United Statas
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Solid Waste
and Emergency Response
Washington, DC 20460
EPA.530-SW-87-028C
October 1987
r/EPA
Solid Waste
Characterization of MWC Ashes
and Leachates from MSW Landfills,
Monofills, and Co-Disposal Sites
Volume III of VII
Addendum to Characterization
of Municipal Landfill Leachates
A Literature Review
-------
D-33-3-7-10
FINAL
ADDENDUM TO CHARACTERIZATION OF
MUNICIPAL LANDFILL LEACHATES - A LITERATURE REVIEW
VOLUME III OF VII
Prepared for
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF SOLID WASTE
WASHINGTON, D.C
CONTRACT NO. 68-01-7310
WORK ASSIGNMENT NO. 04
EPA Contract Officer EPA Project Officer
Jon R. Perry . Gerry Dorian
Prepared by
NUS CORPORATION
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1-1
2.0 FACTORS AFFECTING LEACHATE VOLUME 2-1
3.0 FACTORS AFFECTING LEACHATE COMPOSITION 3-1
3.1 REFUSE COMPOSITION 3-1
3.2 LANDFILL AGE OR DEGREE OF STABILIZATION 3-3
3.3 RATE OF WATER APPLICATION AND REFUSE DEPTH 3-6
4.0 LEACHATE COMPOSITION DATA 4-1
4.1 CODISPOSAL OF INDUSTRIAL WASTES AND MUNICIPAL SOLID
WASTES 4-1
4.2 CODISPOSAL OF MUNICIPAL WASTE COMBUSTION ASH
AND MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTES 4-6
5.0 CONCLUSIONS 5-1
6.0 REFERENCES 6-1
-------
TABLES
NUMBER PAGE
3-1 Range of Composition of Municipal Solid Waste 3-2
3-2 Landfill Leachate Concentration Ranges and their 3-7
Relative Significance to the Degree of Landfill Stabilization
4-1 Range of Constituent Concentrations in Leachate from 4-2
Municipal Waste Landfills
4-2 Preliminary Data on Concentrations of Organic Constituents 4-4
in Leachate from Municipal Waste Landfills
4-3 MWC Solid Residue Inorganic Composition 4-7
4-4 MWC Solid Residue Organic Composition 4-9
4-5 MWC Residue MonofillLeachate Chemical Analysis 4-10
4-6 EP Toxicity Results on MWC Residues 4-11
in
-------
ACRONYMS AND DEFINITIONS
BNA
BOO
CAS
CB
CERCLA
COD
Codisposal
CP
DWE
EP
EPA
ESP
HSWA
HWC
LF
MCL
Monofill
MSW
MW
MWC
MWEP
ND
NPDES
PAHs
PCBs
Base-neutral and Acid Extractables
Biological Oxygen Demand
Chemical Abstract Service
Chlorobiphenyl
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Disposal together of municipal solid wastes and municipal solid waste
combustion ashes
Chlorinated Phenols
Deionized Water Extraction Test Method
Extraction Procedure
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Electrostatic Precipitator
Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments
Hazardous Waste Combustion
Landfill
Maximum Contaminant Level
A landfill that contains only solid waste combustion ashes and
residues
Municipal Solid Waste
Monitoring Well
Municipal Waste Combustion
Monofilled Waste Extraction Procedure, also known as SW-924
Not Detected
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons
Polychlorinated Biphenyls
IV
-------
ACRONYMS AND DEFINITIONS
PAGE TWO
PCDDs
PCDFs
POTW
RCRA
RDF
RPD
SS
SW-924
TCLP
TDS
TEF
TNK
TOC
TSCA
Polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins
Polychlorinated dibenzofurans
Publically Owned Treatment Works
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
Refuse Derived Fuel
Relative Percent Difference
Suspended Solids
Deionized Water Extraction Test Method
Toxic Characteristics Leaching Procedure Test Method
Total Dissolved Solids
Toxic Equivalency Factors
Total Nitrogen Kjeldahl
Total Organic Carbon
Toxic Substances Control Act
-------
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this report is to summarize the findings of literature focused on the
assessment of leachate production at municipal solid waste landfills. This is
undertaken in support of the USEPA study of the RCRA Subtitle D Program. The EPA
is mandated to assess the potential impacts of solid waste municipal landfills on
human health and the environment and to make recommendations concerning
possible changes to the Subtitle D Program. This study is one of a series of
investigations designed by EPA to aid EPA in this task.
This report summarizes information found on factors influencing both the quantity
and quality of leachates generated at Subtitle D municipal landfills and presents
data generated on the composition of real leachates and leachates formulated
under test conditions (extracts).
The NUS report Determination of Municipal Landfill Leachate Characteristics was
the first literature review report issued for this purpose.- It reviewed only the
following three documents.
McGinley, P. M., and P. Kmet. Formation. Characteristics. Treatment, and
Disposal of Leachate from Municipal Solid Waste Landfills. Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources Special Report, August 1,1984.
Sobotka & Co., Inc. Case history data compiled and reported in a July 1986
report to the U.S. EPA's Economic Analysis Branch of the Office of Solid
Waste.
Brown, K. W., and K. C. Donnelly. The Occurrence and Concentration of
Organic Chemicals in Hazardous and Municipal Waste Landfill Leachate.
Texas A&M University, Soil and Crop Sciences Department, College Station,
Texas.
This report summarizes additional reports and published papers on the subject. This
literature was searched by EPA and NUS. The list of references reviewed in the
course of this study is provided in the Reference section (6.0).
1-1
-------
2.0 FACTORS AFFECTING LEACH ATE VOLUME
Leachate volume generation is dependent on numerous factors that generally can
be grouped into the following four categories:
1. Availability of water
2. Landfill surface conditions
3. Refuse conditions
4. Underlying soil conditions
Some of these factors are directly related to the waste and to the geographic and
climatic locations of the landfill whereas others can be controlled by landfill
operators and designers.
Factors affecting water availability include precipitation, surface run-on,
groundwater intrusion, irrigation, refuse decomposition, and co-disposal of liquid
waste or sludge with refuse. Of these, precipitation in the form of both rain and
snow should be the largest contributor of liquid to the landfill.
Water reaching the landfill surface may either evaporate or transpire, run off, or
infiltrate the soil surface, depending on landfill surface conditions. These
conditions include topography, temperature, humidity, wind speed, vegetation,
and cover material (type, dimensions, water content, compaction, permeability,
etc.).
After the surface cover material has been fully saturated, refuse retention and
transmission characteristics determine the rate of percolation of leachate through
the refuse. Theoretically, water does not move through a compacted refuse cell
until the field capacity of the waste has been exceeded. Realistically though,
because of the heterogeneous nature of most wastes, the channeling of some water
through the waste does occur prior to the attainment of field capacity. Once field
capacity has been reached, any additional moisture will cause leachate movement.
Ultimately, underlying soil conditions can modify the rate and amount of leachate
generation. Soils underlying and surrounding the refuse cell, which have lower
permeabilities than the cover soil and refuse, can determine the rate of infiltration
2-1
-------
and percolation and thus the volume of leachate generated. Where underlying
layers are unsaturated, the infiltration rate is determined by the permeability of the
upper layers. Where underlying layers are saturated, the layer with least
permeability will control infiltration. When fine-grained underlying soils control
infiltration and percolation, the upper layers will become saturated or the water
will flow laterally.
Landfill design, management or operating procedures can influence factors such as
water availability, surface conditions, and refuse conditions and thus influence the
volume of leachate generated. These procedures include handling of cover
material, watering prior to compaction, variation in compaction and cell
construction, and variation in waste composition.
2-2
-------
3.0 FACTORS AFFECTING LEACHATE COMPOSITION
Leachate composition, like volume generation, is a function of several variables that
are both inherent in the refuse mass and landfill location, and created by landfill
operators and designers. These factors include, but are not limited to, refuse
composition and processing, landfill age or stage of maturation, rate of water
application, and the depth of the leached bed (or thickness of waste layers).
3.1 Refuse Composition
Wastes reach ing municipal solid waste landfills can be grouped into five categories:
Residential
Agricultural
Commercial
Municipal
Industrial
Residential and commercial wastes are composed primarily of rubbish (paper,
plastics and glass), food wastes, and ashes from waste incineration. Agricultural
waste includes, in addition to wastes similar to residential wastes, organic materials
from crops and animals. Industrial wastes contain materials characteristic of the
industry from which they were generated and may include sludges, ashes, and
industrial residues. Presently, municipal landfills are not permitted to accept
hazardous industrial wastes except those generated from small-quantity
generators. Municipal wastes consist of a diverse list of wastes. The relative
composition of municipal solid waste, as determined by several investigators, is
presented in Table 3-1 (Pohland and Harper, 1984).
The codisposal of industrial sludges, ashes, and residues with residential,
commercial, municipal, and other solid wastes can contribute toxic compounds,
both organic and inorganic, to leachates and subsequently to groundwater. The
small generator exclusion rule under RCRA has allowed the disposal of small
quantities of these hazardous materials in sanitary landfills. Additionally, small
quantities of hazardous constituents are disposed from households and businesses
3-1
-------
TABLE 3-1
RANGE OF COMPOSITION OF MUNICIPAL SOUD WASTE*
Component
Food Wastes
Garden Wastes
Paper
Cardboard
Plastics
Rubber
Leather
Textiles
Plastic File
Wood
Glass
Metallic
Tin Cans
Non-Ferous
Metals
Ferrous Metals
Dirt , Ashes,
Brick, etc.
Moisture
Average
12
39
7
2
3
2
7
10
8
10
Average
<25.1
44.5
>22
1.1
11.3
8.7
7.1
Average
25.0
0
50.0
>3.0
5.0
1.0
7.0
4.0
5.0
Range
8.8-12.8
5.8-17.0
>35.2-25.3
>4.2-5.2
1.1-2.5
0.4-1.3
9.1-12.4
8.0-8.6
1.0-3.6
Average
10.7
10.4
>40.6
>4.5
1.7
1.0
10.9
9.0
2.3
Range
4-9
1-10
45-57
4-9
2-5
1-2
.9-17
6-15
3-15
21-35
Average
7
5
50
6
3
1
12
10
7
27
Range
6-26
0-20
25-45
3-15
2-8
0-2
0-2
0-4
1-4
4-16
2-8
0-1
1-4
0-10
15-40
Typical
15
12
40
4
3
1
1
2
2
8
6
1
2
4
20
'Percent by weight, wet weight basis
Source: Portland and Harper, 1984
3-2
-------
and reach the sanitary landfill as residential, commercial, agricultural, or municipal
wastes.
Several municipal solid waste landfills throughout the country serve as co-disposal
sites where, along with refuse, ash from municipal waste incinerators is disposed.
Several studies have been conducted on the characteristics of municipal waste
combustion (MWC) leachates and codisposal leachates. Results for these studies are
discussed in Section 4.0 of this report.
3.2 Landfill Age or Degree of Stabilization
According to Pohland and Harper, 1984, the coupling of landfill age with leachate
production has been one of the most elusive challenges for landfill operators,
designers and regulators. Most municipal waste landfills proceed through a series
of predictable phases whose significance and longevity are determined by the
previously mentioned inherent and controlled climatological and operational
factors.
A municipal landfill exists throughout much of its active life as an anaerobic
microbial unit that experiences an initial lag period that lasts until sufficient
moisture has accumulated to sustain a viable microbial community. Thereafter,
further manifestations of waste conversion and stabilization occur in more or less
distinct phases. These phases are described by Pohland and Harper (1984) as
follows.
.
Phase I: Initial Adjustment
Initial waste placement and preliminary moisture accumulation.
Initial subsidence and closure of each landfill area.
Changes in environmental parameters first detected to reflect the onset of
stabilization processes, which are trending in a logical fashion.
3-3
-------
Phase II: Transition
Field capacity is exceeded and leachate is formed.
A transition from initial aerobic to anaerobic microbial stabilization occurs.
The primary electron acceptor shifts from oxygen to nitrates and sulfates
with the displacement of oxygen by carbon dioxide in the gas.
A trend toward reducing conditions is established.
Measurable intermediates such as the volatile organic fatty acids first
appear in the leachate.
Phase III: Acid Formulation
Intermediary volatile organic fatty acids become predominant with the
continuing hydrolysis and fermentation of waste and leachate
constituents.
A precipitous decrease in pH occurs with a concomitant mobilization and
possible complexation of metal species.
Nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorus are released and utilized in
i
support of the growth of biomass commensurate with the prevailing
substrate conversion rates.
Hydrogen may be detected and affect the nature and type of intermediary
products being formed.
3-4
-------
Phase IV: Methane Fermentation
Intermediary products appearing during the acid formation phase are
converted to methane and excess carbon dioxide.
The pH returns from a buffer level controlled by the volatile organic fatty
acids to one characteristic of the bicarbonate buffering system.
Oxidation-reduction potentials are at their lowest values.
Nutrients continue to be consumed.
Complexation and precipitation of metal species proceed.
Leachate organic strength is dramatically decreased in correspondence
with increases in gas production.
Phase V: Final Maturation
Relative dormancy following active biological stabilization of the readily
available organic constituents in the waste and leachate.
Nutrients may become limiting.
Measurable gas production all but ceases.
Natural environmental conditions become reinstated.
Oxygen and oxidized species may slowly reappear with a corresponding
increase in oxidation-reduction potential.
More microbially-resistant organic materials may be slowly converted with
the possible production of humic-like substances capable of complexing
with and re-mobilizing heavy metals.
3-5
-------
Table 3-2 illustrates the variation in leachate composition caused by the progression
of the landfill through the stabilization phases.
The rate of progress through these phases is dependent on the physical, chemical,
and microbiological conditions developed within each landfill cell. For example,
acidic conditions established during acid formation may preclude methane
fermentation; high compaction may restrict the movement of moisture and
nutrients through the waste; and microbial inhibition may be induced by the
presence of toxic substances. This last example means that in-situ stabilization may
occur at reduced rates as the leachate becomes more concentrated and the
extended stabilization period increases the opportunity for ieachate migration
from the landfill. In addition, this leachate is likely to be carrying some of the
microbe-inhibiting toxic constituents with it.
3.3 Rate of Water Application and Refuse Depth
As mentioned earlier, the rate of water application and refuse depth have an effect
on the leachate composition. Once the soil has been saturated with moisture,
leaching closely follows the rate of moisture input. Because of this input-output
leaching pattern , it is found that higher rates of water application to a landfill will
produce a more dilute leachate than lower rates of water applications.
A comparison of refuse test cells with and without continuous flow-through of
water showed that continuous flushing brought about a marked trend toward
reduced levels of dissolved materials. This proved true for both inorganic and
organic solutes, and demonstrates the important effect of dilution on leachate
quality.
Refuse depth works in conjunction with water application rates in affecting the
composition of the leachate. Water travels from the top of the refuse mass, moving
from one void space to the next until it reaches the bottom of the fill. The
percolating water will accumulate contaminants until the solubility limit of the
leaching solution is attained. Thus, for a deeper landfill, the probability of the
leachate reaching its solubility limit is greater than for a shallower landfill, because
of greater contact time between refuse and percolate. However, much depends on
the rate at which the water percolates through the landfill. Higher infiltration
3-6
-------
TABLE 3-2
LANDFILL LEACHATE CONCENTRATION RANGES AND THEIR RELATIVE SIGNIFICANCE TO THE
DEGREE OF LANDFILL STABILIZATION
Leachate
Constituent
Biochemical Oxygen
Demand (BOD,)
mg/l (ppm)
Chemical Oxygen
Demand (COD)
mg/l (ppm)
Total Volatile Acids
(TVA), mg/l (ppm) as
Acetic Acid
Total Organic
Carbon (TOO, mg/l
(ppm)
BOD,/COD Ratio
COD/TOC Ratio
Phase of Biological Stabilization
Transition
100-10,900
Influence of
dilution and
aerobic solubil-
ization of waste
organic*
480-18.000
Trending in a
similar fash ion to
BOD,
100-3,000
Beginning to
appear as a result
of aerobic
solubilization
100-3,000
Beginning to
appear as a result ,
of solubilization
0.23-0.87
Increasing bio-
degradabilityof
organic* due to
solubilization
4.3-4.8
Low oxidation
state of organ ics
Acid
Formation
Phase
1,000-57,700
Accumulation of
biodegradable
organic acids due
to methanogenic
lag
1,500-71,100
Trending in a
similar fashion to
BOD,
500-27,700
Increasing rapidly;
accumulation due
to methanogenic
lag
3,000-18,800
Solubilization of
organic polymers
to monomers;
beta oxidation to
volatile acids
0.44.8
High biodegrad-
ability
2.1-3.4
Low to moderate
oxidation state of
organic*
Methane
Fermentation
Phase
600-3,400
Conversion of
biodegradable
organ ics to
gaseous end
products (CH4 and
C02) '
580-9,760
Trending in a
similar fashion to
BOD,
300-2,230
Conversion of
volatile acids to
methane;
decrease in
aqueous carbon
250-4,000
Conversion of
fatty acids to
acetic acid;
fermentation of
acetic acid to
methane
0.17-0.64
Decreasing bio-
degradability due
to methanation
2.0-3.0
Moderate to high
oxidation of
organic*
Final
Maturation
Phase
4-120
Influence of high
molecular weight
organic residuals
(humics, fulvics)
31-900
Higher influence
of residual
organic* than in
BOD, assay
70-260
Influence of high
molecular weight
organic*
Essentially absent;
methanogenic
system under-
saturated
0.02-0.13
Low degree of
biodegradabiiity
0.4-2.0
Overall
Range
4-57,7000
31-71,100
70-27,700
0-18,800
0.02-0.87
0.4-4.8
3-7
-------
TABLE 3-2
LANDFILL LEACHATE CONCENTRATION RANGES AND THEIR RELATIVE SIGNIFICANCE TO THE
DEGREE OF LANDFILL STABILIZATION
PAGE TWO
Leachate
Constituent
Total Kjeldahl
Nitrogen (TKN), mg/l
(ppm)
Nitrate Nitrogen
(NO3-N), mg/l (ppm)
Ammonia Nitrogen
(NH3-N), mg/l (ppm)
NH3-NHXN Ratio
Total Phosphate
(PO4-P),mg/l (ppm)
Total Alkalinity, mg/l
(ppm)asCaCOj
Phase of Biological Stabilization
Transition
Phase
180-360
0.1-51
Increasing due to
oxidation of
ammonia
120-225
0.1-0.9
0.6-1.7
200-2,050
Acid
Formation
Phase
14-1,970
May be low due to
microbial assimi-
lation of nitro-
genous
compounds
0.05-19
Decreasing due to
reduction to
ammonia or
nitrogen gas
2-1.030
Increasing due to
nitrate reduction
and protein
breakdown
0-0.98
Protein
breakdown;
biological
assimilation
0.2-120
Biological
assimilation and
metal
complexation
140-9,650
Increasing due to
volatile acid
formation and
bicarbonate
dissolution
Methane
Fermentation
Phase
25-82
Low due to
microbial assimi-
lation of nitro-
genous
compounds
Absent
Complete
conversion to
ammonia or
nitrogen gas
6-430
Decreasing due to
biological
assimilation
0.1-0.84
0.7-14
Low due to
biological
assimilation
760-5,050
Decreasing due to
volatile acid
removal
Final
Maturation
Phase
7-490
0.3-0.6
0.3-0.97
0.2-14
200-3,520
Overall
Range
7-1,970
0-51
0-0.98
0.2-120
140-9,650
3-8
-------
TABLE 3-2
LANDRLL LEACHATE CONCENTRATION RANGES AND THEIR RELATIVE SIGNIFICANCE TO THE
DEGREE OF LANDFILL STABILIZATION
PAGE THREE
Leachate
Constituent
Solids (TS), mg/l
(ppm)
PH (pH units)
Oxidation-Reduction
Potential (ORP), mV
Copper, mg/l (ppm)
Iron, mg/l (ppm)
Lead, mg/l (ppm)
Magnesium, mg/l
(ppm)
Manganese, mg/l
(ppm)
Phase of Biological Stabilization
Transition
Phase
a
2,450-2,960
6-7
+ 40 to -40
0.085-0.39
68-312
0.0001-0.004
.
66-96
0.6
Acid
Formation
Phase
4,120-65,300
increasing due to
solubiiization of
organicsand
mobilization of
metals
4.7-7.7
Low due to
volatile acid
accumulation
+ 40 to -240
Decreasing due to
the depletion of
oxygen
0.005-2.2
90-2,200
0.01-1.44
3-1,410
0.6-41
Methane
Fermentation
Phase
2,050-6,410
6.3-6.8
increasing due to
volatile acid
removal and
bicarbonate
dissolution
-70 to -240
0.03-0.18
Decreasing
(complexation)
115-336
Decreasing
(complexation)
0.01-0.1
Decreasing
(complexation)
81-505
Decreasing
(complexation)
0.6
Decreasing
(complexation)
Final
Maturation
Phase
1,460-4,640
7.1-8.8
-97 to +163
0.02-0.56
4-20
0.01-0.1
31-190
0.6
Overall
Range
1 ,460-65.300
4.7-8.8
-240 to + 1 63
O.OOS-2.2
4-2,200
0.001-1.44
3-1,140
0.6-41
3-9
-------
TABLE 3-2
LANDRLL LEACHATE CONCENTRATION RANGES AND THEIR RELATIVE SIGNIFICANCE TO THE
DEGREE OF LANDFILL STABILIZATION
PAGE FOUR
Leachate
Constituent
Nickel, mg/l (ppm)
Potassium,mg/l
(ppm)
Sodium, mg/l (ppm)
Zinc, mg/l (ppm)
Total Coliform,
CFU/100ml
Fecal Coliform,
CFU/100 ml
Fecal Streptococci,
CFU/IOOml
Viruses, PFU/1 00 ml
Conductivity,
u mhos/cm
Chloride mg/l (ppm)
Sulfate mg/l (ppm)
Phase of Biological Stabilization
Transition
Phase
0.02-1.55
35-2,300
20-7,600
0.06-21
' 10°- 10«
10"- 10s
10°-10«
2,450-3,310
30-5,000
Biologically stable;
good indicator of
washout
10-458
Increasing due to
aerobic oxidation
Acid
Formation
Phase
0.03-79
35-2.300
065-220
10°- 10s
100-105
10°-106
Essentially absent
1,600-17,100
Increasing due to
mobilization of
metals
30-5,000
Stable; good
hydraulic tracer
10-3,240
Increasing initially
due to aerobic
solubilization then
decreasing as
anaerobic
conditions are
established
Methane
Fermentation
Phase
0.01-1.0
Decreasing
(complexation)
35-2,300
0.4-6.0
Essentially absent
Essentially absent
Essentially absent
Essentially absent
2,900-7,700
Decreasing due to
metals
complexation with
sulfides
30-5.000
Stable; good
hydraulic tracer
Absent
Complete
conversion to
sulfides
Final
Maturation
Phase
0.07
35-2.300
0.4
Absent
Absent
Absent
Essentially absent
1 ,400-4,500
30-5,000
Stable; good
hydraulic tracer
5-40
Reappearing due
to aerobic
oxidation
Overall
Range
0.02-79
35-2.300
20-7,600
0.06-220
0-1 0s
0-10'
0-1 0«
Absent
1,400-17,100
30-5,000
0-3,240
3-10
-------
TABLE 3-2
LANDRLL LEACHATE CONCENTRATION RANGES AND THEIR RELATIVE SIGNIFICANCE TO THE
DEGREE OF LANDFILL STABILIZATION
PAGE FIVE
Leachate
Constituent
Sulfide mg/l (ppm)
Cadmium, mg/l
(ppm)
Calcium, mg/l (ppm)
Chromium, mg/l
(ppm)
Phase of Biological Stabilization
Transition
Phase
Essentially absent
-------
rates increase the percolation rate and reduce the contact time between percolate
and refuse. Thus, a more dilute leachate can be expected.
3-12
-------
4.0 LEACHATE COMPOSITION DATA
As discussed in the previous section, a large number of variables determine the
composition of a municipal landfill leachate. Table 4-1 presents literature values
demonstrating the concentration ranges for the chemical composition of municipal
landfill leachates. From this table and the references indicated, the following
observations can be made: leachates are highly variable with respect to constituent
concentration; leachates are generally high in total organic carbon and total
dissolved solids; and leachates tend to be acidic, though the leachate final pH will
' be influenced by the buffering capacity of the geologic formation the landfill is
placed in.
Table 4-2 demonstrates the wide range in types and concentrations of organic
constituents detected in municipal leachate. Most of these compounds do not occur
naturally and are a result of the wastes placed in the landfill.
4.1 Codisposal of Industrial Wastes and Municipal Solid Wastes
One EPA-sponsored study conducted by Jones etal. (1985) simulated the effects of
co-disposal of industrial waste with municipal solid waste (MSW). In this study,
MSW leachate was shown to be acidic (pH = 5.3) and to have very high organic and
ionic loadings. Early samples in the test exceeded Federal Primary Drinking Water
Standards for all constituents with established standards except copper. When
untreated industrial wastes, including a glass-electronics etching sludge, a chlorine
production brine, and an electroplating waste were added individually to test cells,
the leachate pH rose from about 5.3 to 6.3. Also, biological activity was reduced,
especially by the glass-electronics etching sludge (COD and BOD values averaged
only 28 percent of the values for MSW-only leachates). This illustrates the effect of
toxics on biological activity and the stabilization process. Metals in the industrial
wastes were generally not readily leached from the test cells. Though the
electroplating waste produced significantly increased levels of metals, the increases
were small relative to the total metal content in the waste. Soluble salts were
readily leached from all of the industrial wastes codisposed with the MSW. Sodium
and chlorine concentrations were elevated for all codisposed industrial wastes,
especially the chlorine production brine.
4-1
-------
TABLE 4-1
RANGE OF CONSTITUENT CONCENTRATIONS IN LEACHATE
FROM MUNICIPAL WASTE LANDFILLS
(in mg/l (ppm) unless noted)
Constituent
COD
BOD
Total organic carbon (TOO
Total sol ids (TS)
TDS
Total suspended solids (TSS)
Volatile suspended solids (VSS)
Total volatile solids (TVS)
Fixed Sol ids (FS)
Alkalinity (as CaCO3)
Total coliform (CFU/1 00 ml)
Iron
Zinc
Sulfate
Nickel
Total volatile acids (TV A)
Manganese
Fecal coliform (CFU/1 ,000 ml)
Specific conductance (mhg/cm)
Ammonium nitrogen (NHa-N)
Hardness (as CaCOa)
Total phosphorus
Organic phosphorus
Nitrate nitrogen
Phosphate (inorganic)
Ammonia nitrogen (NHs-N)
Concentration Range
50-90,000
5-75,000
50-45,000
1-75,000
725-55,000
10-45,000
20-750
90-50,000
800-50,000
0.1-20,350
0-105
200-5-.500
0.6-220
25-500
0.2-79
70-27,700
0.6-41
0-105
960-16,300
0-1.106
0.1-36,000
0.1-150
0.4-100
0.1-45
0.4-150
0.1-2,000
4-2
-------
TABLE 4-1
RANGE OF CONSTITUENT CONCENTRATIONS IN LEACHATE
FROM MUNICIPAL WASTE LANDFILLS
(in mg/l (ppm) unless noted)
PAGE TWO
Constituent
Organic nitrogen
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN)
Acidity
Turbidity (Jackson units)
Chlorine
pH (dimensionless)
Sodium
Copper
Lead
Magnesium
Potassium
Cadmium
Mercury
Selenium
Chromium
Concentration Range
0.1-1,000
7-1,970
2,700-6,000
30-450
30-5,000
3.5-8.5
20-7,600
0.1-9
0.001-1.44
3-15,600
35-2,300
0-0.375
0-0.16
0-2.7
0.02-18
Source: Sobotka, 1986.
4-3
-------
TABLE 4-2
PREUMINARY DATA ON CONCENTRATIONS OF ORGANIC CONSTITUENTS
IN LEACHATE FROM MUNICIPAL WASTE LANDFILLS (units in ppb)«
Constituent
Acetone
Benzene
Bromomethane
1-Butanol
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Chioroethane
Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Delta BHC
Dibromomethane
1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene
Dichlorodifluoromethane
1,1-Dichloroethane
1 ,2-Dichloroethane
Gs 1,2-Dichloroethene
Trans 1,2-Dichloroethene
Dichloromethane
1,2-Dichlorbpropane
Diethyl phthalate
Dimethyl phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Endrin
Ethyl acetate
Ethyl benzene
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Minimum
140
2
10
50
2
2
5
2
2
10
0
5
2
10
2
0
4
4
2
2
2
4
4
0
5
5
6
Maximum
11,000
410
170
360
398
237
170
14
1,300
170
5
25
20
369
6,300
11,000
190
1,300
3,300
100
45
55
12
1
50
580
110
Median
7,500
17
55
220
10
10
7.5
10
10
55
0
10
7.7
95
65.5
7.5
97
10
230
10
31.5
15
10
0.1
42
38
22
4-4
-------
TABLE 4-2
PRELIMINARY DATA ON CONCENTRATIONS OF ORGANIC CONSTITUENTS
IN LEACHATE FROM MUNICIPAL WASTE LANDFILLS (units in ppb)«
PAGE TWO
Constituent
Isophorene
Methyl ethyl ketone
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Naphthalene
Nitrobenzene
4-Nitrophenol
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
2-Propanol
1 , 1 ,2,2-Tetrachloroethene
Tetrachloroethene
Tetrahydrofuran
Toluene
Toxaphene
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
1 , 1 ,2-Trichloroethane
Trichloroethene
Trichlorofluoromethane
Vinyl chloride
m-Xylene
p-Xylene + o-Xylene
Minimum
10
110
10
4
2
17
3
10
94
7
2
5
2
0
0
2
1
4
0
21
12
Maximum
85
28,000
660
19
40
40
25
28,800
10,000
210
100
260
1,600
5
2,400
500
43
100
100
79
50
Median
10
8,300
270
8
15
25
3
257
6,900
20
40
18
166
1
10
10
3.5
12.5
10
26
18
a The table was provided by U.S. EPA, Office of Waste, Economic Analysis
Branch. It includes data from 15 municipal landfill case studies performed by
OSW12; data from landfill leachate sampling studies performed by
Wisconsin and Minnesota; and data from NPDES discharge permits for
leachates from landfills in New Jersey. These studies provided reliable data,
albeit on a relatively small number of facilities.
Source: Sobotka, 1986.
4-5
-------
4.2 Codisposai of Municipal Waste Combustion Ash and Municipal Solid Wastes
One codisposal practice currently common in the United States and potentially
affecting leachate quality is the codisposal of municipal waste combustion (MWC)
ash with other municipal solid wastes. A study by GCA Corporation (1986) reports
that by the end of 1986, 61 MWC facilities would be in operation and would
produce 9,781 tons per day of residue. Eighty-eight percent of these residues would
be land disposed, including codisposal with municipal solid wastes. Thus, the
composition of these ashes and the effect they may have on the composition of
municipal waste leachates must come under scrutiny.
Varying incineration options and fuel composition vary the characteristics of the
MWC residues. Tables 4-3 and 4-4 present data on inorganic and organic
compositions, respectively, for both MWC fly ash and bottom ash. Table 4-4 shows
that polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDDs) and polychlorinated dibenzofurans
(PCDFs) are present in ash and are more abundant in fly ash than bottom ash. The
2,3,7,8-TCDD dioxin isomer exceeds the EPA standard of 1 part per billion (ppb) for
most fly ash data. These data are corroborated by a study done in Japan on
municipal incinerator ashes (Wakimoto and Tatsukawa, 1985).
Data presented by GCA Corporation (1986) for MWC residue monofill leachates
indicate that lead and chromium values exceed Federal Primary Drinking Water
Standards. These results are presented in Table 4-5. Also, EP Toxicity leach testing
on various MWC residues resulted in lead and cadmium values above the maximum
allowable limits. These data are presented in Table 4-6. These results compare well
with results obtained in tests conducted by C.W. Francis (1984) from the Oak Ridge
National Laboratory. The author found that a simulated codisposal leachate was
more acidic than an ash-only leachate and that a municipal waste leachate
extracted metals more aggressively than water. Several of the municipal-waste-
leachate ash leachates exceeded Federal Drinking Water Standards, particularly for
cadmium and lead during initial leaching.
4-6
-------
TABLE 4-3
MWC SOLID RESIDUE INORGANIC COMPOSITION (UNITS IN pp» UNLESS NOTED)
I,,..
h«
c
M
c
5
ft
Cl
I
1
c
t
r«
t
*
(0
M
Cy
III
Aff*
it*
»«*
U
J»
st
U
C.
)a
In
In
tb
Ik
ft
|.
k
An
>
"1*
II
LI
SI
r
c
s
c.
H«
Ir
II
1
SWTT : e.c.
I l|> AC* (I)
11.100
1.0
I)."""
tP.un
? 1
J.li"
I.JO-
IS
It
11. tin
101
J'.ooo
|10
2. 101
:«.ooo
ii
9)0
j-.cot
)9
11
111
III
I.I
1.100
110
11
11
1.1
0.92
= 1
«=0 1
11. >
«.l
2J
1)
l\ tj
M*
1
fl< *.'
1". . ' M
ft
1 1 I'P"
. .to'1
* .
:
f.i «
12'
;t
II I."
10.1
111
i. I'M
i !><>(>
1!
'.0
M
it.foo
.1
l.i
(t
11
on
1.1)0
!)o
Ii
If
-.J
i.o;
0 21
1.5
)1
» *
) 1
II
I.I
p. 10;
III II AO. Mi-
ll. 000
9 100
li.eoc
2'»-
I.MO
1:0.000
00
I.IM
i.ioe
It.MO
100
l.fOO
MO
IP. 100
i;
in
it
I.IM
)IO
1.200
. 1
P M
11.100
11
Scf.tkrt l«» )> l-l
II. ».k 111 II. A.k 121 ri. Aik 111 C, AO |l|5
II.OUO It. 100 IV 100 It. 100
12. POO ».VK« «,^P IMOO
10.000 22. coo :: ro? >»,«<»
211 J»?
l.JOO I.IOO I.1TT .t,l>K>
iii.ooo m.rno tn.oo" no. too
11. ion
l.tu i. no HP . ;P«
1.100 I.IM 1.170 <-*
it. oo« )i.iv>o t: coj i». wo
M 104 «P
up i.ivi IIP -. i;*
1.000 I0t> III «00
«.tOO l.tOK I.N» l.jno
II
lot is |)" .100
11 It i'
III Ml
11.000 11.001 ll.'OO
)| )4
1*1. )00
l.tw
I!.»OI>
S. 100
00
100
100
I-I
II. A.k |J|S
10.000
IP.K10
tf.ooo
>».ooo
IJf.POO
M.'OO
100
100
w.ioo
00
1.000
100
too
-100
200
MO
li.WO
10*. MO
I.IOO
I.IOO
1.100
100
100
10*
I-J
11, Aik 1)1*
Il.tlW
10 KK>
ii.OUO
»,000
111, MO
U.IOO
100
100
10.000
.100
too
t.OOl
>)00
100
)00
l.OCO
wo
11.000
Itfr.MO
t.100
1.100
I.IOO
100
.100
<100
l-l
II. All III*
u.too
I.APP
t;.ouo
».w
io/.??o
12. IPO
10"
>IOO
11. MO
< »0
too
I.IM
.100
Ml
-wo
I.IOO
<)00
U.IOO
III. 100
I. MO
lit. to*
2.100
200
< 110
<100
-------
9861 ' '
VDD
CVI Ool Oil
u; ont'c oot't
o>,.';i too o;i ooo'it
our ( joo ;: oiw'(
i :': 1-1
M: c:i Oil
Oil- (rtt> Oil-
t U t I
11- ((. il-
«t< oir- on-
OM l»I"l' C?t
Ofc.'l 0<* MO'I
Vt ' bCt > 01 1 *
II U. II
OOC'll luO'K OOO'K
OiVt .^'1 OOt'l
Ov( 1 (,,-( OK
tl 1C ((
ooo't; ;oi'» ooo'l
OOU'II .J> >l 000 '01
«:>- 1 . t'l Alt
(,:: it ow
ooo':: i^u'n OM'II
Ui, '. uM't 00. '1
Oi:': <*-'i. ooft
111 i.i \:. Ill 1.1
101
ff
OOt'l
uri
IK'K
t
0
t(0'l
nti
III
0
0
HI
its' it
IK
II
II
((I'll
orrt
on
u
itri
OOO'll
01
itt'ti
itt'ii
OOO'll
V,
0(1
N
M
001 't
(in
Ml'lf
t
0
«(»
1(1
(It
0
II
1(1
a\n'll
(it
001
It
ooi'u
otrt
on
it
itrt
ClO'lt
tl
Itl'OI
OCA'I
(XX 'H
..»
*
(t
0
tl
Oil
Oil OU'I
i1> It
u- on
Oil >
OOt'l *
OM't OOO'OI
0(( OOt'l Oil
oil > ooi'l
It' Ml
eoc'ti ooo'll ooo'll
oai'l o«'l
c(t ot otrt
4(
ooo'll
OOO'K 001 'II 000' III
OOt'l OtK'1
Olt
OOO'd OOO'll
AjO't 1 . oo:'t
OOO'OI OOO'tl
III V«» 1(1 »» MlWf ,«!» «ll
>*!>. '«'ll
**""' M
tl
001 't
10
OO/'I
on
001
It
w
OOI'(
0(1
Oil
01
OOO'll
OOI'I
OK
OOO'lt
OOt'l
OOO'lt
OOI'II
OOt'l
«>t
""""'
,. ......
001
001-
OOt
OOI'I
Olt'll
OM'OI
OOt 'Ml
OOt'l
DM-
OOO'I
090'!
OOI
Ofl-
O00'(
OOt '1
Obi-
ooftti
OOO'I'
001
otn'i
OOI'II
OOO'I
OOt 'It
OOl't
OOt 'I I
,1(1 !»
IH
!*"»»
Ml-
001-
001 >
ont'i
eoi'tii
oot'l
ooriti
OOI'I
00,.
ooo'l
dot
001
001-
COO'I
eon
(XX >
001 '(f
004' t<
OOt
OOI'U
OOT'ii
COO'I
Mf'lt
OOt'il
il(l >">
l-\
!-"»
Ml
001
Ml
000 't
OM'tl
oort
ooriii
OOI'II
OOt-
OOO'I
cot.
001
Mt
ooo'f
Mt
00(>
OOt 'It
Ml
Ml
Ml'll
OOO'tll
OOO'I
oo'tt
OOt '01
OOl'tt
,1(1 M«» Ml
c-
l*"i
I
II
1
u
3
I
I
1
IS
n
1
*H
.*
'~J
M
«l
IM
"1
3
IS
"S
1
,n
.1*
.'f
1
"J
III
J
1
u
.'3
A
11
l»
1
u
.*!
IS
J
IK
J
""II
00
4
(panii|iuoD)
-tr 310V1
-------
u>
TABLE 4-4
MWC SOLID RESIDUE ORGANIC COMPOSITION (UNITS IN PPb)
t |l| Ullt.l.1.1 |»| >MIMi«l»l ll»|« RlkU till* lMU.IM.1 I*)* *..!...» Ill) tl| ttl. 41..» |U) »..-;..>
«IIM fc*IIM t*(t*» Irtll.l t«l.»«.H
ill Juk i«f lir *.k t+ xr. «.» uk
W t II I.Mb III II t t * II 11 H.I-H- It.>-M>
1J U '
l.CM t I I.IM > «» > II II
.111 It -». 4 « «
it .t -:. i.'ki
I ;i.^l. . VMM » M' :>» »
... .,!!,,..:.. >.)M >K II t t
!,_,... M *«IMI IM < I
t .ut>il.» '.»00 U* >« II II
t:-i I.: i | i>.1.;. CilOMI »3 M
lh.-i.in. . >.SW >U II
».>r. f..i . . ii...I. mi-Mi, It;
Cit,..r. »« 01 «<*>
UM .; . w..,,^l... II MM IM
..4.|.,il.,:.,il~>. .» tOI.IOJI
Source: CCA Corp., 1986
tl I »
11
n 1:1 t.
ii >: i
nil
I «
t »
»1,U4 ...i. i.i-n.. .11 ».!-. ... ...IM" ! l» " « " ~" «« l~l-«i-i » «..i«i »MI>.I. '«-»i>«i «
1V.|M. ., .-. I-.. ~> ^.....« .~41U~ ».l,.l. -«W4.. .W...L I..' '"
'till*". ll~ .1.1.--IJ. J-l.
-------
TABLE
NUC RIISIDUE HONOF1LL I. E AC HATE CHEMICAL ANALYSIS (All Units rag/1)
C«nuny
fataaeter |2I|
COO 3*
tss
TDS
Cl
Ma
rb« .012
Cd* »DL
CB 24
HI IDL
Za .02)
BH
Ho
r*
Cr»
*a*
I**
H|*
N
-------
TABLE 4-6
LP TOXICiTY RESULTS ON MWC RESIDUES (Units in mg/l)
Ml. IC ill. 4 k.11,11* ill* i*
I.-I »ll. <* |lt| )/<.) I.', |
I*11* kollim *((« flM Ca.r»« CfMpu.ll. Co*^«>Hlld ftolluw
rty 4*k A.k My'A.k A«K fly A.k A«h fly Uk fly A.k Atk fly A|h A«li kol.liu riy A.k A.k
* ..0011 ..0011 <.001i ..OM «.M« ..Odli <..BOJJ <.0021 <.0011 ..OUli . 00* ..00* ..UUli ..-Ml ..OOI .01* l.MQ |>.4Q1 .211 I0.**q .Ui .010 LL-liS *< ' '
Ci .ubk ,00k .0)1 .Oil ..02 Oik .021 .012 .01* .01* ..02 -.ul .011 .Hi
fk .III 11.10 .10) 1.141 .420 .01* .IkO . 12.M 4>.IO .117 |1.4ii 1.14i .140 il.liO
h, . .8001 .OM1 ,.0001 ..OOOJ <.0001 .0001 <.0001 .OOB* .OOM ..OOOI .0011 . .UOU1 .OOki .OOOI. .000) u)
»« ..0011 .011 ..OOli .041 < 010 ..0011 ..OOli ..OOli ..OOli ..0011 Oil . .OIU .0.1/1 .0*1 .010 I C
»4 . OOI 001 <.001 .01} .Oil -.001 .001 -.001 ..OOI ..00| .010 .Oli ..OUI -.041 ..010 i i
i.Jii* ..oo) ..oo) ..001 . .ooj <..oo> ..oo) ..oo) <.ooi «.ooi ..oo) ..oo) ..oo) 001 -.001 ..oo) . .>:
llLd.M ..OOOI ..0001 ..UOOl ..OOOI (.OOOI ..01)01 . OOOI ..OOOI ..OOOI -.OOOI -.OOOI ..00l>l -.00111 ..0001 ..OOOI u 4
t.ll.jly- ..001 ..001 ..OOi ..OOI ..OUi . OUI '.OOi <.OOi ..OUI -001 .OOi HllV .001 OUi .UJ1 U
Ia.4j>I..M ..OOi ..001 ..OOi .Mi ..001 ..001 ..OUi , .001 ..OOI >.OO1 ..Ml Out .UOI -.OOI ..UO) u. :
l.i-D ..04 ..04 ..04 ,.00| ..OOI ..04 ..0«k ..04 < .04 -.04 ..UOI i»,l .04 .OUI . Udl n
1.4.1-lr ..01 ..01 ..01 .001 . .001 ..01 ..01 <.OI c.OI ..01 ..OUI -Out ..01 .OUI ..OUI I..
»»»<* by Iki>i>. NSW. ca«a*rcl*l ««.l«. tm4 ..l.cl.4 f»4«.lil. .l,c<*tf.r.. .It cl.»lllW. fflAttt «!! ! k*i ki«*kcr (,II*H !!!) rvi.fy «. akf«44«ia f«ffr*Mis MparailM, »* »>lf t-«U t*c*mf. r. Mlal U CM...J do ..I., -kick U Mt*t *iMKlu4. tat CMk|M« Hill. H, ..k lio» tl.cL.i.lU
fi.clfll.laf. rio4>^.. IIMB.
*:u.lllpU cl«.b.( ku<«l.( »' *" «" * »'! < ''«« 'l«l« « duM » < »">«t !»* « "f > cull*"!"- 'luJuc.. .!.».
'«* Wl.» MM. l> i UcU»»t>< mil* xltfc l.tc«* >|[ IU.J (««. tatloB »«k U ««»«t ^IM««I *! M» ««k U
-------
TABLE <-6
Continued
It r«". 'I »»«. HA i:il «.!.>*. ». Ill) :«,<. f« . IM (Ml J.I... « I."kilt, in
l:il I II nil .<..«. »« Aril IM
l«ll<« *!* L«>«klii»l fellft i«»Mn*4 l«*^ln*4 t**k|M4 k » II* > «> >!. Ill A.k «! ».. »«|M« k»ltoi«l Cn»lu4 Alk (kli»4 «>k >. T» >A HI M,t~.
MIL Ml ;:> «M M>l IM. l«)\ »l Ml ML UK OW OO) DM .l|l .001 « I
III l» I » 'n " 1*1 .!>»> .Ill 41' lit Ml .-» 10 ''
on L^ '» ! J» -u '" iJ* I' * "i **> "i OM oiv »L .MO no ton MO i i
r,, .« H. o» .0,, .. .,, . . »» ... IM » ' "> " if
II. Ill II I I IF i m ».|» 11 I JO 41 JIJ y_j .Hi I )1 i.M .in .110 F ; ~ t*J '" J
»r ML Ouni .Olt COU .OMW MOO Ml Ml Ml IN «OO Mt * '
*^ AA« QAl MB M) I
' V. Ml 0| (10 .*! Ml Ml. Ml HI ML Ml Ml OOI W'
Kl «r mil oot MI lit oni DM MI 001 MI IM IM lot ' '
l*frl* §
0 1
11 .4...
II
IM - 0>ln> rl>rl«tl» IUII>
*<.n.>' Hi I >! .1 <!
I*- Hf> filMi 4rarflMl*«« 4nr(*^»lr4 »ir»ff Oilr«ii* HI ( laklr I Milviil.
Source: OCA Corp., 1986
-------
5.0 CONCLUSIONS
Municipal solid waste landfill leachate production volume and leachate chemical
composition are dependent on many variables; some of which are related to
climatology, geography, geology, and hydrology and others of which are related to
landfill engineering design and operating procedures. Thus, some variables are
uncontrollable because they are inherent to the location and can only be controlled
via a proper site selection process; others are controllable. The controllable and
noncontrollable variables include the following:
Availability of water
Surface conditions
Refuse composition, condition, and depth
Underlying soil conditions
Landfill age or degree of stabilization
The hazardous small-quantity-generator exclusion rule under RCRA has allowed the
disposal of small quantities of hazardous materials in municipal landfills. Codisposal
of industrial wastes can cause leachates to contain elevated levels of toxic inorganic
and organic materials. Some of these contaminants, particularly the metals, can
inhibit the biological activity needed to decompose the solid wastes. Thus they can
interfere with the natural stabilization phases of the landfill and create a more
concentrated, contaminant-carrying leachate. At the same time, organic solvents
may increase the solubility of organics present in the solid waste and thus also
increase the contaminant loading of the leachate.
Codisposal of municipal waste combustion ashes with other municipal wastes is
practiced in the United States. These ashes have been shown to contain dioxins and
chlorinated dibenzofurans and to leach elevated levels of metals under both
codisposal and monofill conditions.
Selective and careful sampling of leachates generated from newer solid waste
disposal sites and analyses of these leachates for both hazardous organic and
inorganic constituents (RCRA, Appendix IX) may provide important information
regarding the chemical composition of these leachates. Such information could
5-1
-------
serve as a data base to be used for making decisions concerning changes to the
Subtitle D Program.
5-2
-------
6.0 REFERENCES
Francis, C. W., 1984. Leaching Characteristics of Resource Ash in Municipal Waste
Landfills. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge Tennessee, December 31.
GCA Corporation, 1986. Evaluation of the Land Disposal of Solid Residues from
Municipal Waste Combustion. Report 1: Data Summary. Bedford, Massachusetts,
August.
Jones, L. W., T. E. Meyers, and R. J. Larson, 1985. Study of Codisoosed Municipal and
Treated/Untreated Industrial Wastes. EPA/600/S2-85/091, United States
Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio, December.
Lu, James C. S., Bert Eichenberger, and R. J. Stearns, 1982. Production and
Management of Leachate from Municipal Landfills: Summary and Assessment.
Contract No. 68-03-2861, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Pohland, Frederick G., and S. R. Harper, 1984. Critical Review and Summary of
Leachate and Gas Production from Landfills. Cooperative Agreement
No. CR809997, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Wakimoto,Tadaaki, and Ryo Tatsukawa,-1985. "Polychlorinated Dibenzo-p-dioxins
and Dibenzofurans in Fly Ash and Cinders Collected from Several Municipal
Incinerators in Japan." Environmental Health Perspectives. Vol. 59, February.
The following references have been reviewed but not cited:
1. Boyle, W. C., R. K. Ham, and F. J. Blake, 1978. Foundry Landfill-Leachate from
Solid Wastes. American Foundrymen's Society, Inc.
2. Bramlett, J., C. Furman, A. Johnson, W. D. Ellis, H. Nelson, and W. H. Vick, 1986.
Composition of Leachates from Actual Hazardous Waste Sites. Contract
No. 68-03-3113, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.
3. Brown, K. W., and H. E. Murray, 1984. To Evaluate the Mutaqenic Potential of
Municipal Landfill Leachate. Texas A&M Research Foundation.
6-1
-------
4. Christensen, T. H., 1984. "Leaching from Land Disposal Municipal Composts:
Three Inorganic Ions." Waste Management & Research. Vol. 2.
5. Cdte, P. L., and T. W. Constable, 1984. Development of a Canadian Data Base
on Waste teachability. Special Technical Publication 805, American Society for
Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
6. Cundari, K. L., and Jeffrey M. Lauria, 1986. The Laboratory Evaluation of
Expected Leachate Quality from a Resource Recovery Ashfill. Malcolm Pirnie,
Inc., White Plains, New York.
7. Fero, R. L, R. K. Ham, and C. W. Boyle, 1986. An Investigation of Groundwater
Contamination by Organic Compounds Leached from Iron Foundry Solid
Wastes. University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, September.
8. Ham,.R. K., W. C. B.oyle, and F. J. Blaha, 1985. Leachate and Groundwater
Quality in and Around Ferrous Foundry Landfills and Comparison to Leach Test
Results. University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, January.
9. Landreth, R. E., 1986. Long-Term "Effects of Municipal Solid Waste Leachate on
Landfill Liners. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio, June.
10.* Patel, V. P., and R. L. Hoye, and R. 0. Toftner, no date. Gas and Leachate:
Summary. PEDCo Environmental, Inc., Cincinnati, Ohio.
11. Plumb, R. H., Jr., 1985. "Volatile Organic Scans: Implications for Groundwater
Monitoring."* Proceedings of the Petroleum Hydrocarbons and Organic
Chemicals in Groundwater-Prevention. Detection, and Restoration-
Conference. Lockheed Engineering and Management Services Company, Inc.,
Las Vegas, Nevada.
12. Plumb, R. H., Jr., and C. K. Fitzsimmons, 1984.. "Performance Evaluation of
RCRA Indicator Parameters." Proceedings - First Canadian/American
Conference on Hydroqeoloqy.
6-2
-------
13. Plumb, R. H., Jr., 1985. "Disposal Site Monitoring Data: Observations and
Strategy Implications." Proceedings - Second Canadian/American Conference
on Hvdroqeoloqy.
14. Plumb, R. H., and J. R. Parolini, 1986. Organic Contamination of Groundwater
Near Hazardous Waste Disposal Sites: A Synoptic Overview. Lockheed
Engineering and Management Services Co., Las Vegas, Nevada.
15. Surgi, Rene, 1986. Residues from Resource Recovery Facilities: Current
Research. Signal Environmental Systems, May 23.
16. Wigh, R. J., and D. R. Brunner, no date. Leachate Production from Landfill
Municipal Waste, Boone County Field Site. Regional Services Corporation,
Columbus, Indiana, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati,
Ohio.
17. Wigh, R. J., no date. Comparison of Leachate Characteristics from Selected
Municipal Solid Waste Test Calls. Order No. C2652NAST, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio.
U S Environmental Protection Agency
Region 5, Library (PL-12J)
77 West, Jackson Boulevard, 12th
Chicago^H/60604-3590
6-3
------- |