Shredder and Incinerator

Technology for Treatment of

Commercial Transuranic Wastes
K. H. Oma
J.H. Westsik, Jr.
W. A. Ross

October 1985

Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy

under Contract DE-AC06-76RLO 1830

Pacific Northwest Laboratory

Operated for the U.S. Department of Energy
by Battelle Memorial Institute
 DISCLAIMER

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the

United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any
agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or
implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, com-
pleteness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process
disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights.
Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by
trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily
constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the
United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of
authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United
States Government or any agency thereof.

PACIFIC NORTHWEST LABORATORY

operated by
BATTELLE
for the
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
under Contract DE-AC06-76RLO 1830

Pr~ntedIn the U n ~ t e dStates of America

Available from
Nal~onalTechnical Information Service
U n ~ t e dStates Department of Commerce
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, Virginia 22161

NTlS Price Codes

Microfiche A01

Printed Copy
Pr~ce
Pages Codes
SHREDDER AND INCINERATOR TECHNOLOGY FOR
TREATMENT OF COMMERCIAL TRANSURANIC WASTES

K. H. Oma
J. H. Westsik, J r .
W. A. Ross

October 1985

Prepared f o r
t h e U.S. Department o f Energy
under C o n t r a c t DE-AC06-76RLO 1830

Paci f i c Northwest L a b o r a t o r y
R i c h l a n d , Washington 99352
 SUMMARY AND CONCLIJSIONS

P a c i f i c Northwest L a b o r a t o r y (PNL) i s d e f i n i n g s t r a t e g i e s , e v a l u a t i n g
a1 t e r n a t i v e s , and d e v e l o p i n g techno1 ogy f o r t r e a t m e n t o f r a d i o a c t i v e wastes
generated by commercial n u c l e a r f a c i l i t i e s . Treatment s t r a t e g i e s f o r com-
m e r c i a l t r a n s u r a n i c (TRU) wastes have been i d e n t i f i e d and e v a l u a t e d by Ross
e t al. (1985). Ross concluded t h a t e x t e n s i v e t r e a t m e n t of t h e TRU wastes i s
w a r r a n t e d f r o m b o t h c o s t and waste f o r m c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . The
e v a l u a t i o n recommended t h a t wastes c o n t a i n i n g c o m b u s t i b l e m a t e r i a l s be p r o c -
essed by s h r e d d i n g and i n c i n e r a t i o n and t h a t t h e r e s u l t i n g r e s i d u e be i n c o r p o -
r a t e d i n t o a cement waste form. T h i s r e p o r t d e s c r i b e s t h e s e l e c t i o n and
eval u a t i o n of process equipment t o accompl i s h t h e s h r e d d i n g and i n c i n e r a t i o n
o f commercial TRU wastes.

Defense s i t e s have been d e v e l o p i n g t r e a t m e n t t e c h n o l o g y f o r TRU wastes f o r

many y e a r s and much of t h a t t e c h n o l o g y can be used f o r some c o m m e r c i a l l y gener-
a t e d wastes. The defense wastes a r e m o s t l y c o n t a c t - h a n d l e d (CH), however, and
r e s u l t f r o m g l ovebox o p e r a t i o n s w i t h weapons-grade p l utonium. O p e r a t i on o f a
p o s t u l a t e d commercial r e p r o c e s s i n g p l a n t w i l l generate l a r g e q u a n t i t i e s o f TRU
wastes t h a t c o n t a i n s i g n i f i c a n t amounts of f i s s i o n products. Radiation l e v e l s
f r o m commercial TRU wastes w i l l t h e r e f o r e be h i g h e r t h a n f o r defense wastes.
As such, s h r e d d i n g and i n c i n e r a t i o n equipment f o r t h e commercial a p p l i c a t i o n
w i l l be needed t o process b o t h remote-handled (RH) and CH wastes. Technology
devel oped f o r defense waste t r e a t m e n t must be e v a l u a t e d f o r appl ic a t i on t o
remote o p e r a t i o n s r e q u i r e d f o r t h e RH commercial waste.

Our r e v i e w of c u r r e n t shredder and i n c i n e r a t o r t e c h n o l o g i e s i n d i c a t e d t h a t

*
t h e e l e c t r i c a l l y d r i v e n , low-speed shredder process was p r e f e r r e d f o r TRU
waste p r e t r e a t m e n t . The r e v i e w a l s o i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e e l e c t r i c a l l y heated
c o n t r o l l e d - a i r , gas-heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r , and r o t a r y k i l n i n c i n e r a t o r s were
p r e f e r r e d over o t h e r i n c i n e r a t i o n processes f o r t h e commercial TRlJ a p p l i c a t i o n .
Rased on t h e r e v i e w of e x i s t i n g t e c h n o l o g y , an e x p e r i m e n t a l program was under-
t a k e n t o demonstrate t h e p r e f e r r e d t e c h n o l o g y on s i m u l a t e d commercial TRU
wastes. The o b j e c t i v e s of t h e t e s t s were t o : 1) c o n f i r m t h a t shredders and
i n c i n e r a t o r s can be used t o e f f e c t i v e l y process c o m m e r c i a l l y g e n e r a t e d TRU
wastes, 2) e v a l u a t e t h e p r o c e s s equipment f o r a d a p t a b i l i t y t o r e m o t e r a d i o -
a c t i v e o p e r a t i o n , and 3) s e l e c t a r e f e r e n c e s h r e d d i n g and i n c i n e r a t i o n system
f o r f u r t h e r t e s t i n g and development.

S i m u l a t e d wastes r e p r e s e n t i n g g e n e r a l p r o c e s s t r a s h , sample and a n a l y t i c a l

c e l l waste, wood-framed HEPA f i l t e r s and m e t a l -framed HEPA f i l t e r s were used
f o r t h e t e s t program. S p e c i a l waste m i x e s c o n s i d e r e d d i f f i c u l t f o r t h e i n c i n -
e r a t o r and s h r e d d e r p r o c e s s e s were a l s o f o r m u l a t e d and t e s t e d . Low-speed
s h r e d d e r s m a n u f a c t u r e d by t h r e e d i f f e r e n t companies were t e s t e d and compared i n
t e r m s o f waste t h r o u g h p u t , c u t t e r f o r c e , c u t t e r c o n f i g u r a t i o n and f r a g m e n t
size. The shredded w a s t e was t h e n used as feed m a t e r i a l f o r t h e i n c i n e r a t i o n
tests.

The e l e c t r i c a l l y h e a t e d c o n t r o l l e d - a i r , gas-heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r and

r o t a r y k i l n i n c i n e r a t i o n p r o c e s s e s were e v a l u a t e d and compared based on t e c h -
n i c a l m e r i t and system c o s t . The t e c h n i c a l m e r i t o f each p r o c e s s was j u d g e d by
a f i v e member panel u s i n g t h e F i g u r e - o f - M e r i t (FOM) p r o c e s s s e l e c t i o n method-
ology. Performance c r i t e r i a i n t h e a r e a s o f i n c i n e r a t o r p r o d u c t , equipment,
and o p e r a t i o n s were e s t a b l i s h e d and used as a bases f o r t h e FOM comparison.
The FOM numbers o b t a i n e d were viewed as a measure of t h e o v e r a l l p r o c e s s e f f e c -
t i v e n e s s f o r t h e c o m m e r c i a l l y g e n e r a t e d TRlJ waste a p p l i c a t i o n . C a p i t a l and
o p e r a t i n g c o s t s were e s t i m a t e d f o r t h e s h r e d d i n g , i n c i n e r a t i n g , and o f f - g a s
treatment operations. C a p i t a l c o s t s were a l s o e s t i m a t e d f o r t h e p o r t i o n o f a
h o t c e l l f a c i l i t y t h a t would c o n t a i n t h e s e u n i t o p e r a t i o n s . Cost-effectiveness
r a t i o s were c a l c u l a t e d u s i n g t h e cost/FOM r a t i o f o r each i n c i n e r a t i o n p r o c e s s .
These r a t i o s were t h e n used t o s e l e c t a r e f e r e n c e s h r e d d e r and i n c i n e r a t o r
p r o c e s s f o r f u r t h e r development.

The p r i m a r y c o n c l u s i o n s d e r i v e d from t h i s s t u d y a r e l i s t e d b e l o w :

S h r e d d i n g and i n c i n e r a t i o n t e c h n o l o g y appears e f f e c t i v e f o r c o n v e r t -
i n g s i m u l a t e d commercial TRU wastes t o a n o n c o m b u s t i b l e form.

0 The gas-heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r i n c i n e r a t o r r e c e i v e d t h e h i g h e s t t e c h -
n i c a l ranking. On a s c a l e of 1 t o 10, t h e i n c i n e r a t o r had an FOM
number of 7.0. T h i s compares t o an FOM of 6.1 f o r t h e e l e c t r i c a l l y
h e a t e d c o n t r o l l e d - a i r i n c i n e r a t o r and an FOM o f 5.8 f o r t h e r o t a r y
 k i l n incinerator. The major advantages and disadvantages o f each
i n c i n e r a t o r , which came o u t o f t h e FOM e v a l u a t i o n , a r e summarized
be1 ow.

Summary o f I n c i n e r a t o r Advantages and Disadvantages

Incinerator Major Advantages Major D i s a d v a ~ t a g e s

E l e c t r i c a l l y Heated Minimum o f f - g a s t r e a t m e n t Residue c o n t a i n s h i g h

C o n t r o l 1e d - A i r r e q u i r e d due t o l o w f l o w f r a c t i o n o f f i x e d carbon
and l o w ash e n t r a i n m e n t
Process r e q u i r e s h i g h
Low a s h l r e s i d u e l e v e l o f feed
retainment i n t h e primary pretreatment
chamber
Residue c o n t a i n s k l i n k e r s
Long equipment l i f e of carbon -r ich wood

Able t o process wide Remote maintenance i s

range of f e e d m a t e r i a l s judged d i f f i c u l t

Gas-Heated High b u r n o u t o f f i x e d (no major disadvantages

C o n t r o l 1 ed-Air carbon i s achieved identified)

Process has been we1 1

devel oped f o r TRU and LL
waste a p p l i c a t i o n s

Rotary K i l n Able t o process wide e Low r e t e n t i o n of t r a c e

range of f e e d m a t e r i a l s elements i n r e s i d u e

Minimal feed p r e t r e a t m e n t High o f f - g a s t r e a t m e n t

i s required r e q u i r e m e n t s due t o h i g h
f l o w r a t e and h i g h ash
entrainment

Remote maintenance i s
judged d i f f ic u l t

Shorter r e f r a c t o r y l i f e
a t t r i b u t e s t o increased
maintenance and personnel
exposure
The p r e s e n t w o r t h c o s t s o f t h e i n c i n e r a t i o n p r o c e s s e s f o r a p o s t u -
1 a t e d commercial r e p r o c e s s i n g p l a n t were l o w e s t f o r t h e e l e c t r i c a l l y
h e a t e d and gas-heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r i n c i n e r a t o r s w i t h c o s t s o f
$16.3 M and $16.9 Y r e s p e c t i v e l y (1985 d o l l a r s ) . Due t o h i g h e r c a p i -
t a l and o p e r a t i n g c o s t s , t h e r o t a r y k i l n p r o c e s s had a p r e s e n t w o r t h
c o s t o f $20.8 V. These c o s t numbers a r e f o r c o m p a r a t i v e purposes
o n l y and a r e n o t a d j u s t e d f o r f u t u r e i n f l a t i o n .

The recommended p r o c e s s f r o m t h e t h r e e e v a l u a t e d f o r t h e commercial

TRU w a s t e a p p l i c a t i o n i s t h e gas-heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r i n c i n e r a t o r
w i t h a s i n g l e s t a g e of s h r e d d i n g f o r f e e d p r e t r e a t m e n t . This process
had t h e b e s t c o s t - e f f e c t i v e n e s s r a t i o o f 1.0 ( n o r m a l i z e d ) . The e l e c -
t r i c a l l y h e a t e d c o n t r o l l e r - a i r i n c i n e r a t o r had a r a t i n g o f 1.2 and
t h e r o t a r y k i l n r a t e d a 1.5. It i s i m p o r t a n t t o n o t e t h a t a l l t h r e e
i n c i n e r a t i o n systems t e s t e d were e x c e l l e n t p i e c e s of equipment and
each has i t s advantages f o r d i f f e r e n t incineration applications. The
s e l e c t i o n of t h e gas-heated c o n t r o l 1 e d - a i r p r o c e s s o n l y a p p l i e s t o
t h e s p e c i f i c a p p l i c a t i o n t e s t e d and s h o u l d n o t be used t o i n f e r t h a t
t h e process i s s u p e r i o r f o r o t h e r a p p l i c a t i o o s .

Y o s t o f t h e s i m u l a t e d wastes were e a s i l y p r o c e s s e d b y t h e low-speed

shredders e v a l u a t e d here. The HEPA f i l t e r s p r o v e d d i f f i c u l t t o p r o c -
ess, however. Wood-framed HEPA f i l t e r s t e n d e d t o r i d e on t h e c u t t e r
wheels and s p a c e r s w i t h o u t b e i n g g r i p p e d and shredded. Methods f o r
f e e d i n g wood-framed HEPA f i l t e r s and o t h e r wood-boxed i t e m s t o t h e
s h r e d d e r need t o be developed. The m e t a l - f r a m e d HEPA f i l t e r s and
o t h e r d i f f i c u l t t o s h r e d i t e m s caused t h e s h r e d d e r s t o p e r i o d i c a l l y
r e a c h t h e t o r q u e l i m i t and go i n t o an a u t o m a t i c r e v e r s a l c y c l e ; how-
e v e r , t h e f i l t e r s were e v e n t u a l l y p r o c e s s e d by t h e u n i t s . Metal-
framed f i l t e r s w i l l r e q u i r e a s h r e d d e r d e s i g n e d f o r h i g h c u t t e r t o o t h
f o r c e a n d / o r l a r g e r shredded f r a g m e n t s i z e . Some o f t h e d u s t on
l o a d e d HEPA f i l t e r s was r e l e a s e d d u r i n g t h e s h r e d d i n g o p e r a t i o n .
Yethods f o r f i x i n g t h e d u s t on t h e HEPA f i l t e r s s h o u l d be e v a l u a t e d
and t e s t e d .
A l l t h r e e i n c i n e r a t o r s were i n e f f e c t i v e f o r o x i d i z i n g t h e aluminum
metal used as spacers i n HEPA f i l t e r s . Aluminum metal w i l l cause an
u n d e s i r a b l e h y d r o l y s i s r e a c t i o n i n t h e cemented waste form.
 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The a u t h o r s w i s h t o t h a n k H. C. Rurkholder f o r h i s programmatic guidance

and r e v i e w . Several f e l l o w s c i e n t i s t s and t e c h n i c i a n s c o n t r i b u t e d t o t h e
research e f f o r t . The 1 i s t be1 ow i n c l u d e s i n d i v i d u a l c o n t r i b u t o r s and t h e i r
areas o f c o n t r i b u t i o n :
D. U. Rerger - FOM e v a l u a t i o n team member
H. J. C a r t m e l l - I n c i n e r a t o r residue sampling
C. A. Church - S i m u l a t e d TRU w a s t e makeup
R. {I. E l o v i c h - I n c i n e r a t o r residue sampling
F. T. Hara - Chemical a n a l y s i s
C. L. M a t s u z a k i - Chemical a n a l y s i s
I?. W. S t r o r n a t t (HEDL) - Carbon a n a l y s i s
R. L. T r e a t - FOM e v a l u a t i o n team member.

We w i s h t o t h a n k t h e f o l l o w i n g p e r s o n s f r o m o f f s i t e who were i n s t r u m e n t a l
i n t h e s u c c e s s f u l t e s t i n g o f t h e s h r e d d e r and i n c i n e r a t o r equipment.

W. bl. Coppel - S h r e d d i n g Systems, I n c o r p o r a t e d

M i l s o n v i l l e , Oregon

D. W. Dedo - MAC C o r p o r a t i o n , S a t u r n Shredder D i v i s i o n

Grand P r a i r i e , Texas

K. J. Johansen - S h i r c o I n f r a r e d Systems I n c o r p o r a t e d
Dal 1 as, Texas

S. R. M i t c h e l - C o l o r a d o School o f Mines Research I n s t i t u t e

Gnl den, Col o r a d o

M. S. Rodney - Shred Pax C o r p o r a t i o n

Wood Dale, I l l i n o i s

F. L. Van Swearingen - Qowman Gray School o f M e d i c i n e o f Wake F o r e s t

U n i v e r s i t y , Winston-Salem, North Carolina

The a u t h o r s a r e a l s o g r a t e f u l f o r N. M. Sherer and S. L. Hays who c o o r d i -

n a t e d e d i t i n g and p u b l i s h i n g o f t h i s r e p o r t . Thanks a l s o t o R. 0. G o t t s c h and
h e r s t a f f who p e r f o r m e d t h e word p r o c e s s i n g .
 ACRONYMS

AGNS A1 1 ied Gener a1 Nucl ear Ser v i ces

BNFP B a r n w e l l Nuclear Fuel Pl a n t
C FR Code o f Feder a1 Regul a t ions
CH contact-hand1 ed
CSMRI Col orado School o f Mines Research I n s t i t u t e
ECP Environmental C o n t r o l Products
E PA Environmental P r o t e c t i o n Agency
GPT general process t r a s h
HEDL Hanford E n g i n e e r i n g Devel opment L a b o r a t o r y
HEPA high efficiency particulate a i r
HLW h i g h 1e v e l waste
INEL Idaho N a t i o n a l E n g i n e e r i n g L a b o r a t o r y
LANL Los A1 amos Nat ional L a b o r a t o r y
LLW 1ow 1 e v e l waste
OR NL Oak Ridge N a t i o n a l L a b o r a t o r y
PREPP process e x p e r i m e n t a l p i 1o t p l a n t
PVC poly vinyl chloride
PW I p l u t o n i u m waste i n c i n e r a t o r
RFP Rock F l a t s P l a n t
RH remote-hand1 ed
SAC sampl e and a n a l y t i c a l c e l l waste
SRL Savannah R i v e r L a b o r a t o r y
SWIFT suspect waste i n c i n e r a t o r f a c i l i t y t e s t
TRlJ transuranic
WERF waste e x p e r i m e n t a l r e d u c t i o n f a c i 1 it y
WIPP Waste I s 0 1 a t i o n P i 1 o t P l a n t
 CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION ............................................................
COMMERCIAL TRANSURANIC WASTE DEFINITION .................................

EVALUATION OF TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES ....................................

SHREDDER TECHNOLOGY ................................................

INCINERATOR TECHNOLOGY ..............................................

C o n t r o l l e d - A i r I n c i n e r a t o r s ...................................

R o t a r y - K i l n I n c i n e r a t o r s ......................................

Off-Gas Treatment Systems .....................................

SHREDDER TESTS ..........................................................

SHREDDER DESCRIPTIONS ..............................................

TEST RESULTS .......................................................

General Process T r a s h .........................................

Sample and A n a l y t i c a l C e l l Wastes .............................

Wood-Framed HEPA F i l t e r s .....................................

Metal-Framed HEPA F i l t e r s .....................................

Type 2 Wastes .................................................

Type 3 Wastes .................................................

Fragment S i z e A n a l y s i s ........................................

INCINERATOR TESTS .......................................................

ELECTRICALLY HEATED CONTROLLED-AIR INCINERATOR .....................

Equipment D e s c r i p t i o n .........................................

T e s t D e s c r i p t i o n ..............................................

GAS-HEATED CONTROLLED-AIR INCINERATOR ..............................

Equipment D e s c r i p t i o n .........................................
 Test Description ..............................................
ROTARY KILN INCINERATOR ............................................
Equipment D e s c r i p t i o n .........................................

T e s t D e s c r i p t i o n ..............................................

TEST RESULTS .......................................................

Residue C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s .......................................

Off-Gas C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s .......................................

T r a c e Element B e h a v i o r ........................................

COMPARISON OF INCINERATOR PROCESSES .....................................

INCINERATOR ECONOMICS ..............................................

FIGURE-OF-MERIT ANALYSIS ...........................................

COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS ........................................

DEVELOPMENT NEEUS .......................................................

REFERENCES ..............................................................
 FIGURES

1 Process and Equipment Flow Diagram f o r t h e Noncombustible

Waste Forms O p t i o n ...................................e.............
2 S i m u l a t e d SAC Waste Ready f o r Shredding Tests ......................

3 C u t t e r Wheel C o n f i g u r a t i o n o f a T y p i c a l Low-Speed Shredder .........

4 LANL Gas-Heated C o n t r o l 1e d - A i r I n c i n e r a t i o n System .................
C

5 ......
SRL-PWI E l e c t r i c a l l y - H e a t e d C o n t r o l l e d - A i r I n c i n e r a t o r System

6 INEL-PREPP R o t a r y K i l n I n c i n e r a t i o n System .........................

7 Model 1600 E l e c t r i c D r i v e Shredder .................................

8 Model AZ-80 E l e c t r i c D r i v e Shredder ................................

9 Model 36-22 H y d r a u l i c D r i v e Shredder ...............................

10 Larger Metal and Wood Pieces o f SAC Waste A f t e r

Shredding by Test U n i t 1 ...........................................

11 Wood-Framed HEPA F i l t e r s Processed by Sing1 e Stage Shredding

and Dual Stage Shredding ...........................................

12 E l e c t r i c a l l y Heated C o n t r o l 1 e d - A i r Test I n c i n e r a t o r
Schematic ..........................................................

13 E l e c t r i c a l l y Heated C o n t r o l 1 e d - A i r T e s t I n c i n e r a t o r ................

1.4 Gas-Heated C o n t r o l l e d - A i r T e s t I n c i n e r a t o r Schematic ...............

15 Gas-Heated C o n t r o l l e d - A i r Test I n c i n e r a t o r .........................

16 R o t a r y - K i l n Test I n c i n e r a t o r Schematic .............................
17 R o t a r y - K i l n Test I n c i n e r a t o r .......................................
 TABLES

D e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e Noncombustible Waste Forms O p t i o n ...............

1500 MTU/yr Reprocessing P l a n t .....................................
Annual U n t r e a t e d Q u a n t i t y o f Wastes P r o j e c t e d From a

Average Waste Compositions ........................................

Si mu1 a t e d TRU Waste Compositions ...................................

I n c i n e r a t o r Feed Makeup ............................................

E s t i m a t e d R a d i o n u c l i d e Content o f Commercial TRU Wastes ............

Advantages and Disadvantages o f High-Speed Shredders ...............

Advantages and Disadvantages o f H y d r a u l i c and E l e c t r i c

Dr ives f o r Low-Speed Shredders ..................., .................
i

Summary o f U.S. DOE R a d i o a c t i v e Waste I n c i n e r a t o r

Treatment Systems ..................................................

Shredder Test U n i t Comparison ......................................

Shredder Performance Comparison ....................................

Shredded Waste S i z e A n a l y s i s .......................................

I n c i n e r a t o r O p e r a t i n g Data Summary .................................

I n c i n e r a t o r Weight and Volume Reductions ...........................

Chemical A n a l y s i s of I n c i n e r a t o r Ash ...............................

R e s i d u a l Carbon A n a l y s i s o f I n c i n e r a t o r Product ....................

I n c i n e r a t o r Test Off-Gas C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ...........................

D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Trace Elements i n t h e I n c i n e r a t o r
Product and Off-Gas P a r t i c u l a t e ....................................
I n c i n e r a t i o n System Equipment Requirements Used
f o r Cost E s t i m a t e ..................................................
C a p i t a l Costs f o r I n c i n e r a t o r Processes ............................

Annual Labor Requirements and O p e r a t i n g Cost E s t i m a t e

f o r I n c i n e r a t i o n Processes .........................................

xvi
22 F i gure-of-Meri t Model f o r I n c i n e r a t o r Process Comparison ........... 71

23 Figure-of-Meri t R e s u l t s f o r I n d i v i d u a l Panel Members ............... 73

INTRODUCTION
 INTRODUCTION

Commercial t r a n s u r a n i c (TRU) wastes a r e b e i n g s t u d i e d f o r p r o c e s s i n g p r i o r

t o d i s p o s a l i n a deep g e o l o g i c r e p o s i t o r y . Shredding and i n c i n e r a t i o n f o l l o w e d
by cementation o f t h e ash and r e s i d u e has been i d e n t i f i e d as t h e most e f f e c -
t i v e s t r a t e g y f o r t h e t r e a t m e n t o f c o m b u s t i b l e TRU wastes generated d u r i n g t h e
r e p r o c e s s i n g o f commercial spent f u e l (Ross e t a1 . 1985). This treatment
s t r a t e g y was s e l e c t e d from s i x t r e a t m e n t o p t i o n s r a n g i n g f r o m "no t r e a t m e n t " t o
"process t o noncombustihle waste forms." Table 1 shows t h e recommended t r e a t -
ment processes f o r expected waste t y p e s and F i g u r e 1 shows a schematic o f t h e
recommended t r e a t m e n t s t r a t e g y . The s h r e d d i n g l i n c i n e r a t i on/cementati on method
produces a noncombustible cemented waste form. I n c i n e r a t o r ash has been e f f e c -
t i v e l y produced and i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o cemented waste forms d u r i n g LLW s t u d i e s
( T r e a t e t a l . 1983, Westsik 1984). Y e t a l l i c wastes i n c l u d i n g f u e l h u l l s and
f a i 1ed equipment would be consol id a t e d by me1t i n g (Montgomery 1983). Cost sav-
i n g s f o r t h e s e t r e a t m e n t s r e s u l t from t h e volume r e d u c t i o n achieved and t h e
r e s u l t i n g l o w e r t r a n s p o r t a t i o n and d i s p o s a l costs. The Nuclear Waste Treatment
Program a t t h e P a c i f i c Northwest L a b o r a t o r y has t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r
d e v e l o p i n g t h e s e processes f o r t h e U.S. Department o f Energy (DOE). I f reproc-
e s s i n g of commercial spent f u e l becomes a r e a l i t y , t h e waste t r e a t m e n t t e c h -
n o l o g i e s w i l l be ready f o r use.

TABLE 1. D e s c r i p t i o n of t h e Noncombustible Waste Forms O p t i o n

.
(Ross e t a1 1985).

Waste Type Treatment

Hardware and H u l l s S i z e reduce as r e q u i r e d and me1 t i n remote-handled

F a i 1ed Equipment
F i 1t e r s
F l u o r i n a t o r Sol i d s
GPT and SAC Wastes
batches i n metal m e l t e r .
S i z e reduce as r e q u i r e d and m e l t i n e i t h e r c o n t a c t -
handled o r remote-handled batches i n metal m e l t e r .
Shred i n e i t h e r contact-handled o r remote-handled
shredder and i n c i n e r a t e . I n c o r p o r a t e ash, media,
c o n c e n t r a t e d scrub s o l u t i o n and metal s i n t o cement waste
form using remote-hand1 ed in-drum mixer.
Mix w i t h s u f f i c i e n t cement i n in-drum m i x e r t o form LLW.
T r e a t noncombustibles as f a i l e d equipment when segrega-
t i o n i s p o s s i b l e . Shred and i n c i n e r a t e a l l combustibles.
I n c o r p o r a t e ash and scrubber s o l u t i o n i n t o cement waste
form.
cans's' of RH RH or CH Batches
RH Lid Sealtng.
nulls and Hardware To RH Surge
Falled Equipment
RH Lid Removal, Sort
by Size and Type
of Metals RH Batch
Melter
-%+ Inspect. Assay, Certify
Storage
Filters 4 and Labeling
as Required
Fluorinator Solids
GPT-SAC Waste
Slze Reduced
Metals CH Lid Sealing.
CH To CH Surge
2 p Inspect. Assay, Certify Storage
and Labeling
as Required
Fluorlnator
Sollds
4

Cellulose, Plastlc.
Rubber. Filters.
CH or RH Batches
of Combustibles
and F~lters
1 CH

Large Metal Items

RH Size
Reduction A
RH Batch
Inonerator * Cementation
RH In-Can RH

A
Off-Gas

Canda' of CH
Faded Equipment CH Lld Removal, Sort CH Size Off-Gas
Filters by Slze and Type Reduction Scrubber
GPT
S~zeReduced Scrubber
Metals Solution

Y Scrubber
Solution

Scrubber Solution

FIGURE 1. Process and Equipment Flow Diagram f o r t h e Noncombustible Waste

Forms O p t i o n (Qoss e t a l . 1985)

General Process Trash (GPT), Sample and A n a l y t i c a l C e l l Waste (SAC), and

HEPA f i l t e r s a r e TRU wastes t h a t c o n t a i n c o m b u s t i b l e m a t e r i a l . These wastes
a r e p r e s e n t i n b o t h c o n t a c t - h a n d l e d (CH) and remote-handled (RH) forms. As a
r e s u l t , much of t h e equipment r e q u i r e d i n t h e t r e a t m e n t t h e TRU wastes must be
designed t o o p e r a t e r e m o t e l y . The TRU waste s t r a t e g y document (Ross e t a l .
1985) recommends t h a t t h e s e wastes be s i z e reduced i n a CH and RH shredder and
t h a t t h e waste be i n c i n e r a t e d i n a RH i n c i n e r a t o r .

Commercial shredders and U.S. DOE-developed i n c i n e r a t o r s were r e v i e w e d and

e v a l u a t e d w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e i r a b i l i t y t o process c o m m e r c i a l l y generated TRU
wastes. Based on our r e v i e w , s i m u l a t e d TRU wastes were processed t h r o u g h can-
d i d a t e shredders and i n c i n e r a t o r s t o d e t e r m i n e t h e process a p p l i c a b i l i t y f o r
e f f e c t i v e l y t r e a t i n g t h e waste. This r e p o r t contains t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e
i n i t i a l r e v i e w , as w e l l as a d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e shredder and i n c i n e r a t o r t e s t s .
I n c i n e r a t o r systems a r e compared u s i n g system economics and a F i g u r e - o f - M e r i t
e v a l u a t i o n o f p r o d u c t , equipment, and o p e r a t i o n c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . Based on t h i s
comparison, a r e f e r e n c e p r o c e s s i s s e l e c t e d and development needs and recom-
mendations a r e i d e n t i f i e d .
 COMMERCIAL
TRANSURANIC WASTE DEFINITION
 COMMERCIAL TRANSURANIC WASTE DEFINITION

Q u a n t i t i e s and c o m p o s i t i o n s o f TRU wastes f r o m a commercial r e p r o c e s s i n g

p l a n t have been e s t i m a t e d by Oarr (1983) f o r t h e Rarnwell Nuclear F u e l s P l a n t
(BNFP) and a r e used i n t h i s r e p o r t as t h e b a s i s f o r e v a l u a t i o n o f waste p r o c -
e s s i n g equipment. I n c l u d e d i n t h e wastes a r e spent f u e l h u l l s and f u e l
assembly hardware, general process t r a s h (GPT), used HEPA f i l t e r s , f a i l e d
equipment , sarnpl e and a n a l y t i c a l c e l l wastes (SAC), and f l u o r i n a t o r s o l i d s .
O f these, t h e GPT, SAC, and HEPA f i l t e r s would r e q u i r e t r e a t m e n t v i a s h r e d d i n g
and/or i n c i n e r a t i o n . F a i l e d equipment may a1 so r e q u i r e s i z e r e d u c t i o n v i a
shredding.

T a b l e 2 1 i s t s t h e annual volumes and w e i g h t s o f GPT, SAC, f i l t e r , and

f a i l e d equipment wastes a n t i c i p a t e d t o be generated a t a 1500 MTU/yr commercial
r e p r o c e s s i n g p l a n t (Ross e t a l . 1985). A p p r o x i m a t e l y 75 w t % o f t h e waste i s
c o n t a c t handled and t h e remainder r e q u i r e s remote h a n d l i n g ( r a d i a t i o n dose
>ZOO mR/hr a t t h e s u r f a c e o f t h e waste c o n t a i n e r ) . The waste c o n t a i n e r s a r e
expected t o be r e c y c l e d and w i l l n o t be shredded w i t h t h e waste.

TABLE 2. Annual U n t r e a t e d Q a t i t y o f Wastes P r o j e c t e d From a 1500 MTU/yr

Reprocessing P l a n t Yay
Container
Net W t , Net Yo1 , Packag~d Capacity, Number o f
Waste Type CHIRH kg m Vo1 , m L (gal) Containers

Filters CH 16,380 117.6 347.9 208 (55) 50

303 (80) 1,114

GPT & SAC CH 11,340 104 112.3 208 (55) 540

Waste
RH 7,080 70.3 125.2 208 ( 5 5 ) 198
2,270 (6130) 37

F a i 1ed CH 17,600 19.8 23.6 208 ( 5 5 ) 70

Equipment 2,270 (600) 4

(a) Based on B a r n w e l l N u c l e a r Fuel P l a n t (Ross e t a l . 1985).

 T a b l e 3 shows t h e e s t i m a t e d c o m p o s i t i o n s f o r t h e TRU waste streams con-
s i d e r e d here. The GPT and SAC wastes c o n t a i n b o t h c o m b u s t i b l e and noncom-
b u s t i b l e f r a c t i o n s , which would be segregated a t t h e p o i n t o f o r i g i n o n l y f o r
t h e GPT. The HEPA f i l t e r s have e i t h e r wooden o r m e t a l l i c frames, o r g a n i c
adhesives and gasket m a t e r i a l s , noncombustible f i l t e r media, and a1 urninurn
spacers. F a i l e d equipment c o n s i s t s p r i m a r i l y o f s t a i n l e s s s t e e l and may be
shredded p r i o r t o volume r e d u c t i o n i n a metal m e l t e r .

N o n r a d i o a c t i v e , s i m u l a t e d TRU wastes were p r e p a r e d f o r p r o c e s s i n g by t h e

shredders and i n c i n e r a t o r s e v a l u a t e d i n t h i s study. T a b l e 4 l i s t s t h e nominal
c o m p o s i t i o n of t h ? f i v e s i m u l a t e d wastes as f o r m u l a t e d f o r t h e shredder t e s t s .
An example o f t h e SAC waste which was prepared i s shown i n F i g u r e 2. Type 2

TARLE 3. Average Waste Compositions

Composition,
Waste Type Reference Constituent Wt%

F i 1t e r s U.S. DOE 52
(1979) Metal 8
Glass media - 40
100
GPT and SAC Darr (1983) Combustible
P l a s t i c and r u b b e r ( b )
C l o t h and wood
Paper

Metal 18
Glass - 2
100
U.S. DOE Combusti b l e
PaperIRags
PVC
Neoprene
Polyethylene
Latex
Wood

Noncombustible
(no data given)

(a) Combustible g l u e s and adhesives may c o n s t i t u t e up t o one t h i r d o f

t h e w e i g h t of t h e f i l t e r s .
(b) PVC i s 30 wt% o f t h e p l a s t i c and r u b b e r (AGNS 1978, p. E-2).
(c) M e t a l s i n c l u d e s t a i n l e s s s t e e l , carbon s t e e l , copper, and aluminum
i n t h e f o r m of v a r i o u s s t r u c t u r a l shapes, p i p e , t o o l s , w i r e rope,
plate, etc.
 TABLE 4. S i m u l a t e d TRU Waste Compositions
Waste Composition, wt%
HEP
Waste Component GPT SAC Type 2 Type 3

~ombustibles:(~)
Paper
Rags
Wood
Neoprene
Latex
Polyurethane
Polyethylene
PVC
SUBTOTAL

Noncombusti b l e s : ( c )
Carbon s t e e l - 32.1 - 33.6 38.2
Stainless steel - 11.8 54.0 10.0 17.0
Glass
SUBTOTAL

Composite:
E l e c t r i c motors - - - 7.3 20.0
Insulated wire - - - 2.9 9.9
SUBTOTAL 0 0 0 10.2 29.9

TOTAL 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

(a) Composition shown i s f o r 0.61 x 0.61 x 0.30-111 metal-framed HEPA f i l t e r s .

Wood-framed HEPA f i l t e r s were a1 so used; however, t h e i r c o m p o s i t i o n s were
n o t determined.
(b) Paper added as magazines, computer paper, books, and sheetgoods. Rags
i n c l uded c l o t h i n g and canvas. Neoprene added as sheets, 1eaded g l o v e s
and r e g u l a r gloves. L a t e x added as gloves. P o l y e t h y l e n e added as sheet,
bags, t u b i n g , and b o t t l e s . PVC added as 3- and 4 - i n c h pipe.
(c) M e t a l s added as c a b l e , 1 t o 5 i n c h p i p e , and 114- and 112-inch bar and
p l a t e . Glass added as m i s c e l l a n e o u s labware and l a r g e b l o c k s o f v i t r i -
fied soil.

waste i s c o n s i d e r e d a d i f f i c u l t waste f o r an i n c i n e r a t o r t o process because i t

c o n t a i n s a 1a r g e f r a c t i o n o f noncombusti b l e s , PVC, and some con~posit e m a t e r i a l s
t y p i c a l o f f a i l e d equipment. The Type 3 waste i s c o n s i d e r e d a d i f f i c u l t waste
f o r a shredder t o process because i t c o n t a i n s a h i g h l o a d i n g o f m e t a l s and
e l e c t r i c motors. The f i v e waste t y p e s were shredded s e p a r a t e l y . Type 1 waste
was prepared from a m i x t u r e o f shredded GPT, SAC, and HEPA f i l t e r wastes as
shown i n T a b l e 5. T h i s waste has a low noncombustible f r a c t i o n (-33%) and i s
expected t o be an average TRU feed m a t e r i a l t o t h e i n c i n e r a t o r . The same
Type 1 waste c o m p o s i t i o n was used i n a l l i n c i n e r a t o r t e s t s and a d i f f e r e n t
Type 2 c o m p o s i t i o n ( T a b l e 5) was t r i e d a t each o f t h e i n c i n e r a t o r f a c i l i t i e s .
FIGURE 2. Simulated SAC Waste Ready f o r Shredding Tests

TABLE 5. I n c i n e r a t o r Feed Makeup

- Makeup Compos i t i o n , wt%

Waste
Constituent Type 1 Type 2A Type 28 Type 2C

GPT 25 - 4 -
SAC 23 - a -
Wood HEPA 43 20 50 35
Metal HEPA 9 80 30 15
Type 2 - - 8 50
Trace ~ i x t u r e ( ~ ) 0.58 - - -
(a) Composition o f t r a c e mixture given i n Table 6.
 P r i o r t o t h e i n c i n e r a t i o n t e s t s , n o n r a d i o a c t i v e t r a c e r s (Ce, Cs, Mo and
S r ) were added t o t h e shredded Type 1 wastes t o p r o v i d e i n f o r m a t i o n on t h e
v o l a t i 1 it y b e h a v i o r o f r a d i o n u c l i d e s d u r i n g i n c i n e r a t i o n t e s t s . Tab1 e 6 shows
t h e w e i g h t f r a c t i o n f o r s i g n i f i c a n t e l e m e n t s t h a t c o u l d be p r e s e n t i n t h e TRU
wastes f r o m a commercial r e p r o c e s s i n g f a c i l i t y . These c o n c e n t r a t i o n s a r e t o o
l o w t o be d e t e c t a b l e u s i n g r e a s o n a b l e chemical a n a l y s i s t e c h n i q u e s ; t h e r e f o r e
t h e t r a c e r s were added i n t h e l a r g e r c o n c e n t r a t i o n s shown i n t h e l a s t column of
T a b l e 6.

TABLE 6. E s t i m a t e d R a d i o n u c l i d e C o n t e n t of Commercial TRU Wastes

GPTISAC, g / k g Waste F i l t e r s , g / k g Waste

U.S. DOE U.S. DOE Type 1 T r a c e , ( a )
Radionucl i d e Darr (1983) (1979) Darr (1983) (1979) , g / k g Waste

Cs 7 x loq4 1x 9 lo-2 9 1 0 ~ ~0.32

Mo 6 x 2 x 7 lo-? 1 lo4 0.23
Sr 2 lo-4 4 lo-6 2 lo-2 3 lov4 0.39
Zr 6 x 2 x 8 x lo-' 1 x --
Rare E a r t h s 1x 5 x 1.7 4 10'~ 0.54 as Ce
Actinides + U 18 3 . 5 ~lo-2 35 1.4 --

Waste Genera-
t i o n Rate 12 kg/MTU 196 kg/MTHM 13 kg/MTU 22 kg/MTHM

(a) The t r a c e r s were added as an aqueous s l u r r y o f S r ( N 0 3 ) 2 , Moo3, CsN03, and

a r a r e e a r t h n i t r a t e m i x t u r e c o n s i s t i n g p r i m a r i l y o f cerium.
 EVALUATION OF
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES
 EVALUATION OF TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES

A l i t e r a t u r e search and s i t e v i s i t s were conducted t o i d e n t i f y c u r r e n t

g e n e r a t i o n shredder and i n c i n e r a t o r t e c h n o l o g i e s . I n c i n e r a t i o n concepts have
been e v a l u a t e d e x t e n s i v e l y a t DOE s i t e s s i n c e t h e e a r l y t o mid 1970s. On t h e
o t h e r hand, s h r e d d i n g i s j u s t b e g i n n i n g t o see a p p l i c a t i o n a t DOE s i t e s as an
i n c i n e r a t o r f e e d p r e t r e a t m e n t technology. I n t h i s s e c t i o n , shredders and
i n c i n e r a t o r s a r e r e v i e w e d and e v a l u a t e d w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e i r a p p l i c a b i l i t y t o
c o m m e r c i a l l y generated TRU wastes. The t e s t i n g program d e s c r i b e d i n subsequent
s e c t i o n s was based on t h i s p r e l i m i n a r y e v a l u a t i o n and s c r e e n i n g o f t r e a t m e n t
techno1 o g i es .
SHREDDER TECHNOLOGY
The recommended t r e a t m e n t s t r a t e g y (Ross e t a l . 1985) c a l l s f o r s h r e d d i n g
of GPT, SAC, and HEPA f i l t e r s as p r e t r e a t m e n t f o r t h e i n c i n e r a t i o n step.
Shredding reduces t h e s i z e , i n c r e a s e s t h e s u r f a c e area, and improves honio-
g e n e i t y of t h e i n c i n e r a t o r f e e d m a t e r i a l r e s u l t i n g i n a s u i t a b l e f e e d s t o c k
for the incinerator. By s h r e d d i n g t h e wastes, some i n c i n e r a t o r s a r e a b l e t o
process a h i g h e r f r a c t i o n of noncombustibles. T h i s i s necessary when i t
becomes d i f f i c u l t t o s e p a r a t e c o m b u s t i b l e s f r o m noncombustibles, which i s t h e
case w i t h HEPA f i l t e r s . I n a d d i t i o n t o i n c i n e r a t o r feed pretreatment, t h e
metal shredder w i l l be used t o s i z e reduce some CH f a i l e d equipment f o r t h e
b a t c h metal me1 t e r process.

Shredder t e c h n o l o g y can be d i v i d e d i n t o low-speed and high-speed c a t e -

gories. High-speed shredders such as hammer m i 11 s, g r i n d e r s , and f l a i l m i 11s

(I
have been e v a l u a t e d by Darnel 1 and A1 d r i c h (1983) of EGRG Idaho f o r i n c i n e r a t o r
feed pretreatment. These u n i t s a c t t o p u l v e r i z e t h e waste t o a s i z e f a r
s m a l l e r t h a n i s r e q u i r e d f o r i n c i n e r a t o r feed. W h i l e t h i s i s an advantage f o r
some a p p l i c a t i o n s , i t i s n o t a p a r t i c u l a r advantage f o r TRIJ waste. The advan-
t a g e s and disadvantages of high-speed shredders a r e l i s t e d i n T a b l e 7. Because
t h e one advantage, s m a l l e r p a r t i c l e s i z e , i s n o t a s i g n i f i c a n t b e n e f i t f o r t h e
TRU waste a p p l i c a t i o n , high-speed shredders were e l i m i n a t e d f r o m f u r t h e r con-
s i d e r a t i o n f o r c o m m e r c i a l l y generated TRU wastes. T h i s was a l s o t h e c o n c l u s i o n
d reached by Darnel 1 and A1 d r i c h c o n c e r n i n g INEL TRU wastes.
 TABLE 7. Advantages and Disadvantages o f High-Speed Shredders

Advantages Disadvantages

a Waste i s reduced t o a much Equipment r e q u i r e s e x t e n s i v e maintenance.

smaller s i z e than possible
w i t h low-speed shredders. a Yore r e s p i r a b l e f i n e s a r e generated t h a n
w i t h 1 ow-speed shredding.

Power r e q u i r e m e n t s a r e c o n s i d e r a b l y h i g h e r
t h a n f o r low-speed shredder o f e q u i v a l e n t
capacity.

a Reportedly are susceptible t o dust

e x p l osions.

a High c a p i t a l c o s t .

Occupy l a r g e r volume t h a n low-speed

shredder w i t h eqrli v a l e n t c a p a c i t y .

Although t h e low-speed shredder i s a r e l a t i v e newcomer t o t h e market,

s e v e r a l government l a b o r a t o r i e s ( i n c l u d i n g INEL and SRL) have s e l e c t e d them f o r
p r e t r e a t i n g i n c i n e r a t o r f e e d (Darnel 1 and A1 d r i c h 1983, Char1 e s w o r t h and
P31cCampbell 1985). Shredding i s a c h i e v e d by two c o u n t e r - r o t a t i n g s h a f t s w i t h
c u t t e r wheels and spacers (see F i g u r e 3). One s h a f t t y p i c a l l y r o t a t e s f a s t e r
t h a n t h e o t h e r , which improves t h e s h r e d d i n g e f f i c i e n c y , p r o l o n g s t h e c u t t e r
wheel l i f e by d i s t r i b u t i n g t h e wear, and improves t h e tendency of t h e c u t t e r s
t o s e l f clean. The c u t t e r wheels c o n t a i n one o r more t e e t h ( o f t e n r e f e r r e d t o
as hooks o r k n i v e s ) t h a t i n t e r m e s h w i t h t h e c u t t e r wheels on t h e a d j a c e n t s h a f t
( a s shown i n F i g u r e 3). Waste i s drawn down t h r o u g h t h e wheels and i s t o r n
apart. A comb i s used on t h e n o n c u t t i n g s i d e of t h e c u t t e r s h a f t s t o p r e v e n t
waste f r o m f a l l i n g t h r o u g h t h e v o i d s between t h e c u t t e r wheels. Low-speed
shredders a r e designed t o a u t o m a t i c a l l y r e v e r s e t h e c u t t e r s h a f t ' s normal
r o t a t i o n when an unshreddable o b s t r u c t i o n i s encountered, t h e n r e v e r s e a g a i n
and resume shredding. The shredded p a r t i c l e s i z e can be reduced by a d d i n g more
t e e t h t o each c u t t e r wheel, by r e d u c i n g t h e wheel w i d t h , o r by p e r i o d i c a l l y
r e v e r s i n g and t h e n resuming c u t t e r r o t a t i o n .

Manufacturers o f 1ow-speed shredders use e i t h e r an e l e c t r i c o r h y d r a u l i c

d r i v e motor t o t u r n t h e c u t t e r s h a f t s . D a r n e l l and A l d r i c h (1983) determined
 FIGURE 3. C u t t e r Wheel C o n f i g u r a t i o n o f a T y p i c a l Low-Speed Shredder

t h a t t h e e l e c t r i c t y p e of d r i v e system was s u p e r i o r f o r r a d i o a c t i v e waste

applications. Advantages and disadvantages f o r each t y p e o f d r i v e a r e l i s t e d
i n Table 8. C o n s i d e r i n g t h e s e advantages and disadvantages, e l e c t r i c a l l y
powered shredders a r e p r e f e r r e d f o r TRU waste a p p l i c a t i o n s . Higher maintenance
a s s o c i a t e d w i t h e l e c t r i c d r i v e motor r e v e r s a l s can be o b v i a t e d by r e d u c i n g t h e
• amperage l i m i t a t which r e v e r s a l s occur o r by o v e r s i z i n g t h e u n i t so t h a t
r e v e r s a l s w i l l n o t occur d u r i n g normal s h r e d d i n g o p e r a t i o n s .

Slow-speed s h r e d d i n g t e c h n o l o g y i s developed t o t h e p o i n t t h a t a p p l i c a t i o n
t o TRU wastes would be r e l a t i v e l y s t r a i g h t forward. System c a p a c i t y and p r o -
d u c t p a r t i c l e s i z e s h o u l d be v e r i f i e d w i t h s i m u l a t e d wastes. A1 so, considera-
t i o n s h o u l d be g i v e n t o remote i n s t a l l a t i o n , remote f e e d i n g o f wastes, and
removal o f nonshreddabl e items.
 TABLE 8. Advantages and Disadvantages o f H y d r a u l i c and E l e c t r i c
D r i ves f o r Low-Speed Shredders
Final
D r i v e Motor lvantages Disadvantages

tau1 i c H y d r a u l i c motors have b e t t e r O i l s p i l l s and l e a k s a r e

shock 1 oading p r o t e c t i o n i n
t h e event o f encountering an
unshreddabl e item.
Reversals a r e f a s t e r (-3 sec)
The power u n i t can be separa-
t e d a substantial distance
from t h e shredder.
common w i t h h y d r a u l i c u n i t s .
Power u n i t s a r e b u l k y and
r e q u i r e considerable space.
A more educated maintenance
f o r c e i s required.
H y d r a u l i c hoses between shred-
der subsystems i s undesira-
b l e , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n remote
appl ic a t i ons

Up t o one t h i r d more horse-

power i s r e q u i r e d due t o
energy losses t o t h e
hydraulic drive.

The presence o f hydraul 1 c o i l

may add a f i r e hazard t o a
remotely operated system
(a1 though nonflammable o i l s
are avai 1abl e l .

Electric Power u n i t s a r e much smaller Reversal times a r e slower

and r e q u i r e l e s s horsepower.
Less maintenance i s r e q u i r e d
due t o t h e absence of
h y d r a u l i c pumps and motors.
(-10 sec). U n i t must pause
upon c o n t a c t i n g a nonshred-
dable i t e m t o p e r m i t t h e
motor t o come t o a complete
stop b e f o r e reversing.

Small t o medium s i z e d e l ec- Reversals p r o v i d e more wear

t r i c shredders a r e t y p i c a l l y and t e a r on an e l e c t r i c motor
l e s s expensive than equiv- than on h y d r a u l i c motors.
alent hydraulic units.

INCINERATOR TECHNOLOGY

The U.S. Department o f Energy (DOE) has sponsored research, development,

and demonstration of r a d i o a c t i v e waste i n c i n e r a t i o n ( P e r k i n s 1976, Bordiun and
Taboas 1980, Z i e g l e r 1982). The p u b l i s h e d work from t h e s e s t u d i e s p r o v i d e s an a

e x c e l l e n t d a t a base f o r comparing and s c r e e n i n g i n c i n e r a t o r systems f o r use

w i t h TRU c o m b u s t i b l e wastes from commercial r e p r o c e s s i n g and f u e l f a b r i c a t i o n .
Table 9 p r e s e n t s a summary of U.S. DOE r a d i o a c t i v e waste i n c i n e r a t o r s . The
i n c i n e r a t o r t r e a t m e n t systems i n c l u d e a c i d d i g e s t i o n , c o n t r o l l e d a i r , cyclone,
f l u i d i z e d bed, r o t a r y k i l n , sing1 e h e a r t h , and s l agging p y r o l y s i s .
 TABLE 9. Summary o f U.S. DOE R a d i o a c t i v e Waste I n c i n e r a t o r Treatment Systems

Incinerator DOE Feed

Type Site Capacity I n t e n d e d Appl ic a t i o n Status

Acid HEDL 10 kg/h Pu r e c o v e r y from TRU Decommissioned

Di g e s t ion cBmbusti b l es.
C o n t r o l 1ed LANL 45 kg/h Volume r e d u c t i o n o f TRU Testing w i t h
Air combustibles (LL & Haz. new1y generated
s o l i d and l i q u i d wastes TRU.
a1 so t e s t e d , 1 icensed
f o r PCB).
Controlled SRL- SWIFT(^) 180 k g l h Vol. r e d u c t i o n of sus- FY-85 h o t
Ai r p e c t LL wastes, (1 mR/h operation.
surface.
40 g a l l h Purex s o l v e n t
Controlled SRL-PWI(~) 10 k g l h Vol. r e d u c t i o n oe s o l i d FY-85 c o l d t e s t i n g .
Ai r alpha waste, (10 nCi1g.
Controlled INEL-WERF(C) 180 k g l h Vol. r e d u c t i o n of a l l F u l l y operable by
Ai r INEL LLW, (10 nCi1g. mid FY-85.
Cycl one Mound 35 k g l h Vol. r e d u c t i o n of d r y Used f o r LLW i n c i n -
( f o r one TRU waste. M o d i f i e d f o r eration.
station) 1 j q u i d feed.
ii
F l u i d i zed RFP 82 k g l h Pu r e c o v e r y from TRU Operational on
Bed combustibles. a c t u a l waste.
Rotary RFP 40 k g l h Vol. r e d u c t i o n and Pu Decommi s s i oned
Ki 1n r e c o v e r y f o r s o l i d and
l i q u i d TRU waste o f l o w
t o high a c t i v i t y .
Rotary INEL-PREPP(~) 230 kg/h Permit c e r t i f i c a t i o n o f Production u n i t
Kiln r e t r i e v a b l e TRU waste installation i n
f o r WIPP ( h i g h l o a d i n g progress (FY-86
o f noncombusti b l es cold testing).
present).
Single RFP 55 k g l h Vol. r e d u c t i o n o f s o l i d Decommissioned
Hearth and l i q u i d t r a c e a c t i v i t y
TRU.
Slagging INEL 100 k g l h Permit c e r t i f i c a t i o n o f Canceled
Pyrolysis b u r i e d and s t o r e d TRU
waste a t INEL f o r WIPP
disposal.

(a) SWIFT -
Suspect Waste I n c i n e r a t o r F a c i l i t y Test.
(b) PWI -
Plutonium Waste I n c i n e r a t o r .
(c) WERF -
Waste Experimental Reduction F a c i l i t y .
(d) PREPP -
Process Experimental P i l o t Plant.

Of t h e s e i n c i n e r a t o r s , t h e a c i d d i g e s t i o n , c y c l o n e , f l u i d i z e d bed, s i n g l e
h e a r t h , and s l a g g i n g p y r o l y s i s systems were e l i m i n a t e d f r o m f u r t h e r c o n s i d e r a -
t i o n w i t h o u t a d d i t i o n a l t e s t i n g and e v a l u a t i o n . The bases f o r el i r n i n a t i o n a r e
as f o l l o w s :

Acid O i gestinn - The p r e s e n c e of n o n c o m h u s t i b l e s , as w o u l d he t h e

case w i t h c o m p o s i t e s such as shredded HEPA f i l t e r s , g r e a t l y
 complicates operation. The r e c o v e r y o f Pu f r o q t h e wastes, a l t h o u g h
a m a j o r advantage o f t h i s system, i s n o t a p p l i c a b l e t o commercial TRU
wastes. rVoncombustible s o l i d s a c c u m u l a t e i n t h e d i g e s t i o n chamber
and must be removed p e r i o d i c a l l y . C l a s s i f i c a t i o n t o separate t h e
n o n c o m b u s t i h l e s p r i o r t o p r o c e s s i n g i s n o t p r o b a b l e s i n c e HEPA f i l t e r
a d h e s i v e s a r e a f f i x e d t o t h e frames and t o t h e media. Also, t h e a c i d
r e c o v e r y system u t i l i z e s a c e n t r i f u g e , which i s a h i g h maintenance
item. T h i s , w i t h t h e c o n c e n t r a t e d s u l f u r i c and n i t r i c a c i d s , w o u l d
make r e m o t e o p e r a t i o n d i f f i c u l t . The p r o c e s s has been o p e r a t e d on a
p i l o t s c a l e ; however, n o p r o d u c t i o n - s c a l e t e s t i n g has been p e r f o r m e d .
The R&D and e n g i n e e r i n g s t u d y r e q u i r e m e n t s r e q u i r e d t o a d a p t t h e a c i d
d i g e s t i o n t e c h n o l o g y a r e c o n s i d e r e d above average compared t o t h e
o t h e r processes.

Cyclone I n c i n e r a t i o n - T h i s u n i t was d e s i g n e d as a s i m p l e and r e l i a -

b l e b a t c h i n c i n e r a t o r f o r volume r e d u c t i o n of CY TRU wastes ( K l i n g l e r
1981). The b e n e f i t s d i s a p p e a r when t h e u n i t i s c o n s i d e r e d f o r RH
wastes such as HEPA f i l t e r s . High i n l e t a i r f l o w s r e q u i r e d t o c r e a t e
t h e c y c l o n e a c t i o n r e s u l t s i n h i g h ash c a r r y o v e r t o t h e o f f - g a s
system. The c o m p l e x i t y of t h e secondary waste t r e a t m e n t p r o c e s s e s i 5
i n c r e a s e d due t o t h e ash c a r r y o v e r . The ash i s removed f r o m s c r u b
1 i q u i d by a v e r t i c a l l e a f f i l t e r . Remote o p e r a t i o n and m a i n t e n a n c e
o f t h e l e a f f i l t e r and a drum c h a n g e o ~ l t system w o u l d be d i f f i c u l t .

m F l u i d Bed - The p r e s e n c e of n o n c o m h u s t i b l e s i n c r e a s e s t h e c o m p l e x i t y
o f t h e f l u i d bed i n c i n e r a t o r o p e r a t i o n . N o n c o m b u s t i b l e s o l i d s , such
as m e t a l s , and g l a s s , a c c u m u l a t e i n t h e bed media and must he r o u -
t i n e l y removed. T h i s i n c r e a s e s t h e c o m p l e x i t y o f t h e s e c o n d a r y waste
t r e a t m e n t p r o c e s s e s and makes r e m o t e o p e r a t i o n d i f f i c u l t . For t h i s
r e a s o n , t h e f l u i d bed i s n o t w e l l s u i t e d f o r t h e a p p l i c a t i o n and can
be e l i r n i n a t e d as an i n i t i a l p r o c e s s i n g o p t i o n .

Single Hearth - These i n c i n e r a t o r s a r e t y p i c a l l y l a r g e u n i t s used f o r

b u r n i n g sewage s l udge. A1 t h o u g h t h e y a r e common c o n i m e r c i a l l y , n o
s i n g l e h e a r t h u n i t has been d e m o n s t r a t e d on a p r o d u c t i o n s c a l e w i t h
r a d i o a c t i v e wastes. The RRD and e n g i n e e r i n g s t u d y r e q u i r e m e n t s
 necessary f o r development o f t h i s i n c i n e r a t o r p l a c e s t h e s i n g l e
h e a r t h i n c i n e r a t o r a t a d i s a d v a n t a g e t o t h e o t h e r U.S. DOE u n i t s . A
r a b b l e arm on a r o t a t i n g s h a f t i s used f o r m i x i n g t h e wastes d u r i n g
t h e h i g h - t e m p e r a t u r e corr~bustion c y c l e and f o r removal o f t h e ash
d u r i n g t h e ash d i s c h a r g e c y c l e . T h i s makes t h e u n i t more d i f f i c u l t
t o r e m o t e l y m a i n t a i n t h a n o t h e r u n i t s such as t h e c o n t r o l l e d a i r o r
rotary k i l n incinerators.

Slagging P y r o l y s i s - T h i s u n i t i s designed t o produce a c a s t s l a g

waste p r o d u c t r a t h e r t h a n ash. I n o r d e r t o produce a m o l t e n s l a g ,
c e r t a i n p o r t i o n s o f t h e i n c i n e r a t o r must be designed t o o p e r a t e a t
1500°C as opposed t o t h e 1000° t o 1200°C t e m p e r a t u r e s o f more con-
ventional incinerators. This introduces additional complexities t o
t h e design, i n c r e a s e s t h e system c o s t , and would l i k e l y reduce t h e
r e 1 i a b i l i t y of a r e m o t e l y o p e r a t e d system. The s l a g g i n g p y r o l y s i s
process was n o t g i v e n s e r i o u s c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n t h e TRU S t r a t e g y Study
(Ross e t a1 . 1985) because of p r e v i o u s u n r e s o l ved problems ( T a i t
1983).

The c o n t r o l l e d - a i r and r o t a r y - k i l n i n c i n e r a t o r s a r e b e i n g developed f o r

b o t h TRU and LLW a p p l i c a t i o n s and deserve f u r t h e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n f o r commercial
TRU waste a p p l i c a t i o n s . A s t u d y a t INEL (Hedahl 1982a) concluded t h a t t h e
c o n t r o l l e d - a i r and r o t a r y - k i l n i n c i n e r a t o r s were p r e f e r r e d f o r i n c i n e r a t i o n o f
INEL c o m b u s t i b l e TRU waste. Proof of p r i n c i p a l t e s t s were t h e n conducted t o
determine which i n c i n e r a t o r was b e s t s u i t e d f o r p r o c e s s i n g t h e INEL wastes.
I n c i n e r a t o r f e e d f o r t h e t e s t s c o n t a i n e d between 40 and 90% noncombustibles
(based on p r o j e c t e d INEL waste c o m p o s i t i o n s ) . For t h i s appl i c a t i o n , t h e r o t a r y
k i l n was s e l e c t e d f o r f u r t h e r development. A d d i t i o n a l e n g i n e e r i n g t e s t s and
e v a l u a t i o n s were t h e n conducted on t h e r o t a r y k i l n and i t s o f f - g a s system
b e f o r e t h e process d e s i g n was compl e t e d ( P a t t e n g i 11 e t a1 . 1982, Hedahl 1982b).

The f e e d c o m p o s i t i o n and c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of c o m m e r c i a l l y generated TRU

wastes and t h e remote o p e r a t i n g r e q u i r e m e n t s a r e s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t f r o m
t h a t of INEL waste a p p l i c a t i o n . The a n t i c i p a t e d n o n c o m b u s t i b l e w e i g h t f r a c t i o n
of t h e commercial TRU waste i s 34%, soniewhat l o w e r t h a n t h e INEL n o n c o m b u s t i b l e
fraction. The INEL wastes t h a t were t e s t e d c o n t a i n e d up t o 90% noncombusti-
b l e s , were a l l c o n t a c t handled, and were n o t p r e t r e a t e d by s h r e d d i n g p r i o r t o
the incinerator proof-of-principle tests. These d i f f e r e n c e s would have an
impact on t h e ash and r e s i d u e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and c o u l d impact f i n a l s e l e c t i o n
o f a r e f e r e n c e process f o r commercial TRlJ wastes. Testing o f both t h e
c o n t r o l l e d - a i r and r o t a r y - k i l n i n c i n e r a t o r s has been conducted f o r t h e commer-
c i a l waste appl i c a t i o n . A more d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e s e i n c i n e r a t o r s and
a d i s c u s s i o n of s e v e r a l off-gas treatment options are l i s t e d i n t h e f o l l o w i n g
sections.

Controlled-Air Incinerators

C o n t r o l l e d - a i r systems use two chambers t o a c h i e v e complete combustion.

Wastes a r e charged t o t h e f i r s t chamber where t h e y a r e burned a t near s t o i c h i o -
metric conditions. T h i s r e s u l t s i n a l o w t u r b u l e n t combustion environment
which m i n i m i z e s e n t r a i n m e n t of f l y ash. Products o f p a r t i a l o x i d a t i o n and
v o l a t i l iz a t i o n f l ow i n t o t h e second chamber where excess a i r and supplemental
h e a t i n g a r e added t o a c h i e v e complete combustion.

Four c o n t r o l l e d - a i r i n c i n e r a t i o n systems a r e e i t h e r o p e r a b l e o r soon t o be

a t U.S. DOE s i t e s ( r e f e r t o Table 9 ) . The u n i t a t LANL i s gas h e a t e d and has
o p e r a t e d f o r t h e l o n g e s t t i m e , w i t h development b e g i n n i n g i n 1973 and t e s t i n g
b e g i n n i n g i n 1978 (Neuls e t a l . 1982). Two o t h e r g a s - f i r e d u n i t s , one a t '5RL
(SWIFT) and t h e o t h e r a t INEL (WERF) a r e of v e r y s i m i l a r design, o n l y w i t h
larger capacity. The SRL-PWI i n c i n e r a t o r i s e l e c t r i c a l l y h e a t e d and d e v i a t e s
more f r o m t h e s t a n d a r d d e s i g n i n o r d e r t o accommodate h i g h a l p h a wastes
(Char1 esworth and McCampbell 1985). The two b a s i c t y p e s o f c o n t r o l 1 e d - a i r
i n c i n e r a t o r s a r e d e s c r i b e d i n more d e t a i l below.

1. Gas Heated - Wastes a r e t y p i c a l l y charged a t r e g u l a r i n t e r v a l s t o

t h e p r i m a r y i n c i n e r a t i o n chamber u s i n g a ram f e e d e r o r a t o p l o a d -
i n g chute. F i g u r e 4 shows a f l o w diagram of t h e LANL gas-heated
c o n t r o l l e d - a i r i n c i n e r a t o r which uses a ram feeder. A systew o f
g u i l l o t i n e doors a r e used t o h e l p m a i n t a i n an a i r b a l a n c e on t h e u n i t
d u r i n g feeding. The I N E L c o n t r o l l e d - a i r i n c i n e r a t i o n i s of a s i m i l a r
design t o t h a t a t LANL b u t uses a t o p l o a d i n g c h u t e f o r i n t r o d u c i n g
waste. U n d e r f i r e a i r i s i n t r o d u c e d from beneath t h e h e a r t h i n t h e
 Condenser and
Off Gas Mist Elim~nator

Gas
Burner
-1 I
- Gas Stack

Ib
Reheater

I
A
B
S HEPA
c-- Secondary Air 0 Filters
Burner Q R
U Variable
E Throat
E
N Venturi
R

Gravity
Ash f r
Dropout
Scrub-Solution
Recycling System

F I G U R E 4. LANL Gas-Yeated Controlled-Air Incineration System

 p r i m a r y chamber t o m a i n t a i n a s l i g h t l y r i c h e r t h a n s t o i c h i o m e t r i c oxygen
l e v e l and t o b u r n o u t any f i x e d carbon i n t h e ash. Combusti on
t e m p e r a t u r e s i n t h e p r i m a r y chamber range f r o m 800 t o 1000°C. A nominal
t e m p e r a t u r e o f l l O O ° C i s m a i n t a i n e d i n t h e secondary chamber w i t h 200 t o
300% excess a i r . Supplemental h e a t i n g t o b o t h t h e p r i m a r y and secondary
combustion chambers i s s u p p l i e d by d i e s e l o r n a t u r a l gas burners. Once
t h e wastes a r e charged i n t o t h e u n i t , t h e b u r n e r s o p e r a t e on demand,
supplementing t h e waste h e a t c o n t e n t t o m a i n t a i n t h e d e s i r e d
temperatures. Ash i s removed a t t h e end o f each i n c i n e r a t i o n r u n by an
i n t e r n a l ash d i s c h a r g e ram. The ram moves a l o n g t h e i n c i n e r a t o r f l o o r
p u s h i n g t h e ash t o a g r a v i t y d r o p o u t p o r t . Ash removal systems a r e
a v a i 1ah1 e whi ch p e r m i t c o n t i n u o u s ash removal o p e r a t i on as opposed t o
b a t c h ash removal o p e r a t i o n .

E l e c t r i c a l l y Heated - F i g u r e 5 shows a f l o w diagram o f t h e SRL-PWI

c o n t r o l l e d - a i r i n c i n e r a t i o n system. Wastes a r e a c c u r a t e l y metered t o
t h e p r i m a r y chamber o f t h e e l e c t r i c a l l y heated i n c i n e r a t o r t h r o u g h
two stages of low-speed shredders and a waste compactor pump. For
t h i s a p p l i c a t i o n , t h e compactor pump i s coupled w i t h a v a r i a b l e speed
d r i v e and serves as a feed m e t e r i n g device. The p r i m a r y chamber has
a woven w i r e mesh conveyor b e l t which s l o w l y moves waste m a t e r i a l
t h r o u g h t h e i n c i n e r a t o r t o a g r a v i t y ash d r o p o u t p o i n t . Residence
t i m e i s c o n t r o l l e d by t h e b e l t speed. Combustion a i r i s i n t r o d u c e d
a t t h e ash d i s c h a r g e end of t h e i n c i n e r a t o r and t r a v e l s c o u n t e r c u r -
r e n t t o t h e waste d i r e c t i o n . O f f gases e x i t near t h e f e e d p o r t and
pass t o t h e secondary chamber where excess a i r i s added t o complete
t h e combustion process. H e a t i n g i n b o t h chambers i s p r o v i d e d by
e l e c t r i c g l owbars.

Rotary-Kiln Incinerators

The r o t a r y k i l n has been t e s t e d a t INEL an s i m u l a t e d TRU wastes

( P a t t e n g i l l 1982). It i s e s p e c i a l l y e f f i c i e n t f o r i n c i n e r a t i n g d i f f i c u l t t o
burn wastes because t h e k i l n r o t a t i o n c o n s t a n t l y exposes new s u r f a c e s o f waste
m a t e r i a l t o t h e o x i d i z i n g atmosphere. K i l n i n c i n e r a t i o n systems u s u a l l y o p e r -
a t e a t 800 t o 10003C and i n c l u d e a secondary combustion chamber t o improve t h e
 Waste
Feed

Stack
Coarse
Shredder
Secondary

1 ,
Meter~ng
Air
Coollng
Air Dllut~on

Pump S~ntered
Metal F~lters

1
Flne
F~lters

Electrlc. Glowbar
Shredder
Heaters

I
L.TL 0 w
0
Woven W ~ r eBelt
Combust~onA I ~

Drlv? and
f
Pr~ni,~rv
Chdrnber
I'
Grdv~ty
Ash Dropout
P ~ n c hRollers

FIGURE 5. SRL-PW I E l e c t r i c a l l y - H e a t e d C o n t r o l 1 ed-Ai r I n c i n e r a t o r System

o v e r a l l o x i d a t i o n e f f i c i e n c y , w h e r e i n t e m p e r a t u r e s r u n a b o u t 1250°C. Other
i n h e r e n t d e s i g n f e a t u r e s i n c l ude c o n t i n u o u s ash removal and c o n t r o l 1a b l e
r e s i d e n c e t i m e (by a d j u s t i n g r o t a t i o n r a t e and/or i n c l i n a t i o n ) .

The IUEL-PREPP f a c i l i t y i n c l u d e s a r o t a r y - k i l n i n c i n e r a t o r as t h e p r i m a r y
means o f volume r e d u c t i o n . A f l o w d i a g r a m o f t h e INEL-PREPP system i s shown i n
F i g u r e 6. The r o t a r y k i l n was chosen o v e r a c o n t r o l l e d - a i r i n c i n e r a t o r because
t h e r a n g e of e x p e c t e d waste c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s r e q u i r e d a system w i t h p r o c e s s i n g
f l e x i b i l i t y (Hedahl 1982a). A1 so, t h e k i l n ' s h i g h e f f i c i e n c y i n o x i d i z i n g
w a r t e s y i e l d s an ash t h a t i s e a s i l y w e t t a b l e f o r g r o u t i n g , w h i c h i s an i n t e g r a l
p a r t o f t h e PREPP process.

W h i l e k i l n r o t a t i o n i m p r o v e s combustion e f f i c i e n c y , i t a l s o c r e a t e s opera-
t i o n a l and m a i n t e n a n c e problems. The s e a l between t h e r o t 3 t i n g k i l n and t h e
s t a t i o n a r y ends i s c r i t i c a l f o r c o n t a i n m e n t o f r a d i o n u c l i d e s and i s r t i f f i c u l t
t o maintain. Rocky F l a t s p o i n t s t o s e 3 l i n g t r o u b l e s as b e i n g one f a c t o r i~
t h e i r d e c i s i o n t o decommission t h e i r r o t a r y k i l ~ . INEL has d e s i g n e d a t r i p l e
 wilst1:
Ft:t:fl

HEPA
Secondary F~lters
Shreddt:r Ch;~~nl)er

t
Pref~lters

Burner Wave
Plate
Separator
'
Mesh Pad
M~st
El~rn~nator
- t
Gas
Reheater

Pressur17ed
Seals

I f I
Grav~ty
Ash
Drop~ut
I Scrub Solut~on
Recovery System

FIGURE 6. INEL-PREPP R o t a r y K i l n I n c i n e r a t i o n System

p r e s s u r i z e d s e a l f o r t h e PREPP f a c i l i t y . W i t h t h e s e a l p r e s s u r i z e d and t h e
k i l n o p e r a t i n g a t a s l i g h t l y n e g a t i v e atmosphere, a p o s i t i v e f l o w o f gases f r o m
t h e s e a l i n t o t h e i n c i n e r a t o r w i l l be m a i n t a i n e d b u t f i n e s o l i d s may s t i l l
m i g r a t e i n t o t h e s e a l c a u s i n g a b r a s i v e wear and e v e n t u a l s e a l f a i l u r e . The
t u m b l i n g a c t i o n o f wastes a c c e l e r a t e s r e f r a c t o r y wear l e a d i n g t o a d i f f i c u l t
and c o s t l y r e p l a c e m e n t p r o j e c t ; t h e r e i s no c u r r e n t method t o r e h r i c k a k i l n
remotely.

A l l r o t a t i n g e l e m e n t s o f t h e r o t a r y k i l n r e q u i r e f r e q u e n t maintenance
making i t one of t h e more m a i n t e n a n c e - i n t e n s i v e i n c i n e r a t o r o p t i o n s . The PREPP
d e s i g n has p r o v i d e d f o r d r i v e m a i n t e n a n c e by e x t e n d i n g t h e k i l n d r i v e s h a f t
t h r o u g h t h e w a l l , p l a c i n g t h e d r i v e motor and gear hox o u t s i d e t h e r a d i o a c t i v e
area. Mowever, t h e r o t a t i n g s e a l s w i l l r e q u i r e c o n t a c t maintenance f o r a d j u s t -
meqt and r e p a i r , and t h e t i r e s , t r u n n i o n , and b u l l gear r e q u i r e r e m o t e
lubrication.

Feed t o t h e k i l n may be e i t h e r c o n t i n u o u s o r s e m i - c o n t i n u o u s . Uhatever

t h e f e e d i n g methods, i t i s e s s e n t i a l t o i n t r o d u c e t h e f e e d f a r i n t o t h e k i l n t o
p r e v e n t s o l i d s f r o m f a l l i n g back i n t o t h e s e a l . The INEL-PREPP k i l n u t i l i z e s a
v i b r a t o r y s l i p conveyor and a s h u t t l e c a r system t o t r a n s f e r shredded w a s t e
into the kiln.

Rotary k i l n i n c i n e r a t o r s are normally f i r e d concurrent w i t h t h e feed

s t r e a m and t h e f i r i n g r a t e c o n t r o l l e d b y t h e t e m p e r a t u r e o f t h e d i s c h a r g e
gases. Long w a s t e r e t e n t i o n t i m e i n t h e k i l n t e n d s t o smooth o u t f l u c t ~ ~ a t i n n s
i n h e a t l o a d i n g from changes i n feed r a t e o r h e a t c o n t e n t . Since t h e residence
t i m e f o r gases i s o n l y a few seconds, v e r y r a p i d and s t a b l e c o n t r o l can be
qaintained.

Off-Gas T r e a t m e n t Systems
B o t h wet and d r y o f f - g a s t r e a t m e n t systems can he used w i t h t h e c o n t r o l l e d -
a i r incinerators or the r o t a r y k i l n . Following are general d e s c r i p t i o n s o f
t r e a t m e n t systems used i n c u r r e n t i n c i n e r a t o r d e s i g n s .

The c o n t r o l l e d - a i r i n c i n e r a t o r a t LANL has a wet o f f - g a s system c o n s i s t i n g

of a quench column, v e n t u r i s c r u b b e r , packed column a b s o r b e r , and HEPA f i l t e r s
( s e e F i g u r e 4). Roth c o n t r o l l e d - a i r i n c i n e r a t o r u n i t s a t SRL and t h e one a t
INEL a r e equipped w i t h d r y off-gas systems. O f f gases f r o m t h e SRL-PWI
i n c i n e r a t o r a r e c o o l e d by a i r d i l u t i o n p r i o r t o s i n t e r e d - m e t a l and HEPA f i l t r a -
t i o n (see F i g u r e 5). The s i n t e r e d metal f i l t e r s a r e o f a blow-back t y p e and
c o n t a i n a c o a t i n g o f 1 ime t o n e u t r a l i z e HC1 and SO2 i n t h e o f f gas. rlilution
a i r i s added t o f u r t h e r cool t h e o f f gases p r i o r t o f i n a l HEPA f i l t r a t i o n . The
SRL-SWIFT o f f - g a s system resembles t h a t o f t h e SRL-PWI u n i t e x c e p t c o o l i n g i s
done by b o t h a s p r a y quench and a i r d i l u t i o n . These d r y systems were s e l e c t e d
t o reduce secondary waste t r e a t m e n t d i f f i c u l t i e s and reduce HC1 c o r r o s i o n p r o b -
lems a s s o c i a t e d w i t h b u r n i n g C 1 - c o n t a i n i n g wastes such as PVC. O f f gases f r o m
t h e INEL-WERF c o n t r o l 1 e d - a i r i n c i n e r a t o r a r e c o o l e d f i r s t by a i r d i l u t i on, t h e n
by p a s s i n g t h r o u g h an a i r - t o - a i r h e a t exchanger, and f i n a l l y by a second a i r
dilcltion. Gases a r e t h e n passed t h r o u g h one of two p a r a l l e l hag horlses and
f i n a l HEPA f i l t e r s . U n l i k e t h e LANL and SRL i n c i n e r a t o r s , t h e INEL-WERF u n i t
i s n o t designed t o process PVC wastes. Water and c h l o r i d e , which a r e p r e s e n t
as combustion p r o d u c t s , t e n d t o condense o u t as HC1 a t c o o l p o i n t s i n t h e o f f -
gas system, c a u s i n g c o r r o s i o n (Waters and Volodzko 1983). Another f a c t o r i n
n o t i n c i n e r a t i n g PVCs i s t h a t when n e u t r a l i z e d t o a s a l t , e s s e n t i a l l y no v o l u v e
r e d u c t i o n i s obtained.

The r o t a r y k i l n a t INEL-PREPP uses a wet s c r u b b i n g s.ystem c o n s i s t i n g o f a

quencher , variable t h r o a t v e n t u r i , wave p l a t e s e p a r a t o r , mesh pad m i s t e l i m i -
n a t o r , gas r e h e a t e r , p r e f i l t e r s , HEPA f i l t e r s and an i n d u c e d d r a f t blower (see
Figure 6). Depending on t h e c o m p o s i t i o n o f t h e waste, t h e s c r u b b i n g s o l u t i o n s
may become q u i t e c o r r o s i v e . D e s t r u c t i o n of wastes c o n t a i n i n g halogens, such as
PVC and contaminated o i l s , c r e a t e s off-gas c o r r o s i o n problems as i t would i n a
c o n t r o l l e d - a i r i n c i n e r a t o r o f f - g a s system.
SHREDDER TESTS
 SHREDDER TESTS

Low-speed s h r e d d e r s from d i f f e r e n t m a n u f a c t u r e r s were t e s t e d u s i n g GPT,

SAC, HEPA f i l t e r s , Type 2 and Type 3 s i m u l a t e d wastes ( r e f e r t o T a b l e 4). The
o b j e c t i v e s o f t h e t e s t s were t o :

C o n f i r m t h a t low-speed s h r e d d i n g can be used t o e f f e c t i v e l y s i z e

r e d u c e s i m u l a t e d commercial TRU waste.

e Generate a shredded w a s t e m a t e r i a l s u i t a b l e f o r use d u r i n g t h e

incineration tests.

E v a l u a t e t h e process f o r a d a p t a b i l i t y t o remote r a d i o a c t i v e opera-

t i o n s and i d e n t i f y p o t e n t i a l p r o c e s s problems.

Develop s p e c i f i c a t i o n s o f a r e f e r e n c e s h r e d d i n g system t o be used f o r

subsequent t e s t i n g and development.+

The waste m a t e r i a l was i n i t i a l l y d i v i d e d i n t o t w o i d e n t i c a l l o t s ; one t o

be shredded a t S h r e d d i n g Systems, I n c . i n W i l s o n v i l l e , Oregon, and t h e o t h e r t o
be shredded a t Shred Pax Corp. i n Wood Dale, I l l i n o i s . These t w o companies a r e
c o n s i d e r e d m a j o r m a n u f a c t u r e r s of low-speed e l e c t r i c - d r i v e shredders.

The s u b c o n t r a c t o r p e r f o r r n i n g t h e e l e c t r i c a l l y h e a t e d c o n t r o l l e d - a i r i n c i n -
e r a t i o n t e s t d e t e r m i n e d t h a t t h e shredded wastes were t o o l a r g e t o p r o c e s s i n
t h e s m a l l p i l o t - s c a l e i n c i n e r a t o r t h e y were u s i n g . As a r e s u l t , arrangements
were made w i t h a l o c a l s h r e d d e r m a n u f a c t u r e r ( S a t u r n Shredder n i v i s i o n o f MAC
Corp., Grand P r a i r i e , Texas) t o r e s h r e d t h e waste m a t e r i a l . Even t h o u g h t h e
s h r ~ d d e r sused b y S a t u r n were h y d r a u l i c d r i v e and n o t t h e p r e f e r r e d e l e c t r i c
d r i v e , t h e s h r e d d i n g r e s u l t s as t h e y a r e a v a i l a b l e a r e i n c l u d e d w i t h t h e e l e c -
t r i c d r i v e shredder r e s u l t s .

m
The r e m a i n d e r o f t h i s s e c t i o n c o n t a i n s d e s c r i p t i o n s o f t h e s h r e d d e r s and
the t e s t results.
SHREDDER DESCRIPTIONS

The shredder systems t h a t were t e s t e d and t h e i r c u t t e r c o n f i g u r a t i o n s a r e

l i s t e d i n Table 10. The f i r s t two t e s t u n i t s were a c t u a l l y t h e same model 1600
machine manufactured by Shredding Systems w i t h d i f f e r e n t c u t t e r c o n f i g u r a t i o n s .
F i g u r e 7 shows t h e Model 1600 u n i t w i t h i t s 100 hp e l e c t r i c d r i v e motor. This
u n i t i s a t e s t model and i s n o t c u r r e n t l y b e i n g marketed, a l t h o u g h i t i s r e p r e -
s e n t a t i v e o f o t h e r shredders on t h e market. The c u t t e r wheels used were
48.9 cm diameter, 5.1 cm wide, and had one t o o t h on each wheel w i t h a h e i g h t o f
5.1 cm. The t o o t h h e i g h t determines how much m a t e r i a l i s g r i p p e d and shredded
w i t h each r o t a t i o n of t h e wheel. The f i r s t t e s t u n i t had a 2+2+2 c u t t e r con-
f i g u r a t i o n ( 2 c u t t e r s , 2 spacers and 2 c u t t e r s ) . Each c u t t e r t o o t h was o f f s e t
from t h e a d j a c e n t t o o t h i n what i s termed a " s i n g l e - s p i r a l " alignment. The
t o o t h o f f s e t i s such t h a t i t t a k e s t h e f u l l l e n g t h o f t h e c u t t e r s h a f t t o make
one rev01 u t i o n i n t h e c u t t e r t o o t h p o s i t i o n s . With a sing1 e - s p i r a l c o n f i g u r a -
t i o n , o n l y one t o o t h a t a t t i m e shreds t h e waste m a t e r i a l . Theoretically the
e n t i r e s h a f t f o r c e i s a p p l i e d t o each c u t t i n g t o o t h as i t c o n t a c t s t h e waste.

TABLE 10. Shredder Test U n i t Comparison

S h a f t Speed, Tooth Force,

Test Shredder Power Infeed Config- C u t t e r Tooth C u t t e r Wheel
-
U n i t No. -
Model -
Unit Opening, m uration #/Wheel Ht, cm Wth,cm Dia,crn 6
- Newtons/1000
Fast Slow
1 1600(~) 100 hp 1.27 x 0.91 2+2+2 1 5.1 5.1 48.9 26.7 21.1 109 138
Electric Single
Or1 ve Spiral
2 1600(~) 100 hp 1.27 x 0.91 1+1+1 1 5.1 5.1 48.9 26.7 21.1 109 138
Electric Single
Drive Spiral
3 A Z - ~ O ( ~ )8 0 hp 1.60 x 0.84 1+1+1 3 6.0 4.7 47.0 25.0 21.7 97 112
Electric I n Line
Drive
4 A Z - ~ O ( ~ )80 hp 1.60 x 0.84 2+2+2 1 R 3 6.0 4.7 47.0 25.0 21.7 97 112
Electric Single
Drive Spiral
5 A Z - ~ Ub( , 8 0 hp 1.60 x 0.84 1+1+1 1 6.0 4.7 47.0 NA(C) NA NA NA
Electric Single
Drive Spiral
6 3 6 - 2 ~ ( ~ ) 75 hp 0.91 x 0.56 1+1+1 2 3.2 1.9
27.3 83.6 53.6 37 58
Hydraulic Single
Drive Spiral
7 52-32(*) 150 hp 1.32 x 1.02 1+1+1 2 5.4 3.8
43.2 47.7 23.5 83 115
Hydraulic Single
Drive Spiral

(a) Model 1600 manufactured by S h r e d d i n g Systems, Inc., W i l s o n v i l l e , Oregon.

(b) Model AZ-80 r n a n ~ ~ f a c t u r e by
d Shred Pax Corp., Wood Dale, I l l i n o i s .
(c) S h a f t speed and t o o t h f o r c e d a t a on t e s t u n i t 5 i s n o t a v a i l a b l e .
(d) Models 36-22 and 52-32 m a n u f a c t u r e d by S a t u ~ nShredder D i v i s i o n o f MAC Corp., Grand P r a i r i e , Texas.
 FIGURE 7. Model 1600 E l e c t r i c D r i v e Shredder (Manufactured by Shredding
Systems)

T e s t u n i t number 2 ( T a b l e 10) was s e t up u s i n g a 1+1+1s i n g l e s p i r a l con-

figuration. T h i s c o n f i g u r a t i o n r e q u i r e s more power f o r s h r e d d i n g a g i v e n i t e m
b u t i t produces a s m a l l e r p a r t i c l e s i z e .

T e s t u n i t s 3, 4 and 5 ( T a b l e 10) a r e model AZ-80 shredders manufactured by

4

Shred Pax. The u n i t s a r e equipped w i t h two 40 hp e l e c t r i c motors which t r a n s -

f e r power i n t o a s i n g l e gear box. F i g u r e 8 shows one o f t h e AZ-80 t e s t u n i t s .
* C u t t e r s on t h e AZ-80 shredders were a l l 47.0 cm diameter, 4.7 cm wide and had
t e e t h 6.0 cm h i g h . T e s t u n i t 3 had a 1+1+1i n - l i n e c o n f i g u r a t i o n w i t h t h r e e
t e e t h per c u t t e r wheel. U n i t 4 had a 2+2+2 s i n g l e - s p i r a l c o n f i g u r a t i o n w i t h a
combination of c u t t e r wheels which had one o r t h r e e t e e t h each. Test u n i t 5
had a 1+1+1 s i n g l e - s p i r a l c o n f i g u r a t i o n w i t h one t o o t h per c u t t e r wheel.
 F I G U R E 8. Model AZ-80 E l e c t r i c D r i v e Shredder (Manufactured by Shred Pax)

Test u n i t s 6 and 7 (Table 10) are both h y d r a u l i c d r i v e shredders manufac-

t u r e d by Saturn Shredders. Each u n i t has a 1+1+1 s i n g l e s p i r a l c u t t e r con-
f i g u r a t i o n w i t h two t e e t h per c u t t e r wheel. The model 36-22 ( t e s t u n i t 6) had
a s i n g l e 75 hp e l e c t r i c motor and h y d r a u l i c pump which power a f i n a l h y d r a u l i c
d r i v e motor. The model 36-22, shown i n F i g u r e 9, i s a smaller and l i g h t e r d u t y a

shredder than t h e o t h e r s tested. It uses 27.3 cm diameter c u t t e r wheels which

are 1.9 cm wide. The combination of t h e narrow dual t o o t h c u t t e r wheels and
1+1+1 c o n f i g u r a t i o n , r e s u l t s i n a shredded product w i t h a much smaller p a r t i c l e I

s i z e than achievable u s i n g t h e other shredder t e s t u n i t s . The model 52-37

shredder ( t e s t u n i t 7) had two 75 hp e l e c t r i c motors and pumps which power a
s i n g l e h y d r a u l i c d r i v e motor. The c u t t e r s a r e 43.2 cm diameter and 3.8 cm
wide.
 FIGURE 9. Model 36-22 Hydraul i c D r i v e Shredder
(Manufactured by Saturn Shredders)

The actual shredding power i s determined by t h e t o o t h f o r c e exerted by t h e

f a s t e r s h a f t and by t h e c u t t e r configuration. Tooth f o r c e i s dependent on
d r i v e u n i t power, c u t t e r wheel diameter, and s h a f t rpm. The l a s t f o u r columns
o f Table 10 show t h e s h a f t rpm and t o o t h f o r c e o f t h e d i f f e r e n t shredder t e s t
- u n i t s . The model 1600 has t h e h i g h e s t t o o t h f o r c e a t 109,000 newtons (N) on
t h e f a s t s h a f t compared w i t h 97,000 N f o r t h e AZ-80s, 83,000 N f o r t h e model
52-32 and 37,000 N f o r t h e model 36-22.
*

TEST RESULTS

Shredder performance was determined by measuring throughput r a t e , number

of r e v e r s a l s , and p a r t i c l e s i z e f o r t h e d i f f e r e n t types o f simulated TRU
wastes. A p o r t i o n of t h e waste m a t e r i a l was shredded a second t i m e t o p r o v i d e
d a t a on two-stage shredder systems. I n a l l cases, where two stages o f shred-
d i n g was performed, t h e f i r s t u n i t had a 2+2+2 c o n f i g u r a t i o n and t h e second
u n i t had a f i n e r 1+1+1c o n f i g u r a t i o n . Table 11 presents t h e! t h r o u ghput d a t a
- -e e
and number r e v e r s a l s per 100 k g o f waste f o r each combination or r i r s t and
second stage shredders.

General Process Trash

Three d i f f e r e n t ' ,tage shredders were t e s t e d u s i n g s i m u l a t e d GPT

waste. Test u n i t 1 i s considered t h e b e t t e r performer s i n c e no c u t t e r r e v e r -
s a l s occurred d u r i n g t h e t e s t i n g . The AZ-80 u n i t 4 experienced 1.4 r e v e r s a l s
per 100 kg b u t had thc h i g h e s t n e t throughput o f 80 kg/min. Sever a1 f a c t o r s
causing t h e r e v e r s a l s on u n i t 4 were: g r e a t e r t o o t h h e i g h t ,, n a r r ower c u t t e r
wheel w i d t h ( t h u s more t e e t h per s h a f t ) , l o w e r n e t t o o t h f o r c e , and t h e
presence of s e v e r a l t h r e e - t o o t h c u t t e r wheels. Test u n i t 3 e x h i b i t e d t h e most
r e v e r s a l s a t 14 per 100 k g of GPT. The i n l i n e c o n f i g u r a t i o n a l o n g w i t h t h r e e
t o o t h c u t t e r wheels d i s t r i b u t e s t h e power o u t over many t e e t h . Since several
t e e t h may c o n t a c t a waste i t e m a t one time, t h i s u n i t i s much more l i k e l y t o
reverse. Second s t a g e shredding of t h e GPT by t e s t u n i t 5 was no problem as a
throughput r a t e of 76 k g l m i n was m a i n t a i n e d w i t h no r e v e r s a l s .

Sample and A n a l y t i c a l C e l l Wastes

Shredding of t h e SAC waste was more d i f f i c u l t , p r i m a r i l y because o f t h e

metal p r e s e n t i n t h e waste. Test u n i t 1 e f p e r i e n c e d 1.6 r e v e r s a l s per 100 k g
w h i l e t e s t u n i t 4 had 6.7 d u r i n g f i r s t - s t a g e shredding.
The causes f o r t h e
d i f f e r e n c e i n r e v e r s a l s a r e t h e same as those given-above f o r t h e GPT wastes.
Second-stage shredding of SAC was l e s s d i f f i c u l t than t h e f i r s t stage, however,
t e s t u n i t s 2 and 5 b o t h experienced some r e v e r s a l s (see Table 11). -
Wood-Framed HEPA F i l t e r s

Wood-framed HEPA f i l t e r s were shredded u s i n g t e s t u n i t s 1, 4 and 5. No 0

c u t t e r r e v e r s a l s o c c u r r e d d u r i n g any of these t e s t s ; however, f e e d i n g o f t h e

f i l t e r s t o t h e shredders was d i f f i c u l t . The wood-framed HEPAs tended t o r i d e
on t h e c u t t e r wheels and spacers w i t h o u t b e i n g g r i p p e d and shredded.I n order
t o complete t h e s h r e d d i n g process, i t was necessary manually r e p o s i t i o n t h e
f i l t e r s on t h e c u t t e r t e e t h . Even w i t h t h i s manual r e p o s i t i o n i n g , t h e
 TABLE 11. Shredder Performance Comparison

F i r s t Stage Second Stage

Waste Shredder C u t t e r Wheel Throughput Reversa l s Shredder C u t t e r Wheel Throughput Reversa I s
Mater i a l (Model Configuration Rate, kg/min p e r 100 k g (Model Configuration Rate, kg/min p e r 100 kg
GPT Test U n i t 1 2 +2 +2 60 0 None -- -- --
(1600) Single Spiral

GPT Test U n i t 4 2 +2 +2 80 1.4 Test U n i t 5 1+1+1 76 0

(AZ-80) Single Spiral (AZ-80) Single Spiral

GPT Test U n i t 3 1+1+1 19 14 None

(AZ-80) In Line

SAC Test Unit 1 2 +2 +2 Test U n i t 2 1+1+1

( 1600) Single Spiral (1600) Single Spiral

SAC Test U n i t 4 2 +2 +2 Test U n i t 5 1+1+1

(AZ-80) Single Spiral (AZ-80) Single Spiral

Wood HEPAs Test Unit 1 2 +2 +2 None

0 ( 1600) Single Spiral
v

Wood HEPAs Test Unit 4 2 +2 +2 Test U n i t 5 1+1+1

(AZ-80) Single Spiral (AZ-80) Single Spiral

Wood HEPAs Test Unit 5 ltl+l None

(AZ-80) Single Spiral

M e t a l HEPAs Test Unit 1 2 +2 +2 Test U n i t 2 1+1+1

( 1600) Single Spiral (1600) Single Spiral

M e t a l HEPAs Test Unit 4 2 +2 +2 None

(AZ-80) Single Spiral

Test Unit 1 2 +2 +2 Test U n i t 2 1+1+1

(1600) Single Spiral (1600) Single Spiral

Test Unit 4 2 +2 +2 19 18 None -- -- --

(AZ-80) Single Spiral

Test Unit 1 2+2 +2 25 1.2 None -- -- --

( 1600) Single Spiral

(a) Wood HEPA f i l t e r s had t o be manually r e p o s i t i o n e d a t r e g u l a r i n t e r v a l s t o f a c i l i t a t e shredding. No t h r o u g h p u t

d a t a i s r e p o r t e d as it was dependent on t h e manual r e p o s i t i o n i n g , and n o t t h e s h r e d d e r c a p a c i t y .
s h r e d d i n g was v e r y slow. A f e e d i n g a s s i s t d e v i c e such as a t o p p r e s s s h o u l d be
i n c o r p o r a t e d i f wood-framed f i l t e r s a r e t o be r o u t i n e l y shredded. T h i s same
f e e d i n g problem was encountered by r l a r n e l l and A1 d r i c h (1983) d u r i n g s h r e d d i n g
of plywood boxes. They s u c c e s s f u l l y designed and t e s t e d a d e v i c e which h o l d s
t h e box u p r i g h t and r o t a t e s i t across t h e t o p o f t h e shredder c u t t e r wheels.

Metal-Framed HEPA F i l t e r s

G r i p p i n g o f t h e metal-framed HEPA f i l t e r s by t h e shredder t e e t h was no

problem. The f i l t e r s r e q u i r e d more power t o s h r e d as i n d i c a t e d by t h e h i g h
l e v e l o f r e v e r s a l s (4.1 p e r 100 k g w i t h t e s t u n i t 1 and 9.3 per 100 k g w i t h
u n i t 4). One reason t h e r e v e r s a l s o c c u r r e d was because t h e shredders t r i e d t o
process t h e f i l t e r s t o o q u i c k l y . Second-stage s h r e d d i n g o f t h e metal HEPAs
u s i n g t e s t u n i t 2 r e s u l t e d i n 4.4 r e v e r s a l s per 100 kg, s t i l l q u i t e h i g h . The
p r o c e s s i n g r a t e c o u l d be slowed down by r e d u c i n g t h e t o o t h h e i g h t and by
d e c r e a s i n g t h e s h a f t rpm. Another approach would be t o program t h e shredder t o
c y c l e f o r w a r d and r e v e r s e a t i n t e r v a l s t h a t a r e f r e q u e n t enough t o e l i m i n a t e
t h e h i g h - t o r q u e s i t u a t i o n s t h a t cause normal r e v e r s a l s . When t h i s i s done, t h e
p a r t i a l l y shredded f i l t e r would be k i c k e d back up on t o p o f t h e c u t t e r wheels
d u r i n g t h e r e v e r s a l and t h e n shredded a l i t t l e more d u r i n g t h e f o r w a r d c y c l e .
Because t h e f i l t e r r e p o s i t i o n s i t s e l f each t i m e i t i s k i c k e d up, t h e shredded
p a r t i c l e s i z e would be s m a l l e r .Programmed r e v e r s a l c y c l e s a r e commonly used
w i t h h y d r a u l i c d r i v e shredders because t h e h y d r a u l i c d r i v e s can be q u i c k l y and
e a s i l y reversed. E l e c t r i c d r i v e shredders c o u l d i n c o r p o r a t e t h e a u t o m a t i c
r e v e r s a l s , however e x t r a wear and t e a r on t h e e l e c t r i c motor would occur due t o
t h e repeated on-off cycles.

The metal-framed HEPA f i l t e r s t h a t were shredded had been used p r e v i o u s l y

as o f f - g a s f i l t e r s d u r i n g n o n r a d i o a c t i v e t e s t i n g of t h e l a r g e - s c a l e i n s i t u
v i t r i f i c a t i o n process ( B u e l t e t a l . 1985). D u r i n g t h e shredder t e s t s , some o f
t h e d u s t c o n t a i n e d on t h e l o a d f i l t e r s was released. A method f o r f i x i n g con-
t a m i n a n t s p r i o r t o shredding, such as a water o r chemical spray, appears t o be
needed t o reduce o r e l i m i n a t e t h e d u s t i n g problem.
 Type 2 Wastes

The Type 2 waste m a t e r i a l (waste judged d i f f i c u l t t o i n c i n e r a t e ) was b a t c h

f e d t o t e s t u n i t s 1 and 4 i n 208 L ( 5 5 gal .) drums. Test u n i t 1 has 2.7 rever-
s a l s per 100 kg w h i l e t e s t u n i t 4 was h i g h e s t a t 18 r e v e r s a l s per 100 kg. The
frequency o f r e v e r s a l s i s a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e h i g h m e t a l s l o a d i n g of t h e Type 2
material. Second s t a g e s h r e d d i n g u s i n g t e s t u n i t 2 was somewhat e a s i e r w i t h
o n l y 1.6 r e v e r s a l s per 100 kg.

Type 3 Wastes

T e s t u n i t 1 was used t o process t h e d i f f i c u l t t o s h r e d Type 3 m a t e r i a l .

The i t e m s were m a n u a l l y fed, one a t a t i m e , i n t o t h e shredder. The o n l y
r e v e r s a l s o c c u r r e d when a 1 / 4 hp vacuum pump was shredded. Had t h e Type 3
waste been b a t c h fed t o t h e shredder, t h e r e v e r s a l s would have heen much h i g h e r
t h a n t h e 1.2 p e r 100 k g observed. No Type 3 m a t e r i a l was t e s t e d u s i n g an AZ-80
shredder as t h e m a n u f a c t u r e r b e l i e v e d i t would r e s u l t i n unacceptable wear and
t e a r on t h e equipment. T h i s judgment was made a f t e r t h e h i g h frequency o f
r e v e r s a l s was observed w h i l e p r o c e s s i n g Type 2 waste w i t h t e s t u n i t 4.

Fragment S i ze A n a l y s i s

Fragment s i z e was determined by randomly s e l e c t i n g t e n p i e c e s o f each

major waste component ( i .e. paper, c l o t h , wood, m e t a l , f i l t e r media, e t c . ) from
t h e shredder p r o d u c t and measuring t h e l e n g t h , w i d t h , and t h i c k n e s s o f t h e
fragments. The mean dimensions and s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n o f t h e fragment s i z e was
c a l c u l a t e d f r o m t h e s e measurements.

T a b l e 12 p r e s e n t s t h e fragment s i z e a n a l y s i s o f t h e shredded wastes.

Several o b s e r v a t i o n s r e g a r d i n g t h e e f f e c t s o f shredder c o n f i g u r a t i o n and s i n g l e
-
o r dual s t a g e o p e r a t i o n on t h e r e s u l t i n g waste fragment s i z e have been made.
Wastes t h a t a r e shredded one t i m e a r e t y p i c a l l y l o n g and narrow. The mean
+ l e n g t h o f t h e fragment i s p r o p o r t i o n a l t o t h e d i s t a n c e between t e e t h on t h e
c u t t e r wheel and t h e w i d t h corresponds c l o s e l y t o t h e w i d t h o f t h e c u t . The
c u t w i d t h f o r a 2+2+2 c o n f i g u r a t i o n i s two t i m e s t h e w i d t h o f t h e c u t t e r wheel.
The shredded fragment t h i c k n e s s f o r t h e s i m u l a t e d TRU wastes d u r i n g t h i s s t u d y
was more a f u n c t i o n of t h e o r i g i n a l m a t e r i a l t h i c k n e s s t h a n a n y t h i n g e l s e .
 M a t e r i a l s , which were b o t h f l e x i b l e and d u r a b l e such as c l o t h and p o l y -
e t h y l e n e s h e e t i n g , had shredded fragment s i z e s w e l l above t h e mean v a l u e s shown
i n Table 12. Both l o w - s t r e n g t h m a t e r i a l s , such as paper, and r i g i d m a t e r i a l s ,
such wood, and metal , had average fragment s i z e s be1 ow t h e mean v a l ue.

TABLE 12. Shredded Waste S i z e A n a l y s i s

Sample Waste Shredding H i s t o r y Mean S i z e
Number Material F i r s t Stage Second Stage LxWxH,cm

1 GPT Test U n i t 1 None 52 x 13 x 1.0

( 1600) (27 x 6.8 x 0 . 8 ) ( ~ )

2 GPT Test U n i t 3 None 22 x 5.5 x 0.9

(AZ-80) (17 x 2.9 x 0.7)

3 GPT Test U n i t 2 Test U n i t 6 15 x 3.4 x 0.2

( 1600) (36-22) (9.4 x 1.9 x 0.1)

4 SAC Test U n i t 1 Test U n i t 2 15 x 5.3 x 0.4

( 1600) ( 1600) (6.8 x 1.7 x 0.5)

5 SAC Test U n i t 2 Test U n i t 7 7.8 x 2.5 x 0.6

( 1600) (52-32) (4.8 x 1.3 x 0.6)

6 SAC Test U n i t 4 Test U n i t 5 29 x 6.4 x 1.2

(AZ-80) (AZ-80) ( 2 9 x 4.4 x 1.1)

7 Wood Test U n i t 1 None 18 x 6.4 x 0.4

F i 1t e r s ( 1600) ( 1 0 x 2.2 x 0.2)

8 Wood Test U n i t 5 None 12 x 5.5 x 0.5

F i 1t e r s (AZ-80) (4.7 x 2.0 x 0.2)

9 Wood Test U n i t 1 Test U n i t 6 7.3 x 2.0 x 0.3

Filters ( 1600) (36-22) (5.2 x 0.9 x 0.4)
10 Wood Test U n i t 4 Test U n i t 5 9.8 x 6.1 x 0.4
F i 1t e r s (AZ-80) (AZ-80) (3.5 x 2.2 x 0.2)

11 Metal Test U n i t 4 None 15 x 7.3 x 2.4

F i 1t e r s (AZ-80) (8.4 x 6.8 x 3.6)

12 Metal Test U n i t 1 Test U n i t 2 9.5 x 4.2 x 0.4

Filters (1600) ( 1600) (4.4 x 1.8 x 0.8)

13 Type 2 Test U n i t 4 None 25 x 5.9 x 1.3

(AZ-80) ( 2 0 x 3.5 x 1.1)

14 Type 2 Test U n i t 4 Test U n i t 7 1 0 ' x 3.2 x 0.8

(AZ-80) (52-32) (4.8 x 1.4 x 0.6)

15 Type 2 Test U n i t 1 Test l l n i t 2 20 x 3.7 x 0.8

( 1600) ( 1600) ( 1 1 x 1.7 x 0.6)

(a) Numbers i n p a r e n t h e s i s are s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s o f 30 o r more p i e c e s .

 The e f f e c t s o f c u t t e r c o n f i g u r a t i o n on shredded fragment s i z e i s r e a d i l y
apparent i n GPT samples 1 and 2 ( r e f e r t o Table 12). The l e n g t h o f t h e average
fragment was 52 cm u s i n g shredder u n i t 1 which had a s i n g l e t o o t h wheel and t h e
l e n g t h was reduced t o 22 cm u s i n g u n i t 3 which had t h r e e t e e t h per wheel. The
average w i d t h o f sample 1 was 13 cm and f o r sample 2 was 5.5 cm, corresponding

.- c l o s e l y w i t h t h e c u t widths o f 10.2 and 4.7 cm f o r t h e r e s p e c t i v e shredders.

Shredding t h e waste through a second stage reduces both t h e mean fragment

r., s i z e as w e l l as t h e standard d e v i a t i o n of t h e waste size. The GPT Sam~
(see Table 12) which was processed by both shredder u n i t s 2 and 6, had
average fragment s i z e of 15 x 3.4 x 0.2 cm, which i s s i g n i f i c a n t l y smaller than
t h e GPT pieces produced by one-stage shredding (samples 1 and 2).

During t h e i n i t i a l shredding of t h e SAC wastes, i t became apparent t h a t

some of t h e l o n g narrow pieces o f wood and metal were standing on end and
dropping through t h e shredder c u t t e r s w i t h o u t adequate shredding.
F i g u r e 10
shows some o f these pieces a f t e r processing by t e s t u n i t 1 which had a 2+2+2
configuration. S i m i l a r l o n g pieces were a l s o observed a f t e r shredding by t e s t
u n i t 4 which a l s o had a 2+2+2 configuration. Upon shredding t h e SAC through a
second stage, t h e fragment s i z e was reduced such t h a t t h e average l e n g t h ranged

FIGURE 10. Larger Metal and Wood Pieces of SAC Waste a f t e r

Shredding by Test U n i t 1
.
from 7.8 t o 29 cm long. The smallest s i z e shredded SAC waste was produced by
t e s t u n i t 7 which had a 1+1+1s i n g l e s p i r a l c o n f i g u r a t i o n and two c u t t e r t e e t h
per wheel.

The wood-framed HEPA f i l t e r s were reduced q u i t e n i c e l y by a s i n g l e stage

o f shredding (Table 12 samples 7 and 8). The frames were made o f e i t h e r p l y - .
wood or pressed wood, which tended t o f r a c t u r e i n t o s h o r t e r pieces than wooden .
boards present i n t h e GPT, SAC and Type 2 waste materials. Second stage shred-
d i n g by t e s t u n i t s 5 o r 6 reduced t h e mean fragment l e n g t h t o between 7.3 and .4

9.8 cm. Figure 11 shows wooden HEPAs a f t e r shredding by t e s t u n i t 1 and a f t e r

dual shredding by both t e s t u n i t s 1 and 6 (samples'7 and 9 i n Table 12).

FIGURE 11. Wood Framed HEPA F i 1t e r s Processed by (a) Sing1 e Stage Shredding
(Test U n i t 1) and ( b ) Dual Stage Shredding (Test U n i t s 1 and 6)
 Upon shredding, p i e c e s o f metal -framed HEPA f i l t e r s w i l l remain b a s i c a l l y
t h e same s i z e through subsequent i n c i n e r a t i o n and cementation processes because
85% o f t h e f i l t e r s a r e noncombustible. I t i s important, t h e r e f o r e , t o reduce
t h e fragment s i z e by shredding t o t h a t which i s acceptable by b o t h t h e i n c i n e -
r a t i o n and cementation processes. An acceptable s i z e f o r t h e cementation proc-
ess i s c u r r e n t l y undefined. Single-stage shredding o f metal-framed f i l t e r s by
t e s t u n i t 4 produced a p r o d u c t w i t h an average l e n g t h of 15 cm (sample 11
Table 12). Dual shredding by u n i t s 1 and 2 r e s u l t e d i n a smaller mean fragment
l e n g t h of 9.5 cm (sample 12 Table 12).

Two stages of shredding makes t h e p a r t i c l e s i z e more u n i f o r m as i n d i c a t e d

by t h e standard d e v i a t i o n of t h e p a r t i c l e s i z e s o f t h e Type 2 waste m a t e r i a l
(see Table 12 samples 13, 14 and 15). One stage o f shredding by t e s t u n i t 4
r e s u l t e d i n an average fragment l e n g t h o f 25 (220) cm. Dual shredding w i t h
t e s t u n i t s 4 and 7 produced a fragment l e n g t h o f 10 (f4.8) cm and dual shred-
d i n g w i t h u n i t s 1 and 2 produced a fragment l e n g t h of 20 (211) cm. Ry u s i n g
two stages of shredding, t h e standard d e v i a t i o n of t h e p a r t i c l e l e n g t h was
reduced t o about 112 of t h e average length. T h i s occurs because t h e l o n g e r
pieces which a r e produced d u r i n g t h e f i r s t shred t e n d t o l i e down f l a t i n t h e
hopper d u r i n g t h e second stage shred and a r e segmented i n t o m u l t i p l e s h o r t
1 engths.
INCINERATOR TESTS
 INCINERATOR TESTS

Three i n c i n e r a t o r s , t h e e l e c t r i c a l l y heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r , gas-heated

controlled-air, and gas-heated r o t a r y k i l n were t e s t e d u s i n g s i m u l a t e d TRU
waste com positions ( r e f e r t o Table 4). The o b j e c t i v e s of t h e t e s t s were t o :

Confirm t h a t i n c i n e r a t i o n can be used t o e f f e c t i v e l y process simu-

1a t e d commerci a1 TRU waste.

Generate a low-carbon ash and r e s i d u e f o r p r o d u c t c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n

t e s t s and f o l low-on cement immobil i z a t i o n t e s t s .

Evaluate t h e process f o r a d a p t a b i l i t y t o remote r a d i o a c t i v e opera-

t i o n s and i d e n t i f y p o t e n t i a1 process problems.

S e l e c t a r e f e r e n c e i n c i n e r a t o r system f o r f u r t h e r t e s t i n g and
devel opment .
T e s t i n g o f t h e e l e c t r i c a l l y heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r , gas-heated c o n t r o l l e d -
a i r , and r o t a r y k i l n i n c i n e r a t o r s was performed by o f f - s i t e c o n t r a c t o r s . Each
i n c i n e r a t o r was operated f o r two t e s t p e r i o d s ; one w i t h average (Type 1) and
t h e o t h e r w i t h d i f f i c u l t (Type ZA, B o r C) i n c i n e r a t o r feed. Incineration
parameters were s e l e c t e d t o y i e l d t h e most complete combustion, p r o d u c i n g a
low-carbon ash. The i n t e n t of t h e s e t e s t s was n o t t o o p t i m i z e t h e process, b u t
r a t h e r t o c o n f i r m t h a t t h e techno1 ogy i s appl i c a h l e f o r commerci a1 l y generated
TRU wastes. Follow-on t e s t s w i l l be r e q u i r e d f o r process o p t i m i z a t i o n .

A l l s i m u l a t e d wastes were preshredded f o r t h e t e s t s as d e s c r i b e d p r e v i -

o u s l y i n t h e Shredder Tests s e c t i o n . A p o r t i o n o f t h e wastes were shredded
- t w i c e u s i n g s i m i l a r s i z e d shredders t o reduce t h e mean p a r t i c l e s i z e o f t h e
i n c i n e r a t o r feed. Trace q u a n t i t i e s of Ce, Cs, Mo and Sr ( r e f e r t o Table 6)
were added t o t h e shredded waste t o f o l l o w t h e i r v o l a t i l i t y behavior d u r i n g
.
)
incineration.

O f f gases were analyzed i n t r i p l i c a t e d u r i n g f e e d i n g o f both t h e average

and d i f f i c u l t i n c i n e r a t o r feeds. Off-gas d a t a were taken i n accordance w i t h
€PA methods d e s c r i b e d i n 40 CFR P a r t 60. A summary o f t h e o f f - g a s analyses
t h a t were performed a r e l i s t e d below:
 Stack v e l o c i t y - EPA Method 1
Stack gas f l o w - EPA Method 2
C02, O2 and CO - EPA Method 3
Yoisture content - EPA Method 4
Particulate loading - EPA Method 5
NOx - EPA Method 7
SOx - EPA Method 8 o r combined Methods 5 and 8
CO - EPA Method 10 (Gas-Heated C o n t r o l l e d - A i r I n c i n e r a t o r t e s t o n l y )
C1' - Combined EPA Methods 5 and 8

llpoli c o m p l e t i o n o f t h e t e s t s , t h e i n c i n e r a t o r s u b c o n t r a c t o r s s u p p l i e d o f f - g a s
system samples and r e s i d u e p r o d u c t t o PNL f o r subsequent a n a l y s i s . A final
t e s t r e p o r t was a l s o p r e p a r e d by each subcontractor. These r e p o r t s c o n t a i n
incinerator specifications, off-gas a n a l y s i s r e s u l t s , a summary of t h e i n c i n -
e r a t o r o p e r a t i n g performance and a l o g o f a l l i n c i n e r a t o r o p e r a t i n g data.

The r e n a i n d e r of t h i s s e c t i o n c o n t a i n s a more d e t a i l e d d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e
t e s t equipment, p r o c e d l ~ r e , and r e s u l t s o f t h e t h r e e i n c i n e r a t i o n t e s t s .

--ELECTRICALLY HEATED CONTROLLED-AIR INCINERATOR

A p i l o t - s c a l e i n c i n e r a t o r manufactured and o p e r a t e d by S h i r c o , Inc. o f
D a l l a s , Texas, was used f o r t h i s t e s t . T h i s same u n i t was used e a r l i e r by SRL
d u r i n g development of t h e i r PWI process ( C h a r l e s w o r t h and Hi1 1 1985).

Eauioment D e s c r i o t i o n

The process equipment c o n s i s t s of a conveyor f e e d system, a p y r o l y s i s

chamber w i t h a moving conveyor, an a f t e r b u r n e r and a l i q u i d s c r u b system.
F i g u r e 1 2 s h o w a schematic of t h e S h i r c o p i l o t - s c a l e i n c i n e r a t i o n process
equipment and F i g u r e 13 shows a p i c t u r e of t h e t e s t u n i t .

The f e e d i n g conveyor c o n s i s t s of a hopper w i t h a v a r i a b l e speed conveyor

b e l t used t o meter t h e waste t o t h e i n c i n e r a t o r . Wastes d r o p o f f o f t h e b e l t
i n t o t h e f r o n t end of t h e p r i m a r y chamber t h r o u g h a s e a l e d f e e d chute, w i t h a
7.6 x 30.5 cm opening a t t h e i n l e t t o t h e i n c i n e r a t o r . Tho f e e d system d e s i g n
 W
.
Water

I
Off Gas
Secondary Chamber
4b
A
Spray
Feed Tower

Combustion Modules Discharge Module

bvk-
4 I Combustion Air
D

t
I

Primary Chamber
I

Lt Ash Hopper
I
Drain

FIGURE 12. E l e c t r i c a l l y Heated C o n t r o l 1ed-Ai r Test I n c i n e r a t o r Schematic

FIGURE 13. E l e c t r i c a l l y Heated C o n t r o l 1ed-Ai r Test I n c i n e r a t o r

41
a l l o w s t h e waste t o be dropped a t an even r a t e , u n i f o r m l y across t h e w i d t h o f
t h e conveyor b e l t i n t h e p r i m a r y chamber. During o p e r a t i o n , waste m a t e r i a l i s
f e d t o t h e i n c i n e r a t o r a t feed r a t e s up t o 10 kg/hr.

The p r i m a r y chamber used f o r p i l o t t e s t i n g i s a scaled-down model of

p r o d u c t i o n - s i z e furnaces ( r e f e r t o F i g u r e 5 f o r i n t e r n a l d e t a i l ) . It c o n s i s t s
o f a feed module, two combustion modules (zones) c o n t a i n i n g s i l i c o n c a r b i d e .
7

h e a t i n g elements, and a discharge module. H e a t i n g elements d e l i v e r up t o

20 KVA t o each of t h e two furnace zones and 20 KVA t o t h e secondary chamber. h

The p r i m a r y chamber has a s t e e l s k i n and measures 0.91 x 1.1 x 4.3 m.

A 41-cm wide conveyor b e l t woven of 315 SS w i r e i s used t o t r a n s p o r t t h e

waste m a t e r i a l f r o m t h e feed end t o t h e ash discharge end o f t h e i n c i n e r a t o r .
The be1 t w i d t h i s wider than t h e feed i n l e t p o r t , which p r e v e n t s waste from
f a l l i n g over t h e edge. The b e l t moves on a s e r i e s o f r o l l e r s , which have bear-
i n g s t h a t a r e s e r v i c e a b l e from t h e o u t s i d e .
The d r i v e r o l l e r i s powered by a
v a r i a b l e speed motor t h a t a l l o w s t h e waste r e s i d e n c e t i m e t o be c o n t r o l l e d f r o m
10 t o 60 minutes. A t t h e feed end of t h e i n c i n e r a t o r , t h e r e i s a p n e u m a t i c a l l y
operated b e l t - c e n t e r i n g mechanism t h a t i s s e t t o p i n c h t h e b e l t from t h e s i d e s
once every minute, a s s u r i n g t h a t t h e b e l t remains i n t h e c e n t e r o f t h e r o l l e r
system. The c e n t e r t o c e n t e r d i s t a n c e between t h e end r o l l e r s i s 3.35 m and
t h e e f f e c t i v e b e l t l e n g t h from t h e feed drop p o i n t t o t h e d i s c h a r g e end i s
3.05 m. Ash r e s i d u e f r o m t h e process discharges i n t o a sealed r e c t a n g u l a r
c r o s s - s e c t i o n hopper. The hopper i s f l a n g e d t o t h e f u r n a c e d i s c h a r g e c h u t e t o
p e r m i t ash removal.

The combustion gas f l o w through t h e system i s c o u n t e r - c u r r e n t t o t h e waste

m a t e r i a l flow. Combustion a i r i s p r o v i d e d t o t h e f u r n a c e e n d p l a t e by means o f
*
a p r e s s u r i z e d l i n e from an a i r compressor, w i t h f l o w r a t e measured by a v e r t i c a l
flowrneter. A i r s u p p l i e d by a c e n t r i f u g a l f a n i s i n j e c t e d through t h e p o r t s
a l o n g t h e furnace l e n g t h .
P y r o l y s i s products generated i n t h e p r i m a r y chamber d

pass through an e l e c t r i c i'nfrared secondary chamber where t h e y a r e combusterl a t

a nominal s e t p o i n t temperature of 980°C. Standard SPA gas sampling p o r t s a r e
l o c a t e d i n t h e secondary chamber exhaust. Emissions were sampled from t h e s e
p o r t s as d e s c r i b e d e a r l i e r .
 Combustion gases pass f r o m t h e secondary chamber t h r o u g h t h e i n s u l a t e d
o f f - g a s l i n e d i r e c t l y t o a v e n t u r i s c r u b b e r w h i c h q ~ l e n c h e st h e h o t o f f - g a s and
removes t h e p a r t i c u l a t e s . The gases t h e n pass i n t o t h e b o t t o m o f a s p r a y t o w e r
t h a t has t w o s p r a y n o z z l e s a x i a l l y l o c a t e d a t d i f f e r e n t h e i g h t s w i t h i n t h e
column. O f f - g a s e s e x i t t h r o u g h t h e t o p o f t h e c o l u q n i n t o a b l o w e r and o u t t h e
stack. The o f f - g a s system uses a f r e s h w a t e r s c r u b s o l u t i o n f o r b o t h t h e
v e n t u r i s c r u b b e r and t h e s p r a y t o w e r .

I n s t r u m e n t a t i o n and c o n t r o l s i n c l u d e i n d e p e n d e n t t e m p e r a t u r e c o n t r o l l e r s
f o r t h e h e a t e d zones and secondary chamber, t h e r m o c o u p l e s c o n n e c t e d t o a m u l t i -
p o i n t c h a r t r e c o r d e r and LED d i s p l a y t o m o n i t o r t h e t h e r m a l p r o f i l e i n t h e
incinerator. A1 so i n c l u d e d a r e b e l t speed c o n t r o l s and w a t t - h o u r m e t e r s t o
r e c o r d power consumption. The s c r u b b e r system i s i n s t r u m e n t e d w i t h w a t e r
f l o w m e t e r s f o r b o t h t h e v e n t u r i s c r u b b e r and s p r a y t o w e r .

T e s t Descr i ti on

D u r i n g a p r e l i m i n a r y shakedown o p e r a t i o n o f t h e p i l o t system, i t was f o u n d

t h a t due t o t h e l a r g e p a r t i c l e s i z e , t h e w a s t e w o u l d b r i d g e i n t h e f e e d c h u t e
and cause p l u g g i n g . 4s a r e s u l t , i t was n e c e s s a r y t o r e s h r e d t h e w a s t e mate-
r i a l t o a smaller size. The S a t u r n Shredder Company was c o n t r a c t e d t o r e p r o c -
ess t h e nonmetal w a s t e u s i n g a s h r e d d e r w i t h a 1.9 CQI c u t t e r wheel w i d t h ( t e s t
u n i t 6 T a b l e 10) and t o r e p r o c e s s t h e m e t a l - c o n t a i n i n g w a s t e b y a s h r e d d e r w i t h
a 3.8 cm w i d t h c u t t e r ( t e s t u n i t 7).

The r e s h r e d d e d w a s t e was b l e n d e d u s i n g a manual drum m i x e r . The a p p r o p r i -

a t e p e r c e n t a g e s of each waste component was p l a c e d i n t o a 303 L (80 g a l .) drum,
w h i c h was t h e n r o t a t e d s e v e r a l t i m e s t o o b t a i n a p a r t i a l mix. Tracer m a t e r i a l
was s l u r r i e d i n a b o u t 200 ml o f w a t e r and p o u r e d i n w i t h t h e w a s t e as i t was
b e i n g tumbled. The t u m b l i n g was c o n t i n u e d f o r s e v e r a l m i n u t e s , a f t e r w h i c h t h e
w a s t e was r e a d y f o r t h e i n c i n e r a t o r .

The S h i r c o p i l o t i n c i n e r a t o r r e q u i r e d a p p r o x i m a t e l y 45 m i n u t e s t o h e a t u p
t o p r o c e s s t e m p e r a t u r e s of 700°C i n Zone 1 and 870°C i n Zone 2. Temperature
s e t p o i n t s were t h e n s e l e c t e d on t h e panel mounted c o n t r o l l e r s f o r t h e d e s i r e d
f u r n a c e zone and a f t e r b u r n e r temperatures. When t h e f u r n a c e reached a p r e -
determined temperature, t h e gas scrubber water f l o w was t u r n e d on a l o n g w i t h
t h e induced d r a f t f a n t h a t exhausts t h e system.

S i m u l a t e d Type 1 waste m a t e r i a l ( r e f e r t o Table 5) was f e d a t r a t e s r a n g -

i n g from a p p r o x i m a t e l y 5 t o 9 k g / h r . The f e e d conveyor b e l t speed was s e t t o
obtain t h e desired feed rate. An o p e r a t o r m o n i t o r e d t h e conve,yor t o assure
t h a t t h e c o r r e c t amount o f m a t e r i a l was on each f l i g h t . This resulted i n a
c o n t i n u o u s and c o n s i s t e n t feed r a t e . E x c e s s i v e l y l a r g e p i e c e s o f metal o r
f a b r i c were p e r i o d i c a l l y encountered. Pieces t h a t were judged l a r g e enough t o
cause b r i d g i n g were s e p a r a t e d o u t and n o t f e d t o t h e i n c i n e r a t o r . The d i f f i -
c u l t t o i n c i n e r a t e Type 2A waste m a t e r i a l ( T a b l e 5) was f e d a t 6.9 k g / h r d u r i n g
t h e l a s t day of o p e r a t i o n .

Combustion a i r f o r o x i d a t i o n o f t h e waste s o l i d s i n t h e p r i m a r y combustion

chamber was i n p u t t h r o u g h end p o r t s as d e s c r i b e d p r e v i o u s l y . I n an a t t e m p t t o
decrease t h e f i x e d carbon c o n t e n t i n t h e ash, t h e combustion a i r f l o w was
i n c r e a s e d a t s e v e r a l i n t e r v a l s t h r o u g h t h e f i r s t day o f o p e r a t i o n . Due t o
l i m i t a t i o n s of t h e compressed a i r system, t h i s f l o w was l a t e r decreased and
a d d i t i o n a l a i r was added f r o m a blower t h r o u g h p o r t s i n t h e f u r n a c e s i d e .

It was n o t necessary t o add combustion a i r t o t h e secondary chamber d u r i n g

t h i s t e s t program. The a i r leakage i n t o t h e secondary chamber around i t s glow-
b a r s was s u f f i c i e n t t o s u s t a i n a complete combustion process. T h i s was based
upon r e s i d u a l oxygen measurements made down stream of t h e secondary combustion
chamber. For t h e p i l o t t e s t program, f u r n a c e d r a f t was measured i n t h e f u r n a c e
d i s c h a r g e module. To m i n i m i z e a i r i n - l e a k a g e and c o n t r o l t h e p y r o l y s i s p r o c -
ess, t h e exhaust system was a d j u s t e d t o e l i m i n a t e smoke emissions f r o m t h e
material feed i n l e t . T h i s was done by m a n u a l l y p o s i t i o n i n g t h e scrubber ven-
t u r i b u t t e r f l y damper. The s e t t i n g remained s u b s t a n t i a l l y c o n s t a n t f o r each
t e s t condition. Thus, t h e d r a f t was p r i m a r i l y a d j u s t e d w h i l e r e a c h i n g s t e a d y
s t a t e f o r each c o n d i t i o n . A t t h e end o f each of t h e d i f f e r e n t o p e r a t i n g con-
d i t i o n s , t h e e n t i r e ash hopper was emptied. The r e s i d u e was weighted and i t s
volume measured. A f t e r c o m p l e t i o n of f e e d i n g b o t h Type 1 and Type 2 wastes,
t h e i n c i n e r a t o r was a l l o w e d t o c o o l , was opened up, and r e s i d u a l ash and
r e s i d u e was removed.
 Operating data f o r t h e t h r e e i n c i n e r a t o r s t e s t e d are presented i n
Table 13. The e l e c t r i c a l l y heated c o n t r o l 1 e d - a i r u n i t was operated f o r f i v e
t e s t p e r i o d s (A-1 t h r o u g h A-5) u s i n g Type 1 waste m a t e r i a l and one t e s t p e r i o d
1

(A-6) u s i n g Type 2A waste m a t e r i a l . The i n c i n e r a t o r conveyor speed was

a d j u s t e d t o p r o v i d e a 0.5 h r r e s i d e n c e t i m e d u r i n g a l l t e s t p e r i o d s except A-5
i n , w h i c h i t was a d j u s t e d t o 1.0 h r . A t one p o i n t d u r i n g o p e r a t i o o , t h e d r i v e
r o l l e r began t o s l i p , c a u s i n g t h e conveyor t o stop. The conveyor was r e s t a r t e d
manually by a p p l y i n g a wrench t o t h e p i n c h r o l l e r shaft. The p r e s s u r e between

TABLE 13. I n c i n e r a t o r Operating Data Summary

- .
Temperature,
.. .
OC
Test Feed Feed Rate, Run Time, Residence P r i m a r y Chamber Secondary
Period Type kglhr hr Time, h r Feed End Mid S e c t i o n Exhaust Chamber

E l e c t r i c a l l y Heated C o n t r o l 1 ed-Ai r I n c i n e r a t o r
A- 1 1 8.7 13.9 0.5

Gas-Heated C o n t r o l l e d - A i r I n c i n e r a t o r
8- 1 1 66 7 .O 2.0 t o 9.0 --- 860( b, --- 980
(81) (59)
8-2 28 66 6.2 2.2 t o 8.2 --- 895(b) --- 980
(77) (34)

Rotary K i l n I n c i n e r a t o r
C-1 1 57 1.5 1.5 605 400 290 NA(C)
(45 (75) (30)
C-2 1 54 7.2 1.5 800 620 4.20 NA
(84) (83) (22

(a) Numbers i n p a r e n t h e s i s a r e s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s o f m u l t i p l e r e a d i n g s .
(b) Gas f i r e d c o n t r o l l e d - a i r i n c i n e r a t o r e q u i p p e d w i t h s i n g l e p r i m a r y zone.
(c) Not a p p l i c a b l e s i n c e r o t a r y k i l n i n c i n e r a t o r d i d n o t have a secondary chamber.
t h e d r i v e and p i n c h r o l l e r s was i n c r e a s e d which s o l v e d t h e s l i p p a g e problem.
C u r r e n t p r o d u c t i o n model i n c i n e r a t o r s o f t h i s design a r e equipped w i t h pneuma-
t i c c y l i n d e r s t h a t a u t o m a t i c a l l y m a i n t a i n t h e d e s i r e d p r e s s u r e between t h e
d r i v e and p i n c h r o l l e r s .

Temperatures d u r i n g t h e s e t e s t s averaged from 710 t o 770°C i n t h e zone

n e a r e s t t h e r e s i d u e d i s c h a r g e end and from 875 t o 880°C i n t h e zone n e a r e s t t h e
f e e d end. Although t h e system c o u l d o p e r a t e a t h i g h e r temperatures, t h e s e
ranges prevented m e l t i n g of g l a s s m a t e r i a l s i n t o t h e woven w i r e conveyor, which
would be d e t r i m e n t a l t o t h e continuous movement o f t h e conveyor. A t the p r i -
mary chamber exhaust p o r t , where t h e wastes a r e a c t i v e l y burning, temperatures
averaged up t o and above 970°C. Secondary chamber temperatures were lower,
r a n g i n g fr om 865 t o 940°C.

D u r i n g o p e r a t i o n , a small p o r t i o n o f t h e ash and r e s i d u e f e l l o f f t h e con-

veyor b e l t . Most of t h e i n c i n e r a t o r r e s i d u e was d i s c h a r g e d i n t o t h e ash hopper
w i t h o n l y 1.0 wt% r e m a i n i n g i n t h e p r i m a r y chamber.

Off-gas emission sampling, as d e s c r i b e d e a r l i e r , was performed i n t r i p l i -

c a t e d u r i n g f e e d i n g of b o t h waste types. The f u r n a c e system was operated u n t i l
a steady s t a t e c o n d i t i o n was achieved b e f o r e sampling was i n i t i a t e d . 4s sev-
e r a l d i f f e r e n t s e t s of o p e r a t i n g ' parameters were t e s t e d d u r i n g f e e d i n g o f
Type 1 waste, environmental samples were taken d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d thought t o be
p r o d u c i n g t h e l o w e s t carbon ash.

GAS-HEATED CONTROLLED-AIR INCINERATOR

The gas-heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r i n c i n e r a t o r t e s t e d i s a p r o d u c t i o n model

500-TE manufactured by Ecol a i r Environmental C o n t r o l Products (ECP), Inc. o f
Charlotte, North Carolina. The t e s t u n i t i s owned by Bowman Gray School o f
Medicine i n Winston-Salem, North C a r o l i n a and i s used f o r d i s p o s i n g o f patho-
l o g i c a l wastes. The i n c i n e r a t o r i s of a r e c e n t design, f a b r i c a t e d i n 1983, and
f i r s t p u t i n t o o p e r a t i o n i n A p r i l of 1984. D e s c r i p t i o n s of t h e equipment and
t h e t e s t a r e presented i n t h e remainder o f t h i s s e c t i o n .
 The 500-TE u n i t i s a dual chamber i n c i n e r a t o r heated by e i t h e r d i e s e l f u e l
o r n a t u r a l gas. It i s designed f o r semicontinuous (ram) f e e d i n g and b a t c h ash
d i s c h a r g e (continuous ash d i s c h a r g e model s a r e a v a i l a b l e ) . It has a r a t e d
c a p a c i t y o f 180 kg/hr f o r p a t h o l o g i c a l wastes. A schematic o f t h e system i s
I. shown i n F i g u r e 14 and a p i c t u r e i s presented i n F i g u r e 15. The u n i t i s equip-
ped w i t h a h y d r a u l i c system which powers a ram feeder, a r e f r a c t o r y - f a c e d
g u i l l o t i n e charge door, an ash d i s c h a r g e ram, and an ash s l i d e gate.
8
Both p r i m a r y and secondary chambers a r e l i n e d w i t h r e f r a c t o r y b r i c k and
c o n t a i n s dual f u e l burners. There a r e two a i r blowers a s s o c i a t e d w i t h each
chamber; one p r o v i d e s a i r t o t h e gas burner and t h e second p r o v i d e s combustion
a i r t o o x i d i z e t h e wastes. The blowers and t h e burners a l l operate automat-
i c a l l y t o m a i n t a i n t h e d e s i r e d temperature and t o c o n t r o l t h e a i r balance
w i t h i n t h e i n c i n e r a t o r d u r i n g t h e feed cycle. The gas r e s i d e n c e t i m e i s
approximately 11 seconds i n t h e p r i m a r y chamber and two seconds i n t h e secon-
d a r y chamber.

The i n c i n e r a t o r i s n o t equipped wi t h an o f f -ga tment system f o r a i r

p o l l u t i o n c o n t r o l , as i t meets t h e
..
existing Federal ion Code w i t h o u t o f f -
gas treatment. Two p o r t s were placed on t h e stack t o perrn i t environmental
a n a l y s i s o f t h e o f f gas d u r i n g t h e t e s t . No blower i s usc?d t o remove t h e o f f
gases because n a t u r a l convection p r o v i d e s t h e d r a f t

The i n c i n e r a t o r i s equipped w i t h a c o n t r o l sys~ttrnL I I ~ ~ p e r m l ~ se l t h e r

automatic o r manual operai To begin t h e automa zd c y c l e , t h e waste i s
dropped i n t o a ram charge area and t h e t o p door c l o The charge door i n t o
t h e i n c i n e r a l:or then opens, t h e ram pu shes t h e waste m a t e r i a l i n t o t h e i n c i n -
*
e r a t o r chambc:r and p a r t i a l l y r e t: r a c t s t o a1 1 ow t h e charge door t o c l ose, a
water spray ( he ram and i t: r e t u r n s t o ii t s o r i g i n a l I3 o s i t i aIn, and t h e t o p
. door o pens t c t t h e Ivext wa~ s t edrop. Tkr i s f e e d cyclcz takes about one
- -

m i n u t e t o complete. The p r i m a r y chamber burner a u t o m a t i c a l l y sh~ u t so f f w h i l e

t h e g u i l l o t i n e door i s open t o p r e v e n t smoke from e x i t i n g t h e op)en charge door.
 I I
Off Gas
Sample
I fI Stack

---------
Secondary Chamber

Ram Primary Chamber

Feeder

-Slide Gate Assemblv

Underfire
Combustion

FIGURE 14. Gas-Heated Controlled-Air Test I n c i n e r a t o r Schematic

FIGURE 15. Gas-heated Control 1 ed-Air Test I n c i n e r a t o r

48
 Test D e s c r i p t i o n

P r i o r t o t e s t i n g , t h e i n c i n e r a t o r was cleaned out, w i t h a l l ash from p r i o r

i n c i n e r a t i o n s removed. As t h e i n c i n e r a t o r had been used f o r some wastes t h a t
c o n t a i n e d s h o r t 1 i v e d low-1 eve1 r a d i o i s o t o p e s (1 i q u i d s c i n t i l l a t i o n v i a l s ,
animals w i t h microspheres, etc.), i t was checked f o r b o t h gamma and b e t a con-
tamination. A survey o f t h e p r i m a r y chamber and e n t r a n c e t o t h e secondary
chamber showed t h a t no r a d i a t i o n above background was p r e s e n t .

The f e e d m a t e r i a l s were loaded i n t o cardboard boxes t h a t measured 42 x

42 x 52 cm and had a t a r e weight o f 0.91 kg. Compositions f o r Type 1 and
Type 2B wastes were t e s t e d (see Table 5). Because t h e i n c i n e r a t o r was charged
batchwise, i t was judged l e s s i m p o r t a n t f o r t h e wastes t o be i n t i m a t e l y mixed
as t h e y were d u r i n g t h e e l e c t r i c a l l y heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r t e s t s . As a r e s u l t ,
t h e shredded wastes were loaded i n t o t h e cardboard boxes w i t h o u t mixing. Trace
elements were s l u r r i e d w i t h a p p r o x i m a t e l y 200 m l of water and were poured on
t o p of t h e Type 1 wastes.

The i n c i n e r a t o r was s t a r t e d up and a l l o w e d t o warm up f o r a p e r i o d o f

45 minutes t o 60 minutes b e f o r e f e e d i n g was i n i t i a t e d . Boxes o f waste w i t h a
n e t weight of 15 kg each were charged t o t h e i n c i n e r a t o r every 15 minutes dur-
i n g each o f t h e two t e s t periods. Ash and r e s i d u e was a l l o w e d t o accumulate i n
t h e p r i m a r y chamber u n t i l completion o f each run.
A f t e r each f e e d p e r i o d was
completed, an a u t o m a t i c two-hour shut-down sequence was i n i t i a t e d . The i n c i n -
e r a t o r was m a i n t a i n e d a t o p e r a t i n g temperatures d u r i n g t h i s p e r i o d t o ensure
t h a t t h e l a s t waste charged was c o m p l e t e l y combusted.

The gas-heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r i n c i n e r a t o r was operated d u r i n g t e s t p e r i o d s

- B-1 and B-2 as shown p r e v i o u s l y i n Table 13. The r e s i d e n c e t i m e f o r t h e waste
charges ranged from 2 t o 9 hours w i t h Type 1 waste and 2.2 t o 8.2 w i t h Type 2B
waste. The v a r i a b l e r e s i d e n c e t i m e i s due t o t h e semicontinuous f e e d i n g and
t h e batch mode of ash removal, i n which a l l r e s i d u e remains i n t h e p r i m a r y
chamber u n t i l a f t e r t h e i n c i n e r a t i o n burn i s completed.

A t one p o i n t d u r i n g f e e d i n g of Type 1 m a t e r i a l , a c i r c u i t breaker t r i p p e d

on one of t h e automatic c o n t r o l c i r c u i t s and had t o be r e s e t . This caused t h e
i n c i n e r a t o r t o momentarily s h u t down. Upon i n i t i a t i n g t h e a u t o s t a r t sequence,
t h e s t a c k smoked f o r about 2 mi nutes u n t i l t h e burners and combustion a i r blow-
e r s were on and o p e r a t i n g normally. The smoking c o n d i t i o n c o u l d have been
prevented had t h e i n c i n e r a t o r been r e s t a r t e d manually.

Temperatures i n t h e p r i m a r y chamber of t h e gas-heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r

i n c i n e r a t o r averaged from 860 t o 895OC, e s s e n t i a l l y t h e same as i n t h e f e e d end
o f t h e e l e c t r i c a l l y heated u n i t (see Table 13). The secondary chamber was
m a i n t a i n e d somewhat h o t t e r , a t 980°C.

The i n c i n e r a t o r was a l l o w e d t o c o o l f o r a t l e a s t 36 h r a f t e r each t e s t

b e f o r e t h e r e s i d u e was removed. An access door on t h e end o f t h e p r i m a r y
chamber was opened so t h a t t h e ash removal process c o u l d be viewed. F i r s t the
ash s l i d e g a t e was opened and t h e n t h e a u t o m a t i c ash d i s c h a r g e ram was c y c l e d
several t i m e s t o d i s c h a r g e t h e r e s i d u e i n t o 208-L ( 5 5 g a l l o n ) b a r r e l s . The
s l i d e g a t e was a p p a r e n t l y warped and c o u l d o n l y be opened about h a l f way. This
caused some d i f f i c u l t y i n d i s c h a r g i n g t h e r e s i d u e , e s p e c i a l l y t h e l a r g e r pieces
of metal. A f t e r t h e a u t o m a t i c removal process was completed, t h e i n s i d e o f t h e
i n c i n e r a t o r was manually swept o u t t o remove a l l t h e r e m a i n i n g ash.

The ash d i s c h a r g e ram e f f e c t i v e l y removed 80 w t % of t h e i n c i n e r a t o r r e s i -

due a f t e r t e s t i n g ; however, t h e r e m a i n i n g 20% had t o be removed manually. The
removal e f f i c i e n c y c o u l d be i n c r e a s e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y by u s i n g an a1 t e r n a t e
p r i m a r y chamber design. The t e s t i n c i n e r a t o r had a r o u n d i n g bottom t h a t per-
m i t t e d t h e r e s i d u e t o remain on t h e sloped w a l l s a f t e r t h e d i s c h a r g e ram was
cycled. E c o l a i r has manufactured p r i m a r y chambers w i t h a f l a t bottom and
square side s, which would p e r m i t much b e t t e r d i s c h a r g e e f f i c i e n c i e s t h a n
experienced w i t h t h e t e s t u n i t .

ROTARY K I L N INCINERATOR

The r o t a r y k i l n i n c i n e r a t i o n system was b u i l t and o p e r a t e d by Colorado

School of Mines Research I n s t i t u t e (CSMRI) i n Golden, Colorado. This i s the
same t e s t u n i t used by INEL d u r i n g t h e r o t a r y - k i l n p r o o f - o f - p r i n c i p l e t e s t s
conducted p r i o r t o design of t h e PREPP i n c i n e r a t i o n system (tiedahl 1982a).
 The process equipment c o n s i s t s o f a ram f e e d u n i t , r o t a t i n g k i l n , c y c l o n e
d u s t separator w i t h spray quench, baghouse d u s t separator and a f i n a l induced-
d r a f t blower (see F i g u r e s 16 and 17). The ram f e e d system c o n s i s t s of a hopper
on t o p o f a 61-cm diameter ram s h a f t . The ram i s h y d r a u l i c a l l y d r i v e n and has
#

Stack
A
Gas Sampling
Waste Bag
House
Gas
End Hood Burner End Hood

Ram Off Gas Cyclone

Feeder - .. - --I
Rotary Kiln

Quench
Collection

Incineration Cyclone Baghouse

Residue Dust Dust

FIGURE 16. R o t a r y - K i l n Test I n c i n e r a t o r Schematic

FIGURE 17. Rotary-Ki 1n Test I n c i n e r a t o r

51
a s t r o k e o f 2.3 m. The r o t a r y k i l n i n c i n e r a t o r has a 0.91-m ( 3 f t ) ID, a
1.2-m ( 4 f t ) OD, a 9.1-m (30 f t ) e f f e c t i v e l e n g t h , and a 10.7-111 ( 3 5 f t ) a c t u a l
length. The k i l n i s o p e r a t e d i n a c o n c u r r e n t g a s - f i r i n g mode w i t h an 0.8O
slope. The k i l n d r i v e uses a c h a i n - d r i v e n r i n g s p r o c k e t and a v a r i b l e - s p e e d
drive unit. The r o t a t i o n a l speed o f t h e k i l n i s a d j u s t a b l e f r o m a p p r o x i m a t e l y
*
0.5 t o 3 rpm, b u t was o p e r a t e d a t 1 rpm f o r t h e t e s t . The k i l n i s s u p p o r t e d by
f i v e sets o f r o l l e r s along i t s length. During operation, the i n c i n e r a t o r
r e s i d u e i s d i s c h a r g e d from t h e k i l n i n t o a r e f r a c t o r y - l i n e d end h o u s i n g where L
i t drops i n t o a 208 L ( 5 5 g a l l o n ) drum.

Temperatures i n s i d e t h e k i l n a r e m o n i t o r e d a t f i v e l o c a t i o n s u s i n g thermo-
couples. A p a i r of c o n t i n u o u s copper r i n g s mounted around t h e k i l n and a p a i r
of g r a p h i t e c o n t a c t s mounted on t h e s u p p o r t s t r u c t u r e a r e used t o t r a n s m i t t h e
thermocouple s i g n a l from each sensor on t h e moving k i l n t o a t e m p e r a t u r e
recorder .
The burner system c o n s i s t s of a 7.6-cm main burner and a 5.1-cm pilot
burner w i t h n a t u r a l gas as f u e l . 80th b u r n e r s a r e p o s i t i o n e d a t t h e f e e d end
of t h e i n c i n e r a t o r above t h e ram feeder tube. The p o s i t i o n o f t h e p i l o t burner
t i p i s l o c a t e d below and b e h i n d t h e main b u r n e r t i p , c r o s s i n g a t an a n g l e t o
t h e a x i s of t h e main burner. The burner gas f l o w r a t e s a r e c o n t r o l l e d manu-
a l l y , however a u t o m a t i c systems a r e a v a i l a b l e .

O f f gases e x i t from t h e end of t h e k i l n i n t o a 0.91-m diameter by 1.52-m

t a l l cyclone. Gases a r e t h e n r o u t e d t h r o u g h a 0.61-m diameter by 11.3-m long
p i p e t h a t i s used f o r e f f l u e n t sampling. Gases t h e n pass v e r t i c a l l y t h r o u g h a
water quench s e c t i o n of p i p e and i n t o a baghouse. nuring operation, t h e r e s i -
due f r o m t h e c y c l o n e and f r o m t h e baghouse i s dropped i n t o 208-L ( 5 5 g a l ) .
drums. The baghouse c o n t a i n s 36 n y l o n bags t h a t a r e 3 . 7 4 l o n g and 11-cm
diameter. It i s equipped w i t h a p u l s e a i r blow-back system f o r p e r i o d i c
u n l o a d i n g of t h e f i l t e r s . Cleaned gases t h e n pass t h r o u g h an i n d u c e d - d r a f t
-
blower and t o t h e s t a

Test D e s c r i ti on

The r o t a r y k i l n was preheated f o r 4.75 h r u s i n g t h e main and p i l o t b u r n e r s

p r i o r t o t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n of Type 1 f e e d waste m a t e r i a l . The t e m p e r a t u r e a t
 t h e s t a r t o f f e e d i n g was 550°C near t h e burner end o f t h e k i l n . The tempera-
t u r e o f t h e e n t i r e k i l n r o s e s t e a d i l y t o 927OC d u r i n g t h e t e s t due t o t h e
a d d i t i o n a l h e a t i n p u t o f t h e c o m b u s t i b l e waste. The k i l n was fed t h e Type 1
waste m a t e r i a l b a t c h w i s e e v e r y 10 minutes. The waste was l o a d e d d i r e c t l y i n t o
t h e c h a r g i n g c h u t e w i t h o u t u s i n g a box as was done d u r i n g t h e gas-heated
controlled-air incinerator test. A f e e d r a t e o f 80 k g l h r was t r i e d f o r t h e
f i r s t two b a t c h charges b u t was t h e n reduced t o 54 k g l h r a f t e r e x c e s s i v e smoke,
flame o u t of t h e p r i m a r y b u r n e r , and minor d r a f t f l u c t u a t i o n s were observed.
The system e f f e c t i v e l y handled t h e 54 k g / h r feed r a t e (batches o f 9 k g e v e r y
10 m i n ) . Each b a t c h was prepared by w e i g h i n g o u t t h e c o r r e c t amounts o f waste
m a t e r i a l ( r e f e r t o Table 5 ) i n t h e ram c y l i n d e r , p o u r i n g t h e t r a c e r ( s l u r r i e d
w i t h a p p r o x i m a t e l y 200 m l o f w a t e r ) over t h e batch, and t h e n a c t i v a t i n g t h e
p l u n g e r t o charge t h e b a t c h i n t o t h e k i l n .

The k i l n and c y c l o n e p r o d u c t s from Test 1 were c o l l e c t e d a t two d i f f e r e n t

t i m e s d u r i n g t h e t e s t ( p e r i o d s C - 1 and C-2 Table 1 3 ) . The f i r s t c o l l e c t i o n was
made f o l l o w i n g 3 h r of f e e d i n g i n o r d e r t o a l l o w o b s e r v a t i o n o f t h e products.
The p r o d u c t f r o m t h e f i r s t p e r i o d r e p r e s e n t e d feed f o r t h e f i r s t 1.5 h r because
r e s i d e n c e t i m e was measured a t 1.5 h r ( t i m e r e q u i r e d f o r waste t o t r a v e l t h e
l e n g t h of t h e k i l n ) . The p r o d u c t f r o m t h e remainder o f t h e Test 1 was c o l l e c -
t e d c o n t i n u o u s l y d u r i n g t h e balance of t h e t e s t and d u r i n g t h e k i l n d r a i n
period.

The procedure f o r f e e d i n g Type 2C waste ( t e s t p e r i o d C-3) was s i m i l a r t o

t h e t e s t procedure f o l l o w e d f o r t h e Type 1 t e s t i n g e x c e p t t h a t t h e k i l n was
heated f o r over 7.7 h r p r i o r t o i n i t i a l feeding. The k i l n was f e d t h e Type 2C
waste i n 11.3 kg bdtches e v e r y 10 min r e s u l t i n g i n a f e e d r a t e o f 68 k g l h r .
*

The k i l n t e m p e r a t u r e a t t h e s t a r t of feed of Type 2C was 555°C near t h e

b u r n e r end o f t h e k i l n . Due t o t h e l o n g e r p r e h e a t i n g p e r i o d , t h e t e m p e r a t u r e s
*
d were a p p r o x i m a t e l y 170°C h o t t e r f u r t h e r down t h e k i l n t h a n f o r t h e p r e v i o u s
startup. The i n c i n e r a t o r system temperatures a l l began t o r i s e s t e a d i l y as
soon as feed was i n t r o d u c e d t o t h e system. Temperatures d u r i n g t h e l a t t e r
p o r t i o n o f t h i s t e s t approached 980°C near t h e f e e d end o f t h e k i l n ( r e f e r t o
Table 1 3 f o r average k i l n t e m p e r a t u r e s ) .
 D u r i n g b o t h t e s t s , t h e k i l n t e m p e r a t u r e p r o f i l e was l o g g e d c o n t i n u o u s l y on
a s t r i p c h a r t r e c o r d e r w h i l e p r e s s u r e s and o t h e r o p e r a t i n g d a t a were r e c o r d e d
a p p r o x i m a t e l y e v e r y one h a l f hour on a l o g sheet. The o b j e c t i v e was t o r e a c h a
s t e a d y - s t a t e t e m p e r a t u r e ; however, due t o t h e r e l a t i v e l y s h o r t d u r a t i o n o f t h e
t e s t s , t h e k i l n t e m p e r a t u r e s were s t i l l c l i m b i n g a t t h e end o f each t e s t .

The ram f e e d system and k i l n d r i v e system p e r f o r m e d w e l l d u r i n g a l l t e s t

p e r i o d s . The k i l n o p e r a t i o n c o u l d be i m p r o v e d by i n c r e a s i n g t h e b u r n e r s i z e i n
t h e p r i m a r y chambers t o f a c i l i t a t e a f a s t e r warm-up c y c l e . Also, t h e s y s t e m
s h o u l d be b u i l t t i g h t e r t o p e r m i t b e t t e r c o n t r o l o v e r t h e c o m b u s t i o n a i r f l o w .

Upon c o m p l e t i o n o f each t e s t , t h e r e s i d u e , c y c l o n e p r o d u c t , and baghouse

p r o d u c t were c o l l e c t e d . Samples were a l s o t a k e n o f t h e quench l i q u i d . The
w e i g h t s and volumes of each p r o d u c t were a l s o measured.

TEST RESULTS

R e s u l t s o f t h e t h r e e i n c i n e r a t o r t e s t s a r e compared i n t h i s s e c t i o n . Data
p e r t a i n i n g t o r e s i d u e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , off-gas c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , and t r a c e e l e -
ment b e h a v i o r a r e p r e s e n t e d and discussed.

Residue C h a r a -c--t e r i s t i c s
----
Weight and volume r e d u c t i o n s a c h i e v e d d u r i n g t h e i n c i n e r a t o r t e s t p e r i o d s
a r e p r e s e n t e d i n T a b l e 14. Weights and volumes f o r t h e i n c i n e r a t o r r e s i d u e and
o f f - g a s p a r t i c u l a t e a r e a1 so p r e s e n t e d . The e l e c t r i c a l l y h e a t e d c o n t r o l 1 e d - a i r
i n c i n e r a t o r h a d t h e h i g h e s t a v e r a g e w e i g h t and volume r e d u c t i o n s (4.1 and 10.8,
r e s p e c t i v e l y ) w h i c h were n e a r l y d o u b l e t h o s e a c h i e v e d w i t h t h e gas-heated
c o n t r o l l e d - a i r and r o t a r y k i l n i n c i n e r a t o r s . These h i g h n e t r e d u c t i o n s a r e
somewhat m i s l e a d i n g and s h o u l d be l o w e r . A p o r t i o n o f t h e metal i n t h e elec-
t r i c a l l y h e a t e d i n c i n e r a t o r feed was s o r t e d o u t due t o l i m i t a t i o n s o f t h e
s h r e d d e r used f o r t h e a d d i t i o n a l f e e d s i z e r e d u c t i o n . Some m e t a l was a l s o
removed p r i o r t o t h e i n c i n e r a t i o n t e s t due t o t h e s i z e l i m i t a t i o n imposed b y
t h e i n c i n e r a t o r f e e d chute. Ry r e m o v i n g a f r a c t i o n o f t h e rnetal ( w h i c h does
n o t undergo w e i g h t o r volume r e d u c t i o n d u r i n g i n c i n e r a t i o n ) t h e a p p a r e n t r e d u c -
t i o n s i n c r e a s e as t h e y a r e more dependent on t h e c o m b u s t i b l e f r a c t i o n o f t h e
w a ~ t e . The r e s h r e d d i n g o p e r a t i o n a l s o i n c r e a s e d t h e p a c k i n g f a c t o r o f t h e
 TABLE 14. I n c i n e r a t o r Weight and Vol ume R e d u c t i o n s

I nci nerator Off-Gas ( b )

Test Feed Res i due Particulate Tota I Product Net Reduction
Period Wt, kq VOI,'~' L
- - - - - - - -
W t , kq Vol, L
Volume W t , Kq Vol, L Wt, kg Val, L Weiqht

E l e c t r i c a l l y Heated C o n t r o l led-Ai r I n c i n e r a t o r

A-1 8 2 129.3 580 35.8 84.9 0.28 1.40 36.1 86.3 3.6 6.7
A-3 122.5 549 27.2 37.4 0.26 1.30 27.5 38.7 4.5 14.2
A-4 79.4 356 14.5 14.6 0.17 0.85 14.7 15.5 5.4 23.0
A-5 18.1 81.2 5.1 4.7 0.04 0.20 5.1 4.9 3.5 16.5
A-6 59.0 258 15.4 22.4 0.15 0.75 15.6 3.8 11.1
- - - - - - -
23.2
- -
TOTAL A: 408 1824 98 164 0.9 4.5 99 169 4.1 10.8

Gas-Heated C o n t r o l led-Ai r I n c i n e r a t o r

TOTAL 8: 869 3330 380 503 18.3 91.5 398 59 5 2.2 5.6

Rotary K i l n Incinerator

C- 1 81.6 34 7 25.8") 33.4 5.63 28.2 31.4 61.6 2.6 5.6

C-2 402.8 1710 149.6") 148.0 27.8 139.0 177.4 287.0 2.3 6.0
C-3 294.8 989.0 108.9'~)
-
96.2
-
6.4
-
32.0 115.3 128.2
-
2.6
-
7.7

TOTAL C: 779 3046 284 278 39.8 199 324 477 2.4 6.4

(a) Volumes c a l c u l a t e d from feed d e n s i t i e s .

(b) Weights c a l c u l a t e d from o f f - q a s p a r t i c u l a t e loadinqs. Volumes c a l c u l a t e d u s i n g d e n s i t y o f 0.20 kq/L,
which i s measured d e n s i t y o f bag house p a r t i c u l a t e d u r i n q t e s t p e r i o d C-2.
(c) Rotary k i I n r e s i d u e w e i g h t i n c l u d e s w e i g h t o f c y c l o n e product.
metal noncombustibles, which f u r t h e r i n c r e a s e s t h e n e t volume r e d u c t i o n . The
average w e i g h t and volume r e d u c t i o n s measured d u r i n g t h e gas-heated c o n t r o l l e d -
a i r and r o t a r y k i l n i n c i n e r a t i o n t e s t s a r e a p p r o x i m a t e l y equal, as any d i f -
ferences a r e w i t h i n t h e standard d e v i a t i o n o f t h e data.

Table 15 p r e s e n t s t h e chemical a n a l y s i s o f t h e i n c i n e r a t o r ash. O f prime

i n t e r e s t i s t h e f a t e o f aluminum ( A l ) from t h e HEPA f i l t e r separators. The
presence o f A1 metal i n a cement waste form promotes an u n d e s i r a b l e h y d r o l y s i s
r e a c t i o n , which generates H2 gas. A s i g n i f i c a n t f r a c t i o n o f t h e ash i s A l ,
r a n g i n g from 11.7 wt% i n t h e e l e c t r i c a l l y heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r r e s i d u e t o

---TABLE 15. Chemical A n a l y s i s of I n c i n e r a t o r ~ s h ( ~ )

E l e c t r i c a l l y Heated Gas-Heated
El ement C o n t r o l l e d - A i r , wt% C o n t r o l l e d - A i r , wt4 R o t a r y K i 1 n, wt%
A1 15.0 37.7
B
Ba
Ca
Ce
Cr
Cs
Cu
Fe
K
Li
Yg
Mn
Mo
Ni
P
Pb
Si
Sr
Ti
Zn

(a) Numbers shown a r e average values o f t h r e e sample a n a l y s i s .

The noncombustible r e s i d u e ( i .e. m e t a l s , g l a s s , e t c . ) was
s e p a r a t e d f r o m t h e ash p r i o r t o a n a l y s i s . Cs was analyzed
by f l a m e atomic a b s o r p t i o n . A l l o t h e r elements were
analyzed by i n d u c t i v e l y coupled argon plasma atomic e m i s s i o n
spectroscopy.
37.7 wt% i n t h e r o t a r y k i l n r e s i d u e . None o f t h e i n c i n e r a t o r s e f f e c t i v e l y o x i -
d i zed t h e A1 as HC1 sol u b i l it y t e s t s r e v e a l e d t h a t over 95% i s i n t h e metal
form. Other elements which were predominent i n t h e i n c i n e r a t o r ash i n c l u d e B y
Ca, Fe, Si , and Zn. It i s l i k e l y t h a t t h e s e elements a r e p r e s e n t as oxides;
however, an a n a l y s i s o f chemical form was n o t made.

High c o n c e n t r a t i o n s o f unburned carbon i n t h e ash i s u n d e s i r a b l e , as t h e

a b i l i t y o f t h e r e s i d u e t o become w e t t e d i n t h e cementing process i s hinder ed.
The i n c i n e r a t o r ash carbon c o n t e n t shown i n Table 16, was l o w e s t a t 1.9 w t % f o r
t h e gas-heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r i n c i n e r a t o r , p r o b a b l y due t o t h e prolonged r e s i -
dence t i m e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of t h i s u n i t . No carbon a n a l y s i s was performed on
t h e o f f - g a s f i l t e r p a r t i c u l a t e c o l l e c t e d d u r i n g t h i s t e s t due t o t h e small s i z e
of sample. Ash from t h e e l e c t r i c a l l y heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r i n c i n e r a t o r t e s t
c o n t a i n e d t h e h i g l i e s t l e v e l of r e s i d u a l carbon a t 11.0 wt%. This i s probably
due t o t h e s h o r t r e s i d e n c e t i m e ( 4 . 5 h r ) used d u r i n g t h e t e s t period. The
carbon c o n t e n t of t h e off-gas p a r t i c u l a t e t h a t passed t h r o u g h t h e secondary
combustion chamber was lower a t 3.1 wt%. I n c i n e r a t o r r e s i d u e from t h e r o t a r y
k i l n ash c o n t a i n e d 6.7 w t % carbon w h i l e t h e o f f - g a s p a r t i c u l a t e c o n t a i n e d
29 w t % . The q u a n t i t y of unburned carbon i n t h e r o t a r y k i l n ash i s l i k e l y due
t o t h e lower o p e r a t i n g temperature of t h e k i l n compared t o t h a t o f t h e two
c o n t r o l l e d - a i r i n c i n e r a t o r s ( r e f e r t o Table 13). The tumbl i n g a c t i o n w i t h i n a
k i l n promotes entrainment of t h e l i g h t e r carbonaceous m a t e r i a l as i n d i c a t e d by
t h e e x t r e m e l y h i g h carbon c o n t e n t of t h e off-gas p a r t i c u l a t e . The carbon

TABLE 16. Residual Carbon A n a l y s i s o f I n c i n e r a t o r

Incinerator ' E l e c t r i c a l ly-Heated Gas-Heated Rotary

Product C o n t r o l 1 ed-Ai r, w t % C o n t r o l 1ed-Ai r, wt% K i 1 n, wt%
Ash 11.0 1.9 6.7

O f f -Gas
Particulate

(a) Numbers shown a r e average v a l u e s o f t h r e e sample a n a l y s i s . The non-

c o m b u s t i b l e r e s i d u e ( i .e. m e t a l s , g l a s s , etc.) was s e p a r a t e d f r o m t h e
ash p r i o r t o a n a l y s i s . Carbon a n a l y s i s was p e r f o r m e d by t h e r m a l
decomposi t o n and o x i d a t i o n o f t h e c a r b o n f o l 1 owed by gas chromatograph
analy;is f o r COj: ,
(b)
% ,
There was i n s u f i c l e n t sample on t h e o f f - g a s p a r t i c u l a t e f i l t e r s t o
perform carbon analysis.
c o n t e n t o f t h e o f f - g a s p a r t i c u l a t e would have been s u b s t a n t i a l l y l o w e r had t h e
r o t a r y k i 1n i n c i n e r a t o r been equipped w i t h a secondary combusti on chamber.

The ash r e s i d u e f r o m t h e e l e c t r i c a l l y heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r i n c i n e r a t o r

t e s t i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by small chunks o f c a r b o n i z e d wood as w e l l as chunks o f
unfused and f u s e d A l . Much of t h e unfused A1 remained w i t h t h e l a r g e r metal
f r a c t i o n when t h e ash was s e p a r a t e d from t h e metal. The r e s i d u e generated
d u r i n g t h e gas-heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r t e s t c o n t a i n e d c l i n k e r s o f f u s e d A1 and
fused g l a s s media from t h e HEPA f i l t e r s . R o t a r y k i l n r e s i d u e c o n t a i n e d t h e A1
c l i n k e r s b u t no s i g n i f i c a n t q u a n t i t i e s o f fused g l a s s f i l t e r media.

--
Off-Gas C h a r a c-t--e r i s t i c s

Off-gas a n a l y s e s were performed i n t r i p l i c a t e d u r i n g t e s t p e r i o d s A-4,

A-6, R-1, R-2, C-2 and C-3. Table 17 p r e s e n t s t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e s e analyses,
showing o f f - g a s f l o w , excess a i r , water vapor, gas c o m p o s i t i o n and n o r m a l i z e d
releases. Test p e r i o d s A-4, B-1 and C-2 w i l l be used f o r purposes o f comparing
t h e t h r e e i n c i n e r a t o r s because a l l t h r e e t e s t p e r i o d s used a cornmon Type 1
waste m a t e r i a l . The o t h e r t h r e e t e s t p e r i o d s (A-6, B-2 and C-3) cannot be used
f o r d i r e c t comparison s i n c e t h e Type 2 feed c o m p o s i t i o n was d i f f e r e n t f o r each
period.

The n o r m a l i z e d off-gas f l o w d u r i n g t h e e l e c t r i c a l l y heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r

t e s t ranged f r o m 10 t o 12 dscrnlkg of waste feed. The f l o w d u r i n g t e s t i n g o f
t h e gas-heated u n i t was t h r e e t i m e s h i g h e r , r a n g i n g f r o m 32 t o 36 dscm/kg due
t o t h e a d d i t i o n a l gases i n t r o d u c e d by t h e gas burners. Flows were h i g h e s t a t
75 t o 93 dscmlkg d u r i n g t h e gas-heated r o t a r y k i l n t e s t s . Excess a i r was
l o w e s t f o r t h e gas-heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r i ~ c i n e r a t o r (138% excess a i r f o r t e s t
period R-1) as i t was equipped w i t h t h e most automated b u r n e r and combustion
a i r c o n t r o l system. The l o w e r O2 c o n c e n t r a t i o n and h i g h e r CO? and water vapor
c o n c e n t r a t i o n s ( s e e T a b l e 17) d u r i n g p e r i o d R - 1 c o r r e l a t e w i t h t h e l o w e r excess
a i r l e v e l d u r i n g t h i s period. The CO l e v e l was l e s s t h a n fl.1 v o l % d u r i n g b o t h
c o n t r o l l e d - a i r t e s t s ; however, t h e CO averaged 0.57 v o l % d u r i n g o p e r a t i o n o f
t h e r o t a r y k i l n ( p e r i o d C-2) p r i m a r i l y because t h e k i l n was n o t equipped w i t h a
secondary combustion chamber.
 TABLE 17. I n c i n e r a t o r T e s t Off-Gas C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s

Gas Composition, Normalized Release,

Test Feed Off-Gas Flow d r y vo 1 $ g/kg Waste
Excess Water
--
P e r i o d Type dscm/kg Air, % Vapor, $ 4 c% CO CI - s% P a r t i cu I a t e

E l e c t r i c a l l y Heated C o n t r o l l e d - A i r Incinerator

Gas-Heated C o n t r o l l e d - A i r I n c i n e r a t o r

Rotary K i l n I n c i n e r a t o r

(a) Dry Standard Cubic Meters per kg o f waste feed.

(b) Numbers i n parenthesis are standard d e v i a t i o n s of t h r e e o r more samples.
 Normalized r e l e a s e d a t a f o r C1-, SO2, NOx and p a r t i c u l a t e , expressed as
g/kg waste, a r e p r e s e n t e d i n t h e l a s t f o u r columns o f T a b l e 16. The C1-
r e l e a s e s were s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r d u r i n g t h e gas-heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r i n c i n -
e r a t i o n t e s t s as were t h e S O p and NOx r e l e a s e s d u r i n g t h e r o t a r y k i l n t e s t -
ing. Reasons f o r t h i s b e h a v i o r a r e n o t r e a d i l y apparent. P a r t i c u l a t e releases
were l o w e s t a t 2.2 g / k g waste d u r i n g t h e e l e c t r i c a l l y h e a t e d c o n t r o l l e d - a i r
t e s t , were somewhat h i g h e r a t 13.9 g/kg d u r i n g t h e gas-heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r
i n c i n e r a t o r t e s t , and were h i g h e s t a t 69 g/kg d u r i n g t h e r o t a r y k i l n t e s t . Low
p a r t i c l e r e l e a s e s d u r i n g t h e e l e c t r i c a l l y heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r i n c i n e r a t o r
t e s t s a r e a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e l o w l e v e l of t u r b u l e n c e i n t h e p r i m a r y chamber.
A d d i t i o n a l gas f l o w and t u r b u l e n c e generated by t h e gas b u r n e r i n t h e gas-
heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r i n c i n e r a t o r i s b e l i e v e d t o be r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e h i g h e r
p a r t i c u l a t e release. The h i g h e s t r e l e a s e a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e r o t a r y k i l n i s
a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e r o t a t i n g a c t i o n of t h e k i l n i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h t h e i n c r e a s e d
gas f l o w i n t r o d u c e d by t h e gas b u r n e r system.

Trace Element Rehavi o r

--- -7

The d i s t r i b u t i o n of t r a c e elements i n t h e i n c i n e r a t o r p r o d u c t and o f f - g a s

p a r t i c u l a t e i s p r e s e n t e d i n Table 18. Elements c o n s i d e r e d n o n v o l a t i l e (Ce and
S r ) a r e l i s t e d s e p a r a t e l y f r o m t h o s e t h a t have s e m i v o l a t i l e t e n d e n c i e s (Cs and
0). C o n c e n t r a t i o n s of t h e n o n v o l a t i l e Ce and Sr i n t h e ash and o f f - g a s p a r -
t i c u l a t e were averaged and used t o c a l c u l a t e t r a c e e l ement m a t e r i a1 ha1 ances
f o r t h e t e s t p e r i o d s A-4, B - 1 and C-2. The t o t a l t r a c e element m a t e r i a l
balance was l o w e s t a t 39% f o r t e s t p e r i o d A-4 b u t was much more r e a s o n a b l e a t
71% and 75% f o r t e s t p e r i o d s 9-1 and C-2, respectively. The h i g h unaccounta-
b i l i t y d u r i n g o p e r a t i o n o f t h e e l e c t r i c a l l y heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r i n c i n e r a t o r
i s n o t understood and t e n d s t o d i m i n i s h t h e u s e f u l n e s s o f t h a t data. It i s
i m p o r t a n t t o n o t e , however, t h a t e s s e n t i a l l y a l l t h e t r a c e element m a t e r i a l
d e t e c t e d d u r i n g t h e e l e c t r i c a l l y heated t e s t was i n t h e r e s i d u e .

D e s p i t e t h e l e s s t h a n i d e a l m a t e r i a l balances, i t appears t h a t t h e b u l k o f
t h e n o n v o l a t i l e t r a c e m a t e r i a l s d e t e c t e d d u r i n g t h e two c o n t r o l l e d - a i r t e s t s
were p r e s e n t i n t h e ash, w i t h l e s s t h a n 1%showing up i n t h e o f f - g a s p a r t i c u -
late. I n c o n t r a s t , t h e r o t a r y k i l n o f f gas c o n t a i n e d 20% o f t h e n o n v o l a t i l e
t r a c e elements added t o t h e feed. This i l l u s t r a t e s t h e bulk off-gas s o l i d s
 TABLE 18. D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Trace Elements i n t h e I n c i n e r a t o r P r o d u c t and Off-Gas P a r t i c u l a t e

Trace Element D i s t r i b u t i o n , % o f I n i t i a l Added

Test P e r i o d A-4 Test P e r i o d B- 1
( E l e c t r i c a l l y Heated (Gas-Heated Test P e r i o d C-2
Control led-Air) Control led-Air) (Rotary K i l n)

E lement Ash o f f - ~ a s ( ~ )T o t a l
Ash o f f - ~ a s ' ~ )Total Ash Cyclone Subtotal o f f - ~ a s ( ~ ) Total
- - --
N o n v o l a t i les:

Ce 37.9
(9.5)(b)

Sr 39.1
(3.3)

.4verage 39
(c)
M a t e r i a l Balance:

Semivolatiles:

Cs 28.8
(6.1)

Mo 37.9
(6.0)

(a) Off-gas a n a l y s i s are o f p a r t i c u l a t e c o l l e c t e d on f i l t e r s d u r i n g environmental t e s t i n g .

(b) Numbers i n parenthesis a r e standard d e v i a t i o n s o f t h r e e samples.
(c) The net m a t e r i a l balance i s based on +be accountabi I i t y o f Ce and S r i n t h e i n c i n e r a t o r
product and o f f-gas p a r t i c u l a t e .
c a r r y - o v e r a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e t u m b l i n g a c t i o n o f a r o t a r y k i l n , which i s n o t
observed w i t h a c o n t r o l l e d - a i r t y p e o f i n c i n e r a t o r .

The s e m i v o l a t i l e components (Cs and Mo) were d e t e c t e d p r i m a r i l y i n t h e ash

d u r i n g t h e e l e c t r i c a l l y h e a t e d c o n t r o l l e d - a i r t e s t w i t h l e s s t h a n 1%i n t h e
off-gas s o l i d s . T h i s i n d i c a t e s good r e t e n t i o n and i s p r o b a b l y a r e s u l t o f t h e
r e l a t i v e l y s h o r t r e s i d e n c e t i m e (0.5 h r ) d u r i n g t h e t e s t p e r i o d . For t h e gas-
heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r t e s t , t h e s e m i v o l a t i l e s were d e p l e t e d i n t h e ash and
e n r i c h e d i n t h e off-gas, p r o b a b l y due t o t h e much l o n g e r r e s i d e n c e t i m e a s s o c i -
a t e d w i t h t h e b a t c h mode o f ash removal. As seen i n Table 18, o n l y 0.4% o f t h e
n o n v o l a t i l e elements were d e t e c t e d i n t h e o f f - g a s p a r t i c u l a t e w h i l e 4.1% o f t h e
Cs and 3.1% of t h e Mo were present. A s i m i l a r v o l a t i l i z a t i o n e f f e c t was
observed d u r i n g t h e r o t a r y k i l n t e s t , however, p h y s i c a l e n t r a i n m e n t was t h e
predominant mechanism f o r l o s s of t r a c e element t o t h e o f f gas. O f t h e 75% o f
t o t a l t r a c e element accounted f o r i n t h e r o t a r y k i l n t e s t , 55% of t h e n o n v o l a -
t i l e s were p r e s e n t i n t h e ash and c y c l o n e p r o d u c t . The r e m a i n i n g 20% was p r e s -
e n t i n t h e o f f - g a s p a r t i c u l a t e , s u g g e s t i n g p h y s i c a l c a r r y o v e r as t h e mechanism.
Some v o l a t i l i z a t i o n o f Cs i s e v i d e n t s i n c e 36.3% was p r e s e n t i n t h e ash and
28.4% was d e t e c t e d i n t h e o f f - g a s p a r t i c u l a t e .
 COMPARISON OF
INCINERATOR PROCESSES
 COMPARISON OF INCINERATOR PROCESSES

The e l e c t r i c a l l y heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r , gas-heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r , and

r o t a r y k i l n i n c i n e r a t i o n processes were e v a l u a t e d based on t e c h n i c a l m e r i t and
system cost. C a p i t a l and o p e r a t i n g c o s t s were e s t i m a t e d f o r shredding, i n c i n -
e r a t i o n , and o f f - g a s t r e a t m e n t o p e r a t i o n s . The t e c h n i c a l m e r i t o f each process
was judged by a f i v e member panel u s i n g t h e F i g u r e - o f - M e r i t (FOM) process
s e l e c t i o n methodology. The FOM numbers a r e viewed as a measure of t h e o v e r a l l
process e f f e c t i v e n e s s . C o s t - e f f e c t i v e n e s s r a t i o s were generated u s i n g t h e
cost/FOM r a t i o f o r each process. These r a t i o s were t h e n used t o s e l e c t a
r e f e r e n c e shredder and i n c i n e r a t o r process f o r f u r t h e r development.

-
INCINERATOR ECONOMICS

C a p i t a l c o s t s have been e s t i m a t e d f o r f e e d shredding, i n c i n e r a t i o n , o f f -

gas t r e a t m e n t , and t h e p o r t i o n o f t h e f a c i l i t y o c c u p i e d by t h e s e u n i t p r o -
cesses. Annual c o s t s were e s t i m a t e d f o r l a b o r and energy t o h e a t t h e i n c i n -
erator. Other f i x e d o p e r a t i n g c o s t s w i l l be s i m i l a r f o r t h e t h r e e processes
and as such, were n o t i n c l u d e d i n t h e c o s t a n a l y s i s . L i k e w i s e , t h e economic
comparison does n o t i n c l u d e t h e r e s i d u e h a n d l i n g and cementation p o r t i o n s o f
t h e process s i n c e t h e y would be t h e same r e g a r d l e s s o f t h e i n c i n e r a t i o n system
used.

C a p i t a l c o s t s f o r t h e process components a r e based on t h e equipment

r e q u i r e m e n t s l i s t e d i n Table 19. nue t o t h e i r mechanical n a t u r e , t h e i n c i n e r a -
t i o n systems a r e b e s t s u i t e d f o r remote o p e r a t i o n i n a h o t c e l l as opposed t o a
canyon. H o t - c e l l volumes f o r t h e o f f - g a s systems were c a l c u l a t e d u s i n g t h e
v o l umes of a p i 1 o t - s c a l e and 1 arge-scal e i n s i t u v i t r i f i c a t i o n o f f - g a s system
(Timmerman and Oma 1984, R u e l t e t a l . 1985). To compensate f o r p e r i o d i c
surges, an o v e r d e s i g n f a c t o r of f o u r was used t o s c a l e t h e o f f - g a s system t o
t h e required capacity. C e l l volumes f o r t h e o t h e r i n c i n e r a t o r subsystems were
e s t i m a t e d by t a k i n g f o u r t i m e s t h e equipment volume envelope as s p e c i f i e d by
t h e manufacturers. The a d d i t i o n a l v o l ume a1 1 ows f o r c e l l rnani p u l a t o r s and an
overhead c r a n e r e q u i r e d f o r remote o p e r a t i o n and maintenance.
 TABLE 19. I n c i n e r a t i o n System Equipment Requirements Used f o r Cost E s t i m a t e
E l e c t r i c a l l y Heated Control led-Ai r Gas-Heated C o n t r o l l ed-Ai r Rotary K i I n
Incinerator
Subsystem
Requ i red
Volume,
3" Equipment I n f o r m a t i o n
Required Cel I
Volume, m
3 Equipment I n f o r m a t i o n
Requ i red
Volume,

Feed System: ' Coarse shredder Coarse shredder 80 Coarse s h r e d d e r 85

Metering pump Top loading chute V i b r a t i n g conveyor
F i n e shredder Feed s h u t t l e system

Primary 40 k g / h r Type 1 waste 40 kg/hr Type 1 waste 40 kg/hr Type 1 waste

Ch ambe r: 90 m i n residence t i m e 90+ m i n residence t i m e 90 min residence t i m e
Continuous ash removal Batch ash removal Continuous ash removal
Automatic h e a t e r Automatic bu m e r Automatic b u r n e r
c o n t r o l (no computer) c o n t r o l (no computer) c o n t r o l (no computer)
Pressurized k i I n seals

Seconda ry 2 sec residence t i m e 2 sec residence t i m e 70 2 sec residence t ime

Chamber: 1 100°C mean temperature 1 100°C mean temperature 1 100°C mean temperature
200% excess a i r 200% excess a i r 200% excess a i r
Automatic h e a t e r Automatic b u m e r Automatic b u r n e r
c o n t r o l (no computer) c o n t ro I (no computer) c o n t r o l (no conpute r )

O f f -Gas 6.7 scm/min mean flow 33 scm/mi n mean f l ow 33 scm/min mean f l o w

System: Quencher Quenche r Cyclone s e p a r a t o r
V e n t u r i scrubber V e n t u r i scrubber Quencher
Condenser Condenser Venturi scrubber
Gas r e h e a t e r Gas r e h e a t e r Condenser
HEPA f i l t e r s HEPA f i l t e r s Gas r e h e a t e r
HEPA f i l t e r s

T o t a l C e l l Volume:
 The e l e c t r i c a l l y heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r i n c i n e r a t o r process r e q u i r e s two
stages o f feed s h r e d d i n g w h i l e t h e o t h e r two i n c i n e r a t o r s r e q u i r e o n l y one
( r e f e r t o T a b l e 19). A s m a l l e r waste fragment s i z e f o r t h e e l e c t r i c a l l y heated
u n i t i s needed t o promote complete combustion o f t h e wastes f o r s e v e r a l
reasons:

The wastes a r e n o t tumbled o r a g i t a t e d as t h e y a r e w i t h t h e r o t a r y

kiln. Combustion a i r must r e a c h t h e unburned waste by d i f f u s i o n .

The r e s i d e n c e t i m e i s s h o r t compared t o t h a t o f t h e gas-heated

c o n t r o l l e d - a i r i n c i n e r a t o r , which has b a t c h ash removal.

Heat t r a n s f e r t o t h e waste i s by r a d i a t i o n f r o m t h e glowbars. For

most e f f e c t i v e h e a t i n g , t h e glowbars must be p o s i t i o n e d w i t h i n i n c h e s
o f t h e woven w i r e conveyor. T h i s l i m i t s t h e maximum s i z e o f waste
fragments t h a t can be 1 oaded o n t o t h e conveyor.

For t h e economic comparison, f e e d i n g i s accomplished u s i n g a waste meter-

i n g pump s i m i l a r t o t h a t demonstrated on t h e SRL-PWI system ( C h a r l e s w o r t h and
McCampbell 1985) f o r t h e e l e c t r i c a l l y heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r process. The gas-
heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r process has a t o p l o a d i n g c h u t e w i t h a i r l o c k doors f o r
f e e d i n g w h i l e t h e r o t a r y k i l n process uses a v i b r a t i n g conveyor and f e e d s h u t -
t l e system s i m i l a r t o t h a t used on t h e INEL-PREPP k i l n process.

Another b a s i c d i f f e r e n c e between t h e i n c i n e r a t i o n processes i s t h e

r e q u i r e d off-gas capacity. S i n c e t h e e l e c t r i c a l l y h e a t e d u n i t does n o t have
a d d i t i o n a l combustion a i r and combustion gases f r o m a gas b u r n e r system, t h e
o f f - g a s f l o w r a t e i s about one f i f t h o f t h a t r e q u i r e d f o r t h e two gas-heated
i n c i n e r a t i o n processes. T h i s reduces b o t h t h e equipment c o s t s and f a c i l i t y
c o s t s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e e l e c t r i c a l l y heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r process o f f - g a s
system. For t h e c o s t comparison, t h e r o t a r y k i l n o f f - g a s system has a c y c l o n e
as t h e f i r s t s t a g e c l e a n i n g d e v i c e s i n c e h i g h p a r t i c l e c a r r y o v e r i s a t r a i t o f
t h e process.

The c a p i t a l c o s t e s t i m a t e s a r e p r e s e n t e d i n T a b l e 20 showing t h e c o s t
breakdown between t h e f a c i l i t y and process equipment. Cost d a t a f o r t h e f e e d
systems and i n c i n e r a t o r s were o b t a i n e d f r o m p o t e n t i a l m a n u f a c t u r e r s w h i l e t h e
o f f - g a s system c o s t s were d e r i v e d f r o m a c t u a l c o s t s o f t h e i n s i t u
 TABLE 20. C a p i t a l Costs f o r I n c i n e r a t i o n Processes ($1000)
Capital E l e c t r i c a l l y Heated Gas-Heated
Component C o n t r o l 1 ed-Ai r C o n t r o l 1e d - A i r R o t a r y K i 1n

Facility 5,360 5,420 6,520

Equipment Cost:
Feed System
Incinerator
Off-Gas System 440 1,150 1,260

S u b t o t a l Equipment 1,520 1,5417 2,245

T o t a l C a p i t a l Cost 6,880 6,960 8,765

(a) Cost based on $11,60O/m 3 h o t c e l l volume. I n c l u d e s c o s t o f h o t c e l l

with m a n i p u l a t o r s and windows, an overhead crane, o p e r a t i n g g a l l e r y ,
rear f a c e g a l l e r y , aqueous s t o r a g e , and c e l l v e n t i l a t i o n . F a c i l i t y cost
does n o t i n c l u d e those c o s t s which a r e independent of t h e process s i z e
such as a n a l y t i c a l l a b o r a t o r y and o f f i c e s .

v i t r i f i c a t i o n off-gas t r e a t m e n t systems (Timmerman and Oma 1984). Off-gas

system c o s t s were a d j u s t e d t o t h e r e q u i r e d equipment c a p a c i t y u s i n g t h e s i x -
t e n t h s - f a c t o r r u l e ( P e t e r s and Timmerhaus 1968) and were e s c a l a t e d t o 2nd
q u a r t e r 1985 d o l l a r s . F a c i l i t y c o s t s were based on $11,600 p e r c u b i c m e t e r of
h o t c e l l volume p l u s $85,000 f o r one h o t c e l l crane. Facil i t y costs include
t h e h o t c e l l w i t h m a n i p u l a t o r s and windows, o p e r a t i n g g a l l e r y , r e a r f a c e
g a l l e r y , aqueous s t o r a g e , and c e l l v e n t i l a t i o n . These c o s t s were based on a
1981 P a c i f i c N o r t h w e s t L a b o r a t o r y c o s t e s t i m a t e f o r a R y p r o d u c t Recovery
F a c i l i t y and were e s c a l a t e d t o 1985 d o l l a r s .

To d e t e r m i n e equipment and f a c i l i t y s i z e and annual o p e r a t i n g c o s t s , t h e

f o l l owing assumptions a r e made:

38,500 k g o f TRU wastes a r e shredded and i n c i n e r a t e d each y e a r .

I n c i n e r a t o r i s o p e r a t e d t h r e e s h i f t s p e r day d u r i n g waste p r o c e s s i n g
campai gns.

I n c i n e r a t o r i s on l i n e 20% o f t i m e and t h e r e a r e 250 w o r k i n g days p e r

y e a r ( t h i s c o r r e s p o n d s t o a p p r o x i m a t e l y 40 k g l h r p r o c e s s i n g
capacity) .
 Labor d i r e c t r a t e s a r e :
- $25/hr f o r s u p e r v i s o r and e n g i n e e r
- $21/hr f o r maintenance, o p e r a t o r and r a d i a t i o n t e c h n i c i a n

Labor o v e r h e a d i s 110%.

C a p i t a l equipment i s c o s t e d based on t h e f o l l o w i n g i n f o r m a t i o n :

- Equipment l i f e = 15 y e a r s

- F a c i l i t y l i f e = 30 y e a r s

- Salvage v a l u e = O

- Real d i s c o u n t r a t e ( i ) = 3% p e r annurn ( t h e c o s t o f i n f l a t i o n f r e e
money)

-
4
1
P r e s e n t w o r t h f a c t o r i n y e a r n (pwf,) =
(1 + iIn
T a b l e 2 1 g i v e s t h e e s t i m a t e d annual l a b o r r e q u i r e m e n t and o p e r a t i n g c o s t s
f o r each i n c i n e r a t i o n process. Annual l a b o r r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r s u p e r v i s i o n and
o p e r a t i o n p e r s o n n e l i s j u d g e d t o be i d e n t i c a l f o r a l l t h r e e processes.

TABLE 21. Annual Labor Requireme t and O p e r a t i n g C o s t E s t i m a t e f o r

I n c i n e r a t i o n Processes Pay
I n c i n e r a t i o n Process
Annual D i r e c t L a b o r , E l e c t r i c a l l y Heated Gas-Heated
man y e a r s C o n t r o l 1e d - A i r C o n t r o l 1e d - A i r Rotary K i l n

Supervisor ' 0.6

Engi n e e r 0.3
Maintenance 1.1
Operator 2.4
Radiation Technician 0.6

T o t a l Labor 5.0 4.6 5.9

Annual C o s t , $1000

Labor:
Direct 217
Overhead ( 110%) 239
Incinerator Heating:
Electricity 7
Diesel #1

T o t a l Annual C o s t 463

(a) F i x e d o p e r a t i n g c o s t s w h i c h a r e t h e same f o r a l l i n c i n e r a t o r o p t i o n s a r e
n o t i n c l u d e d . The c o s t a n a l y s i s o n l y i n c l u d e s c o s t s j u d g e d t o have a
dependency on t h e p r o c e s s s e l e c t e d .

67
E n g i n e e r i n g and maintenance personnel r e q u i r e m e n t s a r e s l i g h t l y l o w e r f o r t h e
gas-heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r process because o f l o w e r o v e r a l l maintenance. Main-
tenance and r a d i a t i o n t e c h n i c i a n personnel r e q u i r e m e n t s a r e h i g h e s t f o r t h e
r o t a r y k i l n p r o c e s s p r i m a r i l y because t h e r e f r a c t o r y o f t h e k i l n r e q u i r e s more
f r e q u e n t replacement t h a n f o r t h e two c o n t r o l l e d - a i r processes.

The p r e s e n t - w o r t h method ( P e t e r s and Timmerhaus 1968) was used t o c a l c u -

l a t e t h e c o s t s of t h e t h r e e i n c i n e r a t i o n processes f o r a 30 y e a r o p e r a t i n g
period. T h i s was done by a p p l y i n g t h e f a c i l i t y c o s t t o y e a r zero, t h e e q u i p -
ment c o s t t o y e a r s z e r o and s i x t e e n , and t h e o p e r a t i n g c o s t s t o y e a r s 1 t h r o u g h
30. The t o t a l cash o u t 1 ay i n each y e a r was niul t i p 1 i e d by t h e p r e s e n t - w o r t h
f a c t o r and t h e n summed f o r a l l t h e y e a r s t o generate t h e p r e s e n t - w o r t h o f each
i n c i n e r a t i o n process. The p r e s e n t w o r t h c o s t o f t h e e l e c t r i c a l l y h e a t e d
c o n t r o l l e d - a i r and gas-heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r i n c i n e r a t i o n processes were l o w e s t
a t $16.3 M and $16.9 M r e s p e c t i v e l y . Due t o b o t h h i g h e r c a p i t a l and o p e r a t i n g
c o s t s , t h e p r e s e n t w o r t h o f t h e r o t a r y k i l n processes was c a l c u l a t e d t o be
$20.8 M. These c o s t s a r e n o t a d j u s t e d f o r f u t u r e i n f l a t i o n .

FIGURE-OF-MERIT A N A L Y S I S

A five-member p a n e l , c o n s i s t i n g of t h e a u t h o r s and two o t h e r t e c h n i c a l l y

qua,l if i e d persons, was e s t a b l i s h e d t o conduct t h e FOM e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e i n c i n -
e r a t i o n processes. The panel members had v a r i e d t e c h n i c a l backgrounds i n areas
r e 1 a t e d t o t h e e v a l u a t i on i n c l u d i n g : i n c i n e r a t o r t e s t i n g , r a d i o a c t i v e process
development, waste f o r m development, off-gas t r e a t m e n t , CH and RH equipment and
f a c i l i t y design, and waste form c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n . The FOM e v a l u a t i o n was p e r -
formed as f o l l o w s :

I n c i n e r a t i o n o p e r a t i n g r e q u i r e m e n t s were d e f i n e d ( f e e d c o m p o s i t i o n ,
f e e d r a t e , etc.).

A l i s t o f e v a l u a t i o n c r i t e r i a was p r e p a r e d by t h e panel members.

The l i s t was d i v i d e d i n t o p r i m a r y and secondary c r i t e r i a .

Performance measures used t o judge t h e c r i t e r i a were defined.

Panel members i n d e p e n d e n t l y assigned w e i g h t s t o t h e p r i m a r y and

secondary c r i t e r i a . For each s e t of c r i t e r i a , t h e sum of w e i g h t s i s
 unity. The i n d i v i d u a l w e i g h t i n g s f o r each c r i t e r i a were t h e n
averaged t o o b t a i n group w e i g h t i n g s t h a t were used t o g e n e r a t e a FOV
model.

Panel members i n d e p e n d e n t l y assigned r a t i n g s o f 1 t o 10 f o r each o f

t h e secondary c r i t e r i a f o r t h e t h r e e c a n d i d a t e i n c i n e r a t i o n
processes.

A FOM number f o r each c a n d i d a t e process was c a l c u l a t e d f o r each panel

member and f o r t h e group as a whole. T h i s was done by m u l t i p l y i n g
t h e p r i m a r y c r i t e r i a w e i g h t i n g by t h e secondary c r i t e r i a w e i g h t i n g
and by t h e group r a t i n g f o r t h a t c r i t e r i a .

The FOM model was t e s t e d f o r s e n s i t i v i t y .

The panel members were g i v e n t h e o p p o r t u n i t y t o r e v i s e t h e i r w e i g h t -

i n g ~and r a t i n g s and a f i n a l FOM model was developed.

The f i n a l i z e d FOM model i s shown i n Table 22 a l o n g w i t h t h e group r a t i n g s

and FOM v a l u e s f o r t h e t h r e e i n c i n e r a t i o n processes. The p r i m a r y c r i t e r i a
s e l e c t e d were p r o d u c t , equipment and o p e r a t i n g c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . Secondary
c r i t e r i a and t h e a s s o c i a t e d performance measures a r e a l s o shown i n Table 22.
The maximum p o s s i h l e FOM v a l u e a process c o u l d a c h i e v e u s i n g t h i s model i s a
10; The FOM numbers d e r i v e d f r o m t h e model were 7.0 f o r t h e gas-heated
c o n t r o l l e d - a i r i n c i n e r a t o r , 6.1 f o r t h e e l e c t r i c a l l y h e a t e d c o n t r o l l e d - a i r
i n c i n e r a t o r , and 5.8 f o r t h e r o t a r y k i l n i n c i n e r a t o r . The r a t i n g s a r e r a t h e r
t i g h t l y grouped; however, t h e FOM r a t i n g s based on each panel member's i n d i v i -
dual e v a l u a t i o n were c o n s i s t e n t l y h i g h e s t f o r t h e gas-heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r
process. The i n d i v i d u a l FOM e v a l u a t i o n r e s ~ ~ l ft os r t h e f i v e panel members a r e
. 1 i s t e d i n Table 23. Four of t h e f i v e panel members r a n k e d t h e e l e c t r i c a l l y
heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r process second and t h e r o t a r y k i l n process t h i r d w h i l e
one of t h e panel members r e v e r s e d t h i s r a n k i n g . The d i f f e r e n c e between t h e FGM
&

number f o r t h e second and t h i r d ranked processes i s o n l y 0.3 and, as such, t h e y .

a r e c o n s i d e r e d about equal i n o v e r a l l e f f e c t i v e n e s s .

The e l e c t r i c a l l y h e a t e d c o n t r o l l e d - a i r i n c i n e r a t o r ' s s t r o n g p o i n t s a r e t h e
minimal o f f - g a s t r e a t m e n t r e q u i r e m e n t s , l o w a s h / r e s i d u e h o l d u p i n t h e p r i m a r y
chamber, l o n g equipment l i f e , and t h e a b i l i t y t o process d i f f e r e n t f e e d m a t e r i -
a l s ( a l l o f t h e s e areas r e c e i v e d r a t i n g s o f g r e a t e r t h a n 8). The main weak-
nesses o f t h e process were t h e i n a b i l i t y t o b u r n o u t t h e r e s i d u a l carbon, t h e
h i g h l e v e l o f f e e d p r e t r e a t m e n t r e q u i r e d , t h e presence o f k l i n k e r s i n t h e ash,
and t h e d i f f i c u l t y of remote maintenance ( t h e s e areas r e c e i v e d r a n k i n g s o f l e s s
t h a n 5).

The h i g h e r r a t e d f e a t u r e s of t h e gas-heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r i n c i n e r a t o r a r e
t h e complete b u r n o u t of r e s i d u a l carbon i n t h e ash and t h e s t a t e o f development
( s e v e r a l u n i t s a r e o p e r a t i o n a l w i t h b o t h TRU and LL wastes). The p r o c e s s was
r a t e d g r e a t e r t h a n 5.6 f o r a l l of t h e o t h e r e v a l u a t i o n c r i t e r i a and as stlch,
t h e r e a r e no process weaknesses t h a t s t a n d out.

The r o t a r y k i l n ' s g r e a t e s t s t r e n g t h i s i t s a b i l i t y t o process d i f f e r e n t

feed m a t e r i a l s i n c l u d i n g s o l i d s , 1 i q t r i d s and sludges w i t h up t o 100% noncom-
b u s t i b l e content. The k i l n a l s o r e c e i v e d a h i g h r a t i n g f o r f e e d p r e t r e a t m e n t
because i t can h a n d l e r e l a t i v e l y l a r g e p i e c e s o f f e e d m a t e r i a l . The process
r e c e i v e d r a t i n g s of l e s s t h a n 5 f o r t r a c e element r e t e n t i o n i n t h e r e s i d u e ,
o f f - g a s t r e a t m e n t r e q u i r e m e n t s , maintenance r e q u i r e m e n t s and personnel expo-
sure. Because of t h e c o n t i n u a l t u m b l i n g a c t i o n a s s o c i a t e d w i t h k i l n r o t a t i o n ,
p h y s i c a l e n t r a i n m e n t of t h e ash p a r t i c l e s was n o t e d b o t h i n terms o f a h i g h
c a r r y o v e r of s e m i v o l a t i l e and n o n v o l a t i l e t r a c e elements and i n t e r m s o f a h i g h
p a r t i c u l a t e l o a d i n g i n t h e off-gas. The h i g h maintenance r e q u i r e m e n t s and h i g h
personnel exposures a r e r e l a t e d t o one another. Remote maintenance i t e m s add
t o t h e personnel exposure a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h a t maintenance. The d e s i g n r e f r a c -
t o r y l i f e f o r t h e r o t a r y k i l n i s e s t i m a t e d t o be 3 y e a r s as compared t o 5 f o r
t h e c o n t r o l l e d - a i r i n c i n e r a t o r s . Replacement o f t h e r e f r a c t o r y adds t o b o t h
t h e remote maintenance r e q u i r e m e n t s and personnel exposures a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e
rotary kiln.

COST E F F E C T I V E N E S S A N A L Y S I S

The c o s t e f f e c t i v e n e s s r a t i o of each i n c i n e r a t i o n process i s c a l c u l a t e d by

d i v i d i n g t h e p r e s e n t w o r t h by t h e FOM number and t h e n n o r m a l i z i n g t h e r a t i o s
such t h a t t h e most c o s t e f f e c t i v e system has a r a t i o o f u n i t y . k i n g this
t e c h n i q u e , t h e most c o s t e f f e c t i v e i n c i n e r a t i o n process i s t h e gas-heated
 TABLE 22. F i g u r e - o f - M e r i t Model f o r I n c i n e r a t o r Process Comparison

Primary C r i t e r i a Secondary C r i t e r i a E l e c t r i c a l l y Heated C o n t r o l l e d - A i r

Description Weight Description Weight Performance Measure Performance Measure R a t i n g FOM Value

Product 0.376 Elimination o f 0.31 Residual Carbon 11.0% o f ash 3.2 0.37 1.9% o f ash 8.2 0.96 6.7% i n ash 5.4 0.63
Considerations Combustibles Residual A1 Metal Most A1 as metal Most A1 as metal Most A1 as metal

Net Reduction 0.45 Volume Reduction 10.8 ( l a r g e r metal pieces 6.8 1.15
Weight Reduction 4.2 s o r t e d from feed)

Trace Element R e t e n t i o n 0.16 F r a c t i o n of Trace Ce/Sr - 39% 6.0 0.36 Ce/Sr - 70% 6.6 0.40 Ce/Sr - 55% 4.0 0.24
Element Retained CS - 29% CS - 28% CS - 36%
i n Residue MO - 38% Mo - 49% MO - 58%
( M a t e r i a l Balance - 39%) ( M a t e r i a l Balance - 71%) ( M a t e r i a l Balance - 75%)
a
Ash P a r t i c l e Size 0.08 Presence o f K l i n k e r s Carbon r i c h wood chunks, 4.4 0.13 Fused A1 from HEPA sep- 6.6 0.20 Fused A1 from HEPA 6.4 0.19
most HEPA f i l t e r A1 a r a t o r s and fused g l a s s separators
spacers unfused from HEPA media
TOTAL 1.00

Equipment 0.336 S t a t e o f Development 0.15 Nuclear Systems i n SRL ( c o l d s t a r t u p FY-85) 6.2 0.31 INEL ( o p e r a t i o n a l FY-85) 8.0 0.40 INEL ( f i n a l c o n s t r u c t i o n ) 5.8 0.29
Considerations Progress LANL (LL & TRU o p e r a t i o n ) ORNL ( d e s i g n complete)
SRL (LL o p e r a t i o n FY-85) SRL ( i n i t i a l d e s i g n )

Feed Pretreatment 0.13 Feedparticlesize 2 i n . max (L+W) 3.8 0.17 18 i n . max (L+W) 7.4 0.32 24 i n . max (L+W) 8.4 0.37
Requirements Limits ( A c c u r a t e m e t e r i n g rqd.)

Off-Gas Requirements 0.16 Off-Gas P a r t i c u l a t e 2.2 g/kg waste 8.8 0.47 14 g/kg waste 5.8 0.31 69 g/kg waste 4 .O 0.22
Loading
O f f -Gas Vol ume 10 scm/kg waste 50 scm/kg waste 50 scm/kg waste

Product Hand1i n g 0.17 Ash/Residue Holdup 20% (Can be reduced by 5.8 0.33 6% (can be reduced by 7.2 0.41
Requi rements redesign) redesign)

Remote Mai n t a i n a b i 1 it y
0.28 Idumber of Major ( 8 ) Two shredders, feed 4.8 0.45 ( 7 ) Shredder, a i r - l o c k 7.6 0.72 (11) Shredder, feed 5.0 0.47
Maintenance Items pump, i n c i n e r a t o r conveyor, door, c h a r g i n g door, ash conveyor, feed s h u t t l e ,
Inside Cell r o l l ers, be1t c e n t e r i n g d i s c h a r g e ram, ash dropout a i r - l o c k door, c h a r g i n g
system, ash dropout door, door, u n d e r - f i r e a i r p o r t s , door, r o t a t i n g seal, k i l n
heaters burners r o l l e r s , d r i v e system, ash
dropout door, s l i d i n g T/C
connectors, b u r n e r s

Equi pment L i f e 0.11 T o t a l System L i f e 20 y r d e s i g n 8.0 0.30 15 t o 20 y r d e s i g n 7.8 0.29 10 t o 15 y r d e s i g n 5.6 0.21
Refractory L i f e 5 y r d e s i g n (10 y r max) 5 y r d e s i g n (10 yr max) 2 y r d e s i g n (10 y r max)
TOTAL 1.OO

a. Operating 0.288 Controlability/Safety 0.22 Number o f Operators 2 for incinerator 7.4 0.47 2 for incinerator 7.0 0.44 2 for incinerator 7 .O 0.44
Considerations Pressurization P o s s i b l e by o v e r f e e d i n g P o s s i b l e by o v e r f e e d i n g P o s s i b l e by o v e r f e e d i n g
P o t e n t i a1 No c o m b u s t i b l e f u e l s used Fuel l i n e break Fuel l i n e break
Fire PMential

A b i l i t y t o Process 0.23 Feed Types S o l i d s & sludges 8.2 0.54 Solids & liquids 7 .O 0.46 S o l i d s , l i q u i d s & sludges 9.0 0.60
D i f f e r e n t Feeds Noncombustible L i m i t Up t o 100% 50% (depends on waste) Up t o 100%

Maintenance Number Maintenance

Requirements Items
Percent Downtime

Personnel Exposure 0.22 5.2 0.33 7.2 0.46 4.6 0.29

Total 1.OO TOTAL 1.OO TOTAL FOM VALUE 6.1 TOTAL FOM VALUE 7 .O TOTAL FOM VALUE 5.8
 TABLE 23. F i gure-of-Meri t R e s u l t s f o r I n d i v i d u a l Panel Members
E l e c t r i c a l 1y Heated Gas-Heated
Panel Member C o n t r o l 1ed-Air Control 1 ed-Air Rotary K i 1n

1 5.7 6.0 3.9

2 6.1 6.5 5.4
3 5.5 7.1 6.3
4 6.4 7.5 6.1
5 6.6 7.4 6.5

c o n t r o l l e d - a i r u n i t w i t h a c o s t e f f e c t i v e n e s s r a t i o o f 1.0 f o l l o w e d by t h e
e l e c t r i c a l l y heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r process w i t h a r a t i o o f 1.2 and t h e r o t a r y
k i l n process w i t h a r a t i o of 1.5. Rased on t h i s a n a l y s i s , t h e gas-heated con-
t r o l l e d a i r i n c i n e r a t o r i s judged s u p e r i o r f o r t h e commercial TRU waste a p p l i -
c a t i o n and i s s e l e c t e d as t h e r e f e r e n c e process f o r f u r t h e r development.

The t h r e e i n c i n e r a t o r s t e s t e d a r e a l l e x c e l l e n t pieces o f equipment and

each has i t s advantages f o r d i f f e r e n t i n c i n e r a t i o n a p p l i c a t i o n s . The s e l e c t i o n
o f t h e g a s - f i r e d c o n t r o l l e d - a i r u n i t o n l y a p p l i e s , t o t h i s TRU waste a p p l i c a -
tion. The e l e c t r i c a l l y heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r or r o t a r y k i l n systems a r e 1 i k e l y
t o be r a t e d s u p e r i o r f o r o t h e r waste a p p l i c a t i o n s .
DEVELOPMENT NEEDS
 DEVELOPMENT NEEDS

The i n c i n e r a t o r FOM and economic a n a l y s i s shows t h e gas-heated c o n t r o l l e d -

a i r i n c i n e r a t i o n system t o be t h e most c o s t e f f e c t i v e f o r p r o c e s s i n g commer-
c i a l l y g e n e r a t e d TRU wastes. One s t a g e o f s h r e d d i n g i s adequate f e e d p r e -
t r e a t m e n t t o p r o d u c e a w a s t e p a r t i c l e s i z e t h a t can be e f f e c t i v e l y passed
through t h e incinerator. While t h e i n i t i a l t e s t s confirmed t h a t t h e technology
i s a d a p t a b l e t o t h e TRU w a s t e t r e a t m e n t a p p l i c a t i o n , t h e s e t e s t s d i d n o t d e t e r -
mine processing ranges, o p t i m i z e t h e o p e r a t i n g parameters, o r e v a l u a t e t h e
equipment d e s i g n f o r r e m o t e o p e r a t i o n . Several development needs f o r t h e
s h r e d d e r and gas-heated c o n t r o l l e d - a i r i n c i n e r a t i o n system a r e l i s t e d below.

I d e n t i f y and t e s t methods t o f i x r a d i o a c t i v e c o n t a m i n a n t s on HEPA

f i l t e r s p r i o r t o t h e s h r e d d i n g process. Ouring t h e shredding tests,
i t was n o t e d t h a t a p o r t i o n of t h e d u s t c o n t a i n e d on l o a d e d HEPA
f i l t e r s was r e 1 eased.

Develop and t e s t a m e c h a n i c a l d e v i c e f o r f e e d i n g wood-framed HEPA

f i l t e r s t o t h e shredder. I n order f o r t h e shredder t e e t h t o e f f e c -
t i v e l y g r a b t h e edges o f t h e wood-framed HEPA f i l t e r s d u r i n g t h e
s h r e d d e r t e s t s , i t was n e c e s s a r y t o m a n u a l l y r e p o s i t i o n them a t r e g u -
1a r i n t e r v a l s .

T e s t a s h r e d d e r t h a t i s programmed f o r p e r i o d i c a u t o m a t i c r e v e r s a l
cycles. Such a s h r e d d e r c o u l d f u r t h e r r e d u c e t h e p a r t i c l e s i z e o f
t h e wastes and more e a s i l y p r o c e s s d i f f i c u l t t o s h r e d i t e m s such as
m e t a l - f r a m e d HEPA f i l t e r s .
- E v a l u a t e t h e i n c i n e r a t o r o f f - g a s t r e a t m e n t r e q u i r e m e n t s and s e l e c t a
r e f e r e n c e o f f - g a s t r e a t m e n t system. Roth wet and d r y d e s i g n s s h o u l d
be c o n s i d e r e d as w e l l as t h e need f o r f i s s i o n p r o d u c t s o r b e r s .
C

D e t e r m i n e i m p a c t of r e s i d u a l A1 m e t a l c o n t e n t i n t h e ash on subse-
q u e n t c e m e n t i n g o p e r a t i o n s and p r o d u c t performance.

E s t a b l i s h t h e o p e r a t i n g r a n g e s of t h e i n c i n e r a t o r d u r i n g i n d e p e n d e n t
f e e d i n g o f each d i f f e r e n t w a s t e c o m p o s i t i o n (i.e., GPT, SAC, wood
framed HEPAs, and m e t a l framed HEPAs).
Prepare p r e c o n c e p t u a l and conceptual designs o f t h e i n t e g r a t e d
shredder, i n c i n e r a t o r , and o f f - g a s system.

Test a p r o t o t y p e shredder, i n c i n e r a t o r , and o f f - g a s t r e a t m e n t system

w i t h s i m u l a t e d TRU wastes. The shredder s h o u l d have an o p t i m i z e d
cutter configuration. The i n c i n e r a t o r s h o u l d have an improved ram
and ash d i s c h a r g e d e s i g n t o reduce t h e a s h l r e s i d u e h o l d u p w i t h i n t h e
p r i m a r y chamber. The system s h o u l d a l s o have remote d e s i g n f e a t u r e s
t o p e r m i t o p e r a t i o n and maintenance by master m a n i p u l a t o r s and an
overhead crane.

Perform r a d i o a c t i v e v e r i f i c a t i o n t e s t i n g o f t h e i n t e g r a t e d shredder,
i n c i n e r a t o r , and o f f - g a s system.
REFERENCES
 REFERENCES

A1 1 ied-General Nuclear Services. 1978. S t u d i e s and Research Concerning

BNFP--Storage and H a n d l i n g o f Wastes from Uranium Fuel Processing
A1 t e r n a t i v e s . AGNS-1040-3.3-3.4, A1 1 i e d General Nucl ear S e r v i c e s , B a r n w e l l ,
South C a r o l i n a .

Bordiun, L. C., and A. L. Taboas. 1980. "USDOE R a d i o a c t i v e Waste I n c i n e r a t i o n

Techno1 ogy: S t a t u s Review," CONF-800334-5, 2nd DOE Environmental C o n t r o l
Symposium, Reston, V i r g i n i a , March 17, 1980.

B u e l t , J. L., V. F. F i t z P a t r i c k , and C. L. Timmerman. 1985. " E l e c t r i c a l

Technique f o r I n - P l ace S t a b i l i z a t i o n o f Contaminated S o i l s." Chemical
E n g i n e e r i n g Progress, March 1985, pp. 43-48.

Charlesworth, D. L., and M. Hi1 1. 1985. " E l e c t r i c a l l y F i r e d I n c i n e r a t i o n o f

Combustible R a d i o a c t i v e Waste." CONF-850744-1, p r e s e n t e d a t t h e 1985
N a t i o n a l Conference on Environmental Engineering, J u l y 1-3, 1985, Boston,
Massachusetts.

Charlesworth, D. L., and R. B. McCampbell

I n c i n e r a t i o n Process."
.
1985. "Design of a PU-238 Waste
Waste Management 1985, Volume 1, pp. 301-307.
U n i v e r s i t y o f Arizona, Tucson, Arizona.

D a r n e l l , G. R., and W. C. A l d r i c h . 1983. Low-Speed Shredder and Waste

S h r e d d a b i l i t y Tests. EGG-2226, EG&G Idaho, Inc., Idaho F a l l s , Idaho.

Darr, D. G. 1983. Waste Model C h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n Study: E v a l u a t i o n o f

R e ~ r o c e s s i n aWaste Estimates. DOEl3156lFR-01. A l l i e d - G e n e r a l Nuclear
- 8 d

S e r v i c e s , B a r n w e l l , South C a r o l i n a .

Hedahl , T. G. 1982a. C o n t r o l 1ed-Ai r and Rotary-Ki 1n I n c i n e r a t i o n P r o o f - o f -

P r i n c i p l e Tests. EGX-WN-5841. tG&G Idaho, Inc., Idaho Fa1 1 s, Idaho.

Hedahl , T.G. 1982b. Off-Gas Treatment System Process Experimental P i 1 o t P l a n t

(PREPP) K-T E v a l u a t i o n . EGG-WM-5866, EG&G Idaho, Inc., Idaho F a l l s , Idaho.
s
K l i n g l e r , L. M. 1981. Mound Cyclone I n c i n e r a t o r Volume 1, D e s c r i p t i o n and
Performance. MLM-MU-81-72-0003, Mound F a c i l i t y , Miamisburg, Ohio.
L Montgomery, 0. R. 1984. Consol i d a t i o n of Sirnul a t e d Nuclear Metal 1 i c Waste by
Vacuum Core1 ess I n d u c t i o n Me1t i n q . PNL-5254. P a c i f i c Northwest L a b o r a t o r v .
< ~

Richland, Washington.

Neuls, A. S., W. E. Oraper, R. A. Koenig, J. M. Newmyer, and C. L. Warner.

-
1982. C o n t r o l l e d A i r I n c i n e r a t i o n f o r R a d i o a c t i v e Waste Volume 1.
LA-UR-82-2282, Los A1 amos N a t i o n a l L a b o r a t o r y , Los A1 amos, New Mexico.
P a t t e n g i l l , M. G., F. A. Brunner, J. L. Fasso, S. R. M i t c h e l , and R. T.
Praskac. 1982. Rotary K i l n I n c i n e r a t o r Engineering Tests on Simul a t e d
Transuranic Wastes from t h e Idaho N a t i o n a l E n g i n e e r i n g Laboratory.
EGG-2223, EG&G Idaho, Inc., Idaho F a l l s , Idaho.

Perkins, R. L. 1976. I n c i n e r a t i o n F a c i l it i e s f o r Treatment o f R a d i o a c t i v e

Wastes: A Review. -
LA 6252 , Los Alamos N a t i o n a l Laboratory, Los Alamos, New
Mexi co.

Peters, M. S., and K. D. Timmerhaus. 1968. P l a n t Oesign and Economics f o r

Chemical Engineers, Second E d i t i o n . McGraw-Hill Rook Company, New York, New
York.

ROSS, W. A., K. J. Schneider, J. L. Swanson, K. M. Yasutake, and R. P. A l l e n .

1985. ~ r ei m
l i n a r y A n a l y s i s of Treatment S t r a t e g i e s f o r T r a n s u r a n i c Wastes
from Reprocessing P l a n t s . PNL-5130, P a c i f i c Northwest Laboratory, Richland,
'hashi ngton.

T a i t , T. D. 1983. Demonstration Test Assessment of t h e S l a g g i n g P y r o l y s i s

I n c i n e r a t o r f o r Processing I N t L T r a n s u r a n i c Waste, tG&G-TF-6192, Idaho
National E n g i n e e r i n g Laborato ry, Idaho Fa1 1 s, Idaho.

Timmerman, C. L., and K. H. Oma. 1984. An I n S i t u V i t r i f i c a t i o n P i l o t - S c a l e

R a d i o a c t i v e Test. PNL-5240, P a c i f i c Northwest Laboratory, Rich1 and,
Washington.

Treat, R. L., R. 0. Lokken, and M. J. Schliebe. 1983. I n c i n e r a t i o n o f a

T y p i c a l LWR Combustible Waste and A n a l y s i s o f t h e R e s u l t i n g Ash.
NUREGICR-3087, Nucl ear Regul a t o r y Commi ssion, Washington, D.C.

U. S. DOE. 1979. Technol ogy f o r Commerci a1 R a d i o a c t i v e Waste Management,

Vol. 1. DOEIET-0028, U.5. Dept. of tnergy, Washington, D.C.

Waters, R. Y., and M. Volodzko. 1983. "The Impact o f PVC on Waste

I n c i n e r a t i o n Systems." Presented a t American Nucl ear S o c i e t y 1 1 t h B i e n n i a l
Conference on Reactor O p e r a t i n g Experience, August 1-3, 1983, S c o t t s c a l e,
Arizona.

Westsik, J. Y., J r . 1984. C h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n of Cement and Bitumen Waste Forms

C o n t a i n i n g Simulated Low-Level Waste I n c i n e r a t o r Ash. NURtG/CR 3/98, -
Nuclear Regul a t o r y Commission, Washington, O.C.

Z i egl e r , D. L. 1982. Technol ogy Documentation f o r S e l e c t e d Radwaste

I n c i n e r a t i o n Systems. Rl-P- 3411 , Rocky t l a t s P l a n t , Golden Colorado.
DISTRIBUTION
 No. o f No. o f
Copies COP ies

OFFSITE 30 DOE T e c h n i c a l I n f o r m a t i on
Center
.
b' J. E. R a u b l i t z , NE-24
DOE O f f i c e o f T e r m i n a l Waste J. W. B e n n e t t , RW-20
D i s p o s a l II Remedial A c t i o n DOE O f f i c e o f Terminal Waste
GTN n i s p o s a l R Remedial A c t i o n
J
Washington, D.C. 20545 GTN
Washington, D.C. 20545
J. A. Coleman, NE-25
DOE O f f i c e o f T e r m i n a l Waste C. R. Cooley, RW-4
D i s p o s a l R Remedial A c t i o n r)OE O f f i c e o f T e r m i n a l Waste
GTN D i s p o s a l 8 Remedial A c t i o n
Washington, D.C. 20545 GTN
Washington, D.C. 20545
0. J. McGoff, NE-23
DOE O f f i c e o f T e r m i n a l Waste M. W. F r e i
D i s p o s a l & Remedial A c t i o n DOE O f f i c e o f Terminal Waste
GTN D i s p o s a l h Remedi a1 A c t i o n
Washington, D.C. 20545 GTN
Washington, D.C. 20545
J. A. T u r i . NE-25
DOE O f f i c e o f T e r m i n a l Waste R. Rusche, RY-1
D i s p o s a l R Remedial A c t i o n DOE O f f i c e of Terminal Waste
GTN Disposal R Remedial A c t i o n
Washington, D.C. 20545 GTN
Washington, D.C. 20545
W. R. V o i g t , NE-20
DOE O f f i c e o f T e r m i n a l Y a s t e R. S t e i n , RW-?3
D i s p o s a l & Remedial A c t i o n DOE O f f i c e o f T e r m i n a l Waste
GTN O i sposal R Remedial A c t i o n
Washington, D.C. 20545 GTN
Washington, D.C. 20545
H. F. W a l t e r , NE-25
DOE O f f i c e o f T e r m i n a l Waste n. R. L e C l a i r e , DP-12
D i s p o s a l h Remedial A c t i o n DOE O f f i c e o f Defense Waste 8
GTN R y p r o d u c t s Management
Washington, D.C. 20545 GTN-
Washington, DC 30545
J. R. l o r n , NE-25
DOE O f f i c e o f T e r m i n a l Waste R. D. Walton, Jr., DP-123
Disposal & Remedial A c t i o n DOE O f f i c e o f Defense Waste h
GTbI R y p r o d u c t s Management
Washington, D.C. 20545 GTN
Washington, DC 20545
No. of No. o f
Copi es Copi es
M. J. Re11 W. 4. Hannum
D i v i s i o n o f Nuclear M a t e r i a l s OOE West Val 1ey O p e r a t i o n s
S a f e t y & Safeguards Office
M a i l S t a t i o n 881-SS P.O. Box 191
Nucl ear Regul a t o r y Commi s s i on West V a l l e y , NY 14171
Washington, DC 20555
J. 0. Harnric
A. T. C l a r k 90E Idaho Operations O f f i c e
D i v i s i o n o f Fuel M a t e r i a l 550 Second S t r e e t
Safety Idaho Fa1 1 s, I D 83401
Nucl ear Regul a t o r y Commission
Washington, DC 20555 J. R. W h i t s e t t
DOE Idaho Operations O f f i c e
W. J. D i r c k s 550 Second S t r e e t
O f f ice o f t h e E x e c u t i ve Idaho Fa1 1 s, I 9 83401
D i r e c t o r f o r Operations
M a i l S t a t i o n 6209 L. Lanni
Nucl ear Regul a t o r y Cornrni s s i on DOE San Fr a n c i sco Oper a t i ons
Washington, DC 20555 1333 Rroadway
San F r a n c i s c o , CA 94612
0. Egan
Environmental P r o t e c t i o n Agency W. E. Pasko
O f f i c e o f R a d i a t i o n Programs DOE Oak Ridge O p e r a t i o n s O f f i c e
401 M S t r e e t , S.W. P.O. Box E
Washington, OC 20460 Oak Ridge, TN 37830
G. L. Sjoblom S. A. Mann
Environmental P r o t e c t i o n Agency DOE Chicago O p e r a t i o n s O f f i c e
O f f i c e of R a d i a t i o n Programs 9800 South Cass Avenue
401 Y S t r e e t , S.W. Argonne, I L 60439
Washington, DC 20460
(1. 0. N e f f
R. Y. Lowrey DOE N a t i o n a l Waste Program
DOE A1 buquerque O p e r a t i o n s Office
Office 505 King Avenue
P.O. Rox 5400 Col urnbus, OH 43201
A1 buquerque, NM 87185
6. K. O e r t e l
(3. M c G o u ~ ~ DOE Savannah R i v e r O p e r a t i o n s
DOE A1 buquerque O p e r a t i o n s Office
Office P.O. Box A
P. 0. Box 5400 Aiken, SC 29801
A1 buquerque, NM 87185
D. L. V i e t h
M. H. McFadden DOE Nevada Operat i o n s O f f i c e
DOE A1 buquerque O p e r a t i o n s P.O. Rox 14100
Office Las Vegas, NV 89114
P.O. Box 5400
A1 buquerque, NM 87185
No. of No. of
Cop ies Copies

C. S. Arbamsl D. T. Oakley
J. H. K i t t e l Los Alamos S c i e n t i f i c
Argonne N a t i o n a l L a b o r a t o r y Labor a t o r y
9700 South Cass Avenue MS 671
Argonne, I L 60439 P.O. Box 1663
Los A1 amos, NM 87544
M. J. S t e i n d l e r l
L. E. T r e v o r r o w I. C. Rordwin
A r gonne Nat ional Labor a t o r y Los A1 amos S c i e n t if ic
9700 South Cass Avenue Laboratory
Argonne, I L 60439 MS 671
P.O. Rox 1663
W. A. C a r b e i n e r l Los A1 atnos, NM 87544
S. H. Basham
R a t t e l l e Memori a1 I n s t i t u t e R. A. Koenig
P r o j e c t Management D i v i s i o n Los A1 amos S c i en t if ic
505 K i n g Avenue Laboratory
Col unbus, OH 43201 MS 671
P.O. Rox 1663
J. F. K i r c h e r Los A1 amos, NM 87544
B a t t e l l e Memorial I n s t i t u t e
P r o j e c t Management D i v i s i o n T. H. Row
505 K i n g Avenue Oak R i d g e N a t i o n a l L a b o r a t o r y
Col umbus, OH 43201 P.0. Box X
Oak Ridge, TN 37830
R. 9awl es
R a t t e l l e Memorial I n s t i t u t e J. 0. Rlomeke
P r o j e c t Management D i v i s i on Oak Ridge N a t i o n a l L a b o r a t o r y
505 K i n g Avenue P.O. Rox Y
Col umbus, OH 43201 Oak Ridge, TN 37830

W. $1. Madia W. O. Rurch

R a t t e l l e Vemor ia1 I n s t i t u t e Oak Ri dge Nat ional L a b o r a t o r y
P r o j e c t Management D i v i s i o n P.O. Rox Y
505 K i n g Avenue Oak Ridge, TN 37830
Col umbus, OH 43201
L. A. D o l e
H. J. Peters Oak R i d g e N a t i o n a l L a b o r a t o r y
R a t t e l l e Memori a1 I n s t i t u t e P.0. Rox Y
P r o j e c t Management D i v i s i o n Oak Ridge, TN 37830
505 K i n g Avenue
Col umbus, OH 43201 R. R. K i m m i t t
Oak Ridge N a t i o n a l L a b o r a t o r y
F. H o l z e r P.O. Rox Y
Lawrence L i vermore N a t i o n a l Oak Ridge, TN 37830
Laboratory
University of California O. R. Anderson
P.O. Rox 808 Sandia L a b o r a t o r i e s
L i v e r m o r e , CA 94550 P.O. Box 5800
A1 buquerque, NM 87185
No. of No. o f
C o ~esi Copies
R. W. Lynch S. M i r s h a k
Sandia L a b o r a t o r i e s E. I. du Pont de Nemours R
P.0. Box 5800 Company
A1 buquerque, NM 87185 Savannah R i v e r L a b o r a t o r y
Aiken, SC 29801
J. F. Ney
Sandia L a b o r a t o r i e s R. M. W a l l a c e
P.O. Box 5800 E. I. du Pont de Nemours &
A1 buquerque, NM 87185 Company
Savannah R i v e r L a b o r a t o r y
W. Weart Aiken, SC 29801
Sandi a L a b o r a t o r i e s
P.O. Box 5800 D. L. C h a r l e s w o r t h
A1 buquerque, NM 87185 E. I. du Pont de Nernours &
Company
Technical L i b r a r y Savannah R i v e r L a b o r a t o r y
Sandia L a b o r a t o r i e s Aiken, SC 29801
P.O. Rox 5800
A1 buquerque, NM 87185 R. B. McCampbell
E. I. du Pont de Nemours ,%
B. R. Wheeler Company
Westinghouse I d a h o N u c l e a r Co., Savannah Ri v e r L a b o r a t o r y
Inc. Aiken, SC 29801
P.O. Box 4000
Idaho Fa1 1 s, I D 83401 G. R. D a r n e l 1
EGRG I d a h o
M. D. Rorsma P.O. Box 1625
E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Idaho F a l l s , I D 83415
Company
Savannah R i v e r L a b o r a t o r y C. A. Cargo
Aiken, SC 29801 EGRG I d a h o
P.O. Rox 1625
J. L. C r a n d a l l Idaho F a l l s , I D 83415
E. I. du Pont de Ue~nours ,%
Company T. G. Hedahl
Savannah R i v e r L a b o r a t o r y EGRG I d a h o
Aiken, SC 29801 P.O. Rox 1625
I d a h o Fa1 1 s, I D 83415
E. (1. H e n n e l l y
E. I , du Pont de Uemours & E. A. J e n n r i c h
Company EG&G I d a h o
Savannah R i v e r L a b o r a t o r y P.O. Box 1625
Aiken, SC 29801 Idaho Fa1 1 s, I D 83415
L. I-. K i l p a t r i c k l D. E. W i l k i n s
L. M. Lee EGG I d a h o
E. I. du Pont de Nemours & P.O. Box 1625
Company Idaho Fa1 1 s, I D 83415
Savannah R i v e r L a b o r a t o r y
A i k e n , SC 29801
No. of No. of
Copies Copi es

K. McKinley/P. G. Hagen J. E. Krauss

Joint Integration Office West Val 1 e y Nucl e a r S e r v i c e s
P.O. Box 3150 Company
A1 buquerque, NM 84190 P.O. Box 1 9 1
West Val l e y , NY 14171-0191
G. W. Meyers
Atomics I n t e r n a t i o n a l D i v i s i o n J. M. Pope
Rockwell I n t e r n a t i o n a l West Val 1 e y Nucl e a r S e r v i c e s
8900 DeSoto Avenue Company
Canoga Park, CA 91304 P.O. Rox 1 9 1
West Val l e y , NY 14171-0191
R. F. W i l l i a m s
El e c t r i c Power Research W. A. Freeby/J. L. J a r d i n e
Institute R e c h t e l N a t i o n a l , Inc.
3412 H i l l v i e w Avenue P.O. Box 3965
P.O. Box 10412 San F r a n c i s c o , CA 94119
P a l o . A1 t o , CA 94304
Librarian
A. R. T e t e r Westinghouse E l e c t r i c
Rockwell I n t e r n a t i o n a l Corporation
Rocky F l a t s P l a n t Technical L i b r a r y
P.O. Box 464 P.O. Box 40039
Go1 den, CO 80402-0464 A1 buquerque , NM 87196

D. L. Z i e g l e r L. L. Hench
Rockwell I n t e r n a t i o n a l n e p a r t m e n t o f M a t e r i a1 s Science
Rocky F l a t s P l a n t R Engineering
P.O. Rox 464 IJniversity o f Florida
Go1 den, CO 80402-0464 G a i n e s v i l l e , FL 32611

J. C. Cwyner J. L. Larocca, Chairman

West V a l l e y N u c l e a r S e r v i c e s Energy Research R n e v e l opment
Company Authority
P.O. Box 1 9 1 Empire S t a t e P l a z a
West V a l l e y , YY 14171-0191 A1 bany , NY 12223

L. R. E i s e n s t a t t R. I;. P o s t
West Val 1 e y N u c l e a r S e r v i c e s College o f Engineering
Company l l n i v e r s i t y o f Arizona
P.O. Rox 191 Tucson, AZ 85721
West V a l l e y , NY 14171-0191
S. R. M i t c h e l
(1. L. Knabenschuh C o l o r a d o School o f Mines
West Val 1 e y Nucl e a r S e r v i c e s Research I n s t i t u t e
Company 5920 M c I n t y r e S t r e e t
P.O. Box 1 9 1 Golden, CO 80403
West V a l l e y , NY 14171-0191

D i s t r -5
No. of No. o f
Copi es Copies

F. L. Van Swearingen 17 Rockwell H a n f o r d O p e r a t i o n s

Bowman Grey School o f M e d i c i n e
o f Wake F o r e s t U n i v e r s i t y J. D. White
300 South Hawthorne Road E. R. Ash
Winston-Salem, N o r t h C a r o l i n a 27103 G. D. Dymmel
K. A. Gasper
K. J. Johanson R e N. Gurley
S h i r c o I n f r a r e d Systems K. J. Leist
1195 Empire C e n t r a l R. S. YcBeath
D a l l as, Texas 75247-4301 J. W e Patterson
R e D. Prosser
D. W. Dedo J. H. Roecker
MAC Cor p o r a t ion K. R. Shah
S a t u r n Shredder D i v i s i o n Y. J. Smith
201 East Shady Grovey Road T. V. Veneziano
Grand P r a i r i e , Texas 75050 G. F. Williamson
C. E. Wilson
W e M. Coppel O. D. Wodrich
S h r e d d i n g Systems, I n c . File Copy
P.O. Box 869
W i l s o n v i 11 e, Oregon 97070 UNC U n i t e d N u c l e a r I n d u s t r i e s

J. Meyers T. E. Dabrowski/W. J. K y r i a z i s
Shred Pax C o r p o r a t i o n
136 W. Commercial Avenue 2 Westinghouse H a n f o r d Company
Wood Dal e, I 1 1 in o i s 60191-1304
R. E. L e r c h
C. Raker J. 9. Watrous
H e a l t h P h y s i c s Department
University o f California 73 P a c i f i c Northwest L a b o r a t o r y
I r v i n g , CA 92717
Re P. A l l e n
3. G. T r i p o d e s W. J. B j o r k l u n d
H e a l t h P h y s i c s Department W. F. Ronner
University o f California J. L. Ruelt
I r v i n g , CA 92717 He C. Burkholder
J. R. Carrel1
ONS ITE T. D. Chikalla
R. Y. Cole
6 DOE R i c h l a n d O p e r a t i o n s O f f i c e P. M. Oal i n g
V. F. FitzPatrick
J. H. Anttonnen/P. A. C r a i g J. He J a r r e t t / C . 4. Geffen
E. A. Bracken Y. R. Katayama
H. E. Ransom D. E. Knowlton
J. L. Rhoades W. L. Kuhn/R. D. P e t e r s
M. W. Shupe
No. of No. o f
Copies C o ~esi

L. T. Lakey/K. M. Harmon W. A. Ross ( 1 0 )

J. M. Latkovich L. J. Schneider
R. C. L i i k a l a / M . R. K r e i t e r P. A. Scott
R. 0. Lokken N. M. Sherer
D. McCarthy S. C. Slate
J. L. WcElroy (1. L. Swanson
R. W. McKee C. L. Timrnerman
G. B. Mellinger R. L. Treat
J. E. Mendel/M. D. Merz G. L. McVay
J. E. Winor J. H. W e s t s i k ( 1 0 )
D. R. Montgomery W. R. Wiley/D. B. C e a r l o c k /
K. H. Oma ( 1 0 ) R. P. M a r s h a l l
A. M. Platt Technical Information (5)
J. V. Robinson Pub1 i s h i n g C o o r d i n a t i o n ( 2 )