NCD980602163_19831212_19830929_Warren County PCB Landfill_SERB C_Intergovernmental Working Group for PCB Detoxification meetings, Jun - Dec 1983-OCR

11:00 a.m.
12:00 Noon
1:00 p.m.
2:00 p.m.
3:00 p.m.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL WORK GROUP
for
DETOXIFICATION OF PCB LANDFILL
Monday, December 12 , 1983
11:00 a.m. -3:00 p.m .
Depart Board of Education Building for
Tour of State's PCB l andfill at Afton
Box Lunch at Coley Springs Baptist Church
Call to Order
Roll Call
Approval of Minutes
Announcements
Presentation by Sybron
Daniel A. Okun
Chairman
Dr. Ann Kop e cky
Review and Summary of Pre sentations
Bill Meyer
Planning Session Chairman
Adjournment
,,,
,. < . l I
[Ji ' i ift Lt..,
I ,,
..,1.. ,J •
~--~,; ,,,.,// Q/c me,, /4; .~•
/-1 l/rl, ~'fr..:.... ~-
,,.
( ( I L,
~ ) ,' ✓---~ I . ( I "., (.) /, ' 1,• ,1 // J •; (
I ..
L= /}t{: { ,:,,-.._-,,,-) ·prJ;t6-( •~'>1, ,,
1
I
,-• ". 1 ,:.. c.. I // 1/)J°OII ..S
, ,,
I 'J ' ., ... , .,; I· I < /,. , : V '; /Z
·~
------
D! m.tf(-s ) /; ·;1·:•l/; {,. /v' 1
\' ,J,·1i //,,
/, r; , , ;}_ ¾ ct<-/, / t . , , , l t I J ()l u ;1c1. ,tu
l _,I r ~ ' I , , \
(): l c.':.C:.I ( L\ t Ur)L<.'._
INTERGOVERNMENTAL WORKING GROUP FOR PCB DETOXIFICATION
Proceedings of September 29, 1983 Meeting
Attending:
Dr. Daniel A. Okum, Chairman
Rev. Luther C. Brown
Mrs. Joyce Lubbers
Dr. Robert A. Neal
Dr. Robert G. Lewis
Dr. Linda Little
Mr. William W. Phillips
Mr. 0. W. Strickland
Mr . W. L. Meyer
Mrs . Rebecca Manning
Not Present:
Mr. T. Henry Rooker
Mr . George E. Shearin
Visitors:
Mr. Joe Lennon
Ms. Betsi Simmons
Purpose: Consider Proposals by Environmental Science and Engineering
Atlantic Research Corporation and Polybac Corporation f or
detoxification of PCB materials in the PCB landfill in
Warren County .
Light Activiated Reduction of Chemicals (LARC) Proposal by Environ-
mental Science and Engineering Atlantic Research Corporation
Proposal Presentation by Edmund A. Kobylinski, Chemical Eng i neer
The proposal involves a patented process for photo chemical dehal-
ogenation of PCB transformer oils. Fundamental principles in the
process include solvent extraction, distillation, UV induced de-
halogenation with biphenyl and salts as the ultimate residue. A
flow diagram of the process is illustrated in Figure I.
·' 1000 gal Transformer 01 l Feed Transformer 011 Recycle Loop Carbon Column OIIF PCBs Otlf PBCs 011 Transformer 011 Recycle Loop Ollf Figure I. LARC FLOW SHEET 2 Pressure OHF • H O . ~ Hedi um ' '\ Ch lorobenzenes UV La~ Vacuum Chamber Hedi um ,----------i-----1 Pres sure t-----UV Lamp H20 lsopropano I St 111 h lorobenzenes Transformer 01 l, PC8s Ollf 011 PCBs NaOH, I sopropano I, Transformer Oil, PCBs LARC LARC H2 Vents to Carbon Column "2 H2 LARC t-l LARC H2 __J H2 __J H 2000 gal Tank Product Transformer Oil Product St 111 LARC H2 LARC H H2 _j ~cycle H20 Wash to Remove NaC I , NaOH LARC H2 LARC I Waste I sop ropano I , Transformer 011 ' I H2
Sequential steps in the process include the following:
l. Liquid -liquid extraction utilizing demethylformamide (DMF) in a
centrifugal extractor (Robatel), any chlorobenzene emissions are
UV treated prior to venting to atmosphere.
2. Distillation of PCB, DMF and transformer oil mixture, any chloro-
benzene emissions are UV treated prior to venting to atmosphere,
distillation bottoms are metered to the LARC.
3. Sodium hydroxide for salt formation and pH control and isopropanol
as a hydrogen source are added to the distillation bottoms prior to
introduction to the LARC mecha~ism. The LARC mechanism utilizes
UV radiation in the 1850-4000 ~ region to affect dehalogenation
of the PCB's.
4. Excess isopropanol, biphenyl, sodium chloride, sodium hydroxide
are metered from the LARC to a distillation unit for recovery of
isopropanol.
5. The biphenyl, sodium chloride, sodium hydroxide distillation bottom
mixture is washed to remove the salts and the biphenyl is recycled
as a nonchlorinated transformer fluid or wasted.
Rate of reaction in the LARC system is directly proportional to PCB con-
centration. Examples reported included 1000 gallons per day for a 3000
ppm PCB concentration and 5000 gallons per day for a 500 ppm concentration.
The reaction is reported to be complete with no chlorinated biphenyl
residue. No toxic chlorinated benzofurans or methoxy derivatives have
been observed in process operation.
The advantages of the LARC system for treatment of PCB contaminated oil
were reported to include the conversion of PCB to biphenyl and sodium
chloride. The oil is reusable, no hazardous residue remains for disposal
and treatment cost compare favorably with incineration and sodium treatment
alternatives.
Issues Addressed by the Work Group on the LARC System Proposal
The LARC system was acknowledged to be a liquid treatment process and not
amenable to treatment of soil-PCB mixtures without prior solvent extract-
tion of the PCB from soil materials. The process is a pilot scale design
and not sufficient to manage large volumes of soil. A feasibility study
is being conducted to determine applicability to treatment of soil-PCB
mixtures.
Dr. Lewis commented on the presence of di-and trichlorinated phenyls in
the gas chromogram. Dr. Neal commented on the toxicity implications of
utilizing DMF and isopropanol relative to the existing PCB landfill.
Contact for Environmental Science and Engineering Atlantic Research Corporation:
Edmund A. Kobylinski
Chemical Engineer
Environmental Engineering Section
Research and Technology Division
Atlantic Research Corporation
5390 Cherokee Avenue
Alexandria, Virginia 22314
[phone]
Polybac Corporation Proposal
Presentation by Robert L. Peterson, P.E.
Golson Research Corporation and
Thomas G. Zitrides, President
CYTOX Corporation
The Polybac proposal involves treatment of the PCB-soil mixture with a
proprietary reagent for chlorine removal and replacement to render the
PCB molecule susceptible to biological oxidation and incorporation in
to biomass. The process can be accomplished by landfill excavation
and batch treatment external to the landfill or by in situ treatment.
The landfill will remain the ultimate disposal site for treated residues.
Treatment external to the landfill would require excavation, mixing of
soil and reagent, placement of mixture in reagent reactor, transfer of
materials from reagent reactor to biological, removal of decontaminated
soil to landfill and reconstruction of landfill for ultimate disposal.
Reagent recovery and re-use would be necessary to reduce cost. Emission
controls proposed were "closed" reactor vessels and single or combinations
of foam, oil or plastic for excavation areas. In situ treatment would
consist of injection of reagent and sample until reaction with soil-PCB
mixture indicated complete reaction. Water would then be injected into
the landfill to displace and remove the reagent for recovery. Water, air,
nutrients, biological organisms or other constituents would be added or
removed as required to maintain aerobic decomposition. Ultimate disposal
of the residues would require partial reconstruction of the landfill surface.
It was proposed that extensive bench scale testing be performed to establish
conditions for treatment under either alternative. A major concern for in
situ treatment was the effect or compatibility of the process on the landfill
liner system.
Polybac proposed a three step approach to the project including feasibility
and cost estimates of batch and in situ treatment, pilot or bench scale
testing of procedures, and full scale implementation.
The feasibility study would require evaluation of the following:
1. Soil reaction -Expansion with reagent
2. Compatibility of reagent and landfill liner with respect to permeability
modification~.
3. Rate of movement and completeness of mixing of reagent and soil.
4. Rate and completeness of PCB dechlorination.
5. Rate and completeness of dechlorinated compound degradation.
6. Degree of reagent recovery.
7. Cost estimates of batch and in situ treatment.
8. Procedures and process for pilot study.
.. ~
The pilot study would consist of a bench scale evaluation of all proposed
alternatives and procedures and would be used to establish a cost estimate
for full scale implementation.
Polybac estimated that a feasibility study would cost from $200,000 to
$250,000. Implementation of a batch process is estimated to cost from
$2.6 to $8 million and and in situ process from $3 to $14 million.
Issues Addressed by Work Group on Polybac Presentation
Dr. Neal commented upon the necessity to evaluate the toxicity of reagents,
emissions and all treatment residuals.
Dr. Okum raised the issue of lack of specificity of rates of reaction and
decomposition which does not afford any reasonable estimate of the time
required for project completion. He also noted that the in situ system
could very easily become anaerobic and present a totally different set
of concerns.
The working group discussed general issues of concern including toxicity
of reagents, nonchlorinated biphenyl and other reaction or decomposition
by products and the residual levels of PCB. Other issues discussed were
directed to the integrity of the landfill liner and potential logistics
of different mechanisms for injection and removal of materials if in situ
treatment were implemented.
Contact for Polybac:
Robert L. Peterson, P.E.
Vice President
Galson Research Corporation
6601 Kirkville Road
P.O. Box 546
E. Syracuse, N.Y 13057
[phone]
Thomas G. Zitrides
President
CYTOX Corporation
954 Marcon Boulevard
Allentown, P.A. 18103
[phone]
INTERGOVERNMENTAL WORKING GROUP FOR PCB DETOXIFICATION
Proceedings of July 21, 1983 Meeting
Attending:
Dr. Daniel A. Okum, Chairman
Dr. Robert A. Neal
Dr. Robert G. Lewis
Mr. William W. Phillips
Ms. Kathy Visocki
Rev. Luther C. Brown
Mrs. Joyce Lubbers
Mr. T. Henry Rooker
Mr. George E. Shearin
Mr. Robert Jansen
Mr. O. W. Strickland
Mr. W. L. Meyer
Purpose: Evaluate Proposals by PPM, Inc. and Bioteknika
International, Inc. for detoxification of PCB materials
in the PCB Landfill in Warren County.
PPM, Inc. Proposal
Dr. Louis Centofanti, President of PPM, Inc. presented the
PPM, Inc. proposal.
The US EPA granted approval to PPM, Inc. to destroy PCB's in
mineral oils on April 12, 1982.
Connnercial applications of the PPM, Inc. process include: 17,000
gallons of PCB contaminated mineral .oil for Kansas City Power and
Light Company, 500 gallons of PCB contaminated Kerosene for State
of Missouri and US EPA Officials, 60,000 gallons of PCB contaminated
oil for Georgia Power Company, 23,000 liters of PCB contaminated oil
for Federal Pioneer Electric Company of Canada, and 500,000 gallons
of PCB contaminated oil for Virginia Electric and Power Company.
These projects were performed on-site in mobile treatment units.
Treatment capacity is approximately 10,000 gallons of PCB contaminated
oil per day. Approximately 150 pounds of sludge is generated per
10,000 gallons of PCB contaminated oils.
The PPM, Inc. PCB treatment process consists of adding a highly complex
propriatary organo-sodium reagent to PCB contaminated materials which
react in the absence of air and at room temperature to reduce the PCB's
to chloride salts (sodium chloride),plastic like polymers,(polyphenylene)
and non-PCB contaminated oils.(See Figure 1)
-2-
FIGURE 1 -BASIC OUTLINE OF PPM, INC. PCB TREATMENT PROCESS
PCB-Oil ..... Sodium Reagent ...
I
J, J, J,
Salts Plastic Non PCB
Like Polymer Contaminated
~/
Oil
I ,., •
Sludge Returned Utilized for
to Dielectric Fuel
Use In
Transformers
~r
Chemical
Landfill
or
Incineration
The PPM proposal to detoxify the PCB contaminated soil mixture in
the landfill requires the following basic steps: Removal of the
PCB contaminated soil, extraction of the PCB from the soil with a
proprietary solvent, distillation of the solvent to remove the PCB's,
detoxification of the PCB through the PPM, Inc. treatment process,
return of decontaminated soil to the landfill site and disposal of
treatment residues in an approved chemical landfill or incinerator.
(See Figure 2)
-3-
FIGURE 2 -PPM, INC. PROPOSAL FOR DETOXIFICATION OF
PCB -CONTAMINATED SOIL
Removal of PCB-Contaminated Soil
From Landfill
~,
-Proprietary Solvent Extration .. To Remove PCB From Soil Materials
~· 1J
Solvent & PCB Non-PCB Contaminated
Soil
, r ,.
Solvent Distillation Returned to Landfill
, , ~·
Dirty Solvent PCB's ~ PPM Inc. PCB Detoxification
Process (Figure 1)
~,
11J
Carbon
Filtration -Residues ...
1i, 1.
Clean Solvent To PCB Permitted
Landfill or Incinerator
-4-
Issues Addressed on the PPM Inc. Proposal
The PPM Inc. process is not EPA approved for solvent
extraction of PCB's from contaminated soil materials.
The proposed solvent is an unknown proprietary solvent with
no data on toxicity of solvent, toxicity of off gases
generated by extraction and potential for air emissions.
The volume of extraction solvent and cost cannot be deter-
mined.
No bench scale or research data is available to evaluate
the solvent extraction procedure with respect to effectiveness
or efficiency. No data is available to evaluate PCB residual
in soil after extraction, which precludes a decision on
ultimate disposal of treated soil residues.
The toxicity of the PPM process decomposition products (salts
and polyphenylene) has not been evaluated in animal tests
(nor any other toxicity test).
No economic feasibility evaluation was presented.
A Pilot Scale Project will be required to evaluate each step
of the PPM I nc. proposal.
Documents Presented by PPM, Inc.
April 12 1982 USEPA approval letter to PPM, Inc.
for destruction of PCB's in mineral oil
February 16, 1983 The PPM Process for Chemical
Destruction of PCB's by Dr. Louis Centofanti
January 1, 1982 & June 26, 1983
PPM, Inc.
Contact for PPM, Inc.
Dr. Louis F. Centofanti, President
PPM, Inc.
1875 Forge Street
Tucker, Georgia 30084
[phone]
Newspaper Articles on
-5-
Biotecknika International, Inc. Proposal
Byron Moe, Dr. Josephine Smith and Dr. John Ludlem of Bioteknika International,
Inc. (BII) participated in the presentation.
Bioteknika International, Inc. gave a brief history of the company. BII pre-
sented a company philosophy that all organic molecules are biogradable by micro-
organisms. BII selects microorganisms for contaminant degredation based on
pathogenic characteristics and efficiency to utilize contaminants as carbon on
nutrient sources.
BII has five patents on microorganisms for petroleum base contaminants (fuels
and oils), DDT and other halogenated materials, and PCB's.
BII presented data on a General Motors clean up project that indicated PCB
Arochlor 1260 at a concentration of 90 ppm was biologically degraded to 8 ppb
in 4 days.
BII's proposal was to treat the PCB in place by injection of water, nutrients,
and proprietary aerobic microorganisms specific for PCB decomposition.
BII's proposal included a request for one cubic yard of PCB-contaminated soil
for bench scale testing to determine optimum biogradation conditions.
Issues Addressed by the Work Group on the BII Proposal:
Data presented by BII did not meet scientific standards for presentation format
and was difficult to interpret.
BII did not present any scientifically supportable data to confirm that the
proposed PCB degradation microorganisms could utilize PCB 1260 as a unique
carbon or energy source.
All data presented was based on field studie~ and due to lack of control of
variables was debated as to scientific acceptability.
No data was submitted to demonstrate lack of pathogicity of the PCB micro-
organism or identification and toxicity of decomposition products.
No mechanism or procedures for injection of microorganisms,water, and nutrients
into the landfill were presented. No consideration of the effect of these pro-
cedures on landfill engineered structures were presented.
No data was presented to demonstrate that the concentration of PCB's in the
landfill was amenable to supporting active microbial populations for PCB
decomposition.
-6-
No level of PCB's remaining in the residue after treatment was presented.
The microorganisms are not approved by EPA for PCB degredation.
Documents Presented by BIi:
Bound notebook containing test data conformation reports
Brief history of company
10 tests on contaminated sites
EPA authorization for use of microorganisms on oil spills
Press Reports
Contact Person for BIi:
Byron A. Moe, President
Bioteknika International, Inc.
7835 Greeley Boulevard
Springfield, Virginia 22152
[phone]
Respectfully submitted
William L. Meyer
...
INTERGOVERNMENTAL WORKING GROUP FOR PCB DETOXIFICATION
Journal of Proceedings
The organizational meeting of the Governor's
Intergovernmental Working Group on PCB Detoxification was
convened on Thursday, June 23, 1983 at 2:00 p.m. Dr. Daniel
A. Okun, the Chairman, presided. The meeting was held in the
ABC Conference Room (Room 559) of the Administration Building
in Raleigh.
Attendance was recorded as follows:
Dr. Daniel A. Okun, Chairman
Dr. Robert G. Lewis
Dr. Linda Little
Mr. Tom Karnoski
Mr. W.W. Phillips
Absentees:
Dr. Robert A. Neal, excused
Mr. Paul G. Waugaman, resigned
Guests:
Rev. Luther C. Brown
Mrs. Joyce Lubbers
Mr. Thomas Henry Rooker
Mr. George E. Shearin
Mr. Joe Lennon, Warren County Health Officer
Ms. Betsi Simmons, Henderson Daily Dispatch
Orientation
1. The chairman described the origins and purpose
of the Working Group. He reviewed the history of the 1978
spills of PCB-tainted oil on the roadways in 14 North Carolina
counties and the State's efforts to clean up the contaminated
material. A landfill was constructed near Afton in Warren
County and the material was stored in that facility. The
project was completed in the Fall of 1982. Last October,
Governor Hunt met with residents of Warren County and sub-
sequently made commitments regarding the future use and care
of the landfill. He promised that
"the State will push a s hard as it can for
detoxification of the landfill when and if
the appropriate and feasible technology is
developed. We will s eek to establish a
joint local-state-federal working group to
pursue this end."
This committee has been appointed to gather informa-
tion about available technologies for the detoxification of
PCBs and evaluate them for the Governor. The findings and
recommendations of the committee will be submitted to him.
2. Dr. Linda Little, Executive Director of the
Governor's Waste Management Board, presented a report on
Poly-chlorinated Biphenyls -what it is, where it comes from,
and the properties of the substance. She gave a brief history
of the manufacture and use of the substance, and the known
risks to human health and environment. She distributed several
papers from governmental agencies and federal guidelines for
the disposal/destruction of PCBs by non-thermal methods.
3. Mr. W. w. Phillips, project director for the PCB
clean-up operation, described the State owned facility in
Warren County. He distributed sketches showing the design
features of the landfill, the procedures used for storing the
contaminated soil, and the present status of the operation.
He indicated that final inspection would be conducted in July,
and he described post-closure procedures such as monitoring of
air and water and leachate (removal).
A general discussion of the North Carolina problem
and the task of the committee continued in a question and
answer period. Visitors and observers participated.
Special Presentation
Dr. Gary Sayler of the University of Tennessee, and
director of a study in PCB detoxification, reported the results
of his research using microbiological t e chniques . The report
was based on a paper prepared for the American Society of
Microbiology and the Committee on Science and Technology of
the U.S. House of Representatives. He cautioned the committee
that his tests were conducted under simulated conditions, but
that natural bacteria have been found to break down PCBs in a
matter of days. He expects to continue his studies and to
release some findings by the end of the year.
Dr. Sayler led the committee through a careful
explanation of the chemical changes which occurred through
interaction with the bacteria. He commended the group for
its inquiry and encouraged it to continue its collection of
information on available technologies. He asked to be informed
of the committee's progress.
A question and answer period followed.
◄
Committee Business
It was agreed that the next meeting of the Working
Group would be held in Raleigh on Thursday, July 21. The staff
was asked to schedule two presentations by commercial organiza-
tions with procedures for detoxification of PCB . The staff
identified Polybac o f Allentown, Pa., Sybron of Salem, Virg inia
and Genex of Rockville, Md. for possible participation. Others
named Bio Technica International, Inc. of Springfield, Va. and
PPM of Tucker, Georgi a .
It was agreed that no outside assignments wo uld be
made, or subcommittees named at this time.
. . The meeting was adjourned with special thanks to
partici pants and the chairman.
Respectfully submitted
Robert Janse n