TD767.4
.585
1985
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water
Regulations and Standards
Washington, DC 20460
            Water
                     822S98100
            Summary of
            Environmental Profiles
            and Hazard Indices
            for Constituents of
            Municipal Sludge:
            Methods and Results

-------
SUMMARY OF  ENVIRONMENTAL  PROFILES AND  HAZARD INDICES
        FOR CONSTITUENTS  OF MUNICIPAL  SLUDGE
                      U.S.  Environmental  Protection Agency
                      Office  of Water Regulations and Standards
                      Wastewater Solids Criteria Branch
                      July  1985
                 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                 Region V, Library
                 230 South Dearborn Street
                 Chicago, Illinois  60604.

-------
                             Preface
     Section 405 of the Clean Water Act requires the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency to develop and issue regulations
which: (1) identify uses for sludge including disposal;  (2)
specify factors to be taken into account in determining  the
measures and practices applicable for each use or disposal (in-
cluding costs); and (3) identify concentrations of pollutants
which interfere with each use or disposal.  In order to  comply
with this statutory mandate, EPA has embarked on a major program
to develop five major technical regulations: distribution and
marketing, land application, landfilling, incineration and ocean
dumping.  EPA is also developing regulations which govern the
establishment of State sludge programs to implement both existing
and future technical criteria.  Key to the Agency's regulatory
effort is the policy that EPA is actively promoting those munici-
pal sludge management practices that provide for the beneficial
use of sludge while maintaining or improving environmental quality
and protecting public health.

     The identification of potential pollutants of concern for
each reuse and disposal option is a critical part of the technical
sludge regulation development process.  The purpose of this
document is to describe the data compilation, analyses and con-
clusions of EPA's effort to identify pollutants of potential
concern.  The major questions addressed by this document are:

(1) What are the potential pollutants of concern for each reuse
    or disposal option?

(2) For such pollutants, which environmental pathways are of
    primary concern?; and
(3) What is the degree
    for such pathways?
of hazard associated with each pollutant
     The results of the analyses contained in this document are
intended to facilitate selection of pollutants and to determine
which pollutants and pathways should be studied further.  These
further studies may indicate that the pollutant/pathways are not
of sufficient concern to require regulation or they may indicate
that there are additional pollutants/pathways that need to be
studied.  Thus, the magnitude of the hazard indices discussed in
this document are not, in and of themselves, an indication of the
absolute risk for a contaminant/exposure pathway.  Rather, this
should be viewed only as an initial screening mechanism.  For
those pollutants/pathways that EPA decides to regulate, the
regulations may take the form of numeric limits, best management
practices, or other controls and limitations needed to protect
the environment and public health.

-------
     This summary document will describe in detail the overall
process to develop the "technical" sludge regulations and will
show how the data profiles/hazard indices fit into the regulatory
framework.  The individual environmental profile documents for  ,
each pollutant will be available for public inspection at EPA's
Regional Offices.  Any questions related to this document may be
directed to:

                    Elliot Lomnitz
                    Criteria and Standards Division (WH-585)
                    401 M Street, S.W.
                    Washington, D.C.  20460
                    Telephone: (202) 245-3036
                               James M. Conlon, Acting Director
                               Office of Water Regulations and Standards
                                11

-------
                         TABLE OF CONTENTS
PREFACE                                                          i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY                                                1
I.    INTRODUCTION                                               3
II.   OWRS WORKPLAN  AND STEPS FOR DEVELOPING                    5
      TECHNICAL  REGULATIONS
III.  OWRS APPROACH  FOR DETERMINING POTENTIAL                   9
      POLLUTANTS OF  CONCERN
IV.   HAZARD  INDICES DEVELOPED FOR EACH REUSE/DISPOSAL          11
      OPTION

      A.  LAND APPLICATION                                       12
      B.  LANDFILLING                                           14
      C.  INCINERATION                                           15
      D.  OCEAN  DUMPING                                         15

V.    DATA USED  IN ENVIRONMENTAL PROFILES AND HAZARD  INDICE     16
      CALCULATIONS

VI.   RESULTS OF HAZARD INDICES                                 18

      A.  LAND APPLICATION                                       18
      B.  LANDFILLING                                           19
      C.  INCINERATION                                           31
      D.  OCEAN  DUMPING                                         35

VI.   INTERPRETATION OF HAZARD INDICE RESULTS                   40

      A.  GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE INTERPRETATION APPROACH   40
      B.  RESULTS OF THE TWO TIER SCREENING APPROACH            41
      C.  USE OF RESULTS FROM TWO TIER SCREENING APPROACH       64
APPENDICES

APPENDIX A:
APPENDIX B:

APPENDIX C:
APPENDIX D:

APPENDIX E:

APPENDIX F:
LIST OF OWRS COMMITTEE  MEETING EXPERTS
LIST OF POLLUTANTS  FOR  ENVIRONMENTAL PROFILE
DEVELOPMENT
SAMPLE ENVIRONMENTAL  PROFILE
SUMMARY OF EPA'S METHODOLOGY FOR PRELIMINARY
ASSESSMENT OF CHEMICAL  HAZARDS
HAZARD INDEX VALUES FOR ALL CONDITIONS OF
ANALYSIS RELATED TO LANDFILLING
SLUDGE CONCENTRATION  DATA USED IN THE
ENVIRONMENTAL PROFILES  AND HAZARD INDICES
A-l
B-l

C-l
D-l

E-l

F-l

-------
                        EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

     The following briefly summarizes some of the key points
contained in this document:

0  The purpose of the environmental profile and hazard indices is
   to rapidly screen pollutants so that those most likely to pose
   a hazard to human health or the environment can be identified
   for further assessment and possible regulatory control.  The
   results from the calculation of the hazard indices also allow
   for the deletion of pollutants from further consideration for
   a specific environmental pathway if no environmental or health
   hazard is evident even under worst case conditions.

0  A two tier screening system was developed which allows for (a)
   the elimination of pollutants which do not present a hazard
   for a specific pathway and for (b) the prioritization of those
   pollutants that potentially may present a hazard.  The first
   tier is accomplished by ranking the pollutants based on their
   hazard index values for each environmental pathway and deleting
   those pollutants with values less than 1 (indicating no
   potential problem under assumed worst case scenario).  The
   second tier is the prioritization of pollutants based on
   incremental values; that is, the portion of the hazard index
   values solely attributable to sludge.  The incremental values
   were derived by subtracting the "null" or background levels
   from the total hazard values associated with a pollutant for a
   specific pathway.  The result of this two tier system is a
   list of pollutants for each environmental pathway  (per reuse/
   disposal option) which identifies priorities for further risk
   assessment.

0  The outcome of the environmental profile evaluations and the
   two tier screening approach is not a definitive list of pollu-
   tants that EPA will ultimately regulate.  Rather, the outcome
   of this process is an identification of those pollutants of
   "potential concern" which require further analysis and evalu-
   ation.  The numerical magnitude of the hazard indices discussed
   in this summary are not in and of themselves an indication of
   absolute risk for a contaminant/exposure pathway.

0  Fifty pollutants were identified at the OWRS expert committee
   meetings as being of concern to one or more reuse/disposal
   options.  For each of these pollutants, an environmental
   profile document was generated which included the hazard
   indices calculated.

0  For land application (including distribution and marketing),
   thirty two pollutants were evaluated.  For this option,
   thirteen hazard indices were developed to evaluate the hazard
   associated with each of the major environmental pathways

-------
related to this option.  The pathways and effects examined
included: toxicity to soil biota; toxicity to predators of
soil biota; phytotoxicity; plant uptake; toxicity to animals
resulting from plant consumption; toxicity to animals from
sludge ingestion; human toxicity from plant consumption; human
toxicity from animal ingestion; and incidental soil ingestion
by humans.

For landfilling, twenty eight pollutants were evaluated.  Two
hazard indices were developed for this option:  an index of
groundwater concentration increment resulting from landfilled
sludge and an index of human toxicity resulting from groundwater
contamination.

For incineration, thirty compounds were evaluated.  Two hazard
indices were developed for this option:  an index of air
concentration increment resulting from incinerator emissions
and an index of human toxicity/cancer risk resulting from
inhalation of incinerator emissions.

For ocean dumping, twenty one compounds were evaluated.  Four
hazard indices were developed for this option: (a) an index of
seawater concentration resulting from initial mixing of sludge;
(b) an index of seawater concentration resulting from a 24
hour dumping cycle; (c) an index of toxicity to aquatic life;
and (d) an index of human toxicity resulting from seafood
consumption.

Based on the environmental profiles and the two tier screening
process, 22 pollutants require further analysis for at least
one of the 10 pathways related to land application (Table 11);
16 pollutants for the one pathway related to landfilling (Table
12); 17 pollutants for the one pathway related to incineration
(Table 13); and 10 pollutants for the two pathways related to
ocean dumping (Table 14).

-------
     Summary of Environmental Profiles and Hazard Indices for
                 Constituents of Municipal Sludge
                           INTRODUCTION
I.

     The need for effective sludge management is continual and
growing.  The quantity of municipal sludge produced annually has
almost doubled since 1972 when the Clean Water Act was enacted.
Recognizing the importance of sludge management, Congress enacted
Section 405 of the Clean Water Act which requires the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency to develop and issue regulations
which: (1) identify uses for sludge including disposal; (2)
specify factors to be taken into account in determining the
measures and practices applicable for each use or disposal (in-
cluding costs); and (3) identify concentrations of pollutants
which interfere with each use or disposal.  In addition to the
Clean Water Act, EPA has authority to regulate municipal sludge
under other statutes and several regulations have been issued
using such authorities (Table 1).  Currently municipalities are
generating approximately 6.5 million dry tons of wastewater sludge
per year with the annual production expected to double by the
year 2000.

     In 1982, EPA established a Sludge Task Force which was
responsible for: (1) assessing the magnitude of and management
approaches to municipal sludge reuse and disposal nationwide; (2)
evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of past regulatory act-
ivities; and (3) identifying data and informational needs in
order to direct EPA research in the field.  The establishment of
the Task Force was a result of the recognition that the author-
ities and regulations related to municipal sludge were fragmented
as each regulation was developed in isolation from other disposal
options.  Thus, the individual regulations did not provide States
and municipalities with adequate guidelines on which to base
sludge management decisions.  The Task Force was therefore man-
dated to develop a comprehensive workplan which would: (1)
delineate a framework for improving the Agency's regulatory
program and (2) identify the entities within EPA responsible for
implementing a sludge regulatory program.

     In 1983, the Sludge Task Force presented its recommendations
and issued an Agency workplan.  One of the main conclusions and
suggestions was the need for a comprehensive regulatory program
with the primary legislative authority being Section 405 of the
Clean Water Act and that sludge regulations should be developed
by the Agency's Office of Water.

     Based on the recommendations of the Task Force, EPA is
proceeding with a major regulatory program to develop two sets of

-------
               Table 1.  Sludge Regulations Issued By The
                         U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
  Coverage
Reference
   Application
Polychlorinated
Biphenyls (PCBs)
40 CFR 761
All sludges containing
more than 50 milligrams
of PCBs per kilogram
Ocean Dumping
40 CFR 220-228
The discharge of sludge
from barges or other
vessels
New Source of
Air Emissions
40 CFR 60
Incineration of sludge
at rates above 1,000
kilograms per day
Mercury
40 CFR 61
Incineration and heat
drying of sludge
Cadmium, PCBs,
Pathogenic
Organisms
40 CFR 257
Land application of
sludge, landfills, and
storage lagoons
Extraction
Procedure Toxicity
40 CFR 261
Defines whether sludges
are hazardous
Source:  U.S. EPA, 1984 "Environmental Regulations and Technology:
         Use and Disposal of Municipal Wastewater Sludge."  76 pp.

-------
regulations - State Sludge Management Program Regulations to be
developed by the Office of Municipal Pollution Control (OMPC) and
Technical Sludge Regulations to be developed by the Office of
Water Regulations and Standards (OWRS).  The technical regulations
are being developed for five major reuse and disposal options:
distribution and marketing, land application to food chain and
non-food chain crops, landfilling, incineration and ocean dumping.
The regulation on ocean dumping will be coordinated with the
Office of Marine and Estuarine Protection within the Agency's
Office of Water.  The regulation for municipal sludge incineration
will be coordinated with the Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards.  Finally, the regulations for land application,
distribution and marketing, and landfilling will be coordinated
with the Office of Solid Waste and the Office of Pesticides and
Toxic Substances.

     In November 1983, OWRS developed an internal workplan which
delineated the work elements and steps needed to propose and
issue technical sludge regulations for the various reuse/disposal
options.  A description of the workplan and major steps needed
for the development of the technical regulations is contained in
the next section of this document and is highlighted in Figure 1.
This workplan was developed with the underlying principle that
all 5 regulations should be generated concurrently in order to
give an intermedia perspective and to provide States and munici-
palities with the data and information on all the options to
facilitate informed decisionmaking.  The work plan also was
developed to ensure that the regulations would be issued in a
timely fashion, with proposed regulations being issued in mid-1986.


II. OWRS WORKPLAN AND STEPS FOR DEVELOPING TECHNICAL REGULATIONS

     Initiating a major regulatory program leading to the con-
current development of five regulations requires concise steps
and work elements in order to ensure that such an effort will be
manageable and timely.  The workplan was designed recognizing
EPA's available resources and the magnitude of the effort.  The
following will describe the major steps being pursued by OWRS in
the development of these regulations:

°  WORK ELEMENT 1: DETERMINING POLLUTANTS OF CONCERN FOR EACH
   DISPOSAL OPTION
     The initial focus of this regulatory development process is
the identification of pollutants that may interfere with each
reuse and disposal option because of environmental or health
considerations.  Besides identifying the pollutants of concern,
it is also critical to identify the environmental pathways and
the magnitude of the hazard to the target organisms be it plant,
animal or human.  The mechanism used for determining the pollu-

-------
m

H

§


3
u
P
                        a
                        3
                        CJ
                        z
                                0  C 0  0  OS
                               •o -H £ -o  o
                                         (N


• •
Cl
5
^j
CJ
z
r-l
»
•8
4J
c
fe
Qj
o
rH
0
0
U-l
0
4J
tn
• rH
rH
C

K
5
03
Ll
4J
tn


in
4J
c
03
4-1
3
rH
rH
a
8
in
?'
•H
4J

^

4J
Li

0
of concern

tn
4_>
r
03
4J
3
rH
rH
a
•<«•
CO
1
(0
s:

i— t
•r-l
Ll
t
of envir-
4J
c
&
Q,
CJ
rH
0
>
0
TD
•8
03
tn
0
rH
•rH
U-l
O
Ll
a
rH
03
4J
C

O
tn
0
0
• rH
"S
•rH

•D
LJ
03
N
03
                         M    -^
                         &5
a  o < u,  Du
                                                                                                                 ro

CO
Q
3
u
z
M
ula tions
CT-
0
Li
4J
14-1
03
y Impact
Li
O
jj
05
rH
3
CT


tn
0
in
^,
rH
03
y Reviews
u

0
if^


in
• rH
ST
etings
0
£
O
•H
rH
.D
                                                                                                        LI  0  c  a.  tn  0
                                                                                                        c  <£  <  C  M  K

                                                                                                                         CJ
                                                                                                                         • rH
                         to o  c
                      tn  4-> -rH  (D
                      Ll  -rH E -rH
                      O  U-l 0 rH
                     4J  0 C  Ci
                      o  c o  E
                      03  0 CJ  D
                     u-i  CQ w cj



                         ^T IP VO
                                                                     5a

-------
tants of concern has been the environmental profiles containing
(a) data compilations for a specific contaminant and (b) hazard
indices for each of the major environmental pathways associated
with a reuse/disposal option.  The next section of this document
will describe more fully the process for identifying pollutants
and for developing the environmental profiles and hazard indices.
the output of this work element is a list of pollutants of poten-
tial concern per reuse/disposal option and the relative hazard
associated with each of the pathways based on the profiles.  This
information will allow EPA to begin more intensive analyses and
assessments on the highest risk pathways for a pollutant.

°  WORK ELEMENT 2: DEVELOPMENT OF RISK ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGIES

     Concurrent with the generation of the environmental profiles,
EPA has been developing methods for quantifying the risk of a
particular pollutant for a specific pathway.  These methodologies
will ultimately be used to derive maximum permissible contaminant
levels and to identify management practices for municipal sludge.
The generation of these methodologies is complex due to the
number of environmental pathways for which methods are needed.
Figure 2 demonstrates this complexity by showing the environmental
pathways related to the land application option.  The development
of these methodologies includes the use of models and will delineate
the assumptions and limitations associated with each model and
methodology.  Sensitivity analyses will also be incorporated.
The output of this work element is five final risk assessment
methodologies, one per reuse/disposal option.  The outputs from
work element 1 and 2 are then interlinked in work element 3.

0  WORK ELEMENT 3; DERIVATION OF CRITERIA, APPLICATION RATES AND
   MANAGEMENT PRACTICES

     The outputs of work element 1, that is, the pollutants of
concern for specific pathways, will be analyzed using the risk
assessment methodologies developed in work element 2.  The pollu-
tants will be analyzed for degrees of risk for specific application
rates or input rates by varying the inputs into the models and
methodologies.  The outputs of this work element may be either
maximum numeric concentrations (e.g. no sludges may be incinerated
which contain greater than x ug/kg of pollutant y) or management
practices (e.g. incinerators should be operated under certain
conditions) or combinations of practices and numbers (e.g. sludge
containing pollutant x at concentration y should only be applied
twice a year by injection).  The reader should clearly understand
that the Agency will not be solely regulating on numeric limits
but will also utilize management practices.  Furthermore, site-
specific factors will be considered in the regulatory development
process with EPA providing guidance and/or algorithms to the
States.  The utilization of management practices is consistent
with EPA's policy of the beneficial reuse of sludge while main-

-------
                              Sludge
                                                      Residue On
                                                      Eauipment
                                                        V?
                                              Human
                                              Consumpti on
Figure   2  ! Land Application Pathways

-------
taining environmental quality and protecting public health.  The
output of this work element will form the framework for how each
of the pollutants of concern will be regulated.  Based on the
outputs of this element, OWRS will also be able to identify data
gaps and informational needs which will be transmitted to EPA's
Office of Research and Development to initiate tasks to fill the
voids.

°  WORK ELEMENT 4; GENERATION OF TECHNICAL SUPPORT DOCUMENTS

     Technical background or support documents are being generated
for each of the five regulations.  The purpose of these documents
is to summarize the results of work elements 1-3 as well as
incorporate the following analyses and evaluations:

(1) Fate and Transport of Pollutants - Description and data
related to the fate and effects of pollutants in each medium
(air, water, soil) will be incorporated in the documents.  Pro-
cesses such as biodegradation, absorptability, volatilization and
others may affect the availability and toxicity of the compounds
to the target organisms.

(2) Site-Specific Factors - Data related to site-specific factors
such as soil or climatic variability will be incorporated.  For
example, certain processes may be viable for certain geographic
locations and not others.  Soil conditions may enhance or ameliorate
the toxicity of certain pollutants.  The Agency believes that
States should have the flexibility to consider such factors in
their sludge management programs.

(3) Economic Evaluations and Benefit Analyses - Costing data on
the various technologies associated with each option will be
included to provide the States and municipalities with a com-
prehensive picture of the option both from a standpoint of assoc-
iated risk and economics.  The benefits of reusing sludge in
terms of cost savings, e.g. fertilizer value for the land ap-
plication option, will also be quantified and incorporated.

(4) Compliance Monitoring Requirements - The regulations as well
as the technical support documents will describe the requirements
for compliance monitoring i.e. frequency of monitoring, methods
of analysis, etc.

(5) Intermedia Analysis - Contained within each document will be
a section that describes the relative risks among each of the
options for specific pollutants.  The purpose of this section is
to allow the decisionmakers to quickly assess the implications
"across the board" without having to refer back to the other four
documents.  This section will summarize, for example, what the
risks of sludges high in pollutant X are for this option as well
as for the other reuse/disposal options.  This section will not

-------
attempt to equate or assign absolute values associated with each
of the options, for example, cases of cancer expected from land
applications as opposed to aquatic toxicity effects from ocean
disposal.

(6) Description of Data Gaps - An appendix to each of the documents
will describe the voids in data and information related to the
reuse/disposal option.  Much of this will be identified during
the course of work elements 1-3 and will also be identified when
developing the fate and transport, site-specific and economic/
benefits sections of the document.  EPA will continue its research
in municipal sludge and will focus its program to fill the
identified data gaps.

°  WORK ELEMENT 5; DEVELOPMENT AND ISSUANCE OF PROPOSED REGULATIONS

     With the completion of the technical support documents,
drafting of the proposed regulations can commence.  The proposed
regulations will clearly delineate the requirements in terms of
management practices and generic or site-specific numeric stan-
dards.  The regulations will also contain compliance monitoring
requirements.  The technical support document will be available
along with the proposed regulations to allow the public to review
the analyses used as the basis of the proposal during the public
comment period.

0  WORK ELEMENT 6; ISSUANCE OF FINAL REGULATIONS

     After the public comment period on the proposed regulation
closes, EPA will assess the comments and make appropriate changes.
The projected date for final promulgation of these regulations is
mid-1987.
III. OWRS APPROACH FOR DETERMINING POTENTIAL POLLUTANTS OF CONCERN

     After the generation of the OWRS workplan for developing the
technical regulations, work began on Element 1 - the determination
of potential pollutants of concern.  As previously mentioned, the
purpose of this element was to identify pollutants which require
additional analyses and should undergo a rigorous risk assessment.
The lists of pollutants generated from this work element does not
constitute a list of pollutants that EPA will definitively regulate.
Rather, this work element should be viewed as a screening mechanism
which identifies the pollutants needing risk analyses.  Subsequent
analysis by the Agency may add or delete pollutants from the lists.
Several steps were initiated to identify the potential pollutants
of concern:

(1) Development of a "Strawman" List of Pollutants - A strawman
list of pollutants of concern was developed based on data readily

-------
available to OWRS.   The purpose of developing this list was to
provide a group of  experts (Appendix A) with an initial list from
which they could add or delete pollutants.  The development of
the strawman list was based on data available on frequency of
occurrence, aquatic toxicity, phytotoxicity, human health effects,
domestic and wildlife effects and plant uptake.  Once this straw-
man list was developed, a series of expert meetings were convened.

(2) Expert Meetings on Each of the Reuse/Disposal Options - Four
expert meetings were convened during April and May 1984 to
determine the potential pollutants of concern for the various
options.  The options for land application and distribution and
marketing were combined into one meeting as the environmental
pathways related to these options overlap.  The other meetings
were: landfilling,  incineration and ocean dumping.  The experts
for these meetings  were selected based on the recommendations of
the Sludge Task Force and were from various sectors including
academia, State government, consultants and EPA personnel.
The experts received the strawman list of pollutants prior to the
meetings and were also presented with several questions for their
consideration prior to the meeting including:

(a) for which pollutants does sufficient data exist which indicates
    that such pollutants present a potential hazard if reused or
    disposed by the option in question?

(b) for which pollutants does sufficient data exist which indicates
    that such pollutants do not present a potential hazard or
    problem to human health or the environment?

(c) for which pollutants are there insufficient data to make a
    conclusive recommendation concerning potential hazard?

     The experts were convened and were advised that an environ-
mental profile would be generated for each pollutant suggested by
the group as being of potential concern.  The experts were given
broad latitude in determining the pollutants for evaluation.
They were allowed to add or delete from the strawman list.  Based
on the recommendations of the four expert meetings, 7 pathogens
and 50 pollutants (Appendix B) were identified for development of
environmental profiles and, therefore, were selected for further
analysis.

     The experts also were responsible for identifying the major
environmental pathways that should be evaluated; that is, which
pathways were the worst as related to a specific reuse/disposal
option.  The experts also identified several pathways that the
lack of data precluded an evaluation.  For ocean dumping the
pathway of sediment contamination and subsequent food chain
transfer could not be evaluated using hazard indices.  Thus, not
all all pathways related to a specific option were analyzed.
                                10

-------
During the meetings the experts in some cases suggested a re -
presentative of a group of compounds for which a profile would be
generated.  If that analysis showed a hazard, other members of the
group would be analyzed.  Upon completion of these meetings the
development of environmental profiles commenced.

(3) Development of Environmental Profiles - The development of
environmental profiles for 50 pollutants was a major effort for
OWRS and the Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office (ORD-
Cincinnati) in late 1984 and early 1985.  The environmental
profiles each consist of two major portions: (a) a compilation
of data on toxicity, occurrence and fate and effects for the
pollutant and (b) a series of indices for evaluating the hazard
relative to the major environmental pathways for the reuse/
disposal option of concern.  Appendix C is an example of an
environmental profile.  Drafts of each profile were reviewed by
the experts as well as submitted to an internal EPA review.
Changes and modifications were incorporated into the final pro-
files.  The results of these profiles and the hazard indices are
summarized in this document.  Once again the reader must recognize
that the primary goal and approach of the data profiles/hazard
indices was to screen out those contaminants that do not pose a
threat to health and the environment and to establish relative
priorities for those that do warrant further investigation.  To
do this, worst case conditions for exposure and effect were
assumed.  There was no attempt to assess the relative risk of
exposure to contaminants in sludge versus other sources of the
contaminant in the environment.  The numerical magnitude of the
hazard indices discussed in this summary are not in and of them-
selves an indication of absolute risk for a contaminant/exposure
pathway.  Rather this is a screening technigue to identify con-
taminants that will be subjected to a more rigorous examination.
The remainder of this summary document will discuss the various
indices developed for each of the reuse/disposal options, results,
interpretation and conclusions based on the indices for each
pollutant.

IV.  HAZARD INDICES DEVELOPED FOR EACH REUSE/DISPOSAL OPTION

     As mentioned, the environmental profiles contain two portions;
a compilation of data and a set of hazard indices related to each
reuse/disposal option.  These indices are intended to identify or
screen pollutants which have a reasonable possibility of adverse
affects for given exposure scenario from those pollutants that do
not.  The calculation of these indices facilitate evaluations and
decision-making by reducing large bodies of data and information
into index values.  The hazard indices developed may be separated
into two types,  one type showing the expected increase of con-
taminant concentration in an environmental medium ("incremental
index") and the other showing whether adverse effects could
                                   11

-------
result ("effect index").  The incremental indices show the expec-
ted degree of increase of contaminant concentration in water,
soil, air or food resulting from sludge disposal.  This type of
index does not by itself indicate hazard, since contamination
alone does not necessarily mean that adverse effects will occur.
However, the incremental index aids in both the calculation and
interpreptation of the "effect" indices.  The effect indices
evaluate whether a given increase of contaminant level could be
expected to result in a given adverse impact on health of humans
or otheer organisms.  Both types of indices were developed for
each reuse/disposal option.  The purpose of the remainder of this
section is to describe the hazard indices developed for each
reuse/disposal option.

°  LAND APPLICATION/DISTRIBUTION AND MARKETING

     Thirteen indices were developed for land application and
distribution and marketing to address specific environmental
pathways.  Each of the indices were calculated for two sludge
pollutant concentrations and for several different cumulative
application rates (i.e. 5 mt/ha, 50 mt/ha or 500 mt/ha) so that
for a single index a determination can be made as to the application
rate at which the pollutant becomes a hazard.  The following is a
general description of each of the thirteen indices and shows how
these indices were designed to cover all the pathways associated
with these reuse options.

- INDEX 1; INDEX OF SOIL CONCENTRATION INCREMENT - This index
shows the degree of elevation of the contaminant in soil after
sludge has been applied.  This index is calculated for sludges
with normal and high contaminant concentrations.  The data used
for this index is the soil background concentration for the
contaminant, the concentration of the contaminant in the sludge
and the sludge application rate.

- INDEX 2: INDEX OF SOIL BIOTA TOXICITY - This index compares the
contaminant concentration in the sludge-amended soil with con-
centrations shown to be toxic for a soil organism (e.g. earth-
worms).  This is calculated for sludges with normal and high
concentrations to determine if there is a potential hazard to
soil biota.

- INDEX 3: INDEX OF SOIL BIOTA PREDATOR TOXICITY - This index
compares the concentrations in tissues of organisms inhabiting
sludge-amended soil with food concentrations shown to be toxic to
predators of soil biota.  For example, this index assesses the
potential hazard to birds which prey upon earthworms residing in
sludge amended soils.

- INDEX 4; INDEX OF PHYTOTOXICITY - This index compares the con-
taminant concentration in sludge-amended soils with soil con-


                                 12

-------
centrations shown to be toxic to plants.  This  index determines
the potential hazard to crops for specific applications of sludge
to soils on which the crops are being grown.

- INDEX 5; INDEX OF PLANT CONCENTRATION INCREMENT CAUSED BY UPTAKE
This index calculates the incremental amount of the pollutant
which is taken into the tissues of plants growing in sludge-amended
soils.  This index uses data on the uptake in responsive plants.
Two plants were chosen to represent all plants  in the human and
animal diets respectively.

- INDEX 6; INDEX OF PLANT CONCENTRATION INCREMENT PERMITTED BY
PHYTOTOXICITY - This index compares the maximum plant tissue
concentration associated with phytotoxicity with the background
concentration in the same plant tissue.  This index determines
whether the plant tissue concentration caused by uptake of pollu-
tants from sludge-amended soil may be limited by phytotoxicity.

- INDEX 7; INDEX OF ANIMAL TOXICITY RESULTING FROM PLANT CONSUMPTION
This index evaluates the potential hazard to domestic or wild
animals which consume crops grown on sludge-amended soils.  This
index uses data on the dietary concentration toxic to herbivorous
animals and the contaminant concentration in the plant tissue.
This index builds upon Index 5, described earlier.

- INDEX 8: INDEX OF ANIMAL TOXICITY RESULTING FROM SLUDGE INGESTION
This index calculates the amount of contaminant in a grazing
animal's diet resulting from consumption of sludge-amended soil
or sludge adhering to forage and compares this with the dietary
toxic threshold concentration for a grazing animal.

- INDEX 9; INDEX OF HUMAN TOXICITY/CANCER RISK RESULTING FROM
PLANT CONSUMPTION This index compares the expected dietary intake
of a pollutant from crops grown on sludge-amended soils to the
acceptable daily intake for that constituent, if it is a non-
carcinogen.  For carcinogens, the dietary intake is compared to a
daily dietary intake of the pollutant associated with an incre-
mental cancer risk of 10~6.  This index builds upon Index 5,
described earlier.

- INDEX 10: INDEX OF HUMAN TOXICITY/CANCER RISK RESULTING FROM
CONSUMPTION OF ANIMAL PRODUCTS DERIVED FROM ANIMALS FEEDING ON
PLANTS - This index calculates the human dietary intake expected
to result from contaminant uptake by domestic animals given feed
produced from crops grown on sludge-amended soil and compares
this to the acceptable daily intake for that contaminant, it a
noncarcinogen or to a daily dietary intake of the pollutant
associated with an incremental cancer risk of 10~5 if a carcinogen.
This index builds upon Index 7, described previously.
                                 13

-------
- INDEX 11: INDEX OF HUMAN TOXICITY/CANCER RISK RESULTING FROM
CONSUMPTION OF ANIMAL PRODUCTS DERIVED FROM ANIMALS INGESTING
SOIL - This index calculates human dietary intake expected to
result from contaminant uptake by grazing animals incidentally
ingesting sludge-amended soil or sludge adhering to forage and
compares this to the acceptable daily intake for that contaminant
if a noncarcinogen or to a daily dietary intake associated with
an incremental cancer risk of 10*~6 if a carcinogen.  This index
builds upon Index 8 described previously.

- INDEX 12; INDEX OF HUMAN TOXICITY/CANCER RISK RESULTING FROM
SOIL INGESTION - This index calculates the amount of contaminant
ingestion for a child and adult resulting from inadvertant or
intentional -  jestion of sludge-amended soil.  Consideration of
this route of exposure is important for protecting children
demonstrating Pica behavior.  The amount ingested is compared to
the acceptable daily intake or 10~6 risk-specific intake level.

- INDEX 13; INDEX OF AGGREGATE HUMAN TOXICITY/CANCER RISK - This
index calculates the aggregate amount of the contaminant in the
human diet resulting from the pathways described in indices 9-12.
This index compares the aggregate amount of contaminant intake
with the acceptable daily intake or 10~6 cancer risk specific
daily intake level.

     For land application, the groundwater and surface water
pathways were not. evaluated based on the recommendation of the
OWRS expert committee that such pathways are not of major concern
when municipal sludge is applied using good management practices.
The experts based their recommendation on EPA's "Process Design
Manual: Sludge Treatment and Disposal" document which clearly
deliniates practices which would prevent ground water and surface
water contamination.

0 (B) LANDFILLING

     The modelling of contaminants leaching from a landfill is a
complex effort.  Many assumptions need to be made regarding
soil and aquifer properties, mobility of the contaminants, their
dilution and other factors.  The following describes in general
the two indices developed for the disposal option of landfilling:

- INDEX 1; INDEX OF GROUNDWATER CONCENTRATION INCREMENT RESULTING
FROM LANDFILLED SLUDGE - The purpose of this index is to evaluate
the leaching of pollutants to an aquifer from an unlined sludge
landfill.  This index is based on the EPA Exposure Assessment
Group's model, "Rapid Assessment of Potential Groundwater Con-
tamination Under Emergency Response Conditions (EPA 600/8-83-030)."
Calculation of the index involves the following steps:  (1) Es-
timation of pollutant transport through the soil profile to the
water table beneath the landfill, and (2) estimation of pollutant
transport through the aquifer to a nearby well.  The index value
gives the degree of increase in groundwater concentration at the
well.
                                  14

-------
- INDEX 2; INDEX OF HUMAN TOXICITY/CANCER RISK RESULTING FROM
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION - This index calculates the human
health impacts due to groundwater contamination in the landfill
vicinity.  This index is determined by comparing the exposure
from the groundwater with the acceptable daily intake values for
non-carcinogens.  For carcinogens the comparison is made with the
intake level calculated to result in an increase in cancer risk
of 10-6.

0 (C) INCINERATION

     As with landfilling, the analysis for incineration requires
transport modelling.  This effort involves delineating assumptions
such as incinerator operation parameters and incinerator plume
dispersion to be used in determining the chemical constituents in
and the size and shape of the plume.  Two indices were developed
for incineration to determine the increase in air concentration
of the pollutant and the resultant human health impacts from
inhalation of incinerator emissions.  The residual ash is assumed
to be landfilled and is not further considered in this analysis.
The indices developed for incineration are:

- INDEX 1; INDEX OF AIR CONCENTRATION INCREMENT RESULTING FROM
INCINERATOR EMISSIONS - This index shows the degree of elevation
of pollutant concentration in the air due to the incineration
of municipal sludge.  This index was generated using a model
which examines the thermodynamic and mass balance relationships
appropriate for multiple hearth incinerators and relates the
input sludge characteristics to the stack gas parameters and
chemical constituents.  Dilution and dispersion of these stack
releases can then be described and normalized annual ground level
concentration predicted using an algorithm.

- INDEX 2; INDEX OF HUMAN HEALTH OR CANCER RISK FROM INHALATION
OF INCINERATOR EMISSIONS - This index evaluates the incremental
human health impacts due to incinerator emissions.  The annual
ground level concentration predicted above is compared to an
exposure criterion for that contaminant.  The exposure criterion
is based on a maximum permissible intake by inhalation (for
non-carcinogens) or a 10~6 cancer risk-specific intake (for
carcinogens).

0 (D) OCEAN DUMPING

     Four indices were developed for the ocean dumping option:

- INDEX 1; INDEX OF SEAWATER CONCENTRATION RESULTING FROM INITIAL
MIXING OF SLUDGE - This index estimates the increase in the sea-
water concentration of a contaminant at a dumpsite as a result of
sludge disposal assuming initial mixing.  The data inputs into
this index include: the sludge diposal rate, the contaminant
concentration in the sludge, and the disposal site characteristics.

- INDEX 2;  INDEX OF SEAWATER CONCENTRATION REPRESENTING A 24-HOUR
DUMPING CYCLE - This index calculates the increased concentrations
of the pollutant in seawater around an ocean disposal site utilizing
a time-weighted average concentration.  The time-weighted concen-
tration is that which would be experienced by an organism remaining
stationary (with respect the ocean floor) or moving randomly
within the disposal vicinity during a 24-hour period,
                               15

-------
- INDEX 3; INDEX OF TOXICITY TO AQUATIC LIFE - This index compares
the resultant water concentration of the contaminant at the
dumpsite with the ambient water quality criterion or with another
value judged protective of marine aquatic life and its market-
ability.  This index does not address the possibility of effects
arising from contaminant accumulation in sediments since EPA is
just beginning to derive methodologies for generating sediment
criteria.  Once such a methodology is available, EPA can determine
effects of sludge constituents on sediment biota.

- INDEX 4; INDEX OF HUMAN TOXICITY RESULTING FROM SEAFOOD CONSUMPTION
This index estimates the expected increase in human intake of the
contaminant due to seafood consumption, taking into account that
fraction which originates from the dumpsite vicinity.  This index
compares the total expected contaminant intake with the acceptable
daily intake or, if a carcinogen, with the intake level calculated
to result in an increase of cancer risk of 10~6.

     In summary, twenty one indices were generated for the five
reuse/disposal options to cover the major associated environmental
pathways.  Once again, the reader should keep in mind that the
selection of pathways was based on the judgment of the experts at
the OWRS committee meetings.  Not all possible pathways related
to a specific reuse/disposal option have been evaluated.  The
pathways of groundwater and surface water impacts from land
application; plant and soil impacts from deposition of incinerator
particulates; and marine life impacts from sediment contamination
will be evaluated during the risk assessments conducted for each
option.  Environmental profiles using these indices were generated
for each of the fifty pollutants selected as pollutants of poten-
tial concern by the experts.  The following section describes the
types of data used in developing the environmental profiles and
in calculating the hazard indices.

V.  DATA USED IN ENVIRONMENTAL PROFILES AND HAZARD INDICE CALCULATIONS

     In generating the environmental profile documents and cal-
culating the hazard indices, various types of data were gathered
and used for the analyses.  The information contained in the
profiles was based on a compilation of the recent literature and
an attempt was made to fill out the profile outline to the greatest
extent possible.  The following briefly describes some of the
types of sources of data used in the profiles and hazard indices
calculations.

°  Sludge Concentration Data

     Data on sludge contaminant concentrations were derived from
an EPA report, "Fate of Priority Pollutants in Publicly Owned
Treatment Works" (U.S. EPA, 1982), frequently referred to as the
"40-City Study."  Whenever the 40-City Study provided insufficient
information, data from another report prepared for the U.S. EPA,
"A Comparison of Studies of Toxic Substances in POTW Sludge" was
used (Camp, Dresser and McKee, 1984).  The "typical" sludge
concentrations used in the hazard indices calculations represent a

-------
median or mean value where the "worst" sludge concentration
represents a 95th percentile value.  Appendix F shows the typical
and worst sludge concentrations for each pollutant, which was
used in determining the hazard index values.

        and Animal Effects Data
     In order to assess the effects of municipal sludge on plants
and animal life, several types of data were gathered for the
environmental profiles.  Data on plant and animal uptake factors
and slopes were gathered in order to evaluate tissue concentrations
of the polluant.  In order to assess the effects on the target
organism from a specific pollutant, toxicity data was gathered
and evaluated.  The uptake data and toxicity data was derived
from a literature search and the key data points were extracted
in order to evaluate the effects on plants and animals.  The
reader should refer to Appendices C and r In order to fully
understand and appreciate the types of data gathered for these
analyses.

° Human Effects Data

     As previously mentioned, the effects indices show whether a
given increase in contaminant level could be expected to result
in a given impact on health of humans or other organisms.  For
humans, the type of data used and the benchmarks against which
such data is evaluated is dependent on the pollutant; that is,
whether it is a carcinogen.  For carcinogens, EPA considers the
effects to be nonthreshold ; that is, any level of exposure to a
carcinogenic contaminant is regarded as posing some risk.  Since
no threshold can be identified, a "benchmark" level of incremental
risk was chosen against which to evaluate carcinogen exposure.
The Carcinogen Assessment Group of the U.S. EPA has estimated the
carcinogenic potency (i.e., the slope of risk versus exposure)
for humans exposed to low dose levels of carcinogens.  These potency
values indicate the upper 95% confidence limit estimate of incre-
mental cancer risk for individuals experiencing a given exposure
over a 70 year lifetime.  These potency values can also be used
to derive the exposure level expected to correspond to a given
level of excess risk.   An incremental risk level of 10~6, or one
in a million, was chosen as a benchmark in the hazard indice eval-
uations.  For non-carcinogens, EPA considers such effects to have
thresholds.   For humans the threshold value chosen was an estab-
lished Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI), which is usually chosen to
be below the threshold for chronic toxicity.

     The data required to evaluate human health effects varied
according to the reuse/disposal option being evaluated.  For land
application of sludge,  data was gathered on:  (a) the daily human
dietary intake of the  pollutant;  (b) the daily dietary intake of
affected plant and animal tissues;  (c) the uptake factors of the
                              17

-------
pollutant in plant and animal tissues; and (d) the amount of soil
in the human diet, in order to evaluate the Pica child syndrome.
For landfilling of sludge, data on (a) the average human consumption
of groundwater and (b) the average daily human intake of the
pollutant was gathered and assessed in order to evaluate the
human health effects from groundwater which has been contaminated
due to landfilling.  For incineration, data was gathered on the
background concentration of the pollutant in ambient air and an
exposure criteria was developed from cancer potency data for
carcinogens or from threshold limited values for non-carcinogens.
For ocean dumping, data on seafood consumption and bioconcentration
factors were used to assess human health effects from ocean dumping.

     Once all the data was gathered and evaluated, the calculation
of hazard indices commenced.  The next section of this document
describes the results of the hazard indice calculations for each
of the reuse/disposal options.

VI. RESULTS OF HAZARD INDEX CALCULATIONS

     Based on the development of the environmental profiles and
the calculation of hazard indices for the various environmental
pathways, Tables 2-5 were generated to summarize the results of
the analyses.  These tables report the values calculated for each
of the pathways and reuse/disposal options.  The following will
briefly describe the results presented in each of the tables.
   LAND APPLICATION
     Three tables were developed to summarize the results of the
analyses conducted, for land application (Tables 2a-2c).  Table
2a shows the hazard index values for the land application of
sludges at a loading rate of 5 metric tons per hectare dry weight
(mt/ha DW) which represents a sustainable yearly agronomic appli-
cation, i.e. loading typical of agricultural nitrogen reguirement.
Table 2b shows the hazard index values for a loading rate of 50
mt/ha DW as may be used on public lands, reclaimed areas or home
gardens.  Table 2c summarizes the values at a loading of 500
mt/ha DW which represents a cumulative loading after 100 years of
application at 5 mt/ha/year.  The analyses for land application
were performed for the thirty two pollutants identified at the
OWRS expert committee meetings as being of potential concern for
this reuse/disposal option.  Thirteen indices were calculated for
land application as described previously.  For Indices 9-13, the
indices were calculated both for adult and toddler ingestion and
are represented in the tables with an "a" indicating values for
adults and a "t" for toddlers.  As also can be seen on Tables
2a-c, each index was calculated for a typical sludge concentration
of the pollutant (denoted by "T") and for a worst sludge concen-
tration of the pollutant denoted by "VJ") .  The "null" indicated

-------
on the tables are the values or concentrations calculated  in the
absence of sludge application.  The hazard indices cover a large
array of environmental pathways associated with land application
of sludges.  For some of the compounds, the paucity of data
precluded the calculation of some of the indices.  For information
on how each of the indices were calculated and the data require-
ments for such calculations, the reader should consult Appendix
D.

     As can be seen from Tables 2a-c, Index 2 which evaluates
the toxicity for soil biota was calculated for eleven pollutants.
The range of hazard index values was from 0.000088 for aldrin/dieldrin
to 2.3 for copper.  Of these eleven compounds, ten had hazard
indice values of less than 1 for the worst case scenario.  Thirteen
compounds had adequate data for calculating Index 3 which evaluates
toxicity to predators of soil biota.  Under the worst case con-
ditions, eight compounds had hazard indices less than 1.  For
Index 4 values were calculated for nineteen compound in order to
assess phytotoxicity from sludges being land applied.  Index 5
determines the plant uptake in ug/g DW.  These concentrations are
used in subsequent indices related to land application.  The
remainder of the indices contained in these tables deal with the
effects related to animals and humans.  Indices 7 and 8 evaluate
toxicity to animals from two routes of exposure - plant consumption
and incidental sludge ingestion while grazing.  Indices 9-13 all
deal with the routes of exposure to humans including plant con-
sumption, animal consumption and incidental ingestion.  As can be
seen from these tables, many calculations were made to assess the
major pathways related to land application.


0 LANDFILLING

     In the analysis of groundwater contamination, predictions of
pollutant movement in soils and groundwater are determined using
parameters related to transport and fate, and boundary or source
conditions.  Transport parameters include the interstitial pore
water velocity and dispersion coefficient.  Pollutant fate
parameters include (1) the degradation/decay coefficient and (2)
the retardation factor which is based on a partition coefficient,
the soil bulk density and the volumetric water content.  A com-
puter program was used for this analysis to facilitate computation
of the analytical solution.  The program predicted the pollutant
concentration as a function of time and location in both the
unsaturated and saturated zones.  For more detail on the methods
used in this analysis, the reader should refer to the summary of
methodologies (Appendix D) and to the sample environmental profile
(Appendix C).

     The results of the analyses for the groundwater concentration
increment resulting from landfilled sludge (Index 1)  and for
human toxicity resulting from groundwater contamination (Index 2)
                                19

-------
 ^
— • •*•

Si-
«=><=><=>




§ s g

SSg
t*> O


o  o

ooo





••TOO
— .

5 ^


r-« u~> — • -*
ooo
ooo

d d <=>
CJ E_J C_>
z as z
0 § S
ooo
0 0
ooo
ooo
o « •
s ""i £
d d
Kl CP f«4
d ci d
S g |
^ ^ 0
0 O
„ „ 9
*"" "* S
at
UJ
z:
«
CJ LJ CJ
a; z z



o o o

-o-o-o


33 S

odd



in in in
co en co
odd

sss
odd


d o d

m CQ -o
odd

i* i
d

r-o -w r--»
000
•ooo
odd
o

°: ~


d d d

z z z





„ ,, 5



UJ
ce
(_« CJ LJ
z z z



t_) CJ CJ




cj cj cj





zzz

CJ CJ CJ
^ -y •**



zzz

Z g z


z z 3=






zzz


z z z

zzz


r--- -^ in
. d
0 0
„ „ 3
LU
LJ
i
CD
UJ
to
c_) cj CJ
a= a: a=



-0 ~0 0




•0 O <=>

...



zz^

z z ==





S 2 2


o o


111



s s s
c> c> c>

zzz

££ ^


S ° 5


., „ 5


S
1
L_l
UJ

ac BE ac



CJ t_) CJ




(_J CJ LJ

se as =c



ac =s a=

zzz



zzz

z" ^ ^


Z Z 2=


ZZZ



zzz


zzz

zzz


d -•


II M Zj
UJ
-I
«
3;
UJ
OQ


O 0

CD -in
o- 01 o-

d d


in in m
odd
• in — *
r-- • iri



r^ CD r~~
odd

in in in
odd


^ •= «

-o • tn
<=» "^ 0

c> c>


=; ° =;



_:


°. ^ d
"
" ^ "•

zzz
— C-4


„ „ 5



g
CJ


0

c-^ oa *-•
cvi r-^ m

""^ *"* o


CO => CO

cs o aa
in m



r-~ ^o in

^s°;
-o — *


ro r-j rn

cn r-j


d <=>


• 0

CJ t_) t_)

s 1 °
C3 0-

-o c-*
 0
d ^
^ z" z

. (=>
§ °


„ „ 5



a.
3:


•0 0 t=>
odd
o --^ o
O 0 0
odd
r-- GO t-~

<=> e> o

odd
-o -a -o
 o *=>
ooo
§ § §
in in in
 o o

0 0 =3
OOO
c> o o
000
odd
en CD co
in tn in
o ^ o
o o <3>
Ooo
r-jf.no
o o <=>
d d
S S K
g ^ g
d ^ d
i 2 i
o o

000
d c> d

K>

_;


• in •
e.

in -o in
ooo





.. ., 3



ac
cc
^





C_) CJ CJt




CJ (-J t-J

Z 3= 3E
zzz



zz^

^^z



z = z

Z 3= Z


^ ** d


d d d

in




odd

in in in

odd



.. M 3



«e
S


0 d

•»- o- r-j
rvi ro t--j

*"^ *i *^
<^ o o

£J J*J J^
odd
<=f d
ooo


t-» r-o K>
g S S
d d a

S K ^
d d d


00 ao en
o o o

s s ?J
d d d

d ^ d


, . c^
^* ^ d

07

«


odd

5 5 i
odd
0 d =:
-


„ ,, 3



0£
UJ
s




~ —
r- r-, r-.




0- 0- 0-

O O 1^1
•-i in •••



Z !2 2

— • CM D-



— . — H —M

D- 0 0-


i i

d d
0 S 0
g § g
odd


o- o- o~
ooo
o o d

o o a
d d d
i-o ro i-^
c-* rn rs

•ooo
d d d
o o o


.. „ 3


g
LU
S





o o
-a in
r-4 CH


0 0

_



^^^

zzz



zzz

^ g z1


o
d



t_J CJ I_i

zzz


zzz

z^z


g

^
« „ 3
«u
^
I
ce
UJ
»
r-.r-.r--

d o o

do' d
r- r~- r~~
in in in
odd


r--> ro ro
d d d
odd
d d d


d o d

-o -a -jo
d d d


d d d

c-t r-3 r-4
d d d

^ o- ro

to tn in


^^
r-o



odd

z1 ^ z





,, « 3



j
u_
                                                                                                                                                                                                    M  X T3
                                                                                                                                                                                                    4-t  H  3
                                                                                                                                                                                                    C  O ^
                                                                                                                                                                                                    O  3 Ul
                                                                                                                                                                                                    tj
                                                                                                                                                                                                    C  JJ 5:
                                                                                                                                                                                                    o  c P
                                                                                                                                                                                                    O  Q) O
                                                                                                                                                                                                       E a,
                                                                                                                                                                                                    0)
                                                                                                                                                                                                      * (0  C
                                                                                                                                                                                                    U  U
                                                                                                                                                                                                    -H  •*  U
                                                                                                                                                                                                    t3  -H -H
                                                                                                                                                                                                    0)  jO  X
                                                                                                                                                                                                    to  3  0
                                                                                                                                                                                                    Q, 0- H
                                                                                                                                                                                                    U)  -P  Q)
                                                                                                                                                                                                    0)  C -H
                                                                                                                                                                                                    Oi  (fl TJ
                                                                                                                                                                                                       JJ  3
                                                                                                 20

-------
S S"
— • CM

**• t-1 f~*
t-t •••



* V •»'


c5 ?« tv*



IT> 0




o o ^
•^- r-4 r-«
M ^~

_, _, oa
in in -^



r-< r-«< 0-4




in in •*•


in u~i ^
0-4 0-« O-i



0 §
0 C>

as?
^> 0 C.'
c_j c_) £_)
-s-. x. -x.




§0 S
. ° s
o
ro i«*> .—
000
O 0 O
<> G> O
s|l
0
OP- — ro
I i §
S <=> S
O ft •— «
O « •



C3
C^
UJ
 0 l^>

gf £



c-* r-"> t^t


r r: r



S * r-< .
— in



^ S ^



•w in


|5~

^- •-. r^
000
<=> o o
o • o
=; ° ~
(_> LJ CJ




o o



i 2 §

a= ar ac

0. *0 O
~^ 0
z;

UJ
z
UJ
UJ
0
cc:
— i
=e
UJ
£ £ £

a: a: ac



i 2
,_;

25°
O •

<~3
^ 3 °




"2°

CJ CJ CJ




z z1 M




Z Z Z






0

3: z z
£ S Z








* == ^

at a= z;

S =
—

5
=J
C3
cc:
CJ
UJ
»••> i--> *^>
^•J »^> M
r— o- in
in ^o in
O 

3- -S ^ ic> o o i^j -o in to »•-» r-^ 000 tn tn in O 0 0 C? ^? ^2 ca o c> - in 0 . 0 r-( . o~ oo r-- . -*j 0 O en f) ^ C* O *=* S ^ * r; s 000 r-i r-*> t-"i "I c> ™ O 0 tv» r-4 r-< 0 0 <=> « « — 0 <=> <3 "^ "^ ^ 0 0 0 o «i o' . <2, C3 0 •=> O- O~- Cr- r-- 0 0 O rn r^i r^j o o o G> O d <=> o - " ^ UJ ^ ^ i' (_> e_» t_J ac ie. ar s s s LIT in ill S S S C.J CJ CJ :K 3e = u u t-J ^ Z 3= —i O* o <^ 0 -0 0 0 =r ac a= cj c_j u 3C 3C Z; •£> o cr> r-j r-j e"^ O O O o <=> o C> 0 0 S ° 3 o c> o Zi LiJ r< r-< r--< <=.<=.<=» KT . ^"2 o^ ro rl to ho 0 0 -o GO in rj c-. o-i o e> c> c» « o 0 in in in c--* r-j rn o =: =; I-T — ' C-4 o • o • o o r^ o- in m in <;> 0 0

«•• r-< o o> o ar a= a; " * * - ~ cc ^D (-J § ^ S ^J Ll C_J CJ z z z z z z z S z z z z z a S z S Z1 z z z y z* iJ i ° • 0 O C> O £ ^ s t_» t-J t-J s= a: ar s: a: at tx »^> r^3 •^ UJ £ 5 tr Cc: ^ C_l I~H to CD £ UJ s UJ z1 z' _• C_J LJ L.1 z z z z a: z z ac z ^ ^ « ^ ar z z ac a^ ^ ^ s z y ^ CJ CJ U t_J CO C-J :z ai z Z a: z a= ae ar X a: =r zzz <^> *1^- — UJ ca C3 g 3? UJ =C i «*• to ^ f--) I--1 »-•> ooo a* o- ^^, '—> . • O o cj S S o •o o o- o- o- <^> o o •0 0 O o PI o 0 °. 0 0 o~ o~ c» s s «=> to to ro <~> o ^ 0 0 C> O~ Or- O- O CP O •O 0 O- o e> «» o o' O Sg£ <^ - e> ~ T S ° ° 0 R S R 0 O O s « 2 <= 3= 3C SC a: z z z; g Oj e »-~ r^ «n 0 "^ 0 & =• =: r^4 r— -•* O O <^> ^ 5 5 0 0 •=' — « " o 0 0 •=> n « " — c- -r o- i-J 0 0 C» r^ -o — — ^ c>* — •• 0 0 -O hO g ^ £ « •= =: O- DO O~ SD~ -C> o ° 5 ° s -— • cvi ho . ro 0 0 s ^ s z: z; 3E _: Z; ^ s S 0 ^ in >c> M O r-j 0 C,,-, I--, -0 v ^r v •^> <^» r-* r-« -o in S ro Of- 0 — . in ro »o § S 5 — . ~0 o o ~o — in O 0 f^ to -o d 0 0V o in m ^~ o •o CJ LJ 1_J 32= 3^ 3= • o r* r-. -•« - 0 O . C3 = z z Z 3= SC O -O C> o 2 « ~ tn S z z z (— > t_l LJ ar ae ae ? ^' S *= 0 0 S £P ^ s M o z z z ae ac 3= C-J (_J (-J a= at; at ^^ z" -0 ~ -0 S o S g 2 § o o ™ P5 i o • o 0 ** 0 -0 «. 0 0 P> UJ O CQ o -o ro cr> UJ O> 0 0 I— 1 C_) CJ o c> c> LJ t_) U a: ar a: S s ^ g <=» o *~. ^ ° §s ° g UJ cc o l_) M •S in C 0 H JJ rfl M 4J C QJ O C 0 u 0> CP 1 M tft C o Tf QJ 4J <0 u •H T3 V lM D. yi 4J D w (1) en 0) & •C3 OJ 1 LJ LJ in o X [3 C o 1 5 -s „ C O w •H M rd & 3 . .p < X 5 g t* H O 4) (U ~ W CN 00 • a* ~- ^H ^r ^ 03 < 01 w - U) U 3 - V) = 0) w w X "O H 3 O iH 2 W JJ 2 C H QJ O C A. B (0 C HI -H VI H 01 0> •D o 01 C c a gu 0) ^ -9 X 3 M UJ O •H U rH -H XS X £8 c w •H O [ft Ul 4J (U C -H « 13 4J 3 3 AJ ^H U) O >W U, O t. = 4= •3 £ „ 21


-------
**• CD —
0 <= 0
<=; -=;»
552
75 S S
55"
SSS
rvi oo — i
=; » «
55"
0 =J~
I: 5 §
C> O
325
z z z
- _:
°^ ^j ^
3= a= 3=
—
2=
UJ
LiJ
00 —
-0 Cr- -0
in o
,. »»
ir» in in
•^i rn in
•w CJ-
m
— « -^
r^ t~~j •
u~>
™ ro in
2 ^
°ii
UJ LJ UJ
S =: 1:
in ^- --.
•o
f^> cjo m
o >i> 

3:
•a:
<_> t-j <_>

ae =e z:
LJ l_J UJ
•X- a= ar

3* ^ 3E
ac a= a=



LJ 1-1 t-J
ac s= as
=K 3: a=
f J UJ UJ
2= 3= 3K
=£ -_ JZ
UJ UJ UJ

s °s
z.
_j
LU
UJ
UJ CJ (_J


U.) I_J UJ
ac ar z:
t J UJ UJ
z ac ar.
a: -3= as
z_
UJ UJ UJ
= as 3=
ac a= a^
3= ac a;
2= a= as

z: ar 3K
a= a= as
3: a: ^
-"
3 '
•a:
U1
0-
r-t •«• -AJ
o <:>
^ -»
555
« s s
<=;»=;
;S5
™ ^ «

« = <=:
<=• = «
521
2 °°
—
_; _:
o
o- ••— • oo
gss
^~

^
















en
"S cn
•n
QJ ,-.
>- Ci
a t:
M
-t-f rO
C — •
*.' tJ
                                                    u  o
                                                    O  w
                                                   •H  H
                                                    ^1  M
                                                   a*  m
                                                       a
                                                   U-l  g
                                                    o  o
                                                       u
                                                    01
                                                       O
                                                    e
                                                    O  *-*
                                                       cn ^~


                                                    01   v CO
                                                           S
                                                        •  Q
                                                       W  U
                                                    C  O  rH
                                                    01 S  W
                                                    u
                                                    a 4J  s
                                                    o  c  P
                                                    U  (U  O
                                                           Ba.

                                                    CT>  n)  C
                                                    TJ  a)  -H

                                                    ^H H  w
                                                    w     a)
                                                       T3  U
                                                    c  a)  C
                                                    O  C  fl

                                                    •a c5  "i
                                                     3  trt  in
                                                     in  ^J  o
                                                     o  c  -i
                                                     x  a "a
22

-------
g g S
in c--* «
—. in
ooo
o-oo-
•w r- t-i





000



S- 3 w


go —
in o o-
10 O


^»- CD ro



fH 0 C>
o-oo-



S 2 £
*""* ~° """*



000


S °

<=> 0 0
d d
0
z z z

10 < c^
=: «= c;


in ~a tn
gg g
odd


S f3 S
odd



CO .0 10
"^ d *^



odd


g <=> o

•ooo
000
S


d ^




000


K Z Z

o~
d "





a
UJ
ce
ae ac ac



Z Z Z.





IE ac z



z z; z


C-J LJ C_l



z z z



C_J OJ LJ




Z £ S







zzz

zzz

z z z


31 Z =C







z z as

0 ™ 0
. d -o
o

LiJ
B
£
g
1
z
z ^ z



in o- in





1C « —



z z: z


y z z



z z z



z z! z




r^< o ^~




to  — •


i°

•0 t±i ^0
d ^ d
"-


g <=><=>


zzz

"
_





^
i
2 g S
— o


. n r-i
°~ d



03 r~i co




r* o*


0 0 00
— in — .


cv* CD r^i
d


o r-t oa
_-. — .



o c> r--i




£33 •^-i —
CO


S °

d

222


d o"




"""i d
°

2°

•0






S
1
000

d d cJ
o ~ c^
"*" ^ ?~
<= ^ c>
odd



0 0> -T>

. c>
*-*
g g S
d d o

co co co
ooo
odd

ooo



™ S S
o o o
000
odd

•w co r-«
in »-•> o
ooo
go o
.



g S S
d *"* ^
d
0 - 0

g § g
00=,
-


-


in -o

0 0

000
d d d
z y z

'
^,





5
cr>
z z y



3E Z Z





Z Z Z



3= Z Z


tJ OJ LJ



Z Z Z



CJ LJ CJ




U CJ CJ







o d ^

d * d

to
in


-




*=>

10 io to
d d d

^
.





(
1
— ?i cf
d o

ooo
0- - 0-
d ^ d




r-< r--^ r^4



• o o


£ — £J
odd


to oa to
CO CO CO
o o o
d d d


rn r-j t*-*
d d d



co o^ co
0 •=> O
d d o



d d d


CO • O
• CM •

d d d

™


_: -:




0 0 O

S •= S
odd

« rn
	





ce
CL.
e s K



__ _ —




Or- »- or-




to r-- r-*


O o ro
— — -i


r5 ^ ^2



— t 10 0-
^- 10 — «




^ £ 10




C^J tO — "


1 1

g g g
ooo
odd
zzz


c> d •




ooo
=>=><=
<= ci c>
o S S

-; —
0 C)




g
1
1
t_> LJ CJ
2: Z *

UJ (-1 (-J
a: a: =E
-a 10




0 0




Z Z Z


ae y z



ac y a!



zzz




y ae *







g
d

zzz

(_) (-J CJ


zzz







z Z1 z

0
'.

s
s
s
cc
1
LLJ
in . io
c> o

. -o -o
o . .
in in in
odd




-O -0 -O



odd


to ro to
-.0 -o -o



^ ^ ^
d d d


r-l C-4 CN»
-0-0-0
odd



°! K S
° d d



d


odd

odd

&


d




odd

^ z z
y y z

°~.
d





UJ
1




>t
•H C
M O
o vt
•H -H

04 10

U-4 E
0) ^J
•u < x
ID = 41

O d)
§ ~ w
» (N
IH co •
TJ iH ?
QJ ^ CO
> < 3!
-H n, ^
8" *
•0 • S
w o
w • -^
C D
O — s
-H (0


H X tj
O O H
01 S Ul
o

8C P
d; O
SO.
tTi « C
T3 0) -H
U) CO
•0 0
§ S S
T3 O »
jj >, 'a
fl r-l UJ
•H -H O
V A X
n 3 o
Q< 0. H
w C >w
4J -H O
rH
3 « M
U) 4J 01
O C -H
o: io -o
•• a w
41 ^1 W

0 0 *<
z p. o


'S 0.
_2 5-
*o
U .4
m 3
U
0
IU 1
o

^
J.
1 1
II
23

-------
O
1
^
0
r 11 adult moddlerl2adu
—.
o
Qj
CO
-
-°
m


">
c*
^i
"X
0
« r>4
ro ^
in m *e
^- ^- -*-
S s "
g g s
.
ro I"O CN
•0 0- •«•
0 O
C> 0
0 0
iO O UJ
000
3= =C 3=
S 0 O
S2 K <=.
0 0 0
s s s
o
tn -o ro
00 .
0 0
HEPTOLOR
(N
"S
O o- «
— • TJ m
*i i>: c-5
^ ^, ^
C> o o-
in r-* •
o- «r
'-is
r- o
o o •*•
r- ro in
0 <=>
r^ — . CM
0 O 0
"^ o" o
z == a=
~-s
z z :a=

•o "" •

ir> in o
^ 0 0
HEIACHLOROBEN/ENE
(N
£ £ £
Z 3= Z
0 -^
O
0
m o o
3= as z
...
as z z
S^
= a- z

3e a: z
ae »;_ 3:

z a: z
=• z z
2
HEUACKURQBUTftBlEtlE
IN'
ro ro 10
u") oa in
O C> O
ro ro ro
UT in in
0 O <=>
10 ~o in
-«-*»-•«-
000
tn tn *n
— • ro in
in -a
*""* o
en — i r-.
-o
— i
z z =e





--t r-* •
°"°
"i U "*^
^ •* •*
0 O O
c*< tn r*J
!-•> to ro
0 O 0
0 0
fo i-o r-o
0 0 O
2-^
°°s
0-0-0-

*^
— ro — •

<=> 0 0
O 0 C>

UJ


-o -o -a
in in in
in to in
•x. -sc. -x.
C-J U CJ
z 3: :z
ac as ac
a; as z
C> 0
at 3= a=


O -0 0

S 22
§ § o
C> o •=:>

— . -0 ^_-
"^ 0 ".
u~j in tn
oj r-4 c^*
O O <3>
• ho
-*-
0
r^> tr- tn
K) IT) C-^
O «> O
f""> •*• .
o o
2 ^ 2
in — 

*"* "*
--. 0 — <
« ° «

a= z ^

£— J
i
ac ae ac
ac ac ar
z z ac
CJ t_) LJ
CJ LJ <_J
z ac a=
3E 3C =
s».
ac ac a=
S5

ai a^ z

z z z

2= Z Z


•X.
₯ ^ S

z == z
c_, r_) c->
^^S
ae z ae
CJ CJ CJ
as z 3=
3S 3C 3=
ae z z

a= a= z
ai z z

3= Z Z



•o •*-
BEIHYLENE CHLORIDE 1
INI
•»- co ^-
5° *
s s s
o-o-o-
o o e*
o ro  0
— ' ITS O-
o £ ^
/=> 0
rst .CM
M
—,
•«»- in o
00^
3= Z Z


=:
Oft
a
mz
en -a -o
S ° 2
» ~ =;
~o ai jj
c* c* c*
0- O 0
000
0 O 0
—4 CM — *
000
ro ro 1-1
222
O 0 .
2 * ^
•o »
• o o

*-«
K> -o ro
0-00
2°2


i
UJ

§ 1
"*" — "~*
r- m r-
So ro
o r--<
au -o
<^> <=> rn
0 0 ~0
in •«-
ro
0 <3> — •
ro
§85
2 S
o* in
in
o o r-
r* in
C5 C-l
0

«-2
s s §


3= == Z
— mo
o e> o
tn


S> 0 -0
"^ ci "^i
 o
•o o o
o d o
ILJ t_) CJ
3= 3= Z
!JC 3C 3=
3= Z Z
£££
§ 2 i
O 0 O
UJ O
r-< o
m
0 0
as = z
o
o o
0
z z z

. 0
s^
o
PENIACHLOROPHENOL
i
INI



5
o
0
s

b.
I

ons derived
e concentrati
Oi
I
tn
o
t)

u
•H
TJ
(D
JJ
a
10
8.


^ s
OJ O*
3
01 HI
O
A - dinethylnitrasanine, only worst
1 • Indues 1 and 5 are expressed H



c
tn
H
3 j
< X
Is
o «
V
— w
rvj
O> "
H -^T
- CD
< 01
04 -H
".s
U) U
D
' — ;
tment Works"
POTW Sludges
a c
0) -H
. "1
Public
Toxic
c «w
•H O
tn tn
4-) Q)

™ a
3 JJ
^-t Ul
(2 0



24

-------
—     r-*
2 - 5
OQ • r-t

<=.=:<=
0 O d>
55°
O- m U~l

o -^> °
-0 . ft
* f-4
•0 CJ ^
*"* GJ
•C> - -O
C 0
^ss
c-j o-
r-4 r^i — •


Z 3C Z

"~* ~^

II II ^



UJ
r-j -o
CJ O 10
'O C> liT


IO IO 4T)
^o co u-j
•O O IT)

t'-> ^- in
-ja co in
— i oa
fj OJ IO
M3 CD
i s
***
^ "^ e=>
•=* 0 0
121
-0 D3 O
252

° s. i
0


it u zi


UJ
UJ
a.
•x -sc. -x.
t-J t_J l_)
Z Z z:



a: ^ z:
LJ CJ CJ

Z Z Z



31 Z =


:z z 3s=
3: 3: z




^-§

„ „ ^
3=
i , 1
UJ
CD
5
^ ^ ₯
<-) LJ L»



Z Z Z
t_) LJ C_)




=e =c z
z z z:

Z Z Z
z z z
CJ t_J LJ
a: 3e ic

z = z
ae z: as;

°

i> u _J

^
1
2
P^ ^ ^
r~ .to
<:> o
555
c> o <=>
525
5 £ 3
000
— . ro — •
c> <=> o
^- co r^>
° ° °
=: r" =
5 2 §
0

"2"
r-« -o
0 O
~~~


— • to





2




















Ol O^
3
u in
OJ »«
u
0 >e
oT cu
J= 01
•a —
                                                                                                                H  W
                                                                                                               Ox  10
                                                                                                                :   M
                                                                                                                    O     rt  a>
                                                                                                                 • H  (X  <-H
                                                                                                                 M  W   »
                                                                                                                 (II      S
                                                                                                                 »o    •  o
                                                                                                                    W  U
                                                                                                                 01   •  ~*
                                                                                                                 C 3

                                                                                                                 5"  «
                                                                                                                 4J :   
                                                                                                                        C  -H
                                                                                                                        «  -g
                                                                                                                        4J  3
                                                                                                                        3  ^j
                                          25

-------
O _l
g s s
^ s "~


000
S g 5:

o o o

O O 0
£ £ £



o o o
•O O ro
«r -o .~



g 0 S
in <=> o-

«c» o o
•*- in ro




o o o
c-4 in o
O- 0- 0-



o- in ro


go o
<=> o
— 100-


d °


0 0 0
§ S i
d d
a= z a;



S o S
°i °, g
o o •
^

S S g

o o o
»-^ *o r-.

0
_ (0 _.
i i i


d
go 
0 0

o
Hj
"



5
0
"J

as

oe
C)
si
CJ CJ CJ



CJ WJ CJ
a= z a=

gs s
o o
^- co -a
c~* r~»  ~ fO
r-J O «
000


S 0 0
o d ^
o
S



""! ™
*=*



o o


CJ CJ CJ


CJ f-J CJ




d """

^
~







CJ

CO
£
UJ CJ CJ



<-> CJ CJ
Z Z Z



CJ CJ CJ
Z Z Z



£££



a: as as

Sz z1




CJ CJ CJ



ac z se


CJ CJ CJ



£zz


z z a=

CJ CJ CJ



3= z a=




as as as


£ z z1


0 CJ CJ




d o o

^



S
 ^~
• o *o


°~ -=>'
^. ^ ^.
odd



• in — <



r~ .in
o d

— 03 f— .
c*4 in —
0 0 <=»



d d


10 in r**



CN --o *r
-°"S


" S °
^ 0


~: s
<=>
S
*~*


^ ^°




0*^0


• OD


CJ CJ CJ




OD

G








g

ca
CJ
o o in
tn in r*4
— m •
o


o o oa



d
co on co
_• « -



o o in
r~- -o r^
c>



m 10

i~~ — « in
o



l-> •*- OD


— o m
r"* r-< ^


o o co
rsi r- —


-*3 CN
0


•=> O
5°
z z a:



o
d



— -< in
So
o


CJ CJ CJ
.e z z


S K °
§ ^
. 0
o

S S

tj






UJ

s

3
5
oo ««- ^
0 *^ S

d d
ro 10 ^»
O3 CO «C>
§tr> -c>
*  ^ o
g s g



in in m
§e> -c>
0 0

odd

0 O 0

**
ro ro CD
CD CO IO
0 O 0
o • o
0 ° °.
0

CD co in
in m CNI
g g g
ddd


0 S S
0*^0
t2



^ "*"




d "~" **


r^< in in
10 0- CN|
o o -o

d o d
cj CJ cj




- ^

j








2
ac
S
UJ
at ac ac



CJ CJ CJ




cj cj cj
a: ac a:



CJ CJ CJ



z a= z

CJ CJ CJ
z z z




ȣz



a= se ae


CJ CJ CJ



oa rsi <«-
10 .O




in
in



-4 c4




^ d


in in in
ddd

S S K
c> <=> «^



_; _:

Zi








t_

m
CJ
- r, -
o d
o

r-* -o in
d d


•=• ° 5
••- -»• •*
C^l C1^ f *



c^( r^ in
• do



ddd

c£ — 03
d d



d d


— O--M
o =: •=:
0

0< 10 ^~
ro 10 e^
odd


en • o
d d


"1 — *"!

CD
"*"


r^ ^a




d


^ 3 S
C3 • ^

0
oa 10 o-
d ^ d





Hi
~







oc
UJ
S:
S
000-
C*4 CO C*4
-^ — •


o o to


03 O- r~-

0- O- 0~




r~- tn in
in r— CM



"< tn •»-

fO -O *O
-0 O- — •




s s «


in r-i ro



r-j o o~



—• m o
0 0
o o
d d

000
0 O O
odd
z z z



— . — g
O 0
o



go o
. °. °.


— » in ro
ro ro CN<
odd

., ,0 _
O 0 O
o o o


odd

H n 5





o
>=»

UJ

r^
S
CJ CJ CJ



CJ CJ CJ
z z a=



0 0
r^ r*-



CJ CJ CJ
a; sc as


CJ CJ CJ


z z a=




CJ CJ CJ
as a= as


CJ CJ CJ



CJ CJ CJ



"O O
s
o
d




z a= a£



z ac z







CJ CJ CJ
as ^ as


CJ CJ ^




o
d



Z
JC
s
s
^

=c

g
s
10 ro r—
•V QU IO
ddd


-r _ ro
d d

r-J oo r—
0 O O
ro ro ro
odd



ddd



~o -o -o
ddd

N ^ r^
odd



-0 -0 ~0
d d C'


^- ^> -
d o o


s — s
d d


— -t t*-t r—
d d o


S d "t
o
0
ro



03
^



m co -O
odd


CJ CJ CJ
z a= a=


C, CJ CJ




03

"-J







UJ


§
U^







•H C
M O
o w
•H -<-4
£ S
s*
° s •
0) 4J
4-> < X
10= Q)
b, M
= M
o o

O — ^ CO
k CM
<*-! CO
T3 ,-t T
ty -co
•H | H
"* • Q
05 U
01 • ' —
c o
O •" -
•H 01
4J S 0)
id tn o>
V< Ai -O
4-> M 3
C O H
(1) S M

o c g

en n) C
•a o -i
3 »
rH E-> W
01 111
T3 y
c o) c
0 C fl
S 4->
*^ O ol
QJ ^
4-> >. 3
u o
o ja x
M 3 o
Oi ft f
01 C >H
4J "4 O
3 tn 01
01 4J Q)
(1) C -H
5 la
.. ^ 4J
CD r-* t/1
4J ^
O O **-*
Z CU O









"S "^
J2 §"
— "5
o> _•
• s
*C Ot
0 >i
V
--• r&
ta
a -o
l» C

cr — *
5 S
Oi -•
c -o
-. e
-o — •
u ii
ro •»
                               26

-------
e> o u->
«— > CH
01 0 •»
s 3: M
("••4 C^J CN

K § "~*

•*- tvi C-*
l^» ^~

*-^ r^ rs<


fo ro c-j
•o <^>
0 -0
r-O r^i -<3
f-- Cr- 0
C> O UJ
<0 <=> -0
•C> 0 C^

O o a
. 0
•o
o — o
g o g
0 0 C>

Hj
3!
oc.
C3
3:
UJ
0 O f>
t^> cx>
r- ? in
f^r^.r^

r- o~ •

un t^i
— • 03 tn

ss -:


in o- in
o*
<^> .
c> G*
03 r-» in
S •=> 
O O o
O 0
a= 3: =
- -I s
0 <=> c>
3E Z =C
— i 03 r-j
c^ 
CJ CJ t-J

3C 3= =C
z: 3= =r
z: = ae
:z: 3K at
01
HEXACHLOROBUTADIENE 1
t
(Nl
r-o m ro
— > 1^- uo
O <=>
to r-i
— . r^ —
tn in in
o o o

<=> C3 <^>
in ^o in
«> G> C>

c=> o o
in in in

ooo
o ~-
r^ •
o-
O 0
-0
— ^ C-*




a
o- •-• •*
_-, en
cvi r-, .
•*• m -*-
o o o
i-o fv fo
<=><=> <±>
0 ° 0
to to to
000
0^0
r-H co
o
~ 2
000
— i r-« -o
O

— • to
• C-l
ao . r--rf
. r-i
.^> .0
• r-j
in
UJ


UT UT 1>T





ac =e z


ar = z
— C-J
IZ>
^ a 2
z ^ ^
z a: :z
0 O 0
OH r--* r-<
•c^ ^> -o
 •£>  o <^>
U.J
r^ -o
r^t
in in in
o-« r-j r-a
O -o c^
. — . in

. -to

to to in
o- r--i
O 0
. *-4 <>
o
ro ^o c^i
ooo
ro — « r^
 O
3C Z 3:

sr ae 31
2= = 3=

r-j t~>4
!tETHYLEt!EBISI2-CHLOF.O-ANIl.INE>
IN
se ac ac

3c ae =e
^ £ £

a: 3: ^

z z z
ae z z
S ^^


ac se as
SE = =e:
z =e a:

z ae a:



- to r-*
<=>
13
IIETHYLENE CHLORIDE
IN
225
0
o o o-
O O O
o-o-o-
<=> 0- 0

o
^ "^ o
o o

. . o
0- — • t O
. 0 O
01 o o
<=>
• OO
-O in i>*
2 rJ 2
§
— 4 r-i
-•o --• ^
• o <=><=>
000
0 o
0 0
r-4 r-o o-
r-» -o o-
— -* r-- -O
O 0 O
0 0 O

. C-)
\n — *
•a- . r-">
, r-j -
0 0
•~Q irt -*r
 0
=K z: =S

3=
d
LJ
o-- — *
D- "£>
r— oo r^


r-» -o
K S

ID C>
(O
o o> r-
— ^o
u-i
K 0 "*"
r-* •*•
s s °
u~J ^ «*•
r-- - t--.
<=> -0 -0
Z>
zi z: =:
C^J • C^<
CJ
cJ ° •=.
o o


• u~j 
O C> OJ
0 •» C>
•c. -o o
•=> Ci 0
0 O O
3C Z ^



CJ CJ l_>
=zr a= a:

<=> O 0
o <^ c^
o <^>
0 C=^ .0
- 
0 •=>
CN
• <^-

•±> "".
•=> 0

C-J Cr-
0- -0
<>
0> — .
»* ~>
s S
^:
LjJ
=c
Ci_
C3
CD
_J
UJ
                                                                                                           •H  q
                                                                                                           n  O
                                                                                                           o  w
                                                                                                           •H -H
                                                                                                           M  IH
                                                                                                           A.  m
                                                                                                               a
                                                                                                            <  o-
                                                                                                           -H A<  r-l
                                                                                                           H U    •
                                                                                                           a)     7;
                                                                                                           13   •  a
                                                                                                              w  u
                                                                                                           AJ  ^  P
                                                                                                            C  O fH
                                                                                                            cu  S w
                                                                                                            o
                                                                                                            C  4J S
                                                                                                            o  c P
                                                                                                            u  cu o
                                                                                                               g o.
                                                                                                            cu  AJ
                                                                                                               o  in
                                                                                                               -p  3
                                                                                                             ••  3  *i
27

-------
^-    C3
CO -0 —
« 00
-O *"> U~>
• <->* r J
o
c> <=> 
r-4 r--. — >
o o
CN •«- r-j
d e> c*
— -43 O
ho
<=>
-0 10 — i
%n ^ i

• c~t
—i -0
0 ^* §
^: *"" ^


•^> C3
a: 3: a=
2= z a:

- u-i


M H 5
—






UJ
Ul
So -o
c*
<=, 0 IT)
R=rS

cr. o &-
-o co u~)
"•- 0-
u-> ~o irt
s:1"
0 •=> -0

0- 0 U~i
S^
10 r-^ u"i
z ^: z
- o
o <£. ^
222
^ S 3
°
. 0
d>

II .. zl
—





LtJ
£
ac a; a:
c,uu
222

CJ (_» (_J


z, =tr as
"'
222

x z a:
:z 3; :z
a: =^ =e
a; a-. 31
Z Z 3S
"~
•X- 3E 3=
^ z as

S -; S
«r> c>

„ „ 5




Z
^
en
1
tJ 1-1 <_J
z as ae
LJ C_< CJ
=K iC 3=

<_> C» L)



~"
^^^





3t: ae a:
**"
- = -
^ ^ ^.

» CO







n:
i
_,
™
M — -0
^ r i -o
cr"
-jj -o -a
°=:=:
03 -w -J3
o 
0 C> C>
d <=>
<3> O
_ , -0
o
~ o
" . 0
-o .0

r*~"
.•«•<=>
cu t^i ao
5 ™ S

i-i "


,. ., 5
—






M



















2
-c>
nl O
— o
u ui
n> =]
U
•s -
i^ -a
s
£
(4
S '
e= •«
£
-- d
x> •— >
                                                                               M  O
                                                                               O  KJ
                                                                               °s
                                                                               0)
                                                                                  O  Q)
                                                                               6     at
                                                                               o  — w
                                                                                   • a
                                                                                  to u
                                                                               4J =
                                                                               n3 in
                                                                               u X
                                                                               4J H
                                                                                C O
                                                                                 a c
                                                                                13 OJ -H
                                                                                3 H
                                                                                    ,-§
                                                                                     w
                                                                                   3  O
                                                                                   a, H
                                                                                 ^ in  in
                                                                                 (T 4J  0)
                                                                                 a) c -H
                                                                                 « nj -a
                               28

-------
                                      a
                                     °8

H

j__|] Q2






CN
r*^ <^
DU hJ CJ
Q ^1 h- (
2j 1^ (Xi
HH JH
^-1





j J
j j
< D
z



w
w
u
M
Q H
z iJ 05

"^ O
Q 2
p2
5

•^
rH t-H
*— P <^L
M 2 J t-l
Q Z >j

J5n
J

••
ro
J vJ
3 ^y
§
H


















H
2

o
o
o
rH
in





ro
in









0











o
CM
rH






rH
•-H








rH




















U
M
§


o

CM







O
rH
CM








0
rH
CM








*
CO
ro







£
VC
CN
O
O
O
•
0



*
0




















w
1
pa

o
o
00
ro






o
tn
rH








0
in
rH








*
rH
r— 1







*
ro
rH
O
O
o
.
o



*
0


















u
§
ZO(A)PY
§
03

O
O
rH
r-t






rH










O










4c
O
O

CM





*
VO
CM







*
0










s
(ff
p
p^
!ic
0^
x^»
(J
1
l-J
>H
i
w
M
m


in
•
o






^J1
m
•
0







^«
in
•
0








0
rH
in






CM
rH








rH




















5i
M
1

O
0
CM
ro







•
ro








00

rH








*
C*
VO







*
^J1
0
•
o



























u
5
1
r-
in
i— i
•
o





r-
o
0
0
•
0



CO
in
o
o
o

0







o
o
ro
rH





0
•
CM





























§
r-l
5

CJ
z








u
z









C_)
J2










O
o
ro
00





CM
rH








I—I




















H
8


•
ViD







VO
CO
o
0
•
o





0











o
ro
CO






t— 1
•
CM








rH




















OS
U
(X
§

1— 1
»
^J*







^4
ro
o
o

o





0










•K
O
O
o

r— 1




ro
rH







«
0




















8
M
U

r— 1
p*.









(Ti O CN
1 0 O
1 0 CM
• <— 1
O




ro o r^
rO ^* rH
o r-- i
o t o
o
*
0
1
1


CN O rj-
rO ^* rH
o r-
o I o
o

o




* *
ro co o
•H
M rc
Q H
^ M Cu
CM D J

O I rH
O rH
CM O
•
O





O ro
VO VD
rH O
O
•
O





O ro
VD VO
rH O
0

o





* *
ro v£>
• •
rH ro






* *
rH O
0 1
^D d-
* o
O 00
•
CM


•K *
0 0




















§
CJ M
z 2
1—1 &
1 u.
VD 1 =
' 1 6
ro 1 o
i £
1
1 v
1 2
i S
1 *
I ^
1 •"
in i w
CM §
U
f™\ jj
03
_,j
1 c

1 c
1 o
!O
0)
CN 1 Oi
• I tJ
! 3
0 i 5
I «
1 c
1 0
1 •»
1 a
-u
1 ^
u
rH
TD
£
0 1 Q,
•0- 1
ro I "!
I ^
1 3
Ul
1 «
1 a
I
! s
1 ^9
^* 1 **
r4 |
1
1


k-
^
c
I :
rH 1
t C
1
! c
i i
1 C
t
t j.
1 r
1 I
1 -l
1 C
j
C
i

r-
(1
-
1 I
1 ^
! c
1 C
I 4.
1 d
1 C
1
& ! 1
8 I "r
K 1 1
(il |
S 1 *
: UJ
IH
4*

CN
CO •
cr> — .

* 00
X .H
w *
• a
in u

2_
"w
: 0)
V ,-§
^H Ul
O
H U

3 x
3 0

C ^'
-rH O
l/l l/l
-U O
t: H

4J P
3 -t-1
ft 'S





J
X
31


H
Q

5
H
J
0
-j
J

i3

5

H
D

j
0
0
u
5
H
2
H

29

-------




















w
u
CJ
t—l
a
z
1— 1

Q
fV
*?
[SQ
£
J
^_J
M
&H
C

15*
t [
..
*~ 1
o
u

z




•*-x

m

frl
^Q
S
H

















£-(
*-J C/^
( 1 p^
*^ o
g


CN
( T
^ ^
Q J M
Z < PJ

^H



J j
rj l-J
<5_ ! \
z









f— {
t— 3 CO
< O
2





rH ) "I
i^
r*N 1 1 C^J
H J M
Q < DJ
Z >H
M H




i "] t ^
, i ^[
•^ ] ^
Z





















H
1
J
2
i
CJ 1 CJ
Z 1 Z

i
i
i
!
!
i
CJ 1 CJ
z z





CJ CJ
z z








1
1
1
1 *
CJ 1 O
z\~
1

1
I
1
1
1 *
CJ 1 CO
z i o
1 •
1 0
1
1
t
I
1 *
CJ 1 O
Z 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
!

I
1
1
1
!
1
1
U 1
Z 1 U
p Q
EH 1 H
ta i cd
* \ s
J 1 -C
>H 1 U
a: i
u i 1
>H I >H
§ 1 E


O
•
O




*
o























CO


CJ








u
2





CJ












*
o
CN
i— 1






*

O
i-H
•
O




•K
O




















u
z
Q
ENANTHR
£


rH
•
0





o
CN
1
w
o
o
o
•
ro
O













O
00






•K
VO
rH
1
U
o
o
c
•
rH
*
O























O
§
£

r-
ro
•
0





•*
CN
•
O






CN
•
O










in
•
«*







rH








rH























rH
tu!
i c/>

0
o

CN





rH
*^O





in
in











*
CN







*
CN)
•
O






•K
0























XAPHENE
R


m







oo
o
o

o



o












•K
O
o
1— 1






*
ro
rH
O
•
0




*
o

















DQ
§
•*
3-1
P-t
uj
ICHLORO
£


•
rH






vc
ro
•
O






ro
•
O










0
o
r--
CN







oo
•
CN







rH























CJ
1 — I







































m
-U
ro
•D

0)

CO

Q. O1
O 3

a, c
PI •*"*
re
tn
4H C
0 0
-ii 4- ^
CJ (0

C
O Q)
C
CD O
D CJ

rH
'O ^0
cu ^
[ t j 1
ro CJ
rH (0
u en
rH 0)
ro -tJ
O ro
0
4J -r-t
O 'O
z c
•rH
II
II
U
z *
                                                           D.
                                                        14 E
                                                         O O
                                                         01  -
                                                         > ft
                                                         .-I O.
                                                           S 01
                                                         0)
                                                         u
                                                         c: AJ jc
                                                         O C H
                                                         U QJ O
                                                           G 0.
30

-------
are summarized in Table 3.  The analyses related to landfilling
were performed for the twenty eight pollutants identified at the
OWRS expert committee meetings as being of potential concern.  In
the table, the columns labelled "all null" reflect the assumed
existing conditions in the absence of sludge disposal.  In the
absence of actual concentration data, a value of zero was used
for organics in this analysis.  The columns labelled "all typical"
reflect the conditions associated with a typical landfill or
those most frequently encountered in landfill situations.  The
"all worst" columns show the results of the analyses when the site
parameters and sludge concentrations used were all worst case.
Intermediate analyses using several worst case parameters with
several typical parameters were also conducted for each pollutant.
Appendix E contains the results of the intermediate analyses
conducted.

     As can be seen in Table 3, the index values associated with
human toxicity from ingestion of groundwater contaminated by
leaching from an "all worst" case landfill range from 0.0098 for
2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid to 51,000 for arsenic.  For four
compounds (cobalt, methyl ethyl ketone, methylene chloride and
phenanthrene)  human toxicity index values could not be calculated
due to missing data points.  For seven compounds the index values
in the worst case situation are less than 1 indicating that no
human toxicity problem exists for non-carcinogens or that the
risk from cancer is below the 10~6 risk level for carcinogens.
The seven compounds are: cadmium, chromium, 2,4-dichlorophenoxy-
acetic acid, molybdenum, malathion, phenol and selenium.

     For groundwater contamination from the "all typical" landfill
situation, the associated human toxicity index values ranged from
3 x 10~20 for phenol to 740 for dimethyl nitrosamine.  Indices
for four compounds could not be calculated due to data gaps
(cobalt, methyl ethyl ketone, methylene chloride and phenanthrene)
For the "all typical" scenario, fourteen compounds have indice
values less than 1.  These compounds are: cadmium, chromium,
copper, cyanide, 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid, lead, malathion,
mercury, molybdenum, nickel, phenol, selenium, trichloroethylene
and zinc.
0  INCINERATION

     For the sludge disposal option of incineration, two indices
were calculated.  Index 1 shows the degree of elevation of a
pollutant's concentration in air due to the incineration of
sludge.  This index was developed by using two models, the BURN
model and the ISCLT dispersion model.  The BURN model uses
thermodynamic and mass balance relationships appropriate for
multiple hearth incinerators to relate the input sludge
characteristics to the stack gas parameters.  Fluidized bed
                                31

-------
incinerators were not evaluated due to a paucity of available
data.  The dilution and dispersion of these stack gas releases
were described by the ISCLT dispersion model from which normalized
annual ground level concentrations were predicted.

     Index 2 shows the human health impacts expected to result
from the incineration of sludge.  The results of Index 1 were
compared to the ground level concentrations used to assess human
health impacts.  Ground level concentrations for carcinogens were
developed based upon assessments published by the U.S. EPA Car-
cinogen Assessment Group.  These ambient concentrations reflect
a dose level, which for a lifetime exposure, increases the risk
of cancer by 1Q~6.  For non-carcinogens, levels were derived from
the American Conference of Governmental and Industrial Hygienists
threshold limit values for the workplace.  The reader should
refer to Appendix D for details on the calculation methods.

     The results of the analyses related to incineration of
municipal sludge are summarized in Table 4.  The analyses related
to incineration were performed for thirty compounds identified at
the OWRS expert committee meetings as being of potential concern.
The analyses were conducted using two sludge feed rates: 2660
kg/hr DW which represents an average dewatered sludge feed rate
into a furnace serving a community of 400,000 people, and 10,000
hg/hr DW which represents a higher feed rate which would serve a
major U.S. city.  For each feed rate the analysis was conducted
using both a "typical" concentration of the pollutant in sludge
and a "worst" concentration of the pollutant.  Thus the terms
"typical" and "worst" in Table 4 refers to the analyses performed
using the two concentrations of pollutant in sludge.  The null
values represent conditions in the absence of sludge incineration.

     As can be seen in Table 4 for the disposal of worst case
concentration sludges at a feed rate of 2660 kg/hr (DW) the index
2 values range from 0.00035 for selenium to 380 for chromium.
For the disposal of worst concentration sludges at the higher
feed rate of 10,000 kg/hr six compounds have hazard indices less
than 1 indicating that no human toxicity problem exists (for non-
carcinogens) or that the risk from cancer is below the 10~6 risk
level (for carcinogens).  The six compounds are:  Copper, DDT,
heptachlor, lindane, selenium and zinc.  For sludges containing
the worst concentration of pollutant incinerated at the lower
feed rate of 2660 kg/hr  (DW), ten compounds have hazard indices
less than 1.  These compounds are:  beryllium, DEHP, copper, DDT,
heptachlor, lead, lindane, mercury, selenium and zinc.  For
sludges containing typical concentrations of the pollutant dis-
posed at the higher feed rate of 10,000 kg/hr (DW), ten compounds
have hazard indices less than 1.  For sludges containing typical
concentrations disposed at the lower feed rate of 2,660 kc/hr
(DW), thirteen compounds have hazard indices less than 1.
                               32

-------


































CO
fc")
u
M


2
) — i

§
^
N
<£


§
H-<
H
<^
CM
CL]
z

C_)
z
M
.,
^r
,_j
cc
«2
f— !





















H

Cx
52
i-i
x:

en 3
^ CJ
i — i
0 &
o H
o
f— 1
J
(J

CM Z

X
Cd
Q
2 H
rH LO
(X
^g

x:
C1 ^
t*j C_J
M
O (X

CM

>J
vj
3
r£







H


Q

\ ^
CJ1' "^C
t^- c3
n
o ex
O >H
C EH
0
rH
J
J
D
rH 2
X
u
D
2 H

1
l-i
H
^D H
CM

j
Z







H
(-.
b
i
<*•
*^o




1 — 1

^o




o^
•
r-H





^*
•
in


. — i
•
fvj




o>
•
rH








^j-
ro




CM
t
ro





rH




ON

CM


i — i
•
i — 1




f — 1





Z

c
l_J
Q
ALDRIN
0
0
VD
rH


O
o
ro





ro






O
ro
rH


rH
in






ro









V0
•^




in
•
CO





rH




m
•
ro



, — i




t — i









CJ
ARSENI
0
rH
rH



0
rH
rH




O
1 — i
rH





O
rH
rH


0
rH
rH




O
rH
rH








r-H





i — 1







rH




i — 1




rH















W
BEN ZEN
U





r_)
Z





U
z






u
z



CJ
z





u
z









CN
rH




VD
•
i — t





rH




CM




1 — t





, — f





§
£
rr
H
|
0
tx:
5
CQ
CM
CM




. — 1






CM
i£>
•
O




CO
•
r— 1



VD
•
o



CM
*sO
•
0







in
ro




>£>
•
f— 1





rH




O*1*
*
CM


( — 1





r-H






CO
n
S
f^_[
*^
q
5
m
ro
•
rH



ON,
CN
*
0



CO
rH
•
O




m
CM
o


ON
rH
t
O



00
rH
•
O







CM
•
r-



u?

. — i





i — i




*vf

rH


rH





i — 1









S
t — 1
,_3
L-3
u
CQ
^
1 — 1




01
•
o





in
o
*
o



00

o


1 — 1
•
0





m
o

o






0
o
ro



<£>
rH






rH




CO
rH



CTi
t — i




, — 1










1
O
c^>
in



o
LO
CM




r^
•
^o





o
o
CM


0
CM






•
**0








O
CM
LO



f-
ro






r — (




i — 1
CO



ro





rH










CADM1IJ
CM
CM




i — 1
CM





i — 1
CM






i — l
CM



i — l
CM





rH
CM









> — I





i — l







i— l




rH




rH





rH



DO
a
S
5

s
£
CARBON
vc
•
ON



r^-
•
ro




i — i
^T
•
O




CM
•
ro


ON
in
•
o



rH
^}*
•
0







o
CM
rH



ON
C
•
cr>




i — i




x
•
r^


rr
rH




, — i









Z
5
3
5
o\
CTv




CO
cn





CO
Q>






00




CO
CTN





CO
O"\









1 — 1





1— 1







1 — 1




, — 1




, — 1





1 — I









§
£
OttDRO
o
o
CO



o
CO
"-T




0
CM
1 — 1





0
CO
ro


o
"vj4
1 — 1




o
CM
p — t








rH
^




t — f
•
"^f





1 — 1




o-
t
ro


CM
1 — 1




rH










t
1 — 1
CM
•
c


CM
CO
o

o


I^Q
^3*
O

0



in
in
o
o

CO
^r
0

o


>*o
^r
o

o






VC
•
*^F



CO
•
t — i





r-H




CM
•
1-1


, —





i — I










8
3>
CO
•



ro
CM
•
O



CO
CO
o
•
c



ro
i — i
O


CM
O^
0

o


ro
CO
£2
•
o






rH
rH




r-
•
CM





1 	 1




L^
•
r— l


rH
rH




t— 1








G
CJ
Q
t-T
G
CJ
Z




CJ
z





CJ
z






CJ




CJ
z





u
z









CJ
z




CJ
z






CJ
z



u




CJ
z




CJ
z









DIOXIN,
u
z




CJ
z





cj
z






r__J
z




z





u
z









CJ
J




C_)
z






(J




L,




CJ
z




y










FUPAMS
rH
CTi
•
O


cr>
CM
•
o



*3*
1 — 1
•
o




ON
i — i
O


in
rH
•
O



^
rH
•
O







ro
•
•
•"* C
M O
O W
w u
A. /Q
u-j £
O O
u •
0.1 -P
iO r 0)
U, H
: JH
E o>
o *— m
i-t (N
<3\ . — .
TJ >-* ^
C) "CO
> < cn
H (X rH
In W
CJ S
-0 • Q
CO U
U) . — '
c r>
o -* =
rH W
jJ ; 0)
M ^ TJ

C O -H
0) S LO
U
C -u S
0 C P
U GJ O
ID 4J
tji fU C
3 V-i
-H H U>
If) 0)
T3 O
C 01 C
O c to
? *J
Tj O «"
u .Q
.u >, 3
(13 rH Ul
H H 0
TJ -H H
(U .£ X
Ij 3 O
W C u-'
-U -H O
3 in in
oj c: -H
C£ O T3
-P 3
0) ^ tn
4J .-H
O 0 «
S O* O












0)
i — i
(0

t t
^CU
rH
x:
0)

i — i
Q)
CM

T
0?
5
1!
EX
1
33

-------



























en
u
u
M
Q
Z
1H

Q
S
^C
[S3
<

§
rH
H

r^
CO
z
fH
U
z
(H
• •
H
CO
*D
z
M
H
6
ii

^j<

fo
S
H






















H

Cc
S
^. j
£3
tH
O PI
O >H
o H
0
H
o H
o

. ~)
j
•-t Z
X
QJ
a
^y P— '
*~* 59
g
b^-
x:

CTt 2
^ r_ }
tH
0 Ou
VD >H
VD FH
CN
_!
D
Z







H
f-H
2
•=1*
»
ro

,_,
m
o




r-H
CN
•
o



en
ro
•
O



ro
CM
•
O



, — 1
CN
•
O





VD
rH






rr
CN



f-H





CD
•.
r— (



r-H
•
r-H

















Q
CiJ
(JD
r-
*
o
r_^
1 — 1
0




o>
1 — i
o
*
0


r-H
VD
0
•
0


^f
CN
0
*
0



O"i
r— <
O
1.
o




o







CT.
•
in



rH





CN
•
00



ro
»
r-H















CO

Q
Z
rH
m
•
i — i

CM
^
0




VD
m
*
o



•*
rH
•
O




p-^
o
0



VO
tn
•
0





r^
CM






VD
•
O-



rH





IT)
*
CvJ



"^
*
r-H
















(£
U
^J*
•
t — j

-*
rH





^*
•
rH




T
•
rH





•
rH




<3*
•
i — 1






rH







rH




rH





rH





rH







rH





CO
a
HH
ai
S
re
u
CO
§
,_ "]
1
rH
VD


ro
^





ro






CN
•
VD




ro






ro








rH
CN






•sT
•
i — 1



rH





, — I
•
CN



rH







r-H










. _")
NICKE
o
VO
CN

O
CN





tN I
• 1
CTi




rr
CN





CO

O




CM
•
O^






CTl
CN






CN
CN



r—{





VD
•
CN



*—4

i-H





r*H











CO
u



CJ






vj
Z





u
z





o
z





u
z







o
CN
0
ro




vO
ro
rH



rH





CN
r^*
I— 1



-(
£
8
S
T-*
U
TCTRA'
-H 1
OO


VD






CTN '
ro
•
0



I — 1
*
CN




r— 1

*
O




ro
•
O





1 — i
CO






VD
rH



rH





in
•
in



00

rH





rH









CO
S
TOXAP
o
ro
CN

0
CN
CN





0
CN
CN




O
CN
CN




O
CN
CN




O
CN
CN






rH
•
1— 1





l — 1




rH





f — (





rH
















g
CHLORI

VINYL
^r
CN
•
O
i — 1
i — i
O

0



00
ro
O
o

o

r^
1 — 1
0

0


CN
^'
o
o
o


oo
ro
0
O
•
o



CN
VD






CO
•
CM



r-H





T
•
^



r— t
•
r-H





r- H











y
CNI

















X
H
^4
O
2
ft

O
Q)
4J
t*4
5
§
V-<
U-J
TJ

>
-H

-S
TJ
U)
c
"*J
(TJ
JJ
C
,-§
rH O)
C'
•H U
r— i -H
rQ X
3 O
CL. H
C l*-'
-H O
in w
-U CJ
C -H
rt3 T)
JJ 3
3 ±J
^H CO
0 •*•*
0- O






















34

-------
0  OCEAN DUMPING

     Four indices were calculated for the disposal option of
ocean dumping.  As mentioned previously, Index 1 calculates the
increased concentration of the pollutant in seawater around an
ocean disposal site assuming initial mixing; whereas, Index 2
calculates the increased effective concentration of the pollutant
in seawater around an ocean disposal site utilizing a time weighted
average (TWA) concentration.  The TWA concentration is that which
would be experienced by an organism remaining stationary or moving
randomly within the disposal vicinity over a 24-hour period.

     Two "effects" indices were calculated for ocean dumping.
Index 3 compares the resultant water concentration of the con-
taminant at the dumpsite with the ambient water quality criterion
or with another value judged protective of marine aquatic life
and its marketability.  Index 4 estimates the expected increase
in human intake of the contaminant due to seafood consumption,
taking into account that fraction which originates from the
dumpsite vicinity.  This index compares the total expected con-
taminant intake with the acceptable daily intake or, if a car-
cinogen, with the intake level calculated to result in an increase
of cancer risk of 10~6.

     The results of the analyses conducted for the four indices
are summarized in Table 5.  The analyses related to ocean dumping
were performed for twenty-one compounds identified at the OWRS
expert committee meetings as being of potential concern.  Each of
the indices were calculated for two sludge disposal rates, 825 mt
DW/day and 1650 mt DW/day, and for two sludge concentrations - a
"typical" and "worst" concentration of the contaminant in sludge.
For Index 4 an additional variable was added - "worst" case and
"typical" case seafood intake.  Thus, in Table 5 the values
associated with typical (T) refer to typical sludge concentrations;
and in the case of Index 4, T refers to the value for both typical
sludge concentrations and typical seafood consumption.  The worst
case (W) indicates the values for worst sludge contaminant concen-
trations; and in the case of Index 4, W refers to the value for
worst sludge contaminant concentrations as well as worst case
seafood consumption.  The null values represent the index values
in the absence of sludge disposal.

     As can be seen in Table 5, Index 3 was calculated for all
the compounds except dioxins, furans and trichlorophenol due to a
paucity of available data.  For the disposal of sludge at the 825
mt DW/day rate using "worst" sludges, the range of Index 3 values
was from 0.000011 for benzo(a)pyrene to 14.3 for chlordane.  For
the disposal of sludge at the 1650 mt DW/day rate using "worst"
sludges the range of Index 3 values was from 0.000011 for benzo(a)-
pyrene to 29 for chlordane.
                                35

-------
     Index 4 was calculated for all the compounds except dioxins,
furans, benzo(a)anthracene and phenanthrene due to the paucity of
data.  For the disposal of worst case sludges at the 825 mt DW/day
disposal rate, and assuming worst case seafood intake, the values
range from 0.00047 for pentachlorophenol to 920 for aldrin/dieldrin.
For the worst case sludges disposed at a 1650 mt DW/day rate, and
assuming worst case seafood intake, the values ranged from 0.00047
for pentachlorophenol to 930 for aldrin/dieldrin.  For this
scenario, seven compounds have hazard indices less than 1 indicating
that no human toxicity problem exists for the non-carcinogens or
that the risk from cancer is below the 10~^ risk level for carcin-
ogens .
                               36

-------




^*

X
Q1
Z
M









ro

X
1
M
U")
CtJ
u
M
Q —
Z J
M *\
Q §"'
CH ^"^
•"2
iS! CN
*~c
3 X
CJ
tJ Q
 O O}





o o o
O CN O
CT* CT\ O^





CN rH O
^H »
• *3*
0



ro CN O
V£>
O

0



^ r* o
CN r-
o o
0 0
o .
• 0
o

CN o> O
i — t ro
0 0
0 0
0 •
• o
0

^J* *^* ^^
0 0
o •
o o
•
o

*^ "31 co
«3- rH
0 O

o o
•
o

II
1 — 1
II II rH
H 5 D

CN o^ o
rH LD
o
0
•
0


rH O O
VD ro
o
o
0
*
o

" — I \sD O
O CO
0 0
0 0
0 O
• o
o •
o
i — 1 \£) O
o co
0 0
0 0
0 0
• o
o .
o
^r CN o
rH ' — I
o •
• o
o



O~l r— 1 O
<*£> VD
0 0
o .
• 0
o


in CN O
CN CN
o .
• o
0



in CN o
CN CN
o •
• 0
o



II
II II rH
H 3 3

C_) C-) r)
Z 2 2






r) r) r)
222





*£> r~- o
O CN
1 0
CJ 0
0 0
m •
. o
vo r~* CD
O CN
I 0
CJ 0
0 0
m •
. o
^*
ro ^ O

0 0
O •
O O
•
o

r- ro o
ro CN
o o
o •
0 0
•
o

TT CN O
rH CO
0 0
o •
. o
o


"* CN O
rH CO
0 0
o •
• o
0


II
II II rH
H 12 D

o c o
^3* CD ^3*
.-H CN rH





o o o
r— < rH rH





r- rH O
0 rH
1 0
CJ 0
0 0
in o
&\ co
r~ rH O
O rH
1 0
CJ 0
0 0
in o
• •
CTi O
VO CO O

0 0
0 .
0 O

o

CO CN O

0 0
0 0
o .
0 0

o
a\ ro o
CN ro
0 0
o .
0 O
*
o

a> ro o
CN ro
0 0
0 •
0 O
*
0

II
II II rH
EH 2 D

r-  CN O
{£) •
0 0
0

0


II
II II rH


O> ro cTv
r-- CN rH






G\ i — ( ry^
rH CN rH





CN CJ> O
r- •
• CO
o



IjD ^f O
ro •

O




CN O> O
0 0
go
•
• o
o


>*£> *^ C5
ro *y
o o
0 0
o •
• o
o

ro v£> CD
i— 1 rH
0 0
o •
• o
o


ro  O
rH rH
0 0
O •
. o
0


II
II II rH













>•
H
C
•H
l-j
i4_J
0
Q,

it
s
G
O
1"


01

•H
l_,
QJ
T3
(/I
C
0
Jj

^-i
4J
c
o
u
c
o
o

en
T3
3
in

c
Q
tJ
4J
«J
U
TJ

Q<
C w
J_J -iJ
D
t — i in
.C ^
-LJ
-C
QJ °
""•* o
.— i 2
><














r;
0
irt
H
m
n.
6
0
U •
< X
= ft)
O OJ
rg ^
CD •
o> *-*
- CD
rtj ffi
w «.

• Q
W U
D
•-^ r
U)
in en
X TJ
Vj 3
O rH
3 u)
££
CJ O
£ £U
-tJ
ffl C
HI -H
H 
-------














ft
U-l
u
M
Q
Z
M

Q
&,
<
N
<
2

j
<

p
C/>
M
Q

ry
1
8
••
..— s.
Q
U
D
2
M
g
U


in

ca
,_!
CQ
<
H








•^

X
s
2
M









m

X
8
2
i— i




•^
r— 1
D^

^_-.

CN
X
8
2
rH



^^
iJ
CT
V_rf-

rH

X
CO
Q
2
M




rc
0
in
VO
rH



rc
in
CM
CO




0
in
vo
rH



rC
m
CN
CXI






in
VD
rH

rc
in
CM
oo



rO
O
m
vo
•— (



rc
in
CN
CO



rr r- o
O CN
o •
0 O
o
o
•
o

CN ^ O
O rH
o •
0 O
o
0
o
VO 00 O
VD r-
0 0
o •
• o
o


VD 00 O
VD f-
0 0
o •
• o
o


00 CN O
rH CN
0 0
o •
o

ON rH O
00 rH
0 0
o •
o o
•
co
oo ON O
oo oo
0 0
o •
• o
o


oo ON b
oo ro
o o
o •
• (~~)
* \^
o
                             O O  O
                              •   •   •
                             o o  o
                            o o  o
                              *  •   •
                            o o  o
                             vo
                             o
                                rH  O
                              • o
                            o
                            m in o
                            ro ro
                            o   •
                              • o
                            o
                            m VD o
                            rH I—I
                            o o
                            o o
                            o  •
                              • o
                            o
                            VD <-! O
                            r~ cc
                            o o
                            o o
                            o o
                            o  •
                              • o
                            o

                            co en o
                            fsi 
-------
&
in
•^T rH
X
to
D
2 ro
M in
CN
CO


m
U
H fv
D O
g LO
(-O rH
6? ^
N Q
<(, z ro
JE rH LO
CN
J CO
2
CD
Cj ^~*"
a _j
CO \
M en ro
O D o
-S LO

^ f\J i-~4
w
M X
o w
c
•• 2 ro
.~ 1— 1 LO
Q CN
u oo
S
(_H ^

S ^^'X.
O C7* Ti
B 3 £
^o
in rH rH

CJ X
tJ LO
CO Q
< 2 
o •
• o.
o



co cr> o
O ro
o •
. 0
o

II
1 — 1
II II r-t
H 3 a









IP
LO o m
LO rH LO





LO rH LO
LO CO LO




CN LO O
i — < •
• rH
O


VD ro O
0 r-

O 0





\D ' — 1 O
00 .
0 O
c>
•
c


ro CN O
•^ in
0 O
o -
• o
0



^ co o
. — 1 1 — 1
o •
. o
o



^0 CO O
rH rH
o •
• 0
o

II
r— 1
II II rH
H 2 5
2






UJ
u
5j
^
CO rH O
?s
DJ 0
rH •
• o
ro


CO >>D O
To
CJ O

. o

u u cj
2 2 Z



r) U r)
2 2 2







in ^f o
CN "31
o o
o •
• 0
0


CN CN O
rH CN
o o
o •
. o
o



V£> CO O
^r r^
0 0
o •
• o
o


VO CO O
0 0
o •
• o
0

II
rH
II II rH
'^ ^ 2
^^



o

s
s
3
n~^
u










J

Z3
c

U3
"E
§.


o

^_J
0)
x:
aJ
o

1— (
, — 1
ro

U3
(/?
^}
(73 m r-^
XJ 0 4J
ro DI--I
T? 'O C
-^ Z3
0) rH
J-> W CD
ro L,
•H i
o u u

Oj 0) jJ O
Ow 4J U3 Li
ro ro L: o
Li O S
4-1 3
O 0) TJ
en C c
-^ LI o ro
u ro
«J .C -O g
rH U 0 3
1/3 U3 -H
o -H ro e
J-1 t3 -Q 'S
0) >rH 5

T? T3 ro LJ
o
T3 LJ 10 U-i
a> 0 QJ
-i-J GJ 13 CN
rH to ro T;
D C > C
u o ro
ro ^'SrH
u o -u
•H Ll X
J-> Li O 0)
0 JJ COi TJ
2 O O C
fc Qi rH
II
                                                                         •w  <
                                                                          co  :
                                                                             O
                                                                          6
                                                                          O  -~
                                                                         13 ^H  "^
                                                                          HI   -CO
                                                                          > <  01

                                                                          ^ w   ^
                                                                          01     S
                                                                         X!   •  a
                                                                            w  u
                                                                          C  O  H
                                                                          0)  S  W
                                                                          U
                                                                             CJ  O
                                                                             F.  ft,
                                                                          o  c

                                                                          Tt  6
                                                                              O 
-------
VII.  INTERPRETATION OF HAZARD INDICES RESULTS

A.  General Description of the Interpretation Approach

     In order to facilitate interpretation of the data and results
discussed in the previous section (especially Tables 2-5), a two
step screening procedure was used:

Step 1 - Ranking of Pollutants for Each Environmental Pathway

     This step consisted of arraying the pollutants for each of
the indices, in order to determine which pollutants can be
eliminated from further consideration for a specific environmental
pathway.  Pollutants were eliminated from consideration if under
the worst case scenario designed for a specific pathway, the
resulting hazard index value is less than 1.  Values less than 1
indicate that the compound is not toxic to either man, animal or
plants, depending on the pathway being evaluated.  For the pathways
related to man, an index value less than 1 indicates that the
pollutant does not pose a toxic hazard in the case of non-car-
cinogens, or in the case of carcinogens, will not exceed the 10~6
cancer risk level.  By using the hazard index value associated
with the worst case scenario for a particular pathway, the analysis
can definitively rule out any pollutants with values less than 1,
as these index values represent the total hazard including the
background concentration in air or water or soil, depending on
the pathway.  Pollutants which have been eliminated for a specific
pathway by this step will not be considered for future risk
assessment for that pathway.  Pollutants with values equal to or
greater than 1 will undergo Step 2 of the screening procedure.

Step 2 - Incremental Ranking of Pollutants for Each Environmental
Pathway

     In Step 1, pollutants with values less than 1 were eliminated
since they prese.nted no potential hazard even when including the
background concentration of the pollutant.  All pollutants with
values equal to or greater than 1 underwent Step 2, incremental
ranking.  This step evaluated what portion of the hazard associated
with a pollutant for a particular environmental pathway is attrib-
utable to sludge.  In order to make such an evaluation, the back-
ground concentration or background hazard of the pollutant must
be discounted.  Step 2 discounts the background by subtracting
the "null" hazard index value, or background level, determined for
a specific pollutant from the total hazard index value determined
for that pollutant.  The resulting hazard index value is the
increment attributable to sludge.  For example, if a compound has
a total index value of 920 for a specific pathway under worst
case conditions and a "null" value of 900, the incremental hazard
index value of 20 is attributable to sludge.  Once again, the
                             40

-------
worst case scenario associated with a pathway was used in this
analysis.  Once all the incremental values had been determined, a
ranking of pollutants, from ascending to descending order, was
performed.  These pollutants were then "bracketed" into several
groups:  those with incremental values greater than 1,000; those
with values from 100 to 1000; those with values from 1 to 100 and
those with values less than 1.  Pollutants with incremental
values in the group from 100-1000 would generally be of more
concern than those pollutants found in the grouping from 1-100.
Thus the groupings would allow for the prioritization of pollutants
for further risk assessment during the regulatory development process,

B.  RESULTS OF THE TWO TIER SCREENING APPROACH

    ° STEP 1; RESULTS

     The results of the ranking of pollutants for each index
(Step 1) are portrayed in Tables 6-9.  The pollutants were ranked
using the hazard index values associated with the worst case
scenario.  As can be seen in the tables, those pollutants with
index values less than 1 have been eliminated from further con-
sideration for that pathway.  The eliminated pollutants therefore
represent those pollutants which will not adversely affect the
environment or human health.  Table 10 lists all of the pollutants
per pathway that were eliminated during Step 1.  As can be seen
on Tables 6-9, only those indices related to "effects" as defined
previously have undergone a Step 1 analysis since such an analysis
for other indices, such as groundwater contamination, would be
meaningless since these indices relate only to concentrations of
the pollutant in the media and do not imply an effect on the
environment or human health.  These indices have been ranked and
placed in these tables simply for reference.  The following
describes the results of the Step 1 analysis for each reuse/dis-
posal option:

- Step 1; Land Application

     Table 6 shows the results of ranking the pollutants for each
environmental pathway using the values associated with the assumed
worst case scenario.  For the "effects" indices (Indices 2,3,4,6,7-
13), pollutants with hazard index values less than 1 were "boxed"
and will not be considered further in this analysis for that path-
way.  Table 6 shows that for Index 2, which evaluates toxicity to
soil biota, all compounds except copper have hazard index values
less than 1 indicating no potential problem to soil biota when
"worst" sludges are applied.  For Index 3, which evaluates the
toxicity to predators of soil biota, eight compounds have hazard
indices of less than 1 indicating no potential problem.  The
eight compounds are:  DDT,  copper, nickel, cobalt, chromium,
pentachlorophenol, heptachlor and lindane.  For Index 4 which
evaluates phytotoxicity, twelve compounds have indice values less
than 1.  For Index 7, which evaluates animal toxicity from consuming


                                41

-------
                        TABLE 6: RANKING OF POLLUTANTS FOR LAND APPLICATION
                        BASED ON HAZARD INDICES USING WORST CASE PARAMETERS
           SOIL CONCENTRATION INCREMENT  (1-1)
                            TOXICITY TO SOIL BIOTA (1-2)
               ORGANICS (ug/g/DW)
    Pollutant
Tricresyl phosphate
Bis(2 ethyl hexyl) phthalate
Methylinebis (2 chloro aniline)
Methylene chloride
Tr i chloroethylene
Hexachlorobutad i ene
Benzo(a)anthracene
Pentachlorophenol
PCB
Toxaphene
Chlordane
DDT
Lindane
Dimethyl nitrosamine
Benzo(a)pyrene
Hexachlorobenzene
Aldrin/Dieldrin
Heptachlor
Index Value

     280
     92
     25
     3.8
     3.6
     1.6
     0.96
     0.74
     0.57
     0.49
     0.29
     0.24
     0.13
     0.062
     0.057
     0.054
     0.02
     0.0023
 Pollutant
Copper
(Zinc
 Lead
|Chlordane
 Cobalt
| Toxaphene
 Pentachlorophenol
|DDT/DDD/DDE
 Lindane
|Heptachlor
                          Index Value
                              2.3
                             0.86
                             0.22
                             0.10
                             0.048
                             0.029
                             0.019
                             0.010
                             0.0027
                             0.00069
                             0.00068
SOIL CONCENTRATION INCREMENT  (1-1)
INORGANICS
Pollutant
Cadmium
Zinc
Lead
Copper
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Molybdenum
Chromium
Cobalt
Iron
Arsenic
Fluoride

Index Value
89
22
20
12
12
7.9
5.4
3.9
3.8
1.8
1.6
1.5
1.3
                                      = those pollutants which
                                        would not present a
                                        hazard under assumed
                                        worst case conditions
                                              42

-------
         TABLE 6 (CCNT):   RANKING OF POLLUTANTS FOR LAND APPLICATION
         BASED ON HAZARD INDICES USING ASSUMED WORST CASE PARAMETERS
TOXICITY TO SOIL BIOTA PREDATORS (1-3)
Pollutant
Cadmium
Zinc
Lead
Aldrin/Dieldrin
Hexachlorobenzene
Copper
Nickel
DDT/DDD/DDE
Cobalt
Chromium
Pentachlorophenol
Heptachlor
Lindane
Index Value
82
23
2.7
1.5
1.2
0.61 |
0.55
0.35 |
0.35
0.095 |
0.092
0.080 |
0.0028
PHYTOTOXICITY (1-4)
   = those pollutants which would
     not present a hazard under
     assumed worst case conditions
Pollutant
Cadmium
Zinc
Copper
Nickel
Lead
Chromium
Selenium
Fluoride
Arsenic
Cobalt
Mercury
Molybdenum
PCB
Chlordane
Toxaphene
Lindane
Aldrin/Dieldrin
DDT/DDD/DDE
Hegtachlor
Index Value
7.1
4.2
3.0
2.9
2.2
1.9
1.0
0.84
0.20
0.18
0.16
0.16
0.057
0.023
0.016
0.01
0.0062
0.0036
0.000023
                              43

-------
                         TABLE 6 (CONT); RANKING OP POLLUTANTS  FOR LAND APPLICATION
                        BASED CN HAZARD INDICES USING ASSUMED WORST CASE  PARAMETERS
            PLANT UPTAKE (1-5)
            ORGANICS (ug/g DW)'
                                                    ANIMAL TOXICITY RESULTING FROM
                                                         PLANT CCNSUMPTICN (1-7)
  Pollutant

  PCB
  Fluoride
  Hexachlorobenzene
  Chlordane
  Toxaphene
  Pentachlorophenol
  DDT/DDD/DDE
  Benzo(a)pyrene
  Aldrin/Dieldri n
  Heptachlor
  MOCA
        Index Value

           1.2
           1.3
           0.87
           0.67
           0.43
           0.26
           0.15
           0.10
           0.015
           0.0017
           0.0
 PLANT UPTAKE (1-5)
   INORGANICS
Pollutant

Nickel
Selenium
Chromium
Cadmium
Arsenic
Zinc
Copper
Mercury
Lead
Iron
Cobalt
Molybdenum
Fluoride
Index Value

    120
    73
    42
    35
    14
    6.5
    6.5
    4.0
    3.1
    2.9
    2.8
    2.4
    1.3
   Pollutant

   Zinc
   Molybdenum
   Selenium
   Copper
   Cadmium
   Fluoride
   Cobalt
   PCB
   Iron
   Lead
   Mercury
   Nickel
   Chlordane
   Chromium
   Hexachlorobenzene
   Toxaphene
   Pentachlorophenol
   Arsenic
   Benzo(a)pyrene
   DDT/DDD/DDE
   Aldrin/Dieldrin
   Heptachlor
   MOCA
Index Value

   4.4
   2.5
   2.1
   1.3
   1.0
   0.92
   0.45
   0.42
   0.36
   0.12
   0.078
   0.076
   0.074
   0.024
   0.013
   0.0086
   0.0042
   0.0010
   0.00060
   0.00040
   0.00041
   0.00017
   0.0
those pollutants which would
not present a hazard under
assumed worst case conditions
                                                 44

-------
                    TABLE 6 (CCNT); RANKING OF POLLUTANTS FOR LAND APPLICATICM
                   BASED CM HAZARD INDICES USING ASSUMED WORST CASE PARAMETERS
ANIMAL TOXICITY RESULTING FROM
   SLUDGE INGESTICN (1-8)

Pollutant          Index Value
HUMAN TOXICITY RESULTING FROM
Copper
Iron
| Fluoride
Cadmium
|zinc
Lead
| Molybdenum
Nickel
| Chlordane
PCB
| Cobalt
Mercury
| Hexachlorobenzene
Aldrin/Dieldrin
(Chromium
Selenium
IMOCA
Hexachlorobutadiene
| Toxaphene
Heptachlor
| Pentachlorophenol
Dimethyl nitrosamine
| Benzo ( a ) pyrene
Lindane
| Arsenic
DDT/DDD/DDE
2.8
2.8
0.92 |
0.88
0.76 |
0.67
0.40 |
0.33
0.24 |
0.23
0.20 |
0.15
0.11 |
0.04
0.038 |
0.035
0.034 |
0.013
0.011 |
0.009
0.0031 |
0.0026
0.0024 |
0.0022
0.0010 |
0.00015
PLANT CONSUMPTION (1-9)
Pollutant
PCB
Hexachlorobenzene
Chlordane
Benzo ( a ) pyrene
Aldrin/Dieldrin
Toxaphene
Cadmium
DDT/DDD/DDE
Heptachlor
Zinc
Nickeel
Lead
Selenium
Arsenic
Iron
Mercury
Fluoride
Copper
Molybdenum
Chromium
Pentachlorophenol
Index Value
15000
4300
3100
3000
2200
1300
96
70
39
17
125
8.5
6.8
1.8
1.6
1.3
1.0
0.55 |
0.45
0.083|
0.026
           = those pollutants which would
             not present a hazard under
             worst case conditions

-------
                TABLE 6 (CCNT); RANKING OF POLLUTANTS FOR LAND APPLICATION BASED CN
                         HAZARD INDICES USING ASSUMED WORST CASE PARAMETERS
      HUMAN TOXICITY RESULTING FROM
HUMAN TOXICITY RESULTING FROM
ANIMAL PRODUCTS <
Pollutant
PCB
Toxaphene
Hexachlorobenzene
Aldrin/Dieldrin
Chlordane
DDT/DDD/DDE
Heptachlor
Selenium
Zinc
Cadmium
Mercury
Fluoride
Iron
Copper
Arsenic
Lead
Molybdenum
Nickel
Chromium
i(I-10)
Index Value
65000
1400
1100
1000
182
170
31
16
4.1
3.0
3.0
0.62
0.50
0.48
0.29
0.14
0.11
0.11
0.00058
ANIMAL PRODUCTS b(I-ll)
Pollutant
PCB
Aldrin/Dieldrin
Toxaphene
Hexachlorobenzene
Chlordane
Heptachlor
Lindane
DDT/DDD/DDE
Hexachlorobutadiene
Mercury
Cadmium
Copper
Zinc
Fluoride
Selenium
Arsenic
Lead
Nickel
Molybdenum
Chronium

Value
34000
10000
1900
820
550
420
170
150
130
13
2.7
0.91
0.89
0.67
0.45
0.27
0.20
0.12
0.093
0.0005
a = Index 10 is for animal products derived from animals feeding on plants
b = Index 11 is for animal products derived from animals incidentally ingesting
    sludge-amended soil
          = those pollutants which would not
            present a hazard under worst
            case conditions
                                       46

-------
                    TABLE 6 (CCNT); RANKING OF POLLUTANTS FOR LAND APPLICATION BASED ON
                             HA2ARD INDICES USING ASSUMED WORST CASE PARAMETERS
      HUMAN TOXICITY RESULTING FROM
          SOIL INGESTICN (1-12)

    Pollutant            Index Value
                                        INDEX OF HUMAN AGGREGATE
                                             TOXICITY (1-13)
                                  Pollutant
                      Index Value
  Arsenic                   9500
  Aldrin/Dieldrin           900
  PCS                       190
  Benzo(a)pyrene            150
  Lindane                   150
  Toxaphene                 55
  Chlordane                 34
  Heptachlor                24
  Hexachlorobenzene         9.3
  Hexachlorobutad i ene       8.9
  Lead                      7.7
  Iron                      5.0
  Mercury                   2.4
  Cadmium                   1.6
|  Fluoride
  Zinc
|  Nickel
  Copper
|  Selenium
  Molybdenum
|  Chromium
_P£n^a£hlprpp_henol_
0.68
0.36
0.25
0.24
0.24
0.090
0.017
0.0019
 PCB
 Aldrin
 Hexachlorobe nzene
 Tbxaphene
 Chlordane
 Heptachlor
 DOT/DDD/DDE
 Cadmium
 Selenium
 Mercury
 Zinc
 Lead
 Nickel
 Iron
 Copper
 Fluoride
[Molybdenum
110000
12000
6200
4500
3900
450
360
100
23
22
22
16
12
5.4
1.6
1.0
             = those pollutants which would
               not present a hazard under
               worst case conditions
                                                   47

-------
plants grown on sludge-anended soils,  nineteen compounds have
hazard indices less than 1 and thus will not be considered further
in this analysis.  Analysis of Index 8 which evaluates animal
toxicity from incidental sludge ingestion shows that all compounds,
except copper and iron, have index values less than 1.  Human
toxicity resulting from consuming plants grown on sludge-amended
soils was evaluated by Index 9.  The Step 1 ranking shows that
four compounds (copper, molybdenum, chromium and pentachlorophenol)
have index values less than 1 and thus will not be considered
further in this analysis for that pathway.

     For Indices 10-13 which are all human health related, the
ranking was conducted using the highest index value related to
the worst case scenario.  Thus if the hazard value associated
with pollutant x for Index 10 was higher for adults than toddlers
such a value was used.  If for pollutant y, the toddler value was
higher than the adult value then the toddler value was used.  The
rationale for this is that the screening must account for the
absolute worst values with respect to age differences in order to
definitively eliminate pollutants from further consideration;
thus by "lumping" the adult and toddler values and choosing the
highest, this is accomplished.

     For Index 10, which evaluates human toxicity resulting from
consuming animal products derived from animals feeding on plants,
eight compounds  (fluoride, iron, copper, arsenic, lead, molybdenum,
nickel and chromium) have index values less than 1 and thus will
not be considered further for this pathway.  For Index 11, which
evaluates human toxicity resulting from consuming animal products
from animals incidentally ingesting sludge-amended soils, or
sludge adhering to forage, nine compounds have index values less
than 1.  For Index 12, which evaluates human toxicity from soil
ingestion, eight compounds had index values less than 1 and for
Index 13 which aggregates the human toxicity indices, only 1
compound has a value less than 1.  All compounds with values
egual to or greater than 1 underwent a Step 2 incremental analysis
for the appropriate environmental pathway.   All other chemicals
having index values of less than 1 were not considered further in
this analysis and will not be considered in subsequent risk
assessments for that pathway.

- Step 1; Landfilling

     Table 7 shows that for Index 2, which evaluates human toxicity/
cancer risk resulting from groundwater contamination, seven
compounds have hazard index values less than 1 indicating no
potential toxicity problem for noncarcinogens or for carcinogens
a risk less than the 10~6 level.  The seven compounds (cadmium,
selenium, molybdenum, chromium, phenol, malathion, and 2,4-dichloro-
phenoxyacetic acid) therefore will not be considered further in
this analysis and in subsequent risk assessments performed during
                                 48

-------



g

H
g
J2
§
cu

w

H

Q
CO
%
O
Z
CO
CO
o
M
Q
Z
Q
s
N
fCf.
cc

g
Q
U
o3

o
z
M
d
M
C*4
9
3





r-
0

g

t_{
P.
CO

"
1









g
M

z
M
y
H
g
CJ
w
H

6
Q
H?
o







,_
CN
1
r-H


o$
£
D
§
0












- — ,
r-H
1
M
CO
u
M
%
P^J
CM
o
s







X
0)
•g
rH




4J
CO
4J
3
rH
rH
g



O
o
o

in








U
•rH
Q}
%










O
o

^
CO






4J
rH
5
8



o
o
o

[_j







rH
t
S-H
Q










0 0
O O
r-~ ro
^ w
CN r-H





g
•H


36



o
o
o

i-H





CD
•rH
1
4-J
••H
Z












o
ro
CO






^j
Qi
g;
CJ



0
0
CO
ri*J QQ) g3a>3-rHi
mcDjCrd DO iS-n'O-HrHx:
CC4JrH \1H -rHCi5gO4JOI
'OX^T^CCQr-H l-l'Owr-H 'Oi — 1' — )i-iQ)i — lTJ*l
O T3 ^ — XC N 'O \. OT?&jCO^O OCOSCJfXSCNI
r-ixcnaccH-rH(oScaijuc i
6O *rH CD -rH D r4 Q) 0 ^ Q> -rH 'rH 1
HCQ mrJQHJCjOSZN 1 	 	 	 	












ooo in
rH ^T CN T •
in ro r-t CN ^r





c g
S*rH
r^
e u a> >i 0
rO ^J W rH rH
u S ^ £ $








cfl
4-1
c

to
a
4J
•o
r-H
§
-6
1
to
m
"^
rH
rH
0
0)

1


II

	
1
1
1

1












s
o

Jj
-H
§

8
4J
03
*
i
0)
w
TS

X
0)
•g
-K M
^
|
M

HH



0
o
o

i — i

, — i
^
x
0)
rH
utant
rH
rH
£
4-J
0) 0)
•H CN
(0 to
cj'm



o
o
r— o
- ro
CN r-\




0)
thalat
cum
&





0
CN
rH




a





o o
rH 0
rH rH

 0) 1-1 O
C rH O rH
CO >irH SZ
c x:
0) 4J
cS ^
x: u
CJ "rH
^




^f
•
CT\ CN rH CO





S £
i
I? x: ex:
l-i Oi Q (P 4->
O TO N QJ
rH X T C g
6O " CD -rH
H CN CD Q




CO

, — i




s
-r-1
trosam
z






•^
rH •
rH U">




g
CD
M QJ
>ig
ro Q
~o S

Q) Q
CD Q





vn ro
• •
ro « — i





O
"x; c
4J ro
r^?
CO -r-t
 U)  en
•rH  D


rH  C

 I  -rH
M

    CO


 W  O
 O  "H
-rH  4J

 C  CO
                                                                                                                                                    V-i  C
                                                                                                                                                    0  a>

                                                                                                                                                    u  c
                                                                                                                                                    o  o
                                                                                                                                                    14-1  O
                                                                                   49

-------
the regulatory development process for this pathway.  Table 7
also shows that the compounds with the highest total index values
(which includes the background hazard) are arsenic, PCBs and
dimethyl nitrosamine.  All the compounds, with the exception of
the seven compounds with index values less than one, were incre-
mentally ranked in Step 2.

- Step 1; Incineration

     Table 8 shows that for Index 2, which evaluates human
toxicity/cancer risk resulting from the inhalation of incinerator
emissions, six compounds have hazard index values less than 1
indicating no potential toxicity problem for noncarcinogens or
for carcinogens, a risk less than the 10~6 level.  The six
compounds (heptachlor, DDT, lindane, zinc, copper and selenium)
therefore will not be considered further in this analysis and in
subsequent risk assessments performed during the regulatory
development process for this pathway.  Table 8 also shows that
the compounds with the highest total index values (which includes
the background hazard) are chromium, cadmium and arsenic.  All
the compounds, with the exception of the six with index values
less than one, were incrementally ranked in Step 2.

- Step 1; Ocean Dumping

     Table 9 shows the ranking for two effects indices:  Index 3
which evaluates aquatic life effects and Index 4 which evaluates
human health effects from seafood consumption.  For Index 3, ten
compounds have hazard index values less than 1 indicating no
aquatic toxicity hazards.  The ten compounds are: endrin,
heptachlor, cadmium, dichlorobenzidine, lindane, pentachlorophenol,
phenanthrene, benzo(a)anthracene, benzidine, and benzo(a)pyrene.
These compounds will not be considered further in this analysis
and in subsequent risk assessments conducted during the regulatory
development process for this pathway.  All the remaining compounds
were incrementally ranked by Step 2.  For Index 4, which evaluates
human health effects from seafood consumption, seven compounds
have hazard index values less than 1 and will not be considered
further in this analysis.  The seven compounds are:  cadmium,
mercury, dichlorobenzidine, bis(2-ethyl hexyl) phthalate, endrin,
trichlorophenol, and pentachlorophenol.  The highest index values
for this pathway were for aldrin/dieldrin, PCBs and benzo(a)pyrene.
All compounds, with the exception of the seven with values less
than 1, underwent Step 2 incremental ranking.

- STEP 1; Summary

     Table 10 summarizes the results from the Step  1 analysis by
deliniating for each environmental pathway, which compounds are
not of concern and thus were not included in the Step 2 analysis.
These compounds will not be considered in future risk assessments
for that specific environmental pathway.  Thus Step 1 screened
out many pollutants for each specific environmental pathway.
                                 50

-------
«
<


Cd

o
r_,
ff)
?y
s

Q



CO
c/5
^
O

C/3
CD
g
z
M
§
C-Q
tf
pg

g

p

m
a

z
M
s?
ts
w
z
U
z
H
OH
g
en
~
^
g
( 1
fc-3
s
fc_4
°
O
M
^7
JeT








X
*
c
M











4->
I
rH
s










jj

w
^*
X
-§
r- 1













C
TO
>-H
rH
Q





o o o vo
O O O O O O
TjX>TrO(N<•>->

Illalliilllll













o
(NO O 0
°S Rr^SS^^^^M^J









____^
r—j
s^
X C
0) 0) -rH
£. C. IH
(U i -p ^>i d)
V-l XI ITS CD 1) Cl4 ' H
x; jjrncc P -~p
^J G fl) (0 iD <1) CJ 9 0} 10 \
cai-CiDx: -H -H c — c
ID-rHCNJ4JUQj CElOO-rH
C G — X!OtT3UQ)O'UNkt
(1) •£) W D«rH XCtOVjCC'DCa
X^(t5*rH XZO-rHjHX^-rHflJr-jf)
CUOCQ OEH£Ni1 rH -rH
57 >1 rH
a) x: o
X; -U rH
rH 0) O U

i3 1— 1 1— i c 3
?ID XI >1 (D -rH
X; U M rH rH
^i- 2-n BxT>,
^•^ A_i rH ^ v_/ ^_t _*»(
U) Oj -*-1 10 i-i -P JH
•IH fl)  Q)
CQ r-i ^J S SI Cu














c^) CN ro
CM c^J ' — 1 ' — 1 t~- [ — ^£)









QJ
c
0)
o
ITS
x:
4J
TO EO

Btt) O C rH US
\* N tU U) r-N t '
rJ U C fO rH Vj Q4
Q) -H q)  ct)  1
rH
rH £> ^t rH O 1
a\ oo r~ CN r-i o
o o o o o o
1
1

1
1

1

1

1

1
1
VH Q |
°5 g I
x: ijj a) 9
U Q C rJ -rH |
ID P (D  C
ti^-H H s^ '
(D Q -rH -tH cy o i
re a >J N o w















rH rH rH , — | rH








0)
73 Q)
l-i TD 0)
O -r-l rH
rH i-l >,
x: ox:
U rH -U
i "3
N xj o x: vj
C IH rH 4_> 4J
d) It3 XI CU CL)
CQ U U S H
























(0

-p
c
0)

x; o -6 "5 co 4-1 ID 1 1 rH o to 11 ' 1 ' to d o -H 4J -rH •o c o o 0) U) m U 4-> LO § 73 m s CO w (0 0) c 13 T3 r^l 03 51


-------
5
u
CJ
u

CJ

             cu
             X


             c
             3
             (H

             2
             cu
             X
             cu

             "H
            4J






            I
            rH

            r-l



            fi
             CD
             3
             X
             a>
             •o
                      o o
                      n VD
                      CTS r~
                           o o
                           o m
                           CN i-l
o
r-i -*r
      (Ti tn
      in (N
ro
CN
                      o>  •
                      rsi oo
                                      >i
                                      X
                                      CU
                               •o
                      CU Q


                      (0 Q
   £  (0 i 0)  (0 CU
 L?    x: ;C
                                                        OOO
r-l O O O


o o o o
                                                               CU r-l
                                                               C  >1

                                                              •^  X
                                                              •o  cu
                                                              •r-l £.
                                                               N
                                                               C r-<  0)

                                                                  >l4J
                                                                           O 0)

                                                                          ^§
                                                                           £8
                                                            >t U
                                                            C7 O
                                                                    i
                                                                    4J .i
                                                                        c-H
                                         ox:
                                            O
                                                                              r- r-i
                                                                           i
                       X
                      -C    £

                             &
                      i—I O>  O

                      J=. TO  O
                                     C  0
                                                                   O  O  3  (t
                                                                                                     a> -o
                                                     I
                                       <0
                                       N
                                                                                                              n
                                                                                                              tj-
                                                                                                             •d 3
§
                      pg 4J it]




                      CD    (i
                                         -COCI>Vj-H
CJ
u
s
co

O
z
r-l
X
      c^

H
t—4

Z

             §
             X
             0)
             4->
             c
                                                                     r~ ON in
                            oo     inrocNfNrH    oooooo

                            r-     ooooo    oooooo
                                                                        o o

                                                                        o o
                                                        <-{•<-<     C

                                                         O -O  CU  -H
                                                         C -H  C  Ll

                                                     CU  CU  N  

a> tO-C CuC CUO) C r-l ^ cu £ qj x; 52 x: CU CJ 0 (C O


-------
   TABLE 10: POLLUTANTS WHICH UNDER WORST CASE CONDITIONS DO NOT PRESENT
         A HAZARD FOR A SPECIFIC PATHWAY (SEE TEXT FOR EXPLANATION)
0  LAND APPLICATION

   Toxicity to Soil Biota (Index 2); Zinc, Lead, Chlordane, Cobalt,
   Toxaphene, Pentachlorophenol, Lindane, Heptachlor, Aldrin/Dieldrin,
   DDT

-  Toxicity to Soil Biota Predators  (Index 3); Copper, Nickel, Cobalt,
   Chromium, Pentachlorophenol, Heptachlor, Lindane, DDT

   Phytotoxicity (Index 4); Fluoride, Arsenic, Cobalt, Molybdenum, Mercury,
   Chlordane, Lindane, Toxaphene, Heptachlor, Aldrin/Dieldrin, PCB, DDT

   Animal Ingestion of Plants Grown on Sludge-Amended Soil (Index 7):
   see Table 6 "boxed" compounds.

-  Animal Incidental Ingestion (Index 8): see Table 6 "boxed" compounds.

-  Human Ingestion of Plants Grown on Sludge-Amended Soil (Index 9); Copper,
   Molybdenum, Chromium, Pentachlorophenol

-  Human Ingestion of Animals Ingesting Plants Grown on Sludge-Amended
   Soil (Index 10); Fluoride, Iron, Copper, Arsenic, Lead, Molybdenum,
   Nickel, Chromium

-  Human Ingestion of Animals Ingesting Sludge-Amended Soil (Index 11):
   Copper, Zinc, Fluoride, Selenium, Arsenic, Lead, Nickel, Molybdenum,
   Chromium

   Incidental Ingestion (Index 12):  Fluoride, Zinc, Nickel, Copper,
   Selenium, Molybdenum, Chromium, Pentachlorophenol.


0  LANDFILLING

   Human Consumption of Contaminated Groundwater (Index 2): Cadmium,
   Selenium, Molybdenum, Chromium, Phenol, Malathion, 2,4 D

0  INCINERATION

-  Human Inhalation of Incinerator Emissions (Index 2); Heptachlor, DDT,
   Lindane, Zinc, Copper,  Selenium


0  OCEAN DUMPING

   Aquatic Life Effects (Index 3): Endrin, Heptachlor, Cadmium, Dichloro-
   benzidine, Lindane, Pentachlorophenol, Phenanthrene, Benzo(a)anthracene,
   Benzidine, Benzo(a)pyrene

   Human Health Effects (Index 4); Cadmium, Mercury, Dichlorobenzidine,
   Endrin, Trichlorophenol, Pentachlorophenol, Bis(2-ethyl hexyl)phthalate

                                   53

-------
° STEP 2 - RESULTS

     The compounds which were not eliminated by Step 1 underwent
the Step 2 incremental ranking.   As previously mentioned, the
purpose of Step 2 was to evaluate what portion of the total hazard
associated with a pollutant for a particular pathway is attributable
to sludge.  In order to make such an evaluation, a discounting of
the background hazard was necessary.  Tables 11-14 show the
results of ranking and bracketing the pollutants based on their
incremental value.  The incremental value was determined by
subtracting the null or background value, for the worst case
scenario from the total hazard index value for the worst case
scenario.  The values recorded in Tables 11-14 are the incremental
values after the discounting was accomplished.  The bracketing on
these tables are for purposes of grouping pollutants.  The
following describes the results of the Step 2 analysis for each
reuse/disposal option.

- Step 2; Land Application

     Table 11 shows the incremental ranking and incremental values
for the ten "effects" indices related to land application.  For
Index 2 which evaluates soil biota toxicity only one compound was
incrementally ranked (copper).  Index 3 which evaluates toxicity
to predators of soil biota had 4 compounds incrementally ranked,
all found in the 1-100 grouping.  All compounds incrementally
ranked for Index 4 were found in the grouping from 1-100 with
cadmium having the highest incremental values of 7.1.  For Index
7 which evaluates animal toxicity from plant consumption, all
compounds were found in the 1-100 grouping.  Only two compounds
were incrementally ranked for Index 8 - copper with a value of
2.8 and iron with a value of 2.1.  For Index 9, six compounds
were found in the >1000 grouping, with PCBs having the highest
value.  No compounds were found in the grouping from 100-1000;
however, ten compounds did have incremental values between 1 and
100.  For Index 10 and Index 11, pollutants were found in all the
groupings except the grouping of <1.  For both these indices, the
highest incremental value was for the same compound - PCB.  For
Index 12 which evaluates human toxicity from soil ingestion, the
highest incremental values were for arsenic and PCB.  For Index
13, the highest incremental values were for PCB, aldrin/dieldrin,
and hexachlorobenzene.

- Step 2; Landfilling

     Table 12 shows the incremental ranking and values for each
of the compounds evaluated in Index 2, the index of human toxicity/
cancer risk resulting from groundwater contamination.  As can be
seen, seven compounds have incremental values greater than 1000 and
nine compounds have incremental values between 1 and 100.  No
compounds were found in the grouping of 100-1000 or the grouping
of less than 1.  The highest incremental values were for arsenic,
PCB and dimethyl nitrosamine.  The lowest  incremental values were
for nickel, mercury, cyanide and copper.
                                 54

-------
- Step 2; Incineration

     Table 13 shows the incremental ranking and values evaluated
in Index 2, the index of human toxicity/cancer risk resulting
from the inhalation of incineration emissions.  As can be seen,
three compounds (chromium, cadmium and arsenic) have incremental
values greater than 1000.  PCB was the only compound in the 100-
1000 grouping.  Eleven compounds fall into the grouping from 1-
100 whereas four compounds fell into the grouping of less than 1.
For two compounds, methylene chloride and benzene, no incremental
hazard is attributable to sludge.

- Step 2; Ocean Dumping

     For ocean dumping, two incremental rankings were performed
and are shown in Table 14.  For Index 3, the index of toxicity
to aguatic life, no compounds were found in the groupings of
>1000; 100-1000; and <1.  Seven compounds were found to have
incremental values between 1 and 100.  For Index 4 which evaluates
human health effects from seafood consumption, no pollutants were
found in the grouping of greater than 1000 and only one compound
(PCB) was found in the grouping from 100-1000.  Seven compounds
were found in the grouping of 1-100.  Lindane was found to have
no incremental hazard attributable to sludge.
                                 55

-------
                      TABLE 11;  INCREMENTAL RANKING FOR LAND APPLICATION  (See Text)

                   0   For  land application, ten effects indices were calculated.
                      This table contains the incremental ranking for each of the
                      effects indices.
          INDEX 2:  SOIL BIOTA TOXICITY
                  INDEX 3:  TOXICITY TO SOIL BIOTA PREDATORS
  > 1000
 100-1000
1-100
                COMPOUND      INCREMENTAL VALUE
                    NO POLLUTANTS
                   NO POLLUTANTS
               Copper
2.1
  <1
                   NO POLLUTANTS
                       COMPOUND
                           INCREMENTAL VALUE
                                                     >1000
             100-1000
1-100
                 <1
                           NO POLLUTANTS
             NO POLLUTANTS
Cadmium             81.4
Zinc                21.2
Lead                2.4
Aldrin/Dieldrin     1.5
                            NO POLLUTANTS
                                                56

-------
                  TABLE 11 (CCNT):  INCREMENTAL RANKING FOR LAND APPLICATION  (see Text)
          INDEX 4: PHYTOTOXICITY
             INDEX 7:  ANIMAL TQXICITY FROM PLANT CONSUMPTION
  > 1000
 100-1000
L-100
  <1
                COMPOUND      INCREMENTAL VALUE
                    NO POLLUTANTS
                   NO POLLUTANTS
                  Cadmium
                  Zinc
                  Copper
                  Nickel
                  Lead
                  Chromium
                   Selenium
7.1
4.0
2.75
2.5
2.1
1.4
0.8
                       COMPOUND
                           INCREMENTAL VALUE
                                                     >1000
             100-1000
1-100
   <1
                           NO POLLUTANTS
             NO POLLUTANTS
Zinc
Molybdenum
Selenium
Copper
Cadmium
                           NO POLLUTANTS
4.4
2.3
2.1
1.0
1.0
                                                 57

-------
                    TABLE 11 (CCNT):  INCREMENTAL RANKING FOR LAND APPLICATION
   INDEX 8:  ANIMAL TOXICITY FROM SLUDGE INGEST1CN     INDEX 9:  HUMAN  TOXICITY FROM PLANT CONSUMPTION
  > 1000
 100-1000
1-100
  <1
                COMPOUND
INCREMENTAL VALUE
                   NO POLLUTANTS
                   NO POLLUTANTS
              Copper
              Iron
       2.8
       2.1
                   NO POLLUTANTS
         COMPOUND
              INCREMENTAL VALUE
                                                     >1000
                      100-1000
1-100
                          <1
                                   PCB
                                   Hexachlorobenzene
                                   Chlordane
                                   Benzo(a)pyrene
                                   Aldrin/Dieldrin
                                   Toxaphene
             NO POLLUTANTS
Cadmium
DDT
Zinc
Heptachlor
Nickel
Lead
Selenium
Arsenic
Iron
Mercury
                                     Fluoride
                                   14953
                                   4295
                                   3100
                                   2860
                                   1300
                                   1245
95
51
16.4
15
11.9
8.2
6.6
1.5
1.1
1.0
                                   0.4
                                               58

-------
                    TABLE 11 (CCNT); INCREMENTAL RANKING FOR LAND APPLICATION (see Text)


  INDEX 10: HUMAN TOXICITY FPDM ANIMAL PRODUCTS3    INDEX 11: HUMAN  TOXICITY FROM ANIMAL PRODUCTS5
                COMPOUND
             INCREMENTAL VALUE
  > 1000
PCB                 64953
Toxaphene           1345
Hexachlorobenzene   1095
 100-1000
                 Chlordane
                 DDT
                 Aldrin/Dieldrin
1-100
              Selenium
              Heptachlor
              Zinc
              Mercury
              Cac3mium
                    180
                    151
                    100
                    15.7
                    7.0
                    3.7
                    2.75
                    2.5
  <1
                   NO POLLUTANTS
          COMPOUND
              INCREMENTAL VALUE
                                                     >1000
100-1000
              PCB                  33947
              Aldrin/Dieldrin      9090
              Toxaphene            1845
Hexachlorobenzene    814
Chlordane            448
Heptachlor           396
Hexachlorobutadiene  130
DDT                  117
 1-100
Mercury
Lindane
Cadmium
12.5
10
2.2
                                       <1
                                                  NO POLLUTANTS
          a = Index 10 is for animal products derived  from animals  fed  on plants.
          b = Index 11 is for animal products derived  from animals  incidentally
              ingesting sludge-amended soil.
                                                 59

-------
                    TABLE 11 (CONT);  INCREMENTAL RANKING FOR LAND APPLICATION (see Text)
 INDEX 12:  TOXICITY RESULTING FROM SOIL INGESTICN
                                          INDEX 13: INDEX OF HUMAN AGGREGATE TOXICITY
  > 1000
                COMPOUND
                 Arsenic
                INCREMENTAL VALUE
                     3100
 100-1000
                  PCB
1-100
              Aldrin/Dieldrin
              Benzo(a)pyrene
              Chlordane
              Toxaphene
              Hexachlorobutadiene
              Lead
              Hexachlorobenzene
              DDT
              Mercury
              Cadmium
              Iron
  <1
Heptachlor
Lindane
                     171
                       40
                       39
                       33
                       21
                       8.9
                       7.1
                       6.5
                       2.0
                       1.9
                       1.4
                       1.2
0.9
0
                         COMPOUND
              INCREMENTAL VALUE
                                                     >1000
               100-1000
                1-100

PCB
Aldrin/Dieldrin
Hexachlorobenzene
Toxaphene
Chlordane

Heptachlor
DDT
Cadmium
Selenium
Mercury
Zinc
Lead
Nickel
Iron
Copper
109937
11090
6200
4445
3900
425
317
100
22.8
21.4
21.4
15.3
11.9
2.2
1.3
                                                        <1
Fluoride
0.4
                                                60

-------
 TABLE 12:  INCREMENTAL RANKING FOR LANDFILLING  (See Text)
For landfilling, the only effects index was Index 2: Index of
Human Toxicity/Cancer Risk Resulting from Groundwater
Contamination.  This table shows the incremental ranking for
this index.
                 COMPOUND
                     INCREMENTAL VALUE
  > 1000
Arsenic
PCBs
Dimethyl nitrosamine
Benzo(a)pyrene
Chlordane
Toxaphene
Bis(2-ethyl hexyl)
  phthalate
51,000
16,941
11,260
3,650
3,198
2,045

1,100
100-1000
                      NO POLLUTANTS
1-100
Trichloroethylene
DDT
Benzene
Lindane
Lead
Copper
Cyanide
Mercury
Nickel
56
52
50
40
29
6.4
4.1
3.3
2.2
< 1
                      NO POLLUTANTS
                           61

-------
 TABLE 13:  INCREMENTAL RANKING FOR INCINERATION (See Text)
For incineration, the only effects index is Index 2:
Index of Human Health/Cancer Risk from Inhalation of
Incineration Emissions.  This table shows the incremental
ranking for this index.
                 COMPOUND
                    INCREMENTAL VALUE
  > 1000
                Chromium
                Cadmium
                Arsenic
                         4,860
                         3,493
                         1,564
100-1000
                 PCB
                         251
1-100
                 Aldrin/Dieldrin          62.1
                 Nickel                   58.0
                 Chlordane                49.2
                 Toxaphene                30.6
                 Benzo(a)pyrene           21.4
                 Bis(2-ethyl hexyl)
                   phthalate)             15.9
                 Vinyl Chloride           10.0
                 Lead                     3.2
                 Beryllium                1.1
                 Chloroform               1.0
                 Carbon Tetrachloride     1.0
< 1
Mercury
Tetrachloroethylene
Methylene Chloride
Benzene
0.9
0.2
0
0
                             62

-------
                   TABLE 14:   INCREMENTAL RANKING FOR OCEAN DUMPING (See Text)
              For ocean dumping,  two effects indices were  calculated:
              Index 3:  Index of  Toxicity to Aquatic Life
              Index 4:  Index of  Human Toxicity/Cancer Risk Resulting  fron
              Seafood Consumption.   The following is the incremental ranking
              for these two indices.
          INDEX 3
                                                   INDEX 4
  > 1000
                COMPOUND      INCREMENTAL VALUE
                    NO POLLUTANTS
 100-1000
                   NO POLLUTANTS
1-100
Chlordane
DDT
PCB
Aldrin/Dieldrin
Bis(2-ethyl hexyl)
  phthalate
Mercury
Toxaphene
29
8.9
7.3
4.1

2.3
2.2
1.5
  <1
                   NO POLLUTANTS
                                                COMPOUND
                                           INCREMENTAL VALUE
                                                     >1000
                                                    NO POLLUTANTS
                                      100-1000
                             PCB
                     713
                                                     1-100
Chlordane
Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzidine
Toxaphene
Aldrin/Dieldrin
DDT
Heptachlor
62
60
59
45
30
4
1
                                          <1
                              Lindane
                                                  63

-------
C.   Use of Results from Two-Tier Screening Approach

     As can be seen from the previous sections, the two tier
screening approach accomplishes two objectives: (1) it eliminates
those pollutants which under assumed worst case conditions do not
pose a hazard for a specific pathway and (2) prioritizes the
remaining pollutants based on the incremental hazard attributable
to sludge for that pathway.  EPA, in conducting such assessments
on each environmental pathway, will use the outcome of the Step 2
analysis as the basis for establishing priorities for further
analysis and potential regulatory development.  Thus pollutants
in the grouping of >1000 for a specific pathway will be examined
first, with subsequent analyses being done on the grouping of 100-
1000, then for the grouping of 1-100 and finally for the grouping
of <1.  By using this two tier system, EPA can place its resources
and emphasis on those pollutants which potentially may present a
hazard to human health and the environment.  As subsequent more
intensive risk assessments are performed, additional pollutants
may be found to be of no concern.  The key to this whole environ-
mental profile effort has been to recognize that the hazard
indices is a screening device which allows EPA to eliminate those
pollutants which would not present a health or environmental
problem and that the two tier screen would provide a prioritization
mechanism for the remaining pollutants.
                                64

-------
          APPENDIX A:

 LIST OF QWRS COMMITTEE MEETING
 EXPERTS FOR DEVELOPING LIST OF
POTENTIAL POLLUTANTS OF CONCERN

-------
                        OWRS COMMITTEES ON
                         M_U NICI PAL S LJJpG E


I .   Land Application/Distribution and Marketing - March 27, 28j-  1 § 8 4

  - Rufus Chaney, U.S.D.A.
    Biological Waste Management and Organic Resources Lab
    Building 008 Bare-West
    Beltsville, Maryland  20705

  - Terry Logan, Ohio State University
    Agronomy Department
    412C Kottman Hall
    2021 Coffey Road
    Columbus, Ohio  43210

  - Dale Baker, Pennsylvania State University
    Agronomy Dept.
    221 Tyson Bldg.
    University Park, Pennsylvania  16802

  - Dan O'Neill, Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources
    Groundwater Quality Division
    P.O. Box 30028
    Lansing, Michigan  48909

  - Mike Overcash, North Carolina State University at Raleigh
    Chemical Engineering
    113 Riddich
    Raleigh, North Carolina  27695-7905

  - Norm Kowal, U.S. EPA
    Health Effects Research Lab
    26 West St. Clair
    Cincinnati, Ohio  45268

  - Greg Diachenko, U.S. Food and Drug Administration
    Division Chemical Technology (HFF-424)
    200 C St., S.W.
    Washington, D.C.  20204
                            A-1

-------
                        OWRS COMMITTEES ON
                         MUNICIPAL SLUDGE
II.  Landfill - April 10,l]y  1984

  -  Chuck Sorber, University of Texas at Austin
    College of Engineering
    Office of the Dean
    Austin, Texas  78712-1080

  -  Wallace Fuller, University of Arizona
    Dept. of Soils, Water and Engineering
    Tuscon, Arizona  85721

  -  Kirk Brown, Texas A & M
    Soil and Crop Sciences
    College Station, Texas  77843

  -  Jim Ryan, U.S. EPA
    Municipal Environmental Research Lab
    26 West St. Clair
    Cincinnati, Ohio  45268

  -  Dirk Brunner
    E.C. Jordan Company
    P.O. Box 7050
    Portland, Maine  04112
                             A-2

-------
                        OWRS COMMITTEES ON
                         MUNICIPAL SLUDGE
III.  Incineration - May 8,9,  1984

   -  Walter Niessen, Camp Dresser and McKee
     Boston, Massachusetts

   -  P.  Aarne Vesilind
     Department of Civil Engineering
     Duke University
     Durham, North Carolina  27706

   -  Joe Farrell, U.S. EPA
     Municipal Environmental  Research Laboratory
     26  West St.  Clair
     Cincinnati,  Ohio  45268

   -  Jim Smith, U.S. EPA
     MERL Information Transfer
     26  West St.  Clair
     Cincinnati,  Ohio  45268

   -  Bob Dykes
     Radian Corporation
     Progress Center
     3200 East Chapel Hill Rd.
     P.O. Box 13000
     Research Triangle Park,  NC  27709

   -  Tim Opelt, U.S. EPA
     Industrial Environmental Research Lab
     26  West St.  Clair
     Cincinnati,  Ohio  45268
                            A-3

-------
                        OURS COMMITTEES ON
                         MUNICIPAL SLUDGE
IV.   Ocean Dumping - May 22, 23 , iyfc4

    - Tudor Davies, U.S. EPA
      Office of Water - Headquarters

    - Jack Gentile, U.S. EPA
      Environmental Research Lab
      South Ferry Road
      Narragansett, RI  02882

    - Thomas O'Conner, National Oceanic
        and Atmospheric Admin.
      National Marine Pollution Program Office
      N/OMS 32
      Rockwall Bldg.  Rm. 652
      Rockville, MD  20852

    - Mike Conner, U.S. EPA
      Region I
      John F. Kennedy Bldg.
      Planning and Standards
      Boston, MA  02203

    - Peter Anderson, U.S. EPA
      Region II, 26 Federal Plaza
      New York, New York  10278

    - David Young
      Dames and Moore
      445 South Figueroa Street
      Suite 3500
      Los Angeles, California  90071
                              A-4

-------
            APPENDIX  B:

LIST OF POLLUTANTS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL
        PROFILE DEVELOPMENT

-------
CHEMICALS  FOR  SLUDGE  ENVIRONMENTAL PROFILE DEVELOPMENT
                                            Applicable DUposal Options    	
           Compound
             Name
landspreading/
 Distribution
     and
  Marketing
LandfUHng   Inclncerstlon
 Ocean
Disposal
 Fluoride
 Iron
 Molybdenum
 Selenium
 Arsenic
 Copper
 Lead
 Cadmlun
 Beryl HUM
 Nickel
 Zinc
 Cobalt
 Mercury
 Cyanide
 Chronlun
 Aldrln/Oleldrln
 HepUchlor
 Chloroform
 Carbon  Tetrachlortde
 Tttrachloroethylene
  Vinyl  Chloride
  2,4,6-Trlchlorophenot
  Pentachlorophenol
  B«i2ld
-------
        APPENDIX C:




SAMPLE ENVIRONMENTAL  PROFILE

-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water
Regulations and Standards
Washington, DC 20460
Water
                              June, 1985
Environmental Profiles
and  Hazard Indices

of Municipal Sludge:

-------
                                 PREFACE
     This document is one of a  series  of  preliminary assessments dealing
with  chemicals  of potential  concern  in  municipal  sewage  sludge.   The
purpose of these  documents  is  to:   (a) summarize  the  available data for
the  constituents  of  potential  concern,  (b)  identify  the  key environ-
mental  pathways  for  each  constituent   related  to a  reuse  and disposal
option  (based on  hazard  indices),  and  (c) evaluate  the  conditions under
which such a pollutant may pose a hazard.  Each  document provides a sci-
entific basis  for making an  initial  determination  of whether  a pollu-
tant, at levels currently observed  in  sludges,  poses  a  likely  hazard to
human health  or   the  environment  when   sludge  is disposed  of   by  any of
several methods.   These  methods include  landspreading on  food chain or
nonfood chain  crops,  distribution  and marketing  programs,  landfilling,
incineration and  ocean disposal.

     These documents are intended to serve as a rapid screening tool to
narrow an initial list of pollutants to those of  concern.   If  a signifi-
cant hazard is  indicated by this preliminary analysis,  a  more detailed
assessment will  be  undertaken  to  better quantify  the  risk   from  this
chemical and to derive  criteria if  warranted.   If a hazard is shown to
be unlikely, no further  assessment  will be conducted  at  this  time;  how-
ever, a reassessment will  be  conducted  after  initial  regulations  are
finalized.   In no  case,  however,  will  criteria be derived  solely on the
basis of information presented  in  this  document.
                                  C-l

-------
                            TABLE OF CONTENTS


                                                                    Page

PREFACE 	   i

1.   INTRODUCTION.	  1-1

2.   PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS FOR LINDANE IN MUNICIPAL SEWAGE
      SLUDGE	  2-1

    Landspreading and Distribution-and-Marketing	  2-1

    Landfilling 	  2-2

    Incineration 	*	  2-2

    Ocean Disposal	  2-2

3.   PRELIMINARY HAZARD INDICES FOR LINDANE IN MUNICIPAL SEWAGE
      SLUDGE	  3-1

    Landspreading and Distribution-and-Marketing 	  3-1

         Effect on  soil concentration of lindane (Index 1) 	  3-1
         Effect on  soil biota and predators of soil biota
           (Indices 2-3) 	  3-2
         Effect on  plants and plant tissue
           concentration (Indices 4-6)	  3-5
         Effect on  herbivorous animals (Indices 7-8) 	  3-7
         Effect on  humans (Indices 9-13) 	  3-10

    Landf illing 	  3-17

         Index of groundwater concentration resulting
           from landfilled  sludge (Index 1) 	  3-17
         Index of human cancer risk resulting from
           groundwater contamination (Index 2) 	  3-24

    Incineration	  3-25

         Index of air concentration increment resulting
           from incinerator emissions (Index 1) 	  3-25
         Index of human cancer risk resulting from
           inhalation of incinerator emissions (Index 2)	  3-29

    Ocean Disposal  	  3-30

         Index of seawater  concentration resulting from
           initial  mixing of sludge (Index 1) 	  3-31
         Index of seawater  concentration representing a
           24-hour  dumping  cycle (Index 2) 	  3-34

                                    C-2

-------
                            TABLE OP CONTENTS
                                (Continued)
                                                                     Page
         Index of  toxicity to aquatic life  (Index 3)  	  3-35
         Index of  human cancer risk resulting from
            seafood consumption (index 4)	  3-37

4.  PRELIMINARY DATA PROFILE FOR LINDANE  IN MUNICIPAL SEWAGE
      SLUDGE	  4-1

    Occurrence	  4-1

         Sludge	  4-1
         Soil - Unpolluted 	  4-1
         Water - Unpolluted 	  4-2
         Air  	  4-3
         Food 	  4-4

    Human Effects  	  4-6

         Ingestion 	  4-6
         Inhalation 	  4-7

    Plant Effects  	  4-7

         Phytotoxicity 	  4-7
         Uptake 	  4-8

    Domestic Animal and Wildlife Effects  	  4-8

         Toxicity  	  4-8
         Uptake 	  4-8

    Aquatic Life Effects 	  4-8

         Toxicity  	  4-8
         Uptake 	  4-9

    Soil Biota Effects 	  4-9

         Toxicity  	  4-9
         Uptake	  4-9

    Physicochemical Data for Estimating Fate and Transport 	  4-10

5.  REFERENCES	  5-1

APPENDIX.  PRELIMINARY HAZARD INDEX CALCULATIONS FOR
    LINDANE IN MUNICIPAL SEWAGE SLUDGE 	  A-l
                                C-3

-------
                                SECTION 1

                               INTRODUCTION
     This  preliminary  data  profile   is  one  of  a  series  of  profiles
dealing  with chemical  pollutants  potentially of  concern  in  municipal
sewage sludges.   Lindane was initially identified  as being  of potential
concern  when sludge  is  landspread  (including distribution and  market-
ing), placed  in a landfill,  incinerated  or ocean  disposed.*   This pro-
file is  a  compilation of  information  that  may be  useful  in determining
whether  lindane   poses   an  actual  hazard   to   human  health   or  the
environment when sludge is disposed of by these methods.
     The  focus   of  this  document  is  the   calculation  of  "preliminary
hazard indices" for  selected  potential exposure  pathways,  as  shown  in
Section  3.    Each  index  illustrates  the  hazard  that could result from
movement of   a  pollutant  by  a  given  pathway  to  cause  a  given  effect
(e.g., sludge •*•  soil  •»• plant  uptake ->•  animal uptake ->•  human  toxicity).
The  values  and  assumptions   employed in   these   calculations  tend  to
represent  a  reasonable  "worst  case";  analysis  of error  or uncertainty
has  been conducted  to  a limited  degree.    The  resulting  value  in most
cases  is indexed  to unity;  i.e., values  >1 may indicate  a  potential
hazard, depending upon the assumptions of the calculation.
     The data used for index  calculation  have been selected  or estimated
based  on  information  presented  in  the  "preliminary  data   profile",
Section 4.   Information  in the profile is  based  on a compilation  of the
recent literature.    An  attempt has been  made to  fill  out the  profile
outline  to the  greatest  extent possible.    However,  since  this  is  a pre-
liminary analysis, the literature has not  been exhaustively perused.
     The "preliminary conclusions" drawn  from each  index in  Section  3
are  summarized  in Section  2.   The preliminary  hazard  indices will  be
used as  a  screening  tool to determine which  pollutants  and  pathways may
pose a hazard.   Where a potential hazard is  indicated by  interpretation
of  these  indices,  further analysis will  j.nclude  a more detailed  exami-
nation of  potential  risks  as  well  as an  examination  of site-specific
factors.   These  more rigorous  evaluations  may  change the  preliminary
conclusions  presented in  Section  2,  which  are  based  on  a  reasonable
"worst case" analysis.
     The   preliminary  hazard  indices  for   selected   exposure   routes
pertinent  to  landspreading and distribution  and  marketing,  landfilling,
incineration  and  ocean  disposal practices  are included  in this  profile.
The  calculation formulae for  these  indices  are  shown in the  Appendix.
The indices are rounded to two significant  figures.
* Listings  were determined  by  a  series  of  expert  workshops  convened
  during  March-May,  1984  by   the  Office   of   Water   Regulations  and
  Standards  (OWRS)  to discuss landspreading,  landfilling,  incineration,
  and ocean disposal, respectively, of municipal  sewage  sludge.
                                  C-4

-------
                                SECTION 2

      PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS  FOR  LINDANE  IN MUNICIPAL SEWAGE SLUDGE
     The  following  preliminary  conclusions  have  been derived  from the
calculation  of  "preliminary hazard  indices",  which  represent conserva-
tive or  "worst  case" analyses  of hazard.   The  indices and  their basis
and  interpretation  are  explained  in  Section  3.    Their  calculation
formulae are shown in the Appendix.

  I. LANDSPREADINC AND DISTRIBUTION-AND-MARKETING

     A.   Effect on Soil Concentration of Lindane

          No increase in  the concentration of lindane in  sludge-amended
          soil   is  expected  to  occur  from  ah-uication  rates  of 5  to
          50 mt/ha.  A  slight  increase in lindane  concentration  in soil
          is expected  to  occur  when sludge is  applied at  a  cumulative
          rate  of 500 mt/ha (see Index 1).

     B.   Effect on Soil Biota and Predators of Soil Biota

          Landspreading of sludge  is  not  expected  to  pose  a  toxic hazard
          due to lindane  for  soil  biota  which  inhabit  sludge-amended
          soil    (see  Index  2).     Accordingly,    the   landspreading   of
          municipal sewage sludge  is  not  expected  to  pose  a  toxic hazard
          to predators  of soil  biota  due to lindane  contamination (see
          Index  3).

     C.   Effect on Plants and Plant Tissue Concentration

          Landspreading of   sludge  is  not  expected  to result   in  soil
          concentrations of  lindane  which pose  a  phytotoxic hazard (see
          Index   4).    The  tissue concentrations  of   lindane  in  plants
          grown   in  sludge-amended   soil,  and  the   phytotoxic   tissue
          concentrations  of  lindane  for  the  same plants could   not  be
          determined due to lack of data (see Indices  5 and 6).

     D.   Effect on Herbivorous Animals

          The effects of  lindane  on  herbivorous  animals  consuming plants
          grown   in  sludge-amended soil  could  not   be  determined  due  to
          lack  of data (see  Index  7).   However,  the incidental ingestion
          of sludge-amended  soil  by  herbivorous  animals is  not  expected
          to result in a toxic  hazard due to  lindane (see Index 8).

     E.   Effect on Humans

          The potential   cancer   risk due  to  lindane  for   humans  who
          consume  plants  grown  in  sludge-amended  soil  or  who  consume
          animal products  derived  from  animals  that grazed  on  plants
          grown   in  sludge-amended soils  could  not be  evaluated   due  to
          lack  of  data  (see Indices 9 and  10).   The landspreading  of
                                        C-5

-------
          sludge containing a  high concentration of lindane  is  expected
          to slightly increase the cancer  risk  due  to  lindane for humans
          who  consume animal  products  derived  from  animals  ingesting
          sludge-amended  soils  (see  Index   11).    The  consumption  of
          sludge-amended soils that  have received application rates  of 5
          to 50 mt/ha by  toddlers  or adults  is not  expected  to  increase
          the risk of human cancer due  to  lindane above  the pre-existing
          risk attributable to other dietary sources of lindane.   There
          may be an  increased risk  when soils  amended with  sludge  at a
          cumulative rate of 500 mt/ha  are ingested  (see Index 12).   The
          aggregate human cancer risk due  to  lindane associated  with the
          landspreading   of   municipal  sewage   sludge   could   not   be
          determined due to a  lack of data  (see Index 13).

 II. LANDFILLING

     The  landfilling  disposal of  municipal   sewage  sludge is  generally
     expected to result in slight  increases  in  lindane concentrations in
     groundwater.    However,  when  the  composite  worst-case  scenario  is
     evaluated, a moderate increase  in  concentration is  anticipated  (see
     Index  1).    Accordingly,   the  landfilling  of  sludge  should  not
     increase the  risk  of  cancer due  to the ingestion of  lindane  above
     that normally associated  with consuming groundwater.   But  when the
     worst-case scenario  is  evaluated, a  moderate increase in  cancer
     risk can be expected when contaminated  groundwater  is  ingested  (see
     Index 2).

III. INCINERATION

     The  incineration of municipal  sewage  sludge at typical  sludge  feed
     rates may  moderately  increase  lindane  concentrations in air.    At
     high rates, the resulting concentration  may  be  substantially higher
     than typical  urban  levels (see Index  1).   Inhalation of emissions
     from incineration of  sludge may slightly increase the human cancer
     risk due  to  lindane,  above  the risk  posed by  background urban air
     concentrations of lindane (see Index 2).

 IV. OCEAN DISPOSAL

     Only  slight   increases  of  lindane are  expected   to   occur  at  the
     disposal site  after  sludge  dumping  and  initial  mixing  (see  Index
     1).   Only  slight increases  in  lindane  concentrations are  apparent
     after  a 24-hour  dumping cycle  (see  Index  2).    Only slight  to
     moderate  incremental  increases  in  hazard  to  aquatic  life  were
     determined.   No toxic conditions occur  via any  of   the  scenarios
     evaluated (see Index 3).  No  increase of risk  to human  health  from
     consumption of   seafood  is  expected   to  occur  due  to  the  ocean
     disposal of sludge  (see Index 4).
                                    C-6

-------
                              SECTION 3

               PRELIMINARY HAZARD  INDICES  FOR LINDANE
                      IN MUNICIPAL  SEWAGE SLUDGE
I. LANDSPREADING AND DISTRIBUTION-AND-MARKETING

   A.   Effect on Soil Concentration of Lindane

        1.   Index of Soil Concentration (Index 1)

             a.   Explanation -  Calculates concentrations  in Ug/g  DW
                  of pollutant in sludge-amended  soil.   Calculated for
                  sludges  with  typical  (median,  if  available)  and
                  worst   (95   percentile,   if   available)   pollutant
                  concentrations,  respectively,   for  each  of   four
                  applications.    Loadings (as  dry matter) are  chosen
                  and explained as follows:

                    0 mt/ha  No sludge applied.   Shown  for  all  indices
                             for  purposes of  comparison,  to  distin-
                             guish hazard posed  by  sludge  from  pre-
                             existing   hazard   posed   by   background
                             levels  or other  sources of  the pollutant.

                    5 mt/ha  Sustainable  yearly agronomic  application;
                             i.e.,  loading  typical  of   agricultural
                             practice,  supplying   S^Q   kg   available
                             nitrogen per  hectare.

                   50 mt/ha  Higher  single application  as  may be  used
                             on public  lands,  reclaimed areas or  home
                             gardens.

                  500 mt/ha  Cumulative loading  after   100  years  of
                             application at 5 mt/ha/year.

             b.   Assumptions/Limitations   -   Assumes   pollutant   is
                  incorporated into  the upper  15  cm of  soil  (i.e.,  the
                  plow  layer),   which has  an  approximate  mass   (dry
                  matter)  of  2  x  10^ mt/ha  and  is  then  dissipated
                  through first order  processes which can  be  expressed
                  as a soil half-life.

             c.   Data Used and Rationale

                    i. Sludge concentration of  pollutant (SC)

                       Typical    0.11 Ug/g DW
                       Worst      0.22 yg/g DW

                       In a  study of   lindane  in  the municipal sludge
                       of  74  cities  in  Missouri  (Clevenger  et   al.,
                                C-7

-------
                    1983)  the  mean  concentration was  0.11 Ug/g  DW
                    and the maximum concentration was 0.22  Ug/g DW.
                    These   values  were  used  for  the  typical  and
                    worst   concentrations   of  pollutant  in  sludge
                    since   they  were  the   only  data   immediately
                    available.    (See  Section 4,  p.  4-1.)

                ii. Background  concentration of  pollutant  in soil
                    (BS) = 0.13 ug/g DW

                    This  concentration  was  derived by taking  the
                    mean value  of the  most  recent soil data  avail-
                    able  (Matsumura,  1972a).   Although significant
                    commercial  use  of  purified  lindane  continues
                    (U.S.  EPA,  1980),  this was the most current in-
                    formation  for  generating a  background  concen-
                    tration value.   (See Section  4,  p.  4-2.)

               iii. Soil half-life of  pollutant  (t£)  =1.04 years
                    A soil  half-life of  378 days  is  reported  for
                    sandy loam soils and 56  days  in  clay  loam (U.S.
                    EPA,  1984a).   The  value for  sandy  loam  soils
                    was  used because  it  represents the worst  case,
                    namely,  longer  persistence.   (See  Section  4,
                    p. 4-10.)

          d.   Index 1 Values  (ug/g DW)

                                   Sludge Application Rate  (mt/ha)
                   Sludge
               Concentration        0        5        50        500
Typical
Worst
0.13
0.13
0.13
0.13
0.13
0.13
0.27
0.27
          e.   Value  Interpretation  -  Value  equals  the  expected
               concentration  in  sludge-amended  soil.

          f.   Preliminary Conclusion - No  increase  in  the  concen-
               tration  of   lindane   in   sludge-amended  soil   is
               expected to  occur  from  application  rates of  5  to
               50 mt/ha.    A  slight  increase  in lindane  concentra-
               tion in  soil  is  expected  to  occur  when sludge  is
               applied at  a  cumulative  rate of 500 mt/ha.

B.   Effect on Soil Biota  and Predators  of Soil Biota

     1.   Index of Soil Biota Toxicity  (Index 2)

          a.   Explanation -  Compares   pollutant  concentrations  in
               sludge-amended soil with soil concentration shown  to
               be toxic for some soil organism.
                                     C-8

-------
b.   Assumptions/Limitations -  Assumes pollutant  form in
     sludge-amended  soil   is   equally  bioavailable  and
     toxic as form used  in  study  where toxic effects were
     demonstrated.

c.   Data Used and Rationale

       i. Concentration of pollutant in sludge-amended
          soil (Index 1)

          See Section 3, p.  3-2.

      ii. Soil concentration toxic to soil biota (TB) =
          >100 yg/g DW

          There  is  limited  data   on  soil  concentrations
          toxic  to  soil  biota.     (See  Section  4,  p.
          4-15.)  A  range of 12.5  to  100 Ug/g  was  given
          for   experimental   soil   concentrations   for
          bacteria/fungi  (Eno  and  Everett,   1958).    The
          high value  of  100 Ug/g was  selected  so  as  to
          represent  a   conservative   worst   case.     The
          "greater than"  symbol is used  to  indicate that
          this  concentration did  not  actually  generate
          toxic  effects,  although  a   35%  reduction  of
          fungi did occur.

d.   Index 2 Values

                        Sludge  Application Rate (mt/ha)
         Sludge
     Concentration        0          5       50       500

        Typical         <0.0013 <0.0013  <0.0013  <0.0027
        Worst           <0.0013 <0.0013  <0.0013  <0.0027

e.   Value Interpretation -  Value equals factor  by  which
     expected soil concentration  exceeds  toxic concentra-
     tion.  Value >  1  indicates a toxic  hazard  may  exist
     for soil biota.

f.   Preliminary Conclusion  -  Landspreading  of  sludge  is
     not expected to  pose a toxic  hazard due to  lindane
     for soil biota  which inhabit  sludge-amended  soil.

Index of Soil Biota Predator Toxicity (Index  3)

a.   Explanation  -   Compares   pollutant  concentrations
     expected in  tissues  of organisms   inhabiting  sludge-
     amended  soil  with  food  concentration  shown  to  be
     toxic to a predator on  soil organisms.

b.   Assumptions/Limitations  -  Assumes  pollutant   form
     bioconcentrated   by  soil   biota   is  equivalent   in

-------
     toxicit.y to  form used  to demonstrate  toxic  effects
     in  predator.    Effect  Level  in  predator  may  be
     estimated from that in a different species.

     Data Used and Rationale

     i.   Concentration  of  pollutant  in  sludge-amended
          soil (Index 1)

          See Section 3, p. 3-2.

     ii.  Uptake factor of pollutant  in  soil biota (UB) =
          1.05 vig/g tissue DW (wg/g soil
          The only available  uptake factor of  lindane in
          soil biota  is  for  the earthworm  (Yadav  et al.,
          1976).   A  range  of  0.45 to  1.05  was  given,  and
          the high value of 1.05 was used  so  as to repre-
          sent   a   conservative   worst    case.      (See
          Section 4,  p.  4-16.)

     iii. Peed  concentration   toxic  to  predator  (TR)  =
          50 ug/g DW

          No  data  are available  for  a  typical  earthworm
          predator (e.g., a bird) so the value  of  50 Ug/g
          in  rats  was  used.    This  concentration  repre-
          sents  the  lowest level  that  produced a  toxic
          effect:    hypertrophy  of   the   liver.     (See
          Section 4,  p.  4-13.)

d.   Index 3 Values

                        Sludge Application  Rate  (mt/ha)
         Sludge
     Concentration        0         5        50       500

        Typical         0.0027   0.0027   0.0027   0.0056
        Worst           0.0027   0.0027   0.0028   0.0056

e.   Value Interpretation - Values equals  factor by which
     expected  concentration   in  soil   biota exceeds  that
     which is  toxic  to  predator.   Value > 1 indicates a
     toxic hazard may exist for predators of soil biota.

f.   Preliminary Conclusion - The landspreading of  muni-
     cipal sewage sludge  is not expected to pose  a  toxic
     hazard  to  predators  of   soil  biota  due   to  lindane
     contamination.
                        C-10

-------
C.   Effect on Plants and Plant Tissue Concentration

     1.   Index of Phytotoxic Soil Concentration (Index 4)

          a.   Explanation  -  Compares  pollutant  concentrations  in
               sludge-amended soil  with the lowest  soil  concentra-
               tion shown to be toxic for some plants.

          b.   Assumptions/Limitations  -  Assumes  pollutant  form  in
               sludge-amended  soil   is   equally   bioavailable  and
               toxic as form used in  study  where  toxic effects were
               demonstrated.

          c.   Data Used and Rationale

                 i. Concentration  of  pollutant  in  sludge-amended
                    soil (Index 1)

                    See Section 3, p. 3-2.

                ii. Soil  concentration  toxic  to   plants   (TP)   =
                    12.5 Jjg/g DW

                    This value  represents  the  lowest soil  concen-
                    tration toxic  to  plant  tops  when lindane  was
                    applied.   At a  12.5  Mg/g  DW concentration,  a
                    27% reduction  in root  weight  was observed  for
                    stringless    black   valentine   beans  (Eno   and
                    Everett, 1958).    BHC  values were not  considered
                    since  they  represent  data  for  a  blend of  the
                    isomeric forms of hexachlorocyclohexane  and  not
                    just  the  gamma   isomer,  lindane.    (See  Sec-
                    tion 4, p.  4-11.)

          d.   Index 4 Values

                                  Sludge Application  Rate  (mt/ha)
                   Sludge
               Concentration        0         5        50        500
Typical
Worst
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.021
0.021
          e.   Value Interpretation -  Value  equals  factor by  which
               soil concentration exceeds phytotoxic  concentration.
               Value > 1 indicates a phytotoxic hazard may exist.

          f.   Preliminary Conclusion  -  Landspreading of sludge  is
               not   expected  to  result  in  soil  concentrations  of
               lindane which  pose a  phytotoxic  hazard.
                                  C-ll

-------
2.   Index of Plant Concentration Caused by Uptake (index 5)

     a.   Explanation -  Calculates  expected  tissue  concentra-
          tions, in pg/g DW,  in  plants  grown in sludge-amended
          soil,  using  uptake data  for  the  roost  responsive
          plant   species   in    the    following   categories:
          (1) plants  included  in the  U.S.  human  diet;  and
          (2) plants serving as  animal  feed.   Plants  used vary
          according to availability of  data.

     b.   Assumptions/Limitations -  Assumes  an uptake  factor
          that is constant  over  all  soil concentrations.   The
          uptake factor  chosen  for the  human diet is  assumed
          to be representative of all crops  (except  fruits) in
          the  human  diet.    The  uptake  factor  chosen for  the
          animal diet  is  assumed to be representative  of  all
          crops  in  the  animal   diet.    See  also  Index  6  for
          consideration of  phytotoxicity.

     c.   Data Used and Rationale

          i.   Concentration  of  pollutant  in  sludge-amended
               soil (Index  1)

               See  Section  3,  p.  3-2.

          ii.  Uptake factor of  pollutant in  plant  tissue (UP)
               - Data not immediately available.

               The   uptake   factor  of   the   pollutant  in  plant
               tissue is derived by comparing  the  plant  tissue
               concentration with the soil  concentration.   Due
               to  the lack  of  tissue  concentrations  in  the
               available literature  (see  Section  4,  pp.  4-11
               to 4-12),  a  UP value could not be determined.

     d.   Index 5 Values - Values were  not calculated  due to
          lack of data.

     e.   Value  Interpretation   -  Value  equals  the  expected
          concentration in  tissues of  plants grown in  sludge-
          amended  soil.     However,  any  value  exceeding  the
          value of  Index 6  for  the same  or  a similar  plant
          species may be unrealistically high because  it would
          be precluded by phytotoxicity.

     f.   Preliminary Conclusion - Conclusion  was  not  drawn
          because index values could not be  calculated.
                               012

-------
     3.   Index  of Plant  Concentration Permitted  by Phytotoxicity
          (Index 6)

          a.   Explanation  -  The index value  is  the maximum tissue
               concentration,    in    Ug/g    DW,   associated   with
               phytotoxicity  in  the  same  or  similar  plant species
               used  in  Index  5.     The   purpose   is  to  determine
               whether  the plant  tissue  concentrations  determined
               in  Index  5  for high applications are  realistic,  or
               whether  such  concentrations  would  be precluded  by
               phytotoxicity.   The maximum  concentration  should  be
               the highest  at which some  plant  growth still occurs
               (and  thus   consumption  of  tissue   by  animals  is
               possible)  but  above which  consumption  by  animals  is
               unlikely.

          b.   Assumptions/Limitations   -   Assumes   that   tissue
               concentration  will  be  a  consistent  indicator  of
               phytotoxicity.

          c.   Data Used and Rationale

               i.   Maximum  plant   tissue  concentration  associated
                    with  phytotoxicity  (PP)  -  Data  not  immediately
                    available.

                    The tissue concentrations  associated  with plant
                    phytotoxicity  in  Table 4-1,  pp. 4-11  to  4-12,
                    were  not  reported.    Because  of  this  lack  of
                    data, a PP value could not be selected.

          d.   Index 6  Values - Values  were  not  reported due  to
               lack of  data.

          e.   Value  Interpretation  -  Value  equals  the  maximum
               plant tissue  concentration  which  is  permitted  by
               phytotoxicity.    Value  is   compared  with  values  for
               the same or  similar plant   species given by Index  5.
               The lowest  of  the two indices  indicates the maximal
               increase  that  can  occur  at   any  given  application
               rate.

          f.   Preliminary  Conclusion -  Conclusion  was  not  drawn
               because  index values could  not be calculated.

D.   Effect  on Herbivorous Animals

     1.   Index of Animal Toxicity  Resulting  from Plant  Consumption
          (Index 7)

          a.   Explanation  -   Compares   pollutant   concentrations
               expected   in  plant  tissues  grown  in  sludge-amended
               soil with  feed concentration  shown   to be  toxic  to
               wild  or   domestic herbivorous   animals.    Does  not
                              C-13

-------
          consider direct  contamination  of forage  by adhering
          sludge.

     b.   Assumptions/Limitations  -  Assumes   pollutant  form
          taken up by plants is  equivalent  in  toxicity to form
          used to demonstrate toxic effects in  animal.   Uptake
          or  toxicity  in  specific plants  or  animals   may  be
          estimated from other  species.

     c.   Data Used and Rationale

            i. Concentration of  pollutant  in  plant  grown  in
               sludge-amended soil (Index !s) -  Values were not
               calculated due to  lack  of  data.

           ii. Feed concentration  toxic  to herbivorous  animal
               (TA) = 50 yg/g DW

               Data are  reported for  an  inadvertent  poisoning
               of cows  with benzene  hexachloride  (BHC)  which
               contained  19.1%  lindane  (McParland   et  al.,
               1973).    This information  was  not used  because
               it cannot  be determined  what   part  lindane  or
               the  other 80.9%  hexachlorocyclohexane  isomers
               played  in  causing  the  deaths   of the  animals.
               The  only  available  chronic  data  for  lindane
               pertain  to rats,  which  exhibited no effects  at
               25 Ug/g  but  showed  liver  hypertrophy after  50
               Ug/g   lindane  was   consumed    in   the;   diet
               for 2 years   (NRG,  1982).    (See  Section A,  p.
               4-13.)   This  value  will  be assumed  to  apply  to
               all herbivorous  species.

     d.   Index  7 Values - Values were,  not calculated  due  to
          lack of data.

     e.   Value Interpretation -  Value  equals factor  by which
          expected  plant  tissue  concentration  exceeds  that
          which  is  toxic to animals.   Value  >  1  indicates  a
          toxic hazard  may exist  for herbivorous animals.

     f.   Preliminary  Conclusion - Conclusion   was  not  drawn
          because index values  could not  be  calculated.

2.   Index of  Animal Toxicity  Resulting  from Sludge  Ingestion
     (Index 8)

     a.   Explanation -  Calculates  the  amount of pollutant  in
          a  grazing   animal's   diet   resulting  from   sludge
          adhesion to  forage or  from  incidental ingestion  of
          sludge-amended  soil   and  compares   this   with   the
          dietary toxic  threshold  concentration for  a  grazing
          animal.

                             c-14

-------
Assumptions/Limitations  -  Assumes  that  sludge  is
applied over  and  adheres to growing  forage,  or that
sludge  constitutes  5  percent  of  dry  matter  in  the
grazing animal's  diet,  and that  pollutant  form  in
sludge  is equally  bioavailable  and  toxic   as  form
used to demonstrate  toxic effects.  Where  no sludge
is applied  (i.e.,  0 mt/ha), assumes diet is  5 per-
cent soil  as a basis for comparison.

Data Used  and Rationale

  i. Sludge concentration of pollutant (SC)

     Typical   0.11 Ug/g DW
     Worst    0.22 Ug/g DW

     See Section 3,  p.  3-1.

 ii. Fraction of animal diet assumed  to  be  soil (CS)
     = 5%

     Studies   of  sludge  adhesion  to growing  forage
     following applications of  liquid  or filter-cake
     sludge show  that  when  3  to  6 mt/ha of  sludge
     solids  is  applied,  clipped  forage  initially
     consists  of  up  to 30  percent  sludge on  a  dry-
     weight basis (Chaney and  Lloyd,  1979;  Boswell,
     1975).   However,  this contamination  diminishes
     gradually with  time and  growth,  and  generally
     is not detected in  the following  year's  growth.
     For  example, where  pastures  amended  at  16  and
     32 mt/ha were  grazed throughout a  growing  sea-
     son  (168 days), average  sludge content  of  for-
     age   was    only     2.14    and    A.75  percent,
     respectively (Bertrand et  al.,  1981).   It seems
     reasonable to  assume  that  animals  may  receive
     long-term dietary exposure  to 5  percent  sludge
     if maintained  on  a  forage to  which sludge  is
     regularly applied.   This  estimate of 5  percent
     sludge is used  regardless  of  application  rate,
     since the  above   studies  did   not  show  a  clear
     relationship  between application  rate  and  ini-
     tial  contamination,  and  since  adhesion   is  not
     cumulative yearly  because  of die-back.

     Studies  of  grazing  animals  indicate  that  soil
     ingestion,  ordinarily <10   percent of dry weight
     of diet,  may  reach  as  high as  20  percent  for
     cattle and  30  percent  for  sheep  during  winter
     months  when  forage  is  reduced  (Thornton  and
     Abrams,   1983).     If  the  soil  were   sludge-
     amended,  it  is  conceivable that up  to 5  percent
     sludge  may be ingested in  this manner as  well.
     Therefore,  this  value accounts  for  either  of
                    C-15

-------
                    these scenarios, whether  forage  is  harvested or
                    grazed in the field.

               iii. Peed concentration  toxic to  herbivorous animal
                    (TA) = 50 ug/g DW

                    See Section 3, p. 3-8.

          d.   Index 8 Values

                                  Sludge Application Rate (mt/ha)
                   Sludge
               Concentration        0         5       50       500

                  Typical          0.0    0.00011  0.00011  0.00011
                  Worst            0.0    0.00022  0.00022  0.00022

          e.   Value Interpretation  -  Value equals  factor  by which
               expected dietary concentration  exceeds  toxic concen-
               tration.   Value  >  1  indicates a  toxic  hazard  may
               exist for grazing animals.

          f.   Preliminary Conclusion -  The  incidental  ingestion of
               sludge-amended  soil   by  herbivorous  animals  is  not
               expected to result in a toxic hazard due to lindane.

E.   Effect on Humans

     1.   Index   of  Human   Cancer  Risk   Resulting   from  Plant
          Consumption (Index 9)

          a.   Explanation -  Calculates  dietary intake  expected to
               result  from  consumption  of  crops  grown  on  sludge-
               amended  soil.   Compares  dietary  intake  with  the
               cancer risk-specific intake (RSI) of the pollutant.

          b.   Assumptions/Limitations - Assumes that all crops  are
               grown on sludge-amended soil  and  that all those con-
               sidered to be  affected  take  up the pollutant  at  the
               same  rate.   Divides  possible variations  in  dietary
               intake into two  categories:   toddlers (18 months to
               3 years) and  individuals over 3 years  old.

          c.   Data Used and Rationale

                 i. Concentration  of pollutant  in  plant grown  in
                    sludge-amended soil (Index 5)  -  Values  were  not
                    calculated due to lack of data.
                                C-16

-------
  ii. Daily  human dietary  intake  of  affected  plant
      tissue (DT)

      Toddler     74.5 g/day
      Adult      205   g/day

      The  intake  value for adults  is  based  on  daily
      intake of crop  foods  (excluding  fruit)  by  vege-
      tarians  (Ryan  et al.,  1982); vegetarians  were
      chosen to represent  the  worst case.   The  value
      for toddlers  is  based on the FDA  Revised  Total
      Diet  (Pennington,  1983)   and   food   groupings
      listed by  the  U.S.  EPA (1984b).   Dry  weights
      for  individual  food  groups  were estimated  from
      composition data  given   by  the   U.S.  Department
      of  Agriculture  (USDA)   (1975).    These  values
      were   composited    to    estimate    dry-weight
      consumption of all non-fruit crops.

iii.  Average daily human dietary intake of pollutant
      (DI)

      Toddler    2.71 Ug/day
      Adult      8.21 Ug/day

      The DI value for  lindane was  determined  by  cal-
      culating   the   daily   pollutant   intake  through
      food  consumption  and  adding it  to  the  daily
      intake of pollutant through  ingestion  of water.
      Assumptions  made are  that  the  average  adult
      weighs 70 kg,  that  the  average  adult  consumes
      2.0 L  of  water  daily,  and  chat   a   toddler
      consumes  33% of an adult  intake  per day.

      The average total relative  daily intake  of  lin-
      dane  from  food  over a  four-year  period   from
      1975 to  1978  was 0.0030  ug/kg   body  weight/day
      (Food  and   Drug  Administration   (FDA),  1979).
      When  this  value  is  multiplied   by the  average
      adult  weight   of  70  kg,  the  daily  intake  of
      lindane due  to food  is 0.21  Ug/day.

      A  data  point  of 4.0 yg/L was  available  for
      drinking  water in Streator,  Illinois  (U.S.  EPA,
      1980).    (See   Section  4, p.  4-3.)   By multi-
      plying the  value of 4.0  Ug/L  by  the consumption
      rate of 2.0 L of water/day,  the  daily  intake  of
      lindane  due   to   water   consumption  equals
      8.0 ug/day.

      By adding together the dietary intake and water
      intake  value,  the  total  daily human  dietary
      intake of  lindane during   the  period  1975  to
      1978 is estimated at  8.21 ug/day for an adult.
               C-17

-------
               It  is  assumed  that  a  toddler  consumes  33%  of
               this value or 2.71 Mg/day.

          iv.  Cancer potency = 1.33 (mg/kg/day) ~1

               Because of a  lack of human data,  the   value  of
               1..33 (mg/kg/day)~1 was  derived  from a  study  of
               mice in which oral doses  of  lindane resulted  in
               liver tumors  (U.S. EPA,  1980).   (See Section  4,
               p. 4-6.)

           v.  Cancer    risk-specific    intake     (RSI)    =
               0.053 Ug/day

               The  RSI  is  the  pollutant  intake  value  which
               results in  an increase  in  cancer  risk  of 10~6
               (1 per  1,000,000).   The RSI  is  calculated from
               the cancer potency using the  following formula:

               RSI =  10~6 x  70 kg x 103  yg/mg
                          Cancer potency

     d.   Index  9  Values - Values  were  not calculated  due  to
          lack of data.

     e.   Value  Interpretation  - Value  >1  indicates  a  poten-
          tial  increase  in  cancer   risk   of  >10~°   (1  per
          1,000,000).   Comparison with  the  null index  value  at
          0 mt/ha  indicates  the degree to which  any hazard  is
          due  to  sludge  application,   as  opposed   to  pre-
          existing dietary sources.

     f.   Preliminary  Conclusion -  Conclusion was  not  drawn
          because index values  could not be  calculated.

2.   Index of  Human  Cancer  Risk Resulting  from Consumption  of
     Animal  Products  Derived  from  Animals  Feeding on  Plants
     (Index 10)

     a.   Explanation  -  Calculates   human  dietary   intake
          expected to result from pollutant  uptake  by  domestic
          animals  given  feed   grown  on  sludge-amended  soil
          (crop or pasture land) but not  directly contaminated
          by  adhering  sludge.    Compares  expected  intake  with
          RSI.

     b.   Assumptions/Limitations - Assumes  that  all  animal
          products are  from animals receiving  all their  feed
          from sludge-amended  soil.   Assumes  that all  animal
          products  consumed  take   up   the   pollutant   at  the
          highest  rate  observed  for  muscle of  any  commonly
          consumed species  or   at  the  rate  observed   for  beef
          liver  or  dairy   products   (whichever   is   higher).
          Divides  possible  variations  in dietary intake  into
                              C-18

-------
 two categories:  toddlers  (18 months  to  3 years) and
 individuals over 3 years old.

 Data Used and Rationale

  i.  Concentration  of  pollutant  in  plant grown  in
      sludge-amended soil (Index 5)  -  Values  were not
      calculated due to  lack of data.

 ii.  Uptake  factor  of  pollutant   in  animal  tissue
      (UA) = 0.65 ug/g tissue  DW (ug/g feed DWT1

      Uptake factors  for lindane  in beef  fat  varied
      from 0.35 to 0.65 Ug/g  tissue  (ug/g diet)~l for
      feed   concentrations   of   10   and   100   Mg/g
      (Claborn, 1960, cited in Kenaga,  1980).    As  a
      conservative approach, the higher value  is  used
      to  represent  the  uptake factor  for  lindane  in
      all  animal  fats   in   the   human  diet.     (See
      Section 4,  p.   4-14.)   The  uptake  factor  of
      pollutant in animal tissue (UA)  used  is  assumed
      to apply to all animal fats.

iii.  Daily  human  dietary  intake  of affected  animal
      tissue (DA)

      Toddler    43.7 g/day
      Adult      88.5 g/day

      The fat intake values presented, which  comprise
      meat,  fish,  poultry,   eggs  and  milk  products,
      are  derived  from  the  FDA  Revised  Total  Diet
      (Pennington,   1983),   food  groupings  listed  by
      the U.S.  EPA  (1984b)  and food composition  data
      given by USDA (1975).   Adult intake  of meats  is
      based on  males  25  to  30 years  of  age and  that
      for milk  products  on  males  14 to  16 years  of
      age, the  age-sex groups  with the highest daily
      intake.   Toddler  intake of  milk  products  is
      actually   based  on  infants,  since  infant  milk
      consumption  is  the  highest  among that age group
      (Pennington,  1983).

 iv.  Average daily human dietary intake  of pollutant
      (DI)

      Toddler    2.71  Ug/day
      Adult      8.21  Ug/day

      See Section 3,  p. 3-11.
                C-19

-------
           v.  Cancer    risk-specific    intake     (RSI)     =
               0.053 yg/day

               See Section 3, p. 3-12.

     d.   Index 10 Values  -  Values  were not calculated  due  to
          lack of data.

     e.   Value Interpretation - Same as for Index 9.

     f.   Preliminary  Conclusion  -  Conclusion was  not  drawn
          because index values could not be  calculated.

3.   Index of Human  Cancer Risk Resulting  from Consumption  of
     Animal  Products  Derived  from  Animals   Ingesting  Soil
     (Index 11)

     a.   Explanation  -   Calculates   human   dietary   intake
          expected  to  result   from  consumption   of   animal
          products derived  from  grazing animals  incidentally
          ingesting  sludge-amended  soil.    Compares  expected
          intake with RSI.

     b.   Assumptions/Limitations  -  Assumes  that  all  animal
          products  are  from  animals  grazing  sludge-amended
          soil,  and that all  animal products consumed take  up
          the  pollutant   at   the  highest   rate  observed   for
          muscle  of  any  commonly consumed  species  or  at  the
          rate  observed   for  beef   liver   or   dairy  products
          (whichever  is higher).   Divides  possible  variations
          in  dietary  intake  into  two   categories:    toddlers
          (18 months  to 3  years)  and  individuals  over 3  years
          old.

     c.   Data Used and Rationale

            i. Animal  tissue  = Beef  fat

               See Section  3,  p. 3-13.

           ii. Sludge  concentration  of pollutant  (SC)

               Typical     0.11 Ug/g  DW
               Worst       0.22 yg/g  DW

               See Section  3,  p. 3-1.

          iii. Background  concentration  of  pollutant  in  soil
               (BS) =  0.13  Mg/g DW

               See Section  3,  p. 3-2.
                            C-20

-------
   iv. Fraction  of  animal  diet assumed to be soil  (CS)
      = 5%

      See Section  3, p. 3-9.

   v. Uptake  factor  of  pollutant  in  animal  tissue
      (UA) =  0.65  pg/g tissue DW (yg/g  feed DW)'1

      See Section  3, p. 3-13.

   vi. Daily  human dietary  intake of  affected animal
      tissue  (DA)
      Toddler
      Adult
      39.4 g/day
      82.4 g/day
      The  affected  tissue intake value  is  assumed to
      be  from the fat  component of meat  only (beef,
      pork,    lamb,     veal)    and    milk    products
      (Pennington,  1983).   This is  a  slightly  more
      limited choice than for  Index 10.   Adult intake
      of  meats  is based  on  males  25  to 30  years of
      age  and the intake  for  milk products  on males
      14  to  16  years of  age,  the age-sex  groups  with
      the  highest daily  intake.   Toddler  intake of
      milk  products  is  actually   based  on  infants,
      since  infant   milk  consumption  is the  highest
      among that age group (Pennington, 1983).

 vii. Average daily  human dietary  intake of pollutant
      (DI)
      Toddler
      Adult
      2.71 ug/day
      8.21 Ug/day
      See Section 3, p. 3-11.

viii. Cancer    risk-specific
      0.053 jag/day

      See Section 3, p. 3-12.

 Index 11 Values
                       intake
                  (RSI)
 Group
   Sludge
Concentration
    Sludge Application
       Rate (mt/ha)

         5     50     500
Toddler
Typical
Worst
54
54
54
56
54
56
54
56
 Adult
  Typical
  Worst
160
160
160
170
160
170
160
170
                         C-21

-------
     e.   Value Interpretation - Same as for Index 9.

     f.   Preliminary Conclusion -  The  landspreading of sludge
          containing  a   high  concentration  of   lindane   is
          expected to slightly  increase  the  cancer  risk, due to
          lindane  for  humans  who  consume  animal  products
          derived from animals ingesting sludge-amended soils.

4.   Index of Human Cancer Risk from Soil Ingestion (Index 12)

     a.   Explanation - Calculates  the  amount of  pollutant in
          the diet  of a  child who  ingests  soil  (pica child)
          amended with sludge.  Compares this amount with RSI.

     b.   Assumptions/Limitations   -  Assumes  that   the  pica
          child  consumes  an  average  of  5  g/day  of  sludge-
          amended soil.   If  the  RSI specific for a  child is
          not  available,  this  index  assumes the  RSI for  a
          10 kg child is  the  same  as that  for a  70  kg adult.
          It is  thus  assumed  that uncertainty factors  used in
          deriving the  RSI  provide  protection for  the child,
          taking  into  account  the  smaller  body  size  and  any
          other differences  in sensitivity.

     c.   Data Used and  Rationale

            i. Concentration  of  pollutant  in  sludge-amended
               soil (Index 1)

               See Section 3,  p. 3-2.

           ii. Assumed amount  of soil in human diet (DS)

               Pica child     5    g/day
               Adult          0.02  g/day

               The value  of  5 g/day  for a pica  child is  a
               worst-case   estimate  employed  by   U.S.  EPA's
               Exposure  Assessment   Group  (U.S.   EPA,  1983a).
               The value  of  0.02  g/day for  an  adult is  an
               estimate  from U.S.  EPA, 1984b.

          iii. Average daily human  dietary intake  of pollutant
               (DI)

               Toddler    2.71 pg/day
               Adult       8.21 pg/day

               See Section 3,  p. 3-11.

           iv. Cancer    risk-specific     intake     (RSI)     =
               0.053  Mg/day

               See Section 3,  p. 3-12.
                         -22

-------
                    Index 12 Values
                                                  Sludge Application
                                                     Rate  (mt/ha)
Group
Toddler
Adult
Sludge
Concentration
Typical
Worst
Typical
Worst
0
63
63
150
150
5
63
63
150
150
50
63
64
150
150
50
76
76
160
160
              e.   Value Interpretation - Same as for Index 9.

              f.   Preliminary  Conclusion  - The  consumption  of sludge-
                   amended  soils  that  have received  application  rates
                   of  5  to  50 mt/ha  by  toddlers  or  adults is  not
                   expected to  increase the risk of human cancer due to
                   lindane  above  the pre-existing  risk, attributable to
                   other dietary  sources  of lindane.   There may  be an
                   increase of  cancer risk for  both  toddler  and adults
                   when soils  amended with sludge  at  a cumulative rate
                   of 500 mt/ha are ingested.

         5.   Index of Aggregate Human Cancer Risk  (Index 13)

              a.   Explanation  -   Calculates  the  aggregate  amount  of
                   pollutant  in the  human   diet  resulting from  pathways
                   described  in Indices 9  to 12.   Compares  this amount
                   with RSI.

              b.   Assumptions/Limitations   - As  described for Indices 9
                   to 12.

              c.   Data Used and Rationale  - As  described for Indices 9
                   to 12.

              d.   Index 13 Values - Values were not  calculated due to
                   lack of  data.

              e.   Value Interpretation -  Same  as for Index 9.

              f.   Preliminary  Conclusion   -  Conclusion  was  not  drawn
                   because  index values could not be calculated.

II. LANDFILLIMG

    A.   Index  of  Groundwater  Concentration Resulting from  Landfilled
         Sludge (Index 1)

         1.   Explanation  - Calculates  groundwater contamination  which
              could occur in  a potable aquifer  in the landfill vicin-
              ity.    Uses  U.S.  EPA's  Exposure  Assessment  Group  (EAG)
                                       C-23

-------
model, "Rapid Assessment  of  Potential Groundwater Contam-
ination  Under  Emergency  Response  Conditions"  (U.S.  EPA,
1983b).  Treats  landfill  leachate  as  a pulse input, i.e.,
the application  of  a constant source  concentration for a
short time period relative to  the  time frame of the anal-
ysis.   In order  to predict  pollutant movement  in soils
and groundwater, parameters  regarding transport and fate,
and boundary or  source conditions are  evaluated.   Trans-
port  parameters  include  the  interstitial  pore  water
velocity  and  dispersion  coefficient.    Pollutant  fate
parameters include  the degradation/decay  coefficient  and
retardation factor.   Retardation is  primarily  a function
of  the  adsorption  process,  which  is characterized by a
linear,  equilibrium  partition  coefficient  representing
the ratio  of adsorbed  and  solution  pollutant  concentra-
tions.   This  partition coefficient,  along  with soil  bulk
density and volumetric  water content, are  used to calcu-
late  the  retardation  factor.    A computer program  (in
FORTRAN) was  developed to facilitate computation  of  the
analytical solution.  The program  predicts pollutant  con-
centration as a function of  time and  location in both  the
unsaturated  and  saturated  zone.   Separate computations
and parameter estimates  are  required  for  each  zone.   The
prediction  requires  evaluations  of   four  dimensionless
input  values  and  subsequent  evaluation  of the  result,
through use of the computer  program.

Assumptions/Limitations - Conservatively  assumes  that  the
pollutant  is  100 percent mobilized  in  the  leachate  and
that all  leachate  leaks out  of  the landfill in  a finite
period and undiluted  by precipitation.   Assumes  that  all
soil and aquifer properties  are  homogeneous and isotropic
throughout each zone; steady,  uniform flow occurs only in
the vertical  direction  throughout  the unsaturated zone,
and only  in the  horizontal  (longitudinal)  plane  in  the
saturated zone;  pollutant movement is considered  only in
direction of groundwater flow  for  the saturated zone;  all
pollutants exist  in concentrations that  do  not  signifi-
cantly affect water  movement;  for organic  chemicals,  the
background concentration  in  the  soil profile  or aquifer
prior to  release  from the source  is  assumed to  be zero;
the pollutant source is a pulse  input;  no dilution of  the
plume occurs  by recharge  from  outside  the  source area;
the  leachate  is  undiluted   by  aquifer   flow within  the
saturated  zone;  concentration  in  the  saturated  zone  is
attenuated only by dispersion.
                      C-24

-------
3.   Data Used and Rationale

     a.   Unsaturated zone

          i.   Soil type and characteristics

               (a)  Soil type

                    Typical    Sandy loam
                    Worst      Sandy

                    These  two  soil  types were  used by Gerritse  et
                    al.   (1982)  to  measure partitioning of  elements
                    between  soil  and  a   sewage   sludge   solution
                    phase.   They are used  here since these  parti-
                    tioning measurements (i.e., Kj  values)  are  con-
                    sidered  the  best   available   for analysis  of
                    metal  transport  from  landfilled  sludge.    The
                    same soil types are also used  for  nonmetals for
                    convenience and  consistency of  analysis.

               (b)  Dry  bulk density (Pdry)

                    Typical    1.53   g/mL
                    Worst      1.925 g/mL

                    Bulk density is the dry mass per  unit volume  of
                    the  medium (soil),  i.e., neglecting the mass  of
                    the  water (COM,  1984a).

               (c)  Volumetric water content (8)

                    Typical    0.195 (unitless)
                    Worst      0.133 (unitless)

                    The  volumetric  water  content   is  the  volume  of
                    water  in  a  given   volume  of  media,  usually
                    expressed as a fraction or  percent.  It depends
                    on  properties of the media and the  water  flux
                    estimated by infiltration or net recharge.  The
                    volumetric water content is used  in calculating
                    the  water movement  through  the  unsaturated  zone
                    (pore  water  velocity)   and    the  retardation
                    coefficient.   Values  obtained from  CDM,  1984a.

               (d)  Fraction of organic  carbon  (foc)

                    Typical    0.005  (unitless)
                    Worst       0.0001 (unitless)

                    Organic content  of   soils  is described   in terms
                    of percent organic  carbon,  which is required  in
                    the  estimation  of   partition   coefficient,  Kj.
                                 C-25

-------
          Values,   obtained  from  R.  Griffin  (1984)  are
          representative values  for  subsurface  soils.

ii.  Site parameters

     (a)  Landfill  leaching  time (LT)  = 5  years

          Sikora et  al. (1982)  monitored several  sludge
          entrenchment  sites throughout the United  States
          and estimated time of landfill  leaching to  be  4
          or 5 years.  Other types of  landfills may leach
          for longer periods of time; however, the  use of
          a value  for  entrenchment  sites  is conservative
          because   it   results   in   a  higher   leachate
          generation rate.

     (b)  Leachate  generation rate (Q)

          Typical     0.8 m/year
          Worst       1.6 m/year

          It  is   conservatively  assumed   that    sludge
          leachate  enters the  unsaturated zone undiluted
          by precipitation  or   other  recharge,  that  the
          total  volume  of   liquid  in  the  sludge  leaches
          out of the landfill,  and  that leaching is  com-
          plete  in  5 years.   Landfilled sludge is assumed
          to be  20  percent  solids by volume, and depth of
          sludge in  the landfill is  5 m in  the  typical
          case  and  10  m in  the worst  case.    Thus,  the
          initial   depth of  liquid  is  4  and  8 m,  and
          average  yearly leachate  generation is  0.8  and
          1.6 m, respectively.

     (c)  Depth  to  groundwater (h)

          Typical     5  m
          Worst       0  m

          Eight  landfills were  monitored  throughout  the
          United States  and  depths  to  groundwater   below
          them  were  listed.    A typical depth  to ground-
          water  of  5 m  was observed  (U.S. EPA,   1977).
          For the  worst  case, a value of 0 m  is  used to
          represent  the situation where the bottom  of  the
          landfill  is occasionally or regularly below  the
          water  table.   The depth to  groundwater  must be
          estimated  in  order  to evaluate  the  likelihood
          that  pollutants moving  through  the unsaturated
          soil will  reach the groundwater.
                      C-26

-------
     (d)  Dispersivity coefficient (a)

          Typical    0.5 m
          Worst      Not applicable

          The  dispersion  process  is  exceedingly  complex
          and  difficult  to quantify,  especially  for  the
          unsaturated zone.   It  is  sometimes  ignored  in
          the  unsaturated  zone, with  the reasoning  that
          pore water  velocities are  usually  large enough
          so  that  pollutant   transport   by  convection,
          i.e., water movement,  is paramount.  As  a  rule
          of  thumb,   dispersivity  may  be  set  equal  to
          10 percent   of  the distance  measurement   of  the
          analysis  (Gelhar  and  Axness,   1981).     Thus,
          based on depth to groundwater listed  above,  the
          value for the typical case  is 0.5  and that  for
          the  worst  case   does  not apply since  leachate
          moves directly to the  unsaturated zone.

iii. Chemical-specific parameters

     (a)  Sludge concentration of pollutant (SC)

          Typical     0.11  mg/kg  DW
          Worst      0.22  mg/kg  DW

          See Section 3, p.  3-1.

     (b)  Soil half-life of pollutant  (t£) =  378 days

          See Section 3, p.  3-2.

     (c)  Degradation rate (y) = 0.0018 day"1

          The unsaturated  zone  can serve  as  an  effective
          medium  for  reducing  pollutant   concentration
          through  a  variety  of chemical  and  biological
          decay mechanisms  which  transform  or  attenuate
          the pollutant.   While  these decay  processes  are
          usually complex,  they are  approximated  here  by
          a   first-order rate  constant.   The  degradation
          rate is  calculated using  the  following formula:

                      _  0.693
                   P'~

      (d)  Organic   carbon  partition  coefficient  (Koc)  =
          1080 mL/g

          The  organic  carbon   partition   coefficient   is
          multiplied   by   the   percent   organic   carbon
          content   of  soil  (foc)   to  derive  a partition
          coefficient  (K^),  which represents  the ratio  of
                         C-27

-------
               absorbed   pollutant    concentration    to   the
               dissolved  (or  solution)  concentration.    The
               equation  (Koc  x   fOc^  assumes  that  organic
               carbon  in the  soil  is  the  primary  means  of
               adsorbing organic  compounds  onto  soils.   This
               concept serves  to  reduce much of  the  variation
               in  KJJ values  for  different  soil  types.   The
               value of Koc is from Hassett et al. (1983).

b.   Saturated zone

     i.   Soil type and characteristics

          (a)  Soil type

               Typical    Silty sand
               Worst      Sand

               A silty sand  having the values  of  aquifer por-
               osity and hydraulic conductivity defined below
               represents a  typical  aquifer material.   A more
               conductive medium  such  as  sand  transports  the
               plume more readily  and  with  less dispersion and
               therefore represents a reasonable worst case.

          (b)  Aquifer porosity (0)

               Typical    0.44  (unitless)
               Worst      0.389 (unitless)

               Porosity is  that portion of  the  total  volume of
               soil that is  made  up of voids (air) and water.
               Values  corresponding  to  the  above  soil  types
               are   from  Pettyjohn et  al.  (1982) as  presented
               in U.S. EPA  (1983b).

          (c)  Hydraulic conductivity of the aquifer (K)

               Typical    0.86 m/day
               Worst     4.04 m/day

               The  hydraulic conductivity (or permeability) of
               the  aquifer  is needed to estimate  flow velocity
               based on Darcy's Equation.   It is a measure of
               the   volume of liquid  that  can  flow  through  a
               unit area or  media with time; values  can range
               over nine orders  of magnitude depending  on  the
               nature of the media.   Heterogenous conditions
               produce  large  spatial  variation  in  hydraulic
               conductivity,   making  estimation  of  a  single
               effective  value  extremely  difficult.     Values
               used  are   from  Freeze  and   Cherry  (1979)  as
               presented  in  U.S.  EPA (1983b).
                           C-28

-------
     (d)  Fraction of organic carbon (£oc) =
          0.0 (unitless)

          Organic  carbon  content,  and  therefore  adsorp-
          tion,  is assumed to be 0 in the  saturated zone.

ii.  Site parameters

     (a)  Average hydraulic gradient between  landfill  and
          well (i)

          Typical    0.001 (unitless)
          Worst       0.02   (unitless)

          The hydraulic  gradient   is  the  slope  of  the
          water   table  in  an  unconfined  aquifer,  or  the
          piezometric  surface  for  a   confined  aquifer.
          The hydraulic gradient  must  be  known  to  deter-
          mine the magnitude and direction  of  groundwater
          flow.     As  gradient  increases,  dispersion   is
          reduced.      Estimates  of   typical   and  high
          gradient   values  were   provided  by   Donigian
          (1985).

     (b)  Distance  from well to landfill (AS,)

          Typical    100 m
          Worst        50 m

          This distance is  the distance  between a  land-
          fill  and  any  functioning  public   or  private
          water  supply or  livestock water  supply.

     (c)  Dispersivity coefficient  (a)

          Typical    10  m
          Worst        5  m

          These   values  are  10 percent of  the  distance
          from well  to  landfill (Ai),  which  is 100  and
          50  m,   respectively,  for   typical   and   worst
          conditions.

     (d)  Minimum thickness  of  saturated zone  (B) = 2 m

          The minimum  aquifer  thickness   represents  the
          assumed  thickness  due   to  preexisting   flow;
          i.e.,  in  the absence of  leachate.  It  is termed
          the minimum thickness  because  in  the vicinity
          of  the  site  it  may  be  increased  by  leachate
          infiltration  from  the site.    A  value  of  2  m
          represents  a  worst   case  assumption  that  pre-
          existing  flow  is  very   limited  and   therefore

                    C-29

-------
                    dilution  of  the  plume  entering  the  saturated
                    zone is negligible.
               (e)  Width of landfill (W) = 112.8
                                                  m
                    The  landfill  is  arbitrarily   assumed   to  be
                    circular with an area of 10,000 m^.

          iii. Chemical-specific parameters

               (a)  Degradation rate (|i) =  0 day"!

                    Degradation  is  assumed not  to   occur  in  the
                    saturated zone.

               (b)  Background   concentration   of   pollutant   in
                    groundwater (BC) = 0  pg/L

                    It is  assumed  that no  pollutant exists  in the
                    soil  profile  or aquifer  prior  to  release  from
                    the source.

     4.   Index Values -  See Table 3-1.

     5.   Value Interpretation  -  Value equals the  maximum expected
          groundwater concentration  of pollutant,  in  pg/L,  at the
          well.

     6.   Preliminary Conclusion - The landfill  disposal  of  munici-
          pal  sewage  sludge  is  generally  expected  to  result  in
          slight  increases  in lindane  concentrations  in  ground-
          water.  When the composite worst-case  scenario  is  evalu-
          ated,   a   moderate   increase    in    concentration    is
          anticipated.

B.   Index   of   Human  Cancer  Risk  Resulting  from  Groundwater
     Contamination (Index 2)

     1.   Explanation  -    Calculates   human exposure   which   could
          result from groundwater  contamination.   Compares exposure
          with cancer risk-specific intake  (RSI)  of pollutant.

     2.   Assumptions/Limitations   -  Assumes  long-term exposure  to
          maximum concentration at  well at  a rate of 2  L/day.

     3.   Data Used and Rationale

          a.   Index  of  groundwater  concentration  resulting  from
               landfilled sludge (Index 1)

               See Section 3,  p. 3-26.
                                 C-30

-------
               b.   Average human  consumption of  drinking water  (AC)  =
                    2 L/day

                    The  value  of  2  L/day  is  a  standard  value used  by
                    U.S. EPA in most risk assessment studies.

               c.   Average daily  human dietary  intake  of  pollutant (DI)
                    = 8.21 pg/day

                    See Section 3,  p. 3-11.

               d.   Cancer risk-specific intake (RSI) = 0.053 Ug/day

                    See Section 3,  p. 3-12.

          4.   Index 2 Values - See Table 3-1.

          5.   Value  Interpretation -  Value  >1  indicates  a  potential
               increase  in  cancer  risk of  10~6  (1  in  1,000,000).   The
               null index value should be used as  a basis  for comparison
               to indicate the degree  to  which any risk is  due  to land-
               fill disposal,  as  opposed to preexisting  dietary sources.

          6.   Preliminary Conclusion - Generally,  the  landfill  disposal
               of municipal  sewage sludge  should  not  increase  the  risk
               of cancer due to the  ingestion of  lindane above  that  nor-
               mally  associated  with  consuming  groundwater.   When  the
               worst-case scenario  is  evaluated,  a moderate  increase  in
               cancer risk can be  expected  when  contaminated groundwater
               is ingested.

III. INCINERATION

     A.   Index of Air Concentration Increment  Resulting from
          Incinerator Emissions (Index 1)

          1.   Explanation  -   Shows  the   degree  of elevation  of   the
               pollutant concentration  in  the  air  due  to  the  incinera-
               tion of  sludge.  An input  sludge with thermal  properties
               defined by the  energy parameter  (EP)  was  analyzed  using
               the BURN model  (COM, 1984a).  This  model uses  the thermo-
               dynamic  and  mass balance  relationships  appropriate  for
               multiple hearth incinerators to  relate  the  input  sludge
               characteristics  to  the  stack  gas  parameters.    Dilution
               and dispersion  of  these stack gas  releases  were  described
               by  the  U.S.  EPA's   Industrial  Source  Complex  Long-Term
               (ISCLT)  dispersion  model  from  which normalized  annual
               ground  level  concentrations  were  predicted  (U.S.  EPA,
               1979).   The predicted pollutant concentration can then  be
               compared to a  ground level  concentration used to  assess
               risk.
                               C-31

-------
•-I CN

X X
W W
O Q
u

03
OO




r»-








vD






u
*x
Xi
*>h
CO
cn in
• fH
cn
X
*-H
CFT
•U
C
•5

C4H
0

C -3-
O
• fH
U
• fH
T3
C
O
U



fl










ol









f-H







cn
, cn to 73
u to 4_i •- a. 41
la la 4-1
0) 3 --H 0) 41 to
OO 4-1 -fH 4J 4J la
T3 Cfl O -H 3
3 to to cn 4-1
fH C «
cn rs cn
z z o
O vO
fH



33 0
O
CO CM
•
r-H




H 3 !-• 0
m \o
O fH
•
O






m
3 H i>- o
O vO
0 f-i
•
O





o
H H ro o
O vO
0 fH
•
O






oo
H H •-" O
O vO
0 fH
O






oo
H EH CN 0
O vO
O fH
O






H H ^ 0
^3 v.O
O --H
•
0

i
CJ
CO
1- ^
to J
X! 00 —
u cn oo
Va 3-
73 4) v_-
CMH 4J
tO 01 O> 4) 41
U £ 3 3
4) -fH Cfl f-H fH
Q. 4-1 la CO CQ
X CO CO > >
4-1 -fH O.
la fl CN
fH 4) 4)
• ft 4-1 4-1 X X
O -fi 0) 4)
cn cn 73 T3
c c
f- 1 fH

tn
to
73
0)
01
3

fA
cn
4-1
cn
•H
X
0)
f-H
cH
• H
MH
73
C
to
1 — 1

o
c

4)
la
41
x;
3

•t
c
o
• H
4-J
• fl
73
C
o
u

, — i
, — i
3
C

II

Z

• .It
73
4)
3

cn
4)
3
fH
CO
>

01
to
m
su
U
1
4-1
cn
la
O
3
H
3

•f*
73
OJ
cn
3

01
ai
3
fH
CO
>

, — i
efl
U
•rH
a.
x
H

II

H
CO








































•
c
0
• fH
4->
•fH
-o
c
o
CJ

cn
• fH
XI
4-1

V4
O
U-J

ai

_a
tfl
CJ
• f4
i — 1
a.
a
cfl

4-1
o
c
n

<
Z

• **•
c
o
cn
• fH
la
CO
a.
E
o
CJ

la
O
U-J

cn
•fH
cn
to
XI


•
X
• fH
-o
c
4)
a.
a.
<

4)
X!
4J
C
• t— i
4>
tO
t — i
3

V4
O
C4H

ai
x;
4J

oo
c
• fH
cn
3
T3
4)
4-1
tO
f-H
3
CJ
f-H
to
0

0)
X)

X
cfl


c
3
o
X!
cn

41
cn
O
Xi
4_)

C
CO
XI
.UJ
la
41
x;
4-1
O

CO
C
O
• fH
4_>
CO
c
• fH
XI
E
O
u

la
O
UH

cn
01
3
, 	 ,
CO
>

X
01
-o
c
1— 1
XI

















































»
73
4>
cn
3

cn
4)
3
f-H
to
>

la
41
J— '
41
E
CO
la
CO
a.

L<
O
;-fM
x
• -H
73
C
4)
a.
0.
<

c
•fH

-H
1
<



•V
^^
X
la
73
Oa
v-^

>x
4->
• fH
cn
C

o
(J

X
4-1
• fH
>
• iH
cn
l*
01
a.
cn
• ~a
73

•o
C
CO

«x
/ — \
x;
\*x

la
0>
4-1
tO
3
73
C
3
O
la
00

O
i— '
x;
»j
ex
4)
73

/— X
c_y
S«X

0)
4-1
tO
la

c
o
•fH
4-1
CO
la
ai
c
0)
oo

CD
4-)
CO
j:
CJ
CO
01
_3
0)


































•
^-^
iv:


la
0)
U-i
•H
3
O"
cfl

01
.c
4J

C4H
O
X
4-J
• «H
>
• fH
4-)
CJ
3
•a
C
o
CJ

u
• fH
fH
3
to
V>4
T3
^N
x;

"D
c
CO

X~N
tsx
^^

X
4-1
• fl
cn
o
la
O
a.

la
O>
If,
• f~ t
3
CT
<
14-1










•
a
^^

4-1
C
0)
• H
U
• H
<-»H
"-H
4)
O
U

X
4-1
• tH
>
• H
cn
Vi
0)
a.
cn
• fH
73

•a
c
to

•*
^•N
c*
<


i — i
fH
• fH
UH
73
C
CO
f-H

O
4-)

f_H
f-H
41
3

O
la
U-l

4)
U
C
CO
4-1
cn
•fH
73

«x
,fx
•fH
v^x

4J
C
41
• H
•a
to
la
oo

CJ
• fH
-H
3
to
la
-a
x
_c
00
                                                             C-32

-------
2.   Assumptions/Limitations  -  The  fluidized bed  incinerator
     was  not  chosen  due   to a  paucity  of  available  data.
     Gradual plume rise, stack tip  downwash,  and  building wake
     effects   are appropriate for  describing plume  behavior.
     Maximum  hourly  impact  values  can  be  translated  into
     annual average values.

3.   Data Used and Rationale

     a.   Coefficient to correct for mass and time  units (C) =
          2.78 x 10~7 hr/sec x g/mg

     b.   Sludge feed rate (DS)

            i. Typical = 2660 kg/hr  (dry solids input)

               A  feed  rate  of  2660  kg/hr   DW  represents  an
               average  dewatered  sludge  feed  rate  into  the
               furnace.  This feed  rate would serve a  commun-
               ity of approximately 400,000 people.  This rate
               was incorporated into  the U.S. EPA-ISCLT model
               based on the following input  data:

                    EP = 360 Ib H20/mm BTU
                    Combustion zone  temperature -  1400°F
                    Solids  content - 28%
                    Stack height  - 20 m
                    Exit gas velocity - 20 m/s
                    Exit gas temperature - 356.9°K (183°F)
                    Stack diameter - 0.60 m

           ii. Worst = 10,000 kg/hr  (dry solids input)

               A  feed  rate  of  10,000  kg/hr DW  represents  a
               higher feed  rate  and would  serve  a major  U.S.
               city.   This  rate was incorporated  into the U.S.
               EPA-ISCLT   model  based  on  the following  input
               data:

                    EP = 392 Ib H20/mm BTU
                    Combustion zone  temperature -  1AOO°F
                    Solids  content - 26.6%
                    Stack height - 10  m
                    Exit gas velocity  - 10 m/s
                    Exit gas temperature - 313.8°K (105°F)
                    Stack diameter - 0.80  m

     c.    Sludge concentration of pollutant  (SC)

          Typical     0.11 mg/kg DW
          Worst       0.22 mg/kg DW

          See  Section 3,  p.  3-1.
                        C-33

-------
     d.   Fraction of pollutant emitted through stack (FM)

          Typical    0.05 (unitless)
          Worst      0.20 (unitless)

          These  values  were chosen  as best  approximations  of
          the  fraction  of   pollutant  emitted  through  stacks
          (Farrell, 198A).   No data was available  to validate
          these values; however, U.S.  EPA  is  currently testing
          incinerators for organic emissions.

     e.   Dispersion parameter for estimating  maximum annual
          ground level concentration (DP)

          Typical    3.4 yg/m3
          Worst     16.0
          The  dispersion  parameter  is  derived  from the  U.S.
          EPA-ISCLT short-stack model.

     f.   Background concentration of pollutant in urban
          air (BA) = 0.00005 Ug/m3

          Since lindane was  only infrequently detected  in  air
          samples from 9 U.S.  cities  (Stanley  et  al.,  1971),  a
          value of  one-half  the detection limit  of  0.1  ng/m3,
          or 0.00005 yg/m3,  will be used to represent  a typi-
          cal urban background  concentration.   (See  Section 4,
          p. 4-3.)

4.   Index 1 Values

                                              Sludge  Feed
     Fraction of                            Rate  (kg/hr  DW)a
     Pollutant Emitted     Sludge
     Through Stack     Concentration      0      2660   10,000
Typical
Typical
Worst
1.0
1.0
1.3
1.6
5.9
11
     Worst               Typical        1.0     2.1     20
                         Worst          1.0     3.2     40

     a The typical (3.4 pg/m3) and worst (16.0 yg/m3)   disper-
       sion parameters  will  always  correspond,  respectively,
       to the typical  (2660  kg/hr DW) and worst  (10,000  kg/hr
       DW) sludge feed rates.

5.   Value  Interpretation  -  Value   equals   factor  by  which
     expected  air  concentration exceeds background  levels  due
     to incinerator emissions.
                        C-34

-------
     6.   Preliminary  Conclusion -  The  incineration of  municipal
          sewage sludge at typical  sludge  feed  rates may moderately
          increase  lindane  concentrations  in  air.    At high  feed
          rates,  the  resulting  concentration  may be substantially
          higher than typical urban levels.

B.   Index  of  Human  Cancer  Risk  Resulting  from  Inhalation  of
     Incinerator Emissions (Index 2)

     1.   Explanation - Shows the increase  in human  intake  expected
          to result from  the  incineration of sludge.   Ground  level
          concentrations  for  carcinogens  typically   were  developed
          based upon assessments published  by the  U.S.  EPA  Carcino-
          gen Assessment Group  (GAG).   These  ambient concentrations
          reflect  a dose  level  which,  for  a  lifetime  exposure,
          increases the risk of cancer by 10"^.

     2.   Assumptions/Limitations  -   The   exposed   population   is
          assumed to reside within  the impacted area for 24  hours/
          day.   A respiratory volume  of  20  m-Vday  is  assumed  over a
          70-year lifetime.

     3.   Data Used and Rationale

          a.   Index of air  concentration increment resulting  from
               incinerator emissions (Index 1)

               See Section 3,  p. 3-28.

          b.   Background  concentration  of pollutant  in urban  air
               (BA) =  0.00005  Mg/m3

               See Section 3,  p. 3-28.

          c.   Cancer  potency = 1.33 (mg/kg/day)~^

               This potency  estimate has been derived from  that  for
               ingestion,  assuming  100%  absorption for  both  inges-
               tion and inhalation  routes (see Section 3, p. 3-12).

          d.   Exposure criterion (EC) = 0.00263 yg/nr*

               A lifetime exposure  level  which would  result  in  a
               10~" cancer risk was  selected as  ground level  con-
               centration  against  which  incinerator  emissions  are
               compared.   The  risk  estimates developed  by  GAG  are
               defined  as  the lifetime incremental cancer risk  in  a
               hypothetical     population   exposed     continuously
               throughout  their  lifetime to  the  stated concentra-
               tion  of  the   carcinogenic  agent.    The   exposure
               criterion is calculated using the following formula:
                             C-35

-------
                              1Q~6 x 103 UK/mg x  70  kg
                             -  - - - -
                             Cancer potency x 20 mj/day
         4.    Index 2 Values

                                                       Sludge Feed
              Fraction of                              Rate  (kg/hr DW)a
              Pollutant Emitted    Sludge
              Through Stack     Concentration      0     2660  10,000
Typica 1
Typical
Worst
0.019
0.019
0.024
0.030
0.11
0.20
              Worst                Typical         0.019   0.040   0.39
                                  Worst          0.019   0.061   0.76

              3 The  typical  (3.4 yg/m^) and worst (16.0 pg/m^)   disper-
                sion parameters  will  always  correspond,  respectively,
                to the typical  (2660  kg/hr DW)  and worst  (10,000  kg/hr
                DW)  sludge feed rates.

         5.    Value  Interpretation  - Value  > 1  indicates a  potential
              increase   in cancer  risk of >  10~6  (1  per  1,000,000).
              Comparison with the null  index  value at 0 kg/hr  DW  indi-
              cates  the  degree to  which   any hazard is  due  to  sludge
              incineration,   as   opposed   to   background   urban   air
              concentration.

         6.    Preliminary  Conclusion  -  Inhalation  of  emissions   from
              incineration of  sludge  may  slightly  increase  the  human
              cancer risk due  to  lindane,   above  the  risk  posed  by
              background urban  air concentrations of lindane.

IV. OCEAN DISPOSAL

    For  the  purpose  of  evaluating   pollutant   effects   upon and/or
    subsequent uptake  by marine  life  as   a  result  of sludge  disposal,
    two types  of  mixing were modeled.  The  initial mixing or  dilution
    shortly  after dumping of a single  load of sludge  represents a  high,
    pulse concentration  to  which organisms  may be  exposed  for  short
    time periods  but  which  could be  repeated  frequently; i.e.,  every
    time a  recently dumped  plume  is encountered.   A subsequent  addi-
    tional  degree of  mixing  can  be  expressed   by  a further  dilution.
    This is  defined as   the  average dilution  occurring  when  a  day's
    worth of  sludge is  dispersed  by 24 hours of current movement  and
    represents  the  time-weighted  average  exposure  concentration  for
    organisms in the disposal area.  This  dilution  accounts for 8  to 12
    hours of  the  high  pulse  concentration  encountered by  the  organisms
    during  daylight  disposal operations and  12  to 16 hours of  recovery
    (ambient  water   concentration)  during   the   night  when   disposal
    operations are suspended.
                              C-36

-------
A.   Index of  Seawater Concentration Resulting  from Initial Mixing
     of Sludge (Index 1)

     1.   Explanation - Calculates  increased  concentrations  in Ug/L
          of  pollutant  in  seawater around an  ocean  disposal  site
          assuming initial mixing.

     2.   Assumptions/Limitations  -  Assumes   that  the  background
          seawater concentration  of pollutant  is  unknown or zero.
          The  index  also  assumes  that  disposal  is  by  tanker  and
          that  the  daily  amount  of  sludge  disposed  is  uniformly
          distributed  along  a   path   transversing   the  site  and
          perpendicular  to   the   current  vector.     The   initial
          dilution  volume  is  assumed   to  be  determined  by  path
          length,  depth  to  the  pycnocline   (a  layer  separating
          surface and  deeper water masses),  and  an  initial  plume
          width defined as  the  width of t' e  plume four hours after
          dumping.  The seasonal  disappearance  of  the pycnocline is
          not considered.

     3.   Data Used and Rationale

          a.   Disposal conditions

                          Sludge         Sludge  Mass         Length
                          Disposal        Dumped by a       of Tanker
                          Rate (SS)    Single  Tanker  (ST)   Path (L)

               Typical     825 mt DW/day    1600  mt  WW         8000 m
               Worst      1650 mt DW/day    3400  mt  WW         4000 m
               The typical value for  the  sludge  disposal  rate assumes
               that  7.5  x  10^  mt  WW/year  are  available  for  dumping
               from  a  metropolitan  coastal area.   The conversion  to
               dry weight  assumes  4  percent  solids  by  weight.   The
               worst-case  value  is   an  arbitrary  doubling  of  the
               typical value to allow for potential future increase.

               The assumed  disposal  practice  to be  followed  at the
               model   site  representative  of the  typical  case  is  a
               modification of that proposed for  sludge  disposal at
               the formally designated  12-mile site  in  the New York
               Bight  Apex  (City  of New York,  1983).   Sludge  barges
               with  capacities  of  3400 mt  WW  would be required to
               discharge a  load  in no less than  53  minutes  travel-
               ing at a  minimum  speed of 5 nautical miles  (9260 m)
               per hour.  Under  these conditions,  the  barge  would
               enter  the site, discharge  the sludge  over  8180  m and
               exit  the  site.   Sludge  barges  with capacities  of
               1600 mt WW would  be required to discharge  a  load in
               no less than 32 minutes  traveling  at  a minimum speed
               of  8   nautical  miles  (14,816  m)  per hour.    Under
               these   conditions,  the  barge would  enter   the  site,
                            C-37

-------
     discharge the  sludge  over 7902 m and  exit  the site.
     The mean path  length  for  the  large  and small tankers
     is 8041 m  or approximately 8000  m.    Path  length is
     assumed  to   lie  perpendicular  to  the direction  of
     prevailing  current  flow.  For  the   typical  disposal
     rate (SS) of  825  mt DW/day,  it is  assumed  that this
     would  be  accomplished by  a  mixture of  four 3400 mt
     WW and four  1600 mt WW  capacity barges.   The overall
     daily  disposal operation  would  last  from  8  to  12
     hours.    For  the worst-case  disposal  rate  (SS)  of
     1650 mt DW/day,  eight 3400 mt  WW and eight  1600 mt
     WW capacity  barges  would  be  utilized.   The overall
     daily  disposal operation  would  last  from  8  to  12
     hours.     For  both  disposal  rate   scenarios,  there
     would be a 12  to  16 hour  period at  night  in which no
     sludge  would  be dumped.   It  is  assumed that  under
     the  above   described  disposal  operation,   sludge
     dumping would occur every day of the year.

     The  assumed  disposal  practice  at  the  model  site
     representative  of  the  worst  case  is  as stated  for
     the typical site, except  that  barges would  dump half
     their  load   along  a  track,  then   turn  around  and
     dispose of the balance  along the  same  track, in order
     to prevent a  barge  from dumping outside  of  the site.
     This  practice  would   effectively   halve  the  path
     length  compared to the typical  site.

b.   Sludge  concentration of pollutant (SC)

     Typical    0.11 mg/kg DW
     Worst      0.22 mg/kg DW

     See Section 3, p. 3-1.

c.   Disposal site characteristics

                                     Average
                                     current
                  Depth to           velocity
              pycnocline (D)       at  site  (V)
     Typical      20 m             9500 m/day
     Worst         5 m             4320 m/day

     Typical site  values  are  representative   of  a  large,
     deep-water  site  with  an area  of  about  1500  km^
     located beyond the  continental  shelf in  the New York
     Bight.    The pycnocline value  of  20 m chosen  is  the
     average  of  the  10 to  30 m  pycnocline   depth  range
     occurring  in  the  summer   and  fall;  the  winter  and
     spring  disappearance  of the pycnocline is not consi-
     dered  and  so  represents  a conservative  approach  in
     evaluating annual or  long-term impact.   The current
                    C-38

-------
          velocity  of  11 cm/sec  (9500 m/day) chosen  is based
          on  the  average current  velocity  in this  area (COM,
          1984b).

          Worst-case values are  representative  of a near-shore
          New York  Bight site with an area  of about  20 km^.
          The pycnocline value  of 5 m chosen  is  the  minimum
          value of  the  5 to  23 m  depth  range  of  the  surface
          mixed  layer  and  is  therefore  a  worst-case  value.
          Current  velocities   in  this area  vary  from  0  to
          30 cm/sec.   A value  of  5 cm/sec  (4320 m/day)  is
          arbitrarily  chosen  to  represent  a  worst-case  value
          (COM,  1984c).

4.   Factors Considered in Initial Mixing

     When a  load  of sludge  is dumped  from a  moving tanker,  an
     immediate  mixing  occurs  in  the  turbulent  wake  of  the
     vessel, followed  by more gradual spreading  of  the plume.
     The  entire plume,  which initially  constitutes a  narrow
     band the length of  the tanker path,  moves  more-or-less  as
     a  unit with  the  prevailing  surface current  and,  under
     calm conditions,  is  not  further dispersed by  the  current
     itself.  However, the current  acts to  separate successive
     tanker  loads,  moving each  out  of the immediate  disposal
     path before the next load is dumped.

     Immediate   mixing   volume    after   barge   disposal   is
     approximately  equal  to   the  length  of  the  dumping  track
     with a cross-sectional  area  about  four times that  defined
     by  the  draft  and width   of   the  discharging   vessel
     (Csanady,  1981, as  cited in  NOAA,  1983).    The  resulting
     plume  is  initially  10  m deep  by 40  m wide  (O'Connor  and
     Park,  1982,   as  cited   in  NOAA,  1983).     Subsequent
     spreading  of plume  band  width  occurs  at an average  rate
     of approximately  1  cm/sec (Csanady et al., 1979,  as  cited
     in NOAA, 1983).   Vertical  mixing is  limited by  the  depth
     of the pycnocline or ocean  floor,  whichever  is shallower.
     Four hours after  disposal,  therefore, average  plume  width
     (W) may be  computed  as  follows:

     W = 40 m + 1 cm/sec x 4  hours  x  3600 sec/hour  x  0.01 m/cm
     = 184 m = approximately 200  m

     Thus  the   volume  of  initial  mixing is  defined  by  the
     tanker path,  a 200 m width,  and  a  depth  appropriate  to
     the site.  For  the  typical  (deep water)  site,  this  depth
     is chosen as the  pycnocline value of 20 m.   For  the  worst
     (shallow water)  site,  a  value of 10 m  was   chosen.    At
     times the  pycnocline may be  as shallow  as  5 m,  but  since
     the barge  wake causes  initial  mixing  to  at least  10  m,
     the greater value  was used.
                         C-39

-------
     5.   Index 1 Values (jig/L)

               Disposal                         Sludge Disposal
               Conditions and                   Rate (mt DW/day)
               Site Charac-     Sludge
               teristics    Concentration      0      825     1650

               Typical        Typical         0.0  0.00022  0.00022
                              Worst           0.0  0.00044  0.00044

               Worst          Typical         0.0  0.0019   0.0019
                              Worst           0.0  0.0037   0.0037

     6.   Value Interpretation - Value  equals  the  expected increase
          in  lindane  concentration  in  seawater  around a  disposal
          site as a result of sludge disposal after initial mixing.

     7.   Preliminary Conclusion - Only  slight  increases  of lindane
          occur  at  the  disposal  site  after  sludge  dumping  and
          initial mixing.

B.   Index of Seawater  Concentration  Representing  a 24-Hour Dumping
     Cycle (Index 2)

     1.   Explanation  - Calculates  increased  effective  concentra-
          tions  in  Ug/L  of  pollutant in  seawater around  an  ocean
          disposal  site  utilizing  a  time  weighted  average  (TWA)
          concentration.  The TWA  concentration  is  that which  would
          be experienced  by  an  organism remaining  stationary  (with
          respect to the  ocean floor) or moving  randomly within the
          disposal vicinity.  The  dilution volume  is  determined  by
          the tanker  path length  and depth to  pycnocline or,  for
          the shallow  water  site,  the 10 m  effective  mixing  depth,
          as before,  but  the effective  width  is now  determined  by
          current movement perpendicular to  the  tanker  path over  24
          hours.

     2.   Assumptions/Limitations - Incorporates all  of the assump-
          tions  used  to  calculate Index  1.   In  addition,   it  is
          assumed  that   organisms  would   experience   high-pulsed
          sludge  concentrations for  8 to 12 hours per  day and then
          experience recovery (no  exposure to  sludge)  for  12  to  16
          hours  per  day.   This  situation can  be  expressed by the
          use of  a TWA concentration of sludge  constituent.

     3.   Data Used and Rationale

          See Section 3, pp.  3-31 to 3-33.

     4.   Factors  Considered in  Determining Subsequent  Additional
          Degree  of Mixing (Determination of TWA Concentrations)

          See Section 3, p. 3-34.
                              C-40

-------
     5.   Index 2 Values (pg/L)

               Disposal                         Sludge Disposal
               Conditions and                   Rate (mt DW/day)
               Site Charac-    Sludge
               teristics    Concentration      0      825     1650

               Typical        Typical         0.0  0.000059  0.00012
                              Worst           0.0  0.00012   0.00024

               Worst          Typical         0.0  0.00052   0.0010
                              Worst           0.0  0.0010    0.0021

    •6.   Value   Interpretation   -  Value   equals   the   effective
          increase in lindane concentration expressed  as  a TWA con-
          centration in seawater around  a  disposal  site experienced
          by an organism over a 24-hour period.

     7.   Preliminary Conclusion - Only  slight  increases  in lindane
          concentrations are apparent after 24-hour dumping cycle.

C.   Index of Toxicity to Aquatic Life (Index 3)

     1.   Explanation - Compares the effective increased concentra-
          tion of  pollutant  in  seawater around  the  disposal  site
          resulting  from  the  initial  mixing  of  sludge   (Index  1)
          with the  marine  ambient  water quality  criterion of  the
          pollutant,  or with  another  value   judged   protective  of
          marine   aquatic  life.    For  lindane,  this  value is  the
          criterion that will protect  marine  aquatic  organisms from
          both acute and chronic  toxic  effects.

          Wherever a  short-term,  "pulse" exposure  may occur  as  it
          would from  initial  mixing,  it is usually  evaluated  using
          the  "maximum"  criteria  values  of  EPA's  ambient  water
          quality criteria methodology.  However,  under this scena-
          rio, because  the  pulse is  repeated  several  times daily  on
          a long-term basis,  potentially resulting in  an  accumula-
          tion of  injury,  it seems  more  appropriate  to use values
          designed  to  be   protective   against   chronic   toxicity.
          Therefore, to evaluate  the potential for adverse effects
          on marine  life  resulting  from  initial mixing  concentra-
          tions,  as quantified by  Index 1, the  chronically derived
          criteria values  are used.

     2.   Assumptions/Limitations -  In  addition to the assumptions
          stated   for  Indices  1  and 2,  assumes  that all  of  the
          released pollutant  is  available  in the  water  column  to
          move through predicted  pathways (i.e.,  sludge to seawater
          to aquatic organism to man).   The possibility of effects
          arising from  accumulation  in  the  sediments  is  neglected
          since the U.S.  EPA presently  lacks  a  satisfactory method
          for deriving sediment criteria.
                            041

-------
3.   Data Used and Rationale

     a.   Concentration  of  pollutant  in  seawater  around  a
          disposal site (Index 1)

          See Section 3, p. 3-34.

     b.   Ambient water quality criterion (AWQC) = 0.16 Ug/L

          Water  quality  criteria  for  the  toxic  pollutants
          listed  under  Section  307(a)(l)  of  the  Clean  Water
          Act  of  1977  were developed  by  the  U.S.  EPA  under
          Section 304(a)(l) of  the Act.   These criteria  were
          derived by utilization  of data reflecting  the resul-
          tant environmental  impacts  and human  health  effects
          of these pollutants if  present in  any  body of water.
          The criteria values presented  in  this  assessment are
          excerpted  from   the  ambient  water  quality  criteria
          document for hexachlorocyclohexane.

          The 0.16 Ug/L  value chosen as the  criterion  to  pro-
          tect saltwater  organisms  is based  on  acute  toxicity
          data  for   marine  fish  and  invertebrate   species
          exposed to lindane.  No  data  for  the  chronic  effects
          of lindane  on  marine  organisms are presently avail-
          able (U.S.  EPA,  1980).   (See Section 4, p. 4-9.)

4.   Index 3 Values

          Disposal                         Sludge Disposal
          Conditions  and                   Rate  (mt DW/day)
          Site Charac-    Sludge
          teristics    Concentration      0      825      1650
Typical
Typical
Worst
0.0
0.0
0.0014
0.0028
0.0014
0.0028
          Worst          Typical         0.0   0.012    0.012
                         Worst           0.0   0.023    0.023

5.   Value Interpretation  -  Value equals  the factor  by  which
     the  expected  seawater concentration  increase  in  lindane
     exceeds the protective value.   A value  >1  indicates that
     acute or chronic toxic conditions may  exist  for organisms
     at the site.

6.   Preliminary Conclusion  - Only  slight  to moderate  incre-
     mental  increases  in  hazard  to  aquatic  life were  deter-
     mined via this assessment.   No  toxic  conditions occur via
     any of the scenarios evaluated.
                          C-42

-------
D.   Index of Human  Cancer Risk Resulting  from Seafood Consumption
     (Index 4)

     1.   Explanation  -  Estimates  the  expected  increase  in  human
          pollutant  intake  associated  with   the   consumption  of
          seafood,  a fraction of which  originates  from the disposal
          site vicinity, and  compares the  total  expected pollutant
          intake with  the  cancer  risk-specific intake  (RSI)  of the
          pollutant.

     2.   Assumptions/Limitations -  In  addition to  the assumptions
          listed for   Indices  1 and 2,  assumes  that  the  seafood
          tissue concentration  increase can  be estimated  from the
          increased  water   concentration   by   a   bioconcentration
          factor.    It  also assumes  that,   over  the  long  term,  the
          seafood   catch  from  the  disposal  site  vicinity will  be
          diluted   to  some  extent by the  catch  from uncontaminated
          areas.

     3.   Data Used and Rationale

          a.   Concentration  of  pollutant  in  seawater  around  a
               disposal site (Index  2)

               See  Section  3,  p. 3-35.

               Since  bioconcentration  is  a  dynamic  and  reversible
               process,  it  is  expected   that  uptake  of  sludge
               pollutants by marine  organisms  at the disposal  site
               will reflect  TWA  concentrations,  as  quantified  by
               Index  2, rather than  pulse  concentrations.

          b.   Dietary consumption of seafood (QP)

               Typical      14.3  g WW/day
               Worst        41.7  g WW/day

               Typical  and  worst-case  values are  the  mean and  the
               95th  percentile,  respectively,   for   all   seafood
               consumption  in the United  States (Stanford  Research
               Institute  (SRI)  International,  1980).

          c.   Fraction  of  consumed  seafood originating  from  the
               disposal site (FS)

               For  a  typical  harvesting  scenario,   it  was  assumed
               that the total catch  over a  wide region is  mixed  by
               harvesting,  marketing and consumption practices,  and
               that exposure  is  thereby  diluted.    Coastal areas
              have been  divided by the  National  Marine  Fishery
               Service  (NMFS)  into  reporting areas for  reporting  on
              data on seafood  landings.   Therefore  it was  conven-
               ient to express  the  total  area  affected  by  sludge
              disposal as  a  fraction  of  an NMFS  reporting area.


                                  C-43

-------
The area  used  to represent the  disposal  impact area
should  be  an approximation of  the total  ocean area
over  which  the  average  concentration  defined  by
Index 2  is  roughly  applicable.   The  average  rate of
plume  spreading  of  1 cm/sec  referred  to  earlier
amounts to  approximately  0.9  km/day.   Therefore, the
combined  plume  of  all  sludge  dumped  during  one
working day will  gradually spread, both  parallel to
and perpendicular  to current direction,  as  it pro-
ceeds  down-current.    Since  the  concentration  has
been  averaged  over  the direction  of  current  flow,
spreading in this  dimension will not  further reduce
average concentration;  only spreading  in  the  perpen-
dicular dimension will  reduce the average.   If sta-
ble conditions are  assumed over  a  period  of days, at
least 9 days would  be  required  to  reduce  the  average
concentration by one-half.  At  that  time,  the origi-
nal plume length of approximately  8  km (8000  m) will
have   doubled    to   approximately    16 km   due   to
spreading.

It  is  probably  unnecessary  to  follow  the  plume
further  since   storms,  which would   result   in  much
more  rapid   dispersion  of  pollutants   to  background
concentrations   are   expected  on  at   least  a  10-day
frequency   (NOAA,   1983).     Therefore,    the   area
impacted  by sludge  disposal  (AI,  in  km2)  at  each
disposal  site  will  be  considered to  be  defined by
the  tanker   path  length  (L)  times  the distance  of
current movement (V) during 10  days,  and  is computed
as follows:

     AI = 10 x L x  V x  10~6 km2/m2          (1)

To be consistent with  a conservative  approach,  plume
dilution  due   to   spreading  in  the  perpendicular
direction  to  current   flow   is  disregarded.    More
likely, organisms  exposed to the  plume in the area
defined by  equation  1 would experience a  TWA  concen-
tration  lower   than the  concentration expressed  by
Index 2.

Next,  the  value  of  AI  must   be  expressed  as  a
fraction of  an  NMFS  reporting area.   In the New York
Bight,  which includes  NMFS  areas  612-616 and  621-
623,   deep-water   area   623   has    an   area   of
approximately 7200  km2  and  constitutes approximately
0.02 percent of  the total  seafood  landings  for the
Bight (CDM,  1984b).  Near-shore  area  612  has  an area
of    approximately    4300   km2   and   constitutes
approximately   24  percent   of   the    total   seafood
landings  (CDM,  1984c).   Therefore  the fraction  of
all  seafood  landings   (FSt)  from  the  Bight  which
could  originate  from  the  area   of  impact  of  either

                    C-44

-------
      the typical  (deep-water)  or worst  (near-shore)  site
      can  be   calculated   for  this   typical   harvesting
      scenario as follows:

      For the typical (deep water) sites
      cc    AI x 0.02% =                                (2)
      bbt - 7200 km^

[10 x 8000 m x  9500  m  x  10~6  km2/m2]  x 0.0002   ,  ,    ,n_c
h                          „ — - - -- J - = 2.1  x  10 J
                   7200 km2

      For the worst (near shore) site:
      FSt -          -                                  (3)
            4300 km2

  [10 x 4000 m  x 4320 m  x  1Q~6  km2/m2]  x  0.24  _          3
                         /^                        7 • o  x i u
                  4300 km2

      To construct  a  worst-case harvesting  scenario,  it
      was assumed  that  the  total  seafood consumption  for
      an  individual could  originate  from  an  area  more
      limited   than  the  entire  New  York  Bight.     For
      example,  a particular fisherman providing  the  entire
      seafood   diet  for  himself  or  others   could  fish
      habitually within a single NMFS reporting  area.   Or,
      an  individual   could   have  a   preference    for   a
      particular species which  is taken  only  over  a  more
      limited  area,  here assumed arbitrarily  to equal  an
      NMFS   reporting  area.     The   fraction   of  consumed
      seafood  (FSW)  that could  originate  from  the area  of
      impact under  this  worst-case  scenario is  calculated
      as follows:

      For the  typical (deep water)  site:

      FSW = - AI  .  = 0.11                        (4)
            7200 km2

      For the  worst  (near shore)  site:
               AT
      Fs  = - £i —  = 0.040                        (5)
            4300 km2

 d.    Bioconcentration    factor   of   pollutant   (BCF)   =
      130 L/kg

      The value  chosen  is   the  weighted  average  BCF  of
      technical  grade  BHC  (39%   lindane)  for   the  edible
      portion   of   all   freshwater  and  estuarine  aquatic
      organisms   consumed  by  U.S.  citizens   (U.S.   EPA,
      1980).      No   lindane-specif ic  BCF   is  presently
      available.   The  weighted  average BCF  is  derived  as

                         C-45

-------
          part of the  water  quality criteria developed  by the
          U.S. EPA to  protect  human health  from  the  potential
          carcinogenic  effects of lindane  induced by  ingestion
          of   contaminated   water   and   aquatic   organisms.
          Although no  measured steady-state  BCF  is  available
          for lindane  or  any of its  isomers,  the BCF  of  lin-
          dane for aquatic organisms containing  about  7.6  per-
          cent lipids  can be estimated from  the  octanol-water
          partition coefficient.  The  weighted average  BCF  is
          derived by  application of  an  adjustment  factor  to
          correct for the 3  percent lipids  content of  consumed
          fish and shellfish (U.S.  EPA,  1980).    It should  be
          noted  that lipids  of marine  species  differ  in  both
          structure and quantity from those  of  freshwater  spe-
          cies.   Although a  BCF value calculated  entirely  from
          marine  data   would  be  more   appropriate   for  this
          assessment, no such data are  presently available.

     e.   Average daily human dietary intake  of  pollutant  (DI)
          = 8.21 yg/day

          See Section 3, p.  3-11.

     f.   Cancer risk-specific intake (RSI) = 0.053 Ug/day

          See Section 3, p.  3-12.

4.   Index 4 Values

     Disposal                                  Sludge  Disposal
     Conditions and                            Rate (mt  DW/day)
     Site Charac-      Sludge     Seafood
     teristics     Concentrationa  Intake3'0    0    825   1650

     Typical       Typical        Typical       150   150    150
                   Worst         Worst          150   150    150

     Worst         Typical        Typical       150   150    150
                   Worst         Worst          150   150    150

     a All  possible  combinations   of   these  values   are   not
       presented.   Additional combinations  may  be  calculated
       using the formulae in the Appendix.

     k Refers to  both  the  dietary  consumption of  seafood  (QF)
       and  the  fraction of  consumed  seafood originating  from
       the disposal site (FS).  "Typical"  indicates the  use  of
       the  typical-case  values  for  both  of  these  parameters;
       "worst" indicates the use  of the worst-case values  for
       both.
                           C-46

-------
5.   Value Interpretation  -  Value equals  factor by  which  the
     expected intake exceeds  the  RSI.   A value  >1  indicates a
     possible human  health threat.   Comparison with  the  null
     index value at 0 mt/day  indicates the  degree  to which  any
     hazard is due to sludge  disposal, as  opposed  to preexist-
     ing dietary sources.

6.   Preliminary Conclusion  -  No increase  of  risk to  human
     health from consumption  of  seafood  is expected  to  occur
     due to the ocean disposal of  sludge.
                        C-47

-------
                              SECTION 4

   PRELIMINARY DATA PROFILE FOR LINDANE IN MUNICIPAL SEWAGE SLUDGE
I. OCCURRENCE

   Hexachlorocyclohexane is a broad spectrum
   insecticide of the group of cyclic chlorinated
   hydrocarbons called organochlorine insecticides.
   Lindane is the common name approved by the
   International Standards Organization for the
   y-isomers of 1,2,3,4,5,6-hexachlorocyclohexane.
   BHC is the common name for the mixed configura-
   tional isomers of 1,2,3,4,5,6-hexachlorocyclo-
   hexane, although the terms BHC and benzene
   hexachloride are misnomers for this aliphatic
   compound and should not be confused with aromatic
   compounds of similar structure, such as the
   aromatic compound hexachlorobenzene.

   A.  Sludge

       1.  Frequency of Detection

           In samples from 40 waste treatment
           plants, lindane occurred in influent
           and effluent but not in sludges (438
           samples)

       2.  Concentration

           Lindane not found in Denver-metro
           sludge
           Alpha-BHC occurred at 20 ng/g (WW) in
           waste-activated sludge

           <500 Vig/L in Chicago sludge
           Summary of lindane in sludge of 74
           cities in Missouri (pg/g DW)
                                 U.S. EPA, 1980
                                 (p. A-l, A-2)
           Min.
Max.
Mean
Median
           0.05      0.22     0.11       0.11

   B.  Soil - Unpolluted

       1.  Frequency of Detection

           0.9% positive detection  in Florida
           soils, 1969
                                 U.S.  EPA,  1982
                                 (p.  36,  39,  41)
                                 Baxter et al.,
                                 1983a (p. 315)
                                 Jones  and Lee,
                                 1977  (p.  52)

                                 Clevenger
                                 et  al.,  1983
                                 (p.  1471)
                                 Mattraw,  1975
                                 (p.  109)
                                 C-48

-------
        Not detected in cropland soil from
        37 states, 1973
        1 detection out of 1,483 samples for
        benzene hexachloride

    2.  Concentration

        Concentration of gamma-BHC (lindane)
        in various soils (data 1971 or earlier)
                        Mean     Maximum
                        (Mg/g)
 Carey et  al.,
 1979  (p.  212)
Orchard
Horticultural
Agricultural
Pasture
Noncropland
Desert
0.05
0.001
0.26
0.04
-
0.20
0.06
0.05
0.60
1.40
-
0.30
        Trace to 0.26 Ug/g lindane in U.S. soils


        Lindane was not detected in soil
        samples from Everglades National Park
        and adjacent areas

C.  Water - Unpolluted

    1.  Frequency of Detection

        Data not immediately available.

    2.  Concentration

        a.  Freshwater

            Trace to 0.7 pg/L lindane in U.S.
            waters (data 1965-1971)

            Detectable but not quantifiable
            amounts of lindane were found in
            the Great Lakes.

            Trace to 0.28 |Jg/L gamma-BHC in  U.S.
            water systems (1965-67  data)

        b.  Seawater

            Data not available for  seawater
            concentrations
Edwards,  1973
(p.  417)
Matsumura,  1972a
(p. 47)

Requejo et  al.,
1979,  (p. 934)
Edwards, 1973
(p. 441)

Glooschenko
et al., 1976
(p. 63)

Matsumura
1972a (p. 42)
                              C-49

-------
        c.  Drinking Water

            0.01 yg/L highest level observed
            in finished water

            4.0 Mg/L criteria for domestic
            water supply (health)

            56 Ug/L permissible criteria
            for lindane in public water
            supplies

            Finished water in Streator, IL
            found to contain 4 Mg/L of lindane
D.  Air
    1.  Frequency of Detection

        Not detected in air of 6 agriculutral,
        1 city, and 1 suburban sites

        Lindane occurrence in 9 U.S. cities
        (detection limit = 0.1 ng/m3):
        4 of 123 samples, Baltimore, MD
        0 of 57 samples, Buffalo, NY
        0 of 90 samples, Dothan, AL
        0 of 120 samples, Fresno, CA
        1 of 94 samples, Iowa City, IA
        0 of 99 samples, Orlando, FL
        0 of 94 samples, Riverside, CA
        24 of 100 samples, Salt Lake City, UT
        0 of 98 samples, Stoneville, MS

    2.  Concentration
NAS, 1977
(p. 794)

U.S. EPA, 1976
(p. 157)

Edwards, 1973
(p. 449)
U.S. EPA, 1980
(p. C-5)
Edwards, 1971
(p. 18)

Stanley et al.,
1971 (p. 435)
        a.  Urban
            Maximum pesticide levels in 3
            U.S. cities:

            2.6 ng/m3, Baltimore
            0.1 ng/m3, Iowa City
            7.0 ng/m3, Salt Lake City

            Rural

            alpha-BHC 0.25 ng/m3 mean,
            0.075 to 0.57 ng/m3 at Enewetak
            Atoll
            gamma-BHC 0.015 ng/m3 mean,
            0.006 to 0.021 ng/m3 range
            at Enewetak Atoll
Stanley et al. ,
1971 (p. 435)
Atlas and Giam,
1980 (p.163)
                               C-50

-------
E.  Pood

    1.  Total Average Intake

        10 ug/kg body weight/day acceptable        FDA, 1979
        FAO/WHO intake

        Total relative daily intake ug/kg          FDA, 1979
        body weight/day

          FY75     FY76      FY77     FY78
        0.0031   0.0026   0.0038   0.0024


    2.  Frequency of Detection and Concentration

        Frequency and range of lindane in          FDA, 1979
        food groups (number of occurrence
        out of 20 composites)

        Food Group                Occurrence

        Dairy                         1
        Meat/fish                     3
        Grain & cereals               1
        Potatoes
        Leafy vegetables
        Legumes
        Root vegetables
        Garden fruit                  5
        Fruit
        Oils/fats
        Sugars
        Range                T*-0.005 Ug/g

        * T = Trace

        Lindane residues in milk and milk          Wedberg et al.,
        products (1,169 samples) in Illinois       1978 (p. 16A)
        1971-1976:

        Number of positive:  857
        % positive:  73
        Mean:  0.01 Ug/g
        Range:  0.00 to <0.20
        Out of 360 composite market  basket          Johnson and
        samples (1972-3),  39 contained             Manske, 1976
        lindane.   Thirteen contained trace          (p.  160-166)
        levels and 26 contained levels ranging
        from 0.0003 to 0.006 Ug/g.  Occurrences
        by food class were as follows:
                             C-51

-------
                No. Positive    Range
                   Samples     (jJg/g)
Dairy products   7 out of 30  T-0.0006

Meat, fish, &
  poultry       16 out of 30  T-0.003

Garden fruits    1 out of 30    0.006
Sugars and
  adjuncts

Potatoes
11 out of 30  T-0.002

  1 out of 30    0.001
Lindane residues (yg/g) in four market
basket samples:
Ice cream
Cheese
Roast beef
Ground beef
Fish
Lunch meat
Frankfurters
Ham
Lamb
      0.001
      0.001
      0.004
      0.004
      0.027
    T-0.002
      0.003
          T
          T
                           Johnson and
                           Manske, 1976
                           (p.  168-9)
Out of 420 composite market basket
samples (1971-2), 17 contained lindane.
Eleven contained trace levels and 6
contained levels ranging from 0.001 to
0.005 |Ug/g.  Occurrences by food class
were as follows:
                           Manske and
                           Johnson,  1975
                No. Positive
                   Samples
                Range
Meat, fish, &
poultry
Grain & cereal
Root vegetables
Garden fruits
Sugars &
adjuncts

5 out of 35
3 out of 35
1 out of 35
1 out of 35

6 out of 35

T-0.001
T-0.002
T
T

T-0.007
                        C-52

-------
II. HUMAN EFFECTS

    A.   Ingest ion

        1.  Carcinogenicity

            a.  Qualitative Assessment

                No epidemiological studies of cancer
                in humans associated with exposure
                to lindane have been reported.
                However, liver tumors have been
                observed in mice given oral doses
                of 52 mg/kg/day.  In order to
                report the most conservative case,
                lindane has been assumed to be a
                possible carcinogen to humans.

            b.  Potency

                Cancer potency = 1.33 (mg/kg/day)"1

                Derived from mice research in which
                oral doses of lindane resulted in
                liver tumors.

        2.  Chronic  Toxicity

            The recommended long-term ADI  is equal
            to 0.023 mg/day.   This  value is based on
            a NOAEL of 4 ppm dietary lindane given
            to rats for 84 consecutive days.

        3.  Absorption Factor

                 absorption in rats
        4.   Existing Regulations

            Water  quality  criteria  for human  health
            have been developed.
U.S. EPA,  1984a
(p.  16)
U.S. EPA,  1980
(p. C-62)
U.S. EPA, 1980
(p. C-62)
U.S. EPA, 1985
(p. 1-4)
U.S. EPA, 1984a
(p. 3)
U.S. EPA, 1980
                                   053

-------
     B.   Inhalation

         1.   Carcioogenicity

             a.   Qualitative Assessment

                 Based  on  mice  studies  where car-
                 cinogenic effects  were observed,
                 lindane has been assumed  to be
                 a possible human carcinogen so
                 as  to  project  a  conservative case.

             b.   Potency

                 Cancer potency = 1.33 (mg/kg/day)~l
                 This potency estimate  has  been
                 derived from that  for  ingestion,
                 assuming  100%  absorption  for both
                 ingestion and  inhalation  routes.

             c.   Effects

                 Data not  immediately available.

         2.   Chronic Toxicity

             Data not evaluated since assessment
             based on carcinogenicity.

         3.   Absorption Factor

             Pertinent  data regarding absorption  of
             lindane following  inhalation  exposure
             could not  be  located in  the available
             literature.

         4.   Existing Regulations

             American Conference  of Governmental  and
             Industrial Hygienists  have set  a time
             weighted average - threshold  limit value
             at  0.5  mg/nH, and  a  short-term  exposure
             limit of  1.5  mg/nrr.

III. PLANT EFFECTS

     A.   Phytotoxicity

         See Table 4-1.
From data pre-
sented in U.S.
EPA, 1980
(p. C-62)
Values derived
from data pre-
sented in U.S.
EPA, 1980
(p. C-62)
U.S. EPA, 1984a
(p. 3)
U.S. EPA, 1984a
(p. 23)
                                    C-54

-------
    B.  Uptake

        0.6 U8/g lindane in maize, 3 crop periods      Finlayson and
        following 2.8 kg/ha application to soil        MacCarthy, 1973
                                                       (p. 63)

IV. DOMESTIC ANIMAL AND WILDLIFE EFFECTS

    A.  Toxicity

        See Table 4-2.

    B.  Uptake

        See Table 4-3.

        Uptake data for pure lindane were not found in
        the available literature.

        Concentration of lindane in fatty tissue of    Hansen et al.,
        cows overwintered two seasons on sludge-       1981  (p.  1015)
        amended plots:

                                       Fat Concentration
            Sludge Application Rate        (Ug/g WW)
                   Control                      3  +  2
                   126  t/ha                    2  +  1
                   252 t/ha                      <1
                   504 t/ha                      <1


        0.010  vig/g (WW) alpha-BHC in fat  of cattle      Baxter  et  al.,
        feeding on sludge-amended plots with            1983b  (p.  318)
        0.020  ug/g alpha-BHC in sludge
        0.030  Ug/kg alpha-BHC in control  cattle

 V.  AQUATIC LIFE EFFECTS

    A.   Toxicity

        1.   Freshwater

            a.   Acute

                Acute  toxicity  has been observed        U.S. EPA,  1980
                over a  range  of  2  Ug/L to  141  \ig/L      (p. B-2)
                for brown trout  and  goldfish,
                respectively.
                                 C-55

-------
            b.  Chronic

                Freshwater invertebrates displayed     U.S. EPA, 1980
                a range of chronic toxicity of         (p. B-4)
                of 3.3 yg/L to 14.5 yg/L.

                A freshwater vertebrate (fathead       U.S. EPA, 1980
                minnow) had a chronic value of         (p. B-5)
                14.6 yg/L.

        2.  Saltwater

            a.  Acute

                Ambient saltwater quality criteria     U.S. EPA, 1980
                for lindane is 0.16 Mg/L               (p. vi)

                Saltwater invertebrates display a      U.S. EPA, 1980
                range of acute toxicity from           (p. B-3)
                0.17 ug/L to 3,680 Ug/L.

                LC50 value for pinfish and sheephead   U.S. EPA, 1980
                minnows are 30.6  Ug/L and              (p. B-4)
                103.9 Mg/L, respectively.

            b.  Chronic

                Data not immediately available.

    B.  Uptake

        The bioconcentration factor for freshwater     U.S. EPA, 1980
        species ranges from 35 to 486.                 (p. B-22)

        The weighted average bioconcentration factor   U.S. EPA, 1980
        for the edible portion of all freshwater and   (p. C-6, C-7)
        estuarine aquatic organisms consumed by U.S.
        citizens was generated using technical grade
        BHC which contained 39.0% lindane.  The
        resulting value is 130.

VI. SOIL BIOTA EFFECTS

    A.  Toxicity

        See Table 4-4.

    B.  Uptake

        See Table 4-5.
                                C-56

-------
VII. PHYSIOCHEMICAL DATA FOR ESTIMATING PATE AND TRANSPORT

     Chemical name:  gamma-1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, -
     hexachlorocyclohexane
     Vapor pressure of lindane (gamma-BHC) at 20°C
     (mm Hg):  9.4 x 10~6
     lindane described as volatile

     Water solubility of lindane at 20 to 30°C:
     10 mg/L

     Lindane is immobile to slightly mobile in
     soils (Rf = 0.09 to 0.00)

     36-month persistence in soils
     Half-life in soil:   56 days in clay loam,
     378 days in sandy loam

     General persistence of lindane in soils:
     95% disappearance = 6.5 years
     75-100% disappearance = 3 years

     Melting point = 65°C
     Molecular weight = 290.0

     Gamma-BHC (lindane) is the actual insecti-
     cidal  principle of  BHC.  Aside from gamma-BHC,
     perhaps the most important terminal residue
     arising from the use of BHC is beta-BHC.   This
     isomer appears to be the most stable one, among
     others, and is the  factor causing the eventual
     increase of beta-BHC in the environment,  in
     comparison to other sources.

     In a micro agro ecosystem study,  lindane  was
     applied to the soil (65.4 mg) and after  11
     days,  51.2 mg (78.3%) had volatilized and
     8.51 mg (13%) remained on the soil  surface.

     Organic carbon partition coefficient (Koc):
     1,080  mL/g
Edwards,  1973
(p. 433)
Edwards,  1973
(p. 447)

Lawless et al. ,
1975  (p.  57)

Lawless et al.,
1975  (p.  52)

U.S.  EPA, 1984a
(p.l)

Matsumura,
1972a (p. 39)
U.S. EPA, 1980
(p. A-l)

Matsumura,
1972b (p. 527)
Nash, 1983
(p. 214)
Hassett et al.,
1983
                                   C-57

-------
a
z

j

u.
o

>•
f-
X
o
s-
o
H





























CO
C 01
0) D
E GO
.»* ea
01 H

X
Cll
c
o
4J
CO

.,4
r_l
a.
o.





^t

o
en




cu
3
en
en
E-i

^
O
I*
4-1
C
0
o




































en
u
C
cu
01

01
a!





en
u
01

14-1
CtJ








c
o
«o 3
u. Q

c oc
0) ^
u oo
C 3.
o ^
u


a
01 -C
4-1 *-•*
CO 00
os j;


c
o

4-1 *^
01 Q

i-t

0) ^
u oo
C 3.
o -^
o
c
o

4_1 -^
2 a

c oo
cu —
u oo
C 3.
o —
ej


cu
a.

El
,

o
•o
CU
CO —4
U 0.
• - a
E <
CD
J= E
CJ 14
o
b.



cu
3
en
en
•-•
-t^

C

^J
a.





73
C
eo

O
C

u
01
'•M
e*4
01
^
C
ca
U
••<
.^
C
00

m

O
z




as
z








as
z





0
o

1
in
1,
CN









CO
OS
z





"O
c:
to
en

E
to
O


CU
c
to

c

J


^
CJ
CO
J3

en
en
cu
00
c


4-1
en

oo
in
o\
„
4J
4-1
01

01
>
til





c
o

u
ca
M

CO
>

CO
m
ai

SI?"
CN « cu
Id
• 0 01
a. c >



4J
_fr
00
'cu
3

TJ
CU
3
•o
CU


}*(

IN




as
z








a
z





in

CN
~H













f£
Z





•X3
C
et)
eo

E
CO
O


cu
c
co

c

J


^
U '^
CO C
2 CU
^
en
en eu
cu c
00 4_l
c c
73 — CU
CU I- — *
0) VJ ^
en en >

oo
in
o>
_
fO C *•>
(N qj OJ

• 0 OJ
a. c >
X.X JjJ ^J



JC
00
(U
3

"^
QJ
3
•^
QJ
U

}s(

^




ad
z








cc
z







o
in













^
Z





TJ
C
CO
en

E
to
o


cu
c
CO
-a
c

i T


_^
O *^*
CO C
_a n

en
en cu
CU C
00 4J
c c
4J •-. 01
O I- —i
O 4j m
k4 C/4 >

CO
m
0*
^
r~> G. 4-1
CM 10 01
u
• O 01
a. c >
•*--• CxJ CxJ



r^
00
01


13
01
3

01


fsJJ

**





Z








ex!
z







o
o













ae
z





.^
C
CO
ea

E
CO
O


CU
c
CO
-a
c

J


_^.
ej ^~
Q C
-Q CU
-a
en
en 01
cu C
OO 4-*
C C
4-t •— . 01
0 V- — .
O 4-4 tO
i< en >

oo
in
e?>

<-\ C 4J
CN to 01
u
• O 01
a. c >
^^ fTi M










u
cu
14-1
U-l
01

o
z




cc.
z








03
Z





in

CN
^H













ce
z





T3
C
CO
en

g
CO
O


11
c

en
en 01
CU C
00 4-1
C C
4J -H O>
O t- — <
O 4J CO
u en >

t»
in
o>

<-> e w
IN Kl 01

• o cu
s_ , [Jj fj]


4-1
J3
00
0)
3

"9
u
3
•o
a;


M

<-*




a:
2









Z







O














^
z





•o
c
(0
en

g
(0
O


QJ
G

en
n 
c c
.-. cu
a. i* .-<
O i-i Q
JJ C/3 >





f** C
fN «

• o
a. c



w
IT;
OC
0)
3

73
01
3
•a
01
u

)>4

t-l




a:
z








a:
z







o
o













as
z





•o
c
ca
en

E
co
0


01
c
ca
-o
c

_J


J,
CJ
to
_Q

en
en
cu
00
c

o. t.
O 4-1
4-1 en

00 CO
in in
a\ en
^
4j n c 4-1
U CN « CU
14 V4
01 • O 01
> 0. C >
bj *^ Cti CiJ



x:
00
CU
3

^3
«
3

CU


^(

•3-




01
Z








a:
z





m

CN














^
Z





•^
c
to
en

g
to
Q






U
X
en


J,
u ^~
C ea C
01 XI CU

en
cu en cu
C CU C
4J 00 ^
c c d
01 .-CU

to O *-» efl
> 4-1 en >

00
in
C7>

ro C 4J
(N tO 01
1*
• O 01
a. c >



4_>
_r"
00
CU
3

•o

3
•O
01
Ui

}>4V
CO
MO




03
Z








ex!
z







o
in













a
z





-o
c
CO
en

e
a
o






u

OS


^
CJ -*^
eo C
.0 cu
XI
en
en CU
CU C
00 4-1
C C
4-i •-. 01
0 k. — .
O *-t CO
14 en >

CO
in
cr>
^
n c 4J
CN ca ai
u
• o tu
& c :>
s-^ r,i ^j


4J
f"
00
cu
3

•o
cu
3
73
01


}*(

CO




acr
z








ex:
z







o
o













^
z





73
C
CO
en

E
co
O






e_j
X
03


j.
CJ ^--
CO C
J3 CU
r^
en
en cu
01 C
00 4J
c c
4J •-. CU
O U —1
O 4J CO
iw en >






IN 10

• o
a. C
— ' Ctl


4j
e'.
00
"3
3

73
0)
3

CU


^4

^^




CC
Z








ca
z





in

CN














32
Z





73
C
CO
en

E
CO
O






U

CO


J.
CJ
CO
_fl

en
en
01
00
c

O u
O 4J
u en

00
in
ON


01 (N

eu •
> o.





















































































c
cu
j3

CU
C
4_,
C
cu
.-« a.
CO O
> 4-1
                                            C-58

-------










































•^1
0)
3
C

C
0
u
%«f


1-t
1
^

w

03

t-i



















































to
01
u
c
01
1*
01
0)
a:








ai

u
01

14-1
w



c
—i O
(0 .^
4J 4-1 *^
C 01 to 3
tu 3 u O
6 tn 4-1
•i in C oo
V> -H 01 	
01 H 0 00
a c 3.
x o ^-<
u u
c
o
4J a
to o> jz
U 4J 	
.^4 to 00
~* a. 3.
a. — '
a
^*


c
o
.H
«I
— u Q
.~4 4J
o c oo
t/J 01 --•
L) 00
c a
o ^-»
CJ

01 C
3 0
.2 '5s
H i;

,-, C 00
O 01 " —
k> U 00
4J C 3-
C 0 ^
0 CJ
u

01
a.
X


•-i
'o
tn


•o
01

CO — i
u a.
•H a.
E <

€ e
o
Cb





01
3
tn
tn

f— i

4J
C

a.
oo
2

«
•^J 4J
C 4*J
tQ 01
O 01
c >
Cx3 U

j:
00

01
3

T>
01
U
3
TJ
01


M





X
Z









05
Z











O










as
Z





T3
C
<0


X
6
0










u
X
m




u —
to e

J3 01
J3
tn
tn o>
Ol C
I— 1 •*-!
00 u
c c
• « 0)
Iw -J

en >
CO
2

^> 4k
•& T3 4J
en C 4J



J^
00

01
3

•o
01
u
3
•o
Ol


^4
0




ce
2









ce
z











0
0









a:
z





TD
C
to



E
o










CJ
X
CO




o --~
to c

J3 01

tn
tn 01
01 C

00 4J
c c
.« 01
a tw -4
O 4J tO
4J en >


to
^•^ *o
S4? t^

CM
• en
a«c
•~~ z









^j
u
a)
14-1
IM
01

o
z




fv;
Z









03
Z











0










a;
z












at!
Z









U
03




tn
j_t
o
o


01
c
0)

^
eg
a. oo
O 3
i-i cn


00
>0
^^ CT* ^^

^H «-«
• en •
a. < a.
«w/ z ^^
01
14
0
X to
ta 4J
O
X 0
— i h
00
C U
-H 01
tn 3
to 0)
Ol 14-1

0 TJ
C C
t— I to




01
z









a:
z










o
o
-3-
1








Oi
Z












cn
z









CJ
X
CQ




tn
4-1
O
O


01
c

u

00
3
cn










































o>
c
a
X
0>
o
—4
u
X
u
o
o
_f.
u
to
X
0)


01
.3
u
u
01
in
c


Ol

4J

o


Ol
E
to
c
01
•o
10
Ll
to
4k
01
•o


o

X
u

-------

























cu

I— t
J
Q
J
3
a
3
cn

2
~
3
u
cn
Ct]
1
g
u
1
J

o
f-
c_>
X
0
H

^
(N
1
•*
Crf
CQ

u
Ol
t4-l

u











C X
o -a
—4 3

to cn
14
3 144
a o


01
eg »-s
4-1 00
C Ji
00
J


c
0
4_) *-v
14 <8 kj
0) t. -~~
iJ •*•* 00
a e 6
3 cu ^-*
C
o
u


c
o
4-1 3
to C!
T) U
01 4-4 00
01 C —
b, 01 °0
U 3.
C -^
O
u



— -a
ca 01
(j b.
• f-4
E E
O> 1-
.c o
CJ CL,





to

^^

01

,r^
(J
CU
a.
cn
O vO
Sv en
^H «—4
•o
C -
0) /-. a. r—
u Ui «4P u in
^ -O •
u to • en •
3 b a. • o.
f-4 O -^ 3 —











4-1
CJ
01

U4
O 01

a o
_J Z






as as
z z




a
o
a
r-i
CM •
A O





U
CA c&
Z Z















06 -«
Z



J
•
00

w cu
in c
CM tO
1 -O
u c
ca '_]








•o
u
to

—t 00
to O
f O
CO to
4-1 O U O
Ol f^ 0) f~-
<-n m
^^r^'OT3CMCMCMCMCMCM
Or-tnr-. S aS a.a!'-'Cj!'^cj\— «t5 — e?'--c?
-4CO-4CX)-4>-'-4^-'-4O-as exec: cxce: cxas exec: a.as
Z— 'Z-^Z-HZ-^Z — Z^^Z-^Z^-'Z'-'Z


01
.^



o
01
00 X
C ^\ y\ ^^
O -4 O
^
• CJ •
a. as a.


14
01
.,4
—4 01
3
14-1 cn
O 01

X 4J O

a x u
O u to
14 4-1 t.
4J 10 CU
LJ "4-4 C
CU 01
a. -a oo
X C 0)
33 to -o




u
>,

CM





as
z





as
z














o
0








Ol
c
CO

c
-J






s~<*
o
tO


(A

<3

1





































a>
c
x
£
o
(J
>•%
u
o
o
-C
o
(Q
X
•=
a>
u
'Zl

oj
c


o CQ a. c
E cu cu

U CO C
& 00 4-» CX)
£3 o ca
3 II Z
Z II
• II
II -4 U
• as z
z oo z ca

ca .a o t3
C-60

-------
 u
 u.
 o
 j
 5
 *—I

 1
t-.
«
u

I
a
z
b.
O
                   £  00
                   U  3-



                  I"
                   o>  M
                   3  X
                  •->  C
                  H  <
                   -
                    o
                                     CO
                                            —>  01


                                                01
                                            4J  U O
                                            0)     00  ->

                                                C W  CN
                                            05  .-. ^H  OO
                                            X)         CM
 •  ki

 •  0)

03  OJ

   CJ  O
4J     GO ^
a>  c  o> i
   •«4  ^ OO
C        tM
O 4/^   ••
                             in in


                             o o
                                            -J
                                             •

                                            O
                                            a:
                                            z
                                                              a:
                                                              z
                                o
                                0
                                          .0

                                           05
                                            C
                                           • H
                                           J
                                                             TJ
                                                              C
                                                                                   V.   O
                                                                                   o   a
                                                                                   4->   0)
                                                                                  oi  z

                                                                                  
-------








































•4
s
t— t
CO
(— i
O
en

O


CxJ
5
a
z
j

CK
O

^4
H

U

X
8


^.

-iT


T
33
H













































































«
4-1
C V
e 3
• »* ol

01 H
a.
X
u

c
o

4j
to
u

1—4
a.
a.
•*







"ft
o
en





01
3
Ol
en

H
^
a


c
0
u











—
to
u

E
01

u



















01
ai
u
c

b
01
a)
as







o>
4J


e4-4
IW
It!








C
O

" 5
to a
i! oo
c "^~
(U 00
0 3.
c >-^
o
u




4-0
01 J=
4J 	
«5 00
a: -*
'-'


c
o
..H
4J *^
ca 2

4-1
C 00

u oo
C 3,
O ^x
u


c
o

4-1 3
eg Q
U
c —
0) 00
U 3.
C -^
o


0)
a.
H

^

o
en




•o
01
6 -H

a a.

^











01
01
u
Ol
a
CO
oo
in
ON
^

•> >*N
*O w in
C 4J t*l
HJ 11 tN
O 01 •
c > a
(U [jj ..^

-*-4
0) QO
u c

,0 t*J

3 -0
C C
to
c
o to

*-l L4
U 01
^
•O 4J m

tg 01 CM
O 01 •
o > a.
U U3 >^
•^ «-4
oe 'to
e c
3 3



0 0

c c
o oo o
._. ^- ._4 00
>a 00 4J ^^
0 3. 0 00
3 33.
•o o -a
01 . 01 O
>- O 1- O

4^4 M
CM 4J in 4J
-^ eg ci tt)




PS











a:
Z




0
a
,-H
1
in

rsl
^-4












a;






•o
c.
01

0>
e.

**j








o
X
m





,^
00
c
3


<0

01
4J
u

a
r-.

a o


Ol •
a.
c <^
01
*-4 in
O ON
CD -H
4J 1 U «»
C •- 0
tg 4-1 14-4 14^ rM
o u C •- rsi
.~i 11 O Cue
u- LM ._ 00 0..- w
. -4 14-1 01 "4 tV tO
C oi in en o c
SO 01 X O 0)
.- 4J f O 01 — H 01
01 C O- C 4J 4-1
01 01 4J U 0)
O 4J -O 01 U 3 U
c 01 u, •• a) -a x
•^ 01 oi to *4-» ai 6
en 6 -O •- i« u o
•• c o e i- 11 »-i
01O0130I MO.tO
^ tj C 4J 4J O tV £
^ 4j u c m b —

jEO-OOnOuttjenji:




a!
Z




^
rsl
(M
1
CO


O










tx:
z












OS
z





i
o
~"

4-1

.-4
tn


'«
§
to
00


u
X
a






01
H
0
IM
U

€

,»4
O
17)
;


4J
01

01
C

o.
o
X










X


^^
to

o
E

O
z




03
Z








OO

in
C"l










as
Z












OS
z





e
o


•o
c

et>

u
•-
00


t*>
1
U
X
CO









01
E
L.
O
3

T3
H
ce









m

•^










u


Q
jj
o
E

^4
O





0!
Z








f^
•

f>^










Q£
Z












OS
Z





g
10
o


-o
c
to
01


•-
00


f*l
1
y

m









en
E
u
§

•a
tu
as




















X
4J

^ ^
to

g


^4
O
O





as
z








^
•

•a-










a;
z












a:
z





E
to
o
'"'
X
•o
c
to
01


•-"
00


CO

u
z
ca









01
E

§

•o
01

-

to CO
fl

01 •
a.
C x-»

b m

X -

u
u
(U

t-w


ij
C

y

U-I
C
00

Ol

o
z




05
Z








rsi
,_4

_^










EX













as
Z





E
O


•a
c
*Q
CQ




V
C
CO
•o
c

"-J






en
_g
O

y

6

-^
o
en


















































,
Of
c
flj
X
o

u

u
o
u
o


u
X

JC
0)
•a

u

^j
u
w
c


0)
-C
J-J
L.
o

4J

<0
c

(U
(0
^
03
fc

-------
            to
            u
            B
          u  o
          a. a
s
CO

_J
o
ta
I
z
             00

             3.
H  C
   O
           00 *J
           c c
              e
              o
             u
o


 I
 H
 IX
    aO

   ~^
    oo
                   a:
                   z
            u  a.
           ._•  a.
            6 <
                               o
                               a
                               
-------
                                SECTION 5

                                REFERENCES
Abramowitz,  M.,  and  I.  A.  Stegun.    1972.    Handbook  of  Mathematical
     Functions.  Dover Publications, New York, NY.

Atlas,  E.,  and  C.  S.  Giam.     1980.    Global  Transport  of  Organic
     Pollutants in the Remote Marine Atmosphere.  Science.  211:163-165.

Baron R.  L.,  F.  Copeland, and M.  F.  Walton.   1975.   In;  Environmental
     Quality and Safety,  Supplement Vol.  III.   F.  Coulston  and F. Korte
     (eds.), G.  Thieme  Publishers, Stuttgart,  p.  855.   (Cited in Geyer
     et al., 1980.)

Baxter,  J.  C.,  M.  Aquilar,  and K.  Brown.    1983a.   Heavy Metals  and
     Persistent Organics  at  a  Sewage Sludge  Disposal  Site.   J. Environ.
     Qual. 12(3):311-315.

Baxter, J. C., D.  E.  Johnson,  and E. W. Kienholz.   1983b.   Heavy Metals
     and Persistent Organics Content  in Cattle  Exposed to Sewage Sludge.
     J. Environ. Qual.  12(3):311-319.

Bertrand,  J.  E., M.  C.  Lutrick,  G. T.  Edds,   and  R.  L.  West.   1981.
     Metal Residues  in  Tissues,  Animal  Performance and  Carcass Quality
     with Beef Steers Grazing Pensacola Bahiagrass  Pastures  Treated with
     Liquid Digested Sludge.  J. Ani. Sci.   53:1.

Bollen, W.,  H.  E.  Morrison, and H.  H.  Crowell.   1954.   Effect of Field
     Treatments  of  Insecticides  on Numbers  of Bacteria,  Streptomyces,
     and Molds in the Soil.  J.  Econ. Ent.   47(2) :302~306.

Boswell,  F.  C.   1975.   Municipal  Sewage Sludge  and  Selected  Element
     Application to Soil:  Effect  on  Soil  and Fescue.   J. Environ. Qual.
     4(2):267-273.

Camp Dresser  and McKee, Inc.   1984a.   Development  of  Methodologies  for
     Evaluating  Permissible  Contaminant Levels  in  Municipal  Wastewater
     Sludges.   Draft.   Office of  Water Regulations and  Standards,  U.S.
     Environmental  Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

Camp Dresser  and McKee, Inc.   1984b.   Technical Review  of  the 106-Mile
     Ocean  Disposal Site.   Prepared  for  U.S.  EPA under  Contract  No.
     68-01-6403.  Annandale, VA.   January.

Camp Dresser  and McKee,  Inc.   1984c.  Technical  Review of  the  12-Mile
     Sewage Sludge  Disposal  Site.   Prepared   for U.S.  EPA under Contract
     No. 68-01-6403.  Annandale,  VA.  May.

Carey, A.  E.,  J. A. Gowen, H. Tai,  et  al.    1979.   Pesticide Residue in
     Soils and  Crops from  37  States,  1972  - National  Soils  Monitoring
     Program (IV).   Pest. Monit.  J.  12(4) :209-229.
                                       C-64

-------
Chaney,  R.  L.,  and  C.  A.  Lloyd.    1979.    Adherence  of  Spray-Applied
     Liquid Digested  Sewage Sludge  to Tall  Fescue.   J.  Environ. Qual.
     8(3):407-411.

City  of  New  York  Department  of  Environmental  Protection.    1983.   A
     Special Permit  Application  for  the  Disposal of  Sewage  Sludge from
     Twelve New  York  City Water  Pollution Control Plants  at  the  12-Mile
     Site.   New York, NY.  December.

Claborn,  H.  V.    1960.    Pesticide  Residues  in  Meat and  Milk.   U.S.
     Department of Agriculture.  ARS-33-63.   (Cited in Kenaga, 1980.)

Clevenger,  T. E.,  D.  D.  Hemphill,  K. Roberts, and W.  A.  Mullins.  1983.
     Chemical  Composition   and   Possible   Mutagenicity   of   Municipal
     Sludges.  J. WPCF.  55(12):1470-1475.

Donigian, A. S.   1985.   Personal Communication.   Anderson-Nichols & Co.,
     Inc.,  Palo Alto, CA.  May.

Edwards,  C.  A.    1971.   Persistent   Pesticides  in the Environment.   CRC
     Press, Cleveland, OH.

Edwards,  C.  A.    1973.    Pesticide  Residues  in  Soil and  Water.   In;
     Edwards,  C.  A.  (ed.),  Environmental   Pollution   by  Pesticides.
     Academic Press, New York,  NY.

Eno,  C., and P.  Everett.   1958.    Effects  of  Soil  Applications  of  10
     Chlorinated  Hydrocarbon Insecticides on  Soil  Microorganisms  and the
     Growth of Stringless Black  Valentine Beans.   Soil Sci.  Soc. Proc.
     22:235-238.

Farrell,  J.  B.    1984.    Personal  Communication.    Water  Engineering
     Research   Laboratory,    U.S.    Environmental   Protection   Agency,
     Cincinnati,  OH.  December.

Finlayson,  D.  G., and H.  R.  MacCarthy.   1973.   Pesticide Residues  in
     Plants.    In:    Edwards,  C.A.  (ed.),  Environmental  Pollution  by
     Pesticides.   Plenum Press, New  York,  NY.

Food  and Drug  Administration.   1979.   Compliance   Program  Report  of
     Findings.   FY78 Total Diet Studies -  Adult (7305.003).

Freeze, R.  A.,  and J. A.  Cherry.    1979.   Groundwater.   Prentice-Hall,
     Inc.,  Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Gelhar,  L.  W.,   and  G.  J.  Axness.   1981.    Stochastic  Analysis  of
     Macrodispersion  in  3-Dimensionally Heterogenous  Aquifers.    Report
     No.  H-8.    Hydrologic   Research Program,  New Mexico  Institute  of
     Mining and Technology,  Soccorro, NM.

Gerritse, R.  G.,   R. Vriesema,  J. W.  Dalenberg, and H. P. DeRoos.   1982.
     Effect of Sewage Sludge  on  Trace Element  Mobility in  Soils.   J.
     Environ. Qual. 2:359-363.
                                         C-65

-------
Geyer,  H.,  A.  G.  Kraus,  W.  Klein,  E. Richter,  and  F.  Korte.   1980.
     Relationship Between  Water  Solubility and Bioaccumulation Potential
     of Organic Chemicals  in Rats.  Chemosphere 9:277-291.

Glooschenko,  W.  A.,  W.  M.   Strachan,   and  R.   C.  Sampson.    1976.
     Distribution of  Pesticides  and Polychlorinated  Biphenyls  in Water,
     Sediments,  and   Seston  of  the Upper  Great  Lakes -  1974.   Pest.
     Monit.  J.  10(2):61-67.

Griffin,  R. A.   1984.    Personal  Communication  to  U.S.  Environmental
     Protection  Agency,   ECAO  -  Cincinnati,   OH.     Illinois  State
     Geological Survey.

Hansen,  L.  G.,  P.  W.  Washko,  L.  G.   Tuinstra,  S.  B.  Dorn,  and  T. D.
     Hinesly.    1981.    Polychlorinated Biphenyl,  Pesticide,  and  Heavy
     Metal  Resides in  Swine Foraging on Sewage Sludge Amended Soils.   J.
     Agric. Food Chem.  29:1012-1017.

Hassett, J. J., W. L.  Banwart, and  R.  A. Griffin.   1983.   Correlation of
     Compound  Properties  with  Sorption  Characteristics  of  Non-Polar
     Compounds  by  Soils  and  Sediments:     Concepts  and  Limitations.
     Chapter 15.  In;   The Environment and Solid Waste Characterization,
     Treatment  and  Disposal  -  Proc.   4th  Oak Ridge  National Laboratory
     Life Science  Symposium,  October  4,  1981, Gatlinburg,  TN.,   C.  W.
     Francis and I.  Auerbach (eds.), Ann Arbor Science Pub.

Hopkins, A., and V.  Kirk.   1957.   Effect  of  Several  Insecticides on  the
     English Red Worm.  J. Econ. Ent.  50(5):699~700.

Jacobs, A.,  M.  Blangetti, and  E.  Hellmund.   1974.    Vom  Wasser 43:259-
     273.   (Cited in Geyer et al., 1980.)

Johnson,  R.,  and D.  Manske.    1976.    Pesticide  Residues  in Total  Diet
     Samples (IX).   Pest Monit.  J.  9(4):157-169.

Jones, R. A., and G.  F. Lee.   1977. Chemical Agents of Potential Health
     Significance for Land  Disposal   of Municipal Wastewater  Effluents
     and  Sludges.    In;   Sagik,   B.P.,  and  C.A.  Sorber  (eds.),  Risk
     Assessment  and   Health  Effects  of Land Application  of  Municipal
     Wastewater and  Sludges.    University  of  Texas,  Center  for  Applied
     Research and Technology,  San Antonio,  TX.

Kenaga,  E.   E.    1980.    Correlation of  Bioconcentration  Factors   of
     Chemicals  in Aquatic  and  Terrestrial  Organisms  with  Their Physical
     and Chemical Properties.   Environ. Sci. Technol. 14:553-556.

Lawless, E.  W.,  T.  L. Ferguson,  and  A. F.  Meiners.    1975.   Guidelines
     for  the  Disposal of  Small  Quantities of  Unused Pesticides.   EPA-
     670/2-75-057.    U.S.  Environmental Protection   Agency,  Cincinnati,
     OH.

Manske, D., and R. Johnson.  1975.  Pesticide Residues in  the Total Diet
     Samples (VIII).   Pest. Monit. J.   9(2):94-105.
                                          C-66

-------
Martin,  J.,  R. B.  Harding, G.  H.  Cannell, and  L.  D.  Anderson.    1959.
     Influence of  Five  Annual  Field Applications of Organic Insecticides
     on  Soil Biological and Physical Properties.  Soil Sci.  87:334-338.

Matsumura, F.  1972a.   Current Pesticide Situation in the United States.
     In:   Matsumura, F.  (ed.), Environmental  Toxicology of Pesticides.
     Academic Press, New York, NY.

Matsumura,   F.     1972b.     Biological  Effects  of   Toxic  Pesticidal
     Contaminants  and  Terminal  Residues.   In:    Matsumura,  F.  (ed.),
     Environmental Toxicology  of Pesticides.   Academic  Press,  New  York,
     NY.

Mattraw,   H.   C.     1975.     Occurrence   of   Chlorinated   Hydrocarbon
     Insecticides,   Southern   Florida,   1968-1972.     Pest.   Monit.  J.
     9(2):106-114.

McParland, P. J.,  R. M. McCracken,  M.  B. O'Hare,  and A. M. Raven.   1973.
     Benzene Hexachloride Poisoning in Cattle.  Vet. Record.  369-371.

Nash,  R.   1983.    Comparative Volatilization  and  Dissipation  Rates of
     Several Pesticides from Soil.  J. Agric. Food Chem.  31:210-217.

National Academy of  Sciences.   1968.   Effects  of Pesticides on Fruit and
     Vegetable Physiology.  Publication  1698.

National  Academy  of  Sciences.    1977.    Drinking  Water  and  Health.
     Washington,  D.C.   NAS, National Review Council  Safe Drinking  Water
     Committee.

National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration.     1983.    Northeast
     Monitoring  Program  106-Mile  Site  Characterization  Update.    NOAA
     Technical Memorandum NMFS-F/NEC-26.    U.S.  Department of  Commerce
     National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.  August.

Pennington, J.A.T.   1983.  Revision of  the Total Diet  Study  Food  Lists
     and Diets.  J. Anu Diet. Assoc. 82:166-173.

Pettyjohn, W. A.,  D. C. Kent, T. A.  Prickett,  H. E. LeGrand, and  F. E.
     Witz.    1982.    Methods  for  the  Prediction  of  Leachate   Plume
     Migration and Mixing.   U.S.   EPA  Municipal Environmental  Research
     Laboratory,  Cincinnati, OH.

Requejo,  A.  G.,   R.  H.  West,   P.  G.  Hatcher,  and  McGillivary.    1979.
     Polychlorinated  Biphenyls and  Chlorinated Pesticides  in  Soils  of
     the Everglades  National  Park and Adjacent Areas.    Environ.  Sci.  &
     Tech.  13(8):931-935.

Ryan, J. A., H. R.  Pahren,  and J.  B. Lucas.   1982.   Controlling Cadmium
     in  the  Human  Food Chain:   A Review and  Rationale  Based on  Health
     Effects.  Environ.  Res. 28:251-302.
                                  C-67

-------
Sikora,  L.  J.,  W.  D.  Burge,  and  J.  E. Jones.   1982.   Monitoring  of a
     Municipal Sludge  Entrenchment  Site.   J.  Environ.  Qual.   2(2):  321-
     325.

Stanford  Research  Institute International.   1980.   Seafood Consumption
     Data Analysis.  Final  Report,  Task II.   Prepared for U.S. EPA under
     Contract No. 68-01-3887.  Menlo Park, CA.  September.

Stanley,  C.  W.,  J. E.  Barney,  M.  R.  Helton,  and  A.  R.  Yobs.   1971.
     Measurement  of   Atmosphere   Levels  of  Pesticides.     Env.  Sci.
     Technol.  5(5):430-435.

Thornton, I., and P. Abrams.   1983.   Soil  Ingestion  - A Major Pathway of
     Heavy Metals into Livestock Grazing  Contaminated Land.   Sci.  Total
     Environ.  28:287-294.

Tucker, R.,  and  D.  Crabtree.   1970.  Handbook of  Toxicity  of Pesticides
     to Wildlife.   Bureau  of  Sport Fisheries and Wildlife.   Res.  Pub.
     No. 84., p. 75-76.

U.S.   Department   of   Agriculture.     1975.     Composition   of  Foods.
     Agricultural Handbook No.  8.

U.S.  Environmental  Protection  Agency.    1976.    Quality  Criteria  for
     Water.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,  Washington, D.C.

U.S. Environmental  Protection  Agency.   1977.   Environmental Assessment
     of  Subsurface  Disposal  of Municipal  Wastewater  Sludge.   Interim
     Report.     EPA/530/SW-547.       Municipal  Environmental  Research
     Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH.

U.S. Environmental  Protection  Agency.   1979.  Industrial  Source Complex
     (ISC)  Dispersion  Model  User  Guide.    EPA  450/4-79-30.   Vol.  1.
     Office  of  Air Quality Planning  and  Standards,  Research  Triangle
     Park, NC.  December.

U.S. Environmental  Protection  Agency.    1980.    Ambient  Water  Quality
     Criteria for Hexachlorocyclohexane.  EPA 440/4-80-054.   October.

U.S.   Environmental  Protection  Agency.     1982.      Fate   of  Priority
     Pollutants   in  Publicly-Owned  Treatment   Works.     Final  Report.
     Vol. I.     EPA   440/1-82-303.      Effluent  Guidelines   Division,
     Washington,  D.C.   September.

U.S. Environmental  Protection  Agency.    1983a.   Assessment  of  Human
     Exposure to Arsenic:    Tacoma,  Washington.    Internal  Document.
     OHEA-E-075-U.     Office  of  Health  and  Environmental  Assessment,
     Washington,  D.C.   July 19.

U.S. Environmental  Protection  Agency.    1983b.   Rapid  Assessment  of
     Potential   Groundwater  Contamination   Under   Emergency   Response
     Conditions.   EPA  600/8-83-030.
                                 C-68

-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   1984a.   Health Effects Assessment
     for Lindane.   Final  Draft.   ECAO-CIN-H056.   Prepared  for Office of
     Emergency  and  Remedial  Response  by  the  Environmental  Criteria
     Assessment Office, Cincinnati, OH.  September.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   1984b.  Air  Quality Criteria for
     Lead.   External  Review  Draft.    EPA 600/8-83-028B.   Environmental
     Criteria  and  Assessment  Office.    Research  Triangle  Park,  NC.
     September.

U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency.    1985.   Drinking Water  Criteria
     Document  for  Lindane.   EPA-CIN-402.   Final  Draft.   Environmental
     Criteria and Assessment Office,  Cincinnati, OH.  January.

U.S. National  Research Council.    1982.    An  Assessment  of  the  Health
     Risks of  Seven  Pesticides  Used for  Termite  Control.   Committee on
     Toxicology.  NTIS:  PB83-136374.

Wedberg,  J.   L.,  S.  Moore,  F.  J.   Amore,   and  H.   McAvoy.     1978.
     Organochlorine Insecticide Residues  in  Bovine Milk and Manufactured
     Milk Products in Illinois,  1971-1976.  Pest.  Monit. J.   161-164.

Yadav,   D.  V.,  M.  K.  Pillai,  and  H.   C.  Agarwol.   1976.    Uptake  and
     Metabolism of DDT and Lindane by  the Earthworm Pheretina posthuma.
     Bull. Env. Cont. Toxicol.   16(5):541-545 .
                                    C-69

-------
                              APPENDIX

          PRELIMINARY HAZARD INDEX CALCULATIONS FOR LINDANE
                      IN MUNICIPAL SEWAGE  SLUDGE
I. LANDSPREADING AND DISTRIBUTION-AND-MARKETING

   A.  Effect on Soil Concentration of Lindane

       1.  Index of Soil Concentration (Index 1)

           a.  Formula

               re  = (SC x AR) + (BS x MS)
                 s          AR + MS

               CSr = CSS  [1 +  Q

               where:

                    CSS = Soil  concentration   of   pollutant   after  a
                          single    year's    application    of    sludge
                          (ug/g DW)
                    CSr = Soil  concentration  of  pollutant  after  the
                          yearly   application   of   sludge  has   been
                          repeated for n + 1 years (ug/g DW)
                    SC  = Sludge concentration of pollutant (ug/g DW)
                    AR  = Sludge application rate (mt/ha)
                    MS  = 2000  mt   ha/DW  =  assumed  mass   of  soil  in
                          upper 15 cm
                    BS  = Background  concentration   of   pollutant   in
                          soil (ug/g DW)
                    ti  = Soil half-life of pollutant (years)
                    n   =99 years

           b.  Sample calculation

               CSS is calculated for AR = 0, 5, and 50 mt/ha only

   n iooo«;n ,, /  nu - (0-H Ug/g DW x 5 mt/ha) + (0.13 ug/g DW x 2000 mt/ha)
   0.129950 Ug/g DW - 	    	(5 mt/ha DW * 2000 mt/ha DW)	

               CSr is calculated for AR = 5 mt/ha applied for 100 years

               0.267117 ug/g DW = 0.129950 ug/g DW [1 •»• 0.5(1/1'°4)  +

                        0.5(2/1'°4) * ...  * 0.5(99/1'04)]
                                     C-70

-------
B.  Effect on Soil Biota and Predators of Soil Biota

    1.  Index of Soil Biota Toxicity (Index 2)

        a.  Formula
            Index 2 = —
                      ID
            where:
                 II  = Index 1 = Concentration of pollutant  in
                       sludge-amended soil  (ug/g DW)
                 TB  = Soil  concentration   toxic   to  soil   biota
                       (yg/g DW)
        b.  Sample calculation
          < ••««»»« • "
    2.  Index of Soil Biota Predator Toxicity (Index  3)

        a.  Formula

            T j   i   Xl x UB
            Index 3 = — — -


            where:

                 I[  = Index 1  = Concentration  of  pollutant  in
                       sludge-amended soil  (yg/g DW)
                 UB  = Uptake  factor of  pollutant  in   soil  biota
                       (yg/g tissue DW [Mg/g soil DW]"1)
                 TR  = Feed  concentration  toxic to  predator  (yg/g
                       DW)

        b.  Sample calculation

                 - 0-129950  yg/g DW x  1.05  yg/g tissue  DW (yg/g soil DW)"1
                 — — — — ————•—** —               ;  ,,. .             -
                                         50  ug/g  DW

C.  Effect on Plants  and Plant  Tissue Concentration

    1.  Index of Phytotoxic Soil Concentration  (Index 4)

        a.  Formula


            Index 4 = —
                            C-71

-------
            where :
                 Ij^  = Index 1 = Concentration of pollutant in
                       sludge-amended soil  (Mg/g DW)
                 TP  = Soil concentration toxic to plants (Ug/g DW)
        b.   Sample calculation
    2.  Index of Plant Concentration Caused by Uptake (Index 5)

        a.  Formula

            Index 5 = Ii x UP

            where:

               1} = Index 1 = Concentration of pollutant  in
                   sludge - amended soil  (yg/g DW)
               UP = Uptake factor of pollutant in plant  tissue
                     (pg/g tissue DW [ug/g soil DW]"1)

        b.  Sample Calculation  - Index  values  were not  calculated
            due to lack, of data.

    3.  Index   of   Plant  Concentration   Increment  Permitted   by
        Phytotoxicity (index 6)

        a.  Formula

            Index 6 = PP

            where:

                 PP  = Maximum  plant  tissue  concentration  associ-
                       ated with phytotoxicity (pg/g DW)

        b.  Sample calculation  - Index  values  were not  calculated
            due to lack of data.

D.  Effect on Herbivorous Animals

    1.  Index  of  Animal Toxicity  Resulting  from Plant  Consumption
        (Index 7)

        a.  Formula

            Index 7 = —
                                C-72

-------
            where:

                 Ij  = Index  5  =  Concentration  of  pollutant  in
                       plant grown in sludge-amended soil (yg/g DW)
                 TA  = Feed  concentration   toxic   to   herbivorous
                       animal (ug/g DW)

        b.  Sample calculation -  Values  were not calculated  due  to
            lack of data.

    2.  Index of  Animal  Toxicity Resulting  from Sludge  Ingestion
        (Index 8)

        a.  Formula

            If AR = 0; Index 8=0


            If AR * 0; Index 8 =  SC *S
            where :

                 AR  = Sludge application  rate (mt  DW/ha)
                 SC  = Sludge concentration of pollutant  (wg/g DW)
                 GS  = Fraction of  animal  diet assumed  to  be  soil
                 TA  = Feed  concentration   toxic   to   herbivorous
                       animal (Ug/g DW)

        b.   Sample  calculation

            If  AR = 0; Index 8=0

            If  AR # 0;  0.00011 -°'
                                       ug/g DW

E.  Effect on Humans

    1.   Index of Human Cancer Risk Resulting from Plant  Consumption
        (Index 9)

        a.  Formula

                      (I5 x DT)   + DI
            Index  9 =


            where:

                15  = Index   5   =  Concentration  of  pollutant   in
                       plant grown  in  sludge-amended soil  (pg/g  DW)
                DT  = Daily human  dietary intake of affected plant
                       tissue  (g/day DW)
                             C-73

-------
         DI  = Average daily human dietary intake of
               pollutant (yg/day)
         RSI = Cancer risk-specific intake (yg/day)

b.  Sample   calculation  (toddler)   -   Values   were   not
    calculated due to lack of data.

Index  of  Human  Cancer  Risk Resulting  from Consumption  of
Animal  Products  Derived from Animals  Feeding  on  Plants
(Index 10)
a.  Formula
    Index 10 =
               (15  x  UA  x  DA)  +  DI
                       RSI
    where:
         15

         UA

         DA


         DI

         RSI
Index  5  =  Concentration  of  pollutant  in
plant grown in sludge-amended soil (yg/g DW)
Uptake factor  of  pollutant  in  animal  tissue
(Ug/g tissue DW [Ug/g  feed DW]"1)
Daily  human   dietary  intake   of   affected
animal tissue  (g/day DW)  (milk  products and
meat, poultry, eggs, fish)
Average daily human dietary intake of
pollutant (yg/day)
Cancer risk-specific intake (yg/day)
b.  Sample   calculation  (toddler)
    calculated due to lack of data.
                           Values   were   not
Index  of  Human  Cancer  Risk Resulting  from Consumption  of
Animal Products  Derived  from Animals Ingesting  Soil  (Index
11)
a.  Formula

    If AR = 0; Index  11  =

    If AR / 0; Index  11  =
               (BS  x  GS  x  UA  x  DA)  +  DI
                        RSI

               (SC  x  GS  x  UA  x  DA)  +  DI
                        RSI
    where:
         AR
         BS  =

         SC  =
         GS  =
         UA  =

         DA  =
                                           in
= Sludge application rate (mt DW/ha)
= Background  concentration  of   pollutant
  soil (yg/g DW)
= Sludge concentration of pollutant (yg/g DW)
= Fraction of animal diet assumed to be soil
= Uptake factor  of  pollutant in  animal  tissue
  (yg/g tissue DW [yg/g  feed DW]"1)
  Daily  human   dietary   intake   of   affected
  animal tissue  (g/day  DW)  (milk  products  and
  meat only)
                 C-74

-------
             DI  = Average daily human dietary intake of
                   pollutant (yg/day)
             RSI = Cancer risk-specific intake (pg/day)

    b.  Sample calculation (toddler)

        53.78971 = [(0.11 Ug/g DW x 0.05 x 0.65 yg/g tissue DW

               [Ug/g feed DW]"1 x 39.4 g/day DW) + 2.71 Ug/day]

               t 0.053 yg/day

4.  Index  of  Human  Cancer  Risk  Resulting  from  Soil  Ingest ion
    (Index 12)

    a.  Formula

                   (Ii x DS) + DI
        Index  12 « - — -


        where:

             II  = Index 1 - Concentration   of   pollutant    in
                   sludge-amended  soil (ug/g DW)
             DS  = Assumed amount  of soil  in human  diet  (g/day)
             DI  = Average daily human dietary intake of
                   pollutant (ug/day)
             RSI = Cancer risk-specific intake (ug/day)

    b.  Sample calculation (toddler)

        A, oQ1c9 _ (0.129950 ug/g  DW x 5 g/day) +  2.71  yg. day
        63.39152 -
5.  Index of Aggregate Human Cancer Risk (Index 13)

    a.  Formula


        Index 13 = Ig + I10 + IU  +  I12  -


        where:

             Ig  = Index   9 =  Index   of   human  cancer   risk
                   resulting from  plant  consumption  (unitless)
             IIQ = Index  10 =  Index   of   human  cancer   risk
                   resulting   from   consumption   of   animal
                   products   derived   from   animals  feeding on
                   plants  (unitless)
             III = Index 11   =  Index   of   human  cancer   risk
                   resulting   from   consumption   of   animal
                   products  derived from animals ingesting  soil
                   (unitless )
                     C-75

-------
                         = Index 12 =   Index   of   human   cancer   risk
                           resulting from soil ingestion (unitless)
                     DI  = Average   daily   human   dietary   intake   of
                           pollutant (yg/day)
                     RSI = Cancer risk-specific intake (ug/day)

            b.  Sample   calculation  (toddler)   -   Values   were   not
                calculated due to lack of data.

II. LANDFILLING

    A.  Procedure

        Using Equation  1, several  values  of  C/CO for the  unsaturated
        zone  are  calculated  corresponding  to  increasing values  of  t
        until equilibrium  is reached.   Assuming  a  5-year  pulse  input
        from the landfill, Equation  3 is employed to estimate  the con-
        centration vs. time data at  the  water  table.   The concentration
        vs. time curve is then transformed into a  square  pulse  having a
        constant  concentration  equal  to the peak  concentration,  Cu,
        from the unsaturated  zone,  and  a duration,  to, chosen so that
        the  total  areas under  the  curve and  the pulse  are equal,  as
        illustrated in  Equation  3.   This square  pulse  is then used  as
        the  input  to the  linkage  assessment, Equation 2,  which  esti-
        mates initial dilution in  the aquifer to  give  the initial con-
        centration, Co, for the saturated zone assessment.   (Conditions
        for  B,  minimum  thickness  of unsaturated  zone,  have  been  set
        such that dilution is actually negligible.)   The  saturated zone
        assessment procedure is nearly identical to that  for the  unsat-
        urated zone except for the definition  of  certain  parameters  and
        choice of  parameter  values.   The maximum concentration at  the
        well, Cmax,  is  used  to  calculate  the  index  values  given  in
        Equations 4 and 5.

    B.  Equation 1:  Transport Assessment


     C(y.t) = i  [exp(A!) erfc(A2) + expCBj)  erfc(B2)]  = P(x»t)
         Requires evaluations  of four  dimensionless  input  values  and
         subsequent   evaluation  of  the  result.    Exp(A^)  denotes  the
         exponential   of    Aj,   e  *,   where   erfc(A2)   denotes   the
         complimentary error function  of  A2.  Erfc(A2)  produces  values
         between 0.0 and 2.0 (Abramowitz  and Stegun,  1972).

         where:
              .     1_  [V* - (V*2 + 4D* x y*)"h
              Hl   2D*

                   X - t (V-2 •*• 4D* x y*)^
              A2 ~       (4D* x t)?
                               C-76

-------
           [V* + (V*2 + 4D* x u*
      2D*
        - X
        _
             (V*2  + 4D* x U*
                 (4D* x  t)*


and where for the unsaturated zone:

     Co = SC x CF = Initial leachate concentration  (ug/L)
     SC = Sludge concentration of pollutant (mg/kg DW)
     CF = 250 kg sludge solids/m3 leachate =

          PS x 103
          1 - PS

     PS = Percent  solids  (by  weight)  of  landfilled  sludge  =
          20%
      t = Time (years)
     X  = h = Depth to  groundwater (m)
     D* = a x V* (m2/year)
      a = Dispersivity coefficient (m)

     u* = —Q—  (m/year)
          9 x R
      Q = Leachate generation rate (m/year)
      0 = Volumetric water content (unitless)

      R = 1 +  dry x KJ = Retardation factor  (unitless)
                0
   Parv = Dry bulk density (g/mL)
     Kd = foc x Koc (mL/g)
    foc = Fraction of organic carbon (unitless)
    KQC = Organic carbon partition coefficient (mL/g)

          365 x  u  ,      N_i
     M* = —5	  (years)  A
                                i
      p = Degradation rate (day"-1-)

and where for the saturated zone:

     C0 = Initial  concentration  of   pollutant  in  aquifer  as
K
      determined by Equation 2
  t = Time (years)
  X = AS, = Distance from well to landfill  (m)
 D* = a x V*  (m2/year)
  a = Dispersivity coefficient (m)

 v* = K x 1  (m/year)
      
-------
C.  Equation 2.  Linkage Assessment
             -            Q * w
                               _
                    365 [(K x  i) t 0] x B
     where:

          Co = Initial concentration  of  pollutant in  the  saturated
               zone as determined by Equation 1 (yg/L)
          Cu - Maximum  pulse  concentration  from  the  unsaturated
               zone (jag/L)
           Q = Leachate generation rate (m/year)
           W = Width of landfill (m)
           K = Hydraulic conductivity of the aquifer (m/day)
           i = Average hydraulic gradient between  landfill  and  well
               (unitless)
           $ = Aquifer porosity (unitless)
           B = Thickness of saturated zone (m) where:

               B >  _   Q.*W*0 -  and B > 2
                 —  K  x  i  x  365             —

D.  Equation 3.  Pulse Assessment


          C(x>t) = P(x,t)  for  0 £ t £ t0
             co
             Co

     where:
                 = P(X,t) -  P(X,t  - t0)  for t > t
          t0  (for  unsaturated  zone) =  LT  = Landfill  leaching  time
          (years)

          t0  (for  saturated zone)  =  Pulse duration  at  the  water
          table (x = h) as determined by the following equation:

               t0 = [  o/w  c dt] *  cu
                   C( Y t)
          PvX>c' = —r— as determined by Equation  1
                     Go
E.   Equation 4.  Index of Groundwater Concentration  Resulting
     from Landfilled Sludge  (Index 1)

     1.   Formula

          Index 1 = Cmax

          where:

               Cmax = Maximum concentration  of  pollutant  at well  =
                      maximum of  C(A8,,t)  calculated  in Equation  1
                      (Ug/D
                                  C-78

-------
          2.   Sample Calculation

               0.00142 yg/L = 0.00142 yg/L

     F.   Equation  5.    Index  of  Human  Cancer  Risk  Resulting  from
          Groundwater Contamination (Index 2)

          1.   Formula

                          (Ij x AC) + DI
               Index 2 =  	—	


               where:

                    II - Index   1  =  Index of  groundwater  concentration
                         resulting  from  landfilled sludge  (yg/L)
                    AC = Average human   consumption  of  drinking   water
                         (L/day)
                    DI = Average daily human dietary  intake of  pollutant
                         (Mg/day)
                   RSI = Cancer risk-specific intake (yg/day)

          2.   Sample Calculation

                       - (0.00142 yg/L x 2 L/day)  + 8.21 yg/day
                       *              0.053  yg/day

III. INCINERATION

     A.   Index   of   Air   Concentration   Increment  Resulting    from
          Incinerator Emissions (Index 1)

          1.   Formula

               T  j   i    (C x PS x  SC x  FM x DP) + BA
               Index 1 =	


          where:

             C -  Coefficient  to correct  for  mass and time  units
                 (hr/sec x g/mg)
            DS =  Sludge feed  rate (kg/hr  DW)
            SC =  Sludge concentration  of  pollutant  (mg/kg  DW)
            FM =  Fraction of  pollutant emitted  through stack (unitless)
            DP =  Dispersion parameter  for  estimating maximum
                 annual ground  level  concentration  (ug/m^)
            BA =  Background concentration  of  pollutant  in  urban
                 air (yg/m^)
                                       C-79

-------
             2.   Sample Calculation

                  1.276565 = [(2.78 x 10~7 hr/sec x g/mg x 2660 kg/hr DW
                             x 0.11 mg/kg DW x 0.05 x 3.4 yg/m3) + 0.00005yg/m3]
                             t 0.00005yg/m3

        B.  Index  of  Human  Cancer  Risk  Resulting  from  Inhalation  of
            Incinerator Emissions (Index 2)

            1.  Formula

                             j - 1) x BA]  +  BA
                Index 2 =
                                    EC
                where:

                  I] = Index 1 = Index of air concentration increment
                       resulting from incinerator emissions
                       (unitless)
                  BA = Background concentration of pollutant in
                       urban air (yg/m3)
                  EC = Exposure criterion (yg/m3)

            2.  Sample Calculation

                0 024269 =  [(1.276565 -  1)  x  0.00005  UR/m3] + 0.00005 UR/m3
                                            0.00263 yg/m3

    IV. OCEAN DISPOSAL

        A.  Index of  Seawater Concentration  Resulting from  Initial  Mixing
            of Sludge (Index 1)

            1.  Formula

                           SC x ST x PS
                Index 1 =
                            W x D x L

                where!

                    SC =   Sludge concentration of pollutant (mg/kg DW)
                    ST =   Sludge mass dumped by a single tanker (kg WW)
                    PS =   Percent solids in sludge (kg DW/kg WW)
                    W  =   Width of initial plume dilution (m)
                    D  =   Depth to pycnocline or  effective  depth  of mixing
                       for shallow water site (m)
                    L  =   Length of tanker path (m)

            2.  Sample Calculation

. _.__, ,  /T    0.11  mg/kg  DW x 1600000 kg WW x 0.04 kg  DW/kg  WW  x 103 ug/mg
U.UUU// Mg/L =  	 	 	 	-j   —X— 	
                            200  m  x 20 m x 8000 m x 103 L/m3


                                  C-80

-------
B.   Index  of  Seawater Concentration Representing a 24-Hour Dumping
     Cycle  (Index 2)

     1.   Formula

                      SS  x  SC
          Index 2 =
                    V x D x L

          where:

               SS = Daily sludge disposal rate (kg DW/day)
               SC = Sludge concentration of pollutant (mg/kg DW)
               V  = Average current velocity at site (m/day)
               D  - Depth  to   pycnocline   or   effective  depth  of
                    mixing for  shallow water site (m)
               L  = Length of tanker path (m)

     2.   Sample Calculation

     0.000059   /L =   825000  kg DW/day x 0.11 mg/kg DW  x  103  UR/mg
                          9500 m/day x 20 m x 8000 m x 103 L/m3

C.   Index of Toxicity to Aquatic Life (Index 3)

     1.   Formula


          Index 3 = AWQC"

          where:

            II =  Index   1   =   Index   of   seawater   concentration
                  resulting   from   initial  mixing  after   sludge
                  disposal (yg/L)
          AWQC =  Criterion or  other  value expressed as an  average
                  concentration  to protect  marine  organisms  from
                  acute and chronic toxic effects (yg/L)

     2.   Sample Calculation


          0.0014 = °-°Q°22
                     0.16

D.   Index of Human  Cancer Risk. Resulting from  Seafood Consumption
     (Index 4)

     1.   Formula

                     (1 2 x BCF x  10~3  kg/g x  FS  x QF) + DI
          Index 4
                                           RSI
                         c-81

-------
                    where:

                    12 =  Index   2   =   Index   of    seawater   concentration
                         representing a 24-hour dumping cycle (Ug/L)
                    QF =  Dietary consumption  of seafood (g WW/day)
                    FS =  Fraction  of consumed  seafood originating  from the
                         disposal  site (unitless)
                    BCF = Bioconcentration factor of pollutant (L/kg)
                    DI =  Average  daily  human  dietary  intake  of  pollutant
                         (Ug/day)
                    RSI = Cancer risk-specific intake  (yg/day)

               2.   Sample Calculation

                    150 =

(0.000059 pg/L x 130 L/kg x 10~3 kg/g x 0.000021 x 14.3 g WW/day)  + 8.21 Ug/day
                                       0.053  pg/day
                                       C-82

-------









z
o
fr-t

^_l
Q
2
8
x
u
3

ec
O
Cb

H
J
en
u
sc

a
z


en

en
2
O

*4
•
as
>
5
a
a.
2


_^
i


cu
,j
a




























I














01
01
jS
a
c

1*4
O

c
o

.^
•a
e
o
u






























































00

r»



•a





in









^











<*>








fM



























a
aj
O


3
o.
c
1—1














01
Z

cs
0


-H
O


—4
*^

0






^
,_<
•
0









**
•—i

0




 O






JO

Z Z









^ rt
(N fO
9 **H

^ o



iT\
PO &\
tn *-H

^-. o




»n
^ ^
.n -^
^ o






Q
CO
V

^
.^
C
3

-— 1
m E O

00 *

C
• U *J
•o c
a. o


X U
-» v

U o> to
•a S *
c -a u
a •->
J^ b

x i |
X —»
••2 ££
0
en


z

<
z

o
o
0


0
o

0







^J
z








^4
o
0
o

0



in
0
o

o




in
0
o
0



to
01
01
™*

c
3


u
o



c
o

a
u

u

c
00
b
0

o

B
o
u

u.





















































































09
b
41
u
11
B

b
Q,

01
u

en


z z

•0
-< 0


CO
o m



00

O m







•o

-4 O










00

0 in





00

O m






CD
O in








b
91

X

£



B

4)
41
U *
IM
C W
O *J

u 9
a -a
b C
U 3
C 0
01 b
00 00

01 0

U *J
a Q.
J Q




Z

<
z


in
o"



in

0







^
z











in

0





m

O






m
O













S




•,
.W
g

U
•*H
U«4
u^
§
u

x
•*>4 01
> c
—i O
01 M
b
=1 ?
01 u
Q b
3

*
en





































































O)
u

^
ta
b
01

u
a
b
01

u
•o
c
a)

V
a
x

••4
O
en


z z
en
00 -»
f^ C3
O •*


-» 00
0 O


co -a-
f*l O

O 4






*3* ^
•ar oo

0 O









^ -loO
-^ 00

o o




•^ *«o
-» 00

0 0





sj «
-T CO
C3 0






b
0>
144

3
er
OJ

01 01
0) JC
4) JhJ

^ UH
— o
c
3 X



>M

X U
4J 3
— -a
01 c
0 O
b U *•>
o x
O. u aj

b ^4 ^
01 3 E
144 OJ v^
.- b
3 -0 M
cr x




Z Z Z

o
O o m
in
01
o
0 o m
in

O
o

o o o
0 —




_^
o
0

o o o
O -4








0
o

000
O -4



0
o

000
O -4




o
o
0 O 0
o *••





^^
E


at
^3
^^
Ul •'^
« — e
01 —t •**

ij 1*4 O

C C •
3 OJ u
01
• ~ o •-
u u

*J «4 144
C — H4
01 01 01
.-JO
•o u
a oj E
b bOX
01 00 b  u >
E — 01 —

-------




























^•^
•o
01

c
B
0
u



•
1
"*
CO

E->

































































01
at
1

l*-l
O

E
O
u
B
O
U























00













in













CO











CM







^^



















01


3
01
ce





















z z z as

O CO
o o o m
m m »n CM



o o% oo
r»! -H o> ro
CM P*l CM


o
tn m o
• • •
r*« r*» tf> po
CM CM in
CM



CM
tf> PO O

r^> <«o in t<0
CM «-• CM
^4





r^k
O csi o*
 vO
in en CN




,3.
m MS ^
r-! -J 0% M3
CM P"> (N


£
^
5 3

_ 00

01 *-*
B
O O
•- o

(0 »
3 B
CT O '"7 ^
u .„ -J CM

eg MX— C
4J I* cl 01 O
C *J *-^ ^ •-! ^*
O) C «8 *-» 6
E 01 3 01 M *-*
01 U U >> 3
01 E ^ CT 03
U O * fyl
01 O B O ^-^ •
01 O *-t ol

U U 0 C 01
01 <0 "3 C 01 B
a f v. o E .*
O u u •-< « U
M -< a. a. c <
E •-»
2 —
z


o
in



-»
>«
~

j.
*
rf




in

r>*
CM





CO

^







r^
CM
CO





^
vO
^-1



0
u
„
01
B
O
N

T3
01

Q
U
3

<8
Ul

B


B
O

4J
a

^j
B
OI
U
E
O
U

r—i — J
n — -

u 3.

B



Z


CM
-<

ON
vO
in
o
o
s
o
o
o


CM
o
o

o



00
^
o
o

o





oo
CM
0
o
o



CM
•3"
O
o
o



^^
CO
TT
E ^

"— *
—i OO
3,
OI ^^
B
0 X

4_( g
eg U
3
o-
f»i E
--^ O

4-1 4-1
E a
1 i
01 B
01 01
01 U
01 C
n o

U

B
a
.•*


u

B
01
U
E
0
U

14
01

eg
3
•o
E
3
O
^


IM
O

)f
01
T3
B
»-*
0


CM
-^

ON

in
0
0
in
O
0
o


CM
O
o

o



oo

o
o

o





00
CM
O
0
o



CM
-a-
o
o
o








-j
--^
00
3.


-^



T3
E
>— i

«.
V
00
T3
3

tfl

73
01


••4 0^
U-l
•D E
C 0


(0
E 3
O O"

M-l ^^

























































E
o
u


00
c
• ^
^J
r— t
3
tn
U
u


0)
.,4
u
u
HI
u
c
<0
u

c

e
3



O

M
01
"O
C





























































(N

M
D
-o
C



c
o

*J
a
c

e
(0
u
c
o
u

l_,
0)
iJ
10
3

c
3
O

ofl


in
m



01

OI


.-4
B
3













































•o
1 01
01
3

--
01
3
0
E
H
Ul
X
0)

—H JJ
— o

U* 4_J

c -o

— 0
u
o
C n

01 Si

01
j: L.
* ^

C 01
O —i
.-• J5
-J eg

•a --i
E —i
O CL
u a.
eg

f^ 4-)
3 0
Z Z

II II

43
z z
eg .a
C-84

-------
                             LINDANE


p. 3-2    Index 1 Values should tread:
          typical at 500 rot/ha = 0.13; worst at 500 mt/na - 0.13

Preliminary Conclusion - should read:
  No increase in the concentration of lindane in sludge-amended soil is
  expected to occur at any application rate.


p. 3-3    Index 2 Values should read:
          typical at 500 mt/ha = <.0013; worst at 500 mt/ha <.0013

p. 3-4    Index 3 Values should read:
          typical at 500 mt/ha = 0.0027; worst at 500 mt/ha - 0.0027

p. 3-5    I^ndex 4 Values should read:
          typical at 500 mt/ha = 0.01; worst at 500 mt/ha = 0.01

p. 3-17   Index 12 Values should read:
          adult-typical at 500 mt/ha = 150; worst at 500 mt/ha = 150
          toddler-typical at 500 mt/ha = 63; worst at 500 mt/ha = 63

Preliminary Conclusion - should read:
  The consumption of sludge-amended soils by toddlers or adults
  not expected to increase the risk of human cancer due to lindane
  above the pre-existing risk attributable to other dietary
  source of lindane
                              C-85

-------
       APPENDIX  D:




HAZARD INDEX METHODOLOGIES

-------
     APPENDIX D:  SUMMARY OF EPA'S METHODOLOGY FOR PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT
     OF CHEMICAL HAZARDS RESULTING FROM VARIOUS SLUDGE DISPOSAL PRACTICES

    This  appendix  contains a  short  synopsis  of  the draft  "Methodology for
Preliminary  Assessment  of  Chemical   Hazards   Resulting  from  Various  Sewage
Sludge  Disposal Practices"  developed  by  EPA's  Environmental Criteria  and
Assessment  Office   (ECAO-C1nc1nnat1).    This   methodology  was  developed  to
conduct  preliminary  assessments  of   chemical hazards  resulting  from  the
utilization  or  disposal  of  municipal  sewage  sludges.    The  methodology
enables the  Agency  to rapidly screen a  11st  of chemicals  so that those most
likely to pose  a hazard  to  human health or  the environment can be Identified
for  further  assessment  and  possible  regulatory  control.    Four  different
sludge utilization  or disposal  practices were considered:   land  application
(Including  distribution  and  marketing), landfUUng, Incineration  and ocean
disposal.
    The goal  of  this  methodology 1s  to approximate  the  degree of contamina-
tion  that  could occur as  a  result  of each  disposal  practice,  and  then  to
compare the potential exposures that  could  result from  such contamination
with  the  maximum levels considered  safe,  or  with  those  levels  expected  to
cause  adverse effects to  humans or  other  organisms.   The methodology  has
been kept as  simple as possible  to enable rapid preliminary screening of the
chemicals.   Estimating potential exposures   1s extremely complex,  and often
requires  the  use of  assumptions.   Unfortunately, modifying  the  assumptions
used may  cause the results  to  vary  substantially.   Therefore,  the  assump-
tions  used  tend to be  conservative  to  prevent falsely negative determina-
tions  of  hazard.   This 1s  of  critical  Importance In a  screening exercise.
                                     D-l

-------
However, to  preserve  the utility of  the  method,  an effort has been  made  to
ensure  that  the conservative assumptions  are  nevertheless  realistic,  or  have
a  reasonable  probability  of  occurring  under  unregulated  or  uncontrolled
conditions.
    The  simplicity  and conservatism  that  make  this methodology  appropriate
for  screening  of  chemicals make  1t  Inappropriate for  estimating  regulatory
criteria or  standards.  The latter  require more  detailed analysis  so  that
the  resulting  levels  are adequately  protective,  yet  no more  stringent  than
necessary  based  on  the  best  available   scientific   Information  and  risk
assessment procedures.
IDENTIFICATION OF  EXPOSURE  PATHWAYS
    Each disposal  practice may result  In  the  release  of sludge-borne  con-
taminants  by several   different environmental pathways, which vary  1n  their
potential  for  causing  exposures  that  may lead  to  adverse  effects.   For  each
practice,  this methodology attempts  to  Identify  and   assess  only the  most
overriding pathway(s).   If a chemical  does not pose a hazard 1n  the  over-
riding pathway(s), It  1s unlikely to do so by a  minor  pathway.
CALCULATION OF CONTAMINANT TRANSPORT
    Methods  for estimating contaminant  transport have been kept  as  simple  as
possible,  so  that  the  screening  procedure  could be  carried out  rapidly.
Thus,  1n  some cases,  a  simple  volumetric  dilution   of  the  sludge by  an
environmental  medium  (e.g., soil,  seawater) 1s  assumed, followed  by  the use
of simple  biological  uptake relationships.   Computerized models  were  used  to
estimate groundwater transport,  Incinerator operation  and aerial dispersion.
    The  Identification of  parameter  values  used  as Inputs to  the equations
was  a  task of major  Importance.   Parameters can  be divided  Into  two types:
those  having  values  that  are  Independent  of  the Identity  of  the chemical
                                      D-2

-------
being  assessed  (such as  rate  of  sludge  application to  land,  depth of  the
water  table,  or  amount  of  seafood consumed per  day)  and those  specific  to
the  chemical  (such  as Us  rate  of uptake by  plants,  adsorption to soil  or
toxUHy).
    In an attempt to show the  variability of  possible  exposures,  two  values
were ordinarily  chosen  for  chemical-Independent parameters;  these  are  Iden-
tified  as  "typical"  and  "worst-case."   The  typical  value  represents  the
situation most frequently encountered;  1f  known,  a median or mean  value  has
been used.   The  worst-case  value represents the  "reasonable  worst-case;"  1f
known, a 95th percentHe value  has been used.
    For  chemical-specific  parameters,  a single  value was ordinarily  chosen
because of  the effort required to  make  two  determinations  for each chemical,
and  because of  the  paucity  of   Information  available.  In  each case,  the
value that gave the  more conservative result was chosen.
    An exception to  the  single value was the  selection  of  typical and  worst-
case values  for  contaminant concentrations 1n  sludge.   Sludge  concentration
may  be  viewed  as the starting  point for each  method.   A valid  estimate  of
the  level  of contamination  1s   essential  to determine  1f  a hazard exists.
Without  1t,  none of  the Indices can be calculated.   For  a  given  chemical,
the majority of  Publicly Owned  Treatment Works  (POTWs) have relatively  low
sludge  concentration levels,  but  a few  have much higher  concentrations.
Because of  the  Importance of contaminant concentrations  1n  sludge  for each
of  the  Indices,  a  typical  and  worst-case  value  have  been  chosen  for this
parameter.
    Data  on sludge  contaminant  concentrations  were  derived   from  an  EPA
report,  "Fate  of  Priority  Pollutants  1n  Publicly  Owned  Treatment  Works"
(U.S. EPA,  1982), frequently referred to as  the  "40-CHy Study".   Wherever
                                     D-3

-------
the  40-C1ty  Study  provided   Insufficient   Information,  data  from  another
report  prepared  for  the  U.S.  EPA,  "A  Comparison of  Studies  of Toxic  Sub-
stances In POTW Sludges" was used (Camp, Dresser & McKee,  1984).
CALCULATION OF HAZARD INDICES
    After  contaminant  transport  has  been   estimated,  a  series  of  "hazard
Indices"  are  calculated  for  each chemical.   Each hazard  Index  Is  a  ratio
that 1s  Interpreted  according  to whether 1t 1s greater or  less  than  one,  as
further  explained  below.   The purpose  for   calculating  these  Indices  Is  to
reduce a  large and complex body  of  data  to  terms  that facilitate evaluation
and  decision-making.   Careful  Interpretation  of  these  Indices  Indicates
whether  a more  detailed  analysis  of  a chemical  should  be  undertaken  or
whether  the  chemical   can  be "screened out"  at  this  stage.   The  hazard
Indices  may  be  separated  Into  two  types,  one  type  showing  the  expected
Increase  of  contaminant  concentration  In an  environmental medium  ("Incre-
mental  Index") and  the other  showing  whether  adverse effects could result
("effect Index").
Incremental Indices and Their Interpretation
    Incremental  Indices show  the expected degree of  Increase  of  contaminant
concentration  1n  water,  soil, air  or  food  resulting from  sludge  disposal.
The Incremental  Index does not  by  Itself Indicate hazard,  since contamina-
tion  alone  does   not   necessarily  mean  that   adverse effects  will  occur.
However, the  Incremental  Index aids  In both the  calculation and  Interpreta-
tion of  the  subsequent  effect  Indices.  For Inorganic  chemicals,  the Incre-
mental Index (I.) 1s calculated as follows:
                                  T    A + B
                                  i \  =
                                   1      B
                                      D-4

-------
where A  1s  the  expected concentration of the chemical  that  1s  due  to sludge
disposal,  from  the  transport  estimation  method,  and  B  1s the  background
concentration 1n  the  medium.   The  Index  1s  thus  a   simple,  dlmenslonless
ratio  of  expected  total  concentration  to background concentration.   Its
Interpretation 1s equally simple.  A  value  of 2.0  would Indicate that sludge
application  doubles   the  background  concentration;   a  value  of  1.0  would
Indicate  that  the concentration  1s  unchanged.*   In  addition,  for  the  null
case, where no sludge 1s applied,  A = 0 and therefore I. = 1.0.
    Consideration  of   background   levels   1s  Important  since  concentration
Increase  resulting  from  sludge  may  be  quite  small relative  to the  back-
ground.   In  some  Instances, sludge  use could even  result In  a  decrease  of
contaminant  concentration.    Failure  to  recognize  this  fact  may  cause  a
loss of  perspective  on the  Importance  of a particular  concentration  level.
On the other  hand,  this calculation falls  to distinguish  between the chemi-
cal form  or  availability  of the  contaminant  present as  background  and  that
added by sludge  disposal.
    The  above equation  assumes   that  the  background  concentration 1n  the
medium of  concern 1s  known and  1s  not  zero,  as  Is   usually  the  case  for
Inorganic chemicals.   For  organic  chemicals,  this assumption often  does  not
hold.  Since  In  these cases 1t  1s Impossible to  express  the  Increase as  a
ratio,  the Index then becomes the following:
                                    I1=A
*In most cases, A will be finite  and  positive,  and thus  I>1 .   However,  since
 the Index  values  are not carried  to more than two significant  figures,  1f
 B 1s far greater  than A,  then I  will  be given as 1.0.
      example,  1f  soil  1s  amended  with sludge  having  a  contaminant  con-
 centration lower than the soil  background,  then I<1.0.
                                     D-5

-------
Therefore,  when  the  background  concentration  for  organic  chemicals   1s
unknown,  or  assumed to  be  zero, the  Incremental  Indices show  the  absolute
Increase, in units  of concentration.  Note  that  these  do  not  fit the form of
the other Indices and that for the null  case, I.  = 0 for organic chemicals.
Effect Indices and Their Interpretation
    Effect Indices  show  whether  a given Increase 1n contaminant  level  could
be expected to result 1n  a  given adverse  Impact  on  health of  humans  or  other
organisms.   For   both   Inorganic  and  organic  chemicals,  the  effect  Index
(I ) Is calculated as follows:
                                  T     C + D
                                  Ie = —
where C  1s  the  Increase 1n exposure  that 1s  due to sludge disposal, usually
calculated  from  I.; 0  1s  the  background  exposure;  and   E  1s   the  exposure
value used to evaluate  the  potential  for  adverse effects,  such  as a  toxlclty
threshold.  Units  of all  exposures  are  the  same (I.e.,   they  are  expressed
either  as  concentration or as dally  Intake), and  therefore  the  Index  value
Is dlmenslonless.
    The  Interpretation   of  I   varies according to whether  E   refers  to  a
threshold or  nonthreshold effect.  Threshold  effects  are those  for  which  a
safe  level  of contaminant  exposure can  be  defined.   EPA  considers  all  non-
carcinogenic effects to  have  thresholds.  For effects  on  nonhuman organisms,
the  value chosen  for  E  1s usually  the  lowest  level  showing   some adverse
effect  In  long-term exposures,  and  thus   1s  slightly  above  the  chronic-
response  threshold.  For  humans,  the  value chosen 1s  generally an  estab-
lished  Acceptable  Dally Intake  (ADI), which  usually 1s designed  to  be  below
the  threshold for  chronic  toxlclty.    In either case,  1f Ig1 the  effect cannot
                                      D-6

-------
 be  ruled  out.   Values  of  I   close  to  1   may  be  somewhat  ambiguous  and
 require careful Interpretation.
    EPA  considers   carcinogenic  effects  to  be nonthreshold;  that  Is,  any
 level  of  exposure  to a  carcinogenic  contaminant Is  regarded as  posing some
 risk.  Since no threshold  can  be  Identified,  a "benchmark" level  of risk was
 chosen  against  which  to  evaluate  carcinogen exposures.   The  Carcinogen
 Assessment  Group  of  the  U.S.  EPA  has  estimated  the  carcinogenic  potency
 (I.e.,  the slope of  risk  versus  exposure)   for humans  exposed to  low dose
 levels of  carcinogens.   These potency values Indicate  the  upper  95% confi-
 dence  limit estimate of  excess  cancer  risk  for Individuals  experiencing  a
 given  exposure over a 70-year  lifetime.   They can  also be used to derive the
 exposure  level  expected to  correspond  to a  given  level of  excess  risk.   A
 risk  level  of  10~6, or one  In  one million,   has been  chosen  as an arbitrary
 benchmark.   Therefore,  for  nonthreshold  effects,  1f  I >1  then  the  cancer
 risk  resulting  from the disposal  practice may exceed  10~*.   Effect  Indices
 based  on  nonthreshold  effects  must be  clearly  differentiated   from  those
 based  on  threshold  effects,  since  their  Interpretation  Is  fundamentally
 different.   Subthreshold   exposures  are   normally  considered  acceptable,
 whereas the acceptability of a given low level of risk Is less clear.
 LIMITATIONS OF THE APPROACH
    The  approach  summarized 1n  this  appendix Involves  many  assumptions  and
 has many  limitations  that must be recognized, a few  of which  are discussed
 here.
    In the  null  case, where no  sludge  1s applied, the  Increase  1n exposure
 from  sludge  disposal  (C)  Is  zero.   Therefore,   the  effect  Index,  I  ,
 reduces  to the background  exposure  level  divided by the  level  associated
with  adverse  effects,  or D/E.   If E refers  to  a  threshold  effect,  then  It
                                      D-7

-------
should  be  the case  that  I  <1.   If  Instead  I  >1 then  one of the  follow-
                           c                   "
1ng must be  true.   EHher  a background condition  1s  causing adverse  effects
(an unlikely situation); D or E has  been  Incorrectly  chosen; or  D  and E  each
may have been  correctly  chosen  per  se, but are based on  two different  forms
of the contaminant.
    For example, perhaps a pure form  of the contaminant  caused  toxldty  to  a
bird  species  at  a  dietary  concentration (E)  of  100  yg/g,  but  the  back-
ground concentration (D) measured 1n  earthworms, which the  bird  consumes,  1s
200 vg/g.   The  value  for   the  null   case  of  Land  Application  Index 3,  the
Index  of  Soil   Biota  Predator  Toxldty,  would  then be  200/100  or  I =2.
Such an  Index  value 1s clearly unrealistic,  since earthworms are not  ordi-
narily toxic to  birds.  It may be Impossible  to  correct  the value  within the
limited  scope  of  this  analysis;  that  1s,   without  detailed  study  of  the
spedatlon or complexation of the contaminant  1n  soil and earthworm  tissues.
Therefore,  proper  Interpretation of  the  Index may require  comparison  of all
values to  the null  value rather than  to 1.0.   For  example,  1f the  null  value
of  I    1s  2.0  and  the value  under   the  worst sludge  disposal  scenario  1s
2.1, the best  Interpretation  1s  that there 1s little cause for  concern.  If
on the  other  hand  the  worst scenario resulted 1n  a value of 10,  there  prob-
ably  1s  cause for concern.  In  situations  Intermediate   to  these  two cases,
judgment should  be used following careful examination  of  the data  on  which
C, 0 and E are based.
    If  E refers  to a nonthreshold effect, I.e., cardnogenesls, a  null-case
value  of  I   >1  1s  still   more  difficult  to Interpret.    If  D  and  E  are
chosen  correctly,  the  straightforward  Interpretation  1s that  current  back-
ground  exposure levels are  associated with  an  upper-bound  lifetime  cancer
risk of  >10~6.   This risk  estimate  may be accurate  In  some Instances  since
                                      D-8

-------
there 1s  a  background risk of  cancer  1n the U.S. population,  some  of  which
may be  attributable  to pollutant exposures.  However,  the  Interpretation 1s
probably  Impossible  to  verify  because  the model  used  to  estimate the cancer
potency has  extrapolated from  observable  Incidences  1n  the  high-dose  range
to low doses where Incidences are not observable.
    In addition to uncertainties about  the  accuracy of  the  low-dose  extrapo-
lation  the  same  Issues of  chemical  form  discussed  earlier  arise   here  as
well.    The   chemical   forms  assessed  1n  cancer   bloassays  or  epidemiology
studies may be  significantly  different tox1colog1cally  than either  back-
ground forms or forms released due to sludge disposal  practices.
    Although the hazard  Indices  presented below are geared  toward rapid and
simplified  decision-making  (I.e.,  screening),  they   cannot   be  Interpreted
blindly.  Their  Interpretation requires  a  familiarity with  the  fundamental
principles underlying the generation and  selection of  the data on which they
are based, and the exercise of careful  Judgment on a  case-by-case basis.
    As  stated  earlier,  the preceding  has  been  summarized  from the  draft
document  entitled   "Methodology   for   Preliminary  Assessment  of   Chemical
Hazards  Resulting  from  Various   Sewage Sludge  Disposal  Practices".   The
latter  document  has  undergone peer  review  within the  Agency  and by outside
scientists.   Comments  effecting revision  of the  methodology  are  appropri-
ately reflected  1n  this  summary.   The  final document will  soon be  available
1n final form.
                                      D-9

-------
                                HAZARD INDICES
     The  following  outline  Illustrates  how each  hazard  Index was  derived,
Including  the  types  of  data  needed and  the  calculation formulae  employed.
However,  the  guidelines  and assumptions  that were  used  1n  selecting  the
numerical values for each  parameter are not Included  In  this  brief  summary.
For more  Information,  the reader 1s  referred  to the  draft  report,  "Method-
ology for  Preliminary  Assessment  of Chemical  Hazards  Resulting from Various
Sewage Sludge Disposal Practices  (ECAO-CIN-452)," which will be available 1n
final form from ECAO-C1nc1nnat1 .
I.   LANDSPREADING AND DISTRIBUTION-AND-MARKETING

     A.  Effect on Soil Concentration

         1.  Index of Soil Concentration Increment (Index 1)

             a.  For Inorganic Chemicals

                           (SC x AR) * (BS x MS)
                           J - ' - ' - L
                 T  .   ,
                 Index 1
                               BS (AR + MS)
                 where:
                     SC = Sludge concentration of pollutant (yg/g DW)
                     AR = Sludge application rate (mt DW/ha)
                     BS = Background concentration of pollutant In soil
                          (iig/9 DW)
                     MS = 2000 mt DW/ha = Assumed mass of soil 1n upper  15 cm
             b.  For Organic Chemicals
        Index !  .  CSs  .
                    5
                                       AR) + (BS x MS)
                                        AR + MS
                 or
                 Index 1 = CSr =
(CSS-BS)
                                                                        BS
                 (CSS 1s calculated for AR = 0, 5 and 50 mt/ha only;
                  CSr 1s calculated for AR = 500 mt/ha, based on 5 mt/ha
                  applied annually for 100 years)
                                     D-10

-------
            where:

                CSS = Soil  concentration of pollutant after  a single
                      year's application of sludge (vg/g OW)
                CSr = Soil  concentration of pollutant after  the yearly
                      application of sludge has  been repeated for  n + 1
                      years (vg/g DW)
                SC  = Sludge concentration of pollutant (vg/g DW)
                AR  = Sludge application rate (mt/ha)
                MS  = 2000 mt DW/ha = assumed mass  of soil 1n upper  15 cm
                BS  = Background concentration of pollutant In soil
                     (vg/9  DW)
                t-|/2 = Soil half-life of pollutant (years)
                n  = 99 years

B.  Effect on Soil  Biota and Predators of Soil Biota

    1.  Index of Soil Biota Tox1c1ty (Index 2)

        a.  For Inorganic Chemicals

                      In x  BS
            Index 2 = —	
                        TB

            where:

                I]  = Index  1 =  Index of soil concentration Increment
                     (unUless)
                BS  = Background concentration of pollutant 1n soil
                     (vg/9  DW)
                TB  = Soil concentration toxic to soil biota  (v9/g  DW)

        b.  For Organic Chemicals


            Index 2 = —
                      TB

            where:

                IT  = Index  1 =  Concentration of  pollutant 1n sludge-
                     amended soil (pg/g DW)
                TB  = Soil concentration toxic to soil biota  (vg/g

    2.  Index of Soil Biota Predator Tox1c1ty (Index 3)

        a.  For Inorganic Chemicals

                      (Ii - 1)(BS x UB) + BB
            Index 3 = —•	
                                TR
                                D-ll

-------
        where:

            I-} = Index 1  = Index of soil concentration Increment
                 (unltless)
            BS = Background concentration of pollutant 1n soil
                 (pg/9 DW)
            UB = Uptake slope of pollutant 1n soil biota (yg/g
                 tissue DW [yg/g soil DW]"1)
            BB = Background concentration 1n soil biota (yg/g DW)
            TR = Feed concentration toxic to predator (yg/g DW)

    b.  For Organic Chemicals

                  Ii x UB
        Index 3 = —	
                    TR

        where:

            J-) s Index 1  = Concentration of pollutant 1n sludge-
                 amended  soil (yg/g DW)
            UB = Uptake factor of pollutant 1n soil biota (yg/g
                 tissue DW [vg/g soil OW]"1)
            TR = Feed concentration toxic to predator (yg/g DW)

Effect on Plants and Plant Tissue Concentration

1.  Index of Phytotoxldty (Index 4)

    a.  For Inorganic Chemicals

                  Ji x BS
        Index 4 = —	
                    TP

        where:

            I~\ = Index 1  = Index of soil concentration Increment
                 {unltless)
            BS = Background concentration of pollutant 1n soil
                 (vg/9 DW)
            TP = Soil concentration toxic to plants (yg/g DW)

    b.  For Organic Chemicals

                  Ii
        Index 4 = —
                  TP
        where:
            !•) = Index 1 = Concentration of pollutant 1n sludge-
                 amended soil (yg/g DW)
            TP = Soil concentration toxic to plants (yg/g DW)
                            D-12

-------
2.  Index of Plant Concentration Increment Caused by Uptake
    (Index 5)

    a.  For Inorganic Chemicals

                  (Ii - 1) x BS
        Index 5 = —!	 x CO x UP + 1
                       BP

        where:

            I]  = Index 1  = Index of soil  concentration Increment
                 (unltless)
            BS  = Background concentration of pollutant In soil
                 (yg/g OW)
            CO  = 2 kg/ha  (yg/g)""1 = Conversion factor between  soil
                 concentration and application rate
            UP  = Uptake slope of pollutant 1n  plant tissue (yg/g
                 tissue DW [kg/ha]"1)
            BP  = Background concentration 1n plant tissue (yg/g DW)

    b.  For Organic Chemicals

        Index 5 = I] x UP

        where:

            I]  = Index 1  = Concentration  of pollutant 1n sludge-
                 amended  soil (yg/g DW)
            UP  = Uptake factor of pollutant 1n plant tissue (yg/g
                 tissue DW [yg/g soil DWJ'1)

3.  Index of Plant Concentration Increment Permitted by Phyto-
    toxldty (Index 6)

    a.  For Inorganic Chemicals

                  PP
        Index 6 = —
                  BP

        where:

            PP  = Maximum  plant tissue concentration associated  with
                 phytotoxldty (yg/g DW)
            BP  = Background concentration 1n plant tissue (yg/g DW)

    b.  For Organic Chemicals

        Index 6 = PP

        where:

            PP  = Maximum  plant tissue concentration associated  with
                 phytotoxldty (yg/g DW)
                            D-13

-------
C.  Effect on Herbivorous Animals

    1.  Index of Animal Toxldty Resulting from Plant  Consumption
        (Index 7)

        a.  For Inorganic Chemicals

                      I5 x BP
            Index 7 = —	
                        TA

            where:

                15 = Index 5 = Index of plant concentration Increment
                     caused by uptake (unltless)
                BP = Background concentration 1n plant tissue (yg/g DW)
                TA = Feed concentration toxic to herbivorous  animal
                     (w9/g
        b.  For Organic Chemicals


            Index 7 = —
                      TA

            where:

                15 = Index 5 = Concentration of pollutant  1n plant
                     grown In sludge-amended soil  (yg/g DW)
                TA = Feed concentration toxic to herbivorous animal
                     (vg/g DW)

        Index of Animal Toxldty Resulting from Sludge Ingestlon
        (Index 8)

        a.  For Inorganic Chemicals

                                BS x GS
            If AR =0,     IQ



            If AR * 0,     I8
  TA

SC x GS
                                  TA

            where:

                AR = Sludge application rate (mt DW/ha)
                SC = Sludge concentration of pollutant (yg/g DW)
                BS = Background concentration of pollutant 1n soil
                     (yg/g DW)
                GS = Fraction of animal diet assumed to be soil
                     (unltless)
                TA = Feed concentration toxic to herbivorous animal
                           DW)
                                D-14

-------
        b.  For Organic Chemicals

            If AR = 0,  Index 8=0
            If AR 4 0,  I8 -
                              TA

            where:

                AR  = Sludge application rate (mt DW/ha)
                SC  = Sludge concentration of pollutant  (vg/g DW)
                GS  = Fraction of animal diet assumed to  be soil
                TA  = Feed concentration toxic to herbivorous animal
                     (vg/g OW)
E.  Effect on Humans
        Index of Human Tox1c1ty/Cancer  Risk  Resulting from Plant
        Consumption (Index 9)

        a.   For Inorganic Chemicals

            T ,   o   tds - D  BP x DT]  + PI
            Index 9 =	
                            ADI  or RSI

            where:

                15  = Index 5 = Index of plant  concentration Increment
                     caused by uptake (unltless)
                BP  = Background  concentration  1n  plant tissue (vg/g  DW)
                DT  = Dally human dietary  Intake of  affected plant  tissue
                     (g/day DW)
                DI  = Average dally human  dietary  Intake of pollutant
                     (vg/day)
                ADI = Acceptable dally  Intake  of  pollutant (v9/day)
                RSI = Cancer risk-specific Intake (vg/day)

        b.   For Organic Chemicals

                      [{I5 - BS  x UP) x DT]  -i-  DI
            Index 9 =	
                              ADI or RSI

            where:

                15  = Index 5 = Concentration of pollutant  1n plant
                     grown 1n  sludge-amended soil (vg/g DW)
                DT  = Dally human dietary  Intake of  affected plant  tissue
                     (g/day DW)
                DI  = Average dally human  dietary  Intake of pollutant
                     (yg/day)
                ADI = Acceptable dally  Intake  of  pollutant (vg/day)
                RSI = Cancer risk-specific Intake (vg/day)
                                D-15

-------
2.  Index of Human Tox1c1ty/Cancer  Risk Resulting from Consumption
    of Animal Products Derived from Animals  Feeding on Plants
    (Index 10)

    a.  For Inorganic Chemicals


        T .,   ,ft   Ids " 1}  BP x UA x DA]  + DI
        Index 10 = - - -
                            ADI or  RSI

        where:

            15 = Index 5 = Index of plant  concentration Increment
                 caused by uptake (unltless)
            BP = Background concentration  1n plant tissue  (yg/g  DW)
            UA = Uptake slope of pollutant  In animal  tissue  (yg/g
                 tissue DW [yg/g feed DW]"1)
            DA = Dally human  dietary Intake  of affected animal
                 tissue (g/day DW)
            DI = Average dally human dietary Intake of pollutant
            ADI = Acceptable dally Intake of  pollutant  (yg/day)
            RSI = Cancer  risk-specific  Intake (yg/day)

    b.  For Organic Chemicals

                   [(Is - BS x UP) x UA x DA] + DI
        Index 10 = - - -
                             ADI  or RSI

        where:

            15  = Index 5  = Concentration of pollutant 1n  plant
                 grown 1n sludge-amended soil (yg/g DW)
            UA  = Uptake factor of pollutant 1n animal tissue  (yg/g
                 tissue DW [yg/g  feed DW]"1)
            DA  = Dally human dietary Intake of affected animal
                 tissue (g/day DW)
            DI  = Average  dally human dietary  Intake of  pollutant
                 (vg/day)
            ADI = Acceptable dally Intake of  pollutant  (vg/day)
            RSI = Cancer  risk-specific  Intake (yg/day)

3.  Index of Human Toxlclty/Cancer Risk Resulting from Consumption
    of Animal Products Derived from Animals Ingesting Soil
    (Index 11)

    a.  For Inorganic and Organic Chemicals

        If AR = 0,     index 11 . (BS x GS x  UA x DA) * DI
                                         ADI  or RSI


        If AR i 0,     index 11 . 'SC " 6S '  UA « DA' *  "'
                                         ADI  or RSI
                            D-16

-------
        where:

            AR  = Sludge application rate (mt DW/ha)
            BS  = Background concentration of pollutant 1n soil
                 (vg/g DW)
            SC  = Sludge concentration of pollutant  (vg/g DW)
            GS  = Fraction of animal diet assumed to  be soil
                 (unltless)
            UA  = Uptake slope (Inorganics)  or uptake factor
                 (organlcs) of pollutant 1n animal  tissue (vg/g
                 tissue DW [vg/g feed DW'1])
            DA  = Average dally human dietary Intake  of affected
                 animal tissue (g/day DW)
            DI  = Average dally human dietary Intake  of pollutant
                 (vg/day)
            ADI = Acceptable dally Intake of pollutant (vg/day)
            RSI = Cancer risk-specific Intake (yg/day)

4.  Index of Human ToxIcHy/Cancer Risk Resulting from Soil
    Ingestlon (Index 12)

    a.   For Inorganic Chemicals

                   (I] x BS x DS)  + DI
        Index 12 =
                       ADI  or  RSI

                                           (SC  x DS)  + DI
        Pure sludge Ingestlon:   Index 12 =
                                             ADI  or  RSI

        where:

            I]  = Index 1  = Index of  soil concentration  Increment
                 (unltless)
            SC  = Sludge concentration of pollutant  (vg/g  DW)
            BS  = Background  concentration of  pollutant  1n soil
                 (vg/g DW)
            DS  = Assumed  amount  of  soil  1n human  diet  (g/day)
            DI  = Average  dally  dietary Intake of  pollutant  (vg/day)
            ADI = Acceptable dally  Intake of  pollutant  (vg/day)
            RSI = Cancer  risk-specific Intake (yg/day)

    b.   For  Organic Chemicals

                   (1-1 x  DS) +  DI
        Index  12 =
                     ADI  or  RSI

                                           (SC  x  DS)  +  DI
        Pure  sludge  Ingestlon:   Index  12
                                             ADI  or  RSI
                            0-17

-------
    where:
        IT  = Index 1  = Concentration of  pollutant  In  sludge-
             amended  soil  (vg/g DM)
        SC  = Sludge concentration of pollutant  (vg/g  DW)
        DS  = Assumed  amount of  soil  1n human  diet  (g/day)
        01  = Average  dally human dietary Intake of pollutant
        ADI =; Acceptable dally Intake of  pollutant  (vg/day)
        RSI = Cancer risk-specific  Intake (yg/day)

Index of Aggregate Human Toxlclty/Cancer  Risk (Index  13)

a.  For Inorganic and Organic Chemicals

                                         3DI
    Index 13 = Ig + Iin + In + IT? - -  -
                y    IU    "    u   ADI or  RSI

    where:

        Ig  = Index 9 = Index of human toxldty/cancer  risk
              resulting from plant  consumption (unltless)
        IIQ = Index 10 = Index of human  toxlclty/cancer  risk
              resulting from consumption  of animal  products
              derived from animals  feeding on plants  (unltless)
        I]] = Index 11 = Index of human  toxldty/cancer  risk
              resulting from consumption  of animal  products
              derived from animals  Ingesting soil  (unltless)
        I-|2 = Index 12 = Index of human  toxldty/cancer  risk
              resulting from soil Ingestlon (unltless)
        DI  = Average dally dietary Intake of pollutant  (yg/day)
        ADI = Acceptable dally Intake of  pollutant  (vg/day)
        RSI = Cancer risk-specific  Intake (vQ/day)
                        D-18

-------
II.   LANDFILLING

     A.   Procedure

         Using Equation 1,  several  values of  C/C0  for  the unsaturated  zone
         are calculated corresponding  to  Increasing values of t until  equi-
         librium 1s reached.   Assuming a 5-year pulse  Input  from the  land-
         fill, Equation 3 1s employed  to estimate the concentration  vs.  time
         data at the water  table.   The concentration vs.  time curve  1s  then
         transformed Into  a  square pulse  having  a  constant concentration
         equal  to  the  peak  concentration,  Cu,  from  the  unsaturated  zone,
         and  a  duration,  t0,  chosen   so  that  the  total areas  under  the
         curve and the  pulse  are  equal, as Illustrated 1n Equation  3.   This
         square  pulse  1s  then used as  the  Input to the linkage assessment,
         Equation  2, which estimates Initial dilution 1n the  aquifer  to  give
         the  Initial concentration,  C0, for  the saturated zone assessment.
         (Conditions for  B,  thickness of  unsaturated  zone,  have  been  set
         such that  dilution  1s actually  negligible.)   The  saturated  zone
         assessment procedure  1s  nearly  Identical  to  that  for  the  unsatu-
         rated  zone  except  for  the   definition  of certain  parameters  and
         choice  of  parameters  values.   The  maximum   concentration  at  the
         well,  Cmax,   1s   used  to  calculate   the   Index  values  given  1n
         Equations 4 and 5.

     B.   Equation  1:   Transport Assessment


             £1^il = 1/2  [exp(Ai)  erfc(A2)  + exp(Bi)  erfc(B2)l = P(x,t)
              co

         Requires  evaluations  of  four  dlmenslonless Input values and  subse-
         quent evaluation  of  the  result.   Exp(A-))  denotes   the exponential
         of   A],   e^i,  and   erfc(A2)  denotes   the   complimentary   error
         function   of   A2-   Erfc(Ap)  produces   values   between  0.0  and  2.0
         (Abramowltz and Stegun, 1972).

         where:

                      [V*  -  (V*2 + 40*  x v*)1/2]
             A  _
              1  = 2D*
             A  _ x - t (V*2 + 4D* x
              2 =       (40* x t)1/2
             D    _2L_ [V* + (V*2 + 4D*  x v*)1/2]
              1  = 2D*
                  x + t  (V*2 +  4D*  x
             82 =       (40* x  t)l/2
                                     D-19

-------
and where for the unsaturated zone:
    C0 = SC x CF = Initial leachate  concentration (yg/9.)
    SC = Sludge concentration of pollutant (mg/kg DW)
                                            pc y ins
    CF = 250 kg sludge sol1ds/m3 leachate =       u
                                             1 - PS
    PS = Percent solids (by weight)  of landfUled sludge  = 20%
    t  = Time (years)
    x  = h = Depth to groundwater (m)
    D* = a x V* (mVyear)
    a  = D1spers1v1ty coefficient (m)
    V* = — ^— (m/year)
         6 x R
    Q  = Leachate generation rate (m/year)
    e  = Volumetric water content (unltless)
    R  = 1 t -^ x Kd = Retardation factor (unltless)
              e
    pdry = Dpy bulk density (g/mfc)
    K(j = Soil sorptlon coefficient (mi/g) (for Inorganic chemicals)
    *d = foe x KOC (m*-/9) (f°r organic chemicals)
    foc = Fraction of organic carbon (unltless) (for organic
          chemicals)
    KQC = Organic carbon partition coefficient (mi/g) (for
          organic chemicals)
            K
    v  = Degradation rate (day"1)
and where for the saturated zone:
    C0 = Initial concentration of pollutant 1n aquifer as deter-
         mined by Equation 2 (yg/fc)
    t  = Time (years)
                            D-20

-------
        x  = AS. = Distance from well to landfill (m)
        D* = a x V* (mVyear)
        a  - Dlsperslvlty coefficient (m)
        V* = *-*— *- (m/year)
             0 x R
        K  = Hydraulic conductivity of the aquifer (m/day)
        1  = Average hydraulic gradient between landfill  and well
             (unltless)
        0  = Aquifer porosity (unltless)
        R  = 1 + -    x K(j = Retardation factor = 1  (unltless)
                   0
             since K(j 1s assumed to be zero for the  saturated zone.
C.  Equation 2.  Linkage Assessment
                C  - C  x         Q x W
                 0 "  U   365 [(K x 1) * 0] x B
        where:
            C0 = Initial concentration of pollutant  1n the saturated
                 zone as determined by Equation 1 (pg/4)
            Cu = Maximum pulse concentration from the unsaturated zone
                 (wg/l)
            0  = Leachate generation rate (m/year)
            M  = Width of landfill (m)
            K  = Hydraulic conductivity of the aquifer (m/day)
            1  = Average hydraulic gradient between  landfill  and well
                 (unltless)
            0  = Aquifer porosity (unltless)
            B  = Thickness of saturated zone (m)  where:
                     B >   2
                       ~ K x 1 x 365
                                D-21

-------
D.  Equation 3.   Pulse Assessment
        ^f^1' P(x.t) for  0 < t < t0

        ^^ * P(x,t) - P(x,t - t0)  for  t  > t0
          Lo
    where:
        t0 (for  unsaturated  zone) = LT = Landfill  leaching  time  (years)
        t0 (for  saturated zone) = Pulse duration at  the  water  table
           (x =  h)  as determined by the following  equation:
                     t0 - to'"0 C dt] * Cu
            P(xit)  =  **' '  as determined  by Equation  1
                       C0
E.  Equation 4.   Index of Groundwater  Concentration  Increment  Resulting
    from Landfllled Sludge (Index 1)
    1.  For Inorganic Chemicals
                  Cmax * BC
        Index 1  = 	
                     BC
        where:
            cmax = Maximum concentration of  pollutant  at well  =
                   Maximum of C(AH,t)  calculated  1n  Equation  1  (yg/l)
            BC   = Background concentration  of pollutant 1n groundwater
    2.  For Organic Chemicals
        Index 1 = Cmax
        where:
            cmax = Maximum concentration of pollutant at  well  =
                   Maximum of C(At,t)  calculated 1n Equation 1
                                D-22

-------
F.  Equation 5.   Index of Human Tox1c1ty/Cancer Risk Resulting from
    Groundwater  Contamination (Index 2)

    1.  For Inorganic Chemicals

                  [(I-i - 1) BC x AC] + DI
        Index 2  = - ! -
                        ADI or RSI

        where:

            I-]  = Index 1 = Index of groundwater concentration Increment
                 resulting from landfllled sludge
            BC  = Background concentration  of pollutant 1n groundwater
            AC = Average human consumption of drinking water (a/day)
            DI = Average dally human dietary Intake of pollutant
                 Ug/day)
            ADI = Acceptable dally Intake of pollutant (vg/day)
            RSI = Cancer risk-specific  Intake (vg/day)

    2.  For Organic Chemicals

                  (Ii  x AC)  + DI
        Index 2 = — - - -
                    ADI or RSI

        where:

            I] = Index 1 = Groundwater  concentration resulting from
                 landfllled  sludge
            AC = Average human consumption of drinking water (8,/day)
            DI = Average dally human dietary Intake of pollutant
                 (pg/day)
            ADI = Acceptable dally Intake of pollutant (vg/day)
            RSI = Cancer risk-specific  Intake (vg/day)
                                D-23

-------
III.  INCINERATION

     A.   Index of Air  Concentration  Increment  Resulting  from Incinerator
         Emissions (Index  1)

         1.  For  Inorganic  and  Organic  Chemicals

             Index T  _ (C  x PS  x  SC  x  FH x  DP) +  BA
                                    BA

             where:

                 C =  Coefficient to correct for  mass  and  time  units
                      (hr/sec x g/mg)
                 DS --  Sludge feed rate  (kg/hr  DW)
                 SC =  Sludge concentration  of  pollutant  (mg/kg  DW)
                 FM =  Fraction  of pollutant emitted  through  stack  (unltless)
                 DP •=  Dispersion  parameter  for estimating  maximum  annual
                      ground level concentration  (yg/ms  [g/sec]-1)
                 BA =  Background  concentration of pollutant  1n  urban  air
                      (vg/m»)

     B.   Index of Human Toxlclty/Cancer Risk Resulting from  Inhalation  of
         Incinerator  Emissions  (Index  2)

         1.  For  Inorganic  and  Organic  Chemicals

                   ,    [dl - 1)  x BA]  + BA
             Index 2  = -
                               EC

             where:

                 II =  Index 1 = Index  of air concentration Increment
                      resulting from Incinerator  emissions (unltless)
                 BA =  Background  concentration of pollutant  In  urban  air
                 EC = Exposure clrterlon
                                     D-24

-------
IV.   OCEAN DISPOSAL

     A.   Index of Sea water  Concentration Resulting from Initial  Mixing  of
         Sludge (Index 1)

         1.   For  Inorganic  Chemicals

                        SC  x ST x PS
             Index
                       W x D x L x CA

             where:

                 SC  = Sludge concentration of  pollutant  (mg/kg OW)
                 ST  = Sludge mass dumped by a  single  tanker  (kg WW)
                 PS  = Percent solids  1n sludge (kg DW/kg WW)
                 W  = Width of Initial  plume dilution (m)
                 D  = Depth to pycnocllne or effective depth  of mixing for
                      shallow water site (m)
                 L  = Length of tanker  path (m)
                 CA  = Ambient water concentration of  pollutant (yg/1)

         2.   For  Organic Chemicals

             Index !  , SC x ST x PS
                        W x D x L

             where:

                 SC  = Sludge concentration of  pollutant  (mg/kg DW)
                 ST  = Sludge mass dumped by a  single  tanker  (kg WW)
                 PS  = Percent solids  In sludge (kg DW/kg WW)
                 W  = Width of Initial  plume dilution (m)
                 D  = Depth to pycnocllne or effective depth  of mixing for
                      shallow water site (m)
                 L  = Length of tanker  path (m)

         Index of Seawater Concentration Representing a  24-Hour Dumping Cycle
         (Index 2)

         1.   For  Inorganic Chemicals

                          SS x SC
             Index 2
                       V  x  D  x L  x  CA

             where:

                 SS  =  Dally sludge  disposal  rate  (kg  DW/day)
                 SC  =  Sludge  concentration  of  pollutant  (mg/kg  DW)
                 V   =  Average current velocity at  site  (m/day)
                 D   =  Depth to pycnocllne or effective  depth  of mixing  for
                      shallow water  site  (m)
                 L   =  Length  of tanker  path  (m)
                 CA  =  Ambient water  concentration  of  pollutant
                                     D-25

-------
    2.  For Organic Chemicals


        Index 2 .  SSxSC
                  V x D x L

        where:

            SS = Dally sludge disposal  rate (kg DW/day)
            SC = Sludge concentration of pollutant (mg/kg DW)
            V  = Average current velocity at site (m/day)
            D  = Depth to pycnocllne or effective depth  of mixing for
                 shallow water site (m)
            L  = Length of tanker path  (m)

C.  Index of Toxldty to Aquatic Life (Index 3)

    1.  For Inorganic Chemicals

                  IT or Io x CA
        Index 3 •

        where:

            I-)   = Index 1 = Index of seawater concentration resulting
                   from Initial mixing after sludge disposal

            AWQC = Criterion or other value expressed as an average
                   concentration to protect marine organisms from acute
                   and chronic toxic effects
            I?   = Index 2 = Index of seawater concentration repre-
                   senting a 24-hour dumping cycle

            AWQC = Criterion expressed as an average concentration to
                   protect the marketability of edible marine organisms
                   (AWQC)

            CA   = Ambient water concentration of pollutant

    2.  For Organic Chemicals

                  IT or I?
        Index 3 = — - -
                    AWQC
                                D-26

-------
    where:

        I]    = Index 1  = Index of  seawater  concentration  resulting
               from Initial  mixing after  sludge disposal  (yg/l)

        AWQC = Criterion or  other  value expressed as  an average
               concentration to protect marine organisms  from acute
               and chronic toxic effects  (yg/8.)

        \2    = Index 2  = Index of  seawater  concentration  repre-
               senting  a 24-hour dumping  cycle (yg/4)

        AWQC - Criterion expressed as  an  average concentration to
               protect  the marketability  of edible marine organisms

Index of Human Toxlclty/Cancer Risk Resulting from Seafood Consump-
tion (Index 4)

1.  For Inorganic Chemicals

              [(I2 - 1) x CF x FS  x QF] + DI
    Index 4 = 	
                        RSI  or ADI

    where:

        \2  = Index 2 =  Index of seawater  concentration represent-
             ing a 24-hour dumping cycle
        OF  = Dietary consumption of seafood (g WW/day)
        FS  = Fraction of consumed  seafood originating from the
             disposal site (unltless)
        CF  = Background concentration  of  pollutant 1n seafood (yg/g)
        DI  = Average dally human dietary  Intake of pollutant
        ADI = Acceptable dally Intake of pollutant (yg/day)
        RSI = Cancer  risk-specific  Intake (yg/day)

2.  For Organic Chemicals

              (I? x BCF  x 10"3 kg/g x FS x QF)  * DI
    Index 4 = 	
                           RSI or  ADI

    where:

        Ip = Index 2  = Index of seawater concentration represent-
             ing a 24-hour  dumping  cycle (yg/fc)
        QF  = Dietary  consumption of seafood (g  WW/day)
        FS = Fraction of consumed  seafood originating from the
             disposal site  (unltless)
        BCF = B1oconcentrat1on factor of pollutant (I/kg)
        DI  = Average  dally  human dietary Intake of pollutant
             (yg/day)
        ADI = Acceptable dally Intake of pollutant (yg/day)
        RSI = Cancer  risk-specific  Intake (yg/day)
                            D-27

-------
                               LITERATURE CITED
Camp,  Dresser  and  McKee,  Inc.   1984.   A Comparison  of  Studies  of  Toxic
Substances  1n  POTW  Sludges.   Prepared  for   U.S.  EPA  under  Contract  No.
68-01-6403.  Camp, Dresser and McKee, Annandale, VA.   August.

U.S.  EPA.   1982.   Fate  of  Priority Pollutants  1n  Pullcly-Owned  Treatment
Works.   Final  Report.    Vol.  I.    EPA  440/1-82-303.   Effluent  Guidelines
Division, Washington, DC.  September.
                                     D-28

-------
        APPENDIX E:
HAZARD INDEX VALUES  FOR  ALL
   CONDITIONS OF ANALYSIS
   RELATED TO LANDFILLING

-------








































u
M
.2
W
C.O
r5
<



















































a
z

.»*-*..



a
25

^^

U CM
a
rs x
cn o
Q t-H

•J Z
1-1 O
O H
Z <
< Z
•J t-l

s; 3
O H

Cr. O
U
z a:
H H
•J <
n 3

tij 2
a: n

F-4 Q£
Z O
bJ
z s:
Ctj O
U fTi
Z

z
Z — i
O t-i
l—i >-3
t"* *"^
< cn
C£ U3
H OS
Z
W V-
u cn
2 1-4
O D£
U
ad
a£ M
CzJ O
£"• 25
^ ^
^ O
Q
z z
3 <
O Z
OS =>
O 31

cti r* •
0 0

•*^ ?^

c o
z z
1— 1 »— 1


















CO






r—







>o



u
j3
•X
to
cn u"*
•t-i
cn
X
cfl
C

U-l
O

c <•
O

j_J
• c4
•^
c
o
u



CO











CM











•—1








Ol
U

Ll
UI
.^4
kl
Ol
4-1
u
eg

cfl
jS
o

01

• •H
cn
Z Z Z





^J
3 Z 3







H H H







H H H








 o E
o TJ o) -^ to
c 01 cx 4-1 ki
O -J X 0) cfl
U cfl 4-1 "i CX
k. kf
Ol -3 •— i 4) CU
QO 4-J "^ ^ ^
-O CO O ->-i
3 ui cn cn
—i C
tn r3
Z Z O O






3300
CM O
^-i O
•^
i-^



O
H 3
^O C.^
o
CM




^^
3 H
•H O
OO
CM





•—I
H H
^^ f^
in







,— (
H H
*"* PO
i.O








vO
H H •
.-H O
XT
CM







r-l
H E-i
*-H PO
m



1
u
tfl
ki
CQ
jc ao
u 01
^J
•o oi
0) CU-I 4J
C tg in oi CU CU
o o E a 3
M Ol -rt CO _i _i
CX ±J kj Cfl Q]
•O X Ul cfl > >
Ol 4-1 -^i CX
4J ki —1 CM
CO —i CU 0)
k. •-« 4-1 4J X X
3 O -^ Ol Ol
j-1 cn en TJ t3
CO C C



01
to
"O
CU
Ol
3

•^
Ul
1 1
Ul
X
01
,— ^
r- 1
U-l
-C3
C
cfl
•-1
0
C

01
^4
V
•C
3

C
O
4-1
• »-•
"X3
C
o
CJ

1—4 •
-4 C
3 0
C ••"!
II Tl
-o
z c
o
•«•• tl
T3
Ol 01
01 ••*
•3 J=
4^
01
Ol kl
3 O
—I U-l
to
> 0)

O> J3
01 CO
CO U
O "H
1 •— 1
4-1 CX
ui CX
ki CO
O
3 iJ
o
II C

3 II

• •* ^
•o z
O)
Ul •»
3 C
O
01 01
0) ••*
3 ki
— v CO
CO CX
> E
o
r-l O
Cfl
U ki
.H O
fl. '_^ _)
>^
H w
>
JC
4-1

oo
c
• «-!
Ul
3

-a
CU

to

3
U
«— i
CO
U

ai
J3
^
CO
E

C
3
o
r*,
01

0)
tn
O
jC
4-1

C
cfl
jC
4-1

kl
Ol
r?
4-1
O

01
C
o
• •H
4-1
cfl
C
• •H
r\
E
o
u

kl
o
U-l

01
0)
3
,— ^
CO


X
01
•a
c
H-l
J3












































•
•^
Ol
Ul
3

cn
O)
3
•—4
CO
^

kj
Ol
4-J
O)
E
ca
ki
ca
cx

k.
o
U-l

x
• f-l
TS
C
Ol
CX
CX
^

c
• ••4

•~l
t
^

CU
•_- 1
o
cfl
H

01
0)
cn
u








































sZ.
CD
N_^

4-1
C
OJ
4-1
C
o
o

kl
01
4-1
CO
3

u
• «-l
kf
4J
01
E
3
1— <
o
>

-o
c
fO

.«^s
>\
Vj
"O
04
*.™x

X
u
. *-*
cn
C
0)
•o

^d
I— J
3
JO

^
v^
a
•o















'a
"^^
u
C
cu
• •-!
U
• »^
U-l
U-l
O)
o
o
x
4J
'>
• •-1
cn
U
Ol
cx
Ol
• •-1
•^3

T3
C
CO
•*
^*v
.r^
s^s

kl
Ol
4-J
CO
3
•o
C
3
0
k>
00

0
4-1

JC
4J
CX
o>


•h
^-s
cr


Ol
4^
CO
kl

C
o
• »-4
4-)
CO
kl
Ol
C
01
00

0)
4-1
tfl
JC
u
CO
o>
-J
Ol






























•
^-*
^
**^

kl
01
U-l
.,H
3
cr
CO

O)
-f?
4-J

U-|
o

^s^
4-)
• l-l
>
• •H
4J
u
3
•o
c
o
u

•"!
U-l
Ol
0
^
.^
•^^
•*-*
**c
^
Ol
kl
Ol
CX
Ol
• -4
TD

"w
c
CO

^
'"^
erf
3

^_ 1
r- 1
• l-l
uw
•o
c
CO
•—1

o
4-J

,—4
•—1
Ol
3

E
o

U-l

0)
u
c
CO
4-1
Ul
i-4
•a

•>.
»*v
• •H
v^

4-1
c
Ol

•o
CO
u
00

u
s»*
.—I
3
CO
kl
•a
>>^
•?•
00
E-l

-------















































W

W
N
z
H
CQ
























































Q
Z
^j.

^"x x"s
«-« CN

X X
w w
z z
t— 1 1— 1
V-^ N«X

w z
0 O
Q 1-1
3 H
•-J <
f/3 Z
1— «
t- J ^y
U] 
•
vO


CO
1
o
^H O

3 H H H H X tC

n
•
LO


vr
1
O
— < O

f- E- H H H X cs

^
•
CNI

1 1
U O
to to
C V4 U '~>
O CO CO -3
•^ x; a) x oo ^~-
4_l u en u in 60
tfl Q) V- V- 3.
1- C -O Ol T3 0) « —
4-1 O CT3 4-1 01 CtM XJ
C t>4 toenoi c toenQJ QJ CV
01 OEO OE33
CJ "O OJ •»-* to C*0 O) •*-< to r— * ^-J
C Ol C4,4-)k4 CLiJU CfJ CO
o J-J Xtnnj "TD Xtnto z> >
U CO 4_I**4CL O) U-^HQ4
Vl VJ 4_l U — 1 CNI
QJ 3 ^^aiai to — i oi o)
00 4-1 .rtJ_>4-> Vl -^HiJi-l X X
•U tfl O «^ 3 O «-H QJ QJ
3 ent/3CO4-it/5CO-OT3
— i c to c c
C/O 3 t/2 )-H HH


cn •
to x
"O -0
0- c
Wi QJ
3 a.
a.
•* ^!
tn
iJ O)
en x:
'x ^
QJ C °
• «H ^^* ^^^
r-t <->
r-t QJ o • -y

Hi J3 «^ a a)
T3 3 >-^ •"
c E c o
CO W O 4_> >rH
^ o -° c "^
t-v^ W (^j ^^
O to ._, 0)
C Ol t-l U °
_c -^ ^
Ci) 4-} t-J t4-,
^-t "^ ' 1 ( ^**
01 oo c oi ^
x; c "J o '^
5 .„, oo u >
tn u •--;
3 0 >, J"
C 4J U
0 -U "-" .-, ^
— o) o > «•
4J 4-1 .rH m
.^ to C tn • "^
•a — i o v, ^-, ~o
C 3 •-" Ol lai __
0 U *> CL^ ^
(J ^ U « C
to to •-< ij *
— < • u u -a cy
t c "^"1 u-i **
3 O Ol "O "-1 '"'^
e -~ xi "a c 3 «
4-1 C co o" <3
II .rt X trj nj s^
"O H3 *"
Z C E -'-> 0) — c
o '~v _c x: —
•- O C • CD V_/ 4_l --.
-O 5 TD ^ Uj
0) in o oj ^ I-M ~o
en--i_c tnj-j ai O C
3 x; tn 3 C 4_i co
4J 0) CO X— 1
tn 01 en j-> t2 4-J
Oil-.enoiC-D--HO
3OO3OC>4J
r-4 U_l £ _! (J 3-^1

> 0) > lj U, 
0) XI CO l-i 4-1 T3 3
en fa x: Ol co O C
to ^^ Ol
o o ex oi -a 3 u
3 u E eo c
O en IMI 3 ^ i- co
u c c o — i «~> -a 4-1
O tw O O" X en
3 n .rt > v-' x: •-
4-J X T3
•** <£ CO -M •• QJ TJ
-ozc-a--^4_jc
Ol --H C X cc to '-»
in •'* X) o> I-* i-i • »-i
3 C E 0. T3 *-• x^
o o o- ex c ta
in in u  — 4_i
QJ -^ .-. C
3V.UCXXJXO)
f— ( CC' O'*^ 4-1 CQ J-J>^^
CO CX U-, •-( Ui .^H -^
> E •-" in co in «o
O tn 1 c C O 1-
^HUOJXl< — i j-J ^4*— i
X to 3 CO QJ 3
t-. tn XHXix:1*-! to
•-< Q) £J --H Vw
II tn-ooiXco3"a
to c a) i- QJ cr x
f-«XlH-ltOQJ<3:
CQ _-Q tj *O ^ ^*^ O<0
E-2

-------
 O
 z
 X
 bJ
 a
 z — «
 l-t «M
 o a
 o z
 3 H-1
 •J v^
 CO

 O O
 W t-i
 >J H
 J <
 i-i Z
 b. M
 o 5
 z 2
 < H
 T.  U
 O

 [x,  u
     H
 U  <
 Z  3
 i-i  Q

i5|

! co  c&
' Lei  U
 a  =3
 Z  CO
 o  u
 O  a£

 as  v
 U  CO
 E—  >—i
 <  oS

 O  as

 =>
     U
 O  Z
 &.  <
 CJ  U

 Cz.  U.
 o  o

 .X  X
 U  bJ
 a  o

co





>-•








v£>






*^
XI

BS
en m

en
^
cO

C4-I
O

C 
1
O O
3 H H H H — i m
X —i
ex)
•
»-H





o~i
•
4-H

1 1
ej cj
co eg
Cl- >- ^"7
O co 10 «-J
.-i x; 01 xi oo ^~
j_> o en u en OO
ig 0) t- Li 3.
Li n 73 Ol 73 O) ^-^
AJ O C 73 AJ Ol C U-4 AJ
C IsJ coenoi C cgenoi 0) 0)
0) oEO CJE33
U 73 0) •— CO M OI--4CO —i ,— i
C Ol O. AJ Li CL AJ Li rQ iO
O AJ >> in eo 73 ixtnco > >
(J 10 AJ -^ CL OJ AJ •** CX
V. L> AJ Li .— 1 csj
11 3 ^OIOI co ^j Ol Ol
00 AJ .^AJAJ 1-1 •-< AJ AJ X X
-a<0O-~'3O'-iOIOI
3 (ncOCOAJCOCO7373
— c ,« c c
co ra w ^ »_


en
co
73
0)
en
3
*.
en
1 1
en
X
CD

j
,__,
•r-4
U^
73
C
CO
t— J
o
c

0)
Ui
OS
x;
3
•.
C
o
AJ
• ~*
73
C
o
0

*—4
,_^
3
C

II

Z

«lk
73
Ol
en
3

en
Ol
3
,—i
CO
>

Ol
en
CO
u
1
AJ
en
Ui
O
3

II

3

•».
73
CU
in
3

en
QJ
3

CO
>

1—4
CO
u
.,-1






































•
C
o
• i-4
AJ
• IM
73
C
O
O

en
• *H
x;
AJ

lu
O
U-l

0)

X)
CO
u
• r-l
*-^
a.
a.
CO

AJ
O


II


u
CO
r— 1
3
O
efl
o

01
X)

>s
CO
E

c
3
o
f~L
en

0)
en
O
j^
±j

C
CO
JC.
AJ

Ll
Ol
JC
AJ
o

en
C
O
• *-l
AJ
Q
C
• •H
XI
E
O
u

Ll
o


en
O>
3
,—<
efl
>

X
0)
c

Xl















































•
73
Ol
en
3

en
01
3
<_i
CO
>

Li
CU
AJ
0)
E
CO
Li
CO
a.

t,
o
U-4

X
• «-4
73
C
0)
a.
a.
^

c


r«4
1
^

CU

XI
CO


01
Ol
CO
u












.
-~~
u
0
U-i
^— ^

c.
o
XI
CO
u

u
• f-4
c
CO
oo
L4
o

U-l
o
c
o
• .-1
AJ
u
CO
Ll
U-4

73
c
CO

**
*~**
CD
**^

AJ
c
cu
iJ
c
o
u

Li
01
AJ
CO
5

o
• «-l
Li
AJ
Ol
E
3
4 	 1
o
£>

••
^-v
>^
Li
73
Cu
\^

^
AJ
• ^
en
C
Ol
73

V?
^_4
3
XI

X
Li
a
73















•
*~*
O
s^^

J
J
iD
U

U-4
U-l
01
O
CJ
X
AJ
• 4-1
en
Li
Ol
D.
en
• 4-1
73

73
C
<0

^
**— s
x;


u
0)
AJ
10
3
73
C
3
O
Li
00

O
AJ

r-.
AJ
a.
Ol
73

•>
*-^
cr


0)
AJ
CO
Li

C
O

AJ
CO
Li
Ol
C
Ol
00

01
AJ
CO
JC
CJ
ca
01

01

































«
/-*.
\s.
^
Jj
O>
U-l
• ^
3
cr
CO

Ol
c
AJ

U-4
o

>^
AJ
• •-t
^
• •H
AJ
U
3
73
C
O
LJ

CJ
.,-«
4 	 (
3
10
^j
73

x:

73
C
CO

^**
*^S
'•_-'

^^
AJ
• •-4
en
O

0
0.

tj
Ol
U-l
.^4
3
cr

U-l











.
a
*""•""*

4J
C
s
T"^
00
                                                                             E-3

-------
<





















w
EH
3
<
r.
t~<
ac
OH
•1
1— 1
X
w
a
•ETHYL
1
(N
CO
hH
m
















X X
CO W
O Q
2 2
(— t l— i
teJ 2
CJ O
a i-i
3 H
J <
to 2
HH
0 T.
Utff*
*^«
J H
fJ 2
»-i O
tlH U
O
2 as
< U
J H
Z 3
O O
X 2
f- f-^
Hj ffJ
0
cj on
2 U
H 3C
-J O
:=> os
CO UH
w
os u
2 1-1
0 £-
NTRATI
RESUL
UJ _i
C_> CO
2 1-1
O 02
O
as
as cu
tu u
H 2
<


ro









CM











•—*








en
CJ
• ft
4-1
en
• ft
VH
a>
4-1
u
03
VH
OS
.C
u

V
4-1
• ft
CO
2 22 2 Z 0 0



<;
3 23 3300
O O
r^ *--*
CM f-l






E-< H H H 3 O O
O -a-
»— «





in
•
H H H 3 H <• in
•—H.







< sO O
H 23 H H
CM —1









sO O
H 3 H H H
CM f^








O
3 H H H H CM m
•—HI









\o o
E-i H £-H H H
CM —l




I I
U O
CO CO
C l-l L. ^
O to ttj i-J
•ft j= 01 j= oo ~~-
4-1 cj en u en OO
CO Ol L> VH 3.
VH C -O 01 -O 0) ^
4-1 o c-o 4-1 o> eu-i 4.1
C N coenoi C toencu Ol Ol
Ol uEO CJE33
O *O ol-«HtO N OJ*f O,H-)Li CX, U Vj CO CO
O 4-1 Xenoj -0 Xenco > >
(J CO 4->-f>Q* Ol 4J*flO.
Ll In U VH •— 1 CM
CU 3 ,— I 0) 0> to f-tCUOl
00 4-1 .f!4-l4J Ll •fl4->4-> X X
T3«oO"43 O-ftOlO)
3 encOC/J4-icOC/J-OT3
— c 5 c c
00 3 ^ l-l 1-t

CO
CO
t3
0)
en
3

en
4-1
en
• ft
X
0)
«— t
f-l
• ft
U-l
•o
c
CO
f—t
o
c
01
Li
01
£.
3
C
o
• fl
4-1
._,
•o
c
o
CJ

«-4 •
—i C
3 O
C — i
4-1
II —1
-o
2 C
O
... CJ
•o
0) en
en -ft
3 £
4-1
en
01 VH
3 O
—H U-4
to
> O)
*— 4
O) -Q
en to
to U
CJ .— t
1 f H
4-J Q.
en CX
L OJ
0
3 4-1
o
II C

3 II

— <
•C 2
CU
en ••>
3 C
O
tn en
CU -ft
3 Li
f-H CO
CO CX
> E
O
-H CJ
CO
CJ Li
•« O
CX U-i
X
6-4 
en
3

en
0)
3
f-i
CO
>
Li
CU
4-1
Ol
E
CO
VH
CO
a.

VH
O
U-l

X
• l-l
•a
c
Ol
a.
a.
<

c
•ft

•—i
<
01
r—4
J3
to
H

CU
01
CO
CJ












•
s~^
u
o
U-l
X— '

c
o
,f i
LI
CO
CJ
u
• ft
c
to
00
Li
O
U-l
o

c
o
• f4
4-1
CJ
CO
VH
U-l

•a
c
to

«*
/— s
CD
*^r

4-J
C
0)
4-J
C
O
(J

L)
0)
4-1
to
3

O
• ft
VH
4-J
0)
6
3
f-t
O
>

•*
.f*.
X
Ll
•u
Cu

X
4-1
• fl
en
C
a>
t>
_i>

3
JD

X
VH
O
•o














•
O
V—*

4-1
C
0)
CJ
• rH
**^
l+»l
0)
Q
U
X
1 1

>
• ft
en
Li
0)
CU
en
• H
T3

t3
C
CO

^
^•^
_3
Li
0)
4-1
<0

•O
C
3
O
Li
oo

o
4-1

J=
4J
O.
HI
T3

^
^^
Cr


CU
4-1
03
VH

C
Q
• *H
4-J
to
LI
0)
C
Ol
oo
cv
4-)
to
.c
(J
CO
o>

Ol































^
*fx
_<

Li
01
U-l
««-4
3
cr
to

0)
.C
4-1
U-l
O

X
4-1
• ft
>
• ft
4-1
U
3
•u
C
0
u

u
• ••H
»— t
3
to
Li
-o
X
JZ

•o
c
05

»~>
*&

X
4J
•«-4
en
O
Li
O
A
Li
CU
U-l
• *-t
3
CT
<
U-l










*

a
^•f*

4-1
C
Ol
• ft
CJ
• ft
U-H
It-t
O)
0
(J

X
4-1
• ft
>
• ft
en
Li
o>
Q.
en
• ft
-o
t3
C
to

^
*^*
o{
<3
^f-

fH
• ft
U-t
T>
C
to
f— 1

o
4-1

<—4
f- 4
o>


e
o
u
U-l

0)
o
c
to
4-1
en
• •-*
-o

„
^-^
• •-4
+^
4J
c
Ol
• ft
"O
o3
Li
00
CJ
f-4
3
to
Li
•a
X
s
00
                                          E-4

-------
I
        X
        o
        z
        u
        o
        o
        3 s^
        •J CN
        to
           X
        o u
        u a
        4-J Z
        X Z
        O i-i
        03 £
        b. <5
           H
        O Z
        z o
        HH U
        0(1 2
w o
z; «
cu u
OS
o r
z o
HI C£
   Ct4
Z
o u
i-i Z
H I-H
< H
a J
H a
z w
u u
u a:

o >•
o H
   »-H
a: u
U HH
H X
< o
3 H
a
z z
=3 <
o r
a: r>
        tu Cu
        O O

        x x
        CO U
        a a
        z z


co






IV.







<0





U
£
eg
01 in
•F-4
01
X
4—1
C

U-l
O

c si-
o

u
.f-l
^J
c
o
u



f*>











CN











f-H








01
u
««-1
1-1
01
.4-4
kl
CO
i-l
u
CO
IM
03
f
u

oj
u
• «H
CO

-H O








•-4
3 H H H E-i •* vO
• •
PH O








«tf
H H H H H €^ *n
• •
^H 0



1 1
U U
CO CO
c k, k.
O eo eg
•-< .c o) £ oo
I-I U VI O 01
eg OJ k. k.
ki C TJ OJ -BO)
•J O CTJ U 01 CU-i u
C is) cgmoj C eg 01 CO 0) OJ
0) 0 E 0 0 E 3 3
U TJ OJ'»Hca M Q) -4H eg — i •— i
c oi cxi-iu a. .u k. eg eg
o i-i xoico TJ x eo to > >
u tg i_i .-H o. co ±j -.H ex
ki U u ki ~4 CM
ai 3 -H oj oj eg -H  j_i k> .-4 u i_j x x
TJeOO"-.3O-**COCO
3 tn CO OO UCOCOTJTJ
— c « c c
CO 13 CO ft t-t




01
<3
T3
CO
4H
k4H
•o
c
0
u

f-^ •
r-- C
3 O
C --i

II —i
-a
Z C
o
... (J
•o
OJ en
01 -4H
3 x:
xj
01
OJ ki
3 O
4-^ U-l
eg
> OJ
4—4
QJ _f"*
01 «;
 E
O
—1 ^
H 01
•4H
II 01
eg
H JD
01




.
X
•o
c
OJ
a.
CX
^

0)
x:
i-i
c
OJ
eg
3
e
k.
o
U-l

OJ
"
oo
c
>4H
01
3

QJ
eg

a
u
«-^
eg
u

cu
XI

X

E



o
sz
01

OJ
01
o
jr
i_i

c
ea
j.:
u

ki
OJ
.c
iJ
o

en
c
0

i_)
CO
c
• t-4
J3
E
0
u

kr
O


0]
01
3

CO


X
OJ
tJ
c
h- 1
X)
















































•
•a
OJ
vi
3

01
OJ
3
_i
eg
>

kl
CO
u
01
E
eg
k.
eg
a.

ki
o
U-l

X
.4-1
•o
c
OJ
CX
(X
^

c


^-4
|
<£

0)
4—1
r<
CO
H

OJ
OJ
CO
U











































•
^""*
CD
<*^

u
C
OJ
1-1
c
o
u

kl
OJ
J«l
CO


u
.»*
kl
1-1
0)
E
3
,—4
O
J>

T3
C
eg

>«.v
X
kl
TJ
CL,
^^

X

,^
n
C
CO
TJ

V
^H
3


X
IM
O
X)
















.
^
^^

u
c
OJ

u
U-l
U-l
OJ
O
U

X

m>
01

0)
CX
01
.*4
•a

TJ
c
CO

»
s~^
r^
x^

ki
OJ
4J
CO
3
-o
C
3
O
ki
oo

o
±J

f!
i-l
CL
01
TJ

»
s~*
or


V
u
CO
kl

c
o
.4-4
XJ
eg
kt
a>
c
CO
00

01
j_»
CO
r"
U
CO
CO
J
OJ

































A
/-x
KX
X^*!

kl
OJ

• 4-4
3
o-
CO

0)
r~
1-1

U-l
O

X
i-l
• ^4.
>
• l-t
1-1
U
3
TJ
C
O
U

u
• fH
*— 4
3
eg
kj
"O
X
•C

•a
c
«0

r~*
•SL
*-_-

X
J-l
• f-l
01
o
kl
o
CX

k^
OJ
U-l
««4
3
cr

U-l














.
'a
LJ
c
41
•«-4
U
**^
U-l
U-l
0)
o
u
X
u
*f"4
i'
.4^
01
k>
0)
CX
01
•4H
T)

"vJ
C
eg

fc
**^*
o)
<3


f— 1
4— 1
.4-1
U-l
TJ
c
eg
_ 1

0


^H
«— 1
OJ
3

E
o
kl
U-l

OJ
u
c
eg

01
.,-,
TJ

fjk
,— \
,,H
^^

1-1
c
OJ
• fH
TJ
eg
kl
oo

u
»4H
,--,
3
eg
kl
TJ
X
32
oo
                                                                               E-5

-------
   Q
   2
   «-H  CN

   X  X
   W  bJ
   O  O
   2  2
   CU  2
   O  O
   O  n
   ro  H
   rJ  <
   CO  2
       i— I
   Q  .e
   u  <
   rJ  H
   rJ  2
   HH  O
   Du  U
   O
   2  a:
   <  w
   •J  H
   OS  2
   b  ra
       O
   O  OS
   2  U
   =3  OS
   CO  C!H

   OS  U

s 2  5
*"* O  E™*

9 H  =>
OH «C  to
U UJ  ini
   o  co

   o  5
   u

   OS  U3
   2 2
   O -S

   DS =5
   ClH Cb
   o o

   X X
   u u
   a o
   2 2

00




f-









vD





U
••
XI
••
CO
co in
•rH
to
X
rH
CO
C
«^

U-t
O

c -a-
0

u
.rH
T)
e
o
u



en











OI











rH





2 22



^£
3 23









H H H










H H H










^
H 23











H 3 H











3 H H











H H H








cn
U
.H
4-1
cn
.rH
Lt
0)
4-1
CJ
CO
Li
CO
.C
U

OJ
4->
• H
CO
1
u
to
C VH
o to
•rH .CO)
4-i o tn
Cfl 0) VH
Ll C -O O)
XJ Q C ^O A.J QJ
C N to m O> C
0) o E o
U T> O> -rH to ts3
c 01 a. 4-1 L.
o i-i x u> to -o
U Cfl 4-1 -rH CX CJ
I- Ll 4->
0) 3 rH 4) 0) CO
OO 4-1 .rH 4-1 4J V"
•O eg O -H 3
3 tn CO CO 4J
rH C <*
co => tn
oo
220
rH




3 3 a> o
vO O
CN
r~i




fT)
fr^
H 3
f"^ p"^
•—i






o
«N
3 fc-H •r-H
0 ^H







r^.
CO
o oo
H EH
o m







u-i
to
O f*1
EH §H • •
O -3-








p—
rH ^3"
H H
O CTi







^^
%H^
O OO
H EH
O C"")




1
O
cfl
VH ^""*
CS "J
X! OO """*•
o in oo
Li 3.
-O 01 >-••

tfl tn a) 0) 0)
U E 3 3
0) -H CO •— 1 ' — I
Q. 4^ V* cfl cfl
X « 10 > >
4J -rH O.
VH •— « CN
— i QJ CJ
• H 4-1 4J X X
O •- 0) 01
CO CO T3 "O
C C
i— i i— t


CO
T5
O)
tn
3

•*
tn
4-)
tn
X
0)
rH
i — 1
• H

• H

C
o
u

rH
rH
3
C

II

2

• ••
•D
01
U5
3

tn
01
3
rH
to
^

OI
tn
CO
u
1
4^
in
Li
O
3

II

3


•a
OI
tn
3
i
tn
01
[ 3

CO


• — i
CO
u
• rH
a.
X
£-*

u

H
co










































•
C
O
• H
4-1
• H
TJ
O
O
U

tn
• H
x;


VH
O
VH

01
i — l
JD
CO
u
• rH
rH
O.
0.
CO

4J
O
c

II

«c
2

• 4*
C
o
tn
• H
VH
CO
a.
E
O
U

VH
O
UH

tn
• H
tn
to
_Q



X
•o
c
CJ
a.
a.
^

OI
x:

c
.H
0)
CO

3
E
L
0
t. .

0)
x:


oo
c
• H
tn
3

•o
OI

CO

3
U
rH
tO
u

01


X
CO
E

C
3
O
.c
in

OI
tn
O
r~
4J

C
CO
x;
4-1

VH
O>
f^
4J
O

tn
C
O
• H
4-1
CO
C
• H
ri
E
O
u

VH
O
t4-l

tn
01
3

CO


X
OI

c
rH
XI



















































•
-o
0)
tn
3

tn
01
3
rH
Cfl
>

Li
0)

OI
E
cfl
VH
CO
0.

VH
O
VM

X
• H
•o
c
0)
a.
a.
^

c
• rH

rH
1


0)
rH
XI
cfl
H

01
OI
CO
u













•
u
o
U-w
*^*

c
o
•£
CO
u

u
• H
c
to
00
Li
o

U-l
o

c
o
• H
4-1
u
CO
Li
'•M

"X3
C
CO

^
**^
05
^^

4\J
C
01

c
o
u

Li
o>
4-1
CO
3

y
• H
VH
4_)
01
E
3
t-H
O
>

••
y**\
^
VH
T3
OH
^^

X
4J
• rH
tn
C
01
•^

V
_ ^
3
XI

X

Q
•o















•
y-N
c3
^^,

j_j
C
• H
U
• H
U-f
UH
OI
O
u

X

• H
^
• rH
tn
Li
O
a.

CL
d)
"C

*,
t~+L
cr


CJ
4-1
cfl
Li

C
O
• H
4_J
CO
VH
tu
c
01
00

a>
4_)
CO

U
CO
OI

o>




































,
x*^
^s/|
»^,^

Li
o>
VrH
• H
3
cr
CO

OI
x;


UH
o

X
4J
• H
>
• H
4.J
u
3
•a
c
o
u

u
• H
rH
3
CO
Ll
"O
X
x:

•T3
C
CO

x~s
TCSl
V.X

X
4J
• H
tn
O
VH
o
a.

L.
01
U-l
• rH
3
cr

UH











m
XV
o

4-1
C
ai
• H
O
• rH
VrH
UH

O
u

X
i->
• rH
r*
• H
tn
VH
01
a.
in
• rH
•a

•a
C
to

**
.-^N
O^

tn
• rH
-o

••
t^*
• rH
^^

4-1
C
OI
• H
T3
CO
L.
QQ

U
• H
^_,
3
CO
L
•a
x

ac
                                                                          E-6

-------










































s
D
M
•S
O
K
tin
U

























































Q

^

fH

^*
U
Q
Z

^^

to

o
3 £N
cn
X
Q W
co a
•J Z
rH ^
(b
a z
z o
< HH
J H

3C 55
0 !-•
OS £
H
Z O
rH U
H
J as
3 bJ
cn H

OS 3
Q
H Z
Z =3
CiJ O
z: os
w u
OS
u z:
z o
1-H OS
z
o u

H -i
< H
OS ,-J
£—» H5
z cn
u u
O OS
z
o >•
U H
»»<
os u
W i-(
H X
< O
3 H
Q
Z Z
3 <
O Z
OS Z3
U X
tu tu
0 0

X X
txj UJ
Q Q
Z Z
t-H I-H




















CO







r^.










v£>





U

r\
*.
qj
in i/t
-i-i
in
t— 4
C

U-l
O

c sr
o

jj
«iH
•o
c
o
u



f>










r^











t-H







cn
U
• rH
J-l
CD
•rH
IM
QJ
XJ
U
eg
v^
<0
JZ
U

U
u
• •H
c/i


2! IZ 35






 o e
o "o a) •-* co
c a> a. 4-1 ^
O 4-1 X in co
o co 4J .^ a.
W-i l-i
a) 3 — ( tu a>
QC 4-1 --4 4-1 4J
-O CO O "<
3 cn cn cn
<— < c
cn Z3
CO
i/1
Z Z 0 0
o
0
•
o



3E 3 0 l^-
o ir>
CO »-H
i— 1 •
0




co
*j
H 3 r-» o
tn o
•
o




01
f— 1
•-» o
12 £"* • CD
*£> •
O



O
f**
o o
E-* EH • O
01 O
•
o





o

0 0
H H • O
01 O
•
o





PO
rH
CO O
H H -0
P1^ •
O






o
r~
0 0
H H -0
01 O
o


1
u
 >

4-1 V4 -H Ol
co t— t d) cl)
W -H 4J 4_l X X
^3 O **H OJ CU
^J ^0 C/3 T3 ^O
«5 C C
cn i— i I-H





cn
CO
•a
0)
in
3

••
cn
4.)
in
• «-4
X
0)
<— 1
«— I
• *H
u^
*T3
C
r2

O
C

01
la
Q)
&
5
»
C
o
• •H
4_>
• fM
•o
c
o
u

*— * •
r-< C
3 O
C ••*
4J
II **H
T)
Z C
O
•£ y
Qj cn
m *«^
3 -C
ij
cn
0) V-
3 O
I—* *4-4
GO
> QJ
r— <
(U «O
cn CQ
co U
O -rt
1 *-^
4-1 G.

•a z
a>
cn ••*
3 C
O
cn cn
CU "H
3 ^
r-J 01
co CX«
> E
o
«— * u
CO
O V-*

CX M-i
>v
f-t cn
«•»
O -H 4J
UM **^
rH 01
co 1 C
QJ ^ CU
3 T3
r— i Q)
CO »~* ^f
^ .O *— 4
CO 3
X £~* «Q
0)
"Xi3 CD I^s
C 0) l^
t-H C/D O
^> o -o




















•
^"^
o
X.X

c
01
»r-4
U
• •-<
VM
(4-4
Ol
o
u
£•
>
.rH
cn
V4
cu
cx
in
*|H
•o

TJ
c
CO

•>
^^*
£
'^
(d
CU
4_l
Cfl
3
"O
C
Z3
O
(w
t>o

o
4J

f^
4-1
a.
0)
•o

•h
*-*\
cr
""^
cu

ca
^i

c
o
• «-4
4-1
CO
^4
01
c
CU
00

o
u
CO
•C
u
(0
OJ
i—3
0)
















^^n

5

•*~*
c
cu
*#H
• "
CM
t*-*
/•»
O
(J

^**
^
*»v
-S
W
a.
cn
• *^
^^* "O
^
x^,^. *O
m
jj Gg
Q)
W-t
• rH "^*
3 ot
cr ^ ^_i
j-J
.rH O
> U
• rH
XJ r-l
U *— ^
3 «» 
W *<-<
*rH "^
tn c0
O W
r^ OrO
0
CX U

Ul r— '
a> a
*4-( CO
*<-< >-*
3 "O
CT" J>s
^J 33
•*-* 00
E-7

-------


o
3
^
•— 1

8
Q
z
HH
S.X
to
1-
•J CM
cn
X
Q CxJ
Cx3 O
i-J 35
*J *H
f— 1 ^-^
fri
0 Z
z o
< H-l
,J H
i ^*
3J Z
O ^
o£ £
it, -3
H
u z
z o

H
-J as
•3 Cd
en fr-i
to <
CC 3
Q
E- Z
Z =3
to O
^ •S. en

fi§ U •£
8Z O
I-H o:
Cb
z
o u
^"^ «S
H t-i
< H

H 3
Z en
Czl Cz3
O Cfi
Z
O >•
0 H
i— i
C£ U
[i3 ( i
H X
^ O
3 f~*
O
SS Z
i"i ^J
o z
OS 3
C2 S

fy_t Cti
0 O

X X
U CO
Q O
Z Z
HH I-H



















CO





r--








vO






U
•k
XI
•t
CO
01 ir\
• •H"
01
X

cQ
c
^

U-l
0

C ^
O
• -4
U
.,H
•o
C
o
u



•~i x: oi
4J O 01
CD 0) t*
U C -D 01
4-1 O C"O 4J 0)
C N et) 01 01 C
O) O g O
U "O 0) •*•< «8 c-0
C Ol O. 4J P
o u x wi 4
o

H H «M H
-H U
to


o
4-1

0)
3
"O
H H  01 c\) o)
U E 3 3
4) .-. to -* —>
Q. u V, to to
X 01 CO > >
4J .-I Q.
b —• CM
— i 0) Ol
.-1 J-l 4-1 X X
O •-< 01 01
en en -^ -a
c c
I-H I-H



01 •
to x
-a -o
Ol C
01 Ol
•3 a.
a.
** ^
01
4-» Ol
••-(4-1 *
x 7?
Ol C B
• •H ^"'^
f-H
^-1 Ol .4.)
•-H CO f~^ C
14H ^H Q 0)
•03 Ci —
C E "
CO VJ 4-1 "
»-H O C ^~*
LIH O) ^4lJ
o .^ 01
coi o o

0) j » i ] [
W 't i ^
Ol OO 0) •"
£. C 0 '^
3 ..-i u •*
01 "^
3 X ™
c "it
o -o .- 1 «
•-< 01 > Q<
*J 4_> .^« ^n
• •* co tn • '^
T3 --H k* >"™N ^*
C 3 Ol ^
O u &.*-' "^
O i— < in J-
^
T3 to <33 •>
ZCE *-* *-* 01 -4
O .C £ -H
•" U C • 4-J ^-^ 4-1 •«
-a 3 -o c MH
OJtnOOIOILiUHT?
0i.^j:0i4-)O)OC
3 .C 0) 3 C 4J to
4.) O CO X-H
01 Ol 01 O 3 4-1
O> Vi t/1 O) T3 «-H O
3OO3»-c>4j
—i vw j; -H 01 3 —>
CO 4-1 CO 4-J O 4-) — H
> Ol > CO U U — i
—< C 3 00 3 0)
01 J2 CQ Ui -03
01 to .e 01 u o c
taU4-l4-l.-44.lOE
U •-! QJ U U O
t •— * (-< G 4-J .^ tj
4->a.oicaoi4Ju>4H
01 o. £ LI E Q. -^
Ut04-)C0301— >0)
O O CU-H -0 3 U
3 4J O <0 C
O cn Li > •> Li to
u c c o ^v -o 4-1
O vw -U O" X 01
3 II "H C >-^ J= -iH
4-> X CO T3
• * ^ <0 «
Ol •*-* C X«0 to ^^*
01 •*• -O Ol Li Li --H
3 C e O" -0 — .— '
ooo.a,cta
tn 01 o<>-' o»-'4->
Ol -^ -rt C
3LiLiCX4-iXOI
I— 1 tO O * — * T3
> e I-H 01 01 01 co
O 01 1 C C O Li
~-4UOiLiao
to 3 -a oo o
U Li ^H Ol CL U
... O to — i X. Ol --^
Cu IM ^ ^ «-H 4-1 Lt #«i
X CO 3 CO Ol 3
H  U •-* Lf
u 0i-aoixca3"u
to c 0) L, 01 a- x
H-Cl'-iC/)O»J
-------















































«•
W

Qj
0
























































o
z

*— i

s^
bJ
O
Z

^^

o
0
=>
, T
CO

o
bJ

jj
rH
tu
O
Z
<
J

y
O
cd


O
Z
i— i
H

3
CO
W
03

H
Z
bJ
z:
bJ

U
Z
rH

Z
o
*— 1
H
<

H

UJ
u
z
o
u

OS
u
H
<
3
Q
Z

o

u

r» .
0

X

a
z
r-4

































*•— X
CM

^
bJ
a
z
rH
^^

Z
o
1— t
H

Z

y*
<£
H
Z
0
o

Qd
bJ
H
<
3
a
z
=3
O
CJ

3C
o
oi
tu

U
z
rH
H
J

CO
bJ
a:

>H
H
rH
O
rH
X
o
H

Z

3E

3=

bLi
O

X
L.O
a
z
rH


















CO






r-.










\O






U
••
XI
•»
tO
03 lA
.^4
cn
X
rH
CO
C
H^

U-l
O

C -tf
O
• «H
U
• «H
TJ
C
0
u



rn











CM











,«H








01
u
.r4
4J
01
• rH
Ui
CU
4J
u
<8
u.
CO
x:
o

Ol
4_)
• •H
CO
Z Z Z Z Z 0 0




^>
^ *
3 Z 3 3 3 0 vO
r-i
oo





o
CO
•
H H H H 3 O 0
vr







in
*^
C7^ ^"^
H H H 3 H







vO
ao
o
< -HO
H Z 3 H H
CM O





sO
00
0
rH O
H 3 H H fH
0-4 O







O
CO
O^ (O
3 H H H H
sT O






vO
00
O
-H O
H H E-H EH (H • •
«M O




1 1
U U
eg to
C U. U
O CO to
"- x: a) x: oo
4J U O) U 01
tO O) Ui Ui
U. C TJ 0) -O 0)
4-> o c "a 4j 01 c ^4-1 4-t
C N coenai C igtooi Ol 0)
Ol U E O UE33
U "O 0) •*•< <0 CS3 QJ 'iH 10 *—J rH
c 01 ex 4j u/ c. i_i u to to
O ^J X cfl O T? X W 05 > >
U CO 4-l-rHCX -lCX
Ui Ui W Lf *—t CM
0) 3 «-4 Ol 0) to •— 4 0) 0)
00 _> .~44->4-> Ul .-. i-/ i-l X X
•OtOO-r<3O--<4>OI
3 WCOCOi-ICOCO-OT-)
rH C tO C C
co rr co i-i i-i


CO
CO
-o
0)
01
3

•k
01
J_l
in
X
0)

rH
,_4
• •H
U-l
-o
c
tO
1— 1

o
c

Ol
Ui
0)
XI
3

•k
c
o
• fH
4J
• «H
T3
c
o
u

,^4 •
rH C
3 O
C "H
4-1
II •">
-o
z c
o
••• CJ
•a
v  0)

0) X)
01 to
CO U
CJ -rH
1 rH
4-1 a.
en CX
Ui eg
o
3 4J
o
II C

3 II

• *> <£
-a Z

01 •»
3 C
o
cn en
CO — <
3 W
>H CO
to CX
> E
o
-H a
CO
U Ui
•-i O
CX <4H
X
EH in
..H
II in
to
fH X)
CO



X
-o
c
01
ex
CX
^J

Ol
x:
*"*
c
• rH

01
to
rH
-1
t
u
c


Ol
XI
4_>

00
c
• •H
01
3

ts
O)
4J
tO
r—t
a
u
rH
to
CJ

Ol
X)

X
CO
E

c
3
o
f~.
01

0!
01
o
£.
4-1

c
CO
x:
4^1

Ui
0)
x;
4-1
o

cn
c
o
• rH
4-)
CO
c

JS
e
o
CJ

Ui
o
Ct-l

cn
0)
3

a)


X
ai
•a
c
rH
XI





















































*
•a
a/
cn
3

01
0)
3
— -4
CO
>

Ui
0)
4j
01
E
RJ
Ui
CO
CX

Ui
o
Uw

X
• v-4
TJ
c
Ol
a.
CX
<£

c
• r-4

^-4
1


Ol
,—!
XI
CO
H

0)
o>
CO
u
















































*
*"**
CD
N.X

4_»
c
a>
4J
c
o
u

Ui
Ol
4->
to
3

0
• r4
u
4_J
0)
E
3
— H
o
^

TJ
c
CO

^ \
X
Ui
TJ
a,
^.^

X
4-1
.,-t
en
c
01
TJ

V
-H
3
X)

X

a
TJ

















•
*"* *
£}
^^

4J
c
o>

CJ
>r-l
U-l
U-l
01
0
u

X
AJ
*t-4
J>
11-4
cn
Ui

tfl
Ui
01
c
0)
oo

01

CO
x;
u
(0
01

0)







































•
^ *•
*^
N^X

Ui
Ol
U-l
3
tr
CO

Ol
x;
*_J

U-l
o

X
4-1
• H
>
• f-l
4j
u
3
TJ
c
0
u

u
•rH
(—1
3
to
Ui
TJ
X
x;

TJ
c
CO

X-s
ts
•*^ir

X
4J
• rH
cn
o
Ui
o
CX

Ui
Ol
U-l
• *-t
3
cr
<
U-l












•
^
o
**^

W
c
CU
***
u
*^
l*J
U-i
CU
o
u

>»
iJ
*r*
^
•^
cn
fcj

-------


















































w
o
!_(

*5
^
(J



















































o
z
^

*"si
•— 1

X '-«
W  --<
-* X

•
CO




ri
1
O

•-< X
^f
•
CO




CM
1
Q
E-, f_i 

,^4




m
l
O
f-l f-4 PO •— 4
-< X

•
PO
1
u
03
Ll *~*
03 i—4
JC 60 ~-~
u in oo
Li 3-
"O OJ ^-^
OJ CU-I 4-1
c 03 in oj v a)
o u E 3 3
CM 0) .-• n3 — i — i
O. 1-1 Li 03 cq
T3 9"s tn rfl ^> ^>
CJ 4-1 - ~* O.
•*-> LI f— 1 CN
03 r-4 OJ Q)
L, .H jj u X X
3 O •-< OJ OJ
jj cn cn "o TJ
03 C C
cn i— 4 »— t

tn •
to x
•o -o
OJ C
tn QJ
•3 0.
cx
** ^c
tn
J-I O)
01 JZ .

X ^^
OJ C • ^
-|H ^"^ s^'
-< ' 0
^4 OJ 0 • "
£ JS ^"a QJ
•O 3 »_»••*
c e c °
03 Li O u •-<
! Q n *— u-4
U-4 Ll QJ **^
O 03 >t_^ OJ
C QJ 
tn Li •-•
3 0 >, «
C '-•It
o -o "-w --i 5;
—i OJ O > CX
J-l J_> —C <"
._i 03 C tn • '**
T3 ,— 4 O Li --^ ""
C 3 >rt OJ i<
.-) C nj cr<]
tt •*-! 9*N 03 C3 v^
"O 03 •*
2 C E "'-^ OJ —i
o ^ j: _c — i
•^ (J C • CD *ta^- 4-f «.-4
•O 3 -0 v-' u-i
OJ tn o oj LI u-i -o
tn *«-i j~i tn ^j oj O c
3 JC « 3 C 4J 03
4-1 OJ 03 >-, — .
tn a) in ij 3 u
OJ Li in OJ C "X3 •*-* O
3O030C>4-1
•— < U-4 (~* »^ tj 3 "-t
03 4-1 to O 4-) T—I
> OJ > U W 0 r-J
^-l C OJ 00 3 OJ
OJ XI 03 Li 4_> -a 3
tn 03 j: a> 03 O C
cou^J^34-*OE
0 — i OJ U O
1 •— i Li £ u f Li
4-1 CL OJ CO *H 4-1 CJ U-I
in CX .C Li Li Q*>r*
Li 03 4-} 03 4-) 0) i— l OJ
O 0 CX 01 TJ 3 U
34-1 £ «J C
O tn Li 3 •* Li (0
u c, tr. o ~-> *~* ~o >->
O UJ O O* X «
3 II .^ > v— j= .-i
4-1 x "a
• ^ ^ 03 -«H •* OJ "^
OJ ••-i C X to 03 ^-^
tn •*• .O oj u Li *^
3 C E CX -0 <~* -*
O O £X BJ C "Si
cn tn u < v-x o <.^ j_)
OJ «rt --H C
3 Li Li C 9s 4-) X OJ
T— 4 n3 O * **^ *-* to 4^ »^^
10 CX U-4 --J Li --< T3
> E t— ( in QJ tn 03
O tn | c C 0 L,

03 3 T3 00 O
U Li ,_> QJ O. U
••-I O 03 ^-4 J^ 0) "I
CXU-l >^3i — l 4-1 Lit— i
X 03 3 tO OJ 3
H tn XH.fl.C14-' °3
•-4 QJ U ••< Li
II tn "TU OJ X 03 3 ~o
03 c o> L. oj cr x
E-4 <-> H-I cn O »—3 ^ *^"
10 JD u T3 QJ u-, OO
E-10

-------
Q
     a
     2
     X x~x
     bJ CM
     O
     2 X
     t—4 ExJ
     x^ Q
         2
     txj h-l
     U *-*
     Q
     3 2
     nJ O
     CO 1-4

     oS
     fjj 2
b-,  H
Q  2
2  O
<  U

    Od

O  H

b-  3
    Q
U  2
2  3
<-H  O
H  cn
J  o

CO  5S
Ci3  O
ai  oi

2
O  U
^ _j  ^-.T
H  .-i
      2 co

      U OS

      o »
      U H
         f-d
      QS U
      LjJ I—i
      H X
      < O
      3 H
      Q
      2 2

      o r:
      os r5
      U 33

      ri- tU
      O O

      :< X
      -O CiJ
      Q Q
      2 2



oo







r^.









vD



o

^n
^
«
cn
• «-4
in
Xm
,—4
CO
c
<
U-l
0

c
o
• H
4-J ••d"
• •d
"O
c
0
u






cn











CM









f— 4







in
o
• fd
4-1
in
• i-t
id
Ol
4J
U
CO
Id
CO
S^
u

Ol
4-1
• f-4
CO



2 22






^J
3 23









H H H











H H H









«[JJ
H 23











H 3 H











3 H H









H H H




1
U
CO
C Id
o 
4_> (j in
CO 41 Id
Wi C -O 0>
4J O CT3 4-1 01
C N co cn Ol C
Ol U E O
U ~O Ol -fi cfl N
C 01 Q. 4-1 Id
O 4-1 x m cfl "O
U co 4-1 -rf o. 4)
XJ id 4-1
01 3 — i QJ QJ CO
OO 4-1 -fd 4-1 4-1 Id
T3 eo O — < 3
3 in CO CO 4->
-1C CO




2 2







3 3









H 3











3 H










H H











H H











H H









H H




1
u
ca
id
cfl
si oo
U in
Id
•0 41
CUd 4-1
cfl in Ol
0 E
4) «fd CO
a. 4-1 id
X 
o
•
o





•—4
\o
fM
*-H
•
O






f-d.
CN


»— 4

x
4)
T3
C
•—<
1
O
X
CN
*


cn
1
o
f-d
X
oo
•
01



•
m






CN

X
QJ
T3
C
"— '



cn
cfl
-a
01
in
3

•v
in
4-J
in
••-4
X
^
« — 4
.fd.
U-l
•u
C
CO


O
C

0)

0)

"3

•t
c
o

•H
•o
c
o
u

1 — 1 •
r— 1 C
3 O
C -^

II -rH
•^
2 C
O
• •* (j
-o
Ol in
in •«
a x;
4^
cn
01 Li
3 O
f— ( Ud
CO
^ Ol
,-d
oi xi
in ca
ca u
u -^
i --
4-1 Q.
in O.
Id co
O
3 4-1
o
II C

3 II

• ^ ^
•0 2
01
cn >»
3 C
O
in in
01 -^
3 ^
^ CO
CO O.
> E
O
-^ o
cfl
U Id
"* O
CX U-l
x
H in
• i-4
II in
CO
H jO
cfl



*
X
•u
c
0)
a.
ex
^

Ol
r]
4J
C
-lH
Ol
CO

3
E

0
U-l

O)
x:


00
c

in
3

T*J
O>
CO

3
U
,— <
CO
U

01
r\

X
(0
E

C
^
O
x:
in

41
in
O
x:
4J

C
cfl
j^
4J

td
o>
x;
4J
o

in
C
O
-t-l
4-1
CO
c
• «H
c\
e
o
u

Jd
o
Ud

cn
Ol
3
t-d
Cfl


X
0)
"0
c
i— i
XI





















































•
-a
Ol
in
3

in
0)
3
— d
Cfl
>

^1
Ol
4-1
O>
E
cfl
Id
CO
a.

v<
o
Ud

X
• ~4
-o
c
O)
a.
a.
^

c


^_i
i


0)
>— 4
XI
cfl
H

0>
01
CO
u















^-
u
o
Ud
•*— '

c
a
-Q
Id
CO
U

u

c
CO
00
Id
o

Ud
o
c
0
• iH
4-1
o
cfl
Id
Ud

•o
c
CO

•*
'"^
CD
s_ s

4-1
C
01
4-J
C
o
u

Id
01
4_l
CO
3

u
• rd
id
4-J
0)
E
a
^-d
o


••
x-x
X
^4
"X3
a,
^^

X
4-1
.»-*
in
C
Ol
T3

V
f-d
3
dO

X
^4
o
-a

















•
x-x
8


4J
C
0>

u
• fd
Ud
Ud

O
(J

X
4-1
• t-4
>
• t-l
in

Ol
cx
in
• •H
•a

•o
c
CO

••
^^
x:


^!
0)
4-J
CO
3
-o
c
3
0
Id
00

o
4-1

x:

a.
01
•o

••
x-«
cr


01
4-1
CO
jd

C
o

4-1

^J
01
c
ai
oo

01
4-1
CO
x:
u
CO
01

01






































^
x— s
s/
t^^

Id
Ol
Ud
• pd
3
cr
cfl

Ol
x:
4-1

Ud
O

X
4-1
• ft
£>
• <-4
4-1
U
3
T3
C
0
u

o
• «d
^d
3
CO

-a
x
x:

T3
C
CO

^•s
tsi


x
4-1

in
O

O
a.

id
Ol
Ud
>rd
3
O"

Ud














*
a

4-1
C
01
• *-4
U
•fd
U-l
Ud
ai
o
CJ

X
4-J
•«H
>
•»-*
cn
f-1
O)
Q.
-^
•a

-o
c
CO

**
'"*•
erf
<^|
s^

r ,
1
. .d
Ud
•^J
c
CO
f-d

0
4-1

_!
r— 4
Ol
5

E
o
id
Ud

0)
u
C
ca

in

-a

•.
*~*.
• fd
• -

I >
c
QJ

-^j
CO
V.
00

U

J
3
CO
Id
"O
x

00
                                                                                   E-ll

-------














































w
Q
Q
j\
Q
Q
^»


Q
























































Q
SS
.^^

.""N
rH

X
u
0
SE
t~t
s™^

£xj
u
o
J3
rJ
CO

a
CrO
J
,-J
f-H
CL-
a
z
•<
j

r
o

Ct<

o
z
(—1
H

CO
Cz3
OS
Z
o
t— t
H
^
as
H
Z
U
CJ
z
o
CJ

ce:
u
H
^
3
a
55
|""i
o
a:
CJ>

CL,
0

X
w
Q
Z
r-H
































^•"x
CM

X
u
Q
Z
rH
VM^

Z
o
1— 1
H
<
Z
rH
3C
«^
H
Z
O
CJ

Oi
bJ
H

3
Q
Z

O
OS
'J

£
§
Cl4

u
z
H
-J
3
CO
w
02

£x£
(/>
t-H
OS

CA
CxJ
u
z
^3
U

^
<

=>
33

tu
o

X
u
Q
Z
r-H
























OO






r*»











\o






u

^3
•«
cfl
tn in
• H
en
X
,— !
cfl
C


l4_(
O

C -3"
O
4-1
• f-4
TJ
c
0
u



c*l











rM











f-H








en
0
• H
4-1
en
•f-4
}J
Ol
4-1
O
cfl

cfl

CJ

0>

• H
CO
o
Z Z Z Z 2 •
O O1^
t- *



^c ^nf
3 23 33'
in —i
•^





oo
ro
O
o
H H H H 3
<^ en
f-H





oo
CO
0
o
H H H 3 H
CO ON
^H






00
f— 1
< O
H Z 3 H H
^™l ^^
^




OO
f-H
o
E-i 3 H H H
t"^ ON
,—t





ro
m
O
O
3 H H H H
o cr>
r-H





00
C*"!
O
o
E-i H E-i H H
o tn
r-H



1 1
U U
cfl co
C 1- ^ ^
O Cfl Cfl rJ
•rH .C 0) .COO*--,.
4-1 u en u en 00
ca 0) V- Ix 3-
JH C "O 0) "O 0) *"-^
4-J O C "U 4J O) C ^*H ^i
C N coenoi C CflenOl Ol 0)
Oi UEO UE33
u -v oi-rtce N 01 >H co i— i t-H
C QJ 0.4-tl-i CX4-II-I cfl cO
O 4-1 Xenco "U Xencfl > >•
u co *j .-i o. o> 4j •-< a.
k- lj 4-1 iJ r-H CM
O> 3 r-HOIO> CO r— IOIQI
OO 4-J *rH4_)4J rH 'rH^^ X X
-OCOO-H3O— iflJOl
3 tnCOCO4JCOCO-OT>
r-4 C Cfl C C
t/5 3 CO HH rH



en
CO
"O
01
in
3

•*
in

en

X
01

1
f-H
• rH
14H
TJ
C
CO
t— i

O
c

0)
!H
Ol
x;
3

P.
C
O

4-1

T3
C
O
U
f-H •
r-H C
3 O
c -^
II -^
-a
z c
o

TJ
OJ en
Ol -rH
3 J=

en
Ol >H
3 O
f-H UH
cfl
> O)
, — i
01 J3
en cO
ec U
U -fH
1 * — <
4-1 a.
en ex
V. CO
o
3 4J
O
II C

3 II

•* ^
•o z
0)
en ••>
3 C
O
en en
01 -rH
3 »H
f-4 CO
ca ex
> E
O
f— i ej
Cfl
U IH
-rt O
ex u-i
">^
H en
•fH
II en
ca
H ^
CO



.
X
•a
c
Ol
ex
ex
^J

0)

±_)

c
• *H

Ol
CO

3

li
0


01

4-1

oo
c

en
3

T3
01

cfl

3
U
r-H
Cfl
U

01
.a
x
cfl
E

C
3
o
.c
en

01
en
O
r*|
4-1

C
CO
r-J
4-1

f^
01

4-1
O

in
C
O
• rH
4-1
CO
C
• *4
fN
E
0
u

»H
o
UH

en
01
3
i — i
CO


X
O)
-o
c
r-H
-O






















































•
TJ
-^

C
O
. ^
4
CO
u

u
• H
c
CO
00
(H
O

e*>H
0

C
o
• rH
4-1
U
CO
14H

•a
c
CO

•»•
*""•*
CD
X.X

U
C
01
4-1
c
o
(J

1^
01
4-1
CO


u
• rH
J^j
4-1
Ol
E
3
r-H
O
7>

••
s^
x
f^j
T3
a.
x-x

^
J-»
• *H
cn
C
OJ
•a

J(*
,__(
3
.0

^
^_|
a
•o



















•
^•^
jj
s^.

4J
c
Ol

u

(4H
MH
01
o
u

^
4-1
• rH
•^
• tH
en
l^
Ol
ex
en
• rH

T)
C
CO
•*
^•^
r"
• ^x

tH

c
01
00

0)
4-1
cfl
f"
u
CO
0)
H-J
o>









































•
^^
s^
*^s

Ol

.,_,
3
cr
cfl

QJ

4-J

i j [
O

X
4-1

>

4-1
U
3
TJ
C
O
U

u

f-H
3
Cfl

TJ
X


TJ
C
cfl

s-^
^CS
V_r

X
iJ
t t-t
en
O

0
a.

\*
a>
U-4
• *-t
D
a-
<
U-(














*

O
•****

j_j
C
O)
. (-<
u
• *-t
U-i
^w
0)
o
u

l^V
u
• «H
«•*
»IH
CA
J-<
(U
ex
en
• t-^
T3

%)
C
cfl
•*
^^»
^*i
3

i
i
.,_!
<4H

C
cfl


O
4-1

f-H
j
Ol
3

E
O

UH

Ol
U
C
r_t
-o

••
^^
• fH
s. ^

4-1
C
01
.rH
-^
CO
»4
00

U
• «H
^H
3
CO
W,
TJ
X
X
ao
E-12

-------
w
z
H
§
ffi
H
      Q
      2
      tU 2
      U o
      a i-t
      n H
      -j <
      Q x
      w <
      •J H
      i-J 2
      1-1 O
      Cu U
      a
      2 as
      < uj
    a
    2
         O
      U 03
      2 U
nJ  O
n  as
CO  [Jj
bJ
DC  U


2  M
O  H
      < CO
      OH b-
      H oi
      •z

      u co
      2 I-H
      O a:
      u
         a:
      oc u

      H 2

      3 CJ
      O
      2 2
      :=> <
      o z:
      a: 3
      u z

      fa* tlw CM
      O O
            X
      X X bJ
      bJ UJ Q
      Q Q 2
      2 2 <-i

oo






t-«







vO





U
.O
^
CO
co in
•»•*
cn
X
1-^
eg
c

cw
0
C 3-
r-.




o
CO O
33 -0
»3- CM



CM
1
o
-H O
H 3 X r~
.
m




1
o
t-H O
3 H X 
i
o
H H X sT
co r~
•
CM





*3"
I
H H o o
X r-.
O
*
CTi




*3"
1
0 0
H H -H  >.
CU 4J •- Q.
U U. -4 CN
tg — i a> cu
W -M iJ AJ X X
3 O -H CU CU
.u co co -a -a
 C
. . *^? p* CU
"^ (-^ l^J
•a c c ^^ J O j_l '-1
CO O -° C ^
— I K-l l-i a) "^
tg .r-< v
o cu u o p
C f-; j^ U
J-l <-> U-l
CU "^ f i i X
v-, oo c cu "
CU C ^0 o "^
-C •* 00 U >
3 cn t, •"
I 3 0 >, <>>
cT T3 "-1 -ti *"
• o cu o > ^
t-i efl C cn • '**
•~4 1 O L, ^-s "^
•0 3 --1 CU 1*2 _
co" n.v^ ^
O _, CJ 05 C
U to <8 -^i lj "
u ^ -a cu
*— t • t^-t ^4-1 ^
^-i c cu -a .-i -~*
3 O J3 -0 c 3 °*
C —i c eg cr<3
j-l X « tO -^
II -H CO
-o E ~'-» ai —i
2 C "^ J= £ —
O C • CD s-x AJ >r4
TJ O CU lj i-u t3
cuwj: WAJCUOC
cn .-< in 3 n AJ eg
3 jC 0) eg X^
J-l 0) 01 JJ 3 AJ
in in cu C TD --i O
CUU03OC>AJ
3 O .C r-< U 3 •-(
»-< u-i AJ eg o AJ —i
co > 1-, i-, (j — i
> CU C CU 00 3 CU
,— i tg U. u T3 3
cu J3 x: cu — AJ
en cn .^ c
0)-^ U, C XAJ XCU
3 t-l O ••H AJ CO AJ *r^

eg a. •— i in CU cn eg
> E « 1 C C O U
O CU < CU CU t" 00
<-i U 3 "O OO O
 x: u-i tg
H in cu u "-" Vi
•-< T) cu X eg 3 -a
II inctuucucrx
eg i— c CO Q J < X
H _0
CO ^ CJ T3 CU **-< OO
                                                                          E-13

-------
 a
 2
 .J  CN
 cn
     X
 a  u
 u  o
 J  2
 ba
 O  2
 2  O
 U  2
 2  O
 hH  U
 H
 •J  OS
 .3  W
 CO  H
 U  <
 an  3
     Q
 bJ  O

 ci]  o
 OS
 U  Z
 2  O
I (-1  Da
'.     k4
I 2
i o  u
 I-H  2
 *-  .  ,

 <  H
 a:  J
 H  -3
 2  cn
 rrl  [Jj
 U  OS

 O  >•
 U  H
     t-H
 Q;  U
 < O
 3 £->
 Q
 2 2
 =3 <
 o r
 Oi _3
 U =

 Cr, EL.
 O O

 X X
 CrJ W
 a a
 2 Z
oo





r**.







vO






U
•k
A
#•>
cQ
cn */•>
• •H
cn
>*
i— )
CO
C

U-l
O

C -0-
O
• •H
4-J
• rH
-o
c
o
u



cn











CN











t-H








cn
u
• fH
( >
tn
,.H
t,
01

u
Cfl

OJ
-C
u

CU

• •H
cn
2 22 220
^
O


< O CTv
3 23 3 3 0 CN
CN




CN
,^
H H H H 3
cn o
f-H







CT>
sr CN
H H H 3 H
r-~ O







f-*.
^ •"•I" f"1
H 25 3 H H
CN O








r*
**T «"•*
H 3 H E- H
CN O








OO
OO CN
3 H H H H
^5 r~^








r^.
ro «^
H H H H H
CN O




1 1
u o
OJ 0)
C U la
O OJ CO
• >
u ot — > •--< a. a> jj -.H Co.
la la 4-1 la — < CN
CU 3 -H QJ OJ 0) — QJ QJ
00 4.) ..H 4J 4-> V. .f-4->4-> X X
•U03O'tH3O"HO>CU
3 tncncn4Jcncn-oT3
— c to c c
Cn 3 W HH 1-4
1
cn
ca
-a
QJ
cn
3

cn
jj
cn
X
IU
,_,
1
• H
UH
T3
C
03
f-H

O
c

V
la
CU
(—
u

«•
c
o
4-1

•o
c
o
u

f-H •
,-H C
3 O
C -H
J_J
It ->a
•o
2 C
O

"O
CU in
tn -fH
3 JZ
^
cn
', 0) la
3 0
-H UH
OJ
> OJ

QJ _a
IB tO
CO 0
U ~H
1 -a
4_> a.
tn a.
la OJ
o
3 4-1
o
II C

3 II

• .v. ^
•0 2
0)
tn -~
3 C
O
cn in
0) ..H
3 la
—< cfl
OJ CL
> E
O
-a CJ
tO
U la
•-" O
O. Ua
>^
H tn
• tH
U cn
OJ
H j3
CO

.
X
'-^
c
OJ
a.
a.

OJ
J=
c
"
OJ
CO
t-H
3
E
L,
0
UH

OJ

4J

oo
c
• fH
cn
3

T3
0)
CO

3
U
i
to
u

QJ
-0

>^
03
E

C
3
O
f!
cn

QJ
cn
O
.c
u

C
OJ
aC
4-J

la
0)
r*
— I
o

cn
C
O

4-)
cfl
C

-D
E
O
u

la
O
UH

cn
QJ
3
,_,
03


X
CU
•a
c
t-H
J3

















































•
"^
QJ
V)
3

cn
9J
3
t-H
OJ
>

la
Q)
4J
Q)
g
OJ
l_t
03
a.

u
o
UH

x
..H
-o
c
1)
a.
a.
^

c
• tH

*_4
1
^

0)
_4
JD
OJ
H

HI
QJ
cn
u












































•
^— x
03
N*^

4-1
C
OJ
4_)
C
o
u

Vj
QJ
A_(
03
3

o
• tH
la
4-1
QJ
E
3
_^
O
^

T3
C
OJ

*— s
X
L,
-o
a,
•^^>

X
4-1
• tH
cn
C
ai
-o

V?
,-a
3
o

X
la
O
T3













•
^+.
0
•-_-

4-1
C
CU
• tH
U

U-l
U-l
CU
o
CJ

X
LJ
• tH
••a
tn
la
OJ
a.
cn
•fH
T3

•a
c
to

«•
^— N
f*
S_^

la
CU
4-)
OJ
3
T3
C
3
O
la
00

o
4-1

f"
J_l
ex.
OJ
T3

«».
s~*
o-


cu
4J
OJ
la

C
o
• tH
4-1
OJ
la
CU
C
cu
00

cu
4-1
03
r*
0
03
CU
f^
OJ


































,
x^
*s>
^^^

la
CU
Ua
• tH
3
•^r
OJ

QJ
.C


UH
O

X
4-1
• »H
>
• rH
4-1
U
3
T3
C
O
u

u

t-H
3
CO
la
-a
X
r-

•o
c
OJ

^^^
TS1
\^s

X
4-1
• fH
tn
o
la
o
a.

Ld
HI
UH
• rH
3
CT
<^
UH










.
X-S
O

4-1
C
cu
• rH
U
* pH
tt-W
**-.!
(U
O
u

X
J-J
• »-l
^
••^
cn
Vj

-------
  <:
  .-H CM


  X X
  U CD
  O Q
  Z Z
  bJ Z
  O O
  Q t-H
  => H
  .J <
  tn z
     f-H
  Q -5
  UJ <
  ,J F-
  _J Z
  M O
  Cb U
  o
  z a:
  < eu
  J H
     <
  Z 3
  O Q
  c£ z
  CL. .3
     O
  o «
  z u
  t-H
  H z:
  j o
  3 as
  tn u.
Q z  >-,

§25
^ H  =
   <  tn
   a.  cu
   H  a:

   u  X.
   u  to
   Z  -i
   O  ai
      o
   3  U
   O
   Z  Z
   a  <
   o  z:
   OS  3
   U  3C

   Cu  te.
   O  O

   X  X
   bJ  U
   a  Q
   z  z
CO






r—








vO






U

.O
•X
a
en in
•  O. 4-1 Li
O 4-1 X in Cfl -o
U (0 4-1 •— CL 01
Li Li 4^
0) 3 — ' 0) 0) 4
OO 4-1 **H 4-14-1 IH
T3 to O "H 3
3 tn CO to 4_i
,-« C <0
to 3 to
Z Z






3 3








H 3











3 H











H H











H H











H H











H H





1
u
CO
L
CO
f. 00
u tn
Li
T3 0)
CUH 4J
to en cu
0 E
01 -.H cjj
O. 4-1 IH
X en to
4-1 -fH a.
Li
— < 0) Q)
•«H 4-) 4-1
O --H
CO W)


O
o \o





o
o
CO CM
•
•—4




r- o
in \o
O »-•<
•
o






m
f» O
O vO
O — l
*
o






o
CO O
O sO
O f-H
•
o






CO
,-H O
O VO
O —i
*
o






oo
CM O
o ^o
^3 r~4
•
O






•^
r-H O
O SO
O — t
•
o




•*"•»
»-J
•"••..,
00
3.
X. »•

0) Ol
3 3
1— < f-H
cfl co
> >

•-• CM

X X
Ol 0)

c c
r—4 f-H


cn
CO
-a
01
en
3

•*
cn
4_l
en
• »H
X
OJ
__,
r-l
• *H
UH
•o
c
eO
P-H

O
c

Ol
Li
O)
f"!
3

•k
c
o
• «H
J_)
• rH
•o
c
o
u

•-H •
r-> C
•3 O
C **-4
4_j
II "H
•o
Z C
o

-o
0) en
en ->H
3 £
4-1
en
0) IH
3 O
— i UH
CO
> 0)

CV _Q
en ca
co U
U •-(
1 —i
4-1 a.
en a.
Li CO
O
? 4-1
O
II C

3 II

• »• 
en •»
3 C
O
en en
Ol •«
D Li
i-H CO
CO O.
> E
O
l-H U
CO
U Li
.fH O
O- UH
•>^
H en

II en
CO
£-* jQ
CO


.
X
'-v
c
Ol
o.
Q.
^

Ol
43
.kJ
C
"H
Ol
CO

3

IH
O
UH

Ol
r\
4-1

oo
c

en
3

•a

4-1
CO

3
U

CO
U

01
43

>^
CO
E



O
4=
en

01
en
O
4=
4-1

C
<0
f
4-1

Li
CU
4=
4-1
O

en
C
O
• rH
4-1
CO
C
• 

IH
01
4-1
Ol
E
CO
IH
CO
a.

IH
O
UH

X
..H
-a
c
o<
a.
a.
^

c
• fH

f-H
1
^

Ol
-.H
O
<0
H

Ol
01
CO
u













.
0
o
UH
s^

c
0
43
Li
CO
U

U
•iH
C
cfl
oo
Li
o

UH
O

C
0
• «H
4-1
U
CO
Li
UH

-o
C
CO

»•
*~^
CD
*^s

4-1
C
Ol
4-1
C
0
u

Li
0)
4-1
CO
3

u
• fH
IH
4-1
CU
§

.— •:
O
>

•>,
S-+.
>m
U
•a
cu
NM*.-

^
J-t
»!-«
tf)
C
QJ
-o

j^
•— ^
a
^

X
^i
a
"U















•
/•^
o


4J
C
Ol

u

U-l
UH

O
U

X
4-1
• fH
•^
• fH
en
IH
Ol
a.
en

-o

13
C
to

•V
s~*
1-7
N. ^

IH
01
4-1
cfl
3
•a
c
3
O
IH
00

o
4-1

43
4-1
a.
01


•h
*^
Q^
s-^

01
4-1
CO
IH

C
o
• •H
4-1
CO
Li
0)
C
0)
00

01
4-1
to
4^
U
CO
Ol
_J
Ol





































9
,-^t
\S
^^

Li
Ol
UH
.,H
3
cr
cfl

Ol
r^
4-1

UH
O

^
4-1
• iH
•>
• rH
4-1
U
3
"O
C
o
u

u
• *H
,-H
3
<0
Li
"O
>^
4=

"O
C
CO

*" -V
ts
^.^

X
4-1
• fH
tn
O
IH
O
a.

Li
0)
UH
• fH
3
cr
•^
UH












,
'a

4-1
C
01
• fH
U
• fH
UH
UH
01
O
u

X
4->
• fH
>
• fH
cn
IH
Ol
a.
en
• fH
"C

T3
C
tfl

^
^^*
oi
^3
•^s

f-H
^•H
• fH
UH
•a
c
CO
f-H

O
4-1

,-H
^^1
Ol
3

E
o
u
UH

Ol
U
c
cfl
4-1
en
• fH
•a

••
/-^
• •H
*«^

4-1
C
0)

•o
CO
Li
00

U
• •H
-^
3
cfl
IH
-o
X
"T*
00
                                                                   E-15

-------
 <
X •-*
« CM
O
Z X
t-H U
^-> o
   2
U I-i
u •*->
o
,3 2
rJ O
in i-i
   H
O <
W 2















2
O
H
a
H
3
s


















fcu H
O 2
Z 0
< 0
*J
as
•£. W
O H
OS <
Cl4 3
Q
U 2
Z =3
rH O
H OS
:J U
Eo y:
CiJ O
os os
u.
z
o u
1-4 Z
H. .
t—4
< H
OS J
H 3
Z CO
w u
u os
z
o >
U H
OS U
U HH
H X
< 0
_* H
Q
Z Z
3 <
o i:
OS 3
o s:

CIH Civ,
O O

X X
W u
O Q
Z Z




CO







r*»








o



u
•t
JO
*•
(0
en
•^
DO
Xl/1
r-4
CO
C
<

U-4
O

c
o
• rH
j-> -a-
•r-4
•a
c
o
u





CO










CM







f-H






01
U
Site Characteristi




2 22






<
3 23








H H H









H H H










£ 3









H 3 H










3 H H







H H H




1
U
cfl
C V4
O CO
•-H jc ot
4-1 U Ol
CO Ol VH
1- C TJ Ol
4-1 o CTJ *-• o)
C N CO 01 HI c
oi u e o
U TJ 0) •-* cfl Cvj
c.  CO
60 4-> -rH 4-1 4-1 VH
TJ Cfl O "H -J
3 U1 CO CO 4-1
—4 C CO
CO =) CO




Z 2







3 3








H 3









3 H










H H









H H










H H







H H




1
u
CO
IH
CO
Soil type and ch
teristics^
Site parameters^


o
*
o






vO
•
CO




ir>
1
O
f-H
X
r—4
•
r-H



V4O
1
O
r-H
X
m
•
r-H




CO
1
o
r-H
X
CM
•
r-H



vO
I
O
t— 4
X
o
•
CM




vO
1
O
r-H
X
Ol
•
CO


r^
1
O
r-H
X
oo
•
CM



-J
00
a.
V.X
01
3
r-H
CO
r-H
X
01
TJ
C
t— 4
CO
1
o
r-4
X
CO
•
\jQ


eg
I
o
*-»
X
«— t
•
^^



CO
1
o
*— 4
X
CO
•
vO



CO

o
r— 4
X
CO
•
vO




CO
1
o
r-4
X
CO
•
vO



CO
1
0
r-H
X
CO
•
vO




CO
1
o
r-4
X
CO
•
vO


CO
I
O
r— 4
X
CO
•
v£>




01
3
r-H
CO
>
CM
X
0)
TJ
C
I— 4




Ol
CO
TJ
01
tn
3

M
Ol
4-1
Ol
X
01
r—4
t— 1
• rH
U-l
TJ
C
CO
«— i

O
c
01
lJ
Ol
-=
5
1 •>
c
o

4-1
• «H
TJ
c
o
u
1— 1 •
_i c
3 O
C 'r-l
4-1
II -rJ
TJ
2 C
O
.. o
TJ
Ol Ol
Ol >r4
3 JC
4-1
Ol
01 l-
3 O
— -4 U-l
CO
> 0)
r-4
W -0
CO CO
CO u
O -rH
1 t— 4
4-1 ex
en ex
I- cfl
o
3 j->
O
II C
3 II

— <
TJ Z
Ol
w **•
3 C
O
CO Ol
01 -^
3 t-.
r-4 CO
CO CX
> E
O
r-4 U
CO
U Vi
•-H O
CX U-4
X
H 01
• *4
II CO
Cfl
H Jd
CO




•
X
TJ
C
O)
ex
ex
<;

01
JC
^
c
'
Ol
CO
r—4
3
E
V4
O
UH

0)
JC
4-1

00
c
• rH
Ol
3

TJ
Ol
4_l
CO
r-H
3
u
r—4
CO
U

01
ja
X
CO




0
J=
01

0)
Ol
O
JC
4-1

C
CO
J=
4-1

14
01
JC
4J
o

en
C
0
•»H
4-1
CO
C
• rH
J3
E
O
u
,4
o
U-4
co
0)
3
r—4
CO
>
X
Ol
TJ
C
1—4
J3


















































•>
TJ
OI
Ol
3

CO
01
•3
r-H
C8


lw
QJ
4-1
Ol
E
CO
Vw
CO
CX

U
O
UH
X
• rH
TJ
C
V
ex
ex
<
c
• rH
r—4
<
Ol
r-H
J3
CO
H
01
01
CO
u
















•
^•x
u
o
UH
^-^
C
O
J3
VH
CO
U
u
•rH
C
CO
oo
IH
O

UH
O

C
o
• rH
4-1
U
cfl
V4
UH

TJ
C
cfl

•*
x" ^
CD
^^^'
4-1
C
(1)
4-1
C
o
u

rJ
01
4-1
CO

U
• rH
|H
4-1
01
E
3
r-H
O
>

•h
X- N
X
VH
T>
CX,
v-x
X
4-1
• rH
01
C
O)
TJ
Ji
r—4
3
J3
X
VH
a
TJ


















•
*-^
a

4-1
C
Ol
• tH
u
• H
C4H
't [
Ol
o
u
X
4-J
-rH
>
• rH
w
VH
QJ
CX
CO
• rH
TJ

TJ
C
cfl
et
/^^
JC
^-»

Vj
Ol
4-1
CO

TJ
C
3
O
VH
00

o
4-1

jS
4-1
ex
Ol
-a

/— \
CX

a>
4-1
CO
VH
C
o
eLeachate generatii





































•
S-*L
•^
>«-»

U
0)
1-^ j
• t^
3
cr
Cfl

01
JT
4-1

UH
O

X
4-1
• rH
>
• rH
4-1
U
3
TJ
C
O
u

u
•rH
t
3
CO
)*
TJ
X
JC

TJ
c
CO

x^*
TSl
^^
X
4^
• rH
01
O
V4
O
CX
I-
01
UH
•rH
3
cr
<
UH














•
x-s
a
^^*

4VJ
C
ai
• rH

• rH
Ol
rH
Ol
CX
Ol
• rH
TJ

TJ
C
CO
•*
r-V
erf
<3

r-H
r-4
• rH
UH
TJ
C
CO
r—4

O
4-1

r—4
r—4
OJ
3
E
O
Ll
UH

01
U
C
CO
4-1
Ol
• *H
^3

fc
s^*
• rH
1 1
C
QJ
• rH
TJ
Cfl
VH
00
u
• «H
r—4
3
CO
VH
TJ
X
n:
00
                                                                            E-16

-------
Q
2
Q
2

oo






P^







vO






U
•t
£t
*,
CO
Ol lf\
• H
Ol
^^
i-l
cfl

<
m
0

C T
o
• rH
4-1
• H
T3
C
0
O



CO











CM











-H








Ol
u
«tH
4-)
en
.,H
u<
01
4-J
u
CO
Ui
CO
x;
U

0)
4-1
»r"l
CO
CM
2 22 220*
O




< vD
3 23 33
O CO
CO



oo
0 CM
H EH EH H 3
<• o








r^
ey\ CM
H H EH -3. H • •
CM 0







m
< ** CM
H 23 H H
— . O








U-I
•^ CM
H 3 EH H H
.-1 O








p^
vO CM
3 H EH H H
CM 0








\f\
»* CM
H H H H H
fH O




1 1
U U
CO CO
C Ui Ui
O CO to
••H -co> x; oo
4-1 U 01 U 01
CO Ol Ui Ui
Ui C -O 0) T5 01
4-1 O CT3 4-1 Ol CUH 4J
C M coenoi C COOIO) 01 01
Ol U E O UE33
U "O Ol *»H cfl Cs3 Ol .«H cfl i— i < — i
C Ol CX 4-J Ui CX 4_l U CO tfl
O 4-1 Xenco -o Xoico >• >
U to 4-1 -H CX Ol 4-1 ..H CX
Ui Ui 4-) Ui i— t CN
O) 3 t— I W O) to <— IOIO)
OO 4J -.H 4-1 4-1 U- •H4-14-I X X
-acflO-iH3O..HOIO>
3 OICOCO4-ICOCO-OT3
-H C CO C C




en
CO
-o
Ol
en
3

en
4-1
Ol
X
Ol
^
i— i
• H
e4-t
T3
C
CO
•— i

O
C

OJ

Ol
_r*t
5

«>k
C
o
4-1
.1-1
T3
C
O
U

1-^ •
r-> C
3 0
C ••-<
4-J
II *fl
T3
2 C
O
... (j
•c
0) in
01 -,-1
3 x:
4_)
Ol
Ol U<
3 0
•— 1 U-I
to
> 01
r—t
Ol Xl
01 to
cfl cj
o .^
1 ~->
4-1 CX
01 CX
U CO
0
5 4-1
o
II C

3 II

• *. ^
•u z
0>
en •••
3 c
O
en 01
Ol -rH
3 Ui
-J Cfl
CO CX
> E
O
r- 1 U
CO
U Ui
•^ o
CX U-i
x
H 01
*r-l
II en
cfl
H .40
Cfl



.
X
T3
C
Ol
CX
CL
**•
Ol
x;
c
"*
o>
cfl
f— f
3

Ui
o
U-l

Ol

4J

00
c
• fH
01
3


01
4J
tfl
1— 1
3
u
1— 1
cfl
u

Ol
Xi

^
tfl
E



o
JS
en

Ol
en
O
x;
4-1

C
cfl
f*.
4J

V4
Ol
Si
4-1
O

en
C
O
.1-1
4-1
cfl
C
..-*
n
E
O
u

Ui
o
U-I

en
O>
3

cfl


X
01
•o
c

Xl



















































•
-o
O)
en
3

01
Ol
3
,—1
CO


Ui
0)
4-1
0)
E
CO
Ui
CO
CX

u>
o
U-I

X
.••4
•o
c
01
CX
CX
^

c
.«-!

«— 1
1
<£

Ol
f— 1
o
cfl
H

0>
Ol
CO
u














































•
***•
CD
<***

4-1
c
Ol
4-J
c
o
u

Ui
Ol
4-1
CO


u
*f-H
Ui
1 I
Ol
a
3

'o
>

-o
c
CO

^^
x
^,
-o
CX
x-«/

x
4J
.1-1
en
C
O)


V*
t— 4
3
J3

X

Q
•o















•
^**
a


4»J
C
Ol
.fH
o
• r-l
U-I
U-I

O
0

x


'.*
tn

Ol
CX
en

13

13
C
tfl

•t
<^v
x;


Ui
0)
4-1
CO
3
•u
c
3
O
Ui
oo

0
4-1

f"
1^1
CX
Ol
T3

«K
^-s
o-


Ol
4-1
cfl
^

c
o
.rH
4-1
CO

Ol
c
01
oo

01

cfl
x:
o
CO
Ol
, T
Ol




































,
^-v
v;


Ui
Ol
U-I
.fH
3
cr
CO

0)
x:
4-1

U-I
O

X
4-1
>f-l
>
>l~l
4-1
U
3
13
C
o
0

u

i — i
3
CO
U
13
X
x;

T3
c
CO

^^
TS


X
4-1
>r-l
en
O
u-
o
CX

Ui
01
U-I
.-4
3
cr
^
U-I












.
a

±J
C
(X)
*r^
O
*^H
'-M
14-1
(U
o
u

^"»
*-*
•r4
r
• r4
Ul
U<
QJ
CX
VI
+ r-t
-V

*O
C
(0

**
/™s
o?
^^
s_^

r-H
r~*
•ft
<4-4
"O
c
eO
i— <

O
4-1

r— 1
f-l
O)
J

E
o

U-I

Ol
u
c
cfl
4-1
en
.fH
•o

•.
*~~*
.,_)
^_s

4-1
C
Ol
.fH
T3
to
Ui
00

ej
.,_!
_
3
cfl
Ui
•o
X
•T"
oc
                                     E-17

-------
































t-3
Q
H

3
K
U
EJJ
2
W

"5H
K
[H

!?
























































Q
Z


*^
•— t

X
u
o
z
t-H
•- _ -*
fcj
o
Q
^-"i
, i
CO

Q

•J
-1
(—1
TT .
a
z
j

y
O
OS

u
z
t— t
t-J
^
en
[n]
c£

z
o

E->
<
CS
£— (
Z
w
u
z
0


OS
CzJ
H

3
Z
1 :
O
OS
U

Cr,
O

X
(V
Q
Z
I-—"






























^— s
Csl

X
CiJ
Q
2
t— i
v_x
2
o
t-H
H

2
1— <
y
^jj
H
Z
0
u

as
c_,
<;
3
a
z

0
03
a
o
OS
TT .

U
z
h-l
H

:3
CO
Cr]
OS

N^<
to

OS

a:
w
r_j
Z

U
z
<
2:
^
T^

Cu
O

X
M
Q
Z























03






f^.








vO






u

n
»*
CO
tn u"i
tn
^
_i
CO
C
«

^_j
u
CO

CO
.C
CJ

OI

.~4
CO
Z Z 2 Z Z 0 U
Z




^£
3 Z 3 3300
-< Z
t— H





^
H H H H 3 • C_>
-H Z









CO
H H H 3 H CM U
Z
O






en
H Z 3 H H 0 U
• Z
o







CO
^
H 3 H H H 0 0
Z
O








CM
3 H H H H tr> u
Z
0







co x:
H E-> H t-> t-i  x: t>o ~-~
jj (j in o « oo
co 0) *-" U 3.
u c -a CD T3 CD v-<
i_j o C "^ j-* CD C *-*-< *-*
c M minoi C crjtnoi CD CO
OJ UEO UE33
tj "^ 0) "-' CO t^3 CD -^ CO i— i t— i
C OI O.J-IVJ O.4JU cfl cfl
O 4-J >,tnco -o SKWIU > >
u TO u.^a. CD ij.^Q.
l^ »- *-» ^ •— I CM
O) 3 «— 4 CD CD CO *— 4 

CD
tn
u
1
i_>
tn
Vw
O
3

II

^

• •>
CD
tn
a

tn
a)
3
p— i
CO
>

,— t
CO
u
•fH
o.
>-v
H

II

f-4
03







































•
c
0
'»H
J_)
• «H
"0
c
o
u

tn
• rH
r"
I i

V4
O
U-4

CD

o
CO
.-<
l-H
QN
-X
cfl

1 1
o
c

II

<:

••>
c
o
tn
.,-t
^j
eg
a.
E
O
U

JM
o
U-l

tn
• t-«
U]
ca




*
X
•a
c
CD
a.
a.
^

CD
x«
iJ
• rH

co
,—!
3
E
Vrf
Q
*4-4

CD
t~t
4-)

oo
c
tn
3

*O
CD
i_)
CO
3
U
CO
U

0)


X
CO
E

c
5
o
jC
(/)



X
OJ
"U
c

X)
















































«
T3
OI
tn
3

tn
CD
3
, — i
CO
>

Vj
CD
CD
H
CO
twl
co
a.

IH
o
UH

X
.-(
c
CD
a.
a.
<

C
.r-(

t—4
|
<

OJ
, . i
r^
CO
E-

0**
CD

U














^
O
U-l
^-^

«
1
.^
- <
•0
u

u
• t-4
c
CO
bO
V-i
o

U-4
o

c
u
CO
*-*
U-l

"t3
c
CO

•*
^~^
CD
^-x

J^
C
CD

C
O
O

V,
CD
j_i
CO

U
• l-l
Iw
l_j
01

3
t— i
O
>

"•
>-
v^
TJ
0-
^^

^^
j_l
*t-4
tn
C
CD
-o

V
p^
3
J3

^^
t-i
O
"O















*
'^^
C5
N_X

a_J
C
s
i_-
-^
^

t/1
aj
---<
•o

T3
C


**
»^>«
JZ
N— X

Vw
QJ
j_j
cu
3
^j
C
D
O
la
00

0

-C
J_)
ex
QJ
-o

»s
x-*v
cr
S_-X

O)
>CO
l_l

c
0
• *H
t t
co
t«i
CD
C
ai
00

0)

CO
x:
u
to
OJ
t-J

.^H
cn
*^
ri
ft

• *
"^ C
U ^
CJ
•-4.-I "*
. ^_( /"~ **
3 °<
o-O
CQ S_x

a; — <
.c ^-«
'«> *>-i
U-l
U-i 13
O C
(0
x^

« p-i O
> .LJ
•*-«
i-) •— 1
U >— i
3 CD

C
O O •
li CO
O 'i i i i
• t-i ro
•—i CD TJ
3 U
CO C u-t
V- CO 0
T3 u)
>-. in ^
x: -^ u
T3 CO
T3 —i
cu ^-T O
••H 4_J
^*v v-^
•^i CD
^-^ XJ 3
c -o
l^s CD
iJ -tH T3
•~ T3 OJ
tn CO iJ
O lw CO
V- 00 —i
O 3
a. u u
• *H r— t
»- r-l Cfl
flj 3 u
u-i co
•*H kl J-l
3 "U O
cr x z
<; "T*
4-1 oo x:
E-18

-------
w
Q
e
>i
^

i
     a
     z
    o
    Q

    J CN
    co
        x
    a CD
    frl O
    J Z
     fa.
     o z
     z o
     
-•-4
-o
c
o
CJ



m











CN











f—t








en
u
• i-i
4-i
en
• -^
Li
cu
i_J
u
to
Ll
<8
JC
u

 jC CU
4_i cj en
CO CU u
Li C -O CU
±J O C ^3 *J Q)
C M co in 0) C
cu u E O
O "O 0) -I co CN]
C CU CU 4-1 Li
o t-> x in co "o
O rC 4-1 •- Cu CU
u >» *J
CU 3 --> CU 01 Cfl
00 4-1 •«-* 4-1 4-1 L4
T3 (0 O •-« 3
3 in to CO 4_>
.-i C nj
CO _3 CO

z z






3 3








H 3








3 E™*









H H











H H











H H











&-I .—1





1
U
to
Li
Cfl
JC 00
U en
Li
T3 CU
CU-i i-l
cfl en cu
0 E
CU • -« co
CU 4-1 Li
X in co
4J — ( CU
Li
r-l CU CU
••H 4-1 4_l
o -r<
co co


o
o o
o



CN
CN
**7" •
CN O




vO
CTl
0 0

CN O





—•
<-t O
• •
—l O





0
en
o o

—* o







o
O"\
0 0
• •
— • o







•— 1
GTs
~t O

—i O







0
en
o o

•-1 0














cu cu
3 3

CO cfl


—* CN

X X
CU CU
"0 TJ
c c
t— 1 t— 1



M
CO
•o
CU
in
3

en
4j
en
X
01

,^
^^
• *H
U-l
•o
c
J3
o
c

Lj
CU
JC
3
„
c
o

•*4
TJJ
C
o
CJ

«— 1 •
--4 C
3 O
C "4

II "H
-o
z c
o
««k (J
•o
cu en
en -ft
3 JZ
4-J
in
CU Li
3 0
r—4 U-4
CB
> CU

cu lo
en ca
cfl •'ej
u .^
1 t-^l
u CU
in cu
V4 CO
O
3 u
O
II C

3 II

— <
1 -o z
CU
in •«•
3 C
O
en en
01 --i
3 Li
^Hl (fl
CO 0.
> E
O
•—I U
cfl
U Li
.-i o
Cu U-i
>^
H en
.r*
II at
to

<0



•
X
~a
c
cu
CU
CU

CU
JC
c
• p^

cu
CO
*— i
3
E
0
U-l
cu

'u
00
c

3


CU
CO
_- i
3
U
4—1
CO
ej

CU


>ht
cfl
E

c
3
O
^c
en

CU
en
0
j£
vVJ

c
CO
J«
4_|

Li
CU
^
4-1
O

en
c
o
• •-!
4-1
CO
C
• fH
J^
E
O
u

1-
0
U-l

CA
CU
3

CO


X
CU
•o
c
r— I
_o
















































•
•o
cu
en
3

en
cu
3
_i
cfl
>

Li
CU

CU
E
cfl

CO
Cu

Li
O
U-l

X
• I-l
•o
c
cu
Cu
a.
^

c
tf*

••H
i


cu

n
CO


CU
CU
CO
u











































•
*~^
CE
*«-x

iJ
c
cu
i_l
c
0
o

Li
Ol
u
cfl
3

ej

Li
4-1
0)
E
3
«— 1
o
>

•a
c
03

.•— *
X
Li
•o
D-.
Sw^

X
4LJ
• ^•1
en
c
0)
-o

JZ&
^
3
^Q

>s
\4
o
T?
















•
(•^N
a
s^

c
O)
u

U-j
U-l
CU
o
CJ
x

in
^
cu
Cu
en
• •~4
-o

•a
c
ca

«k
^*\
f"!
s^x

Li
CU
4-)
cfl
3
•a
c
3
0
Li
00

O


r*_
4J
CU
CU
-a

•«
^^
cr


cu
4V
ca
i^

c
o
• I-l
4-)
cfl
Li
CU
c
01
00

Ol

CO
JC
u

01
_]
cu

































.
^•x
s^
x-^

Li
CU
U-l
•*•!
3
cr
cfl

cu
i~
4_)

U-l
O

X
Jj
.-4
p>
• •^
4-J
u
3
•a
c
o
u

u

i— i
3
tfl
Li
13
X
f-

•a
c
to

f^^
^CS
Xi^

X
4-1
.r*
en
0

O
Cu

Li
CU

.,-1
3
CT
^
U-l












.
*&
**^

4J
C
CU
*•"*
u
U-l
01
O
u
X
4-1
• l-l
_^
in
^-
01
CU
in
"*
"O

"O
c
CO

^
"^
oi
<3
"*-^

— -^
»4
*r4
u_,
T3
C
CO


0


»— *
I—H
0)
3

E
o
V-
UM

OJ
u
C
CO

V)
• »-«
•^3

'A
x*^»
•*H
Nw^

A-t
c
0)
• «H
•^
tfl
Li
00

u

f— 1
3
CO

•^
X
•-"
00
                                                                             E-19

-------












































l_3
g
o
M



























































O
z
^

i—4

X

a
z
«_^
s^.

CsJ
U
a
=3 ^N
i-J CM
CO
X
o u
U Q
J Z

^ S.^
tiu
a z
z o
< 1-4
J H

X Z
O M
oe r
u- <
H
U Z
z o
^™* CJ
H
J ac

CO H
U3 -
0 E-
»— «
oc u
til l_4
H X
< O
3 f-
0
Z Z
=> <
O T.
CZ 13
O =

Cb Cb
0 0

X X
u u
0 0
z z
1— 1 t-t

















oo







r*.











vO






U

J3

CO

• fH
cn
X
i — i
cfl
C

U-l
O

c -a-
o
4-1
*i-4
•o
c
o
u



f*O











CN











,-4








ca
o

4-1
ca
>*-<«
V-.
Ol

o
CO

cfl
JC.
u

01
4-1
• «-l
in
r-t
Z Z Z Z Z •
0 0





<£
3 Z 3 3 3 0 fl
O
00 CM








.j^-
H H H H 3 -H
t— 4 •
~H 0







CM
CO *•"*
H H H 3 H
CM O







^H
< m — <
H Z 3 H H
— i 0







«-H
f^ «"H
H 3 H t- H
-H 0









CM
3 H H H H oo <->

 ^
U C -a O) T3 0)
4-1 O CT3 JJ 01 CU-i *-•
C CO cocnOI C cflcooi Ol 41
CD oEo uE33
CJ "O 0) ••* co M 01 •** cfl — ^ ^^
C 0) Q.4-lV< Q. *J V« Cfl CO
o i-i >\cnco "O Xcacfl > >
u CO 4J.rtCX 41 4-1— iQ.
V, V4 «-" U ^-4 CM
01 3 — < 41 0) CO —4141
p^f\ ,j ^ | | |.^ lj *«*4| ^J .kJ iX IX
-acoO"<3o"4
•a
c
o
u
_,
»— t
3
C

II

Z

• •X
•n
Ol
cn
3

cn
01
3
•—i
cfl
>

41
cn
CO
u
1
4J
cn
l^
O
3

II

3

•«*
•o
01
cn
3

m
4)
3
t— 4
CO
>

t— 1
ca
u
• •H













































.
C
O
• ft
4-)
•f-l
-a
c
0
u

cn
«•*•!
-C
*J

Jj
o
M-*

4)
1—4
^
cfl
U
• »-«
t— 4
a.
ex
CO

4_J
O
c

II

^
z

*»k
c
o
cn
••*!
I-
CO
ex
E
0
u

b
o



•
X
•o
c
01
a.
ex
^

0)
JC
4^

c
• *H

01
ca
«— i
3
E
14
Q
CM

Ol
,£
4-1

oo
c
•«^
cn
3

T3
Ol
4-1
cfl

3
U
t— I
cfl
u

Ol
jQ

>s
CO
E

C
3
O
J=
cn

01
cn
O
.C
4-1

C
Cfl
JC
4-1

I*
Ol
.c
4-J
o

cn
C
o
• *•*
4-1
ca
c
.**
r\
E
0
U

Ij
0
U-l

cn
Ol
3

CO






















































•
T3
01
cn
3

cn
O)
3
*— i
CO
>

Ui
01
4-1
0)
E
cfl
t-,
CO
ex

Wi
o
U-l

X
• •-1
T3
C
41
ex
ex
^

c
• ««4

i—4
|
4>
4j
41
E
3

O
>

•a
c
cfl

/*• ^
>^
j_,
T3
a.
«^x

^s
4-1
• tH
cn
c
41
T3

V



















•
*~*
CJ
X^'

4-1
C
41
• «-!
U
• H
U-l
U-l
4)
O
U

X
4-1
• •H
.^
cn
u
41
ex
cn
•u

T3
C
CO

».
y— s
JC
^^

V4
Ol
4-1
CO
3
T)
C
3
O
L4
00

o
4-1

X

ex
4)


*.
/•^s
Q'
v^

41
4-1
CO


C
O
• f-l
4J
CO

41
C
41
00

41








































•
S~*
^
^^

QJ
U-4
«^«
D
CT"
CO

0)
-C
4-)

U-l
o

>*«
i_J
. »-4
>
««-<
4->
U
3
T3
c
O
U

U

,_4
3
CO
U
"0
>•»
,£

T3
C
ca

X— N
'^&
Sv^

^\
4-1
 J3 *— I 4-1 U*— i
>,
H

II
F^H
«0

cn
• ^4
cn

-------











































w
2
8

F-H
2
<
2*
W
s
CH


















































0
z
<

t—l

X
w
Q
Z
t— I
>t^

to Z
cj o
O I-H
=3 H
J <
CO Z
f— 1
0 -Zf
to  CN
O O
X
X X &J
to UJ Q
a c z
Z Z HH
f— 1 f-H N-^






















00






r-»









vO






u
••
J3
..
CO
cn in
• fH
cn
X
f-H
CO
C
<

UH
O

c sr
o
• fH
4-1
• «H
•o
c
o
c->

[
m











CM









f— «






cn
0
• fH
4J
OT
»
C N cocnoi C fljcncy
4> u E O u E
u TJ cy.fHto N ai.fHcg
C 4> O. 4J k, O. 4J In
O *-i Xcntfl -O Xcnco
cj nj 4-1 --H a. oi 4-1 .fH a.
k, kl 4J kl
41 3 — i 01 01 CO — i 41 4>
00 4-1 •** 4-) 4J kl >fH 4J 4J
-0 10 O -H 3 O ••«
3 en CO CO 4-1 CO CO
— i C CO
CO Z3 CO
0 U
z



o
• u
0 Z
CN







O\ O
(N Z
•
c*>







o
m o
Z
o







-* J=
0 U
-• z
•
o





/^
I-J
^^
oo
a.
>^

OI OI
3 3
f-H f-H
co co
•> •>

fH CN
X X
01 01
•O XI
c c
I-H f-H


cn
<0
•O
41
cn
y

cn
u
cn
• fH
x
0)
f_4
f— 1
• •*
U-l
T3

CO
r-4

o
c

01
kl
0>
JZ


-
c
o
• fH
4-1
.fH
•a
c
o
CJ

,— 1 •
f-H C
3 O
C -fH
4-1
If ..H
•a
z c
o
... CJ
T3
Oi cn
cn .fH
3 J=
4-1
cn
OI ki
3 O
-H UH
CO
> 01
«-H
0) -O
cn co
to u
CJ --4
1 f-H
4-1 a.
01 CX
k, co
O
3 u
o
II C
3 II
•-  E
O
—i CJ
CO
U lu
•« o
O. UH
X
H cn
• fH
II m
<0
f- .0
a


•
X
•o
c
0)
0.
o.

4)
jC
4.1

C
• fH
CD
CO
*_4
3
I
ki
O
UH

0)
jC
4_>

oo
c
• fH
cn
3

T3
OI
4.)
CO
P-H
3
CJ

CO
CJ
4)
_a

X
CQ
E
C
3
0
JZ
cn

a>
cn
O
J=
4-1

C
CO
JC
4-1

kl
01
JC
4J
o
cn
C
o
• fH
4-1
CO
C
**H
jQ
E
O
CJ

ki
O
UH

cn
O)
3
*-H
CO

X
0)
•o
c
1— 1
JO



















































•
•o
0)
cn
3

cn
01
3
1—4
CO
>

ki
01
t-i
01
E
ca
ki
CO
a.
ki
o
UH
X
• f-4
"O
c
41
a.
o.
<

c
• fH

«-H
1
<

0)
•-H
J3
CO
H

41
01
CO
CJ














•
U
o
14-1
\^

c
o
J3
IH
CO
U

U
• fH
c
CO
oo
ki
0

UH
O

c
o
• •4
4J
CJ
CO
kl
UH
•a
C
10

^
s-^

•t
s-^
X
kl
•o
OH
*^

X
4-1
.«H
cn
C
0)
•v

^
f-H
3
_O

X
kl
a
•o
















•
^^
3
x,^

4_l
c
a>
• •H
CJ
• fH
IM
UH
0)
o
u

X
4.J
.fH
>
.fH
cn
ki
0)
O.
cn
• •H
TJ
•a
c
CO

•k
/-*<
JC

ki
01
4-1
CO
3
•a
c
3
0
kl
oo

o
4.1

jC
4J
a.
01
•o
f^
^^
o-
v«^
41
4-1
CO
kl

c
0
>fH
4-1
CO
kl
O>
C
01
00

41
4-1
CO
JC
CJ
CO
4)
_3
01






































•
/•^
i,J


ki
41
UH
• fH
3
cy
cs

41
JC
4J

UH
O

X
4J
.fH
>
.•H
J-l
u
3
•o
c
o
CJ

CJ
• fH
f-H
3
CO
ki
•a
X
jC
T3
C
CO

y^X
•C9
N^*

X
4-1
*r4
01
O
ki
O
a.

ki
41
UH
• fH
3
cr
<
UH












•
^^
0
X^f

4J
C
4)
• fH
U
• «H
UH
UH
41
O
U

X
4J
• fH
>
• fH
cn
ki
0)
a.
cn
• fH
•o

•o
c
a

x-x
erf
^


^^
f»H
• fH
UH
T3
C
CO
fH

O
4J

»«<
i-^
01 •
3 -4
cn
~H O
"O 4J

K (y
"•» 3
• rH -O
V-^
T3
i-J IV
C 4-1
41 CO

•O 3
CO CJ
kl f-H
OO CO
u
CJ
•fH ±J
, <••
3 Z
CO
>- II
T3
X CJ
s: z
00 JC
E-21

-------




Q
Z
^

f*s
f— 1

X
to
Q
Z
^
CcJ
O
O
=>
_J
CO

Q
[^
J
HJ
M
Eb
a
z
<

r
o
QS

u
z
hH
H
,J
rs
CO
bJ
OS

« 5
U ^

^ H
<
o:
H
z
CzJ
U
z
o
o

a:
Cx3
H
^£
3
Z
3
o
OS

Cl*
o

X
CxJ
a
z
hH































^\
CN

X
W
Q
Z
hH
x^
Z
0
hH
H
<
Z
hH
y
^r
H
Z
0
u

as
to
H
3
a
z
0
Q2
O

IE
O
as
*&f

U
3S
t-H
H
-_1
3
to
u
as

:*:
CO
hH
as

as
u
u
z
^J
CJ
z
<
r
g

Cu
o

X
u
a
z
hH























CO






f.









VO






u

J3
•A
CO
01 m
• fH
cn
X
f— 1
CO
C

UH
O

c <•
O
• fH
4_)
.fH
•o
C
0
u



f>











CM









f—t








in
u
• fH
4-1
01
• fH
hi
0)

u
CO
la
CO
r*
U

01
4.J
• iH
CO
z z z





^J
3 Z 3









H H H











H H H








^J
H Z 3











H 3 H











3 H H









H H H





1
U
CO
C la
O CO
••H .C O>
4-1 U 01
CO 0) L>
V4 c *^ o)
4-1 O CTJ 4-1
C M CO 01 0)
at u E
O t> 0) -fH Cfl
C 0) a. 4-> la
O 4-> X 01 co
u ca 4J -fH o.
ia iw
0) 3 f— * O 
O

O CT*
m







CO
m
H H
o o
f-H
*"*



CM
CT>
O
H H
o a>
in



1
u
CO
l_t *^N
CO hJ
j= oo "^-
(J Ol Clu
t^ .3.
-a u *~>
0) C«H 4J
C co 01 0) 0) 0)
O U E 3 3
C*J 0) •»-* CO 1—4 ,— i
CX* U la CO CO
"O X 01 ca > >
a> 4-i -.H a,
4-1 V« f-H CN
CO *— i 0) 0)
la .,H U 4-1 X X
3 O -fH Q) 0)
4-1 co co *o "u
CO C C
CO hH I-H


CA
CO
•a
0)
O]
3

«*
01
4-J
01
• fH
X
__,
f — 1

1 ( ,
•a
c
CO
^— t

o
c

0)

0)

3

c
o

J-J
• 

ai

u

^_j
Ol
0
3

})

3

• •»
T3
O)
Ol
3

Ol
ai
3
\
CO
>

F— 4
<0

• r- .
pt.
x


|}

f— <
CO










































•
C
o

4-1
.f^
T3
C
o
u

01
• .
c
o
Ul
••-(
V*
flj
ex
E
o


Jj
Q
M-4

tft
• H
cn
Cfl
^Q



•
X
•o
c
(y
0.
a.
^

0)

4-1

• H
0)
CO

fj
E
IH
O


a>
x:
»_i

00
c

01
3
•a
0)
^J
CO

3
U
f— *
CO
u

0)


X
cfl
E

C
J
o
JC
cn

(U
w
O
•C
A->

c
ca

w
j-
a>

o

cn
C
Q
. .— <
4-J
03
C
• r-4
J3
E

(J

Vj
o
U-*

cn


>,*
0)

C
f-H
^














„
U
0

*>**'

c
o
~Q
Vw
^J
u

u
• rH
C
CO
oo
IH
°
*-w
0
C
O
• •H
^J
(J
«0
•W
U-i

"O
C
*TJ

*•
*****
• ^D
"^ **^
O)
01 4-1
3 C
01
Ol 4-J
O) C
3 O
r-l U
CO
> V-
a>
Va 4-1

0)
E u
CO -fH
IH IH
a. a)
^
IH 3
O <~H
UH O
>
X

T3 ^-^
C .X
OJ ^
a. -o
pi, c^
^J S..X

C l^N
• rM ft.j*
*tH
•— < cn
1 C

"D

«-^ J^
r^t ^_j
CTJ 3


(U i^
(1J •L*
C/3 Q
U "O
















•
s~*
Jj
^^^

4->
c
0)
• rH
u

U-4
U-l
QJ

u

^
• fH
>
III
IH
0)

Ol

•a

-a
c
CO

fx
*— N
f-!
s,^

la
01
4-)
CO
5

C
3
O
U
GO

O
JJ
•C
J_)
ex
T3

»,
*-*x
O'
SH^

0)
Jj
ca
i_i

c
Q
•^
jj
03
v^
OJ
C

00

d)
j-j
CO

U
CO
Q)
i—J

• fH
4-1
U
3
"^
C
u

u
-r-t
3

^i
"O
>**
X.

T3
C
cfl

-"^*
^Sl.
•^^

?N
^.1
*,-4
cn
O

O
a.

jj
0)

. i-.
3
C7*
^
U-(













•
Jj
^^^
a_j
C
a)
• «H
U
"-*
M-4
U-4
CJ
o
u

>"\
J-J
• r^
>
• H
u
QJ
O-
«t-t
T.7

"O
C
CO

**
**^*
o^
^3
v^X

^_(
r- (

<-H
T3
C
CO
T— 1

O
4~)

^_(
*— *
0)
^

o

Lt j

u
c
CO

yj
• r-l
"^

*.
S~ X
• •— 1
^^^

^J
c
QJ
• •H
T3
CO
U
00

u

1—*
3
CO
J_,
T3
>^
3C
OO
E-22

-------















































hq
O
2
W
X
a<




















































o
z
<

/^
f— 1

X
o
z
1— I
v""'
u
CJ
u
3
J
cn

O
W
J
1-3
t— 1
Cb
o
z
<
J

z:
o
cfi
U.

U
Z
t-H
H
J
3
cn
CD
a:

z
O
hH
H
<
at
H
Z
W
o
z
0
CJ
a:
OJ
H
<
3
a
z
3
O
as
o

u*
O

X
u
a
z
»— t









































z
o
1— 1
H
<
Z
M
?
H
Z
O
CJ

as
U
H
<
3
a
z
3
O
a:
u

z:
o
a:
Cu

o
z
1— I
H
J
3
cn
u
a;

>•
H
a
KH
X
o
H

Z
<
•z.
3
X
^~^
CL. CM
O
X
X U
u o
a z
Z >-t
*— * ^--^























CO





r«-









O






u

xt
(0
en LO
• H
n
X
i— i
CO
<:

CM
0

c 
CO
x;
CJ

Ol
Jj
• iH
cn
Z Z Z Z Z 0




< 0
3 Z 3 3 3 CO
«T





ul
^H
O
H H H H 3 — «
X
rsi
•
sr



•*D
r-4
1
o
H H H 3 H ^H
X
sO
•
m





?
^M
|
O
£-. 3 H H H -H
X
tn
•
Ol



in
"7*
o
3 H H H H -H
x
00
•
•-*



vC
•-H
1
O
H H H H H -H
X
o
•
r~4

| |
U U
cfl <0
C t-i Wi "^
O to co -J
•M x: oi x; M -^
jj u en u en M
CO 0) kj We 3.
W, c -O 0) T3 Ol '-^
jj O C "O i-i Ol CLM JJ
C N cgenoi C coenoi Ol
Ol u E O O E 3
u -a ai •>* 
U co JJ-MO. 01 j-i -M CL
U U jj U "H
Ol 3 — . CU Ol CO ^-lOIOI
CO JJ -MJJJJ iJ .M Jj JJ X
-O co O •-< 3 O "* Ol
3 (ncncnjJcntnT3
--c « c
CO 3 CO 1-1
O




S3-
»— i
•
O




CO
1
o
«— t
X
CN
»
•— 1



Ol
1
0
•— 4
x
vO
•
r-H



i/^
|
O
•— *
x
CO
•
n



r-.
^H
1
0
1— H
X
r*-
•
CN



O>
1
O
1— t
X
o
•
m



O
CN
1
0
«— *
X
0
•
m











01
3
, — i
CO
>

CN

X
Ol
13
C
HH

n
ca

•a
01
en
3

•
cn
jj
e/1
• r-<
X
01
r-l
«— 1
• H
CM
•o
C
CO
rM

O
c
01
Wi
0)
x;
3

•i
C
O
«M
Jj
• M
•o
c
0
u

*— t
,—i
3
C

1!

Z

• ••
•o
o>
tn
3

tn
Ol
3
CO
>

Ol
en
CO
U
1
JJ
tn
u
O
3

II

3

• ••«
T3
01
en
3

cn
01
3
i— <
CO
>

^M
CO
(J
.M
a.
>,
H

II

H
CO









































•
c
o

*J
-T-4
-a
c
o
o

en
• M
x;
jj

u
o

a>
f— i
XI
CO
U
• M
, — 1
O.
a.
CO

jj
o
c

II

<
z

• •>
c
o
en
• M
\-,
cfl
O.
E
O
u

t,
o
LM

en
*M
CO
CO
X)


•
X
• M
"O
C
a>
o.
a.
<

QJ
p*
,£_i
jj

c
"
0)
CO
.— l
3
E
W
O
LM

0)
.C
jj

00
c
• H
en
3

•a
QJ
JJ
CO

3
O
..4
CO
U

01
XI

>,
CO
e

c
3
O
x:
tn

O>
tn
O
X>
JJ

c
CO
x:
jj

Vj
0)
x;
jj
o

en
C
o

jj
CO
C
•r-t
X)
E
o
u

t-.
o
LM

en
Ol
3
* — i
CO
>

X
0)
•a
c
H-4
X)













•
X~N
U
o
UH
^^

C
o
X)
IH
CO
U
u
• »H
c
CO
00
k>
o

LM
O

C
o
• ft
JJ
u
CO
L4
LM

-a
c
CO

*•
/-^
a>
T3 • —
ai
in j_>
3 C
01
tn jj
01 C
3 O
r-~4 (J
to
> i-i
01
W. JJ
01 CO
jj 3
Ol
E u
CO -M
V< I-
co JJ
a. a>
E
t. 3
O — i
LM O
>
X
• M *\
-a »-^
c >»
01 U
a. -a
a. ix
^ s-^

c x
•M jj
• «H
— i cn
1 C
< Ol
T3
01
— i J!
Xi —i
tO 3
H XI

01 X
01 V-
in o
o -a















*
s~**
a
\^

jj
c
Ol
• M
u
»M
LM
LM
Ol
O
u

x
jj
• M
>
• M
CO
l_
Ol
0.
tn
• M
-o

•o
c
CO

•t
y^-S
x;
^^

P
01
jj
CO
3
T3
C
3
O
U
00

o
JJ

x;
jj
a.
Ol
-o

••
^^
O*
N«^

01
jj
CO
w,

c
0
• M
JJ
CO
u
0)
c
01
00

Ol
4-1
CO
x:
u
CO
o>
J
01











•

V— '

JJ
C
O)
• v<
u
• f-<
LM
LM
O)
O
u

>N
JJ
• .H
>
«*-4
tn
M
a)
a.
cn
. --1
*— x "^3
^ ^,
^ ?
C
W «
01
LM
*M
3 =>«
LT <3
CO ^— '

Ol —(
x; — i
jj •-*
LM
LM T3
0 C
CO
>> -M
Jj
• M O
> JJ
• *-*
JJ ~l
U r— 1
3 •. en
x: •-<
-a
•o
c
CO .— .
-M
^•*v »^tf
TS>
S-' JJ
C
>-. Ol
JJ -M
•M TJ
en co
O lw
u so
O
a. o
-•-*
ij j 	 ,
Ol 3
LM co
•M U,
3 T3
cr x
< 33
'A-l 00
E-23

-------
  X
  Q
  2
  to
  U
  a
  CO
      O
      Z
  Ci.
  Q  2
  2  O
  <  1-1
  J  H
      <
  x:  2
  O  M
      H
  U  2
  2  O
  -3  a:
  .o  u
  co  H

  02  3
      a
  E-  2
  2  =3
      Z
S2  O

(-4    Ct4
W2
LOO  U
  .,_,_.  25


  <  H
  CZ  i-J
  H  3
  2  CO

  CJ  OJ
  2
  O  >-
  U  H
  H  X
  <  o
  2  2
  3  <
  O  •£.
  o  o

  X  X
  'J-1  U
  Q  Q
  2  2

oo






f-






\D





U
•t
XI
^
Cfl
tn u-i
• iH
cn
J^
OJ
C
^

U-l
O

c sr
o
• r*
4J
>fH
-o
C
o
o



CO











CM











_t








tn
0
• •H
4-1
cn
-f-l
Lj
Ol
4-1
U
CO
Li
CO
-C


01
4-1
..-«
CO
CN
2 22 220-
O



1 —
 qj N Ol-iHCO —t •—>
C O> 3. 4-1 L, CX 4-J Li Cfl CO
O »j x cn cfl -o X tn cfl > >
U CO 4-1 ••-! CL Q) 4-1 . r-l CX
L. Li 4-1 Li .— i CM
QJ 3 . — iQJOl CO r-4 OJ CV
00 4-J .-1 4-J 4-J Ll -PH 4-14-1 X X
-OeflO"«3O'.-iOlo>
3 tncoco4-icoco-a-a
.-< C CO EC
CO Z3 CO i— I I— I



cn
tq
•o
01
cn
3

tn
4J
tn
X
Ol
I—I
• i-l
U-4
•a
c
cfl
r— 4
O
c

01
Ll
Ol
t~i
3
fc
C
0

4-1
.^
•a
c
o
CJ

«— 4 •
•-> C
3 0
C •-!
i_J
II  0)

Ol -Q
tn cfl
cfl u
U 'r-l
1 r-l
4-1 O.
cn c.
L, flj
O
3 4-1
o
II C

3 H

• * ^
•a 2
Q)
tn —
3 C
0
cn cn
0) •-!
3 Li
^J CO
to a.
> E
O
r- 1 U
Cfl
U Li
.~ O
CX u-i
^
H cn
.^H
II cn
s.
CD
E

C
3
O
(~*
tn

01
cn
O
.C
4-J

C
to
_c
4-1

Li
Ol
f
4-J
O

tn
C
O
• iH
4-J
CO
c
• *H
(~l
E
O
u

Lj
O
U-l

cn
01
3
^-i
CO
£>

X
01
•o
c
t— 4
JD

















































•
•o
Ol
tn
3

cn
01
3
r— 1
CO
>

Li
Q)
4_i
OJ
E
to
Li
cfl
CX

Li
O
U-l

X
• r-l
•0
C
01
CX
Q.

E
3
_^
0
^

T3
C
CO

s—^
^
Li
•^3
Oi
VH^

^,
4-J
• iH
cn
C
0)
"O

•s.
r— I
3
-Q

^
Li
Q
T3














.
/•^
a
^_,

1^1
c
0)
u
• r-t
U-l
U-l
QJ
O
U
^
4-1

^
>rH
cn
Li
OJ
CX
tn

•o

-a
C


•t
^-v
t~t
s^^

Li
QJ
4_l
CO
3
"O
c
3
O
L,
00

0
4-1

r^
4-J
CX
OJ
•o

•^
^^
o-


O)

tfl
Li

C
o
• «H
4-1
Cfl
Li
Ol
C
0)
oo

Ol
4-J
CO

u
CO
Ol

01


































,
s-*>
\s
^^

L.
01
U-l
.-^
3
-j-
CD

01
(~i
4-1

U-l
O

>.,
4_(
•rH
>
.iH
4-1
U
3
•^
C
O
u

u
•*-4
— H
3
CO
Li
T3
>^
x:

•^
c
n

^
IS
N^

>^
4-1
««-4
cn
O
Li
O
CX

Li
QJ
U-l
• •-4
3
cr

U-4












.
"a
4-1
C
QJ
•«-!
U
>PH
U-i
U-4
01
o
CJ

r*N
4-1
•*"*
.rt
tn
Li
Ol
o.
cn
• r-l
TJ

T3
C
CO

^
*^^*
Caj
<]
s_x

(—4
,-_,
.1-4
U-l
-o
c
cfl
,— i

O
4-1

^^
,
0)
3

E
O
IM
U-l

OJ
u
c
CO

tn
• -H
T3

•*
s~\
>r-l
S^ ^

4J
C
QJ

"D
cfl
Li
00

O

— ^
3
CO
L.
•o
X
a:
00
                                                                                  E-24

-------
   Q

   •<
   --I tM

   X X
   Q Q
   Z 2
   U Z
   u o
   Q I-H
   3 H
   -3 <
   •J  H
   .J  Z
   h-t  O
   Cu  C_)
   Q
   Z  OS
   <  CiJ
   J  H
      <
   Z  3
   O  Q
   Ci  Z
   tu  r=
      o
WO  OS
ZZ  U
W*H
EH  £
Qv-J  O
>tC3  OS
XCO  U-
  O  H
  i-i  J
  H  3
  <  to
  OS  U
  H  cd
  z
  u  ^
  u  to
  Z  hi
  o  os
  o
      OS
  os  u
  U  t->
  H  Z
  <  <
  3  U
  O
  Z  Z
  3  <
  O  £
  OS  3
  O  O

  X  X
  u  u
  Q  a
  Z  Z

OO






r-~








o






u
•*
JO
*
CO
01 m
•••*
en
X
*— i
to
c

00







•—4
CM
H Z 3 H H 0 rs
sO







O
CM
H 3 H H E-* O cv
vO







r^
CM
3 H H H H 0 VT
vD







CD
CM
H H H H H 0 -«
vO




1 1
U U
cfl cfl
C Ui Ui -"^
O to cfl i-4
••H js  o c-atJ 0) cu-i i_>
C N CQUIOI C cooicu CU CU
CO UEO UE33
u T) cu -*H to CM a> * >
u to i_i •*-! ex cu i-j ..H ex
U Ui i-l Ui — , CM
CU 3 •— iCUOl cfl ,— i O>  --i u i-J Ui --< j-i ij x X
"O tOO"-< 3 O — i 0)0)
3 entOCOi-itOCOTJ-a
— i C co C C
C/3 r) tO t_l hi



01
CO
T3
CU
01
3

ffc
01
u
01
X
CO
r-l
J
-H
U-i
•u
c
CO
-1
1
o
c

CO
Ui
CU
J3
3

•^
c
o
• f-l
AJ
>»H
-o
c
o
0

.— I •
—i C
3 O
C --i
1-1
II •-<
-o
z c
o
... o
-o
a) en
01 .r4
3 J=
1-1
en
a; ui
3 0
-J U-i
CO
> CU
0) J3
en co
CO U
O -i-i
1 ^
u ex
en CX
U, CO
o
3 u
0
II C

3 II

.~ <
T3 Z
O)
en «»•
3 C
o
01 01
o> •**
3 Ui
^ to
to ex
> E
o
^J U
to
U Ui
•-i 0
ex u-i
X
H 01
II 01
CO
H j3
(0



•
X
-o
c.
0)
ex
CX
<

0)
J=
4-J
c
.1-1
tv
C3
f— 1
3
E
Ui
0
U-I

0)
J3
1-1

00
c
• f-l
Ul
3

•^
0)
l->
CO
f— 1
3
u

CO
u

0)
J3

X
CO
E
c
3
o
JC
en

0)
01
o
J=
1-1
c
CO
J=
1-1

Ui
O)
J=
1-1
o

Ul
c
o
••-4
1-1
CO
c
-.-1
J2
E
o
IJ

Ui
0
U-l
en
0)
3
CO
>
X
01
•o
c
*— 1
J3



















































•
•a
0)
01
3

01
01
3
f— 1
CO
>
Ui
0)
1-1
CU
E
tfl
Ui
to
a.

Ui
o
U-I

X
• I-*
T3
c
u
ex
ex
<;

c
• «H
»— 4
<
01
J3
to
H
01
CO
to
(J














•
u
o
U-I
>^x

c
0
JO
Ui
CO
u

u
•H
c
to
00
Ui
o

U-I
o

c
o
«»s
1-1
u
CO
Ui
U-I

-o
c
to

»•
s^.
CD
^^

1-1
c
01
J_t
c
o
u

Ui
01
1-1
CO
3

CJ
• I-*
Ui
1-1
a>
e
3
, — 1
o
>

•t
x-^
X
Ui
"O
a.

X
u
• I-l
01
c
CU
•o
^
,__•!
3
J3
X
Ui
o
"O
















•
x-s
«
***?

Jj
c
a>
*«-(
o
• r-t
tM
(4-t
CU
o
u

X
±J
• •H
>
• <-l
en
Ui
0)
CX
01
«f-l
T3

•a
c
tfl

•s
x~x
J=
\—s

Ui
0)
1-1
tfl
3
-o
c
3
o
Ui
oo

o
l_l

JS
1-1
ex
0)
•o

^_^
cr


0)
1-J
CO
Ui
c
Q

1-1
CO
Ui
CU
c
CU
QO
0)
J_l
eLeachai






































•
x^
^

Ui
O)
U-I
• -H
3
cr
CO

O)
J=
l->

U-l
o

X
1-1
• t-l
>
• «H
1-1
u
3
•o
c
o
u

u

,—4
3
CO
Ui
-o
X
JC

-o
c
CO

IS

X
1-J
r poros:
o>
U-l
• •*
3
cr
<
Ui













•
*— s
a
^, -»

i_)
c
CU
• t-l
u
• t-l
U-l
U-l
CU
o
o

X
1_1
•4H
>
• «-l
01
u
o>
ex
01
• «H
•o
•o
c
to

•^
•'"^
erf
<3
>^x

^_ ,
— '
U-i
-o
c
CO


o
l_l

J. j
f~4
Ol
3

E
o
Ui
U-i

CU
(J
c
tfl
1-1
Ul
. _
T3

^
^-^
• *-l
* —

c
0)
• rH
"^3
CO
u<
oo
u
3
CO
u,
TD
X
.x:
00
                                                                         E-25

-------



Q
Z
<;

r— x
p-H

X
CzJ
O
•z.
h-l

Cd
U
a
3
_:
CO

a
w
r-J
J
1— 1
tL,
Q
Z
<
J

z:
o
OS
tu

O
Z
K- 1
HH
2^
H^3
3<^
£[U
s*
EH
Sz
00
as-*
OH
hH<
|T| 3-4
OH
H Z
tfCU
EH"
Z
O
CJ

QS
W
E-
<
3

Z
ra
o
OS
o

Ci.
o

X
w
^
z
^ *






























/— *,
CM

X
u
a
z
t-H

Z
o
t~H
H
<
Z
i— t
y|
^
H
Z
O
u

os
w
H
<
3
O
Z
3
0
as
p

T.
O
as
C*.

U
Z
1— t
H
ZJ
CO
u
as

v:
CO
r— 1
as

OS
QJ
u
z
<
u

z
<
z:
3
*T^

Clw
O

>:
^j
£2
Z
K"1























CO





f—.










vO






U

XI
•k
CO
0) 1/-I
• p-4
tn
X
i — i
«J
c
<

U-l
O

c  x: oo ^
^j u tn u tn OO
-00) U lw 3.
l-i C "O O> T3 Ol ^ — '
~> o c -a ^> 01 cu-i 4-1
c: M totnoi C njtnoi Ol
0) u 6 o u E 3
u -c a) --.to N oi--ito —i
c u a. -j i- o-i-iu to
o ^j xtnto -a xtnto >
u CB 4_>--«a. oi u •" a.
-C kj U l-l kl — 4
O | O) 3 — Ol Ol to ,— lOIOI

QJ
4-1
• _4
CO
OO ^ • f-4 4-; LJ kl >rH ±J LJ X
T3 to O --H 3 O •-• Ol
3 ulCOCOiJCOt.O"O
— ' C to C
en rD tn i~i
o




v£>
LO








r».
CN
•
O







vO
n
o
•
o






CO
<£>
o
o
•
o






CO
vO
o
0

o








vO
CM

o







OO
-o
o
o
•
o













Ol
3
,_4
«3
>

CN*

X
oi
•a
c |

tn
t8
-a
01
tn
3

•h
«1
u
tn
•rH
X
01
1— 1
f— 1
•  01
f— 1
<3J J2
tn to
to u
U -~i
1 ^-4
_j a.
tn a.
u to
0
3 4-1
0
II C

3 II

.- <
"O Z
01
tn •*•
3 C
O
tn tn
01 •-!
3 U
,-i to
«3 O-
> E
0
r— 1 O
to
U I-
• rt O
a. u-i
>,
"—i tn
• <^
II tn
to
E- J3
f"1 , J £0

•
X
T3
C
0)
C.
a.
-,
CO
E

C
3
O
_c
tn

0)
in
O
JZ
4.j

C
CO
-C
4-j

U
0)
x:
i-j
0

tn
C
o
• *4
i^
to
c
• ~1
JO
E
o
u

u,
o
U-l

tn
01
r*
f— <
to
>

X
01
-o
c
h—4
^3




















































•
"3
Ol
tn
3

tn
01
3

CO
>

U:
Ol
4_l
Ol
E
to
l-l
C3
O.

Vi
o
t-M

X
• (-4
••a
c
01
a.
a.
<

c
• -«

1—4
1
<

,JJ
p— 4
J3
CO
H

Ol
0)
t/)
U














^
U
o
U-l
x_^

c
o
_a
u
CO
U

u
• -H
c
to
00
u,
o

U-l
o

c
0
• •^
^J
u
CO
u
U-4

T3
^
CO
^
x"v
o
^.^

4_>
C
01
^J

0
u

l_,
Ol
4-J
CO
3

u
• r-4
I*
4-4
01
E
3
-— •
O
>

•t
/^^
X
Ll
T3
a,
•v™*-

x
.U)
>r-4
tn
c
01
•o

^
^-4
3
J3

X
Li
a
-o
















•
^™\
a
*-«~*

4»J
c
Ol
• r-f
U
• pH
U-l
U-4
01
o
u

^
i-l
• rH
>
• pH
tn
u
0)
a.
tn
•p-4
-o

-o
c
to

Ph
x:


L.
Ol
4^
to
3
-a
c
3
O
U
00

0
4-1

.c
4-J
Q.
Ol
T3

p*
X"*,
O1


01
LJ
to
k.

c
o
^4
LJ
to
kl
Ol
c
O)
00

Ol
4_l
CO
JZ
u
10
Ol
J
01






































,
f —
^


kl
01
U-l
• r4
3

to
OJ
f^
4-1

U-4
o

X
4-J

>
• *H
4^
o
a
•X3
c
o
p

u

^-a
3
tO
kl
-o
X
£.

-a
c
CO

,•—*
TSi
^^^

X
i^l
.-^
tn
o
kf
o
a.

kf
01
U-l
• »w
3
^"
<
U-l












*

a

4-1
c
OJ
• r-4
u
• p-4
U-4
U-l
O)
o
u

X
l-l
»H
>
• •-!
tn
kl
OJ
ex
tn
• •H
•a

T3
c
«j

•t
*~*-
erf
<]

, — 1
	 ^
• p«*
U-l
•o
c
ca


o
4-1

1
, — 4
01
3

6
o
kl
U-l

Ol
u
c
CO
4-1
tn

-g

«,
^-^
• «-l
^_,

4-1
c
01

-a
CO
kl
00

u

-^
3
CO
k.
•o
X

00
E-26

-------
u
tsi


Q
;z

x- x
r-H

^

a
2
^—4


U
Q
j
CO
Q
U3
_]


tt,
o
2
<

0
DS
u.
o

E-H

^3

UJ
OS

c—
J£
z:

OS
2
h-*

2
Q
t— 4

<
DS
E-
2
CjJ
u
^
O

fr1
r
<
C;
2

o
ce
CJ

CL,
O
X
Ui

2
h— (


































CN
x

Q
2

CO






f»^








vo



. . ' \


2
O
hH
H
2
H- i.
z:
<
H
2
O

O3

£-H
<
3
o
rr.

O

as
0
OS
Cii

CJ
2

H
CO

OS
>1
H
t— i
U

x
O
H
2»
<

-^
—

Li-
O
X

^
2
»-H


















u
».
J3
CO
tn m
• i-i
en
X
»— i
CO
C

U-l
o

c 
in
H H H H 3
CN O
•—4







sO
H H H 3 H
oo <^






o
^ oo n
H 23 H H
OJ O






CO r*i
H 3 f-' H H
CM O






£
3 H H H H
CO O





^o

H H H H H
CN O



1 1
o u
03 CO
C *J u
O CO CO
.^ £ 0' £ 00
xj u m u in
cfl 
C N CO"-OO) C CO CA 0) 0) 01
QJ UEO UE33
U "O QJ - ^ CO C\3 01 • <-< CO 1—1 1—1
C QJ O- *••' Wi O. *J Vj CO CO
O J-J Xi/ICO "X3 Xmto > >
U to jj.— D. QJ i_i-»-iCl.
^, Li 1 1 !h4 1- ^ CN
QJ 3 — i 01 01 CO -*0)QJ
OO i-> --.jJi-i V- -i-<4_iiJ X X
-acoO"H3O-^oiai
3 inEOCO*-JCOCOT3T3
^ C cc C C
CO 3 CO (_((-!



en
CO
"O
QJ
in
3

**•
tn
4-J
in
• i— *

QJ
.— i
*i-l
U-l
-o
C
CO
,__<

o
c

QJ
QJ
3
-
C
O
1_>
-1-1
-o
c
0
u

~-i
^^
3
C

II
2
• •*
•a
o
t/i
3
in
QJ
3
^H
>
QJ
CO
U
1
^j
in
O
It

II

3

-a
QJ
in
13

in
QJ
3
i—t
CO
>

•— i
CO
u
.*-!







































•
C
0

•a
c
o
u

in
'•H
n
u.
o
^M
01
1—1
ja
u
>i-i
, 	 !
a.
Q.

u

C

II

<
2

• V-
C
O
in
• ^
t-i
cfl
a.
E
O
u

^t
Q
a. u-i
^•^
H

It

E—i
CO

tn
•1H
cn
CO
jj




•
X
•o
c
QJ
O-
n.
^C

QJ
A-J

c
••-4

(U
to
,— i
D
>_
U
O
U-l

CJ
^^
^
00
c
• rH
3

"S
i_>
CO
r— *
13
U
^3
o

QJ
J3

X
to
E
C
3
O
r"
in
in
o
.^
J-l
c
CO
u

l-i
QJ
O


C
O
.1-1
J_l
CO
• -^
jO
E
0
o



X
0)
•X3
c
f-H
-^













































•
"O
OJ
Ul
D
w
QJ
3
i— *
CO
>
u
.LJ
QJ
E
to
U
CO
a.


0
it-i

X
'•a
c
QJ
a.
a.
*^

c
>iH

•—1
|
<

0)
,_<
_Q
CO


OJ
0)
CO
u












































s"^
AJ
c
01
iJ
c
0
u
*-•
QJ
CO
3
* *~*
w
J_J
QJ
E
3
. 	 4
O


T^3
C
CO
^
X
1-1
-a
OM
N-^

X
AJ
• f-1
en
C
QJ
T3

•^
. — i
3


X
Vi
Q
T3

















^
C5
• —


c
01
-r-4
U
- ^H
CM
0)
o
^*
X
J_J
>
..— :
tn
LI
OJ
a.
tn
- ^H
-a

-a
to
fc
j:
^^*

i-i
QJ
U
CO
3
-o
c
3
O
00
Jj

J^
D.
QJ
T3


^
O'
^w^

QJ
CO
^i

C
o
• iH
i_)
Cfl
w<
01
c
01
00

QJ
AJ
CO

u

QJ
_J
01













•
'J
-—
iJ
c

"u
»*H

U-l
01
O


X
 1-J
« 1— 1
U ,-1
3 QJ
T3 3
0 E
U 0
U,
U U-.
— i QJ
3 U
tO C

T3 AJ
X en
r* .-^
"O
•a
c -
to -— N
• —4
x-^ ^-^
•ts
V— ^ Aj
c
X 0)
AJ "4
.,-, T3
en to
O I-
u 00
O
3, U
• -^
U, — <
QJ 3
U— i CO
• <-^ kf
3 T3
Q* >-x
•^ HC
U-t GO
                                                     E-27

-------
      APPENDIX  F;   SLUDGE CONCENTRATION DATA
USED IN ENVIRONMENTAL PROFILES AND HAZARD  INDICES

-------
Typical and  Worst Sludge Pollutant  Concentrations  in  Environmental  Pro-files

                         Pollutant              Typical    Worst

              Aldrin/Dieldrin
              Arseni c
              Benzene
              Bens idi ne
              Benso(a)anthracene
              Benzo(a)pyrene
              Beryl 1i urn
              Bis(2-ethylhexyl>phthalate
              Cadmi urn
              Carbon Tetrachloride
              Chlordane
              Chioroform
              Chramium
              Cobalt
              Copper
              Cyani de
              DDT/DDE/DDD
              3,3-Di chlorobenzi di ne
              Di chloromethane
              2,4-Di chlorophenoxyaceti c Acid
              Dimethyl Nitrosamine
              Endrin
              Fluoride
              Heptachlor
              Hexachlorobenz i ne
              Hexachlorobutadi ene
              Iron
              Lead
              Lindane
              MOCA
              Maiathion
              Mercury
              Methyl Ethyl Ketane
              Molybdenum
              Nickel
              PCB's
              Pentachlorophenol
              Phenanthrene
              Phenol
              Seleni um
              TCDD
              TCDF
              Tetrachloroethyl ene
              Toxaphene
              Tri chloroethylene
              2,4,6-Tri chlorophenol
              Tricresyl Phosphate
              Vinyl Chloride
              Zinc

                                        F-l
O.O7
4.6
0.326

0.68
0. 14
0.313
94.28
8. 15
0.048
3.2
0.049
230. 1
11.6
409 . 6
476.2
0 . 28
1.64
1.6
4.64

0.14
86.4
0. 07
0 . 38
0 . 3
28000
248. 2
0. 11
18
0 . O45
1 .49
Data not
9.8
44.7
0.99
O.O865
3.71
4.884
1.11
Data not
Data not
0. 181
7.88
0 . 46
t-\ ~^r
6.85
0.43
677.6
0.81
20.77
6. 58
12.7
4.8
1.94
1. 168
459.25
88. 13
8.006
12
1. 177
1499. 7
40
1427
2686.6
0.93
•n '"tQ
JL m -£."
19
7. 16
2.55
0.17
738.7
O. 09
2. 18
8
7870O
1070. 8
0. 22
86
0.63
5.84
avai 1 abl e
40
662.7
2.9
30.434
20.69
82. O6
4. 848
avai 1 abl e
avai 1 abl e
13.707
10.79
17.85
4.6
1650
311.942
4580
    *U.S. GOVERNMEHT PRIHTIKG OFFICE : 1985 0-528-652/30789

-------