United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Municipal Environmental Research ^
Laboratory
Cincinnati OH 45268
Research and Development
EPA-600/S2-83-108 Nov. 1983
&ERA Project Summary
Literature-Review Screening
Techniques for the Evaluation of
Land Treatment of Industrial
Wastes
Joan Berkowitz, Bruce Goodwin, Judi Harris, and Kate Scow
This report describes a four-stage
literature-review screening process for
identifying waste streams that are listed
as hazardous in the Federal Register
(Vol. 45, pp. 74890-74892, November
12, 1980). The method will allow the
evaluation of promising candidate
waste streams for land treatment.
The first stage is an inorganic screen
for waste streams listed as hazardous
solely on the basis of heavy metal
content. The basis for screening was
the assimilative capacity of a soil with a
pH of 6.5 and a cation exchange
capacity of 15. Calculations are made
of the land area required to assimilate
the quantity of waste generated by a
single plant of average size over a period
of 10 years. If the calculated area was
no greater than 40 ha (100 acres), the
waste stream was considered to be high
priority for research. Only the listed
waste streams from the petroleum
refining industry ranked high in priority
on the basis of this screen. The
petroleum refining industry wastes are
listed as hazardous because of high
chromium and lead concentrations. Of
course, these streams also contain
petro-chemicals that are degraded in a
land treatment system.
Stage 2 is an organic screen for waste
streams listed as hazardous solely on
the basis of organic chemical content.
The screening is based primarily on the
potential for degradation of hazardous
components in the soil. A number of
industrial wastes were identified as
promising candidates for land
treatment.
Stage 3 is an inorganic and an organic
screen in sequence to the two streams
listed as hazardous because they
contained both heavy metals and
organic chemicals. Ammonia still lime
sludge is a promising candidate for land
treatment research.
Stage 4 involves waste streams listed
as hazardous on the basis of cyanide
content. Available data are insufficient
to identify promising research
candidates. Heavy metals are more
likely to be the land-limiting constitu-
ents than cyanides, since the latter can
be degraded in a suitably designed land
treatment facility. Information on heavy
metal content was not available.
This Project Summary was developed
by EPA's Municipal Environmental Lab-
oratory, Cincinnati. OH, to announce
key findings of the research project that
is fully documented in a separate report
of the same title (see Project Report
ordering information at back).
Introduction
Background
Land-treated hazardous waste constit-
uents are detoxified or immobilized
through the controlled use of physical,
chemical, and biological processes that
occur naturally in the upper 15 to 20 cm
(6 to 8 in.) of soil systems. Examples of the
types of treatment that can occur in the
well-aerated soil systems include:
-------
• Aerobic microbial decomposition of
organic chemical components of the
waste;
• Chemical oxidation and/or hydrol-
ysis.
• Ion exchange;
• Precipitation; and
• Neutralization.
Land treatment has been used for oily
wastes from the petroleum refining
industry for more than 25 years. None of
these land treatment facilities, which are
located in many different parts of the
country, are known to have resulted in
damage to human health or the
environment. Furthermore, extensive
monitoring of field sites has demonstra-
ted that certain types of oily wastes are
transformed in an aerobic soil environ-
ment to a less hazardous or nonhazard-
ous composition.
Land treatment is mainly used for haz-
ardous wastes from petroleum refining,
but this method may be feasible for other
types of wastes. If feasibility can be
demonstrated, land treatment has two
potential advantages over alternative
treatment and disposal methods. First,
land treatment is considerably less
expensive than incineration, secure
chemical landfill, and other types of phys-
ical, chemical, and biological treatment
processes. Second, if a land treatment
site is well controlled, subsequent bene-
ficial uses of the land are not precluded.
Federal regulations governing the use
of land treatment for the management of
a hazardous waste require a
demonstration of the effectiveness of the
method. In particular, it must be shown
that the waste can be made less hazard-
ous or nonhazardous by biological
degradation or chemical reactions occur-
ring in or on the soil.
The U S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) has issued a Technical
Resource Document that describes a
systematic methodology for evaluating
the technical feasibility of land treatment
for any particular hazardous waste
(Brown, K. W., and Associates, "Hazard-
ous Waste Land Treatment," EPA #SW-
874, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, September 1980). In general, a
three-step process is involved.
1. Detailed analysis of the waste and
review of available information on
the biological and chemical action of
natural soil treatment processes on
each of the waste constituents. This
step can provide a preliminary indi-
cation of whether or not land treat-
ment is sufficiently promising to
warrant further investigation. In
general, this step will also identify
gaps in the available data base that
need to be filled through subsequent
laboratory or field tests.
2. Laboratory and greenhouse studies
under simulated field conditions to
obtain basic data on degradability,
sorption, mobility, volatilization, and
toxicity. These data should be
suitable for developing a prelimi-
nary land treatment facility design
and operating plan.
3. Pilot field studies to verify the tech-
nical and economic feasibility and
the environmental acceptability of
the preliminary design and
operating plan formulated in Step 2.
Each step in the above process requires
an increased commitment of resources.
Objectives
The purpose of this report is to present
a screening process for identifying waste
streams that are listed as hazardous in
the Federal Register (Vol. 45, pp. 74890-
74892, November 12, 1980) and that are
promising candidates for land treatment
research. The specific objectives of the
contract were:
• To develop a literature review screen-
ing technique for the evaluation of
land treatment of industrial wastes.
• To identify listed hazardous waste
streams potentially amenable to
land treatment.
• To make use of readily available data
to rank listed waste streams in order
of potential land treatment feasibility.
Methods for Assessing Waste
Streams
Assimilation
A listed hazardous waste is potentially
amenable to land treatment if the
hazardous components can be
assimilated within the upper 1 5 to 20 cm
(6 to 8 in.) of the soil into which the waste
is incorporated. The hazardous
components of a waste are said to be
assimilated if:
— the application area can be used for
any other purpose at the end of the
post-closure period; and
— migration from the application area
of waste-related chemicals (i.e.,
components of the waste and their
transformation products) does not
adversely affect human health or
the environment at any time during
or after the period of application.
The potential for assimilation is the
major attraction of land treatment as a
hazardous waste management option. If
land treatment proves to be appropriate, it
can be applied without an irreversible or
irretrievable commitment of land
resources.
Very few data are available to assess
the assimilative capacity of a particular
site for a specific waste stream. Such an
assessment must generally be done on
a waste-specific, site-specific basis, as
described in the EPA Technical Resource
Document on land treatment.
Land Treatment Scenario
To screen potential waste stream
candidates, a land treatment scenario
was developed, and listed waste streams
were ranked on the basis of known
hazardous components. The elements of
the land treatment scenario are as
follows:
• The annual application rate of a
listed waste stream is assumed to be
equal to the average generation rate
of that waste stream from a typical
manufacturing plant. (In other
words, it is assumed that the land
treatment site is dedicated to waste
of a particular type generated by a
single plant.)
• The available application area is
assumed to be no greater than 40 ha
(100 acres), which is the size of a
relatively large landfill. The
assumption is that no larger area
would be dedicated to an individual
waste stream from a single plant. In
practice, the median size of existing
facilities is only 5.5 ha (13.5 acres),
and facilities of several hundred
acres do exist.
• The depth of waste incorporation is
assumed to be 15 cm (6 in.) -- the
technical agricultural zone or plow
layer.
-------
• The site is assumed to be used for
land treatment of wastes for a period
of 10 years.
• The soil pH is assumed to be
maintained between 6 and 7.5.
These conditions are generally not
difficult to maintain, and they
strongly affect the accumulation
limits of heavy metals-in the soil.
Screens
Two screens were developed -- an
inorganic and an organic screen. The
inorganic screen was applied to wastes
that are listed because of hazardous
heavy metal components. The organic
screen was applied to wastes that are
listed because of hazardous organic
chemical components. Both screens
were applied to wastes that are listed as
hazardous because of both heavy metal
and organic chemical components.
Inorganic Screening Method
The inorganic screen is quite straight-
forward and is based on the land-limiting
constituent concept (i.e., the area of land
required to assimilate a given amount of
toxic waste is determined by the most
persistent toxic constituent present) The
first step is to calculate the quantity of
each heavy metal generated in the waste
stream of an average plant over a 10-year
period. Data for this calculation were
obtained primarily from the EPA
background document supporting the
listing of the waste stream. The second
step in the inorganic screen is to
determine the area required to assimilate
the heavy metal components of the waste
stream. This area is calculated by dividing
the output from the first step (total kg of
metal in the waste over a 10-year period)
by the allowable cumulative limit (kg/ha)
for the metal in question.
If the calculated area requiredforassim-
ilation of any heavy metal in the waste
stream exceeds 40 ha (100 acres), the
waste stream is given a low priority for
further research. If the area is less than
40 ha (100 acres), the waste stream is
assigned a high priority for research.
Organic Screening Method
The persistence of the individual chem-
ical constituents that make up each
waste stream is the most important factor
in determining the suitability of the waste
stream for land treatment. For screening
purposes, the persistence might most
conveniently be expressed in terms of the
expected half-life for degradation of the
chemical in the soil environment. From
the half-life it would be possible to
calculate the degree of treatment that
could be accomplished over a given
period. Unfortunately, the data needed to
estimate the half lives of organic
chemicals in soils are not generally avail-
able. But a biodegradation study
conducted by Tabak et al. (H.H. Tabak,
S.A. Guare, C.I. Mashni, and E.F. Barth,
"Biodegradability Studies with Priority
Pollutant Organic Compounds," U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1980)
provided a good data base for evaluating
the persistence of a broad range of
organic waste components. The study
uses an aqueous medium and a sewage-
sludge-derived microbial population
rather than a soil or simulated soil
situation. Though the absolute
degradation rates reported cannot be
assumed to apply to a soil environment,
the data provide a useful indication of the
relative persistence of many organic
chemicals.
The following steps are involved in the
screening process developed for the
listed waste streams whose hazardous
components are all organic chemicals:
1. A persistence score is assigned to
each hazardous component that
forms a basis for listing the waste
stream.
2. A persistence score is calculated for
each waste stream based on the
persistence scores of its hazardous
components.
3. Each waste stream is assigned to
one of the following categories,
based on the waste stream persist-
ence scores calculated in Step 2:
Category l-Least
waste stream.
persistent
Category Il--Moderately
sistent waste stream, or
per-
Category Ill--Highly persistent
waste stream.
4. Priorities are set for future research
on waste streams within each
category based on other available
data (e.g., organic loading, hydraulic
loading, toxicity of degradation
products, reactivity with water) or
significant gaps in the data base.
Results
Of the waste streams that were listed
as hazardous only because of the
presence of heavy metal species, only
those from the petroleum refining
industry appear to be high priority
candidates for land treatment research
(see Table 1). The rankings are based
solely on waste stream components cited
as the basis for listing. Waste streams
that were listed as hazardous only
because of the presence of organic
chemical species were assigned a high or
moderate priority for research (see Table 1).
Only two waste streams are listed
because they contain both heavy metal
and organic chemical species that are
considered hazardous-aqueous spent
antimony waste from fluoromethane
production and ammonia still lime sludge
from coking operations. The latter has
been assigned a high priority for research
based on the data available.
The presence of cyanides does not
preclude land treatment, since these
chemicals are degraded in soils. Though
cyanide is the basis for listing the waste
streams in this group, the land-limiting
constituent is likely to be a heavy metal
that is also present. Available data on the
heavy metal contents of these waste
streams are insufficient to allow ranking.
Discussion
Limitations of the Screening
Methods
The screening results provide only a
relative ranking of listed hazardous waste
streams in terms of their suitability for
land treatment. Waste streams assigned
a low priority for research are not neces-
sarily unsuitable for land treatment.
Rather, they only appear to be less
suitable than waste streams assigned a
high priority based on available data.
In fact, the feasibility of land treatment
can be strongly influenced by both trace
quantities of hazardous constituents not
cited as a basis for listing and by constitu-
ents not normally considered hazardous.
For example, small quantities of highly
persistent polynuclear aromatic hydro-
carbons may critically limit application
rates of petroleum refining wastes at a
particular site, and salt must be con-
sidered in assessing land treatment
feasibility even though it is not normally
considered hazardous.
Thus all constituents of the waste
stream should be known to assess the
suitability of land treatment for a given
waste stream. But for the screening
purposes of this report, it is sufficient to
consider only the potential treatability of
the hazardous components cited as a
basis for listing.
-------
Table 1. High- and Moderate-Priority Candidates for Land Treatment Research
EPA No. Waste Stream Description
Priority
Inorganics:
KO48 - K052 Petroleum refining wastes (hazardous due to chromium and lead) High
Organics:
K009 Still bottoms from production of acetaldehyde from ethy/ene High
KO10 Distillation side cuts from the production of acetaldehyde from
ethylene High
KO13 Bottom stream from the acetonitrile column in the production
of acrylonitrile. High
KOI4 Bottoms from the acetonitrile purification column in the production
of acrylonitrile High
KO93 Distillation light ends from the production of phthalic anhydride
from ortho-xylene High
KO26 Stripping still tails from the production of methyl ethyl pyridines High
KO36 Still bottoms from toluene reclamation distillation in the production
of disulfoton High
K037 Wastewater treatment sludges from the production of disulfoton High
FOO4 Spent cresols, cresylic acid, and nitrobenzene, and still bottoms from Moderate-
recovery of these solvents High
KO47 Heavy ends (still bottoms) from the purification column in the Moderate-
production of epichlorohydrin High
K011 Bottom stream from the wastewater stripper in the production of
acrylonitrile Moderate
KOI5 Still bottoms from the distillation of benzyl chloride Moderate
K023 Distillation light ends from the production of phthalic anhydride
from naphthalene Moderate
KO94 Distillation bottoms from the production of phthalic anhydride from
orthoxylene Moderate
KO38 Wastewater from the washing and stripping of phorate production Moderate
K039 Filter cake from the filtration of diethylphosphorodithioic acid in the
production of phorate Moderate
KO4O Wastewater treatment sludge from the production of phorate Moderate
Mixed organics and inorganics:
The following four steps should be
involved in an applied research program'
1. Secure the cooperation of a plant
that generates a high-priority waste
stream to assure the availability of
the waste and a potential user of any
treatment method developed.
2. Obtain specific documented data on
the waste stream, including
quantity and frequency of
generation and major and trace
organic and inorganic constituents.
3. Characterize the site or alternative
sites for a possible land treatment
facility.
4. Analyze potential waste and site
interactions and identify significant
data gaps and areas of uncertainty.
Data that would typically need to be
developed include (a) mechanisms of
degradation of the waste constituents
under the prevailing site conditions, (b)
mobility of the constituents and
degradation products, and (c) toxicity
indices for hazardous components and
degradation products that could be
released from a land treatment site.
The full report was submitted in
fulfillment of Contract No. 68-03-2930 by
Arthur D. Little, Inc., under the sponsor-
ship of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency.
K060
Ammonia still lime sludge from coking operations
High
Recommendations for
Improving the Screening
A research plan needs to be developed
for improving the screening of hazardous
waste streams that appear to be primary
candidates for land treatment (Table 1).
Applied research on one or more specific
waste streams from individual plants is
recommended. Applied research contrib-
utes directly to solving the immediate and
urgent national problems of developing
cost-effective hazardous waste manage-
ment methods. Basic research on
establishing the assimilative capacity of
various types of soil systems for individ-
ual organic chemical constituents of
waste streams would be of considerable
scientific interest and value.
4
-------
Joan Berkowitz, Bruce Goodwin, Judi Harris, and Kate Scow are with Arthur D.
Little, Inc., Cambridge, MA 02140.
Robert Landreth and Laura Ringenbach are the EPA Project Officers (see belo w).
The complete report, entitled "Literature-Review Screening Techniques for the
Evaluation of Land Treatment of Industrial Wastes, "(Order No. PB 84-110386;
Cost: $10.00, subject to change) will be available only from:
National Technical Information Service
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, VA 22161
Telephone: 703-487-4650
The EPA Project Officers can be contacted at:
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati. OH 45268
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Center for Environmental Research
Information
Cincinnati OH 45268
BULK RATE
U.S POSTAGE
PAID
Cincinnati, Ohio
Permit No. G35
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use S300
LOU
TlLLtV
V EPft
<>30 b DEAHoUKN
CHICAGO IL
U.S GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1983-759-102/0791
------- |