This
equipment was specifically designed and manufactured for use
with the primary parts washing equipment used in automotive
repair.
Pressure cleaning chambers(jet spray washers), hot tanks, and
solvent sinks are the parts washing devices most commonly used
on-site at automotive repair shops. Pressure cleaning chambers
and hot tanks are self contained baths with recirculating
and/or agitated compartments. The solution is used and
replaced on a 2 to 3 month schedule depending on the degree of
use. Appendix 5 provides the Material Safety Data Sheets
(MSDS) for detergent and caustic based cleaners for aluminum
and ferrous based metals cleaned in both of these devices.
-------
The EVAP-85 is designed to operate periodically on the
contaminated caustic or detergent wash solutions produced from
hot tanks or detergent jet spray parts washers. By
periodically reducing the levels of oil, dissolved solids and
heavy metal contaminants in the wash solution , maintaining
make-up water and providing additional detergent, the wash
solution activity is maintained for better cleaning. Clean
parts with a minimum amount of labor is extremely important for
most transmission repair shops.
The evaporation of the spent wash solutions are more easily
done on a frequent periodic basis. The aqueous wastes are
reduced to a semi-dry cake suitable for Class 1 disposal
sites. Aqueous untreated or treated wastes are given a hazard
class of a corrosive liquid or solid and a Department of
Transportation (DOT) shipping name of Waste Corrosive Liquid or
Solid, N.O.S. These wastes are shipped under I.D. No. UN 1760
as a liquid and UN 1759 as a solid for Class 1 disposal.
A typical Pressure Cleaning Chamber(jet spray washer) and Hot
Tank are shown in Appendix 6. The EVAP-85 waste evaporator is
used adjacent to the parts cleaning device which it services.
Appendix 1 provides the manufacturer's description of the
device. Batches of waste up to 85 gallons in volume can be
processed. One recommended method of operation is to treat 20
gallons from a 60 gallon jet spray washer every 10 days. Waste
solution is pumped into the evaporator using an auxiliary pump
provided.
The waste is heated to its boiling point using six-2KW
electrical resistance type heating elements. Heating is
indirect through a bottom flat plate. A fan Is used to draw
vapors from the evaporator. After volume reduction the
solution is allowed to cool and solidify. The waste solid
residue must be removed manually from the vessel.
3.3 Impact of the Technology
The manufacturer of this equipment has sized and priced it for
a low capital cost. This means low profit margins but a high
sales volume to the manufacturer. The impact on waste
quantities from the automotive repair industry could be
significant. This approach provides for wide distribution and
a more ready acceptance. The cost of this equipment is $2300.
Currently no other known evaporative device exists to perform
this drying operation on-site using electrical heat. The
primary competitor at the present time is the Nordale Fluid
Evaporator of Minneapolis, MN with an equipment cost of $9500.
This device is a natural gas fired evaporator. Other
competitors are expected to come on the marketplace in the near
future. Alternatives are discussed in Chapter 6.
-------
This equipment can have widespread application nationally. A
two year survey of small quantity generators (SQG) (Ref.l),
issued by the Office of Solid Waste (OSW) was released March
12, 1985 by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). SQG' s
average over 220 pounds but less than 2200 pounds of hazardous
waste per month. This study shows vehicle maintenance leading
nationally in numbers of waste generators at 82,530 of 175,000
total. It also was highest in the quantity of total wastes
produced at 351,000 tons/year out of a total 760,000
tons/year for SQG's. The proposed technology would reduce in
volume by a factor of up to 10 a significant portion of the
351,000 tons/year generated. SQG's produce less than one-half
of one percent of the hazardous waste produced nationally.
However, the sheer number of SQG's pose human health and
environmental risks.
3.4 Limitations of Study
The conclusions and recommendations developed in this report
apply typically to waste generation in the automotive repair
industry. The wastes treated were chosen to represent the
ranges of wastes expected to be processed by the waste
evaporator. They do not represent all types of wastes which
may be processed.
Waste disposal costs were based upon disposal services and
costs in Northern California.
3.5 QA/QC Activities
Test evaluation plans met quality assurance (.QA) guidelines as
required by EPA Quality Assurance requirements. Those
requirements are per subsection 30.503 of the Federal Register,
Part VIII; Vol 48, No. 191, Sept. 30, 1983. A copy of the
sixteen point QA project plan is provided in Appendix 7. QA/QC
activities which lend support to the credence of the data and
the validity of conclusions are documented in Appendix 7.
-------
CHAPTER 4
DESCRIPTION OF TESTS PERFORMED
4.1 Sources of Waste, Test Site, and Variances
The EVAP-85 waste concentrator was operated through a series of
three process waste tests and two domestic water baseline
tests. Waste material was selected to represent the two types
of waste normally produced, hot tank and jet spray washer
solution. Of these two types of waste, many transmission shops
are now using the detergent wash due to the increased use of
aluminum parts. The caustic wash is used on ferrous based
parts. Two waste reduction tests were performed on the
detergent jet spray solution and one on the caustic hot tank
solution.
The waste solution was obtained from a major equipment supplier
and maintenance service firm for hot tanks and jet sprays in
the Northern California area. Over 700 auto repair firms are
serviced, from larger automotive dealerships to small repair
shops. The waste is collected in 55 gallon drums and brought
back to a central treatment site. The test equipment was one
of three units operated on an on-going basis. The samples
selected were taken from the normal range of composite wastes
brought in for processing.
Variances for manifesting of spent parts cleaning corrosive
liquids per Title 22, CCR per Section 66310 are on file. An
exemption for operation of experimental equipment was obtained
by a CEQA Notice of Exemption, Ref. Section 15304(e) and 15306
CEQA guidelines.
-------
4.2 Test Procedures and Approach to Analysis
4.2.1 General
The test procedure developed was to study the waste
reduction characteristics of the EVAP-85. This was done
by studying the following four areas:
A. Operating Characteristics Initial volume
Run length
Evaporation rate
Temperature profile
B. Heat Transfer Characteristics Overall
ht.trnsfr.coeff.
Heat flux
Electrical efficiency
C. Waste Reduction Volume basis
Weight basis
D. Process Economics Total power consumed
Total power cost
Cost per gal.
evaporated
Cost per gal. treated
The test procedure involved two primary phases , 1)
Equipment Performance, and 2} Waste Characterization.
4.2.2 Equipment Performance Measurements
A Honeywell multipoint continuous temperature recorder was
used to monitor operating conditions throughout each run.
The following temperature traces were recorded:
1. Interior dry bottom temperature
2. Interior liquid surface temperature
3. Interior vapor temperature
4. Exterior skin temperature
5. Bulk liquid temperature - 6" from vessel bottom
6. Ice bath temperature standard
Power consumption was continuously measured using and
Esterline-Angus Model S22904 strip chart watt-hour
recorder.
A 1000 pound capacity Toledo double pendulum automatic
indicating scale was used to weigh the EVAP-85 containing
the waste solution. (Dead equipment weight was tared out.)
Measurements were taken at 15 minute intervals throughout
each test run. Process test runs were from 13 to 15 hours
in duration.In addition, liquid height was taken by use of
a calibrated dip stick.
10
-------
Table 4-1 summarizes the temperature, weight, power and
volume data recorded.
Table 4-1
Process Measurements and Data Recorded
Variable Frequency
waste weight loss 15 minute intervals
power consumption continuous (strip chart)
temperatures 30 second intervals,
(multipoint strip chart)
liquid height 60 minute intervals
Appendix 2 provides the detailed test procedure used.
Appendix 3 provides the actual test data recorded for all
runs.
4.2.3 Waste Characterization
Waste characterization of the treated and untreated wastes
was performed by the analysis of a series of 13 samples.
Table 4-2 identifies the samples obtained for each of the
three waste reduction tests. Table 4-3 lists the array of
chemical analyses performed.
Samples were obtained of the raw waste, the vapor
condensate collected at 32 degF over a 5 to 7 hour period,
and the treated waste. The treated waste was sampled
when: 1) the evaporator was shut down automatically by its
internal thermal protection thermocouple, 2) the unit
reached a dry-bottom temperature of 400o_ . _ ,
* * F as in runs 2 and
5, indicating the physical limits of the evaporator, or 3)
after achieving a 10 to 1 volume reduction as in run 3.
Additional samples were taken for run 5 to characterize
the concentration of wastes after normal thermocouple
shutdown (samples J and K), and the sun dried residue from
evaporation (sample M).
11
-------
Table 4-2
Process Samples Obtained
Sample Number
1 hr. 3 hr. § 400°
Waste Raw Conden- T/C aft.T/C aft.T/C Bottom Dry
Run Material Waste sate Shutdn. Shutdn. Shutdn. Temp.
Solid
1 Water - - -
2 Caustic A B - - - C -
Hot Tank
3 Detergent D F - - - E(265°)
Jet Spray
4 Water - - -
5 Detergent G H I J K L M
Jet Spray
Process samples were analyzed to allow:
a) comparison of raw waste to the local sewer
discharge
limits for heavy metals, organic carbon content
and
pH.
b) determination of the initial and final weight
percent dissolved solids the EVAP-85 could handle.
c) determination of the leaching characteristics of
the
residual waste requiring Class 1 disposal.
d) determination of concentrate densities for
disposal
purposes.
e) Screening a sample of the raw waste for the
presence
of chlorinated hydrocarbons(EPA Group 601),
aromatic
hydrocarbons(EPA Group 602), and common solvents
(EPA Group 604).
12
-------
Description
Raw Waste
Processed Waste
Table 4-3
Chemical Analyses Performed
Sample
No.(a)
A D G
XXX
XXX
XXX
XXX
XXX
- - x
I J K C E L
X X X X X X
X X X X X X
X X X - - X
X X X X X X
- - - - x -
22,Div.4,Sec66699
Final Solid
Product
22,Div.4,Sec66699
Condensate
M
x
x
x
B F H
XXX
XXX
Test
Total Hydrocarbons (ppm)
Heavy Metal Analysis (b)
Wt.% Solids (Moisture Content)
Density
PH
EPA 601,602,604 (Ref.2)
Total Hydrocarbons (ppm)
Heavy Metal Analysis (b)
Wt.* Solids (Moisture Content)
Density
Leach Test,Title
x x x x x x pH
Total Hydrocarbons (ppm)
Heavy Metal Analysis (b)
Leach Test,Title
PH
Total Hydrocarbons (ppm)
Heavy Metal Analysis (b)
a) See Table 4-2 for sample identification.
b) Cu, Cr, Cd, Hg, Pb, Zn, As, Ni, Ba, Ag, Fe, & F'
13
-------
4.2.4 Analytical Methods
Carter Analytical Laboratory, Inc. of Los Gatos, CA was
contracted to perform the chemical analysis of the process
samples. The analyses were performed by standard methods
but were not performed in a laboratory certified by the
State of California. The following EPA Standard Methods
were employed:
Analyses
Heavy Metals
Elements
Fe,Mg,Cu,Cr
Pb,Zn,Na,K,Cd
Ca,Sn,Ag,Ni
As, Se
P~
Hg
Ba
Hydrocarbon
Chloride
Content
al
Leachability
leach
Atomic
Spectro-
Chlorinated
Hydrocarbons
Aromatic
Hydrocarbons
Common Solvents
Total Solids
wgt
Method
EPA Method 303a
EPA Method 304
EPA Method 413c
EPA Methods 303a
& 303f
EPA Method 303c
(Ref.2)
Technique
Flame Atomic
Absorption
Spectrophotometry
CCR Title 22,
Division 4,
Article 11,
Sec.66700(e)
EPA Method 601
(Ref.2)
EPA Method 602
(Ref.2)
EPA Method 604
(Ref.2)
Methylene
extraction;residu
weight
Sodium Citrate
followed by
.Absorption
photometry
Evaporation to
dryness;residual
Suspended
Solids
pH
Filtration and
measurement of
residual weight
pH paper
14
-------
CHAPTER 5
DEMONSTRATION PROJECT RESULTS
5.1 Equipment Operating Characteristics
Some general comments will provide some observations on the
overall operation of the EVAP-85.
1) For all liquid wastes tested, the solution temperature
came to the boiling point gradually. Boiling occurred
within 1 to 2 hours of start-up.
2) The electrical power usage was constant during all runs
and averaged approximately 10.9 to 11.3 kilowatts. The
rate of evaporation was also relatively constant at 2.9
to 3.4 gph for both waste material and water.
3) For the range of dissolved solids (5 - 26 wt.SK) or
suspended solids (1 - 3 wt.%) present in the treated
wastes, no sludge layer was detected at the bottom of
the evaporator during operation.
4} The oil present in the wastes treated (0.7 - 4.7 wt.SK)
did not produce a layer of free oil to be skimmed
during evaporation.
5) All evaporation tests ended with a final liquid
concentrate which solidified upon cooling. (Runs 2 and
5 were operated beyond the normal thermocouple shutoff
point.)
6) The thermostat used to shut off the evaporator is an
on-off device which must be manually reset if boiling
does not occur due to:
a) a layer of inhibiting oil l"or more thick
b) the concentration of dissolved solids in solution.
7) Removal of the final waste concentrate as a solid was
difficult since the only access to inside the evap-
orator was from the top.
15
-------
Chapter 2 provides the recommendations to improve the operation
of the evaporator by addressing some of the above limitations.
5.2 Equipment Performance Summary
The test data obtained has been developed into a series of
charts. The charts show the variations of temperature,
volume and weight reduction, and heat transfer
characteristics over the duration of each run. These charts
are presented in Appendix 3 followed by the actual data
collected.
To highlight the results of these tests, a summary showing
the key results is presented in Table 5-1. The specific
charts from which the summary information was derived are
referenced. In addition, the results of the chemical
analyses described earlier are presented in Table 5-2. The
laboratory report from Carter Analytical Laboratory, Inc.
which is the basis of this table is found in Appendix 4.
5.3 Equipment Test Results
5.3.1 General
Two of the three test runs, Runs 2 and 5, represent a worst
case to test the limits of the evaporator. Total solids
were 26 wt. % and 23 wt. % respectively, with exceptionally
high heavy metals content in Run 2. The jet spray waste
tested in Run 3 represents a more typical waste solution
with 5.3 wt. % solids. The wastes tested were for off site
treatment and disposal. This type of waste is expected to
be higher in concentration of waste products than materials
found in on-site processing.
The initial solids content of the fresh wash solution is
between 4 and 6 wt.fc. On-site waste evaporation of waste
solutions on a 10 day schedule would result in waste
solutions in this lower concentration range.
5.3.2 Waste Volume Reduction
The degree of waste volume reduction possible is primarily
dependent upon the initial concentration of dissolved
solids.
For wastes with high solids content, the maximum degree of
volume reduction was 68% for Run 2 and 80% for Run 5. This
is equivalent to a 3 to 1 reduction for Run 2 and a 5 to 1
reduction for Run 5. Beyond this degree of concentration,
the bottom temperature of the EVAP-85 climbs above 40QOp
which is beyond the operating limits of the device. The
16
-------
TflBLE 5-1
EVflP-85 EVRLUflTION RESULTS SUMMRRY
March 31,1988
n.
B.
c.
D.
RUN NUMBER
WflSTE MRTERIflL.
OPFKffl ING CHflRfiCTERISTICS
1. INITIflL VOLUME
2. RUN LENGTH
3. EVfiPGRflTION ROTE
4. TEMP PROFILE
S/S LIQ BOILING SURF/BOTM
FINflL LIQ TEMP SURF/BOTM
VflPOR TEMP
SKIN TEMP TOP/FRT
BOILING PT ELEV.FNL SURF
HEflT TRflNSFER CHflRflCTERISTICS
1. OVL HT TRFR COEF,U INIT/FINflL
2. HEflT FLUX (WG/RflNGE
3. ELECTRICflL EFF, CUM
, RflNGE
WflSTE REDUCTION
1. flT THERMOCOUPLE INIT/FINflL
SHUTDOWN INIT/FINflL
2. SHUTDOWN flT FINflL INIT/FINflL
BOTM TEMP INIT/FINflL
PROCESS ECONOMICS
1. TOTflL POWER CONSUMED
2. TOTflL POWER COST, $0. 10/KWH
3. GflL EVflPORflTED
4. OPER. COST PER GflL EVflP
5. UPER. COST PER GflL TRERTED
GflL
HRS
GPH
LB/HR
DEG F
DEG F
OEG F
DEG F
DEG F
BTU/HR-FT2-F
BTU/HR-FT2
•/.
•/.
REF 1
CHflRTS WflTER
(SEE HPP.3)
5.5
3.4
28
3fl 212/258
3R 211/258
3fl 190-205
3fl -/95-112
3G
3D
3E
3F 75
3F 70 - 85
2
CflUSTIC
HOT TRNK
36
7
3.4
28.3
218/260
230/400
190
134-165/-
18
180/50
6/5-7
72
70 - 80
PER
3
DETERGENT
JET SPRflY
54
14.5
3.2
26.5
212/265
217/265
190
182- 192/-
5
120/140
-
72
90 - 72
CENT PER CENT
4
WflTER
9.5
3.4
28
212/253
212/253
190
-/1 10-165
180/200
5.5/5-6
70
68 - 75
REDUCTION REDUCTION
GflL
LBS
GflL
LBS
KUH
$
GflL
$/GflL
$/GflL
3C
3B
3C
3B
35.8/19.5
277/148
35.8/11.3
277/117
80
$8.00
24.5
$0.33
$0.22
46X
47X
68/> 54.3/5.3 90*
59X 409/68 83*
162
$16.20
49
$0.33
$0.30
5
DETERGENT
JET SPRRY
48
13
2.9
24.5
213/228
228/400
190
-/I 35- 165
16
200/70
4.8/4-5
62
55 - 63
PER
CENT
REDUCTION
48/25.5
406/238
48/9.4
406/132
155
$15.45
38.6
$0.40
$0.32
47X
41*
80*
67*
17
-------
U3LEY H. TOY, P.F.
MRSTE TOmrEMT-HflaRRDUJS WeiES FFO1 fUTOMOTIVE REffilHS
flMLYSES CF PBXESS SH-RfS
TRBLE5-2
MFRCH 31, 1968
RLN 3TO£
MJ MO
86-072
fiftl CHJHT
UfSTE TJET JS
KT.J5
ccw:
UF5TE
WTO?
COO
2
3
5
2
3
5
5
5
5
5
3
5
TITLE
2
3
5
(NOTE 1.:
A
D
G
(FDC
(D)E
(G)I
J
K
L
tl
E
M
220IV4 SEC
(FOB
(D)F
(G)H :
DENSITY
G/M
)
1.16
1.03
1.18
1.61
1.55
1.31
1.46
1.62
1.96
CITOTTE
CITHTTE
SOLIDS
TOT/3J5
26.34X3.3
5.29X1.3
23.19X1.8
38.23
58.49
67.85
77.18
OIL
UTX
4.59
0.70
4.74
8.26
7.42
1.72
1.48
7.36
13.89
4.91
66699 - STLCCSTD)
EFFLUENT SID - SJ/3C
0.005
0.006
<0.001
0.015
O
FFM
11.6
7.6
<0.4
34.4
95.5
13.1
14.5
15.4
17.9
10.2
5.2
<48.0
560
<0.39
<0.39
<0.39
1.00
Fb
1486.1
407.0
453.1
4887.5
20.0
967.1
1097.6
805.8
1755.0
469.2
40.7
89.4
5
0.74
0.71
0.39
0.40
Zn
327.3
119.7
199.1
1118.3
1560.2
461.7
541.0
604.4
900.9
516.1
5.9
164.2
250
0.43
0.51
0.12
'2.60
fis
-,7.0
39.9
59.1
109.5
110.0
102.4
90.2
79.0
93.6
101.7
<4.3
<4.8
5
<3.88
19.65
7.84
1.00
Ba
200.2
75.8
23.6
477.0
31.4
159.2
160.7
110.6
140.4
7.8
8.6
14.5
100
<3.88
<3.93
<3.92
5.00
F
57.7
61.5
34.6
123.1
126.9
103.8
138.5
138.5
138.5
138.5
180
107.70
103.80
107.70
10.00
Ni
2.5
1.3
1.1
9.5
12.8
2.8
3.3
3.4
3.7
2.9
1.9
1.6
20
0.19
0.12
0.08
2.60
0.,
65.5
59.9
2.5
418.4
487.3
31.0
31.2
23.2
58.5
25.4
42.3
<6.8
25
1.94
3.38
2.12
2.70
Cd
2.2
1.4
0.3
11.5
15.5
1.6
1.8
2.0
2.1
1.1
0.8
0.6
1
0.08
0.08
0.04
0.70
ftj
0.5
<0.04
0.2
0.9
0.9
0.8
0.9
0.9
1.3
0.9
<0.04
<0.05 '
5
0.04
<0.04
<0.04
0.70
«3
53.9
8.0
<4.0
46.9
43.2
11.9
43.1
43.5
46.8
43.0
<4.3
<4.8
0.2
3.88
<3.93
<3.92
0.01
Fe
412.0
466.8
6.2
939.2
4539.2
250.7
325.4
185.7
604.5
297.2
2.2
2.9
0.54
0.35
0.39
-
FH
11-12
9-10
11-12
9-10
9-10
11-12
9-10
11-12
11-12
11-12
„
-
-
5-10.5
VCLU-E REDXTIOM IflGHT REUJCTION
WUJt REDLCTICN
FFCTlRS
2
3
5
R
D
G
3.1
10.0
5.0
2.4
6.0
3.1
NOTE 1. SF£ TflELI: 4-2 FOR IDENIIFICHTION OF SfWLES
-------
evaporator is equipped with a thermostat to shut off power
when the bottom temperature reaches 340°p.
Run 3 produced a 90% reduction in volume, equivalent to a 10
to 1 ratio. The initial solids content was 5.3 wt.*. The
evaporator was shut down after the bottom temperature
started to climb sharply. The final solids content for all
runs was in the 60 to 70 wt.* range based upon either direct
measurement or density correlations.
Run 5 was operated to a bottom temperature of 400°F.
Samples of the waste concentrate were collected to show that
the weight percent solids over the last four hours of the 13
hour test increased steadily from 38 wt.% to 77 wt.fc. This
last figure, 77 wt.*, appears to be the ultimate
concentration of jet spray waste possible. A more typical
final concentration would be 60 wt.* solids. Evaluation of
the samples taken show that a 60* solids content meets the
water of hydration needs of the residual solids.
Table 5-2 also shows the equivalent weight reduction factors
for the volume reductions obtained.
5.3.3 Heat Transfer Characteristics
The rate of heat transfer as measured by the overall heat
transfer coefficient started at 180 to 200 BTU/hr.ft2-°p for
both the water and the process waste runs. For the water
runs this rate was constant throughout as expected. For the
process waste runs, the rate of heat transfer steadily
decreased to approximately 50 to 80 BTU/hr. ft °F at the
end of the run. Appendix 3D shows that the caustic waste
does go through a phase transition midway through the con-
centration to produce two different rates of heat transfer
variation. The more dilute waste in Run 3 produced a more
uniform heat transfer rate of 100 to 140 BTU/hr.ft2P°F. The
results of heat transfer calculations for Run 3 are in
question because of a questionable dry bottom temperature.
The thermocouple taking this reading may have seen the
process solution instead of a true dry bottom temperature
producing results 30 °F low.
The heat flux calculated is both an instantaneous and a
cumulative average as shown in Appendix 3E. The
instantaneous values show a substantial scatter of data due
to inconsistencies with measurement times for the calculated
heat transferred. This was dampened by calculating the
cumulative average heat flux. The heat flux ranged between
4 and 7 BTU/hr./ft2 for Runs 2 and 5>2 The water tests
showed a range between 5 and 6 BTU/hr./ft .
Electrical efficiency generally averaged 72% for the overall
run. Initially the efficiency ran as high as 90* for the
19
-------
caustic and detergent waste in Runs 2 and 3. The primary
reason for reduced efficiencies are from radiant heat losses
from the electrical elements to the environment. The
cumulative heat transfer efficiency also drops off. Natural
convection is the primary method for heat transfer. As the
solids content of the waste builds up and the viscosity
increases, the efficiency of heat transfer naturally
decreases.
5.3.4 Comparison With Effluent Standards
The San Jose Industrial Waste Discharge standards for
releases to the sanitary sewer system are shown on Table 5-2
(Ref.3). Comparison of these limits with the concentrations
in the raw waste showed significant excesses for oil
content, Cr, Pb, Zn, As, Ba, F, Cu, Hg, and pH. The waste
material is a significant hazardous waste. Due to the
presence of significant amounts of sodium, analyses of As
and Hg species by flame atomic absorption methods may have
resulted in questionable results.
5.3.5 Comparison with Hazardous Waste Standards
The treated waste (samples C, E, & L) are compared to the
guidelines for identification of hazardous wastes in the
California Administrative Code (Ref.4). Table 5-2 lists the
Soluble Threshold Limit Concentrations (STLC) for solid
wastes. Classification as a hazardous waste requires
disposal at an approved Class 1 landfill. These criteria
are based upon the leachability of solids requiring
landfill. As outlined in Section 4.2.4, Analytical Methods,
the waste is subjected to a prescribed sodium citrate
leaching. The leach solution is then analyzed by atomic
absorption for toxic species.
The waste solids are classified as a hazardous waste due to
the presence of exceptionally high leach concentrations of
lead and more moderate concentrations of copper.
In addition, the concentration of chlorinated hydrocarbons,
aromatic hydrocarbons and common solvents were screened.
EPA Methods 601, 602, and 604 (Ref.2) respectively were
performed on the raw waste for Run 5. Appendix 4 shows
those results. No significant levels of these wastes were
detected.
5.3.6 Vapor Condensate Analysis
Vapor condensate samples were taken over a five to six hour
duration for the test run. Analyses show only small
quantities of hydrocarbons present with dew points above 32
deg F escaping with the vapors. Material balance
calculations show that 31% of Run 2 oils were not present in
the final solids. Similar calculations for Run 5 show that
20
-------
85% of oils were not present in the final solids. Similar
temperatures were recorded for both runs. However, Run 5
was nearly twice as long as Run 2, 13 hours compared to 7
hours. One conclusion that may be derived is that the oil
present with boiling points higher than 215 deg F are being
broken down into lower boiling point compounds over time.
These more volatile compounds leave with the vapor removed.
Chapter 6 discusses other implications for these results.
5.3.7 Types and Range of Treatable Wastes
The results show that for the three wastes concentrated, the
evaporation rate remained relatively constant between 2.9
and 3.4 gph. In addition, volume reduction was limited by a
maximum solids content between 60 and 77 wt.fc. As expected,
lower initial solids contents allowed higher volume
reductions.
The types of waste which the EVAP-85 is most suitable would
be low in dissolved solids and free oils. From other tests,
the evaporator was inhibited from active boiling when the
layer of oil increased beyond 3/4" (2 gal. of oil) for cold
starts. Once active boiling occurred, higher amounts of oil
were tolerated without stopping the boiler action. There
are provisions for skimming oil in the EVAP-85 but they were
not needed under the conditions tested.
The EVAP-85 was demonstrated capable of processing both the
caustic hot tank waste as well as the detergent jet spray
waste. The range of treated wastes includes high-solids
waste as well as low-solids waste. In. both cases a solid
suitable for Class 1 disposal sites is produced. Based upon
volume reduction alone the lower concentrations of solids in
solution are the wastes better treated. The electrical
efficiency did not vary appreciably between the two types of
wastes processed.
5.3.8 Volume Reduction Limits
The expected volume reduction limits for automotive waste
for the EVAP-85 were calculated. Typical initial waste
concentrations and final waste densities analytically
determined were used in the calculation. Table 5-4
summarizes this information.
21
-------
Table 5-4
Volume Reduction Limits
Weight % Solids
Density ,g/cc
Volume of Waste,gal
Volume Reduction
Volume Evaporated,gal
Hours of Operation
Hours of Operation
for Trtmt.of 20 gal
Initial
5
1.03
85
Dilute
Waste
Final
60
1 .46
5.3
Concentrated
Waste
Initial Final
26
1.16
85
60
1 .5
28.5
16:1
80
25
5.9
3: 1
57
17.7
4. 1
These calculated limits show what is possible, but more
realistic performance for dilute waste would be closer to
what was actually observed in the test run, a 10 to 1
reduction.
Also shown is the number of hours operation if the EVAP-85
was operated on a 10 day basis to service only 20 gallons of
waste from the 60 gallons contained in a parts washer. An
operating time of 4 to 6 hours would be suited to most
repair shop operations.
5.4 Process Economics
The EVAP-85 waste evaporator was evaluated to determine the
economic suitability of the equipment for most automotive repair
shop operators. Low capital cost and low labor requirements
would promote use of the device. The evaluation performed is
summarized in Table 5-5.
The key bases for the calculation are listed below:
Capital cost
Waste processed per month
Waste reduction achieved
Electrical power costs
Cost for residue removed
On-site labor per charge
Interest on money, annual
$2300
60 gal. & 3000 gal.
90%
$0.10 / kwh.
$250 / 55 gal.
2 hr.
The evaluation shows that for a typical repair shop processing 60
gallons per month that costs for purchase and operation would be
recovered in 12 months. These results are acceptable to
encourage operation of these devices. Processing a higher volume
(3000 gallons) per month could produce a breakeven point in 3
months.
22
-------
Table 5-5
Economic Payback Analysis
EQUIPMENT EVALUATION - EVAP 85
SITE: PAYBACK CORRELATION
BASIS: 1 YEAR
WASTE GENERATION RATE(GAL/MO): 3000 60
OTHER CONSTRAINTS MANUFACTURER AND MODEL NUMBER
EVAP EVAP
ITEM 85E 85E
UNIT COST: $4,600 $2,300
INSTALLATION: $600 $300
TOTAL CAPITAL COST: $5,200 $2,600
UNIT CHARACTERISTICS:
GALLONS/CHARGE: 85 20
UNIT POWER, KW: 10.00 10.00
GAS USAGE,BTU/HR: 0 0
GAS USAGE,THERMS/HR: 0 0
DISTILLATION RATE.GPH: 3.5 3.5
HRS/CYCLE: 21.86 5.U
CYCLES/MO.: 35.3 3.0
% OF MAXIMUM CAPACITY: . 58.47% 2.98%
WATER RATE, GPH: 0 0
WATER USAGE,CF/YR: 0 0
LABOR, HRS/CHARGE: 2 2
WASTE GEN. RATE, GAL/MO: 3000 60
PERCENT REDUCTION: 90% 90%
DISCARD VOLUME, GAL/MO: 300 6
MAINTENANCE MATLS,$/YR: $100 $30
LABOR,HRS/YR,MAINT.: 30 6
LABOR RATE,$/HR: $13.00 $13.00
OPERATING COSTS, $/YR:
POWER $ 8$0.10/KWH: $8,331 $167
GAS § $0.50/THERM: $0 $0
WATER 8 $0.01/CF: $0 $0
CHEMICALS:
MAINT MATERIALS: $100 $30
SLUDGE REM.,(STABILIZED): $4,713 $327
LABOR:
OPERATIONS: $11,012 $936
MAINTENANCE: $390 $78
TOTAL OPERATING COSTS: $24,546 $1,538
PRESENT WASTE DISP.COST: $48,063 $4,209
YEARLY COST SAVINGS: $23,517 $2,571
BREAKEVEN @ i% (MO.): 3 12
Interest rate,i: 5.00% 5.00%
23
-------
CHAPTER 6
ADVANTAGES, DISADVANTAGES, AND TECHNOLOGY
ALTERNATIVES
6.1 General
A discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of using on-site
evaporation as a method of waste minimization follows. This
information allows the potential user to better decide whether
electrical resistance evaporation is suitable for his shop.
Alternative methods of waste minimization are provided. A more
comprehensive discussion of equipment alternatives and costs are
provided in the Waste Audit Study on Automotive Repairs prepared
for the Alternative Technology Section of DHS (Ref.5).
6.2 Advantages and Disadvantages
The following advantages will be discussed:
o Reduction of volume required for disposal
o Reduction in transportation costs
o Reduction in off-site treatment costs
o Simple operation compared to chemical waste treat-
ment alternatives
o Low maintenance costs
o Off-site waste management of a solid residue may be
simpler than the original liquid waste.
o Periodic reduction of dissolved solids in parts
cleaning equipment. Cleaner parts provide
operators with real incentives to practice waste
minimization.
24
-------
Some disadvantages which will be discussed include:
o Capital investment required
o Electrical Power costs
o Labor, management and maintenance commitment
o TSCD permit may be required in the future for on-
site evaporation equipment
o Higher unit fees may be charged for off-site
management of the solid residue compared to the
raw waste liquid.
o Quantities of unskimmed or dissolved oils may
evaporate in violation of regional Air Quality
Management District (AQMD) regulations.
6.2.1 Advantages
Volume reduction experienced by the tests performed in this study
show that volumes requiring disposal can be reduced to 1/3
to 1/10 of the original liquid waste. This can significantly
reduce the costs for drums and transportation costs for off-site
waste management.
Use of on-site equipment eliminates the need for off-site treat-
ment costs. It reduces the volume that must be transported off-
site.
The operation of the evaporative device is simple compared to a
chemical waste treatment device. No technical knowledge is
required. Additional chemicals, solids separation equipment and
more sophisticated process controls are not needed.
Maintenance costs for the evaporator are small. The evaporator
uses no purchased chemicals in its operation. The internals of
the device use flat plate construction to allow easy clean out.
Replacement of heating elements require vendor servicing.
Disposal of a solid residue in place of a liquid residue is more
compatible with Class 1 disposal site requirements. A liquid
must be solidified by an absorbent such as vermiculite or
chemically treated to produce a solid for Class 1 disposal.
The periodic use of an on-site waste reduction device allows
removal of dissolved solids from the cleaning solution to produce
cleaner parts. This method of operation puts source reduction
into practice while improving the normal cleaning operation.
25
-------
6.2.2 Disadvantages
The user incurs capital, operating, maintenance and management
costs. A capital investment of $2300 plus estimated installation
costs of $300 are required for a 85 gallon unit.
Additional electrical power costs of $18.00 per month would be
incurred. This cost would allow the evaporator to process three
20 gallon batches per month.
The use of an on-site evaporation device requires a commitment of
labor and management to operate the evaporator every 10 days for
6 hours to service the typical hot tank or jet spray washer.
The Toxic Substances Control Division of DHS may require permits
for operation of on-site evaporators in the future. There is
currently no requirement.
In the future Class 1 waste disposal sites may require higher
fees for disposal of waste concentrates. This should be taken
into account in anticipated costs.
Hydrocarbon emissions from the waste evaporator are regulated
under Regulation 8, Rule 2, Section 300 of the Bay Area Air
Quality Management District (BAAQMD), Rules and Regulations.
This regulation limits organic emissions to the atmosphere to 15
Ibs per day and 300 ppm total carbon on a dry basis. By material
balance, the net loss of organics from the evaporated waste
averaged 0.6 and 1.2 Ib/hr for Runs 2 and 5 respectively. If
this is representative of evaporative losses of organics a run
length of 12.5 to 25 hours would be necessary to exceed the 15 Ib
per day emission level. This may require - a BAAQMD permit.
Specific tests for air emissions are necessary to establish
emissions over a number of tests.
6.3 Alternative Methods of Waste Control
Other methods which are currently available for on-site waste
minimization include:
o Use of a gas fired evaporator
o Chemical treatment of waste liquids
Use of a gas fired evaporator is expected to result in similar
volume reductions. Chemical treatment of waste solutions would
produce an effluent suitable for disposal to the sanitary sewer.
In this case a solid would also be produced for disposal at a
Class 1 landfill. The use of tanks, pumps, agitators and a
filter press make this process more suitable to larger
applications than individual parts washers. In addition TSCD
permits are normally required.
26
-------
Off-site treatment methods are currently used by many automotive
repair shops for waste solutions from parts cleaners. Typically
these wastes are picked up for disposal by waste disposal
companies.
The alternatives described are developed in greater detail in the
Waste Audit on Automotive Repairs (Ref.5). Specific equipment
suppliers and equipment economics are also presented.
27
-------
REFERENCES
1. Survey of Small Quantity Generators
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), Office of
Solid Waste and Emergency Response. Washington D.C., 1985.
2. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater
16th Edition, 1985, published by American Public Health,
American Water Works et al.
3. Industrial Waste Discharge Regulations, San Jose-Santa Clara
Municipal Code of the City of San Jose, CA
Title 15, Chapter 15.12, Section 15.12.245
4. Persistent and Bioaccumulative Toxic Substances
CCR, Title 22, Division 4, Article 11, Section 66699.
5. Waste Audit Study on Automotive Repairs, California
Department of Health Services (CDHS), Toxic Substances
Control Division. Sacramento, CA, 1987.
28
-------
GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS
AA Atomic Absorption
AQMD Air Quality Management District
BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District
OCR California Code of Regulations
CDHS California Department of Health Services
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
DOT Department of Transportation
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
MSDS Material Safety Data Sheet
OSW Office of Solid Waste
SQG Small Quantity Generator
STLC Soluble Threshold Limit Concentration
TSCD Toxic Substances Control Division
29
-------
-------
E»R01DUOT LITERATU
-------
EVAP eliminate? jater-leaving only solid v >te to dispose of.
APPLICATIONS
Automatic
Parts Washers
Hot Tanks
FEATURES
1. No obstruction on Unh bottom
•Having lor ***y cteanouL
2. Thru-Hoot n**l*d
X Comptot* reduction of wast*.
4. Oil •klmnwr dovles lor removing
Irwnp oil with 24ncfl bad varv*.
I. Automatic high ltmp*r»lur» •Aut-otf.
«. ln*ulat*d Unk w«U> polycUiytoo* paint.
7. M OPU U*n*l*r pump.
•. On* y**r pan* w*rr«nty.
t. Equipped with l*v*Ung teg*.
SPECIFICATIONS
1. ftoduc** liquid MkiUon up lo »7 p*n>*nl.
2. Eitr»cl« 7 • 10 gallon* or mor* p*r hour.
3. EiUmalfrd co»l of dl*po**l S to
2i cents p*r gallon.
4. Power *«h*u*l er**t** vacuum In EVAP c*Mn*L
». UquW capacity M gallon.
•. EtactrtcAl on-titf contortion within 10 mlnuK*.
7. Pov«r r*qulr*m*nt* 230 V, 1 Ph..
50 amp*, 320 V. 1 Ph.. M amp*.
I. JO Inch width. 37 Inch dapth *nd
3« Inch** In halght on In* EVAP «5
I. Tn* Mod*! U «r*lgh* 425 Ib*
OUIPMEISfT MANUFACTURING
CORPORATION
1433 Udcombe Avenue
So. El Monte. CA 91 733
818/575-1644
EVAP should not b* us*d with
fluids containing volslll* organ
compounds or solvents.
A - 1
-------
WATER
Equipment Manufacturing Corporation's WATER
EATER has been engineered to accept most water-
based, non-volatile liquids, and — utilizing an
efficient combination of heat and forced air—to
evaporate the water content harmlessly into the
atmosphere. Eliminating water at a continuous rate
of three to eight or more gallons per hour, the
WATER EATER quickly and economically reduces
the volume of liquid wastes requiring disposal by as
much as 97%. This results in:
• Reduced storage requirement!
• Less frequent disposal!
• Reduced labor and handling!
• Huge reduction in disposal costs!!!
Very compact—Just 30"Wx37"Dx36"H,
requiring access to only two sides.
Thru-floor healing with 220V, 1 or 3 phase
(440V optional); no gas piping or flame
hazard.
Easy cleanout, no-obstruction tank
bottom.
Complete reduction of waste—The
WATER EATER has the ability to reduce
wastes to a dry residue, if desired,
eliminating the handling of gooey
concentratea.
Power exhaust permits easy venting of
moisture out-of-doors, if desired; prevents
condensation in stack.
Quality polyurethane finish.
Insulated carbon steel tank with 85 gallon
capacity.
Automatic shutoff.
85 GPM Transfer Pump for easy filling.
Equipped with leveling legs.
SPECIFICATIONS —MODEL BSE
SIZE 30" wide x 37" deep x 36" high
WEIGHT 425 lt».
CAPACITY 85 gallons
POWER 220 VAC, 1-phase, 50 amps or
3-phase, 40 amps. 440 VAC
optional.
WARRANTY One year, parts
NOTE: Not intended for use with acidic fluids or ones
containing volatile compounds or solvents.
RELIABILITY VIA QUALITY-
PARTS WASHERS
HOT TANKS
WATER REDUCERS
EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURING
CORPORATION
1433 Lidcombe Avenue
South El Monte, California 91733
(818) 575-1644
A - 2
11/87 Printed in U.S A
-------
TEST
-------
STUDY OF A HASTE REDUCTION AhnMTUS, RFP 86-072 WESLEY H. TOY, P.E.
DEFARTHENT OF HEALTH SERVICES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA . PAGE 1
Performance and Qperabi 1 i ty of a DS
-------
STUDY OF A WASTE REDUCTION A'h^ftTUS, RFP 86-072 WESLEY H. TOY, P.E.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA PAGE 2
b. Temperature: A Fluke™ 2190A-Y2001 Multipoint
Thermometer equipped with Type J thermocouples and
capable o-f reading 10 separate points will also be rented
•from U.S. Instrument Rentals, Inc. at a rate o-f $225 per
month.
3. Special Equipment:
a. Vapor Sampling: The vapor in the duct will be drawn
by vacuum through a water-cooled condenser to a cooled
receiver (Figure 1).
b. Level Gauge: The chamber will be -fitted -for attach-
ment o-f a calibrated liquid level gauge glass (Figure 2).
c. Volume: The initial waste volume will be determined
by a calibrated Rubbermaid™ bucket.
d. Weight: The -final sludge will be weighed in a tared
container on a commercial balance accurate to the nearest
ounce.
C. Measurements:
1. Temperature: Thermocouples will be placed at -five
locations in or on the unit. These are:
0 Heating surface: This thermocouple will be a-f-fixed in
intimate contact with the bottom o-f the evaporating
chamber with a thermally conductive and electrically
insulating epoxy resin (example:. The thermocouple will
be insulated -from direct exposure to either the heating
coils or the liquid. It will be placed as closely to the
center o-f the heating surface as possible without its
being in direct contact with a heating coil.
0 Sludge layer: A wire framework will be used to suspend
this thermocouple approximately 0.5" from the bottom of
the unit and half-way to the center. This framework will
be movable in a vertical direction to enable the observer
to immerse it in the sludge layer as it accumulates on
the bottom of the unit.
0 Liquid: A wire framework will be used to suspend this
thermocouple approximately 5" from -the bottom of the unit
and half-way to the center. This framework will be
movable in a vertical direction to enable the observer to
continue to immerse it in the liquid as the level drops
below 5".
0 Vapor phase: The thermocouple will be suspended in the
center of the exhaust duct at a point before the
entrainment with the faster moving stream occurs.
A - 4
-------
STUDY OF A HASTE REDUCTION AhmlATUS, RFP 86-072 WESLEY H, TOY, P.E.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA PAGE 3
0 Skin temperatures To determine the heat loss across the
insulated wall, and whether a sa-fety hazard exists, the
outside skin of the unit will also have a thermocouple
a-f-fixed. This thermocouple will be movable so that
several locations can be monitored during a run.
2. Material Balance: The volume o-f waste added will be
measured, and a representative sample taken to determine the
liquid density a The sludge residue at the end o-f the run and
any petroleum products skimmed off the surface of the liquid
will also be weighed.
3. Evaporation Rates The level gauge will be monitored at
regular intervals to determine the volume of liquid evap-
orated. Samples of the condensed vapor will provide the
density of the distilled material.
4. Power Consumption: A continuous record of each run will
be maintained to determine any changes in the power consump-
tion of the unit as evaporation proceeds.
D. Test Materials ,
The device will be tested at Safe-Way Chemical Company, a major
supplier of leased auto parts washing equipment. This company
collects the aqueous waste from nearly 700 auto re?pair operations
in Northern California. Pooled samples of the washing liquid from
three different sources will be collected. These sources are:
c> Hot tank washers used for washing of aluminum parts.
c> Hot tank washers used for washing of ferrous parts.
•^ Jet Spray washers.
E. Test Procedure:
1. Calibration Run(s):
a. Water: With all testing instrumentation in place, a
run will be made on water alone. This will ensure that
all measuring devices are working properly, arid that the
frequency of observations is sufficient to present a
complete picture of the unit's operating characteristics.
b. Wastes E
-------
STUDY OF A HASTE REDUCTION Ah-nrtATUS, RFP 86-072
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
WESLEY «. TOY, P.E.
PAGE 4
practical to obtain a dry cake because o-f radically
reduced evaporation rates as the material concentrates.
This must be determined be-fore the quantitative runs to
•follow. A second consideration will be the comparative
cost o-f stabilising and disposing o-f the residue At
various moisture contents.
The time required to
empty the unit under
determined.
•fill the unit, skim oil, arid to
normal operating conditions will be
Test Runs:
a. Bb gallons o-f the pooled test material will be
thoroughly mixed and measured into the evaporation
chamber. This material will be at ambient temperature.
A sample o-f the initial charge will be taken -for
analysi s.
b. The instruments will
taken.
be turned on and a baseline
c. The power to the unit and to the blower will be
turned on.
d. After the predetermined heating period, the unit will
be turned off and the petroleum oil residue skimmed.
Vapor samples will be taken during this period to
determine if any quantity of lower boiling volatiles is
emitted. (Little or none of these are expected because
of the elevated temperatures at which the washing devices
themselves are operated.)
e. The heating will then recommence and continue until
the evaporation is complete. Power usage will be
recorded automatically, and the temperatures wi11"be
recorded at frequent intervals. Liquid levels will also
be recorded. The slipstream of vapor will be condensed
continuously to obtain a composite sample.
f. At the completion of the waste reduction, the residue
will be weighed and sampled. Sludge samples of varying
moisture content will be obtained as the operation nears
completi on.
F. Data Analysis:
1. Applicability: It will be determined whether the unit
will indeed reduce the volume of waste to be handled; and
whether the resulting products are more stable and may be
disposed of more easily. The? practical reduction limits in
terms of residual moisture content will be defined.
A - 6
-------
STUDY OF A HASTE REDUCTION APfM.iATUS, RFP 8i-072 HESLEY M. TOY, P.E.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA PAGE 5
2. Cost Ef f ecti veness: The capital and operating costs of
the unit will be compared to current available methods o-f
disposal -for the uncancentrated waste.
0 The cost of this unit will be compared to other equipment
capable of the same waste reduction.
0 Energy efficiency will be calculated and the cost of
energy used will be compared to other devices.
0 The cost of disposal of residual wastes at differing
moisture contents will be evaluated.
3. Product Improvement: Recommendations for product
improvement,if needed, will be generated. Particularly, if
any improvements in heat transfer and energy consumption; in
safety; and in ease of use and simplified operating procedures
can be made, the manufacturer will be informed.
A -
-------
AIPIPENDIX 3
EVALUATION CHARTS — EVAE>— 85
-------
I
o>
EVALUATION RUN - EVAP-65
4PO
MO
flui> ft? - C* urtfc Not If*
270
eso
260
EVALUATION RUN - EVAP-85
«3 - I
c- Bvttw GurtK9
80
70
80
o Vipor
Uqukt Surfw*
2BD
EVALUATION RUN - EVAP-65
RUM * 4 - WUCR, CXPCP.UCUTS
SO
O YAPW
ELAPSED TUC (HGS.)
4- UQUIO GURFAtt
O Mr BOTTOM
400
ISO
EVALUATION RUN - EVAP-65
RUN « B - BCTEBCCKT XT SPU7 V*BTC
3DD
ft 55D
150
1DO
SO
^B
BOB,
***
TCUP.
ELAPSED TUC (MRS.)
SURFACE TCUP.
10 12 14
O DB/ BOTTOM TEMP.
Appendix 3A
Tp-mnerafure v«? .
-------
EVALUATION RUN - EVAP-65
flvn «
EVALUATION RUN - EVAP-85
IMv«Mrt Jrt Spay Want.
e_«*V *i
i *°~
' 1 CO
•- i
' w
4-*-*~*
Jjj—
4
»
EVALUATION RUN - EVAP-65
RUN • * - vttfcup, EXPCRWEHT: Ar-
Ua'th
^
X
>x'"r
f'°-B
"I
X
i
x1
.X
L
O.
**
J-
'"'
fa__
^
X
8
m
^
r*
•"r
i
B
i.W«lgMLM>
. »•
s*
X'
1
%
e
. t
1
BU
X
s,
M
EVALUATION RUN - EVAP-65
RUN • 5 - DETERGENT .ET SPRAY VdiETC ,.,
350 -
300 -
.-» 350 -
n
|
* 150 -
100 -
50 -
0
0
ra
^
V
X
3 4
CHUGE WEIGHT
X
X
S
X
•
X
»-:-a>
!„
5^
X
HP
T3
a i 10 13
EUPSEB TUE (H BE.)
f CUy.VKIBHT LOSS
,,*•
'b
*
^
1
i
1
!
.'
-i
14 '
Appendix 3B
Solution Weight vs. Time
-------
EVALUATION RUN - EVAP-65
. Run «2 — Courita Hot Tonfc Wotrtn^ -90
12 H
10 -
e
i •-•
\ B -
i 2 '"
! I
! *
7 -
I
B -
!-:
I 0
13 -
10 -
z "
- , t B -
14
I 7 _
; a
5
D B -
3
r
2 -
0
a
"
2
D
Houn
a
t
D
I
-.
0
i
EVALUATION RUN - EVAP-65
RUN « 4 - mTER, EXPCRUEHTS ^-
a
D
2
n
D
4
ELAPSED TUC
a
i
(MRS.)
a
i
I
"
Q
10
Aooen
B -. 1
17 -
3M
*
}n -
».-
1
a
2_
-
.
:
0
EVALUATION RUN - 1^
KUfc **3 ~ DnM^MK iMt Sfivy W
1
a
D
i
2
1
1
4
D
j
o
o
-^
'
a •
Run
/AP-e;
•to
a
a
B
j
3
e'
1
4-*
)
a
M
EVALUATION RUN -EVAP-65
RUN • 6 - DETERGENT XT SPRAY mCTE *• . it.
17 -
^ 13 -
Z
i ID-
§ B -
0
7 -
0
dix 3C
2
a
i
•
4
1
[
I .
r
1
|
B 1
ELAPSED THE (MRS.)
1
1
10
1
*-
13
,
n
•
14
Liquid Height vs. Time
-------
i EVALUATION -EVAP-65
' ' PUUwZ - CAUSTIC HOT TAX K WASTE (o
i 1BO -
; • i5D -
• C 1<°~
S 13D "
? 120 -
J
c 11D~
V, 10D-
i HH
- ' fe
9 '0 -
50 -
1
p>
E
~~n-
£^_
E
1^-
/
-Til
a
A
V
'\
\
\
.-
\
\
vn
1
0 H 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
o 20 •« en BO 100
> ! LIQUID CVAPORATCO (LB.)
--=^.
UT
J — i
^-jn
12D 140 1BD
^ :; EVALUATION RUN - EVAP-65
^ , RUN « 4 - WTCR, CXPCP.UCHTE
': 300 -i 1 1 1 1 , 1 , , , , , , , , , , , , , .
: - 280 -!
1
: 3BD -
' $ 20D -
: S
: ? 180-
H
r t ion -
: $ i4o-
i ^ 120 -
' ft
3 100 -
t on
i
! 40-
\
•• D -
1
B
D
B.
.e.
B-
) '
} 0 20 40 80
^fl-
B-
t-B
-D
C
C
D1
B"'
s,
'
D
1
BO 100 120 140 1BO 1BD 200 220
UQUID EVAPORATCO (LB.)
Appen
300
280
260
240
£20
C 200
1 *°
F BO
I HO
1 "°
» 100
00
60
40
20
0
240 -
230 -
200 -
C 180 -
O
IM inn -
V 1
X .
tf . nn
S-* 100 -
Vf
3 BO -
BO -
EVALUATION RUN - EVAP-65
Ru>«3-IMw9»ai.litSrray Wacfe <^_ •
I
0
j
/
7
i
0
^
\,
\
aa
r^
*
i*S
S
•^\
fl
^
i
.1
0 40 ' ID 120 160 200 240 210
WCIDHT LOSE (LB)
dix 3D
Overall Heat Transf. Coeff. vs. Wgt. Loss
-------
EVALUATION - EVAP-65
PU K «• J - CAUSTIC HOI TAX K WASTE
- . B
1
f a -
1 * -
I , - i ;
1 l.i
I . DELTA T (F DEC.) HEATING SUPF.TO LIQUID
; D INSTANTANEOUS FLUX ' 4- CUUULATfVC FLUX
1 :i . • _
EVALUATION RUN - EVAP-65
K> ' BUM 04 - V*TER, EXPERWENT5 In
?
i ^ "' *
»• h-
? <
30 D
/*"
/
1
i ' .El
'F
D
D
/V4-.
i
o
m
ri n
1
0 3
O INSTANTANEOUS FLUX
a
"*^/~~
L [
n
t
--k^t— +—
ID D
4
ELAPSED TUE
a
a
D
(
Q
D '
1 -t- 1
D
a
D
0
t 11
'' 4- CUUULATIW FLUX
S
M
10 •
I
EVALUATION RUN -EVAP-65
RUH • B - DETERGENT JET SPfUV mSTE /-
I! .
s*
a'
D D D
+4+^0
Appendix 3E
tT "" - " TTC- ^o 1 4- •=
CJ
t 2 4 B 1 10 12
ELAPSED THE (MR!".)
D HUITAHTAKEOU: fLUX 4- CUIUL4TIV aUX
14
-------
f^/ALUATION -.'.E
RUN * 2 - CAUSTIC HOT TANK WASTE
0.9
0.0
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
i
i
o
'
o
a
0
a
a
°
o
a
O
• I
O INSTANTANEOUS EPT.
2 4
ELAPSED TIME (HR)
+ CUMULATIVE EFF.
EVALUATION RUN - EVAP-S5
RUN / 4 - WATER. EXPERIMENTS
0 2
D INSTANTANEOUS EFF.
4 6
ELAPSED TIME (MRS)
I I
1 -J
J
•'
n -i
m
a
A, /
r :
••
•
D
f^J
a
a
m
UJ
D D
\
Yn
a c
a
a
a
--t—i — *—
1 0 !
°
O
o
i \
1 ^
1
D
O
a
i
]
a
a
i
o
i
- — t
a
3
10
+ CUMULATIVE EFF.
no _
8
1 -»
B as -
i
Q9 _
EVALUATION RUN - EVAP-85
DC
a
c
Y
"/
J
«
J
r
f
r '
• a
a c
k^J
^S^H
n
i 1
b
a
,
1
• b
3 d
D
1
024
i
0.9
O.B
U 0.7
U
**• 0.(
Ld
LJ 0.5
Si
| 0.3
0.2
0.1
0
o
D.OD
O
*-
n
1 d
c
1
68 n e
ELAPSED TMEHtS
+ CwraMhraCft.
EVALUATION RUN - EVAP-85
RUN / 6 - DETERGENT JET SPRAY WASTE
n
a
*
: J 1
c
a
w
ft O
3
GDI
&v
DO
1
i
a
ID a
*«"*'
i
a
-^
D
» i ^,
024"
INSTANTANEOUS EFT.
1
1 0
.m i i
a
i
o
01 i i
a
-
i
D
U-t
^4^
LJ
6
ELAPSED TIME
_
,
1
I
O
*k^a
1
D°
-*+•
1
-»-f
c
-*.
a
na
a c
0 D
14
. o
i
1
V^ori
Ifc
1 0
u
1
8 10 12
(MRS.)
+ CUMULATIVE EFF.
'
14
. 1
Appendix 3F
Electrical Efficiency vs. Time
-------
I ; EVALUATION - EYAP-65
I BUM « S - CAUSTIC HOT TANK WASTE
1 SOD -, 1 1 1 1 1 . 1 1 i 1
V
t:
t i 4OO -J
•• •
t
£ •" 3
i • o 300 -t
' ' fc
; 5 zoo -
r ! '• *
i i
? 100 -
fj
'
°
'
I
t
1
! 40 80 120 80 200
' UOUD TEMP. DCOFI
• i
|l
1
240
1.1.
-
280
•; ' EVALUATION RUN - EVAP-65
2. PUN « 4 - VATCP, CXPEPUEHTS ^d-
r
:' |
: ' t 2DD -
f . • • 5
. H
1
! n -
D
a
3
[
\
1
3
b
3
g 300 -
b
0 zoo -
BO -
0 -
soo
400
300
ZOO
BO
O
EVALUATION RUN - EVAP-85
ftta «3 - Hihrf »tt At Syray W««t» ' c, |
•
.
c
-
']
"I
1
,
40 80 CO BO 200 240 280
LJOUDTEMP.DCCn
EVALUATION RUN - EVAP-85
MM* E-OCTEBCCNT ft SHUT WASTE • • 1-~[
'
1
— t
1
~B
•
BO. 12D 1BO 200
no mo TEUCCPXTURC (KC.O
940
310
Appendix 3G
Solution Weight vs. b.point.elevation
-------
M.M.TOY
PROJECT 86-072
RUN I 1 DATE
MATERIAL: MATER
EXPMT. TIME
NORMAL
SEAL LID
BLUR. OFF
& SEAL
BLNR.OFF
UNSEALED
OPENED
LID
BLMR.ON
LID DOWN
:39 PH
:40 PH
:41 PH
:42 PH
:47 PH
:55 PM
2:00 PH
2:15 PM
2:30 PM
2:45 PM
3:00 PM
3:15 FH
3:30 PH
3:45 PM
4:00 PH
4:15 PM
4:30 PH
4:45 PH
4:47 PH
5:02 PH
5:17 PH
5:18 PM
5:33 PH
5:48 PH
6:03 PH
6:03 PM
6:18 PH
6:18 PH
6:33 PH
6:48 PM
6:49 PM
7:04 PH
7:19 PH
07/10/87 12:06 PH
POWER FACTOR =1.00 GAS RATE: 13
CONTROL: NONE UP TO SHUTDOWN POINT § 340 DEG. F
06/19/87
ELAPSED POWER HEIGHT DIFF. CUM. MT.
TIME (KW) (LB.) HEIGHT LOSS
0
0.016666
0.033333
0.05
0. 133333
0.266666
0.35
0.6
0.85
1.1
1.35
1.6
1.85
2.1
2.35
2.6
2.65
3.1
3.383333
3.633333
3.65
3.9
4.15
4.4
4.65
4.9
5.15
5.416666
5.666666
11.4
11.0
11.0
11.0
11.3
11.2
11.2
11.2
11.2
10.8
10.9
. 11.3
11.3
11.4
10.8
11.3
11.2
11.3
11.3
11.3
11.3
11.3
11.3
11.2
11.3
11.2
11.4
11.4
475
466
464
462
460
453
447
441
433
426.5
420
413
406
397.5
390.5
385.5
376
0
9
2
2
2
7
6
6
8
6.5
6.5
7
7
8.5
7
5
9.5
0
9
11
13
15
22
28
34
42
48.5
55
62
69
77.5
84.5
89.5
99
FRONT
ICE SURFACE
31
31
31
31
31
30
31
32
32
32
32
30
30
30
29
30
30
31
32
34
34
32
33
33
33
33
34
33
93
93
94
94
94
95
95
101
102
106
106
111
112
114
113
112
112
113
115
112
113
109
109
110
98
85
84
82
TEMP. DEG. F.
VAPOR LIQUID 6' FROM BOTTOH
SPACE SURFACE BOTTOH SURFACE COMMENTS
93
94
94
94
94
95
95
104
108
113
119
123
132
141
149
165
188
193
199
204
203
209
205 '
199
162
172
191
190
79
79
80
80
82
89
96
110
124
138
153
166
177
188
199
208
209
208
211
210
211
211
206
211
211
212
210
210
79
79
79
81
86
94
97
114
131
146
161
174
187
198
208
214
216
213
215
214
215
214
214
214
214
214
215
213
74 TURN ON
122 DEVICE
141
149
175
188
193
205
215
224 SECOND
233 DEVICE ON
240 SECOND
246 DEVICE OFF
250
253 CONDENSAT
258 = ° ML
258
259
259
258
258 CONDENSAT
258 r 250 ML.
258
257
259 ; . .
260 CONDENSAT
= 460 ML.
259
258 CONDENSAT
= 505 ML.
A - 15
-------
H.H.TOY 07/10/87
PROJECT 86-072
RUN 1 2 DATE: 06/23/87
MATERIAL: HOT TANK HASTE, 35
ELAPSED POWER
TIME TIflE (KH)
4:25 AN 0
4:30 AN 0.033333
4:45 AH 0.333333
5:00 All 0.583333
5:15 Ad 0.833333
5:24 All 0.983333
5:25 AH 1
5:26 AH 1.016666
5:27 AH 1.033333
5:28 AH 1.05
5:30 AH 1.083333
5:45 AH 1.333333
6:00 An 1.583333
6:17 AN 1.866666
6:32 All 2.116666
6:47 AH 2.366666
7:02 AH 2.616666
7:17 AN 2.866666
7:32 AH 3.116666
7:47 AN 3.366666
8:02 An 3.616666
8:17 An 3.866666
8:32 AH 4.116666
8:47 AH 4.366666
9:02 AH 4.616666
9:17 AH 4.866666
9:32 AH 5.116666
9:47 AH 5.366666
10:02 AH 5.616666
10:17 AH 5.866666
10:32 AH 6.116666
10:33 AH 6.133333
10:34 AH 6.15
10:35 AH 6.166666
10:37 AH 6.2
10:40 AH 6.25
12:26 PH 6.25
12:27 PH 6.266666
12:28 PH 6.283333
12:29 PH 6.3
12:30 PH 6.316666
12:32 PN 6.35
12:35 PH 6.4
12:45 PH 6.566666
1:00 PH 6.816666
1:15 PH 7.066666
1:24 Pd 7.216666
1:38 PH 7.45
1:55 PH 7,733333
2:08 PH 7.95
10.5
10.5
10.5
10.5
10.5
10.5
10.5
10.5
10.5
10.5
10.5
10.6
10.6
10.7
10.8
10.8
10.7
10.7
10.7
10.9
10.8
10.8
10.8
10.8
11.0
11.0
11.0
10.9
11.1
11.2
11.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
11.8
11.4
11.3
11.2
11.2
11.2
11.4
11.2
11.3
11.4
11.2
12:12 PH
POWER FACTOR =1.0
CONTROL: NONE UP Tl
.8 6AL
HEIGHT DIFF. 1
(LB.) HEIGHT
277
254
248
242
234.5
229.5
223
218
210
204
199
193
186
179
172
167.5
160
153
148
141
135.5
127
121
117
113.5
111
109
0
23
6
6
7.5
5
6.5
5
8
6
5
6
7
7
7
4.5
7.5
7
5
7
5.5
8.5
6
4
3.5
2.5
2
0 GAS RATE: 12
] SHUTDOHN POINT 8 340 DE6. 1
CUM. HT. LIQ.HT.
LOSS
0 12
23 11.75
29
35
42.5
47.5 11
54
59
67
73 9.25
78
84
91
98 7.5
105
109.5
117
124 6.5
129
136
141.5 5.5
150
156
160
163.5
166
168
F.
TOP
ICE SURFACE
40
34
32
32
33
32
32
32
32
33
33
33
32
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
32
32
32
32
32
32
32
32
33
32
32
32
32
31
32
31
30
30
30
31
31
32
32
33
33
33
34
58
58
60
63
67
72
86
112
126
134
138
146
147
147
146
146
146
152
152
152
14?
149
149
152
152
152
151
152
153
153
155
153
149
143
133
122
138
138
145
153
153
163
163
168
169
165
167
TEHP.DE6.F.
VAPOR LIQUID 6' FRON BOITOH
SPACE SURFACE BOTTOM SURFACE
68
68
72
80
90
100
150
163
170
174
178
186
184
188
186
187
188
186
186
188
184
186
186
186
186
186.
188
188
189
190
190
182
176
170
159
150
151
150
162
169
174
180
187
190
190
189
189
98
101-
125
151
ISO-
207
210
213
213
213
213
215
215
215
215
216
216
215
217
217
218
218
218
218
219
220
221
221
223
223
223
224
223
223
222
222
218
220
222
223
223
223
223
226
228
229
230
98
102
131
162
191
212
214
214
214
215
215
215
215
216
216
217
217
218
218
218
218
218
219
219
220
221
222
222
223
223
223
223
221
219
215
211
196
193
198
208
221
222
212
205
205
189
188
210
COMMENTS
TURN ON .
228 UNIT
232
242
244
244
243
244
242
241
241
256
258
258
261
263
263
265
268
271
274
263
268
273
290
306
318
328
337
342
346
295
271
262
244
233
238
265
294
312
323
339
350
364
373
387
400
BOILING
COMMENCES
THERHOSTA
TRIPS OUT •
BYPASS :
THERMOSTAT CUTOF
6' PROBE
OUT OF LIQUID
TURNED OFF UNIT
TURNING ON & OFF
SAHPLE 3 TAKEN
A - 16
-------
H.H.TOY 07/10/87 12:19 PH
PROJECT 86-072 POWER FfiCTOR = 1.0(
CONTROL: NONE UP H
RUN 1 3 DATE: 06/29/87
HATERIAL:JET SPRAY HASTE, 55 GAL.
ELAPSED POWER HEIGHT DIFF. (
TINE TIME IKHH)
-------
W.H.TQY 07/10/87 12:19 PH
PROJECT 86-072 POWER FACTOR =1.00
CONTROL: NONE UP TO
RUN It 3 DATE: 04/29/87
HATERIALsJET SPRAY HASTE, 55 SAL.
ELAPSED POKER HEIGHT DIFF. C
TIME
12:47 PR
1:04 PH
1:20 PF!
1:30 PH
1:45 PH
1:52 PH
2:04 PH
2:15 PR
2:30 PH
2:45 PR
3:00 PH
3:15 PR
3:30 PR
3:45 PH
4:00 PH
4:15 PH
4:30 PH
4:45 PH
5:00 PH
5:15 PH
5:30 PR
5:42 PH
T1HE
9. 916666
10.2
10.46666
10.63333
10.88333
11
11.08333
11.26666
11.51666
11.76666
12.01666
12.26666
12.51666
12.76666
13.01666
13.26666
13.51666
13.76666
14.01666
14.26666
14.51666
14.71666
(KWH)
106.4
118.5
120.8
122.8
125,6
128.4
131.2
134
136.8
139.6
142.4
145.2
148
150.6
153.6
156.4
159.2
161.6
(LB.) WEIGHT
208
199
180
173
168
161
154
147.5
140
133
126
118
111.5
104
97
90
33
75
14
9
19
7
5
•?
/
7
6.5
7.5
7
7
8
6.5
7.5
7
7
7
8
GAS RATE: 12
SHUTDOWN POINT
UH. WT. LIQ.HT.
LOSS
201
210 8.75
229
236 7.5
241
248
255
261.5 6
269
276
283
291 5.5
297.5
305
312
319 5.5
326
334
TOP FRONT
ICE SURFACE
33
33
36
38
40
41
42
43
36
37
30
30
32
32
32
33
7T
JO
34
34
37
38
39
133
146
142
138
156
160
158
147
153
148
143
143
137
140
143
139
130
124
122
129
TERP.DE6
.F.
VAPOR LIQUID 6
1 FRQH BOTTQH
SPACE SURFACE BOTTOH SURFACE COHHENTS
197
197
195
197
198
198
195
195
197
196
198
193
193
193
192
194
194
193
193
192
194
193
213
213
213
213
213
213
213
213
213
212
212
213
212
213
212
213
213
213
213
214
216
217
213
213
213
213
213
213
213
213
213
213
213
213
193
185
186
186
187
186
185
185
185
185
218
218
218 DISTURBANCE
218 WITH ALL PROBES
218 PROBLERS
2ig WITH PROSE 4
213
213
213
219
220
220
223 PROBE 6
223 OUT OF WATER
224
228
228
230
234
239
248
264 OFF AT
THIS POINT
A - 18
-------
H.R.TQY 07/14/87 02:34 PH
PROJECT 36-072 PQBER FACTOR = 1.00
RUN 1 4 CONTROL: THERMOSTAT
DATE; 07/03/87
RATERIAL: HATER
ELAPSED POSER HEIGHT DIFF. C
TIHE TINE (KWH) IL8.) WEIGHT
07:00 AN
07:03 AH
07:04 AH
07:05 AH
07:06 AH
07:07 AH
07:15 AH
07:30 AH
07:45 AH
03:00 AH
08:15 AH
08:23 AH
08:24 AH
08:25 AH
08:26 AH
08:27 AH
08:28 AN
08:30 AH
08:45 AH
09:00 AH
09:15 AN
09:30 AH
09:45 AH
10:00 AH
10:15 AH
10:30 AH
10:33 AH
10:34 AH
10:35 AH
10:36 AH
10:38 AH
10:40 AH
10:42 AH
10:45 AH
11:00 AH
11:15 AH
11:30 AH
11:45 AH
12:00 PH
12:15 PH
12:30 PH
12:46 PH
01:00 PH
01:33 PH
01:48 PH
01:55 PH
02:00 PH
02:15 PN
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
L
2
2
t
J
3
0
3
7
0
3
•7
-.1
3
7
3
3
4
4
4
4
.5
5
5
5
6
6
6
6
7
7
: 0
: 3
: 4
: 5
: 6
: 7
:15
:30
:45
: 0
:15
:23
:24
:25
:26
:27
:28
:30
:45
: 0
:15
:30
:45
: 0
:15
:30
:33
:34
:35
:36
.:33
:40
:42
:45
: 0
:15
:30
:45
: 0
:15
:30
:46
: 0
:33
:48
:55
: 0
:15
0.0
0.5
0.7
0.9
1.1
1.3
2.7
5.5
8.2
10.9
13.6
15.1
15.3
15.4
15.6
15.8
16.0
16.4
19.1
21.8
24.5
27.3
30,0
32.7
35.4
38.2
38.7
38.9
39.1
39.2
39.6
40.0
40.3
40.9
43.6
46.3
49.1
51.8
54.5
57.2
60.0
62.9
65.4
71.4
74.1
75.4
76.3
79.0
260.5
256.5
254
247
242
235.5
229
223
217
210
205
199.5
193.5
187.5
180
174
167
161
152
144.5
137.5
123
118
111.5
106
0
4
2.5
7
C
J
6.5
6.5
6
6
7
5
5.5
6
6
7.5
6
7
6
9
-I C
.' I J
1
14.5
IT
6.5
5.5
GAS RATE: 15
UR. WT. LIQ.HT.
LOSS
0
4
6.5 12.5
13.5
13.5 12
25
31.5 11.33
37.5
43.5 10.875
50,5
55.5 10.125
61
67
73
80.5 3.75
86.5
93.5
99.5
108.5 7.25
116
123
137.5
142.5
149
154.5
TOP FRONT
ICE SURFACE
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
67
64
66
67
67
67
66
67
67
67
67
67
67
63
63
68
67
68
63
68
63
68
68
63
68
68
68
69
69
69
70
71
72
74
- 77
78
38
91
92
95
93
58
58
59
59
58
59
59
61
64
66
68
71
73
73
74
75
76
79
100
108
105
110
109
103
112
128
129
127
135
144
154
161
166
163
166
159
168
161
166
160
163
172
173
169
117
103
111
130
TEHP.DEG.F.
VAPOR LIQUID BOTTOfl
SPACE SURFACE SURFACE COHNENTS
58
58
59
60
61
61
63
76
92
119
126
138
142
154
163
172
178
183
184
186
184
136
186
185
185
185
187
193
199
201
202
202
202
203
203
203
203
203
203
203
203
203
206
206
204
203
205
206
71
71
73
75
77
77
91
118
145
171
193
206
206
209
210
208
208
208
209
210
211
210
211
209
210
211
.211
211
211
211
211
211
211
211
212
212
212
212
212
212
212
212
211
210
210
209
210
209
75
75 TURN ON UNIT
100
121
135
142
176
200
221
235
246
251
252
251
252
252
252
250
251
252
252
253
253
252
253
252
252 SEAL LID
252
252
252
252
252
252
252
252
252
252
252
252
252
252 BLOHER OFF
252
251
249
249 SURF. -F.CTR, SUN
248 SURF. -L. 3D. SHADE
249 SURF. -BK. SUN
249 T.CTR.SUN
A - 19
-------
W.H.TOY 07/14/87 02:34 PH
PROJECT 84-072 POWER FACTOR = 1.00 GftS RATE: 15
RUN I 4 CONTROL: THERMOSTAT
DATE: 07/08/37 TEHP.DEG.F.
MATERIAL: WATER
ELAPSED POWER WEIGHT DIFF. CUH. WT. LIQ.HT. TOP FRONT VAPOR LIQUID BOTTOM
TIME TIME (KWH) (LB.) WEIGHT LOSS " ICE SURFACE SPACE SURFACE SURFACE COMMENTS
02:30 PM 7 :30 81.8 98 8 162.5 4.5' 89 177 207 21! 248 NORMAL OPN.
02:45 PH 7 :45 34.5 91 7 169.5 92 170 186 208 249
03:00 PH 8:0 87.2 84 7 176.5 3.75 108 165 186 208 247
03:15 PM 8 :15 39.9 73 6 182.5 110 169 185 208 248
03:30 PM 8 :30 92.7 70 3 190.5 112 168 188 209 248 ADD 1/2 GAL 90 WT OIL
03:45 PM 3 :45 95.4 64.5 5.5 196 113 164 184 209 246
04:00 PM 9:0 98.1 57 7.5 203.5 109 162 184 207 243 ADDED 1/2 GALLONS 90 WT.OR
04:15 PH 9:15 100.3 55.5 1.5 205 84 161 185 207 245 ADDED 1/2 GALLONS 90 WT.OIL
04:30 PH 9 :30 103.6 50 5.5 210.5 33 161 183 208 249
A - 20
-------
W.M.TQY
PROJECT
RUN t 5
HATERIAL
TIRE
3:00 AH
3:03 AH
3:04 AH
3:05 AH
3:06 AH
3:07 AH
3:03 AH
3:09 AH
3: 10 AH
3:15 AH
3:13 AH
3:20 AH
3:24 AH
3:30 AH
3:45 AH
3:50 AH
3:55 AH
4:00 AH
4:05 AH
4:08 AH
4:10 AH
4:15 AH
4:20 AH
4:23 AH
4:25 AM
4:30 AH
4:40 AM
4:45 AH
5:00 AM
5:15 AH
5:30 AH
5:45 AH
6:00 AH
6:15 AH
6:30 AH
6:45 AH
7:00 AH
7:15 AH
7:30 AH
7:45 AH
8:00 AM
3:15 AH
8:30 AH
8:45 AM
9:00 AH
9:15 AM
9:30 AH
9:45 AH
10:00 AM
10:15 AM
10:30 AH
10:45 AH
07/10/87 12:24 PH
36-072 POWER FACTOR = 1,00
CONTROL: BYPASSED A
DATE: 07/09/87
: DETERGENT JET SPRAY WASTE WITH CRYSTA
ELAPSED POWER HEIGHT DIFF. C
TIME
0.00
0.05
0.066666
0.083333
0.1
0.116666
0.133333
0.15
0.166666
0.25
0.3
0.333333
0.4
0.5
0.75
0.833333
0.916666
1
1.083333
1.133333
1.166666
1.25
1 . 333333
1.383333
1.416666
1.5
1.666666
1.75
2
2.25
2.5
•1 ~7C
L. .< J
T
3.25
3.50
3.75
4.00
4.25
4.5
4.75
5
5.25
5.5
5.75
6
6.25
6.5
6.75
7
7.25
7.5
7.75
(KWH)
0
0
0.733333
0.916666
1.1
1.233333
1.466666
1.65
1.833333
2.75
3.3
3.666666
4.4
5.5
8.25
11
13.75
16.5
19.25
22
24.75
27.5
30.25
33
35.75
38.5
41.25
44
46.75
49.5
52.25
55
57.75
60.5
63.25
66
68.75
71.5
74.25
77
79.75
82.5
85.25
(LB.) WEIGHT
398
353.5
348
344
336.5
330.5
326
319.5
313.5
307.5
301.5
295.5
290.5
283.5
277.5
272
265. 5
259.5
252
0
44.5
5.5
4
7.5
6
4.5
6.5
6
6
6
6
5
/
6
5.5
6.5
6
7.5
i GAS RATE: 15+
iFTER POWER FAILURE AND INABILITY TO RESTART SUCCESSFULLY.
TERP.DEG.F.
1 i T?rn ni imcc
LLi LLU dLUl/QL.1
;UH. HT. LI9.HT.
LOSS
0 16
44.5 17.333
50
54 13.75
61.5
67.5
72
78.5 13.25
84.5
90.5
96.5
102.5 12.25
107.5
114.5
120.5
126 10.125
132.5
133.5
146
TQPCENTER
ICE SURFACE
38
34
33
33
33
32
32
32
32
32
32
32
32
32
31
31
32
32
32
32
32
32
32
32
32
32
32
71
32
32
32
33
34
34
36
35
35
33
33
33
33
34
34
35
34
34
33
71
32
31
31
71
•JL
59
59
59
59
59
59
59
59
59
59
59
59
59
59
63
63
64
66
67
67
68
69
71
71
70
72
74
101
138
139
141
134
136
133
124
134
132
136
133
134
136
138
143
143
145
145
144
143
143
146
147
150
VAPOR LIQUID 6" FROR BUTTON
SPACE SURFACE BOTTOH SURFACE COHHENTS
62
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
69
76
79
81
35
36
39
90
92
93
96
96
100
107
163
183
134
184
134
184
136
130
138
134
137
188
188
188
133
136
188
138
138
189
187
185
133
139
138
78
78
78
73
78
79
79
79
79
80
81
33
91
105
130
133
144
153
157
160
163
170
178
180
183
191
203
208
212
211
212
213
213
213
213
213
213
213
213
213
213
214
215
214
214
215
215
214
214
214
214
214
78
78
79
78
79
79
79
79
79
81
83
34
99
105
133
134
146
154
160
163
167
173
179
183
136
193
206
212
213
213
213
213
214
214
214
215
214
214
213
214
214
215
216
216
217
216
216
216
216
216
216
217
78
78
130
144
193
210
137
190
223
240
235
254
212
226
235
185
194
235
199
243
206
235
215
247
224
222
230
246
251
250
252
250
1C7
253
254
255
253
253
255
254
254
257
258
260
261
263
263
263
265
265
267
263
A - 21
-------
W.H.TOY 07/10/87 12:24 PR
PROJECT 86-072 POWER FACTOR = 1.00
CONTROL : BYPASSED A
RUN It 5 DATE: 07/09/87
MATERIAL-DETERGENT JET SPRAY WASTE WITH CRYSTA
ELAPSED POWER WEIGHT DIFF. C
TIME
11:00 AH
11:45 AN
12:05 PH 9.
12:15 PR
12:24 PH
12:30 PR
12:45 PH
1:00 PH
1:15 PR
1:30 PH
1:45 PH
2:00 PH
2:15 PH
2:30 PH
2:45 PH
3:00 PR
3:15 PH
3:30 PR
3:45 PH
4:00 PH
4:13.5 PH
TIRE (KWH)
3 88
8.75 96.25
083333 99.91666
9.5
9.75
10
10.25
10.5
10.75
11
11.25
11.5
11.75
12
12.25
12.5
12.75
13
13.225
(LB.) HEIGHT
247.5
245.5
238
232
224
218
212
204
197.5
191
184
173
171.5
165
158
151
144.5
137
132.5
4.5
2
7.5
6
8
6
6
3
6.5
6.5
7
6
6.5
6.5
7
7
6.5
7.5
4.5
GAS RATE: 15+
FTER POWER FAILURE AND INABILITY TO RESTART SUCCESSFULLY.
TEHP.DE6.F.
iiT7m ci iincc -
LLi&UU wUUUUt *
UR. WT. LIQ.HT.
LOSS
150.5 9.125
152.5
160
3.5
166
174
180 7.5
186
194
200.5
207 6.33
214
220
226.5
233 5
240
247
253.5
261
265.5 3.125
TOPCENTER
VAPOR LIQUID 6
* FRQH BOTTQR
ICE SURFACE SPACE SURFACE BOTTOH SURFACE
31
33
32
31
31
31
29
30
32
32
32
35
34
38
38
37
37
37
31
28
28
153
142
148
133
138
161
165
156
167
166
160
168
166
168
168
164
158
162
164
158
187
142
176
165
139
183
137
137
188
186
185
191
191
191
190
188
186
187
189
187
183
214
200
213
213
212
213
213
213
213
213
215
214
218
218
213
213
217
228
223
217
221
218
213
218
218
218
219
218
219
219
220
221
223
224
225
226
215
230
232
233
233
190
263
213
263
245
238
265
270
270
271
270
270
273
275
277
280
282
289
300
313
349
400
CQRRENTS
POWER OUT
POWER ON
BYPASSED
THERMOSTAT
A - 22
-------
JSNDIE2C 4
CHEMICAL
OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
-------
CARTER ANALYTICAL LABORATORY, INC.
P.O. BOX 865 • LOS GATOS, CA 95031 • (408)666-1600
Reissue 3/21/33
P. O. #3£-O72
Mr-. Wesley M. Toy 5951 -123 3/OS/33
REPORT FOR ANALYSIS NO DATE
SUB.JFCT Chemical (Analysis Of Evapc 2 layers: top — slight oil; bottom - gold
1 i quid.
C (#3) 1 layer i solid, black, wet.
.£> f#4.> 3 layers: top — oil, black; middle — liquid,
black; bottom - sludge, brown—black.
E <#5) 2 layers: top - oil, black, viscousf bottom —
solid, black.
F (#G) 2 layers: top — slight oil; bottom — liquid,
yel low.
G (#7) 2 layers: top — oil, light black; bottom —
liquid, black.
H (#3) 1 layer: liquid, pale yellow.
I <'•#:•?.> i? layers: top — oil, black, liquid; bottom —
solid, black.
J (#1O) 3 layers: top — oil, black; middle solid,
black; bottom — sludge, brown—black.
H (#11) 1 layer: solid, black, wet.
L (#12) 1 layer: solid, black, dryish.
M (#13) 1 layer: soil type, dry.
We certify the above analysis to be the true result obtained on the described sample(s).
CARTER ANALYTICAL LABORATORY, INC.
'^L
by f'l ' jLA/\s> Ph.D.
President
Information and data in this report is correct and reliable to the best of our knowledge and the results are guaranteed. No part of
this report is to be reproduced for any purpose without our written consent.
A - 23
-------
CARTER ANALYTICAL LABORATORY, INC.
analysis no.
page of page(s)
PI 1 of the solid samples were slightly wet and liquid like when
they were stirred and shaken.
The first set of total hydrocarbon data Mas analyzed by taking a
known amount of the sample and extracting it with nanograde
methylene chloride. The extract was condensed for a residue
weight. The second set of total hydrocarbon data was analyzed by
taking a known amount of the digested solution made to a pH of 2
and extracting it with nanograde methylene chloride for a residue
wei ght.
Sam pi e Total Hydrocarbon (sample.) Total Hydrocarbon (solution.)
ft 4. 59% O. 1 77 %
B O. OO5% O. O45 %
C B. 26% O. 254 %
D O. 696% O. 1OO %
E 7. 42% O. 353 %
F O. 005% O. 123 %
G 4. 74% O. 146 X
H
-------
CARTER ANALYTICAL LABORATORY, INC.
page
analysis no.
-Of-
_page(s)
Satapl e
fi
D
G
SUB pended So J i ds
3. 37X
1. 3B%
1. S7X
The density was analyzed by taking a
and weighing it.
known volume of the sample
Sara pi e
C
D
E
G
I
J
K
L
Densi t v
1. 163
1.612
1. O3O
O. 551
1.176
1. 312
1. 464
1. 622
1. 955
g/ml
g/ml
g/ml
g/ml
g/ml
g/ml
g/ml
g/ml
g/ml
The pH of the sample was determined using pH paper.
Sam pi e
fi
C
D
E
G
1
J
A'
L
M
11-12
9-1O
9-10
9-1O
11-12
11-12
9-10
11-12
11-12
11-12
The fluoride concent ration was determined by analyzing
digested solution using a standard colorimetric procedure.
proper operational conditions Here established
the spectrophotometer was calibrated with known
the
The
for the anion and
standards.
Sam pi e
B
C
D
E
Fl u or ide Concen t rat ion f ppm .>
53.
110.
120.
61.
127.
A - 25
-------
CARTER ANALYTICAL LABORATORY, INC.
page
analysis no.
_of-
_page(s)
F
G
H
I
J
A'
L
M
JOS.
35.
11O.
1OO.
14O.
140.
14O.
14O.
The metal concentration was determined by taking a known amount
of the sample, digesting in 5O'< nitric acid, filtering and
diluting to a known volume. The solutions were analyzed using
atomic absorption (ftft) spectroscopy. The proper operational
conditions were established for each element and the
spectrophotometer was calibrated with proven standards. nil
concentrations relate to the solid and are in ppm.
Sam pi e Bari urn
Chromi urn
Cooper
Iron
Nickel
Cadmiurn
fi
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
2OO.
(3. 33
477.
75. 3
31. 4
('J. 93
23. 6
('3. 92
159.
161.
111.
14O.
7. 32
11.5
<0. 39
34. 4
7. S3
95. 5
<0. 39
-------
CARTER ANALYTICAL LABORATORY, INC.
page
analysis no.
_of.
_page(s)
ft known amount c
-------
CARTER ANALYTICAL LABORATORY, INC.
page
analysis no.
_of_
_page(s)
Jf, 1 -Dichloroetherte
trsris —1 f 2—Di ch 1 oroethene
1, 2—Di ch 1 oropropane
cis-1, 3-Di ch 1 oropropene
trans—l f 3—Dich 1 oropropene
Methylene chloride
1, 1 r 3, 2—Tetrachloroethane
Tetrachloroethene
1, 1., 1—Tri ch 1 oroethane
1,1, 2— Trich 1 oroethane
Tri ch 1 oroethene
i ch 1 orofl uorotaethane
nyl ch 1 or i de
( 10
< 10
< 10
< 10
< 10
< 10
<• 10
(' 10
< 10
< 10
< 10
< 10
< 10
EPfi METHOD GO2
5951-G
Benzene
Tol uene
Xylenes nzene
1,2 —D i ch 1 oro bens ene ( o .>
1 , 3-Di ch 1 orobenzene
1 , 4 -Di ch 1 orobenzene < p)
<
<
<
<
<
<
f
<
1O
10
10
10
10
10
10
10 ' '
EPfi METHOD SO4
2—Ch 1 c
-------
MATERIAL SAFETY 1DATA SHEETS
-------
Sht 1 of 2
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Xw £.%TSij«7
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET
Required ..nder USOL Safety and Health Regulations for Ship Repairing,
Shipbuilding, and Shipbreaking (29 CFR 1915, 1916. 1917)
SECTION 1
MANUFACTURER'S NAME .
Manufactured by: Exsl Chemical
P EMERGENCY TBLCPHONK NO.
(408) 727-7031 '
ADDS ess (Numbtr. Strctt, City. Suit, ant ZfF Codt)
630 Walsh Ave. Santa Clara,
CHEMICAL NAME AND SYNONYMS
Alkaline Detergent Blend
CHEMICAL FAMILY
Alkalies /Surfactants
CA 95050
1 TRADE. NAME AND SYNONYMS
1 gateway 98 62
FORMULA
Proprietary
SECTION
PAINTS. PRESERVATIVES, ft SOLVENTS
PIGMENTS
CATALYST
VEHICLE
SOLVENTS
ADDITIVES Surfactants
OTHERS Caustic Soda
HAZARDOUS MIXTURES
This is a highly Alkaline
or oxidizers. Exothermic
Treat as Sodium Hydroxide
II •
»
0
0
0
0
2
75
HAZARDOUS INGREDIENTS
TLW
(Unitri
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
ALLOYS AND METALLIC COATINGS
BASE METAL
ALLOYS
METALLIC COATINGS
FILLER METAL
PLUS COATING OR CORK FLUX
OTHERS
OP OTHER LIQUIDS. SOLIDS. OR OASIS
material
Do not mix with acids
cheat releasing reaction may occur.
dye)
ft
0
0
0
0
0
ft
TLV
(Until)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
TLV
(Unitt)
.
SECTION III - PHYSICAL DATA
•OILING POINT (°F.| I N/
VAPOR PRESSURE (mm Hf.) N/
VAPO N DENSITY (Al R- 1| fl /
SOLUBILITY IN WATCH COfflP
A SPECIFIC GRAVITY (HjO-l)
A PERCENT. VOLATILE
•Y VOLUME (%)
. EVAPORATION RATS
A c -u
lete
N/A
0
APPEARANCE AND ODOM Coarse white powder, bland odor
SECTION IV - FIRE AND EXPLOSION HAZARD DATA
FLASH POINT (Method UMd) N/A
IFLAMMASO LIMITS I LM
u«
EXTINGUISHING MEDIA . , , ,
Will not support combustion
SPECIAL FIRS FIGHTING PROCEDURES ....
N/A
*
UNUSUAL FIRS AND EXPLOSION HAZARDS ....
N/A
t
PAOt (1)
'Continued an ••nrtm tutel
A - 29
Form OSHA-20
-------
Sfct 2 o
I
SECTION V • HEALTH HAZARD DAT*
THRESHOLD LIMIT VALUB (Air) 2mg/tt> \f ok • 15 minute*
Edicts o,6v.».x*».u». Corro8iyc burns to ali body tlsTme in Contact
EMERGENCY AND IMRST AID P«OC«OU«M Flu-sh affecte
-------
Sht 1 of 2
ttaW ••* !««•••'• *•«•»"•
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Occupational Safety and Uaaltn Administration
MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET
Form Aooroxd
QMS No. 44-R13I7
Required under USDL Safety and Health Regulations for Ship Repairing,
Shipbuilding, and Shipbreaking (29 CFR 1915, 1918, 1917)
SECTION I
MANUFACTURER'S NAME
Safe-Way Chemical Co.
EMERGENCY TELEPHONE NO.
(408) 292-9289
ADDRESS ;\:i'nt>cr. Strctt, Citv. St:tt. and ZIP Code) .
Stockton Ave.f 3an Joaef-CA.
CHEMICAL NAME AND SYNONY'.'S
Alkaline Detergent Blend
COMICAL FAMILY
FORMULA
TRADE NAME AND SYNONYMS
Safewav -HT-E-11
SECTION II - HAZARDOUS INGREDIENTS
PAINTS. PRESERVATIVES, & SOLVENTS
PIGMENTS
• CATALYST
VEHICLE
SOLVENTS
•ADDITIVES
OTHEPS Alkaline Determent
%
0
0
0
0
0
„
TLV
(Unitfl
0
0
0
0
0
—
ALLOYS AND METALLIC COATINGS
BASE METAL
ALLOYS
METALLIC COATINGS
FILLER METAL
PLUS COATING OR CORE FLUX
OTHERS Alkaline Determent
HAZARDOUS MIXTURES OF OTHER LIQUIDS. SOLIDS. OR GASES
Do not mix with strong acids
*
%
0
0
0
o
^^
TLV
(Units)
mm
i
1
I
« i TLV
L* ! IUnit$>
SECTION III • PHYSICAL DATA
BOILING POINT
-------
Sht 2 of
SECTION V • HEALTH HAZARD DATA
THRESHOLD LIMIT VALUE
-0-
EFFECTS OF OVEREXPOSURC
-0-
EMERGENCY AND FIRST AID PROCEDURES Treat as an alkali detergent turn.
SECTION VI - REACTIVITY DATA
STABILITY y
SI
STABLE CON
FABLE X
OITIONS TO AVOID
Do not mix with stron«
acids or oxidizers
iNCOMPATABiLiTY7A7jf*ria/» ra avoid)
Strong acids
HAZARDOUS DECOMPOSITION PRODUCTS Wor,o
HAZARDOUS
POLYMERIZATION
MAY OCCUR
WILL NOT OCCUR
CONDITIONS TO AVOID
X None
•
SECTION VII • SPILL OR LEAK PROCEDURES
STEPS TO BE TAKEN IN CASE MATERIAL IS RELEASED OR SPILLED
Treat as
an alkaline detergent spill, flush area with water.
WASTE DISPOSAL
METHOD Dilute with water
'•
SECTION
VIII - SPECIAL PROTECTION INFORMATION
RtiPIRATORV PROTECTION /Specify type) ^^ required
VENTILATION
LOCAL EXHAUST
None required ' ' SPECIAL uone
MECHANICAL (General) OTHER
PROTECTIVE GLOVES _ . , EYE PROTECTION ,, . ,
i Required Required
1 OTHER PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT
SECTION IX - SPECIAL
PRECAUTIONS
PRECAUTIONS TO BE TAKEN IN HANDLING AND STORING
none
OTHER PRECAUTIONS
none
PAGE (2)
Form OSHA-20
NOT. May 7*
A - 32
-------
"VENDOR LITERATURE
-------
SafeAAfoy Chemical Co.
909 Stockton Avenue
San Jose, California 95110
(408) 292-9289
Pressure Cleaning Chamber
The fastest and most ecomonical method for cleaning parts without
scrubbing. Safe-Way Chemical pressure cleaning chamber is a fully auto-
matic spray cleaning system.
Outside Dimensions
46" high
39" wide
28" deep
Specifications
220 V power required
48 gallons
gas fired
4 part basket: 26" diameter
cleaning chamber: 25" high
Work area tray: 34" diameter
Work capacity height: 28" diam.
Larger models available upon special request. They are 60" high, 57" wide,
and 45" deep.
A - 33
-------
Safety Chemical Co.
909 Stockton Avenue
San Jose, California 95110
(408) 292-9289
Safe-Way Hot Tanks
60 gallon tank
26" x 38" Surface Area
26" deep
packed with 702
/,///' fiberglass insulation
150 gallon tank
34" x 56" Surface Area
30" deep
Safe-Way hot tanks are also available in larger sizes.
250 gallon tank
40" x 56" Surface Area
36" deep
400 gallon tank
40" x 56" Surface Area
42" deep
Agitation and filtration options can be ordered with the 150,250, and
400 gallon tanks. Safe-Way Chemical can provide custom-tanks and
service as well. Hoists available upon request.
A - 34
-------
QA/QC ACTIVITIES
-------
Department of Health S'. 'ices Wesley M. Toy, P.E.
RFP 86 - 072 January 13, 1987
Page 1 of 2
Quality Assurance Project Plan
per subsection 30.503 of the Federal Register, Part VIII;
Vol. 48, No. 191, Sept. 30, 1983
Item
1 Title of Project: On-site Treatment of Hazardous Wastes from
Automotive Repairs
Principal Investigator: Wesley M. Toy, P.E.
2 Table of Contents of Project Plan: See Exhibit A
(initial submittal only)
3 Project Description: See Exhibit B
(initial submittal only)
4 Project Organization and Responsibilities: See Exhibit C
(initial submittal only)
5 Quality assurance objectives and criteria for determining precision,
accuracy, completeness, representativeness and compatibility of data:
Quality assurance objectives are to ensure that all analytical
results are error free and consistant with standard laboratory
quality.
All measurements are to be internally standardized using traceable
standards
All work is to be overseen by the laboratory manager assuring
precision and completeness consistant with Carter Analytical
Laboratory s standard high quality work.
6 Sampling Procedures: Sample collection will be taken from premixed waste
materials on an as needed basis. All samlples to be collected in
glass containers and refrigerated until used.
7 Sarnie Custody: Standard sample custody forms will be employed with
copies maintained at each sign off point. Sample custody forms
are available to EPA in Carter Analytical Laboratory files on an
as needed basis.
8 Calibration Procedures and Frequency and Traceability Standards:
Standard calibration procedures are employed daily for each piece
of analytical equipment in the laboratory and for each sample
batch. All standards have traceability histories available.
9 Analytical Procedures: All procedures used will be those approved
by State of California laboratory certifying agents, namely:
Standard Methods & Published EPA Methods.
Both of which are on file in the laboratory.
10 Data Reduction, Validation and Reporting: All data will be treated in
standard form. Validation will be enforced by cross checks and
A - 35
-------
Department of Health Set sices Wesley M. Toy, P.E.
RFP 86 - 072 January 13, 1987
Page 2 of 2
Quality Assurance Project Plan ( Continued)
Item
10 Data Reduction, Validation and Reporting: (Continued)
blind standards. All data will be reported on a regular basis with
no data points withheld.
11 Internal Quality Control Checks: As discussed previously at least daily
standardization and blind standards.
12 Performance and system audits: This item not applicable due to the size
of the subject project.
13 Preventive Maintenance: Conducted weekly as part of cleaning and
standardization procedures.
14 Specific standard operating procedures used to assess data precision,
accuracy, representativeness, and comparability:
Procedures will be as prescribed in the reference document:
Standard Methods for the Examination of Water & Wastewater
16 th Edition, 1985, pub. by Am. Pub. Health, Am. Water Works et al.
Procedures include analyses for: pH, dissolved Solids, total solids,
percent extractable oil and ppm determination of specific
metals as given below.
Standard Methods for Specific Metals:
Method 303a Fe, Mg, Cu, Cr, Pb, Zn, Na, K, Ca, Sn, Ag, Ni, Cd
Method 304 As, Se
Method 413c F
Methods
303a&303f Hg
Method 303c Ba
These Methods are also EPA approved Methodofgies.
15 Corrective Action For Out-of-Control Situations: Conducted on a batchwise
basis several times daily. No out of control situations exists for
more than a few samples.
16 Quality Assurance Reporting Procedures: Previously discussed as part of
other sections.
A -• 36
------- |