&ER&
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
EMB Report 85-FPE-08
June 1986
Air
Hazardous Waste
Treatment, Storage, and
Disposal Facilities
Site-Specific Test Report
Newport Steel Corporation
Newport, Kentucky
-------
SITE-SPECIFIC TEST REPORT
NEWPORT STEEL CORPORATION
NEWPORT, KENTUCKY
ESED 85/12
EMB 85 FPE 08
Prepared by:
Entropy Environmentalists, Inc.
Post Office Box 12291
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709
Contract Nos. 68-02-3852 and 68-02-4336
Work Assignment Nos. 24 and 1
PN: 3024 and 3501
EPA Task Manager
Clyde E. Riley
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMISSION MEASUREMENT BRANCH
EMISSIONS STANDARDS AND ENGINEERING DIVISION
RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, NORTH CAROLINA 27709
June 1986
-------
DISCLAIMER
This document has been reviewed by the Emission Standards and Engineering
Division, Office of Air Quality Planning arid Standards, Office of Air, Noise
and Radiation, Environmental Protection Agency, and approved for publication.
Mention of company or product names does not constitute endorsement by EPA.
Copies are available free of charge to Federal employees, current contractors
and grantees, and nonprofit organizations - as supplies permit - from the
Library Services Office, MD-35. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, NC 27711.
Order: EMB Report 85-FPE-02
11
-------
CONTENTS
Page
Figures iv
Tables v
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1-1
2.0 SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS 2-1
2.1 Background Samples 2-2
2.2 Landfill (Process Z) 2-4
2.3 Unpaved Roads (Process AA) 2-7
2.4 Conclusions 2-8
3.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION AND OPERATION 3-1
3.1 Landfill 3-1
3-2 Unpaved Roads -- Two Segments 3~2
4.0 SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS 4-1
4.1 Site Plot Plan 4-1
4.2 Landfill (Process Z) 4-2
4.3 Unpaved Roads (Process AA) 4-6
4.4 Background Samples 4-8
5.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE 5-1
111
-------
CONTENTS (continued)
APPENDICES Page
RAW FIELD DATA AND SAMPLING LOGS A-l
Process Data Sheets and Sampling Grid Sketches A-3
Chain of Custody Forms A-5
B ANALYTICAL DATA B-l
EMB Split Sample Inventory B-3
Screening Data Sheets B-k
Moisture Determination Data Sheets B-16
Percent PMin Determination Data Sheets B-32
Metals Analysis Results and Quality Assurance Data B-44
SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES C-l
Sampling Apparatus C-3
Sampling Location Selection and Documentation C-8
Sample Collection C-ll
Sample Handling and Transport C-14
Drying and Sieving Procedures C-16
Chemical Analyses C-19
Quality Assurance (QA) Procedures C-25
D SAMPLING PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS AND OBSERVERS D-l
PROCESS OPERATIONS DATA E-l
Summary of Processes Sampled During Site Survey E-3
Summary of Equipment for Processes Sampled During Site Survey E-4
IV
-------
FIGURES
Number Page
4.1 Site plot plan of Newport Steel Corporation showing
locations of processes sampled. 4-2
4.2 Sampling grid and process dimensions for landfill at
Newport Steel. 4-5
4.3 Sketch showing locations of unpaved road samples and
background samples. 4-7
C.I Example process grid. C-10
C.2 Label used for sample jars. C-12
v
-------
TABLES
Number Page
2.1 Sampling Plan for Newport Steel Corporation 2-3
2.2 Analytical Results of Silt Screening, Weight Loss on
Drying, and PM10 Sieving, Fugitive Particulate from
TSDF (85/12), NSC Site, Newport, KY 2-5
2.3 Analytical Results for Metals, Fugitive Particulate from
TSDF (85/12), NSC Site, Newport, KY 2-6
4.1 Metals, Measurement Methods, and Detection Limits 4-8
5-1 Quality Assurance Results For Metals Analysis 5~2
C.I Sampling Equipment Specifications C-5
C.2 Sampling Equipment Preparation and Clean-Up C-7
C.3 Metals and Measurement Methods C-20
C.4 Semivolatile Organic Compounds Measured C-22
\
C.5 Pesticides Analyzed For and Their Quantifiable Detection C-24
Limits
C.6 Spiking Compounds: Acid Extractables II C-27
C.7 Spiking Compounds: Neutral Extractables V C-28
C.8 Spiking Compounds: Neutral Extractables VI C-29
C.9 Spiking Compounds: Pesticides II C-30
C.10 Spiking Compounds: Metals C-31
VI
-------
1.0 INTRODUCTION
On November 12, 1985, Entropy Environmentalists, Inc. collected soil
samples from two disposal related processes at Newport Steel Corporation
(NSC) located in Newport, Kentucky. The purpose of this sampling program was
to provide preliminary data on the magnitude of fugitive particulate
emissions from various processes at treatment, storage, and disposal
facilities (TSDF's) and on the degree to which these emissions are contam-
inated. The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) anticipates
utilizing the analytical data from this program with emission models to
estimate contaminated fugitive particulate emissions from TSDF's. The
information generated by this study may ultimately be used by the Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS) of EPA to assess the adequacy of
regulations governing contaminated fugitive particulate emissions from
TSDF's.
\
To accomplish the overall goals of this study, soil samples were
collected from two representative processes at this plant and were submitted
for the appropriate analyses in order to determine the following:
• The percent by weight of silt in the soil (i.e., material that
passes through a 200 mesh screen and has a nominal diameter
less than 75 urn) and the percent by weight of moisture in the
soil.
• The degree of contamination of the soil silt fraction with
metals.
• The percent by weight of soil silt less than 20 urn in diameter
based on a sonic sieving technique.
1-1
-------
• The particle size dependency of the degree of contamination
(i.e., greater or lesser degree of contamination in particles
with diameters not in excess of 20 urn) by conducting separate
analyses of different soil particle size fractions.
• The repeatability and reproducibility of the sampling and
analytical procedures for the entire sampling program (not
included in this report since no samples were collected for
this purpose at NSC).
At NSC, the two processes sampled were (1) a landfill, and (2) two unpaved
road segments. A pair of background samples were also taken.
Samples taken were analyzed for weight loss on drying (LOD), silt content,
PMin content, and metals as described in Section 4. Entropy Environ-
mentalists, Inc. conducted the analyses for LOD, silt content, and PMin
content. Research Triangle Institute (RTI) conducted the analyses for metals.
Field sampling was performed by Mr. Steve Plaisance and Mr. Kent Spears of
Entropy Environmentalists. Mr. Tom Lapp of Midwest Research Institute (MRI)
directed Entropy personnel regarding specific processes to be sampled and the
boundaries of the processes, and recorded the pertinent process and operating
characteristics. Mr. Gene Riley (EPA Task Manager) of the Emission Measurement
Branch (EMB) observed the sampling program. Mr. Bob Brunson, Manager of Plant
Engineering, served as the contact for NSC.
This report is organized into several chapters addressing various aspects
of the sampling and analysis program. Immediately following this chapter is
the "Summary and Discussion of Results" chapter which presents table summaries
of data on silt and PMin content and degree of contamination for each sample
fraction analyzed. Following the "Summary and Discussion of Results" chapter
is the "Process Description" chapter (supplied by MRI) which includes descrip-
tions of each process sampled. The next chapter, "Sampling and Analysis,"
presents the plot plan and sampling grid for each process. The method of
selecting the sampling grid and the sample collection procedures are
1-2
-------
outlined, including any deviations and problems encountered. This chapter also
describes the sample preparation and analytical procedures used for each
sample; any deviations from the normal procedures are addressed. The
appendices present the Raw Field Data and Sampling Logs (Appendix A);
Analytical Data (Appendix B); detailed Sampling and Analytical Procedures
(Appendix C); Sampling Program Participants and Observers (Appendix D); and
Process Operations Data (Appendix E).
1-3
-------
2.0 SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
This chapter presents a summary of the sampling and analysis results and a
brief discussion of significant deviations from the proposed sampling and
analysis protocol for this program. Since the standard sampling and analytical
procedures are not addressed in this chapter, it is recommended that those
individuals who are not familiar with the sampling and analytical procedures
used in this study review Chapter 4, "Sampling and Analysis," prior to reading
this chapter.
Soil samples were collected from two processes at the Newport Steel
Corporation (NSC) facility located in Newport, Kentucky. The processes were a
landfill and two unpaved road segments. Sampling and analysis were conducted
using the procedures described in the Sampling and Analysis Protocol. The
protocol was written specifically for this sampling program and was provided to
the facility prior to the sample collection. The procedures described in this
protocol are described again'-in detail in Chapter 4 and Appendix C of this
report.
As described in the Sampling and Analysis Protocol, this site-specific
report is intended to present the data relevant to the samples obtained at one
site in this study and the procedures used to obtain these samples. Some
statistical analyses will be performed on the data concerning this site;
however, the majority of statistical analyses will involve the data collected
over the entire study and will be included in the summary report to be com-
pleted at the conclusion of the program. With the exception of the data from
the screening conducted to determine silt contents, there is not sufficient data
to conduct meaningful statistical analyses on a site- or process-specific basis.
2-1
-------
The sampling plan for NSC is shown in Table 2.1. The sampling procedures
were designed to obtain a representative sample of that portion of the soil
having the potential of becoming airborne. The analyses of the collected
samples were conducted to measure the concentration of the most likely
elements that could be soil contaminates. Sample collection was conducted
using a scooping technique to obtain near-surface samples from moderately
disturbed surfaces. The number of samples collected within each process was a
function of the variability expected in the degree of contamination and/or the
amount of sample that was needed for the analyses.
According to the Sampling and Analysis Protocol, the collected samples were
to be analyzed for metals, cyanide, semivolatile organics, and pesticides. The
organics of interest were taken from the Hazardous Substance List (HSL) in the
EPA Contract Laboratory Program (CLP), Statement of Work. If significant
quantities of cyanide, semivolatile organics, or pesticides were not expected
to be present in a particular process, the analyses of the corresponding
compounds were not conducted. MRI decided that at this particular site,
cyanide, semivolatile organics and pesticides would not be present in
significant quantities, and therefore, the analyses for these compounds were
deleted. All samples were analyzed for metals. A complete list of the
elements that were measured and their detection limits are presented in Chapter
4 (see Table 4.1).
The analytical results are discussed in the following subsections.
Complete sampling data sheets are presented in Appendix A and all analytical
data sheets are presented in Appendix B.
2.1 BACKGROUND SAMPLES
Because many compounds and elements are either naturally occuring in the
soil or may be present as a result of factors other than those attributed to
2-2
-------
TABLE 2.1. SAMPLING PLAN FOR NEWPORT STEEL CORPORATION
Process
Sampled
Landfill
Unpaved Roads
Background
Samples
Process
Designation
Z
AA
BCD
Number of
Samples
8
2
2
Collection
Method
Scooping
Scooping
Scooping
Analyses
Loss on drying
Silt and PM content
Metals
Loss on drying
Silt and PM content
Metals
Loss on drying
Silt and PM content
Metals U
2-3
-------
NSC's activities, background samples were taken at a point on-site and
analyzed.
The percent weight loss on drying (LOD), determined on a 10 g portion of
each sample, averaged 17-37 percent (see Table 2.2) for the two background
samples (sample identification numbers BGD-711 and BGD-712). The background
samples were oven-dried for 3-5 hours at 105 C followed by desiccation for 18
hours. The silt content of the dried background samples was determined on a
full stack of sieves consisting of the following mesh sizes: 3/8. 4, 40, 1^0,
and 200. The silt content of the two background samples averaged 14.9
percent. The silt material from the background samples was mixed together to
form a homogeneous silt composite sample. The silt composite sample was sonic
sieved to determine the percent PMin content (sample identification number
BGD-739). The PM _ content for the silt composite averaged 45.71 percent by
weight of the silt material (see Table 2.2).
Results of the analyses for metals are shown in Table 2.3- The analytical
results for the metals in the background silt sample (Sample ID BGD-737) are in
terms of micrograms of the metal per gram (ug/g) of silt sample (dry basis).
These results reflect the nominal concentrations of these materials present in
the soil which are not a result of NSC's landfill activities. The results for
the background samples have not been subtracted from the results for the other
samples since risk assessments utilize the inclusive value of the degree of
contamination. It should be understood, however, that the actual outside
contribution to the degree of contamination of the soil is that portion of the
contaminate concentration which exceeds the nominal background level.
2.2 LANDFILL (PROCESS Z)
The landfill (Process Z) was sampled using a grid layout. Eight samples
were collected within this grid in a random manner as described in Chapter 4.
2-4
-------
TABLE 2.2.
ANALYTICAL RESULTS OF SILT SCREENING, WEIGHT LOSS ON DRYING, AND PM
FUGITIVE PARTICULATE FROM TSDF (85/12)
NSC SITE, NEWPORT, KY
10
SIEVING
Site and
Process
Newport Steel, Newport, KY
Landfill
(Process Z)
Newport Steel, Newport, KY
Road Sample
(Process AA)
Newport Steel, Newport, KY
Road Sample
(Process AA)
v
Newport Steel, Newport, KY
Background Sample
Sample
ID
Z-701
Z-702
z-703
Z-704
Z-705
Z-706
Z-707
z-708
Average
Std. Dev.
AA-709
AA-710
BGD-711
BGD-712
Average
Std. Dev.
Percent
Silt*
2.6
5-5
4.1
4.8
4.8
4.2
3-6
3-7
4.2
0.9
4.0
12.6
16.3
13-6
14.9
1.9
Percent
Loss on
Drying
7.12
12.67
5-99
7.12
8.53
11.73
5-95
14.50
9-50
3-31
10.26
8.14
i
17-08
17.66
17-37
0.4l
Sample 1
ID
Z-726
Z-726
AA-732
AA-732
Average
Std. Dev
AA-735
AA-735
*
Average
Std. Dev
BGD-739
BGD-739
Percent
PM10
38.53
39.20
38.87
0.47
46.70
46.41
46.56
. 0.21
51-70
50.88
51.29
. 0.58
45-87
45.54
45-71
0.23
All silt values determined with a full sieve stack.
2-5
-------
TABLE 2.3. ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR METALS
FUGITIVE PARTICULATE FROM TSDF (85/12)
NSC SITE, NEWPORT, KENTUCKY
Metals Analysis
Sample Identity
Element
Aluminum (Al)
Antimony (Sb)
Arsenic (As)
Barium (Ba)
Beryllium (Be)
Cadmium (Cd)
Chromium (Cr)
Cobalt (Co)
Copper (Cu)
Iron (Fe)
Lead (Pb)
Manganese (Mn)
Mercury (Hg)
Molybdenum ( Mo )
Nickel (Ni)
Osmium (Os)
Selenium (Se)
Silver (Ag)
Thallium (Tl)
Vanadium ( V )
Zinc (Zn)
Landfill
Silt
Z-721
(ug/g)
20,059
2.3
19.2
163
1.17
97-3
1,501
11.0
718
144,943
4,324
23,963
1.10
68.8
108
<2
1.4
41.4
<0.5
147
32,005
PM1Q
A-723
(ug/g)
23,065
2.5
22.9
169
1.08
121
1,110
8.1
957
129,723
5,163
19,578
1.48
66.2
110
<2
1-7
36.0
0.5
132
40,314
>PM
z-725
(ug/g)
20,178
2.1
21.5
157
1.21
81.5
1,692
9.4
575
157,773
3,725
26,372
0.84
64.1
103
<2
1.2
41.6
<0.5
156
25,917
Road
Silt
AA-731
(ug/g)
13,831
1.9
16.5
208
1.08
80.7
2,192
11.8
548
190,237
3,874
27,377
0.55
80.7
144
<2
0.9
62.2
<0.5
205
42,634
Road
Silt
AA-734
(u/g)
10,211
1.5
27-9
144
0.64
42.7
1,328
ll.l
408
181,727
2,426
16,374
0.34
76.8
99-4
<2
1.0
30.8
<0.5
140
29,267
Background
Silt
BGD-737
(ug/g)
13,493
1.9
12.6
223
1.20
16.5
344
12.1
326
80,336
945
422
0.23
26.1
69-5
<2
0.5
<9
0.6
61.6
2,851
2-6
-------
A scoop sampling technique was employed to obtain near-surface samples.
A 10 g portion of each sample was taken for the percent LOD determination.
The LOD for the eight samples (sample identification numbers Z-701 to Z-708)
averaged 9-50 percent by weight (see Table 2.2). The remainder of each sample
was oven-dried at 105°C for 2.5 hours followed by desiccation for 14 hours.
After drying, each of the eight samples was screened with a full stack of
sieves to determine the percent silt content. The silt content for the eight
samples averaged 4.2 percent silt by weight. The silt from the eight samples
was mixed together to form a homogeneous silt composite (sample identification
number Z-726). The PMin content of the silt composite, determined by sonic
sieving, averaged 38-8? percent by weight of the silt (see Table 2.2).
Portions of three fractions (silt, >PM10, and PM-irv) produced from the
composite silt sample from the landfill were analyzed for the metals as shown
in Table 2.3. The portion of the silt sample that did not pass through the 20
m sieve was referred to as the "greater than PMin" (>PMin) fraction. All
three fractions were analyzed to determine if the degree of contamination was
less or greater in the PM1(-. fraction than in the silt or >PM1f) fraction
(particle size dependent). The results for the metals are expressed in
micrograms of the metal per gram of sample on a dry basis. The concentrations
measured for the background sample were not subtracted from the landfill sample
results.
2.3 UNPAVED ROADS (PROCESS AA)
Two unpaved road segments leading to the landfill were sampled using the
scoop sampling technique. A separate sample jar was filled with each sample.
The percent weight loss on drying (LOD) was 10.26 percent for sample AA-709 and
8.14 percent for sample AA-yil (see Table 2.2). The road samples were oven
2-7
-------
dried for 3-5 hours at 105°C followed by desiccation for 18 hours. The silt
content of the dried road samples, determined by using a full stack of sieves,
was 4.0 percent for sample AA-709 and 12.6 percent for AA-yiO. The silt
samples were sonic sieved to determine the percent pMin content (sample
identification numbers AA-732 and AA-735) . The PM content for AA-732
averaged 46.56 percent by weight of the silt material and, for AA-735. averaged
51.29 percent by weight of the silt material (see Table 2.2). Because an
insufficient amount of silt was available, PM1(-. and >PMin fractions were not
separated from the silt for analysis of the concentrations of metals in these
fractions .
The results of the metals analyses of the unpaved road silt samples are
presented in Table 2.3- The concentrations measured for the background sample
were not subtracted from the results for the road silt samples.
2.4 CONCLUSIONS
No major problems were encountered during sample collection. And the
sampling program was considered successful in obtaining representative samples.
In the analyses of the samples , no problems were encountered in obtaining
silt content or determining PM-- content. The results of the metals analyses
are also believed to be accurate.
2-8
-------
3.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION
Sampling at this facility was undertaken for two processes. The term
"process" refers to a likely source of potentially contaminated fugitive
particulate emissions within a facility. The processes sampled were:
a. The active lift for landfill; and
b. Unpaved roadway segments at two locations within the facility.
The following process descriptions are based largely upon the information
provided by the facility and observations made during the course of the
survey/sampling effort.
3.1 LANDFILL
• The landfill was inactive during the survey/sampling visit. All in-
formation concerning the landfill operation was provided by company repre-
sentatives. This landfill has been in existence for 13 years. The area of
the landfill is 8 acres with a total design capacity of 112 acre-feet. The
only hazardous waste landfilled at this site is electric arc furnace (EAF)
dust (K061) generated by the three furnaces at this facility. Currently,
only two of the three furnaces operate at any given time. On the average,
about 26 Ib of EAF dust is generated per ton of steel produced.
Last year 11,100 yd3 of K061 plus cover were landfilled at this site;
of the total, 2,990 yd3 was K061. The cover consists primarily of coarse
furnace slag, with some mill scale, which provides a porous cover. A typi-
cal lift dimension is 200 ft x 7 ft x 2 in. of EAF dust. One lift is com-
pleted daily; an intermediate (operating) cover 4 in. in depth is applied
to the open lift after each load of EAF dust.
The principal equipment types, functions, and appropriate level of
tivity for this landfill operation are as follows.
ac-
Equipment (commercial
designation if available)
Function
Activity units
Dump truck (International)
--3-axle, 10-wheel
Water truck (Ford F-500)
--2-axle, 6-wheel
Transports EAF baghouse
dust to landfill; also used
to spread material.
Dust control concurrent
with waste application at
landfill.
Truck capacity 240 ft3;
2-3 loads every 2 days.
Waste truck--1,000 gal.
capacity; 14-ft pres-
surized spray bar.
3-1
-------
Equipment (commercial
designation if available) Function Activity units
Off-road truck (Euclid Used to transport and Activity assumed same as
R-30)--2-axle, 6-wheel spread furnace slag which dump truck.
is used as temporary cover
at landfill.
Front-end loader (John Used to transport and level Bucket capacity 5 yd3;
Deere JD 844)--2-axle, waste and cover. activity assumed same as
4-wheel dump truck.
The transport of the EAF dust is very intermittent depending upon the level
of use of the furnaces. A dedicated dump truck travels from the landfill
to the baghouse where it is filled with EAF dust. The load is covered with
a tarp and transported to the landfill. At the landfill, the dust is spread
by dropping from the rear of the dump truck (3- to 4-ft drop height) while
the truck is traversing the lift face. The EAF truck is followed immedi-
ately by a water spray truck to wet the dust and suppress particulate dis-
tribution. The spray bar on the spray truck is mounted on the driver's
side of the truck so the truck does not travel on the freshly deposited EAF
dust. After wetting, a slag cover is placed over the dust.
3.2 UNPAVED ROADS—TWO SEGMENTS
Samples were collected from roads at two different locations in the
facility. The truck filling area at the baghouse is asphalt paved, but be-
cause of the very wet conditions, samples could not be obtained. An unpaved
road from the baghouse to the main paved road had been regraveled 2 weeks
prior to the visit so no samples were taken along this portion of roadway.
Samples were collected at two points of unpaved road: (1) the road leading
down into the landfill; and (2) at a railroad crossing on the way to the
landfill. These samples were not normal dust samples but scoop samples of
damp road material.
The average vehicle volume at the railroad crossing is 1 to 1.5 trips
per day by the covered EAF truck. For the road leading down into the land-
fill, the average volume is 1 to 1.5 trips per day each for the EAF truck,
water spray truck, front-end loader, and off-road truck.
3-2
-------
4.0 SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS
This section outlines the procedures used for (1) the sampling conducted at
Newport Steel Corporation (NSC) and (2) the analysis of the samples collected.
Included are descriptions of the location of each process sampled and the
sampling grid used for sample collection. Sample handling, preparation, and/
or analysis specific to this facility or any process therein are described in
detail. Any deviations from the standard sampling and analysis procedures (see
Appendix C) are discussed.
Two processes were sampled at NSC: a landfill and two unpaved road
segments. The samples from each of these processes were analyzed for silt, PM1f)
content, and metals. A tabular presentation of the sampling plan for NSC which
specifies the number and types of samples and the locations at which they were
collected can be found in Chapter 2 (see Table 2.1). The subsections that
follow further describe the sampling locations, sampling grid schemes, and
applicable sampling and analytical procedures.
4.1 SITE PLOT PLAN
Figure 4.1 shows the site plot plan of NSC in Newport, Kentucky. The scale
of Figure 4.1 is approximately 1 inch equals 500 feet. The location of
processes sampled is indicated on the site plot plan. Pertinent topographical
features, both natural and man-made, are also shown.
4-1
-------
4.2 LANDFILL (PROCESS Z)
The landfill, designated process Z, is located west of the electric arc
furnaces (see Figure 4.1). The process boundaries were determined to
approximate a rectangle with sides of 300 feet and 90 feet. Based on these
dimensions, the sampling grid was designed and laid out using 30 foot square
grid cells (see Figure 4.2). The grid cells were numbered from left to right
starting in the northwest corner of the sampling grid.
MRI determined that eight grid cells would be sampled. A random number
table was used to select the grid cells for sampling (Appendix C). Cell 2 was
eliminated due to its proximity to selected Cells 1, 3. arid 5- Cell 19 was
selected to replace Cell 2.
Because this process involved a temporary cover of furnace slag which is a
moderately disturbed surface, MRI decided that the landfill would be sampled
using the scooping technique (see Appendix C). Within each cell a sampling
template was randomly tossed four times. The sample from each cell consisted
of the four soil aliquots (two scoops each) taken from inside the areas defined
by the template. The eight samples were numbered Z-701 through Z-708. Figure
4.2 shows each sample and the corresponding grid cell from which it was taken.
. A 10 g portion of each sample from this process was first analyzed for
weight loss on drying (LOD) by drying for 12 to 16 hours in an oven at 105 C.
The remaining portion of each sample was oven dried for 2.5 hours at 105 C
followed by desiccation for 14 hours. The dried samples were analyzed for
percent silt content and percent PMin content (see Appendix C for specifics of
sample handling during each of these analyses). The silt content was
determined on a full stack of sieves consisting of a 3/8 inch, 4, 20, 40, 100,
140, and 200 mesh sieves.
4-2
-------
(.;:
!':.•
I
*'$?&$$'$
Figure 4.1. Site plot plan for Newport Steel Corporation.
4-3
-------
Background
Samples
IX
;,-•>;::^'^^S^jS*8fe|
NEWPORT STEEL CORPORATION
4-4
-------
90'
300'
©
Z-701
4
7
10
Z-705
16
®
Z-706
22
25
28
2
(?)
Z-703
(?)
Z-704
11
14
17
20
(S)
Z-707
26
29
©
Z-702
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
®
Z-708
30
300'
r
90'
30'
30'
SCALE: 0.017" =1'
FIGURE 42. SAMPLHG GRD, PROCESS DIMENSIONS, AND SAMPLE NUMBERS
FOR LANDFLL AT NEWPORT STEEL (PROCESS Z).
4-5
-------
Using the screening and sieving techniques described in Appendix C, all the
samples from this process were utilized to make composite samples of the silt,
PM1f), and >PM.,n fractions. The part of the silt sample that did not pass
through the 20 urn sonic sieve was referred to as the "greater than
PM '' (>PM n) fraction. Portions of these fractions were then sent to RTI for
metals analysis. The procedures used for analysis of the metals followed the
methods outlined in the EPA publication "Testing Methods for Evaluating Solid
Waste," SW-846. The metals measured and the detection limits of the analytical
methods used are shown in Table 4.1. Samples for analysis of all metals except
mercury (Hg) were prepared by acid digestion using EPA Method 3050 (SW-846).
Mercury (Hg) samples were prepared and analyzed by the cold-vapor atomic
absorption procedure following EPA Method 7^71- Two modifications were used in
the final dilutions of the digestates. The samples for inductively-coupled
argon plasmography (ICAP) determination by EPA Method 6010 and furnace atomic
absorption determination of antimony (Sb) by EPA Method 7041 were diluted to
achieve a final concentration of 5$ HC1. The sample digestates for arsenic
(As) determination by EPA Method 7060, for selenium (Se) determination by EPA
Method 7740, and for thallium (Tl) determination by EPA Method 7841 were
diluted to achieve a final concentration of 0.5$ nitric acid.
The samples were only analyzed for metals since MRI decided that cyanide,
semivolatile organics, and pesticides would not be found in significant
quantities.
4.3 UNPAVED ROADS (PROCESS AA)
Two samples were collected from unpaved roads at NSC (see Figure 4.3). One
sample (identification number AA-710) was taken at a railroad crossing on the
unpaved road leading to the landfill. The other road sample (identification
number AA-709) was taken from the unpaved road leading down into the landfill.
4-6
-------
DATE: ""2/85
PROCESS LETTER: AA
SITE NAME
NEWPORT STEEL
LOCATION
NEWPORT. KENTUCKY
SAMPLING TEAM S. PLAISANCE. K. SPEARS
PROCESS NAME
ROAD SAMPLES
SAMPLING TECHNIQUE SCOOPING
PROCESS LAYOUT (Indicate Cell *, Sampled Cell *, Sample *, and Dimensions)
-N
BGD-711
AND _
BGD-712
NOTES:
4-7
-------
TABLE 4.1. METALS, MEASUREMENT METHODS, AND DETECTION LIMITS*
Element
Aluminum (Al)
Antimony (Sb)
Arsenic** (As)
Barium** (Ba)
Beryllium (Be)
Cadmium** (Cd)
Chromium** (Cr)
Cobalt (Co)
Copper (Cu)
Iron (Fe)
Lead** (Pb)
Manganese (Mn)
M OT*/"*! i T*TT^ ^ 1 U rr \
Mercury [f^SI
Molybdenum (Mo)
Nickel (Ni)
Osmium (Os)
Selenium** (Se)
Silver** (Ag)
Thallium (Tl)
Vanadium (V)
Zinc (Zn)
Detection Limits (ug/g)*
ICAP*** GFAA*** Cold Vapor AA***
375
0.5
2.0
4.0
0.3
5.0
6.0
4.0
22
375
8.0
2.0
On^
• U.3
6.0
10
2.0
0.5
9.0
0.5
2.0
4.0
*
Detection limits were calculated as three times the standard deviation
the values measured for compounds at or near the suspected detection
limit in the background sample. For compounds not detected in the
background sample, the detection limits were calculated as three times
the standard deviation of the background noise. Fe, Mg, and Al detection
limits were determined using low level standards as three times the
standard deviation of the values measured.
**
Eight RCRA metals
***
ICAP = Inductively-Coupled Argon Plasmography
GFAA = Graphite Furnace Atomic Absorption
AA = Atomic Absorption
4-8
-------
Both road samples were collected using the scoop sampling technique.
The samples from this process were first analyzed for weight loss on drying
by drying a 10 g portion for 12 to 16 hours in a 105 C oven. Later, the
remaining portion of each sample was oven dried at 105 C for 3-5 hours followed
by desiccation for 18 hours. The dried samples were analyzed for percent silt
content and percent PM,n content (see Appendix C). A full sieve stack was used
to determine the percent silt content. PMi0 and >PMir) material for metals
analysis was not produced because insufficient amounts of silt were available.
Portions of the silt fraction of the samples were submitted to RTI for
metals analysis. They were analyzed for metals as described previously for the
composite samples from Process Z.
4.4 BACKGROUND SAMPLES
Two background samples were taken at NSC near the melt shop (see Figure
4.3). The scooping technique was used for sample collection. These samples
were numbered BGD-711 and BGD-712.
\
The background samples were analyzed for weight loss on drying. The
samples were oven dried at 105 C for 3-5 hours followed by desiccation for 18
hours. The dried samples were then analyzed for percent silt and percent PM1f)
content (see Appendix C). A full sieve stack was used to determine the percent
silt content.
A homogeneous silt composite was made by mixing the silt from the
background samples. PM.. _ and >PM1 _ material for metals analysis was not
produced because an insufficient amount of silt was available.
A portion of the silt composite generated by screening was sent to RTI for
metals analysis. The sample was analyzed for metals as described previously
for the composite samples from Process Z.
4-9
-------
5.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE
The quality assurance (QA) measures for the metals analysis was conducted
internally by RTI. For the metals analysis, RTI used EPA Trace Metals QC
samples for Water Quality Analyses as check samples for the accuracy of the
instrumentation. A marine sediment reference material (MESS-1) acquired from
the Marine Analytical Chemistry Standard Program of the National Research
Council (NRC) of Canada and an NBS fly ash sample (1633 A) were used as QA
samples to check the overall accuracy of the digestion and analysis
procedures. One sample was spiked with eight elements and their percent
recoveries calculated to assess matrix effects. Another sample was analyzed in
duplicate to demonstrate analytical precision. Results of these checks are
presented in Table 5-1-
5-1
-------
TABLE 5.1. QUALITY ASSURANCE RESULTS FOR METALS ANALYSIS
Sample Identity
Elements (ug/g)
Aluminum (AD
Antinony (Sb)
Arsenic (As)
Bariuo (Ba)
Beryllium (Be)
Cadmium (Cd)
Chromium (Crl
Cobalt (Co)
Copper (Cu)
Iron (Fe)
Lead (Pb)
Manganese (Kn)
Hercury (Hg)
Molybdenum (Mo)
Nickel (Nil
Osmium (Qs)
Selenium (Se)
Silver (Aq)
Thallium (Tl)
Vanadium (V)
Zinc (Zn)
cyanide
EPA Check
Expected
(ug/g)
-
8.2
43.0
-
29.0
9.1
7.1
43.0
8.9
-
43.0
13.0
-
-
-
-
7.6
-
25.2
130
10. 0
-
Sample
Found
(ug/g!
-
9.0
43.6
-
30.5
7.7
6.8
40.1
12.3
-
43.0
12.9
-
-
-
-
6.9
-
26.7
123
10.0
-
NBS Fly Ash 1633 A
Expected
(ug/g!
140,000
7.0
145
1500
12.0
1.0
196
46.0
118
94,000
72.4
190
0.17
29
127
-
10.3
-
5.7
300
200
-
Found
(ug/g)
18 j 000
3.5
136
743
3.9
3.0
41.4
15.9
43.3
35,000
64.5
78. 0
0.18
66
40.0
-
7.6
-
2.7
121
94.2
-
NRC Sediment MESS-1
Expected
(ug/g)
58,000
0.73
10.6
-
1.9
0.6
71.0
10.8
25.1
36,500
34.0
513
-
-
29.5
-
0.4
-
0.7
72.4
191
-
Found
(uq/g)
14JOOO
0.73
10.3
46.0
0.9
0.1
31.3
10.5
23.3
23,000
53,2
322
-
25.4
22.8
-
0.4
-
0.3
42.9
247
-
Matrix Spike Recovery
Expected
(ug/g)
30,859
-
25.50
1,713
482
481
173
10.1
594
15,285
521
619
0.45
109
136
-
20.0
494
19.9
158
703
-
Found
(ug/g)
31,436
-
28.30
1,300
422
412
142
11.5
541
14,718
446
550
0.46
84
119
-
19.7
437
17.8
147
599
-
Percent
-
-
1117.
767.
m
m
m
-
911
-
86X
897.
103X
777.
887.
-
992
88X
897.
937.
85Z
-
Duplicates
Silt
(ug/g)
89,102
1,5
12.0
94.4
3.7
<5
4,278
250
248
173,248
97.3
192
<0.03
89.3
528
<2
<0.5
52.3
0.5
694
963
<0.5
Silt
(ug/g)
83,695
1.3
5.7
88.6
3.6
<5
4,103
240
239
172,113
94.5
187
<0.03
92.0
483
<2
<0.5
116
<0.5
663
912
<0.5
5-2
------- |