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
------- |