United States Office of
Environmental Protection Toxic Substances
Agency Washington, D.C. 20460
Office of Toxic Substances
Office of Solid Waste
Office of
Solid Waste
Washington, D.C. 20460
EPA 560/5-90-008A
April 1991
&EPA PROJECT SUMMARY
PCB, LEAD, AND CADMIUM
LEVELS IN SHREDDER WASTE
MATERIALS: A PILOT STUDY
'i t> mtu.fnitM
-------
United States Office of Office of EPA 560/5-90-008A
Environmental Protection Toxic Substances Solid Waste April 1991
Agency Washington, D.C. 20460 Washington. D.C. 20460
Office of Toxic Substances
Office of Solid Waste
&EPA PROJECT SUMMARY
PCB, Lead, and Cadmium Levels in Shreddej
Waste Materials: A Pilot Study
Authors and Research Team
Principal authors included Dan Reinhart, John Scalera, Brad Schultz, Cindy Stroup, and Joe
Breen of the Exposure Evaluation Division, Office of Toxic Substances. This project
summary was abstracted from a report on the Fluff Pilot Study written by Westat.
Field work was conducted by Westat, Midwest Research Institute, and Battelle Columbus
Laboratories. Chemical analyses were performed at Midwest Research Institute, EPA's
National Enforcement Investigation Center, and EPA's Environmental Systems Laboratory
in Las Vegas, Nevada,
EPA's Office of Solid Waste, Characterization and Assessment Division co-sponsored the
effort and provided design, sampling, and analysis consultation for lead and cadmium portion
of the pilot study. Alexander McBride was the principal contributor.
Summary
Prior to this pilot study, the United States from across the continental United States.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Measurable concentrations of PCBs, lead,
received information from state and local and cadmium were found in shredder out-
environmental agencies which indicated the put at all sites. The analyses of these
shredding of automobiles and other pro- samples indicated that over 98% of the
ducts for metal recycling may produce waste PCBs found in shredder output were asso-
materials contaminated with poly- ciated with fluff, the nonmetallic waste
chlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), lead, and output. The average PCB concentration for
cadmium. The information available was fluff produced during the sampling visits
insufficient to establish the sources and was 43 ppm.
extent of the contamination or what regu-
latory action, if any, would be approriate. To obtain information on the leachability of
Consequently, EPA's Office of Toxic Sub- PCBs from fluff, EPA conducted a hypothe-
stances and Office of Solid Waste planned tical "worst case" hot water extraction test.
and conducted this study to gain more In this test, only 0.0073% of the PCBs
knowledge about shredder operation and present were released from the fluff
characteristics of the waste output. samples. The hot water leachability data
indicate that PCBs adhere to fluff more
Samples of shredder output material were strongly (less likely to leach out) than to a
collected at seven shredder sites wide range of soils.
-------
Leachability of lead and cadmium
from shredder fluff was another major
focus of the pilot study. Using the
(then standard) EPTOX extraction
test, EPA determined that the average
lead leachate concentration was 12
mg/L for fresh fluff. The average
cadmium leachate concentration in
fresh fluff was 0.84 mg/L.
The results of this study allow EPA to
make a preliminary assessment of
potential PCB, lead, and cadmium
contamination and to provide valuable
information for the design of future
studies. It is important to acknow-
ledge that this was a pilot study and
the study results may not necessarily
be representative of the shredder
recycling industry as a whole. Only
seven shredder sites were included in
the study, and some numerical
estimates are based on a limited
number of samples. For practical
reasons, some restrictions were
imposed on the random selection of
sites, although EPA has no reason to
believe that bias was introduced by the
sampling plan.
INTRODUCTION
The United States Metal Shredding
Industry generates approximately 12 to
14 million tons of steel scrap for
recycling each year. About 90% of the
steel output is from the 8 to 10 million
cars, trucks, and vans which are
disposed of every year. The remaining
steel salvage results from the recycling
of several million discarded household
appliances and a variety of other
industrial, commercial, and household
scrap.
EPA recognizes the major environ-
mental benefits of recycling as a
national environmental policy and
strongly fosters and supports all
recycling efforts which are environ-
mentally sound. Metal recycling
results in a two-thirds to three-
quarters reduction in the volume of
space required in landfills to deposit
waste automobiles and appliances, a
substantial reduction in energy
required to recycle metal instead of
producing it from raw ores, and a
reduction in air pollution associated
with metal production. The commer-
cial value of recycled metal, over $1.5
billion per year, is considerable.
In addition to recycled metal, shred-
der operations produce 3 million tons
of non-metallic waste material each
year. This non-metallic waste is
usually referred to as 'fluff* or 'auto
shredder residue* (ASR). The shred-
ding of a car, for example, produces
about 500 pounds of fluff on average.
Fluff is typically composed of a variety
of materials, including plastics, rubber,
foam, fabric, wood, insulation, glass,
road dirt, and small metal fragments.
Little, if any, of this material is
presently recycled. Most fluff is
disposed of in municipal landfills.
Preliminary and »nerAnt»\ information
received by the EPA before this study
indicated that PCBs, lead, and
cadmium are dispersed during the
shredding of various scrap materials,
resulting in the contamination of fluff
by these substances. Some of the
reported contamination levels
exceeded the Federal regulatory levels
set under the Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA) and the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act(RCRA). Shredder wastes which
contain these contaminants in con-
centrations exceeding prescribed
TSCA and RCRA regulatory levels
must, under Federal regulations, be
managed in approved disposal sites.
This would result in considerably
greater cost to the recycler (shredder
operator). In addition, the TSCA
landfill capacity would quickly be
filled if a large proportion of shredder
fluff proved to be PCs-contaminated.
Similar capacity concerns exist for
RCRA disposal facilities.
Since PCBs were commonly used as
dielectric fluids in electrical
transformers and capacitors, many
scrap metal shredder operators
assumed that capacitors in motorized
consumer appliances (called "white
goods") were the primary source of
PCB contamination in shredder fluff.
These operators, therefore, stopped
accepting appliances for recycling.
This decision not to accept and process
'white goods* created a solid waste
disposal predicament in several states
when refrigerators, stoves, washing
machines, and other appliances
frequently were abandoned and began
accumulating along streets or in vacant
lots.
Due to the lack of general knowledge
about shredder operations and conclu-
sive information regarding contami-
nation sources, the EPA's Office of
Toxic Substances (OTS) and Office of
Solid Waste (OSW) undertook this
pilot study. Of specific interest was the
examination of PCB, lead, and
cadmium levels in shredder output
streams; the teachability of these sub-
stances; and the identification of con-
tamination sources, if possible. The
results of the pilot study win be used to
evaluate the need for additional
Agency action and to design future
studies if they are required.
OBJECTIVES
The specific objectives of the study
were:
To estimate ranges of PCB, lead,
and cadmium levels in fluff, the
m^fallir outputs, and in soil
collected from where fluff is stored
by the shredder,
-------
To determine how readily PCBs,
lead, and cadmium will kadi (to
dissolve out by percolation) from
fluff to pose a potential threat
to human health and the environ-
ment;
To examine the relationship be-
tween shredder input materials and
levels of PCBs, lead, and fft^tniitm
in the resulting fluff output; and
To develop and test procedures for
field sampling, sample preparation,
and laboratory analysis which yield
more precise and accurate
measurement of PCB, lead, and
cadmium levels in shredder output
materials.
PROJECT
METHODS AND DESIGN
Site Selection and Description
Based on statistical and cost con-
siderations, EPA decided that seven
shredder sites from geographically
diverse regions of the continental
United States would be included in the
Fluff Pilot Study. Because of the time
and expense required to relocate a
sampling crew in the event that a
shredder operator would not or could
not participate in the program (e.g,
due to breakdown), k was essential
that EPA prearrange conveniently
located alternate shredder sites prior
to the commencement of sampling.
To implement random procedures for
site selection, to the extent possible,
and to have substitute sites readily
available, EPA began the process of
selecting the seven sites to be included
in the pilot study by first identifying
dusters of shredder sites throughout
the country. Each of die seven
geographic dusters chosen for the pilot
study consisted of three or more sites
and all sites, within each duster, were
within about 100 miles of one another.
Each duster of sites was located in a
separate EPA region (there are ten
EPA regions). From within each
geographic duster, one primary and
two alternate sites were randomly
selected.
EPA sent advance letters to the
owner/operators of selected shredder
sites, asking for their cooperation with
the Pilot Study, promising them
anonymity if they participated. In
addition, the metal recycling trade
association, the Institute of Scrap
Recycling Industries (ISRI), provided
the sampling teams with letters
endorsing the study and soliciting
cooperation from its members. (AD
shredder sites visited were ISRI
members.) The field sampling team
gave these letters to site owners/
operators at the beginning of sampling
visits.
Four of the seven primary sites parti-
cipated in the study, while three sites
were unable or unwilling to take part
and were replaced with alternate skes
from the same geographic duster as
the primary site. While the site se-
lection process imposed some restric-
tion on the random selection of
shredder sites, EPA has no indication
that bias was introduced by this sam-
pling plan.
Shredder Operation
Shredder operations invariably have
several important features in common
(see Figures 1 and 2). Automobiles,
appliances, and other objects are fed
to a nammermill which shreds them
into fist-sized pieces. Powerful
magnets and conveyor belts then
separate the ferrous (iron-containing)
metals from non-ferrous components.
Next, using either air cyclone or water
"flotation* separation, metallic
components are segregated from the,
generally less dense, fluff. In this way,
all shredder output is divided into piles
of ferrous metal, non-ferrous metal,
and fluff.
EPA developed standard procedures
for collecting specified quantities of
shredder output (fluff, ferrous, and
non-ferrous metal, etc.) before the
start of sampling.
Inpat Rons
One of the objectives of the pflot study
was to investigate the relationships
between the input materials being
shredded and the concentrations of
PCBs, lead, *nd (-aHmiitm measured in
the shredder output streams. In order
to investigate this relationship,
shredder operators, segregated their
input materials into three groups and
made separate "runs* of the shredder,
by material type, for the sampling
team. Each 'run* consisted of the
shredding of a predetermined quantity
of scrap material from one of three
categories of input
The three categories of input material
were:
* Automobiles, tn/-^u4ing trucks and
vans;
White Goods, which induded
refrigerators, washing machines,
and other rimilar appliances; and
Mixed Inputs, which induded a
variety of mixed scrap materials,
such as those which come from
demolition sites and may have
contained parts or all of some
automobiles or white goods.
What consituted a 'run* depended on
the category of input material being
processed. For example, the shredding
of two cars was defined as one "run*
for automobiles, whereas eight home
appliances equaled a "run* for white
-------
Figure 1. Illustrated shredder system
Figure 2. Schematic illustration of the
shredding process
goods. One 5-gallon bucket (sample)
of fluff was normally collected after
each "run" using the sample collection
protocol developed for the study
(described below).
Sample Collection
Because of the heterogeneous nature
of the fluff output stream, considerable
effort was devoted in this study to the
development of methods for sampling
fluff. Standard procedures for
collecting specified quantities of fluff
and other shredder output (ferrous or
non-ferrous metal, etc.) were carefully
developed prior to the commencement
of sampling. For fresh fluff sampling,
a front-end loader caught the fluff
output stream as it tumbled off the end
of a conveyor belt or dropped from an
air cyclone funnel. The sampling team
spread this fluff over a tarp to create a
1' deep 9' x 9' square pile. This pile
was subdivided into a nine square grid
of 3' by 3' squares. A five gallon
sample of the fluff was collected by
compositing a roughly equal portion of
fluff from near the center of each of
the nine squares.
EPA developed other sampling proce-
dures for piles of stored fluff, fluff that
spilled off conveyor belts (spill-over),
and soil from the vicinity of fluff piles.
Descriptions of all sampling protocols
are detailed in the full report.
The following types of samples were
collected at each shredder site:
Fresh fluff One sample of "fresh"
fluff, fluff as it was produced by the
shredder, was collected from each
run of the shredder. Depending on
what type(s) of input material
were processed, there were
generally between eight and twelve
runs at each site.
Ferrous metals Two ferrous metal
output samples were collected from
-------
each site, one from each of two
input runs.
Non-ferrous metals Two non-
ferrous metal samples were col-
lected from each site, one from
each of two input runs.
Spillover Fluff which fell or blew
off conveyor belts during process-
ing and accumulated on the ground
around shredding machinery and
conveyor belts was sampled. Two
samples of this spill-over fluff were
collected from each site.
Stored Fluff Five of the seven
shredder sites visited had piles of
stored fluff that had accumulated
during normal operation prior to
the arrival of the sampling team.
At each of these sites, the sampling
team collected four samples of
stored fluff.
Soil The sampling team collected
four soil samples from each site
from locations where fluff typically
accumulated. These samples were
used to investigate the potential for
migration of contaminants from
fluff to soil. These samples were
also taken from beneath stored
fluff piles, if they were present.
Sample Analyses
Sample Preparation
Before analysis, each five gallon
(sample) bucket of fluff was divided
into approximately eight to ten 450 to
500 gram "representative sub-samples"
for chemical analysis. These sub-
samples were carefully constructed
such that every subsample contained
all the basic physical components of
fluff (glass, foam, plastics, fabrics, dirt,
etc.) in proportions nearly identical to
those found in the original sample.
The goal was to create subsamples
which, in their physical composition,
were very similar to the other
subsamples (from the same bucket)
and to the original sample. The
actual steps involved in the creation of
the "representative subsamples" are
described in the full report.
Each 450 to 500 gram subsample was
placed into a 1-gallon large mouth
glass jar for storage. Depending upon
the quantity of sample material
required for chemical extraction/
analysis, the subsamples were split
further, sieved and/or milled. Addi-
tional details describing sample
preparation for each type of chemical
extraction/analysis can be found in
the full report.
Development of PCB Extraction
Procedures
Solvent Extraction
Existing laboratory procedures for the
preparation and chemical analysis of
fluff samples for PCBs were judged to
be deficient. The conventional pro-
cedure for measuring PCB concentra-
tions prescribes that a relatively small
quantity of material (often 20 grams
or less) be subjected to solvent ex-
traction before instrument analysis.
Using such a small quantity of a
heterogeneous material (such as fluff)
has historically resulted in high
measurement variability between
subsamples from the same sample, as
reported by many state and indepen-
dent laboratories. In practical terms,
this means that the actual estimate of
the PCB concentration for any sample
depends to a great extent on the
specific aliquot of fluff used for
extraction and analysis. Different
portions of fluff from the same
sample often produce very different
results which make overall estimates
for each sample highly variable and
potentially inaccurate.
Two methods were developed in the
pilot program to reduce this source of
sampling error: (1) the technique for
creating "Representative Subsamples"
from the initial 5-gallon buckets, and
(2) the quantity of the subsample
material subjected to chemical extrac-
tion/analysis was greatly increased.
Two innovative procedures for
increasing the quantity of material
subjected to hexane/acetone extraction
were developed, tested, and compared
for the Pilot Study. These techniques
were (1) a tumbler (slurry) extraction
using an agitation apparatus, and (2) a
large-volume Soxhlet (500 cc Soxhlet)
capable of extracting PCBs from up to
100 grams of fluff.
A systematic comparison of measure-
ments from matched subsamples ana-
lyzed by the two procedures was con-
ducted. On the basis of this com-
parison, the tumbler (slurry) procedure
was selected on the basis of its overall
superiority to be used as the standard
extraction method for the remainder of
the PCB analyses. This new technique
allowed extraction of fluff samples
weighing between 450 to 500 grams, as
opposed to 20 gram samples used in
the conventional soxhlet, or the 100
gram samples used with the large
Soxhlet.
Water Extraction (PCB teachability)
In order to evaluate the teachability of
PCBs from fluff using water as the
solvent, two additional extraction
techniques were developed. One
technique for room temperature water
used a slurry extraction apparatus and
the other technique for "hot" water
extraction used a Soxhlet extractor.
The fluff samples used in the "hot"
water extraction were milled to 9.5
mm. A portion of the non-millable
fraction of the fluff was included in
each sample, the quantity added being
based upon the appropriate weight
-------
fraction of non-millable versus millable
portions (from the original sample).
For the room temperature extraction
(22°C), 80 grams of fluff (particle size
z 95 mm) was placed with 2 liters of
high purity water bto the slurry
extraction apparatus (described
previously) and tumbled for eight
continuous days. For the hot water
extraction (65°C), a similar 80 gram
sample was placed in a large Soxhlet
extractor and extracted over a period
of eight days with high purity water at
a temperature of 65°C. After eight
days, the extract from each of the two
procedures was filtered and analyzed
for PCBs.
Chemical Analyses
All chemical analyses were based on
EPA methodology. The inorganic
analyses were done using Methods
213.1 or 7131 for Cd and 239.1 or 7421
for Pb.
Unless otherwise stated, PCB analyses
were performed using a modified gas
chromatography/electron capture de-
tector (GC/ECD) EPA Method 8080.
The modified analytical method as well
as all other analytical methods used in
the Pilot Study can be found in the
Appendix section of the full report.
Summaries are provided here.
Total PCB Concentration The
total concentration of PCBs in
each of the subsamples analyzed
was determined by extraction using
a hexane/acetone solution, then
analysis using a gas chromato-
graphy/electron capture detection
(GC/ECD) method. The sample
particle sizes were not reduced for
any of the tumbler (slurry) extrac-
tions, however the samples under-
going Soxhlet extraction were
milled to * 9.5 mm.
PCB Concentrations in Individual
Fluff Components Fluff subsam-
ples were divided bto their physi-
cal components (glass, plastics,
fabrics, etc.). Each component
was individually analyzed for total
PCB concentration by EPA's
National Enforcement Investi-
gation Center (NEIC) in Denver,
Colorado. The analytical method
employed was EPA Method 600
The Determination of Polychlor-
inated Biphenyls in Oil, Soil and
Surface Samples". This analysis
was conducted to determine
whether PCB contamination was
more closely associated with
specific components of fluff.
PCB Leachabilitv EPA measured
the extent to which PCBs leach
from fluff, using water as a
solvent, to estimate how likely they
are to be released from shredder
wastes into the environment. To
represent a "worst case" scenario
EPA performed a hot water
extraction of size-reduced fluff in
a Soxhlet extractor. Samples were
also subjected to a room-
temperature water extraction, to
represent something closer to a
"real world" scenario. These
samples were extracted using a
slurry extraction apparatus. The
extracts from both techniques
were analyzed using the GC/ECD
method.
* Total Lead and Cadmium Concen-
trations The total concentrations
of lead and cadmium were deter-
mined by digesting the sample in
acid and analyzing the digestate by
Flame Atomic Adsorption Spec-
troscopy (FLAA). Samples with
lead or cadmium concentrations so
low that they could not be de-
tected by the FLAA method were
analyzed by Graphite Furnace
Atomic Adsorption Spectroscopy
(GFAA). The sample particle size
used for the digestion and analysis
was & 9.5 mm.
Lead and Cadmium Leachabilitv
EPA Method 1310 Extraction Pro-
cedure Toxicity Test (EPTOX) was
used to measure how readily lead
and cadmium will leach from fluff
to estimate the potential release of
these substances from shredder
wastes into the environment. The
EPTOX extracts were analyzed for
lead and cadmium concentrations
using the FLAA and GFAA
methods. The sample size require-
ments were that the particle size be
£ 9.5 mm and/or have a surface
area to weight ratio of i 3.1 cm
squared per gram.
PCBs in Ferrous and Non-ferrous
Metal Metal samples were analyzed
for total PCB concentration by
extraction followed by analysis with
the GC/ECD method. Subsamples
of metal samples were also
analyzed for quality assurance
purposes and archived.
Analysis of Soil Sample Soil
samples were analyzed for total
PCB concentration, PCB composi-
tion, and total lead and cadmium
concentrations. Subsamples of soil
samples were analyzed in
accordance with the quality
assurance program and others
were archived.
Quality Assurance
The Quality Assurance Project Plan
(QAPjP) presents the features of the
quality assurance design for the pilot
study. The QAPjP was developed in
three phases: Phase I-Field Sampling,
Phase II-Chemical Analysis and Phase
Ill-Statistical Data Processing and
Analysis. A more detailed description
of what each phase included follows.
-------
Field Sampling As previously de-
scribed, a grid-type sampling scheme
was employed to increase the likeli-
hood of obtaining representative
samples. A standard operating pro-
cedure (SOP) was also developed for
the sampling of piles of stored fluff.
The QAPjP also stated specific details
for the tracking of field samples
including the use of log books for
sampling details and chain-of-custody
sheets for sample tracking. Duplicate
samples were taken in order to assess
field sampling variability.
Chemical Analysis Before the lab-
oratory analysis of any samples,
chemical analysis methods were care-
fully reviewed for their adequacy in
meeting the project's data quality
objectives (DQOs). The DQO for
accuracy was equal to or greater than
60% recovery for spiked samples. The
DQO for precision was + or - 50%
relative standard deviation for replicate
samples. The measurement of the
experimental accuracy and precision
was done through laboratory quality
control samples which included
method blanks, replicate samples, Geld
duplicates, and matrix spike samples.
All standards used for spiking were
traceable to their manufacturing
source. The data quality objectives
were met for all but a few samples.
Splits were obtained from 10% of the
samples, the splits being sent to an
external laboratory for analysis (EPA
Environmental Monitoring Systems
Laboratory - Las Vegas) (EMSL-LV).
Statistical Data Processing and
Analysis A great deal of effort was
expended in order to assure that the
data generated by the laboratory were
correctly transferred to the contractor
conducting the statistical analysis of
the data. The correctness of data
values generated by the laboratory was
cross checked by the contractor
conducting the statistical analyses once
they were keyed into a matrix file.
One other important aspect of the
project's quality assurance program
was the use of audits. Three types of
audits were conducted during the
project: system audits to assure
standard operating procedures were
being followed, performance audits
using performance audit samples so
that the laboratory could demonstrate
its ability to accurately analyze for the
analyte(s) of interest, and data audits
which reviewed portions of the data
for error.
RESULTS
The results of the Pilot Study provide
a preliminary evaluation of the waste
characteristics of fluff and valuable
information for the design of future
studies. Caution must be exercised
when generalizing from these findings.
As noted earlier, the Pilot Study
results are based on limited data and
do not necessarily represent the metal
shredding industry as a whole.
Total PCB Concentrations in Fluff,
Metals and Soil
PCBs were detected in all shredder
output materials analyzed. Over 98%
of PCBs are estimated to end up in
the fluff waste stream. PCB concen
trations in both the ferrous and
nonferrous metals were very low
(means of 0.21 ppm for the ferrous
metal and 0.90 ppm for the non-
ferrous metal). The mean PCB con
centration for all fresh fluff was 43
ppm. Using a bootstrap resampling
procedure, an approximate 95%
confidence interval for this mean was
calculated to be 22 ppm to 120 ppm.
Table 1 displays the average PCB
concentration in parts per million
along with the standard deviation for
each category of sampled material.
Also presented are median, minimum,
and maximum concentrations and the
number of samples and sites upon
which these statistics are based.
Table 1 shows that fresh fluff from
mixed inputs had higher PCB concen-
trations than fresh fluff resulting from
white goods or automobiles, and this
difference is statistically significant.
PCB concentrations in the non-ferrous
waste metals were roughly 50 times
lower than those in fluff. PCB
concentrations in ferrous waste streams
were approximately 200 times lower
than those in fluff. The highest PCB
concentration for ferrous metal was
0.42 ppm and for non-ferrous metal,
2.6 ppm. It is notable that ferrous
metal output is very "clean." In
contrast to non-ferrous metal which
cannot be separated primarily with
magnets, ferrous metal output contains
practically no fluff. The non-ferrous
metal typically contains much higher
proportions of non-metallic waste
(fluff), which may explain the
somewhat higher PCB levels in the
non-ferrous output.
PCB concentrations in soils were in the
same range as those in stored fluff.
How PCBs got into the soil is unclear.
The PCB concentrations found in these
soil samples may reflect the migration
of PCBs from fluff which regularly
accumulated nearby, or "soil" samples
may contain a substantial amount of
fluff material which had become mixed
with the soil over time. The soil
sampling protocol prescribed that if the
demarcation between soil and fluff
residues was not distinct, "soil" samples
should contain a minimum of 50% soil.
From the accounts of sampling crew
members, the distinction between soil
and fluff sometimes was unclear. Soil
samples collected in accordance with
the sampling protocol may often have
contained some portion of fluff.
-------
PCB Composition In Fluff
The fluff samples were analyzed for
the specific concentrations of PCB
Aroclors 1242, 1254, and 1260, to
explore the possibility that sources of
PCB contamination could be identified
by PCB composition. This approach
was considered feasible because
different PCB Aroclors were
developed for specific uses. This
analysis for specific PCB Aroclors
revealed that Arodor 1242 was domi-
nant in almost every sample, making
up more than half of the PCBs in each
sample category. While this part of
the pilot study yielded some general
information on the proportions of the
three most commonly used Aroclor
mixtures, it produced no definite
information on sources of PCB
contamination.
PCB Concentrations In Individual
Fluff Components
Subsamples from four fresh fluff
samples (two resulting from auto-
mobile shredding, one resulting from
the shredding of white goods, and one
resulting from the shredding of mixed
inputs) were divided into the following
components:
Metals, wire and glass;
Soft plastics, foams, soft rubber,
and vinyl;
Fabrics, paper and wood;
Hard materials, hard plastics, and
hard rubber;
Fine materials too small to classify,
dirt, and dust; and
Other, not classifiable, materials.
All components, except for the
"Other, not classifiable" materials were
analyzed separately for total PCB
content. Table 2 shows the percent,
by weight, of each component in the
four samples, and the PCB
concentrations found in each
component.
Total PCB concentrations in fresh
fluff samples, as well as the relative
concentrations of the PCBs in dif-
ferent components, varied with input
material. They also varied between
the two samples produced from the
same input material (i.e. automobile).
In one sample from automobile in-
puts, the highest PCB concentration
occurred in materials in the "Soft
plastics, foams, soft rubber and vinyl"
category. In the other (matching)
automobile sample, the highest PCB
concentrations were in materials in
the "Fine materials too small to
classify, dirt, and dust" category.
The highest PCB concentrations in
fluff from white goods were also
found in materials in the "Fine
materials too small to classify, dirt,
and dust" category, while fluff from
mixed inputs showed the highest PCB
concentrations in the "metals, wire
and glass" category.
PCB Extractability From Fluff
Subsamples from seven different fresh
fluff samples found to have high total
PCB concentrations were extracted,
using hot water as solvent, to estimate
how readily PCBs migrate from the
fluff waste stream to the surrounding
environment. The hot water (65°C)
extraction provides a theoretical
"worst case" estimate of PCB extract-
ability. An average of 0.0073% of the
PCBs in the samples was extracted
using the hot water extraction
described earlier.
Using other subsamples from the
same seven high PCB fluff samples,
an average of 0.0050% of the PCBs in
the samples was extracted using a
room temperature (22°C) water extrac-
tion. These results suggest that PCBs
are less likely to leach (dissolve out by
percolation) from fluff than from a
wide range of soils.
Total Lead And Cadmium
Concentrations In Fluff and Soil
Total lead concentrations in most fluff
samples ranged from 1,000 to 10,000
ppm. Total cadmium concentrations in
most fluff samples were substantially
lower, falling between 10 and 100 ppm.
Table 3 presents total lead concen-
trations for each type of fluff and soil
sample analyzed. The Table shows the
mean, standard deviation, median,
minimum, and maximum lead concen-
tration values, as well as the numbers
of samples and sites on which the
results were based. The total lead
concentration data for fresh fluff from
automobiles, white goods and mixed
inputs were combined to produce an
average for all fresh fluff which was
then compared with spillover and
stored fluff. The mean total lead
concentration in all types of fresh fluff
(combined) is 2,800 ppm. The
approximate 95% (bootstrap) confi-
dence interval for this mean is 1,800
ppm to 4,100 ppm. Total lead
concentrations in spillover fluff are
greater than in stored fluff, which in
turn are greater than in all types of
fresh fluff combined. These differ-
ences are statistically significant. Lead
concentrations in soil are statistically
significantly lower than in all types of
fluff combined.
Table 4 presents the total cadmium
concentrations in each type of fluff and
soil. It gives the mean, standard
deviation, median, minimum, and
maximum lead concentration values, as
well as the numbers of samples and
sites on which the results were based.
-------
Table 1. Summary of Total PCB Concentrations (ppm) by Sample Type
Number Number
Sample Input
Type Type Mean
Fresh fluff Auto 32
Fresh fluff White Goods 80
Fresh fluff Mixed input 180
Stored fluff 68
Spillover 28
Ferrous 0.2
Non-ferrous 1
Soi I 44
Table 2. Total PCB Concentrations (ppm)
Automobile
Sample 1
X of PCB
Total Concen-
Sample t rat ion
Concentration
Component (by Weight) (ppm)
Metals, wire,
and glass 11X 13
Soft plastics,
foams, soft
rubber, vinyl 17X 66
Fabrics, paper,
and wood 17X 37
Hard materials,
hard plastics,
hard rubber 9X 11
Fines too small
to classify,
dirt, dust 40X 43
Other, not
analyzed 6X
Total sample
weight (gin) 1090
Standard
Deviation Median Minimum Maximum
43 13 1.7 210
190 21 0.67 760
170 88 12 500
43 52 16 150
25 28 4 65
0.11 0.21 0.1 0.42
1.1 0.9 0.13 2.6
38 32 0.13 100
in Five Fluff Components
Input Material
Automobile
Sane I e 2 White Goods
X of PCB X of PCB
Total Concen- Total Concen-
Sample t rat ion Sample t rat ion
(by Weight) (ppm) (by Weight) (ppm)
2X 9.9 3X 0.6
14X 7 8X 35
28X 12 9X 24
2X 24 10X 5.5
38X 29 65X 62
16X 5X
1260 859
of of
Samples Sites
28 7
15 5
9 3
10 5
5 5
8 6
5 3
8 4
Mixed Inputs
X of
Total
Sample PCB
(by Weight) (ppm)
2X 390
17X 260
26X 63
5X 46
45X 140
5X
1080
-------
10
Table 3. Summary of Total Lead Concentrations (ppm) by Sample Type
Sample Input
Type Type
Fresh fluff Auto
Fresh fluff White Goods
Fresh fluff Mixed input
Stored fluff
Spillover
Soil
Standard
Mean Deviation
2,700
3,100
4,600
3,900
6,100
2,200
2,200
3,200
3,500
3,500
5,600
3,900
Median Minimum
2,400
1,800
3,600
2,600
4,300
1,100
570
1,300
1,100
1,300
2,800
8.1
Maximum
12,000
14,000
12,000
13,000
21,000
16,000
Number
of
Samples
28
15
13
20
9
16
Number
of
Sites
7
5
3
4
5
5
Table 4. Summary of Total Cadmium Concentrations (ppm) by Sample Type
Sample
Type
Fresh fluff
Fresh fluff
Fresh fluff
Stored fluff
Spillover
Soil
Input
Type
Auto
White Goods
Mixed input
Mean
47
48
46
35
32
22
Standard
Deviation
36
19
14
13
11
24
Median
40
47
46
35
33
18
Minimum
14
23
29
16
18
10
Maximum
200
87
70
59
59
100
Number
of
Samples
28
15
12
20
9
16
Number
of
Sites
7
5
3
5
5
4
The data for fresh fluff from auto-
mobiles, white goods, and mixed inputs
were combined to compare total
cadmium concentrations in fresh,
spillover, and stored fluff. The mean
cadmium concentration for all types of
fresh fluff combined is 47 ppm. The
approximate 95% (bootstrap) confi-
dence interval for this mean is 31 ppm
to 65 ppm. Differences between cad-
mium concentrations in the different
types of fluff are not statistically
significant. Total cadmium concentra-
tions in soil are statistically
significantly lower than in all types of
fluff combined.
Lead and Cadmium Leachability
From Fluff
Of considerably greater interest,
environmentally, than total lead and
cadmium concentrations, is how
readily lead and cadmium leach from
fluff to contaminate the environment.
Lead and cadmium concentrations in
leachate were measured using the
EPTOX procedure for samples from
all categories of fluff.
The EPTOX procedure was the
standard EPA method for deter-
mining teachability at the time these
lead and cadmium analyses were
conducted. In March 1990, EPA
replaced the EPTOX with the TCLP
(Toxicity Characteristic Leaching
Procedure) as the standard method for
determining leachability. EPA compar-
ison analyses have shown little differ-
ence between the results of the
EPTOX and TCLP methods.
Table 5 summarizes the results for lead
in leachate from the EPTOX extrac-
tion. The Table presents the mean,
standard deviation, median, minimum
and maximum concentration of lead in
the EPTOX extract for fresh fluff from
-------
11
automobiles, white goods and mixed
input; as well as for stored and
spillover fluff. Table 6 also presents
the number of samples and sites
represented in the calculation of each
statistic.
Lead concentration values in the
EPTOX extract ranged from 0.8 to 220
ppm, with an average of above 6 ppm
for every type of fluff. While the
highest EPTOX lead concentrations
were associated with stored fluff, fresh
fluff from mixed input and spillover
fluff, the differences between average
concentrations as presented in the
table are not statistically significant.
The mean EPTOX lead concentration
for all types of fresh fluff combined is
7.2 ppm. The approximate 95% (boot-
strap) confidence interval for this
mean is 4.8 ppm to 13 ppm.
Table 6 summarizes the results of the
EPTOX cadmium extraction. This
table gives the mean, approximate
95% confidence interval for the mean,
standard deviation, median, minimum,
and maximum concentrations for the
different types of fluff; as well as the
numbers of samples and sites
represented by these statistics.
The mean EPTOX cadmium concen-
tration for all types of fresh fluff
combined is 0.84 ppm. The approxi-
mate 95% (bootstrap) confidence
interval for this mean is 0.53 ppm to
1.2 ppm.
Table 5. Summary of EPTOX Lead Concentrations (ppm) by Sample Type
Sample
Type
Fresh fluff
Fresh fluff
Fresh fluff
Stored fluff
Spillover
Input
Type
Auto
White Goods
Mixed input
Mean
6.9
6.1
23
22
18
Standard
Deviation
5.5
5.0
24
47
12
Median
5
3.2
13
9.5
20
Minimum
.8
1.6
1
1.6
1.7
Maximum
21
14
78
220
Number
of
Samples
28
15
12
20
9
Number
of
Sites
7
5
3
5
5
Table 6. Summary of EPTOX Cadmium Concentrations (ppm) by Sample Type
Sample
Type
Fresh fluff
Fresh fluff
Fresh fluff
Stored fluff
Spillover
Input
Type
Auto
White Goods
Mixed input
Mean
0.81
1.3
1
0.73
0.45
Standard
Deviation
0.67
0.77
0.27
0.41
0.26
Median
0.7
1.3
1
0.61
0.3
Mininun
0.35
0.45
0.48
0.2
0.18
Maximum
4
1.3
1.4
2
0.81
Number
of
Samples
28
15
12
20
9
Number
of
Sites
7
5
3
5
5
-------
12
CONCLUSIONS
In this pilot study, EPA's research
team:
Determined that PCBs were pre-
sent in all sampled materials at all
seven pilot study sites and that
over 98% of tie PCBs in all
shredder output were associated
with fluff; PCB concentrations in
fluff ranged from 0.67 to 760 ppm.
Determined that in the "worst case"
scenario of leachability, a hot water
extraction, only .0073% of the
PCBs present leached from the
sample on average. In a situation
more closely resembling "real
world" conditions, room temper-
ature water extraction leached
.0050% of the PCBs, on average,
from the fluff. In both cases, the
observed leachability of PCBs from
fluff was lower than usually found
in a wide range of soils;
Could not conclude that any par-
ticular input material was the
source of the PCBs, lead and
cadmium found in shredder out-
puts. Cross-contamination of
samples within sites may have
masked the relationship between
input material and contamination
of resulting output materials.
For example, if PCBs were
released onto shredder surfaces
during the shredding of PCB-
containing items, fluff produced for
some time after the initial release
may have been contaminated as it
came into contact with parts of the
shredder apparatus, although no
PCBs existed in the input material
associated with this fluff;
Found that lead and cadmium
leachate concentrations in fluff, as
determined by the EPTOX,
ranged from 0.8 to 220 ppm and
0.18 to 4 ppm, respectively.
Developed and tested field sam-
pling and sample preparation
procedures to obtain represen-
tative samples and subsamples of
fluff, ferrous and non-ferrous
metals and soil from shredder
sites; and
Developed and tested laboratory
protocols to analyze very large
fluff samples (500 grams) for PCB
content. This technique reduced
the sampling variability associated
with conventional PCB extraction
and analysis of fluff, and resulted
in more reliable estimates of PCB
concentration.
Determined that the limited size
of the sample precludes using the
analytical results from this Pilot
Study to characterize the shredder
industry as a whole; also identified
the need to collect and evaluate
additional analytical data gene-
rated by State agencies and indus-
try sources subsequent to comple-
tion of the Pilot Study. Care will
be taken to review sampling
procedures and analytical methods
used in collecting data.
Identified the need to obtain a
better understanding of the
economic viability of the shredder
industry and to assess the
economic impacts, if any, resulting
from various approaches to
residual waste management
-------
50272-101
REPORT DOCUMENTATION
PAGE
1. REPORT NO.
EPA 560/5-90-008A
3. Recipient's Accession No.
4. Title and Subtitle
Project Summary: PCB, Lead, and Cadmium Levels in Shredder Waste
Materials: A Pilot Study
5. Report Date
April 1991
6.
7. Author(s)
Reinhart, el a]
8. Performing Organization Rept. No.
9. Performing Organization Name and Address
Westat, Inc.
1650 Research Blvd.
Rockville, MD 20850
10. Project/Task/Work Unit No.
11. Contract (C) or Grant (G) No.
(O 68-02-4293 (Westat)
(G) 68-02-4252 (MRI)
68-02-4294 (BCL)
12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Offices of Toxic Substances and Solid Waste
Washington, DC 20460
13. Type of Report & Period Covered
Technical Summary
14.
15. Supplementary Notes
16. Abstract (Umlt: 200 words)
Summary Report on Pilot Study:
The US EPA conducted a pilot study to investigate the presence of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and other
hazardous substances in waste products produced at metal salvage and recycling facilities. Held sampling, sample
preparation, and laboratory methods were developed. For the purposes of the pilot study, input materials were
segregated by type to allow separate shredding of three distinct material categories: automobiles only, white goods
(appliances) only, and mixed input. PCBs were found in all sampled materials at all pilot study sites: however, 98% of
the PCBs were associated with the waste product (which is known as fluff due to its fibrous appearance). Leachability
was determined and appeared to be lower than that found in most soil matrices. The fluff was analyzed for lead and
cadmium; those contaminants were found in most samples. The Extraction Procedures Toxicity test (EPTOX) was run
for lead and cadmium. The pilot study data do not clearly point to any particular input material as the source of PCBs,
lead, or cadmium. Highest PCB levels were found in mixed input materials, which included construction materials,
demolitions waste, and at some sites, appliances and/or automobile components. White goods fluff and automobile fluff
had similar levels of PCBs.
17. Document Analysis a. Descriptors
Environmental contaminants
b. Identifiers/Open-Ended Terms
Fluff, PCB, cadmium, lead, shredder
c. COSATI Field/Group
18. Availability Statement
Available to public from NTIS, Springfield, VA
19. Security Class (This Report)
Unclassified
20. Security Class (This Page)
Unclassified
21. No. of Pages
12
22. Price
(SeeANSI-Z39.18)
See Instructions on Reverse
OPTIONAL FORM 272 (4-77)
(Formerly NTIS-35)
Department of Commerce
------- |