NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS
2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20418
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competencies and with regard for appropriate balance.
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. William A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Kenneth I. Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. William A. Wulf are chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council.
This is a report of work supported by Contract DAAD19-99-C-0010 between the U.S. Army and the National Academy of Sciences. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project.
International Standard Book Number 0-309-06595-X
Limited copies are available from:
Board on Army Science and Technology
National Research Council
2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20418
(202) 334-3118
Additional copies of this report are available from:
National Academy Press
2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Lockbox 285 Washington, D.C. 20055 (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area) http://www.nap.edu
Copyright 1999 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America.
COMMITTEE ON REVIEW AND EVALUATION OF THE ARMY CHEMICAL STOCKPILE DISPOSAL PROGRAM
DAVID S. KOSSON, chair,
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick
CHARLES E. KOLB, vice chair,
Aerodyne Research, Inc., Billerica, Massachusetts
DAVID H. ARCHER,
Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
PIERO M. ARMENANTE,
New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark
DENNIS C. BLEY,
Buttonwood Consulting, Inc., Oakton, Virginia
FRANK P. CRIMI,
Lockheed Martin (retired), Saratoga, California
ELISABETH M. DRAKE,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge (until 3/31/99)
J. ROBERT GIBSON,
DuPont Agricultural Products, Wilmington, Delaware
MICHAEL R. GREENBERG,
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick
KATHRYN E. KELLY,
Delta Toxicology, Inc., Crystal Bay, Nevada
RICHARD S. MAGEE,
New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark (until 1/27/99)
JAMES F. MATHIS,
Exxon Corporation (retired), Houston, Texas
WALTER G. MAY,
University of Illinois, Urbana
ALVIN H. MUSHKATEL,
Arizona State University, Tempe (until 3/31/99)
H. GREGOR RIGO,
Rigo & Rigo Associates, Inc., Berea, Ohio
KOZO SAITO,
University of Kentucky, Lexington
ARNOLD F. STANCELL,
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta
CHADWICK A. TOLMAN,
National Science Foundation, Arlington, Virginia
WILLIAM TUMAS,
Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico
Board on Army Science and Technology Liaison
RICHARD A. CONWAY,
Union Carbide Corporation, Charleston, West Virginia
Staff
DONALD L. SIEBENALER, Study Director
HARRISON T. PANNELLA, Research Associate
WILLIAM E. CAMPBELL, Senior Project Assistant
BOARD ON ARMY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
WILLIAM H. FORSTER, chair,
Northrop Grumman Corporation, Baltimore, Maryland
THOMAS L. MCNAUGHER, vice chair,
RAND Corporation, Washington, D.C.
RICHARD A. CONWAY,
Union Carbide Corporation, Charleston, West Virginia
GILBERT S. DECKER,
Walt Disney Imagineering, Glendale, California
LAWRENCE J. DELANEY,
Delaney Group, Potomac, Maryland
ROBERT J. HEASTON,
Guidance and Control Information Analysis Center (retired), Naperville, Illinois
ELVIN R. HEIBERG, III,
Heiberg Associates, Inc., Mason Neck, Virginia
GERALD J. IAFRATE,
University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana
KATHRYN V. LOGAN,
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta
JOHN H. MOXLEY, III,
Korn/Ferry International, Los Angeles, California
STEWART D. PERSONICK,
Bell Communications Research, Inc., Morristown, New Jersey
MILLARD F. ROSE,
Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama
GEORGE T. SINGLEY, III,
Hicks & Associates, McLean, Virginia
CLARENCE G. THORNTON,
Army Research Laboratories (retired), Colts Neck, New Jersey
JOHN D. VENABLES,
Venables and Associates, Towson, Maryland
JOSEPH J. VERVIER,
ENSCO, Inc., Melbourne, Florida
ALLEN C. WARD,
Ward Synthesis, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan
Staff
BRUCE A. BRAUN, Director
MICHAEL A. CLARKE, Associate Director
MARGO L. FRANCESCO, Administrative Associate
ALVERA G. WILSON, Financial Associate
DEANNA P. SPARGER, Senior Project Assistant
Preface
The United States has maintained a stockpile of highly toxic chemical agents and munitions for more than half a century. In 1985, Public Law 99-145 mandated an "expedited" effort to dispose of M55 rockets containing unitary chemical warfare agents because of their unlikely, but plausible, potential for self-ignition. This program soon expanded into the Army Chemical Stockpile Disposal Program (CSDP), the mission of which is to eliminate the entire stockpile of unitary chemical agents and munitions. The current baseline incineration system was developed to carry out this mission.
Since 1987, the National Research Council (NRC), through its Committee on Review and Evaluation of the Army Chemical Stockpile Disposal Program (Stockpile Committee), has overseen the Army's disposal program and has endorsed the baseline incineration system for destroying the stockpile. In 1992, after setting several intermediate goals and dates, Congress enacted Public Law 102-484, which directed the Army to dispose of the entire stockpile of unitary chemical agents and munitions by December 31, 2004. As a result of the subsequent implementation, on April 29, 1997, of the international Chemical Weapons Convention, which the United States has ratified, the date has been reset to April 29, 2007.
Incineration processes raise concerns about potentially harmful emissions. Many people fear that substances in the exhaust gas could adversely affect their health and the environment, and some have remained resolutely opposed to the baseline incineration system. When properly operated, however, the incineration system with its pollution control devices releases mostly harmless products: carbon dioxide, water, and other completely oxidized products in their most stable state. However, incinerator emissions also contain small quantities of products of incomplete combustion and other trace contaminants, collectively known as substances of potential concern (SOPCs). For the CSDP, the presence of these SOPCs (and, potentially, trace quantities of chemical agents below the monitoring detection limits) have become matters of concern.
At a workshop sponsored by the Stockpile Committee in 1991, the committee suggested that the Army evaluate a number of modifications to the pollution abatement systems (PASs) for cleaning the incinerator off-gases at sites in the continental United States. One of these technologies involved using activated carbon to adsorb SOPCs. At the time, this technology was already being routinely used at chemical processing plants for the separation and recovery of trace organic products, although it had not been used as an air pollution control system for incinerators in the United States. Hence, activated carbon filters were not included in the PAS at the first full-scale chemical agent disposal facility, the Johnston Atoll Chemical Agent Disposal System (JACADS), or at the Tooele Chemical Agent Disposal Facility (TOCDF).
The Stockpile Committee described public concerns regarding emissions from the baseline incineration system in a 1992 letter report entitled, "Letter Report on Review of the Choice and Status of Incineration for Destruction of the Chemical Stockpile," and again in a February 1994 report, Recommendations for the Disposal of Chemical Agents and Munitions. The Stock-pile Committee found the baseline system to be adequate for the safe disposal of the stockpile but noted that adding activated carbon filter beds to polish all facility exhaust gases could further protect against emissions of chemical agent or trace organic materials,
even in the unlikely event of a major upset. Consequently, the committee recommended that the use of activated charcoal beds to filter the discharge from baseline system incinerators be evaluated. The assessment was to include estimates of the magnitude and potential consequences of upsets and site-specific estimates of benefits and risks. If carbon filtration was found to have site-specific advantages, the committee recommended that the equipment be installed.
This report reviews the Army's evaluation of carbon filters for use in the baseline incineration PAS, as well as the Army's change management process (the Army's tool for evaluating major equipment and operational changes to disposal facilities). In preparing this report, members of the Stockpile Committee evaluated exhaust gas emissions testing at the two operating baseline incineration systems, JACADS and the TOCDF; evaluated the development of the dilute SOPC carbon filter simulation model; and evaluated the conceptual design of a modified PAS with an activated carbon filter. The two major risk assessments conducted for each continental disposal site that use the baseline system, namely, (1) the quantitative risk assessment, which evaluates the risks and consequences of accidental agent releases, and (2) the health risk assessment, which evaluates the potential effects of nonagent emissions on human health and the environment, were also examined.
In a 1997 NRC report, Risk Assessment and Management at Deseret Chemical Depot and the Tooele Chemical Agent Disposal Facility, the Stockpile Committee first reviewed carbon filters and included findings and recommendations concerning the addition of carbon filters to the baseline PAS. In the present report, the Stockpile Committee has evaluated continuing developments pertaining to these findings and recommendations.
The committee greatly appreciates the support and assistance of NRC staff members, Donald L. Siebenaler, Harrison T. Pannella, William E. Campbell, Carol R. Arenberg, and Margo L. Francesco in the production of this report.
David S. Kosson, chair
Charles E. Kolb, vice chair
Committee on Review and Evaluation of the Army Chemical Stockpile Disposal Program
Acknowledgments
This report has been reviewed by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the NRC's Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the authors and the NRC in making the published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The content of the review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their participation in the review of this report:
Gene H. Dyer, Bechtel Corporation (retired)
Stan Kaplan, Bayesian Systems, Inc.
George E. Keller II, Union Carbide Corporation
Frank Mirer, United Auto Workers
Mark J. Rood, University of Illinois
Douglas M. Ruthven, University of Maine
Harrison Shull, U.S. Naval Postgraduate School
Leo Weitzman, LVW Associates, Inc.
Ralph T. Yang, University of Michigan
While the reviewers provided many constructive comments and suggestions, responsibility for the final content of this report rests solely with the authoring committee and the NRC.
Figures And Tables
FIGURES
4-1 |
Schematic diagram of Alternative 1 for fixed-bed PFS, |
|||
4-2 |
The six PFS filter units and dampers, |
|||
4-3 |
PFS gas reheater, |
|||
D-1 |
Sketch of adsorption equilibrium, |
|||
E-1 |
Typical concentration profile of a material strongly adsorbed on a solid, |
|||
E-2 |
"Favorable" adsorption isotherm for strongly adsorbed species, |
|||
E-3 |
Comparison of maximum adsorption for fixed bed (q) and solids injection (qm) adsorption separation modes, |
TABLES
2-1 |
Emissions Tests at the Two Operational Baseline Incineration Facilities, JACADS and the TOCDF, |
|||
2-2 |
Effect of Data Characteristics on Emissions Characteristics for Different Averaging Times, |
|||
3-1 |
Emission Levels of Chlorinated Dioxins for Some European Incinerators, |
|||
3-2 |
"Before" and "After" Data on Chlorinated Dioxin/Furan Cleanup with a Carbon Filter, |
|||
3-3 |
Chlorinated Dioxins Adsorbed on Powdered Activated Carbon, |
|||
3-4 |
Estimated Carbon Filter Breakthrough Times for Substances of Potential Concern in Stack Gases from the Chemical Agent Disposal Facility Liquid Incinerator, |
|||
3-5 |
Calculated Range of Carbon Adsorption of Agents, |
|||
4-1 |
Pressure Parameters for the Incineration of HD for a PFS-Equipped Baseline System, |
|||
4-2 |
Design Information for the PFS Carbon Filter Unit, |
|||
5-1 |
Effect of the Carbon Filter System on Risk at the Anniston Facility, |
B-1 |
Exhaust Gas Characteristics for the JACADS and TOCDF Baseline Incineration Systems, |
|||
C-1 |
Partial List of Activated Carbon Bed Filter Installations, |
|||
C-2 |
Performance of Activated Carbon Bed Filters, |
|||
D-1 |
Vapor Pressures for Various Chlorinated Dioxins, |
|||
D-2 |
Calculated Partial Pressures for Chlorinated Dioxins Based on 1 ng/m3, |
|||
D-3 |
Agent Detection Limits, |
|||
D-4 |
Agent Vapor Pressures and p/psat Ratios Based on Agent Detection Limits, |
Abbreviations And Acronyms
ATV
acute threshold value
BIF
boiler and industrial furnace
CAMDS
Chemical Agent Munitions Disposal System (Deseret Chemical Depot)
CDF
chlorinated dioxin/furan
CFR
U.S. Code of Federal Regulations
CMP
change management process
CSDP
Chemical Stockpile Disposal Program
CWC
Chemical Weapons Convention
DCD
Deseret Chemical Depot
DFS
deactivation furnace system
D-R
Dubinin-Radushkevich (adsorption equilibrium relation)
DRE
destruction and removal efficiency
DUN
dunnage incinerator
EMPC
estimated maximum possible concentration
EPA
Environmental Protection Agency
GB
satin (nerve agent)
HD
mustard agent (distilled)
HE
hazard evaluation
HEPA
high efficiency particulate air
HRA
health risk assessment
ITEQ
international toxic equivalence
JACADS
Johnston Atoll Chemical Agent Disposal System
LC50
lethal concentration resulting in fatality of 50 percent of subjects in a given population
LIC
liquid incinerator
MACT
maximum achievable control technology
MPF
metal parts furnace
MWC
municipal waste incinerator
NODA
Notice of Data Availability
NRC
National Research Council
NSPS
new source performance standards
PAS
pollution abatement system
PFS
PAS (carbon) filter system
PIC
product of incomplete combustion
POHC
principal organic hazardous constituent
PQL
practical quantitation limit
QRA
quantitative risk assessment
RAC
reference air concentration
RCRA
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
RfD
reference dose
RsD
Risk-Specific Dose
SOPC
substance of potential concern
SOPEC
substance of potential environmental concern
TOCDF
Tooele Chemical Agent Disposal Facility
VX
a type of nerve agent