PROVISION OF  TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TO SUPPORT

                   IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PCB REGULATIONS

                        (January - December 1983)
                                   by
Robert G. Mclnnes
GCA Corporation
GCA/Technology Division
Bedford, MA  01730

Contract No. 68-02-3168
Technical Service Area 3
Work Assignment No. 58
Radford C. Adams
Radian Corporation
Research Triangle Park, NC
Contract No. 68-02-3174
Technical Service Area 3-40
Work Assignment No. 105
27709
                           EPA Project Officer

                            David C.  Sanchez
              Industrial  Environmental  Research Laboratory
           Office of Environmental  Engineering and Technology
             Research Triangle Park, North Carolina  27711
                              Prepared for

                   OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
                  U.S.  ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY
                         WASHINGTON, D.C.   20460

-------
  DCN  No.  231-060-30-05
              PROVISION OF TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TO SUPPORT

                  IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PCB REGULATIONS

                        (January - December 1983)
                                   by
Robert G. Mclnnes
GCA Corporation
GCA/Technology Division
Bedford, MA  01730

Contract No. 68-02-3168
Technical Service Area 3
Work Assignment No. 58
Radford C. Adams
Radian Corporation
Research Triangle Park, NC  27709
Contract No. 68-02-3174
Technical Service Area 3-40
Work Assignment No. 105
                           EPA Project Officer

                            David C. Sanchez
              Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
           Office of Environmental Engineering and Technology
             Research Triangle Park, North Carolina  27711
                              Prepared for

                   OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
                  U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                         WASHINGTON, D.C.  20460

-------
                                ABSTRACT


     This report summarizes the technical assistance activities continued
during 1983 to support implementation of the PCB regulations.   These
activities, which began in 1981, included regular bimonthly liaison
with EPA regional offices and the provision of specific technical  and
coordinative assistance to these offices as requested.

  v ^GCA/Technglpgy Division was assigned to provide assistance to the
Eastern EPA Regions I-V and OPTS, while Radian Corporation performed an
identical function for the Western Regions VI-X.  Individual technical
assistance reports were prepared and distributed.  Copies of these
reports are included in the appendices.

     This report is submitted in fulfillment of Work Assignment 58 of
Contract No. 68-02-3168 by GCA/Technology Division and Work Assignment 105
of Contract No. 68-02-3174 by Radian Corporation.  These work assignments
were performed under the sponsorship of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency.  This report covers the period 1 January 1983 to 31 December 1983.
                                      m

-------
                                CONTENTS
Abstract ............................   iii
     Introduction  .......................     1
     Regional Permit Activities  ................     1
     Technical Assistance  ...................     3
     Conclusions and Recommendations ..............     4
Appendices
     A.    Report on PCB Activities and Policies - Volume 12
          (Regions I-V)  ....................     6
     B.    Report on PCB Activities and Policies - Volume 12
          (Regions VI-X) ....................    29
     C.    Information on PCB Disposal  Activities - Thermal
          Destruction/Nonthermal Destruction (EPA Regions I-V)  .    49
     D.    Information on PCB Disposal  Activities - Thermal
          Destruction/Nonthermal Destruction (EPA Regions VI-X).    77
     E.    Sampling and Analysis of the New Bedford, Massachusetts
          Multiple Hearth Sewage Sludge Incinerator  ......   101
     F.    Planning for the Sampling and Analysis of the
          Anchorage, Alaska Multiple Hearth Sewage Sludge
          Incinerator  .....................   105

-------
              PROVISION OF TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TO SUPPORT
                  IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PCB REGULATIONS
INTRODUCTION
     Technical  assistance activities continued in 1983 at a level
comparable to those experienced in 1982.  Assistance was again provided
by GCA/Technology Division and Radian Corporation (Radian acquired the
Environmental Operations of TRW Inc. in 1983.  Technical assistance
services prior to November 4, 1983 were provided by TRW.) in a twofold
direction:  the regular bimonthly liaison with EPA regional offices
which began in 1981 and which reports on the status of all PCB related
submittals; and the provision of specific technical and coordinative
assistance efforts to these offices on a quick response, as-needed,
basis.  GCA was assigned to provide technical assistance to the eastern
EPA Regions (I-V), and Radian performed an identical function in the
western regions (VI-X).  This project report will detail specific
advances that were experienced by the PCB program in 1983.  A review of
the bimonthly reports published during 1983 will serve to describe
advances in the PCB disposal industry as well as PCB research and
development projects during this year, while a synopsis of individual
technical assistance efforts will highlight specific areas of need with
regard to administration of the PCB program.  This report covers the
period of 1 January 1983 to 31 December 1983.
REGIONAL PERMIT ACTIVITIES
     Submittals to the EPA regional offices declined sharply in 1983
from the preceding year.  Only nine submittals for destruction or
detoxification of PCBs and PCB contaminated materials by thermal and
non-thermal methods were received.  No applications for new landfills

-------
were received.  The EPA approved five of the nine applications submitted,
of which four were for research and development (R&D) testing.  Chemical
dechlorination, plasma jet incineration, mechanical shredding and
rinsing, and a proprietary process were the process technologies for
which the R&D studies were approved.
     The EPA regions approved a total of 41 applications during 1983
compared with 64 applications approved in 1982.  R&D studies predominated
the approvals with 20 R&D applications approved.  Also, sixteen new
facilities were approved that are available for commercial use and five
new facilities were approved for private use.  These included two high
efficiency boilers.
     The tables of Appendices A and B indentify the year end status of
regional permit activities.  During 1983, responsibility for mobile
disposal permitting was transferred to the Office of Pesticidies and
Toxic Substances (OPTS) in Washington and little permitting was accomplished
while this transfer was being implemented.
     The tables of Appendices C and D are initiated with this report to
provide additional technical  information about PCB disposal facilities
that are permitted or being considered for permitting.   These tables are
useful  for identifying those facilities that are available for commercial
use, their permit expiration dates, and their permit conditions.   PCB
disposal capability at the beginning of 1984 is summarized in the
following paragraphs.  Summary statements about concentration limits,
process capacities, test results and frequency of operation are not
included because much of this information has been classified as
confidential business information (CBI).   All  available data are listed
in the tables of Appendices C and D.
     There were a total of 58 permitted thermal destruction/detoxification
stationary facilities as the year 1983 ended.   Twenty-six were available
for commercial use and 16 sites were involved in R&D studies and not
available commercially.  The rest of the sites treated  onsite wastes
only or had never been utilized.  Eighteen high efficiency boilers were
authorized for PCB disposal use.

-------
     Disposal methods included thermal destruction, chemical dechlorination,
mechanical separations (shredding, container rinsing, etc.), and alternative
methods that are primarily still in the research and development stage.
     The 34 thermal destruction sites included five R&D facilities,
18 high efficiency boilers and 11 incinerators.  Three incinerators and
11 high efficiency boilers were available for commercial  use.
     There were 13 chemical dechlorination sites, including 6 R&D
facilities.
     Five facilities used mechanical separation techniques.
     Research and development focused on thermal and chemical dechlorination
technologies.  Chemical  dechlorination development included optimization
of existing processes and the testing of new solvents.  The developing
thermal methods included molten salt (2), plasma jet incineration,
pyrolysis, fluidized bed incineration and a fluid volume reactor. Non-
thermal methods include  in-situ dechlorination, solvent extraction,
physical  absorption, biodegradation, and one method identified only as
non-thermal.   The process technology at one site was confidential
business information (CBI).
     Additional R&D work was permitted during 1983 or earlier with
expiration dates occuring before the end of the year.  There were eight
chemical  dechlorination, one pyrolysis,  one thermal  stripping, and two
unidentified  studies in  this category.
     At least 19 thermal destruction/detoxification mobile units were
permitted in  one or more regions (the total  number of units may be
higher than 20 because the number of units of one operator are not
available).  There are only two approved mobile incinerators in the
country.   The rest of the mobile facilities use chemical  dechlorination
processes, of which two  are approved for R&D studies.  One test unit is
approved for  thermal research (fluidized bed incineration).  Fifteen
chemical  dechlorination  units are commercially available.
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
     GCA provided direct technical  assistance at the request of EPA
Region I to quantify environmental  releases of PCBs and potential
incomplete combustion products during a PCB destruction efficiency test

-------
of the New Bedford, Massachusetts municipal sewage sludge incinerator.
Sampling was completed in February 1984 and sample analysis is underway.
Results of this effort will be compiled in a separate report.  The test
program is described in Appendix E.
     The New Bedford sewage sludge incinerator was undergoing repairs
during part of 1983 and consideration was given to conducting the needed
test with a surrogate incinerator.  Radian provided direct technical
assistance toward implementation of a test of the Anchorage, Alaska
utilities department sewage sludge incinerator.  Pretest surveys were
conducted and a QA Project Plan was prepared (Appendix F).  Anchorage
has in storage substantial quantities of waste oil containing PCBs in
low concentrations.  Anchorage Utilities was preparing an operations
plan prior to testing by Radian when public opposition to the test led
to a decision to postpone testing indefinitely.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
     During 1983, submittals to the EPA regional  offices for PCB
disposal  authorization declined sharply from the  preceding year.
Application approvals were also down from 1982 but continued at a brisk
pace.  These facts substantiate the conclusions  found in the last
summary report  that regular reports of PCB activities,  such as those
found in Appendices A through D of this report, are unnecessary.  Another
year has provided further opportunity for regional PCB personnel to have
become aware of the activities and the personnel  involved in all of the
regions.  Also, since there is now a single focal  point  at OPTS head-
quarters for mobile sites, interaction and liaison between regions
regarding these disposal  units is no longer necessary.  The need for
regular bimonthly reports is therefore diminished.
     The PCB programs in the regions have been strengthened to the
extent that permitting workload has become more predictable and less
demanding.  Thus, additional manpower needs on an as-call basis to
 Provision of Technical Assistance to Support Implementation of the  PCB
 Regulations (January - December 1982).

-------
alleviate short term personnel  shortages are less  likely.   In  1983,  tests

of the performance of thermal  devices for the destruction  of PCBs  were  the

only short term technical  assistance types of activity provided.   A

continuing need for independent tests of as yet unproven technologies

should be anticipated.

     Accordingly, a few specific technical assistance efforts  appear

desirable in the immediate future.  Specific recommendations are as

follows:

     1.   Continue independent tests of PCB disposal  processes.  There
          was considerable R&D activity in 1983, suggesting that there
          may be continuing need for independent testing of developing
          PCB disposal processes and further clarification of  the
          formation of potentially hazardous products of  incomplete
          combustion is needed for validating the  ability  of combustion
          processes to dispose of PCBs adequately.

     2.   Provide waste generators with information about  the  latest
          advances in PCB disposal processes (or their deficiencies).
          Also, making the public aware of the abilities of reliable
          processes may be equally important.

     3.   Identify best practice test plans for alternate  disposal of
          PCBs found in illegal or abandoned dump sites.   Technical
          assistance efforts might consist of (a)  obtain data  of the
          types of PCB items found at dump sites,  (b) identify the
          optimum disposal process for each dump site, and (c) recommend
          process technologies.

-------
                   APPENDIX A





REPORT ON PCB ACTIVITIES AND POLICIES - VOLUME 12



                (EPA REGIONS I-V)

-------
PCB TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE CONTRACT REPORT         "      Report on PCB
EPA Regions I - V                                      Activities and Policies
                            Office of Pesticides and
December 2,  1983                Toxic Substances                     Volume 12
Introduction
     This is the twelfth of a series of reports designed to inform responsible
Headquarters,  Laboratory and Regional Office personnel of PCB-related
activities in  U.S.  EPA Regions I - V.  Together with a companion report for
Regions VI - X,  it  will serve to update the current status of all regional
actions related  to  implementation of the PCB regulations (40 CFR 761).

Permit Activities
     The current  status  of  all  thermal and  nonthermal  PCB  destruction
 activities in Regions  I  through V are reported  in  Tables A-l  through A-5.
 The  companion newsletter reports these activities  for  Regions VI  - X in
 Tables B-l through B-5 of Appendix B.   Table  A-6 presents  data on
 mobile PCB disposal/destruction systems, which  are the responsibility of
 EPA  headquarters  staff.   Table  A-7,  which is  common to both newsletters,
 presents the principal PCB  and  toxic waste  contacts in each region,  as
 well as the prime technical assistance contacts for PCB-related assistance.
 A narrative of the updated  data obtained from Regional office contacts
 for  Regions I - V is provided  (see Regional Summaries).
                                 GCA CORPORATION
                            GCA/TECHNOLOGY DIVISION
                          Bedford,  Massachusetts   01730
                                 (617) 275-5444

-------
                                  TABLE  A-l.   INFORMATION  ON  PCB  ACTIVITIES  -  REGION  I
. 	 - 	 — 	 	 —
Application
Compel ny ^* ' *

Site
Location
__~~~__ — — — — — —
Type of Dispossl
Haste Method

Process
Utilised

Demonstration
Plan or Burn

Status

Thermal and Nonthermal Destruction
Public Service 02/06/80
Company of New
Hampshire
New England 10/14/80
Power Company
General Electric Spring 1980
Northea.t 06/19/80
Utilities

Massachusetts
Institute of
Technology
New Bedford
Municipal Sludge
Incinerator

ACUHEX January 1981
1 l-l S-H3
Merrimac Sta-
tion, NH

Salem Harbor
Station, MA
Pittsfield, MA
Middletown
Station,
Middletown, CT




New Bedford,
MA

Mobile
PCB contamin- Thermal
ated mineral
oil

PCB contamin- Thermal
ated mineral
oil
PCB contamin- Thermal
ated mineral
oil
PCB contamin- Thermal
ated mineral
oil




Municipal/ Thermal
Industrial
Sludge con-
taining PCB»
PCB contamin- Chemical
ated waste oil
High effici-
ency utility
boiler

High effici-
ency utility
boiler
Liquid in-
jection
incinerator
High effici-
ency utility
boiler
^



Multiple
hearth incin-
erator

Dech lor i nation
No test burn
scheduled

No test burn
scheduled
Test burn con-
ducted 11/39/81
Test burn con-
ducted 09/61
-





Demonstrated
nationally
Approved 3/3/80.

Approved 12-80. Not interested in pursuing an

Approved to burn fluids with 500 ppm on 8/19/80,
November 1981 test utilized oil with 201 PCBs
Approved as an Annex I incinerator March 4, 1982.
Approved 09/04/80.
Informal inquiry oade to EPA office, No further
action taken.


PCB destruction efficiency testing has been post-
poned indefinately due to equipment funding
problems.

Approved February 1, 1982, for mineral oil

SUNOH10
                 March 1981   Mobile
Pyro-MagneticB    December    Mobile
                 1981
PCB Destruction    12/13/81     Mobile
Coiapa ny
                                                                                     09/09/81
PCB contamin-   Chemical  Dechlorination  Demonstrated
ated waste oil                           nationally
                                        10/24/80

PCB contamin-   Thermal   Incineration
ated waste oil
PCB contamin-   Chemical  Dechlorination
ated waste oil
Nov.  1982 to modify approval to accommodate a
design change  in the system.

Anproved June  1981 tor mineral oil dielectric
fluid's JnT7:—Ho limit on maximuB UllowauTe
Test burn results  received May 11, 1982.   Letter
issued July 9,  1982  qualifying unit as an Annex I
incinerator.  Region will issue site specific
approvals.

Demonstration 3-82 in  Region VII apparently
successful; awaiting additional data.
                                                                     (cont inued)

-------
                                                         TABLE  A-l.    (continued)
IO
Company
PPM, Inc.
Transformer
Consultants,
Division of
S.D. Myers
Transformer
Services, Inc.
Landfill 9
Application Site
Date Location
12/14/81 Mobile
04/05/82 Mobile
06/01/82 Concord, N.H.

Type of Disposal
Waste Method
PCB contamin- Chemical
ated waste oil
PCB contamin- Chemical
ated mineral
Mineral oil Chemical
dielectric
fluid

Process Demonstration
Utilized Plan or Burn
Uechlorinat ion
Dechlorination Demonstration
run conducted
14,15 April
1982 in
Region V
Dechlorination Bench scale
demonstration
16 June 1982

Status
Approved March 26, 1982 for
dielectric fluids only.
Approved November 29, 1982
up to 3000 ppm of PCBs.

mineral oil
for fluids containing
Bench scale demonstration on 1600 ppm waste
successful.


       No landfills approved for PCB disposal in Region I.

-------
                                  TABLE  A-2.    INFORMATION ON  PCB  ACTIVITIES  -  REGION  II
   Company
                  Application      Site
                    Date        Location
                  Type  of
                   Waste
                Disposal
                Method
  Process
  Utilized
Denonat rat ion
Plan or Burn
                                                                                                             Status
Thermal and nontheraal disposal

General Electric               Waterfor



General Electric   12-21-82     Waterford, NY
                PCB contamln-   Thermal
                ated waste  oil
Consolidated
Edison of NY
Alcoa
                  1-80
Ravenswood
Station,
Astoria, NY
                PCB's,  RCRA
                wastes
PCB contamln-
ated waste oil
                               Thermal
                                                              Thermal
                  Feb.  1981    Messina, NY
Atlantic Electric  2-81

Trofe
Ne'w Jersey
Rollins
NEWCO
SUNOHIO
                  April  1981   Mount Laural,
                              NJ
                  May  1981     Bridgeport, NJ
                  7-25-83
                  Spring  1981   Niagara Falls,
                               NY
                  Summer  1981  Mobile
PCB contamln-   Thermal
ated waste oil
PCB contamln-   Thermal
ated solid and
liquid waste
                PCB contamin-
                ated liquids
                and nonllqulds

                PCB contamin-
                ated trans-
                formers
PCB contamin-
ated waste oil
                                         Incineration
                         Rotary Kiln
                         Incineration
High effici-
ency boller
                                         High-effici-
                                         ency boiler
Demonstration   Originally  approved September 1978 for 3 years;
test conducted  Permit  renewei) March 31,  torn fcrj— additional
September 1978  5 years.                           —-—	""

Trial burn in   Annex I Incinerator classification sought,
preparation     meetings  held March 1983, responses to EPA
                questions received 5/18/83, under review.
                Trial Burn  Public Notice  Issued 11-18-83.

                Withdrew  application.
                                                                                                       Application never  completed.
                                                                                                       Informal inquiry.
                                         Mul11 chamber    Awaiting test   Awaiting state  approval and other additional
                                         Incinerator     burn plan       information.
                                                              Thermal    Incineration
                                                         Annex I Incinerator  classification  sought, under
                                                         review.
                Non-      Solvent clean-  Test demonstra- Test protocol,  operations  plan  submitted  11-82.
                thermal    Ing,  batch      tton authorized Region II comments sent  12-82.   Reply  to  corn-
                          distillation    7-20-83         nents received  '3-83,  currently  under review.
                          to  concentrate                  Region II awaiting data  from Phase I testing.
                          residue
                                                              Chemical   DechlorlnatIon  Demonstrated
                                                                                       nat tonally
                                                                                       10-24-80
ACUREX
                  Summer  1981  Mobile
                                              PCB contamln-   Chemical   Dechlorlnation  Demonstrated
                                              ated waste oil                           nationally
                                                                                       09-09-81
                                                                         Approved April  28,  1982,  maximum  allowable PCB
                                                                         concentration Into  reactor-500  ppm.  SUNOHIO
                                                                         on 20 July 1982  requested  modifications to
                                                                         approval to allow processing of fluids with up
                                                                         to 2500 ppm of  PCB.   Approved November 9, 1982
                                                                         for 2500 ppm.

                                                                         Approved April  28,  1982.   Maximum allowable
                                                                         PCB concentration into  reactor-1062  ppm.
                                                                         Design change submitted November  4,  1982,
                                                                         approved 1-83 to allow  wastes with up to
                                                                         7500 ppm of PCBs Into the  reactor.   Approval
                                                                         modified 8-1-83  to  allow  use of DECD as an
                                                                         alternate to THF.
                                                                       (cont inued)

-------
                                      TABLE  A-2.   (continued)
Application Site
Company Date Location
Power Authority Summer 1981
of New York
EPA Mobile October 1981 Mobile
Incinerator
(IT Corp.)
PPM, Inc. Dec. 1981 Mobile
Bengart & Memel, Feb. 1982 South Buffalo,
Inc. NY
Type of
Waste
PCB mineral oil
PCB contamin-
ated waste oil
PCB-contamln-
ated waste oil
200 cubic yards
of PCB conta-
minated soil
Disposal
Method
Thermal
Thermal
Chemical
Nonther-
mal In-
situ
• Process
Utilized
High effi-
ciency utility
boiler
Incinerator
Dechlorina-
tlon
Sodium poly-
ethylene
glycol
(Na PEG)
process
Demonstration
Plan or Burn

Trial burn
conducted
1/3-7/83
Status
No longer Interested.
Trial burn permit Issued July 6, 1982.
Trial burn results received. Indicate a DRE
of 99.99Z. Public notice In preparation.



Authorization Issued 4/26/83 for a maximum PCB
concentration of 1100 ppm.
Test demonstra-
tion scheduled
8-22-83
Results of the NaPEG testing were unfavorable.
A test plan utilizing the KPEC process was
requested. Authorization for test demonstration
Issued 8-15-83. Region II awaiting test results
Niagara Mohawk
Feb.  10,     Syracuse,  NY
1982
PCB-contamln-   Nonther-
ated trans-     mal
former fluids
Requested  research and development status to
study alternative nonthermal  methods of
removing PCBs from transformer  fluids.  Approved
for benchscale testing July  20,  1982.  Pilot
plant authorization issued 6-20-83.
Transformer
Consultants

Puerto Rico
Electric Power
Authority
(PKEPA)
April 1982


June 8,
1982


Mobile


San Juan
Station
Units 8 & 9

PCB contamin-
ated mineral
oil
PCB contamin-
ated mineral
oil

Chemical Dechlorlnat ion


Thermal High effi-
ciency utility
boiler

Authorization Issued 4/26/83 for a maximum PCB
concentration of 3000 ppm for the batch
processand 2100 ppm for the continuous process.
Application Incomplete. Additional data re-
quested July 21, 1982. Inactive.


                                                   (continued)

-------
                                                          TABLE  A-2.    (continued)
Company
Application
Date
Site
Locat (on
Type of
Waste
Disposal
Method
Process
Utilized
Demonstration
Plan or Burn
Status
Long Island        August  8,    Barrett
Lighting Company  1982         Station
(LILCO)                       Unit *2
Gal son
Technical
Services

Marcus
Slttenfleld
Associates

CCA, Inc.
                  February  4,  East Syracuse,
                  1982         NY
April 28,    Farnlngdale,
1983         NY
September    Hato Rey,
13,  1983     Puerto  Rico
                            PCB contain-     Thermal   High effi-
                            Inated mineral            clency utility
                            oil                       boiler

                            PCB contam-     Chemical  DechlorlnatIon
                            Inated soil
                                              PCB contan-     Chemical   Dechlorl nat Ion
                                              ated liquids
                                              PCB contain-     Thermal    Mobile  liquid
                                              Inated liquids            Injection
                                                                        Incinerator
                                                                                      Responded  to EPA comments 2-83.  CO/C(>2
                                                                                      monitoring data received, under review.
                                                                                      Inact1ve.

                                                                                      Authorization  Issued 3/10/83 for bench scale
                                                                                      research  and development.
                                                                                      Pilot  scale  research and development,
                                                                                      Issued 8-10-83.
                                                                                      Informal  Inquiry.
Landfills
CECOS No.  2
CECOS No.  3
CECOS No.  4
CECOS No.  5
                               Niagara Fall
                               NY
                               Niagara Falls,
                               NY
                               Niagara Falls,
                               NY
                               N I aga ra Falls,
                               NY
                                              PCB contamln-   Landfill
                                              ated solids
                                              (capac11 ors,
                                              transformer
                                              bodies, etc.)

                                              PCB contamln-   Landfill
                                              ated liquids,
                                              sludges (50-
                                              500 ppm)

                                              PCB contamln-   Landfill
                                              ated liquids,
                                              sludge (50-
                                              500 ppm)
                             PCB  contamln-
                             ated  liquids,
                             sludge  (50-
                             500  ppm)
                                                              Landfill
                                                                                      Approved August  1978, now closed.
                                                                                      Approved March  1980, open and operating.
                                                                                      Approved  January  1982.
                                                                                      New liner system  In  use.
                                                                                                        Under  review.
                                                                       (cont inued)

-------
                   TABLE  A-2.   (continued)
Company
SCA Chemical
Services No. 7
No. 1U
NY DEC
Hudson River PCB
Project Site
No. 10
NY DEC
Horeau Site
NY DEC
West Glens Falls
Site
NY Dept. of
Transportation
- Buoy 212
- Special
Area 13
Abandoned Landfill
NY DEC/
General Electric
NY DEC/
General Electric
Application Site
Date Location
Model City, NY
Model City, NY
Vicinity of
Fort Edwards,
NY
Horeau, NY
West Glens
Falls, NY
"Off-River"
Hudson Kiver,
New York
Type of
Waste
PCB contamin-
ated solids,
sludges (50-
500 ppm)
FCB contamin-
ated solids,
sludges (50-
500 ppm)
Sediment from
hot spot dred-
ging of Hudson
River
Dredge spoils
Contaminated
soils,
capac itors
Dredge spoils
" Dredge spoils
Sites (Agreements made between NY DEC and
Fort Miller,
NY
6 additional
sites (un~
FCB contamin-
ated solids
PCB contamin-
ated solids
Disposal . Process
Method Utilized
Landfill
Landfill
Landfill
Landfill
Landfill
Landfill
Landfill
Landfill
Landfill
Demonstration
Plan or Burn Status
Approved October 1978, open and operating.
Approved April 27, 1982.
Two phase approval, initial phase under active
consideration. EIS out for comment.
Approved September 1978, one time use landfill,
now closed.
Approved October 1979, one time use landfill, now
closed.
Approved September 1979, one time use landfill,
c losed.
Approved September 1979, one time use landfill,
now closed.
es)
Remedial plans under review, engineering plans
approved, site work to begin Spring 1982.
Remedial plans for all six sites now in prelim-
inary review.
specif led)

-------
TABLE A-3.   INFORMATION ON PCB ACTIVITIES  -  REGION III
Application Site
Company Date Location
Thermal and nonthermal disposal
Continental Can Hopewell, VA
Company


Potomtc Electric 10-09-79 Morgantown
& Power Station, HD

Baltimore Gas & 12-21-79 Crane Station
Electric Chase, MD

Energy Optioi- 04-16-80 Unknown
zat ion Inc .
(EOI)-I
EOI-II 03-03-81 Branchton, PA

EO1-III 06/fll PIttsburg, PA

Acurex 01-29-81 Mobile




Pennsylvania O2/81 Montour Sta-
Power & Light tlon, PA

Best Ltd. 03-19-81 Mobile








Type of Disposal
Waste Method

PCB contamfn- Thermal
ated waste oil


PCB contamln- Thermal
ated waste oil

PCB contamin- Thermal
ated waste oil

PCB contamin- Thermal
ated waste oil

PCB contain! n- Thermal
ated waste oj 1
PCB contamin- Thermal
ated waste oil
PCB contamin- Chemical
ated trans-
former oil


PCB contamin- Thermal
ated trans-
former oil
PCB contamin- Thermal
ated waste oil







Process Demonstration
Utilized Plan or Burn

l.lme Kiln,
high effici-
ency indus-
trial boiler
High effi-
ciency utility
holler
High effi-
ciency ut 1 1 Ity
boiler
Diesel engine


l.lme kiln
1 ncinerat Ion
Cement kiln

Dechlorinat ion Demonstrated
nationally
09-09-81


High effi-
ciency utility
boiler
Mobile rotary Pilot scale
kiln incin- Test Plan
erator received-No
date set





Status

EPA conducted emis-
sion testing on lime
kiln and power
boilers In 1976.
Approved.


Approved
-

Approved 01-20-fil .
Withdrawn

Withdrawn

Withdrawn

Approved 3-26-82 for a
Maximum concentration
Into reactor of 1062 ppm.
Approved 11-9-82 for a maximum
concentration of 7500 ppm.
Company reviewing
disposal options

Approved for test
burn 07-15-81.
Awa 1 t 1 ng site
approval from state.
Test burn will be joint
Headquarters and Region
effort, with Headquarters
taking lead role. Test plan
sent to HQ on 12-1-83.
                               (cont1nued)

-------
                                              TABLE A-3.   (continued)
Application Site
Company Date Location
Franklin Instl- 05-28-81 Philadelphia,
tutes/Phlladel- PA
phla Electric






General Electric 05-29-81 Phlladephla,
PA





SUNOHIO 09-11-81 Mobile
(Canton, OH)





SUNOHIO 7-23-82 Jeannette, PA


Type of
Waste
PCB contamin-
ated trans-
former oil






PCB contamin-
ated trans-
former oil




PCB contamin-
ated trans-
former oi 1




PCB contamin-
ated heat
transfer fluid
Disposal Process Demonstration
Method Utilized Plan or Burn
Chemical Dechlor inat ion Pilot scale
demonstration
successful ly
conducted
April 21, 1982
on 7406 ppm
waste


Chemical Dechlorl nation Pilot scale
demonstration
successfully
conducted
May 14, 1982
on 1050 ppo
wast e
Chemical Dechlortnat Ion Demonstrated
PCBx process successfully
at 192 ppm In
Region V
10/24/80


Chemical Dechlori nat Ion Test cond-
(PCBx process) ducted 1-18-83

Status
Approved for pilot
disposal study
09-25-81.
Approved 9-28-82
for 7406 ppm at
reactor. A
modification gent to
Headquarters for
approval.
Approved for pilot
disposal study
09-25-81.
Approved 9-28-82
for 1050 ppm at
reactor .

Approved 5-6-82 for
maximum allowable
PCB concentration
at reactor of
500 ppm. Approved
9-9-82 for 2500 ppm
at reactor.
One-time R&D test
approved 12-14-82.
Based on test result
Chemical
DecontamtnatIon
Corporat ion
(formerly  Life
EnterpriseB  Inc.)
 09-24-81    Mobile          PCB contamin-
 08-20-82    (Douglassvllle, ated trans-
(revised)    PA)             former  oil
                                           Chemical  Dechi orInatIon
Demonst rat ion
runs conduo t ed
11-3-82,
11-17-82
4-15-83
approval granted
3-21-83 for up to
4500 ppm PCBs In
Thermlnol-55 heat
transfer fluid
and MODF.

Approved 9-23-82  for
small pilot study
R&D.  Second R&D
test series success-
ful on 25  gallons
of fluid contamin-
ated with  4179 ppm
of PCBs.  Company
applied to Head-
quarters for a
demonstration per-
mit.  Anticipated
demonstration run
12-15-83.
                                                       (cont inued)

-------
                                             TABLE A-3.   (continued)
CT)
Appllcat Ion
Company Date
PPM, Inc. 12-14-81




Transformer 04-05-82
Consultants,
Division of
S.D. Myers




Atlantic 9-9-83
Ke search Corp.
LandfilU
Brown, Boverl 8-19-82
Electric Company



Goodyear Tire 4 9-14-82
Rubber Company


Site Type of
Location Waste
Mobile PCB contamin-
(Overland ated waste oil
Park, KS)


Mobile PCB contamin-
ated mineral
oil





Alexandria, PCB material
VA.

Philadelphia PCB contamln-
PA ated concrete
slab and
contaminated
soil
Point PCB contamln-
Pleasant, W.VA ated soil


Disposal Process Demonstration
Method Utilized Plan or Burn
Chemical Dechlorinat ion Demonstration
run scheduled
late May 1982.


Chemical Dechlorinat Ion Demonstration
conducted
April 14-15,
1982
Stow, Ohio



Proprle- Proprietary
tary

Landfill Variance from
drumming during
transportation
(bulk shipment)

Landfill Encapsulation



Status
Approval issued
4-28-83 for maximum
allowable PCB
concentration at
reactor of 1100 ppm.
Approval Issued
5-26-83 for maximum
allowable PCB
concentrations of
3000 ppm for the
batch process and
2100 ppm for the
continuous process.
R&D project,
approved 11-30-83.

Company completed
95X of work by mid-
September, remainder
to be completed by
1st quarter 1984.
Proposal under
review. EPA com-
ments sent to
company 5-9-83.

-------
                                    TABLE A-4.    INFORMATION  ON  PCB ACTIVITIES  -  REGION  IV
   Company
                  Application      Site
                    Date         Location
                             Type of
                              Waste
                Disposal     Process       Demonstration
                 Method      Utilized      Flan or Burn
                                                                                          Status
Thermal and  nonthermal disposal

Florida Power  &               Sanford, FA
  Light
                                              Undiluted
                                              askarel (60-
                                              100% PCB)
                                                              Thermal
                                                     High effici-
                                                     ency ut 111ty
                                                     boiler
Tennessee         March  1979   Klngsport, TN   PCB contamln-
  Eastoan Co.                                  ated waste oil
SUNOHIO
                 March  1981   Mobile
                                              PCB contamin-
                                              ated waste oil
Duke Power Co.     May  1981
TVA-Widow' s
  Creek
            Rlverbend  Sta-  PCB contamln-
            tion,  NC        ated mineral
                           oil
                Thermal    High effi-
                          ciency coal-
                          fired indus-
                          trial boiler

                Chemical   Dechlorlna-
                          tion PCBx
                          process

                Thermal    High effl-
                          ency boiler
06/10/81    Bridgeport, AL  PCB contamin-
                           ated waste oil
                                         Test burn con-  PCB destruction efficiency  s<*9.99t.
                                         ducted 5/26/76
                                                                                       Test conducted  PCB destruction  efficiency  -99.7t.
                                                                                       11/5-9/7"       Facility Inspected  by Region IV In July 1981.
                                                                                                       approved and In  compliance.


                                                                                       Nationally      Approved,  April  1981.  Process Demonstrated at
                                                                                       demonstrated    TVA,  Muscle Shoals, Alabama, 12-14-81.
                                                                                       10-24-80        No PCB concentration limit.

                                                                                       Test burn       Test  results received.  PCB destruction
                                                                                       conducted 10-81 efficiency >99.92 percent.
                Thermal    High effi-      Test burn
                          clency coal-    conducted
                          fired utility   11-15-81
                          boiler
                                                                                                       Test results  sent  to EPA  headquarters.
Chemical Waste
  Management
  M.T. Vulcanus
Acurex
           Mobile-
           Offshore
           Mobile, AL
                  July  1981    Mobile
PCB contamln-   Thermal    Liquid Injec-   Demonstration   Federally-approved  under  Ocean  Protection Act.
ated waste oil             tlon  Incln-     burn at sea,    On-shore storage facility inspected  by  Region  IV
                          erator          week of         Two more trips scheduled.   Final  approval pend-
                                         12-14-81        Ing reevaluatlon of test  burn data.

PCB contamln-   Chemical   Dechlorlnation  Demonstrated    Approval issued June 4,  1982.
ated waste oil                            nationally
                                         09-09-81
Louisville        August  1981  Cane Run
Oas & F.lectrlc
                           PCB contamln-
            Statlon         ated mineral
            Louisville, KV  oil
                Thermal   High efficiency
                         boiler
Pyro-Magnetlcs,     10-16-81    Tullahoma, TN   PCB contamin-   Thermal    Incinerator
  Corp.
FBI, Inc.
                           ated waste oil
                           (PCBs 50* by
                           weight)

12-14-81     Atlanta, CA     PCB contamin-
                           ated waste oil
                                         Pilot burns
                                         conducted
                                         12-09-81,
                                         March 1982
                                                              Chemical   DechlorlnatIon
                                                                                                       Approved (submlttal  acknowleged)  8-81.
                                                                                                       Process acceptable  but  site specific approvals
                                                                                                       requlred.
                                                                                                       Approved March 1,  1982.
                                                                       (cont 1 nued )

-------
                                                              TABLE  A-4.    (continued)
00
Application Site
Company Date Location
American 02/82 Jacksonville,
Environmental PL
Protection Corp.
Transformer 05-07-82 Mobile
Consultants
Florida Power - Gainesville,
f. Light FL
(Gainesville
Regional
Utilities)
Georgia Power
& Light
SED 04-26-82 Greensboro,
NC
General Electric 9-8-82
Carolina 11-12-82 Cape Fear
Power & Light Station
Moncure, NC
Franklin 02-1O-82
Inst 1 tutes
Landfills
Chemical Waste 1977 Emelle, AL
Management
Warren County, 12/78 Warren County
NC PCB site, NC
Type of Disposal Process Demonstration
Waste Method Utilized Plan or Burn
PCB-contamln- Thermal Incinerator
ated waste oil
PCB-contamln- Chemical Dechlorlnat Ion
ated mineral
oil


PCB capacitors Median- Shredding
leal wi th ex-
t rac t ion
PCB-contamin- Chemical Sodium
ated trans- (NaPEC)
former oil
PCB contamln- Thermal High effi-
ated mineral clency boiler
oil
PCB contamln- Chemical Sodium
ated mineral (NaPEC)
oil
Solids, Landfill
liquids (50-
500 ppm PCB)
PCB spill Landfill
material
Status
Withdrew application.
Approved November 23, 1982.
Inquiry made, will be submitting formal
, notification.
Inquiry made, no formal notification given.
Approved June 29, 1982 as alternate dis-
posal for capacitors; liquid/liquid extrac-
tion used to remove (but not destroy) PCBs.
Approval Imminent.
Approved (submittal acknowledged) 12-82.
Under review.
Initial site approval 1978, 5 PCB cells, each
cell approved Individually; 2 cells now closed
3 cells active (approved 12-80)
One-time landfill of PCB spill material,
original approval Ofi-79, contested In court,
resolved In 1981, final approval 12-11-81.
        Sagamo Electric    10/79     Plckene, SC    PCB contamln-   Landfill
                                                 ated sol 1
Approved August  1980 - One-time landfill of
spill material.

-------
                                    TABLE A-5.    INFORMATION  ON  PCB ACTIVITIES  -  REGION  V
Application Site
Company Date Location
Thermal and Nonthermal Disposal
Peerless Ceaent Detroit, HI
Company
Merlin Assoc./ 05-03-79 Kanka, IL
Envl recycle
Corp. (now owned
by Genstar Con-
servation Sys-
tems Inc.)
Type of Disposal Process
Waste Method Utilized
PCB contamln- Thermal Cement kiln
ated waste oil
PCB contamln- Thermal Incinerator
ated waste oil
Demonstration
Plan or Burn Status
EPA-sponsored destruction efficiency test in
1978. Facility applied for approval In 1980,
then withdrew application.
Under review, awaiting construction completion.
Estimated completion date Is unknown.
SUNOHIO (A)
SUNOHIO (B)
Illinois Power
Company


Acurex (A)
Acurex (B)
Acurex
Acurex
 05-16-80    Mobile
 (To OPTS)
                   03-29-82
 02-06-81
                              Mobile
                   06-18-80    Baldwin, IL
                              Mobile
PCB contamln-   Chemical  Detoxification  Second demon-
ated waste oil            PCBx process    at rat ion run
                                         scheduled
                                         5-11-82
                            PCB contamln-   Chemical  Detoxification
                            ated waste oil            PCBx process
PCB contamln-   Thermal   High effi-      PCB burn
ated mineral             ciency utility  conducted
oil                                      11-21-80

PCB contamln-   Chemical  Detoxification  Demonstrated
ated waste oil                            nationally
                                         09-09-81
                   08-01-81    Cincinnati,  OH  PCB capacitors
                  11-22-82     Mobile
                                              PCB contamln-   Chemical  Detoxification  Demonstration
                                              ated waste oil                            run  conducted
                                                                                       2/14-16/83
12-13-82      Cincinnati,OH   PCB contamln-   Chemical  DechlorlnatIon
                            ated soils

12-13-82      Klngsbuck, IN   Polygone pro-   Chemical  Dechlorlnatlon
                            prletary
                            solvent
Approved 4-13-82,  maximum allowable PCB concen-
tration Into reactor-500 ppm.  Approved 7-14-82
for maximum concentration of 2500 ppm.  Approved
for 4500 ppm and for  additional types of PCB
contaminated fluids,  5-6-83.

Research and development on PCBx process,
debug, fine-tune new  mobile units, approved
4-13-82.  R&D report  received  5-9-83.  Extension
for additional R&D requested,  approved 7-1-83.
Modification to the extension  approved 10-3-83.

Stop burn order Issued  03-10-81 due to waste oil
storage uncertainties,  issue resolved 05-25-81
Approved 3-2-82,  maximum  allowable PCB concen-
tration Into reactor-1062 ppm.  Approval amended
5-6-83 to allow up to  7500 ppm when THF is used,
1300 ppm when DECD Is  used.

Research and development  project to decontaminate
PCB capacitors.  Approved 12-30-81.

Research and development  process optimization,
approved 1-13-83, demonstration results received
3-10-83.

Research and development  of  soils decontamina-
tion, bench scale, approved  3-8-83.

Research and development, joint venture with
Polygone Corp., Approved  3-9-83, request for R&D
extension received 7-1-83
                                                                      (continued)

-------
TABLE  A-5.   (continued)
Company
General Motors
Corp. Chevrolet
Division
Metropolitan
Sewer District
PCB eliminators,
Inc.
Otter Tall
Power Company
Goodyear Tire
& Rubber Co.
Transformer
Consultants
Transformer
Consultants
Polygone Corp,
Polygone Corp.
Pyro-Magnetlcs
Corp.
Columbus &
Southern Ohio
Edison
Application Site
Date Location
05-01-81 Bay City, MI
06-22-81 Cincinnati, OH
08-10-81 Mobile
10-01-81 Fergus Falls,
MM
10-13-81 Akron, Ohio
10-15-81 Akron, OH
10-09-82 Akron, OH
10-28-81 Warrenvllle,
IL
12-13-82 KtngBbury, IN
11-03-81 Laporte, IN
5-80
Type of
Waste
PCB contamin-
ated waste oil
PCB contamin-
ated waste oil
PCB contamin-
ated mineral
oil and dielec-
tric fluid
PCB contamin-
ated mineral
oil
PCB contamin-
ated waste oil
PCB contamin-
ated waste oil
PCB contamin-
ated waste oil
PCB contamin-
ated waste oil
PCB contamin-
ated hydraulic
fluids
PCB contamin-
ated waste oil

Disposal
Method
Thermal
Thermal
Chemical
Thermal
Chemical
Chemical
Chemical
Chemical
Chemical
Thermal

Process
Utilized
High effi-
ciency oil-
fired indus-
trial boiler
High effi-
ciency indus-
trial boiler
Detoxification
High effi-
ciency utility
boiler
Detoxification
Detoxification
Detoxification
Detoxification
Solvent
extraction
Mobile
incinerator

Demonstration
Plan or Burn
Verification
burn conducted
05-80
Requested
trial burn
plan 7/20/81
Requested
trial run plan
09-11-81


Test run con-
ducted in
Stow, Ohio
14-15 April
1982.



Pilot burn
2-7 March 1982
Tullahoma, TN

Statua
Approval issued 07-10-81.
Reconsidering due to public opposition.
Awaiting additional information, bench scale test
conducted in Region VII. Company has apparently
been dissolved per Region VII.
Approved 11-04-81.
Amended authorization conditions Issued 12-10-81.
Approved 10-30-81. Research and development
project.
Approved 11-02-81. Research and development
project. Approved for extension of R&D work
5-28-82, test report received.
Approved 11-29-82.
R&D process optimization, approved 12-15-82.
Request for R&D extension received 4-27-83,
approved 6-29-83.
Approved 11-24-81. Bench scale research project.
Report submitted 6-25-83.
Approved 1-14-83, R&D report requested 2-22-83,
submitted 6-25-83, request for R&D extension
received 7-1-83, approved 7-25-83, plan for pro-
cess demonstration received 10-12-83, additional
data requested 11-14-83.
Trial burn report received. Draft approval con-
ditions and technical findings completed.
Approved 12-17-82.
Informal Inquiry.
      (continued)

-------
                                                           TABLE  A-5.   (continued)
Company
Northern States
Power Company
PCB Destruction
Company


Dowzer Electric
Company





Application Site
Date Location
12-18-81 Minneapolis
MN
12-14-81 Kansas City,
MS


01-07-82 Mount Vernon,
IL





Type of Disposal
Waste Method
PCB transformer Thermal
fluids
PCB contamln- Chemical
ated waste oil


PCB contamin- Chemical
ated waste oil





Process
Utilized
High effici-
ency boiler
Mobile
detoxl f Icat ion


Detoxification
(Goodyear
process)




Demonstration
Plan or Burn


Demonst ration
run conducted
in Region VII
25 March 1982
Test run on
10-5-82
unsuccessful .
Second run .
4-5-83.


Status
Approved 1-8-82.

Under review. Second test run requested.
Inactive.


Research and development project approved
2-21-82. Approval renewed 4-4-83, test plan
approved 9-16-82, second test plan approved
1-4-83. Second test run successful, third R&D
approval requested 5-10-83, process approved for
commercial application 7-7-83, maximum allowable
PCB concentration 450 ppm.
PPM-PCB
Management
Transformer
Service, Inc. (A)'
Transformer
Service, Inc. (B)
01-11-82
04-22-82
05-17-82
Kansas
MS
Akron,
Akron,
City,
Ohio
Ohio
PCB contamin-
ated waste oil
PCB contamin-
ated waste oil
Mineral oil
dielectric
fluid
Chemical
Chemical
Chemical
Mobile
detoxl f Icat I on
Mobile
detoxl f Icat 1 on
Detoxification
CHEM Oil
Corpora tIon
RTE Corp.
                   06-17-82
                   06-21-82
Midland-Ross       06-28-82
Transformer (A)    8-2-82
Recovery
                               Warren, Ohio
                               Waukesha,
                               Wl scon si n
                              Toledo, Ohio
Brighton, MI
               Mineral oil
               dielectric
               fluid
                                                              Chemical   Detoxification
Mineral oil     Chemical   Detoxification
dielectric
fluid

Solid PCB       Thermal    Pyrolysls
contaminated
material

PCB contamln-   Chemical   Dechlorlnat1 on
ated mineral
oil
                                                                                                       Approved 2-18-83 for 1100  ppm.
                                                                                                       Inactive.
Bench scale research  and  development project
approved 8-5-82.   Request  for  extension approved
12-3-82.  R4D report  received  2-25-83, request
for additional  R&D extension 2-28-83, approved
4-14-83.  Report  submitted  7-29-83.  3rd R4D
extension received 9-23-83, denied 11-21-83.

Research and development  project.  Approved
9-3-82.   R&D report received 3-30-83, R&D
extension approved 4-21-83.  Request for
additional R&D  extension  received 9-12-83,
approved 10-24-83.

Research and development  project, approved
6-28-82.  Final R&D report  received  1-26-83.
                                                                                                       Research and  development  project, approved
                                                                                                       7-16-82.
                                                                                                       Inact1ve.
                                                                       (cont inued)

-------
                                                                   TABLE  A-5.    (continued)
Company
Application
Date
Site
Location
Type of
Waste
Disposal
Method
Process
Utilized
Demonstration
Plan or Burn
Status
        Transformer  (B)   8-2-82
        Recovery
         U.S.  Transformer  8-2-82
         General  Electric  9-8-82
Brighton,  MI    Capacitors
                                Chemical   Decontamination
                                       Jordan, MN      PCB contaml-    Chemical   Decontamination
                                                       nated mineral
                                                       oil
                                       Mobile          PCB contamln-   Chemical   Catalyzed
                                       Schenectady,    ated mineral              sodium detox-
                                       NY              oil                       Iflcatlon
                                                                         Research and development project, approved
                                                                         10-8-82.  Submitted test report 12-2-82.
                                                                         Submitted additional test results 4-15-83,
                                                                         request for R&D extension received 6-21-83,
                                                                         approved 7-19-83.

                                                                         Research and development project, approved
                                                                         9-1-82.  EPA requested status report 10-11-83,
                                                                         company responded, say no work had been
                                                                         conducted.

                                                                         Additional Information requested, 10-18-82,
                                                                         1 nac 11 ve.
ISi
ro
         SCA Chemical  (A)   9-2-82
         Services
         Pollution  Science 9-15-82
         International
         Hoosler  Energy,    10-13-82
         Inc.
         Excell,  Inc.
         Dow Corning
         Corp.
                           11-10-82
Chicago, IL     PCB contamln-    Thermal    Incineration     5  test  burns
                ated waste oil                             conducted
                PCB capacitors                             Sept. 30 -
                                                          Oct.  7, 1982
Glen Coe, IL    PCB contamln-   Thermal    Stripping
                ated sediments
Bloomlngton,     PCB contamln-   Thermal    High efficiency
IN              ated dlelec-              boiler
                trie fluid

Cincinnati, OH  PCB contamln-   Thermal    Molten  salt
                ated oil
                           11-12-82     Midland, MI
         Energystlcs,  Inc.  7-15-83      Toledo, OH
                PCB contamin-    Physical  Absorption
                ated silicon
                fluids

                PCB contamln-    Thermal   Plasma Jet
                ated oil                  Incineration
Trial burn plan approved 9-16-82.
Test burn results received 3-15-83 draft
approval, public notice draft  approved
6-1-83, public meeting held 8-11-83,
approved 9-26-83.

Research and development project,  approved
10-18-82.  Request  for R&D extension  received
5-31-83, approved 6-24-83.

Approved (submlttal acknowledged)  12-7-82.
Research and development project, approved
4-21-83.  Request for R&D extension received
8-21-83, approved 9-14-83.

Bench scale, approved 3-2-83.   Request for R&D
extension received 7-27-83,  approved 8-22-83.
                                                                                                                 Additional data  requested  7-26-83, submitted
                                                                                                                 7-29-83,  approved 9-14-83.
                                                                                (cont1nued)

-------
                                                                   TABLE  A-5.    (continued)
           Company
                          Application
                             Date
                                   Site
                                 Location
  Type of
   Waste
Disposal
 Method
Process
Utilized
Demonstration
Plan or Burn
                                                                                                              Status
        Landfills
        Clermont Envi-
        ronmental Re-
        clamation Co.

          No. 3
                   07-26-78    Wllllamspurg,    Chemical
                               OH
                                                                      Landfill
                                                                                                                Approved  09-28-78.  Now closed.
ro
U>
   Nos.  4/5         02-04-80    WIlllamsburg,    Chemical
                               OH

   Nos.  6-17        03-25-81    WUllamsburg,    Chemical
                               OH

 Allis Chalmers     02-17-81    Appleton, WI    Chemical
        Tecumseh Prod.
        John Sexton
        Contractors
        TRW
        Madlson
        Metropolitan
        Sewage District
Chemical Waste
Management
                           04-07-81    Sheboygan       Chemical
                                       Falls,  WI
                                                                      Landfill
                                                                      Landfill
                Landfill   Sodium  Poly-
                          ethylene  gly-
                          colate
                          (NaPEG) process

                Landfill
                   08-28-81    Des Plalnes, IL PCB contamin-    Landfill
                                               ated dredge
                                               materials
                           06-20-83   Minerva,  OH     Chemical
                           08-1-83     Madison, WI
                          11-9-83      Vlckery, OH
                                               Municipal
                                               sludge
                                                                      Landfill
                                                                      Landfill
PCB contaml-    Landfill
nated solids
                                                         Approved 05-0°-80, nearly filled  and  closure  Is
                                                         c omme nr 1 ng.

                                                         Approved 07-31-81.
                                                                                                                Test  of  NaPEC  Process approved 09-09-81.
                                                                                                                Approval  expired 3-82.
                                                         On-slte one time disposal, approved
                                                         6-24-82.

                                                         Approved 10-13-81.  Request for variance from
                                                         conditions of approval rec. 11-25-81.  Dredging
                                                         will not take place, approval will expire.

                                                         Additional data requested 8-9-83.  Partial res-
                                                         ponse 9-2-83, meeting to  be held 12-83.

                                                         Request for alternate disposal status, PCB
                                                         hot  spots  >50 ppm, memo sent to EPA Head-
                                                         quarters 9-6-83 requesting Involvement,
                                                         HQ  Is reviewing submittal.

                                                         On-site one  time  disposal, under  review.

-------
                          TABLE A-6.   INFORMATION  ON PCS ACTIVITIES - HEADQUARTERS
INJ
Application Site Type of
Coapany Date Location Waste
Disposal Process Denonst ration
Method Utilized Plan or Burn
EPA headquarters aBBuaed responsibility for approving facilities or disposal technologies that operate
the Federal Register, Volume 48. No. 62, Wednesday, March 30, 1983, 40 CFR Part 761.
Glenn Kuntz, Team Leader (202) 382-2326
Jared Flood 382-3990
Leo Kokoszka 382-3937
Pyrotech Systems Habile
Inc.
Zengo, Inc. 1-11-84 Habile
Best Ltd. Habile
Electro Habile
Petroleum
Oil Purifi-
cation Systems,
Inc.
Sunohlo
Transformer
Consultants
PPM, Inc.
CE
Franklin
Institutes

Thermal Incinerator
Thermal Incinerator
Thermal Incinerator
Thermal Incinerator
Chemical
Chemical
Chemical
Chemical
Chemical
Chemical
Status
in more than one region on April 29, 1983, per,
Ltr of deficiencies sent 12-23-83.
Ltr sent 2-22-84 requesting additional Info.
Ltr of deficiencies sent 2-10-84.
Demo, plan being prepared.
Ltr of deficiencies sent 1-25-84.
Region X permit extended 1-84, awaiting demo
plan.
No nationwide permit application received.
No nationwide permit application received.
Ltr sent 1-30-84 stating existing permits
expire 12-31-84, giving guidelines for
new demo.
Research permit extended 12-83.

-------
TABLE A-6.   (continued)



ro
Ol
Application Site
Company Date Location
Atlantic
Research
Acurex
Chemical
Decontamination
Corp.

Type of Disposal Process
Waste Method Utilized
Light
Activated
Chemical
Chemical


Demonstration
Plan or Burn Status
Demo plan received 2-8-84.
Ltr sent 2-17-84 detailing
additional data on demo.
Response to deficiency Itr
manual received 2-27-84.




data needst awaiting
t revised operating



-------
                                     TABLE  A-7.    EPA  REGIONAL  OFFICE  AND   TECHNICAL  ASSISTANCE   CONTACTS
                                                                                           REGIONS   I-X
                                                                                                                                    AT
                           Region/Address
                                                                                      Telephone No.    legion/Address
ro
en
U.S. IPA, Region  I     Paul Heffernan
John P. Kennedy Bldg.
BOOB 2303             Chuck Lincoln
•oston, HA  02203
                      Toa Hlrhel
                                                                     Air H«n«geBent
                                                                     Air Hartflgeaent
                                                                                      (617)  223-7740

                                                                                      (617)  223-1916
                                                                                                      U.S. EPA, lesion VI
                                                                                                      1201 tl« Street
                                                                                                      DalUi, TX  75270
                           U.S. EPA.  Region II
                           Mderal  Office Bldg.
                           24 P«4«r*l PUta
                           •en for*.  NY  10007
                      John Brogard
                      Barrett Salth
                      Jerry HcKcan*
                                          Air  4 U*»
                                          Air  4 Us*
                                          Eov. Scrw
                                                 Dan Kraft
                                                 Herman Phi 11Ips
          e  Hgat
          e  Hgat
                           U.S.  EPA, Region III    Edward Cohen
                           Curtl*  Building
                           Slith 4 Walnut Streets Christopher Pllla
                           Philadelphia, PA 19106
                                                 Nlrhael Vacraro
                                          Env. Si
                                          Public Attereneaa
                                          Environmental
                                          Service*
                                          Environmental
                                          Service*
(212)
(212)
(201)
(201)
(?OI)
(212)
2637
1467
                                                                                               6667
                                                                                               6667
                                                                                                 Jla Sales
                                                                                                 •.egtonal rCB
                                                                                                 Coordinator

                                                                                                 Marl In Allen
l.arry Thoaias
Regional  Toxic
Coordinator

Phi 1  Sthwlndl
                                                                       Technical  Sect Ion
                                                                       Air 4 Waste
                                                                       Hanageawnt Dlvlalon

                                                                       Technical  Section
                                                                       Alr 4 Uaete
                                                                       Hanageaient Dlwlsi on
                                                                       Peatlcldes 4  Toxic
                                                                       Substance* Branch
                                                                                                                 Knvlrunaenlal
                                                                                                                 Services Division
Telephone No


(214) 767 B94I



(Z14) 7far-894l


(214) 7t>7 271*



(214) 76/-27Z7
                                                                                                      U.S. EPA, Region VII
                                                                                                      324 Kail Nth Street
                                                                                                    Kansa* Cltyt HI  64106
                                                                                                                           Marvin Frye
                                                                                                                                            Toxic 4 Pesticide*   (616) 174-30)6
                                                 X.K. Wu
                                                                    Envlronaental
                                                                    Service*
(215) i»)-;668

(2li) 597-46SI


(215) 597-/681





Denvtr, CO B0203
Regional PCB
Coord 1 nal»r


Regional PCB
Coordlnat or
Section



Branch







                                                                                                 Dean Ulllaa
                                                                                                 Regional Toxic
                                                                                                 Coordinator
                                                                                                                                            Toxic Substance*
                                                                                                                                            Branch
                                                                                                                                                               (303) 817-3926
U.S.  IPA, Region IV    Ralph  Jennings
J*5 Court Iand, NV      Regional Toilca 4
Atlaata. ti*   30365     PCB Coordinator

                      Don Hunter
                                                 Howard Zeller

                                                 Constant e All im,

                                                 .'a«e* Finger

                                                 fr.n,I. Rrdaan
U.S.  EPA, Region V     Y.  J. Kla
230 S.  Dearborn St.
Chicago,  IL  60604     BUI Huno
                                                                    Air 4 Wacte
                                                                    Hanageaent
                                          Enforreaxnt

                                          Air 4 Uaate
                                          Hanageaent
                                          Survel1 lance
                                          4 Analysis
                                          Public Airarenea*
                                                                                      (404) 881-3933
                                                                                                      U.S. KPA, Region IX    I
                                                                                                      215 Freannt St reel
                                                                                                      San Pranctcro,  CA 94105
                                                                                                                            aymond Seld
                                                           (404)

                                                           (404)

                                                           (404)

                                                           (404)
Uaate Hanageaent

Waste Hanageaent
                                                                                      (312)

                                                                                      (312)
         2211

         1864

         3116

         3004


         1428

         6136
                                                                                                                 Toxlr and Uaate
                                                                                                                 Hanageaent Branch
                                                                       Office of  Technical
                                                                       6 Sclent IfIc
                                                                       Assistance
                                 U.S. EPA,  Region X
                                 1200 6th Avenue
                                 Seattle, UA 98101
                                                                            t Hanageaent
                            Roger Client es
                            Regional PCB
                            Coordinator
                            Jla Everts
                            Regional Toxic
                            Coordinator
                                                                                                                                           Waste Hanageaent
                                                                                                                                           Branch
                                                                                                                 Penslts 4
                                                                                                                 Compliance Branch
                                    (415)  974-8189




                                    (*15)  974-8192




                                    (206)  442-2728


                                    (206)  4*2-1^54


                                    (206)  442- 1090
                            ror tfthnlcal assistance and review of disposal  technology please contact:
                            US. (PA,  Reqion I-V
                            GtA forporatton
                            Brdford. HA
                            •Ob Mclnnes   (6)7) ?;
                                               U.S. ePA, fleqton Vt-X
                                               Radian Corporation
                                               Research Irlanqlf Park,  Mf
                                               Rad Adams  (919) 641-9100
                            Mhe first  contact listed  for each Region Is the  primary contact for information
                            contained  in  this report.

-------
                      REGIONAL SUMMARIES:  REGIONS I-V
REGION I - PAUL HEFFERNAN

    Region I has requested the use of GCA technical assistance in the PCB
destruction efficiency testing of the New Bedford Municipal Sewage Sludge
Incinerator.  This request is under consideration.  Other than this there has
been essentially no PCB related activity in the region since the last update.

REGION II ^- JOHN BROGARD,--3'

    A public notice for the trial burn to be conducted on the General Electric
Company Annex I Incinerator was issued on November  18, 1983.  Phase I testing
on the NEWCO Project has been completed and Region  II is awaiting a test
report.  Trial burn results from the EPA Mobile Incinerator indicate a
destruction and removal efficiency in excess of 99.99%.  A public notice  for
approval of this unit is being prepared.  Region  II is awaiting test results
from Bengart & Memel on the test demonstration of their soil decontamination
process.  One informal inquiry was received from  CCA, Inc. on a mobile  liquid
injection incinerator, however, no formal documentation has yet been provided.

REGION  III - ED COHEN

    A test plan was received  from Best Ltd, on  their mobile  incinerator.   This
plan was forwarded to Headquarters.  Chemical Decontamination Corporation has
applied to Headquarters for a demonstration permit  for  their  chemical
dechlorination process.  The  demonstration run  is tentatively scheduled for
December 15.  A new submittal was received by Atlantic  Research  Corporation
 for a proprietary  process research and development  project.   This  submittal
was approved on November  30,  1983.  Work  on the  Brown  Boveri  Company  landfill
was 95  percent complete by mid  September, with  the  remainder  to  be  completed
 by early 1983.

 REGION  IV - RALPH JENNINGS

     There has  been essentially  no PCB  related activity in the Region  since the
 last  update.   No  new  submittals were received during the  past three months and
 no approvals were granted to  active  submittals.
                                      27

-------
REGION V - BILL MUNO

    A modification to the SUNOHIO research and development submittal was
approved by the region on October 3,  1983.  The Polygone Corporation submitted
a plan for a process demonstration of their solvent extraction process  on
October 12,  1983.   Region V  has  requested  additional data.   A third extension
request was  received from Transformer Service on September 23, 1983 and this
request was  denied on November 21,  1983.   The Chem Oil Corporation requested
an extension to their R&D approval  on September 12, 1983 and this request was
approved October 24,  1983.   The  SCA Annex  I Incinerator was approved for PCS
disposal on  September 26, 1983.   A  request for an R&D approval extension was
received from Excell on August 21,  1983  and approved by the region on
September 14, 1983.   Similarly,  an  R&D approval extension for Dow Corning was
approved on  August 22,  1983. The Energystics Plasma Jet Incineration
submittal was approved by the region  on  September 14, 1983.  A submittal from
U.S. Transformer has been inadvertently  left off the list.  This application,
for a chemical decontamination process research and development project was
initially approved September 1,  1982. In  November 1983, Region V requested a
status report on the project, and U.S. Transformer responded by stating that
no work had  been conducted on the project.  Relative to landfills, Region V
plans to meet with TRW concerning the company's submittal.  The Madison
Metropolitan Sewage District submittal was forwarded to Headquarters for
review and comment,  while a  new  submittal  for a chemical waste management
landfill is  currently_,jinde£j:eview.

             <^^~~~~~~~
HEADQUARTERS 4 JARED FLOOD

     No new submittals have  been received  by Headquarters  since the last
update and no approvals have been issued for the applications currently in
house.
                                      28

-------
                   APPENDIX B





REPORT ON PCB ACTIVITIES AND POLICIES - VOLUME 12



                (EPA REGIONS VI-X)
                       29

-------
 PCB TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE CONTRACT REPORT       •   Report on PCB Activities
 EPA Regions VI - X                                and Policies
 December  1, 1983         Office of Pesticides and           Volume 12
                             Toxic Substances
 Introduction
     This is the twelfth in a series of reports designed to inform
 responsible Headquarters,  Laboratory and Regional Office personnel of
 PCB-related activities in  the U.S. EPA Regions VI-X.  Together with a
companion report  for  Regions  I-V  (Appendix  A),  it will  serve  to  update
the current  status of all  regional  actions  related to  implementation  of
the PCB disposal  regulations  (40  CFR 761).

 Permit Activities
     The current status of all  thermal and nonthermal  PCB destruction
 activities in Region VI through Region X are reported in Tables B-l
 through  B-5.  The companion report  presents permit  activities information
 for Regions I-V in Tables  A-l through A-5 of Appendix A.  Table B-6,
 which  is common to both reports, presents the principal PCB and toxic
 waste  contacts for PCB-related assistance.  A narrative of the updated
 data obtained from Regional Office Contacts for Regions VI-X is provided
 in Appendix A.
     Responsibility  for mobile disposal units has  been  transferred to
 uPTS Headquarters.   Thus,   region  contacts  had nothing to report on the
 mobile units.  The latest  mobile  unit  status has  been continued in
 Tables B-l through B-5 until the  transfer  has been  fully implemented
 (see Table A-6 of the  companion  report).
                           Radian  Corporation
              Research  Triangle Park,  North  Carolina   27709
                             (919)  541-9100
                                   30

-------
 Technical  Assistance  Under  This  Program
     An objective of  this program  is  to provide  technical and
 coordinative  assistance  as  required  to  Regional  Offices  (Regions  I-X)
 in  the implementation of the  PCB Regulations.  The technical assistance
 will be provided on a first-come first-served basis and will include,
 but will not  be limited  to, the following:
 rtem_l - Provision of background information on  the conduct of thermal
 or  non-thermal PCB destruction/disposal  operations in accordance with
 Federal requirements and guidelines.
 Item 2 - Providing (pre-notice) facility inspections and evaluations in
order to establish the expected quality of any disposal/destruction
activities that could be conducted at the facility.  Such evaluation
shall  identify the "verification test"  potential of the facility.
item 3 - Review and comment on source "test plans" for the destruction/
disposal  of PBC waste materials in accordance with Federal requirements
and guidelines.
item 4 -  Monitoring and reporting on the conduct of "test destructions"
and data obtained  in accordance with quality assurance/quality control
systems audit  procedures.
For technical  assistance under this program, please contact David C.  Sanchez,
Environmental  Protection Agency, IERL, Research Triangle Park, North  Carolina,
telephone number (919)  541-2979.
                                  31

-------
                                                       TABLE  B-l.    INFORMATION  ON  PCB ACTIVITIES  -  REGION  VI
ro
Company
Application Site location
Disposal
type of Waste Method
Process Demonstration Plan
till 1 ized or Burn
Status

thermal and nonthermal destruction ^ ~ ^=>s*r— ^
tnercjy Systems
Company (INSCO)

March 1978 f 1 Dorado, AR


PCB contaminated 1 hernia 1
sol id waste

s
Incineration /^ Test burn conducted
( Dec. 1981, results
\ available. .s
Nmyed_£^ q(n

Ttompany app 1 i eoTToT"3 PCB
drum reclamation permit
on
\ ^^ March 17, 1983. Approved

Dow Chemical


Dow Chemical



Dow Chemical




September Freeport, IX
1979

September Plaquemine, LA
19/9


September Oster Creek, TX
1979



Process waste thermal
stream (vinyl
chloride)
Process waste thermal
stream (vinyl
chloride
production)
Process waste thermal
stream (vinyl
chloride
production)
^-— -^
/
Incineration Test burn complete, /
results are avai table.

V /
Incineration test burn complete, '
results are avai (able.


Incineration J test burn complete, /
results are avai lable.


August 26, 1983.
Approved April 1982.
_._ — .. .
/
Approved June 1982.
__^__ .


Approved June 1982.
~ - 	














Vulcan Materials  January
                 1980
                                                Cieismar,  LA
    Ro1 Ii ns       ;
V.  Invironmental/
    Services   /
                                  April 1980    Deer  Park,  ]*
    lal'ort Chemical    July  1980
    Corporation
                 PPG
                 MINOHIO
                                  1980
                                                Pasadena,
                                                Lake  Charles,
                                                LA
September     Mobile
1981
                                                     Process vinyl     Thermal
                                                     chloride waste
PCB contaminated  Thermal
sol id waste
Heavy bottoms,     Thermal
vinyl chloride
process  waste

Process  waste      Thermal
stream
                                                Mineral oil       Chemical
                                                dielectric fluid
                                                             Inc ineration /
                                                             Incineration
                                                             Incineration
First test burn  con-
ducted June 1981.
Second test burn con-
ducted Nov.  1981.

F irst test burn  con-  '
ducted Nov.  9-13,  1981.
Tests were also  con-
ducted in June and
July 1982.

Test burn conducted  *
July 1981.
                                                                                                                                       /
                                                                                                                                      /
                                                                                               Incineration      Trial burn conducted.
                                                                                                       Approved May 3, 1983.
                                                                                                                         Approved Jan.  1983.
                                                                                                                         Approved  June  1982.
                                                                                                       Trial burn results were
                                                                                                       received and are being
                                                                                                       reviewed.
                                                                                                                                                                 /
                                                                                               Dechlori nation
                                                                                                    Demonstrated nationally
                                                                                                    Oct.  24,  1980.
                                                                        Approval granted Oct.  21,
                                                                        1982, to treat mineral  oil
                                                                        dielectric fluids with
                                                                        ?'MO ppm PCBs.
                                                                                      (CMtlMM4)

-------
                                                                 TABLE  B-l.   (continued)
CO
CO
Company
Pyro-Magnetics
Arurex
PPM, Inc.
Los Alamos
Sc lent i f ic
Iransformer
( onsul tants
San Angel o
1 lectric
Company
General
t lectric
Appl ication
November
1981
November
1981
December
1981
February
1982
May 1982
June 1982
August 1982
Site location type of Waste
Mobile PCB contaminated
waste oi 1
Mobile HCB contaminated
oil
Mobile PCB contaminated
minera 1 oil
Los Alamos, NM PCB contaminated
transformer
fluid
Mobile PCB contaminated
minera 1 oil
San Angelo, TX PCB contaminated
mineral oil
Mobile PCB contaminated
mineral oil
Disposal Process
Method Utilised
Thermal Incineration-^
Chemical Dechlorination
Chemical Dechlorination
Thermal Incineration /
Chemical Dechlorination
Chemical Dechlorination
Chemical Dechlorination
Demonstration Plan
or Burn
first pilot burn con- '
ducted Dec. 9, 1981,
lul lahoma, IN in Region
IV. Second pi lot burn
conducted March b, 1982.
Demonstrated nationally
Sept. 9, 1981.
Demonstration tests were
conducted in Nov. 1981
in Region VII . lest
results are avai lable.
Pretest meeting con-
ducted on May 10-11,
1982. Test burn con-.,
ducted in June 1982.
Demonstration tests were
conducted on April 14,
1982 in Region V.
Test results are
avai lable.
Demonstration tests not
scheduled at this time.
Demonstration tests were
conducted in May 1982 in
Status
Approved June 13, 1983.'
Company acquired by Insco.
Approved May 3, 1982.
Modified to treat up to
7500 ppm PCBs.
Approved March 7, 1983
Test burn final report^
is being reviewed.
Approved March /, 1983.
Company's intent was to •
treat minera) oil up to a
maximum of 901) ppm PCBs.
The operator has cancelled
plans to conduct demonstra-
tion test.
Approved March 7, 1983.
                                                                                             Region III.  Test results
                                                                                             are avai lable.

-------
                                                    TABLE  B-l.   (continued)
CO
Company
f rankl in
Insti lute
Research
laboratory

SEl) Inc.


lluher Corp.


Biotechnology,
Inc.



Landfills
L Ip . itZS

Application Site Location
October Mobile
1982



October Mobi le
1982

December Borger, TX
1982

January Houston, TX
1983




December Waco, TX
1980
lype of Waste
PCB contaminated
mineral oil



PCB contaminated
capacitors

PCB contaminated
soi 1

PCB sludge




PCB contaminated
oi Is
Disposal Process
Method Utilised
Chemical Dechlorinat ion




Mechanical Shredding and
rinsing of
capac i tors
Thermal Pyrolysis


Biological
biodegred-
at ion



Landfill

Demonstration Plan
or Burn
Pilot scale demonstra-
tion successfully con-
ducted April 21, 1982
on 7406 ppm waste in
Region 111.
Demonstration tests
not scheduled at this
time.
Pi lot scale test
planned for Sept. 1983.

Research project con-
ducted Jan. 19B3.
Demonstration test
expected by end of
Sept. 1983.

--

Status
Approved March 7, 1983.




Under preliminary review
Waiting for response to
questions.
Research test results were
received and are being
reviewed.
Finishing up laboratory
work on research project.
Demonstration lest is
expected to be completed by
the end of November, 1983.

Applicant is closing out
site.

-------
                                     TABLE  B-2.   INFORMATION ON PCB ACTIVITIES - REGION VII
CO
en
Company Application Site Location
thermal and non thermal destruction
SUNOHIO October Mobile
1980


PCB Destruction May 1981 Mobile
Company




Acurex May 1981 Mobile



Fnvironmental May 1981 Kansas City,
International MO
Inc.
Alcoa Corp. June 1981 Davenport, IA



Rose Chemical June 1981 Holden, MO
Co. (PCB Div. )





PI'M Inc. October Mobile
1981




f'yro-Maqnetics November Mobile
1981




Disposal
Type of Waste Method

PCB contaminated Chemical
mineral oil


Dielectric Chemical
mineral oils up
to 10,000 ppm
PCBs


Dielectric Chemical
mineral oils
up to 10,000
ppm PCBs
PCB sol ids Nonthermal
(capacitors)

PCB contaminated Thermal /
fuel oil (2.5 I
mi 1 1 ion gal )

I'CB contaminated Chemical
mineral oils up
to 10,000 ppm
PCBs



PCB contaminated Chemical
mineral oils up
to 10,000 ppm
PCBs.


PCB contaminated Thermal
waste oil (50%
PCB concentra-
tion)


Process
Uti 1 iied

Dechlorinat ion



Dechlnrinat ion





Dechlorinat ion



Mechanica 1
shredding 	
^-^>^
Incineration in
aluminum melting
I furnace >
v y







Oechlorination





Incineration /'




Demonstration Plan
or Burn

Demonstrated nationally
Oct. 24, 1980.


F irst full scale test
conducted Dec. 1980.
Second test conducted
March 25, 1982.


Demonstrated nationally
Sept. 9, 1981.


Demonstration complete
Aug. 1981.

\
test burn conducted the/
/ieek of July 27-31, '
1981. lest results are
avai table.
Bench scale tests were
successful. Full scale
tests conducted in
July 1982.



Full scale demonstra-
tion tests completed in
Nov. 1981. Results
are avai table.

t
First pilot burn con- /
ducted Dec. 9, 1981,
Tullahoma, IN in
Region IV. Second pilot
burn conducted March 5,
1982
Status

Approved Nov. 1981 for
mineral oil dielectric
f luids up to 10,000 ppm
PCBs.
Interim approval granted
from June 1, 1982 to
Dec. 1, 1982. Results from
second tests show PCB
concentration reduced from
1000 ppm to 1 ppm.
For 3 year period starting
in Oct. 1982. Request
received for permit
modi f ication.
Approval granted Feb. 17,
1982.
S
''Approved Dec. 1981.



Final approval granted
March 1983. Disposal of
PCB contaminated natural
gas condensate has been
requested. EPA has
requested additional
i nf ormat ion.
f inal approval granted
Aug. 1982. Approval was
modified to allow treatment
ot PCB contaminated kero-
sene and heat transfer
fluids.
Final approval granted
Sept. 1, 1982.





-------
      TABLE  B-2.   (continued)
Company
Environmental
International
Inc.
Union F, lectric
Company
Irans former
Consultants,
Divis ion of
S D. Meyers
GO
^ PCB Treatment
Inc.
Franklin
Institute
Research
laboratory
General
• Electric
Rose Chemical
Co.
SEU Inc.
PPM Inc.
Appl i cat ion
January
1982
April 1982
June 1982
August 1982
October
1982
October
1982
November
1982
November
1982
January
1983
Disposal
Site Location Type of Waste Method
Mobile PCB contaminated Chemical
waste oi 1
St. touis, MO PCB contaminated Thermal
mineral oil up
to 50,000 ppm
PCBs
Mobile PCB liquids Chemical
Kansas City, MO PCB liquids Chemical
Mobile PCB contaminated Chemical
dielectric
mineral oil
Mobile PCB contaminated Chemical
dielectric
mineral oil
Holden, MO PCB capacitors Mechanical
Mobile PCB contaminated Mechanical
capacitors
Kansas City, PCB contaminated Mechanical
MO transformers anil
Process
Uti lized
Dechlorination
High effi- "'•
ciency boi ler
Dechlorination
Dechlorination
Dechlorination
Dechlorination
Shredding and
rinsing
Shredding and
rinsing of
capacitors
Solvent cleaning
Demonstration Plan
or Burn
Full scale demonstra-
tion was conducted on
Jan. 14, 1982. Results
show PCB concentration
reduced from 570,000
ppm to less than 2 ppm.
Test burn conducted ^
week of May 17, 1982.
Test conducted in
Region V, April 1982.
Demonstration tests
conducted Sept. 8,
1982.
Test conducted April
1982 in Region III.
Pilot scale demonstra-
tion successfully con-
ducted May 14, 1982
on 1050 ppm waste in
Region III.
Demonstration conducted
Dec. 1982.
No tests are scheduled
at this time.
Research and develop-
ment.
Status
Final approval was granted
effective until Sept. 17,
1985 to treat waste oils
up 570,000 ppm PCBs.
Final approval granted"^
Jan. 1983.
Interim approval granted
from Oct. 1, 1982 to
April 1, 1983 to treat
PCB liquids up to 10,000
ppm PCBs.
Approval extended effective
September 15, 1983 to
September 15, 1986.
Under preliminary review.
Interim approval granted
March 1983.
Final approval issued on
November 7, 1983 and
effective from October 15,
1983 to October 15, 1986.
Under preliminary review.
Request received Jan. 1983.
Under review.
capacitors

-------
                                                  TABLE B-2.  (continued)
00
Company
PCB Treatment
Inc.


Chemical Waste
Management
Rose Chemical
Co.

PCB
Specialist


PCB Disposal
Systems, Inc.
PCB Disposal
Systems, Inc.

Environmental
International
Electrical
Services

landfills
Corps of
Engineers




Alcoa Corp.





Appl ication
January
1983


February
1983
March 1983


--



October
1983
October
1983

August
1983




January
1980




October
1982




Site Location
Kansas City,
MO


Kansas City,
MO
Holden, MO


Kansas City,
MO


Kansas City,
MO
Kansas City,
MO







Kansas City,
MO




Davenport, IA





Disposal
. Type of Waste Method
PCB capacitors Mechanical



PCB contaminated Mechanical
transformers
PCB contaminated Mechanical
transformers

Mineral oil Chemical
dielectric fluid


Mineral oil Chemical
dielectric fluid
Capacitors and Mechanical
potentially
transformers
PCB contaminated Mechanical
transformers




Contaminated Landfill
dredge soil from
251 ppm to 0.02
ppm PCB concen-
tration

PCB contaminated Landfill
sediment from
surface impound-
ment faci 1 ity
under 500 ppm
PCBs
Process
Utilized
Shredding and
rinsing


Solvent cleaning

Draining,
rinsing, and
salvaging metals
Dechlorination



Dechlorinat ion

Shredding and
rinsing

Mechanical
separation,
cleanup and
salvaging of
metals

	





Contaminated
area insitu
disposal



Demonstration Plar,
or Burn
Demonstration con-
ducted Feb. 28, 1983.


Research and develop-
ment.
Research and develop-
ment.

Tests are not scheduled
at this time.


Demonstration requested
for early December.
Demonstration requested
for early December.

EPA observed demon-
stration conducted on
October 7, 1983.



Site plan available and
acceptable to Region
VII.



--





Status
Interim approval granted
July 5, 1983 for the period
Aug. 1, 1983 to Feb. 1,
1984.
Approved June 9, 1983.

Approved July 8, 1983.
Limited to five trans-
formers.
Informal letter of intent
submitted Oct. 21, 1982.
Further action by company
is not expected.
Request under review.

Request under review.


Awaiting analytical results.





Conditional approval
granted in July 1981.
Project has been held up
for lack of funds (no
change in status since
March 1982).
Under final review.






-------
                                               TABLE  B-3.    INFORMATION  ON  PCB  ACTIVITIES  -  REGION  VIII
CO
00
Company Application Site Location
Thermal and normal destruction
Rockwell March 1980 Commercial
International Mobile Unit
and Department
of Energy
Disposal Process
Type of Waste Method Utilized
PCB contaminated Thermal Hindi /ed bed /
liquids incineration/
Demonstration Plan
or Burn
/
' Test burn completed ^
May 19, 1981 (test done
in Rock F lats nuclear
weapon plant) test burn
results are available.
Status
Evaluation complete.
No action on this permit S
is necessary. Results
are acceptable. (PCB
destruction efficiency
99.9999. )
            Acurex
             I&R Electric
                              March 1981    Mobile
June 1981     Coleman,  SO
             PCB Eliminators   September     Mobile
             Inc.              1981
             SUNOHIO
             Pyro-Magnetics
             Corporation
                              October
                              1981
November
1981
                                            Mobile
                                            Mobile
             PPM  Inc.
                              December
                              1981
                                            Mob iIe
                               PCB liquids up    Chemical      Dechlorination
                               to 1000 ppm
PCB liquids up
to 500 ppm
                                                                               Chemical
                               PCB contaminated  Chemical
                               liquids
Dechlorination


Detoxification
                               PCB liquids up
                               to 1000 ppm
PCB Iiquids up
to 41% by
weight PCBs
                  Chemical
Thermal
                              Dechlorination
             Incineration
                               PCB contaminated  Chemical
                               waste oi1
                                                                                            Dechlorination
                                                                                                             Demonstration test
                                                                                                             completed Sept.  9,
                                                                                                             1981.  Results are
                                                                                                             available.
                              Ongoing testing
                              program.

                              Bench scale tests con-
                              ducted in Region VII
                              were successful.  Full
                              scale tests not yet
                              planned.
                              Tests completed Nov.
                              1980 (test results are
                              available).
                  First pilot burn con-,
                  ducted Dec. 9, 1981<
                  Tullahoma, TN in
                  Region IV.  Second
                  pilot burn conducted
                  March 5,  1982.  Test
                  results are available.

                  Demonstration tests were
                  completed Nov. 1981 in
                  Region VII.
Permit was granted on
Jan.  12,  1982,  for up  to
1000 ppm PCBs.   Permission
to treat up to  7500 ppm
PCBs granted Sept.  1982.

Final approval  granted
Sept. 1,  1982.

Prototype bench scale
operation.  Will be con-
verted into a full-scale
commercial mobile unit at
a later date.   No change
in status since March  1982.

Permit was granted on
Jan.  29,  1982.   Request to
amend the permit to treat
PCB liquids up  to 2500 ppm
was granted in  Sept.  1982.

Permit was granted on    L-
Sept.  12, 1982  to treat
PCB liquids up  to 41%
PCB by weight.
                                                                         Permit granted (March 25,
                                                                         1982) to process PCB
                                                                         liquids up to 1000 ppm PCBs.

-------
                                                                               TABLE B-3.    (continued)
Go
                    Company
Application    Site Location
Type of Waste
Disposal
Method
Process
Utilized
Demonstration Plan
or Burn Status
                PCB Destruction   December
                Company           1981
                                                Mobile
                Environmental
                International
                Incorporated
                Transformer
                Consultants
                PCB
                Specialist
                frank) in
                Institute
                Research
                laboratory

                General
                [  lectric
                Otter  Tail
                Power  Co.
January
1982
April 1982
1982
                                                Mobile
Akron, OH
October
1982
October
1982
November
1982
                                  N/A
                                                Mobile
                                                Mobile
              Mobile
              Big Stone, SD
                                PCB liquids  PCB   Chemical
                                concentration
                                unknown at this
                                time
                                                                                                Dechlorination
                  PCB liquids
                                                                                    Chemical
PCB contaminated  Chemical
waste oil up to
2000 ppm PCBs
                                                                                                Dechlorination
                                                                                                Detoxification
                  Mineral  oil
                  dielectric
                  fluid

                  Mineral  oil
                  dielectric
                  fluid up to
                  7500 ppm PCBs

                  Mineral  oi I
                  dielectric fluid
                  up to 1000 ppm
                  PCBs

                  Mineral  oil
                  dielectric fluid
                                                                                    Chemical
                                                                                                 Dechlorination
                                                                                    Chemical     Dechlorination
                                                  Chemical
                                                                                    Thermal
                                                               Dechlorination
                               High efficiency
                               boiler
first demonstration
tests were conducted in
Region VII on Dec.  18,
1981.  Second tests
were conducted on
March ?b, 1982 in
Region Vll.

Full scale demonstration
was conducted on
Jan. 14, 1982 in Region
VII.  Results show PCB
concentration reduced
from blO ppm to 2 ppm.

Test conducted on
April 13-14, 1982 in
Region V.  About 300
gallons of oil con-
taining 2000 ppm PCBs
were treated during the
tests.  Test results are
available.

Demonstration tests will
be conducted in Region
VII.
                                                                                            Under review,  first
                                                                                            demonstration tests were
                                                                                            unsuccessful.  Awaiting
                                                                                            second test results from
                                                                                            Region VII.
                                                                          Permit granted (March 25,
                                                                          1982) to process PCB
                                                                          liquids up to 1000 ppm
                                                                          PBCs.
                          Permit granted  July  30,
                          1982.
                                                                                                          Under preliminary review.
                                                 Pilot  scale  demonstration Permit granted feb.  1983
                                                 successfully conducted    for fluids up to 7500 ppm
                                                 April  2,  1982 in          PCBs.
                                                 Region III.
Pilot scale demonstra-
tion successfully con-
ducted May 14,  1982 in
 !egion 111.

N/A
                                                                           Permit granted Feb. 1983
                                                                           for  fluids up to  1000 ppm
                                                                           PCBs.
                          After meeting with EPA and
                          state,  company has agreed
                          to install  CO monitor.
                          Once installed they can
                          proceed with the disposing
                          of PCBs.
                 landfills

                 No  landfills approved for PCB disposal in tPA Region VIII.
                N/A:  nut rfpp I i( able.

-------
TABLE B-4.   INFORMATION ON PCB ACTIVITIES - REGION IX
Company
Application Site Location
Disposal
Type of Waste Method
Process
Utilized
Demonstration Plan
or Burn
Status
Thermal and nonthermal destruction
SUNOH10
Dow Chemical
lhagard
Research
Corporation
Rockwel 1
International
Pyro-Magnetics
Corporation
Acurex
transformer
Consultants
Baird
Corporation
1 rsnkl in
Institute
Research
laboratory
June 1980 Mobile
September Pittsburg, CA
1980
July 1981 Irvine. CA
October Ventura County,
1981 CA
November Mobi le
1981
January Mobi le
1982
April 1982 Mobile
May 1982 Irvine, CA
October Mobile
1982
Dielectric Chemical
mineral oils up
to 1000 ppm,
PCBs
Process waste Thermal
(PCB contami-
nated waste)
PCB contami- Thermal
nated sol ids
PCB oils no Thermal
) imit speci ( ied
PCB contami- Thermal
nated waste oils
PCB contami- Chemical
nated mineral oi 1
up to 7500 ppm
PCBs
Transformer Chemical
oi Is
PCB contami- Thermal
nated solids
PCB contami- Chemical
nated dielectric
mineral oil
Dechlorinalion
Incineration
High tempera-
ture fluid
volume reactor
Molten salt
reactor process
Incineration
*S'
Dechlorination
Dech 1 or i nation
High tempera-
ture fluid
volume reactor.
Dechlorination
Test complete Nov.
1980. lest results
are avai table.
lest completed Jan.
1983.
Research and develop-
ment ongoing tests.
Not planned.
1st pi lot burn con- .
ducted Dec. 9, 1981,
lullahoma, TN in
Region IV. 2nd pilot
burn conducted March 5,
1982. Test results are
avai lable.
Demonstrated nationally
on Sept. 9, 1982. Test
results are available.
Demonstration tests
conducted in Region V;
April 1982. Test
results are available.
Research and develop-
ment on going tests.
Test conducted April
1982 in Region III.
Hnal approval granted Dec.
1981.
Trial burn results are
being reviewed.
R&D permit granted June 7,
1982 to treat soil contami-
nated with high concentra-
tions of PCBs. No further
action anticipated.
Research permit granted
Jan. 26, 1982.
Permit issued May 2b, 1983,
Permit granted Aug. 22,
1982.
Under review. Draft
approval is being prepared.
Additional information
requested.
R&D permit granted June 21,
1982, to treat sediment up
to 10,000 ppm PCBs.
Under review. Additional
information requested.

-------
                                                      TABLE B-4.    (continued)

Company
General
1 lee trie

Appl i cat ion
October
1982

Site location
Muhi le

lype ot Waste
PCB contami-
nated dielectric

Disposa 1
Method
Chemical

Process
lit i 1 i/ed
Dechl urinal ion

Demonstration I'lan
01 Burn
I'i lot scale demonstra-
tion successfully con-

Status
Under review. Additional
information requested.
Landfills

Chemical Waste    October
Management,       1980
Inc.'
U.S.  Ecology
November
1981
             Ketl I email
             Hills, CA
Beatty,  NV
                                                mineral oiI
                 PCB solids        LandfilI
PCB sol ids only   LandfiI I
                                                                                               ducted May 14, 1982 in
                                                                                               Region III on wastes
                                                                                               containing 1050 ppro
                                                                                               PCBs.
Approval  to Operate amended
November  14, 1983 to
increase  capacity of one
portion of  landfi11.

Usage  approved Oct.  27,
1982.

-------
                                                  TABLE B-5.    INFORMATION ON  PCB ACTIVITIES  -  REGION X

Company
Application Site location
lype of Waste
Disposal
Method
Process
Utilized
                Ihernml and nonthermal  destruction
                SUNOHIO
August 1980   Mobile
ro
Dielectric        Chemical
mineral oil  up
to IbOO ppm  PCBs
                                                                                   thermal
                                                                                   Chemical
                                                                                               Oechlorination
Washington
Water and
Power Company
Acurex
Environmental
International
Inc
PPM Inc.

I'yro-Maynetics
October
1980

January
1981
September
1981

September
1981

November
1981
Spokane, WA Dielectric
mineral oils
below bOO ppm
Mobile Dielectric
mineral oi Is
Mobile Capacitors

Overland Park, Dielectric
KS mineral oils
below bOO ppm
Mobile PCB contaminated
waste oi 1 up to
41. 7% by weight
PCBs
                                                                                               Hii|h pffi-
                                                                                               ciency boiler
                                                                                               Dechlorination
                                                                                   Chemical
                                                                                   Chemical
                                                             Capac i tor
                                                             disposal
                                                             technology
                                                                                               Oechlorination
                                                                                   Thermal
                                                                                               Incineration
                                                                                                                   Demonstration  Plan
                                                                                                                         or Burn
Demonstrated nationally
Oct.  24, 1980.
                                                                               Burn tool place lor,
                                                                               36 hours in Dec.  1981.
                                                                               Demonstration test
                                                                               complete Sept.  9,  1981.
                                                Full  scale demonstra-
                                                tion  was conducted on
                                                Jan.  14, 1982  in
                                                Region VII.  Test
                                                results are available.

                                                Demonstration  test
                                                conducted Nov.  1981
                                                in Region VI1.
                                                Results are available.
                                                                               First pilot burn con-
                                                                               ducted Dec.  9,  1981,
                                                                               lullahoma,  IN  in
                                                                               Region IV.   Second  pilot
                                                                               burn conducted  March 5,
                                                                               1982.   Test results are
                                                                               avai(able.
                                                                                                                                                   Status
  Approval granted Jan. 21,
  1982  to  treat mineral oil
  dielectric  fluids up to
  IbOO  ppm PCBs.  Approval
  .for  tluids  up to 2500 ppm
/ PCBs  granted Oct. 1982.  /

  Approved Dec. 19B1   _/
                         Approved April 19,  1982 for
                         mineral oil dielectric
                         fluids with 1500 ppm PCBs.
                         Increased to allow treat-
                         ment of oiI up to 7500 ppm
                         PCBs in Dec. 1982.

                         final stage of approval.
                                                                                                        Approval granted July 1982,
                                                                                                        wiII expire Jan.  1, 198B.
                                                                                                        Modified to include kero-
                                                                                                        sene as well as dielectric
                                                                                                        mineral oils up to 1500 ppn
                                                                                                        PCBs in Nov. 1982.
                                                                         Under review.
                                                                         of approval.
                                                                         period ended Dec.
                                        Final  phase
                                       Pub Iic  comment
                                           19,  1982.

-------
                                                             TABLE  B-5.    (continued)
    Company
PCB Destruction   December
Company           1981
tfivironmental      February
International      1982
I nc .
Application    Site location


              Mobi le
transformer
Consultants
Frank!in
Instilute
Research
Laboratory
General
tlectric
Aqua-lech
StU Inc.
PCB
Specialist
              Mobile
April 1982    Akron,  OH
October
1982
                                Mobile
October       Mobile
1982
October
1982
                  November
                  1982
Hillsboro,  OR
                                Mobi le
              Mobile
                   Type of Waste
                                                                    Disposal
                                                                     Method
                                PCB contaminated   Chemical
                                waste oiI
                  PCB contaminated  Chemical
                  waste oi 1
                  PCB contaminated  Chemical
                  dielectric
                  mineral  oil

                  PCB contaminated  Chemical
                  dielectric
                  mineral  oiI  up
                  to 7406  ppm  PCBs
                  PCB contaminated  Chemical
                  dielectric
                  mineral  oil
Oily waste con-
taminated with
PCBs up to
100 ppm
Biodegrad-
dt ion
                                PCB  contaminated  Mechnical
                                capac itors
                  PCB contaminated   Chemical
                  dielectric
                  mineral  oil
                                                                  Process
                                                                 lltil ized
                                                                                Dechlorination
                                                                                Dech1 orination
                               Dechlorination
                               Dechlorination
                               (Na PFG  process)
                                                                                dechlorination
                               Shredding  and
                               rinsing  of
                               capacitors

                               Dechlorination
                                                                     Demonstration Plan
                                                                          or Burn
                               First tests were con-
                               ducted in Region VII on
                               Dec.  18,  1981.

                               Fill 1  scale demonstra-
                               tion was  conducted on
                               Jan.  14,  1982 in Region
                               VII.   Test results are
                               avai table.

                               Test  run  conducted in
                               Region V, April  14-lb,
                               1982.

                               Test  conducted  ApriI
                               1982  on /406 ppm waste
                               in  Region III.
Pi lot scale tests
successfully conducted
May 14, 1982 in
Region III on waste
containing lObO ppm
PCBs.

Research and develop-
ment ongoing tests.
                                                                  Demonstration test not
                                                                  scheduled at this time.
                               Demonstration  test will
                               be  conducted  in Region
                               VII.
                                                                                                                                     Status
                                                                          Under review.  Awaiting
                                                                          second test  results from
                                                                          Region VII.

                                                                          Under review.  Draft letter
                                                                          of approval  is complete.
                          Approved Dec.  8,  1982,  for
                          wastes  up to  2100  ppm  PCB.
Final phase of approval.
Draft approval letter is
ready.   Test results are
available.   Public notice
period ends March 31, 1983.

Final phase of approval.
Draft approval letter being
planned.   Test results are
available.   Public notice
published March 21, 1983.
No further action from
company is expected.
                                                        Under preliminary review.
                          letter  of  Intent submitted
                          March  1983.

-------
TABLE B-5.   (continued)
Company
Anchorage
Uti lilies
landfills
tnv irosafe
Services of
Idaho, Inc.
Chemical
Security
Systems, Inc.
Washington
hedtment, Inc.
Application Site location Type °' Waste
Anchorage, AK Dielectric
mineral oi 1
up to 50 ppm

lehruary Grandview, 10 All waste
19/7 permitted under
regulations
february Arlington, OR All waste
1977 permitted under
regulations
July 198? Batum, WA All waste
permitted under
regulat ions
Disposal Process Demonstration flan
Method Uti 1 ued or Burn
thermal Multiple hearth Research and develop-
sewage sludge men I.
incinerator

Landill -- Site plan complete,
inspection complete.
Landfill -- Site plan complete,
inspection complete.
Landfill -- Initial application
review completed.
Status
further action has been
postponed at least unti 1
Spring 1984 pending
decision by operator to
continue.

Approval renewal granted
March b, 1982.
Approval renewal granted
March 25, 1983.
Reports are being developed
to meet Subparl B require-
ments.

-------
                          TABLE  B-6.    EPA  REGIONAL OFFICE  AND  TECHNICAL  ASSISTANCE  CONTACTS  AT  REGIONS  I  -  X
J>
in
Region/Address
U.S. EPA. legion VI
1201 Elm Street
Dallas, t« 75270


US EPA. Region VII
Contact*
Jim Silll
Regional PCB
Coordinator
Martin Allen
Larry Thomas
Regional Tonic
Coordinator
Phil Schwindt
Steve Butcn
Division
Ttchnical Section, Air 1
Watt* Management Division
Technical Sac t ion, Air &
Pesticides & Toxic
Subitances Branch
Environmental Services
Division
Watte Management Branch
Telephone No.
(214) 767-8941 1
(214) 767-8941 '
(214) 767-2734 y
(214) 767-27^7
(816) 374-6531 ,
Region/Address
U.S EPA, Region 1
John f. Kennedy Building
Ron* 2103
8ostonTjSEM*M^~^^
US EPA, Region (I \
Federal Office Building)
26 Federal Plaza J


Contact"
Paul Heffernan
Chuck Lincoln
To* Michel
John Brogard
Garret [ Siith
Arthur H. Gevirti
Herman Phillips
0 1 v i 5 ion
Air Management
Air Management
Air Management
Air and Waste Management
Air and Waste Manageiwnt
Environmental Services
Publ ic Awareness
Telephone No
(617) 223-0585
(617) 223-7740
(617) 223-5117
(212) 264-2637
(212) 264-3467
(201) 321-6667 !
(212) 264-2515
U.S EPA. Region VII
324 East llth Street
Kansas City, MI 64106

U S. EPA, Regions VIII
I860 Lincoln Street

US. EPA, Region IK
215 Fremont Street
San Francisco, CA 9*105

U.S. EPA. Region X
1200 6th Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101

Stave Butcn

Coordinator
Steve Farrow
Regional PCB
Dean Cilia*
Regional Toxic
Coordinator
Raymond Said
Jin Suhrer

Charles w. Rice
Roger Fuentes
Regional PCB
Coordinator
Jie Everts
Regional Toxic
Coordinator
Waste Management Branch
as

Toxic Substances Branch

Toxic Substances Branch
Toxic and Waste
Management Branch
Office of Technical and
Scientific Assistance

Waste Management Branch
Waste Management Branch
Permits and Compliance
Branch
(816) 374-6531 ;

j
(303) 837-3926 1

(303) 837-3926 j
(415) 974-8389 i
(415) 974-8192

(206) 442-2728
(206) 442-1254



Curtis Building
Sixth and Walnut Streets
Philadelphia, PA 19106

U S EPA, Region IV
345 Court land, Northeast
Atlanta, GA 30365


US EPA, Region V
230 S. Dearborn Street
Chicago, 11 60604

Dan Kraft
Herman Phillips

Christopher Pilla
Michael Vaccaro
K K Wu

Ralph Jenntngs
Regional Toxics &
PCB Coordinator
Howard Zeller
Constance Allison
James Finger
F ranc i s Redman

V. J. Kim
Bill Muno

Environmental Services
Publ ic Awareness

Environmental Services
Regional Council

Air and waste Management
Enforcement
Air and Waste Management
Surveillance and Analysis
Public Awareness

Waste Management
Waste Management

(201) 321-6667
(212) 264-2515

(215) 597-4651
(215) 597-9477

(404) 881-3864
(404) 881-2211
(404) 881-3864
(404) 546-3136
(404) 881-3004

(312) 353-1428
(312) B86-6136
i

                For technical assistance and review of disposal technology please contact:

                U.S  EPA, Region I-V                      U.S. EPA, Region VI-X
                GCA Corporation                          TRW Environmental Operations
                Bedford, MA                             Research Triangle ParK. NC
                Bob Mclnnes (617) 275-5444 Ext  4206         Kid Adams (919) 541-9100

                •The first contact listed for each Region is the primary contact for information contained
                 in this report.

-------
                  REGIONAL SUMMARIES:  REGIONS VI - X

Region VI - Jim Sales
     PPG incineration trial burn results were received and are being
reviewed.  The incinerator is located in Lake Charles, Louisiana and
tests were on the destruction of a process waste stream.
     Los Alamos Scientific Laboratories conducted a test burn in
June 1982 to destroy PCB contaminated transformer fluid.  The results
are still under review at the Region.
     Huber Corporation at Borger, Texas has conducted a research test
for disposing of PCBs in contaminated soil by pyrolysis in a carbon
black furnace.  The Region has received the test results and they are
being reviewed.
     Biotechnology, Inc. at Houston, Texas is conducting research on a
disposal method employing biodegradation.  A demonstration test is
expected to be completed by the end of November.
     San Angelo Electric of San Angelo, Texas has cancelled plans to
conduct a demonstration test for the chemical dechlorination of 900 ppm
PCB in mineral oil.

Region VII -  Steve Busch
     Rose Chemical Company at Holden, Missouri submitted a request
during the third quarter,  1983 to modify  their permit to include the
disposal of PCB contaminated natural gas  condensate.  The present permit
is  for chemical dechlorination of PCB contaminated mineral oils.  The
Region has requested  further information  about disposal of the natural
gas  condensate.  Rose Chemical  also  received final approval for the
shredding and rinsing of  PCB contaminated capacitors.   The permit is
effective  October  15, 1983 to October  15,  1986.
                                    46

-------
     PPM  Incorporated at Kansas City, Missouri submitted a request in
January 1983  for  research and development for the solvent cleaning of
transformers  and  capacitors.  The application is still under review at
the Region.
     PCB  Treatment  Incorporated at  Kansas City, Missouri had their
approval  extended to September 15,  1986 for the chemical dechlorination
of PCB liquids.
     PCB  Disposal Systems, Inc. at  Kansas City, Missouri has requested a
permit for a  demonstration test for the chemical dechlorination of
mineral oil dielectric fluid.  The  request is being reviewed at the
Region.   They have  also requested a demonstration test for the mechanical
shredding and rinsing of capacitors.  The request is under review at the
Region.
     Environmental  International Electrical Services conducted a demonstration
test on October 7,  1983 for the mechanical separation and cleanup of PCB
contaminated  transformers.  Metals are to be salvaged.  EPA observed the
demonstration  test.  Analytical results have not been received.

Region VIII -  Steve Farrow
     Otter Tail Power Company at the Big Stone power station, Big Stone,
South Dakota  plans  to destroy mineral oil dielectric fluid in a high
efficiency boiler.  The power station is owned by Otter Tail, Montana -
Dakota Utilities  and Northwest Public Service.  The utility may proceed
after they install  a CO monitor.  The company has agreed to purchase
this monitor.

Region IX - Raymond Seid
     The Approval to Operate for Chemical Waste Management at Kettleman
Hills,  California was amended on November 14, 1983.   The amendment
approves design modifications to increase the capacity of Burial  Cell
B-14 of the landfill.  The permit for Burial  Cell  B-14 is one of two
permits that Chemical Waste Management has at Kettleman Hills.   It was
issued June 29, 1981.
                                    47

-------
Region X - Charles Rice
     Aqua-Tech at Hillsboro, Oregon has conducted research tests for the
Modegradatlon of PCBs.  The Region expects no further action by this
company.
     The municipal utilities department of Anchorage, Alaska has postponed
a research test to determine destruction of low concentration PCBs
(<500 ppm) in oil.
The municipality has yielded to considerable public pressure to hold off.   No
further action is  expected until  Spring 1984.
                                 48

-------
                APPENDIX C

 INFORMATION ON PCB DISPOSAL ACTIVITIES -
THERMAL DESTRUCTION/NONTHERMAl DESTRUCTION
              (EPA REGIONS I-V)
                      49

-------
         TABLES C-l THROUGH C-5, ABBREVIATIONS, DEFINITIONS
M.O.D.F.:

THF:

DEGM:

R&D:

N/A:

CBI:


MT:

D.E. :

STD. Conditions:



Semi-continuous:



Never utilized:
Mineral Oil Dielectric Fluid

Tetrahydrofuran

Diethylene Glycol, Di-methyl Ether

Research and Development Project

Not Applicable

Data are cited by firm as confidential business
information

Metric Tons

Destruction Efficiency

Regional office approval includes several standard
conditions concerning reporting requirements, system
operation, record keeping, etc.

Process is used regularly in region, duration of
individual decontamination runs may last from several
days to several months.

Process has been approved by EPA but has not yet been
utilized for PCB disposal.
                                 50

-------
TABLE C-l.   INFORMATION OF PCB DISPOSAL ACTIVITIES—THERMAL DESTRUCTION/NONTHERMAL  DESTRUCTION,
                                           REGION I
                       Public Service Company
                         of New Hampshire
                       2-6-80
                       Merrimac Station, N.H.

                       M.O.D.F.
                       Boiler

                       3-3-80
                       STD. Conditions
                       None
Company:

Application Date:
Site Location:

Type of Waste:
Process Utilized:
Permit Status
  Approval Date:
  Approval Conditions:
  Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
  Number of Units:
  Concentration Limit
  of Feed (ppm):
  Capacity of Process
  or Unit:
  % Capacity Presently
  Available:
  Frequency of Operation:
  Test Results (Limits
  as defined by test burn
  or test run):
Commercial Availability:    Never utilized
                       500 ppm

                       Boiler size unknown

                       N/A

                       Never utilized
                       No test conducted
New England Power
  Company
10-14-80
Salem Harbor Station,
  Mass.
M.O.D.F.
Boiler

12-80
STD. Conditions
None
500 ppm

Boiler size unknown

N/A

Never utilized
No test conducted

Never utilized
c
-—Northeast Utilities
     9-4-80
     Middletown Station, Conn.
     Unit No. 3
     M.O.D.F.
     Boiler
    9-4-80
    STD. Conditions
    None
    500 ppm

    2.19 x lO^Btu/hr

    100

    4 times/yr
    D.E. >99.98%

    Available
                                            (continued)

-------
                                                TABLE C-l.  (continued)
en
ro
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste:
Process Utilized:

Permit Status
  Approval Date:
  Approval Conditions:

  Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
  Number of Units:
  Concentration Limit
  of Feed (ppm):
  Capacity of Process
  or Unit:
  7, Capacity Presently
  Available:
General Electric
4-80
Pittsfield, Mass.
All PCB fluids
Annex I liquid
  injection incinerator

3-4-82
30 STD. Conditions

3-4-87
                                No  limit

                                132 gal/hr  «tf>^
                                         /vo-
                                           /^
                                100
       Frequency of  Operation:   Continuous
       Test Results  (Limits
       as defined  by test  burn
       or test  run):
     Commercial Availability/
                           20% PCB feed,
                             D.E. >99.9%
                           Available"
Pyro Magnetic
12-81
Mobile
Waste oil
Mobile Annex I
  incinerator

7-9-82
Concept app'd, but site
  specific approval
  req'd.
None
                          No limit

                          5,940 Ib/hr

                          N/A

                          Never utilized
                          D.E. >99.9999%

                          Never utilized
                                                                                   Sunohio
                                                                                   3-81
                                                                                   Mobile
                                                                                   M.O.D.F.
                                                                                   Chemical dechlorination
                                                                                    6-81
                                                                                    M.O.D.F. only, STD.
                                                                                      Conditions
None

5 (Nationwide)
No limit

600 gal/hr

100

Semi-continuous
Outlet <2 ppm

Available
                                                     (continued)

-------
                                                TABLE C-l.  (continued)
en
OJ
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste:
Process Utilized:
Permit Status
  Approval Date:
  Approval Conditions:

  Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
  Number of Units:
  Concentration Limit
  of Feed (ppm):

  Capacity of Process
  or Unit:
  % Capacity Presently
  Available:
  Frequency of Operation:
  Test Results (Limits
  as defined by test burn
  or test run):
Acurex
1-81
Mobile
M.O.D.F.
Chemical dechlorination

2-1-82
M.O.D.F. only, STD.
  Conditions
None

1 (Nationwide)
No limit

4 - 6,000 gal/day

100

Semi-continuous
Outlet <2 ppm
     Commercial Availability:   Available
PPM, Inc.
12-14-81
Mobile
M.O.D.F.
Chemical dechlorination

3-26-82
M.O.D.F. only, STD.
  Conditions
None

4 (Nationwide)
10,000 ppm

5 - 10,000 gal/day

100

Semi-continuous
Outlet <2 ppm

Available
                                                                                    Transformer consultants
                                                                                    4-5-82
                                                                                    Mobile
                                                                                    M.O.D.F.,  PCB  liquids
                                                                                    Chemical dechlorination
                                                                                    11-29-82
                                                                                    5,000 gal. max per  batch
                                                                                      STD. Conditions
                                                                                    None
                                                                                    2  (Nationwide)
                                                                                    M.O.D.F. -  5,000  ppm
                                                                                      Other PCB liquids -
                                                                                      3,000 ppm
                                                                                    7  -  9,000 gal/day
100

Semi-continuous
Outlet <2 ppm

Available

-------
      TABLE C-2.   INFORMATION OF PCB DISPOSAL ACTIVITIES—THERMAL DESTRUCJION/NONTHERMAL DESTRUCTION,
                                               REGION II
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste:
Process Utilized:

Permit Status
  Approval Date:
  Approval Conditions:
  Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
  Number of Units:
  Concentration Limit
  of Feed (ppm):
  Capacity of Process
  or Unit:
  % Capacity Presently
  Available:
  Frequency of Operation:
  Test Results (Limits
  as defined by  test burn
  or test run):
Commercial Availability:
General Electric            U.S. EPA
Original-1978, Reauth-1982  10-81
Waterford, NY               Mobile (Edison,
Waste Oil                   Waste Oil
Annex I Liquid Injection    Rotary Kiln Inci
  Incinerator
3-31-82
STD. Conditions
3-31-87

1
25%

CBI

100

Continuous
D.E.  >99.99%
Not Available
  (G.E. Wastes Only)
   12/21/83        /
   STD. Conditions
   None           •
                 /
   1
   None

   6  x 106 Btu/hr

   100
              (
\              /
Never utilized
  \          /
  \D.E.   >99/999.9
                          Sunohio
                          7-81
                    J.)   Mobile
                          Waste Oil
                    rator Chemical Dechlorination
11/9/82
STD. Conditions
None

5 (Nationwide)
2,500 ppm

600 gal/hr

100

Semi-continuous
Outlet <2 ppm

Available
                                                (continued)

-------
                                               TABLE  C-2.   (continued)
en
en
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste:
Process Utilized:
Permit Status
  Approval Date:
  Approval Conditions:

  Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
  Number of Units:
  Concentration Limit
  of Feed (ppm):
  Capacity of Process
  or Unit:
  % Capacity Presently
  Available:
  Frequency of Operation:
  Test Results (Limits
  as defined by test  burn
  or test run):
Acurex
8-81
Mobile
Waste Oil
Chemical Dechlorination

1-83
Cone. Limit,
  STD. Conditions
None

1 (Nationwide)
7,500 ppm

4-6,000 gal/day

100

Semi-Continuous
Outlet <2 ppm
   Commercial Availability:   Available
 PPM,  Inc.
 12-81
 Mobile
 Waste Oil
 Chemical Dechlorination

 4-26-83
 Cone. Limit,
  STD. Conditions
 None

 4 (Nationwide)
 1,100 ppm

 5 - 10,000 gal/day

 100

 Semi-continuous
 Outlet <2 ppm

Available
 Transformer  Consultants
 4-82
 Mobile
 M.O.D.F.
 Chemical Dechlorination

 4-26-83
 Cone. Limit,
  STD. Conditions
 None

 2 (Nationwide)
 Batch - 3,000 ppm

 7 - 9,000 gal/day

 100

 Semi-continuous
 Outlet <2 ppm

Available
                                                   (continued)

-------
                                            TABLE C-2.  (continued)
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste:
Process Utilized:

Permit Status
  Approval Date:
  Approval Conditions:
  Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
  Number of Units:
  Concentration Limit
  of Feed (ppm):
  Capacity of Process
  or Unit:

  % Capacity Presently
  Available:
Bengart & Merael
2-82
South Buffalo, NY
PCB Contaminated Soil
Non-Thermal, In Situ
  Dechlorination (R&D)

8-15-83
STD. Conditions
8-15-84
Unknown
10 cu. yrds. of soil
N/A
Galson Technical Services Niagara Mohawk
  Frequency of Operation:   N/A
  Test Results (Limits     Data not yet available
  as defined by test burn
  or test run):
2-4-82
East Syracuse, NY
PCB Contaminated Soil
Chemical Dechlorination
  (R&D)

3-10-83
STD. Conditions
None

1
Unknown

165 Ibs/yr of soil

N/A

N/A
No data
2-10-82
Syracuse, NY
Transformer Fluids
Non-Thermal (R&D)


6-20-83
STD. Conditions
None
5,000 ppm

3,000 gal. @ <500 ppm
  250 gal. 
-------
                                                TABLE C-2.   (continued)
en
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste:
Process Utilized:

Permit Status
  Approval Date:
  Approval Conditions:
  Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
  Number of Units:
  Concentration Limit
  of Feed (ppm) :
  Capacity of Process
  or Unit:
  % Capacity Presently
  Available:
  Frequency of Operation:
  Test Results (Limits
  as defined by test burn
  or test run):
Commercial Availability:
                              Marcus Sittenfield Assoc,
                              4-28-83
                              Fanningdale, NY
                              PCB Liquids
                              Chemical Dechlorination
                                (R&D)

                              8-10-83
                              STD. Conditions
                              None
                               500 ppm

                               25 gallons

                               N/A
                               N/A
                               No data available
                              Not Available
                                (Pilot Scale R&D Study)

-------
       TABLE C-3.
INFORMATION OF PCB DISPOSAL ACTIVITIES—THERMAL  DESTRUCTION/NONTHERMAL  DESTRUCTION,
                               REGION III
   Company:
   Application Date:
   Site Location:
   Type of Waste:
   Process Utilized:
   Permit Status
     Approval Date:
     Approval Conditions:

     Expiration Date:

-------
                                           TABLE C-3.  (continued)
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste:
Process Utilized:
Permit Status
  Approval Date:
  Approval Conditions:

  Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
  Number of Units:
  Concentration Limit
  of Feed (ppm):
  Capacity of Process
  or Unit:
  % Capacity Presently
  Available:
  Frequency of Operation:
  Test Results (Limits
  as defined by test burn
  or test run):
Sunohio
9-11-81
Mobile
M.O.D.F.
Chemical Dechlorination

9-9-82
Cone. Limit,
  STD. Conditions
None

5 (Nationwide)
2,500 ppm

600 gal/day

100

Semi-Continuous
Outlet <2 ppm
Commercial Availability:   Available
Franklin Institutes
3-28-81
Philadelphia, PA
M.O.D.F.
Chemical Dechlorination

9-28-82
Cone. Limit,
  STD. Conditions
None
7,406 ppm

250 gal/batch

100

Never utilized
Outlet <2 ppm

Available
General Electric
5-29-81
Philadelphia, PA
M.O.D.F.
Chemical Dechlorination

9-28-82
Cone. Limit,
  STD. Conditions
None
1,050 ppm

210 gal/batch

100

Never utilized
Outlet <2 ppm

Available
                                                (continued)

-------
                                            TABLE  C-3.   (continued)
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste:

Process Utilized:
Permit Status
  Approval Date:
  Approval Conditions:

  Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
  Number of Units:
  Concentration Limit
  of Feed (ppm) :
  Capacity of Process
  or Unit:
  I Capacity Presently
  Available:
  Frequency of Operation:
  Test Results (Limits
  as defined by test burn
  or test run):
PPM, Inc.
12-1A-81
Mobile
Waste oil
Transformer Consultants
4-5-82
Mobile
M.O.D.F.
Sunohio
7-23-82
Jeannette, PA
Therminol-55 heat
Transfer fluid/M.O.D.F.
Chemical Dechlorination   Chemical Dechlorination   Chemical Dechlorination
4-28-83
Cone. limit,
  STD conditions
None
4 (Nationwide)
1,100 ppm

5 - 10,000 gal/day

100

Semi-continuous
Outlet <2 ppm
Commercial Availability:   Available
5-26-83
Cone, limit,
  STD conditions
None
2 (Nationwide)
Batch - 3,000 ppm
Continuous - 2,100 ppm
7 - 9,000 gal/day

100

Semi-continuous
Outlet <2 ppm
                          Available
3-21-83
Cone, limit,
  STD conditions
None
4,500 ppm

CBI

100

No data
Outlet <2 ppm
                          Unavailable
                          (Pilot Plant R&D Study)
                                                (continued)

-------
                                          TABLE C-3.  (continued)
Company:

Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste:
Process Utilized:

Permit Status
  Approval Date:
  Approval Conditions:

  Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
  Number of Units:
  Concentration Limit
  of Feed (ppm):
  Capacity of Process
  or Unit:
  % Capacity Presently
  Available:
  Frequency of Operation:
  Test Results (Limits
  as defined by test burn
  or test run):
Commercial Availability:
Chemical Decontamination
  Corp.
8-20-83
Mobile
M.O.D.F.
Chemical Dechlorination
  (R&D)

9-23-82
Cone, limit,
  STD conditions
None
4,179 ppm

CBI

N/A

N/A
Outlet <2 ppm
Unavailable (Research
  & Development Pilot
  Study)
Atlantic Research Corp.

9-9-83
Alexandria, VA
PCB waste (unspecified)
CBI
11-30-83
STD. conditions

None

1
CBI

CBI

N/A

N/A
No test conducted
Unavailable (Research
  & Development Study)

-------
       TABLE C-4.   INFORMATION OF PCB DISPOSAL ACTIVITIES—THERMAL DESTRUCTION/NONTHERMAL DESTRUCTION,
                                                  REGION IV
cr>
ro
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:

Type of Waste:
Process Utilized:
Permit Status
  Approval Date:
  Approval Conditions:

  Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
  Number of Units:
  Concentration Limit
  of Feed (ppm):
  Capacity of Process
  or Unit:
  7, Capacity Presently
  Available:
  Frequency of Operation:
  Test Results (Limits
  as defined by test burn
  or test run):
                              Tennessee Eastman Co.
                              3-79
                              Kingsport, TN

                              Waste Oil
                              Boiler

                              4-79
                              STD. Conditions

                              None
                              500 ppm

                              Unknown

                              100

                              3-4/yr
                              D.E. >99.7%
   Commercial Availability:   Available
Duke Power Co.
5-81
Riverbend Station Unit,
Unit No. 4
M.O.D.F.
Boiler

6-81
STD. Conditions

None
500 ppm

977 x 106 Btu/hr

100

No data
D.E. >99.92%

Available
Tennessee Valley Authority
6-10-81
Widow's Creek Station,
Unit No. 1, Bridgeport, AL
Waste oil
Boiler

7-81
STD. Conditions
conditions
None
500 ppm

1,290 x 106 Btu/hr

100

No data
D.E. >99.95%

Available
                                                   (continued)

-------
                                               TABLE C-4.   (continued)
CTi
CO
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:

Type of Waste:
Process Utilized:
Permit Status
  Approval Date:
  Approval Conditions:
  Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
  Number of Units:
  Concentration Limit
  of Feed (ppm):
  Capacity of Process
  or Unit:
       % Capacity Presently
       Available:
       Frequency of Operation:
       Test Results (Limits
       as defined by test burn
       or test run):
                                Louisville Gas & Electric Carolina Power & Light Co.
                                8-81                      11-12-82
                                Cane Run Station,  Units
                                  4,5,6, Louisville,  KY
                                M.O.D.F.
                                Boiler
                                8-81
                                STD. Conditions
                                None
                                500 ppm
Cape Fear Station, Unit
  No. 5, Moncure, NC
M.O.D.F.
Boiler
12-82
STD. Conditions
None
500 ppm
                                Unit 4 - 1,801 x 106      1,200 x 106 Btu/hr
                                Btu/hr, Unit 5 - 1,822 x
                                106 Btu/hr.  Unit 6 -
                                2,759 x 10  Btu/hr
                           100

                           5-6/yr
                           Unknown
     Commercial Availability:   Available
100

3-4/yr
Unknown

Available
                                                     (continued)

-------
                                            TABLE C-4.  (continued)
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste:
Process Utilized:
Permit Status
  Approval Date:
  Approval Conditions:
  Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
  Number of Units:
  Concentration Limit
  of Feed (ppm):
  Capacity of Process
  or Unit:
  % Capacity Presently
  Available:
  Frequency of Operation:
  Test Results (Limits
  as defined by test burn
  or test run):
Sunohio
3-81
Mobile
Waste oil
Chemical Dechlorination

4-81
None
None

5 (Nationwide)
No limit

608 gal/hr

100

Semi-continuous
Outlet <2 ppm
Commercial Availability:    Available
Acurex
7-81
Mobile
Waste oil
Chemical Dechlorination

6-4-82
None
None

1 (Nationwide)
No limit

4 - 6,000 gal/day

100

Never utilized
Outlet <2 ppm

Available
PPM, Inc.
12-14-81
Atlanta, CA
Waste oil
Chemical Dechlorination

3-1-82
None
None

4 (Nationwide)
No limit

5 - 10,000 gal/day

100

Semi-continuous
Outlet <2 ppm

Available
                                                (continued)

-------
                                                TABLE C-4.  (continued)
en
en
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:

Type of Waste:
Process Utilized:

Permit Status
  Approval Date:
  Approval Conditions:
  Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
  Number of Units:
  Concentration Limit
  of Feed (ppm):
  Capacity of Process
  or Unit:
  % Capacity Presently
  Available:
  Frequency of Operation:
  Test Results (Limits
  as defined by test burn
  or test run):
                               Transformer Consultants
                               5-7-82
                               Mobile

                               M.O.D.F.
                               Chemical  Dechlorination
11-23-82
STD. Conditions
None

2 (Nationwide)
No limit

7 - 9,000 gal/day

100

Semi-continous
Outlet <2 ppm
                          S.E.D., Inc.
                          4-26-82
                          Greensboro, NC

                          Capacitors
                          Shredding with solvent
                            extraction
    Commercial Availability:    Available
No limit

CBI

100

Continuous
Not tested

Available
                          Chemical Waste Management
                          N/A
                          M.T. Vulcanus (offshore)
                            Mobile, AL (port)
                          Waste oil
                          Liquid injection
                            Incinerator
                                                         6-29-82                   N/A
                                                         Process  specific common   N/A
                                                         None
                                                                                  No limit

                                                                                  25 MT/hr

                                                                                  100

                                                                                  1-2/yr
                                                                                  D.E. >99.995%
                                                                               Continuous  burn permit
                                                                                 not  yet granted

-------
        TABLE C-5.   INFORMATION  OF  PCS  DISPOSAL  ACTIVITIES—THERMAL  DESTRUCTION/NONTHERMAL  DESTRUCTION,
                                                   REGION  V
cn
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:

Type of Waste:
Process Utilized:
Permit Status
  Approval Date:
  Approval Conditions:
  Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
  Number of Units:
  Concentration Limit
  of Feed (ppm):
  Capacity of Process
  or Unit:
  % Capacity Presently
  Available:
  Frequency of Operation:
  Test Results (Limits
  as defined by test burn
  or test run) :
Commercial Availability:   Available
                               Illinois  Power  Company
                               6-18-80
                               Baldwin Station,  Unit 3
                                 Baldwin,  1L

                               M.O.D.F.
                               Boiler

                               7-80
                               STD.  Conditions
                               None
                               500  ppm

                               6,000 x 106 Btu/hr

                               100

                               No data
                               No test conducted
General Motors Corp.
5-1-81
Chevrolet Division,
  Boiler No. 3,
  Bay City, MI
Waste oil
Boiler

7-10-81
STD. Conditions
None

1
500 ppm

70 x 106 Btu/hr

100

No data
D.E. >99.99%
                                                        Available
Otter Tail Power Company
10-1-81
Hoot Lake Plant, Unit 3
  Fergus Falls, MN

M.O.D.F.
Boiler

11-4-81
STD. Conditions
None
500 ppm

660 x 106 Btu/hr

100

Never utilized
No test conducted

Never utilized
                                                   (continued)

-------
                                           TABLE  C-5.   (continued)
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:
    Type of Waste:
    Process Utilized:

    Permit Status
      Approval Date:
01     Approval Conditions:
      Expiration Date:
    Technical Considerations
      Number of Units:
      Concentration Limit
      of Feed (ppm):
      Capacity of Process
      or unit:
      % Capacity Presently
      Available:
      Frequency of Operation:
      Test Results (Limits
      as defined by test burn
      or test run):
Northern States Power Co. Housier Energy, Inc.
12-18-81
High Bridge Plant,
  Unit 12, Minneapolis,
  MN
M.O.D.F.
Boiler
                           1-8-82
                           STD.  Conditions
                           None
                           500 ppm

                           1,630 x 106 Btu/hr

                           100

                           Never utilized
                           No test conducted
Commercial Availability:    Never utilized
10-13-82
Frank E. Ratts Station,
  Units 1 & 2,
  Bloomington, IN
M.O.D.F.
Boiler
                          12-7-82
                          STD.  Conditions
                          None
                          500 ppm

                          2,332 x 106 Btu/hr

                          100

                          No data
                          No test conducted

                          Available
 SCA  Chemical Services
 9-2-82
 Chicago,  IL


 PCB  Liquids
 Annex I rotary kiln
   incinerator

 9-26-83
 STD. Conditions
 None

 1
 25%

 6,012 Ib/hr

 100

 Continuous
 D.E. >99.99%

Available
                                                (continued) '

-------
                                               TABLE C-5.   (continued)
en
c»
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste:

Process Utilized:      (

Permit Status           V
  Approval Date:
  Approval Conditions:

  Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
  Number of Units:
  Concentration Limit
  of Feed (ppm):
  Capacity of Process
  or Unit:
  % Capacity Presently
  Available:
  Frequency of Operation:
  Test Results (Limits
  as defined by test burn
  or test run) :
Commercial Availability:
                               SCA Chemical Servic
                               Chicago
                               PCB solids
                               Annex I rotary kiln
                                 incinerator
9-26-83
STD. Conditions

None
                               Continuous
                               D.E.  >99.99%

                               Available
                          Pyro-Magnetics, Corp.
                          11-3-81
                          Mobile (La Porte, IN)
                          Waste oil
                          Sunohio
                          5-16-80
                          Mobile (Canton, OH)
                          M.O.D.F., petroleum or
                            synethetic hydrocarbons
                          Rotary kiln incinerator   Chemical Dechlorination
12-17-82
STD. Conditions

None
1
28.5%
2,910 Ib/hr
100
1
No limit
5,940 Ib/hr
100
                          Not utilized
                          D.E. >99.9999%

                          Available
5-6-83
Cone, limit,
  STD. Conditions
None
                          5 (Nationwide)
                          4,500 ppm

                          1,608 gal/hr

                          100

                          Semi-continuous
                          Outlet <2 ppm

                          Available
                                                    (continued)

-------
                                                TABLE C-5.   (continued)
cr>
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste:
Process Utilized:
Permit Status
  Approval Date:
  Approval Conditions:

  Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
  Number of Units:
  Concentration Limit
  of Feed (ppm):
  Capacity of Process
  or Unit:
  % Capacity Presently
  Available:
  Frequency of Operation:
  Test Results (Limits
  as defined by test burn
  or test run):
Acurex
2-6-81
Mobile (Cincinnati, OH)
Waste oil
Chemical Dechlorination

5-6-83
Cone, limit,
  STD. Conditions
None

1 (Nationwide)
7,500 ppm w/THF
1,600 ppm w/DEGD
4 - 6,000 gal/day

100

Never utilized
Outlet <2 ppm
    Commercial Availability:    Available
Transformer Consultants
10-15-81
Akron, OH
Waste oil
Chemical Dechlorination

11-29-82
Cone, limit,
  STD. Conditions
None

2 (Nationwide)
Batch - 3,000 ppm
Continous - 2,100 ppm
7 - 9,000 gal/day

100

Semi-continuous
Outlet <2 ppm

Available
                                                                                   Dowzer  Electric  Co.
                                                                                   1-7-82
                                                                                   Mt.  Vernon,  IL
                                                                                   Waste oil
                                                                                   Chemical Dechlorination

                                                                                   7-7-83
                                                                                   Cone, limit,
                                                                                     STD Conditions
                                                                                   None
450 ppm

200 gal/batch

100

Semi-continuous
Outlet <2 ppm

Available
                                                  (continued)

-------
                  TABLE C-5.   (continued)
    Company:
    Application Date:
    Site Location:
    Type of Waste:
    Process Utilized:

    Permit Status
      Approval Date:
      Approval Conditions:

0     Expiration Date:
    Technical Considerations
      Number of Units:
      Concentration Limit
      of Feed (ppm):
      Capacity of Process
      or Unit:
      % Capacity Presently
      Available:
      Frequency of  Operation:
      Test Results  (Limits
      as defined by test  burn
      or test run):
    Commercial Availability:
PPM-PCB Management        Sunohio
1-11-82                   3-29-82
Mobile (Kansas City, MO)  Mobile
Waste oil                 Waste oil
Chemical Dechlorination
2-18-83
Cone, limit,
  STD. Conditions
None

4 (Nationwide)
1,100 ppm

5 - 10,000 gal/day

100

Never utilized
Unknown

Available
Chemical Dechlorination
  (R&D)
10-3-83
STD. conditions, max
Cone., Qty., Submit R&D
  Report
4-3-84
1
CBI

160 gal. reactor

N/A

N/A
No test conducted
Unavailable
  (R&D Study)
Acurex "B"
8-1-81
Cincinnati, OH
Capacitors
CBI (R&D)
12-30-81
STD. Conditions, Max,
  Cone., Qty., Submit R&D
  Report
6-30-82
1
CBI

CBI

N/A

N/A
No test conducted
Unavailable
  (R&D Study)
                     (continued)

-------
                                            TABLE C-5.  (continued)
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste:
Process Utilized:

  Approval Date:
  Approval Conditions:

  Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
  Number of Units:
  Concentration Limit
  of Feed (ppm):
  Capacity of Process
  or Unit:
  % Capacity Presently
  Available:
  Frequency of Operation:
  Test Results (Limits
  as defined by test burn
  or test run):
Acurex "C"
11-22-82
Mobile
Waste oil
Chemical Dechlorination
  (R&D process
  optimization)
1-13-83
STD. Conditions, Max
  Cone., Qty., Submit
  R&D Report
7-13-83
1
CBI

CBI

N/A

N/A
Unknown
Acurex "D"
12-13-82
Cincinnati, OH
Contaminated soils
Chemical Dechlorination
  (bench scale R&D)

3-8-83
STD. Conditions, Max
  Cone., Qty., Submit
  R&D Report
9-8-83

1
CBI

CBI

N/A

N/A
Unknown
Acurex "E"
12-13-82
Kingsbury, IN
Proprietary solvent
Chemical Dechlorination
  (R&D)

3-9-83
STD. Conditions, Max Cone,
  Qty., Submit R&D Report

9-9-83

1
CBI

CBI

N/A

N/A
Unknown
Commercial Availability:   Unavailable (R&D Stucly)   Unavailable (R&D Study)    Unavailable (R&D Study)
                                                (continued)

-------
                                             TABLE C-5.   (continued)
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste:
Process Utilized:

Permit Status
  Approval Date:
  Approval Conditions:

  Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
  Number of Units:
  Concentration Limit
  of Feed (ppm):
  Capacity of Process
  or Unit:
  % Capacity Presently
  Available:
  Frequency of Operation:
  Test Results  (Limits
  as defined by test burn
  or test run):
Goodyear
10-13-81
Akron, OH
Waste oil
Chemical Dechlorination
  (R&D)
10-30-81
STD. Conditions, Max.
  Cone., Qty., Submit
  R&D Report
4-30-82
1
CBI

240 gal/hr

N/A

N/A
Unknown
Transformer Consultants
10-9-82
Akron, OH
Waste oil
Chemical Dechlorination
  (R&D Process
  optimization)

6-29-83
STD. Conditions, Max.
  Cone., Qty., Submit
  R&D Report
12-29-83

1
CBI

CBI

N/A

N/A
Unknown
Polygone Corp.
10-28-81
Warrenville, IL
Waste oil
Chemical Dechlorination
  (Bench scale R&D)
11-24-81
STD. Conditions, Max. cone.
  Qty., Submit R&D Report

5-24-82
1
CBI

CBI

N/A

N/A
Unknown
Commercial Availability:   Unavailable (R&D Study)   Unavailable (R&D Study)    Unavailable (R&D Study)
                                                (continued)

-------
                                            TABLE C-5.  (continued)
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste:
Process Utilized:

Permit Status
  Approval Date:
  Approval Conditions:

  Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
  Number of Units:
  Concentration Limit
  of Feed (ppm):
  Capacity of Process
  or unit:
  % Capacity Presently
  Available:
  Frequency of Operation:
  Test Results (Limits
  as defined by test burn
  or test run):
Commercial Availability:
Polygone Corp. "B"
12-13-82
Kingsbury, IN
Hydraulic fluids
Solvent extraction (R&D)
7-25-83
STD. Conditions, Max.
  Cone., Qty.,  Submit
  R&D Report
1-25-84
1
CBI

CBI

N/A

N/A
Unknown
Transformer Service, Inc. Chem. Oil Corp.
5-17-82                   6-17-82
Akron, OH                 Warren, OH
M.O.D.F.                  M.O.D.F.
Chemical Dechlorination
  (Bench scale R&D)
4-14-83
STD. Conditions, Max.
  Cone., Qty., Submit
  R&D Report
10-14-83
1
CBI

CBI

N/A

N/A
Unknown
Chemical Dechlorination
  (R&D)
10-24-83
STD. Conditions, Max Cone.
  Qty., Submit (R&D report)
4-24-84
1
CBI

CBI

N/A

N/A
Unknown
Unavailable (R&D Study)   Unavailable (R&D Study)    Unavailable (R&D Study)
                                                (continued)

-------
                  TABLE  C-5.   (continued)
RTE Corp.
6-21-82
Waukesha, WI
M.O.D.F.
Chemical Dechlorination
  (R&D)

6-28-82
STD. Conditions, Max.
  Cone., Qty., Submit
  R&D Report
12-28-82

1
CBI

CBI

N/A

N/A
Unknown
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste:
Process Utilized:

Permit Status
  Approval Date:
  Approval Conditions:

  Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
  Number of Units:
  Concentration Limit
  of Feed (ppm):
  Capacity of Process
  or Unit:
  % Capacity Presently
  Available:
  Frequency of Operation:
  Test Results (Limits
  as defined by test burn
  or test run) :
Commercial Availability:   Unavailable (R&D Study)   Unavailable (R&D Study)   Unavailable (R&D Study)
Midland-Ross
6-28-82
Toledo, OH
Contaminated soils
Thermal-pyrolysis (R&D)


7-16-82
STD. Conditions, Max.
  Cone., Qty., Submit
  R&D Report
1-16-83

1
CBI

CBI

N/A

N/A
Unknown
Transformer Recovery
8-2-82
Brighton, MI
Capacitors
Chemical Dechlorination
  (R&D)

7-19-83
STD. Conditions, Max. Cone.
  Qty., Submit R&D Report

1-19-84

1
CBI

CBI

N/A

N/A
Unknown
                     (continued)

-------
                                            TABLE C-5.  (continued)
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste:
Process Utilized:

Permit Status
  Approval Date:
  Approval Conditions:

  Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
  Number of Units:
  Concentration Limit
  of Feed (ppm):
  Capacity of Process
  or Unit:
  % Capacity Presently
  Available:
  Frequency of Operation:
  Test Results (Limits
  as defined by test burn
  or test run):
U.S. Transformer
8-2-82
Jordan, MN
M.O.D.F.
Chemical Dechlorination
  (R&D)

9-1-82
STO. Conditions, Max.
  Cone., Qty., Submit
  R&D Report
3-1-82

1
CBI

CBI

N/A

N/A
No work done
Pollution Science Intl.
9-15-82
Glen Coe, IL
Contaminated sediments
Thermal stripping (R&D)


6-24-83
STD. Conditions, Max.
  Cone., Qty., Submit
  R&D Report
10-24-83

1
CBI

CBI

N/A

N/A
Unknown
Excell, Inc.
11-10-82
Cincinnati, OH
Waste oil
Thermal-molten salt (R&D)


9-14-83
STD. Conditions, Max. Cone.
  Qty., Submit R&D Report

3-14-84

1
CBI

CBI

N/A

N/A
Unknown
Commercial Availability:   Unavailable (R&D Study)   Unavailable (R&D Study)    Unavailable (R&D Study)
                                               (continued)

-------
                                                 TABLE C-5.  (continued)
en
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste:

Process Utilized:

Permit Status
  Approval Date:
  Approval Conditions:

  Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
  Number of Units:
  Concentration Limit
  of Feed (ppm):
  Capacity of Process
  or Unit:
  % Capacity Presently
  Available:
  Frequency of Operation:
  Test Results (Limits
  as defined by test burn
  or test run):
Dow Corning Corp.
11-12-82
Midland, MI
Contaminated silicon
  fluids
Physical absorption
  (Bench scale R&D)

8-22-83
STD. Conditions, Max.
  Cone., Qty., Submit
  R&D Report
2-22-84

1
CBI

CBI

N/A

N/A
Unknown
Energystics, Inc.
7-15-83
Toledo, OH
Waste oil

Thermal-plasma jet
  incineratin (R&D)

9-14-83
STD. Conditions, Max.
  Cone., Qty., Submit
  R&D Report
3-14-84

1
CBI

CBI

N/A

N/A
Unknown
    Commercial Availability:   Unavailable (R&D Study)    Unavailable (R&D Study)
                                                 (continued)

-------
                APPENDIX D

 INFORMATION ON PCB DISPOSAL ACTIVITIES -
THERMAL DESTRUCTION/NONTHERMAL DESTRUCTION
            (EPA REGIONS VI-X)
                     77

-------
            TABLES D-l THROUGH D-5,  ABBREVIATIONS,  DEFINITIONS
M.O.D.F.:

THF:

DEGM:

R&D:

N/A:

CBI:


Ml:

D.E. :

STD. Conditions:



Semi-continuous:



Never utilized:
Mineral Oil Dielectric Fluid

Tetrahydrofuran

Diethylene Glycol, Di-methyl Ether

Research and Development Project

Not Applicable

Data are cited by firm as confidential business
Information

Metric Tons

Destruction Efficiency

Regional office approval includes several standard
conditions concerning reporting requirements,  system
operation, record keeping, etc.

Process is used regularly in region, duration of
individual decontamination runs may last from several
days to several months.

Process has been approved by EPA but has not yet been
utilized for PCB disposal.
                                  78

-------
TABLE D-l.   INFORMATION ON PCB DISPOSAL ACTIVITIES—THERMAL DESTRUCTION/NONTHERMAL DESTRUCTION,
                                           REGION VI
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste:
Process Utilized:
Permit Status
Approval Date:
Approval Conditions:
Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
Number of Units:
Concentration Limit of
Feed (ppm):
Capacity of Process or
Unit:
% Capacity Presently
Available:
Frequency of Operation:
Test Results (Limits
as defined by test
burn or test run) :
Commercial Availability:

Energy Systems Company
(ENSCO)
March 1978
El Dorado, AR
Solid waste
Annex I rotary kiln i

June 3. 1983
Standard conditions
None

1
None
3,700 Ib/h
Not available
Continuous
D.E. = 99.999997% '
Available

DOM Chemical
September 1979
Freeport, TX
Vinyl chloride
Annex 1 liquid injection
incinerator

April 1982
Waiver - Residence time
None

1
None
48.6 Ib/h PCBs
Not available
Continuous
D.E. = >99. 99999%
Not available
(continued)
DOM Chemical
September 1979
Plaquemine, LA
Vinyl chloride
Annex I liquid injection
incinerator

June 1982
Waiver - Residence time,
feed measurement every
15 minutes, combustion
efficiency during feed
switching
None

1
None
2.3 Ib/h PCBs
Not available
Continuous
D.E. = >99.9971%
Not available

DOM Chemical
September 1979
Oster Creek, TX
Vinyl chloride
Annex I liquid injection
incinerator

June 1982
Standard conditions
None

1
None
3.4 Ib/h PCBs
Not available
Continuous
D.E. = >99. 999998*
Not available


-------
TABLE  D-l.   (continued)
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste:
Process Utilized:
Permit Status
Approval Date:
Approval Conditions:
Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
Number of Units:
00
O Concentration Limit of
Feed (ppm):
Capacity of Process or
Unit:
% Capacity Presently
Available:
Frequency of Operation:
Test Results (Limits
as defined by test
burn or test run):
Commercial Availability:
Vulcan Materials
January 1980
Geismar, LA
Vinyl chloride
Incinerator

May 3. 1983
Waiver - Temperature
automatic cutoff
None

1
None
12.95 Ib/h
N/A
Continuous
D.E. = >99. 99998*
Not available
Roll ins Environmental
Services
April 1980
Deer Park. TX
Solid waste
Rotary kiln

January 1983
Annex I
None

1
None
2.439 Ib/h PCBs
N/A ^T
Continuous
D.E. = >99. 99999% \
5
I
Available,
; -^ 	 „.- - •
LaPort Chemical Corp.
July 1980
Pasadena, TX
Vinyl chloride
Incinerator

January 1983
Annex I
None

1
None
13.2 Ib/h
N/A
Not operating
D.E. - >99. 99999*
Not available
PPG
1980
Lake Charles, LA
Process waste
Incinerator

Proposed March 22,
Waiver - Residence
None

3
None






1984
time



No. 1 & 2 - 1.9 Ib/h
No. 3 - 2.7 Ib/h
N/A
Continuous


D.E.. No. 142 = 99.99997%
O.E., No. 3 * 99.99998%
Not available

       (continued)

-------
                                                TABLE 0-1.   (continued)
CO
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste:
Process Utilized:
Permit Status
Approval Date:
Approval Conditions:
Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
Number of Units:
Concentration Limit of
Feed (ppm):
Capacity of Process or
Unit:
I Capacity Presently
Available:
Frequency of Operation:
Test Results (Limits
as defined by test
burn or test run):
Commercial Availability:
SunOhio
September 1981
Mobile
MODF
Chemical dechlorination

October 21. 1982
Alternate
None

5 (nationwide)
<2500
N/A
Not available
Semi -continuous
c2 ppm PCB
Available •
ENSCO ( formerly Pyro-
Magnetics
November 1981
Mobile
Waste oil
Annex I liquid injection

June 13. 1983
Annex I
None

1
None
217.56 Ib/h - 	
100%
Not in use
D.E. = 99.999943%
Available ";
Acurex
November 1981
Mobile
MODF
Chemical dechlorination

May 3, 1982
Alternate
None

1
<7500
No limit
Not available
Semi -continuous
<2 ppm PCB
Available
PPM. Inc.
December 1981
Mobile
MODF
Chemical dechlorination

March 7, 1983
Alternate
None

4 (nationwide)
<1100
No limit
Not available
Semi -continuous
<2 ppm PCB
Available
(continued)

-------
                                                TABLE D-l.   (continued)
00
ro
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste:
Process Utilized:
Permit Status
Approval Date:
Approval Conditions:
Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
Number of Units:
Concentration Limit of
Feed (ppm):
Capacity of Process or
Unit:
X Capacity Presently
Available:
Frequency of Operation:
Test Results (Limits
as defined by test
burn or test run):
Commercial Availability:

Los Alamos Scientific
February 1982
Los Alamos, NM
MODF
Incinerator

Proposed March 22. 1984
Standard conditions
None

1
None
26.5 It/h
100
Not operating
D.E. = 99.99998%
Not available ,

Transformer Consultants
May 1982
Mobile
MODF
Chemical dechlorination

March 7. 1983
Alternate technology
None

2 (nationwide)
<3,000 batch
No limit
100 ""N^
Semi -continuous \
^2 ppm PCBs j
Available*^
""~" 	 feontfnued)
General Electric
August 1982
Mobile
HOOF
Chemical dechlorination

March 7. 1983
Alternate technology
None

1
< 1.050
No limit
N/A
Semi-continuous
<2 ppm PCBs
Available

Franklin Institute
Research Laboratory
October 1982
Mobile
MOOF
Chemical dechlorination

March 7, 1983
Alternate
None

1
7.400
No limit
100
Semi-continuous
<2 ppm PCBs
Available


-------
                                                              TABLE  D-l.   (continued)
CO
U>
	 	 .... 	 L.- 	 .- i_ . . - i- - --. - I. - - ., ' - - - - --••-•- -i — — -.-•--» 	 »-—-.--.-,_ --!-_- rij i -, m-i -r . H^T-. _
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste:
Process Utilized:
Permit Status
Approval Date:
Approval Conditions:
Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
Number of Units:
Concentration Limit of
Feed (ppm):
Capacity of Process or
Unit:
% Capacity Presently
Available:
Frequency of Operation:
Test Results (Limits
Huber, Corp.
December 1982
Borger, TX
Contaminated soil
Pyro lysis

Proposed - March 22, 1984
Alternate
None

1
None
2.8 Ib/h
100 • '
N/A
D.E. = >99. 999997%
Detox, Inc.
January 1983
Houston, TX
Contaminated soil, sludges
Biodegradation

Proposed - pending
Alternate
None

Not applicable
None
N/A
100
N/A
<1 ppm PCBs
                                        as defined by test
                                        burn or test run):

                                      Commercial Availability:
Available
                          Available

-------
         TABLE D-2.  INFORMATION ON PCB DISPOSAL ACTIVITIES—THERMAL DESTRUCTION/NONTHERMAL DESTRUCTION,
                                                    REGION VII
00
Company:

Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste:
Process Utilized:

Permit Status
Approval Date:
Approval Conditions:
Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
Number of Units:
Concentration Limit of
Feed (ppm):
Capacity of Process or
Unit:
% Capacity Presently
Available:
Frequency of Operation:
Test Results (Limits
as defined by test
burn or test run) :
Commercial Availability:
SunOhio

October 1980
Mobile
M.O.O.F.
Chemical dechlorination


November 1981
Concentration
November 17, 1984

5 (nationwide)
10,000

CBI

CBI

CBI
CBI


Available
Energy Recovery Corp.
(formerly PCB Destruction)

May 1981
Mobile
M.O.D.F.
Chemical dechlorination


October 1, 1983
Concentration
April 1. 1984

CBI
10,000

CBI

CBI

CBI
CBI


Not available
Acurex

May 1981
Mobile
M.O.D.F.
Chemical dechlorination


September 15, 1982
Concentration
September 15, 1983

CBI
10.000

CBI

CBI

CBI
CBI


Available
Chemical Waste Management
(formerly Environmental
International)
May 1981
Kansas City, MO
Capacitors
Mechanical shredding
and rinsing

April 4, 1983
CBI
March 16, 1985

CBI
CBI

CBI

CBI

CB!
CBI


Available
(continued)

-------
                                                TABLE  D-2.   (continued)
00
en
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste:
Process Utilized:
Permit Status
Approval Date:
Approval Conditions:
Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
Number of Units:
Concentration Limit of
Feed (ppm):
Capacity of Process or
Unit:
* Capacity Presently
Available:
Frequency of Operation:
Test Results (Limits
as defined by test
burn or test run):
Commercial Availability:
Alcoa
June 1981
Davenport, IA
Contaminated fuel oil
Incineration

December 1981
2.5 million gallons onsite
None

1
500
CBI
CBI
CBI
CBI
Not available
Rose Chemical Company
June 1981
Hoi den. MO
M.O.D.F.
Dechlorination

March 1983
Concentration
March 15. 1986

CBI
10,000
CBI
CBI
CBI
CBI
Available
PPM Inc.
October 1981
Mobile
M.O.D.F., contaminated
kerosene and heat transfer
fluids
Dechlorination

August 1982
Concentration
August 1. 1985

CBI
10.000
CBI
CBI
CBI
CBI
Available
Pyro-Magnetics
November 1981
Mobile
Contaminated waste oil
Incineration

September 1, 1982
Interim
None

CBI
500,000
1.45 gal/mln
CBI
CBI
CBI
Available
(continued)

-------
                                               TABLE D-2.   (continued)
00
(Ti
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste:
Process Utilized:
Permit Status
Approval Date:
Approval Conditions:
Expiration Date:
technical Considerations
Number of Units:
Concentration Limit of
Feed (ppm):
Capacity of Process or
Unit:
% Capacity Presently
Available:
Frequency of Operation:
Test Results (Limits
as defined by test
burn or test run):
Commercial Availability:
Chemical Waste Management
(formerly environmental
international )
January 1982
Mobile
Contaminated waste oil
Chemical dechlorination

November 5. 1982
Concentration
September 17. 1985

CBI
570,000
CBI
CBI
CBI
CBI
Available
Union Electric Company
April 1982
St. Louis, MO
M.O.D.F.
High efficiency boiler

January 1983
Site generated only
None

1
50,000 + 10,000
750 l 75 gal/hr
CBI
CBI
CBI
Not available
Transformer Consultants,
Div. of S.O. Meyers
June 1982
Mobile
PCB liquids
Chemical dechlorination

October 1, 1982
Concentration
April 1, 1986

CBI
10,000
CBI
CBI
CBI
CBI
Available
PCB Treatment
August 1982
Inc.

Kansas City, MO
PCB liquids

Chemical dechlorination

September 15,
Concentration
September 15,

CBI
10.000
CBI
CBI
CBI
CBI
Available

1983

1986








(continued)

-------
                                               TABLE  D-2.   (continued)
00
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste:
Process Utilized:
Permit Status
Approval Date:
Approval Conditions:
Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
Number of Units:
Concentration Limit of
Feed (ppm):
Capacity of Process or
Unit:
% Capacity Presently
Available:
Frequency of Operation:
Test Results (Limits
as defined by test
burn or test run) :
Commercial Availability:
Franklin Institute Research General Electric
Laboratory
October 1982 October 1982
Mobile Mobile
M.O.D.F. M.O.D.F.
Oechlorinatlon Dechlorination

Permit request March 1983
Sent to headquarters Concentration
October 1. 1983 -
not renewed

CB1
10.000
CBI
CBI
CBI
CBI
Available
Rose Chemical Company SED Inc.
November 1982 November 1982
Holden. MO Mobile
Capacitors Capacitors
Mechanical shredding and Mechanical shredding and
rinsing rinsing

November 7. 1983 Permit request
Effective October 15, 1983 Sent to headquarters
October 15, 1986

CBI
CBI
CBI
CBI
CBI
CBI
Available
(continued)

-------
TABLE  D-2.  (continued)
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste:
Process Utilized:
Permit Status
Approval Date:
Approval Conditions:
Expiration Date:
2° Technical Considerations
CD
Number of Units:
Concentration Limit of
Feed (ppm):
Capacity of Process or
Unit:
% Capacity Presently
Available:
Frequency of Operation:
Test Results (Limits
as defined by test
burn or test run):
Commercial Availability:
PPM Inc. PCB Treatment Inc. PCB Specialist PCB Disposal Systems,
Inc.
January 1983 January 1983 Informal letter of intent. October 1983
October 21. 1982
Kansas City, MU Kansas City, MO Kansas City, MO Kansas City, MO
Transformer and capacitors Capacitors M.O.D.F. M.O.D.F.
Solvent cleaning Mechanical shredding and Dechlorination Dechlorination
rinsing

Permit request July 5, 1983 Application not received Permit request
or expected
Interim
February 1, 1984
CBI
C8I
CBI
CBI
CBI
CBI
Available
     (continued)

-------
                                                                          TABLE  D-2.    (continued)
CO
                                              Company:


                                              ApplIcation Date:

                                              Site Location:

                                              Type of Waste:

                                              Process Utilized:
Permit Status

  Approval  Date:

  Approval  Conditions:

  Expiration Date:

Technical  Considerations

  Number of Units:

  Concentration Limit of
  Feed (ppra):

  Capacity of Process or
  Unit:

  % Capacity Presently
  Available:

  Frequency of Operation:

  Test Results (Limits
  as defined by test
  burn or test run):
PCB Disposal  Systems.
Inc.

October 1983

Kansas City,  MO

Capacitors and transformers

Capacitors:   mechanical
shredding and rinsing
Transformers:  mechanical
separations,  cleanup and
salvage of metals



December 15,  1983

R&D for transformers only

June 15, 1984



CBI

CB1


CBI


CBI


CBI

CBI
                                                            Environmental International
                                                            Electrical Services

                                                            August 1983

                                                            Kansas City, KS

                                                            Transformers

                                                            Mechanical separations,
                                                            cleanup and salvage of metals
                                                                                                           Not approved
                                              Comnercial Availability:
                              CBI

-------
           TABLE D-3.  INFORMATION ON PCB DISPOSAL ACTIVITIES—THERMAL  DESTRUCTION/NONTHERMAL  DESTRUCTION
                                                     REGION VIII
<£>
O
Company :
Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Haste:
Process Utilized:
Permit Status
Approval Date:
Approval Conditions:
Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
Number of Units:
Concentration Limit of
Feed (ppm):
Capacity of Process or
Unit:
» Capacity Presently
Available:
Frequency of Operation:
Test Results (Limits
as defined by test
burn or test run):
Commercial Availability:

Rockwell International/OOE
March 1900
Mobile
Contaminated liquids
Fluidized bed Incineration

May 1981 (test date)
Single test
None

1
N/A
1 gal
N/A
Not operating
DE * 99.9999%
Not available - R&D

Acurex
March 1981
Mobile
Contaminated liquids
Chemical dechlorination

September 15, 1982
Concentration
None

1
<7SOO
4.000 - 6,000 qal/day
100
Semi -continuous
N/A
Available
(continued)
T S R Electric . PCB Eliminator, Inc.
June 1981 September 19B1
Coleinan, SO Mobile
Contaminated liquids Contaminated liquids
Chemical dechlorination

September ). 1982 Withdrew request
-
None

1
500 ppm
500 gal batches
100
Semi-continuous
N/A
Available


-------
TABLE D-3.   (continued)
Company.
Appl ication Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste;
Process Utilized: f
Permit Status
Approval Date:
Approval Conditions:
Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
Number of Units:
Concentration Limit of
Feed (ppm):
Capacity of Process or
Unit:
% Capacity Presently
Available:
Frequency of Operation:
Test Results (Limits
as defined by test
liurn or test run):
Commercial Availability:

SunOhio
October 1981
Mobile
Contaminated liquids
Chemical dechlorination

September 1982
Concentration
None

5 (nationwide)
<2.500 PCBs
600 gal/hr
100
Semi -continuous
N/A
Available

Pyro-Mdgnetics
November 1981
Mobile
Contaminated 1 iquids
Annex I liquid injection

September 12, 1902
Excess oxyyen volume
None

1
410,000 ppm
1/gal/min
520 Ib/hr
100
Semi-continuous
C.E, = 99.95
D.E. = 99.99992
Available
(continued)
PPM Inc.
December 1981
Mobile
Contaminated waste oil
Chemical dechlorination

March 25, 1982
Concentration
None

4 (nationwide)
^2,500
5,000 - 10,000 gal/day
100
Semi -continuous
N/A
Available

PCB Destruction Company
December 19K1 (requested)
Mobile
Contaminated liquids
Chemical dechlorination

Never appl ied
-
-

-
-
-
-
-
~
-


-------
                                                TABLE  D-3.   (continued)
(JO
ro
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste:
Process Utilized: '
Permit Status
Approval Date:
Approval Conditions:
Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
Number of Units:
Concentration Limit of
Feed (ppm):
Capacity of Process or
Unit:
I Capacity Presently
Available:
Frequency of Operation:
Test Results (Limits
as .defined by test
burn or test run):
Commercial Availability:
Chemical Waste Management
(formerly Environmental Intl.
January 1982
Mobile
Contaminated liquids
Chemical dechlorlnation

March 25. 1982
Concentration
None

N/A
^1000
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Available
Transformer Consultants
April 1982
Akron, OH - Mobile
Contaminated waste oil
Chemical dechlorlnation

July 30. 1982
Concentration, Standard
conditions
None

2 (nationwide)
2000
40QQ - 6000 gal /day
100
Semi-continuous
Outlet •?- ppm
Available
PCB Specialist Franklin Institute
Research Laboratory
October 1982 October 1982
Mobile Mobile
M.O.D.F. M.O.D.F.
Chemical dechlorlnation Chemical dechlorination

No action February 1983
-
None

1
7500
250 gal /batch
100
Semi -continuous
Outlet <2 ppm
Available
(continued)

-------
                                                                 TABLE  D-3.   (continued)
<£>
CO
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste:
Process Utilized:
Permit Status
Approval Date:
Approval Conditions:
Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
Number of Units:
Concentration Limit of
Feed (ppm):
Capacity of Process or
Unit:
% Capacity Presently
Available:
Frequency of Operation:
Test Results (Limits
General Electric
November 1982
Mobile
M.O.D.F.
Chemical dechlorination

February 1983
Concentration
None

1
1000
210 gal/batch
100
Semi -continuous
Outlet <2 ppm
Otter Tail Power Company
January 1983
Big Stone, SO
M.O.O.F.
High efficiency boiler

November 1983
Standard for H.E. boiler
None

1
500
25 gal/min
N/A
N/A
no test
                                            as defined by test
                                            burn or  test run):
                                          Commercial Availability:
Available
Not available

-------
TABLE D-4.   INFORMATION ON PCB DISPOSAL ACTIVITIES—THERMAL DESTRUCTION/NONTHERMAL DESTRUCTION,
                                           REGION IX
Company :
Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste: i
Process Utilized:
Permit Status
Approval Date:
Approval Conditions:
Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
Number of Units:
Concentration Limit of
Feed (ppn):
Capacity of Process or
Unit:
X Capacity Presently
Available:
Frequency of Operation:
Test Results (Limits
as defined by test
burn or test run) :
Commercial Availability:

SunOhio
June 1980
Mobile
M.O.D.F.
Chemical dechlorination

December 1981
Standard conditions
None

5 (nationwide)
No limit
600 gal/hr
100
Semi -continuous
Outlet -2 ppm
Available

Dow Chemical
September 1980
Pittsburg, CA
Contaminated process
waste
Thermal oxidizer

Not issued
N/A
N/A

1
N/A
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
(continued)
Thagard Research Corp.
July 1981
Irvine, CA
Contaminated solids
High temperature fluid
volume reactor

June 7. 1982
R&D for contaminated soil
None

1
10,000
100 gm/min.
R&D
Once
99.9997%
Not available - R»D study

Rockwell International
October 1981
Ventura County, CA
Contaminated oils
Hoi ten salt reactor

January 26, 1982
R&D report
None

1
30 Ib. of 70% PCB
Not available
Not available
Once
Not available
Not available - R&D study


-------
                                                  TABLE D-4.  (continued)
cn
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste:
Process Util ized:
Permit Status
Approval Date:
Approval Conditions:
Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
Number of Units:
Concentration Limit of
Feed (ppm):
Capacity of Process or
Unit:
% Capacity Presently
Available:
Frequency of Operation:
Test Results (Limits
as defined by test
burn or test run) :
Commercial Availability:
Pyro -Magi) Hies Corp.
November 1981
Mobile
Contamianted waste oils
Annex I incinerator

Hay 25. 1983
Standard conditions
None

1
No limit
5,940 Ib/hr
N/A
Semi -continuous
D.E. >99.9999*
Available
Excel tech (licensed by
Acurex)
November 19, 1982
(transferred)
Mobile
M.O.D.F.
Chemical dechlorination

August 22, 1982
Concentration
None

1
7,500
4.000-6,000 gal/day
N/A
Semi-continuous
Outlet <2 ppm
Available
Transformer Consultants
April 1982
Mobile
M.O.D.F.
Chemical dechlorination

Not issued
N/A
N/A

2 (nationwide)
N/A
7,000-9,000 gal/day
N/A
Semi-continuous
Outlet <2 ppm
Not available
Baird Corporation
May 1982
Irvine, CA
Contaminated solids
High temperature fluid
volume reactor (Thagard
unit)

June 21, 1982
R&D for sediment
concentration
None

1
10,000
100 gm/min
R&D
Once
D.E. 99.9997X
Not available - R&D study
(continued)

-------
                             TABLE  D-4.    (continued)
Company:


Application Date:

Site Location:

Type of Waste:

Process Utilized:

Permit Status

  Approval  Date:

  Approval  Conditions:

  Expiration Date:

Technical Considerations
  Number of Units:

  Concentration Limit of
  Feed (ppm):

  Capacity  of  Process or
  Unit:

  % Capacity Presently
  Available:

  Frequency of Operation:

  Test Results (Limits
  as defined by test
  burn or  test run):
Franklin Institute
Research Laboratory

October 1988

Mobile

M.O.D.F.

Chemical dechlor1 nation



Not issued
1

N/A


250 gal/batch


100


Semi-continuous

Outlet -2 ppm
General Electric


October 1982

Mobile

M.O.O.f.

Chemical dechlorlnation



Not issued
1

N/A


210 gal/batch


100


Semi-continuous

Outlet <2 ppm
Commercial  Availability:
Available
                              Available

-------
TABLE  D-5.   INFORMATION ON PCB  DISPOSAL  ACTIVITIES—THERMAL  DESTRUCTION/NONTHERMAL  DESTRUCTION
                                                          REGION X
Company:


Applicatipn Date:

Site Location:

Type of Haste:      I

Process Utilized:

Permit Status
SunUhio


August 1980

Mobile

M.O.D.F.

Chemical dechlorination
Washington Mater and
Power Company

October 1980

Spokane, MA

M.O.D.F.

High efficiency boiler
Acurex


January 1981

Mobile

M.O.D.F.

Chemical dechlorination
Environmental Inter-
national ,  Inc.

September  1981

Mobile

Capacitors

Decontamination process
Approval Date:
Approval Conditions:
Expiration Date:
;chnical Considerations
Number of Units:
Concentration Limit of
Feed (ppm):
Capacity of Process or
Unit:
% Capacity Presently
Available:
Frequency of Operation:
Test Results (limits
as defined by test
burn or test run) :
onniercial Availability:
January 21, 1983
Concentration
January 1, 1984

5 (nationwide)
2,500
600 gal/hr
100
Semi-continuous
Outlet <2 ppm
Available
December 1, 1981
Standard for H.C. boiler
None

1
500
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Not available - used once
April 1982
Concentration
January 1, 1984

1 (nationwide)
7,500
4,000 - 6,000 gal/day
100
Semi-continuous
Outlet <2 ppm
Available
December 3, 1982
Concentration
January 1, 1985

1
Outlet <2 ppm
N/A
N/A
Semi -continuous
N/A
Available
                                                     (continued)

-------
                                                    TABLE  D-5.   (continued)
CD
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste:
Process Utilized:
Permit Status
Approval Date:
Approval Conditions:
Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
Number of Units:
Concentration Limit of
Feed (ppra):
Capacity of Process or
Unit:
% Capacity Presently
Available:
frequency of Operation:
Test Results (Limits
as defined by test
burn or test run) :
Commercial Availability:
PPM Inc.
September 19(11
Mobile
M.O.O.F. and kerosene
Chemical dechlorination

November 1982
Concentration
January 1. 1985

4 (nationwide)
1,500
5,000 - 10,000 gal/day
100
Semi -continuous
Outlet <2 ppm
Available
Pyro-Magnetics PCB Destruction Company Environmental Inter-
national, Inc.
November 1981 December 1981 February 1982
Mobile Mobile Mobile
Contaminated waste oil Contaminated waste oil Contaminated waste oil
Annex 1 liquid injection Chemical dechlorination Chemical dechlorination

Not approved Not approved Not approved
-
.

1 1
-
-
.
-
_
-
                                                       (continued)

-------
                                                    TABLE  D-5.   (continued)
ir>
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste:
Process Util ized: f
Permit Status
Approval Date:
Approval Conditions:
Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
Number of Units:
Concentration Limit of
Feed (ppm):
Capacity of Process or
Unit:
% Capacity Presently
Available:
Frequency of Operation:
Test Results (Limits
as defined by test
burn or test run) :
Commercial Availability:
Transformer Consultants
April 1982
Mobile
M.O.D.F.
Chemical dechlorination

December 8, 1982
Concentration
January 1, 1985

2 (nationwide)
2,100
CBI
100
Semi -continuous
Outlet -2 ppm
Available
Franklin Institute Research General Llectric Aqua-Tech
Laboratory
October 1982 October 1982 October 1982
Mobile Mobile Hillsboro, OR
M.O.D.F. M.O.D.F. Contaminated oil waste
Chemical dechlorination Chemical dechlorination B iodegradat ion

Not approved Not approved Research project letter
of permission issued
November 8, 1982
-
October 1, 1983

1 I 1
100
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Not available - R&D study
                                                      (continued)

-------
O
O
                                                                    TABLE  D-5.    (continued)
Company:
Application Date:
Site Location:
Type of Waste:
Proces** Utilized:
SED Inc.
November 1982
Mobile
Capacitors
Mechanical shredding
PCB Specialist
letter of intent -
March 1983
Mobile
M.O.O.F.
Chemical dechlorination
Anchorage Utilities
Letter of intent
Anchorage, AK
M.O.D.F.
Mutliple hearth sludge
Permit Status
  Approval Date:
  Approval Conditions:
  Expiration Date:
Technical Considerations
  Number of Units:
  Concentration Limit of
  Feed (ppm):
  Capacity of Process or
  Unit:
  % Capacity Presently
  Available:
  Frequency of Operation:
  Test Results  (Limits
  as defined by test
  burn or  test  run):
                                                        and rinsing
                                                         Not approved
Not approved
                                                                                                                    Incinerator
                                                                                                                    Withdrawn
                              1
                              50 ppm
                           Coumercial  Availability:
                                                                                                                    Not  available

-------
                      APPENDIX E

SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS OF THE NEW BEDFORD,  MASSACHUSETTS
       MULTIPLE HEARTH SEWAGE SLUDGE INCINERATOR
                         101

-------
            SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS OF THE NEW BEDFORD,  MASSACHUSETTS,
                    MULTIPLE HEARTH  SEWAGE SLUDGE INCINERATOR

     One principal technical assistance task conducted under this work
assignment was a PCB destruction efficiency test of the New Bedford municipal
sewage sludge incinerator.  This sampling and analysis effort was undertaken
by GCA/Technology Division at the request of EPA Region I personnel to
quantify environmental releases of PCBs and potential incomplete combustion
by-products that result from incineration of PCB containing sewage sludge.
The results of this testing will be reported in a separate report.  The
following discussion presents the highlights of this program.
     Due to widespread PCB contamination resulting primarily from the
manufacture of PCB  capacitors, the  entire New Bedford Harbor area has been
classified as a national  priority list  site under  Superfund.  Significant
quantities of PCBs  presently reside in  the  city's municipal sewage  system and
hence represent a potential source  of PCBs  to the  city's  sewage  treatment
plant.  These PCBs  are concentrated in  the  treatment  facility and are
potentially released during sludge  incineration.   A PCB destruction efficiency
test conducted during 1976  indicated an incinerator PCB destruction efficiency
of between 46 and 77 percent.  However,  these results were considered
inconclusive due  to problems encountered with background  interferences.  Under
a previous PCB technical  assistance effort  (Contract  68-02-3168, Work
Assignment 58), a Stack Test Plan,  and  a Quality Assurance Project Plan were
written for the New Bedford sludge  incinerator.  However, this test series was
not conducted until the present  due to  equipment problems at the  facility.
     The New Bedford Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plant is a 30 million
gallon per day primary  treatment facility designed to handle both municipal
and industrial wastewater.  The  onsite  sludge incinerator at the plant is a
multiple hearth unit with seven  hearths.  The incinerator has a  rated capacity
                                     102

-------
of 1,500 pounds per hour of dry sludge feed.  A precooler and an impingement
scrubber are installed downstream of the unit to control particulate and

gaseous emissions.
     Region I PCB program personnel requested that a stack test be conducted

on this unit for four principal reasons.  These include:
     1.   To establish the PCB destruction efficiency of a conventional
          multiple hearth sewage sludge incinerator while burning contaminated
          sludge under actual operating conditions.  The New Bedford situation
          is unique in that the incinerator regularly burns sludge
          contaminated with PCBs.  No additional PCB spiking is required.  A
          test of this incinerator, under standard operating conditions, will
          therefore serve to define the typical performance characteristics of
          multiple hearth incinerator when burning difficult to incinerate
          hazardous wastes such as PCBs.  Little research and emission testing
          has been conducted to date on the capabilities of multiple hearth
          incinerators, and this testing will provide useful information in
          this area.

     2.   Define the historical impact of the incinerator on New Bedford
          ambient air quality.  Region 1 is requiring a capacitor
          manufacturing company to clean PCB contaminated sewer lines.  Once
          this activity is completed, the largest known sources of PCBs into
          the municipal treatment plant will have been eliminated.  Before
          this process is completed, a stack test is essential to define what
          the historical long-term impact of PCB contaminated sludge
          incineration may have had on ambient air quality in the New Bedford
          region.

     3.   Emissions data on combustion by-products (i.e., PCDDs, PCDFs)
          potentially formed during the incineration process do not presently
          exist in the unit.  In fact, the PCDD/PCDF data base on municipal
          sludge incineration in generaly is somewhat limited at this time and
          this test series may provide valuable data in this area as well.

     4.   A valid sampling and analysis test plan and a quality assurance
          protocol of these tests has been completed and are in place.  Only
          slight modifications are needed to adapt these plans to reflect
          existing agency policy on sampling and analytical approaches when
          conducting PCB destruction efficiency burns.
To address these concerns, GCA designed a sampling approach that will:
     •    Quantify PCB levels in raw sewage into the facility, incinerator
          sludge feed, incinerator ash, precooler/scrubber outlet water and
          flue gas emissions.
                                     103

-------
     •    Quantify polychlorinated  dibenzo-p-dioxin (PCDD)  and polychlorinated
          dibenzofuran (PCDF)  levels  in the  incinerator  sludge feed,
          incinerator ash,  and flue gas emissions.

     •    Obtain sufficient operating data on the  sludge, ash, water  and flue
          gas feed rates to permit  calculation of  a PCB  materials balance of
          the sewage sludge incinerator.

     •    Conduct all sampling and  analysis  in accordance with recommended
          protocols, including Quality Assurance/Quality Control criteria.


Testing of the New Bedford incinerator was conducted in  February 1984.
Results of this effort will be compiled in a separate report which will be

available in late spring 1984.
                                      104

-------
                        APPENDIX F

       PLANNING FOR THE SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS OF THE
ANCHORAGE, ALASKA MULTIPLE HEARTH SEWAGE SLUDGE INCINERATOR
                             105

-------
                                          Section No. 1
                                          Revision No. 2
                                          Date:  November 14, 1983
                                          Page 1 of 1
                QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN:
                 SAMPLING AND ANALYSES OF PCB
              CONTAMINATED WASTE OIL INCINERATION
                    FROM A MULTIPLE HEARTH
             INCINERATOR AT THE ANCHORAGE WATER AND
                     WASTEWATER UTILITY -
             POINT WORONZOF SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
                       TRW Incorporated
                    Environmental Operations
         Research Triangle Park, North Carolina  27709
                    Contract No. 68-02-3174
                    Work Assignment No. 115
                       November 14, 1983
TRW Project Manager:
TRW QA Officer:
EPA Project Officer:
EPA QA Officer:
                         Approved by:
c,
(R.  Adams)
(R.  McAllister)
(D.  Sanchez)
(G.  Johnson)
                          106

-------
                                               Section No. 2
                                               Revision No. 2
                                               Date:  November 14, 1983
                                               Page 1 of 2
                          2.  TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section No.           Section
     1       Title Page
     2       Table of Contents and
               Distribution
     3       Project Description
     4       Project Organization and
               Responsibility
     5       Quality Objectives
     6       Sampling Procedures
     7       Sample Custody
     8       Calibration Procedures
               and Frequency
     9       Analytical Procedures
    10       Data Analysis, Validation,
               and Reporting
    11       Internal Quality Control
               Checks
    12       Performance and System
               Audits
    13       Preventive Maintenance
    14       Procedures Used to Assess
               Data Precision, Accuracy,
               and Completeness
    15       Corrective Action
    16       Quality Assurance Reports
    17       References
Pages
1
2
7
5
3
23
10
4
10
14
1
1
2
19
1
1
1
Revision
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
1
2
1
2
2
1
2
2
       Date
November 14, 1983

November 14, 1983
November 14, 1983

November 14, 1983
November 14, 1983
November 14, 1983
September 30, 1983

November 14, 1983
November 14, 1983

September 30, 1983

November 14, 1983

September 30, 1983
November 14, 1983

November 14, 1983
September 30, 1983
November 14, 1983
November 14, 1983
                                   107

-------
                                                Section  No.  2
                                                Revision No.  2
                                             •   Date:  November 14,  1983
                                                Page 2 of 2
Section No.            Section           Pages  Revision         Date
    18       Appendices                            1        September 30, 1983
             A.  Facility Evaluation        9      1
             B.  Trip Report               10      1
             C.  Details of the
                 Glassware Cleaning
                 Procedure                  3      1
             D.  Calculation of Minimum
                 Sample Volume Necessary
                 to Verify a ORE of
                 99.9% for PCB's            3      1
             E.  Trip Report                4      1

List of Copy Holders
     1.    D. Sanchez, EPA Task Officer
     2.    G. Johnson, EPA QA Officer
     3.    R. Hutson, AWWU
     4.    R. Adams, TRW
     5.    R. McAllister,  TRW
     6.    R. Jongleux,  TRW
     7.    J. McGaughey,  TRW
     8.    D. Wagoner,  TRW
                                 108

-------
                                               Section No. 3
                                               Revision No. 2
                                               Date:  November 14, 1983
                                               Page 1 of 7
                         3.  PROJECT DESCRIPTION

     Anchorage Water and Wastewater Utility (AWWU) operates a multiple
hearth incinerator at their Point Woronzof sewage treatment plant located
in Anchorage, Alaska.  The utility has tentatively agreed to test the
performance of this incinerator for the destruction of PCB contaminated
waste oil.
     The EPA is interested in verifying the efficiency of PCB destruction
by this common and readily available disposal means via the multiple
hearth incinerator.  This need is significant in light of the fact that
(1) previous destruction tests have reported variable destruction
performance and are therefore inconclusive, (2) alternative thermal
destruction systems with proven destruction performance (high efficiency
power boilers >99.9 percent and rotary kiln or liquid injection
incinerators >99.9999 percent) are available and (3) savings derived
from using municipal incinerators for disposal of trace or low level PCB
contaminated materials may be substantial.
     The results of the investigation at Point Woronzof will be used to
establish the destruction and removal performance of a typical multiple
hearth sewage sludge incinerator.  The implications of the results,
which go beyond establishing PCB destruction efficiency and quantitation
of possible incineration by-products such as dibenzofurans and/or dioxins,
will establish a basis for comparison with other alternative disposal
means and also establish a basis for an environmental assessment and/or
risk assessment of the Point Woronzof incinerator.
     Primary focus is on the performance of the multiple hearth incinerator
for destroying PCB's and on the fate of any PCB's, dibenzofurans and
dioxins either not destroyed or produced as a result of combustion.  The
test has been designed to clearly identify destruction/removal
efficiencies (DRE) of PCB's as high as 99.9 percent.  PCB's are a class
                                  109

-------
                                                Section No.  3
                                                Revision No.  2
                                                Date:   November 14,  1983
                                                Page  2  of 7
 of compounds  that include  209  different  isomers.   Gas  chromatograph/mass
 spectrometry  (GC/MS)  methods that will be employed to  detect and quantify
 PCB's  will  allow the  summation of the quantities  of  individual  isomers
 if present  in detectable amounts.  Thus  quality assurance criteria
 requires  that a sufficient volume of sample be  collected to  assure  the
 presence  of quantities of  each isomer well above  its detectable limit.
 In order  to achieve this,  it will be necessary  to feed PCB  laced oil  in
 concentrations between 450 and 500 ppm,  as Aroclor.
     The  sampling will include three replications of the simultaneous
 collection  of six samples:
     1.   PCB contaminated oil feed,
     2.   sludge  feed,
     3.   ash discharge,
     4.   flue gas exiting the scrubber,
     5.   scrubber influent water, and
     6.   scrubber effluent water.
 Two sets  of replications will be analyzed and one set  held  in reserve  in
 case of results anomalies.   Material balances for PCB's,  dibenzofurans
 and dioxins will  be used to determine ORE and the fate of these compounds.
 Applicable  quality control  and quality assurance  procedures  will  be used
 in the sampling and analysis of all samples collected.
 3.1  ENGINEERING  ASSESSMENT
     The  Anchorage multiple hearth incinerator  is  described  in  a  facility
 evaluation  and  in a pretest site visit report (Appendix A and Appendix  B).
 This section  sets forth the feed conditions and operating conditions
 requested of  AWWU.  Anchorage Municipal  Power and  Light  (MPL) will
 provide the PCB contaminated waste oil  in sufficient amounts  for  testing.
 3.1.1  Waste  Feed
     Scum,  consisting primarily of an oil phase skimmed  from the  surface
 of the primary sewage treatment clarifiers, is typically  fed  into the
 third hearth  of the incinerator at rates up to one gallon per minute.
Observation by AWWU indicates,  however,  that stable operation cannot be
maintained above about 0.5 gpm.  For test purposes, waste oil containing
400-500 ppm PCB will  be fed at 0.5 gpm.   Discharge of  scum to the
                                 110

-------
                                               Section No. 3
                                               Revision No. 2
                                               Date:  November 14, 1983
                                               Page 3 of 7
third hearth is through an open two inch pipe ending at the wall of the
furnace.  The original intent was to feed the oil through this pipe.
However, better distribution of oil into the combustion space will be
attained with the use of a conventional oil burner.  An oil burner port
is available on the fourth hearth and AWWU will install a burner correctly
sized for oil feed rates to one gallon per minute.  Thus, waste oil will
now be fed to the fourth rather than the third hearth.  A feed system
will have to be installed similar to the one shown in Figure 3-1.
Samples will be collected at the beginning and end of each test and at
15 minute intervals during a test and composited proportionally to feed
rate to make up one sample per test.  Flow rate will be measured by
calibrated flowmeter.
     Sludge and PCB oil feed to the incinerator will be sampled and
analyzed for PCB's, dioxins and furans.  In addition, the sample will
undergo a proximate/ultimate analysis as well as density, ash content,
and BTU determinations.  AWWU should provide these analyses.  Waste oil
feed and sludge feed  sampling will be on the same schedule.  AWWU is
requested to determine the sludge feed rate for the period of each test
by their established  method as well as the dry solids and volatiles
content of the dewatered sludge sample collected for feed rate
determination.
3.1.2  Incinerator Operating Conditions
     AWWU is requested to operate the incinerator normally and at steady
state conditions during the period of each test.  A possible exception
to "normal" operation is maximum operating temperature.  It is understood
that damage may result from operating temperatures as high as 2,000°F
and that sustained operation is possible at 1,700°F ± 100°F.  Operation
within the latter range is requested.
     AWWU will determine the optimum operating settings during a pretest
trial.  Uncontaminated transformer oil will be fed to the incinerator.
A feed  rate will be established for stable operation at maximum temperature
and minimum stack opacity.  To verify 99.9% destruction of PCB's, waste
oil should be fed at  the maximum rate consistent with stable incinerator
operation and should  not be less than 0.5 gpm.
                                  Ill

-------
                     Scum concentrator
ro
                                                               fourth hearth
                                                                               Sample
                                                            Flowmeter
                                        Pump
       500 gal.  tank
                                                                                               Multiple hearth
                                                                                                   furnace
                                                                                                                     "O O -30 l/>
                                                                                                                     at 01 IB  it
                                                                                                                     ua r* <  o
•*»•  -<• o
    O 3
O Z 3
-«. O   Z
  < Z O
^J A O •
                                                                                                                         ro
                                                                                            •Test  installation
                                                                                                                       VD
                                                                                                                       00
                                         Figure 3-1.  Waste oil  feed system.

-------
                                               Section No. 3
                                               Revision No. 2
                                               Date:  November 14, 1983
                                               Page 5 of 7
     Excess oxygen levels should be established during the pretest trial
with the AWWU oxygen analyzer.  Knowing the excess oxygen, limits can
then be established for the test.  Operation outside of these limits
will halt the test until stable operation is reestablished.
     Stable operating temperature limits on the third and fourth hearth
will also be established during the pretest trial.  Sustained operation
outside of these limits will halt the tests until stable operation is
reestablished.  Normal operation will therefore be defined as follows:
     temperature:  1700°F ± 100°F
     oil feed rate:  0.5 gpm minimum to a maximum rate determined
                     from pretest trial
     sludge feed rate:  repeat rate of pretest trial
     scrubber water rate:  repeat rate of pretest trial
     excess oxygen:  range determined from pretest trial.
Short term excursions of temperature and oil feed rate outside the
specified limits will be tolerated.  However, the test will be halted
when sustained temperature excursion occur.  The magnitude of a sustained
temperature excursion will be defined from examination of the temperature
strip charts of the pretest trial.  Sustained operation at oil feed
rates below 0.5 gpm will hamper or prevent verification of DRE's of
99.9%.
3.2  TEST DESIGN
     A series of three tests will be conducted.  Sampling for each test
is expected to take a minimum of seven hours.  Sampling time is fixed by
the amount of sample required to verify destruction efficiencies of 99.9%.
Calculations are shown in Appendix D.  Increase of the original sampling
time from six to seven hours reflects a decrease in feed rate from
one gpm to 0.5 gpm partially offset by elimination of one factor of
safety.  Test results to be reported and the specific data and analytical
requirements to obtain those results are listed in Table 3-1.  Detailed
descriptions of the sampling and analytical procedures are given in
Sections 6 and 9.
     Test has been postponed due to unavailability of process unit.  No
new date has been  selected but will probably be after March 1984.
                                  113

-------
                                               Section No.  3
                                               Revision No. 2
                                               Date:   November 14,  1983
                                               Page  6  of 7
                Table 3-1.   TEST RESULTS  AND  REQUIREMENTS
          Test results
Data/analysis requirements
a.    PCB, dibenzofuran,  dioxin isomers
       of waste oil; weight/time
     PCB, dibenzofuran, dioxin isomers
       of sludge feed; weight/time
     PCB content of flue gas,
       weight/time
     PCB, dibenzofuran, dioxin of
       scrubber influent water;
       weight/time
     PCB, dibenzofuran, dioxin of
       scrubber effluent water;
       weight/time
GC/FID and/or GC/ECD

GC/MS

waste oil flow rate,
  volumetric*

waste oil density

GC/FID and/or GC/ECD

GC/MS

sludge feed rate, weight of
  dry solids*

GC/FID and/or GC/ECD

GC/MS

flue gas flow rate,
  volumetric

flue gas density

GC/FID and/or GC/ECD

GC/MS

feed rate, volumetric*

influent water density

GC/FID and/or GC/ECD

GC/MS

effluent rate, volumetric*

effluent water density
                               (continued)

                                   114

-------
                                               Section No. 3
                                               Revision No. 2
                                               Date:  November 14, 1983
                                               Page 7 of 7
                          Table 3-1.  Concluded
          Test results
                                        Data/analysis requirements
f.
g.
h.
j-
k.
PCB, dibenzofuran, dioxin
  content of incinerator ash;
  weight/time
PCB destruction/removal
  efficiency, weight %
Dibenzofuran, dioxin content  of
  flue gas, weight/time
Fuel gas consumption, volume/time
Incinerator temperature profile,
  °C for all hearths, inlet
  scrubber
Combustion efficiency, %
1.   Excess oxygen in flue gas,
       volume % dry
GC/FID and/or GC/ECD
GC/MS
ash content
a, b, c, d, e, f above

GC/FID and/or GC/ECD
GC/MS
flue gas flow rate,
  volumetric
flue gas density
fuel gas meter*
AWWU control room readings*
CO, C02 in undiluted flue
  gas
02 in undiluted flue gas
"Collected by AWWU.
                                  115

-------
                                               Section No. 4
                                               Revision No. 2
                                               Date:  November 14, 1983
                                               Page 1 of 5
               4.  PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND RESPONSIBILITY

     The primary responsibilities and supporting roles of each member of
the project team are summarized in Figure 4-1.  Project Manager,
Mr. R. C. Adams, has the ultimate responsibility and authority for the
entire project.  He will provide overall technical and administrative
supervision of all project aspects, and will be assisted by the appro-
priate personnel who will perform administrative tasks such as cost
performance and scheduling.  He will be the principal point of contact
with EPA and Anchorage Water and Wastewater Utilities (AWWU).
     Frequent contacts as needed between Mr. Adams and the EPA, supple-
mented with monthly technical progress reports, will provide EPA personnel
with ongoing current information regarding the progress and anticipated
problems.  Mr. Adams will notify the EPA project officer if a significant
problem is anticipated (a significant problem is one which may affect
technical performance, schedule, or cost, either short-term or long-term).
     The program's QA activities will be directed by the QA Officer,
Dr. R. A. McAllister.  Dr. McAllister will report directly to the Project
Manager as shown in the project organization chart, Figure 4-1.  He will
select quality monitors for different aspects of the project.  He will
have full authority to coordinate, direct, and administer all QA activities
as depicted in Figure 4-2.  This is a functional diagram for QA, and
will cover all project activities and serve as a master planning and
control document.  He will also serve as a technical advisor to give
solicited and unsolicited advice, and will make recommendations to the
Project Manager.
     The QA Officer will coordinate the activities of the Quality Control
and Technical Advisory Group (QC/TA).  The purpose of this group will be
to review test plans for sampling and analysis, make recommendations for
                                  116

-------
     EPA
Task Officer

 0.  Sanchez
      TRW
Project Manager
   R.  Adams
                    Field Sampling
                      Team Leader

                       M.  Hartmn
                     Field Sampler

             R. Jongleux. Sample Custodian
             G. Henry
             C. Stackhouse
             A. Blackard
             Sample
            Custodian

          J. McGaughey
                                                                                                QA Officer

                                                                                               R.  McAllister
                                                              QC/TA Group
                                                             M. Hartman
                                                             J. McGaughey
                                                             0. Wagoner
                                      Analytical Laboratory
                                             Manager

                                           0. Wagoner
   Sample
 Preparation

J. McGaughey
D. Plckett
A. Sykes
                                              Figure  4-1.   TRW project  organization.
 Lab Analyst

J. Glover
T. Buedel
J. McGaughey
0. Plckett
A. Sykes
 •O O 30 l/>
 ai at n n
.
 r\j    -•• o
      o 3
 0X3
 -»> o   •*.
   < 2 O
 cn (D o •
                                                                                                                                                  IB  ro
                                                                                                                                                  -j
                                                                                                                                                  CD

-------
                                                   Project
                                                   Manager
00
Quality
Assurance
Manager


1 1 1
Procedure 1 • Sample I
Revletf I Identification
and Approval) |rraceab111tj

Procedure |__ s*"^1ft B*nk
Url ter Personnel
Quality
Control


IM
•W
^•1

1



All Phases
of Sampling

All Phases
of Analyses

All Phases
of Data
Reduction



1


Data
Assessments


MB

1


Assessment

Audits



Feedback
and .
Corrective
Action

Field
- Operations

Laboratory
~~ Operations

Support Group
4 !••••
Computers, et
L Manager
0* 0) CD fl>
(Q r»- < O
(D re -<• r+
to -•. o
O 3
0 Z 3
-h O Z
tn n> o •
. 3 •
' cr *»
S, «M
L »-•
F- *
                             Figure 4-2.  Functional diagram  for  quality assurance.
UD
00
U)

-------
                                               Section No. 4
                                               Revision No. 2
                                               Date:  November 14, 1983
                                               Page 4 of 5
alternate test approaches, assist in resolving problems, review and
carry out QA plans, and review collected data.
     The Field Sampling Team Leader has the responsibility to ensure
that the test procedures are conducted in a timely and accurate manner.
His responsibility is to be sure that the tests are performed according
to the procedures specified.   The Field Sampling Team Leader reports
daily to the Project Manager and relays to him on a timely basis the
overall progress and/or problems or potential problems.
     The Sample Custodian is responsible for keeping a log of all the
samples taken each day.   He makes sure each sample is properly labeled,
identified, and packed for shipment to the TRW Research Triangle Park
analytical laboratory.  A Sample Custodian will be appointed in the
laboratory to handle incoming samples from the field activities.
     A quality control monitor will  be selected for each set of activities
and identified in the daily log of the Project Manager.  The role primarily
addresses internal audits of sampling and analysis procedures.   A
description of the tasks to be done and the responsibilities of the
quality control monitor are detailed in Section 12.
     The TRW laboratory facilities,  located at Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina, will be responsible for performing the sophisticated
analyses that are provided below.   The preparation and/or dispensing of
audit materials will be conducted through the Research Triangle Park
laboratory under the direction of the QA Officer.
     The lines of communication between management,  the QC/TA group, the
technical staff, and within the technical staff are established and will
allow for mandatory discussions of resulting problems, potential  problems,
preventive actions, and corrective procedures.
     The major quality control responsibilities and quality assurance
review functions are summarized below:
                              Major Quality            Primary Quality
   Performance           Control Responsibility        Assurance Review
1.  Project Manager  • Procedure Change Approval        QA Office
                    • Response to Compliance Failures  QA Office
                    • Information Completeness Check   QA Office
                    • Information Validity Review      QA Office
                                   119

-------
3.
   Performance
   Quality
   Assurance
   Officer
Field Sampling
Manager or
Laboratory
Manager
4. Field Sampling
   Team Leader
5. Sample
   Custodian
6. Sample
   Preparation
                                               Section No. 4
                                               Revision No. 2
                                               Date:  November 14, 1983
                                               Page 5 of 5
          Major Quality
     Control Responsibility
• Procedure Approval
• Test Plan Approval
0 Quality Anomaly Recommendations
0 Quality Reports
• Equipment Downtime Record
• Information Validity Review
• Information Completeness Check
• Procedure Currentness
• Response to Completeness Check
  Failures
• Preventive Maintenance
• Documentation
• Sample Integrity
• Calibration and Procedures
• Information Completeness Count
• Documentation

• Sample Integrity
• Inventory Crosscheck

• Information Completeness Count
• Sample Integrity
• Documentation

t Procedures
• Test Blanks
7. Quality Monitor  • Performance Audit
Primary Quality
Assurance Review
Project Manager
Project Manager
Project Manager
Project Manager
QA Office
Quality Monitor
Quality Monitor
Quality Monitor
QA Office

Project Manager
Project Manager
Quality Monitor
Quality Monitor
Quality Monitor
Field Sampling Team
  Leader
Quality Monitor
Field Sampling Team
Leader
Quality Monitor
Quality Monitor
Field Sampling Team
Leader
Quality Monitor
Field Sampling Team
  Leader
Quality Assurance
  Officer
                                   120

-------
                                               Section No. 5
                                               Revision No. 2
                                               Date:  November 14, 1983
                                               Page 1 of 4
                         5.  QUALITY OBJECTIVES


     The major quality objective of this project plan is to provide a

practical means to implement quality assurance techniques into a program
involving the destruction and removal efficiency of PCB waste in a
municipal sewage sludge incinerator.  An objective of this program is to
devise and select testing procedures that are simple and direct, but
that measure the destruction and removal efficiency for the components

of interest when the waste is incinerated.
     In order to facilitate the following discussion, it is useful to
define the following three terms; namely data quality, quality control,

and quality assurance.
     1.   Data Quality:  The totality of features and characteristics of

a product (measurement data) that bears on its ability to satisfy a
given purpose.  These characteristics are defined as follows:

     •    Accuracy - The degree of agreement of a measurement (or an
          average of measurements of the same thing), X, with an accepted
          reference or true value, T, usually expressed as the difference
          between two values, X-T, or the difference as a percentage of
          the reference or true value, 100 (X-T)/T, and sometimes expressed
          as a ratio, X/T.  Accuracy is a measure of the bias in a
          system.

     •    Precision - A measure of mutual agreement among individual
          measurements of the same property, usually under prescribed
          similar conditions.  Precision is best expressed in terms of
          the standard deviation (or the relative standard deviation).
          Various measures of precision exist depending upon the
          "prescribed conditions."

     •    Completeness - A measure of the amount of valid data obtained
          from a measurement system compared to the amount that was
          expected to be obtained under correct normal conditions.

     t    Representativeness - The degree to which data accurately and
          precisely represent a characteristic of a population, parameter
          variations at a sampling point, or an environmental condition.

                                    121

-------
                                               Section No. 5
                                               Revision No. 2
                                               Date:  November 14, 1983
                                               Page 2 of 4

     •    Comparability - A measure of the confidence with which one
          data set can be compared to another.

     2.   Quality Control:  The overall system of activities whose

purpose is to provide a quality product or service; for example, the

routine application of procedures for obtaining prescribed standards of

performance in the monitoring and measurement process.

     3.   Quality Assurance:   A system of activities whose purpose is to

provide assurance that the overall quality control is in fact being done

effectively.

     •    The total integrated program for assuring the reliability of
          monitoring and measurement data.

     t    A system for integrating the quality planning, quality
          assessment, and quality improvement efforts of various groups
          in an organization to enable operations to meet user require-
          ments at an economical level.  In pollution measurement systems,
          quality assurance is concerned with the activities that have
          an important effect on the quality of the pollutant measurements,
          as well as the establishment of methods and techniques to
          measure the quality of the pollution measurements.   The more
          authoritative usages differentiate between "quality assurance"
          and "quality control," where quality assurance is the "system
          of activities to provide assurance that the quality control
          system is performing adequately."

     In summation, the purpose of QA is to assess independently the

overall QC program.  This assessment of QC is done in two ways.   Reviews

and performance audits are conducted by the QC organization itself (in

internal assessment program), and in additional  periodic assessments by

an independent outside organization.

     It is required for a thorough data quality program to delineate the

quality elements for the organization and the required measurement

program.  This quality assurance plan will include provisions for the

following elements:

     1.   the use of validated, well conceived analytical test methods
          and well constructed, equipped, and maintained laboratory
          facilities;

     2.   collection of representative samples;

     3.   use of high quality glassware, solvents, and other testing
          materials;
                                 122

-------
                                               Section No. 5
                                               Revision No. 2
                                               Date:  November 14, 1983
                                               Page 3 of 4
     4.   scheduled, periodic calibration, adjustment, and maintenance
          of equipment;
     5.   use of control samples and standards;
     6.   strict adherence to analytical procedures;
     7.   internal and external review of methods and results;
     8.   internal and external proficiency testing;
     9.   use of replicate samples;
    10.   open lines of communications between management and test
          personnel;
    11.   data validation and review;
    12.   data storage and retrieval;
    13.   up-to-date sample log and instrument maintenance and
          calibration records; and
    14.   periodic review of current, pertinent literature.
5.1  PRECISION, ACCURACY, AND COMPLETENESS OBJECTIVES
     Quantitative guidelines for precision, accuracy, and completeness
objectives have not been established for trial burns.  Composition
measurements from continuous monitors can be made with precisions of ±5%
and accuracies of ±10% according to 40 CFR 60 Appendix A.  Directed
GC/MS measurements in general can be made with precisions and accuracies
of ±30%.  How these GC/MS accuracies relate to trial burns in boilers
and incinerator has not been established.
     Completeness objectives of all measurements can be set at 90%.
     Process measurements will be made by AWWU.  TRW will estimate
instrument precisions based on the specifications of these devices.
These include incinerator temperature and waste oil flow and scrubber
water flow sensors.  AWWU is requested to calibrate the temperature
transmitters and flow meters just prior to testing and to supply TRW
with the calibration records.  The method for determining sludge feed
rate and weight of dry solids have no quantitative guidelines for
precision, accuracy, and completeness objectives.  AWWU will  minimize
measurement error to the extent possible by following these procedures:
                                123

-------
                                               Section No. 5
                                               Revision No. 2
                                               Date:  November 14, 1983
                                               Page 4 of 4

     1.    Verify filter speed of revolution by manual observation.

     2.    Describe in detail  the procedure for sampling each filter
          cake.  Report dimensions of sample to the nearest 0.1 inch and
          weight of sample in grams to one decimal place.

     3.    Describe in detail  the analytical procedure.   Provide detailed
          calculations for determining sludge feed rate.

     4.    Report all  information to TRW.

Ultmate/proximate analyses will  utilize ASTM Methods D2015, D3173, and
D3176.   Precision guidelines  are inherent in these methods.  TRW will
review the results from the analysis of sludge for completeness and for
compliance with precision requirements.
                                 124

-------
                                               Section No. 6
                                               Revision No. 2
                                               Date:  November 14, 1983
                                               Page 1 of 24
                         6.  SAMPLING PROCEDURES

     The test on the Point Woronzof sewage treatment plant will consist
of the following sample runs:
     Flue Gas
                                             7 hours        Isokinetic
3
3
3
       Feed
        3
        3
     Residue
Control Equipment
        3
        3
PCB runs
TCDD/TCDF runs
Integrated bag
  samples
CO, C02, 02
            PCB-waste oil
            Sludge

            Ash

            Scrubber influent
            Scrubber effluent
                                                              (1)
    7 hours
    1 hour
    7 hours

Every 15 minutes
 Every 2 hours

 Every 2 hours

 Every 2 hours
 Every 2 hours
                                                            Isokinetic
                                                            Integrated
                                                            Continuous
(1)
(1)
(2)
                                         Composited
                                         Composited

                                         Composited

                                         Composited
                                         Composited
A single test  run  is  scheduled  for  each  of  3  test days.  The  sampling
duration of  seven  (7) hours was  determined  by the calculation of the
minimum sampling volume  necessary to  verify a ORE of  99.9%.   (See
Appendix D for assumptions and  calculations.)
      In order  to obtain  sufficient  samples  for PCB  and  TCDD/TCDF analysis,
the  flue gas samples  will be  collected with two identically constructed
sampling trains operating simultaneously.   Idential but separate sampling
 ^Sampled downstream of cooling air discharge  to stack.
 ^Sampled upstream of cooling air discharge to stack.
                                125

-------
                                               Section No. 6
                                               Revision No. 2
                                               Date:  November 14,  1983
                                               Page 2 of 24
trains will be operated simultaneously; Train A for PCB's and Train B
for dioxins and furans.  All samples from Train B will be shipped directly
from the field to the mass spectrometry center at the University of
Nebraska for analysis.  The preparation, description, and operation of
the sample train(s) is covered in the following section.
     Flue gas samples are obtained from an 18 inch diameter duct.   The
downstream sampling position is located in a vertical stack and is  five
feet (3+ diameters) from the top of the stack and 14 feet 8 inches
(9+ diameters) of the sampling position is a side connection in the duct
for bypass air that is located approximately ten feet (6+ diameters)
upstream of the sampling position.   The upstream sampling position
(before the ID fan) for gas sampling only will be located about five
feet from the ID fan in a horizontal section of duct.
6.1  PRINCIPLE AND APPLICABILITY OF A SOURCE PCB, TCDD,  AND TCDF
     SAMPLING TRAIN
6.1.1  Principle
     Gaseous and particulate Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB's) are
withdrawn from the source using a sampling train.   The PCB's are collected
               ffi
in the Florisil  adsorbent tube and in the impingers in front of the
                        /ah                        /S\
adsorbent.  The Florisil  is followed by an XAD-2  trap and two basic
impingers.  The total PCB's in the train are determined by solvent
extraction followed by Gas Chromatrography/Electron Capture Detection
(GC/ECD) and/or Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectroscopy (GC/MS).   Total
TCDD's, TCDF's and the corresponding 2,378 isomers are determined by
solvent extraction followed by gas chromatography/high resolution mass
spectrometric detection.
6.1.2  Applicablity
     This method is applicable for the determination of  vaporous and
particulate matter emissions from a multiple hearth furnace.
6.2  RANGE AND MINIMUM DETECTABLE LIMIT (MDL)
     The range of the analytical method may be expanded  considerably
through concentration and/or dilution.  The total  method  sensitivity is
also highly dependent on the volume of gases sampled.  The MDL of the
GC/ECD method is about 50 pg of Aroclor per 1 uL injection.   Both dioxin
and furan can be detected at the 10-50 ppb range (10-50  pg per ul
injection)(6).                        126

-------
                                               Section No.  6
                                               Revision No.  2
                                               Date:   November 14,  1983
                                               Page 3 of 24

6.3  INTERFERENCES
     Organochlorine compounds other than PCB, Tetrachlorodibenzofuran
(TCDF) or Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin (TCDD) found in the raw waste may
interfere with the analyses.  Appropriate sample clean-up steps shall be
performed.
     Throughout all stages of sample handling and analysis, care should
be taken to avoid contact of samples and extracts with synthetic organic
materials other than TFE® (polytetrafluoroethylene).   Adhesives should
not be used to hold TFE® liners on lids, (but, if necessary, appropriate
blanks must be run), and lubricating and sealing greases must not be
used on the sampling train.
6.4  PRECISION AND ACCURACY
     Recovery efficiencies on source samples spiked with PCB's, dioxins,
and furans ranged  from 85 to 95% (1,6).
6.5  APPARATUS
6.5.1  Sampling Train
     The  train consists of  a series of  six impingers with two solid
adsorbent traps between the third and fourth impingers (Figure 6-1).
The first trap contains Florisil  and the second one contains XAD-2 .
The train may be constructed by adaptation of an EPA Method 5 train.
Descriptions of the train components are contained in the following
subsections.
     6.5.1.1  Probe.  The probe should  be stainless steel with a
borosilicate or quartz glass liner.  The glass liner provides an inert
surface for the sample gas.  The glass  liner extends past the retaining
nut into  the stack.  Since  some of the  compounds of interest are in both
the particulate and vapor phases at the point of collection, isokinetic
sampling  is a requirement.   Therefore, an S-type probe must be utilized.
The glass liner shall be equipped with  a glass ball connecting joint
fitting that is capable of  forming a leak-free, vacuum tight connection
without sealing greases.  A stainless  steel  nozzle (precleaned) is  sized
in order  to maintain an isokinetic sampling  rate.
      6.5.1.2  Filter.  A standard glass Method 5 filter holder will be
utilized  to collect the constituents of interest that are condensed  into
                                  127

-------
                                                 CONDENS6R
HEATEC
LINE. 5'
THERMOCOUI
STACK
f THERMO
WATER COOLED
PROBE
) TEFLON)
ORLVESS| FLORISIL
"\!
/i ilii il i i IT
1 &4» od €>Q
. -H2- pSE, rW
>COUPLE| | ;; :!
|i— — • i • — ii — - M
i *U~. Jl— || '
1 i i' u
1 i ' " "
II ll M II
1 a u u
1 l.I\L^-™2
I WATER
iB IT
y
j EMPTY
T
i
i
i
IATH!
	 1
AIR COOLED
                                                              XAD-2
                                                                      THERMOMETER
                                                                                    CHECK
                                                                                    VALVE
                                                                 NaOH  SILICA GEL   j
CO
                                                                                   VACUUM
                                                                                     LINE
                           THERMOMETERS
MANOMETER

       ORIFICE
8$
BY-PASS
 VALVE
                                                           VACUUM
                                                            GAUGE
                               O
          MANOMETER
                   C>RY TEST
                    METER
                   U
. ff> ^s
MAIN
VALVE
AID


1
1
1
1
                                                     TIGHT
                                                     PUMP
"o o •yo •<-»•
  • •  -J.
4k   -.. o
    O 3
O Z 3
-h O  Z
  < Z O
ro n» o •

  o~  o>

  -j
                                                                                   UD
                                                                                   00
                                                                                   OJ
                                     CONTROL BOX

                                     Figure  6-1.  Sample train.

-------
                                               Section No. 6
                                               Revision No. 2
                                               Date:  November 14, 1983
                                               Page 5 of 24
the participate matter fraction.  The glass filter holder will be
precleaned to remove any interfering organic residues.  The filter
material will be binder free glass-fiber.  The filter shall exhibit at
least 95 percent efficiency (£5 percent penetration) of 0.3 micrometer
dioctyl phthalate smoke particles.  The filter efficiency test shall be
conducted in accordance with ASTM Standard Method D2986-71.  Test data
from the supplier's quality control program are sufficient demonstration
of filter performance.
     The filters will be shipped to and from the sampling site in
precleaned glass petri dishes.  Representative filters will be screened
for the components of interest to determine the background or blank
values.
     The filters will be maintained at a temperature of 248°F ± 25°F
during the sampling run in accordance with standard particulate matter
sampling.
     6.5.1.3  Impingers.  Six impingers with connecting fittings able to
form leak-free, vacuum tight seals without sealant greases when connected
together as shown in Figure 6-1 shall be used.  All impingers are of the
Greenburg-Smith design modified by replacing the tip with a 1.3-cm
(1/2-in.) ID glass tube extending to 1.3 cm (1/2 in.) from the bottom of
the flask.
     6.5.1.4  Solid Adsorbent Tubes.  Both the Florisil® and XAD-2®
traps shall be made of glass with connecting fittings which are able to
form leak-free, vacuum tight seals without sealant greases (Figures 6-2
and 6-3).  Exclusive of connectors, the Florisil  tube has a 2.2-cm
inner diameter, is at least 10 cm long, and has four deep indentations
on the outlet end to aid in retaining the adsorbent.  Glass wool  plugs
                                             /a
are used in both ends of the tube.  The XAD-2  tube is about 10 cm long
and 4 cm in diameter.   The resin is surrounded by a water jacket preceded
                                                  A
with a condenser coil.  The gas entering the XAD-2  trap must be maintained
at or below 20°C.   Ground glass caps (or equivalent) must be provided to
seal the adsorbent-filled tube both prior to and following sampling.
All adsorbent tubes must be maintained in the vertical position during
sampling.
                                   129

-------
                             Section No. 6
                             Revision No. 2
                             Date:  November 14, 1983
                             Page 6 of 24
                            J2V12
 10 em
Figure 6-2.   Florisil  adsorbent  tube.

                  130

-------
                                                Section No. 6
                                                Revision No. 2
                                                Date:  November 14,  1983
                                                Page 7 of 24
28/12
                      CONDENSER COIL
                                                                      28/12
                                             XAD-2
                                             TRAP'
                                     COARSE FRIT-
                                                       r            J 2812
                   Figure 6-3.  XAD-2  trap and condenser coil.

                                    131

-------
                                               Section No. 6
                                               Revision No. 2
                                               Date:   November 14, 1983
                                               Page 8 of 24
     6.5.1.5  Sample Transfer Line.  If a sample transfer line is required,
it shall be heat traced Teflon  with connecting fittings that are capable
of forming leak free, vacuum tight connection without using sealing
greases.  The line, (equal to or less than 5'  in length) must be maintained
at 120°C.
     6.5.1.6  Metering System.   The metering system shall consist of a
vacuum gauge, a leak-free pump, thermometers capable of measuring
temperature to within 3°C (~5°F), a dry gas meter with 2% accuracy at
the required sampling rate, and related equipment, or equivalent.
     6.5.1.7  Barometer.   Mercury, aneroid, or other barometers capable
of measuring atmospheric pressure to within 2.5 mm Hg (0.1 in.  Hg) shall
be used.
6.5.2  Sample Recovery, Supplies, and Equipment
     6.5.2.1  Ground Glass Caps.   To cap off adsorbent tube and the
other sample exposed portions of the train.
     6.5.2.2  Teflon PEP® Wash Bottle.   Two, 500 ml,  Nalgene No.  0023A59
or equivalent.
     6.5.2.3  Sample Storage Containers.   Amber glass bottles (or wrapped
in opaque material), 1 liter, with TFE -lined screw caps.
     6.5.2.4  Balance.  Triple beam, Ohaus Model 7505 or equivalent.
     6.5.2.5  Aluminum Foil.  Heavy duty, hexane rinsed.
     6.5.2.6  Metal Can.   To recover used silica gel.
     6.5.2.7  250 ml and 500 ml Graduated Cylinder.
6.5.3  Analysis
6.6  REAGENTS
6.6.1  Sampling
     6.6.1.1  Florisil-Floridin Co., 30/60 Mesh. Grade A.  The Florisil15
is cleaned by 8 hr Soxhlet extraction with hexane and then by drying for
8 hr in an oven at 110°C and is activated by heating to 650°C for 2 hr
(not to exceed 3 hr) in a muffle furnace.  After allowing to cool to
                                      Si
near 110°C, the clean, active Florisil  is transferred to a clean,
hexane-washed glass jar and sealed with a TFE^-lined lid.  The Florisil
should be stored at 110°C until taken to the field for use.   Florisil
that has been stored more than 1 month must be reactivated before use.
                        (S\
A sample of the Florisil   must be carried through the extraction, clean-up,
and analytical finish steps to assure oroper blank values before use.
                                    132

-------
                                               Section No. 6
                                               Revision No. 2
                                               Date:  November 14, 1983
                                               Page 9 of 24
     6.6.1.2  XAD-2® Resin - Supelco. Inc.  The clean-up procedure may
be carried out in a giant Soxhlet extractor, which will contain enough
XAD-2® for several sampling traps.  An all-glass thimble (55- to 90-mm
OD x 150-mm deep [top to frit]) containing an extra-coarse frit is used
                       £\
for extraction of XAD-2 .  The frit is recessed 10 to 15 mm above a
crenulated ring at the bottom of the thimble to facilitate drainage.
The resin must be carefully retained in the extractor cup with a glass
wool plug and stainless steel screen since it floats on methylene chloride.
This process involves sequential extraction in the following order.
Solvent                                      Procedure
Water                                        Initial rinse with 1 L
                                             H20 for 1 cycle, then discard
                                             H20
Water                                        Extract with H20 for 8 hours
Methyl alcohol                               Extract for 22 hours
Methylene chloride                           Extract for 22 hours
Hexane                                       Extract for 22 hours
         (Si
The XAD-2  resin must be dried by one of  the following techniques.
     (a) After evaluation of several methods of removing residual solvent,
a fluidized-bed technique has proven to be the fastest and most reliable
drying method.
     A simple column with suitable retainers as shown  in Figure 6-4 will
                                                        ®
serve as a satisfactory column.  A 10.2-cm (4-in.) Pyrex  pipe 0.6 m (2
ft.) long will hold all of the XAD-2® from the Soxhlet extractor, with
sufficient space for fluidizing the bed while generating a minimum resin
load at the exit of the column.
     The gas used to remove the solvent is the key to preserving the
cleanliness of the XAD-2®.  Liquid nitrogen from a regular commercial
liquid nitrogen cylinder has routinely proven to be a  reliable source of
large volumes of gas free from organic contaminants.  The  liquid nitrogen
cylinder is connected to the column by a  length of precleaned 0.95-cm
(3/8-in.) copper tubing, coiled to pass through a heat source.  As
nitrogen is bled from the cylinder, it is vaporized in the heat source
and passes through the  column.  A convenient heat source is a water bath
                                  133

-------
                                                  Section  No.  6
                                                  Revision No.  2
                                                  Date:  November 14,  1983
                                                  Page 10  of 24
                              LOOM Weavt Nylon
                                 Fabric Covtr
                                        10.2cm    —
                                        (4 Inch) Pyrtx
            Liquid Takt off
                           (X95 cm (3/8 in) Tubing
Liquid Nitrogen
  Cylindtr
  060 £)
                                                                          Fine Screen

                                                                                Suppon
                         Hut Source
                              fit
            Table 6-4.   XAD-2  fluidi7ed-bed drying  apparatus.

                                     134

-------
                                               Section No. 6
                                               Revision No.  2
                                               Date:  November 14, 1983
                                               Page 11 of 24
heated from a steam line.  The final nitrogen temperature should only be
warm to the touch and not over 40°C.  Experience has shown that about
500 g of XAD-2® may be dried overnight consuming a full 160-L cylinder
of liquid nitrogen.
     As a second choice, high purity tank nitrogen may be used to dry
the XAD-2®.  The high purity nitrogen must first be passed through a bed
of activated charcoal approximately 150 ml in volume.  With either type
of drying method, the rate of flow should gently agitate the bed.
Excessive fluidization may cause the particles to break up.
     (b) As an alternate if the nitrogen process is not available, the
XAD-2® resin may be dried in a vacuum oven,  if the temperature never
exceeds 20°C.
     The resin must be checked for both methylene chloride and hexane
residuals, plus normal blanks before use.
     6.6.1.3  Glass Wool.  Cleaned by thorough rinsing with hexane,
dried in a 110°C oven, and stored in a hexane-washed glass jar with
TFE®-lined screw cap.
     6.6.1.4  Water.  Deionized, then glass-distilled, and stored in
hexane-rinsed glass containers with TFE -lined screw caps.
     6.6.1.5  Silica Gel.  Indicating type,  6 to 16 mesh.  If previously
used, dry at 175°C for 2 hr.  New silica gel may be  used  as received.
     6.6.1.6  Crushed Ice.
     6.6.1.7  Sodium Hydroxide.  ACS reagent grade.
6.6.2  Sample Recovery Reagents
     6.6.2.1  Acetone.   Pesticide quality, Burdick  and Jackson "Distilled
in  Glass"  or equivalent, stored  in  original  containers.   A blank must  be
screened by  the analytical detection method.
     6.6.2.2  Hexane.  Pesticide quality,  Burdick and Jackson "Distilled
in  Glass"  or equivalent, stored  in  original  containers and used  as
received.  A blank must  be  screened by  the analytical  detection  method.
6.7 PROCEDURE
     Caution:   Section  6.7.1.1  should be  done  in the  laboratory.
6.7.1   Sampling
     The  sampling shall  be  conducted by competent personnel experienced
with this  test procedure and cognizant  of  intricacies  of  the  operation
                                 135

-------
                                               Section No.  6
                                               Revision No.  2
                                               Date:  November 14, 1983
                                               Page 12 of 24
of prescribed sampling train and the constraints of the analytical
techniques for PCB's, particularily contamination problems.
     6.7.1.1  Pretest Preparation.   All train components shall be
maintained and calibrated according to the procedure described in APTD-0576
(2), unless otherwise specified herein.  Flow rates will be calibrated
using an EPA supplied standard orifice.
     6.7.1.1.1  Cleaning glassware.   All glass parts of the train upstream
of and including the adsorbent tube, should be cleaned as described in
Appendix C.  Special care should be devoted to the removal  of residual
silicone grease sealants on ground glass connections of used glassware.
These grease residues should be removed by soaking several  hours in a
chromic acid cleaning solution prior to routine cleaning as described
above.
     6.7.1.1.2  Florisil® tube.  Weigh 7.5 g of Florisil ,  activated
within the last 30 days and still warm from storage in a 110°C oven,
into the adsorbent tube (prerinsed with hexane) with a glass wool plug
in the downstream end.  Place a second glass wool plug in the tube to
hold the sorbent in the tube.  Cap both ends of the tube with ground
glass caps.  These caps should not be removed until the tube is fitted
to the train immediately prior to sampling.  Store the prepared tubes at
ambient temperature.
     6.7.1.1.3  XAD-2® sorbent tube.  Weigh a sufficient amount of
cleaned resin  into the glass adsorbent trap which has been thoroughly
cleaned as prescribed and  rinsed with hexane.  Follow the resin with
hexane rinsed  glass wool and cap both ends.  These caps should not be
removed until  the trap  is  fitted into the train.
     6.7.1.1.4 Silica  gel.  The silica gel for each run must be prepared
in the laboratory prior  to shipping to  the site.  Sufficient  silica gel
is weighed in  a tared,  scalable, and marked container.  The container
used is recorded with the  other  run data.  Upon completion of the test,
the silica is  carefully  returned to the same container and sealed within.
The container  may be weighed at  the originating  laboratory to determine
the moisture captured if desired at the preference  of the tester.
     6.7.1.2   Preliminary  Determinations.  At  the  selected sampling
site, determine the  flow rate  in the  incinerator  from the burner  combustion
                                      136

-------
                                               Section No. 6
                                               Revision No. 2
                                               Date:  November 14, 1983
                                               Page 13 of 24
calculations and data  from previous operations, if available.  Determine
the preliminary velocity and  sampling point selection according to EPA
Reference Methods 1 and 2.  Determine the stack gas moisture using EPA
Method 4 or previous data.  Select a sampling time appropriate for total
method sensitivity and the PCB concentration anticipated (see Appendix D).
Sampling times will vary based on the relative amount of spiked waste
added to the feed.
     6.7.1.3  Preparation of  Collection Train.  During preparation and
assembly of the sampling train, keep all train openings where contamination
can enter covered until just  prior to assembly or until sampling is
about to begin.  Immediately  prior to assembly, rinse all parts of the
train upstream of the  adsorbent tube with hexane.  CAUTION:  Do not use
sealant greases in assembling the train.  Mark the probe with heat
resistant tape or by some other method at a point indicating the proper
distance into the stack for sampling.
     Place 200 ml of water in each of the first two impingers with a
graduated cylinder, and leave the third impinger empty.  Place 200 ml of
concentrated sodium hydroxide in the fourth and fifth impinger.   The
total concentration of NaOH should be at least the theoretical amount
needed to neutralize the expected hydrochloric acid.  Place approximately
200 to 300 g or more,  if necessary, of silica gel in the last impinger.
Weigh each impinger (stem included) and record the weights on the impingers
and on the data sheet, or determine volumetrically (tester option).   If
no balance is available, use  a preweighed container of silica gel and
record the container number.
     Assemble the train as shown in Figure 6-1.   Before a leak check as
specified below, place crushed ice in the water bath around the impingers.
     6.7.1.4  Leak Check Procedure.  The probe will be leak checked
prior to being inserted into  the stack after the sampling train has been
assembled.   Turn on and set (if applicable) the heating/cooling system(s)
as necessary to avoid  condensation in the probe and filter holder
(approximately 120°C).  Allow time for the temperature to stabilize.
Leak check the train at the sampling site by plugging the nozzle and
pulling a 380 mm Hg (12 in. Hg) vacuum.   A leakage rate in excess of 4%
of the average sampling rate  or 0.0057 m3/min (0.02 cfm) whichever is
less, is unacceptable.

-------
                                               Section No. 6
                                               Revision No. 2
                                               Date:  November 14, 1983
                                               Page 14 of 24
     The  following leak check instruction for the sampling train described
 in APTD-0576  (2) and APTD-0581 (4) may be helpful.  Start the pump with
 bypass valve  fully open and coarse adjust valve completely closed.
 Partially open the coarse adjust valve and slowly close the bypass valve
 until 380 mm  Hg (12 in. Hg) vacuum is reached.  Do not reverse direction
 of bypass valve.  This will cause water to back up into the probe.  If
 380 mm Hg (12 in.  Hg) is exceeded, either leak check at this higher
 vacuum or end the leak check as described below and start over.
     The  final leak check will be first performed at the highest vacuum
 achieved  during the sampling run and again at the initial leak check
 pressure.  If the first leak check fails (at highest vacuum achieved
 during the sampling run) invalidate the run.   If leak check fails at
 initial leak check pressure then determine the leak rate.
     When the leak check is completed, first slowly remove the plug from
 the inlet to the probe then immediately turn off the vacuum pump.  This
 prevents  the water in the impingers from being forced backward into the
 probe.
     Leak checks shall  be conducted as described above prior to and
 after each test run.   If leaks are found to be in excess of the acceptable
 rate prior to the  test, the source of leakage shall be located and
 corrected.  Failure of this test after a run shall invalidate that run.
     6.7.1.5  Train Operation.  During the sampling run, a sampling rate
within 10% of the  selected sampling rate or as specified by the
 Administrator, shall  be maintained.
     For  each run, record the data required on the data sheets.  An
 example is shown in Figure 6-5.   Be sure to record the initial dry gas
meter reading.  Record the dry gas meter readings at the beginning and
 end of each sampling time increment and when sampling is halted.
     To begin sampling, remove the nozzle cap, verify (if applicable)
 that the  probe temperature control system is working and at temperature
 and that  the probe is properly positioned at required sampling point.
 Immediately start the pump and adjust the flow rate.
     If the stack is under significant negative pressure (height of
 impinger  stem), take care to close the coarse adjust valve before inserting
 the probe into the stack to avoid water backing into the probe.  If
                                138

-------
                           HANI  	
                           DATE 	
                           SAMPLING LOCAIION
                           iAHPlE UK 	
                           DUN NUMBER 	
                           OPERATOR 	
                           AMBIIMT UHPERAIUM
                           BAROMETRIC PRESSURE _
                           S1AIIC PRESSURE  (P4)
                           HUER NUMBER (t) 	
UttlBl  UHUIH
NO//U  ID
ASSUMED
SAMPU  BOX NUNllR
HI UK  BOH MMUR
WIIR  OH *
C IACIOR
                                                                                                        \in
PKOBl  HiAUR 5EIIINC
HIAUR BOI SHIINC _
REKRCNCE ip 	
                                                                SCHEHAfU Of  TRAVERSE POINT IAVOUI
                                                           READ AND RECORD AIL DATA EVERY 	 HINUIES
co
Point



















Stapling
TIM, Bin



















Clock TlM
(24-hr Clock)



















Cat Htttr Reading
(».) ri»



















Orifice Pnssurt
Oifftrcntial
(AH) in H20)
Otiirtd



















Actual



















Hack
iMpcralurt
(I§). *f



















Dry Gat Htttr
Inptriturt
Inltl
U. )
•in




















Outltt
"• »
out




















PMV
Vacwa




















Sa^lt ton
ToptraUr*
•c Cf)
XAD-2



















l*t»i»r
Taoptratun
•c cr>



















                                                                                                                                                                     -O O 3O (/>
                                                                                                                                                                     o<  o< re ro
                                                                                                                                                                    CQ  r* < n
                                                                                                                                                                     (D  m -*• r*
                                                                                                                                                                        .. I/I _l.
                                                                                                                                                                     M    -•• O
                                                                                                                                                                     Ul    O 3
                                                                                                                                                                     o  o 3 z
                                                                                                                                                                     -h < Z O
                                                                                                                                                                        (0 O •
                                                                                                                                                                     ro a •
                                                                                                                                                                     4* a-    en
                                                                                                                                                                        ID ro
                                                                                                                                                                        CD
                                                                                                                                                                        CO
                                                     Figure  6-5.    Field  data  sheet.

-------
                                               Section No. 6
                                               Revision No. 2
                                               Date:  November 14, 1983
                                               Page 16 of 24
necessary, the pump may be turned on with the coarse adjust valve closed.
     During the test run, make periodic adjustments to keep the probe
temperature at the proper value.   Add more ice and, if necessary, salt
to the ice bath.  Also, periodically check the level and zero of the
                                               A
manometer and maintain the temperature of XAD-2  module at or slightly
less than 20°C.
     If the pressure drop across  the train becomes high enough to make
the sampling rate difficult to maintain,  the filters should be terminated.
Extra care must be taken to prevent contamination during particulate
filter changes.  All sampling components  should be capped off using
precleaned caps, plugs, and hexane rinsed aluminum foil.   All caps
should be properly stored in a precleaned container prior to usage.
     At the end of the sample run, turn off the pump, remove the probe
and nozzle from the stack, and record the final  dry gas meter reading.
Perform a leak check.*
     6.7.1.6  Blank Train.  For each series of test runs, set up a blank
train in a manner identical to that described above, but with the probe
inlet capped with aluminum foil and the exit end of the last impinger
capped with a ground glass cap.  Allow the train to remain assembled for
a period equivalent to one test run.  Recover the blank sample as described
in Section 6.7.2.
6.7.2  Sample Recovery
     Proper cleanup procedure begins as soon as the probe is removed
from the stack at the end of the sampling period.
     When the probe can be safely handled, wipe off all external
particulate matter near the tip of the probe.   Remove the probe from the
train and close off both ends with aluminum foil.   Cap off the inlet to
the train with a ground glass cap.
     Transfer the probe and impinger assembly to the cleanup area.  This
area should be clean and protected from the wind so that the chances of
contaminating or losing the sample will be minimized.
     Inspect the train prior to and during disassembly and note any
abnormal conditions.  Treat the samples as follows:
*With acceptability of the test run to be based on the same criterion as
 in 6.7.1.4.                      14Q

-------
                                               Section No. 6
                                               Revision No. 2
                                               Date:  November 14, 1983
                                               Page 17 of 24
                                                        iSi
     6.7.2.1  Adsorbent Tubes.  Remove both the Florisil  tube and the
XAD-2  trap and condenser from the train and cap them off with ground
glass caps and wrap in aluminum foil.  Clearly identify each adsorbent
tube by run number.
     6.7.2.2  Sample Container No. 1.  Remove the first three impingers.
Wipe off the outside of each  impinger to remove excessive water and
other material, weigh (stem included), and record the weight on data
sheet.  Pour the contents directly into container No. 1 and seal.
Alternatively, measure volume of each impinger before and after sampling.
     6.7.2.3  Sample Container No. 2.  Rinse each of the first three
impingers sequentially first with acetone and then with hexane, and put
the rinses into container No. 2.  Quantitatively recover material deposited
in the probe and filter housing using acetone and then hexane and add
these rinses to container No. 2 and  seal.
     6.7.2.4  Sample Container No. 3.  Empty the fourth and fifth impingers
into container No. 3.  Rinse each with distilled D.I. water and add the
rinses to container No. 3.
     6.7.2.5  Filter Container No. 4.  Recover the particulate matter
filter into the original glass petri dish with Teflon -coated tweezers.
Label appropriately.
     6.7.2.6  Silica Gel Container.  Remove the last impinger, wipe the
outside to remove excessive water and other debris, weigh (stem included),
and record weight on data sheet.  Transfer the contents to the used
silica gel can.  If preweighed batches of silica gel are used, return
the silica gel to the appropriate container and seal.
6.8  CALCULATIONS
     Carry out calculations,  retaining at least one extra decimal figure
beyond that of the acquired data.  Round off figures after final
calculations.
6.8.1  Nomenclature
     G  = Total weight of PCB's in stack gas sample, ug.
     C  = Concentration of PCB's in  stack gas, ug/m3, corrected to
      s   standard conditions of 20°C, 760 mm Hg (68°F, 29.92 in. Hg) on
          dry basis.
                                  141

-------
                                               Section No.  6
                                               Revision No.  2
                                               Date:   November 14, 1983
                                               Page 18 of 24

     A  = Cross-sectional  area of nozzle,  m2 (ft2).
      n
    B   = Water vapor in the gas stream, proportion by volume.
     W 9
     M  = Molecular weight of water,  18 g/g-mole (18 Ib/lb-mole).
      W
   P.    = Barometric pressure at the  sampling site,  m Hg (in.  Hg).
    oar
     P  = Absolute stack gas pressure,  mm  Hg (in.  Hg).

    std = Standard absolute pressure, 760  mm Hg (29.92 in Hg).

      R = Ideal3gas constant, 0.06236 mm Hg-m3/°K-g-mole (21.83 in.
          Hg-ft /°R-lb-mole).

     T  = Absolute average dry gas meter temperature °K (°R).
      m
     T  = Absolute average stack gas  temperature °K (°R).

   T t. = Standard absolute temperature, 293°K (528°R).

    V,  = Total volume of liquid collected in impingers and silica gel,
          ml. volume of water collected equals the weight increase in
          grams times 1 ml/gram

     V  = Volume of gas sample as measured by dry gas meter, dcm (dcf).

V , ..» = Volume of gas sample measured by the dry gas meter corrected
 m^stdj   to standard conditions, dscm (dscf).

V , trix = Volume of water vapor in the gas sample corrected to standard
 wcstd;   conditions, son (scf).

     V. = Total volume of sample, ml.

     V  = Stack gas velocity, calculated by combustion calculation,
      5   m/sec (ft/sec).

     AH = Average pressure differential across the orifice meter, mm H20
          (in. H20).

     p  = Density of water, 1 g/mL.

      6 = Total sampling time, min.

   13.6 = Specific gravity of mercury.

     60 = Sec/mi n.

    100 = Conversion to percent.

6.8.2  Average Dry Gas Meter Temperature  and Average Orifice Pressure Drop
     See data sheet (Figure 6-5).

-------
                                               Section No.  6
                                               Revision No.  2
                                               Date:   November 14,  1983
                                               Page 19 of 24
6.8.3  Dry Gas Volume
     Correct the sample volume measured by the dry gas meter to standard
conditions [20°C, 760 mm Hg (68°F, 29.92 in.  Hg)] by using Equation 6-1.

                   T       P      -£L        p       AH
                    std    rbar * 13.6 _   »_  bar * I3~6
                      ~    - ~~
     V       - w                     .  _ „ »_
     Vstd) ~ vm  Hm~    - P~~ -- K Vm - T
                               stu                m
                                             Equation 6-1
where K = 0.3855 °K/mm Hg for metric units
        = 17.65 °R/in. Hg for English units

6.8.4  Volume of Water Vapor
                    pw  RTstd
     Vstd) = Vlc  FT  I?*  = K Vlc       Equation 6-2
                     w    std
where K = 0.00134 m3/mL for metric units
        = 0.0472 ftVmL for English units

6.8.5  Moisture Content

             Vw(std) _
     Bws   Vm(std) * Vw(std)                      Equation 6-3
     If the liquid droplets are present in the gas stream assume  the
stream to be saturated and use a psychrometric chart to obtain an
approximation of the moisture percentage.
6.8.6  Concentration of PCB's in Stack Gas
     Determine the concentration of PCB's in the stack gas according  to
Equation 6-5.
                 s
      C  = K r: - = —                              Equation  6-5
       s     Vstd)
where K = 35.31 ftVm3
     Calculation of destruction removal efficiencies are  discussed  in
Section 9.7.3.2.5.

                               143

-------
                                               Section No. 6
                                               Revision No. 2
                                               Date:  November 14, 1983
                                               Page 20 of 24

6.9  SPECIAL CASES
6.9.1  Sampling Moisture Saturated or Supersaturated Stack Gases
     One or two additional modified Greenburg-Smith impingers may be
added to the train between the third impinger and the Florisil  tube to
accommodate additional water collection when sampling high moisture
gases.  Throughout the preparation, operation, and sample recovery from
the train, these additional impingers should be treated exactly like the
third impinger.
6.10 INTEGRATED BAG SAMPLE
     An integrated bag sample will be collected during each PCB run.
EPA Reference Method 3 (Gas Analysis, for Carbon Dioxide, Oxygen, Excess
Air, and Dry Molecular Weight, Federal Register 42 FR 41768) will be
utilized to characterize the stationary gas analysis.   As permitted
under Section 1.2, paragraph 2 of the reference document, a modification
to the sampling procedures and use of an alternative analytical procedure
will be implemented.  A single point integrated sample is anticipated.
In lieu of an Orsat analyzer, a gas chromatograph with a thermal
conductivity detector (GC/TCD) will be utilized to measure the concen-
trations of oxygen (02), carbon dioxide (C02), nitrogen (N2), and carbon
monoxide (CO) in the integrated bag sample.  Previous test programs have
demonstrated the acceptability of this substitution.   This alternative
analytical method offers acceptable accuracy and a permanent hard copy
record of the analysis.  The data will be reported in units of percent
by volume for 02, C02, N2, and CO.  Dry molecular weight will be  calculated
by Equation 3-2 of the EPA reference method.
6.11 WASTE SAMPLING
     During the incineration sample run, one liter aliquots of the waste
being burned must be taken.  A minimum of one aliquot every 30 minutes
is required.   The sample shall be taken from the waste feed line  to the
incinerator as near to the incinerator as possible.  If the sample tap
line has a residual volume it must be discarded before collection of the
sample.   The sample shall be collected in cleaned amber glass bottles or
jars,  with TFE -lined screw caps.

                                   144

-------
                                               Section No. 6
                                               Revision No. 2
                                               Date:  November 14, 1983
                                               Page 21 of 24
     Composite samples of the waste feed shall be made by combining
individual samples taken at frequent intervals or by means of an automatic
sampler.  At the end of each test period (6 hour nominally), mix the
composite sample thoroughly so that a portion of the composite sample
will represent the average for the sample constituents within the sampled
stream.  The composite sample should be placed into two duplicate 500 ml
bottles for shipment to the laboratory.  Record all pertinent data or
sampling data on a field sheet or notebook.  The data points required
from the sampler are:
     •    temperature;
     •    sample point location;
     a    sample volume;
     f    sampling methods used;
     •    observations (sample is cloudy, has odor, etc.); and
     •    specific gravity.
     To acquire the tap sample of the feed material, the valve or stopcock
used for sample removal must be fitted with a length of precleaned
Teflon® tubing long enough to reach the bottom of the sample container.
Because of the wide diversity in valve and stopcock nozzle sizes, a full
                                                 /Si
range of male-to-female and female-to-male Teflon  tubing of sufficient
length to reach to the bottom of the sample container is coupled to the
appropriate male or female adapter.  The adapter is then coupled to the
valve or stopcock.
     The sample is removed by a stopcock or valve by inserting a clean
Teflon® line into the sampling bottle so that it touches the bottom.
The sample bottle should be thoroughly rinsed with sample prior to
filling.  The sample line flow must be regulated so it does not exceed
500 mL/min after the sample line has been flushed at a rate high enough
to remove all sediment and gas pockets.  The apparatus used for tap
sampling is illustrated in Figure 6-6.  If sampling valves or stopcocks
are not available, samples may be taken from water-level or gauge-glass
drain  lines or petcocks.
6.12 FILTER CAKE SLUDGE
     A  representative sample of filter cake sludge will be taken by TRW
or plant personnel every 2 hours and composited over a 6 hour period.
                                 145

-------
                             Section No. 6
                             Revision No. 2
                             Date:  November 14,  1983
                             Page 22 of 24
                                 6.4 am
                                 (1/4 in.)
                           51  cm
                           (20 In.)
Figure 6-6.  Assembly for tap sampling.

                  146

-------
                                               Section No.  6
                                               Revision No. 2
                                               Date:  November 14, 1983
                                               Page 23 of 24
The sample will be collected from the sludge feed belt with a precleaned
scoop and composited into precleaned containers.
6.13 ASH
     The ash will be sampled every 2 hours during each sampling run.
The sample will be collected with a long handled shovel and allowed to
cool before compositing  using standard ASTM cone and quarter techniques.
6.14 SCRUBBER  INFLUENT AND  EFFLUENT
     A liquid  sample of  the scrubber influent  and effluent will be taken
every 2 hours  and composited during each test  run.  A  standard tap
sample will be collected after  sufficiently purging the sampling  line  to
ensure a representative  sample.
6.15  CONTINUOUS MONITORING SAMPLING SYSTEM
     The extractive-type gas monitors  and  gas  chromatograph  to be employed
for analyzing  stack gas  composition will be  supplied with  sample  gas
from a common  manifold.   Sample gas will be  removed from the stack
through an  in-stack particulate filter using  "heat-traced" line to
maintain the  sample at about  121°C to  prevent condensation of water
vapor  in the  sample  line.  Since the  water vapor content  of the sample
gas will be above  the  practical limits for some of the continuous gas
monitors,  a commercial sample gas conditioner will  be utilized to condense
 and remove the moisture and thus provide a dry gas stream for the CO,
 02,  and C02 gas monitors.
      The  sample gas will be pumped into a glass sample manifold at a
 flow rate  which exceeds the total sample requirements of the individual
 gas monitors.   The common  sampling manifold will,  therefore, offer
 slipstream sample flows to each monitor.  Maintaining excess sample flow
 ensures that  there are  no  measurement errors due to back dilution from
 ambient air.  Also, since  the  sampling manifold is exhausted to  ambient
 pressure the  manifold itself remains at ambient pressure and eliminates
 measurement errors which could arise from varying  stack pressures and
 pressure effects which  could be caused by interaction between the gas
 monitors  individual sample pumps.
      To ensure  representative  measurements, all gases for calibration
 will be introduced through the heated  sampling  line such  that it follows
                                     147

-------
                                               Section No. 6
                                               Revision No. 2
                                               Date:  November 14, 1983
                                               Page 24 of 24

the sane flow path as actual sample gas.  The heat-traced sample line

will be attached in such a manner that it can be removed to introduce

calibration gases.
                                 14-8

-------
                                               Section No. 7
                                               Revision No. 1
                                               Date:  September 30, 1983
                                               Page 1 of 10
                           7.  SAMPLE CUSTODY

     This section provides the quality control requirements associated
with custody of samples taken in this project, including both field
custody and subsequent laboratory custody actions.  A set of general QC
requirements is also presented for use by all sample custodians.  For
the purposes of these requirements, a custodian is considered any person
designated to provide receiving inspection, physical acceptance of a
group of samples intended for subsequent treatment or analysis, analysis
tracking, or sample repository operation.  An important QC activity
performed by the custodian is completeness checking of records, data,
identities etc., of the samples, primarily with respect to a preplanned
sample inventory.
7.1  GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
     All custodians in this program are required to present plans for
maintaining custody, sample integrity, and adequate records of all test
samples.  A plan will identify:
     •    Name of sample custodian(s)
     •    Laboratory tracking report sheets to be used which identify
               Sample code number, reserve sample, quantity, aliquot for
               each test, responsible person, date received, date
               completed
               Storage facility for reserve samples
               Method for using hard-bound workbooks in conjunction with
               lab tracking report sheets to note unusual events
               Quality control  inspection results on incoming samples
               Method of  identifying sample at any stage of testing,
               using existing laboratory practices
     •    Use of the completeness check as described in Section 7.4.

                                   149

-------
                                               Section No. 7
                                               Revision No. 1
                                               Date:  September 30, 1983
                                               Page 2 of 10

7.2  FIELD CUSTODY
     To ensure the integrity of collected samples, and to maintain a
timely and traceable transfer of samples, an established and proven
chain of custody or possession is mandatory.  It is imperative that
accurate records be maintained whenever samples are collected, trans-
ferred, stored, analyzed, or destroyed.
     The primary objective of these procedures is to create an accurate
written record that can be used to trace the possession of the sample
from the moment of its collection through the reporting of the final
results.  A sample is in custody if it is in any one of the following
states:
     a.   In actual physical  possession
     b.   In view, after being in physical possession
     c.   In physical possession and locked up so that no one can tamper
          with it
     d.   In a secured area,  restricted to authorized personnel.
     Personnel will receive copies of study plans prior to the study.
Prestudy briefings should then be held to apprise participants of the
objectives, sample locations, and chain-of-custody procedures to be
followed.   After the chain-of-custody samples are collected, a debriefing
is held in the field to verify the adherence to the chain-of-custody
procedures and to determine whether additional samples are required.
     The personnel involved with the sampling and analyses effort will
be briefed by the Project Manager in regard to the following rules.
     a.   Involve a minimum number of trained persons in sample collection
          and handling.
     b.   Establish guidelines for particular procedures to be used for
          each type of sample collection, preservation, and handling.
     c.   Minimum handling of samples.
     d.   Obtain samples using the appropriate sampling techniques.
     e.   Attach sample tag or label securely (see Figure 7-1) to the
          sample container at the time the sample is collected.   The
          label will contain the following items as a minimum:  the
          station number and location, the date and time taken, the type
                                   150

-------
                               Section No. 7
                               Revision No. 1
                               Date:  September 30,  1983
                               Page 3 of 10
               ENVIRONMENTAL
              SNGtNee
             iDIVISION
TRW I
m «mmm /o/,,„,„..              nuir-
                                  DATE
SAMPLE NUMBER


TYPE SAMPLE


FRACTION
COMMENTS
COLLECTED BY

SOURCE 1.0.
Figure  7-1.   Example of sample label.

                151

-------
                                                Section No.  7
                                                Revision No.  1
                                                Date:   September 30, 1983
                                                Page 4 of 10
           of sample,  the sequence number (e.g.,  first sample of the
           day-sequence No.  1),  the preservative  used (if any) and the
           name of the sample  collector.   Labels  will  be completed legibly
           in waterproof ink.  The samples will be  sealed to  preserve the
           integrity of the  sample from the  time  it is collected until  it
           is opened in the  laboratory.
      f.    Use bound field notebooks to record  field measurements and
           other pertinent information necessary  to reconstruct the
           sample  collection processes for future reference.   Maintain  a
           separate set of field notebooks for  each study and store them
           in a safe place where they can be protected and accounted for
           at all  times.  Establish a sample log  sheet with a standard
           format  to minimize field entries and include the serial  number
           of the  sheet, the date, time, survey,  type  of  samples  taken,
           volume  of each sample, type of analyses,  unique sample numbers,
           sampling location, field measurements  and any  other pertinent
           information  or observation.   The QA Manager  will be responsible
           for  the preparation of the necessary sample  log sheets,  etc.,
           and  the periodic review of all  notebooks during and after  the
           study.  The  Project Manager will be responsible for the  safe
           keeping of all notebooks at completion of the  project.   The
           entries should be signed by the sample collector.
     g.    The  sample collector is responsible for the  care and custody
           of the samples until the samples are properly dispatched to
           the  receiving laboratory or given to an assigned custodian.
           The  sample collector will insure that each container is  in his
           physical possession or in his  view at all times, or  stored in
           a  locked place where no one can tamper with  it.
     In the transfer-of-custody procedures,  each custodian or  sampler
will sign, record, and date the transfer.   Sample transfer can be a
sample-by-sample basis or on a bulk basis.   The following protocol will
be followed for all samples as they are  collected and prepared for
distribution.
                                 152

-------
                                          Section No. 7
                                          Revision No. 1
                                          Date:  September 30, 1983
                                          Page 5 of 10
a.   Samples will be accompanied by a chairrof-custody record
     (Figure 7-2) that includes the name of the study, collectors'
     signatures, station number, station location, date, time, type
     of sample, sequence number, number of containers, and analyses
     required.  When turning over possession of samples, the
     transferor and transferee will sign, date, and time the record
     sheet.  This racord sheet allows transfer of custody of a
     group of samples in the field to the mobile laboratory or to
     the central laboratory.
b.   If the custodian has not been assigned, the field custodian or
     field sampler has the responsibility of packaging and dispatching
     samples to the laboratory for analysis.  The appropriate
     chain-of-custody record must be filled out, dated, signed, and
     included with the sample.  A copy will remain with the custodian.
c.   To avoid breakage, samples will be carefully packed in shipment
     containers such as ice chests.  The shipping containers will
     be sealed for shipment to the receiving laboratory.
d.   Packages must be accompanied by the chain-of-custody record
     showing identification of the contents.  The original must
     accompany the shipment.  A copy is retained by the Field
     Sampling Team Leader.
e.   If sent by mail, register the package with return receipt
     requested.  If sent by common carrier, a bill of lading should
     be obtained.   Receipts from post offices and bills of lading
     will  be retained as part of the permanent chain-of-custody
     documentation.
f.   If delivered to the laboratory when appropriate personnel are
     not there to receive them, the samples must be locked in a
     designated area within the laboratory or must be placed in a
     secure area,  so that no one can tamper with them.  The recipient
     must return to the laboratory, unlock the samples, and deliver
     custody to the appropriate custodian.
                            153

-------
                                               Section No.  7
                                               Revision No.  1
                                               Date:   September 30, 1983
                                               Page 6 of 10
                                        Collector's Sample  No.  	
                         CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD
Location of Sampling:  	  Producer	  Hauler	  Disposal Site
                             Other:
                                 Sample
Shipper Name:  	
Address:
          number    street              city           state       zip
Collector's Name	  Telephone: (	) 	
                           signature
Date Sampled 	  Time Sampled	  hours
Type of Process Producing Waste 	
Field Information
Sample Receiver:
1.  		
              name and address of organization receiving sample
2.  	
3.  	
Chain of  Possession:
1.
          signature                  title                inclusive dates
 2.
          signature                   title                inclusive dates
              Figure 7-2.   Example of chain-of-custody record.
                                   154

-------
                                               Section No. 7
                                               Revision No.  1
                                               Date:  September 30, 1983
                                               Page 7 of 10
7.3  LABORATORY CUSTODY
     The following protocol will be followed for all samples received at
the TRW laboratories.
     a.    The laboratory has designated Jim McGaughey as sample custodian.
          The laboratory will set aside a sample storage security area.
          This will be a clean, dry, isolated room with sufficient
          refrigerator space that can be securely locked from the outside.
     b.    Samples will be handled by the minimum possible number of
          persons.
     c.    Incoming samples, along with the sample analysis request form
          (Figure 7-3), will be received only by the custodian, who will
          indicate receipt by signing the chain-of-custody record and
          sample analysis request sheets accompanying the samples, and
          retaining the sheets as a permanent record.  Couriers picking
          up samples at the airport or post office shall sign jointly
          with the laboratory custodian.
     d.    Immediately upon receipt, the custodian places the samples in
          the sample room, which will be locked at all times except when
          samples are removed or replaced by the custodian.  The samples
          are then cross checked with the enclosed chain-of-custody
          record to ensure that the proper number of samples were received
          and that they correspond to the appropriate sample descriptions.
          Samples are also checked for damage and/or leaks.  All
          abnormalities will be documented.
     e.    The custodian will ensure that the samples are logged into the
          laboratory "master" sample log immediately upon receipt.
     f.    Only the custodian will distribute samples to personnel who
          are to perform tests.
     g.    The analyst will record in his laboratory notebook or analytical
          worksheet, identifying information describing the sample, the
          procedures performed, and the results of the testing.  The
          notes will be dated, will indicate who performed the tests,
          and will  include any abnormalities that occurred during the
                                     155

-------
                                               Section No.  7
                                               Revision No. 1
                                               Date:  September 30, 1983
                                               Page 8 of 10
                         SAMPLE ANALYSIS REQUEST
Part I:  FIELD SECTION
Collector Date
Sampled Time hours
Affiliation of Sampler
Address
number street
Telephone ( )
Laboratory
Sample Collector's
Number Sample No.
city state zip
Company Contact
Type of b
Sample Field Information





Analysis Requested


Special Handling and/or Storage



Part II:  LABORATORY SECTION
Received by
Analysis Required
Title
Date
 Indicate whether sample is water, soil, sludge, etc.
}Use back of page for additional information relative to sample location.
                 Figure 7-3.  Sample analysis request.

                                  156

-------
                                          Section No.  7
                                          Revision No.  1
                                          Date:   September 30,  1983
                                          Page 9 of 10
     testing procedure.   The notes will be retained as a permanent
     record in the laboratory.
h.    Laboratory personnel are responsible for the care and custody
     of a sample once it is handed to them and should be in their
     possession and view or secured in the laboratory at all times
     from the moment it was received from the custodian until the
     tests were run.  Sample preparation forms will be drafted for
     each sample and include provisions for conducting and reporting:
     1.   blank determinations for all reagents which become an
          integral part of the sample
     2.   clean-up reagent blank  determination
     3.   glassware blank determination.
     All samples will be refrigerated  prior to  analysis to ensure
     adequate sample preservation.
i.   The laboratory area shall be maintained  as  a secured area and
     shall  be restricted to  authorized personnel.
j.   Once the sample analyses  are completed,  the unused portion  of
     the sample,  together with identifying  labels and  other
     documentation, must be  returned  to  the  custodian.  The  returned,
     tagged sample  should  be retained in the  custody room until
     permission to  destroy  the sample is received by the  custodian.
 k.   Samples should be  destroyed only upon  the order of the Program
     Manager when it is certain that  the information is no longer
      required,  or that the samples  have  deteriorated.
 1.    Figure 7-4 presents the complete chain-of-custody flow of
      samples from initial  sampling to the reporting of results.
                              157

-------
                                Section No. 7
                                Revision No. 1
                                Date:  September  30,  1983
                                Page 10 of 10
            Labeling of Samples
             Sample Integrity
              Field Log Book
                    1
          Chain of Custody Record
       Sample Analysis Request Sheet
            Shipping of Samples
                    1
       Laboratory Receipt of Samples
     Assignment of Sample for Analysis
                    I	
      Laboratory Analysis  Worksheets
Analysis Results Documentation and Storage

                    I
           Reporting of Results
     Figure 7-4.   Chain of custody.

                    158

-------
                                                Section No. 8
                                                Revision No. 2
                                                Date:  November 14, 1983
                                                Page 1 of 3
                8.  CALIBRATION PROCEDURES AND FREQUENCY

     Calibration procedures for laboratory instrumentation will be
performed on a daily basis to establish linearity of parameters being
measured and determine response factors.  This is the general approach
that will be used throughout the project for each measured parameter.
Analytical standard materials to be utilized will come from existing
stocks or will be purchased from Ultra Scientific.  Lot numbers will be
documented for each standard along with date of receipt, date of initial -
use, expiration date, purity, and persons handling standards.
     Complete traceability of each standard used for calibrations will
continue by documenting all preparation steps from primary to working
standards.  A separate standard preparation quality control log book
will be kept which will include weight measured, dilution volumes,
calculations, solvents, solvent brands and lot numbers, and persons
performing these procedures.
     For each day that analyses are done, a calibration curve or checks
(GC/MS and/or GC/ECD) will be prepared each morning.  Thereafter throughout
the day a calibration check will be done with a standard solution after
every five analyses.
     The calibration curve is assumed to be linear.  If the regression
coefficient is less than 0.900, the calibration curve is not considered
to be valid and the calibration is repeated with new standards.
     Any failure of the analysis internal standard checks, or any failure
of the calibration check causes the analyses to stop for that day until
a new acceptable calibration curve is established.
8.1  CALIBRATION REQUIREMENTS FOR LABORATORY EQUIPMENT
     Table 8-1 presents calibration requirements for laboratory equipment.
                                  159

-------
                            Table  8-1.   CALIBRATION REQUIREMENTS  FOR  LABORATORY  EQUIPMENT
cr>
O

Item
Analytical
Balances
Microbalances
Thermometers
Gas chroma-
tography


GC/MS

(4) EPA 600/'

Calibration
method
Standard weights
Standard weights
Water bath check
vs. standard
Retention time/
detection
response check
Response curve
check
Oven temperature
check
MS tuning
Calibration
check
I- 78-043, August 1978, pi

Frequency
of
calibration
Monthly
Each use
3 months
Each use-day
Each use-day
Monthly
Daily
Each 8 hours
of analysis
p. 39-44.

Calibration
recommendation
reference
(5)
(5)
(6)
(4)
(6)
(4)
(7)
(8)


Reference standard
used
NBS Class S weight
NBS Class J or
Class N weights
Certified NBS
thermometer
Reference mixture
Reference mixtures
Reference pyrometer,
thermocouple, or
thermometer
DFTPP, BFD, or BFB
See Table 3.1 of
of Reference (8)







•o o so c/->
tu tu n n
 -j.
ro ->• o
oz§3
-«i O Z
< z o
o- ' oo
(5)  QA practices for Health Laboratories,  S.L.  Inhorn,  APHA,  (1978).
(6)  TRW practice.
(7)  EPA Method 624.
(8)  "Development of  Acceptance Criteria for the Determination of Organic Pollutant at Medium
     Concentrations in Soil, Sediment,  and  Water Samples,  Systems, Science and Software 0R-81-4819,
     April  1981.   See also R-81-5042,  June  1981  and 0R-81-5043,  June 1981.
                                                                                                                 00

-------
                                                Section No. 8
                                                Revision No. 2
                                                Date:  November 14, 1983
                                                Page 3 of 3

8.2  CALIBRATION STANDARDS
     Specific chemical or physical species are available as standard
reference materials or commercially available secondary standards.  A
list of these is provided in Table 3, page 29 of EPA-600/7-78-201, dated
October 1978.  In addition, certain "quality control" standards are
available to check performance after calibrations for some tests.   (See
EPA QA Newsletter, dated February 1980, Volume 3, No. 1.)  The use of
these standards is to be specified in the procedure, and will include
the frequency of calibration and limits of permissible deviation.
8.3  CALIBRATION RECORDS AND SUPPORT
     Maintenance of calibration records will be required to provide
assurance that required calibrations of measurement systems are occurring
at specified intervals.  A dated tag will be attached to the measurement
system indicating expiration date of the calibration and type of standard.
Tagged equipment will include:
     •    Balances
     t    Gas chromatographs
     •    Gas chromatograph/mass spectrometer system
     •    IR, UV, 1C instruments.
Calibrations which are part of the measurement system preparation procedure
(such as GC/MS, GC, 1C, etc.) will be recorded in an instrument log book
to be kept adjacent to the instrument.  The log book will record the
date, concentration versus response data, graphs, equations, preventive
maintenance, parts replaced, etc.
8.4  CALIBRATIONS REQUIREMENTS FOR FIELD EQUIPMENT
     The Method 5 dry gas meters in the control boxes will be calibrated
before and after testing against a wet test meter standardized through
the EPA Method 5 external national audit prgram.
     All temperature measuring devices will be calibrated against an NBS
thermometer.
                                   161

-------
                                                Section No. 9
                                                Revision No. 2
                                                Date:  November 14, 1983
                                                Page 1 of 11
                        9.  ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES

9.1  PRINCIPLE AND APPLICABILITY
9.1.1  Principle
     Gaseous and participate Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB's and/or
dioxins and furans) are withdrawn from the source using a sampling
                                                               8
train.   The compounds of  interest are collected  in the Florisil  adsorbent
                                                                  ®
tube and in the impingers in front of the adsorbent.  The Florisil  is
followed by an XAD-2® trap and two basic impingers.  The total PCB's,
dioxins and furans in the train are determined by solvent extraction
followed by Gas Chromatography/Electron Capture  Detection (GC/ECD)
and/or Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectroscopy (GC/MS).  Identical but
separate sampling trains will be operated simultaneously; Train A for
PCB's and Train B for dioxins and furans.  All samples from Train B will
be shipped to the mass spectrometry center at the University of Nebraska
for analysis.  The analytical procedures are found in Appendix H of
reference 6.
9.1.2  Applicability
     This method is applicable to the determination  of vaporous emissions
from municipal sewage sludge incinerators.  The  analysis of the samples
should be conducted by personnel trained in chemical analysis and
experienced  in determinations of trace organics  utilizing sophisticated,
instrumental techniques.  All extract transfers  should be made quantita-
tively by rinsing the apparatus at  least three times with the appropriate
solvent and  adding the rinses to the receiving container.  A pre-extracted
boiling stone should be  used in all evaporative  steps to control "bumping."
9.2  RANGE AND MINIMUM DETECTABLE  LIMIT  (MDL)
     The  range of the analytical method  may be expanded considerably
through concentration and/or dilution.   The total method sensitivity is
also highly  dependent on the volume of gases sampled.  The MDL of the
                                    162

-------
                                                Section No.  9
                                                Revision No.  2
                                                Date:   November 14, 1983
                                                Page 2 of 11
GC/ECD method is about 50 pg of total PCB's per 1 uL injection.   The MDL
of the GC/MS- system for PCB's ranges between 50 and 200 pg/ML.   The MDL
of the GC/MS system for dioxins and furans is approximately 1 to 20
9.3  INTERFERENCES
     Organochlorine compounds other than PCS, tetrachlorodibenzofuran (TCDF)
or tetrachlorodibenzodioxin (TCDD) found in the raw waste may interfere
with the analyses.  Appropriate sample cleanup steps shall be performed
as needed.  Based on previous experience this will require a sulfuric
acid treatment followed by aluminum and/or Fluorisil column chromatography.
     Throughout all stages of sample handling and analysis, care should
be taken to avoid contact of samples and extracts with synthetic organic
materials other than TFE® (polytetrafluorethylene).  Adhesives should
not be used to hold TFE® liners on lids, (but, if necessary, blanks on
these adhesives must be run).
9.4  PRECISION AND ACCURACY
     From sampling with identical and paired sampling trains, the precision
of the method has been determined to be 10 to 15% of the PCB concentration
measured.  Recovery efficiencies on source samples spiked with PCB
compounds ranged  from 85 to 95% (Reference 1).
9.5  APPARATUS
9.5.1  Gas Chromatograph
     The  gas Chromatograph (GC) will be equipped with an electron capture
detector  (ECD) for the detection and quantisation of PCB's.  The GC
should also be equipped with a capillary column (such as a  fused silica
SE-54, 30 meter x 0.25 mm) capable of resolving the PCB  isomers utilizing
the appropriate temperature  programming.*  The GC/ECD should be vented
to a scrubber or  exterior  vent for safety reasons.  A compatible integrator
should be used which  has the ability to accurately  integrate capillary
peaks.
 *  Resolution of the 209 possible  isomers  into  50  peaks  is  considered
   adequate for work of this  nature.
                                   163

-------
                                                Section No.  9
                                                Revision No.  2
                                                Date:  November 14,  1983
                                                Page 3 of 11
9.5.2  Gas Chromatograph/Mass Spectrometer/Data System
     The gas chromatograph/mass spectrometer (GC/MS) should be equipped
with a capillary column capable of resolving the PCB isomers.  The MS
system will have the capability of both total ion monitoring, as well as
selective ion monitoring up to mass number 500.
9.5.3  Glassware
     9.5.3.1  Soxhlet Extractors.  Used for the extraction of the XAD-2®
                             _
and Florisil  adsorbents.  Select the proper size Soxhlet to accommodate
the volume of adsorbent.
     9.5.3.2  Kuderna-Dam'sh Evaporator.  Used to reduce the volume of
solvent.
     9.5.3.3  Separatory Funnel.  Equipped with a Teflon® stopcock used
for extraction of impinger solutions.
     9.5.3.4  Miscellaneous Volumetric Glassware.   Used for  determining
the volume of solvent.
9.5.4  pH Meter
     A pH meter equipped with appropriate glass and reference electrodes
for measuring the pH of the collected samples.
9.5.5  Glass Wool
     Cleaned by thorough rinsing with hexane,  dried in an oven  at 110°C,
and stored  in a hexane-washed glass  jar with TFE-lined screw caps.
9.6  REAGENTS AND CHEMICALS
9.6.1   Solvents
     Pesticide quality,  Burdick and  Jackson  "Distilled  in Glass"  or
equivalent,  stored  in  original  containers.   A  blank must be  screened by
the analytical detection method.
     9.6.1.1 Acetone.
     9.6.1.2 Hexane.
9.6.2   Chemicals
     g.6.2.1 Sodium Sulfate.   Used  for removing  water  from  organic
 solvents before  concentration step.   Prepare by thoroughly  rinsing with
 hexane and drying at 110°C overnight before  use.
                                    164

-------
                                                Section No. 9
                                                Revision No. 2
                                                Date:  November 14,  1983
                                                Page 4 of 11

9.7  PROCEDURE
9.7.1  Cleaning Glassware
     All glassware shall be cleaned by the following procedure as described
in Section 3A of the 1980 issue of "Manual of Analytical Methods for
Analysis of Pesticide Residues in Human and Environmental Samples".   See
Appendix I for details.
     1.   Removal of surface residuals immediately after use.
     2.   Hot soak to loosen and float most of residue.
     3.   Hot water rinse to flush away loosened residue.
     4.   Soak with deep penetrant or oxidizing agent to destroy traces
          of organic material.
     5.   Hot water rinse to flush away materials loosened by deep
          penetrant soak.
     6.   Distilled water rinse to remove metallic deposits left by  the
          tap water.
     7.   Acetone rinse to flush off any final traces of organic material.
     8.   A preliminary flush of the glassware just before using with
          the same solvent to be used in the analysis.
9.7.2  Sample Preparation
     9.7.2.1  Container No.  1.   (Contents of 1st three impingers.)   Note
the physical properties of the sample as to color, consistency, presence
of solids, and measure the volume and the pH.   The sample will be spiked
for QC purposes with the internal standard, tribromobiphenyl.   Without
adjusting the sample pH, transfer the impinger solutions to a 1,000  ml
separatory funnel.  Rinse the sample container with 20 ml of acetone,
followed by two 20 ml portions of hexane, adding the rinses to the
separatory funnel.  Extract the sample with 3 separate 100 ml aliquots
of hexane.  Transfer the resulting extract into a Kuderna-Danish (K-D)
evaporator first filtering through pre-extracted, dried Na2S04.  The
volume is reduced to the necessary level and then brought up to a known
volume (i.e. 1 mL).  Analyze the sample by the methods discussed in
Section 9.7.3.
                                    165

-------
                                                Section No.  9
                                                Revision No.  2
                                                Date:  November 14, 1983
                                                Page 5 of 11
     9.7.2.2  Container No. 2.  (Hexane, acetone rinse of probe, filter
holder, any Teflon® transfer line, impingers, and any miscellaneous
glassware.)  Note the physical properties of the sample as to color,
consistency, presence of solids, and measure the volume.  The original
solvent sample will be spiked for QC purposes with the internal standard
tribromobiphenyl.  Proceed with the concentration step as described in
Section 9.7.2.1.  Analyze the sample by the methods discussed in
Section 9.7.3.
     9.7.2.3  Container No. 3.  (Contents of 4th and 5th impingers and
water rinses.)  Note the physical properties of the sample as to color,
consistency, presence of solids, and measure the volume and the pH.  The
samples will be spiked for QC purposes, with the internal standard
tribromobiphenyl.  Hold this sample in reserve for analysis,  if required,
at a later date.  If sample preparation and analysis are required,
proceed as outlined in Section 9.7.2.1.  Store the sample in  the dark at
sub-ambient temperatures.
     9.7.2.4  Florisil and XAD-2® Adsorbent.  Observe  and note the
physical properties of the sample.  The samples will be spiked with
tribromobiphenyl directly  into the adsorbents before being removed  from
the glass sorbent trap.  Expel the entire contents of  the sorbent  trap
into a glass extraction thimble with a course-fritted  bottom.  The
Florisil® and XAD-2® are extracted separately.
     Cover  the  resin in the thimble with glass wool  (or an equivalent
device) to  prevent the resin  from floating  out into  the Soxhlet.   If  the
resin  is "wet"  from the condensation of water, the resin  should be
packed loosely  in  the thimble to  allow  it to  float,  but remain  confined
to  the thimble.
     Rinse  the  sorbent trap with  10 ml  acetone and then three 10 ml
portions hexane,  and put  these rinses  into  the receiver.  Assemble the
Soxhlet extractor after  charging  with  250 ml hexane.   Extract for  20  hours
with a cycle  time of 10  to 14 times  per hour.   If  a  water layer is
present,  it needs to be  removed before  proceeding.
     Transfer the resulting extract into  a  K-D evaporator.   Proceed with
 the concentration step  as described in Section  9.7.2.1.   Analyze  the
 sample by  the methods  discussed in Section  9.7.3.
                                  166

-------
                                                 Section No. 9
                                                 Revision No. 2
                                                 Date:  November 14, 1983
                                                 Page 6 of 11
      9.7.2.5  Participate Filter.  Place the participate filter in the
 Soxhlet with the Florisil® for extraction.
      9.7.2.6  Raw Waste.  Note the physical properties of the raw waste.
 A known volume of the PCB oil waste is appropriately diluted with hexane
 to bring the concentration of PCB's into the working range of the standards
 used for the analyses.   A portion of the diluted raw waste can be subjected
 to a cleanup procedure,  if necessary,  before analysis by GC/MS.   This
 cleanup can be performed utilzing Florisil® column chromatography to
 remove polar compounds  (Reference 2).   The  sludge  samples  will  be prepared
 in the same manner as described in Section  9.7.2.4.
      9.7.2.7  Process Samples.   (Scrubber water and incinerator ash.)
 The scrubber water and ash samples will  be  prepared as  described in
 Section 9.7.2,1  and 9.7.2.4,  respectively.
      9.7.2.8  Sample Analysis Priorities.   Samples  may  be  analyzed
 individually or  combined into a  single  sample depending upon the  overall
 information desired and  the levels  of PCB's  expected.
      9.7.3   Analysis
      9.7.3.1 GC/ECD Analysis.  This method  uses a  temperature programmable
 GC equipped with a  suitable detector such as an electron capture or
    8
 Hall  ,  and  fitted with a capillary column.   Data will be acquire on a
 data  system which has the capability of processing capillary peaks.
 Standards will be comprised of various Aroclors, as well as  individual
 isomers.
      9-7.3.1.1  Interferences.  The specificity of the detector and the
 high  resolution of the capillary column minimize the potential
 interferences.
      9.7.3.1.2  Sample extraction.  Sample extractions will  be performed
 using distilled-in-glass hexane (Burdick and Jackson) or equivalent.
 Samples should be concentrated to 1.0 mL using a K-D evaporator.
Additional concentration down to 0.1 mL may be performed if  necessary.
     9.7.3.1.3  Sample cleanup.   It may be possible to analyze the
extracted samples directly or diluted without further cleanup.   The
analysis itself should be the criterion for determining the need for
further cleanup.   If cleanup is  required, use the Florisil  method as
described in Reference 2.
                                    167

-------
                                                Section No.  9
                                                Revision No.  2
                                                Date:  November 14, 1983
                                                Page 7 of 11
     9.7.3.1.4  GC conditions.  Use a glass capillary column such as a
fused silica (SE-54, 30 meter x 0.25-mm I.D.) to achieve the necessary
compound resolution.  The temperature program selected should be one
that gives the best possible resolution of compounds (for example,
100°C to 270°C at 3°/min., holding at 270° until all peaks elute).  The
injector and detector temperatures should be greater than the highest
temperature achieved in the temperature program.  A  1 to 5 uL sample
size injection is made dependent on the sample concentration.  Pure
nitrogen or other suitable carrier gas should be used.  The use of an
oxygen scavenger on the carrier is recommended.  It  is recommended that
similar columns will be used  for the GC/ECD analyses and for the GC/MS
analyses.
     9.7.3.1.5  Qualitative identification of PCB's.  Selected samples
and diluted raw waste will be  initially screened by  GC/ECD and GC/MS to
determine the number and  intensity of potential PCB  peaks.   Selected
Aroclor mixes and individual  PCB isomer standards will be prepared and
analyzed by GC/ECD  to tentatively  identify the observed peaks by  retention
time.  Confirmation by GC/MS  using a  similar  column  will be  performed.
     9.7.3.1.6  Quantitative  measurement  of  PCB  isomers.  Once the
individual  isomers  have  been  confirmed, a calibration  curve  and  response
factors will  be developed.   If necessary, the sample will be diluted to
bring  the concentration  level  into the  range  of  the  standards.   The
concentration of  a  particular isomer will be  determined  by  comparing the
area counts of  the  unknown to those  of  the standard.
      9.7.3.1.7  Detection limit.   The minimum detectable  limit  is 50 pg
per ML injected sample.
      9.7.3.2  GC/MS Analysis.  The method (References  3,  5)  is  designed
 primarily to address the problem of measurement of PCB emissions from
 combustion sources.
      The method uses a gas chromatograph/mass spectrometer  automated  to
 acquire data in a select subset of masses and integrated according to
 gas chromatographic retention time criteria.   Data are reported as
 quantity of monochloro-, dichloro-	decachlorobiphenyl.
      9.7.3.2.1  Interferences.  Interferences in the PCB analysis are
 minimized with this procedure.  Isotope  abundance patterns  are used to
                                 168

-------
                                                Section No. 9
                                                Revision No. 2
                                                Date:  November 14, 1983
                                                Page 8 of 11
verify the composition as a PCB.  Selected mass chromatograms and retention
time windows provide a high degree of specificity in the analysis of a
specie as a PCB.
     9.7.3.2.2  Sample extraction.  Sample extractions should be done
using distilled-in-glass hexane (Burdick and Jackson).   Samples should
be concentrated to 1.0 ml using a Kuderna-Danisn evaporator.  If necessary
to achieve a minimum detectable quantity, samples may be further reduced
in volume.
     9.7.3.2.3  Sample cleanup.  It may be possible to analyze the
extracted samples directly without further cleanup.   The analysis itself
should be the criteria for determining the need for further cleanup as
described for the Standard EPA Method For PCB's In Industrial Effluents
(Reference 2).  If cleanup is required,  use the FlorisiI/silica gel
procedures described in the EPA method.
     9.7.3.2.4  GC conditions.  Use a 30 meter x 0.25 mm I.D.  fused
silica capillary column containing any of several  phases.   Appropriate
                    A         fl»
phases such as SE-54  and DB-5  (0.25-micron film) are acceptable and
have been used successfully for PCB analysis.   A temperature program at
3°C per minute from 100°C to 270°C (hold for 20 minutes) has been
demonstrated to produce adequate separation and repeatability from run
to run.  A 1 to 5 ML sample size injection is  made dependent on the
concentration in the sample.  The GC gas stream is diverted initially,
allowing the solvent (hexane) to elute and be  vented, and then the
diverter is closed and data acquisition initiated.
     9.7.3.2.5  GC/MS conditions.  Exact conditions  will depend on
spectrometer type and condition.  Care should  be taken to calibrate the
mass scale to accommodate the significant mass defect of the PCB's.   It
is recommended that an Arodor mixture be used to construct an alternate
mass calibration scale for the PCB analysis.   Set the mass ranges for
data acquisition as follows:
                                 169

-------
                                                Section No.  9
                                                Revision No.  2
                                                Date:   November 14,  1983
                                                Page 9 of 11

            PCB Group          Mass Range            Analytical m/e
               Ch             186 - 190               188
               C12             200 - 226               224
               C13             254 - 260               258
               C14             288 - 294               292
               Cls             322 - 328               326
               C16             356 - 364               362
               C17             392 - 400               394
               C18             426 - 434               428
               C19             460 - 468               464
               Clio            494 - 504               498
     Because of the expected complex nature of the waste samples, gas
chromatographic separations will be effected with high efficiency fused
silica capillary columns.  Mass spectral observation, confirmation,  and
quantitation of PCB's (and other materials if desired) will  employ a
sequence of limited mass range scans encompassing the principal ions of
interest.   Regions of the chromatograms designated for specific PCB
observation will be defined with modified Kovat's indices, and/or specific
PCB isomers.  Quantitation will be accomplished against a spiked internal
standard using relative response factors measured against individual PCB
isomers.
     For example, Relative Molar Response Factors (RMRF) are determined
for each chlorine isomer group (i.e., mono, di, tri...chloro PCB's)
relative to Tribromobiphenyl (TBB).  The low mass ion (LMI) for the TBB
(m/z 388) was monitored along with the  LMI1s for each chloro group in a
given sample.  The quantitative calculations were then performed in the
following way.
     For Cli  isomers,
(Area counts  for the  LMI of TBB) x (RMRF for Cli isomers) = counts/p mole
     then,
                (Total area counts  for LMI of Cli isomers) x
                            Counts per  p mole
                 Molecular weight  of Ch isomer = pg/uL
                                    170

-------
                                                Section No.  9
                                                Revision No.  2
                                                Date:   November 14, 1983
                                                Page 10 of 11
     2100 x 3.37 = 7,077 counts/p mole.
           = 0.14 p mole for 2 ML injection x 188 = 13.2 pg/uL.

     13.2 pg/uL x 4 ml total sample = 53.1 ng total for C'\l  isomers.
     Upon quantitation of the mono- through deca-chlorobiphenyls in the
                                                               *
input wastes and the collected emission samples,  ORE's will  be calculated
per isomer group.
     An overall ORE may be calculated by summing  the mono- through
deca-chlorobiphenyls in the input waste and comparing with the same run
for the collected samples.
     9.7.3.2.7  Qualitative identification of RGB's.   A total ion
chromatogram is constructed from the sum of all the masses used in data
acquisition.  Individual mass spectra are obtained at GC peak maxima.
These spectra are examined to determine whether the proper isotope
abundance patterns are present for the given chlorobiphenyl  group.
     9.7.3.2.8  Quantitative measurement of PCS groups.  When the species
have been confirmed as PCB's, individual mass chromatograms  are obtained
for the analytical masses corresponding to the PCB groups, 188,
224, — 498.  An Aroclor sample such as Aroclor  1232 and Aroclor 1254
is used to establish a relative retention time (RRT) scale using the
data given by Webb and McCall (Reference 4).  The area for each PCB
group is integrated over the RRT regions indicated below:
            PCB Group          Analytical m/e          RRT Region
               Ch                  188                0(5)  -  20
               C12                  224                  15 -  35
               C13                  258                  25 -  55
               C14                  292                  40 - 100
               C15                  326                  70 - 150
               C16                  363                 125 - 250
               C17                  394                 160 - 350
               C18                  428                 275 - 600
               C19                  464                 400 -1000
               C110                 498                 650 -1200

                                   171

-------
                                                Section No. 9
                                                Revision No. 2
                                                Date:  November 14, 1983
                                                Page 11 of 11

The RRT windows may need to be adjusted slightly for proper measurement
of total areas.  Use of these windows minimizes interferences from other
PCB's groups.
     9.7.3.2.9  Detection  limit.  The detection limit of this method is
expected to be in the  range of 50 to 200 pg/uL per  individual isomer
injected (Reference 3).
     9.7.4  Quality Assurance/Quality Control
     9.7.4.1  (JC.  All glassware will be cleaned before each sample by
cleaning by the prescribed method given in  Section  9.7.1.   Soxhlet
extractors will then be charged with hexane,  assembled, and extracted
for two hours.  The hexane is concentrated  in a K-D and analyzed for
PCB's.
     All samples for PCB analysis will be  spiked before extraction with
the appropriate  internal standard,  tribromobiphenyl.  All  samples  for
dioxin and furan analysis  will be spiked before extraction with the
appropriate  isomers as determined by UNL and  indicated  in  Appendix H of
reference 6.
     Every sixth PCB sample will be a QC sample containing an  internal
standard.  A  hexane "blank" will be run  every seventh  sample.  An
additional "blank" will  be run  following any  highly concentrated samples
to demonstrate the absence of  "memory effects"  for  subsequent  analyses.
     Duplicate sample  analyses  will be  performed  once  daily,  or at a
minimum  of once every  10 samples.
      9.7.4.2  QA.  QA  samples  may  be submitted for  analysis from an
external,  independent  source  at the request of the  EPA Project Officer.
                                   172

-------
                                               Section No.  10
                                               Revision No.  1
                                               Date:  September 30,  1983
                                               Page 1 of 14
              10.  DATA ANALYSIS, VALIDATION AND REPORTING

     The data reduction procedures to be used in calculating the concen-
tration or value of all measured parameters in this program are required
as part of the procedural write-up.  However, it must be recognized that
the final information to be derived from such data is dependent upon a
complex sequence of data flows, beginning at the site sampling/measurement
activity and terminating only after a final review of all data from
various laboratories (including subcontracting laboratories) has been
completed.  The quality of the final information cannot usually be
altered by repeat testing in the final stages of data review.  An ultimate
removal of outlying data, while improving the accuracy and validity of
the data base, reduces the data completeness, sometimes below acceptable
limits.  It is therefore highly important that early data reviews be
made in the data scheme so that timely corrective measures can be taken.
     The approach taken in this program to maintain quality consists of
implementing timely data reviews at the data generation source whenever
possible.
10.1   FIELD DATA QUALITY REVIEWS
     Objective                     Action                Responsible Person
1.  Sample and process       Review of  labeled samples          Sample
    information  conforms     and  in-process samples            Custodian
    to conditions and        using  daily sample inventory
    schedule  in
    Section 6
 2    Verify incoming data    Daily count of incomplete         r
     and sample  complete-    items                            Custodian
     ness
                                   173

-------
3.
4.
 Objective

Verify complete-
ness of field
notebooks
          Action
          ^•I^^M

Review Daily
Section No.  10
Revision No.  1
Date:  September 30, 1983
Page 2 of 14

          Responsible Person

          Test Systems Site
               Manager
All data forms are
completely filled
out
Calibration criteria reviewed
and test calibration accep-
tance recorded

Review and check off during
each test.  Forms provided
by supervisor with non-
required entries marked
10.2  LABORATORY DATA QUALITY REVIEWS

     Objective                     Action
1.  Verify incoming
    data and sample
    completeness
2.  Verify all data
    forms completed
3.  Manual data reduc-
    tion procedures
    Computer data
    reduction proce-
    dures
    Verify completeness
    of field notebooks
                     Daily count of number and
                     nature of samples received
                     versus number and nature of
                     entries made in log.   Mark
                     verified on log

                     Review and check off during
                     each test.  Forms provided
                     by supervisor with non-
                     required entries marked out.

                     Daily review sample rank of
                     calculated values against
                     sample rank of raw data
                     values.  Rank to be the
                     same.

                     After daily set up, verify
                     retrievability of data in
                     memory.  Check off in
                     calibration log.

                     Review Weekly
                         Calibration criteria in
                         method reviewed and test
                         calibration acceptance
                         recorded.

                         Record values of replicate
                         analyses
                                                           Site Chemist
            Site Chemist
                                Responsible Person

                                 Sample Custodian
                                    Technician
                                    Technician
                                    Technician
                               Laboratory Manager


                               Laboratory Chemist




                               Laboratory Chemist
                                   174

-------
                                                Section  No.  10
                                                Revision No.  1
                                                Date:  September 30, 1983
                                                Page  3 of 14
10.3  ENGINEERING DATA  QUALITY  REVIEWS

     Objective                      Action
1.  Assure completeness
    of field and lab
    data.

2.  Assure compara-
    bility of units
3.  Examine engineer-
    ing validity of
    data
4.  Examination of
    statistical data
    homogeniety
Compare field and lab data
forms against data list at
each use and check off

Review units reported for
consistency in calculations
at each use and check off.

Review process parameter
extremes and transients
versus data gathering times.
Document any data excluded
on this basis.

Apply outlier tests to data
groupings to be used.   Record
data and test results.
Responsible Person

     Project
     Manager
     Project
     Manager
     Project
     Manager
     Project
     Manager
This review is also accomplished on a spot check basis by the Field
Sampling Leader and the Project Manager.  This review refers to the

final data assessment step.

10.4  DATA BASE OUTLIER REVIEW

     Three kinds of outlier reviews will be made during the engineer

review in this program:
1.    Values reported by data gatherer as associated with an atypical

     circumstance.  Engineering judgement of the effect of the recorded
     anomaly on the datum will be made.   The datum will be rejected if

     the magnitude and direction of the anomaly, compared to known
     effects, is sufficient to exceed the factor of 2 reproducibility,

     CV2 = .63 (Section 14).
2.    Values identified by data reviewer as nonrepresentative of the
     generalized circumstance being assessed.  Process data reviews will
     be used to establish a nonrepresentative condition if present.   One

     kind of nonrepresentative data would be data obtained during a
     controlled condition test phase in which the controlled condition
     did not comply with the specifications called for in the test plan.
                                  175

-------
                                               Section No.  10
                                               Revision No.  1
                                               Date:  September  30,  1983
                                               Page 4 of 14
     Data  obtained  during non-normal test conditions may be  acceptable
     and representative so  long as the test and process conditions are
     known.
           Representativeness expresses the degree to which data  accurately
     and precisely  typifies a characteristic of a population, parameter
     variations  at  a sampling point, a process condition, or environmental
     condition.
 3.   Values  identified by inspection of results to be possible statistical
     outliers.   The Dixon outlier test (see Section 14) will be  applied
     to suspect  data points at the 5 percent significance level.   Data
     strongly  suggestive of belonging to a logarithmic normal distri-
     bution  rather  than a normal distribution will be transformed to
     their logarithm before applying the test.   A log normal distribution
     is suggested when the standard deviation(s)  of the measurements
     varies  with the mean value, (x), such that the coefficient of
     variation,  s/x, is constant.   In this instance,  two groups of data
     may be  suspected, rather than an outlier to  a single group.   All
     outlier usage  will be reported with the final data.
 10.5  QUALITY  MEASUREMENT
     The quality of data analysis, validation,  and reporting in this
 program will be  maintained by early personnel  indoctrination, review of
 technical  understanding by the QA office,  the provision for data forms
 to be encountered at various steps of the data  gathering processes as
 part of the  test plan, and by the examinations  provided in Sections 10.1,
 10.2, and  10.3 done by data processors at various levels.   Experience
 has shown  that many of the errors introduced into the data during recording
 and data reduction  procedures are detected by subsequent checking;
 however, in  some instances correction is made impossible by time lapses
 or sheer quantity of raw data sheets which would  have to be searched.
The major quality effect in such instances is then a  decrease in complete-
 ness of the  data.
     The completeness check indicated for the field and laboratory
 custodian and  for the engineering data processors in  Sections 10.1,
 10.2, and 10.3 will  provide interim check points  for  preventing such
                                  176

-------
                                               Section No.  10
                                               Revision No.  1
                                               Date:  September 30,  1983
                                               Page 5 of 14
completeness lapses.  The check is performed and recorded by the person
receiving the transfer of information from a previous step.
10.6 LABORATORY DATA SYSTEM
     This wide range of analytical activity in this project will produce
a large and equally diverse amount of data.  TRW has acquired a laboratory
data system capable of storing, analyzing, and graphically presenting
data of this nature.  The data system consists of three components;
(1) a Varian Vista-401 dedicated chromatography data system, (2) a
microprocessor based computer system, and  (3) a Hewlett-Packard 5985A
Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry/Computer System (see Figure 10-1).
     The Vista-401 Data System, as configured in TRW's Eastern Operations
laboratory, consists of a 68K microprocessor based  data acquisition
system capable of simultaneously monitoring four chromatographic channels,
two dual channel printer/plotter units, and 200K of on-line floppy
diskette storage.  Analysis methods  can be programmed into this system,
stored in main memory or on diskette, and  be used to monitor any of the
four data channels.  The Vista-401 is capable of plotting, on the fly,
chromatograms from any or all of the data  channels, and archiving this
data in its complete form on diskette storage for later analysis.
Post-run calculations, including peak area integration and retention
time assignment, can be performed on data  stored either in main memory
or on diskette.  All information concerning sample  identification,
analysis conditions, and results of  post-run calculations is automati-
cally documented upon completion of  each analysis.  The laboratory
microcomputer is connected  to the data  acquisition  system through a
standard RS-232  serial interface which  enables  the  transfer of  raw
chromatographic  data and processed post-run reports from the Vista-401
to the microcomputer.
     The laboratory microcomputer  system  consists  of  a 64K eight bit
Apple microprocessor,  340K  of  online floppy diskette  storage,  a high
 speed printer,  and a  digital  X-Y  Plotter.  This general purpose computer
 system  greatly  extends  the  range  of  data  analysis  capabilities  available
 to the  analyst.   Computer programs  have been written  for  linear regres-
 sion analysis,  statistical  calculations,  sample log-in  and  analysis
                                  177

-------
                                                           Section No.  10
                                                           Revision  No. 1
                                                           Date:   September 30,  1983
                                                           Page  6 of 14
  nsTA-401
tafraphj Oatt Systai
       • Plats
       • Pott run calculations
       • InstrvMnt control
       o Mcroconputar Intarfaca
     MPtC
          Laboratory Nlcrocaapotar

             a Statistical calculations
             a WTA-401 Intarfaca
             a Maport foras
             a $a*la log
             o Scheduling and tracing of
               analysis    	
         Floppy Disk
          o Mathatf storagi
          a lav data
            storaga
          a Oacuaantatlon
                                                  a Raeard kaaplng
                                                  a Osta storsga
                                                  a OociMntatlon
                   p.T Piottar
                  a graphical ly
                    raprasants
                   tdata
        High Spaad Prints*

          a Hard copy
          a Roport foraa
                                      6C/m Data Systa*.
  NI21-C Coaputar

a Library ratHaval
  sytta*
a SIN saf tMra
a OjHantltatlon
            a MS and Mlllay
              MS llaraHaa
On-llna Nina Track
ttognttlc Tspa
Staraga
 a Archival data
   storaga
Graphics Ttnrinal
and Hard Copy Unit

 o Intaractlva
   graphics
                   Figure 10-1.   Data  reduction  and validation.

                                            178

-------
                                               Section No. 10
                                               Revision No. 1
                                               Date:  September 30, 1983
                                               Page 7 of 14
tracking, data report generation, and graphical presentation of QC
charts, calibration curves, and project resource allocation charts.
     The GC/MS/Computer system consists of a 32K, sixteen bit minicomputer,
20 megabyte of online cartridge disk storage, nine track magnetic tape
storage, and a graphics terminal.  Computer software is provided for the
collection, storage, graphical presentation, and identification of data
from either direct probe/MS or GC/MS analysis.  Both the NBS and Wiley
Mass Spectral Libraries are stored on cartridge disk for library retrieval
search identification.  The GC/MS data system allows data collection in
either a selective ion monitoring or full scanning mode.  All data
collected is stored on-the-fly onto the cartridge disk, and can be
transferred to magnetic tape  for archival storage upon completion of the
analysis.
     The utilization of the laboratory data system  is diagrammed in
Figure 10-2.  After a sample  is entered in the laboratory  sample log,
the microcomputer assigns  it  a diskette master record file.  The micro-
computer then creates an analysis schedule for the  sample, storing the
projected completion dates of each assignment in the sample record file.
Analysis assignment forms  are then generated using  the high speed printer,
and the sample is routed to the appropriate instrument.   Upon completion
of each analysis, the status  of the  schedule of analyses  is updated, new
analysis assignment forms  are printed out, and the  sample  is sent  to the
next  instrument.  Data  from HPLC and GC analyses are acquired by the
Vista-401  system, plotted, stored on floppy diskette, and  transmitted to
the microcomputer.  Mass spectrographic data  are collected by the  GC/MS
data  system,  stored in  real time on  cartridge disk,  archived on magnetic
tape,  and  encoded by  the analyst  into the microcomputer.   Data from the
atomic absorption spectrophotometer  are manually  fed into the microcomputer.
The physical  storage  location of  all  data (including that on magnetic
tape,  cartridge  disk,  floppy  diskette,  and  all chromatograms and
X-Y  Plotter graphs)  is  entered into  the master  record  file for each
 sample.   In this manner,  the  exact  status of  each  analysis for any
 sample and the  storage location of  all  of its  data will  be instantly
 available by querying the  memory through  the  microcomputer console.

                                    179

-------
                     S«p1t log look
              Raw Data
              Storage
[  Printer
                        IT Plotterl
00
o
                       VISTA-401
                      Data System
               Printer/
               Plotters
ftaw Data
Storage
-O O 3D CO
o« 01  <* m
(Q c* < n
IB 
                                                                              o
                                                                              vo
                                                                              oo
                                                                              OJ

-------
                                               Section No. 10
                                               Revision No. 1
                                               Date:  September 30, 1983
                                               Page 9 of 14
Once the data have been  input to the microcomputer, the appropriate
computer programs are  implemented for  the  reduction of the data to the
final report format.  These results are then output on the high speed
printer or X-Y Plotter.
10.7 DATA ANALYSIS AND VALIDATION
     The reliability and acceptability of  environmental analytical
information depends upon the rigorous  completion of all the requirements
outlined in the QA/QC protocol.  The elimination of any one step without
a valid reason could easily jeopardize the entire testing program.  Data
analysis and validation  is the process whereby data are filtered and
accepted or rejected based on a set of criteria.  This involves a critical
review of a body of data in order to locate and isolate spurious values.
It may involve only a cursory scan to  detect extreme values or a detailed
evaluation requiring the use of a computer.  In either case, when a
spurious value is located it is not immediately rejected.  Each
questionable value must be checked for validity.  A comprehensive record
of all questionable data, whether rejected or not, will be maintained
along with rejection criteria and any  possible explanation for their
being questioned.  A detailed approach such as this can be time consuming,
but can also be helpful  in identifying sources of error, and in the long
run, save time by reducing the number  of outliers.
     Prior to any statistical approach, the reported data will be checked
to ensure that it was accurately transcribed.  Often times hard copies
of raw data are not available directly from a measuring device.  Here,
the values must be accurately and legibily recorded.  A quick double
check of the value and a comparison to previously recorded data will be
performed.  Additionally, the use of prepared data recording forms
conveniently formatted and bound is essential.   Hard copies of data can
also be obtained directly from measuring devices which are equipped with
the necessary digital recording peripheral.  Usually, this method of
recording data is sufficient if the hard copies are properly labeled and
filed.  However, periodic checks will  be performed to ensure the proper
operation of such a device.
     The collected data will be reviewed at a minimum by the analyst,
his superior, and the QC coordinator.  The data will be scrutinized at
                                   181

-------
                                               Section No. 10
                                               Revision No. 1
                                               Date:  September 30, 1983
                                               Page 10 of 14
least  dally  to eliminate the collection of invalid data should the
measuring  devices not be operating properly.  The analyst will not
hesitate to  record any unusual instances (no matter how minor) in the
daily  cycles (such as power loss or fluctuations, temporary leaks or
adjustments, or operator error).
     Once  the data have been confidently recorded and logically formatted,
at  least two working copies will be made.  The original shall be stored
by  the program manager.  The data can now be statistically validated
either manually or by computer.  In either case, the criteria applied to
the data will depend on the individual measurement processes and the
ultimate purpose of measurement.  Confidence in the accuracy of analytical
results and  improvements in analytical precision is established by
identification of the determinate sources of error.  Precision is governed
by  the indeterminate error inherent in the procedures, and can be estimated
by  statistical techniques.  To ensure the accuracy of a result, the
quality control procedure must be without bias.   Techniques have been
developed  for the elimination of bias.
     Statistical data analysis control involves application of the laws
of  probability.  This technique is employed to detect and separate
assignable (determinate) from random (indeterminate) causes of variation.
"Statistics" is the science of uncertainty.   Any conclusions based on
statistical inference contain varying degrees of uncertainty, which are
expressed  in terms of probability.  Uncertainty can be qualified in
terms  of well defined statistical probability distributions.   These
probability distributions can be applied direct to quality control.   The
application of statistical quality control can most efficiently indicate
when a given procedure is in control.   A continuing program that covers
sampling,  instrumentation, and overall analytical quality will assure
the validity of the analytical program.
     All analytical  methods are subject to experimental errors.
Determinate errors contribute constant error or bias whereas indeterminate
ones produce random fluctuations in the data.  The concepts of accuracy
and precision as applied to the detection and control  of error have been
clearly defined and will be used exactly.
                                  182

-------
                                               Section No. 10
                                               Revision No. 1
                                               Date:  September 30, 1983
                                               Page 11 of 14
     The terms "determinate" error, "assignable" error, and "systematic"
error are synonymous.  A determinate error contributes constant error or
bias to results which may agree precisely among themselves.  A method
may be capable of reproducing results to a high degree of precision, but
only a fraction of the component sought is recovered.  A precise analysis
may be inaccurate due to:
     a.   inadequate standardization
     b.   inaccurate volumetric measurements
     c.   inaccurate balance weights
     d.   improperly calibrated instruments
     e.   personal bias (color estimation)
     f.   consistent carelessness
     g.   lack of knowledge
     h.   calculation errors
     i.   use of contaminated or improper reagents
     j.   nonrepresentative sampling
     k.   poorly calibrated standards of instruments.
     Determinate errors may be additive (the error has a constant value
regardless of the amount of the constituent sought in the sample) or
proportional (the error changes magnitude according to the amount of
constituent present  in the sample).  Generally, determinate errors have
a direct identifiable source and can be detected by such procedures as
the use of "spiked"  samples, control charts, or differing sample sizes.
     Even though all determinate errors are removed from a sampling or
analytical procedure, replicate analyses will not produce identical
results.  This erratic variation arises from random error indeterminate
error, and may have  several sources, e.g.:
     a.   variation  in reagent addition
     b.   instrument response
     c.   line voltage transients
     d.   physical measurement of  volume and mass.
In environmental analysis the sample itself is subject to a great variety
of variability.  Although indeterminate errors appear to be random in
nature, they do  conform  to the laws of chance; therefore statistical
measurements of  precision can be employed to quantitate their effects.
                                  183

-------
                                               Section No.  10
                                               Revision No.  1
                                               Date:   September 30, 1983
                                               Page 12 of 14
     A measure of the degree of agreement (precision) among results can
be ascertained by analyzing a given sample repeatedly under conditions
controlled as closely as conditions permit.   The range of these replicate
results (difference between highest and lowest value) provides a measure
of the indeterminate variations.
     Indeterminate errors can be estimated by calculation of the standard
deviation (a) after determinate errors have been removed.  When indeter-
minate or experimental errors occur in a random fashion,  the observed
results (x) will be distributed at random around the  average or arithmetic
mean (x).
     Another useful and necessary technique to aid in data validation is
the analyses of duplicate samples.   Duplicate analyses are employed for
the determination and control of precision within the laboratory and
between laboratories.   The control  chart technique is directly applicable,
and appropriate control limits can be  established by  arbitrarily
subgrouping the accumulated results or by using appropriate estimates of
precision from an evaluation of the procedures.
     The QA functions in the project for data assessment  are shown in
Figure 10-3 and consist of the following:
     •    Verification of the acceptability of the computation steps and
          calculation checks used in the analytical procedures, including
          any computer programs for processing raw data
     •    Statistical  evaluaton of comparisons between standards,
          replicates,  spiked samples,  and the routine analyses
     •    Records and trend analyses to identify potential  QA problem
          areas in the assessment scheme
     •    Definition of data validation procedures for all  measurement
          systems
     •    Provision for clear definition of various parameters, such as
          flow rates and calibration data
     •    Use of minimum detectable limits to evaluate trace data  for
          appropriateness
     •    Examination of outliers immediately for possible  cause,  error,
          or interferences
                                      184

-------
                                            Section No.  10
                                            Revision No.  1
                                            Date:  September 30,  1963
                                            Page 13 of 14
     REVIEW
   MAW DATA.
 ANALYSIS, AND
 CALCULATIONS
                                                   RECORDS
                                                     AND
                                                   TRENDS
STATISTICAL
 ANALYSIS
                                QA
                              REVIEW
                                                    QUESTIONABLE
                                                       RESULTS
ACCEPTABLE
  RESULTS
Figure 10-3.   Activities  for data quality validation  and assessment.
                                  185

-------
                                               Section No. 10
                                               Revision No. 1
                                               Date:  September 30, 1983
                                               Page 14 of 14
     •    Concern with all rejected data and the cause or reason for
          rejection
     •    Relation between data and standard, replicates, and spikes
     •    Definition of a reporting scheme.
     An important aspect of QA is the establishment of a mechanism for
problem detection, reporting, and correction.  It is vital that the
problems encountered and corrective actions taken be thoroughly documented.
Quality summary reports will be prepared and distributed to the project
manager and appropriate levels of management.  This report will address
the following:
     •    Assessment of measurement data accuracy
     •    Results of system audits
     •    Significant quality problems and recommended solutions
     •    Names of persons responsible for corrective action
     •    Major milestones involving data quality.
In addition, these reports will serve as a basis for data quality reports
to be supplied to the EPA.
     The equations used to calculate values of measured parameters are
available at the TRW laboratory.   Data reduction programs for the gas
chromatographs are stored in one of the computers and follows a standard
peak area integration program.
     Both the GC/MS and the GC/FID are Hewlett-Packard instruments and
have their automatic internal integration devices which are generally
accepted techniques.   These methods along with calibrations and a routine
daily tune up are used to validate the results from these instruments.
                                   186

-------
                                               Section No.  11
                                               Revision No.  2
                                               Date:  September 30, 1983
                                               Page 1 of 1
                   11.  INTERNAL QUALITY CONTROL CHECKS

     Leak checks will be the primary internal quality control on the
sampling systems.  Prior to and after each test, the leak check must be
less than 0.02 cfm or 4% of the total sample volume, whichever is less.
     Internal quality control checks in the laboratory analysis procedures
consist of daily calibration checks and monitoring an internal standard
tribromobiphenyl on each calibration check and on each sample.  A
multipoint calibration curve and response factors for PCB isomers will
be developed.  In order for the calibration to be valid, the regression
coefficient must be greater than 0.90.  The 95 percent confidence interval
on an individual predicted yQ (the response) for a given XQ (the known
concentration of the calibration standard) will be derived from the
calibration data.  Two calibration checks will be made daily covering
the upper and lower ranges of concentration.  The responses of these
calibration checks must fall within the 95 percent confidence interval
developed from the calibration data, or a new set of calibration standards
must be made up, and a new calibration curve (and 95 percent confidence
interval) derived.
                                    187

-------
                                               Section No. 12
                                               Revision No. 1
                                               Date:  September 30, 1983
                                               Page 1 of 1
                   12.  PERFORMANCE AND SYSTEM AUDITS

     The Program Manager and the Quality Assurance Officer for TRW will
conduct performance and system audits on the  records kept in the field
and in the laboratory.
     TRW will analyze external audit samples  as appropriate if requested
and approved by the EPA Project Officer.
                                    188

-------
                                                Section No. 13
                                                Revision No. 2
                                                Date:  November 14, 1983
                                                Page 1 of 2
                       13.  PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE

     TRW's preventive maintenance program involves periodic assessment
of all instrumentation and equipment being used.  Instrument log books
are kept by noting major repairs, modifications, and the next service
date.
     The following table provides a minimum schedule of maintenance.
Item
GC/FID

GC/TC

GC/ECD

GC/MS
Field Meter
  Box
Maintenance
Full servicing

Full servicing

Full servicing

Contract

Full servicing
Frequency
Quarterly, and
  as needed
Quarterly, and
  as needed
Quarterly, and
  as needed
Quarterly, and
  as needed
As needed
  Documentation
Instrument log, tag
Instrument log,  tag
Instrument log,  tag
Instrument log
Calibration log
     At the present time there are no spare parts that can be classified
as critical or in short supply.  Gas chromatographs require little
preventive maintenance, but close attention to standards and quality
control charts must be done to alert the analyst of problems.   Instrument
manuals and trained troubleshooters are on hand to resolve quickly any
problems encountered.  Capillary systems are evaluated initially and
then periodically by injecting a standard test mixture to determine
column efficiency, leaks, detector response, and injector function.
     Gas chromatography/mass spectrometry systems at TRW are periodi-
cally maintained through a maintenance contract with the manufacturer
                                   189

-------
                                                 Section No.  13
                                                 Revision No.  2
                                                 Date:  November  14,  1983
                                                 Page 2 of 2
who performs  a  quarterly preventive maintenance  call and checkout  of the
complete  system and who is on-call within 48 hours as necessary.   A  log
book  is kept  on all service calls, and also on the types of  samples
analyzed.
      During field sampling a complete set of spare sampling  equipment,
glassware, and  supplies will be available.  Spare 02 and C0/C02  monitors
                                    fit
will  be available.  A complete Orsat  apparatus will serve as a  spare
for the GC/TC apparatus.
13.1  QUALITY MEASURES
      Preventive maintenance will be reviewed by means of a weekly  equipment
downtime  report to be provided to the quality office by the  supervisor
of each field or laboratory station.   This report is required only in
the event of equipment or test downtime.   The report will  include:
      •    the instrument identity,
      •    the nature of the problem,
      •    the required action,
      t    the percent downtime, and
      •    the reason for downtime.
The instrument  is to be assumed available over  the hours  regularly
scheduled for its usage, the downtime  is  to  be  considered  the actual
hours lost by the failure.
     The report is only required in the event of  inability  to conduct
the test because of lack of hardware,  supplies  or chemicals.
                               190

-------
                                                Section No.  14
                                                Revision No.  2
                                                Date:  November 14, 1983
                                                Page 1 of 19
             14.   PROCEDURES USED TO ACCESS DATA PRECISION,
                       ACCURACY, AND COMPLETENESS

     The precision and accuracy of data must be routinely assessed on
all environmental monitoring and measurement data.  The specific proce-
dures necessary to assess the quality of the data on a routine basis are
discussed in the following paragraphs.  Such routine statistical proce-
dures applied to a great bulk and variety of samples can become quite
cumbersome.   To avoid this, an inhouse computer will be utilized to
expedite the performance of statistical calculations.  Standardized
statistical  program packages will be used to calculate any necessary
parameters quickly and accurately, store and/or list previous values,
and plot the data in the form of control charts.
     The statistical techniques which best suit the needs of a given
test procedure will be chosen to ensure the routine assessment of data
precision, accuracy, and completeness.  The following is a summary of
examples of statisti-cal techniques used in handling environmental
measurement data which is in turn followed by an individual listing of
each in more detail.
     •    Central tendency and dispersion
               Arithmetic mean
               Range
               Standard deviation
               Relative standard deviation
               Geometric mean
     •    Measures of variability
               Accuracy
               Bias
               Precision; within  laboratory, between  laboratories, and
               laboratory bias
                                        191

-------
                                                 Section  No.  14
                                                 Revision No.  2
                                                 Date:  November 14,  1983
                                                 Page  2 of 19
      t    Significance test
                u-test
                t-test
                F-test
                Chi-square  test
      •    Confidence  limits
      •    Testing for outliers
      •    Control  charts
 14.1   CENTRAL  TENDENCY AND DISPERSION
 A.    The  Arithmetic Mean
      The  sum of all values in  a  measurement  set  (X.), divided  by the
 number of values summed (n), is  the  definition of the arithmetic mean,
 commonly  called the "average."   It is often  denoted symbolically by a
 bar over  the variable symbol,  as "X".
                                 n
                             X = Z  X./n
                                1=1   1
B.   Range
     The difference between the maximum and minimum values of a set of
values defines the range.

                              R = Y    - y
                              *   *max   Amin

A rough indication of variability, particularly when the set of values
is small (<10).

C.   Standard Deviation
     A standard deviation is an indication of the dispersion of a set of
numbers about the mean value.   Normal (and other) distributions are
expressed as a function of the standard deviation.
                                    192

-------
                                                Section No.  14
                                                Revision No.  2
                                                Date:  November 14,  1983
                                                Page 3 of 19
     For a given set of values, an equation to calculate s is:
                                 n-1
D.    Relative Standard Deviation (RSD), or Coefficient of Variation (CV)
     The dispersion of a set of values is expressed as a percentage of
the mean.

                          %RSD = (s/X) x 100
14.2  MEASURES OF VARIABILITY
A.    Accuracy
     Accuracy is defined in terms of the bias, B, which is the difference
(either on an absolute or percentage basis) between a measured value and
an assumed "true" value.  The larger the difference, the lower the
accuracy.

                            B = X - T, or

                           %B = ^f- ' 100
B.   Recovery
     For spiked samples the recovery  (REC) can be defined as a measure
of accuracy as follows:

     let c   = measured concentration analyzed in the sample without the
          0    addition of a  spike, mg/kg
         c1  = concentration  of  a  standard solution mg/L
         v   = volume  of  standard  added  to the sample for Spike No. 1, ml
          s
         Cl  = measured  concentration  analyzed  in the sample after adding
               Spike  No.  1, mg/kg
                                        193

-------
                                                 Section No. 14
                                                 Revision No.  2
                                                 Date:   November 14, 1983
                                                 Page 4 of 19
                          REC =
                                (c1 x v   x Iff3)
                                       sl
      or on a percentage basis
                      % REC =      Cl " co
                              (c1 x v   x 10"3)
                                     si
                                                 x 100
      Note that % Recovery would be related to % B,  percent  bias,
      as follows:
                             % B = 100 -  % REC

 C.    Bias
      Bias is a nonrandom measurement error:   a consistent difference
 either between sets  of results or between a  measured value  and  a  "true"
 value.

 D.    Precision
      A measure of  agreement  among individual  measurements of a  variable,
 under identical  or specified similar conditions.  Precision may be
 expressed in several ways, and care  must  be  exercised in the definition
 and use of precision measures.
      One set of  such measures* follows:
      1.   Within-laboratory:   The within-laboratory standard deviation,
           s,  measures  the dispersion in replicate single determinations
          made by  one  laboratory  team  (same  field operators, laboratory
          analyst, and equipment)  sampling the  same true concentration.
          This is  also termed  the  repeatability.
*
 These definitions are taken from EPA collaborative test result publi-
 cations, and are applied to the various federal reference sampling and
 analysis techniques.
                                    194

-------
                                                Section No.  14
                                                Revision No.  2
                                                Date:   November 14,  1983
                                                Page 5 of 19
     2.    Between-laboratory:   The between-laboratory standard deviation,
          s. ,  measures the total variability in a determination due  to
          determinations by different laboratories sampling  the same
                                                                 2
          true concentration.   The between-laboratory variance, s. ,  may
          be  expressed as:
                              s2 = s2 * s2
                              sb   SL   s
          and consists of a within-laboratory variance plus a laboratory
                          2
          bias variance, s.  (usually termed reproducibility).

     Laboratory bias:   The laboratory bias standard deviation,

                              s2  =    s2 - s2
                              SL       sb   s

     is  that portion of the total variability that can be attributed to
     differences in the field operators, analysts and instrumentation,
     and due to different manners of performance of procedural details
     left unspecified in a technique.  This term measures that part of
     the total variability in a determination which results from the use
     of  a technique by different laboratories, as well as from modifi-
     cations in usage by a single laboratory over a period of time.  The
     laboratory bias standard deviation is estimated from the within-
     and between-laboratory estimates previously obtained.
     A corresponding set of relative standard deviations would be RSD,
RSDh, RSD,.   These are convenient to use if the precision is propor-
tional to the mean value of the variable.
14.3  SIGNIFICANT TESTS
A.   u-Test
     This test measures the significance of individual values and
experimentally estimated means where the normal population has a known
mean and standard deviation.
                                     195

-------
                                                Section No. 14
                                                Revision No. 2
                                                Date:  November 14, 1983
                                                Page 6 of 19
                             u = X " X
where
     X =  individual value being tested
     X =  calculated mean of experimental results
     s =  calculated standard deviation of all data in population

u is a measure of the number of standard deviation units an individual
data point is away from the mean, assuming normal distribution.

B.   t-Test
     If one has an assumed "true value," u ,  however obtained, the
existence of a significant bias in other measurements of this value can
be defined by as t-test:
where d = (x - u )
where
           t = a parameter, the magnitude of which is referenced to
               tabulated values.  A t-value which exceeds the tabulated
               value for given specifications of probability and number
               of degrees of freedom indicates the existence (within the
               definition of probability specified) of a significant
               bias.  The more stringent the probability requirement;
               i.e., the smaller the probability chosen, the larger the
               tabulated t-value.
           d = the average of the signed difference between the true
               value and the measured values; the average bias.
          s . = the standard deviation of the signed differences, d..
           n = the number of measurements made.
                                      196

-------
                                                Section No. 14
                                                Revision No. 2
                                                Date:  November 14, 1983
                                                Page  7 of  19

C.    F-Test
     Fisher's F statistic is used in testing whether  two sets of samples
could have come from normally distributed populations having the same
variance, a2.  The assumption involved in the test is that the samples
are random and independent of one another and are selected from normally
distributed populations.   The first set has nx samples, and the second
set has n2.  The degrees  of freedom are Vj = nt - 1 and  2 = n2 " ! f°r
the two sets of samples.   The statistic, F, is defined as


                              "I
and is distributed as Fisher's F with vx and v2 degrees of freedom.  If
F > F        ,  .  (with  s2/s?, > 1), then the probability  is (1-y) that
     vl» V2> J-~Y'2        A  '
the two sets of samples did not come from normally distributed populations
having equal variances.
D.    Chi-square test
     If one has a reasonable estimate of tKfe expected standard deviation
of a set of measurements, the existence of a defined  "excess variability"
can be tested as follows:
where
        X2/<|> = a random variable with tabulated values (0  =  n  - 1 =
               number of degrees of freedom).
             = the expected variance of the measurements of  x.
     If x2/
-------
                                                Section No. 14
                                                Revision No. 2
                                                Date:  November 14, 1983
                                                Page 8 of 19

 14.4   CONFIDENCE  LIMITS OR  INTERVALS
      Confidence limits take two forms.  One form for a mean or average
 value defines  a numerical range within which one has a (arbitrarily
 chosen)  probability of finding the true mean value of the measured
 variable.   If  the measurement variability is expressed as a standard
 deviation,  the confidence limits as defined above can be calculated as
 follows:
                         CL = X
where all  symbols have been previously defined.  Note that as the number
of measurements, n, increase, the magnitude of CL decreases.  Also, for
higher probabilities of containing the true mean within CL, the larger
the value  of t and therefore the larger the size of CL.
     The second form of confidence limit defines an interval within
which the  next individual measurement can be expected to fall with a
given probability.  The cajculation of this limit,  sometimes called a
probability limit on a specified type of tolerance  limit, is by the
following  relationship:

                              TL = X ± ts
While n, the number of measurements, does not explicity appear in the
equation for TL, it does determine (along with the  selected probability)
the value  of t; i.e., as n increases, t decreases.
14.4.1  Confidence Interval in Calibration Data (Linear Regression)
     Calibration data most often consist of multiple values of the
instrument response y. for known values of concentration x..  An equation
y = a + bx is sought so as to minimize the sum of squares of (y^-pp,
where y^ are the experimental values of the response and y. are the
calculated values of the response, i.e., y. = a + bx..   This is the
method of  least squares and results in the calculation of a and b for a
set of x., y. data (where i = l,...,n, the number of calibration data).
The calibration curve is then
                               y = a + bx                           (1)
                                   193

-------
The calibration data for  n = 5 are
                                               Section  No. 14
                                               Revision No. 2
                                               Date:  November 14, 1983
                                               Page 9 of  19
                                            Vi
                                            y2
The method of least squares  gives

                         n
     a =  I   (y,)/n - b  I  x.,
         1=1    1        i=l  n
                                                                  (2)
                                    n      n
                    L^
                    b
                        n I   x.y • -  I  xi  Z  y-
                         i=l   1  1    1=1  1 i=i  n
                                       n
                          n  Z   x.2 - ( I  x.)2
                            1=1   1     1=1
Other useful  statistics  are:

The residual  mean square,  s2
s2 = ( Z  y.2  -  a  Z  y. - b  Z  x.y.)/(rr2)
      1=1  1       i=l        1=1
The correlation coefficient

                         n
                            (xrx)(yry)

                f  z  (x.-x)2      z   (yry)2l
                I i=i   n         1=1         J
                                                                  (4)
                                    199

-------
                                                Section No. 14
                                                Revision No. 2
                                                Date:  November 14, 1983
                                                Page 10 of 19
The confidence  interval on an individual predicted y , given x  is
     a + bx  - t
           o    V2, l-y/2
                             1 + 1/n
  (XQ-X)2

I  (X^X)2 _
               + t
                  n-2, l-v/2
s < yo < a + bxQ
"l
(x -x)2
+ 1/n + °
1/n n
I (x.-x):
1=1 1
^
1
tn_-  i-Y/2 1S tne cumulative Student's t statistic having n-2 degrees
of freedom and (l-y/2) level  of significance.   A 100 (1-y) percent
confidence interval gives the following values  for t _,
                                                    n~t,
for the 95% confidence interval,  (l~Y/2) = 0.975,  and
                                                               Note that
                          n
                         10
                          9
                          8
                          7
                          6
                          5
                          4
                          3
                                     Ln-2.  0.975
                                        2.306
                                        2.365
                                        2.447
                                        2.571
                                        2.776
                                        3.182
                                        4.303
                                       12.706
14.5  TESTING FOR OUTLIERS
     An outlier is an extreme value,  either high or low,  which has
questionable validity as a member of  the measurement set  with which it
is associated.
     Detection of outliers may be on  one of the following basis:
     (a)  A known experimental aberration,  such as an instrument failure
          or a technique inconsistency.
     (b)  A statistical  test for significance,  such as the Dixon ratio
          test.   This test is described below.
                                     200

-------
                                                Section No. 14
                                                Revision No. 2
                                                Date:  November 14, 1983
                                                Page 11 of 19
     The Dixon criteria is based entirely on ratios of differences
between observations where it is desirable to avoid calculation of s or
where quick judgment is called for.  For the Dixon test, the sample
criterion or statistic for various levels of significance are tabulated.
     Table 14-1 presents selected significance (probability) levels for
criteria over the n range 3 to 20.  Note that the measurement values are
first arranged in order of ascending magnitude:  i.e., x  is the largest
value.
     The ratios shown in Table 14-1 are used if the smallest value, x^
is the suspected outlier.  If the calculated value of the ratio is
greater than the appropriate maximum ratio in the table, then x. is
declared an outlier.  If the largest value, x , is the suspected outlier,
then the appropriate ratios are shown below:

               n < 8               xn ' xn-l
                                    xn ' xl
               8 < n < 15          xn - V2
                                    xn~ X2
               n * 15              xn • xn-2
                                    xn ' X3
For this case, if the ratios calculated are greater than the appropriate
maximum ratio shown  in Table 14-1, then XR is declared to be an outlier.
     The control chart provides a tool for distinguishing the pattern of
indeterminate (stable) variation from the determinate (assignable cause)
variation.  This technique displays  the test data from a method in a
form which graphically compares the  variability of all test results with
the average or expected  variability  of small groups of data - in effect,
a graphical analysis of  variance, and a comparison of the "within groups
variability versus the "between group" variability.
     The data from a series of analytical trials can be plotted with the
vertical scale in units  of the test  result and the horizontal scale in
units of time or sequence of analyses.  The average or mean value can be
calculated and the spread (dispersion or range) can be established.

                                 201

-------
                                         Section No.  14
                                         Revision No.  2
                                         Date:   November 14, 1983
                                         Page 12 of 19
Table 14-1.   MAXIMUM RATIO OF EXTREME RANKING OBSERVATIONS
Recommended Rank Sampl
for difference size
sample size ratio n
n t ft 21 o
x - x, 3
n 1 4
5
6
x - x 7
X, X,
8f n ' 1C J A 0
Vl " xl 9
10
11
12
13
14
n > 15 X3 " xl 15
xn-2 " xl 16
17
18
19
20
Maximum ratio
e
, Probability level
0.10 0.05 0.01
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
886
679
557
482
434
650
594
551
517
490
467
448
472
454
438
424
412
401
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
941
765
642
560
507
710
657
612
576
546
521
501
525
507
490
475
462
450
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
988
889
780
698
637
829
776
726
679
642
615
593
616
595
577
561
547
535
X2
-------
                                                Section No. 14
                                                Revision No. 2
                                                Date:  November 14, 1983
                                                Page 13 of 19
14.6  CONTROL CHARTS
A.   Application and Limitations
     In order for quality control to provide a means for separating the
determinate from indeterminate sources of variation, the analytical
method must clearly emphasize those details which should be controlled
to minimize variability.  A check list includes:
     1.   Sampling procedures
     2.   Preservation of the sample
     3.   Aliquoting methods
     4.   Dilution techniques
     5.   Chemical or physical separations and purifications
     6.   Instrumental procedures
     7.   Calculation and reporting results.
     The next step to be considered is the application of control charts
for evaluations and control of these unit operations.  Decisions rela-
tive to the basis for construction of a  chart are required.
     1.   Choose method of measurement
     2.   Select the objective
          a.   Precision or accuracy evaluation
          b.   Observe test results, or  the range of results
          c.   Measurable quality characteristics
     3.   Select the variable to be measured  (from  the check list)
     4.   Basis of subgroup, if used:
          a.   Size
               A minimum subgroup size of n=4  is frequently recommended.
               The change that small changes  in the process average
               remain undetected decreases as  the statistical  sample
               size  increases.
          b.   Frequency of subgroup sampling
               Changes  are detected more quickly as the  sampling frequency
               is  increased.
                                     203

-------
                                                 Section No. 14
                                                 Revision No. 2
                                                 Date:  November 14, 1983
                                                 Page 14 of 19
      5.   Control Limits
           Control limits (CL) can be calculated, but judgment must be
           exercised in determining whether or not the value obtained
           satisfy criteria established for the method,  i.e., does the
           deviation range fall within limits consistent with the solution
           or control of the problem.   After the mean (X) of the individual
           results (X) and the mean of the range (R) of  the  replicate
           result differences (R)  have been calculated,  then CL can be
           calculated from data established for this purpose (Table 14-2).

                Grand Mean (X)  = X/k
                CL's  on  Mean  =  X +  A2
                Range (R)  = IR/k or d2(J
                Upper Control Limit (UCL)  on  Range = D.R
                Lower Control Limit (LCD  on  Range = D.R

           Where:  k=number of  subgroups,  A2, D4 and  D3 are  obtained  from
           Table  4, R may  be  calculated directly from the data, or  from
           the standard deviation (a) using factor d2-  The  lower control
           limit  for R is zero when n < 6.

     The calculated CL's include approximately the entire data under "in
control" conditions, and therefore are equivalent to + 3o limits which
are commonly used in place of the more laborious calculation.  Warning
lights (WL) set at + 2a limits (95%) of the normal  distribution serve a
very useful function in quality control.   The upper warning limit (UWL)
can be calculated by:
                             UWL = R + 2oR

                          UWL = R = 2/3  D4R-R
                                   204

-------
                                        Section No.  14
                                        Revision No.  2
                                        Date:   November 14, 1983
                                        Page 15 of 19
Table 14-2.  FACTORS  FOR COMPUTING CONTROL CHART LINES
Observations in
subgroup (n)
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Factor
A2
1.88
1.02
0.73
0.58
0.48
0.42
0.37
Factor
d2
1.13
1.69
2.06
2.33
2.53
2.70
2.85
Factor
°4
3.27
2.58
2.28
2.12
2.00
1.92
1.86
Factor
D3
0
0
0
0
0
0.08
0.14
                            205

-------
                                                Section No. 14
                                                Revision No. 2
                                                Date:  November 14,  1983
                                                Page 16 of 19
Where the subgrouping is n = 2, UWL reduces to

                            UWL = 2.51 R.

B.   Construction of Control Charts
1.   Precision Control Charts
     The use of range (R) in place of standard deviation (a) is justified
for limited sets of data n £ 10 since R is approximately as efficient
and is easier to calculate.   The average range (R) can be calculated
from accumulated results, or from a known or selected a (d^a).   LCLR = 0
when n £ 6.  (LCL = lower control limit.)
     The steps employed in the construction of a precision control chart
for an automatic analyzer illustrates the technique:

     a)   Calculate R for each set of side-by-side duplicate analyses of
          identical aliquots.
     b)   Calculate R from the sum of R value divided by the number (n)
          of sets of duplicates.
     c)   Calculate the upper control  limit (UCLR) for the range:
                    UCLR = D4R
          Since the analyses are in duplicates,  D4 = 3.27 (from Table 14-2).
     d)   Calculate the upper warning limit (UWL):
               UWLR = R + 2aR = R + 2/3 (D4R) =  2.51 R
          (D. from Table 1) which corresponds to the 95% confidence
          limits.
     e)   Chart R, UWLR and UCLR on an appropriate scale which will
          permit addition of new results as obtained.
     f)   Plot results (R) and take action on out-of-control points.

2.   Accuracy Control Charts -- Mean or Nominal  Value Basis
     X charts simplify and render more exact the calculation of CL since
the distribution of data which conforms to the normal curve can be
completely specific by X and a.  Stepwise construction of an accuracy
                                   206

-------
                                                Section No. 14
                                                Revision No. 2
                                                Date:  November 14, 1983
                                                Page 17 of 19
control chart for the automatic analyzer based on duplicate sets of
results obtained from consecutive analysis if known serves as an example:
     a)   Calculate X for each duplicate set.
     b)   Group the X values into a consistent reference scale (in
          groups by orders of magnitude for the full range of known
          concentrations).
     c)   Calculate the UCL and lower control limit (LCL) by the equation.
               CL = + A£R (A2 from Table 4)
     d)   Calculate the Warning Limit (WL) by the equation:
               WL = + 2/3 A2R
     e)   Chart CL's and WL's on each side of the standard which is set
          at zero as shown in Figure 12 and Table 6.
     f)   Plot the difference between the nominal value and X and take
          action on points which fall outside of the control limits.
14.7  PRECISION
     This section provides the basis for the quantitative  limits used to
control the precision.  Sections that follow address accuracy, and
completeness of the data and the compliance with test procedures generated
for this project.  The primary measurement of data precision is the
percentage Relative Standard Deviation, or the percentage  Coefficient of
Variation,

                    %RSD = - • 100, where
                           X
the estimated  standard  deviation,
             s =
the estimated  mean,
n
I
i - x)2
n - 1
                                       ,  and
                          x.
                                     207

-------
                                                 Section No. 14
                                                 Revision No. 2
                                                 Date:  November 14, 1983
                                                 Page 18 of 19
      Additional measures of precision will be calculated for the duplicate
 samples.

 Where X: and X2 are any measurement taken on duplicate samples 1 and 2,

                             x = (Xi + X2)/2
                            sx = ±(Xt - X2)A/T

                           ^  •   loo - 10Q
                           *
                                             (Xa  +  X2)

                          %RSD =   V^xi  "  x?)   .
                                    Xj + X2
                              _  100 Jf  (X,  - X, )
                              --
 14.8  ACCURACY
      Accuracy is  defined as the bias, or the difference between a measured
 value and an assumed true value.  Thus,

                              Bi = Xi - T
                or       %B. = [(X. - T)/T] - 100.

      For  example,  for any particular run using the GC/MS,  one might
 calculate a  bias,  B^ or %B., for the internal standard using the mean
 area  as the  expected or true value, T, by the equations given above.  A
 better measure  of  accuracy will be given by the external  standards that
 are expected to be used in the course of the project, considering the
 true  values,  T, to be those of the external standard.
 14.9  COMPLETENESS
     Measurement completeness, C,  can be described as the  ratio of
acceptable measurements obtained to the total number of planned
measurements  for an item.   In this program, the meaning of completeness
has been extended to include supporting information such as identities,
dates, or other data sheet entries.   For this extended meaning,
completeness  is defined as:
                                   208

-------
                                                 Section No. 14
                                                 Revision No. 2
                                                 Date:  November 14, 1983
                                                 Page 19 of 19
                        ,   number of defective  items
                              total  number of  items
     The control criterion for completeness  is based on a count of

defective items within a time period  sufficient  to cause the total

number of items to be large.  A monthly count  is  used for this program.
                                  209

-------
                                               Section No.  15
                                               Revision No.  1
                                               Date:   September 30, 1983
                                               Page 1 of 1
                         15.   CORRECTIVE ACTION

     Corrective action procedures for this program will  be initiated by
the analyst directly involved with the laboratory procedures,  by the
laboratory supervisors or the QA coordinator specified in the  program
organization chart.  Quality control  charts of standard  curves and
intra-laboratory quality control samples will  be utilized to indicate
the necessity of corrective action.   Control charts will be established
for each procedure indicating upper and lower limits of  2 standard
deviations as the acceptability ranges.   At the point when the control
charts show a deviation beyond the acceptability ranges, investigation
as to the cause will be initiated.  Corrective actions will also be
initiated as a result of other QA activities which include performance
audits, systems audits, and laboratory comparison studies.
     The corrective action relative to the control charts relate more to
precision than to accuracy.  These charts give clues when some factor,
generally of a procedural nature, is causing the results to drift or
when an unexpected difference beyond the control limit occurs.  The data
within the upper and lower control limits of the control charts are well
within the precision accuracy, and completeness criteria outlined in
Section 5.5 above.
     Corrective actions taken as a result of TRW internal audits will be
initialed by a memorandum or an audit report and will be given to the
program manager and to the party responsible for the action that needs
correction.  Part of the periodic audit procedure will be to verify that
previously recommended corrective actions have been taken.   Actions
taken that do not result in the keeping the data within  the goals set
for precision, accuracy, and completeness will be reported to  the EPA
Project Officer and discussed with him.
                                    210

-------
                                                Section No. 16
                                                Revision No. 2
                                                Date:  November 14, 1983
                                                Page 1 of 1
                     16.  QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORTS

     The quality assurance officer will provide a written quality assurance
report to the project manager on a monthly basis.  This report will
address quality control problems arising in the application of this QA
plan, an assessment of the probable significances of the problems, and
recommended actions.  Quality control problems to be addressed may arise
from:
     •    Poor compliance with test procedures reported by the several
          quality assurance monitors
     •    Completeness and precision test limit failures relayed through
          the quality assurance monitors
     •    In-Process procedure changes required by the nature of a
          specific  sample matrix
     •    Quality control waivers dictated by operation conditions.
     The assessment of the problem significance will be based, in part,
on the probable effect on the program completeness and validity of
inferences to be made from the data should the problem continue.
     Recommended actions will include, as applicable:
     •    Tests which may clarify the problem, such as use of standards
     •    Corrective actions to alleviate the problem
     •    Further documentation of the problem
     •    Acceptance of the anomalous condition with associated risk
     These reports  will also include:
     •    Periodic  assessment of measurement data accuracy, provision
          and completeness
     •    Results of performance and system audits.
     The final  report will contain a section summarizing the quality
information  contained  in the monthly reports and for the entire project.

                                  211

-------
                                           Section No. 17
                                           Revision No. 2
                                           Date:  November 14,  1983
                                           Page 1 of 1
                             17.  REFERENCES
1.   Haile, C. L. and E. Baladi.  "Methods for Determining the Total
     Polychlorinated Biphenyl Emissions from Incineration and Capacitor
     and Transformer Filling Plants."  EPA Report 600/4-77-048,
     November 1977.

2.   Rom, J. J.  "Maintenance, Calibration and Operation of Isokinetic
     Source Sampling Equipment."  EPA Office of Air Programs, Publication
     No. APTD-0576 (1972).

3.   Thompson, J. R., Ed.  "Analysis of Pesticide Residues in Human and
     Environmental Samples."  Environmental Protection Agency, Research
     Triangle Park, North Carolina, 1974.

4.   Martin, Robert M.   "Construction Details of Isokinetic Source
     Sampling Equipment."  Environmental Protection Agency, Air Pollution
     Control Office Publication No. APTD-0581 (1971).

5.   1973 Annual Book of ASTM Standards. Part 23, Designation:  D 1179-72.

6.   At-Sea Incineration of PCB-Containing Wastes Onboard the M/T VULCANUS.
     EPA Report 600/7-83-024.
                                    212

-------
                              APPENDIX A OF
                    QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN:
                     SAMPLING AND ANALYSES OF PCB
                  CONTAMINATED WASTE OIL INCINERATION
                        FROM A MULTIPLE HEARTH
                INCINERATOR AT THE ANCHORAGE WATER AND
                         WASTEWATER UTILITY -
                 POINT WORONZOF SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
                           FACILITY EVALUATION
          Prepared by:   TRW Energy and Environmental  Division
                              June 2, 1983

1.   SUMMARY
     A program 1s getting underway to burn transformer oil  containing
PCB's 1n concentrations less than 50 ppm 1n a multiple hearth  sewage
sludge incinerator at Po1nt"Worbnzof, Alaska.  The Incinerator 1s
similar In design to the New Bj»dfoni^lte$sachi^                tna t   ~*
cannot be tested due to mechanical failures.  Thus, 1n a broad sense;
data collected on destruction efficiency, PIC's, and by-products at
Point Woronzof 1s expected to be comparable to New Bedford incinerator
performance.  The Incinerator will operate 1n a temperature range  of
870-980°C.  It 1s expected that the feed waste will have to be spiked  to
50-500 pom to determine destruction efficiencies.  Transformer oil  is
available from Anchorage Municipal Light and Power to do the spiking.
     A preliminary verbal agreement has been reached with Anchorage
Hater and Sewer Utilities to test their Incinerator at Point Woronzof
provided that burning PCB's of 50 ppm and greater concentrations will  be
permitted or exempted.^  Municipal Light and Power has verbally  agreed
to provide the PCB laced oil at an agreed upon date after August 23,
1983.<2>
                                      213

-------
      The New Bedford Incinerator, when operating. Is fed with wastes
 containing about 10 ppm of PCB's.  Since the concentration 1s below
 50 ppm. Region I Impetus to obtain data Is to define the by-product
 concentrations In the emissions and In the scrubber water, particularly
 PCOF and PCDD.(3)
      We conclude that from a technical perspective the Point Woronzof
 Incinerator 1s a viable  facility for gathering data that would be
 Indicative of the New Bedford Incinerator performance.
 2.    BACKGROUND
      A  review of the  literature on previous PCB destruction tests 1n
 multiple hearth sewage sludge Incinerators was recently conducted by GCA
 Corporation.*  '  This review Identified four facilities 1n which PCB
 destruction testing had been performed.  Results of these tests are
 summarized  in Table 1.  The tabulated data are sufficiently limited that
 they  do not provide clear insight to the PCB destruction efficiencies
 achievable  in multiple hearth sewage sludge Incineration units.  In
 particular,  the true  incineration destruction efficiencies for the New
 Bedford incinerator were masked by high concentrations of PCB's in the
 scrubber feed water.
      Additional testing at at least one facility which would supplement
 the existing  PCB destruction efficiency data base is currently in
 planning.   The  Region I office of EPA is conducting a comprehensive
 study of all  PCB sources in the New Bedford, Massachusetts Harbor area.
 Since the New Bedford Municipal  Wastewater Treatment Plant at one time
 received  PCB contaminated Industrial  wastewaters, there is concern that
 Teachable PCB residues may be remaining within the plant.   Indeed, PCBs
 have  been detected in the water and sludge discharges of the plant.
 Hence, there is potential for PCB emissions with the incineration flue
 gas.  To quantify PCB emissions,  PIC's  and by-products from this  incinerator,
Region I officials had planned PCB destruction efficiency tests at the
New Bedford plant.  However,  the incinerator is not operating due to
equipment failure.
                                    214

-------
                         TABLE  1.   SUMMARY OF PCB  DESTRUCTION RESULTS FROM MULTIPLE HEARTH
                                        SEWAGE  SLUDGE INCINERATION FACILITIES (4)
ro
(—•
ui
Fee illty/locat 1*n
F»1* Alt* Incinerator,
hit Alt*. Ulif.



live Rlvtr Facility.
Kansas City, HD


HUB ton City,
tenses
New Bedford Municipal
Incinerator,*
New Bedford. MM.



FCB Concentration
Tost In Haste, pom
Date Idr* basts)
SO
SO
SO


1971 Not available
Not available
Not available
Not •«• liable
197i Not available
Not available
1977 5.40
S.2S
Z. 20
1.40


PCI Concentration.
In Fit* Us. M/a«
103
M.7
SI. 7


JOS
JOB
287
98
3.8
3.7
3.08
10.56
S.1I
7.00


Ot struct ton
Cffktmcv. 1
94.1
91.7
97.1


Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
77.S
«t.J
43.8



Unit hat 1 htartlN. a oretooler
and a net scrubber. Sludge MS
eteliverately *>M with rtl for
tectlif. No rtls *>tectetf to
scrubber water or asb.
NM*er of heartks not letottlfteel.
Met scrMbbtnf of fie* fas eaerieyetf.


Unit has 4 koartks ena* a net
scrubber.
UMit Dei 7 heart**, precooler aarf
a t*et scrubber. Scrubber fe»4
noter contatne4 levels of K8 suf-
ficiently hlfb to MS* Incinerator
performance, rtl In ash ranfN
fro«0.9S-2.3S pom.
       Bedford imicipal Incinerator is* ISP*utvirotecii incinerator
       rated incinerator capacity is 1500 pounds per day of dry slvdfc.
cutlet to nearly 1IOD*F in the fixed carbon bvmlnf tone.
                                                                               14 ft.  3  \n. in diaaeter and consisting of 7 hearths.
                                                                            Incineration  teaoeratwres ranft froa 21S*f at the ash

-------
3.   FACILITY EVALUATION*8*
     The Point Vtoronzof wastewater treatment  plant 1s  located on  a
46-acre tract on the northwestern comer of the  Greater Anchorage area
of Alaska.  This plant began operation 1n 1972 and operates 24  hours  a
day, 7 days a week to provide primary treatment  for the sewage  from the
local community.  The optlimjn plant treatment capacity 1s  34 all lion
gallons per day (MGD) with a hydraulic capacity  of 75  MGD. Raw waste-
water enters the plant through a screening process and 1s  clarified to
recover settleable and floatable solids.  These  sol Ids are pumped to
other units for thickening, drying, and Incineration.  Ash from Incineration
is disposed of 1n a sanitary landfill.  Clarified water  is chlorinated
for  reduction of bacteria and is ultimately discharged to  the  waters  of
Cook Inlet.
     This  treatment plant typically treats nearly 24 MGD of wastewater
to yield 250 to 300 tons per day of wet sludge containing 10  to 12 tons
per  day of dry solids.  The sludge is conditioned and dewatered to about
24 percent solids prior to incineration.  From 1.5 to 2  tons  of incineration
ash  is produced each day and, together with about 1.25 tons per day of
grit from raw wastewater, is hauled to a landfill for final disposal.
     During  normal operation, PCBs are not known to be present in the
raw  wastewaters treated nor in plant effluents.  However, during May 1983
the  co-incineration of PCB-containing transformer fluid will be initiated.
These  fluids contain less  than 50 ppmw PCB, and no special permitting
was  required.*5*  The  PCB's are made up of a number of Aroclors  (J242,
 1254,  1260 were mentioned).  However, Arochlor  1260 predominates.*
     The sludge incinerator  1s a BSP-Environtech multiple hearth incinerator
 (Furnace No. T1343) measuring 14 feet 3  inches  In diameter and having
 six  hearths.  Each  hearth  1s approximately 3 feet  1n  height.   A  typical
 unit is  depicted schematically  in  Figure 1.  A  schematic  of the  incinerator
 scrubber system is  presented  1n Figure  2.  The  unit's maximum  rated
 capacity 1s 1261 pounds of dry  sludge per hour  and its minimum is
 626 pounds per hour.   The normal  operating factor for this unit  is
 22 hours per day, 7 days  per week.*5*  Nominal  natural gas requirements
 for supplemental fuel  are 36,000 standard cubic feet  per  day.  Typical
 hearth temperatures and burner configurations  are as  follows:*

                                     216

-------
                                                 L-i &
                                                   U V I '<
SCUM
AUXILIARY
AIM PORTS

RABBLE AFU
2 OR 4 PER
HEARTH

   GAS FLOW
    CLINKER
    BREAKER
              COOUnUi AIR
              DISCHARGE
SLUDGE CAKE.
SCREENINGS,
AND GRIT-
                                    x         «nu unii —i
     RABBLE
     ARM
     DRIVE
                                                         BURNERS
                                                         SUPPLEMENTAL
                                                         FUEL
                                                        • COMBUSTION AIM
                                                         SHAFT COOLING
                                                         AIR RETURN
                                                         SOLIDS FLOW
           DROP HOLES
             ASH
       DISCHARGE
       Figure 1.  Cross section of a multiple-hearth furnace (7)


                                 217

-------
ro
i—1
CXD
                                L
                                                                         1
                                                                       Mf-
                                          AlA
                                                                                    M/CT
                            Figure 2.   Incineration system flow diagram (8)

-------
               Hearth         Gas Burners          Temperature, °F
               1-top              2
                 2                2
                 3                2                 1600-1800
                 4                -                 1600-1800
                 5                2
               6-bottom           -                500 (maximum)
The furnace is nominally designed to operate at temperatures of  up to
2000°F, with higher operating temperatures resulting in damage.
Currently, transformer fluid is being mixed into the scum tanks  and the
mix is injected at a rate of about 1 gallon per minute into hearth
number 3 via a screw pump.  There are no flow meters for measuring the
feed rate.
     Flue gas from the incinerator is ducted to a precooler and  from
there to a scrubber.  Recent testing indicates that PM emissions are in
good control (0.0052 to 0.0067 grains/scf dry).  Stationary gases were
as follows:
               CO-:  4.40 - 5.23  percent
               CO:   0.009-0.03 percent
               02:   14.0 - 15.7 percent
Combustion efficiencies  ((C02  -  C0)/C02) were  99.3  - 99.8 percent.
     The major deficiency at  this incinerator  may be the lack of flow
measurements  for obtaining good  mass balance data.   It may  be possible
 to calibrate  the scum  pump to  obtain viable metering of that stream.
 The dry weight rate of sewage sludge is estimated from filter cake
 thickness,  surface area  of filter, filter  rotational speed, and frequent
 analysis  of the  sludge cake.   Fuel gas  flow rate is metered.  Air flow
 rate is not metered.
                                   219

-------
4.   REFERENCES

1.   By telephone to R. C. Adams from Richard t.  Hutson,  Manager,
     Treatment Division, Anchorage Water and Sewer Utilities,  June 1,
     1983.

2.   By telephone to R. C. Adams from Ron Kuccek, Municipal  Light and
     Power, May 23, 1983.

3.   By telephone to R. C. Adams from Tom Michel, Region I,  June 1,
     1983.

4    Mclnnes, R. G. and R. J. Johnson.  Provision of Technical Assistance
     to Support Regional Office Implementation of the PCB Regulations -
     East and West.  Report prepared jointly by GCA Corporation and TRW
     Incorporated for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, IERL,
     Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.

5   Information provided to TRW by Bill MacClarence, State of Alaska
     Department of  Environmental Conservation.  Telephone conversation
     on May 9, 1983.

6.   By telephone to R. C. Adams from Chris Warren, Anchorage Water  and
     Sewer  Utilities, May 23, 1983.

7.   Robinson, J. M., R.  J.  Kindya, and R. R. Hall.  State of New  Jersey
     Incinerator Study, Volume  II, Technical Review and Regulatory
     Analysis of Sewage  Sludge  Incineration.  Draft Final Report  prepared
     by GCA/Technology Division, Bedford, Massachusetts, for  the  U.S.
     Environmental  Protection Agency, IERL, Research Triangle  Park,
     North  Carolina.   November  1976.

8.   Background data package provided to TRW by  Bill MacClarence,  State
     of Alaska  Department of Environmental Conservation, April  1983.
                                      220

-------
                            APPENDIX B OF
                    QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN:
                     SAMPLING AND ANALYSES OF PCB
                  CONTAMINATED WASTE OIL INCINERATION
                        FROM A MULTIPLE HEARTH
                INCINERATOR AT THE ANCHORAGE WATER AND
                         WASTEWATER UTILITY -
                 POINT WORONZOF SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
                              TRIP REPORT

                             Prepared By:
                 TRW Energy and Environmental Division

               Anchorage Water and Wastewater Utilities
                           Anchorage, Alaska
                             June 14, 1983

     Purpose of the trip was to meet with a potential host, Anchorage
Water and Wastewater Utilities (AWWU), of a site to burn PCB's and
lERL/Ci's test waste in a sewage sludge incinerator.   Additionally, the
incinerator facility would be inspected and samples collected if possible.
This report provides information supplementing "Facility Evaluation of
Point Woronzof, Alaska Municipal Sewage Sludge Incinerator" prepared by
TRW and  submitted on June 2, 1983.  This report also answers additional
questions about the New Bedford facility obtained  from Region I (Tom Michel)
and GCA  (Bob McGinnes) following the June 14 site  visit.  Two separate
meetings were  held; the first meeting is best characterized as a problem
turning of lERL/Ci's test waste not included in Quality  Assurance
 Project Plan.
                                   221

-------
definition session and a technical information exchange and the second
meeting was an attempt to set priorities and identify action items as
the next step in getting a test program underway.  Attendees of each
meeting are appended.

SUMMARY
     AWWU is the water and sewage treatment division  of Anchorage  Public
Utilities, a municipal owned and operated department.   Municipal Power
and Light (MP&L) is the power generating division of  Anchorage  Public
Utilities.
     AWWU had planned to start feeding  PCS  laced  transformer oil to  the
Point Woronzof sludge Incinerator as early  as May of this year.  The oil
provided by MP&L is flushed from transformers during overhaul and  contains
less than 50 ppm PCS.  Delays for various reasons had prevented PCB
burns 1n the Incinerator at the time of the meeting.  Don Oberacker
raised the possibility of incomplete destruction  of PCB and  the emission
of dibenzo furans and dloxlns at the operating  temperatures  of  the
incinerator.  Based on this concern, AWWU decided that  PCB  would not be
burned until tests have been conducted.  Meanwhile. TRW will  provide
those elements of a test plan at an early date  that determines  the
concentration of PCB 1n the feed and how the concentration  can  be
increased (spike the oil or feed the oil at a higher  concentration than
planned).  This Information will determine If there Is  a need for  permitting
to burn PCB at concentrations greater  than 50 ppm and will  determine
                                                 i
feed tank and pumping requirements for the transformer  oil.
COORDINATION ISSUES
     AWWU has agreed to operate the Incinerator at  stable operating
conditions and at temperatures as high as possible  (probably 1600-1800 F)
consistent with avoiding Incinerator damage.  AWWU  has  further  agreed to
honor reasonable requests to Install  additional sampling openings  if
needed.
     The question was raised as to whether a memorandum of  understanding
is needed between the municipality and  EPA.  It  Is  recommended  that AWWU
or the Anchorage A1r Pollution Control Agency advise us of  the  municipality's
requirements.
                                  222

-------
     Test results are urgently needed by the host to determine if  they
should continue to destruct PCB 1n their Incinerator.  Accordingly,  they
requested early release of the test data for their review.
HOST SITE DESCRIPTION
     The Incinerator 1s operated by AUWU, a department of the Municipality
of Anchorage.  Municipal Power and Light (MP&L) 1s a parallel  department
within the Anchorage public utilities organization.  MP&L 1s storing a
sizable quantity of oil washed from transformers that contains less  than
50 ppm PCB and wants to dispose of the PCB by burning the oil  in the
AWWU incinerator.  It was planned to start feeding the transformer oil
by May of this year but due to various delays no PCB had been burned at
the time of the meeting.
     The Point Woronzof sewage treatment plant provides primary
treatment of sewage from the Municipality of Anchorage.  Sludge from
primary treatment  is incinerated in a BSP-Envirotech multiple hearth
furnace referred to herein as the incinerator.  Discharges from the
incinerator are ash that is landfilled,  flue gas that is precooled and
scrubbed to remove particulate matter before being emitted to the
atmosphere, and the scrubber water.  The incinerator is a six hearth
furnace about 14 feet  in diameter.   Each hearth has  a height of about
3 feet.  Sludge that has been dewatered  on a rotary  filter is transported
by conveyor belt and dropped through a hopper onto the top hearth.  Ash
is discharged from the bottom  hearth and flue gas  exhausts from the top
hearth.  The incinerator operates at a negative pressure maintained by
an  induced draft  fan located after  the scrubber.   A  forced draft fan
feeds  air  to the  bottom hearth  and  auxiliary air ports are located on
Hearth 4,  5, and  6.
      Scum  can be  fed to the  third  hearth.   Scum consists of the
concentrated skimmings from  the primary  treatment  clarifiers.  The
intent was to  feed the transformer oil  to  one  clarifier  skimmer box.
The treatment  plant has three  clarifiers.   The  PCB contaminated scum
would be combined with scum  from the other two  clarifiers and  pumped to
 the scum concentrator  through  existing  piping.   The concentrator decants
                                     223

-------
the top layer of scum from an entrained water phase.   The  concentrated
scum Is fed to a screw (Moyno) pump that discharges  to the third hearth
through a combination of rigid pipe and flexible hose.  Feed  rate is  up
to one gpm and is controlled by varying the speed of the pump.   A water
phase separates from the organic phase (scum) in the concentrator and is
returned to the plant influent.  At least during the test, to assure
better material balance closure, the transformer oil  should be  fed to
the pump discharge pipe.  A feed tank, a pump, and possibly a flbwmeter
would be needed.
     The Incinerator was operating as follows during our Inspection.
Scum was being fed.  Sludge was being fed at a fairly high rate as a
"catchup" measure after shutdown.   Temperature profile and gas  burners
1n service were as follows:
                                   ^F                  No. of Burners
     Hearth 1                     1000                       2
                                   •
     Hearth 2                     1450                       2
     Hearth 3                     1460                       2
     Hearth 4                     1300
     Hearth 5                      920                       2
     Hearth 6                      200
     Inlet to scrubber             200
The incinerator is normally operated at temperatures no higher  than
necessary to incinerate the sludge and maintain a clean stack.   However,
during testing AWWU will operate at higher temperatures (1600-1800°F)
than those observed.  The incinerator cannot operate at 2000°F  and above
without damage or Increased maintenance.  At given sludge  and scum feed
rates, temperature is further controlled by thermostatidally controlling
natural gas flow to the burners.  There 1s a thermostat, set  by the
operator, for each hearth where burners are Installed.
                                    224

-------
     The precooler and scrubber feed water is primary effluent that
returns to the primary treatment system.   The precooler consists only of
two sets of sprays 1n the vertical  duct leading to  the gas entrance of
the scrubber.  The scrubber 1s a three stage Impingement  plate scrubber
operating at a pressure drop of 12M W.C.   Hater rates to  the precooler
and to the scrubber were 60 gpm and 260 gpm, respectively, during our
inspection.
     Other Incineration system data is given In the next  section.

 ANCHORAGE/NEW BEDFORD COMPARISONS
      Comparative data is shown in  Table  1.   One objective of the proposed
 test  is to gather data on an incinerator that  is similar to an incinerator
 located in New Bedford, Massachusetts that  has  been fed with PCB
 contaminated sludge.   The major differences in design and operation of
 the two incinerators  are summarized as follows:
      •    Neither incinerators are equipped with afterburners.  Both
           feed sludge to the top hearth.  The  essential  difference is
           that Anchorage normally adds heat to the top hearth whereas
           New Bedford does not.
      •    Anchorage feeds scum to the third hearth.  New Bedford does
           not feed scum by a side stream and it is not known how they
           dispose of their scum.
      e    New Bedford has seven hearths, Anchorage six.  New Bedford has
           50 percent more dry sludge capacity.
      t    New Bedford has operated its scrubber at a pressure drop way
           below design, apparently because of partial bypassing in the
           scrubber.  Repairs are expected during an ongoing outage.
 TEST FACILITIES
      Test ports are available for traversing flue  gas ducts at  exit of
 incinerator and at discharge of ID fan.   There are 3-4"  ports in a
 rectangular section of duct at exit of  incinerator.  The ID fan discharge
 sampling  location is five feet above  roof level in an  18"  circular duct.
 There  are 4-4"  ports at  right angles  at this location.   The sampling
 location  is downstream of the  incinerator's air bypass  line.  Connections
                                      225

-------
are available for sampling precooler and scrubber influent water, scrubber
effluent water, and scum feed to the Incinerator.  Sludge can be sampled
at the feed hopper to the Incinerator.  Ash can be sampled from Hearth
No. 6.
     The following operating data is measured:
     •    temperature, all hearths and scrubber inlet,
     •    flue gas static pressure,
     0    scrubber AP,
     •    flue gas oxygen,
     t    flue gas flow rate,
     •    precooler water flow rate, and
     •    scrubber water flow rate.
 Sludge  feed rates are determined from the circumferential  surface area
 of the  filter, the filter rotational speed, and  the weight of a
 0.25 square foot sample of cake taken from the filter twice a shift.
 Water analysis of the sample also defines the dry solids  feed rate.   Dry
 solids  volatiles are also determined.
      Samples were collected as follows:
      •     sludge feed to  incinerator,
      t     concentrated scum,
      •     ash,
      •     primary  effluent,  and
      0     scrubber effluent.
                                      226

-------
Table 1.   COMPARATIVE DATA FOR NEW BEDFORD AND ANCHORAGE SEWAGE SLUDGE INCINERATOR
                                  Anchorage
     New Bedford
No. of hearths
Approx. dimensions
Scum feed
Scum feed rate
Sludge feed rate, design

% Solids in sludge
Gas flow
% Volatiles in sludge

Natural gas flow rate
Shaft cooling air returned
  to
PCB feed
Stack'diameter
Precooler
Scrubber
                                14' diameter
                                No. 3 hearth
                                  1 gpm max
                            1000 Ib/h dry solids
                              (May:  959 Ib/h)
                              22.4% May actual
                                  3500 scfm
                             78.1% of dry solids
                                 (May actual)
                                  1500 cfh
                                No. 5 hearth

                                 with scum
                                     18"
                                   similar
                             W.W.  Sly 3 -  stage
                              impingement  plate
                                      (continued^
        same
         N/A*
         N/A
1500 Ib/h dry solids

       25-30%
    2500 scfm dry
       75-80%

         N/A
    No.  6 hearth

       sludge
         36"
 12  nozzles  arranged
     in  two  rows
        same

-------
                                      Table  1.   Concluded
                                           Anchorage
                                                New Bedford
   Scrubber data
  Afterburner

  Sampling ports,
     equlv. diameters

  Temperature
ro
ro
CO
   Sludge  de water ing

   Sludge  transfer  to
     incinerator

   Sludge  fed  to

   Gas  burners
        design N/A
       12" AP actual
  320 gpm actual, primary
effluent (not chlorinated)
            N/A
            No

       7-8 upstream
      N/A downstream
Actual
   1 -
   2 -
   3 -
   4 -
   5
   6
                  83
             538
             788
             793
             704
             493
              93
    (can be operated at
     870-980°C on high
   temperature hearths)

       rotary filter

       conveyor belt
       No. 1 hearth

         No. 1 - 2
         No. 2 - 2
         No. 3 - 2
         No. 5 - 2
      8.5" AP design max
        3.3" AP actual
      300 gpm city water

guarantee 0.2 lb/1000 Ib dry
  gas corrected to 12X CO.

             No

        2.3 upstream
       1.8 downstream

       Actual 10/7/81
          1 - 699°C
          2 - 566
          3 - 977
          4 - 871
          5 - 681
          6 - 371
          7 - 102
         centrifuge

        screw feeder


        No. 1 hearth

          No. 1 - 2
          No. 3 - 2
          No. 5 - 2
          No. 6 - 2
   *N/A - information not available.

-------
                              ATTENDEE LIST
Meeting  One,  Point Woronzof
Sewage Treatment  Works
EPA/IERL.Ci -  Don Oberacker
TRW - Rad Adams
Alaska Dept. of Environmental
Conservation - Bill  MacClarence
Anchorage Air  Pollution Control
Agency - George LaMore
AWWU - Gene Nordgren,
Superintendent, Wastewater
Treatment
AWWU - Kris Warren,  Operations
General Foreman
Meeting Two, AWWU
Water Treatment Works
EPA/IERL.Ci - Don Oberacker
TRW - Rad Adams
Alaska Dept. of Environmental
Conservation - Bill  MacClarence
Anchorage Air Pollution Control
Agency - George LaMore
AWWU - Kris Warren,  Operations
General  Foreman
AWWU - Dick Hutson,  Manager,
Treatment Division
Anchorage Public  Utilities  -
Jim Sweeney, Manager,  Environmental
Resources
                                 229

-------
                               APPENDIX C OF
                      QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN:

                       SAMPLING AND ANALYSES OF PCB

                    CONTAMINATED WASTE OIL INCINERATION

                          FROM A MULTIPLE HEARTH

                   INCINERATOR AT THE ANCHORAGE WATER AND

                           WASTEWATER UTILITY -

                   POINT WORONZOF SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT

                 DETAILS OF THE GLASSWARE  CLEANING  PROCEDURE

1.    As soon as possible after  use of  glassware  coming  in contact with
     PCB's, i.e., beakers, pipets, flasks, or  bottles used for standards,
     the glassware should be  acetone flushed before placing in the hot
     detergent soak.   If this is  not done, the soak bath  may  serve to
     contaminate all  other glassware placed  therein.  May instances of
     widespread laboratory contamination are traceable  to the glassware
     washing sink.

2.    The hot soak consists of a bath of a  suitable  detergent  in water of
     50°C or higher.   The detergent, powder  or liquid,  should be entirely
     synthetic and not a fatty  acid base.  There are  very few areas of
     the country where the water  hardness  is sufficiently low to avoid
     the formation of some hard water  scum resulting  from the reaction
     between calcium and magnesium salts with  a  fatty acid soap.  This
     hard water scum or curd  would have an affinity particularly for the
     chlorinated compounds and, being  almost wholly water insoluble,
     would deposit on all glassware in the bath  in  a  thin film.

     There are many suitable  detergents on the wholesale  and  retail
     market.  Most of the common  liquid dishwashing detergents sold at
     retail are satisfactory, but are  more expensive  than other comparable
     products sold industrially.  Alconox,  in powder or  tablet form, is
     manufactured by Alconox, Inc., New York and is marketed  by a number
     of laboratory supply firms.  Sparkleen  ,  another powdered product,
     is distributed by Fisher Scientific Company.

          NOTE:     Certain  detergents, even in  trace quantities, may
                    contain  organics  that will contribute significant
                    background  contamination by  electron  capture
                    detection.   For  this reason, any  detergent selected
                    should  be carefully checked  to  ensure freedom from
                    such contamination.  The following  procedure is
                    recommended:

                                     230

-------
                    Add 25 mL dist. water, previously checked for
                    background contaminants, to a 250 ml separatory
                    funnel.  Add 1 drop of the liquid detergent (50 mg
                    if in powder form), followed by 100 ml hexane.
                    Stopper funnel and shake vigorously for 2 minutes.
                    Allow layer separation, draw off and discard aqueous
                    layer.  Add a pinch of anhydrous Na2S04 to the
                    hexane extract and shake 1 minute.  Transfer extract
                    to a Kuderna-Danish assembly fitted with a 10 ml
                    evaporative concentrator tube containing one 3 mm
                    glass bead.  Reduce extract volume to about 3 ml in
                    a hot water bath.  Cool, rinse down I joint and
                    sides of tube with hexane, diluting extract to
                    exactly 5 ml.  Stopper tube and shake on Vortex
                    mixer 1 minute.  Chromatograph by electron capture
                    GLC and evaluate chromatogram for contaminant peaks.

3.   No comments required.

4.   The most common and highly effective oxidizing agent for removal of
     traces of organic compounds is the traditional chromic acid solution
     made up of H2S04 and potassium or sodium dichromate.  For maximum
     efficiency, the soak solution should be hot (40°C to 50°C).  Safety
     precautions must be rigidly observed in the handling of this solution.
     Prescribed safety gear should include safety goggles, rubber gloves,
     and apron.  The bench area where this operation is conducted should
     be covered with lead sheeting as spattering will disintegrate the
     unprotected bench surface.

     The potential hazards of using chromic sulfuric acid mixture are
     great and have been well publicized.   There are now commercially
     available substitutes that possess the advantage of safety in
     handling.  These are biodegradable concentrates with a claimed
     cleaning strength equal to the chromic acid solution.  They are
     alkaline, equivalent to about 0.1 N NaOH upon dilution and are
     claimed to remove dried blood, silicone greases, distillation
     residues, insoluble organic residues, etc.  They are further
     claimed to remove radioactive traces and will not attach glass nor
     exert a corrosive effect on skin or clothing.  One such product is
     "Chem Solv 2157^," manufactured by Mallinckrodt and available
     through laboratory supply firms.  Another comparable product is
     "Detex ," a product of Borer-Chemie, Solothurn, Switzerland.

5,6, and 7.  No comments required.

8.   There is always a possibility that between the time of washing and
     the next use, the glassware may pick up some contamination from
     either the air or direct contact.  To ensure against this, it is
     good practice to flush the item immediately before use with some of
     the same solvent that will be used in the analysis.
                                  231

-------
     The drying and storage of the cleaned glassware is of critical
importance to prevent the beneficial effects of the scrupulous cleaning
fro* being nullified.  Pegboard drying is not recommended as contaminants
nay be introducted to the interior of the cleaned vessels.  Neoprene-coated
Metal racks are suitable for such items as beakers, flasks, chromatographic
tubes, and any glassware then can be inverted and suspended to dry.
Snail articles like stirring rods, glass stoppers and bottle caps can be
wrapped in aluminum foil and oven dried a short time if oven space is
available.  Under no circumstance should such small items be left in the
open without protective covering.The dust cloud raised by the daily
sweeping of the laboratory floor can most effectively recontaminate the
clean glassware.
                                 232

-------
                           APPENDIX D OF
                    QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN:
                     SAMPLING AND ANALYSES OF PCB
                  CONTAMINATED WASTE OIL INCINERATION
                        FROM A MULTIPLE HEARTH
                INCINERATOR AT THE ANCHORAGE WATER AND
                         WASTEWATER UTILITY -
                 POINT WORONZOF SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT

                 CALCULATION OF MINIMUM SAMPLE VOLUME
              NECESSARY TO  VERIFY  A ORE OF 99.9X  FOR  PCB's
Assumption
     PCB feed 0.5 gal/min. of 400 ppm Aroclor
     Total flue gas effluent - 4866 cfm

PCB Feed
     0.5 gal/min = 1.893  liter/min = 1893 mL/min @ density of 0.9
                                 = 1704 grams/min
     400 ppm = (400 ug/g)(1704 g/nrin) - 681600 pg/min

Total Flue Gas Effluent
     (4866 cf/min)(28.3 liter/cf)(l mVlOOO liter) = 138 mVmin
                                     233

-------
PCB Concentration at Specified  ORE


     6?^00aHXmin = 4939  M9/«3 «* 0% DE               (as Aroclor)
      13o HI /HI! 0

     4939 " * = 0.9999            x = 0.494 pg/m3 (as Aroclor)
       4930                         = 0.494 ng/L (emission at 99.99%)
                                    x 2.4%  (as anyone isomer)

                                      0.0119 (ng/L of air collected,
                                        99. 99%)
                                      0.119 (ng/L of air collected,
                                        99.9%)


 Sample Volume Required for Specified ORE

      1000 pg/uL injected as MOL

      1000 ng/mL extraction vol


      (1000 ng)(oiTn~) = 84034 1iters needed to be collected for 99.99%
                        or 8403 liters needed to be collected for 99.9%


 Sampling Time Requried for Specified ORE

 If sampling rate is  0.75 cfm then
      (.75)(28'3 cfterS) = 21.2 liters/min



      (84034 liters)(21 ^"iters* = 3964 m1n/6° = e6'1 hours (for
      or
      (8403 liters)(2f^) = 396 min/60 = 6.61 hours (for 99.9%)
                                     234

-------
                            APPENDIX E OF

                    QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN:

                     SAMPLING AND ANALYSES OF PCB

                  CONTAMINATED WASTE OIL INCINERATION
                        FROM A MULTIPLE HEARTH

                INCINERATOR AT THE ANCHORAGE WATER AND
                         WASTEWATER UTILITY -

                 POINT WORONZOF SEWAGE  TREATMENT PLANT


                               ACTION ITEMS

                  Meeting  at AWWU  on September  8, 1983


     Actions generated  in  subject  meeting and subsequent test site visit
for Anchorage Utilities and TRW are tabulated herein.  All of the actions
supplement or expand on the responsibilities specified in the QA Project
Plan and memorandum of August  22,  1983, both prepared by TRW.  Meeting
attendees are appended.


Anchorage

 1.  Prepare an Operations Plan for submittal to EPA Region X.  Submit
     Operations Plan and QA Project Plan to Region X by September 19,
     1983.

 2.  Install feed system for oil feed.

 3.  Make a "dry run" with uncontaminated transformer oil by September 22,
     1983.  Dry run will be to determine operable feed rate and
     temperatures.  Feed system installed for test burn will be used.
     Make data available to TRW.

 4.  Provide 500 gallon trailer for transport of oil to Point Woronzof
     (by MPL).

 5.  Install an oil feed gun on third hearth that extends into gas space
     and disperses oil droplets.  Gun will have to be water cooled to
     avoid flashing of oil upstream of spray nozzle.  Check with vendor
     for guidelines as to  how this may be done.   EPA and/or TRW will
     provide design information.
                                   235

-------
6.   Provide  TRW with  free volume of  incinerator  for calculating  residence
     tine.

7.   Install  flowmeter on well water  used for quenching/scrubbing.
TRW

 1.  Provide revisions to QA Project Plan that incorporate expanded test
     program to Include continuous or high frequency (at least every
     15 minutes) monitoring of CO, C02, and 02.

 2.  Provide guidelines for deciding when operation is transient to the
     extent that sampling will be suspended, for restarting sampling,
     and for coordination of  those actions with AwVU.

 3.  Provide design information for oil gun.

 4.  Prepare a list of reagents and gases and submit to Dick Hutson for
     possible local availability.

 5.  Based on results of dry run,  recalculate sampling requirements for
     determining ORE out to 99.9%.
                                    236

-------
                       LIST OF ATTENDEES

               Test Plan/Program Review Meeting
             Point Woronzof Municipal Incinerator
                       September 8, 1983
David Sanchez
Rad Adams
Bill MacClarence
Kris Warren
Gene Nordgren
Alan Boggs
Sandra Morris
Jim Sweeney
Ron Kuczek
Richard Hutson
George LaMore
IERL, U.S. EPA
TRW Inc.
ADEC
AWWU
AWWU
AWWU
AWWU
Public Utilities
ML&P
AWWU
AAPCA
919/541-2547
919/541-9100
907/274-2533
907/243-2151
907/338-3820
907/338-3870
907/243-2151
907/564-1336
907/279-7671
907/338-3870
907/264-4713
                             237

-------