United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Hazardous Waste Engineering
Research Laboratory
Cincinnati OH 45268
Research and Development
EPA/600/S9-87-001 Apr. 1987
Project Summary
Proceedings: National
Workshop on Pesticide Waste
Disposal Denver, Colorado,
January 27-29, 1986
The National Workshop on Pesticide
Waste Disposal -1986 was held in Den-
ver, Colorado, on January 27-29, 1986.
This workshop was jointly sponsored
by the American Chemical Society's Di-
vision of Agrochemicals, the American
Farm Bureau Federation, the American
Society of Agricultural Engineers, the
Association of American Pesticide Con-
trol Officials, Inc., the National Agricul-
tural Aviation Association, the National
Agricultural Chemicals Association, the
National Alliance of Independent Crop
Consultants, the National Barrel and
Drum Association, the National Forest
Products Association, the National Pest
Control Association, the U.S. Depart-
ment of Agriculture, and the U.S. Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency's Office
of Pesticide Programs, Office of Solid
Waste, and Office of Research and De-
velopment. The primary purpose of this
workshop was to work with govern-
ment, pesticide user groups, pesticide
producers, farm organizations, and
academia to define and offer practical
solutions to pesticide users' disposal
problems. The proceedings of the
workshop are a compilation of the
speakers' papers and transcripts of the
summary panels. Topics included in-
dustry's role in users' waste disposal,
on-site demonstration projects, regula-
tory update, the pesticide research
workshop summary, users' waste mini-
mization/reuse, users' waste treat-
ment/storage/disposal, and summary
panels on technology, regulations, and
application of pesticide wastes. The
1986 workshop was an outgrowth of
the workshop held in 1985 which was
developed to provide a national forum
that assembled pesticide users, pesti-
cide producers, researchers, and regu-
lators to collectively address the com-
plex issues of pesticide waste disposal
and serve as a basis for continued dia-
logue and interaction. The workshop
committee continued to meet through
1985 to develop this 1986 solution-
oriented workshop. These proceedings
contain nineteen papers and three sum-
mary panel transcripts that provide
practical information on the issues and
solutions of pesticide waste treatment,
storage, and disposal.
Specific treatment, storage, disposal
and waste minimization technologies
were addressed during the workshop.
On-site demonstration projects in-
cluded: carbon adsorption treatment of
rinsewater, treatment of pesticide-
containing soils, biological treatment,
biological/physical process for the elim-
ination of cattle-dip pesticide wastes,
and biological and chemical •disposal
systems for waste pesticide solutions.
Waste minimization/reuse technology
included: direct injection, wastewater
recycling, rinsewater recycling, and en-
gineering considerations. Container
management technologies were ad-
dressed for reconditioning containers,
recycling metal containers, disposal of
55-gallon plastic drums, and off-site
disposal of pesticide wastes.
This Project Summary was devel-
oped by EPA's Hazardous Waste Engi-
neering Research Laboratory, Cincin-
nati, OH, to announce key information
concerning this research project that is
fully documented in a separate report
-------
of the same title {see Project Report or-
dering information at back).
After opening remarks and a wel-
come from John G. Welles, the U.S. En-
vironmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Regional Administrator for Region VIII,
Robert Wayland who is a special Assis-
tant to the EPA Administrator in Wash-
ington, D.C. delivered the Keynote Ad-
dress. Mr. Wayland discussed the joint
efforts of the Office of Pesticide Pro-
grams and the Office of Solid Waste, the
RCRA activities largely mandated by the
1984 amendments, and specific chal-
lenges and opportunities for pesticide
producers and users to work with state
and federal agencies. Also recognized
was the essential role of research in
deriving future solutions that will tran-
scend any of the regulatory structures
put into place. Mr. Wayland applauded
the workshop as a valuable opportunity
for the private and public sector to work
together on a cooperative venture that
signals the positive aspects of the new
ways EPA hopes to conduct its busi-
ness.
To bring the 1986 workshop into
focus, Dr. James N. Seiber of the Uni-
versity of California at Davis gave a re-
view of the 1985 National Workshop,
which provided a forum for exchanging
ideas, determining needs, and identify-
ing potential solutions. Dr. Seiber indi-
cated the most tangible result of the
1985 workshop was that it led directly to
a Research Workshop held in Cincin-
nati, Ohio, only 6 months after Denver,
where many decisions were reached on
what technologies should be pursued.
Less tangible, however positive, was
the sense of urgency, expectations of
progress, and hope for solutions. Over
400 attendees with a wide diversity of
backgrounds came to the 1985 work-
shop looking for direction and seeking
solutions to the pesticide waste prob-
lems.
The National Agricultural Chemicals
Association (NACA) has for the past
4 years directed a great deal of attention
to the needs of pesticide users concern-
ing pesticide waste disposal. Dr. Jack D.
Early of NACA defined industry's role to
assist pesticide users in finding waste
disposal options that are environmen-
tally sound, cost-effective and realistic
in meeting their legal responsibilities.
NACA has funded five verification stud-
ies to further enhance technology. Dr.
Early identifies a regulatory scheme
that recognizes the types of wastes as-
sociated with pesticide use and is re-
sponsive to the economic and operating
restrictions of both private and com-
mercial applicators.
The first morning session included
on-site demonstration project reports.
Dr. John C. Nye of Louisiana State Uni-
versity described the operation of a car-
bon adsorption treatment unit that was
constructed and tested during the fall
and winter of 1985 to 1986. The objec-
tives of the test were to identify the crit-
ical factors that affect the flocculation of
pesticide-contaminated wastewater
and to provide the data for use by appli-
cators and regulatory agencies to adopt
this technology. The criteria for select-
ing flocculant aids are described in de-
tail within the report, and the tests
prove this treatment process was effec-
tive in removing pesticides from
wastewaters.
Dr. Ian L. Pepper, a University of
Arizona professor, presented a study re-
port on the treatment of pesticide-
containing soils where pesticides have
accumulated in soils adjacent to aerial
applicator landing strips. The objective
of the project was to identify a time- and
cost-effective detoxifying treatment.
The treatment technology identified is
ultraviolet (UV) photo decomposition
and microbial degradation. The project
was initiated in November 1985, and
preliminary data of the project are en-
couraging in finding a reduction to
toxaphene concentrations at these land-
ing strips.
Researchers at the University of
California-Davis are evaluating two dif-
ferent pesticide waste disposal sites for
in situ decontamination using biological
methods. Dr. Authur Craigmill dis-
cussed the two field trials used to test
the biological methods. One of these
trials was the continuation of the
cleanup of the Sutter County Airport
and the other field study was located at
the Glenn County Airport. Both of these
sites are associated with aerial applica-
tor operations using toxaphene at the
Sutter County Airport and using diuron,
atrazine, dursban, trifluralin, Me
parathion, and diazinon as the major
pesticides at the Glenn County Airport.
These studies will provide background
data needed to implement full-scale de-
contamination of pesticide waste ponds
and airport strips with decontaminated
waste pesticide ditches.
Extensive cattle-dipping operations
are continuously carried out along the
U.S./Mexican border as part of an effort
to eradicate the cattle fever tick prob-
lem. These operations generate large
volumes of aqueous pesticide wastes.
Dr. Jeffrey Karns described a biological/
physical process for the elimination of
cattle-dip pesticide wastes using UV-
ozonolysis after natural degradation by
microorganisms in soil. This combined
treatment of microbial hydrolysis
followed by UV-Ozonolysis proved that
a safe and effective disposal of
coumaphos-containing cattledip wastes
can be achieved in the laboratory- This
process has also been field tested and
was shown to be an effective waste
treatment method. Research is under-
way to simplify the process for field per-
sonnel utilization.
The final report of the on-site demon-
stration projects was presented by Dr.
Brian Klubek of Southern Illinois Uni-
versity. Acidic and alkaline trickling fil-
ter systems were assessed for biologi-
cal and chemical decomposition of
waste pesticide solutions. This was per-
formed by using a disposal pit filled
with coarse-grade limestone to pro-
mote alkaline hydrolysis and by using
another pit filled with acid-waste mate-
rial gathered from a strip mine opera-
tion to promote acid hydrolysis. The
treatment systems enhanced degrada-
tion by including indigenous pesticide-
decomposing bacteria. Degradation
rates of up to 30% per day were ob-
served in the acid system compared to
about 2.5% per day rates for the alkaline
disposal system. These systems appear
to be comparatively inexpensive and
simple to construct, operate and main-
tain and work on most pesticides used
in Illinois. The downside of such pit sys-
tems is the overwhelming resistance to
using in-ground disposal systems,
therefore this technology should be
considered for above ground usage.
A regulatory update panel consisting
of Raymond F. Krueger who discussed
FIFRA, Matthew Straus who discussed
RCRA, and Marvin Frye who presented
EPA regional perspectives to pesticide
waste disposal began the afternoon
presentations. These EPA speakers
fielded questions from the attendees
and were available for discussions dur-
ing the workshop.
A research workshop on the treat-
ment/disposal of pesticide wastewater
generated by the agricultural applica-
tion of pesticides was held at the
USEPA's A.W. Breidenbach Environ-
mental Research Center in Cincinnati,
Ohio, on July 30-31, 1985. The partici-
pants were divided the second day into
-------
two workgroups. One workgroup was
entitled "Physical/Chemical Treatment
and Recycling" and the second work-
group was entitled "Biological Treat-
ment and Land Application." The pro-
ceedings of this research workshop are
a compilation of sixteen speakers' ab-
stracts, both work group results, and a
conclusion with recommendations.
Francis T. Mayo of EPA and Dr. Philip C.
Kearney of USDA presented a summary
of the research workshop and briefly de-
scribed the twelve technologies dis-
cussed. A consensus of opinion ad-
dressed immediate research needs.
Concurrent sessions on the second
day of the Denver Workshop provided
participants with an opportunity to se-
lect Session A - "Users' Waste Mini-
mization/Reuse" or Session B - "Users'
Waste Treatment/Storage/Disposal."
Both sessions were repeated to assure
that all participants had an opportunity
to attend each presentation and enjoy
smaller groups for more effective inter-
action among speakers and attendees.
Session A - "Users' Waste Minimiza-
tion/Reuse" began with a presentation
by Lawrence Roth, Oklahoma State Uni-
versity, entitled "Direct Injection As a
Rinsewater Minimization Technology."
This state-of-the-art injection technol-
ogy was reviewed along with an exami-
nation to reduce or eliminate the waste
of expensive materials. The idea is that
nothing would be premixed and what-
ever is introduced into the system
would be metered, measured, intro-
duced, mixed, and controlled by an on-
board control unit. The direct injection
system would release the pesticide di-
rectly from a container into the sprayer
pressure system, on demand, just be-
fore the mixture is discharged from
spray nozzles. This technology will en-
hance application safety, sprayer sys-
tem reliability, and proper application
management.
The second presentation in the area
of rinsewater management was by
Darryl Rester of Louisiana State Univer-
sity. Wastewater recycling involves the
collection and storage of aircraft waste-
water for later use as aqueous dilution
for future applications. Pesticide waste
can be disposed of by rinsing the air-
craft over the treated field or by recy-
cling the washwater. Mr. Rester re-
ported no illegal crop residues or crop
damage as a result of these practices. It
was also stressed that the large cement
wash area was ideal for mixing and
loading pesticides as well as for servic-
ing the aircraft. The cost of such collec-
tion systems must be included in evalu-
ating the cost of any pesticide waste
disposal system.
The final rinsewater management
speaker, A.G. Taylor with the Illinois En-
vironmental Protection Agency, pre-
sented a paper entitled "Recycling Pest-
icide Rinsewater." During the 1984
cropping season, wastewater manage-
ment systems at thirteen agrichemical
outlets in Illinois were studied to deter-
mine the feasibility of recycling pesti-
cide rinsewaters by using them as a
diluent in corn and soybean herbicide
spray solutions. Pesticide rinsewater re-
cycling systems appear to be a practical
and feasible means of managing large
volumes of dilute pesticide solutions.
The two basic system components are a
concrete wash pad and a receptacle for
rinsewater containment. A manage-
ment scheme is required to budget the
use of rinsewater generated.
The topic of product storage and han-
dling equipment was discussed by
David Callahan who represented the
equipment industry with the presenta-
tion on "Tanks and Fittings for Fluid Fer-
tilizers, Pesticides and Other Liquid
Products Related to Agriculture." Mr.
Callahan also stressed the importance
of knowing the rules and regulations, as
the manufacturers' rules are sometimes
different from EPA and state regula-
tions.
Session A was completed with a pre-
sentation by C. Alvin Yorke of the U.S.
EPA entitled "Dealing With Emergen-
cies." Adequate contingency planning,
training, and adequate preparation
were discussed as the requirements
needed to handle emergencies involv-
ing pesticides. Responsible parties and
government agencies must be prepared
for a variety of possible spill situations.
Coordination, team work and being
aware of limitations are important fac-
tors in any emergency. Responding
parties must be aware of pesticide-
related regulations and know how to
contact government personnel who can
provide appropriate information to deal
with notification, clean-up, and treat-
ment/disposal requirements.
Between and after Sessions A & B, a
room was available for participants to
further discuss presentations using
posters and exhibits. This was ex-
tremely helpful because it allowed more
time for the first day on-site demonstra-
tion presenters to better explain their
projects.
Session B, entitled "Users' Waste
Treatment/Storage/Disposal," provided
the other half of the day's technical pre-
sentations featuring container manage-
ment, on-site options, off-site options,
and storage and transportation regula-
tions. Lawrence Bierlein with the Na-
tional Barrel and Drum Association
(NABADA) began this session's discus-
sion on container management with a
presentation entitled "Reconditioning
Containers." A major problem for the
container reconditioner is knowing
which drums may contain hazardous
waste residues. The user and recondi-
tioner are often running the risk of un-
knowingly handling a contaminated
drum. The NABADA has developed an
Empty Container Certification Form to
be signed by the emptier which assures
compliance with the U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT) and EPA regula-
tions. Drum reconditioners are working
with the Association to develop a practi-
cal, easy-to-use mechanism for emp-
tiers, transporters, disposers, and/or re-
conditioners to comply with federal
regulations.
Herschel Cutler, Executive Director of
the Institute of Scrap Iron and Steel, pre-
sented a paper entitled "Recycling
Metal Containers." Recycling of metals
is vital to metal manufacturing and also
provides important environmental ben-
efits. The lack of demand, however, is
causing a rather large involuntary in-
ventory of recyclable scrap. When the
threat of potential hazardous waste con-
tamination is added to the already in-
creasing problem, the weak and over-
supplied market problem increases.
Residues of pesticide wastes add to
these problems since legally "empty" is
difficult to determine by the scrap proc-
essing industry. Because of liability as-
sociated with processing such contain-
ers, scrap processors have totally
banned the acceptance of barrels,
drums, or containers where they "might
have" contained hazardous wastes or
other hazardous substances. The
charge of the Institute is to design recy-
clability into the products at the start
and the problems of hazardous waste
contamination threats will lessen
markedly. Changes are necessary
where recyclability is researched for so-
lutions to the problems that exist today.
The scrap processing industry supports
environmentally sound metal recycling.
The Plastic Drum Institute (PDI) was
represented by Daniel Barber who pre-
sented a talk entitled "Disposal of 55-
-------
Gallon All-Plastic Drums." The Plastic
Drum Institute is a division of the Soci-
ety of the Plastics Industry and is com-
prised of member companies which
manufacture industrial plastic shipping
containers with a liquid capacity of 3
U.S. gallons and above, as well as man-
ufacturers of raw materials for such
containers, the major objective of PDI is
the integrity of container performance
which extends beyond the first-time
shipment to secondary service and fi-
nally to the disposal of the spent con-
tainer. A great deal of interest has been
expressed in reusing all-plastic drums
because they are a valuable resource
utility and reduce packaging costs. Re-
search by the new Plastic Recycling In-
stitute is being conducted to improve
recyclng system efficiencies, to improve
the quality of recycled materials, to de-
velop the recycling processes for vari-
ous materials, and to share the technol-
ogy with the recycling industry. This
presentation rounded out an excellent
discussion on container management
by the container industry.
"RCRA Permitting of On-Site Pesti-
cide Waste Storage and Treatment"
was presented by Felix Flechas who is
with the EPA in Region VIII. Mr. Flechas
discussed the on-site disposal options
associated with pesticide use. These op-
tions were analyzed along with corre-
sponding RCRA requirements. Option
groups included on-site treatment and
on-site storage with off-site disposal.
RCRA requirements included discus-
sions of the Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984 and small quan-
tity generator treatment, storage and
disposal facilities. It was concluded that
on-site options for storage and treat-
ment of pesticide residues where a
RCRA permit is required can result in an
extensive investment of time and re-
sources by a pesticide waste generator
while securing a permit. For a user who
is a small quantity hazardous waste
generator, the economics of acquiring
such a system may not be worth the
benefits, and off-site disposal options
should be explored.
Mr. H. Clayton Ervine, who repre-
sented the Governmental Refuse Col-
lection and Disposal Association
(GRCDA), presented "Off-Site Disposal
of Pesticides and Pesticide Containers."
Because of a combination of factors in-
cluding past abuses of the systems, new
regulations, and public attitudes con-
cerning waste management, the man-
agement of waste pesticides and waste
pesticide containers is becoming in-
creasingly more difficult for the genera-
tor. It does seem reasonable to dispose
of empty pesticide containers using
local systems if certain conditions can
be met. These conditions must permit
the ready verification that the contain-
ers are truly empty and must provide
the ability to pay for any additional
costs incurred. Such arrangements can
be accomplished through discussions
with disposal site owners and the gen-
erators and/or their representative trade
associations.
The storage and transportation as-
pects of proper waste pesticide man-
agement under RCRA was presented by
Rolf Hill, EPA, in his discussion entitled
"Storage, Handling and Shipment of
Pesticide Waste Regulatory Require-
ments." Discussion topics included the
identification and classification of waste
pesticides; notification requirements;
the pretransport requirements of stor-
age, packaging, labeling, marking, and
placarding; the Uniform Hazardous
Waste Manifest; recordkeeping; report-
ing; and the farmer exemption. Special
focus was made on compliance with the
new Uniform Manifest requirements
and the impact of state laws on comple-
tion of this manifest. Another area of
focus was the RCRA reauthorization re-
quirements for small quantity genera-
tors. The presentation was aimed at
pesticide users who generate or trans-
port a hazardous waste and who must
comply with federal hazardous waste
management standards.
After 2 full days of presentations con-
cerned with research and solutions to
proper pesticide wastes disposal, the
last session on the third day encour-
aged participation by using three panel
groups of experts who represented
technology, regulatory, and user
groups. Questions and comments were
gathered from attendees at all of the
previous presentations for these panel
discussion^ Roy Detweiler, Workshop
Chairman, provided pertinent remarks
regarding the assessment of the work-
shop and where we must go from here
before acting as the moderator for all
three panels.
The Technology Summary Panel con-
sisted of Dr. James N. Seiber as Chair-
man, Dr. Philip C. Kearney, Francis T.
Mayo, and George P. Nassus. Each
Panel member (well-known to most of
the attendees) spent a few minutes
summarizing the technology aspects of
the workshop. Questions and answers
followed the panel's comments.
The Regulatory Summary Panel was i
chaired by Raymond F. Krueger and
other distinguished panelists included
Orlo Robert Ehart and H. F. "Butch" Cal-
houn, III. Each panelist summarized
state, regional, and federal regulatory
issues. The entire workshop attendance
was impressed with the efforts of the
researchers, associations, users, regula-
tors, and producers in communicating
with each other in working toward solu-
tions that will benefit the whole group.
It was noted that workshops such as
the ones held in 1985 and 1986 are a
result of people working together for a
common environmental goal.
At the 1985 workshop, a user group
began the workshop by describing the
problems and at this 1986 workshop,
the Users' Summary Panel concluded
the program with a discussion of what
had been accomplished by the first and
second workshops. Harold M. Collins
chaired the panel, which included
Richard Byer, Robert M. Russell, and Dr.
William T. Keane. The concensus of this
group was that whereas we have come
a long way from the first workshop, we
still have a long way to go. The work-
shop ended with a good exchange of
questions and answers. The transcripts
of all three panel interactions are part of
the proceedings.
The full report was submitted in fulfill-
ment of Contract 68-03-3252 by JACA
Corporation under the sponsorship of
the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency.
-------
-------
This Project Summary was prepared by staff of JACA Corporation, Fort
Washington, PA 19034.
James Bridges is the EPA Project Officer (see below).
The complete report, entitled "Proceedings: National Workshop on Pesticide
Waste Disposal -1986," (Order No. PB 87-153 318/AS; Cost: $18.95, subject
to change) will be available only from:
National Technical Information Service
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, VA22161
Telephone: 703-487-4650
The EPA Project Officer can be contacted at:
Hazardous Waste Engineering Research Laboratory
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, OH 45268
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Center for Environmental Research
Information
Cincinnati OH 452G3
BULK RATE
POSTAGE & FEES Pf
EPA
PERMIT No G-35
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use S300
EPA/600/9-87/001
0000329
------- |