&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Municipal Environmental Research
Laboratory
Cincinnati OH 45268
EPA-600/2-79-058
July 1979
Research and Development
Boone County
Field Site
Interim Report
Test Cells 2A, 2B,
2C, and 2D
-------
RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into nine series. These nine broad cate-
gories were established to facilitate further development and application of en-
vironmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
The nine series are'
1 Environmental Health Effects Research
2 Environmental Protection Technology
3 Ecological Research
4 Environmental Monitoring
5 Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
6. Scientific and Technical Assessment Reports (STAR)
7. Interagency Energy-Environment Research and Development
8 "Special" Reports
9 Miscellaneous Reports
This report has been assigned to the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION TECH-
NOLOGY series. This series describes research performed to develop and dem-
onstrate instrumentation, equipment, and methodology to repair or prevent en-
vironmental degradation from point and non-point sources of pollution. This work
provides the new or improved technology required for the control and treatment
of pollution-sources to meet environmental quality standards.
I his document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
ton Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
-------
EPA-600/2-79-058
July 1979
BOONE COUNTY FIELD SITE INTERIM REPORT
Test Cells 2A, 2B, 2C, and 2D
by
Richard J. ₯igh
Regional Services Corporation, Inc.
ColumlDus, Indiana ^7201
Purchase Order No. CA-7-2512-A
Project Officer
Dirk Brunner
Solid and Hazardous ₯aste Research Division
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory
Cincinnati, Ohio ^5268
MUNICIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CINCINNATI, OHIO ^5268
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report has been reviewed by the Municipal Environmental Research
Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and approved for publi-
cation. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect
the views and policies of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, nor does
mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or
recommendation for use.
11
-------
FOREWORD
The Environmental Protection Agency was created because of increasing
public and government concern about the dangers of pollution to the health
and welfare of the American people. Noxious air, foul water, and spoiled
land are tragic testimony to the deterioration of our natural environment.
The complexity of that environment and the interplay between its components
require a concentrated and integrated attack on the problem.
Research and development is that necessary first step in problem
solution, and it involves defining the problem, measuring its impact, and
searching for solutions. The Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory
develops new and improved technology and systems to prevent, treat, and
manage wastewater and solid and hazardous waste pollutant discharges from
municipal and community sources, to preserve- and treat public drinking
water supplies, and to minimize the adverse economic, social, health, and
aesthetic effects of pollution. This publication is one of the products
of that research - a most vital communications link between the researcher
and the user community.
The information presented here was gathered from long-term monitoring
of four sanitary landfill cells (one field-scale and three small-scale).
The cells were constructed to provide an understanding of sanitary landfill
behavior, the potential effects on the environment, and the validity of
conducting this research with small-scale cells.
Francis T. Mayo
Director
Municipal Environmental research
Laboratory
111
-------
ABSTRACT
Sanitary landfills presently play a significant role in the disposal of
solid wastes, and they will proba"bly continue to do so in many areas because
of their economic advantages over other methods. However, justifiable con-
cern exists about the environmental effects of sanitary landfills. The
research project described here was undertaken to provide a better understand-
ing of the processes that occur within a sanitary landfill and the related
environmental effects.
The initial field-scale test cell was completed in June 1971 and has
been monitored since then for temperature, gas composition, settlement, and
leachate quantity and characteristics. Four additional cells (2A, 2B, 2C
and 2D) were constructed during August 1972. One of these was field-scale
(2D), and the others were small-scale cells that simulated the large cell
for the purpose of performance comparison. Water input to the cells was con-
trolled, and all cells were monitored for temperature, gas composition,
settlement, and leachate quantity and characteristics.
This report was submitted in fulfillment of Purchase Order No. CA-7-2512A
by Regional Services Corporation, Inc., under the sponsorship of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. The report covers the period August 1972
to December 1976, and work was completed as of February 1978.
IV
-------
CONTENTS
Foreword ill
Abstract iv
Figures vi
Tables ix
I. Introduction 1
II. Summary and Conclusions 2
III. Recommendations 3
IV. Construction of Test Cells ^
V- Data Collection and Analysis 13
References 97
Appendices 98
A. Summary of Cell Data 98
B. Precipitation and Leachate Quantities 99
C. Leachate Sample Concentrations 105
D. Gas Data - Test Cells 2 1?8
E. Mean Monthly Test Cell Temperatures 186
v
-------
FIGURES
Number Page
1 Concrete base and leachate collection system for cells
A, B , and C 5
2 Construction details for cells 2A and 2C 7
3 Construction details for cell 2B. 8
4 Location of cells 2A, 2B, 2C, and 2D 9
5 Construction details for cell 2D 11
6 Construction of clay cover for cell 2D 12
7 Locations in windrow where refuse was obtained for cells 2A,
2B, and 2C 14
8 Cumulative leachate collection history 22
9 Cumulative leachate collected 23
10 Field capacity determination, cell 2D 27
11 Leachate pH 31
12 Weighted mean COD concentration 33
13 Cumulative COD mass removal 34
14 Weighted Taean sulfate concentration 35
15 Cumulative sulfate mass removal 36
16 Weighted mean Kjeldahl nitrogen concentration 37
17 Cumulative Kjeldahl nitrogen mass removal 38
18 Weighted mean ammonia nitrogen concentration 39
19 Cumulative ammonia nitrogen mass removal 41
20 Weighted mean orthophosphate concentration. 42
VI
-------
Number Page
21 Cumulative orthophosphate mass removal 43
22 Weighted mean chloride concentration 44
23 Cumulative chloride mass removal 45
24 Weighted mean potassium concentration 47
25 Cumulative potassium mass removal 48
26 Weighted mean sodium concentration 49
27 Cumulative sodium mass removal 50
28 Weighted mean calcium concentration 51
29 Cumulative calcium mass removal 52
30 Weighted mean magnesium concentration 53
31 Cumulative magnesium mass removal 54
32 Weighted mean iron concentration. 56
33 Cumulative iron mass removal 57
34 Weighted mean hardness concentration 58
35 Cumulative hardness mass removal 59
36 Weighted mean manganese concentration 60
37 Cumulative manganese mass removal 61
38 Weighted mean zinc concentration 63
39 Cumulative zinc mass removal 64
40 Weighted mean COD concentration history: Eqn. 2 - 2A 72
41 Weighted mean sulfate concentration history: Eqn. 2 - 2A 73
42 Weighted mean chloride concentration history: Eqn. 2 - 2A 74
43 Weighted mean magnesium concentration history: Eqn. 2 - 2A..... 75
44 Weighted mean iron concentration history: Eqn. 2 - 2A 76
45 Gas collection probe 78
VII
-------
Number Page
46 Carbon dioxide content, level 1, test cells 2A, 2B and 2D 80
47 Carbon dioxide content - test cell 2D, level 4 81
48 Carbon dioxide content - test cells 2B and 2C - level 7 82
49 Thermocouple temperature probes 83
50 Mean monthly temperatures : Zl - 2Dlc 85
51 Mean monthly temperatures: 2Dlc - 2Alc 87
52 Mean monthly temperatures: 2D4c - 2C4c 88
53 Mean monthly temperature: 2Alc - 2A7c - 2A7c 89
54 Mean monthly temperatures: 2Dlc - 2D4c - 2D7c 90
55 Mean monthly temperatures: 2B4e - 2B4c..... 91
56 Mean monthly temperatures: 2D4a - 2D4c 92
57 Mean monthly temperatures: 2Dla - 2Dlc 93
58 Cumulative settlement., 94
viii
-------
TABLES
Number Page
1 Petrographic Analysis of Silica Sand and Gravel . 6
2 Construction Timetable 10
3 Composition of Random Refuse Samples .... 15
^ Refuse Composition for Cells 2A, 2B, 2C and 2D l6
5 Comparison of Sample Means for Cells 2A, 2B, and 2C 1?
6 Moisture Content of Separated Refuse Components . 19
7 Moisture Content of Refuse Samples for Cells 2A, 2B, 2C and 2D. . 20
8 Initial Collection of Leachate 20
9 Precipitation and Leachate Quantities 2^
10 Seasonal Precipitation and Leachate 25
11 Refuse Field Capacity 26
12 Peak Concentrations 29
13 Weighted Mean Concentration Histories - Paired Difference Test
Results 65
14 Actual Concentration Histories - Paired Difference Test Results . 67
15 Paired Difference Test Results, Starting Point at Test Cell
2D Peak of Weighted Mean Concentration History 68
l6 Cumulative Weight History Paired Difference Test Results .... 69
17 Interval Mass Removal Paired Difference Test Results ...... 69
18 Equation Constants 71
19 Cell 2A - Total Available Mass Removals 71
20 Peak Refuse Temperatures &4
21 Paired Difference Test Results - Temperatures &4-
IX
-------
SECTION I
INTRODUCTION
The Boone County Field Site consists of a ten acre tract located 8 km
west of the City of Walton, Kentucky, in Boone County. The property is
leased from the Northern Kentucky Sanitation Company. Available facilities at
the site include an office trailer, a pole barn, and a 27.2 t truck scale.
Equipment includes an industrial tractor with a backhoe and front-end loader,
a portable power soil auger, a trailer mounted water tank, and miscellaneous
tools. An instrumentation shed has been placed near the test cell and a
weather station has been erected at the site.
The geologic setting of the site is the northwestern section of the
physiographic Interior Low Plateau Province. Elevations at the research site
range between 213 and 244 m above sea level. Surficial soils at the site are
predominantly a lean clay, classified by the USDA as Nicholson silt loam.
Rubbly limestone mixed with thin beds of soft calcareous shales of the Fair-
view formation underlie the shallow soil. The mean annual precipitation in
the area is 927 mm. Monthly normal mean temperatures range from 0°C in Janu-
ary to 24.4°C in July.
The primary objectives of studying test cells 2A, 2B, 2C, and 2D were toi
(1) Analyze the amount and characteristics of leachate.
(2) Analyze the composition of gasses present in the cells.
(3) Analyze temperature conditions and compare these
temperatures to the conditions existing in the
surrounding soil.
(4) Evaluate settlement of the research cells.
(5) Evaluate construction, monitoring and analytical
procedures.
(6) Evaluate the behavior of a field-scale test cell, 2D,
as compared to similarly constructed small-scale test
cells, 2A, 2B and 2C.
-------
SECTION II
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Four sanitary landfill test cells containing municipal solid waste were
constructed at the Boone County Field Site during August 1972. Three of the
cells, 2A, 23 and 2C were small-scale and-the fourth cell, 2D, was constructed
similarly to a normal landfill cell. These units were constructed to compare
the performance of small-scale systems with a field-scale cell and to evaluate
the variations within the three small cells as measured by leachate quantity
and characteristics, gas composition and temperature.
The initial refuse composition and moisture in all cells was determined
to be statistically similar. In-place refuse densities in the small cells
varied from 392-431 kg/m3. The density in cell 2D was 598 kg/m.3. After pre-
cipitation input to all cells of 2050 mm, leachate collected per unit of sur-
face area varied from 213-2347 mm. The low value occurred in 2C and was pro-
bably due to a leak from the cylinder side or base. The upper value was col-
lected from 2D and was in excess of precipitation, indicating leakage into
the cell from the soil walls. The apparent field capacity of the refuse in
all .cells was found to be within 10% of values reported in the literature.
Leachate composition histories were statistically compared at intervals
of 100 mm of leachate collected using a paired difference test. The statis-
tical test was not adequate, indicating non-similarity tirhere data trends
were close and similarity in some instances where graphs showed obvious dif-
ferences. For most of the parameters studied the concentration histories of
2A and 2B showed similar responses and trends. The histories from 2D char-
acteristically, showed a later and lower peak value than in 2A and 2B. Mass
removals from 2A and 2B were generally similar and statistically the same on
an incremental basis for 9 of 14 parameters.. Mass removed per kg of dry
refuse from 2D was less than that from 2A and 2B for all parameters examined.
It was not possible to accurately compare gas compositions due to data
discontinuities and erratic results. Temperatures were similar among the
small-scale cells at the center of the refuse but were not comparable to the
temperatures\recorded in 2D. Average settlement over the surface of 2D was
only half that recorded in the small-scale cells.
The density and leachate volume differences precluded a definitive com-
parison of the behavior of small and large-scale test cells. The statis-
tical evaluation of the comparative behavior of identically constructed
small-scale cells was inconclusive.
-------
SECTION III
RECOMMENDATIONS
Construction and monitoring of test cells 2A, 2B, 2C and 2D have pro-
vided significant information on the simulation of field-scale landfill per-
formance. While this interim data analysis and report indicate a lack of
statistical similarity among the small-scale cells and in comparison to the
field-scale cell, there exists a potential for more accurate definition of
any difference through further work with the data and further monitoring of
longterm trends. It is suggested that the following recommendations be
considered to further this research work:
1. Leachate sampling should be continued from 2A, 2B and 2D, but on
a frequency of no more than once per month, for an indefinite
period so as to define long-term parameter concentration ranges,
contamination potentials and mass removals. Leachate analyses
from 2C, if continued, should be done on a quarterly basis.
More frequent leachate volume readings from 2D should be ob-
tained in order to delineate the cause of the excessive leachate
production.
2. A more applicable statistical measure of similarity should be
utilized in future data anlysis, and to the extent possible,
all data should be used rather than weighted means. Leachate
volumes and concentrations from 2D should be corrected, when
the source and quantity of leakage is identified, for any
future statistical comparison.
3. The leachate concentration histories and mass removals should
be compared to the results from other similar studies so that
ranges of expected concentrations and removals over a greater
extent of water input rates can be defined. This should be
done together with further development of descriptive equations.
-------
SECTION IV
CONSTRUCTION OF TEST CELLS
Four test cells containing municipal solid waste were constructed at the
Boone County Field Site during August 1972/1) Three of the cells, 2A, 2B,
2C, are enclosed in identical cylindrical steel pipes, 1.83 m in diameter and
3.66 m long. The fourth test cell, 2D, is an 8.53 m square field cell con-
structed similarly to a normal sanitary landfill cell. These units were con-
structed to compare the performance of small-scale systems with a field-scale
landfill cell and to evaluate the variations within the three small cells as
measured by leachate quantity and characteristics, gas composition and temper-
ature .
Construction of Cells 2A, 2B, 2C
The steel pipes containing cells 2A, 2B and 2C were constructed of 4.8 mm
hot-rolled steel plate coated on both sides with cold tar epoxy 1.5-2.0 mm
thick. The pipes were placed vertically in an excavation on 150 mm thick re-
inforced concrete pads. Each pad contained a trough system with a 51 mm
diameter slotted PVC pipe for leachate collection and flow to a central col-
lection well, as shown in Figure 1, After installation of the pipes a 7.6 mm
thick concrete overlay was placed around the pipes to prevent lateral move-
ment. A fiberglass coating was applied to the concrete pad inside the pipe
and .3 m up the interior walls of the pipe as protection against contact with
leachate. The interior of the collection trough was backfilled with silica
gravel and then .3 m of silica sand was placed at the bottom of each pipe.
Petrographic analyses for the gravel and sand are presented in Table 1.
Earth backfill was placed around the exterior of the pipes to within 150 mm
of the tops of the pipes.
Refuse was then placed in the pipes in 90-135 kg increments to a total
depth of 2.56 m. Each increment was compacted by dropping a 135 kg weight
from approximately 1.2 m above the refuse until no further compaction was
apparent. Temperature and gas probes were placed within the cell during
placement of the refuse as shown in Figures 2 and 3. After refuse placement
a 300 mm compacted soil cover from the site was applied. This soil was then
covered by 300 mm of pea gravel to allow rapid percolation of rainfall and to
minimize evaporation. The construction timetable is presented in Table 2.
The relative positions of the cells are shown in Figure 4.
Construction of Cell 2D
Cell 2D was constructed in an excavation 8.53 m square and 3.20 m deep.
The base of the cell was then shaped with sand for drainage and a 7.6 mm
thick chlorinated polyethylene liner (Staff Industries, Inc.) was placed along
-------
6' DIA. STEEL
PIPE
2" P.V.C.
COLLECTION PIPE
#4
REINFORCING
BARS _
0.5'
I __ __ ___ _ I
i i I
1 r~ t-
CONCRETE
PAD
4.
\
\
\
r^~
___ t m m [ ' I
. 1
c
C
I
o i
^_
0 1
1' = .3 m 1" = 25.4 mm
Figure 1. Concrete base and leachate collection system for cells A, B and C.
-------
TABLE 1. PETROGRAPHIC ANALYSIS OF SILICA SAND AND GRAVEL
Material
Percent by
weight
Percent by
volume
Gravel Material
Quartz and Quartzite - dense, hard, tough,
crystalline, particles consisting entirely
of SiCL but with some slight iron staining.
Sandstone - hard, tough, high-silica
particles but containing abundant iron as
a heavy stain deposit and/or a cementing
agent.
Sandstone - hard, tough, high-silica
particles containing a minor amount of
iron as a stain.
Chert - hard, tough particles consisting
of microcrystalline quartz and chalcedony.
The chalcedony is about 90 to 99% Si02 and
minor to moderate amounts of iron and
aluminum compounds.
Igneous and Metamorphic Rocks - dense,
hard, tough, crystd.line particles which
consist of major to moderate amounts of
Si02 and minor to moderate amounts of
ferro-magnesian and alumina compounds.
Weathered Particles - soft, crumbly, iron-
rich particles which may contain moderate
amounts of silica.
Sand Material
Quartz - hard, tough, crystalline grains
of Si02.
Sandstone and Siltstone - hard tough par-
ticles consisting of well-cemented quartz
grains.
Weathered Sandstone - friable, easily-broken
particles consisting of poorly-cemented
quartz grains.
56%
24%
3%
13%.
3%
1%
95.1%
4.4%
0.5%
-------
)
c
c
T-
1
o
4
o
y
/
<
a
3
s|
^
c
^
' ^
r
3
y
GRAVEL
CLAY
Level 1 lc o/\ - -
REFUSE
A
Level 7 7c O/A
SAND
< fi-n> >
1" = 25.4 mm
o TEMPERATURE
PROBE
00
T
1' = 0.3 m
GAS
PROBE
Figure 2. Construction details for cells 2A and 2C.
-------
c
i
O
rH
"W
A
o
H
5
CM
*
<
«
J
C
r
5
.H
GRAVEL
CLAY
REFUSE
Level 4 4c o 4e 0
A
Level 7 7c oA
SAND
< 60' ->
1" = 25.4 mm
O TEMPERATURE
PROBE
cs
CN
1' = 0.3 m
A GAS
PROBE
Figure 3. Construction details for cell 2B.
-------
1' = 0.3 m
28'
CELL 2D
COLLECTION
WELL
CELL 2A
00
CXI
CELL 2C
00
H
CELL 2B
Figure 4. Location of cells 2A, 2B, 2C, and 2D.
-------
the cell side walls and base. A slotted PVC pipe was placed along the center
line of the base of the cell for leachate collection and gravity drainage to
the collection well. Silica gravel was then placed on the top and sides of
the collection pipe. The entire base of the cell and liner was then covered
with 300 mm of silica sand. Plywood sheets were placed against the synthetic
liner on the sidewalls for protection from puncture and tearing during cell
filling. The construction details are shown in Figure 5.
TABLE 2. CONSTRUCTION TIMETABLE
Date
Operation
August 8
August 9
August 10
August 12
August 14
Augus t 15
Augus t 16
August 17
August 18
Begin collecting refuse in windrow and stockpile
Complete collecting refuse
Samples obtained for compositional analysis
Place and compact refuse in Cell B
Place and compact refuse in Cell A
Place and compact refuse in Cell C
Start placing refuse in Cell D
Complete placing refuse in Cell D
Install clay cover on Cells A, B, C, and D
Note: During the period from August 8 through August 17, the weather
was sunny and hot.
A Case 450 bulldozer was lowered into the cell by a crane. Refuse was
added by the crane from a stockpile and compacted by the bulldozer. Tem-
perature and.gas probes were placed during the filling at locations shown in
Figure 5. A 300 mm layer of compacted soil cover was placed over the 2.44 m
of refuse. A berm system, as shown in Figure 6, consisting of 150 mm high
triangular-shaped clay berms, was hand constructed on top of the soil cover.
This was constructed to promote uniform percolation of rainfall into the
refuse cell. A 300 mm layer of pea gravel was placed over the entire soil
cover. Excess liner material was folded over the top of the plywood sheeting
and covered with earth on the outside of the plywood walls. The relative
locations of the four cells and the collection well are shown in Figure 4.
The construction timetable is presented in Table 2.
10
-------
3.0'
3.0'
0.51
LONGITUDINAL PROFILE ALONG LEACHATE COLLECTION PIPE
1.0'
r
GRAVEL
CLAY
O
O A
O
A O
9.0'
7.0'
9.0'
7.0'
O a
O
REFUSE
30 MIL C.P.E. LINER
O __ A O
3" P.V.C. PIPE
28.0'
8.0'
0.8'
0.7'
0.5'
TRANSVERSE PROFILE AT EFFLUENT END OF LEACHATE COLLECTION PIPE
GRAVEL
CLAY
14.0'
OA LEVEL 1
' P.V.C.
O LEVEL 4
REFUSE
OA LEVEL 7
30 MIL C.P.E. .INER
28.0'
1.5'
1" = 25.4 mm
1' = 0.3 m
A GAS
Figure 5. Construction details for cell 2D.
0.9'
O TEMPERATURE
11
-------
Figure 6. Construction of clay cover for cell 2D
-------
SECTION V
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
REFUSE COMPOSITION
Residential solid waste from municipal and private collection routes was
obtained for the test cell!1) A total of 23 truckloads weighing 149.9 t was
placed in a stockpile. Approximately 10% of the refuse in each truck was re-
moved from the ordered stockpile and deposited at a position in a windrow in
accordance with the arrival time of the refuse.
This windrow was divided into quarters on a weight basis as shown in
Figure 7. Random assignments of sample locations within each quarter were
made and twelve 136 kg samples were removed at that location for compositional
analysis. Then approximately 726 kg of refuse was removed from each of the
quadrants at the locations designated in Figure 7 for use in the cells. The
pipes were filled sequentially and the refuse was always in the order quadrant
1, 2, 3, 4. Refuse was removed by hand, weighed, and placed in the pipes.
Several samples were taken during filling for subsequent moisture analysis.
Refuse from the main stockpile was added to cell 2D by means of a clam-
shell so batch weights could not be recorded. The refuse was placed so that
each of the four lifts in the cell came from the quadrant in the stockpile
corresponding to the same windrow location. Estimates of refuse density
were made while filling to try and achieve a similar refuse density to that
obtained in the smaller cells. However, additional compaction of the lower
lifts of refuse occurred as upper layers were being compacted and the final
density was in excess of that desired.
Composition analysis was performed by hand sorting the twelve original
samples. The results are presented in Tables 3 and 4. That fraction showing
as fines represents the material passing through a 25.4 mm square mesh sieve
not readily separated into any of the other categories. Using the method of
Stell and Torrie (2) for unpaired observations and unequal variances the
significance of the variations in refuse component means for cells 2A, 2B and
2C was determined. Results are presented in Table 5. None of the variations
were significant at the 10% level. Therefore, any variations in the perfor-
mance of cells 2A, 2B and 2C cannot readily be attributed to differences in
the quantities of refuse within each category. The possibility of performance
differences due to variations between the actual composition within each
category was not examined.
Twenty samples of approximately 4.5 kg of the separated components were
13
-------
o*
ex
o-
H
o
m
CM
CM
O
CM
CELL 2C
CELL 2A
CELL 2B
CELL 2A
CELL 2C
CELL 2B
CELL 2A
CELL 2C
CELL 2B
CELL 2A
CELL 2B
CELL 2C
1' = 0.3 m
Figure 7. Locations in windrow where refuse was obtained for cells 2A, 2B,
and 2C.
-------
TABLE 3. COMPOSITION OF RANDOM REFUSE SAMPLES
Component-Percent by Wet
Windrow
Sample
Location
Quad. , Cell
I
I
I
II
II
II
III
III
III
IV
IV
IV
2A
2B
2C
2A
2B
2C
2A
2B
2C
2A
2B
2C
Total
Weight
Separated Food
(Ibs.) Waste
288
282
260
282
296
284
289
286
282
288
287
299
4.48
4.26
4.96
3.43
2.19
1.83
1.52
3.49
3.68
2.33
10.18
12.11
Garden
Waste
8.21
10.05
7.42
1.20
28.6
1.62
9.34
12,55
21.65
2.05
4.47
2.74
Paper
52.7
39.0
46.8
38.75
44.7
53.4
58.6
49.2
40.8
65.8
46.9
53.8
Plastics
Rubber,
Leather
and
Textiles
7.62
13.6
5.08
11.78
6.75
11.15
13.3
11.81
14.0
9.96
7.77
11.10
Wood
0.45
2.38
11.58
20.9
0.47
1.58
0.415
0.94
7.25
1.63
0.42
1.20
Metals
7.13
15.62
9.54
13.6
7.79
10.34
4.92
8.28
7.01
6.74
10.50
9.07
Weight
Glass
6.23
8.81
6.00
6.51
7.89
11.53
6.16
6.54
2.44
5.10
11.89
6.26
Ash,
Rocks
and
Dirt
1.36
3.41
0
0.78
0
3.41
0
0
0
0
0.63
0
Diapers
0.66
0.53
0.038
0.39
0.067
0.457
1.87
0.07
0.46
0.90
5.55
0.234
Fines
11.17
2.34
8.58
2.62
1.55
4.65
3.81
7.06
2.62
5.52
1.71
3.42
-------
TABLE 4. REFUSE COMPOSITION FOR CELLS 2A. 2B, 2C, and 2D
o\
Refuse Component - Percent by Wet Weight
Cell
2A
2B
2C
2D*
Statistic
Mean
Stand. Dev.
Mean
Stand. Dev.
Mean
Stand. Dev.
Mean
Stand. Dev.
Food
Waste
2.94
1.29
5.03
3.54
5.65
4.50
4.54
3.29
Garden
Waste
5.20
4.17
13.92
10.36
8.36
9.21
9.16
8.44
Paper
53.96
11.5
44.95
4.37
48.7
6.17
49.20
8.16
Plastics,
Rubber,
Leather
and
Textiles
10.66
2.45
9.98
3.25
10.33
3.75
10.33
2.91
Wood
5.85
10.0
1.05
0.92
5.40
4.96
4.10
6.29
Metal
8.10
3.79
10.55
3.58
8.99
1.42
9.21
3.01
Glass
6.00
0.62
8.78
2.27
6.56
3.75
7.11
2.63
Ash , Rocks
and Dirt
0.535
0.66
1.01
1.63
0.85
1.71
0.799
1.29
Diapers
0.955
0.64
1.56
2.67
0.30
0.20
0.936
1.54
Fines
5.78
3.79
3.17
2.62
4.82
2.64
4.59
2.99
* Determined from all observations for 2A, 2B, and 2C
-------
TABLE 5. COMPARISON OF SAMPLE MEANS FOR
Refuse
Component
Food Waste
Garden Waste
Paper
Plastics, Rubber,
Leather and Textiles
Wood
Metals
Diapers
Fines
Cell
Comparison
2A-2B
2A-2C
2B-2C
2A-2B
2A-2C
2B-2C
2A-2B
2A-2C
2B-2C
2A-2B
2A-2C
2C-2B
2A-2B
2A-2B
2B-2C
2A-2B
2A-2C
2B-2C
2A-2B
2A-2C
2B-2C
2A-2B
2A-2C
2B-2C
f *
1.110
1.158
0.217
1.563
0.625
0.802
1.465
0.806
1.019
0.334
0.147
0.141
0.951
0.080
1.724
0.941
0.441
0.810
0.440
1.941
0.941
1.134
0.416
0.887
-------
taken for moisture analysis. Samples were dried to a constant weight at 100-
105°C for 24 hours. The samples had been stored for approximately 3 weeks in
sealed plastic bags to prevent moisture changes, therefore transfer of mois-
ture from one category to another was not prevented. The results are pre-
sented in Table 6.
A number of grab samples were also obtained during refuse placement for
moisture determination. The results are presented in Table 7. The mean
moisture content of the windrow samples was 24.1% with a standard deviation of
8.7%. The mean moisture content of the stockpiled samples was 31.9% with a
standard deviation of 12.9%. A statistical comparison of sample means (2)
revealed no significant differences in moisture at the 5% level. Therefore,
any variations in the performance of cell 2D as compared to 2A, 2B and 2C
cannot readily be attributed to differences in initial moisture content.
The amount of refuse, wet weight, placed in cells 2A, 2B, and 2C was
2,639 kg, 2,898 kg, and 2,813 kg, respectively. The wet densities were
392, 431, and 418 kg/m3. Refuse placed in cell 2D was calculated to be 106.2t
at an in-jiace wet density of 598 kg/m3. Initial refuse moisture content, by
wet weight, was 22.5% for 2A, 27.1% for 2B, 24.1% for 2C and 31.8% for 2D.
Samples obtained for chemical analysis of the refuse were frozen for
future analysis. These samples were inadvertently destroyed during transfer
of the EPA office of Solid Waste from Cincinnati to Washington B.C. in 1973.
LEACHATE QUANTITY
The experimental design called for the input of approximately 500 mm of
precipitation each year into all of the cells. Average annual rainfall at the
site is in excess of 900 mm so all of the cells were periodically covered,
the cylinders with caps and 2D with nylon reinforced Hypalon. Covers were not
placed on the cells by any schedule but whenever needed to gain as uniform an
input as possible throughout the year. Evaporation and transpiration losses
were further reduced by use of the .3 m gravel layer overlying the soil cover,
preventing vegetative growth and shielding the water stored on top of the soil
cover from direct sunlight.
Leachate Volume
Leachate was initially collected from each test cell on the date and at
the cumulative rainfall quantities in Table 8.
18
-------
TABLE 6. MOISTURE CONTENT OF SEPARATED
REFUSE COMPONENTS
Windrow
Sample
Location
Quad III
Cell 2B
Quad I
Cell 2A
Quad III
Cell 2C
Refuse
Component
Fines
Food
Wood
Garden
Paper
Plastics, Rubber,
Leather & Textiles
Metal
Glass
Fines
Food
Garden
Paper
Plastics, Rubber,
Leather & Textiles
Metal
Glass
Food
Garden
Paper
Plastics, Rubber,
Leather & Textiles
Metal
Percent
Moisture
17.2
42.2
15.4
53.7
25.4
15.5
10.9
0.44
27.1
40.6
54.3
36.3
22.7
7.8
2.0
49.3
44.1
32.6
29.3
4.6
Percent by Weight of Component
in Total Sample
7.1
3.5
0.9
12.5
49.2
11.8
8.3
6.5
S = 99.8
11.2
4.5
8.2
52.7
7.6
7.1
6.2
2 = 97.5
3.7
21.7
40.8
14.0
7.0
= 87.2
19
-------
TABLE 7. MOISTURE CONTENT OF REFUSE SAMPLES
FOR CELLS 2A. 2B, 2C AND 2D
Sample Location Wet
Windrow
Quad Cell
I
I
I
I
I
III
III
III
IV
IV
2A
2B
2B
2C
2C
2A
2A
2C
2A
2C
Stockpile Sample
Quad Weight
12.0
23.0
23.0
8.3
17.6
26.0
12.75
18.2
18.0
15.9
I 14.2
I 22.0
II 13.3
II 8.5
III 10.2
III 16.0
IV 21.0
IV 11.0
Percent Moisture by Wet Weight
Date Sample Obtained
8/14 8/15 8/16 8/17 8/18
28.0
23.0
31.2
31.8
18.9
7.0
35.7
16.7
19.4
29.1
31.7
34.0
38.4
37.2
20.0
17.4
56.3
20.0
Test Cell
2A
2B
2C
2D
TABLE 8. INITIAL
COLLECTION OF LEACHATE
Date Leachate Collected Cumulative Precipitation^
6-5-73
2-13-73
6-19-73
9-25-72
724
588
765
51
a. millimeters
20
-------
Figures 8 and 9 show the quantities of leachate collected from each test
cell with time and with precipitation. Test cell 2C produced very little
leachate during the reporting period in comparison to 2A and 2B. A test
boring in the cell did not show any free water stored in the cylinder. It is
assumed that a leak developed at a welded joint near the surface of the soil
cover and very little of the precipitation actually entered the refuse mass.
The leachate data from cell 2C will not be considered for the remainder of
this section. The raw data is included in the appendices.
The quantities of leachate collected from 2A and 2B vary slightly, but
by the end of 1976 50% more than 2A and 72% more than 2B per unit of surface
area had been collected from 2D. One possible cause of this large difference
could be leakage into cell 2D through the walls. There also could be leakage
through the membrane cover. The quantity of leachate collected from 2D over
the reporting period was in excess of the precipitation that occurred when
the membrane cover was removed.
Evaporation
Table 9 shows the quantity of precipitation and leachate collected from
each cell for each period during which the cells were uncovered and then
covered. The time delay between precipitation and leachate collection is not
as long as it appears to be from the table because the cells were frequently
covered soon after heavy rains. Table 10 was prepared to determine the signi-
ficance of evaporation losses, grouping the precipitation and leachate col-
lection data as close as possible in seasonal sums after leachate flow became
relatively consistent. The percent of the precipitation collected as leachate
in the summer does not show any evidence of evaporation losses for 2A and 2B.
It is not possible to tell whether the lower summer precentage for 2D is due
to evaporation or whether there is more leakage into the cell during the
winter when more water is available from the surrounding soil.
Absorptive Capacity of Refuse
The time delay between initial precipitation input and eventual steady
leachate production results from the absorptive capacity of the refuse being
achieved, or field capacity being reached. The field capacity for the re-
fuse can be estimated from the work of Fungaroli and Steiner (3), knowing the
in-place density of the refuse. These values are presented in the first
column of Table 11.
The water required to bring the test cells to field capacity can be
estimated using these values presented in the first column times the initial
refuse depth, and then subtracting the initial moisture stored in the refuse
and adding in 50 mm of water required to achieve field capacity in the cover
soil (4), This value is listed in the second column of Table 11.
In order to compare this estimated value with the apparent water re-
quired, graphs for the test cells, such as Figure 10, were prepared, and
the apparent water required was chosen as that precipitation less leachate
value when leachate production initially became steady- This apparent
21
-------
ro
2,500 r
2,000 -
w
8
1,500 -
. 1,000 -
w
500 -
u
1972
A
1973 1974 1975
Figure 8. Cumulative leachate collection history.
1976
-------
3,000
2,400
C/3
£ 1,800
1
PC
3
w
r 1,200
600-
0-
2A
2B
O 2C
A 2D
- RAINFALL-LEACHATE
2-0-0 o-o--o Q
200 400
800 1,200 1,600 2,000
CUMULATIVE RAINFALL, MM
Figure 9. Cumulative leachate collected.
2,400
2,800
-------
TABLE 9. PRECIPITATION AND LEACHATE QUANTITIES
Dates Cover
8/72-3/1/73
3/1/73-5/8/73
5/8/73-6/26/73
6/26/73-9/19/73
9/19/73-10/2/73
10/2/73-11/27/73
11/27/73-1/18/74
1/18/74-3/15/74
3/15/74-4/8/74
4/18/74-6/3/74
6/3/74-7/1/74.
7/1/74-10/31/74
10/31/74-11/29/74
11/29/74-2/20/75
2/20/75-3/24/75
3/24/75-5/20/75
5/20/75-6/19/75
6/19/75-11/6/75
11/6/75-12/15/75
12/15/75-4/6/76
4/6/76-6/3/76
6/3/76-8/17/76
8/17/76-1/4/77
Off
On
Off
On
Off
On
Off
On
Off
On
Off
On
Off
On
Off
On
Off
On
Off
On
Off
On
Off
Totals
a. millimeters
b. millimeters - volume per
c. through 12/7/76
d. through 1/4/77
Precipitation3
609.3
0
186.9
0
75.7
0
143.3
0
120.0
0
112.0
0
72.1
0
145.5
0
199.5
0
64.8
0
98.8
0
221.7
2049.6
unit of collection
Leachate Quantity^
2A 2B 2D
0
0
50.4
201.8
36.0
116.6
105.0
100.1
16.3
105.7
17.2
138.4
9.9
24.4
21.1
133.2
54.9
180.0
9.2
46.8
15.2
65.9
108. 3C
1556.4
surface
12.0
23.4
40.3
103.7
8.6
52.5
54.7
74.5
10.5
100.8
21.4
133.6
12.0
32.3
20.3
149.9
65.1
151.8
8.9
53.7
19.9
61.1
149. 5d
1360.5
area
96.3
85.3
67.8
183.4
28.1
51.2
74.6
96.0
46.8
136.4
44.8
175.9
24.7
200.7
74.8
182.2
85.8
199.6
28.2
149.2
62.4
95.8
156. 8d
2346.8
-------
TABLE 10. SEASONAL, PRECIPITATION AND LEACHATE
Dates
5/8/73-1L/27/73
11/27/73-3/15/74
3/15/74-10/31/74
10/31/74-5/20/75
5/20/75-11/6/75
11/6/75-4/6/76
4/6/76-8/17/76
Summer Totals
Winter Totals
Precipitation3
262.6
143.3
232.0
217.6
199.5
64.8
98.8
792.9
% of Precipitation
425.7
% of Precipitation
2A
404.7
205.1
277.5
188.6
234.9
56.0
81.1
998.2
125.9%
449.7
105.6%
Leachate^
2B
205.2
129.2
266.3
214.8
216.8
62.6
81.0
769.3
97.0%
406.4
95.5%
2D
330.6
195.5
378.8
482.4
285.4
177.4
158.2
1153.0
145.4%
855.3
200.9%
a. millimeters
b. millimeters = volume per unit of collection surface area
25
-------
water requirement is in the third column of Table 11. The apparent field
capacity is presented in the fourth column.
TABLE 11. REFUSE FIELD CAPACITY
Test
Cell
2A
2B
2D
Estimated
Refuse
Field
Capacity a
350
358
400
Estimated Water
Required to Reach
Field Capacityb
706
669
560
Apparent Water
Required to Reach
Field Capacity^
720
590
500
Apparent
Refuse
Field
Capacityc
356
327
375
a. millimeters/meter of refuse depth, after Fungaroli and Steiner (3)
b. millimeters
c. millimeters/meter of refuse depth
The values of estimated and apparent field capacity compare favorably,
being within 10% or less of each other for all cells. Values might be closer,
but the sequence of covering and uncovering the cells makes leachate flow
erratic and the graphical estimating of when leachate flow becomes steady
difficult.
LEACHATE COMPOSITION
Leachate samples were obtained on a bi-weekly schedule for the reporting
period. The samples were analyzed at a commercial laboratory in Cincinnati
for a number of parameters with the most extensive testing being performed
on a monthly and quarterly samples. The complete analytical results for all
cells are included in the appendices. The results from test cell 2C have not
been examined because of tne previously mentioned problems of low water flow
through the test cell.
The large amount of data from sample testing required reduction to fewer
data points for analysis of the concentration histories. Work from test cell
1 indicated that concentration histories were more total water flow than time
dependent so the sample concentration data were reduced to weighted mean con-
centrations at the approximate time at which 100 mm intervals of leachate
flow^were recorded. This normalized the data for each cell so that concen-
tration histories were based on a parameter accounting for the varying
leachate quantities collected from each cell.
Weighted mean concentrations were calculated by computing the mass of
26
-------
800 L
3
o
B
-------
the parameter collected, from sample to sample, based on the volume of leach-
ate collected between samples, multiplied by the most recent sample concentra-
tion. The sum of these masses for each sample date divided by the total quan-
tity of flow (approximately 100 mm) gave the weighted mean concentration for
the 100 mm interval.
Peak Concentrations
A summary of peak concentrations, the date of the sample and the leachate
volume per unit of surface area at which the peak occurred is presented in
Table 12 for selected parameters. It is notable that all but one of the peak
concentrations for test cell 2A occurred within a two month time span start-
ing with the onset of leachate production. This was the time period during
which or shortly after field capacity was achieved. This same result was
noted in test cell 1 (5). Apparently these peak concentrations were the re-
sult of initial water contact with the refuse when the supply of the leachable
substances and the contact time was high.
For test cell 2B the time span for peaks was somewhat longer than 2A,
ranging to over 6 months. Test cell 2B did begin leachate production 4
months earlier than 2A and before the estimated field capacity was reached
so this range might actually have coincided closely with 2A with the peak
concentrations occurring during or shortly after field capacity was reached.
For test cell 2D the general time span for peaks was four months, with
calcium and total hardness somewhat later. The volume of leachate collected
prior to and during this time range was much greater though than for 2A and
2B and somewhat later than when sufficient precipitation had entered to
satisfy both the apparent and estimated water requirements. It did not appear
that the peak concentrations for 2D occurred during the period that field
capacity was reached as occurred for 2A, 2B and test cell 1. If peaks did
occur during this period then the high concentrations in the leachate would
had to have been either reduced by significant diluting leakage from the sides
of the cell or by channelling through the cell. The latter situation would
result in field capacity not actually having been achieved until somewhat
after estimated water requirements had been met, possibly during the time and
leachate volume range when peak concentrations were recorded. Dilution was
indicated by the lower magnitude of almost all of the peak concentrations of
2D as compared to 2A and 2B.
Leachate Composition Comparibility
One of the primary objectives of the test cells was to evaluate the be-
havior of a field-scale test cell, 2D, compared to similarly constructed
small-scale test cells 2A, 2B and 2C. The concept was to determine whether
similarity existed between individual small-scale cells for such things as
well as similarity between the small-scale cells and the field-scale cell,
2D. It was hoped that the small-scale cells would be adequate models of
the large-scale cell so that future research efforts might utilize the
smaller cells for prediction of field behavior.
28
-------
TABLE 12. PEAK CONCENTRATIONS
MD
Test Cell 2A
Concen-
Parameter
Initial
Leachate
COD
Total
Kjeldahl-N
Ammonia-N
Ortho-
phosphate
Sulfate
Sodium
Potassium
Chloride
Iron
Magnesium
Manganese
Calcium
Zinc
Hardness
Total Solids
pH
Alkalinity
Acidity
Conductivity
trationa Date
-
57330
1560
1035
390
1306
1900
2225
2335
1547
486
109
2280
150
7067
46484
6
11535
6720
17000
6-5-73
7-31-73
7-31-73
11-7-73
6-5-73
7-31-73
8-14-73
7-17-73
7-31-73
8-14-73
7-31-73
6-5-73
7-17-73
7-17-73
6-19-73
7-31-73
.2 7-31-73
7-31-73
6-19-73
8-14-73
Leachate0
-
133
133
389
17
133
173
115
133
173
133
17
115
115
50
133
133
133
50
173
Test Cell 2B
Concen-
tration3
-
61600°
1897
1185
185
2000
1700
2939
2343
2902
617
115
4000
360
10575
45628
6.0
13880
6843
18000
Date
2-13-73
4-24-73
10-23-73
10-23-73
6-19-73
10-23-73
7-17-73
11-7-73
9-25-73
4-24-73
10-23-73
5-8-73
5-8-73
7-17-73
4-24-73
7-31-73
12-4-73
2-27-73
7-17-73
8-14-73
Leachate
-
32
217
217
76
217
139
230
188
32
217
35
35
139
32
149
251
12
139
161
Test Cell 2D
Concen-
tration3
-
41869
1242
947
82
1280
1375
1893
2260
1183
411
58
2300
67
6713
36252
6.2
8963
5057
16000
Date
9-25-72
11-7-73
10-23-73
11-20-73
7-31-73
11-7-73
8-28-73
11-7-73
10-9-73
9-25-73
11-20-73
8-14-73
1-29-74
7-3-73
12-16-75
8-14-73
10-2-72
2-26-74
2-26-74
8-13-74
Leachate0
-
500
486
512
383
500
417
500
473
447
512
401
628
318
1883
401
2
667
667
985
a. mg/1
b. millimeters
c. early
peak,
- cumulative
leachate
volume per
concentration later dropped and
unit of collection surface area
peaked again
on 11-7-73
sample
-------
Several inputs which are thought to be the major factors in leachate con-
centrations and volumes are the initial refuse composition, the depth of re-
fuse, the in-place density and the quantity of water entering the cell. The
experimental design was to keep these factors constant for all cells.
It was determined that on the basis of a 10 component analysis of com-
position that variations in performance between cells 2A, 2B and 2C could not
readily be attributed to variation in refuse composition. Unit wet weights of
2A, 2B and 2C were similar, ranging from 392-431 kg/m3. The refuse depth was
the same for all small cells. Water input to each cell was assumed to be the
same but the leachate production varies somewhat between 2A and 2B and very
widely for 2C, as shown previously in Figures 8 and 9.
The initial refuse composition for cell 2D was assumed similar to that
of the small cells. The density was somewhat greater at 598 kg/m3 at a
slightly higher moisture content. The possible effect on leachate concentra-
tion of this greater density is not known. The input of water was assumed to
be the same as to the small-scale cells but it was obvious from Figure 9 that
it was not since cumulative leachate production was presently greater than the
precipitation. Refuse depth was slightly less in 2D at 2.44 m whereas in the
small cells the depth was 2.56 m.
The concentration history and mass removal curves for selected para-
meters are presented in Figures 11-39. To determine whether the concentra-
tion histories were similar for 2A and 2B an analysis of differences was
performed according to the method described by Natrella (6). The differences
were compared at the 10% significance level. If there was no significant dif-
ference between 2A and 2B the same analysis was performed comparing the
average concentration of 2A and 2B to that of 2D. If there was a significant
difference between 2A and 2B, then the concentrations of each cell, rather
than an average, were compared to 2D. This same paired difference test was
used to compare the mass removal of selected parameters for 2A and 2B. Two
tests were performed on each set of data, one compared the cumulative mass
removal curves, the other the increases in mass removed over each 100 mm
interval.
pH
The pH on the sample date at the 100 mm intervals, Figure 11, was
reasonably close for cells 2A, 2B and 2D. There was a low period for each
plot which coincides generally with the achievement of field capacity.
Afterwards the pH for the 3 cells remained in the 4.8-5.4 range. Only cell
2D showed any tendency of rising, indicating lower volatile acid production.
There was some dependence of higher pH to high leachate production, indi-
cating some dilution of the buffering system. These rises were of short
duration due to the covering of the test cell, usually following heavy pre-
cipitation input. Generally the pH of test cell 2D was higher than 2A and 2B
as was the leachate production.
30
-------
HI
CU
w
H
<
5
<:
w
6.2
6.0
5.8 .
5.6
5.4
5.2
5.0
4.8
4.6
100 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200
CUMULATIVE LEACHATE VOLUME COLLECTED PER UNIT OF SURFACE AREA, MM.
Figure 11. Leachate pH.
1,400
-------
COD- BOD
The COD was determined on all bi-weekly samples for all 4 test cells.
BOD analyses were run periodically but results were variable and not con-
sidered reliable. The weighted mean concentration of COD with leachate
volume is shown in Figure 12 and the cumulative mass removal per unit weight
of dry refuse in Figure 13.
Concentration history curves for 2A and 2B coincide reasonably well but
because the level of 2B is generally higher than that of 2A the paired dif-
ference test indicated the average difference was significant at the 10%
confidence level. Neither 2A or 2B was statistically similar to 2D. The
concentration in 2D lagged that of 2A and 2B until after its peak concentra-
tion was reached, then agreement was reasonably close. A paired difference
test of 2A versus 2D beginning at the 500 mm data point showed no significant
difference.
Cumulative mass removal per unit weight of dry refuse for cells 2A and
2B was very close, even with the varied leachate production over the time
elapsed. Removal of COD from 2D has been much slower than from the small-
scale cells; t^he difference tended to increase with time and cumulative lea-
chate volume. This trend could be due to channelling or leakage from the
sides through 2D, lowering the removal rate.
Sulfate
Sulfate analyses were done on all bi-weekly samples for all test cells.
Weighted mean concentration histories for 2A and 2B, Figure 14, showed peaks
at the same cumulative volume of flow. Paired difference test results showed
a significant difference at the 10% level between the history curves of 2A
and 2B. Both 2A and 2B showed no significant difference when compared to the
weighted mean concentration of 2D, even though the 2D plot did not visibly
coincide with either small-scale cell history during most of the test period.
The lower concentrations at the beginning and the higher concentrations at
the end produced a low average difference over the entire history and a large
standard deviation, resulting in no significant difference.
The cumulative mass removals, Figure 15, for 2A and 2B showed no signi-
ficant difference for 100 mm interval increases in mass removed. 2D mass
removal per unit weight of dry refuse was far below that of 2A and 2B as was
the case for COD, but the rate of removal from 2D after 500 mm was similar to
that of 2A and 2B whereas for COD the rate was lower.
Nitrogen
Analyses were performed for Kjeldahl and ammonia nitrogen on all samples
and occasionally for nitrate and nitrite. Similar Kjeldahl and ammonia
nitrogen weighted mean concentration histories, Figures 16 and 18, for the 3
cells as compared to COD and sulfate were noted, with similarly timed peaks
for 2A and 2B, a delayed peak for 2D, and higher concentrations for 2D after
600 mm. Paired difference testing showed a significant difference between 2A
and 28 for Kjeldahl nitrogen and no significant difference for ammonia nitro-
32
-------
50,000
40,000
oo
0
O
o
o 30,000
2:
o
H
H
H
53
W
g 20,000
o
fd
10,000
2A
2B
0 ------
_L
0 100 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200
CUMULATIVE LEACHATE VOLUME COLLECTED PER UNIT OF SURFACE AREA, MM
Figure 12. Weighted mean COD concentration.
P
I
1,400
-------
w
to
P
M
Q
60
80 -
70 -
60 -
I 50
n 40
o
p-l
o
M
53
l-l
30 .
20 .
10 .
100 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200
CUMULATIVE LEACHATE VOLUME COLLECTED PER UNIT OF SURFACE AREA, MM
Figure 13. Cumulative COD mass removal.
1,400
-------
60
Pd
1,400
fe 1,200
g
| 1,000
| 800
-------
o\
w
CO
g
60
t>0
o"
13
1.4
1.2
.8
0 .6
CO
.4
.2
A-
2A
2B
0 2D
>0
100 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200
CUMULATIVE LEACHATE VOLUME COLLECTED PER UNIT OF SURFACE AREA, MM
Figure 15. Cumulative sulfate mass removal.
1,400
-------
1,800
w
1,400
'
H
M
is
o 1,000
H
55
W
0
53
8 600
o
w
H
S
400
200
CD-
CD--
2A
2B
2D
_L
100 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200
CUMULATIVE LEACHATE VOLUME COLLECTED PER UNIT OF SURFACE AREA, MM
Figure 16, Weighted mean Kjeldahl nitrogen concentration.
1,400
-------
oo
1.8
w
g 1.6
Q
60
§
H
H
o
05
1.4
1.2
1.0
.6
.4
H ~
H .2
2A
2B
O 2D
--r
200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200
CUMULATIVE LEACHATE VOLUME COLLECTED PER UNIT OF SURFACE AREA, MM
Figure 17. Cumulative Kjeldahl nitrogen mass removal.
1,400
-------
1.500 r
MD
60
e
o
o
p4
H
M
53
1,200 -
53
O
W
U
!S
O
w
H
S3
O
900
600
300
150
I
O
A
0-
2A
2B
2D
I
100 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200
CUMULATIVE LEACHATE VOLUME COLLECTED PER UNIT OF SURFACE AREA, MM
Figure 18. Weighted mean ammonia nitrogen concentration.
1,400
-------
gen. The average of 2A and 2B for ammonia nitrogen was not significantly dif-
ferent from the weighted mean concentrations of 2D, again due to lower initial
values and then larger later values which resulted in a low average differ-
ence and a large confidence interval.
Cumulative mass removals of ammonia and Kjeldahl nitrogen, Figures 17
and 19, for 2A and 2B were very similar and no significant difference was
noted for interval mass removed. 2D removal per unit weight of dry refuse
was lower as was found with COD and sulfate, seemingly due to the depressed
mass removal which occurred prior to the peak concentration; afterwards, the
curves paralleled the removal patterns of 2A and 2B. Total mass removed was
approximately 40% as ammonia nitrogen and 60% as Kjeldahl.
Phosphate
Analyses were done for ortho and total phosphate, more frequently for
the former. The weighted mean concentration history curves for the test
cells and the cumulative mass removed are presented in Figures 20 and 21 for
orthophosphate. A significant difference between 2A and 2B was obtained from
the paired difference test on the weighted mean concentration histories, but
no significant difference when 2A was compared to 2D and 2B to 2D. A signi-
ficant difference was found in interval mass removal increases between 2A and
2B.
The peak concentration for 2D occurred some 300 mm earlier than for the
other organic parameters, but it was still delayed beyond the peaks for 2A
and 2B. After 500 mm the weighted mean concentrations of all 3 cells re-
mained in the 10-50 mg/1 range, with no apparent large decrease with time or
flow volume.
Chloride
Figures 22 and 23 show the weighted mean concentration histories and
cumulative mass removals of chloride for the test cells. Peak concentrations
were recorded early for chloride in both 2A and 2B, indicative of high solu-
bility and availability. The peak for 2D was again delayed until 500 mm.
Thereafter the concentrations tended to range quite widely but all three
followed a general trend downward to concentration levels of 300-600 mg/1.
The slopes of the mass removal curves were decreasing at 1500 mm, indicating
the approach of either complete removal or limited available chloride.
Average difference tests showed no significant difference between 2A and
2B in concentration history but a significant difference at the 10% level
between the average of 2A and 2B as compared to 2D. No significant difference
was noted in interval mass removal from 2A and 2B, indicating parallel curves.
Total mass removed from 2A at 1300 mm was only 9% greater than that removed
from 2B. This removal rate was very comparable to that occurring in test
cell 1 (5). Removal from 2D parallels that of 2A and 2B after 500-600 mm but
was only 68% of the removal from 2A at 1500 mm.
Potassium
Analysis for potassium was done on all bi-weekly leachate samples. The
-------
-p-
h-1
100 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200
CUMULATIVE LEACHATE VOLUME COLLECTED PER UNIT OF SURFACE AREA, MM
Figure 19. Cumulative ammonia nitrogen mass removal.
1,400
-------
a
PM
O
W
8
!S
O
o
Q
w
H
O
300
250
200
150
100
50 -
G
0-
A-
-2A
-2B
Q 2D
100 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200
CUMULATIVE LEACHATE VOLUME COLLECTED PER UNIT OF SURFACE AREA
Figure 20. Weighted mean orthophosphate concentration.
1,400
-------
.10
w
Cfl
to
60
AS
60
.08
'°6
w
o
ts
PU
o
o
fn
o
.04
.02
> .01
O 2A
A 2B
O 2D
100 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200
CUMULATIVE LEACHATE VOLUME COLLECTED PER UNIT OF SURFACE AREA
Figure 21. Cumulative orthophosphate mass removal.
1,400
-------
2,400
to
S. 2,100
g
1,800
W
1,500
o
,-]
tn
u
1,200
900
g 600
@
@ 300
O 2A
A 2B
© 2D
_L
I
I
100 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200
CUMULATIVE LEACHATE VOLUME COLLECTED PER UNIT OF SURFACE AREA, MM
Figure 22. Weighted mean chloride concentration.
1,400
-------
W
ptl
o
OB
w
o
a
o
o
CO
2.4
2.1
l.i
1.5
1.2
.9
.6
.3
O-
A-
2A
2B
O 2D
100 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200
CUMULATIVE LEACHATE VOLUME COLLECTED PER UNIT OF SURFACE AREA, MM
Figure 23. Cumulative chloride mass removal.
1,400
-------
weighted mean concentration histories and cumulative mass removals are pre-
sented in Figures 24 and 25. The concentration history curves for 2A and 2B
coincided very closely and there was no significant difference shown from the
paired difference test. The average concentration of 2A and 2B compared to
2D showed a significant difference from 2p. The concentration history of 2D
was similar to those previously discussed with a peak later than that of 2A
and 2B and higher concentrations later in time and as volume collected in-
creased.
Interval mass removal average difference testing showed no significant
difference betweem 2A and 2B. At 1300 mm only 2% less potassium had been
removed from 2B than from 2A. The mass removed from 2D over the entire 1500
mm was only 83% of that from 2A but the rates were similar after 600 mm.
Sodium
Weighted mean concentration history and cumulative mass removal curves
for sodium are presented in Figures 26 and 27. Although 2A and 2B showed
peaks at the same time and close resemblance after 900 mm they were found to
be statistically different with a,high average difference because of the 2B
concentration values having been consistently lower than 2A. Both 2A and 2B
were not significantly different from 2D though, even with the delayed peak
and higher concentrations later in time. Interval mass removals showed a
significant difference which resulted from 2B not being parallel to 2A and
31% higher removal from 2A than 2B through 1300 mm of leachate.
Calcium
Figures 28 and 29 depict the weighted mean concentration and cumulative
mass removals with leachate volume per unit of cell surface area for calcium.
The peak concentrations for 2A and 2B were spread over a longer time period
t;han previous parameters. The peak concentration for 2D was delayed until
after the peaks for 2A and 2B. After 500 mm, all three cells tended to have
decreasing concentrations down to the 600-900 mg/1 range at 1500 mm.
Statistically, cell 2A differed from 2B and was not significantly dif-
ferent from 2D, and cell 2B was different from 2D. The similarity in 2A and
2D was caused by lower initial concentrations and higher later concentrations
in 2D, resulting in a low average difference and statistical similarity, but
not necessarily similarity of shape or magnitude when compared graphically.
Mass removal from 2A was not significantly different from 2B, on the
interval analysis, indicating the curves were parallel. There was only 17%
difference in total removal at 1300 mm. The mass removed per unit weight of
dry refuse from 2D was lower than from 2A or 2B by about 40%.
Magnesium
The magnesium mean concentration and mass removal histories are pre-
sented in Figures 30 and 31. The peaks for 2A and 2B were recorded at the
250 mm point but there is" a large variation in the magnitude of the peaks,
-------
-p-
2,000j-
1,800-
1,400 -
1,000-
H
U
u
600
400
200
I
o-
2A
2B
G--
2D
_L
I
100 200 400 600 800 1,000
CUMULATIVE LEACHATE, MM
Figure 24. Weighted mean potassium concentration,
1,200
1,400
-------
1.8
oo
0
Pn
o
&0
££
M
i
s
!=>
M
to
H
O
M
H
1.4
1.0
.6
.4
.2
A-
2A
2B
O 2D
_L
100 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200
CUMULATIVE LEACHATE VOLUME COLLECTED PER UNIT OF SURFACE AREA, MM
Figure 25. Cumulative potassium mass removal.
1,400
-------
2,000
\o
e
M
g
O
o
CO
o
M
a
H
J3
W
O
CJ
Q
W
H
33
O
M
1,600 f-
1,200
800
400
200 I
A 2B
O 2D
©
100 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200
CUMULATIVE LEACHATE VOLUME COLLECTED PER UNIT OF SURFACE AREA, MM
Figure 26. Weighted mean sodium concentration.
1,400
-------
O
W
Q
O
60
^
oo
M
O
w
>
§
M
Q
O
O
CO
w
H
H
1.8
1.4
1.0
.6
.4
.2
O 2A
A 2B
O 2D
100 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200
CUMULATIVE LEACHATE VOLUME COLLECTED PER UNIT OF SURFACE AREA, MM
Figure 27. Cumulative sodium mass removal.
1,400
-------
O
§
H
55
8
§
Q
W
H
s
2,700
2,400
2,100
1,800
1,500
1,200
900
600
300
0-
A-
0
2A
2B
2D
I
I
100 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200
CUMULATIVE LEACHATE VOLUME COLLECTED PER UNIT OF SURFACE AREA, MM
Figure 28. Weighted mean calcium concentration.
1,400
-------
tv>
V)
:=>
Q
60
60
«s
p
M
O
3
0
PH
O
W
1/3
100 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200
CUMULATIVE LEACHATE VOLUME COLLECTED PER UNIT OF SURFACE AREA, MM
Figure 29. Cumulative calcium mass removal.
1,400
-------
600
£ 525
w
^ 450
o 375
H
| 300
|
^ 225
w
H
75
A-
2A
2B
© 2D
^
I
I
I
100 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200
CUMULATIVE LEACHATE VOLUME COLLECTED PER UNIT OF SURFACE AREA, MM
Figure 30. Weighted mean magnesium concentration.
1,400
-------
w
CO
n
o
60
Q
i
CO
CO
M
a
.20 -
.10 -
.05 -
100 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200
CUMULATIVE LEACHATE VOLUME COLLECTED PER UNIT OF SURFACE AREA, MM
Figure 31. Cumulative magnesium mass removal.
1,400
-------
2B being 32% higher. Paired difference testing of the weighted mean concen-
trations of 2A and 2B showed a highly significant difference as a result of
2B generally having higher concentration throughout the entire testing period.
2A was comparable to 2D; the statistical test showed no significant differ-
ence. This resulted from the same pattern as with calcium, 2D having been
lower through the initial flow and then higher later in the study. All
curves showed a marked downward trend, with final weighted mean concentra-
tions of only 18-39% of peak values.
There was a significant difference in interval mass removal between
2A and 2B. 2D lagged in total quantity removed but roughly paralleled the
rate of removal in 2A and 2B after 500 mm of leachate volume.
Iron
Figures 32 and 33 depict the weighted mean iron concentration and the
cumulative mass removal. Although statistically the weighted mean concen-
tration histories of iron for 2A and 2B were significantly different, caused
by 2B being higher than 2A throughout most of the data, the resultant curves
were remarkably similar. There was no significant difference between 2A
and 2B in the interval mass removal test.
Concentration history difference analysis for both 2A and 2B as com-
pared to 2D showed no significant difference although the curves were
visibly dissimilar. This was again cuased by lower concentrations in 2D
at the outset followed by higher concentrations after 400 mm.
Hardness
Hardness, shown in Figures 34 and 35, showed a significant difference
statistically between 2A and 2B because 2B concentrations were higher for all
but the initial 100 mm data point. The leachate volumes at peak did not
coincide either. Only test cell 2A was not significantly different from the
weighted mean concentration of 2D. This was once again the result of lower
2D values initially and higher values after 500 mm of leachate volume.
The cumulative mass removal rates for 2A and 2B were significantly dif-
ferent when compared on an interval basis. Mass removal for 2D per unit
weight of dry refuse was 35% greater for 2A than 2D at 1500 mm. All three
cells showed only slow drops in removal rates which indicated large quanti-
ties of hardness were yet to be removed.
Manganese
The weighted mean concentration and mass removal histories for the cells
is shown in Figures 36 and 37. Concentrations for 2A and 2B were very
similar and the paired difference analysis showed no significant difference.
The average of 2A and 2B weighted mean concentrations was also not signifi-
cantly different from 2F, once again due to the early lower values and later
higher values for 2D.
The interval mass removal from 2A compared to 2B showed no statistical
55
-------
VJ1
o\
1,800
60
1 1,400
§
g
§
o
1,000
M
600
400
200
O-
A-
2A
2B
O 2D
100 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200
CUMULATIVE LEACHATE VOLUME COLLECTED PER UNIT OF SURFACE AREA, MM
Figure 32. Weighted mean iron concentration.
1,400
-------
w
w
1.8
1.6 -
Q 1.4
M>
60
1.2
1.0
O
C/3
.6
.4
.2
O
(D 2A
A 2B
O 2D
100 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200
CUMULATIVE LEACHATE VOLUME COLLECTED PER UNIT SURFACE AREA, MM
Figure 33. Cumulative iron mass removal.
1,400
-------
10,000r
oo
8,000 -
W)
6
to
C/3
W
H
H
6,000 -
53
| 4,000
o
! 3,000-
2,000
1,000
0 2A
A 2B
Q_ 2D
I
100 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200
CUMULATIVE LEACHATE VOLUME COLLECTED PER UNIT OF SURFACE AREA, MM
Figure 34. Weighted mean hardness concentration.
I
1,400
-------
MD
W
CO
o
Ml
£1
60
§
CO
CO
W
o
CO
H
-------
100
ON
O
w
w
O
§
8
§
u
80
60
40
20
10 -
I
O-
£*-
2A
2B
O 2D
0 100 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200
CUMULATIVE LEACHATE VOLUME COLLECTED PER UNIT OF SURFACE AREA, MM
Figure 36. Weighted mean manganese concentration.
1,400
-------
w
CO
O
60
60
*
Q
w
en
W
O
CO
M
H
.10
.09 .
.08 -
.07 -
.06
.05
.04
.03
.02
.01
2A
2B
O 2D
O
.0-
100 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200
CUMULATIVE LEACHATE VOLUME COLLECTED PER UNIT OF SURFACE AREA, MM
Figure 37. Cumulative manganese mass removal.
1,400
-------
significant difference although 2B does fall lower than 2A through the en-
tire leachate volume collected. The mass removed from the large cell 2D
lagged 2A and 2B but the difference diminished with increased leachate col-
lected.
Zinc
Figures 38 and 39 show the weighted mean concentrations and cumulative
mass removals for zinc. 2A was significantly different from 2B in concen-
tration history as were 2A and 2B when compared to 2D. There was also a
significant difference statistically in the interval mass removals of 2A and
2B. The greater mass removal of zinc from 2B and the shape of the curve
seemed to indicate an initially soluble mass of zinc available in 2B but not
in 2A or 2D. Total removal from 2B at 1300 mm was 372 g of zinc.
Leachate Statistical Comparibility_
A summary of the statistical test results comparing the concentration
histories of the parameters is presented in Table 13. For only 4 of 14
parameters was the average difference of the concentration history curves of
2A and 2B not significant at the 10% level through the 0 - 1,300 mm range.
Of these four there is no trend indicated, such as all divalent cations not
being different. While 71 percent of the parameters tested indicated test
cells 2A and 2B were statistically different (based on the test used) exami-
nation of the COD concentration history (Figure 12), as an example, showed
very similar responses for the two test cells and closer examination re-
veals consistently smaller concentrations for 2A as compared to 2B. This
data pattern results in a small standard deviation, which when divided into
the average algebraic difference of the data points, yields a high tcalc or
significant difference. The applicability of this statistical test is there-
fore questionable.
The same statistical analysis was used to compare either the average
concentrations of cells 2A and 2B to 2D when there was no significant dif-
ference between 2A and 2B, or the concentration of 2A to 2D and of 2B to 2D
when the paired difference test indicated a significant difference between
2A and 2B. These results are presented in the final 6 columns of Table 13.
Again, no trend was established although in the comparison of 2A to 2D a
greater percentage were not significantly different than in the comparison
of 2A to 2B. This would not be expected since the flow of water through 2D
in comparison to 2A has been much greater than the difference betx^een 2A and
2B.
A total of 9 of the 14 selected parameters showed no significant dif-
ference for the average of 2A and 2B or 2A as compared to 2D. Of the re-
maining 5 parameters only COD showed a highly significant difference or had
a large confidence interval. This indicated that cell 2A statistically pro-
vided a reasonable model of 2D for many parameter concentration histories.
This is not the situation for 2B where only 6 of the 14 parameters showed no
significant difference. Since most of the parameter histories for 2A and 2B
were not statistically similar, based on the results of this test it would
be inaccurate to state that any model of a large-scale cell would provide as
62
-------
300
ON
B
a"
H
Cxi
o
§
M
3
H
U
U
Q
W
H
200
100
A
2A
2B
O 2D
100 200 400 600 800 1,000
CUMULATIVE LEACHATE COLLECTED, MM
Figure 38. Weighted mean zinc concentration.
1,200
1,400
-------
.200
.180
CO
!=>
g .160
o
M
60
ft
P
.140
.120
.100
.080
o .060
CO
M .040
.020
O-
A_
2A
2B
O 2D
7N O
O
9'
j_
100 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200
CUMULATIVE LEACHATE VOLUME COLLECTED PER UNIT OF SURFACE AREA, MM
Figure 39. Cumulative zinc mass removal.
1,400
-------
TABLE 13. WEIGHTED MEAN CONCENTRATION HISTORIES - PAIRED DIFFERENCE TEST RESULTS
Parameter
COD
Sulfate
K-Nitrogen
Ammonia-N
Orthophosphate
Chloride
Potassium
Sodium
Calcium
Magnesium
Iron
Hardness
Manganese
Zinc
2A-23
t a
calc
3.82
2.17
4.15
1.64
2.51
.943
1.25
8.87
5.33
10.0
2.89
8.35
.354
7.50
2A-2B
fciob
1.83
1.83
1.83
1.83°
1.83
1.86
1.83
1.83
1.83
1.83
1.83
1.83
1.83
1.83
2A+2B
2 - u
calc
1.31
2.87
2.14
1.40
-
2A+2B
" 2 ' - D
'10
1.83
1.86
1.83
1.83
-
2A-2D
calc
5.00
0.98
1.97
.921
1.59
1.69
.321
1.45
0.79
2.26
2A-2D
cio
1.83
1.83
1.83
1.83
1.83
1.83
1.83
1.83
1.83
1.83
2B-2D
calc
7.70
0.47
3.92
1.24
1.70
5.55
3.44
.259
5.52
5.80
2B-2D
'10
1.83
1.83
1.83
1.83
1.83
1.83
1.83
1.83
1.83
1.83
a.
b.
tcalc - calculated by division of the average difference by the standard
deviation of the average differences.
- tabular t from Reference 6.
Underscored values shows no statistically significant difference.
-------
close a resemblance as 2 A has to 2D.
Since the data used in the paired difference tests were actually weigh-
ted means at 100 mm intervals, paired difference tests were conducted using
the actual data from every fourth sample to determine if using the weighted
means might possibly have biased the analysis. The results of these tests
on selected parameter concentration histories are shown in Table 14. A sig-
nificant difference was found for all 6 of the parameters using actual data
and for all but one of these the confidence interval was larger than that of
the weighted mean history curves. The results shown in Table 13 might there-
fore be biased as they are not necessarily representative of the actual data.
No tests were made that included all of the actual data.
Many of the weighted mean concentration history curves, Figures 12-39,
showed a later peak concentration for cell 2D than for 2A or 2B then re-
sonably close or slightly higher concentrations. Since this early large
variation in concentrations and time to peak might have influenced the re-
sults of the paired difference tests, additional difference analyses were
done for the data points on the concentration history curves for 2A and 2D
beginning at the peak of the concentration of 2D rather than at the 100 mm
data point. These results are presented in Table 15. The results did not
show as good agreement as the tests using the entire data history- Only 3
of the 13 parameters did not show a significant difference. It is inter-
esting to note that all of these three, COD, chloride and zinc, were signi-
ficantly different over the entire data range (Table 13) .
Paired difference testing was also done on the cumulative mass removal
curves through 1,300 mm. The results for selected parameters with closely
coinciding curves are presented in Table 16. All showed a significant dif-
ference, even when two curves almost coincided throughout the entire leachate
volume range. While two curves might almost coincide, for example COD,
Figure 13, normally one (2A or 2B) was just above the other. This resulted
in a small average difference, but a very small standard deviation, a large
and a significant difference.
To overcome this weakness of the test, the gain in mass removal for eadi
100 mm interval for 2A was compared to that gain for 2B . These paired dif-
ference test results are presented in Table 17. This provided a different
perspective into the closeness of the cumulative mass removal curves for 2A
and 2B with 9 of the 14 parameters showing no significant difference. Four
of the remaining parameters had relatively small confidence intervals.
These results contrasted with the concentration history results in
Table 13, where only 4 of the 14 parameters showed no significant difference.
Apparently 2A and 2B were relatively similar in mass removal but not so in
concentration histories. This indicated that the removal of these substances
from the refuse in 2A and 23 was limited by the amount of the substance
readily available for leaching at that time period in the decomposition pro-
cess. That is the leachate production varied within some range, and the con-
centration varied from cell to cell, but the mass removal during each inter-
val was comparable.
-------
TABLE 14. ACTUAL CONCENTRATION HISTORIES
- PAIRED DIFFERENCE TEST RESULTS
- _ 1 - - - - . ,
Parameter
COD
Sulfate
Chloride
Sodium
Iron
Manganese
Actual Data
2A-2B
tcalca
9.88
5.70
1.96
4.83
3.76
9.15
Actual Data
2A-2B
tlOb
1.74
1.75
1.78
1.78
1.74
1.78
Result
Significant Difference
Significant Difference
Significant Difference
Significant Difference
Significant Difference
Significant Difference
tcalc - calculated by division of the average difference
by the standard deviation of the average difference.
t!0 - tabular t from Reference 6,
Application of the paired difference statistic to the leachate data led
to the following observations:
1. Based incremental increases in masses of parameter removed, test cells
2A and 2B, were not significantly different except for orthophosphate,
sodium, magnesium, hardness, and zinc. Similar analyses were not made
for 2A or 2B compared to 2D or for leachate volume between the three test
cells.
2. The statistic must be used carefully when evaluating the comparability
of concentration or cumulative mass histories. While the majority of
parameters showed significant differences between cells (except for 2A-2D),
very similar data which were consistently and slightly different were de-
termined to be significantly different because their standard deviation
was small. Thus, cells 2A and 2B, designed to evaluate performance du-
plication of identically constructed and sized test cells were statisti-
cally determined to have performed differently. The test cells, however,
did perform in a very similar manner.
3. The extent of the difference between test cells 2A and 2B should be
used as a discriminator to determine whether 2D performed differently
from 2A or 2B.
MATHEMATICAL DESCRIPTION OF LEACHATE CONCENTRATION HISTORY
The repetitive shape of the leachate concentration curves and similar
volumes at peak concentrations for many of the parameters indicated that the
weighted mean concentration history curves might be mathematically described.
6?
-------
TABLE 15. PAIRED DIFFERENCE TEST RESULTS, STARTING POINT AT TEST CELL 2D
PEAK OF WEIGHTED MEAN CONCENTRATION HISTORY
ON
CO
Starting Leachate 2A-2D
Parameter
COD
Sulfate
K-Nitrogen
Ammonia-N
Orthophosphate
Chloride
Potassium
Sodium
Calcium
Magnesium
Iron
Hardness
Zinc
Volume3
500
500
600
600
300
500
500
500
500
500
500
300
300
t calcb
1.39
10.2
9.08
10.4
3.79
1.55
5.29
5.87
2.10
4.71
9.21
4.50
.983
2A-2D
tlOc
1.94
1.94
2.02
2.02
1.86
1.94
1.94
1.94
1.94
1.94
1.94
1.86
1.86
Result
Not Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Not Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Not Significant
a.
b.
millimeters - volume
t - calculated by
per unit of surface area
division of the average
difference by the
ca c standard deviation of the average difference
c.
t - tabular t from Reference 6.
-------
TABLE 16. CUMULATIVE WEIGHT HISTORY PAIRED DIFFERENCE TEST RESULTS
Parameter
COD
Sulfate
K-Nitrogen
Ammonia-N
Orthophosphate
Chloride
Potassium
Sodium
Calcium
Magnesium
Iron
Hardness
Manganese
Zinc
2A-2B
4.25
4.58
1.96
14.2
63.6
9.16
3.14
29.0
27.3
17.9
8.82
18.1
7.21
44.5
2A-2B
tlOb
1.83
1.83
1.83
1.83
1.83
1.86
1.83
1.83
1.83
1.83
1.83
1.83
1.83
1.83
Results
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
a.
calc
- calculated by division of the average difference by the
standard deviation of the average difference
b.
"10
- tabular t from Reference 6.
TABLE 17. INTERVAL MASS REMOVAL PAIRED DIFFERENCE TEST RESULTS
Parameter
COD
Sulfate
K~Nitrogen
Ammonia-N
Orthophosphate
Chloride
Potassium
Sodium
Calcium
Magnesium
Iron
Hardness
Manganese
Zinc
2A-2B
t a
calc
.522
.928
.536
1.35
2.48
.845
.308
2.78
1.49
1.93
.494
2.55
.405
10.0
2A-2B
^
1.833
1.833
1.833
1.833
1.833
1.860
1.833
1.833
1.833
1.833
1.833
1.833
1.833
1.833
Results
Not Significant
Not Significant
Not Significant
Not Significant
Significant
Not Significant
Not Significant
Significant
Not Significant
Significant
Not Significant
Significant
Not Significant
Significant
a.
b.
t - calculated by division of the average difference by the
standard deviation of the average difference
tiri - tabular t from Reference 6.
-------
Two previous efforts at a model based on leaching bed theory (7) (8) met with
limited success. While a descriptive equation was not a part of the original
experimental design it was felt that limited examination of this possibility
might provide further insight into data trends and provide a means for com-
parison with other studies.
The leaching of substances from refuse can basically be thought of as the
dissolving or suspension of soluble or leachable substances in water passing
through the fill. The resultant concentrations in the leachate are dependent
on many factors, not all of which are understood or known, especially the mag-
nitude of influence the factors exert on resultant concentrations. Important
variables might be the initial mass of a substance readily available for lea-
ching, decomposition of refuse within the fill and subsequent additional mass
availability, the pH, solubility limits, the rate of water throughput, decom-
position or reduction of the leachate constituents during travel through the
fill, the depth of the fill and cover soil effects within the fill. The num-
ber of variables involved and the lack of understanding of their effect on
resultant leachate concentrations make a semi -empirical curve-fitting approach
attractive as an initial effort.
The shape of the weighted mean concentration history curves compared
favorably with the well known dissolved oxygen deficit equation widely used
to describe the dissolved oxygen concentration in a stream subjected to an
organic pollution loading and natural reaeration (9) . This equation is a
description of two consecutive first order reactions and has the form:
C = klCi (e-klv-e-k2V) (1)
C is the concentration at any volume of leachate, k, and ^ are rate con-
stants and C is an unknown concentration related to the contaminant mass
available in the refuse. The equation is in terms of v, the volume of lea-
chate collected per unit of surface area, to coincide with the weighted mean
data and the plotting of concentration versus volume. Since volume of lea-
chate collected is some- function of time, such as sinusoidal in a seasonal
environment, the equation could be changed to a time dependent function.
Since C. was unknown, to solve Equation 1 for the rate constants it was
necessary to divide Equation 1 by itself when the values of C and v were
known, resulting in the form:
C = C e-kiv-e-k2 (2)
max e-klvmax-e-k2vmax
C was selected to be the peak concentration on the weighted mean concen-
TTJO V
tration history curves occurring at cumulative volume v . k-, and Ic9 were
IHclX -L f~
determined by trial and error for best visual fit to the 2A plot. The
respective C , v , k. and k0 for selected parameters are presented in
max max 12
70
-------
Table 18. The comparative concentration history plots are shown in Figures
40-44.
TABLE 18. EQUATION CONSTANTS
Parameter
COD
Sulfate
Chloride
Magnesium
Iron
C a
max
55,400
1,130
2,205
425
1,409
v b
max
200
200
100
200
200
k c
1
.00098
.00138
.00120
.00150
.00062
k c
2
.0145
.0125
.0350
.0120
.0170
a. mg/1
b. mm - volume per unit of surface area
c. I/mm
With k-, and ~\a^ known, it was possible to compute C. in Equation 1 and
solve for the total mass of a parameter that might be leached, by inte-
grating the equation through an infinite volume of leachate. The resultant
total leachable mass in mg per unit of surface area was:
M = C.
'i/k.
(3)
The total mass per kilogram of dry refuse for test cell 2A obtained by using
Equation 3 is listed in the first column of Table 19. The percent of this
calculated total mass that had actually been removed at 1500 mm of leachate
is presented in the second column.
TABLE 19. CELL 2A - TOTAL AVAILABLE MASS REMOVALS
Parameter
Available Total Mass3
Removal at 1500 mmb
COD
Sulfate
Chloride
Magnesium
Iron
a. g/Kg of
b. percent
89.6
1.41
2.73
.500
3.26
dry refuse
removed obtained by dividing mass
70
75
81
86
31
actually removed at 1500 mm
by total mass calculated from Equation 3.
A reasonably good visual fit was obtained with Equation 2 for four of the
parameters. It was not possible with this equation to describe the concentra-
tion behavior of iron because of the rapid fall after peak. This also happened
71
-------
Q
a
fn
O
55
O
M
H
H
50,000
40,000
30,000
g 20,000
o
10,000
2A
Equation 2
_L
_L
J_
100 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200
CUMULATIVE LEACHATE VOLUME COLLECTED PER UNIT OF SURFACE AREA, MM
Figure 40. Weighted mean COD concentration history: Eqn. 2 - 2A.
1,400
-------
w 1,400 -
£5
Pn
rf
M 1,200 -
o 1,000
W
u
w
800
600
400
200
2A
Equation 2
_L
_L
_L
_L
_L
100 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200
CUMULATIVE LEACHATE VOLUME COLLECTED PER UNIT OF SURFACE AREA, MM
Figure 41. Weighted mean sulfate concentration history: Eqn. 2 - 2A.
1,400
-------
2,400
* 2'100
o
M
H
^ 1,800
H
13
W
§ 1,500
o
§
a 1,200
o
900
£ 600 |-
300 h
2A
Equation 2
_L
_L
_L
_L
100 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200
CUMULATIVE LEACHATE VOLUME COLLECTED PER UNIT OF SURFACE AREA, MM
Figure 42. Weighted mean chloride concentration history: Eqn. 2 - 2A.
1,400
-------
600
525
450
55
2 375
300
o
u
M
W
225
130
75
2A
Equation 2
_L
_L
0 100 200 300 400 600 800 1,000 1,200
CUMULATIVE LEACHATE VOLUME COLLECTED PER UNIT OF SURFACE AREA, MM
Figure 43. Weighted mean magnesium concentration history: Eqn. 2 - 2A
1,400
-------
1,800
O\
60
S
I 1,400
§
1,000
W
0
600
p
w
H
g 400
200
2A
Equation 2
I
I
100 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200
CUMULATIVE LEACHATE VOLUME COLLECTED PER UNIT OF SURFACE AREA, MM
Figure 44. Weighted mean iron concentration history: Eqn. 2 - 2A.
1,400
-------
to a lesser extent with COD and sulfate. Curve fitting in these instances was
primarily done so that good coincidence was obtained at the end of the data.
The total mass available and percentage removal in Table 19 was based on the
shape of only 1500 mm of an infinite concentration history so these values
should be treated with caution. It is interesting to note, that if this is an
accurate representation, the very high removal percentages that had occurred
after only 1500 mm of leachate.
The total masses projected in Table 19 for sulfate, chloride and magne-
sium range from 1/3 to 1/2 of the total amounts measured in the refuse in
test cell 1 (5). The projected amount of COD is only 11% of that measured
from the samples of refuse in test cell 1. The values in Table 19 might be
more accurate projections of the mass that can be removed than that total mass
measured in test cell 1 because some of the contaminant mass is probably per-
manently bound in a non-water soluble state.
It is quite possible that this type of empirical equation with further
modifications and verification might be of value. Certainly the accuracy in
later leachate flows can only be judged with additional data. It x^as only
compared to cell 2A, which did differ from 2B and 2D and therefore should not
be considered a possible descriptor of any refuse leaching situation. A
potential is present though, after additional data is accumulated and modi-
fications made, that an equation could be developed that would provide a
reasonably accurate prediction of leachate concentrations for landfill and
treatment facility design.
GAS ANALYSIS
Gas samples were obtained from various locations in the cells by use of
the tubing apparatus shown in Figure 45. The piping enclosure extended up
through the cell cover to a sampling shed. Gas samples were initially ob-
tained by pumping each line through gas sampling tubes for 3 minutes at a flow
rate of 33.3 ml/sec prior to removing the tube for analysis. Because residual
oxygen was present in most samples, the procedure was modified to provide 5
minutes of pumping. After methane production began in the cells, a thermal
conductivity detector was connected to the pump exhaust and samples were ob-
tained only after the detector indicator stabalized. For those probe loca-
tions where methane was not present, samples were obtained only after 5 minutes
of pumping.
Analyses were run for oxygen, carbon dioxide, methane and nitrogen. Ini-
tially samples were taken from 10 probes on a weekly basis for the first two
months. The analytical results were quite erratic and much of the data was
deleted from the following analysis.
The analyses showed quick depletion of oxygen to less than 4% by volume
within 2 weeks after cell completion other than in test cell 2C, level 1. In
general, oxygen levels in all probes at levels 4 and 7 were less than 2% after
October 1972. Samples showing as great as 5% oxygen in probes at level 1 in-
dicated some gas movement into the cell from the atmosphere.
Samples showed less than 1% methane in all probes until October 1973,
77
-------
3/4" I.D.
TYGON TUBING
1/4" I.D.
TYGON TUBING
o
o
0
o
o
o
o
X
/
o
o
o
0
o
f
i
$§§§:§
^^^St^
7
\*
\
1 M
i
OO
PERFORATED 3/4" I.D.
POLYETHYLENE TUBING
1/4" O.D.
POLYETHYLENE
TUBING
RUBBER
STOPPER
3/4" I.D.
POLYETHYLENE
TUBING
1" =25.4
nun
Figure 45. Gas collection probe.
-------
when 10.4% was detected in probes 2Dld and 2D4d of cell 2D. Methane concen-
trations rose to as high as 47.2% in probe 2Dld during September 1976, and to
similar levels in 2D4b and 2D4d. After April 1975, methane was detected in
amounts greater than 1% in the probes in cells 2A, 2B and 2C. There did not
appear to be any greater percent by volume at lower depths within the cells.
The highest concentration of methane detected in the small-scale cells was
14.7% during November 1975 at 2Clc.
Carbon dioxide content histories are shown in Figures 46, 47 and 48 for
the three sampling levels. No paired difference tests were attempted be-
cause of the numerous discontinuities in the data.
The characteristic carbon dioxide bloom occurred in all test cells.
The greatest peaks for level 1 occurred in cell 2D. The percent of CO
present appeared to increase with greater cell depth. It was not possible to
statistically evaluate the similarity of the results for the small-scale
cells and 2D. There did appear to be reasonable visual agreement between
cells 2A and 2B at level 1 and between 2B and 2C at level 7.
TEMPERATURE
Thermocouples were placed in each of the test cells at the locations
indicated in Figures 2, 3 and 5. Probe design is shown in Figure 49. An
additional set of probes to determine ambient soil temperatures at depths
of .91, 2.13 and 3.05 m were placed in the soil 3.7 m south and .91 m east
of the center of cell 2A. The thermocouple wires were protected by poly-
thelene tubing extended through the soil cover to the sampling shed.
Temperatures were recorded every day during August 1972 in order to
obtain peak readings. Hie highest readings obtained were from probes 2Alc
and 2Blc on August 18, 1972, 4 and 6 days respectively after refuse place-
ment. Peak temperatures for each probe are shown in Table 20.
After August 1972 temperatures were recorded approximately every week.
Some of the probes failed and there were gaps in the data due to recording
instrument problems. Paired difference tests were performed for the signi-
ficance of the average difference on a number of probes. These results are
shown in Table 21. Figures 50 through 57 show the mean monthly temperature
histories at selected locations.
A comparison of soil and refuse temperatures is shown in Figure 50. A
significant statistical difference was obtained for those two probes, Zl and
2Dlc. The primary difference in the two was the greater amplitude of the
yearly temperature history in the soil (Zl). There was also an amplitude
difference, but of 3-4°F less during seasonal highs than that of 2Dlc, for
2Alc, 2Blc and 2Clc when compared to the soil. The time lag between soil
and refuse seasonal highs and lows was also more pronounced in the small-
scale cells. This amplitude difference and time lag was also noted in test
cell 1 and thought to be due to moisture, specific heat and biological
activity. Insufficient data from probes Z4 and Z7 did not allow a similar
comparison at greater depths.
79
-------
co
o
80
70
60
50
40
PQ
CM
8 30
w
pu
10
Ale
M£
Did
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
Figure 46. Carbon dioxide content, level 1, test cells 2A, 2B and 2D.
-------
co
80
70
60
50
O
> 40
ra
CM
8 30
H
w
20
10
D4b
D4d
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
Figure 47. Carbon dioxide content - test cell 2D, level 4.
-------
cx>
PP
o
u
70
60
50
40
30
8
Pd
W
PM
20
10 -
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
Figure 48. Carbon dioxide content - test cells 2B and 2C - level 7.
-------
co
THERMOCOUPLE TIP
PERFORATED 3/4" I.D
POLYETHYLENE TUBING
3/4" I.D.
TYGON TUBING
RUBBER
STOPPER
1/4" I.D.
TYGON TUBING
o o
o o o
o o/
3/4" I.D.
POLYETHYLENE
TUBING
1" - 25.4 mm
FIGURE 49. Thermocouple temperature probes.
-------
TABLE 20. PEAK REFUSE TEMPERATURES
Probe
2Alc
2Blc
2Ble
2eic
2Dla
2Dlb
2Dlc
2 Did
2A4c
2B4c
2B4e
2C4c
2D4a
2D4b
2D4c
2D4d
2A7c
2B7c
2B7e
2C7c
2D7a
2D7b
2D7c
2D7d
a. degrees
TABLE 21
Peak Temperature Recorded3 Date
Fahrenheit
. PAIRED
124
124
98
99
95
118
122
114
102
98
94
96
101
121
121
119
96
85
75
91
82
113
115
117
DIFFERENCE TEST
8-18-72
8-18-72
8-17-72
8-17-72
8-19-72
8-19-72
8-18-72
8-19-72
8-15-72
8-14-72
8-17-72
8-16-72
8-18-72
8-18-72
8-17-72
8-17-72
8-14-72
8-14-72
8-14-72
8-15-72
8-17-72
8-16-72
8-16-72
8-16-72
RESULTS -
TEMPERATURES
Probes
2 Ale - Zl
2Dlc - Zl
2A4c - 2B4c
2A4c - 2C4c
2A4c - 2D4c
2B4c - 2D4c
2C4c - 2D4c
2B4e - 2B4c
2D4a - 2D4c
t , a
calc
1.95
12.8
.069
1.92
18.3
21.3
19.1
.954
12.0
t1Ab
10
1.69
1.70
1.69
1.69
1.69
1.69
1.69
1.69
1.69
Result
Significant
Significant
Not Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Not Significant
Significant
a. t - calculated by division of the average difference by
the standard deviation of the average difference.
b.
t - tabular t from Reference 6.
-------
00
!=)
130 _
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
Zl
2Dlc
_L
10 20 30 40
TIME IN MONTHS, AUGUST 1972 THROUGH DECEMBER 1976
Figure 50. Mean monthly temperatures: Zl - 2Dlc
50
-------
Annual high temperatures in 2D exceeded those in 2A, 23 and 2C at level 1
(Figure 51). The lows were not substantially different. This difference
in peaks indicated greater seasonal aerobic activity in 2D due to greater
gas exchange through the soil surface or possibly some heating effect due to
the covering. The extent of difference in peaks was not noted at levels 4
and 7. Since similar soils were used for cover, gas diffusion should have
been similar. Since the covers used for 2A, 2B and 2C were dome shaped and
provided approximately .6 m of air space above the gravel, whereas the
polymeric membrane used to cover 2D was placed directly on the gravel, the
covers were the suspected cause of the higher temperature difference in the
surfical layer of refuse.
Statistical test results showed a significant difference in the tempera-
ture histories at the center of the refuse for all small-scale cells when
compared to 2D. Figure 52 compares probe 2C4c with 2D4c. The only statis-
tical similarity among the test cells at level 4, location c, was for 2A and
2B.
Figures 53 and 54 demonstrate the reduction in seasonal temperature
amplitude with increasing depth. For both 2A and 2D the upper probes showed
the greatest yearly amplitude and the earliest attainment of peaks and lox^s
and the lowest probes showed the least amplitude and the greatest time lag
to peak and low. Insufficient data from the soil probes at levels 4 and 7
prevented a soil-refuse comparison of amplitude and lag changes.
No statistical significant difference in temperature histories was
found between the center and the edge of cell 2B» at locations c and es
level 4. The histories, shown in Figure 55, did differ somewhat though.
The statistical similarity results from lower temperatures during the cooler
months and higher temperatures during the summer months at the edge of the
cell with a resultant low average difference and a small t , . There was
virtually no lateral difference at level 1 in cell 2B.
The extent of the lateral amplitude difference between the edge and the
sides in 2B did not occur in 2D at level 4 (Figure 56) or level 1 (Figure
57). There was a time lag to seasonal peak at the center of 2D (probe 2D4c)
but no difference in the seasonal peaks. At level 1 in 2D there was no time
lag but there were higher seasonal peaks at the center (probe 2Die). There-
fore the same lateral thermal gradient that existed in 2B was either less or
nonexistent in 2D.
SETTLEMENT
Settlement readings were taken periodically on all test cells. The
cumulative settlement data is shown in Figure 58. Settlement for the small-
scale test cells was computed by subtracting the vertical distance from the
rim of the pipes to the pea gravel for each reading from the original in-
stalled difference in elevation from the rim to the gravel. For the large-
scale cell, 2D, the cumulative settlement was the average elevation of 9
points on the surface of the cell subtracted from the average initial ele-
vation of the surface.
-------
100
90
80
70
w
oo
60
50
40
30
2Dlc
2Alc
10 20 30 40
TIME IN MONTHS, AUGUST 1972 THROUGH DECEMBER 1976
Figure 51. Mean monthly temperatures: 2Dlc - 2Alc
50
-------
co
co
!=>
H
130
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
2D4c
2C4c
10 20 30 40
TIME IN MONTHS, AUGUST 1972 THROUGH DECEMBER 1976
Figure 52. Mean monthly temperatures: 2D4c - 2C4c
50
-------
130 ,-
oo
\o
H
W
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
2Alc
2A4c
2A7c
I
10 20 30 40
TIME IN MONTHS, AUGUST 1972 THROUGH DECEMBER 1976
Figure 53. Mean monthly temperature: 2Alc - 2A7c - 2A7c
50
-------
120 ,-
MD
O
£3
H
110
100
90
80
70
60
50 -
40 -
30
2Dlc
2D4c
2D7c
i
50
10 20 30 40
TIME IN MONTHS, AUGUST 1972 THROUGH DECEMBER 1976
Figure 54. Mean monthly temperatures: 2Dlc - 2D4c - 2D7c
-------
130
H
W
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
2B4e
2B4c
10 20 30 40
TIME IN MONTHS, AUGUST 1972 THROUGH DECEMBER 1976
Figure 55. Mean monthly temperatures: 2B4e - 2B4c
50
-------
130 ,_
MD
N>
120
110
100
90
80
70
13 60
50
40
30
2D4a
2D46
10 20 30 40
TIME IN MONTHS, AUGUST 1972 THROUGH DECEMBER 1976
Figure 56. Mean monthly temperatures: 2D4a - 2D4c
50
-------
130 r
MD
2Dla
2Dlc
_L
10 20 30 40
TIME IN MONTHS, AUGUST 1972 THROUGH DECEMBER 1976
Figure 57. Mean monthly temperatures: 2Dla - 2Dlc
50
-------
vD
H
S3
W
iJ
H
H
W
C/3
AUGUST 1972
100
200
300
400
\
o-
A-
2A
2B
O 2C
A 2D
1972
1973 1974 1975
Figure 58. Cumulative settlement.
1976
-------
Settlement in 2A, 2B and 2C was comparable from cell to cell, differing
by less than 12%. Cumulative settlement after 52 months averaged 11% of the
total depth for the 3 cells. There did appear to be some correlation with
initial refuse density as 2A, the least dense, recorded the greatest settle-
ment.
Cumulative average settlement for 2D was 137 mm, 5.6% of total depth,
only half that experienced in the small-scale cells. There was a 45% higher
initial wet density in 2D. Settlement in test cell 1 was 4% of total depth
after the same time period. The cumulative settlement was relatively uniform
on the surface of 2D, varying from 85-158 mm over the 9 measurement points.
SUMMARY OF COMPARISON OF PERFORMANCE OF TEST CELLS
As stated earlier, one of the primary objectives of the research was to
evaluate the behavior of a field-scale test cell, 2D, as compared to simi-
larly constructed small-scale cells. It was desired to determine whether
scaling factors were involved and if the small cells produced duplicate re-
sults so that future research efforts might utilize small, less expensive
cells, for prediction of field behavior.
The experimental design was to have similar initial refuse composition,
moisture, and density in all cells and to control water input to approxi-
mately 500 mm per year. Composition and initial moisture content were found
to be statistically similar and refuse depths only varied 5%. The in-place
refuse density in 2D though was 45% greater than the average refuse density
in the small cells on a wet weight basis.
Water input, infiltration, and evaporation were controlled by periodi-
cally covering the cells and with a layer of pea gravel over the soil cover.
Leachate collected (Figures 5 and 6) from one of the small cells, 2C, was so
substantially different from 2A and 2B that the leachate data was not used
in any comparative analysis. Leachate production from 2D was much larger
than from the remaining small-scale cells, 2A and 2B, and was in excess of
precipitation. By the end of 1976, 72% more leachate per unit of collection
surface area had been produced in 2D than 2B and 50% more than from 2A. This
excess leachate production, peak concentrations lower than those experienced
in 2A and 2B, and depressed mass removals with cumulative flow, indicated the
possibility of significant diluting leakage into 2D from the sides and pos-
sible channelling through the cell.
This large difference in leachate production from 2D was considered suf-
ficient enough so as to preclude the possible comparability of cell perfor-
mance between the large and small-scale test cells. It would be unbounded
to assume without further work that the observed behavior would have been the
same had water input been constant.
Leachate concentration data was analyzed by comparing data points occur-
ring at equal volumes of leachate. This normalizing may not have been suf-
ficient to correct for the variation in water input, particularly if it was
due to diluting leakage. Statistical comparison results might also have been
biased by utilizing weighted mean concentrations rather than actual data.
95
-------
The paired difference test used did not appear to be adequate for comparing
concentration histories of the different cells, but was adequate for com-
paring incremental mass removals.
For only 4 of 14 parameters studied was the average difference of the
concentration history curves of 2A and 2B statistically similar. Examination
of the figures though showed similar responses and data trends for all but
1-2 of the parameters. A greater number than 4 of 14 of the parameter con-
centration histories of 2A or 2B or the average of 2A and 2B were found to
be statistically similar to 2D. This would not be expected given the wide
variation in leachate production, and examination of the figures indicated a
much greater deviation in performance in comparing 2D to the small-scale cells
than had occurred between 2A and 2B. Comparison of incremental mass re-
movals from 2A and 2B showed 9 of 14 parameters to be statistically similar,
indicating closely parallel histories.
It was not possible to statistically compare gas composition data due
to discontinuities and erratic results. There did appear to be reasonable
visual agreement for CO between cells 2A and 2B at level 1 and between 2B
and 2C at level 7. Methane levels were generally higher in 2D.
Statistical comparison of temperature histories showed significant dif-
ferences for most of the probes. At the center of the refuse the small-scale
cells were more nearly similar than any of the histories of the small-scale
cells compared to 2D. Higher temperatures were recorded at seasonal peaks
in the surficial layer of refuse in 2D than in 2A, 2B, and 2C. This was
felt to be due to the difference in the covers. The inadequacy of the sta-
tistical test was demonstrated in comparing the lateral amplitude differ-
ence of the temperature histories. While for 2B no statistical difference
was found at level 4 between the center and the edge of the cell, the ther-
mal gradient in 2B was greater than that in 2D where a statistical differ-
ence was indicated.
Settlement in 2A, 2B and 2C was comparable from cell to cell, differing
by less than 12%. Some correlation between initial density appeared to
exist. Cumulative average settlement for 2D was only half that experienced
in the small scale cells, probably as a result of the 45% greater initial
density.
In summary, density and leachate volume production differences did not
allow accurate definitive comparison of small and large-scale test cells.
While concentration data trends among the two small-scale cells were rela-
tively close, the statistical evaluation of comparative behavior of the
identically constructed small-scale cells was inconclusive. Further work
with the data from 2D and the use of a more applicable statistical measure
of similarity might produce more conclusive results of comparability or de-
fine any scaling factors. This further work together with analysis of data
from similar studies might also indicate that landfill leachate behavior
monitoring results can be expected to show performance variations inherent
in the complex refuse-landfill system.
96
-------
REFERENCES
1. Project Plan - Test Cell No. 2, Boone County Field Site, Walton, Kentucky,
Solid Waste Research Laboratory, NERC, EPA, January, 1973.
2. Stell, R. G., and J. H. Torrie, Principals and Procedures of Statistics,
McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1960. 81 p.
3. Fungaroli, A. A., and R. L. Steiner, Investigation of Sanitary Landfill
Behavior, Sept. 1967 to Oct. 1973. Volume I, Drexel University, October
1973. 311 p.
4. Use of the Water Balance Method for Predicting Leachate Generation from
Solid Waste Disposal Sites, EPA/530/SW-168, October 1975. 40 p.
5. Wigh, R. J., Interim Summary Report - Boone County Field Site - Test Cell
I, MERL, ORD, EPA, May 1976. (Unpublished)
6. Natrella, M. G., Experimental Statistics. National Bureau of Standards
Hardbook 91, USGPO, Washington D. C. 20402.
7. Effects of Refuse Dumps on Ground Water Quality. State Water Pollution
Control Board, State of California, Publication No. 24, 1961.
8. Qasim, S. R., and J. C. Burchinal, "Leaching of Pollutants from Refuse
Beds," Journal of the Sanitary Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol. 96,
No. SA1, Feb. 1970.
9. Fair, G. M., and J. C. Geyer, Elements of Water Supply and Waste-Water
Disposal. John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1958. (615 p.)
97
LIBRARY U.S. EPA
-------
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
SUMMARY OF CELL DATA
Parameter
Date start of test
Date of first leachate
USCS soil classification
Surface area of soil cover,
m2
Depth of soil cover, m
Wet density of soil cover,
kg/m3
Moisture content of soil
cover, % wet weight
Surface area of refuse, m2
Depth of refuse, m
Mass of refuse, kg (wet)
Wet density of refuse,
kg/m3
Moisture content of refuse,
% wet weight
2A
8-14-72
6-5-73
CL
2.627
.30
1757
15.8*
2.627
2.56
2640
392.6
22.5
Test
2B
8-11-72
2-27-73
CL
2.627
.30
1679
15.8
2.627
2.56
2898
430.9
27.1
Cell
2C
8-15-72
6-19-73
CL
2.627
.30
1706
15.8
2.627
2.56
2814
418.4
24.1
2D
8-18-72
9-25-72
CL
72.83
.30
1842
15.8
72.83
2.44
106,231
597.8
31.8
a. Not measured, assumed to be the same as for test cell 1.
-------
APPENDIX B
PRECIPITATION AND LEACHATE QUANTITIES
Date
8-30-72
9-7
9-14
9-25
9-28
10-2
10-5
10-10
10-12
10-19
10-24
10-25
10-26
11-2
11-7
11-9
11-16
11-20
11-24
11-30
12-4
12-5
12-7
12-13
12-14
12-18
12-19
12-21
12-28
1-2-73
1-9
1-16
1-17
1-19
1-22
1-23
1-26
1-30
2-6
2-12
a.
b.
Leachate Collected^
Precipitations 2Ac 2RC 2CC
29.72
7.11
14.22
119.38
47.24
7.62
3.00
3.30
64.30
__
31.20
45.20
21.10
23.11
17.02
__
61.21
18.03
12.95
14.73
.
14.99
14.22
11.18
-
mm c. 1 liter = .381 mm
liters d. 1 liter = .01375 mm
2Dd
66.3
51.0
41.5
33.5
1.0
118.8
252.0
272.0
88.0
3.7
901.1
448.0
950.0
1194.8
364.0
234.4
207.9
132.3
162.5
143.6
359.6
99
-------
PRECIPITATION AND LEACHATE QUANTITIES
Date
2-13-73
2-20
2-27
3-1 Cells
3-13
3-15
3-27
4-10
4-24
Precipitation3
6.86
21.59
Cove re d
Leachate Collected*3
2AC 2BC 2CC 2D
-------
PRECIPITATION AND LEACHATE QUANTITIES
Leachate Collected"
Date Precipitation^ 2AC 2BC 2CC 2Dd
12-11-73 7.62
12-13
12-17 8.64
12-18
12-26 33.78
1-2-74 23.88
1-7 14.22
1-14 34.54
1-15
1-18 Cells Covered
1-29
2-12
2-26
3-12
3-15 Cells Uncovered
3-18 22.35
3-26
4-1 21.34
4-2 18.80
4-4 25.91
4-8 31.75
4-8 Cells Covered
4-9
4-11
4-23
5-7
5-21
6-3 Cells Uncovered
6-5
6-10 24.13
6-17 6.35
6-18
6-24 81.53
7-1 7.11
7-1 Cells Covered
7-2
7-16
7-30
8-6
8-13
8-27
a. mm c.
b . li te rs d .
68.0
128.5
88.8
68.0
58.0
48.0
42.7
60.5
87.9
80.2
49.1
22.7
22.7
107.8
84.5
36.3
28.4
26.5
1 liter = .381 mm
1 liter = .01375 mm
90.7
73.0
52.9
37.8
32.1
27.6
68.0
75.6
75.6
45.4
30.2
26.0
91.0
80.1
37.0
31.0
24.6
22.7
8.7
1.9
1.5
4.2
4.5
15.9
6.1
3.8
1.5
2.7
3.0
11.0
11.0
8.7
9.5
8.3
3.8
757.1
3444.7
3009.4
1798.1
1048.6
1135.6
1866.2
1533.1
2271.3
2460.5
1817.0
2150.1
1154.6
1014.5
2332.2
2359.1
1419.5
151.4
1385.5
991.8
101
-------
PRECIPITATION AND LEACHATE QUANTITIES
Date
9-10-74
9-24
10-8
10-22
10-31 Cells
11-5
11-7
11-14
11-19
11-21
11-29
11-29 Cells
12-3
12-17
1-14-75
1-16
1-28
2-3
2-11
Precipitation3
Uncovered
21.34
19.30
18.03
13.46
Covered
2AC
22.7
24.0
17.5
16.0
13.5
12.5
12.6
12.9
16.0
12.5
10.1
Leachate
2BC
26.5
22.0
20.2
18.0
17.0
14.5
15.0
17.1
21.0
17.5
14.1
Collected13
2CC
18.9
1.5
1.5
1.2
1.1
0.8
1.1
1.5
1.1
1.1
1.5
2Dd
2203.1
1589.9
662.5
1135.6
908.5
776.0
1022.1
2744.4
2271.3
1154.6
1703.4
1029.6
1533.1
2-20 Cells Uncovered
2-25
2-27
3-5
3-7
3-11
3--13
3-20
3-24
3-24 Cells
3-25
3-27
4-1
4-8
4-10
4-22
5-6
85.09
8.38
_
36.32
35.81
52.07
Covered
20.9
34.3
132.0
88.0
56.0
37.8
19.5
34.0
151.2
109-7
80.0
37.8
5-20 Cells Uncovered
5-29
6-3
6-5
6-12
a. mm
3.05
62.23
71.63
c. 1
b. liters d. 1
30.3
liter = .381 mm
liter = .01375
26.5
nun
15.9
1.1
7.9
2.3
2.6
3.9
6.8
4220.7
700.3
378.5
1926.8
2271.3
2468.1
189.3
1549.8
2305.8
2570.4
2736.0
1790.3
102
-------
PRECIPITATION AND LEACHATE QUANTITIES
Date
6-17-75
6-19
Precipitation^
*.
65.53
2AC
114.0
Leachate
2Bc
144.4
Collected13
2CC
15.2
2Dd
4449.1
6-19 Cells Covered
7-1
7-15
7-29
8-12
8-26
9-9
9-23
10-7
10-21
11-4
11-6 Cells
11-13
11-18
11-28
12-2
12-4
12-8
12-11
12-15
Uncovered
26.16
21.08
17.53
16.26
21.59
128.5
98.3
60.5
53.2
34.2
31.0
21.0
18.0
15.2
12.8
13.5
10.9
155.0
76.0
41.8
31.5
27.0
22.0
17.3
15.2
12.8
11.3
12.2
11.3
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.8
2.3
3.0
0.8
3.0
2.3
1.8
1.4
3810.2
2657.3
971.5
1368.4
786.2
808.9
1126.4
385.6
1092.4
1504.4
506.5
529.2
415.8
12-15 Cells Covered
12-16
1-20-76
2-3
2-17
3-2
3-16
3-30
4-6 Cells
4-13
4-20
4-27
5-4
5-11
5-18
5-25
6-1
6-3
6 3 Cells
a.
b.
Uncovered
3.05
5.08 (2B
16.26
7.62
4.32
36.07
0.00
62.48
1.52
Covered
mm c.
liters d.
14.0
29.0
22.5
18.5
14.3
12.8
12.0
10.7
only)
9.7
9.4
10.1
1 liter =
1 liter =
16.5
27.5
24.6
20.1
18.2
19.3
14.6
14.4
12.1
12.1
13.6
.381 mm
.01375 mm
4.6
2.0
1.6
1.6
5.2
2.8
2.1
2.0
2.7
1.5
4.5
600.4
1542.8
2055.8
1789.8
2543.9
1767.0
1162.8
1035.7
757.0
873.2
759.8
103
-------
PRECIPITATION AND LEACHATE QUANTITIES
Date
6-8-76
6-22
7-6
7-20
8-3
8-17 Cells
8-27
8-31
9-7
9-14
9-21
9-28
10-5
10-12
10-19
10-26
11-2
11-9
11-23
11-30
12-7
12-14
12-20
12-21
12-27
1-3-77
1-4
Precipitation3
Uncovered
0.00
9.40
7.11
17.02
4.32
56.13
5.33
16.51
0.00
48.77
22.35
__
0.00
16.26
6.60
3.81
3.81
__
1.78
1.52
2AC
38.1
38.0
30.0
28.0
21,0
16.0
14.5
17.0
37.5
52.3
60.0
47.5
39.6
21.5
19.8
Leach ate
2BC
36.2
40.0
30.0
30.0
24.5
19.0
18.2
21.0
41.5
62.5
66.0
51.3
37.4
27.5
25.5
Collected13
2CC
5.3
3.2
2.5
2.5
1.5
3.2
2.8
11.0
4.2
13.5
4.1
4.1
2.6
3.6
3.2
2Dd
1113.4
1958.0
1717.6
1599.8
855.0
76.0
585.2
741.0
1353.2
1504.8
1439.2
2029.2
2300.9
780.9
570.8
a.
b.
mm
liters
c. 1 liter = .381 mm
d. 1 liter = .01375
-------
APPENDIX C
In Appendix C is presented most of the results of leachate sample analy-
ses. Additional analyses were made on occasions for a number of trace metals;
dissolved, total, suspended, volatile and fixed solids; total organic carbon;
threshold odor; cyanide; flouride; phenols; and organic acids.
Weighted mean concentrations for 100 mm intervals were computed from this
data by calculating the mass of the parameter collected, from sample to sam-
ple, based on the volume of leachate collected between samples, multiplied by
the most recent sample concentration. The sum of these masses for each sam-
ple date divided by the total quantity of flow (approximately 100 mm) gave
the weighted mean concentration for the 100 mm interval.
All results are reported as mg/1 except pH (standard units) and conduc-
tivity (ymho/cm @ 25°C). Phosphate results are expressed as POit and BOD is
based on 5-day oxygen use. The following notations are used in the tabula-
tion:
N.V. - result not valid.
N.A. - not analyzed.
N.D. - not detected.
105
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
TEST CELL 9/25/72 10/02/72 10/10/72 10/24/72 11/07/72 11/20/72
pH
2A
2B
2C
2D
CONDUCTIVITY
ALKALINITY (CaCO,
H
O
O\
ACIDITY (CaCO )
HARDNESS
CALCIUM
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
5.4
6.2
6.1
6.2
3600
430
646
1356
223
232
349
341
6.1
1394 1646 2010 1920
649 1072 1344 1616
842 3007 2962 1007
311
6.0
5000 5000 3600 5600 5200
2041
1611
1195
308
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
o
TEST CELL 12/05/72 12/18/72 1/02/73 1/16/73 1/30/73 2/13/73
PH
CONDUCTIVITY
ALKALINITY (CaC03)
ACIDITY (CaC03)
HARDNESS
CALCIUM
2A
2B
2C
2D 6.1 6.1 6.0 6.1 6.0 6.1
2A
2B
2C
2D 3650 2930 3600 5250 6800 7000
2A
2B
2C
2D 2215 1655 2077 3067 4606 4162
2A
2B
2C
2D 1646 987 1466 1732 2560 2784
2A
2B
2C
2D 740 991 1080 1550 2133 2337
2A
2B
2C
2D 229 370 349 518 652 460
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
TEST CELL
PH
2A
2B
2C
2D
CONDUCTIVITY
2A
2B
2C
2D
ALKALINITY (CaCO-)
2A
g. 2B
co 2C
2D
ACIDITY (CaCO )
3 2A
2B
2C
2D
HARDNESS
2A
2B
2C
2D
CALCIUM
2A
2B
2C
2D
2/27/73
5.6
6.0
12700
6300
13880
4449
4910
2594
7315
2172
1900
522
3/13/73
5.7
5.8
12200
7100
9020
4295
5845
2910
7015
2417
1665
595
3/27/73
5.7
5.9
16800
7050"
10994
3365
6223
2078
7155
2033
2071
591
4/24/73
5.55
5.58
16500
6750
10955
3160
6825
1403
10575
2070
2401
592
5/08/73 5/22/73
5.7
5.7 5.6
16600
6600 8000
12050
3817 4481
6730
1612 2191
7412
2261 2750
4000
710 853
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
o
pH
CONDUCTIVITY
ALKALINITY (CaC03)
ACIDITY (CaC03)
HARDNESS
CALCIUM
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
6/05/73
5.0
5.3
5.4
9500
11400
8500
3884
6673
4391
4120
6131
3353
4625
2367
1428
1701
880
6/19/73
4.9
5.2
6.1
5.5
14200
15150
8600
12600
5450
8629
5494
5992
6720
6675
3071
2670
7067
7200
2833
4084
1967
2208
887
988
7/03/73
5.1
5.2
5.9
5.4
15000
16000
14000
11500
6705
8460
9690
5805
5898
6569
4651
2541
5367
6150
3667
5550
1918
2208
2010
1136
7/17/73
5.15
5.15
5.9
5.5
12000
14600
12400
10000
8219
9102
11497
6961
5981
6843
4498
2967
6100
6950
7050
4400
2280
2525
2475
1365
7/31/73
6.2
5.5
5.9
5.6
16000
17000
16500
12600
11535
11625
12525
6930
3452
5898
4507
3069
7005
7401
8613
4785
2474
2839
3101
1460
8/14/73
5.
5.
5.
5.
17000
18000
18000
13700
11231
12024
13054
7218
4622
5634
5061
3178
6850
7775
8575
4700
2262
2581
2871
1392
7
6
9
6
-------
LEACHATE "SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
o
pH
CONDUCTIVITY
ALKALINITY (CaC03)
ACIDITY (CaC03)
HARDNESS
CALCIUM
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
8/28/73
5.45
5.6
5.75
5.6
15750
17000
17000
13200
10656
11988
12965
8081
5008
5152
5296
3467
6809
8140
8870
5159
2073
2453
2750
1438
9/11/73
5.4
5.6
5.7
5.6
14000
16000
17250
13800
9578
11881
13263
8253
4714
4906
5628
3752
6275
8250
9025
5117
1906
2461
2759
1509
9/25/73
5.4
5.55
5.6
5.6
10000
12400
12400
10600
8687
11905
12978
8091
5580
6157
7504
4137
5775
8350
8625
4900
1883
2529
2731
1493
10/09/73
4.4
4.65
4.7
4.6
14000
17000
17000
11000
1437
3279
3505
1761
6590
6830
8514
4666
5850
8300
8475
4350
1941
2824
2839
1388
10/23/73
5.3
5.5
5.5
5.5
10000
13200
12800
9000
8165
11846
11950
7659
4522
5676
5964
3848
5717
8850
8500
5083
1504
2477
2389
973
11/07/73
5.3
5.6
5.5
5.5
15000
17500
10000
13800
7703
11771
12829
8016
4137
4858
5724
4040
5365
8300
9175
5575
1651
2554
2741
1566
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
pH
CONDUCTIVITY
ALKALINITY (CaCO )
3
ACIDITY (CaC03)
HARDNESS
CALCIUM
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
11/20/73
5.5
5.7
5.8
5.8
14000
17000
18000
14800
8255
12010
14587
8582
4185
4680
5580
3944
5263
8350
10125
5400
1784
2726
3288
1700
12/04/73
5.8
6.0
6.1
6.0
14000
17800
18500
13200
8037
11957
13959
7656
3955
4479
5099
3288
4915
8689
9334
4568
1599
2474
2784
1340
12/18/73
5.6
5.7
5.8
12200
15200
12600
8037
12352
8728
3812
4384
3621
5500
7600
4850
1465
2531
1465
1/15/74
5.0
5.6
5.5
5.5
10800
17000
16500
12400
7953
11449
11463
8093
3864
4414
4830
3719
4475
7075
7088
4650
1550
2300
2200
1600
1/29/74
5.4
5.0
9900
14400
13000
9400
7945
12577
10560
6892
4130
4923
4588
3260
4512
8500
7375
5883
1200
2200
2100
2300
2/12/74
5.
5.
5.
5.
12400
16800
18000
13000
6957
11153
12687
8141
4048
4830
4990
3859
4535
7490
8340
4860
1800
2900
3050
1960
0
1
2
2
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
pH
CONDUCTIVITY
ALKALINITY (CaCOn)
3
ACIDITY (CaC00)
3
HARDNESS
CALCIUM
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
23
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2/26/74
5.1
5.3
5.4
5.3
10600
17000
16500
14400
6420
11010
12550
8963
3792
4444
5118
5057
3930
7127
8010
5174
1400
2400
2600
1760
3/12/74
4.5
5.1
4.9
4.9
12000
17500
19000
14200
6315
10819
12290
8245
3864
4444
4685
3671
4025
7880
8330
5070
2050
3100
3350
2200
3/26/74
4.6
4.7
5.1
4.7
10000
14400
16000
10400
6578
10928
13054
6784
3690
4410
5284
3227
4350
7313
8575
4275
1320
2200
2660
1140
4/09/74
4.8
5.1
4.95
5.2
10000
14400
14800
9000
6504
10453
11043
5770
3917
4072
4386
2570
4259
6815
7289
4092
1430
2244
2310
1210
4/23/74
5.0
5.1
5.0
5.3
9300
13200
12500
10000
5325
9050
8688
6108
3806
4178
4275
3381
4150
6725
6550
4263
1440
2170
2080
1340
5/07/74
4.4
4.8
11400
13800
12200
11600
5781
9096
10135
7037
3690
4154
4202
3453
3764
6482
7115
4286
1150
1900
1900
1150
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
PH
CONDUCTIVITY
ALKALINITY (CaC03)
ACIDITY (CaC03)
HARDNESS
CALCIUM
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
5/21/74
5.0
5.1
5.2
5.2
8600
1080
1350
1600
5953-
9448
11020
8164
3824
4267
4341
3824
3740
6211
7232
4952
6/04/74
5.2
5.5
5.6
5.4
3600
6600
3500
5954
9429
10983
8320
3853
4283
4637
3805
4069
6644
7416
5485
1236
1770
2130
1368
6/18/74
4.8
5.3
5.5
5.2
2800
4000
6200
7200
5394
8600
8239
8364
3728
4044
6668
4321
3678
6060
7435
5593
7/02/74
5.3
5.5
5.5
5.4
6300
1100
4500
5400
6027
9355
6710
3596
3963
3533
2729
3419
6286
5830
3838
840
1290
1680
720
7/16/74
5.0
5.3
5.4
5.4
8000
10000
6500
9700
5627
8485
9516
6285
3734
3891
4030
3317
3238
5585
6250
3741
1230
2120
2400
1330
7/30/74
5.
5.
5.
5.
8000
10000
7800
15000
5155
8177
9596
7041
3471
3528
4033
3442
3179
6506
4418
1172
1957
2203
1547
0
2
3
3
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
pH
CONDUCTIVITY
ALKALINITY (CAC03)
ACIDITY (CaC03)
HARDNESS
CALCIUM
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
8/13/74
4.9
5.3
5,3
5.2
5200
6800
9000
16000
5055
8226
10189
8162
3456
3509
4426
3609
7075
5648
7075
4735
1550
2550
2935
2050
8/27/74
4.9
5.2
5.2
5.3
4500
9800
12000
11800
4970
7991
10564
8107
3633
3499
4479
3705
3147
5443
7092
4772
1425
2600
3180
1800
9/10/74
4.8
4.9
5.0
5.0
11800
16250
20000
15500
4743
7599
10353
5738
3743
3504
4780
3012
2998
5261
7021
3479
940
1750
2450
1150
9/24/74
5.2
5.3
5.3
5.4
13400
16200
20500
15500
4191
6407
9091
4788
3791
3518
4570
2882
2942
5108
7279
3480
1250
2250
3055
1440
10/08/74
5.2
5.4
5.4
5.4
9600
12400
14000
13200
5295
9763
12084
7669
3537
3537
4971
3107
2906
5041
7082
3725
1545
2600
3530
1770
10/22/
5.
5.
5.
5.
8200
10400
12400
11500
5883
8494
12588
7367
3824
4015
5258
3442
2956
5125
7358
3707
1260
1445
2100
1850
74
1
2
3
3
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
H
PH
CONDUCTIVITY
ALKALINITY (CaC03)
ACIDITY (CaC03)
HARDNESS
CALCIUM
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
11/05/74
5.1
5.2
5.8
5.6
3000
5200
7000
6200
5179
7790
11788
7154
3728
3776
5425
3489
3010
5124
7319
3973
1162
2044
2829
1442
11/19/74
5.1
5.0
5.1
5.1
7400
11200
14000
9000
3890
6537
9650
6743
3844
3490
5449
3996
2854
4872
7282
4163
1136
1859
2684
1538
12/03/74
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.3
6600
9400
12200
10800
5430
7874
12217
5531
3738
3881
5378
2964
3058
5045
7520
3184
1075
1980
2725
1055
12/17/74
5.2
5.1
5.2
5.45
3600
12400
6000
5200
5308
7946
12109
4652
3640
3783
4742
2508
2992
5040
7296
2675
868
1460
2275
728
1/14/75
5.0
5.2
5.3
5.7
6000
8200
10000
6400
3796
6534
8859
3733
3962
3928
4498
2657
3080
5113
6700
2958
975
1740
2450
725
1/28/75
4.9
5.1
5.3
5.2
7400
10300
13200
7200
3496
6688
10463
4272
3764
3764
4752
2681
3282
5632
7616
2949
1081
1876
2521
954
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
TEST CELL 2/11/75
pH
2A
2B
2C
2D
CONDUCTIVITY
2A
2B
2C
2D
ALKALINITY (CaCCO
2A
2B
2C
2D
ACIDITY (CaCO~)
2A
2B
2C
2D
HARDNESS
2A
2B
2C
2D
CALCIUM
2A
2B
2C
2D
5.1
5.2
5.4
5.3
6400
8300
10800
6400
4779
8396
12268
5970
4037
3779
4424
2974
3258
5276
7381
3121
965
1600
1560
930
2/25/75
5.1
5.2
5.5
5.5
6000
7400
5200
4700
6181
9439
5318
4530
3681
3749
1832
2076
3387
5302
3816
4648
780
1700
610
350
3/11/75
5.0
5.2
5.4
5.3
5600
7800
8600
6000
5891
8869
9704
5563
3769
3853
3729
2770
3492
5642
5927
5253
800
1300
1450
625
3/25/75
5.0
5.2
5.2
5.3
5000 /
7200
5300
4200
4402
6978
4522
3310
3600
3482
2342
1836
2958
4779
3458
3320
655
1210
650
405
4/08/75
4.9
5.2
5.3
5.2
5100
7200
7400
6100
4804
7200
7203
4917
3467
3491
3212
2446
2602
4223
4199
2647
815
1200
1250
805
4/22/75
5.1
5.3
5.4
5.4
7000
9400
10400
8300
3673
5785
6118
4830
3274
3321
3359
2876
2673
4514
4674
3315
865
1375
1450
975
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
pH
CONDUCTIVITY
ALKALINITY (CaCO~)
ACIDITY (CaC03)
HARDNESS
CALCIUM
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
5/06/75
5.
5.
5.
5.
8448
12900
11700
7910
3452 .
5507.
6051.
3843.
3334.
3230.
3245
2544.
2659.
4308.
4657.
2637
930
1350
1400
860
1
2
3
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5/20/75
5.0
5.3
5.3
5.4
7690
11461
13031
10362
3498
5360
6821
4646
3453
3216
3642
3358
2630
1646
1959
1182
950
1510
1755
925
6/03/75
4.9
5.1
5.1
5.2
8075
10710
13260
10200
3487
5269
6597
4103
3614
3212
3759
2786
2583
3968
4712
2583
800
1350
1800
850
6/17/75
5.0
5.1
5.3
5.2
6912
9720
10044
6480
3618
4996
5508
3287
3600
3132
3460
2324
2411
~~~ -36DO
3886
2210
795
1063
1050
635
7/01/75
5.0
5.2
5.1
5.6
6200
8400
8200
8640
3186
4326
4333
3078
3389
3085
3272
2407
2300
3415
3358
2250
670
960
933
575
7/15/75
4
5
4
5
4995
7290
7830
9880
3011
4499
4733
4055
2795
2618
3756
2627
2200
3338
3317
2713
619
1000
1000
715
.7
.0
.9
.2
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
H
oo
pH
CONDUCTIVITY
ALKALINITY (CaC03)
ACIDITY (CaCOj
3
HARDNESS
CALCIUM!
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
7/29/75
4.9
5.1
5.0
5.2
6500
6760
10920
9880
2974
4761
5176
4818
935
905
1210
918
1975
3400
3588
2925
665
1100
1050
900
8/12/75
5.1
5.3
5.2
5.4
4625
6500
8250
9250
2971
4511
5526
4805
2928
2728
4189
3118
2025
3300
3963
3075
568
853
920
715
8/26/75
4.7
4.9
4.9
5.3
6345
8370
11610
7326
3121
4502
5906
4259
3018
2666
4460
2764
2075
3225
4175
2600
820
1030
1400
880
9/09/75
4.9
5.1
5.0
5.3
6240
7800
9620
10660
3264
4555
6494
5010
3104
2713
4474
2952
2010
3200
4375
2838
495
900
1400
805
9/23/75
4.9
4.9
5.1
5.3
4680
6240
7440
6960
3100
4250
6389
4628
3004
2613
4574
3042
2494
4187
5625
3872
489
720
2070
600
10/07/75
4.
5.
5.
5.
5106
7326
8430
7548
3283
4427
6376
4779
3104
2647
4212
2846
2000
2900
4406
2694
9
1
0
3
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
PH
CONDUCTIVITY
ALKALINITY (CaCOg)
ACIDITY (CaC03)
HARDNESS
CALCIUM
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
10/21/75
4.9
5.1
5.2
5.5
6370
8060
9360
4550
3181
4068
4523
2051
3136
2579
2646
1080
2017
3111
3539
3990
789
1275
955
459
11/04/75
5.0
5.2
5.2
5.4
5390
6820
9240
5830
5595
6420
10458
5668
2298
2027
3784
2032
2463
3691
6069
3256
813
1030
1800
770
11/18/75
4.8
5.0
5.0
5.2
6136
7440
8840
8160
3338
4177
7306
4734
3296
2746
4498
2670
3979
3313
6185
4218
733
1079
1747
820
12/02/75
4.8
4.5
4.4
4.6
5400
7020
9726
8250
3537
4548
7834
4796
3117
2731
4664
2856
3634
4298
6847
4572
765
969
1912
867
12/16/75
5.0
5.3
5.2
5.3
6990
8556
11868
7728
3280
4207
6301
489
3403
2737
4450
3051
3467
4190
10825
6713
888
550
1430
890
1/02/76
4
5
5
5
5658
6720
6580
4340
3470
5115
6814
3514
3455
2953
4122
2286
4732
5428
7876
6026
807.
930
1335
610
.9
.2
.2
.3
5
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
M
!\D
O
pH
CONDUCTIVITY
ALKALINITY (CaCOg)
ACIDITY (CaC03)
HARDNESS
CALCIUM
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2/03/76 2/17/76 3/02/76 3/16/76
4.9 4.9 4.9' 4.9
5.0 5.2 5.3 5.1
5.2 5.2 5.3 5.2
5.1 5.2 5.3 5.3
5480 4625 4872 7300
7124 6500 6612
8768 10750 8120 12500
6302 6500 5452 7700
3652
4756
6732
3629
3459
2934
4117
2445
3108
4027
6080
2987
792
1065
1450
660
3/30/76 4/13/76
5.0 5.0
5.2 5.2
5.2 5.3
5.2 5.4
8150 6610
9670 6610
1500 11100
8910 8760
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
M
pH
CONDUCTIVITY
ALKALINITY (CaC03)
ACIDITY (CaC03)
HARDNESS
CALCIUM
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
4/27/76 5/11/76 5/25/76 6/08/76
5.04 5.2 5.0 5.0
5.29 5.3 5.2 5.2
5.3 5.3 5.2 5.2
5.51 5.4 5.5 5.5
2400 6140 7399 6936
2650 6974 9125 7730
800 10937 12578 8324
3000 7811 7275 7064
3116
3936
6642
4510
3262
2533
3054
2863
3850
N.A.
4256
871
1133
1980
960
6/23/76 7/06/76
5.0 5.0
5.2 5.2
5.2 5.15
5.5 5.40
6480
7450
9720
6030
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
pH
CONDUCTIVITY
ALKALINITY (CaC03)
ACIDITY (CaCOo)
J
HARDNESS
CALCIUM
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
7/20/76
5.0
5.2
5.2
5,45
7700
9010
6160
3501
4493
5882
4224
3365
2870
3678
2665
3284
4154
222^
900
952
2900
843
8/03/76
5.0
5.1
5.1
5,5
6760
5950
9380
6940
3422
4134
5705
4038
3186
2586
3546
2637
2505
3141
4454
2264
875
1070
1500
920
8/17/76
4.95
5.15
5.2
5.4
5000
5800
6800
6200
1994
3012
4814
3772
3723
3077
4?Z3
3123
2352
3261
4521
2568
654
848
1925
668
8/31/76
4.8
5.1
5.0
5.6
5500
4990
8960
7780
2987
3811
5682
4542
3007
2899
4191
3197
2163
2908
4492
2632
800
986
1900
883
9/14/76
4.9
4.9
5.0
6.0
7192
8432
12648
8800
3296
4356
5932
5062
3716
2787
4238
3115
2294
2844
4353
2378
780
985
1320
790
9/28/76
4.
5.
5.
5.
7168
7840
8288
7168
2865
3932
4196
3330
3619
2747
2806
2509
2160
3348
3048
2484
655
835
790
468
9
2
2
5
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
pH
CONDUCTIVITY
ALKALINITY (CaC03)
ACIDITY (CaCOQ)
J
HARDNESS
CALCIUM
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
10/12/76
4.8
5.2
5.1
5.4
7480
8360
10010
7810
3661
4162
4874
4424
3441
2709
3561
2805
2308
2976
3844
2217
800
925
1030
770
10/26/76
5.1
5.3
5.3
5.5
6888
7872
8610
7134
2729
3373
3535
3610
4179
3232
3677
3445
3481
3994
4146
3546
540
665
640
513
11/09/76
5.1
5.3
5.2
5.4
7200
8280
7720
13688
2848
3621
3689
5976
3961
3267
3887
4596
2390
3114
3310
4173
722
861
912
1102
11/23/76
4.8
5.0
4.9
5.3
6968
7772
9112
8844
3002
3589
4328
4424
3904
3257
4105
3410
2275
3172
3769
2660
718
1035
1125
852
12/07/76
4
5
5
5
5896
7772
9380
8308
5648
6584
8121
7273
4010
3161
4383
3610
2212
3103
3828
2618
591
885
900
699
.9
o
.1
.6
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
TEST CELL 9/25/72 10/02/72 10/10/72 10/24/72 11/07/72 11/20/72
MAGNESIUM
IRON
MANGANESE
ZINC
COPPER
LEAD
2A
2B
2C
2D 42 47 52 25 51 59
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D 15 19 21 50 21 21
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
V_n
TEST CELL 12/05/72 12/18/72 1/02/73 1/16/73 1/30/73 2/13/73
MAGNESIUM
IRON
MANGANESE
ZINC
COPPER
LEAD
2A
2B
2C
2D 42 61 77 108 137 150
2A
2B
2C
2D 822 430 453 716 1010 1064
2A
2B
2C
2D 20 11 13 21 28 25.1
2A
2B
2C
2D 2.7 ' 4.4 3.6
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D ^n.S
-------
LEACHATE-SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
ON
MAGNESIITM
IRON
MANGANESE
ZINC
COPPER
LEAD
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2/27/73 3/13/73 3/27/73 4/24/73 5/08/73 5/22/73
439 450 487 566 604
142 180 131 132 145 183
1950 2902 2363
793 790 653 592 536 842
98 97.6 115
20.2 29 25 19.8 29 28
240 255
16.9 17.9
N.D. .12
N.D. .05
N.D. 2.76
N.D. .27
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
MAGNESIUM
IRON
MANGANESE
ZINC
COPPER
LEAD
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
6/05/73 6/19/73
293 442
384 530
195
204 281
1100 1105
1825 1250
1454
700 723
109 99
79 74
39
32 38
7/03/73
408
473
391
279
1268
1178
1821
571
82
75
80
41
122
231
47
67
,
7/17/73
453
522
471
340
1281
1302
2016
777
79
76
87
46
150
360
68
64
7/31/73
486
565
576
265
1507
1465
2176
837
80
75
96
45
112
294
70
59
0.05
0.05
0.04
0.02
0.08
3.0
0.2
0.2
8/14/73
471
561
581
355
1547
1630
2321
995
82
82
106
58
113
310
71
60
0.
0,
0.
0.
0.
N.
N.
N.
04
03
06
04
55
D.
D.
D.
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
t\3
oo
MAGNESIUM
IRON
MANGANESE
ZINC
COPPER
LEAD
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
8/28/73
458
564
583
384
1263
1506
2326
1019
59
68
91
48
105
250
75
60
0.08
0.08
.09
.07
0.40
0.8
N.D.
N.D.
9/11/73
424
569
589
400
1092
1484
2499
1132
49
69
83
49
75
298
83
60
0.08
0.08
0.07
0.05
0.63
1.25
0.63
0.12
9/25/73
376
543
539
388
917
1509
2780
1183
40
62
77
49
86
241
70
56
10/09/73
360
562
518
324
851
1621
2521
846
40
60
73
40
88
353
71
50
10/23/73
365
617
580
374
800
1200
1600
1000
39
69
81
51
77
300
86
51
0.10
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
1.9
N.D.
N.D.
11/07/73
341
561
571
399
704
1309
1946
1141
37
59
77
54
68
250
78
50
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
\o
MAGNESIUM
IRON
MANGANESE
ZINC
COPPER
LEAD
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
11/20/73
330
522
514
411
676
1279
2000
1135
35
53
74
55
57
187
83
38
12/04/73
316
510
571
326
681
1250
1778
944
33
56
75
50
60
200
95
36
12/18/73
284
545
363
662
1361
1065
30
56
56
54
187
37
1/15/74
306
448
448
330
624
900
960
878
30
32
48
40
51
136
78
48
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
1/29/74
260
480
400
260
540
780
820
700
27
43
52
39
62
180
80
40
2/12/74
220
460
700
220
600
800
1080
880
22
39
58
47
64
240
126
56
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
H
VjJ
o
MAGNESIUM
IRON
MANGANESE
ZINC
COPPER
LEAD
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2/26/74
247
466
521
370
515
828
1183
1041
16
38
58
51
49
200
146
56
3/12/74
292
544
594
398
520
810
1100
965
23
38
53
48
50
177
112
52
0.21
0.11
0.11
0.11
3/26/74
225
466
545
277
530
870
1270
800
23
37
59
37
45
157
108
50
4/09/74
234
426
439
234
500
750
850
550
23
32
42
29
42
150
66
35
4/23/74
228
400
369
267
521
668
800
690
23
33
37
31
41
132
66
46
5/07/74
207
345
357
268
563
692
865
995
23
32
43
41
39
116
87
46
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
MAGNESIUM
IRON
MANGANESE
ZINC
COPPER
LEAD
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
5/21/74
22
33
50
49
35
107
69
40
6/04/74
200
329
390
358
551
835
1169
1169
22
35
51
47
35
85
61
37
0.13
0.13
0.13
0.13
6/18/74
22
31
47
49
30
84
63
35
7/02/74
210
383
360
270
525
640
750
770
20.3
29.5
34.8
33
28
86
40
29
0.09
0.09
0.08
0.07
0.09
0.088
0.092
0.07
7/16/74
220
350
390
270
520
570
755
729
20.7
27.7
40.28
35.9
37.5
60.8
48.3
37.5
7/30/74
260
395
450
375
520
568
840
960
21
27
45
42
38.6
62
51
42.4
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.2
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
MAGNESIUM
IRON
MANGANESE
ZINC
COPPER
LEAD
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
8/13/74
220
400
485
400
524
593
878
1032
18
26
46.4
46.7
41
100
74
48
N.A.
N.A.
8/27/74
100
255
365
250
510
535
945
1000
18.8
24.3
49
45
32.5
78
68.6
36
0.92
0.5
1.0
0.5
9/10/74
50
98
230
69
543
596
965
690
20
24.5
53
32
26
66
61
22
1.15
1.34
1.34
1.66
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
9/24/74
104
190
336
160
528
528
600
775
23
28
63
50
37
70
65
26
0.70
0.89
0.75
0.90
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
10/08/74
85
182
330
157
608
605
950
935
20
23
57
39
30
70
115
29
10/22/74
80
165
318
148
553
605
625
885
20.5
24
60
36
30
66
63
28
0.03
0.04
0.03
0.02
< 0 . 05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
MAGNESIUM
IRON
MANGANESE
ZINC
COPPER
LEAD
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
11/05/74
121
208
184
608
617
1228
949
19.5
24
45
37.9
27.6
70
66.5
28.3
11/19/74
109
187
301
196
582
573
1170
1170
20
23.5
65
41
29
73
72
30
^r.0.09
-:0.09
,-: 0.09
,-:. 0.09
_0.81
__0.81
/ 0.81
-.- 0.81
12/03/74
80
150
319
96
525
590
1200
775
20.5
25.4
69.7
31.8
24
71.6
75
18
12/17/74
75
150
290
71
583
618
1105
675
20
26
68
26
31.1
72
169
21
.0438
.0292
.0292
.0292
.036
.084
199
.032
1/14/75
128
235
318
118
625
625
953
639
20.6
25.9
55
24.3
35.2
75.5
70.4
22.4
/.0.10
/-0.10
^0.10
Z.0.10
0.0274
0.072
0.1249
0.0252
1/28/75
151
261
427
158
600
645
1060
693
19.5
25.6
67.6
26.9
37.8
83
84.4
29
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
H
MAGNESIUM
IRON
MANGANESE
ZINC
COPPER
LEAD
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2/11/75
106
175
307
123
660
650
825
860
22
27
70
32
25
51
51
17
^- .1
s_ .1
/ .1
f~ .1
.029
.050
.079
.026
2/25/75
145
260
170
120
650
675
495
560
21.1
27.8
24.4
20.9
33
80
29
20
3/11/75
94
163
196
94
587
604
770
679
26
32.8
50.9
34.8
24.2
55.7
36
15.3
-~ 0.146
-^ 0.146
0.146
-- 0.146
0.038
0.089
0.120
0.040
3/25/75
130
325
135
100
588
600
385
473
17.4
23.1
19.6
18.9
30
57
29
31
4/08/75
150
195
210
145
573
540
600
658
15
20
28
25
32
62
49
27
0.092
0.0345
0.0345
N.D.
0.0359
0.0563
0.0762
0.0544
4/22/75
88
163
174
134
582
530
663
813
14
20
32
30
29
67
51
34
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
VJT.,
MAGNESIUM
IRON
MANGANESE
ZINC
COPPER
LEAD
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
5/06/75
106.5
185
195.5
141.5
560
505
560
587.5
13.8
19
28.5
22.5
27.5
64.2
46.3
25.2
-- 0.111
^ 0.111
-,-L 0.111
^ 0.111
0.07
0.07
0.07
0.07
5/20/75
94
122
159
92
585
665
1230
1435
15.4
20.7
39.0
31
20.0
43
37.5
17.5
6/03/75
75
148
198
120
574
510
668
730
15.4
21.3
46.8
27.9
24.0
57.8
42.0
19.5
6/17/75
88
145
173
89
555
508
535
545
15.0
17.8
27.8
21.2
20
39
35
14
^0.1
-^ 0.1
-=-0.1
^-0.1
0.279
0.112
0.083
7/01/75
84
126
129
97.4
578
450
574
600
13.5
16.0
26.1
22.2
21.2
43.4
38.1
15.9
7/15/75
67.3
122
122
114
562
476
608
741
12.2
15.1
25.4
25.5
19.0
49.6
38.1
20.3
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
MAGNESIUM
IRON
MANGANESE
ZINC
COPPER
LEAD
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
7/29/75
80.0
155
161
158
555
465
640
850
11.0
14.5
30.0
29.5
18.4
52.0
38.0
19.4
8/12/75
79.5
141.1
179.2
160.2
560
500
695
885
12.17
15.63
35.88
30.72
19.9
44.0
38.0
21.1
^-0.017
^- 0.017
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
MAGNESIUM
IRON
MANGANESE
ZINC
COPPER
LEAD
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
O ,\
Z--T":
2B
2C
2D
2 A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
10/21/75
71.5
87.5
98
53.3
602
472
566
460
11.8
14.1
34.5
11
.032
.028
.23
.025
.017
.017
.019
.02
11/04/75
81
117
200
97
612
482
904
783
12.6
14.3
55
20.6
11/18/75
72.1
108
180
120
579
485
864
842
13.6
15.3
61
26.2
18.6
3.1
4.1
3.6
.019
.03
.021
.031
.024
.024
.033
.026
12/02/75
73
79
156
80
592
480
876
840
11.9
14.7
60
24.7
12/16/75
85.9
160
166
120
638
505
871
865
13.5
15.2
49.5
28.2
19.3
32
38
6.1
.037
.03
.033
.026
.007
.018
.022
.029
1/02/76
92.4
130.5
191.5
100
700
574
821
760
14.05
17.2
41
20.15
19.1
39.3
39.4
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
Co
MAGNESIUM
IRON
MANGANESE
ZINC
COPPER
LEAD
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2/03/76 2/17/76 3/02/76 3/16/76 3/30/76 4/13/76
93
119
195.5
91
638 360 694 673 658 674
586 290.5 502 576 519 557
810.5 440 643 863 855 931
782.5 486 625 863 934 1105
14.6
11.2
44.5
20.5
0.034 -i-0.01 0.0179 0.008 0.01
0.046 0.011 0.0145 0.015 0.00
0.052 0.016 0.0291 0.029 0.00
0.056 ^0.01 0.0107 0.023 0.00
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
vO
MAGNESIUM
IRON
MANGANESE
ZINC
COPPER
LEAD
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
4/27/76 5/11/76 5/25/76 6/08/76
72
94
228
119
673 700 786 797
519 610 646 608
779 975 1012 682
1120 1500 1132 990
18.9
18.3
31.5
38.6
8.1
22
26.0
6.0
0.038
0.032
0.073
0.040
0.002 0.008 0.003 0.139
0.010 0.010 0.005 0.084
0.021 0.016 0.006 0.016
0.014 0.006 0.002 0.008
6/23/76 7/06/76
795 649
578 817
718 777
915 906
0.008 O.OOf
0.010 0.01C
0.006 0.01C
0.005 0.00?
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
H
-p-
o
MAGNESIUM
IRON
MANGANESE
ZINC
COPPER
LEAD
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
7/20/76 8/03/76 8/17/76 8/31/76 9/14/76 9/28/76
94
206
222
166
800 802 787 810 783
600 630 624 636 607 628
646 815 816 925 860 585
1082 1045 1310 1095 1390 1080
15.6
16.4
36.3
24.6
18.8 19.8 20.5 20 21 20
31.6 36 28 28 27.5 27
33.8 40 36 40 40 23
5-5 5.4 7 7.8 6 2.1
.064
.070
.042
.050
.0135 -010 .0314 .060 .112 .1,
.0184 .148 .0198 .066 .125 .0'
.0369 -197 .0156 .098 .093 .']_(
.0242 .159 .0367 .158 .096 *n-
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
MAGNESIUM
IRON
MANGANESE
ZINC
COPPER
LEAD
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
10/12/76 10/26/76 11/09/76 11/23/76 12/07/76
73.7
143
187
130
905 84 1004 870
740 705 696 645
850 780 840 695
1345 1270 1452 1250
12.7
13.6
23.9
26.5
26 22 24 20.6
32 33 31 30.5
36 27 34 33
5.6 53 35 6.4
.0355
.037
.0402
.037
.14 .0691 .023 .0249
.1356 .0726 .0464 .0271
.1371 .096 .0854 .0384
.1144 .123 .0508 .0441
952
670
845
20
28.3
33.5
13.1
.058
.0578
.0566
.0793
-------
LEACHATE--SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
TEST CELL 9/25/72 10/02/72 10/10/72 10/24/72 11/07/72 11/20/72
CADMIUM
SODIUM
POTASSIUM
CHLORIDE
SULFATE
ORTHOPHOSPHATE
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D 297 603 508 386 393 269
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D 50.4 905 682 668 604 529
2A
2B
2C
2D 30.2 29.0 23.4 11.0 18.1
2A
2B
2C
2D 4.4 6.4 2.4 2.8 1.4 1.5
-------
LEAChATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
H
CADMIUM
SODIUM
POTASSIUM
CHLORIDE
SULFATE
ORTHOPHOSPHATE
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
12/05/72 12/18/72 1/02/73 1/16/73 1/30/73 2/13/73
257 178 202 331 485 507
\
100 160 353 434
303 231 339 494 684 915
19.6 83.3 43.5 62.2 165.6 243
1.2 1.1 2.8 3.1 1.7 2.9
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
CADMIUM
SODIUM
POTASSIUM
CHLORIDE
SULFATE
ORTHOPHOSPHATE
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2/27/73 3/13/73 3/27/73 4/24/73
N.D.
N.D.
1040 1190 1368 1519
411 545 499 488
1481
417
2176
690 790 540
954.1 889
200 285 386.8 390
18.5 18.7 64.5
3.4 3.6 17
5/08/73
N.D.
1.0
1625
550
1612
490
2270
701
1112
225
60
35
5/22/73
864
1028
869
325
24
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
CADMIUM
SODIUM
POTASSIUM
CHLORIDE
SULFATE
ORTHOPHOSPHATE
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
6/05/73
1700
1000
830
1132
1199
791
3558
1711
1113
625
805
370
203
100
48
6/19/73
1645
1390
630
1185
1900
1955
490
938
1982
2118
978
1466
1100
1250
415
730
390
185
13
51
7/03/73
1625
1300
1325
1025
1650
1700
1450
1175
1928
1901
1684
1195
980
1200
925
760
243
125
55
72
7/17/73
1800
1700
1438
1090
2225
2425
1575
1350
2064
2009
1901
1412
1290
1365
1070
855
260
150
48
43
' 7/31/73
0.06
0.03
0.01
0.02
1700
1400
1650
1050
1900
1900
1850
1270
2335
2227
2009
1358
1306
1446
1356
912
63
97
14
82
8/14/73
N.D.
0,01
N.D.
N.D.
1900
1650
1725
1125
1900
1675
1800
1200
2118
2009
1874
1358
1190
1400
1320
960
36
51
29
40
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
o\
CADMIUM
SODIUM
POTASSIUM
CHLORIDE
SULFATE
ORTHOPHOSPHATE
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
8/28/73
N.D.
0.01
N.D.
N.D.
1625
1400
1650
1375
1800
1700
1300
2178
2123
2260
1764
976
1244
1324
912
26
34
11
31
9/11/73
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
1680
1650
1750
1375
1708
1846
1625
1240
2040
1902
1929
1461
915
1205
1025
850
16
24
7
31
9/25/73
1350
1330
1425
1130
1457
1614
1353
1249
1874
2343
1980
1682
825
1280
965
800
12
11
9
26
10/09/73
1250
1300
1375
1125
1864
2227
1954
1273
1984
2095
2260
2260
1035
1160
1280
820
8
18
7
/
36
10/23/73
0.14
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
1264
1445
1445
1084
1293
1645
1411
940
1874
2315
2039
2150
1200
2000
840
1160
8
40
38
11/07/73
1200
1263
1450
1100
1300
2939
2882
1893
1874
2095
1929
1654
920
1520
1520
1280
10
25
7
31
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
TEST CELL
CADMIUM
2A
2B
2C
2D
SODIUM
2A
2B
2C
2D
P'?TASSIIP1
2A
2B
2C
2D
CHLORIDE
2A
2B
2C
2D
SULFATL
2A
2B
2C
2D
ORIHOPHOSPHATE
2A
2B
2C
2D
11/20/73
1087
1188
1525
1075
1181
1574
1759
1065
1819
2040
2591
2012
660
1080
1240
870
10
14
9
28
12/04/73
1100
1250
1513
975
1750
2000
2150
1700
1682
1984
2205
1488
560
1085
1255
720
13
13
9
30
12/18/73
1050
1300
1150
1250
1833
1125
1654
2040
1599
520
880
720
12
7
21
1/15/74
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
900
1000
1130
860
1100
1500
1400
1000
1213
1186
1874
1337
540
776
784
596
25
19
18
45
1/29/74
1000
1200
1200
900
1050
1600
1380
880
1172
1987
1654
1114
430
945
865
555
21
26
14
46
2/12/74
830
970
1160
900
1320
1750
1900
1400
1320
2095
2153
1489
420
830
1050
745
22
24
18
44
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
H
-p-
O3
CADMIUM
SODIUM
POTASSIUM
CHLORIDE
ORTHOPHO SPRATS
TEST CELL
2A
2B
20
,'D
2 A
?B
2C
-?D
2 A
?B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2G
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2/26/74
900
1280
1580
1200
1100
1730
1950
1350
799
1627
2123
1543
460
900
1150
840
43
37
46
56
3/12/74
848
1150
1320
990
948
1625
1660
1115
1047
1924
2150
1406
428
796
848
708
24
16
20
30
3/26/74
796
1060
1390
776
843
1470
1647
866
1056
1613
2255
1048
440
768
1064
604
25
12
19
34
4/09/74
795
925
1100
650 /
895
1400
1450
700
1164
1552
1676
866
324
704
910
422
23
8
11
32
4/23/74
900
1090
1150
915
805
1680
1520
1035
972
1395
1647
991
366
734
764
820
39
46
25
55
5/07/74
780
920
1200
850
842
1224
1301
842
1209
1626
1675
1250
354
620
791
685
20
10
8
24
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
-p-
\o
CADMIUM
SODIUM
POTASSIUM
CHLORIDE
SULFATE
ORTHOPHOSPHATE
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
21)
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
5/21/74
655
835
1185
955
801
1240
1530
1305
430
676
1004
768
22
7
10
24
6/04/74
800
975
1250
900
887
1269
1810
1277
528
999
1121
951
31
9
30
28
6/18/74
700
830
1175
1050
825
1300
1535
1250
624
992
994
994
42
6
9
26
7/02/74
0.024
0.011
0.016
0.03
700
900
950
750
690
1150
1035
690
929
1427
1386
1003
493
772
756
695
31
5
9
34
7/16/74
500
680
950
630
720
1225
1400
890
1085
1489
1346
912
410
605
865
565
32.6
11
7
36.5
7/30/74
500
695
960
800
695
1050
1170
800
1209
1730
2153
1378
460
625
922
845
32
9
9
34.3
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
O
CADMIUM
SODIUM
POTASSIUM
CHLORIDE
SULFATE
ORTHOPK05PHAT1;
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
8/13/74
N.A.
500
665
970
820
675
1180
1350
1015
1009
1560
1791
2943
474
796
1152
956
49
10
12
59
8/27/74
450
640
940
775
625
1000
1344
982
759
922
2145
1524
432
666
1182
854
40.6
10.8
7.5
29,2
9/10/74
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
400
725
975
650
625
960
800
685
731
1098
1922
1121
410
790
1170
610
28
7.6
7
32.6
9/24/74
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
525
950
1300
600
605
918
1003
685
640
988
1654
777
190
590
1132
558
31
8
8
36
10/08/74
450 '
575
1050
630
635
930
1405
770
805
1019
1538
939
557
780
922
532
27.7
6
8
33
10/22/74
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
445
520
1025
575
640
890
1400
768
659
1057
1779
906
525
675
1024
707
30
7
11
30
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
V_n
M
CADMIUM
SODIUM
POTASSIUM
CHLORIDE
SULFATE
ORTHOPHOSPHATE
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
11/05/74
355
480
990
550
620
915
1390
800
791
937
1771
1032
250
485
1025
625
26.3
4.4
4
24.3
11/19/74
/^0.096
_ 0.096
__0.096
.-.0.096
472
455
940
660
630
611
824
1400
766
988
1565
1126
442
505
1120
705
26.4
6.0
6.6
22.3
12/03/74
400
435
955
410
608
865
1500
593
621
846
1796
659
465
590
1051
510
27.2
5.0
6.8
26.3
12/17/74
.1597
.7130
.7540
.1771
435
498
810
305
593
853
1340
500
623
824
1590
563
494
765
1050
535
28
8.1
9.1
34
1/14/75
0.0304
0.0268
0.0299
0.0284
255
325
555
215
600
860
1170
470
510
717
1020
477
420
660
1025
425
24
5.7
6.0
31.3
1/28/75
546.4
650
1189
468
615
900
1475
520
643
717
1406
600
454
606
1200
530
28
5.2
7
37.1
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
to
TEST CELL 2/11/75
CADMIUM
SODIUM
POTASSIUM
CHLORIDE
SULFATE
ORTHOPHOSPHATE
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
.026
.032
.020
.014
465
495
910
460
630
850
1425
635
550
727
1195
555
505
710
1140
565
25
3.8
6.0
32.6
2/25/75
455
560
405
330
588
770
487
380
430
654
443
348
422
646
356
326
23.1
5.9
4.9
27.4
3/11/75
0.012
0.058
0.018
0.020
435
525
770
390
580
863
963
523
559
765
948
580
540
644
812
562
24.6
8.1
6.2
27.2
3/25/75
355
445
340
255
450
780
525
385
401
511
413
325
414
602
474
362
41
16.5
12
17.9
4/08/75
1.45
1.12
2.67
1.47
430
505
850
507
455
800
800
465
380
424
431
213
316
365
699
438
35.8
15
3.50
17.1
4/22/75
390
515
750
500
476
725
842
556
696
928
885
1002
372
560
666
711
43
23
14
33
.3
.3
.3
.0
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
CADMIUM
SODIUM
POTASSIUM
CHLORIDE
SULFATE
ORTHOPHOSPHATE
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
5/06/75
0.031
0.034
0.035
0.029
365
450
615
410
442.5
650
750
465
501
864
717
480.5
138
464
628
350
40.1
17.3
10.8
23.7
5/20/75
301
319
575
359
389
695
970
600
628
948
1602
1054
300
586
760
520
44.0
17.3
11.3
30.0
6/03/75
315
380
640
435
510
725
1100
650
885
1159
1096
406
456
748
476
44.5
16.8
12.3
23.8
6/17/75
0.010
0.016
0.023
0.029
347
385
518
318
410
529
700
337
687
1170
738
262
290
531
46.3
25.5
9.8
7/01/75
305
360
425
332
362
464
765
450
737
1011
1446
893
240
406
522
410
46.8
34.3
26.8
28.6
7/15/75
265
355
425
410
320
483
590
458
759
1286
906
1265
290
450
484
544
48.0
29.1
16.3
32.3
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
CADMIUM
SODIUM
POTASSIUM
CHLORIDE
SULFATE
ORTHOPHOSPKATE
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
7/29/75
244
339
440
450
324
600
500
898
1210
1095
1656
332
486
656
456
46.3
23.8
16.8
30.6
8/12/75
0.004
0.015
0.004
0.005
270
340
514
490
319
400
680
505
1453
1651
1519
2449
300
512
722
670
44.8
23.8
15.8
29.0
8/26/75
0.0025
0.048
0.0069
0.0043
262
335
500
300
293
450
503
250
1524
1738
1812
2491
316
465
606
406
42.8
19.3
11.8
24.8
9/09/75
.0023
.0037
.0049
.0033
260
333
533
450
325
450
625
475
1793
2450
2505
2600
302
460
720
466
28.6
19.2
13.3
25.1
9/23/75
.0050
.0019
.0019
.016
405
315
445
1050
452
230
354
656
300
44.1
18.1
13.7
25.6
10/07/75
506
506
528
320
19.6
7.0
5.6
11.6
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
CADMIUM
SODIUM
POTASSIUM
CHLORIDE
SULFATE
ORTHOPHOSPHATE
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
10/21/75
.0035
.003
.0045
.0045
255
300
365
198
326
414
502
201
595
435
752
320
310
394
538
126
39.3
16.0
9.1
15.0
11/04/75
255
272
720
305
319
394
135
334
382
472
1147
642
264
412
782
4.9
15.8
10.9
24.9
11/18/75
.0054
.0125
.0058
.0035
470
200
480
285
376
340
715
360
176
212
499
286
291
380
744
301
29,8
17.1
12.4
14.4
12/02/75
291
293
575
387
351
436
890
459
248
337
1186
557
308
333
657
271
46
20
11
22
12/16/75
.0032
.0038
.0064
.0049
285
250
505
360
342
275
725
299
330
384
911
473
219
268
505
289
38
15.8
12.0
21.7
1/02/76
264
220
435
220
322.5
443.5
650
337.5
84
190
520
105
265
409
662
157
35.9
13.0
22.3
18.7
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
CADMIUM
SODIUM
POTASSIUM
CHLORIDE
SULFATE
ORTHOPHOSPHATE
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2/03/76
271.5
325
435
276
326.5
446.5
695
296.5
198
514
832
408
257
347
581
206
46.1
27.9
49.9
22.3
2/17/76 3/02/76 3/16/76 3/30/76 4/13/76
0,0141 0.0088 0.0036 0.0090 0.0093
0.0030 0.0193 0.0040 0.0053 0.0077
0,0034 0.0106 0.0045 0.0062 0.0084
0.0056 0.0149 0.0045 0.0021 0.0115
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
VJ1
TEST CELL 4/27/76 5/11/76 5/25/76
CADMIUM
SODIUM
POTASSIUM
CHLORIDE
SULFATE
ORTHOPHOSPHATE
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
0.0142 0.0046 0.002
0.0189 0.0089 0.002
0.0237 0.0136 0.006
0.0128 0.0046 0.004
264
268
470
365
330
373
650
395
741
479
536
250
274
638
316
36.9
17.5
10.2
20.1
6/08/76 6/23/76 7/06/76
0.006 0.004 0.0016
0.006 0.005 0.0055
0.003 0.007 0.0031
0.008 0.006 0.0087
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
oo
CADMIUM
SODIUM
POTASSIUM
CHLORIDE
SULFATE
ORTHOPHOSPHATE
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
7/20/76 8/03/76 8/17/76
.0056 .007 .0098
.0048 .0068 .0072
.0057 .0136 .0077
.006 .0137 .0166
224
262
445
274
300
365
625
300
150
251
572
234
232 256 52
296 261 207
602 544 501
196 53 9
14 13.9
7.4 7.1
5.2 5.1
6.5 6.5
8/31/76 9/14/76 9/28/76
.0081 .005 .0093
.004 .005 .0052
.171 .009 .0055
.0042 .006 .0135
151 1.5 198
135 1,07 202
498 53 348
142 2 96
42.3 38.5 37.4
22.6 23.2 19.1
15.7 16.2 7.5
18.8 16.5 14. 1
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
\o
CADMIUM
SODIUM
POTASSIUM
CHLORIDE
SULFATE
ORTHOPHOSPHATE
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
10/12/76 10/26/76 11/09/76 11/23/76 12/07/76
.0238 .0039 .0049 .0056
.0154 .0034 .0036 .0060
.0086 .0052 .0036 .0089
.0274 .0034 .0078 .0072
162
211
319
270
160
272
466
234
238
344
494
446
179 126 236 228
186 141 238 236
364 116 384 573
163 94 605 260
30 46 60 43
27.4 30 45.7 34
13.7 31 37.2 30.6
16 27 26.3 25
.0008
.0010
.0027
.0040
116
118
225
101
48.4
31.7
28.1
20.7
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
o\
o
TEST CELL 9/25/72 10/02/72 10/10/72 10/24/72 11/07/72 11/20/72
TOTAL PHOSPHATE
AMMONIA-N
KJELDAHL-N
N1TRATE-N
NITRITE-N
COD
BOD
2A
2B
2C
2D 11.4 6.5 4.2 3.8
2A
2B
2C
20 73 107 112 132 123 150
2A
2B
2C
2D 81 43 24 22 26 26
2A
2B
2C
2D 0.73 0.85
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
20 4594 4541 4702 5190 5869 7758
2A
2B
2C
2D
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
o\
H
TEST CELL 12/05/72 12/18/72 1/02/73 1/16/73 1/30/73 2/13/73
TOTAL PHOSPHATE
AMMONIA-N
KJELDAHL-N
NITRATE-N
NITRITE-N
COD
BOD
2A
2B
2C
2D 2.0 3.8
2A
2B
2C
2D 100 92 121 201 342 371
2A
2B
2C
2D 20 29 26 87 58 72
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D 7582 5872 5796 10840 15280 15440
2A
2B
2C
2D 3294
-------
LEACHATE .SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
ON
TEST CELL 2/27/73 3/13/73 3/27/73 4/24/73 5/08/73 5/22/73
TOTAL PHOSPHATE
AMMONIA-N
KJELDAHL-N
NITRATE-N
NITRITE-N
COD
BOD
2A
2B 101
2C
2D 5.2 18.5
2A
2B 791 798 862. 754 906
2C
2D 345 410 302 55 344 424
2A
2B 421 432 657 584
2C
2D 68 88 81 353 61 532
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B 37090 43585 47226 61600 56500
2C
2D 15000 17320 13356 17000 16100 19500
2A
2B 1645 15000
2C
2D 5750 48000
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
o\
TOTAL PHOSPHATE
AMMONIA-N
KJELDAHL-N
NITRATE-X
NTTRITE-N
COD
BOD
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
6/05/73 6/19/73
399 648
573 812
1071
475 599
453 1325
370 1458
160
105 866
32150 51375
40600 53100
21378
22525 30171
7/03/73
664
836
559
557
1256
1403
941
752
48503
50362
42757
28560
7/17/73
95
775
861
689
723
1544
1376
1281
1058
56635
56635
49018
33782
7/31/73
39.8
135
44
43
794
873
755
710
1560
1620
1429
990
57370
57370
54538
32011
8/14/73
42
64
37
875
922
845
773
1501
1467
1455
1033
56331
58247
56331
33722
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
TEST CELL 8/28/73
TOTAL PHOSPHATE
AMMONIA-N
KJELDAHL-N
NITRATE-N
NITRITE-N
COD
BOD
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
42
1800
36
35
870
920
845
850
1470
1608
1478
1086
53670
55508
69477
36660
9/11/73
28
42
27
36
877
948
744
856
1404
1568
1425
1150
51480
55380
55380
9/25/73
839
972
803
872
1348
1550
1333
1172
48726
55158
53256
37279
10/09/73
810
1001
870
703
' 1281
1523
1371
912
48891
56243
56610
33819
10/23/73
20
936
1185
977
945
1456
1897
1673
1242
41722
59040
56285
36605
11/07/73
1035
857
960
935
1262
1696
1619
1225
40608
60352
59598
41869
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
ON
TOTAL PHOSPHATE
AMMONIA-N
KJELDAHL-N
NITRATE-N
NITRITE-N
COD
BOD
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
11/20/73
843
1043
1054
947
1243
1671
1790
1214
45050
56610
61022
41171
12/04/73
821
1025
965
830
1192
1619
1654
1050
43560
55440
57960
34740
24150
31970
28520
28980
12/18/73 1/15/74
805 762
1011 983
888
896 736
1160 1060
1600 1496
1451
1135 1005
41171 40795
52934 51384
54683
37863 36456
25760
37720
33120
20240
1/29/74
728
1045
870
687
1030
1634
1455
925
38805
55020
51317
32395
2/12/74
671
949
951
782
983
1588
1690
1040
38232
53644
60760
38164
17250
30590
29440
29840
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
ON
ON
TOTAL PHOSPHATE
AMMONIA-N
KJELDAHL-N
NITRATE -N
NITRITE-N
COD
BOD
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
21)
2/26/74
655
1006
992
874
960
1593
1790
1226
34500
53432
59536
37928
3/12/74
656
1012
984
827
961
1512
1702
1107
35094
52021
61907
37574
23460
35420
34960
32200
3/26/74
632
976
986
662
910
1480
1689
889
36612
52332
64120
31468
4/09/74
608
938
897
535
930
1422
1517
744
33352
46280
51716
25648
25760
37260
34730
4/23/74
641
966
812
681
894
1380
1329
917
33660
46286
46914
30241
5/07/74
610
921
910
760
842
1331
1490
1011
32688
45380
51856
31604
23000
33580
40480
23000
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
TOTAL PHOSPHATE
AMMONIA-N
KJELDAHL-N
NITRATE-N
NITRITE-N
COD
BOD
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
5/21/74
587
880
907
820
832
1249
1534
1098
33269
44735
55037
37574
6/04/74
579
867
883
804
815
1251
1432
1046
32619
45786
54081
38112
23000
33580
36800
33580
6/18/74
589
851
907
877
796
1079
1537
1074
31940
42854
54607
39877
7/02/74
546
868
718
590
783
1075
1170
893
31164
45215
43223
28766
62560
72220
74980
79120
7/16/74
511
775
782
571
722
1065
1259
730
29288
39496
46736
28436
7/30/74
497
767
806
692
659
1053
858
858
28508
39814
48215
33617
29900
34500
43240
28520
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
00
TOTAL PHOSPHATE
AMMONIA-N
KJELDAHL-N
NITRATE-N
NITRITE-N
COD
BOD
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
8/13/74
N.A.
470
756
825
111
639
1025
1330
1046
N.A.
27334
38875
48988
36054
N.A.
8/27/74
482
741
871
784
585
978
1346
1013
27036
36902
50618
35487
50600
52900
58420
60260
9/10/74
31
10
17.9
33
441
668
841
539
562
752
1414
728
12.3
28.3
48
11
0.075
0.05
0.076
0.06
26410
36680
52086
26520
36340
41860
51980
36800
9/24/74
458
704
911
538
652
955
1430
697
25
18
183
13
0.238
0.070
0.230
0.055
27764
36744
52128
26064
25300
29140
29440
15640
10/08/74
460
700
912
617
674
870
1467
801
27727
35887
52612
29903
10/22/74
475
705
937
599
624
902
1408
733
33.83
2.66
26.7
20
0.14
0.09
0.154
0.11
27984
35476
54348
29792
17940
22080
36800
28520
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
ON
\o
TOTAL PHOSPHATE
AMMONIA-N
KJELDAHL-N
NITRATE-N
NITRITE-N
COD
BOD
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
11/05/74
458
692
930
641
604
917
1434
798
27230
34860
54285
31885
11/19/74
466
689
912
694
596
920
1446
905
28.13
25.2
181.3
32.4
0.005
0.0045
0.020
0.004
26668
32973
53175
33247
11040
17020
31280
23920
12/03/74
433
675
970
495
603
901
1461
579
26714
33744
54131
23199
12/17/74
28
9.6
21.6
34
462
678
909
403
590
894
1411
1411
1.50
9.50
13.50
5.0
28
0.045
0.027
0.027
28656
36072
53856
23040
14720
20010
23000
1/14/75
486
741
809
434
641
954
1203
455
9.0
16.68
18.65
7.43
0.028
0.034
0.069
0.021
27086
35467
46888
20797
15410
20010
28750
24840
1/28/75
458
738
971
446
607
947
1425
554
28694
36483
54041
21847
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
^J
o
TOTAL PHOSPHATE
AMMONIA-N
KJELDAHL-N
NITRATE-N
NITRITE-N
COD
BOD
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2/11/75
515
742
929
470
614
969
1437
601
4
1.9
16.58
6
.005
.003
.006
.004
25245
32736
48444
21450
19550
24150
32660
26330
2/25/75
432
687
307
261
576
893
482
381
23550
31824
16099
16287
3/11/75
24.7
8.1
9.5
26.4
455
729
668
393
611
955
1048
511
147
11.4
10.7
6.4
.007
.011
.028
.016
27342
35601
21576
19090
26680
27600
28290
3/25/75
345
625
373
251
495
787
567
304
25168
32936
22948
15179
4/08/75
346
578
526
380
447
772
693
541
9.9
12.8
18.7
9.9
.053
.068
.108
.228
22681
29409
38114
18485
26312
40480
39560
4/22/75
321
468
543
423
415
739
830
551
23500
31207
33621
23330
32591
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
H
TOTAL PHOSPHATE
AMMONIA-N
KJELDAHL-N
NITRATE-N
NITRITE-N
COD
BOD
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
5/06/75
314
509.5
545.5
351
434
664
711
408
13.75
19
27
9.25
0.021
0.020
0.0235
0.050
20444
28037.5
31199
18039
38980
36065
36055
37355
5/20/75
268
518
587
341
350
658
858
462
9.10
11.5
23.4
11.8
0.021
0.013
0.035
0.058
20992
26823
35153
20692
6/03/75 '
306
466
589
352
434
639
866
434
11.6
11.3
22.0
7.9
.020
.017
.026
.041
23134
27864
35543
18792
6/17/75
62.6
35.0
19.1
32.6
297
436
436
232
398
565
691
276
7.3
6.2
9.9
3.6
62,6
35.0
19.6
32.6
25818
34437
34040
40514
28600
34850
42850
44200
7/01/75
244
392
362
261
365
504
514
305
5.7
4.1
7.5
2.9
0.020
0.018
0.023
0.023
22401
25713
28635
17142
15833
26750
39000
19250
7/15/75
228
412
394
340
348
654
605
412
9.8
11.9
9.3
10.1
0.018
0.028
0.013
0.033
22491
26951
27065
18449
27250
31100
53950
26250
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
H
TOTAL PHOSPHATE
AMMONIA -N
KJELDAHL-N
NITRATE-N
NITRITE-N
COD
BOD
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
7/29/75
206
363
413
383
279
532
627
488
3.5
3.7
5.5
6.0
0.015
0.018
0.025
0.033
12732
24660
23719
23718
N.V.
N.V.
N.V.
N.V.
8/12/75
204
395
487
402
286
470
660
474
4.75
7.75
10.40
7.6
0.010
0.008
0.012
0.018
18870
21450
28118
20740
27500
29400
31050
36900
8/26/75
236
397
516
341
294
546
710
410
2.8
4.2
4.9
3.9
0.010
0.008
0.005
0.013
17344
23061
29882
16890
19800
28400
26600
22550
9/09/75
238
387
532
379
401
869
818
486
2.2
3.3
8.7
7.5
0.006
0.017
0.010
0.009
17131
21674
31356
26722
18051
20394
27192
27489
9/23/75
43.5
20.0
18.5
26.5
283
426
600
396
344
430
806
469
12.0
8.0
3.0
9.0
0.024
0.030
0.046
0.034
9752
10752
22360
28326
30333
32274
36960
40722
10/07/75
670
398
600
392
376
492
835
501
3.33
2.78
21785
25682
32294
23177
19250
22250
27250
28750
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
TEST CELL
TOTAL PHOSPHATE
2A
2B
2C
2D
AMMONIA-N
2A
2B
2C
2D
KJELDAHL-N
2A
2B
2C
H 2D
C5 NITRATE-N
2A
* Plus Nitrite-N 2B
2C
2D
NITRITE-N
2A
2B
2C
2D
COD
2A
2B
2C
2D
BOD
2A
2B
2C
2D
10/21/75
230
381
369
87.4
248
453
529
113
4.30
2.70
3.50
7.20
19150
20683
31020
5948
25750
29500
31750
24000
11/04/75
205
346
611
258
336
434
819
327
.095
0.3
0.3
0.5
0.3
0.3
18126
19426
25950
34833
11/18/75
259
340
612
355
336
422
855
524
.79
2.31
.44
1.55
18390
19347
35649
26764
34000
44000
26500
41750
12/02/75
271
375
660
371
342
433
863
416
6.22
5.45
5.43
3.88
18139
20016
34843
24594
12/16/75
224
338
522
344
322
431
713
394
4.73*
4.86*
4.04*
2.40*
17578
20092
30796
21804
26750
29750
48250
31750
1/02/76
266
417.1
576.7
231.6
306.5
508.6
787.4
305.4
4,10*
6.70*
11.30*
3.60*
17677
23307
34522
14431
29750
29750
38250
26000
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
-p-
TOTAL PHOSPHATE
AMMONIA-N
KJELDAHL-N
NITRATE-N
* Plus Nitrite-N
NITRITE-N
COD
BOD
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2/03/76 2/17/76 3/02/76 3/16/76 3/30/76
295
424
582
257
317.1 348 390.4 379 386
504.4 500 528.1 510 495
815 844 790.7 843 857
518.2 368 315.7 805 409
.53*
1.10*
2.40*
2.05*
21915 21166 20875 21695 19897
24189 24762 22795 23508 21420
34746 38677 31121 37209 37128
15208 19241 9059 16473 16565
4/13/76
385
508
891
450
19758
21663
36987
34752
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
-o
TEST CELL 4/27/76 5/11/76 5/25/70 6/08/76 6/23/76
TOTAL PHOSPHATE
AMMONIA-N
KJELDAHL-N
NITRATE-N
* Plus Nitrite-N
NITRITE-N
COD
BOD
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
37.0
16.7
13.8
19.3
318
441
670
397
394 167 392 382 242
476 206 466 495 502
910 896 730 564 678
469 474 339 332 324
2.4*
3.7*
N.A.
2.2*
23051 19236 20504 18192 21902
23585 21341 22391 20697 23676
39872 37610 36360 26200 29988
21360 21925 17964 14208 16863
2000
> 10000
8000
> 10000
7/06/76
366.4
468.8
246.0
221.3
19701
21312
28903
13338
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
ON
TEST CELL 7/20/76
TOTAL PHOSPHATE
AMMONIA-N
KJELDAHL-N
NITRATE-N
*Plus Nitrite-N
NITRITE-N
COD
BOD
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
320
439
301
406
526
708
356
18654
20542
30520
16586
8/03/76
7.0
5.2
6.0
271
398
560
284
358
455
728
321
4.15*
2.36*
2.90*
7.25*
21315
32534
31972
24017
10000
8000
8650
16000
8/17/76
12.9
289
373
554
324
360
394
732
380
22402
21402
30493
18792
8104
8/31/76
272
380
566
370
346
449
774
397
25533
31304
34124
20769
9/14/76
289
380
588
324
329
384
790
370
23357
22741
33578
19868
9/28/76
298
372
412
212
369
392
522
244
17617
20619
23226
15484
-------
LEACHATE SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS
-o
TOTAL PHOSPHATE
AMMONIA-N
KJELDAHL-N
NITRATE-N
* Plus Nitrite-N
NITRITE-N
COD
BOD
TEST CELL
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
2A
2B
2C
2D
10/12/76
262
354
432
272
363
432
584
332
20570
20300
27560
18400
10/26/76
288
404
425
271
376
473
496
310
22192
23180
23674
16598
11/09/76
261
354
390
556
356
448
529
307
25320
33840
28400
35940
11/23/76
45.6
32.5
31.2
21.6
272
382
454
326
357
459
573
372
2.22*
1.12*
1.20*
0.98*
21925
23345
30525
21260
17000
16000
17750
18000
12/07/76
300
384
490
348
363
486
640
409
22229
23208
31563
21477
-------
APPENDIX D
GAS MTA - TEST CELLS 2 - METHANE (CH )a-
4
Sample Date
Probe Location
8-28-72
9-11-72
9-18-72
9-25-72
10-2-72
10-10-72
10-16-72
10-24-72
11-7-72
11-21-72
12-4-72
12-13-72
1-2-73
1-16-73
1-30-73
2-13-73
2-27-73
3-13-73
3-27-73
4-10-73
4-24-73
5-8-73
5-22-73
6-5-73
Ale
0.20
0.20
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0,01
Blc
0.20
0.00
0.04
0.07
0.18
0.18
0.20
0.10
0.02
0.04
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
Clc
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.10
0.01
0.02
0.01
0.01
Dlb
0.02
0.06
0.07
0.07
0.06
0.06
0.07
0.07
0.11
0.15
0.18
0.14
0.13
0.12
0.18
0.20
0.19
0.25
0,29
0.60
0.83
Did
0.08
0.14
0.08
0.08
0.11
0.14
0.16
0.08
0.09
0.14
0.13
0.08
0.06
0.17
0.18
0.16
0.12
0.29
0.18
0.25
0.17
0.26
D4b
0.04
0.09
0.09
0.09
0.08
0.09
0.10
0.09
0.11
0.13
0.13
0.09
0.08
0.11
0.13
0.15
0.19
0.20
0,25
0.25
0.25
0.33
0.40
D4d
0.04
0.07
0.01
A7c
B7c
0.01
0.04
0.05
0.07
0.09
0.14
0.16
0.18
0.17
0.13
0.12
0.09
0.08
0.08
0.07
0.07
0.09
0.12
0.22
0.29
0.10
0.08
C7c
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.03
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.07
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
6-5-73 to
10-15-73 No Gas Samples Taken
CO
a. All values in % by volume
-------
GAS DATA - TEST CELLS 2 - METHANE (CH )a<
4
Probe Location
11-13-73
12-10-73
1-14-74
2-4-74
3-4-74
4-8-74
4-29-74
7-2-74
8-6-74
9-2-74
10-1-74
11-11-74
12-11-74
1-21-75
4-15-75
5-11-75
6-9-75
7-8-75
11-10-75
2-9-10-76
4-11-76
7-12-76
9-21-76
11-16-76
Ale
_
1.7
3.1
3.8
7.0
_
0.0
-
AIT 1 -_
Blc
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.74
0.6
2.4
-
0.5
0.7
2.1
1.1
2.5
3.9
4.2
Clc
1.1
0.0
0.0
0.04
0.0
4.6
0.43
1.2
-
2.9
2.3
14.7
3.5
2.6
5.6
2.9
Dlb
2.7
1.6
4.3
0.0
11.7
-
0.0
0.0
0.0
_
-
-
-
"
Did
17.3
26.9
49.5
5.2
14.6
25.4
30.5
45.5
10.6
28.2
47.2
27.5
D4b
5.2
6.3
10.0
22.3
8.8
11.8
8.2
0.0
36.9
0.0
6.6
29.4
13.4
D4d
18.0
-
-
-
_
-
-
15.8
4.1
14.3
22.9
28.7
41.5
9.6
34.0
45.9
21.9
A7c
0.1
0.0
0.0
-
-
-
-
_
-
-
-
-
-
-
_
-
-
-
"
B7c
0.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.73
0.0
1.5
1.4
-
0.4
5.3
2.5
2.5
4.5
6.4
C7c
0.3
0.0
0.5
1.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.1
-
-
-
9.7
5.3
2.4
3.8
3.8
H
-------
GAS DATA - TEST CELLS 2 - CARBON DIOXIDE (COj
a.
Sample Date
Probe Location
8-28-72
9-11-72
9-18-72
9-25-72
10-2-72
10-10-72
10-16-72
10-24-72
11-7-72
11-21-72
12-4-72
12-18-72
1-2-73
1-16-73
1-30-73
2-13-73
2-27-73
3-13-73
3-27-73
4-10-73
4-24-73
5-8-73
5-22-73
6-6-73
Ale
26.91
29.79
28.79
30.97
46.16
52.21
54.80
51.98
29.99
35.31
33.55
35.66
35.61
35.35
36.22
29.89
36.18
10.66
20.13
Blc
17.30
17.07
18.98
24.64
46.64
48.31
43.64
33.26
39.85
34.36
33.02
38.78
37.19
40.66
40.36
25.57
33.87
Clc
1.00
31.87
30.14
32.94
53.50
53.61
57.58
48.39
49.10
48.65
51.48
48.80
51.70
28.88
32.97
38.57
35.87
35.75
47.69
43.66
28.17
39.88
Dlb
32.81
36.29
36.30
36.53
39.49
49.00
53.92
54.31
54.04
57.70
61.85
61.89
67.97
70.96
68.49
66.89
68.08
67.52
67.24
63.35
57.54
Did
35.50
37.02
32,02
32.90
40.34
47.33
49.85
54.94
53.05
60.68
45.62
49.20
40.62
49.51
43.97
45.77
50.63
54.97
54.68
59.61
59.20
63.74
6-10 to
D4b
33.27
38.09
38.94
39.35
37.79
48.05
51.07
54.86
54.44
57.21
62.20
66.15
68.04
66.06
62.97
63.43
62.88
60.72
63.52
65.33
54.43
68.32
69.92
D4d
30.40
44.34
38.46
-
-
A7c
-
B7c
28.12
26.40
28.66
29.82
33.93
41.63
44.76
47.37
48.45
52.44
54.92
58.03
61.0
62.80
62.75
63.46
62.33
62.92
62.65
62.12
53.00
52.63
C7c
33.92
37.87
39.75
39.98
39.96
38.80
47.78
51.42
54.57
45.16
56.10
54.03
59.25
61.17
47.84
53.86
51.51
54.55
55.97
56.08
56.72
54.30
55.48
10-15-73 No Gas Samples Taken
All values in % by volume
-------
GAS DATA - TEST CELLS 2 - CARBON DIOXIDE (CO )a-
Sample Date
Probe Location
10-15-73
11-13-73
12-10-73
1-14-74
2-4-74
3-4-74
4-8-74
4-29-74
7-2-74
8-6-74
9-2-74
10-1-74
11-11-74
12-11-74
1-21-75
4-15-75
5-14-75
6-9-75
7-8-75
11-10-75
2-9-10-76
4-11-76
7-12-76
9-21-76
11-16-76
Ale
-
39.5
27.7
41.0
45.9
-
-
-
Blc
36.4
42,7
37.7
47.51
46.72
62.0
32.2
27.1
30.3
39.8
22.5
30.9
34,4
35.1
35,4
Glc
33.6
69.1
52.6
55.4
57.75
67.06
80.7
58.7
68.42
34.7
41.3
49.8
52.3
30.6
46.1
50.0
51.9
44.3
Dlb
54.9
43,1
42.2
49.1
-
-
_
-
-
-
-
Did
37.6
75.9
64.6
41.2
28.8
32.1
40.7
52.2
27.4
32.6
45.0
43.0
37.6
D4b
70.4
63.9
65.1
50.8
51.9
41.6
43.4
-
29.6
-
23.7
38.3
26.7
D4d
42.0
72.8
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
23,7
22.6
30.3
39.5
48.6
26.3
31.3
44.3
40.9
33.6
A7c
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
_
-
-
-
-
B7c
65.7
83.8
68.3
59.3
50.9
49.36
77.79
53.31
0.5
52.0
44.6
49.5
57.4
32.2
55.2
29.7
43.0
46.2
C7c
77.4
65.5
78.8
64.5
71.4
57,75
77.79
67.4
70.4
71.33
55.4
59.7
59.7
57.6
35.4
68.6
54.9
47.7
53.3
co
a. All values In % by volume
-------
GAS DATA - TEST CELLS 2 - OXYGEN (0 )a>
Sample Date
Probe Location
8-28-72
9-11-72
9-18-72
9-25-72
10-2-72
10-10-72
10-16-72
10-24-72
11-7-72
11-22-72
12-4-72
12-18-72
1-2-73
1-16-73
1-30-73
2-13-73
2-27-73
3-13-73
3-27-73
4-10-73
4-24-73
5-8-73
5-22-73
6-5-73
Ale
2.25
1.92
2.12
2.03
0.87
1.12
0.85
1.32
1.43
1.56
1.68
1.63
1.49
1.55
1.58
5.69
3.14
3.99
2.13
Blc
3.91
2.94
3.50
2.26
1.22
1.72
2.10
1.17
3.03
3.66
5.90
2.73
3.08
1.96
2.69
2.67
2.45
Clc
18.71
1.69
2.70
1.67
2.05
1.09
1.32
0.62
2.07
1.60
1.82
1.21
2.40
1.35
3.20
1.12
1.45
1.07
2.46
3.35
0.88
2.44
3.36
2.36
Dlb
2.18
1.15
1.48
1.07
1.12
1.28
0.68
0.76
0.86
0.56
0.60
0.89
0.42
0.24
0.53
0.29
0.61
0.35
0.78
3.60
6.09
Did
1.12
1.19
2.96
2.12
1.36
1.51
1.82
1.04
1.16
0.72
1.49
1.61
2.06
0.77
0.73
1.02
0.81
0.87
0.78
D4b
3.26
1.64
1.32
0.98
1.30
0.67
0.71
0.68
0.69
0.59
0.50
0.71
0.37
0.56
0.47
0.63
0.50
0.81
0.80
0.67
2.27
0.57
0.51
D4d
3.24
-
6-5-73 to
A7c
_
_
B7c
3.21
2.02
2.13
2.33
2.10
1.42
1.77
1.56
1.62
0.83
1.04
0.92
0.87
0.92
0.78
0.79
0.91
1.09
1.36
1.23
1.23
1.10
C7c
1.89
1.43
1.35
1.05
1.34
2.67
1.02
1.13
1.00
2.67
0.89
1.27
0.61
0.74
2.69
1.22
0.83
0.96
0.63
1.03
0.84
1.16
0.89
0.83
10-15-73 No Gas Samples Taken
co
a. All values in % by volume
-------
GAS DATA - TEST CELLS 2 - OXYGEN,(0 )a-
Probe Location
10-15-73
11-13-73
12-10-73
1-14-74
2-4-74
3-4-74
4-8-74
4-29-74
7-2-74
8-6-74
9-2-74
10-1-74
11-11-74
12-11-74
1-21-75
4-15-75
5-11-75
6-9-75
7-8-75
11-10-75
2-9-10-76
4-11-76
7-12-76
9-21-76
11-16-76
Ale
-
0.6
1.1
1.2
1.4
_
-
_
Blc
3.2
2.9
2.5
4.67
4.28
3.9
2.8
4.4
2.5
4.1
3.6
4.0
3.4
2.5
1.7
Clc
1.7
2.2
2.4
1.3
2.51
1.71
1.5
0.5
2.04
1.1
1.5
1.0
0.6
0.9
1.0
1.0
0.5
0.6
Dlb
5.7
9.6
8.7
13.7
-
-
-
-
_
-
-
-
-
Did
3.2
0.4
0.6
1.1
1.0
0.9
0.6
0.1
0.8
-
-
0.4
0.4
D4b
1.4
3.6
4.4
0.7
1.6
0.9
0.9
-
2.3
-
10.8
2.0
9.3
D4d
1.3
0.9
-
-
-
-
5.0
1.1
1.2
1.0
0.2
0.9
0.9
0.4
0.1
0.5
A7c
-
_
-
19.4
21.4
19.9
-
B7c
3.8
0.3
1.5
3.9
1.9
4.48
1.28
4.89
3.4
1.4
1.6
0.9
0.5
0.9
0.8
2.6
0.9
0.5
Clc
2.1
2.0
2.4
3.8
2.8
3.05
2.35
3.5
2.8
4.32
1.1
1.5
1.2
0.4
1.9
0.9
1.5
0.4
1.2
CO
a. All valu-s in % by volume
-------
GAS DATA - TEST CELLS 2 - NITROGEN (N )a.
2
Sample Date P
8-28-72
9-11-72
9-18-72
9-25-72
10-2-72
10-10-72
10-16-72
10-24-72
11-7-72
11-22-72
12-4-72
12-18-72
1-2-73
1-16-73
1-30-73
2-13-73
2-27-73
3-13-73
3-27-73
4-10-73
4-24-73
5-8-73
5-22-73
6-5-73
Ale
61.74
61.56
62.04
60o37
43.12
37.35
36.38
39.80
62.60
57,92
57.33
56.74
54.82
55.99
54.27
5 7 . 84
52.81
80.84
69.90
Blc
71.62
75.20
71.56
66.47
46,16
44,62
48.86
55.22
52.39
56,61
57.49
52.74
54.08
49.98
50.69
65.99
56.69
Clc
76.58
59.34
60.47
58.78
45.56
35.33
35.91
33.38
43.37
41.42
44.11
39.13
42.59
41.22
69.04
62.39
59.96
52.47
54.87
54.67
43.77
45.54
61.88
48,26
Dlb
53.86
54.11
55.09
55.34
49.44
42.48
39.88
39.21
39.50
36.23
34.15
29,19
25.30
23.44
25.02
25.95
25.73
23.77
22.69
20.59
25.74
robe Location
Did
52.13
53.25
57.42
57.13
48,39
42.06
41,41
37.97
39.81
33.23
46.98
43.33
52.62
44.09
49.22
45.40
41.51
38.16
36.17
32.44
32,82
27.88
D4b
52,00
51.47
51.52
52.62
51.54
43.42
41.84
39.04
39.07
36.27
33.93
27.10
26,17
27.31
29.69
30.19
29.54
31.26
28.35
25.21
35.30
22.84
20.25
D4d
54.60
44.87
49.90
-
-
A7c
63.27
-
-
B7c
58.71
63.57
61.85
61.58
55.35
48.87
47.08
44.07
42.44
40.01
39.15
34.13
32.55
31.26
29.92
29.41
29.16
29.40
29.03
29.06
38.32
37.17
C7c
54.43
52.57
51.63
52.71
50.14
49.53
41.98
38.81
35.81
44.40
35.53
33.80
31.50
31.36
45.11
43.53
40.88
39.34
36.92
34.52
32.89
32.12
35.31
34.17
6-5-73 to
10-15-73
No Gas Samples Taken
a. All values in % by volume
-------
GAS DATA - TEST CELLS 2 - NITROGEN (N )a<
Sample Date
Probe Location
10-15-73
11-13-73
12-10-73
1-14-74
2-4-74
3-4-74
4-8-74
4-29=74
7-2-74
8-6-74
9-2-74
10-1=74
11-11=74
12-11=74
1-21=75
4-15-75
5-14-75
6-9-75
7-8-75
11-10-75
2-9-10-75
4-11=76
7-12-76
9-21-76
11-16-76
Ale
-
63.6
64.1
50,6
48.3
-
-
-
-
Blc
58.0
53.5
54.0
51.00
48.46
48.7
66.2
68.2
56.0
59.5
60.8
68.0
64.0
54.4
56.9
Clc
10.6
22.7
46.2
42.8
36.40
32.16
26,9
25.2
28.37
64.5
60.5
47.9
44.7
42.8
53.4
51.0
37.4
49.4
Dlb
20.2
35.9
32.7
25.5
-
-
-
_
-
-
-
-
Did
13.9
5.9
11.8
8.8
69.4
53.0
36.5
21.5
29.0
58.3
22.4
8.7
35.2
D4b
9.6
21.7
29.9
11.5
40.7
40.4
45.9
-
25.9
-
59.0
27.0
46.4
D4d
6.9
8.1
-
-
-
-
-
-
56.5
73.2
53.5
37.9
20.3
34.9
61.5
24.3
10.6
46.1
A7c
77.5
77.1
77.0
75.4
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
76.8
81.5
77.2
_
-
-
-
B7c
27.0
12.4
35.1
43.3
43.0
42.24
30.28
43.40
44.2
45.9
50.7
44.7
48.3
43.1
50.9
70.4
44.6
44.4
C7c
7.4
15.0
23.3
30.1
25.1
26.42
26.32
23.3
24.7
30.16
44.2
43.6
41.2
42.3
32.6
34.8
44.9
31.1
34. Q
CO
a.
All values in % by volume
-------
Month
APPENDIX E
MEAN MONTHLY TEST CELL TEMPERATURE3a-
Probe Location
8-72
9-72
10-72
11-72
12-72
1-73
2-73
3-73
4-73
5-73
6-73
7-73
8-73
9-73
10-73
11-73
12-73
4-74
5-74
6-74
7-74
8-74
9-74
10-74
11-74
12-74
Dla
91.7
79.9
67.3
48.5
44.0
40.8
39.5
45.3
51.5
53.5
62.5
78.0
75.0
66.0
47.0
54.5
62.4
70.9
73.8
78.1
75.8
65.8
63.0
45.8
Dlb
110.5
96.8
79.9
58.0
51.0
45.4
41.2
44.0
48.3
53.2
61.2
-
79.0
65.0
38.0
53.0
61.7
69.0
71.6
80.1
78.5
71.5
67.5
51.5
Die
106.7
91.8
76.0
54.5
47.5
41.5
38.9
43.5
48.5
54.5
63.7
-
80.0
62.0
47.0
54.0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
49.0
Did
106.2
93.1
76.0
55.0
48.5
42.1
39.3
43.4
48.2
54.0
63.0
-
80.0
64.0
48.0
53.5
62.3
70.3
74.0
80.8
79.3
70.8
67.0
49.8
Ale
103.5
77.2
66.9
48.0
44.0
40.0
38.8
42.0
45.1
51.3
59.8
72.0
70.0
66.0
48.0
50.5
57.0
64.6
67.6
72.8
72.5
65.3
62.5
48.0
Blc
106.4
78.3
66.0
48.0
43.5
40.0
38.5
42.5
45.5
51.0
58.5
68.0
70.0
65.5
50.5
56.6
65.6
67.8
72.9
71.7
64.3
62.0
60.3
Ble
87.7
73.9
62.3
45.0
42.5
39.6
37.8
43.5
45.9
50.9
58.8
70.0
68.0
65.0
_
52.5
58.6
65.6
68.8
72.5
71.0
63.0
60.5
47.8
Clc
92.4
76.8
66.7
47.5
43.0
40.3
38.8
41.8
45.3
50.3
59.3
70.0
_
66.0
_
50.0
56.6
64.4
68.0
71.9
72.0
64.5
61.5
48.0
Zl
71.6
69.8
60.4
48.5
44.5
39.7
37.6
43.5
46.2
49.5
59.0
70.0
71.0
62.0
_
53.0
61.3
69.1
73.2
75.3
70.7
61.0
58.5
43.8
oo
o\
a. All values in degrees Fahrenheit
-------
MEM MONTHLY TEST CELL TEMPERATURES
Month
Probe Location
1-75
2-75
3-75
4-75
5-75
6-75
7-75
8-75
9-75
10-75
11-75
12-75
1-76
2-76
3-76
4-76
5-76
6-76
7-76
8-76
9-76
10-76
11-76
12-76
Dla
44.0
44.7
45.5
52.0
63.7
70.3
77.4
79.3
78.0
68.8
61.0
53.4
42.6
43.3
50.3
56.4
62.8
69.0
76.0
76.0
74.5
65.5
53.3
47.8
Dlb
48.3
46.7
47.5
52.2
62.0
68.0
79.4
83.0
83.3
74.8
67.3
58.4
47.8
44.5
53.3
55.6
60.8
67.0
77.0
80.0
77.3
69.0
58.0
53.0
Die
47.3
46.3
46.5
52.4
64.3
70.7
82.2
85.8
84.5
73.0
65.3
56.6
45.6
43.8
51.0
56.8
61.8
68.7
80.0
82.5
78.3
68.5
55.8
48.8
Did
47.7
46.3
46.3
51.6
61.7
68.7
79.8
83.0
82.7
73.8
65.5
57.0
46.2
43.3
51.0
56.0
61.8
68.0
78.0
80.0
78.0
68.8
56.5
49.8
Ale
45.7
44.0
44.8
48.4
57.3
66.0
71.0
73.3
74.0
67.4
61.3
54.8
45.0
42.0
48.5
53.0
58.8
65.3
69.5
71.5
72.0
65.8
55.3
49.3
Blc
46.0
44.7
44.5
48.2
57.3
66.0
71.2
73.0
73.0
66.2
60.3
54.2
45.0
42.3
48.3
52.8
58.5
64.0
69.5
71.0
71.0
64.5
54.0
48.5
Ble
45.3
45.3
44.8
49.2
59.3
63.3
71.2
73.0
72.3
65.4
59.5
53.0
44.2
43.3
49.0
53.2
59.0
64.3
69.8
70.0
69.8
63.0
53.5
48.0
Clc
45.7
44.3
44.3
47.4
56.0
63.0
70.0
72.5
73.0
66.6
60.8
54.8
47.2
42.0
47.5
51.4
57.3
62.7
68.5
70.0
70.3
65.0
55.8
49.3
Zl
43.0
45.0
44.3
50.8
65.0
68.3
76.3
77.8
73.0
65.2
56.0
48.0
39.2
42.0
49.3
55.8
63.5
68.0
75.3
74.5
72.0
61.8
48.8
42.8
co
a. All values in degrees Fahrenheit
-------
MEAN MONTHLY TEST CELL TEMPERATURES,
a.
Month
Probe Location
8-72
9-72
10-72
11-72
12-72
1-73
2-73
3-73
4-73
5-73
6-73
7-73
8-73
9-73
10-73
11-73
12-73
4-74
5-74
6-74
7-74
8-74
9-74
10-74
11-74
12-74
D4a
90.1
77.7
71.7
58.0
53.5
48.5
46.2
45.8
50.7
50.5
54.0
55.0
68.0
68.5
39.0
51,0
54.7
60.3
63.2
67.6
70.7
67.0
64.5
54.3
D4b
116.4
101.7
86.0
71.0
65.5
57.0
51.8
49.7
50.2
51.3
53.0
54.0
71.0
71.5
48.0
52.5
55.0
58.9
61.2
65.8
69.2
67.8
68.0
61.5
D4c
113.5
102.0
87.7
71.5
66.5
57.2
51.8
49.5
50.5
51.7
54.0
55.0
71.0
71.5
42.0
52.5
55.1
59.0
61.2
65.8
68.5
68.8
68.0
61.8
D4d
113.8
99.9
85.3
69.5
65.0
55.9
50.9
48.4
49.4
51.0
54.3
54.7
73.0
73.0
34.0
52.5
55.0
58.9
61.8
65.9
69.3
69.0
67.5
61.3
A4c
89.8
74.2
68.0
54.0
50.5
46.2
40.8
43.0
45.4
48.8
53.3
54.5
69.0
68.0
42.0
49.0
52.7
59.1
62.2
66.5
69.0
66.3
64.0
54.3
B4c
87.6
73.8
68.1
58.0
53.5
48.0
44.8
43.7
45.8
47.5
50.8
52.0
68.0
68.0
-
49.5
52.0
57.4
60.8
64.6
66.7
65.8
63.5
56.5
B4e
85.2
73.1
64.0
49.5
46.0
41.6
39.6
43.0
45.8
49.6
56.2
58.9
68.0
65.5
-
50.5
55.9
62.4
65.2
70.1
70.5
63.8
61.5
49.5
C4c
87.2
73.7
67.3
53.0
50.0
45.9
46.2
43.0
45.8
48.3
53.8
55.0
68.0
68.0
-
49.0
52.4
58.6
62.0
66.9
68.3
65.8
63.5
54.3
Z4
67.0
67.1
63.7
55.0
52.0
46.0
45.5
43.8
45.8
49.0
58.5
62.5
70.0
63.5
-
55.0
60.6
58.9
72.6
74.9
71.2
-
-
-
co
co
a. All values in degrees Fahrenheit
-------
MEAN MONTHLY TEST CELL TEMPERATURESa<
Month Probe :
1-75
2-75
3-75
4-75
5-75
6-75
7-75
8-75
9-75
10-75
11-75
12-75
1-76
2-76
3-76
4-76
5-76
6-76
7-76
8-76
9-76
10-76
11-76
12-76
D4a
51.7
49.0
49.3
50.4
54,3
62.3
65.4
68.5
70.3
68,0
64.5
60.6
52,2
48.0
50,3
52,8
57.3
60,0
65.0
66.5
68.8
67.0
61.8
58.0
D4b
57.7
55.3
54,0
52,8
53.7
57,0
62,4
66.7
70,3
70.8
66.8
65.2
59.2
54.8
53,5
54.0
56,3
57.3
62,5
65,5
68.8
69.0
65.3
61.5
D4c
52,7
56.0
54.5
53.2
54.3
56.7
62.0
66.8
70.0
70.6
68.0
65.8
59.6
55.5
54.3
54.8
56.8
57.7
62.3
65.5
68.5
68.3
65.3
61.8
D4d
57.7
55.3
53,3
51.8
53.7
56.7
62.8
67.0
70.3
70.8
67.8
65.2
59.4
54.5
53.3
54.4
56.5
58.3
62.8
65.5
69.3
69.0
65.3
61.5
vocation
A4c
51.0
48.0
46.5
48.2
52.3
57.3
64.0
66.3
69.8
67.6
63.8
60.0
52.0
46.8
48.3
51,2
55.5
57.7
63.5
65.6
68.0
67.3
61.5
56.3
B4c
52.7
49.7
48.5
48.0
51,0
55.7
63.4
65.3
67.8
66.8
63.5
60,8
54.0
48.8
49,0
51.8
54.5
56.3
61.3
63.5
66.3
66.0
62,0
57.3
B4e
47.0
46.0
46.8
48.4
56.0
62.3
68.2
70,8
70.8
65,8
60.3
55.0
46.7
44.0
48.5
52.2
57.0
62.3
68.5
68,5
69.0
64.8
56.0
51.0
C4c
50.7
48.3
48.0
48.0
51.7
56.3
63.0
66.8
68.7
66.8
63.3
59.8
52.2
47.3
48.3
50.6
54.5
57.0
62.5
64.5
67.3
66,5
61.0
55,3
Z4
-
-
-
-
-
-
_
-
-
55.8
60.5
66.0
_
_
_
_
co
MD
a. All values in degrees Fahrenheit
-------
MEAN MONTHLY TEST CELL TEMPERATURESa<
Month
Probe Location
8-72
9-72
10-72
11-72
12-72
1-73
2-73
3-73
4-73
5-73
6-73
7-73
8-73
9-73
10-73
11-73
12-73
4-74
5-74
6-74
7-74
8-74
9-74
10-74
11-74
12-74
D7a
75.5
70.1
68.4
59.5
57.5
52.5
49.9
48.0
49.7
50.3
51.5
63.0
64.0
65.5
40.0
51.5
53.6
57.3
59.0
61.9
64.8
64.5
63.5
57.8
D7b
97.8
81.4
73.7
66.5
62.0
59.5
56.2
53.5
5?.. 6
51.9
52.0
63.0
63.0
67.0
47.0
53.0
54.3
55.4
57.4
59.9
62.7
64.5
65.0
62.3
D7c
99.8
84.9
76.4
68.0
65.5
60.4
56.5
54.0
53.2
52.7
51.3
62.0
64.0
66.5
38.0
54.0
55.5
56.4
57.6
60.3
63.8
64.5
65.5
63.0
D7d
99.1
82.0
74.1
66.5
64.5
59.6
56.2
53.4
52.6
52.3
52.4
62.0
64.0
66.0
34.0
54.0
55.1
56.4
57.6
60.4
62.8
64.5
65.0
62.5
A7c
81.4
68.4
65.6
55.5
54.0
50,0
47.3
45.6
47.0
48.2
51.5
68.0
64.0
65.5
43.0
50.5
52.6
56.6
59.2
62,5
65.3
64.8
63.5
57.5
B7c
76.4
68.0
65.4
58.5
55.5
51.4
48.4
46.5
47.2
48.3
50.3
60.0
63.0
66.0
40.0
52.0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
B7e
73.1
69.0
65.9
57.0
54.0
49.1
45.9
45.0
46.2
48.0
50.8
64.0
65.0
66.0
-
50.0
52.9
56.9
60.0
63.3
67.0
65.0
62.5
56.8
C7c
78.5
68.1
65.3
54.5
53.5
49.6
44.6
45.8
47.5
48.5
54.0
68.0
50.0
65.5
_
50.0
52.6
56.0
58.6
62.9
65.2
64.5
63.0
57.0
Z7
64.1
63.9
63.2
58.0
56.0
51.0
47.4
45.9
47.0
48.0
-
70.0
-
62.5
_
-
61.0
-
61.0
-
-
-
-
-
vo
o
a. All values in degrees Fahrenheit
-------
MEAN MONTHLY TEST CELL TEMPERATURESa.
Month
Probe Location
1-75
2-75
3-75
4-75
5-75
6-75
7-75
8-75
9-75
10-75
11-75
12-75
1-76
2-76
3-76
4-76
5-76
6-76
7-76
8-76
9-76
10-76
11-76
12-76
D7a
55.0
53.0
51.75
51.6
52.3
56.3
59.4
62.8
65.0
65.0
63,8
61.6
55.8
52.3
52.3
53,4
55.0
56,3
60.3
61,5
64.0
64.8
62,5
60,0
D7b
60.0
57.7
55.8
54.4
5-3.3
54.0
58.0
60,5
63.0
64.6
64.8
63.8
61.0
57.5
55.8
55.0
55.8
55.7
57.8
59.5
62.5
64.3
64.3
62.8
1
D7c
60.0
58.3
57.0
55.6
54.3
54.7
57.8
60.8
63.5
65.6
65.3
64.8
61.8
58.3
56.8
56.0
56.3
56.0
58.0
59.5
63.3
65.0
64.3
63.5
D7d
60.0
58.0
56.8
54.6
53.3
54.0
57.2
60.5
63.0
65.2
64.8
64.4
61.6
58.3
56.5
55,8
56,3
55.7
56.8
59.5
63.0
65.0
64.5
63,3
A7c
53.7
51.3
50.5
50.0
51.7
55.0
59.6
63.0
65.8
65.8
63.5
61.4
55.6
51.0
50.8
52.2
54.5
55.3
59.3
61.5
64.5
65.3
62.8
58.8
B7_
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
B7e
55.3
51.0
48.3
49.4
52.0
55.0
60.4
63.8
66.3
65.8
63.3
60.8
54.6
50.3
50.3
51.6
54.5
56.3
60.5
62.5
65.5
65.5
62.3
58.3
C7c
53.6
51.3
50.3
50.0
51.3
54.0
59.2
62.8
65.0
64.8
63.0
60.8
55.4
51.5
50.8
51.8
54.0
55.3
59.3
61.5
64.0
64.5
61.8
58.0
Z7
_
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
57.0
63.5
67.7
-
-
-
-
VO
a. All values in degrees Fahrenheit
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
/Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1 . REPORT NO.
EPA-600/2-79-058
2.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
BOONE COUNTY FIELD SITE INTERIM REPORT
Test Cells 2A , 2B , 2C, and 2D
7. AUTHOR(S)
Richard J. ₯igh
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Regional Services Corporation, Inc.
3320 Wooderest Court
Columbus, Indiana 4-7201
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory Cin.,OH
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, Ohio 4-5268
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
5. REPORT DATE
July 1979 (Issuing Date)
6 PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
1DC818, SOS #1, Task 2
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
Purchase Order No. CA-7-251-2A
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Interim report 8/72 to 12/76
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA /60 0/14-
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
Project Officer: Dirk Brunner (513) 68^-7871
16. ABSTRACT
Sanitary landfills presently play a significant role in the disposal of
solid wastes, and they will probably continue to do so in many areas because
of their economic advantages over other methods. However, justifiable concern
exists about the environmental effects of sanitary landfills. The research
project described here was undertaken to provide a better understanding of the
processes that occur within a sanitary landfill and the related environmental
effects.
The initial field-scale test cell was completed in June 1971 and has
been monitored since then for temperature, gas composition, settlement, and
leachate quantity and characteristics. Four additional cells (2A, 2B, 2G , and
2D) were constructed during August 1972. One of these was field-scale (2D),
and the others were small-scale cells that simulated the large cell for the
purpose of performance comparison. Water input to the cells was controlled,
and all cells were monitored for temperature, gas composition, settlement,
and leachate quantity and characteristics.
17.
a. DESCRIPTORS
Gas analysis
Leaching
Pollution
Settling
Waste disposal
13 DISTRI BUTION STATEMENT
Release to public
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
b. IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
Solid waste management
Sanitary landfills
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
Unclassified
20 SECURITY CLASS (This page)
Unclassified
c. COSATI Field/Group
13B
21 . NO. OF PAGES
202
22. PRICE
192 "-'r " :' GOVERIKFNT PPI'ITIIIG OFFICE' IT/'l - 657-060/5345
------- |