Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://hdl.handle.net/11681/10033| Title: | Evaluation of treatment technologies for wastewater from insensitive munitions production; Phase 1 : technology down-selection |
| Authors: | Army Armament Research, Development, and Engineering Center (U.S.) Applied Research Associates. Felt, Deborah R. Johnson, Jared L. Larson, Steven L. Hubbard, Brian. Henry, Kerry. Nestler, Catherine C. Ballard, John H. |
| Keywords: | Insensitive munitions Production Load and pack Wastewater DNAN NTO NQ GAC UV-peroxide Bioreactors AOP Fenton oxidation Bimetal reduction |
| Publisher: | Environmental Laboratory (U.S.) Engineer Research and Development Center (U.S.) |
| Series/Report no.: | ERDC/EL TR ; 13-20. |
| Description: | Technical Report Abstract: This report describes the evaluation of treatment technologies for industrial process wastewater containing the insensitive munitions (IMs) hexahydrotrinitrotriazine (RDX), 3-nitro-1,2,4-triazol-5-one (NTO), nitroguanidine (NQ), and 2,4-dinitroanisole (DNAN). The IM-containing waste streams were assessed based on current and expected future production. Current treatment of production wastewater uses granulated activated carbon (GAC) columns and reuse of the treated water. However, the GAC treatment does not completely remove all IM constituents. Engineering issues to consider for treatment of IM wastewater include: the presence of IM precursor components, colorization of the wastewater and the pH of the fresh production water. Ten wastewater technologies were evaluated during this study. The ten technologies are based on destructive and filtration methods such as, biological treatment (destructive), chemical reduction (destructive), reverse osmosis (RO)/nano-filtration (filtration), and advanced oxidation processes (destructive). A comprehensive evaluation of alternatives relies on a detailed list of criteria, allowing for a consistent and unbiased comparison. For this evaluation of production and IM wastewater treatment alternatives, criteria for technical, cost, and risk factors for each proposed technology were used. Ultraviolet catalyzed hydrogen peroxide and electrochemical treatment scored well. UV-peroxide is a more mature water treatment system that degrades most of the IM chemical components and decolorizes the production water. Electrochemistry also scored well because it degrades some of IM chemical components and there are established electrode vendors. There are data gaps associated with all of the evaluated technologies which are discussed in the final chapter. Data to fill these gaps is required before most of these options can be implemented. |
| Rights: | Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. |
| URI: | http://hdl.handle.net/11681/10033 |
| Appears in Collections: | Technical Report |
Files in This Item:
| File | Description | Size | Format | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ERDC-EL-TR-13-20.pdf | 13.61 MB | Adobe PDF |  View/Open |