£EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Municipal Environmental Research
Laboratory
Cincinnati OH 45268
EPA-600/2-78-064
June 1978
Research and Development
A Case Study of
Hazardous Wastes
in Class I
Landfills
-------
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.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
-------
EPA-600/2-78-064
June 1978
A CASE STUDY OF HAZARDOUS
WASTES IN CLASS I LANDFILLS
by
Bert Eichenberger, J. R. Edwards, and K. Y. Chen
Environmental Engineering Program
University of Southern California
Los Angeles, California 90007
and
Robert D. Stephens
California Department of Health
Berkeley, California 94704
Grant No. R-803813
Project Officer
Richard A. Carnes
Solid and Hazardous Waste Research Division
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
MUNICIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CINCINNATI, OHIO 45268
-------
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 rec-
ommendation for use.
-------
FOREWORD
The Environmental Protection Agency was created because of increasing
public and governmental 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 solu-
tion and it involves defining the problem, measuring its impact, and search-
ing for solutions. The Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory develops
new and improved technology and systems for the prevention, treatment, and
management of wastewater and solid and hazardous waste pollutant discharges
from municipal and community sources, for the preservation and treatment of
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 re-
searcher and the user community.
The study reported herein documents the average concentration, estimated
daily deposition, and partitioning of 17 metal species in hazardous wastes
discharged to 5 Class I landfill sites in the greater Los Angeles, California
area.
Francis T. Mayo, Director
Municipal Environmental Research
Laboratory
m
-------
ABSTRACT
This study documents the average concentration, estimated daily deposi-
tion, and partitioning of 17 metal species in hazardous wastes discharges to
five Class I landfill sites in the greater Los Angeles area. These sites re-
ceived an estimated combined daily volume of 2.3 X 106 I/day of hazardous
wastes. A total of 320 samples were collected and consolidated into 99 sam-
ples representative of 17 industrial types. The data were summarized for six
general industrial groups.
Using the average concentration of metal species and^the approximate
daily volume flow, the mass deposition rate can be determined for selected
species at a site of interest. From this projection for the five sites com-
bined, the metal species may be ranked according to their estimated total
daily deposition: Na>Fe>Ca>Zn>K>Mg>Cu>Cr>Ni>Pb>Ba>Mn>V>Cd>As>Be>Ag.
Approximately 50% of the total volume of hazardous wastes sampled was
generated by the petroleum industry. About 35% of the volume was equally
divided between the chemical and industrial cleaning industries. The metal,
food, and misc./unknown industries each contributed less than 10% of the to-
tal volume. The data indicate that the highest average daily mass deposition
of metal species is generated by the following industries:
Petroleum Ag, Be, Ca, Cd, K, Mg
Chemical As, Na
Industrial Cleaning Pb
Metal Cr, Zn
Misc./Unknown Ba, Cu, Fe, Mn, Ni
Approximately 70% of the total volume was in the aqueous phase and 8%
consisted of an organic liquid phase. The weight percent of 17 metal species
in the soluble phase ranged from less than 10% to a maximum of 90%. The
volume flow and concentration of soluble toxic metals pose a potential water
quality problem. Physical and chemical changes in the soil may significantly
affect the vertical and lateral migration of toxic metal species. It is rec-
ommended that further studies on the intetactions of hazardous wastes and
different types of soils and the resulting effect on leachate formation and
migration of toxic metal species be conducted.
The report was submitted in fulfillment of Research Grant R 803813 by
University of Southern California under the sponsorship of the U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency. This report covers the period August 1, 1975 to
July 31, 1975, to July 31, 1976, and work was completed August 1977.
-------
CONTENTS
Foreword i i i
Abstract iv
Figures vi
Tables vii
1. Introduction 1
Overview 1
The problem 2
2. Conclusions 4
3. Experimental Procedures 6
Sampling teams 6
Sampling equipment inventory 7
Sampl i ng procedures 7
Analytical methods 11
4. Results and discussion 14
Individual sites 15
Combined sites 18
Industries by type 19
i
References 26
Appendices 29
A. Miscellaneous tables and figures 29
B. Hydrogeologic description of Class I sites 70
C. Hazardous waste unit surveillance form 76
D. Sample analysis of selected metal species 77
E. Manifest.summary 86
F. Metal species in Class I landfills 89
-------
FIGURES
Number Page
1 Composite liquid waste sampler (Coliwasa) 9
2 Schematic of sampling handling 10
A-l Average concentration and estimated daily depositions of selected
metals in hazardous wastes at the Operating Industries Sanitary
Landf i 11 54
A-2 Average concentration and estimated daily depositions of selected
metals in hazardous wastes at the B.K.K. Sanitary Landfill 55
A-3 Average concentration and estimated daily deposition of selected
metals in hazardous wastes at Palos Verdes Sanitary Landfill 56
A-4 Average concentration and estimated daily depositions of selected
metals in hazardous wastes at Pacific Ocean Sanitary Landfill 57
A-5 Percentage of metals detected in the soluble phase of hazardous
wastes at Operating Industries landfill 58
A-6 Percentage of metals detected in the soluble phase of hazardous
wastes at Palos Verdes 1 andfi 11 58
A-7 Percentage of metals detected in the soluble phase of hazardous
wastes at Pacific Ocean Disposal landfill 59
A-8 Percentage of metals detected in the soluble phase of hazardous
wastes at B.K.K. landfill 59
A-9 Average total concentration and estimated daily depositions of
sel ected metal s in hazardous wastes 60
A-10 Percentage of metals detected in dissolved form in hazardous
wastes 61
A-ll Sample concentration distribution of toxic metal samples 62-69
to
A-18
VI
-------
TABLES
Numbers Page
1 Volume Input - Class I Sites 14
2 General Characteristics of Sampled Volume and Estimated Daily
Inputs into Class I Landfills 16
3 Industry Types Discharging into Class I Sites 17
4 Estimated Daily Deposition and Distribution of Toxic Metal Species 18
5 Weight Percent of Soluble Metal Species . 19
6 Summary of Toxic Metal Concentrations 20
7 Summary: Industry Types Discharging to Class I Landfills 21
8 Maximum Input of Metal Species Contributed by General Industry Types..22
9 Maximum Input of Metal Species Contributed by Industry Types 22
10 Volume Input Generated by General Industry Types 23
11 Volume Input of Liquid Organic Wastes Contributed by General
Industry Types 24
A-l Sampling Schedule - September 1975 29
A-2 Sampling Equipment 30
A-3 Operating Condition for Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer 31
A-4 Ranges and Weighted Averages of Metal Concentrations Found in
Hazardous Wastes Samp!es 32
A-5 Industry Types Discharging to Class I Landfills 33
A-6 Petroleum Production (Drilling) Code 1 34
A-7 Petroleum Refining Code 2 35
A-8 Petrochemical Code 3 36
A-9 Chemical Manufacturing (General) Code 4 37
A-10 Chemical Manufacturing (Pesticide) Code 5 38
A-ll Paint Manufacturing Code 6 39
A-12 Metal Plating, Etching, Cleaning Code 7 40
A-l3 Metal Foundry Code 8 41
A-l4 Equipment Cleaning Code 9 42
A-l5 Tank Cleaning (Petroleum Industry) Code 10 43
VII
-------
TABLES (Continued)
Numbers Page
A-16 Tank Cleaning (Industry Unknown) Code 11 44
A-17 Ship Bilge Cleaning Code 12 45
A-18 Vehicle Cleaning Code 13 46
A-19 Food Industry Code 14 47
A-20 Paper Manufacturing Code 15 48
A-21 Miscellaneous Industry Code 16 49
A-22 Unknown Industry Code 17 50
A-23 Industry Types Discharging to Class I Landfills 51
A-24 Volume Input of Liquid Organic Wastes Contributed by Industry Types...53
D-l 01 (Total Concentration, mg/1) 77
D-2 BKK (Total Concentration, mg/1) 80
D-3 PV, POD, CB (Total Concentration, mg/1) 83
F-l Input in Class I Landfills of Toxic Metal Species 89-105
to
F-17
vm
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
OVERVIEW
The introduction of new and exotic materials into the environment has
been occurring at an increasing rapid rateJ'^ Every year more than 500 new
chemicals and chemical compounds are introduced into industry along with
countless operational innovations. Little is known about the environment and
health aspects effects of many of these compounds, individually or in combi-
nation.! There is a necessity for identifying and cataloguing the industrial
process and specific substances generated by these industrial processes.
Hazardous waste includes any waste or combination of wastes that poses a
substantial present or potential threat to human health or living organisms
because such wastes are lethal 9 nondegradable, or persistent in nature; may
be biologically magnified; or may otherwise cause or tend to cause detrimen-
tal cumulative effect.3 Hazardous wastes include, but are not limited to,
toxic, biological, radioactive, flammable, and explosive by-products.
In recent years, more restrictive air and water pollution controls, in-
cluding ocean dumping restrictions, are increasing the pressure for hazardous
waste disposal to the land.4 At least 10 million tons of non-radioactive haz-
ardous wastes are generated per year, with a rate of increase estimated to be
5% to 10% annually.5 By weight about 40% of these wastes are inorganic mate-
rial and 60% are organic; about 90% occur as liquid or semiliquid. Over 70%
of hazardous wastes are generated in the mid-Atlantic, Great Lakes, and Gulf
Coast areas of the United States.6
Listings of various major industries by Standard Industrial Classifica-
tion and the expected hazardous wastes for each industry have been made.1
Detailed information on various constituents found in industrial hazardous
wastes is also available in the literature.'»°~° At present, the most common
methods of disposing of hazardous wastes is disposal on land, injection in
deep wells, and discharge in the ocean. Sometimes explosives are detonated
and/or burned in the open, and some organic chemicals, biological wastes, and
flammable materials are incinerated. Each of these commonly-used disposal
methods is a potential threat to public health and the environment.9 The
primary findings of EPA's 1973 Report to Congress on Hazardous Waste Disposal,
which was mandated by Section 212 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act as amended,
are that current hazardous waste management practices are generally unaccept-
able, and that public health and welfare are unnecessarily threatened by the
uncontrollable discharge of such waste materials into the environment.10 The
Clean Air Act (as amended), the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (as a-
-------
mended), and the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (as a-
mended), are curtailina the discharge of hazardous pollutants into the Na-
tion's air and water.''-'^ Increasing volumes of sludges, slurries, and con-
centrated liquids will therefore find their way to land disposal sites. This
problem is manifested in potential groundwater contamination by leachate from
landfills and surface water contamination via runoff.
The Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (P.L. 703), and the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, as amended (P.L. 92-516) provide
some mechanisms for control of disposal of radioactive and pesticide-contain-
ing wastes.14"15 Other hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal ac-
tivities have been essentially unregulated at the Federal level.
On September 27, 1976, Congress amended the Solid Waste Disposal Act
(42 U.S.C. 3251).15 The overall objectives of this act are: (1) Regulate
the treatment, storage, transportation, and disposal of hazardous wastes
which have adverse effects on health and the environment and (2) Provide for
the promulgation of guidelines for solid waste collection, transport, separa-
tion, recover, and disposal practices and systems.
THE PROBLEM
Sanitary landfill ing has been developed over a number of years as a
means of disposing of various types of waste material. Many hazardous waste
are disposed of at these sites even though many conventional landfillsites
are not designed for the purpose of handling hazardous wastes. Due to the
lack of effective controls, many hazardous wastes are also being disposed of
in municipal landfill sites without special precautions.17
The problems associated with improper land disposal of hazardous wastes
unlike the problems of air and water pollution have not been widely recog-
nized by the public. In addition, the problem of hazardous waste disposal
becomes even more significant as the progressive implementation of air and
water pollution control programs, ocean dumping bans, and cancellation of
pesticide registrations results in increased tonnage of land-disposed wastes
with potentially adverse impact on public health and the environment.18
Groundwater or infiltrating surface water moving through solid wastes
can produce a leachate containing dissolved matter, finely suspended parti-
culates and microbial waste products. Leachate may leave the landfill as a
spring of surface water or percolate through the soil and rock underlying the
landfill. In either case, if leachate from a landfill is intermittently or
continuously in contact with groundwater or surface water sources, the water
can become polluted and unfit, for domestic or irrigational use.^9
Uncertainty exists as to the long-term effectiveness of hydrogeologic
isolation of a landfill in preventing aquifer degradation. This doubt stems
from a lack of knowledge about the "life span" of the refuse in terms of
1eachate-generation capabi1ities.'°
Contaminants carried by leachate are dependent upon the composition of
the water and the physical, chemical, biological activities occurring within
-------
the landfill. Chemical analyses of leachate at landfill sites have shown a
wide range of components.20-23 There remains much to learn about the move-
ment of hazardous wastes in the land environment. Laboratory-scale (soil
column) investigations of transport mechanisms of specific hazardous wastes
have been undertaken by the Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory,
USEPA. This work has been designed to prove that potentially dangerous leach-
ates can and do result from conventional sanitary landfilling of individual
hazardous wastes. The resulting reports will include characteristics of the
wastes and soils used, other pertinent experimental conditions, the data ob-
tained including transmission rates and attenuation coefficients, and analy-
sis of the potential environmental impact in the real world. The latter will
include an analysis of the potential transportation rate through various
soils under given rainfall conditions.!7
If concentrations of hazardous wastes are high in the leachate from a
landfill, attenuation capacity may be reached relatively quickly. Leachate
treatment may be more complex than conventional water and wastewater treat-
ment due to the wide variety of waste types and constituents. Land disposal
of hazardous wastes normally requires a greater degree of planning and sophis-
tication in design and operation at a given site than would normally be neces-
sary with municipal refuse. The conventional landfill might be used, however,
in those instances where the wastes contain a hazardous substance but in a
form which is not particularly hazardous, i.e., insoluble salts, or in a con-
centration so low as to be innocuous. Certain other wastes should probably
never be land disposed in the conventional landfill area, because of extreme
hazards posed by the migration of even small quantities of toxicants.
Hazardous waste legislation has been enacted in several States;* Oregon,
California, New York, and Minnesota are examples. In most cases, the disposal
of the majority of hazardous wastes generated in the United States is not
regulated by the State or Federal government. Of those few States with some
type of hazardous waste controls, less than half have acceptable treatment/
disposal facilities within their boundaries. Due to the generally limited
scope of Federal, State, and local solid waste and land protection legisla-
tion, regulation, and enforcement, there has been little pressure applied to
generators of hazardous residues to require disposal by environmental accept-
able methods.17
The lack of reliable information has generated many concerns over the
practice of confined landfill disposal of hazardous wastes. This report doc-
uments the concentrations and estimated mass deposition rates of 17 metal
species in hazardous wastes discharged into five California Class I landfills.
The results obtained in this study together with available data from USEPA
soil attenuation and particulate leaching investigations may prove useful in
assessing the pollution potential of hazardous waste disposal under less re-
strictive conditions, e.g., municipal refuse (Class II) landfills.
Most notable around them are California, Minnesota, Texas, New Jersey, and
Illinois. Several other states are in the legislative process in an attempt
to conform to PL94-580
-------
SECTION 2
CONCLUSIONS
The following conclusions have been drawn from this study on the distri-
bution and mass deposition of selected metal species in hazardous wastes gen-
erated by diverse industry types,
1. The average concentrations, estimated average daily inputs, and the
partitioning of metal species (soluble and solid phase) varied over a
wide range for the five selected Class I landfill sites. These varia-
tions are not unexpected when considering the limited number of samples
analyzed (99), the different industry types represented by these samples
(17), and the range of estimated volume flow for the five sites (1.1x105
I/day).
2. The data collected for individual sites, together with the estimated
daily volume input, permit the approximation of mass deposition rates
of selected metal species at a site of interest.
Knowing the approximate daily volume flow, volume percent from in-
dustry types, and the average concentration of metal species, the mass
deposition rate of individual metals can be determined. Calculations
based on the available data indicate that the highest average daily de-
position of metal species is contributed by the following industry types:
Petroleum Ag, Be, Ca, Cd, K, Mg
Chemical As? Na
Industrial Cleaning Pb
Metal Cr, Zn
Misc. /Unknown Ba, Cu, Fe, Mn, Ni , V
3. The results indicate that copper, chromium, and zinc wastes present
the greatest potential threat to groundwater and surface water supplies
in consideration of: (1) total mass deposition, (2) weight percent in
the soluble phase (42% to 86%) and (3) maximum concentration levels
04,000 - 20,000 mg/1),
4. Approximately 8% of the total volume input consisted of liquid or-
ganic wastes; 16% of the organic phase had boiling points less than 95°C
and flash points as low as 17°C, The mixing of volatile organic wastes,
particularly those with low flash points, with incompatible wastes at a
disposal facility can produce dangerous situations through fires and
explosions.
5. The combined results for the five Class I sites are considered
an
-------
approximate representation of the hazardous waste stream generated in
the greater Los Angeles area. The unknown effects of certain variables
prevent a more accurate determination, e.g., (1) the effects of seasonal
types of disposal are not known (samples were collected during five days
over a two-week period), (2) process changes and varied production rates
by large volume generators such as the petroleum and chemical industry,
(3) limited number of samples, (4) the total volume sampled (2.5x106 1)
is only slightly larger than the estimated daily volume input of 2.3x
106 1, and (5) accuracy of the estimated daily volume input is not known.
6. Food industry manifests encountered during this study are of ques-
tionable accuracy. High concentrations of As, Ba, Be, Cd, Cr, Cu, Ni,
Pb, V, and Zn were detected in one or more of six food industry waste
streams. The concentration levels are incompatible with the waste types
listed on the manifests, e.g., dishwater, steam-rack cleaning, cannery
wastes, and bakery wastes. It is suspected that other industrial wastes
were picked up by the waste hauler and were not recorded on the food in-
dustry manifests. It is not known whether this was a deliberate subter-
fuge or simply indifference or carelessness.
7. The manifest system required by the recently amended Solid Waste
Disposal Act should provide, if enforced, adequate monitoring and con-
trol of hazardous wastes. However, this will require a Federal commit-
ment of money to support the manifest development and manpower to enforce
the developed product.
8. The volume flow, concentration, and mass deposition rate of the toxic
metal species determined in this study should prove useful in the pre-
liminary selection of required treatment processes and facilities for
hazardous wastes generated by various industrial activities. The dis-
tribution of metal species in the soluble and solid phases of the haz-
ardous waste is also significant because it is anticipated that the
treatment and disposal of liquid and solid wastes will be processed
separately.
-------
SECTION 3
EXPERIMENTAL
This study was carried out by a cooperative program between the Univer-
sity of Southern California and the California State Department of Health.
Liquid wastes were collected at 5 major Class I landfill sites in the Los
Angeles basin: B.K.K. in West Covina; Pacific Ocean Disposal (P.O.D.) in
Wilmington; Operating Industries (O.I.) in Monterey Park, Calabasas (C.B.);
and Palos Verdes (P.V.) B.K.K., P.O.D., and O.I. sites are operated by the
Los Angeles County Sanitation District. A hydrogeologic description of the
five sites is presented in Appendix B. Assessment of waste hazards, environ-
mental impacts and compatibilities must be primarily based on a sound know-
ledge of waste chemical composition. Such knowledge requires a simple, rapid
and representative sampling method along with accurate analytical techniques.
The parameters listed below must be considered in hazardous waste sam-
pling programs.
Phase Complexity: Hazardous wastes appear as all phases: solid, aqueous, and
organic liquid. Very often the waste is a complex mixture of all of these
phases. Sampling techniques must be able to give representative fractions of
all phases.
Access to Waste: Hazardous wastes are contained in ponds, vacuum trucks,
barrels, etc. Sampling must be adaptable to all of these.
Chemical Reactivity: Many wastes are highly corrosive or strong oxidizers.
Many wastes, although not particularly reactive are, because of their physi-
cal nature, very hard on equipment. These features place severe demands on
equipment design.
Safety: The relatively undefined nature of most waste creates a significant
safety problem to sampling personnel. Rather extensive precautions must be
taken.
Sample Containment and Preservation: The containment and preservation of
corrosive, highly toxic, or highly volotile samples in the field present
significant problems.
SAMPLING TEAMS
Each sampling team consisted of three persons. Two functioned as pri-
mary sample collectors, and one as record keeper. Prior to the sampling pro-
ararn all personnel were thoroughly briefed on procedures and safety precau-
tions This was very important, for several of the personnel had little or
-------
no experience in hazardous waste sampling. However, everyone involved direct-
ly in sampling activities in this program had some experience and background
in either chemistry and/or industrial hygiene. The teams appeared at dispos-
al sites on an unannounced basis and remained at each site from one-half to a
full working day. Over a period of two weeks, the teams circulated among all
the Class I disposal sites in the Los Angeles Basin according to the schedule
shown in Table 12. The purpose of this movement was to avoid major perturba-
tions in normal waste traffic patterns. An effort was made not to establish
a pattern of sampling at any one disposal site. These precautions were ne-
cessary because it has been the experience of the California Department of
Health that the presence of sampling personnel at a disposal site significant-
ly affects waste volumes. Information haulers and disposal sites. This fact-
or can lead to a total unrepresentative sample of waste input. Based on a re-
view of manifests over a one year period of time, it is estimated that samples
collected during the study, represent 90% of the waste types received at these
sites over a one year period. The remaining 10%, mainly seasonal types of
disposal, could not be sampled due to the short duration of the program.
SAMPLING EQUIPMENT INVENTORY
TableA-2 lists the complement of sampling equipment which each team
carried. This equipment list was constructed to supply needs for all the
necessary functions of the sampling team. It was considered important to
have each team self-contained and independent of the disposal site facilities.
These necessary functions are:
a. Sampling acquisition
b. Equipment cleaning
c. Sample storage
d. Safety protection
e. Record keeping
A conventional 3/4-ton pickup truck with a utility side body was used
as the sampling vehicle. The utility body provided adequate storage for all
sampling equipment. This same basic vehicle was later adapted, with some
modifications into the field surveillance vehicle currently used by the
California Department of Health.
SAMPLING PROCEDURES
The object of the sampling program was to obtain representative samples
of all liquid, sludge, and solid wastes delivered to a disposal site during
the time when sampling personnel are present. This presents some operational
problems when high volume industrial waste sites are involved. During a typ-
ical day, 40-50 trucks deliver waste to the site. The deliveries are not e-
ven.ly spaced and several trucks may arrive simultaneously. Sampling proce-
dures must be efficient to prevent excessive delay of the trucks. Such de-
lay usually causes severe complaints by the disposal site management and by
truckers. Efficient procedures are additionally important because it is dur-
ing these periods of high activity that accidents have the greatest probabil-
ity of occurring.
-------
The stepwise procedures for sampling are given below.
1. Intercept Waste Trucks: At most industrial waste sites in Califor-
nia, incoming trucks must stop at a toll gate to submit a waste manifest and
to pay disposal charges. At this time, sampling personnel approach the truck
driver and request a copy of the manifest. The manifest is checked for de-
clared waste composition, physical state of the waste, and possible safety
hazards. The manifest is given to the recorder and appropriate information
is transferred to the waste sampling form (Appendix C). The truck operator
is requested to open the center inspection hatch of the truck.
2. Sample acquisition: Sampling personnel put on all necessary per-
sonal safety equipment, which includes full protective boots, respirators
with general purpose filter cartridges, hard hat and full face shield. The
person sampling must climb onto the truck and walk along narrow catwalks;
therefore, safety equipment should not be too cumbersome. When the primary
sampling person is positioned at the opened tank hatch, the backup person
hands him the Coliwasa sampling equipment (Figure 1). This backup person
then stands ready with sample container and to aid in any problems.
The Coliwasa waste sampler is relatively simple, consisting of a hollow
PVC tube, nominally 1 1/2" I,D., with a concentric PVC rod which is attached
to a neoprene stopper. The sampler is lowered into a liquid or sludge waste
to cut across a column of material. The sampler is then closed at the bottom,
trapping a sample inside which is representative of all the layers and phases
of the waste. Volume of sample taken is about 350 ml/foot of depth of sample.
The waste samples are transferred directly from the sample tube to a one-
liter polyethylene container.
Jars were sealed with plastic lids, numbered, and stored on the sampling
truck for approximately 4 days before transfer to 4°C storage. Sample jars
were used directly from manufacturers' cases without washing. During sam-
pling, open jars were inverted to prevent contamination by trace metals in
the atmosphere. An acidic blank prepared in a sampling jar showed no appre-
ciable amounts of heavy metals.
A schematic diagram for sample collection, preparation, and analysis
appears in Figure 2.
Using the sampling equipment available at the time of this study (Coli-
wasa Model A), certain problems were encountered in the transfer step. When
the sample tube was withdrawn from the liquid waste truck, occasionally the
sample retaining stopper at the bottom of the tube would dislodge and release
the samples. If this occurred while the tube was still in the tank, the
sample would simply discharge back into the tank. If, however, discharge
occurred during the transfer from the tank truck to the area of the sample
bottle, a possible accident could occur. This feature was a design flaw in
the Coliwasa Model A, which is to be corrected in later models. The necessary
improvement would be some type of positive locking mechanism to prevent acci-
dental discharge of the waste. After the sample bottle is properly sealed
and labeled, the sampling equipment must be cleansed in preparation for the
next waste load. The entire process of sampling from stopping of the incoming
-------
Volume =.41 I(.43 qt.)/ft. depth
//
1
'2"
6
j
i
v r
/
^
0"
t
4i
i
i
3/8 PVC rod
\7/& -outer dimensions
dimensions
Class 200 PVC Pipe
No. 91/2 neoprene stopper
-3/ 8 S.S. nut and washer
Figure 1. Composite liquid waste sampler (Coliwasa)
-------
SAMPLE COLLECTION
_SAHPLE PREPARATI ON
tea
DIGESTION
DILUTION
\jllFILTRATIO
E3 (O.ly) *
To Berkeley State Department
of Health
SAMPLE AMALYS I S
Total Trace
Metal Cone.
on Truck
Digestion
D i 1 ution
Factor
Cone, of
Dissolved
Trace Metals
on Truck
Relative Volume
Measurements
pH
-Org
Flashpoint
Acid/Base
Equivalents
Figure 2. Schematic of sample handling.
truck to equipment cleanup takes approximately 5-6 minutes.
3. Equipment Cleaning: Sampling equipment cleaning is one of the more
difficult and time consuming steps in the entire sampling program. Due to
the wide variety of waste products which include heavy, viscous, tacky, odi-
ferous, and generally obnoxious materials, cleaning of equipment becomes a
challenge. The procedure used in this study involved just a rinse with a
strong aqueous detergent and scrubbing with a long-handled bottle brush. This
was followed by a rinse and scrub with trichloroethane followed by air drying.
A 55-gallon "slop" barrel was used to catch all wash water and solvent, rags,
and other discards. The barrel was properly disposed in the disposal site
following the sampling period. It was the experience of this study that a
Coliwasa tube had to be discarded after being used 5 or 6 times due to exces-
sive contamination. Decontamination of these sampling tubes required too much
time and excessive use of solvents. As a result, the sampling equipment must
be at least semi-disposable. This required that it be easily fabricated from
inexpensive materials. The Coliwasa described in this study meets these cri-
teria.
10
-------
ANALYTICAL METHODS
General Parameters
Solids content (total, soluble, insoluble), pH, acidity and alkalinity
were measured in accordance with procedures described in Standard Methods.
14th Edition.24 Mineral acidity and total alkalinity were determined by po-
tentiometric titration to pH 4. Flash point was measured by a Tag open-cup
tester in accordance with ASTM Standard Methods, D 1310-72." phase distrib-
ution (organic, aqueous, solid) was determined by centrifugation for 10 min-
utes at 12,000 RPM; the separated phases were removed and recorded as a
weight percent. Volatile organics were determined by distillation of the
organic phase at 95°C with a Kontes microsteam distillation unit.
Metal Species
Sample preparation for filtration and digestion included thorough washing
of all labware which would come in contact with samples. The following wash-
ing procedure was used: Scrubbing with a brush using detergent and industrial
water. Three rinses with deionized water. Soaked in 5% HNOs for 5 days.
Rinsed with deionized water. Dried in low temperature oven. Stored in washed
polyethylene bags.
Samples, collected as described above, were stored at 4°C in the original
one-liter plastic containers. After one week, about one-third of each sample
was poured into an identically labeled container and sent to the State Depart-
ment of Health for analysis of organics and determination of percent liquid
and solid volumes. Samples were returned to 4°C storage until aliquots were
taken for filtration and digestion. Samples were kept at room temperature for
approximately two days during this process. One aliquot was poured first
through a #1 Whatman Filter and then passed through a 0.1 nm mi Hi pore filter
into a sample bottle. Another aliquot (5 ml) was placed in a teflon beaker
and digested with HNOs, HF and HC104. The resulting liquid was centrifuged,
poured into sample bottles, and diluted.
Sample Analysis
The partitioning of trace metals between those in the soluble phase and
those associated with nonfilterable solids was attained by analyzing the fil-
trates (0.1 nm) and the acid digested total sample. Nonfilterable solids are
then determined by subtracting dissolved trace metal concentrations from total
concentrations.
Seventeen metal species were analyzed, including: Be, Na, Ag, Mg, K, Ca,
V, Cr, Mn, Fe, Ni, Cu, In, As, Cd, Ba, and Pb. All analyses were performed on
a Perkin-Elmer Model 305B double beam atomic absorption spectrophotometer e-
quipped with a HGA 2100 graphite furnace. Sodium and potassium were analyzed
using emission flame photometry. The graphite furnace was employed in the
analysis of As and Cd, low concentration toxic elements, and Be, V, and Ba
which require special fuel (nitrous oxide-acetylene) when analyzed by flame
methods. Levels of the other elements (Mg, Ca, Cr, Mn, Fe, Ni, Ca, Zn, Ag,
and Pb) were determined by direct aspiration into an air-acetylene flame.
11
-------
Apparatus
(A) A Perkin-Elmer Model 305B double beam spectrophotometer equipped with a
HGA 2100 graphite furnace and deuterium arc background corrector.
(B) Perkin-Elmer Model 56 single pen recorder.
(C) Perkin-Elmer hollow cathode lamps (Be, Mg, Ca, V, Cr, Mn, Fe, Ni, Cu, Zn,
Ag, Cd, Ba, Pb).
(D) Perkin-Elmer Electrodeless Discharge Lamp (for As) and power supply.
(E) Corning Mega-pure water distillation unit with Arrowhead Industrial
water ion exchange bed.
Reagents
(A) Prepurified air
(B) Acetylene-standard commercial grade (for flame)
(C) Deionized distilled water
(D) Nitric acid, HN03, cone, ultra pure ultrex nitric acid
(E) Standard metal solutions
(F) Prepurified Ar gas (for HGA)
(G) Ni (N03)2 for As
(H) Hydrogen sulfide
Procedure
Washing Procedures
Washing procedures were the same as those outlined for preparation of
sample bottles for filtration and digestion.
Standard Solutions
Standard solutions were prepared in opaque polyethylene bottles. Several
bottles were filled with concentrated ultra pure HN03, allowed to stand 14
days, and analyzed for metal contamination. None was detected. Bottles were
prepared as outlined above. Appropriate amounts of stock 1000 ppm solutions
of each element to be analyzed were injected into the prepared bottles using
Eppendorf micro pi pets with disposable tips. Concentrated ultra pure HN03 and
deionized distilled water was added diluting to the appropriate volumes.
These standards were checked with values of previously prepared standards (and
found to agree).
12
-------
Flame Atomizer Determination Method
This was the preferred method for determination of most elements because
it is the fastest method capable of detecting the species in the ug/ml concen-
tration range. A Perkin-Elmer Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer Model 305B
with flame atomizer and deuterium arc background corrector was used. Oper-
ating conditions are listed in Table A-3. The procedures were essentially
those listed in the Perkin-Elmer publication "Analytic Methods for Atomic
Absorption Spectrophotometer".26 Emissi-on parameters were also developed.
Some operating conditions were changed midway in the analysis of sample
metrices. For example, an air-rich oxidizing flame increases sensitivity in
the analysis of Mg, Mn, Fe, Ni, Cu, In, Ag, Pb, Na, and K. However, the mat-
rices of some samples acted as fuels producing reducing flames which undoubt-
edly yielded low values for the affected elements in those samples.
The standard additions methods to eliminate matrix effects were not gen-
erally used because time limitations magnified the intrinsic properties of
hazardous wastes which require special handling and preparation. The major
matrix effect is expected to be the lowering of dissolved metal values for
samples which were somewhat viscous and hence were aspirated at a slower rate
than the standards. Precipitates which formed in some samples upon dilution
probably had the same effect.
HGA Direct Injection Method
A Perkin-Elmer 2100 Heated Graphite Atomizer attached to a Perkin-Elmer
Model 305B double beam spectrophotometer was used to determine Be, V, As, Cd,
and Ba levels. Appropriate hollow cathode lamps were used except for As anal-
ysis, for which a discharge lamp (EDL) was employed.
Operating parameters for' HGA analysis were those recommended in the 1973
Perkin-Elmer publication, "Standard Conditions for the HGA" with very slight
modifications (see Table A-3). Prepurified argon gas was used in the contin-
uous flow mode (normal) with gas flow greater than those recommended. The
modification increased the linear concentration range with tolerable sensitiv-
ity losses. The desirability of extending the linear range is apparent upon
examination of TableA-4 which shows the wide concentration ranges encountered
in hazardous waste samples.
Sensitivities are generally much greater than those obtainable by flame
atomization. Sensitivities are not uniform for each element. Changes in
sample volume delivered into the HGA were injected. Sensitivities were prob-
ably less prominent than when using flame atomization. Other matrix effects,
for example, the possible lowering of values by the presence of inorganic
salts, was randomly checked by standard additions method in 10 samples.
13
-------
SECTION 4
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
A total of 320 waste samples were collected. Suplicate samples (those
originating from the same source believed to be identical to previous samples)
were identified, and. sorted so that one representative of each duplicate set
would 6e analyzed. This operation reduced the number of samples for metal
analyses to 99 for the five sites: BtK,K. (41), O..It (40), P,V. (14), P.O.D.
[3), and C.B, Oh
While the EPA is interested in obtaining information on the input of haz-
ardous wastes into specific sites to be extrapolated to the national scale,
the State of California is interested in studying the flow and mass deposit
rate of metal species determined in this study, compared with other areas of
the United States, will probably vary greatly depending on the nature and vol-
ume of regional industrialization,
The calculated mass deposit on rates are based on the total volume inputs
estimated by the Class I site operators, These values are significantly larger
than the hazardous waste volume flow rates estimated by the California State
Department of Health based on extrapolated sample volumes (Table 1).
TABLE 1, VOLUME INPUTCLASS I SITES, 1 X 1Q5/DAY
Site
BKK
01
PV
CB
POD
Site
Operator
5.8
4.7
9.7
1.1
1.3
Calif. Dept.
of Health
3.7
3.0
3.2
*
*
% of
Operator
64
64
33
*
*
Site
Estimate
* not determined because of insufficient samples
Several possible reasons for the large differences in the estimated volume
flow rates are:
14
-------
a. Errors resulting form the extrapolation of 5 sampling days to an
average basis
b. Not all hazardous wastes were accounted for during the sampling
period due to:
(1) some trucks were missed because of a large number of simultane-
ous arrivals;
(2) some haulers avoided State monitoring personnel:
(3) "off hours" dumping.
c. -Errors made by site operators in estimating total input
d. Some wastes entering the landifll were recorded as non-hazardous.
A total of 3,366 metal analyses were performed during the course of this
study (99 samples, 17 sediments, soluble and total concentration). Estimates
were made for the average daily deposition of 17 metal species, average metal
concentration, and average percent concentration of these species in the solu-
ble phase. The results are presented in four general categories: (1) individ-
ual sites, (2) combined sites, (3) industry types, and (4) related industries.
INDIVIDUAL SITES
Hazardous wastes are often a complex mixture of solid, aqueous, and organ-
ic liquid phases. The phase distribution, acid/base equivalents, range of pH
and flash point for the volume sampled, and estimated daily input of liquids
and solids are summarized for the five sites (Table 2).
The data suggest that different types of industrial wastes at individual
sites are major contributors to the total hazardous waste stream input. For
example, over 90% of the total volume input at P.O.D. are acidic liquid wastes.
The low range of pH values, i.e., 1 to 4, indicates the presence of strong
mineral acids. The B.K.K. site is characterized by a relatively low 62% aque-
ous volume input. The 18% liquid organic phase, 23% of which is volatile (B.
Pt. less than 95°C), is much larger than the values obtained for the other
sites.
The wide range of parameter values in Table 2 is consistent with the vary-
ing volume percent contributions of different industry types at specific sites
as shown in Table 3. The Calabasas site is not included in Table 3 because
only three samples were collected.
The B.K.K. site is of particular interest because it is one of the largest
waste disposal areas in the Western United States. It averages about 5.8 x
105 I/day of industrial wastes. Approximately 60% of this volume is classified
by the California State Department of Health as hazardous. This volume repre-
sents about 30% of the liquid industrial waste disposed of in the Los Angeles
area and approximately 45% of the total hazardous wastes.27
15
-------
TABLE 2. GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF SAMPLED VOLUME AND ESTIMATED DAILY INPUTS INTO CLASS I LANDFILLS
Site
PV
01
BKK
CB
POD
Volume Sampled
Phase Distribution
Total
(a)
1660
1140
1710
46
108
Aqueous
(a)
1180
743
1060
40
101
(b)
71
65
62
87
94
Organic
Phase
(a)
79
40
306
0.8
(h)
(b)
4.7
3-5
18
1.7
(h)
Volati le
Organic
B. Pt.<95°C
(a)
6.6
1.5
71
(h)
(h)
(c)
8.4
3.8
22.9
(h)
(h)
Solids
Total
(d)
380
1250
570
6
30
Soluble
(d)
29
970
220
1
23
(e)
7.6
78
39
17
77
Insoluble
(d)
350
280
350
5
7
(e)
92.4
22
61
83
23
Ac i d i ty
(f)
2.8x 103
8.4xl03
6.5xlO/(
(h)
2.9 x 105
(g)
1.7
7.4
38
fh)
2700
Alkal ini ty
(f)
180
1.1 x 105
9.4x 10**
(h)
(h)
(g)
0.11
97
55
(h)
(h)
Flash
Pt.
Range
°C
32-93
17-88
24-93
-
---
pH
Range
1.18-
11.5
3-12
1.1-
13
5-11
1-4
Site
PV
01
BKK
CB
POD
Total
% Total
Estimated Daily Input (i)
Phase Distribution
Total
(a)
970
470
580
110
130
2300
Aqueous
(a)
690
310
360
96
120
1600
69.6
Organ! c
Phase
(a)
46
17
110
1.9
--
180
7.8
Volatile
Organic
B. Pt.<95°C
(a)
3.9
0.62
24
--
--
29
1-3
Solids
Total
(d)
220
520
190
14
36
980
Soluble
(d)
17
400
75
2.4
28
520 1
53-0
Insoluble
(d)
200
120
120
12
8
460
47.0
(a) 1 x 105
(b) % total volume
(c) % organic phase
(d) kgxIO3
(e) % total sol ids
(f) total equiv.
(g) meq/1
(h) negligible value
(i) based on 1974 estimated daily
volume input determined by site
operators
-------
TABLE 3.
Industry
Type
Petroleum
Chemical
Metal
Food
Industrial Cleaning
Misc. /Unknown
INDUSTRY TYPES
B.K.K.
39.7
37.8
4.2
6.7
4.4
7.2
DISCHARGING
% Total Vo
O.I.
29.2
10.1
10.1
4.5
36.0
10.1
INTO CLASS I
lume Sampled
P.V.
69.2
2.3
1.2
0.0
18.6
8.8
SITES
P.O.D.
16.0
0.0
39.2
0.0
6.4
38.4
The concentrations of metal species in each sample from O.I., B.K.K., P.V.,
C.B., and P.O.D. sites are given in Tables D-l, D-2, and D-3 (Appendix D).
Each sample number is cross-indexed in the Manifest Summary (Appendix E) from
which the industry type and volume sampled can be obtained. The weighted aver-
age concentration of metal species in the total volume sampled at each site and
the estimated daily deposition of each species (total, solid, soluble) are shown
in Table F-l - F-17 (Appendix F) and Figures A-l - A-4. The weight percent of
soluble metal species discharged at each site is shown in Figures A-5 - A-8.
The Calabasas site is not included because only one sample was analyzed.
The volume flow and concentration of soluble toxic metals presents a
potential threat to the quality of groundwater and surface water supplies.
Physical and chemical properties of the soil which may be affected include
attenuation capacity, field capacity, flocculation or dispersion of clay
particles, hydraulic conductivity, infiltration rates, and toxic element
accumulation.
Leachate will not be produced until a sizeable portion of the landfill
has reached field capacity (saturation). However, some leachate may be pro-
duced immediately after waste disposal by compaction of initially wet mater-
ial or by channeling of liquid through the fills. If concentrations of haz-
ardous wastes are high in the leachate, the soil attenuation capacity may be
reached relatively quickly. The cation exchange capacity will vary with the
nature and concentration of ions in solution. Clay particles may either
flocculate or disperse depending upon their state of hydration and the compo-
sition of their exchangeable cations. Dispersion usually occurs with monova-
lent and highly hydrated cations, e.g., sodium. Conversely, flocculation
occurs at high solute concentrations and/or in the presence of divalent and
trivalent cations.28 Because of the various chemical, physical, and biologi-
cal processes, the hydraulic conductivity may change as liquid permeates and
flows in a soil. Changes occurring in the composition of the exchangeable-
ion complex, as when the leachate entering the soil has a different concentra-
tion of solutes than the original soil solution, can greatly change the hy-
draulic conductivity.29'31 The detachment and migration of clay particles
17
-------
during prolonged flow may result in the clogging of pores. Changes in the
soil permeability will affect the vertical and lateral migration rates of
leachate. If ponding occurs, surface water contamination could result from
runoff. Further studies on the inter-actions of hazardous wastes and soil,
particularly the effect on hydraulic conductivity and particle size distribu-
tion, should be conducted.
COMBINED SITES
The minimum and maximum concentrations and weighted average of metal
species in 99 samples (5 sites) are listed in Table A-4. The average daily
deposition was obtained by multiplying the weighted average concentration of
each element by the estimated daily volume.
The combined results for five Class I sites in the Los Angeles area are
shown in Figure A-9. In Figure A-9 the unshaded portion of a histogram repre-
sents the weight of that element deposited in the dissolved fraction; the
shaded portion represents that deposited with the solid fraction; together
they represent the total weight deposited. From this projection, one may
rank species according to theri estimated daily deposition rate:
Total: Na>Fe>Ca>Zn>K>Mg>Cu>Cr>Ni>Pb>Ba>Mn>V>Cd>As>Be>Ag
Soluble: Na>Fe>Ca>Cu>Zn>K>Cr>Mg>Ni>Pb>Mn>Ba>V>Cd>As>Ag>Be
Solid: Na>Ca>Fe>Mg>Zn>K>Pb>Cu>Cr>Ba>Ni>Mn>V>Cd>As>Be>Ag
The estimated daily mass deposition and distribution of eiaht toxic metal
species, viz., As, Be, Ca. Cr, Cu, Pl>, V, and Zn are presented in Table 4.
TABLE 4. ESTIMATED DAILY DEPOSITION AND DISTRIBUTION OF TOXIC METAL SPECIES
Metal As Be Cd Cr Cu Pb V Zn
g/day
Total 4.9x103 310 7.5x103 2.1x10$ 2.7xl05 6.6xl04 9.8xl03 4.7xl05
Soluble 310 130 530 1.8x10$ 2.3xl05 2.3xl04 2.3x103 2.0xl05
Solid 4.6xl03 180 7.0xl03 3.0xl04 4.0xl04 4.3xl04 7.5xl03 2.7xl05
Wt.%
Soluble 6.4 41.9 7.1 87.5 85.2 34.8 23.5 42.1
Solid 93.6 58.1 92.9 14.3 14.8 65.2 76.5 57.9
18
-------
The average percent of metal species in the soluble phase is shown in
Figure A-10.The data can be arranged in percent ranges (Table 5).
TABLE 5. WEIGHT PERCENT OF SOLUBLE METAL SPECIES
Metal Specie Weight % in Soluble Phase
As, Ba, Cd <10
Mg, V 10-30
Be, Ca, K, Mn, Na, Pb, Zn 30-50
Ag, Ni 50-70
Cr, Cu, Fe 70-90
Concentration distribution curves (total and soluble) for toxic metals
in the total volume sampled at the five sites is presented in Figures A-ll -
A-18. The data are summarized in Table 6.
The data in Tables 4-6 indicate that copper, chromium, and zinc represent
the largest pollution loads entering the Class I sites in terms of: (1) mass
deposition input; (2) weight percent in the soluble phase; and (3) load inten-
sity, i.e., many samples had very high concentrations of copper, chromium, and
zinc which could result in severe shock loading of water supplies if not at-
tenuated or contained within the landfill site.
INDUSTRIES BY TYPE
The 320 samples collected during the study are representative of 17 des-
ignated industry types shown in Table A-5. These 17 industry types are com-
bined into six general industry groups, viz., petroleum, chemical, metal,
food, industrial, cleaning, miscellaneous/unknown. The estimated daily mass
deposition of metal species (g/day) for the six general industry groups is
summarized in Table 7. The estimated daily mass deposition of metal species
for 17 industry types is presented in Tables A-6 - A-23 and summarized in
Table A-23.
The highest average daily deposition of selected metal species generated
by general industry types is listed in Table 8.
19
-------
TABLE 6. SUMMARY OF TOXIC METAL CONCENTRATIONS
Metal
As
Be
Cd
Cr
Cu
Pb
V
Zn
Maximum Cone.
mg/1
Total
210
2.5
34
20,000
20,000
1300
310
14,000
Soluble
9.5
2.5
10
20,000
20,000
840
300
5100
Percent! le Cone, (a)
90
(b)
2.5
0.35
10
130
95
110
5-5
250
(c)
0.25
0.045
0.5
22
15
8.0
0.81
35
80
(b)
1.3
0.13
4.0
43
32
36
3-0
82
(c)
(d)
0.018
0.21
4.0
2.0
2.5
0.30
7.8
70
(b)
0.94
0.066
1.8
19
18
17
2.0
57
(c)
(d)
0.009
0.13
1.9
(d)
1.2
0.15
3.6
60
(b)
0.67
0.040
0.81
10
12
7.4
1.4
45
1 (c)
(d)
0.005
(d)
1.2
(d)
1.0
(d)
2.2
50
(b)
0.44
0.026
0.32
5.5
8.2
2.5
1.0
32
(c)
(d)
0.003
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
1.4
ro
O
(a) % of samples < given concentration
(b) Total concentration, mg/1
(c) Soluble concentration, mg/1
(d) Data not plotted because of graph paper scale limitations
-------
TABLE 7. SUMMARY: INDUSTRY TYPES DISCHARGING TO CLASS I LANDFILLS
Est.
Total
g/dayt
310
4.9x 103
5.4x lO4
310
2.5x 10b
7.5x 103
2.1 x 105
2.7 x 105
4.5x 106
4.3x 105
4. 1 x 105
3.7x ^0^
1.1 x 107
8. 7x10**
6,6x10**
9.8x 103
4.7x 105
\l ndustry
Elements^
Ag
As
Ba
Be
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
Fe
K
Mg
Mn
Na
Ni
Pb
V
Zn
Petroleum
A
110
630
1 . 1 x 1 01*
140
I.Ox 106
4.6x 103
2.2 x 10**
6.4x 103
3-3x105
2.4 x 105
2.2x 105
9. 1 x 103
3.2x 106
6.4x 103
4. 4 x 103
2.7x 103
2.4 x lO*1
ft*
35-1
12.9
19.7
45.8
41.2
61.2
10.3
2.3
7-4
55.3
53.5
25.0
28.3
7-3
6.7
27.4
5.1
Chemical
*
45
3.4 x 103
1.3x 103
33
3.2 x 105
160
5.9 x 103
5-1 x 103
2.8x 105
1.2 x 104
4. Ox 10
1.5 x 103
4.3x106
1.8x 103
4.0 x 103
210
1.5 x 10**
* ;':
14.4
70.2
2.4
10.7
13.2
2.0
2.9
1.8
6.2
2.8
9.6
4.0
37.7
2.1
6.1
2.2
3.2
Metal
"h
63
110
400
19
3 . 8 x 10^
570
1 .6 x 105
4.0 x 104
5.3x 105
2.0 x 10*4
1.5 x ID*1
3.5 x 103
1.1 x 106
3 . 7 x 1 O*4
8.8x 103
160
3-2 x 105
**
20.1
2.1
0.7
6.3
1.6
7.7
76.5
14.6
11.9
4.7
3-5
9.7
9.3
42.2
13.3
1.6
67.3
Food
A
--
88
370
10
2.1 x 10**
24
1.2x 103
570
1 . 8 x 1 04
2.1 x 104
9.2 x 103
540
2.6x 105
270
1.2 x 103
210
4.3 x 103
**
--
1.8
0.7
3.3
0.9
0.3
Industrial
Cleaning
A
46
520
6.3x 103
51
1 .4x 105
1 .9 x 103
0.6 i 1 .0 x lO*1
0.2
0.4
4.9
2.2
1.5
2.3
0.3
1.8
2.2
0-9
1.1x10
2.5x 105
8. Ox lO4
5.1x10^
4.2 x 103
1.8x 106
1.7x 103
4.2x lo"
580
3. Ox 10**
sV;V
14.7
10.6
11.8
16.5
5.7
25.3
4.8
4.0
5.7
18.8
12.3
11.6
15.9
2.0
63-1
6.0
6.4
Mi seel laneous/
Unknown
x
49
150
3.4x10
53
9 . 3 x 1 05
260
1.1 x TO1*
2.1 x 105
3.1 x 10b
5.9x 104
7.7X1011
1 .8x 10*4
7.8x 105
4. Ox 10**
6. Ox 103
5.9x 103
81. x 1011
* A
15.7
3.1
64.7
17-4
37.6
3-5
5.1
77.1
68.6
13.8
18.8
48.2
6.8
45.9
9.2
60.7
17.2
* Estimated Ava. a/dav (5 Class 1 Landfills) t Site Ix103/day Site Jx103/day
ro
% Total
Based on estimated daily volume determined by
the California State Department of Health
0. I .
B.K.K.
P.V.
470
580
970
C.B.
P.O.D.
Total
110
130
2660
-------
TABLE 8, MAXIMUM INPUT OF METAL SPECIES
CONTRIBUTED BY GENERAL INDUSTRY TYPES
Metal Species (%
Ag (35) , Be (46) ,
Cd (61) , K (55) ,
As (70) , Na
Ba (65) , Cu (77) ,
Mn (48) , Ni (46)
Cr (77), Zn
of Total)
Ca (41),
Mg (54)
(38)
Fe (69),
, V (61)
(67)
Pb (63)
Industry
Petroleum
Chemical
Misc . /Unknown
Metal
Industrial
Cleaning
Food
The maximum deposition of metal species generated by 17 industry types
is shown in Table 9.
TABLE 9. MAXIMUM INPUT OF METAL'SPECIES
CONTRIBUTED BY INDUSTRY TYPES
Metal Species (% of Total)
Ag (35) , Be (25) , Ca (38) ,
K (42), Mg (39)
As (69)
Ba (60)
Cd (60)
Cr (57)
Cu (77) , Fe (67) , Mn (41) ,
Ni (46) , V (59)
Na (36)
Pb (55)
Zn (49)
Industry
Petroleum Production
(drilling)
Chemical Manufacturing
(general)
Misc. Industry
Petroleum Refining
Metal Plating,
Etching, Cleaning
Unknown Industry
Chemical Manufacturing
(pesticide)
Tank Cleaning
(industry unknown)
Metal Foundry
22
-------
The reliability of data correlation with specific industries depends on
the accuracy and completeness of individual manifests. Unfortunately, some
manifests encountered in this study were inadequate, e.h., -4% of the manifests
did not list the company's name or type of industry; 7% of the manifests did
not note the industry type or waste type. The unknown industry waste streams
account for approximately 6% of the total volume sampled (Table 16): however,
this volume, when adjusted for an average daily basis, represents the largest
mass deposition of Cu, Fe, Mn, Ni, and V. Although the data obtained for
wastes of unknown origin cannot be correlated with specific industries, it is
of value in determining the total mass deposition of selected metals in Class
I Landfills. Hopefully, this situation will be rectified by the recently
amended Solid Waste Disposal Act^6 in which required hazardous waste manifests
are defined as follows: The term 'manifest' means the form used for identify-
ing the quantity, composition and the origin, routing and destination of haz-
ardous waste during its transportation from the point of generation to the
point of disposal, treatment, or storage.
The contribution of general industry types to the total volume input is
shown in Table 10.
TABLE 10. VOLUME INPUT GENERATED
BY GENERAL INDUSTRY TYPES
Industry Type % Total Volume
Petroleum 45.9
Chemical 17.9
Metal 6.0
Food 3.6
Industrial Cleaning 17.4
Misc./Unknown 9.2
Total 100.0
Approximately one-half of the total volume of hazardous wastes was gen-
erated by the petroleum industry. About 35% was contributed by the chemical
industry and industrial clenaing. The metal, food and miscellaneous/unknown
industries each produced less than 10% of the total daily volume.
Approximately 70% of the estimated total volume input of 2.3 x 106 I/day
is in the aqueous phase and 8% consists of an organic liquid phase, 16% of
which is volatile (B. Pt. less than 95°C). The total volume input of liquid
organic wastes for the combined sites is estimated to be 1.8 x 10b I/day
(Table 2).
23
-------
The volume percent generated by 17 industry types is presented in Table
A-24 and summarized for six general industry types in Table 11.
TABLE 11. VOLUME INPUT OF LIQUID ORGANIC WASTES
CONTRIBUTED BY GENERAL INDUSTRY TYPES
Industry Type % Total Liquid
Organic Volume
Petroleum 49.5
Chemical 21.4
Metal 0.7
Food 0.3
Industrial Cleaning 21.7
Misc./Unknown 6.4
Total 100.0
Table 11 shows that approximately 50% of the total organic liquid input
was generated by the petroleum industry; 43% of the volume was equally divided
between the chemical and industrial cleaning industries. The remaining 7% was
contributed by the metal, food, and miscellaneous/unknown industries.
There are some unusual features to this industry waste composition corre-
lation (Tables 8 and 9). These points are covered below.
1. Largest input of beryllium appears from the petroleum industry. Other
studies indicate that berylliem waste primarily originates from the elec-
tronics industry.
2. Barium, vanadium, nickel and manganese are listed as industry unknown,
whereas California Department of Health's experience would indicate these
metals orginated primarily from the petroleum industry.
3. Chromium is listed as a waste product of the metals industry, whereas in
many areas the major producer of chromium is the tanning industry.
4. Primary source of lead waste is indicated as industrial cleaning. Other
data would indicate that this must correspond to tank cleaning in the
petroleum industry.
The lack of substantiated data has generated many concerns over the prac-
tice of landfill disposal of hazardous wastes. Uncertainty exists as to the
effectiveness of hydrogeologic isolation of the landfill in providing long-term
24
-------
protection of groundwater and surface water supplies. There is insufficient
information on the life span of hazardous waste regarding leachate generating
capabilities. Additionally, many questions exist regarding the migration of
soluble toxicants and transport mechanisms of hazardous wastes in contact with
landfill leachates and soils of varying chemical and physical properties. The
results obtained in this study, in conjunction with EPA sponsored attenuation
and particulate leaching investigations, should prove useful in approximating
the pollution potential of hazardous waste from selected industries.
25
-------
REFERENCES
1. Dansby, F.R., "Selected Problems of Hazardous Waste Management in Califor-
nia," Report of the Hazardous Wastes Working Group of the Governor's Task
Force on Solid Waste Management, Jan. 1970, 39 pp.
2. Hanks, T.B., "Solid Waste/Disease Relationships," PHS No. 999-UIH-6, 1967.
3. Farb, D. and S.D. Ward, "Information About Hazardous Waste Management
Facilities," Environmental Protection Agency, EPA/530/SW-145, July 1975,
30 pp.
4. Environmental Protection Agency, "Hazardous Waste Management," Federal
Register. 40, No. 181 Sept. 17, 1975, p. 42993.
5. Environmental Protection Agency, "Hazardous Wastes," Pub. SW-138, 1975,
25 pp.
6. Lehman, J.P., "Federal Program for Hazardous Waste Management," Wa ste Age,
Sept. 1974.
7. Hanks, T.B., "Solid Waste-Disease Relationships," Aerojet General Corp.,
1967.
8. University of California, Berkeley, Sanitary Engineering Research Labora-
tory, "Comprehensive Studies of Solid Wastes Management," Second Annual
Report, 1969.
9. Environmental Protection Agency, "Hazardous Wastes and Their Management,"
Office of Public Affairs (A-107), May 1975.
10. Office of Solid Waste Management Programs, "Report to Congress: Disposal
of Hazardous Wastes," EPA SW-115, 1974, 110 pp.
11. U.S. Congress, "Clean Air Amendments of 1970," Public Law 91-604, HR 17255,
91st Congress, Oct. 18, 1972, 32 pp.
12. U.S. Congress, "Federal Water Pollution Control Act," Public Law 92-500,
92nd Congress, Oct. 18, 1972, 89 pp.
13. U.S. Congress, "Marine Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act," Title 1
Ocean Dumping, Section 101, Public Law 92-532, 92nd Congress, HR 9727,
Oct. 23, 1972, 12 pp.
26
-------
14. U.S. Congress, "Atomic Energy Act of 1954," Public Law 703, 83rd Congress,
HR 9757, Aug. 30, 1954, 41 pp. y
15. U.S. Congress, "Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenicide Act, Sec.
19, Disposal and Transportation," Public Law 92-516, 92nd Congress, HR
10729, Oct. 21, 1972, pp. 23-24-
16. Congressional Record-House, "Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 3251),"
Sept.'27, 1976, pp. H11166-H11182.
17. Fields, T.F., and A.W. Lindsey, "Landfill Disposal of Hazardous Wastes:
A Review of Literature Known Approaches, Environmental Protection Agency,
EPA/503/SW-165, Sept. 1975, 36 pp.
18. Environmental Protection Agency, "Hazardous Waste Disposal Damage Reports,"
EPA/530/SW-151, June 1975, 8 pp.
19. "Sanitary Landfill: Alternative to the Open Dump," Environmental Science
and Technology, 6. 5, May 1972, pp. 408-410.
20. Fischer, J.A. and D.L. Woodford, "Environmental Considerations of Sanitary
Landfills," Public Works, June 1973, pp. 93-96.
21. Salvato, J.A., et al., "Sanitary Landfill-Leaching Prevention and Control,"
J.W.P.C.F., 43. 10, Oct. 1971, pp. 2084-2100.
22. Coe, J.J., "Effect of Solid Waste Disposal on Groundwater Quality,"
J.A.W.W.A.. Dec. 1970, pp. 776-783.
23. Yen, T.F., Recycling and Disposal of Solid Wastes. Ann Arbor Science,
1974, pp. 349-367.
24. American Public Health Association, Standard Methods for the Examination
of Jjater and Was tewater, 14th edition", Washington"D.C., T976~.
25. "Standard Method of Test for Flash Point of Liquids by Tag Open-Cup
Apparatus," ASTMD 1310-72, 1973, p. 358.
i
26. Perkin-Elmer, "Instructions, Model 305B Atomic Adsorption Spectrophoto-
meter," Nov. 1973.
27. Stephens, R., "Sampling Techniques for Hazardous Waste Disposal Sites,"
California Department of Public Health, Feb. 2, 1976.
28. Jenny, H., and R.F. Reitemeier, "Ion Exchange in Relation to the Stability
of Colloidal Systems," J. Physical Chemistry, 39. 1935, pp. 593-604.
29. Brooks, R.H. et al., "The Effect of Various Exchangeable Cations upon the
Physical Condition of Soils," Soil Science Soc. Amer. Proc.. 20, 1956,
pp. 325-327.
27
-------
30. Quirk, J.P. and R.K. Schofield, "The Effect of Electrolytic Concentration
on Soil Permeability," J. Soil Science. 6. 1955, pp. 163-178.
31. Reeve, R.C. et a!., "A Comparison of the Effects of Exchangeable Sodium
and Potassium upon the Physical Conditions of Soils," Soil Science Soc.
Amer. Proc., 18, 1954, pp. 130-132.
32. "Amended Waste Discharge Requirements for the BKK Company Class I Land-
fill," California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles
Region, Oct. 4, 1976.
33. "Revised Waste Discharge Requirements for Operating Industries, Inc."
California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles, Sept. 14,
1976.
34. "Requirements for Disposal of Wastes at Landfill No. 5 Sanitation Dis-
tricts of Los Angeles County, Calabasas," California Regional Water Pol-
lution Control Board No! 4, Los Angeles Region, June 1, 1965.
35. "Revised Waste Discharge Requirements for County Sanitation Districts of
Los Angeles County Palos Verdes Landfill," California Regional Water
Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region, June 11, 1976.
36. "Recession of Waste Discharge Requirements for Pacific Ocean Disposal
Co., Inc.," California Regional Water Qaulity Control Board, Los Angeles
Region, Oct. 15, 1976.
28
-------
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
MISCELLANEOUS TABLES AND FIGURES
TABLE A-l SAMPLING SCHEDULE - SEPTEMBER 1975
\Date
Site \
BKK
01
PV
POD
2
X
X
3
X
X
k
X
X
5
X
X
6
7
8
X
X
9
X
X
10
X
X
11
X
X
12
X
X
Total
Days
5
k
5
k
29
-------
TABLE A-2 SAMPLING EQUIPMENT
Equipment List
Sampling:
1. Three (3) sample tubes
2. Sample bottles
3. Funnels
k. Tube Cleaners
5. Disposable wipers
6. Drums, 1-55 gal.; 3~5 gal. pails
7. 5 gal.-1,1,1, Trichloro Ethane
8. Spares: tubes
9. Spares: rods
10. Spares: stoppers
11. Ink pens: Mark-on-anything
12. Tool Kit
13- Clip Board
14. Analytical forms
15. First Aid Kit
Personnel: each team
3 protective suits
2 hard hats with shields
boots for each sampler/nor necessary for record keeper
2 respirators
k pair gloves
2 pair goggles
30
-------
TABLE_A-3 OPERATING. CONDITION FOR ATOMIC ABSORPTION SPECTROPHOTOMETER
GO
Analytical
Method
Atomic
Absorption
Spectrophotometry
by Direct
Aspiration
into an
Air-acetylene
Flame
Emission
Flame
Photometry
Heated
Graphite
Furnace
Atomization
Ar
El ement
Mg
Ca
Cr
Mn
Fe
Ni
Cu
Zn
Ag
Pb
Na
K
Be
V
As
Cd
Ba
D2 Arc
Used
+
+
+
+
+
-
+
+
Wavelength
(1)
NM
285.2
422.7
357.9
279.5
248.3
232
324.7
213.9
328.1
283.3
589
766.5
234.9
318.4
193.7
228.8
553.6
Slit
Width
NM
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.2
0.7
0.7
0.2
Sensitivity
gm/ml
0.3
0.08
0.1
0.05
0.12
0.15
0.1
0.02
0.06
0.5
1
Drying
Temp
110
110
110
100
110
Flame
Type
Oxidizing
Reducing
Reducing
Oxidizing
Oxidizing
Oxidizing
Oxidizing
Oxidizing
Oxidizing
Oxidizing
Oxidizing
Oxidizing
Char Atom
Temp Temp
C C
1200 2700
1700 2700
950 2700
250 2100
1600 2700
gas-normal flow
-------
TABLE A-4 RANGES AND WEIGHTED AVERAGES OF METAL CONCENTRATIONS
FOUND IN HAZARDOUS WASTE SAMPLES, mg/1 (5 SITES)
Element
Be
Na
Mg
K
Ca
V
Cr
Mn
Fe
Ni
Cu
Zn
As
Ag
Cd
Ba
Pb
Dissolved Sample
Concentrations*
Average
0.079
4,300
62
110
540
1.4
111
9.2
2,100
37
140
120
0.19
0.11
0.32
0.62
14
Maximum
2.5
26,000
2,000
2,400
35,000
300
20,000
830
170,000
2,600
20,000
5,100
9-5
2.9
10
9.5
840
Minimum
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Average
0.14
5,500
170
170
970
3.8
94.2
14
1,760
35
110
200
2.9
0.13
2.8
16
26
Total Sample
Concentrations
Maximum
2.4
43,000
2,300
1,400
24,000
310
19,000
820
140,000
2,100
20,000
14,000
210
2.9
34
610
1,300
Minimum
-
11
-
-
-
-
-
-
5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Below detection limit
* Based on liquid volume
32
-------
TABLE A-5 INDUSTRY TYPES DISCHARGING TO CLASS I LANDFILLS
Code
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
Industry Type
Petroleum Production (drilling)
Petroleum Refining
Petrochemical
Chemical Manufacturing (general)
Chemical Manufacturing (pesticide)
Paint Manufacturing
Metal Plating, Etching, Cleaning
Metal Foundry
Equipment Cleaning
Tank Cleaning (petroleum industry)
Tank Cleaning (industry unknown)
Ship Bilge Cleaning
Vehicle Cleaning
Food Industry
Paper Manufacturing
Miscellaneous Industry
Unknown Industry
Total
% Total Volume
17.3
27.7
0.9
3.9
11.2
2.8
4.0
2.0
6.3
2.4
5.3
0.8
2.6
3.6
0.2
3.5
5.5
100.0
Summary
Petroleum
Chemical
Metal
Food
Industrial Cleaning
Miscellaneous /Unknown
Total
45.9
17-9
6.0
3.6
17.4
9.2
100.0
33
-------
TABLE A-6 PETROLEUM PRODUCTION (DRILLING) CODE 1
Element
Ag
As
Ba
Be
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
Fe
K
Mg
Mn
Na
Ni
Pb
V
Zn
Range
mg/1
*- 2
0.2- 2.8
1.2-92
0.01 -0.4
58- 7400
*- 1
* - 298
*- 19
2k- 1300
68- 820
80 - 990
*- 49
630- 18,000
*- 23
*- 24
*- 7
4.8- 74
Wt. Avg.
mg/1
0.28
1.2
20
0.20
2400
0.15
39
3-6
540
460
420
18
5000
12
2.6
5.0
42
Est.
gm/day
110
470
7.8x 103
78
9.3x 105
58
ii
1.5x10
1.4x 103
2.1 x 105
1 . 8 x 1 05
1.6x 105
7. Ox 103
1 . 9 x 1 06
4.7x 103
1.0 x 103
1.9x 103
1.6x10^
% Total
35.1
9-6
14.6
25.4
37.8
0.8
7.0
0.5
4.7
42.1
38.7
19.3
16.7
5.4
1-5
19-5
3.4
Below Detection Limit
34
-------
TABLE A-7 PETFKOOM REFINING CODE T
E 1 emen t
Ag
As
Br
Be
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
Fe
K
Mg
Mn
Na
Ni
Pb
V
Zn
Range
mg/1
*
-L. o
« - /
0.1-20
*- 0.4
k- 1600
*-34
*-51
* - 30
18-960
6- 490
* -740
*- 21
90 - 5500
--7-5
*- I,/,
*- 8.2
0.5-71
Wt. Avg
mg/1
--
0.22
4.4
0.10
97
7.2
11
8.0
190
88
86
3.0
1700
2.5
5.4
1.2
12
Est.
gm/day
140
2.7x 103
62
6.1 x 101*
4.5x 163
6.9x 103
5 . 0 x 1 03
1.2x 105
5.5x104
5.4x 10**
1.9x 103
1.1 x 106
1.6x 103
3.4x 103
750
7.5x103
% Total
--
2.9
5.1
20.2
2.5
60.4
3-2
1.8
2.7
12.9
13.1
5-2
9-7
1.8
5-2
7-7
1.6
* Below Detection Limit
35
-------
TABLE A-8 PETROCHEMICAL CODE 3
Element
Ag
As
Ba
Be
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
Fe
K
Mg
Mn
Na
Ni
Pb
V
Zn
Range
mg/1
JU
f\
0.8- 1.0
0.19- 0.96
0.030 - 0.036
96 - 3400
*
3.8- 29
1 - 2.9
38 - 240
68- 72
270 - 400
9.6-9-8
4900 - 9600
2.9- 3-8
*
1.0
9.6- 16
Wt. Avg
mg/1
--
0.9
0.43
0.034
1100
--
12
2.3
100
71
370
9-7
8200
3.5
--
1.0
12
Est.
gm/day
--
17
8.2
0.65
2 . 1 x 1 O1*
--
230
44
1.9x 103
1.4x 103
7. Ox 103
180
1.6 x 105
67
--
19
230
% Total
0.4
--
0.2
0-9
0.1
--
--
0.3
1.7
0.5
1.4
0.1
--
0.2
0.1
Below Detection Limit
36
-------
TABLE A-9 CHEMICAL MANUFACTURING (GENERAL) CODE 4
Element
Ag
As
Ba
Be
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
Fe
K
Mg
Mn
Na
Ni
Pb
V
Zn
Range
mg/1
* - 2 . 9
* - 2 1 0
0.21 - 9.5
0.01 - 2.4
30- 24,000
*- 0.31
*- 290
* - 330
59- 19,000
0.31 x 150
10- 2300
* - 23
50 - 7500
*-8
A- 23
*- 4.4
11-69
Wt. Avg.
mg/1
0.37
39
4.6
0.29
2700
0.076
35
41
2500
38
320
6.4
1700
4.3
8.8
1.9
30
Est.
gm/day
32
3.4x 103
400
25
2.4x 105
6.6
3.1 x 103
3-6x 103
2.2x 105
3.3x103
2.8x 101*
560
1 . 5 x 1 05
370
770
170
2.6x 103
% Total
10.2
69.4
0.8
8.1
9.8
0.1
1.5
1.3
4.9
0.8
6.8
1.5
1.3
0.4
1.2
1.8
0.6
* Below Detection Limit
37
-------
TABLE A-10 CHEMICAL MANUFACTURING (PESTICIDE) CODE 5
Element
Ag
As
Ba
Be
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
Fe
K
Mg
Mn
Na
Ni
Pb
V
Zn
Range
mg/1
*- 0.09
*- 0.31
1.6- 3.7
0.017- 0.31
45 - 360
*-0.33
2.8- 11
0.28- 5.7
110- 330
*- 30
14- 67
0.46- 3.7
260- 35,000
4.8-6.5
* -1.9
*- 0.28
2.8- 5.3
Wt. Avg.
mg/1
0.05
0.11
3.0
0.029
230
0.19
7-0
1.5
135
16
17
1.9
16,000
5.6
0.83
0.16
4-3
Est.
gm/day
13
28
760
7.4
5.8x 104
48
1.8x 103
380
3.4 x 101*
4.1 x 103
4.3x 103
480
4.1 x106
1.4x 103
210
41
1.1 x 103
% Total
4.2
0.6
1.4
2.4
2.4
0.6
0.9
0.1
0.8
1.0
1.0
1.3
36.0
1.6
0.3
0.4
0.2
* Below Detection Limit
38
-------
TABLE A-11 PAINT MANUFACTURING CODE 6
Element
Ag
As
Ba
Be
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
Fe
K
Mg
Mn
Na
Ni
Pb
V
Zn
Range
mg/1
A
*- 0.6
0.71 - 4.6
0.002 - 0.011
120- 1500
* - 5 . 8
0.76- Mi
*- 44
20 - 930
19- 140
18-460
0.31 - 18
160-J500
* - 2 . 9
* - 130
*- 0.4
4.6- 480
Wt. Avg.
mg/1
0.19
2.0
0.0071
380
1.6
16
18
350
70
120
6.7
670
0.86
47
0.048
180
Est.
gm/day
--
12
130
0.45
2.4 x 10**
100
1.0 x 103
1 . 1 x 1 03
2.2 x 10
4.4 x 103
7.6x 103
430
4.3x 10
55
3. Ox 103
3-0
1.1 x 10*
* Total
--
0.2
0.2
0.2
1.0
1.3
0.5
0.4
0.5
1.0
1.8
1.2
0.4
0.1
4.6
--
2.4
Below Detection Limit
39
-------
TABLE A-12 METAL PLATING, ETCHING, CLEANING CODE 7
Element
Ag
As
Ba
Be
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
Fe
K
Mg
Mn
Na
Ni
Pb
V
Zn
Range
mg/1
*- 0.9
* - 2.9
0.19- 7.8
0.003- 0.95
14- 1400
*- 14
2.6- 19,000
3.7-780
18- 20,000
* - 670
5.5-410
* - 1 60
40- 17,000
* - 1 200
10- 220
*- 4.5
2.4 - 4700
Wt. Avg.
mg/1
0.24
0.83
3-2
0.20
340
3.4
1800
320
5300
150
110
19
4000
270
57
1.3
950
Est.
gm/day
22
75
290
18
3.1 x 10**
310
1 . 6 x 1 05
2.9x 101*
4.8x 105
1.4 x 101*
9.9x 103
1.7x 103
3.6x 105
2.4 x 101*
5.1 x 103
120
8.6x10^
% Total
7.0
1.5
0.5
5.9
1.3
4.2
75.1
10.6
10.8
3.3
2.4
4.7
3.2
27-5
7.7
1.2
18.3
* Below Detection Limit
40
-------
TABLE A-13 METAL FOUNDRY CODE 8
Element
Ag
As
Ba
Be
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
Fe
K
Mg
Mn
Na
Ni
Pb
V
Zn
Range
mg/1
*-2.7
0.4- 0.5
0.42 - 9.8
0.005- 0.054
44- 170
0.3- 13
* - 190
1 - 720
240 - 2100
31 - 230
8.8- 110
16-80
200- 43,000
* - 850
3- 160
0.07- 3.2
5.2- 14,000
Wt. Avg.
mg/1
0.77
0.57
2.1
0.024
130
4.9
55
210
880
110
87
34
13,000
250
68
0.75
4200
Est.
gm/day
41
31
110
1.3
7. Ox 103
260
3. Ox 103
11 x 103
4.7x 10**
5-9x 103
4.7x 103
1.8x 103
7-Ox 105
1.3x lO*1
3.7x 103
40
2.3x 105
% Total
13.1
0.6
0.2
0.4
0.3
3-5
1.4
4.0
1.1
1.4
1.1
5.0
6.1
14.9
5.6
0.4
49.0
* Below Detection Limit
41
-------
TABLE A-14 EQUIPMENT CLEANING CODE 9
Element
Ag
As
Ba
^ ^ ^^ ^B^^
Be
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
Fe
K
Mg
Mn
Na
Ni
Pb
V
Zn
Range
mg/1
j.
*- 10
0.04- 5.1
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ nil II I
0.002- 0.32
5.2- 2000
*- 17
*- 41
* - 500
5 - 2300
*- 350
15-240
*- 52
11 - 5400
A-14
*- 130
*- 2
0.54- 270
Wt. Avg.
mg/1
--
1.3
2.3
BBBHHHBBBBHflBHBBHBBBBBHMHIHBMIiBW^^
0.024
210
4-3
7.9
33
500
86
69
6.7
870
1.9
12
0.49
28
Est.
gm/day
--
190
330
L 1 J I ~ ~ '
3.4
3. Ox !
-------
TABLE A-15 TANK CLEANING (PETROLEUM INDUSTRY) CODE 10
Element
Ag
As
Ba
Be
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
Fe
K
Mg
Mn
Na
Ni
Pb
V
Zn
Range
mg/1
.'-
0.96- 1.9
4.7 - 140
0.1 - 0.36
* - 1 400
0.24- 1.0
2.1-52
8.6- 27
390- 1000
100- 360
62 - 480
2.1-54
1500- 3800
2.1 - 7.2
* - 94
0.21 - 4.8
9-5-68
Wt. Avg.
mg/1
--
1.3
88
0.34
910
0.49
42
10
990
320
360
40
2600
6.2
5.3
4.6
48
Est.
gm/day
--
69
4-7x 103
18
4.9 x 101*
26
2.2x 103
530
5.3x lO4
1.7x 10^
1.9x10^
2.1 x 103
1.4 x 105
330
280
250
2.6x 103
% Total
--
1.4
8.8
5.9
2.0
0.4
1.0
0.2
1.2
4.0
4.6
5.8
1.2
0.4
0.4
2.6
0.6
Below Detection Limit
43
-------
TABLE A-16 TANK CLEANING (INDUSTRY UNKNOWN) CODE 11.
Element
Ag
As
Ba
Be
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
Fe
K
Mg
Mn .
Na
Ni
Pb
V
Zn
Range
mg/1
*- 0.97
*- 4.4
0.85- 17
0.019- 0.21
16- 3100
*- 23
2-130
2- 110
110- 3100
15-450
26- 250
0.56- 26
460- 23,000
*- 15
* - 940
0.9- 3.7
5.1 - 980
Wt. Avg.
mg/1
0.38
2.1
5-6
0.097
410
8.6
55
35
860
280
120
6.5
12,000
7.1
300
1-7
130
Est.
gm/day
46
250
680
12
4.9 x 101*
1.0x 103
6.6x 103
4.2x 103
1.0 x 105
3.4x 10**
1 . 5 x 1 01*
780
1 . 5 x 1 06
860
3.6x 101*
210
h
1 . 6 x 1 0H
% Total
14.7
5.1
1.3
3-9
2.0
13.4
3.1
1.5
2.3
7.9
3.6
2.2
13.2
1.0
54.6
2.2
3.4
Below Detection Limit
44
-------
TABLE A-17 SHIP BILGE CLEANING CODE 12
Element
Ag
As
Ba
Be
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
Fe
K
Mg
Mn
Na
Ni
Pb
V
Zn
Range
mg/1
*
j.
4\
1.2- it. 6
0.020- 1.8
15- 2.8
*- 4.6
0.57- 1.0
0.063- 6.4
11-37
26 - 370
11-41
* - 1 . 7
520- 530
.u
*
0.025- 0.89
0.06- 450
Wt. Avg.
mg/1
--
--
3.0
0.96
22
2.4
0.78
3.3
2k
190
27
0.90
530
--
--
0.49
240
Est.
gm/day
--
--
52
17
380
42
14
57
420
3-3x103
470
16
9.2x 103
__
--
8.5
4.2x 103
% Total
--
--
0.1
5.5
--
0.6
--
--
--
0.8
0.1
--
0.1
--
--
0.1
0.9
* Below Detection Limit
45
-------
TABLE A-18 VEHICLE CLEANING CODE 13
Element
Ag
As
Ba
Be
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
Fe
K
Mg
Mn
Na
Ni
Pb
V
Zn
Range
mg/1
*
*-0.7
1 . 1 - 22
0.0014- 0.013
28 - 800
*- 8.2
0.38- 19
1 -93
68- 780
130 - 410
15-230
0.44- 12
110- 1600
*- 11
* - 200
*- 3
11 - 120
Wt. Avg.
mg/1
--
0.20
9.2
0.0065 '
200
3.4
6.3
27
430
240
110
6.0
590
4.6
62
0.73
46
Est.
gm/day
--
12
530
0.38
1.2x 101*
200
370
1.6 x 103
2.5 x 101*
1.4x10^
6.4x103
350
L
3-4x 10
270
3.6x 103
42
2.7x 103
% Total
--
0.2
1-0
0.1
0.5
2.7
0.2
0.6
0.6
3-3
1.6
1.0
0.3
0.3
5.5
0.4
0.6
Below Detection Limit
46
-------
TABLE A-19 FOOD INDUSTRY CODE 14
Element
Ag
As
Ba
Be
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
Fe
K
Mg
Mn
Na
N!
Pb
V
Zn
Range
mg/1
*
*- 6.6
0.26- 13
0.002 - 0.89
^^^^^^^^^^«^M«»*I I ^M»^»»^^^
9.6- 900
* - 1.8
*- 100
0.4- 42
22- 720
* - 1 200
* - 530
*- 10
92- 15,000
* - 10
* - 150
* - 12
13- 160
Wt. Avg.
mg/1
--
1.1
4.6
0.13
260
0.30
15
7.1
220
260
115
6.7
3300
3.**
15
2.6
53
Est.
gm/day
--
88
370
10
2.1x10
2k
1.2x 103
570
1.8x 104
2.1 x 101*
9.2x 103
540
2.6x 105
270
1.2 x 103
210
4.3x 103
% Total
1.8
0.7
3-3
^^^^^ M*~-BMM^M^^^D^W
0.9
0.3
0.6
0.2
0.4
4.9
2.2
1.5
2.3
0.3
1.8
2.2
0.9
Below Detection Limit
47
-------
TABLE A-20 PAPER MANUFACTURING CODE 15
Element
Ag
As
Ba
Be
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
Fe
K
Mg
Mn
Na
Ni
Pb
V
Zn
Range
mg/1
»v
0.4- 0.6
6.1 - 7.8
* - 0. 12
*- 2100
0.05 - 1.2
88 - 220
14-390
91 - 230
12 - 15
12-75
2- 2.3
41 - 300
* - 1.5
920- 1300
A
12 - 76
Wt. Avg.
mg/1
--
0.47
6.8
0.062
1100
0.56
150
180
150
13
44
2.0
180
0.83
1100
__
40
Est.
gm/day
--
2.3
33
0.30
5.3x 103
2.7
720
860
720
62
210
9.6
860
4.0
5.3x 103
--
190
% Total
--
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
--
0.3
0.3
--
--
0.1
--
--
--
8.0
--
--
Below Detection Limit
48
-------
TABLE A-21 MISCELLANEOUS INDUSTRY CODE T6
Element
Ag
As
Ba
Be
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
Fe
K
Mg
Mn
Na
Ni
Pb
V
Zn
Range
mg/1
JL
A- 2
0.23- 610
0.002- 0.53
240- 15,000
*- 0.71
0.2- 9.1
0.3-25
28 - 3900
6.2- 1370
1 6 - 1 1 00
0.6- 130
2k- 3600
*- Jl
*- 7
*- 14
1 - 1 1 00
Wt. Avg.
mg/1
--
0.33
400
0.076
6600 ,
0.48
6.9
5.1
640
230
360
31
2900
0.36
5.4
2.5
130
Est.
gm/day
--
26
3.2x 10*
6.0
5.2x 105
38
540
400
5.1 x 10*
1.8x10
2.8x 10*
2.5x 103
2.3x 105
28
430
200
1.0 x 10*
% Total
--
0.5
59.9
2.0
21.1
0.5
0.3
0.2
1.2
4.2
6.8
6.9
2.0
--
0.7
2.1
2.1
* Below Detection Limit
49
-------
TABLE A-22 UNKNOWN INDUSTRY CODE 17
Element
Ag
As
Ba
Be
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
Fe
K
Mg
Mn
Na
Ni
Pb
V
In
Range
mg/1
* - 1.1
*- 2.8
1.3 - 110
I. . ^m i,m^,,m I ^»» in ill i
0.005 - 2.1
3.4- 13,000
0.063 - 10
1.1- 46.0
1.9 - 20,000
25 - 140,000
5.6-870
3.4- 1400
0.19- 820
1 30 - 8600
0.25- 2100
*- 17
*- 310
0.38- 5100
Wt. Avg.
mg/1
0.39
0.93
20
0.38
3200
1.8
77
1700
24,000
330
390
120
4400
320
2.5
46
570
Est.
gm/day
49
120
2.5 x 103
47
4. Ox 105
220
9.6x 103
2 . 1 x 1 O5
3.0 x 106
4.1 x 10*
4.9x 10*
1.5x 10*
5.5x 105
4. Ox 10*
310
5-7x 103
h
7-1 x 10
% Total
15.7
2.5
4-7
^^^^^^M^A^W^^^^V-M
15.3
16.3
3.0
4.5
76.6
67.4
9.6
11.9
41.3
4.8
45-9
0.5
58.6
15.1
Below Detection Limit
50
-------
TABLE A-23 INDUSTRY TYPES DISCHARGING TO CLASS I LANDFILLS
Est.
Total
g/day
310
4.9x 103
5.4 x 104
310
2.5x 10b
7.5x 103
2.1 x 105
2.7 x 105
4.5x106
4.3 x 105
4. 1 x 105
3.7x 10**
1 .7x 107
8.7x ID*1
6.6x lO4
9.8 x 10
4.7x 105
E lement
Ag
As
Ba
Be
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
Fe
K
Mg
Mn
Na
Ni
Pb
V
Zn
Petroleum
Production
(drill ing)
.1
110
470
7.8 x 103
78
9.3 x 105
58
1.5x10
1 .4 x 103
2.1 x 105
1 .8 x 105
1.6x 105
7. Ox 103
1 .9 x 10
4.7 x 103
1 .0 x 103
1.9 x 103
1.6x10
**
35.1
9.6
14.6
25.4
37.8
0.8
7.0
0.5
4.7
42.1
38.7
19.3
16.7
5.4
1-5
19-5
3.4
Petroleum
Ref in ing
JU
--
I4o
2.7x 103
62
6.1x10
4.5x 103
6.9 x 103
5. Ox 103
1.2 x 105
S-SxIO1*
5.4 x ID4
1.9 x 103
1 .1 x 106
1 .6 x 103
3.4 x 103
750
7.5x 103
J-.1.
--
2.9
5.1
20.2
2.5
60.4
3.2
1.8
2.7
12.9
13.1
5.2
9.7
1.8
5.2
7.7
1.6
Petrochemical
-V
--
17
8.2
0.65
2.1 x 10**
--
230
44
1 .9 x 103
1 .4x 103
7. Ox 103
180
1 .6x 105
67
--
19
230
**
0.4
_-
0.2
0.9
--
0.1
--
--
0.3
1.7
0.5
1.4
0.1
0.2
0. 1
Chemical
Manufacturing
(general )
*
32
3.4x ID*1
400
25
2.4 x 10b
6.6
3 . 1 x 1 0 ~f
3.6x 103
2.2 x 105
3.3x103
2.8x 101*
560
1 .5x 105
370
770
170
2.6x 103
**
10.2
69.4
0.8
8.1
9.8
0.1
1.5
1.3
4.9
0.8
6.8
1.5
1 -3
0.4
1 .2
1.8
0.6
Chemical
Manufactur i ng
(Pesticide)
-A-
13
28
-A-!';
4.2
0.6
760 1.4
7 4
5.8 x 10
48
1 .8x 103
380
3.4 x 101*
4. 1 x 103
4.3 x 103
480
4.1 x 106
1 .4 x 103
210
41
! ,1 x 103
2.4
Paint
Manufacturing
ft
..
12
130
0.45
2.4 2.4x lO4
0.6
0.9
0.1
0.8
1 .0
1 .0
1.3
36
1.6
0.3
0.4
0.2
100
I.Ox 103
ft*
--
0.2
Metal Plating,
Etching,
Cleaning
ft
22
75
0.2 290
0.2
1 .0
1.3
0.5
1 .1 x 103 0.4
2.2 x 104
4.4 x 103
7.6x 103
430
4.3 x 10**
55
3- Ox 103
3.0
L
1.1x10
0.5
1 .0
1.8
1 .2
0.4
0. 1
4.6
--
2.4
18
3.1 x 10
310
1 .6x 105
2.9 x 10H
4.8x 105
1 . 4 x 1 O4
9.9 x 103
1 .7 x 103
3.6x 105
2.4 x 104
5-1 x 103
120
8.6x 10^
.t- -i;
7.0
1.5
0.5
5.9
1.3
4.2
75.1
10.6
10.8
3-3
2.4
4.7
3.2
27.5
7.7
1 .2
18.3
* Avg. g/day (5
** % Total
Class ! Landfills)
-------
TABLE A-23 INDUSTRY TYPES DISCHARGING TO CLASS I LANDFILLS - CONTINUED
Metal
Foundry
ft
41
31
110
1.3
7. Ox 103
260
3. Ox 103
1 . 1 x 1 0**
4.7x ^o^
5.9x 103
4.7x103
1.8x 103
7. Ox 105
1.3x 101*
3.7x 103
40
2.3x 105
* *
13.1
0.6
0.2
0.4
0.3
3-5
1.4
4.0
1. 1
1.4
1 .1
5-0
6.1
14.9
5.6
0.4
49.0
Equipment
Cleaning
*
190
330
3.4
3. Ox 104
610
1. 1 x 103
4.7x 103
7.1 x 1Q1*
1.2x 10*1
9.8x 103
960
1.2 x 105
270
1 . 7 x 1 03
70
4. Ox 103
ft ft
3-9
0.6
1 . 1
1.2
8.2
0.5
1.7
1.6
2.8
2.4
2.6
1.1
0.3
2.6
0.7
0.9
Tank
Cleaning
(Petroleum)
Industry
1;
--
69
4.7x 103
18
4.9x 104
26
2.2 x 103
530
5.3x 10**
1 . 7 x 1 04
1 . 9 x 1 04
2.1 x 103
1 . 4 x 1 05
330
280
250
2.6x 103
ft ft
--
1.4
8.8
5,9
2.0
0.4
1.0
0.2
1.2
4.0
4.6
5.8
1.2
0.4
0.4
2.6
0.6
Tank
Clean! ng
( Industry
Unknown)
*
46
250
680
12
4.9x 104
l.Ox 103
6.6x 103
4.2x 103
l.Ox ID13
3.4x 10*1
1.5x 10*1
780
1.5x 106
860
3.6x 10**
210
1.6X101*
ft ft
14.7
5.1
1.3
3.9
2.0
13.4
3-1
1.5
2.3
7-9
3-6
2.2
13.2
1.0
54.6
2.2
3-4
Ship
Bi Ige
Cleaning
*
--
52
17
380
42
14
57
420
3.3x 103
470
16
9.2x 103
--
--
8.5
4.2 x 103
* ft
--
0.1
5.5
--
0.6
--
--
--
0.8
0.1
--
0.1
--
--
0.1
0.9
Vehicle
Cleaning
ft
12
530
0.38
1 . 2 x 1 O4
200
370
1.6x 103
2.5x 104
6.4x10**
6.4x103
350
3.4x 104
270
3 . 6 x 1 03
42
2.7x 103
ft A
0.2
1.0
0.1
0.5
2.7
0.2
0.6
0.6
3-3
1.6
1.0
0.3
0.3
5-5
0.4
0.6
Food
Industry
ft
88
370
10
2.1 x 10**
24
1.2x 103
570
1.8x 10*1
2.1 x ID*1
9-2x 103
540
2.6 x 105
270
1.2x 103
210
4.3x 103
ft ft
1.8
0.7
3-3
0.9
0.3
0.6
0.2
0.4
4.9
2.2
1.5
2.3
0.3
1.8
2.2
0.9
Paper
Manufacturing
ft
2.3
33
0.3
5-3x 103
27
720
860
720
62
210
9.6
860
4.0
5.3x 103
--
190
ftft
--
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
--
0.3
0.3
--
--
0.1
--
--
8.0
--
--
Miscel laneous
Industry
ft
--
26
3.2x10
6.0
5.2x 10'
38
540
400
5.1 x 104
1.8x 10**
2.8x 1041
2.5x 103
2.3x 105
28
430
200
1 .Ox 1011
ft ft
--
0.5
59.9
2.0
21.1
0.5
0.3
0.2
1.2
4.2
6.8
6.9
2.0
--
0.7
2.1
2.1
Unknown
Industry
ft
49
120
2.5 x 103
47
4.0 x 105
220
9.6x 103
2.1 x 105
3. Ox 106
4.1 x lO*1
L
4.9x10
1 . 5 x 1 O*1
5 . 5 x 1 O5
4. Ox 10**
310
5.7x 103
7.1 x lO4
l*t;V
15.7
2.5
4.7
15.3
16.3
3-0
4.5
76.6
67.4
9.6
11.9
41.3
4.8
45-9
0.5
58.6
15-1
en
ro
-------
TABLE A-24 VOLUME INPUT OF LIQUID ORGANIC WASTES
CONTRIBUTED BY INDUSTRY TYPES
Industry Type
Petroleum Production (Drilling)
Petroleum Refining
Petrochemical
Chemical Manufacturing (General)
Chemical Manufacturing (Pesticide)
Paint Manufacturing
Metal Plating, Etching, Cleaning
Metal Foundry
Equipment Cleaning
Tank Cleaning (Petroleum Industry)
Tank Cleaning (industry Unknown)
Ship Bi Ige Cleaning
Vehicle Cleaning
Food Industry
Paper Manufacturing
Miscellaneous Industry
Unknown Industry
Total
% Total Organic
Liquid Volume
41.7
7-7
0.0
18.1
0.0
3.4
0.6
0.1
13.1
0.6
7.3
0.0
0.7
0.3
0.7
0.7
5.0
100.0
53
-------
10
10
10'
10
10-
10
[>Avg. Total Cone.
CD Sol id
I" I Dissolved
to
10J
10
10
10
Be Na Mq K Ca V Cr Mn Fe Ni Cu Zn As Aq Cd Ba Pb
(0.61)
A-l Average concentration and estimated daily depositions
of selected metals in hazardous wastes at the Operating
Industries Sanitary Landfill.
en
3-
54
-------
10
I06
c
1(r
,o*
I03
10*
10
t
- -
\
> Avg. Total Cone
CU Solid
£
_.
"J
n
1 C
D
L
c
r
.__
c
[ 1 Dissolved
c
--
f;
r
|
1
L
c
r
c
c
1
~T
t>
j
10>
4
10
1n3
10
102
10
10-'
Be Na Mg K Ca V Cr Mn1 Fe Ni Cu Zn As Ag Cd Ba Pb
rlgur6 A-£ Average concentration and estimated daily
of selected metals in hazardous wastes at
Sanitary Landfi
depositions
the B.K.K.
55
-------
10-
10
10'
10
C> Avg. Total Cone
O Sol id
[ _J Dissolved
10"1
10J
10'
10
10
Be Na Mg K Ca V Cr Mn Fe Ni Cn Zn As Ag Cd Ba Pb
A-3 Average concentration and estimated daily deposition
of selected metals in hazardous wastes at the Palos
Verdes Sanitary Landfill.
z
o
2
-1
56
-------
>Avg.Total Con,
CD Solid
|| Dissolved
Be Na Mg K Ca V Cr Mn Fe Ni Cn Zn As Ag Cd Ba Pb
Figure A-4 Average concentration and estimated daily depositions
of selected metals in hazardous wastes at the Pacific
Ocean Disposal Sanitary Landfill
57
-------
PERCENTAGE OF METALS DETECTED IN THE
SOLUBLE PHASE OF HAZARDOUS WASTES
100
80
60
40
20
Operat ing
I ndustries
Lrb.
Be Na Mg K Ca V Cr Mn Fe Ni Cu Zn As Ag Cd Ba Pb
Figure A-5
80
60
20
0
\
3alos
/erdes
'
Be Na Mg K Ca V Cr
Mn
_ n
Fe Ni Cu Zn As Ag Cd Ba Pb
Figure A-6
58
-------
PERCENTAGE OF METALS DETECTED IN THE
SOLUBLE PHASE OF HAZARDOUS WASTES
100
80
60
20
Pacific
Ocean
Disposal
Be Na Mg K Ca V Cr Mn Fe Ni Cu Zn As Ag Cd Ba Pb
Figure A-7
100
80
60
AO
20
B.K.K.
Be Na Mg K Ca V Cr Mn Fe Ni Cu Zn As Ag Cd Ba Pb
Figure A-8
59
-------
<
o
10'
10
10'
10
10J
10
10
5 Los Angeles Area Disposal Sites
C
.
*
A
'*
M
c
1
1 '
1
D
[>Avg. Total Cone
t
M
-*
t
j~l Sol id
1 l~~l Dissolved
C"
C
M
10
10"
,03
1
^s^
102§
(
<
a:
(~
z
UJ
o
o
AVERAGE METAL ^
1
10'1
Be Na Mg K Ca V Cr Mn Fe Ni Cu Zn As
Cd Ba Pb
FlQUTG A-9 Average total concentration and estimated daily
depositions of selected metals in hazardous wastes.
60
-------
100
90
80
70
60
50
30
20
10
Hn
n
Ag As Ba Be Ca Cd Cr Cu Fe K Mg Mn Na Ni Pb V Zn
ATO Percentage of metals detected in dissolved form in
hazardous wastes. These values represent the weight-
ed averages of 5 Los Angeles area disposal sites.
61
-------
ro
100
o 80
*
o
w
"c
0
« 60
o
o
» 40
o.
E
o
0)
S5 20
I03
As
Soluble
Total
2 ,02 5 2 |o' 5
Concentration (mg/l )
Arseni c
Figure A-ll Sample Concentration Distribution
.5
.2
-------
100
CO
A Soluble
o Total
10
.005
.002 .OOI
Concentration ( mg / I )
Beryl 1ium
Figure A-12 Sample Concentration Distribution
-------
CT>
o
*-
o
U
c
o
O
100
80
60
^ 40
o.
E
o
CO
3$ 20
Cd
Soluble
o Total
10' 5 2
Concentration ( mg/l )
10°
.5
Cadmi urn
Figure A-13 Sample Concentration Distribution
.2
-------
100
01
en
Cr
A Soluble
o Total
2 I
Concentration (mg/l)
Chromi um
Figure A-14 Sample Concentration Distribution
-------
100
CD
A Soluble
o Total
I05 5
5 2 |0-> 5 2
Concentration (mg/l)
Copper
Figure A-1E Sample Concentration Distribution
2 |0' 5
-------
cr>
o
60-
o
o
4)
Q. 40|-
E
o
CO
S5 20
0
Pb
A Soluble
o Total
I04 5 2 JO3
2 |02 5 2 I01
Concentration ( mg / I)
Lead
10° -5
.2
Figure A-16 Sample Concentration Distribution
-------
cr>
00
Concentration (mg/l)
Vanad i um
Fiqure A-17 Sample Concentration Distribution
-------
100
VD
Concentration (mg/l)
Zi nc
Figure A-18 Sample Concentration Distribution
-------
APPENDIX B
HYDROGEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION OF CLASS I SITES
B.K.K.32
The B.K.K. site is located in the southerly portion of the
city of West Covina, California in the San Jose Hills area. Access
to the property is from the east side of Azusa Ave., approximately
three miles north of the Pomona Freeway and two miles south of the
San Bernadino Freeway. Azusa Ave., being a major north-south con-
necting link between the two freeways, provides convenient access
and allows the site to serve as a tributary area of approximately
55 square miles. The property consists mainly of a large box can-
yon running a general east-west direction. Underdeveloped hills
to the north and east provide buffer for the disposal operation.
To the south of the site a new housing tract provides dwelling
units for approximately 17,000 persons. The landfill site has a
total of 583 acres, among which a little over 100 acres are Class
I. The remaining section is designated as Class II. The Class I
site is currently receiving industrial wastes prohibited from
other means of discharge from 176 companies in Los Angeles County.
For the month of September (1975) alone, more than 5 million gal-
lons of semi-liquid industrial wastes were received (a total of
1052 truck loads). At the current rate, the landfill is expected
to last 20 to 25 years.
The site is underlain mainly by shale and siltstone of Puente
formation with lesser amounts of well-cemented sandstone, conglom-
erate soil, alluvium, slope wash and landslide materials. The
Puente formation principally consists of highly-folded shale with
local fine-grained sandstone interbeds. The unweathered Puente is
devoid of large open fractures. However, there are numerous seeps
and corresponding saturated conditions in the bedrock which indi-
cate the presence of significant bedding plane and/or minor frac-
ture permeability within the shale and siltstone members of the
Puente formation. The fractured bedrock can transmit subsurface
water of meteoric origin.
Generally the main streams draining the area flow in a south-
westerly direction to Puente Creek and thence to San Jose Creek
about 5 miles downstream from Azusa Avenue. Surface flow within
the site is limited to ephemeral flow due solely to localized sea-
sonal rainfall. Bedding planes evident within the streambed area
indicate structural strikes toward east-west directions; although
70
-------
in
essentially nonwater bearing will convey any subsurface flow
this direction and therefore limit the amount of underflow toward
the Puente Creek. The alluvial material lining the canyon floor
could also transmit subsurface flow toward Puente Creek.
The geohydrologic conditions of the site have been modified
to preclude subsurface flow from the Class I Area. A positive
hydraulic barrier has been constructed after all soil, alluvium
and highly-weathered bedrock were removed from the barrier site
to expose the firm bedrock. Combination monitoring and extraction
wells have been constructed across the canyon axix easterly of
the center of the barrier fill.
The site lies within Main San Gabriel Hydrologic Subarea,
groundwaters of which are beneficially used for municipal, indus-
trial and agricultural water supply. Requirements for these dis-
posal operations are necessary to protect the water quality for
the beneficial uses of the receiving waters.
OPERATING INDUSTRIES (O.I.)33
Operating Industries, Inc., operates a solid waste disposal
site at Monterey Park, California. The site is approximately 190
acres in size. It is intersected by the Pomona Freeway and is
bounded on two sides by the City of Montebello.
The disposal site is underlain by the Fernando Formation of
Pliocene (and possibly Pleistocene) age within the San Gabriel
Valley Hydrologic Subunit. This formation is known to be com-
prised primarily of conglomerate, sandstone, and siltstone.
Geological reports show that under a (eastern) portion of the
landfill, there is hydraulic continuity between the refuse and the
forebay area of the Central Coastal groundwater basin. This hy-
draulic continuity is provided by relatively permeable conglomer-
ate. Under another (western) protion of the landfill where con-
glomerate has been removed, the refuse directly overlies impervious
siltstone. This western area can safely receive liquid wastes;
the eastern area cannot.
In order to minimize possible lateral migration of leachate
from the liquid disposal area in the western portion of the land-
fill, setbacks provide a buffer zone of Group 2 solid waste along
the north, south, east, and west boundaries of the liquid waste
disposal area.
Groundwaters downgradient of the site are of good quality and
are extensively used for municipal, industrial, and agricultural
purposes. A Southern California Gas Company Well located in close
proximity to the southwest portion of the disposal sites is used
for irrigation of lawns and trees on the Gas Company's property.
71
-------
Gas probes have been installed around the perimeter of the
landfill to detect gas migration. The leachate monitoring wells
drilled into the landfill will also serve as gas extraction wells
when such programs become economically feasible.
CALABASAS (C.B.)
The disposal site encompasses a rectangularly shaped area of
about 260 acres, located about one-half mile north of U.S. High-
way 101 and one mile east of the town of Agoura between the Santa
Monica Mountains to the south and the Simi Hills to the north.
The site is located near the top of an east-west ridge that
attains an elevation of almost 1,500 feet above sea level. Ele-
vations of the ground surface in the immediate vicinity range
from about 900 to 1200 feet.
The site is immediately underlain by middle Miocene deposits
of the Topanga Formation, with outcrops of the late Miocene Modelo
Formation at the northeast margin of the site, and recent alluvium
appearing along the southeast margin.
The Topanga Formation includes predominately medium-to-course
grained sandstone and conglomerate with lesser amounts in inter-
bedded shales. Interfingering, lensing and lateral gradiation of
beds within this formation are common. The sandstone is generally
well-cemented with low porosity and low permeability. However,
there are local sandstone and conglomerate beds that are poorly
cemented and can permit the storage and transmission of ground-
water.
The Modelo Formation consists predominately of brittle, thin-
bedded, highly fractured shales and mudstone, production of water
from which is very limited.
Although the sediments of both the Topanga and Modelo Forma-
tions are highly folded and fractured, faulting is almost absent.
The steep dips (30 -40 ) of the beds restrict horizontal movements
of liquids. Because of the relatively impervious nature of these
materials, it is considered that wastes deposited on the site,
except the small alluvial area near the S.E. corner of Sec. 24,
TIN, R18W, will be essentially hydraulically isolated from the
groundwaters of adjacent canyons where alluvial deposits form
water-bearing strata. One water well at the site, constructed by
the Sanitation Districts, penetrates conglomerate and sandstone
beds of very low permeability values of 10-20 gallons per day per
square foot. Groundwater levels in this well have no relation to
water levels in wells located in the alluvium.
The drainage area tributary to the proposed disposal facility
is about 95 acres. The main streams draining the area flow in a
72
-------
south-easterly direction, and converge with the Las Virgenes Cre-k
about one mile south of the site. The Las Virgenes Creek about
three miles south, merges with the Malibu Creek and continues to
the ocean some seven miles further south. A minor stream drain-
ing the north-west corner of the site follows west to Medea Creek
which joins Malibu Creek upstream from the Las Virgenes confluence
There are no known direct diversions or uses made of the waters of*
the Las Virgenes Creek or Medea Creek in the vicinity of the sub-
ject disposal site, but waters draining from this area through
the Las Virgenes-Medea-Malibu Creek system form an important
source of recharge for the underlying groundwater basin.
Water is drawn from wells along these creeks for domestic and
agricultural uses. The quality of these groundwaters is unsatis-
factory based on the United States Public Health Service Drinking
Water Standards and is Class 3 for irrigation purposes. There
are no water wells within one-half mile of the disposal site.
PALPS VERDES (P,V.)35
The Palos Verdes disposal site is situated on the north
slopes of the Palos Verdes Hills. In accordance with waste dis-
charge requirements, portions of the site are limited to Group 2
and Group 3 waste materials and other portions may accept Group 1,
Group 2, and Group 3 wastes. Filling of the Parcel 1 area was
completed in February 1965 and it is now being used as an arbore-
tum. The Class I areas of Parcels 3 and 5 have also been complet-
ed. Groups 2 and 3 wastes are currently being placed in Parcel 4.
The only remaining active Class I area in Parcel 2 is expected to
be filled shortly.
Because of the need for additional capacity of the disposal
pf Group 1 wastes, the County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles
on March 14, 1975, requested reclassification of the unfilled por-
tion of the landfill, including Parcel 6 for use as a Class I dis-
posal area. The District's proposal was approved by the Califor-
nia REgional Water Quality Control Board in early 1976.
The Class I expansion area has been excavated to an elevation
of 220 feet above sea level so that the abandoned tunnels from the
past diatomite mining operations no longer exist. All sand mater-
ials on or adjacent to this area have been removed and the entire
proposed Class I area is excavated to bedrock. The bedrock (pre-
dominately Malaga mudstone and Valmonite diatomite) is well-exposed
in the bottom and the side of the excavation. Preparation of the
area by excavation to bedrock uncovered no seeps, springs, or
groundwater. The on-site bedrock permeability in test holes was
low. It varied between lxlO~7 and 5 x 10 7 cm/sec.
A leachate collection system of subdrains is now being con-
structed. The system consists of a north westward-sloping longi
73
-------
tudinal gravel and pipe drain set in a trench, with lateral gravel
drains at 500-feet intervals. The bottom of the excavation has
been sloped at a minimum 1% towards the drains.
The western limit of the Class I expansion area is more than
350 feet from an alluvium-bedrock contract in the canyon adjacent
to Hawthorne Boulevard. This alluvium is a remnant of the allu-
vium which extends northerly and southerly along the bottom of the
Hawthorne Canyon and terminates on the flank of the canyon. A
barrier will be constructed at this end of the excavation with
compacted mudstone which will be keyed into the bedrock. A com-
bination monitoring and extraction well will be constructed in
conjunction with the installation of the mudstone barrier to col-
lect leachate from the subdrains for disposal at a legal disposal
site or to recycle it within the Class I area.
Leachate monitoring and extraction wells will also be con-
structed from the intersection of the longitudinal and lateral
subdrains up through the fill along the north face of the proposed
disposal area. Deeper zone wells at a depth which would intercept
the northward-dipping beds beneath the disposal area will also be
installed as a part of the leachate and gas monitoring system.
The Districts utilize Group 2 wastes as an absorbent for the
Group 1 liquid wastes. Disposal operations for Group 2 wastes in
Parcel 6 were initiated in January 1976. A layer of Group 2 solid
waste is being placed on the bottom of the excavation in areas
where the subdrains are already installed. A layer of Group 2
wastes also will be placed against the north, east, and west walls
of the excavation in Parcel 6 prior to disposal of liquid wastes
at these forking faces.
Gas probes and extractor wells are proposed to control gas
migration. A gas migration prevention and recovery system already
exists in te interior refuse fill areas of the completed landfill.
Generally, the surface drainage is northwesterly. Surface
flow within the site is limited to direct precipitation due to
localized seasonal rainfall. Additional surface drainage facili-
ties will be provided by the Districts for this area as a part of
a master drainage plan for the entire site.
The Class I expansion area, with provision of the proposed
control measures, meets the criteria contained in the California
Administrative Code for reclassification as a Class I disposal sita
The remaining portion of the landfill meets the criteria for a
Class II disposal site.
The estimated capacity of the expanded Class I area is 10
million cubic yards. The completed landfill will be used for a
golf course and other recreational purposes.
74
-------
The proposed Class I disposal area is situated southerly
from the water-bearing portion of the West Coast Hydrologic sub-
area in portions of Sections 28, 33 and 34, T4S, R14W, S.B.B.M.
Groundwaters in that subarea are of good mineral quality and'are
extensively produced for municipal, domestic, industrial, and
agricultural water supply.
PACIFIC OCEAN DISPOSAL (P.P.P.)36
The Pacific Ocean Disposal site in Wilmington was originally
approved for the disposal of Group I liquid industrial wastes on
December 11, 1963. A field inspection of the above site by staff
members of the State Water Resources Control Board and Department
of Health in March 1975, found that the site did not meet the re-
quirements set forth in the newly adopted Subchapter 15 of the
California Administrative Code for Class I disposal sites. The
site was closed for the disposal of Group I wastes on October 15,
1976. The site is underlain by groundwaters which have been in-
truded by seawater and which are therefore too saline for use. A
seawater intrusion barrier constructed and operated by the Los
Angeles County Flood Control District prevents these groundwaters
from migrating further inland into West Coast Basin aquifiers.
There is, however, hydraulic continuity with waters of the Long
Beach Harbor and the Pacific Ocean, and these must be protected
from harmful effects of waste disposal. Nearby underground struc-
tures such as wells, pipelines, conduits, vaults, etc., must be
protected from migration of acid wastes which could cause nuisance
or water quality problems; for instance, by interconnection of sa-
line and fresh aquifiers.
75
-------
APPENDIX C
HAZARDOUS WASTE UNIT
SURVEILLANCE FORM
Sample No. 01 122 Lab No. Sampling Date 9/12/75
Manifest No. 1411 Time 11:35
Producer Beth. Stl. Corp.
Producer's Address 3300 E. Slauson Ave., Vernon
Hauler Capri Pumping Service
Hauler's Address 3128 Whittier Blvd., Los Angeles
Process Type Steelmaking Waste Type Mud and Water
Chemical Components Concentration Volume
upper lower (Units)
EE-203 85% 60%
AL 203 5% 2%
Grease
SIO-2 2% 1%
Brief Physical Description Black Liquid
76
-------
APPENDIX D
SAMPLE ANALYSIS OF SELECTED METAL SPECIES
TOTAL D-l 01 (TOTAL CONCENTRATIONS, mg/1)
Ag
71*
/
9
>0
21
I'l
24
>/
49
(3
(6
M
sy
42
«3
X
5fe
57
;8
59
>0
A
>5
>7
?4
'8
10
11
17
)1
n
iii
IS
17
»ft
i
7
9
1
0.1**
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
_-
--
--
--
As
55
5b
21
W
!>8
20
/I
43
2^
83
17
80
87
105
33
64
117
74
39
65
67
91
104
121
19
57
60
111
103
22
27
29
36
37
4?
7fl
107
inft
119
2.0
"775
1.2
1.1
1.0
0.96
0^96
0.93
0.86
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.56
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.28
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.06
--
--
Ba
36
20
104
57
87
103
33
W
55
105
117
21
19
83
71
67
65
24
121
91
43
17
39
42
107
22
37
74
108
56
58
80
M
27
60
119
--
--
78
111
29
610
140
20
13
9.8
9.2
9
8.8
8.4
8.1
7.8
7.7
5.1
A. 9
4.9
4.6
4.6
4.4
4.4
4.4
4.3
3.9
3.8
3-4
3.2
2.2
1.8
1.6
1.6
1.3
1.3
1.1
0.97
0.75
0.71
0.65
0.26
0.23
0.0*1
Be
21
20
121
W
87
M
71
43
91
19
36
57
24
59
74
33
56
103
117
65
37
42
«3
108
67
107
. yQ...
119
64
I/
22
27
29
s8
60
78
104
105
111
0.53
0.36
0.319
0.06
0.054
0.04
0.038
0.03
0.029
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.019
0.019
0.018
0.014
0.014
0.013
0.012
0.011
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.009
0.009
0.009
0.009
0.005
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.002
Ca
56
21
36
55
53
117
121
65
20
71
57
83
19
2k
80
104
39
78
37
43
91
111
5«
103
"64
42
105
60
108
67
«7
17
29
74
27
22
119
107
33
24,000
15,000
7,100
4,600
3,100
2^100
2,000
1,500
1,400
1,400
900
800
580
470
470
440
430
420
390
250
290
240
190
i'8o
170
150
130
120
110
58
44
40
36
35
24
24
7
15
Cd
107
29
17
19
37
22
83
121
64
57
59
74
65
71
108
105
36
87
20
60
91
117
21
24
21
33
39
42
43
55
56
58
67
78
80
103
104
111
119
15
9.8
6
4.1
3.9
2.8
2
2
1.9
1.8
1.8
1.5
1
1
1
0.9
0.7
0.3
0.24
0.2
0.2
0.1
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
* Sample No.
** Total Cone, mg/1
~~ Below detection liinil
77
-------
TABLE D-l 01 (TOTAL CONCENTRATION rng/1) - CONTINUED
I ,1.....IT, . TTTm- _ I * ... . - . . .
Cr
71
43
117
67
60
121
20
59
105
65
17
36
57
87
55
108
80
56
83
22
39
21
71
10*1
91
33
107
b2
103
37
27
111
29
19
2k
58
64
78
119
19,000
300
220
60
44
4l
1(0
28
19
12
11
9.1
8
7.2
7
6.8
5.8
4
it
3.7
3.7
3
2
2
1.9
1 .4
1 .2
0.76
0.6
0.38
0.3
0.2
0.12
--
--
--
--
--
Cu
121
17
57
19
59
108
65
105
21
83
71
«7
7<<
56
117
80
55
20
103
107
104
67
39
29
22
43
91
60
36
37
58
64
119
33
78
111
24
27
42
500
93
42
37
30
30
28
28
25
24
17
15
YV
14
14
12
11
9.6
8.4
5.9
5
4.9
4.7
3.8
3.7
3.7
2.9
2.8
2
1
1
1
1
0.4 "
0.4
0.2
--
--
F
55
121
59
43
91
87
20
80
19
17
21
57
83
104
71
65
39
105
36
56
107
64
103
22
33
67
29
108
117
60
37
58
111
24
78
42
7b
119
27
e
3,900
2,300
1,300
1,300
1,200
1,100
1,000
930
930
760
750
720
700
600
510
440
430
380
300
300
250
240
220
210
200
180
180
99
91
80
68
39
28
, , ^ ,
22
20
18
9.5
5
I
21
55
M
33
57
121
37
20
103
71
78
87
59
19
27
74
56
24
42
17
83
104
64
65
58
91
105
39
67
107
22
108
60
36
80
29
117
HI
119
<
1 ,400
760
470
420
390
350
350
320
320
290
240
230
230
180
180
170
150
140
140
130
130
130
120
91
90
87
84
77
68
59
37
35
34
20
19
15
15
6.2
--
M
56
21
24
20
43
65
71
55
36
57
59
119
37
83
121
19
80
64
105
67
39
17
117
60
104
91
58
103
108
22
27
74
42
111
29
107
78
87
33
g
2,300
1,100
550
480
470
460
410
320
320
270
240
240
230'
220
200
160
120
1 10
93
80
76
76
75
46'
40
31
30
28
22
21
20
20
18
16
15
15
12
8.8
--
^
55
21
20
121
59
71
43
56
91
80
36
87
64
104
19
57
S3
65
17
105
75
37
33
39
103
117
67
-29
27
108
60
111
107
78
42 !
119
22
24
58 '
In
130
1$
54
52
26
2b
24
22
18
18
16
16
16
12
10
10
10
"6.1
6
5.6
4
3.9
3.4
2.8
2.4
2
1.9
1.5
1 .1
1 .1
1
0.6
0.6
0.4
0.31
0.25
--
--
Sample No.
Total Cone, mg/1
Below Detection Limit
78
-------
TABLE D-l 01 (TOTAL
Na
25
121
39
91
36
21
56
20
43
55
57
103
65
74
105
80
19
33
42
64
67
37
83
59
71
117
58
78
22
17
87
60
104
29
108
107
27
111
119
18,000
5,^00
IJtOO
3,900
3,600"
3,500
3,400
3,000
2,900
1,700
1,700
1,600
1,500
1,100
990
810
770
750
750
750
630
530
520
460
310
300
250
250
250
210
200
160
110
110
89
78
56
24
11
Ni
121
104
83
17
105
20
39
39
108
91
55
87
71
43
19
117
65
21
22
24
27
29
33
36
37
42
56
57
58
60
M
67
74
78
80 "
14
11
9
8.4
7.4
7.2
5.5
4.7
4.5
4.3
4"
4
3.8
2.8
2.1
1.5
1 .1
--
--
[ --
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
103
107
11 ! --
119
CONCENTRATION, mg/1 ) - CONTINUED
Pb
117
59
57
17
71
60
121
105
83
108
19
65
64
80
74
67
22
104
103
36
91
87
43
20
24
27
29
33
37
39
42
55
56
78
107
1,300
290
150
140
130
130
130
110
100
"44
41
40
39
38
30
24
12
10
9
7.1
6.8
3
0.6"9"
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
111
V
55
~ 21"."
20
43
87
83
108
121
22
33
36
57
71
104
119
59
105
17
107
91
60
67
64
19
24
27
29
37
39
42
56
5«
65
74
7b
80
119 103
111
117
14
5
4.8
3-7
3.2
3
2.8
2
1.2
1
1
1
"f '
1
1
0.9
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.69
0.4
0.29
0.07
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
Zn
21
59
80
58
64
42
121
78
57
104
20
83
17
91
71
105
74
65
, 56
67"
36
108
43
37
119
27
39
117
103
19
55
87
22
107
2«t
60
1,100
980
480
270
180
180
170
160
75
70
66
6"0
40
39
38
37
35
30
24
20
17
16
16
16
15
13
13
12
1
10
10
5.2
4.9
4.9
To
1 O
33 1
--Mil 1
-- i ^23 0754
* Sample No.
** Total Cone, mg/1
Below Detection limit
79
-------
TABLE D-2 BKK (TOTAL CONCENTRATION, tng/T)
Ag
.',
52
99
68
39
100
80
19
64
sa
2
3
8
15
16
17
22
23
24
27
29
33
3^
35
42
49
50
59
60
63
69
70
71
75
78
81
91
9b
9/
98
104
106
A j.
2.9
2
1. 1
1
0.88
0.67
0.3*1
0.13
0.09
_-
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
As
;V
27
64
35
52
29
70
69
97
104
16
106
75
19
50
42
59
71
99
15
81
24
80
2
39
78
23
68
22
63
49
58
98
3
8
17
33
34
60
91
96
100
j..'.
210
42
10
9.5
6.6
3.9
2.9
2.8
2.8
2
1.4
1.3
1
1
1
1
1
1
o.q
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.41
0.38
0.31
0.26
0.23
0.18
0-03
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
Ba
*
59
97
19
81
100
99
52
69
104
64
29
2
68
75
3
106
63
q8
5fi
35
42.
16
27
91
17
39
21
22
80
50
78
15
60
8
n
/o
33
49
34
24
96
**
110
92
20
15
11
10
9-5
7.8
7.4
7.2
6.4
6.1
5.4
5.4
5.1
5.0
4.8
4.4
3.7
3.4
3.4
2.7
2.5
2.2
2.1
2.1
2.0
1.6
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.2
1.2
1.0
1.0
0.86
0.74
0.72
0.21
0.19
0.1
Be
*
52
39
69
29
19
97
22
59
70
80
99
104
27
100
75
106
16
68
42
17
50
15
24
23
8
71
2
60
63
64
91
49
58
34
78
81
33
35
98
96
2
**
2.4
2.1
0.95
0.89
0.4
0.32
0.31
0.28
0.21
0.2
0.15
0.15
0.14
0.13
0.1
0.075
0.07
0.063
0.052
0.05
0.049
0.04
0.036
0.031
0.03
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.019
0.017
0.013
O.Q06
0.005
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.002
--
Ca
A
68
59
99
97'
71
19
49
81
69
58
16
50
27
22
42
17
15
104
39
70
75
24
78
8
3
63
35
80
34
52
91
23
64
96
100
60
98
29
106
2
33
**
13,000
8,500
7.400
6.600
3.400
2.700
1.600
1 .600
1 .000
360
280
270
240
190
190
180
160
130
120
110 __,
100
96
71
67
66
66
60
59
46
45
45
39
30
20
16
15
14
9.6
4.4
--
Cd
*
39
33
70
80
2
50
99
98
42
68
100
75
58
52
19
69
64
81
106
59
49
3
8
15
16
17
22
23
24
27
29
34
35
60
63
71
78
91
96
97
104
**
10
5.8
2.9
1.7
1.2
1
1
0.63
0.5
0.5
0.44
0.34
0.33
0.31
0.22
0.19
0.13
0.13
0.13
0.063
0.04
--
--
--
--
._
__
__
--
* Sample No.
** Total Concentration, mg/1
-- Below detection limit
80
-------
TABLE
Cr
\l
39
'11
by
100
^y
/u
2
80
104
35
y/
33
71
19
8
99
59
58
16
42
106
96
50
52
81
68
34
2k
78
22
91
98
75
23
64
60
49
3
15
63
ft A
620
460
290
160
130
100
92
88
/4
47
40
40
29
29
20
19
19
13
11
10
9
9
8
5-9
5.6
5.6
4.7
4.2
3.8
2.9
2.8
2.8
2.6
2.1
2
2
1
0.63
--
--
--
D-2 BKK (TOTAL CONCENTRATION, mg/1 ) - CONTINUED
Cu
So
3y
i/
by
2
27
/o
33
98
100
75
16
35
106
97
3
42
99
81
29
72
8
50
64
59
96
24
91
52
63
23
68
49
71
5R
60
15
19
34
78
106
**
20.000
8100
490
430
390
330
110
44
*3
37
27
27
24
21
19
13
11
10
7.4
6.8
5.7
4.8
3.9
3.1
3
3
2.9
2.8
2.6
2.6
2
1.9
1.2
1
0.28
0.063
__
-_
--
Fe
39
80
27
69
70
52
97
76
35
59
19
50
3
75
99
22
42
15
81
17
71
2
104
100
33
29
68
58
49
23
91
8
64
34
78
63
24
106
96
98
20
140,000
140,000
19.000
4900
3100
2100
noo
960
600
590
5.40
440
440
390
370
330
320
270
270
260
240
230
230
230
180
170
140
140
120
110
110
86
70
62
59
40
38
18
20
18
11
K
*
29
68
19
69
104
59
49
99
100
60
97
16
15
81
70
42
50
75
80
24
71
27
33
8
78
34
35
22
1200
870
820
670
630
500
460
440
440
370
340
230
210
170
170
140
130
100
100
72
68
58
58
57
49
33
32
30
96 29
52 29
3
17
39
106
58
23
2
64
63
91
98
20
20
20
19
r 16
15
12
0.31
--
--
Mg
;t
59
99
16
97
68
29
24
15
27
69
71
104
70
8
81
19
42
3
50
17
52
22
39
75
100
49
33
106
80
23
35
78
96
34
58
91
2
60
64
98
63
**
1400
390
740
730
730
530
400
390
320
270
270
Mn
f;
80
33_
6R
59
97
29
99
?7
104
69
70
240 : 16
210
160
160
150
130
88
88
82
77
67
66
62
56
52
48
46
35
26
25
25
20
16
16
14
12
11 _
10
6
--
19
24
71
100
15
52
33
81
3
91
22
50
2
75
'7
35
42
8
23
64
58
106
98
yb
34
49
60
b3
/«
**
ft?n
510
80
52
49
39
33
23
23
20
18
13
10
10
10
8.9
6.5
6
4.8
4.7
4
4.4
2.9
2.9
2-3
2.1
2
2
2
i.y
0.56
0.56
0.4b
0.38
0.21
0.2
0.1
--
--
--
* Sample No.
** Total Concentration, mg/1
-- Below Detection Limit
81
-------
TABLE D-2 BKK (TOTAL CONCENTRATION, mg/]) - CONTINUED
N
...
22
58
100
29
70
21)
59
27
10*1
68
99
71
15
16
75
97
42
50
23
17
78
34
19
8
106
81
69
39
60
52
35
91
33
49
98
80
63
96
64
2
3
a
,', ,',
35,000
26,000
18,000
15,000
13,000
9600
8600
7500
7400
6600
5400
4900
4800
4600
3800
3800
3700
3300
3100
2600
2500
1400
1300
1200
780
720
640
590
530
390
330
260
190
150
140
130
92
88
50
41
20
N
.'-
39
17
80
63
104
19
70
15
29
100
64
99
106
68
97
91
16
3
27
59
42
58
22
49
50
24
52
96
33
71
63
75
8
35
81
98
2
23
34
60
78
"W
2100
1200
480
76
219
23
15
11
10
8.9
8
7.5
7
6.6
6.6
6.5
6.1
6
5.8
5-7
5
4.9
4.8
4.6
3.9
3-8
3
3
2.9
2.9
2.6
2.1
1.9
1
0.9
0.9
--
--
--
--
--
PI
*
2
100
69
75
33
70
96
27
80
3
97
16
17
39
64
52
50
98
68
34 j
22
99
58
104
106
19
7J
8
15
,,?.3
24
29
35
42
49
60
63
7'
78
81
91
)
j'i -V
920
310
220
94
64
59
35
23
17
15
12
10
10
10
10
8
5
5
3.1
3
2
2
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.2
h 0.63
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
;*:
29
59
104
99
19
97
15
3
16
69
64
49
63
52
39
68
106
80
100
27
23
24
35
70
71
81
58
75
22
60
2
8
17
33
34
42
50
78
91
96
98
V
« «V
12
8
7.4
7
7
5.6
4.7
4.4
4.1
3.9
3
2.9
2.6
2.6
2
1.9
.1.9
1.7
1.4
1.2 -
0.9
0.28
0.21
o. iq
0.03
__
_^
__
-_
__
__
__
__
-_
1Z L
z
*
80
39
70
100
17
2
15
16
78
50
75
3
33
42
19
68
63
27 _
8
52
29
99
35
71
59
64
97
^
96
104
24
81
69
106
91
58
23
22
98
49
60
n
5':;'r
5100
3000
150
140
92
7b
74
71
69
69
68
68
62
6Q
58
52
33
28
21
21
19
18
16
16
16
15
13
11
11
10
9.6
9.3
9-8-
7.5
6.5
5-3
5. 1
4.8
2.4
1.1
0.06
* Sample No.
-'" Total Concentration, mg/I
-- Below Detection Limit
82
-------
TABLE D-3 PV. POD. CB (TOTAL CONCENTRATION, mg/1)
Ag
*
PV-21
-12
-19
-22
-25
-28
-33
-34
-37
-40
-41
-43
-45
-46
POO- 2
-1
-3
CB-2
*ft
0.3
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
2.7
0.9
0.3
0.97
As
-I.
PV-40
-28
-33
-12
-43
-25
-12
-19
-21
-34
-37
-41
-45
-46
POD-1
-2
-3
CB-2
**
4.4
1.9
1.2
1
0.6
0.1
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
1.8
0.9
0.84
2. 1
Ba
A
PV-37
-12
-40
-22
-25
-28
-45
-19
-21
-33
-46
-43
-41
-34
POD-2
1
-3
ft ft
22
20
17
5-5
4.8
4.7
4.6
2.9
1.9
1.9
I.L,
1.7
1.2
0.74
0.42
0.36
0.19
B
A
PV-45
-25
-28
-46
-40
-12
-21
-43
-37
-19.
-41
-2i
-33
-34
POD-1
-3
-2
CB-2
e
*ft
1.8
0.4
0.34
0.12
0. 11
0.082
0.067
0.011
0.0^
0.003
0.0014
--
--
0.2
0.08
0.048
0,058
Ca
J.
PV-40
-4
-37
-12
-34
-22
-19
-25
-41
-45
-33
-43
-21
-28
POD-2 i
-3
-1
CB-2
;' '
1200
1000
280
60
52
46n
32
30
2q
?8
22
5.2
3.4
--
89
28
23
35
Cd
-.
PV-12
-43
-40
-22
-25
-33
-37
-19
-45
-46
-41
-34
-28
-21
POB-1
-2
-}
CB-2
* ft
34
17
14
14
12
8.4
8.2
4.8
4.6
4.2
2-9
2-7
1
0.5
14
1?
10
23
* Sample No.
"'-'r Total Concentration, mg/1
-- Below Detection Limit
83
-------
TABLE D-3 PV, POD, CB (TOTAL CONENTRATION, mg/1) - CONTINUED
Cr
.'-
PV-33
-28
-12
-43
-34
-46
-37
-41
-22
-25
-40
-21
-45
-19
POD-1
-2
^
CB-2
"tilt
250
52
51
23
19
11
10
10
9-1
6.7
2.3
1.1
0.57
--
1700
190
18
58
Cu
A
PV-37
-43
-12
-40
-33
-41
-22
-28
-19
-25
-45
-21
-46
-34
POD-3
-2
-1
CB-2
**
44
34
19
13
12
1 1
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
it
780
720
80
16
F
*
PV-28
-37
-43
-40
-12
-33
-19
-46
-22
-34
-25
-41
-45
-21
POD-3
-2
-3
CB-2
a
**
1000
780
660
580
550
360
280
280
180
160
130
100
37
25
20,000
7000
2100
320
K
*
PV-37
-28
-40
-12
-41
-43
-25
-45
-22
-33
-46
-19
-21
-34
IPOD-3
-2
-1
CB-2
**
410
360
2SO
280
230
57
32
26
18
18
12
"M
5.6
5.6
35
31
4.0
450
MS
*
PV-46
-12
-40
-37
-28
-19
-33
-45
-22
-43
-41
-25
-34
-21
POD-2
-3
1
CB-2 .
**
930
270
250
210
200
48
42
41
27
20
15
7-7
7.4
3.4
76
40
7-3
30
Mr
A
PV-34
-28
-12
-46
-40
-37
-43
-19
-25
-45
-k\
-21
-22
-33
POD-1
-2
-3
CB-2
I
-Yft
21
21
14
13
12
10
7.9
1.9
1.9
1.7
0.44
0.19
--
--
160
80
20
0.97
* Sample No.
"- Total Concentration, mg/1
Below Detection Limit
84
-------
TABLE D-3 PV, POD, CB (TOTAL CONCENTRATION, mg/1) - CONTINUED
Na
J.
PV-25
-21
-40
-28
-43
-46
-37
-34
-45
-41
-12
-22
-19
-33
POD-2
-3
-1
CB-2
a*
5500
3800
3700
1500
B4o
690
580
560
530
370
370
220
160
100
43,000
17,000
40
23.000
N
.'-
PV-46
-43
-40
-28
-25
-34
-12
-37
-41
-21
-19
-22
-33
-45
POD-l
-2
-3
CB-2
i
**
17
7.9
/./
4.8
4.8
4.7
4.1
4.1
1.9
0.25
--
--
--
--
1100
850
5
5.3
Pb
*
PV-37
-25
-43
-12
-19
-21
-22
-28
-33
-34
-40
-41
-45
-46
POD-2
-1
_ -1
CB-2
,"..',
200
9-6
1.8
1.2
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
160
40
19
94o
V
*
PV-21
-12
-28
-46
-40
-25
-33
-19
-37
-41
-34
-45
-43
-22
POO-1
-2
-3
CB-2
**
310
8.2
4.8
4.2
3-7
1-3
1.2
1
1
1
0.9
0.89
0.14
--
4.5
0.9
0,33
1.5
Zn
*
PV-33
-45
-37
-12
-43
-40
-41
-46
-28
-22
-34
-25
-19
-21
POD-2
-3
-1
CB-2
**
500
450
120
36
17
13
12
11
10
6.4
4.7
3-9
0.49
0.38
14,000
4700
Jt-5_
101
* Sample No.
** Total Concentration, mg/1
-- Below Detection Limit
85
-------
APPENDIX E
MANIFEST SUMMARY
Company Name
Industrial
Volume
(1 x 103)
O.I. SAMPLES
TWA
Southern Pacific RR
Standard Oil Co-
Petri Terrazzo
Continental Can Co.
Energy Development
Los Schlitz Brew Co.
Steel Castings
ARCO
Reichold Chem
Vernon Wash Rack
Safeway (Bakery)
General Latex Corp.
American Petroleum
Blue Dolphin Pools
Chevron Chemical
Certified Grocer
Emerson & Cuming Inc.
Time-NC, Ben Moore,
C & M Pumping Serv.
CCA
Key Bronner Steel
Cal State Towel
Texaco Inc.
Chrome Crawig Haft Co.
Smith Tool Co.
Pilsbury Co. , General
Latex
W.R. Grace, Dunn Edwards
Time D.C., Asbury Trans.,
Fruloss Truck Wash
U.S. Manufacturing,
Ferro Precision
13
9
10
16
7
1
9
9
2
16
13
14
6
1
16
4
14
9
11
6
8
6
1
7
2
14
6
13
8
16
16
32
5
16
48
16
26
34
29
16
18
16
32
4
16
12
4
5
8
32
10
8
8
10
16
16
6
8
86
-------
Company Name
Industrial
Type
Volume
(IxlO3)
O.I. SAMPLES - Continued
Charles Brumins., Inter-
national Paper, J.B.
Mfg. Co.
Gray Truck
Pasha Trucking
Ryder Truck
Ken Air
Union Oil
Glasteel
Inland Containers
Texaco Inc.
Calif. Milk Products
9
13
13
13
9
2
16
15
9
9
B.K.K. SAMPLES
Albert Van Lust & Co.
Shell Chemical
Texaco
Long Beach Oil Dev. Co.
Standard Oil
Crown Plating
Thums
Stauffer Chemical
GATX
Petrochemical Inc.
Los Angeles Chemical
Denny's Restraunt
Oil & Solvent Process Co.
Staffer Chemical
A & F Plastik
Unknown
Unknown
Mobil Oil
Van Camp Sea Foods Co.
Whitco Chemical
Montrose Chemical
Unknown
Metro Stevadore
Sunkist Growers
Stauffer Chemical
Unknown
Burroughs Inc.
Cyclone Excelweld
Petrochemical Inc.
UCA of Calif.
Tennet Corp.
15
4
2
1
2
7
1
5
11
3
4
14
6
4
9
17
17
2
14
4
5
17
12
14
4
17
7
11
3
10
4
16
16
16
6
16
12
6
6
16
6
4.8
16
112
96
19
16
128
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
240
16
16
48
48
16
16
16
73
2.9
16
87
-------
Company Name
B.K.K. SAMPLES
CHBM Aero
Hall, Burton Services
Montrose Chemical
Edington Oil Co.
Thums
Bruce Lint Computer
Tr ansmi s s ion
Douglas Oil
Ditty Drum Co.
Basin By Products
Mobil Oil
PALOS VERDE S
Union Oil Co.
Texaco Inc.
Unknown
Texaco Co.
Standard Oil
ARCO
Douglas Oil Co.
SCRTD
Unknown
Douglas Aircraft Co.
Pacific Pumps
Todd Shipyard
OBAM Inc.
Industrial
Type
- Continued
17
17
5
2
1
7
1
11
17
2
SAMPLES
2
2
17
2
2
10
17
13
11
13
9
12
2
Volume
(IxlO3)
3
16
176
48
48
16
32
16
16
16
24
47
16
122
112
16
16
16
16
16
6.4
17.5
6.4
P.O.D. SAMPLES
Pacific Tube Co.
PGB Industries
Atlas Galvanizing
7
8
7
6
16
19
C.B. SAMPLE
Pacific Coast Drum 11 21
88
-------
APPENDIX F
METAL SPECIES IN CLASS I LANDFILLS
TABLE F-l ARSENIC
INPUT IN CLASS I LANDFILLS
Landfill
Site
No. of Samples
Total (Sol . + Sol ids)
Soluble
Sol ids
Weighted Avg. (Total)*
Weighted Avg. (Sol . )**
Weighted Avg. (Solids)"
Total Vol. Sampled
1 x 103
Est. Dai ly Flow
1 x 105
Est. Daily Input
gm/day, % of total
Sol uble
Sol ids
Total
O.I .
39
38
38
0.42
0.009
0.41
587
4. 7
3.2 (1.7)
190 (98.3)
190
B.K.K.
41
31
31
4.7
0.36
4.6
1397
5.8
110 (4.1)
2.6x 103(95.9)
2.7x 10-*
P.V.
14
12
12
0.57
0.044
0.53
438
9.7
36 (6.5)
520 (93-5)
560
C.B.
1
1
1
2.1
0.5
1.7
21
1.1
40 (17.4)
190 (82.6)
230
P.O.D.
3
3
3
0.99
0.25
0.79
41
1.3
27 (21)
100 (79)
130
CO
* Total Volume
* Liquid Volume
-------
TABLE F-? BARIUM
INPUT IN CLASS I LANDFILLS
Landfill
Site
No. of Samples
Total (Sol . + Sol ids)
Soluble
Sol ids
Weighted Avg. (Total)"
Weighted Avg. (Sol.)**
Weighted Avg. (Solids)*
Total Vol. Sampled
1 x 103
Est. Dai ly Flow
1 x 105
Est. Daily Input
gm/day, % of total
Soluble
Sol ids
Total
0. 1.
39
38
38
42
0.28
41
587
4.7
99 (0.5)
1.9x1of(99.5)
1.9x 1(T
B.K.K.
41
31
31
9-2
0.55
8.90
1397
5.8
150 (2.8)
5.2x103(97.2)
5.4x 10J
P.V.
14
12
12
6.0
1.3
5.0
438
9.7
1.0x 10^(17.2)
4.8x10^(82.8)
5.8x 103
C.B.
1
1
1
0.85
0.45
0.52
21
1.1
36 (38.3)
58 (61.7)
94
P.O.D.
3
3
3
0.30
0.055
0.26
41
1.3
6.1 (15.6)
33 (84.4)
39
10
o
* Total Volume
** Liquid Volume
-------
TABLE F-3 BERYLLIUM
INPUT IN CLASS I LANDFILLS
Landfi 11
Site
No. of Samples
Total (Sol . + Sol ids)
Sol uble
Sol ids
Weighted Avg. (Total)*
Weighted Avg. (Sol.)**
Weighted Avg. (Sol ids)*
Total Vol. Sampled
1 x 103
Est. Dai ly Flow
1 x 105
Est. Dai ly Input
qm/day, % of total
Soluble
Sol ids
Total
0. I.
39
38
38
0.042
0.0019
0.041
587
4.7
0.69 (3.5)
19 (96.5)
20
B.K.K.
41
31
31
0.16
0.13
0.094
1397
5.8
36 (40)
54 (60)
90
P.V.
14
12
12
0.20
0.092
0.13
438
9.7
75 (38.3)
120 (61.7)
200
C.B.
1
1
1
0.04
0.006
0.036
21
1.1
0.49 (11.2)
3.4 (88.8)
4.4
P.O.D.
3
3
3
0.084
0.035
0.055
41
1-3
3-9 (35-2)
7.2 (64.8)
11
<£>
Total Volume
Liquid Volume
-------
TABLE F-4 CADMIUM
INPUT IN CLASS I LANDFILLS
Landfill
Site
No. of Samples
Total (Sol. + Solids)
Soluble
Solids
Weighted Avg. (Total)*
Weighted Avg. (Sol.)**
Weighted Avg. (Solids)*
Total Vol. Sampled
1 x 103
Est. Daily Flow
1 x 105
Est. Daily Input
gm/day, % of total
Soluble
Solids
Total
O.I.
39
38
38
1.5
0.19
1.3
587
4.7
66 (9-5)
630 (90.5)
700
B.K.K.
41
31
31
0.35
0.20
0.25
1397
5-8
58 (27.9)
150 (72.1)
210
P.V.
14
12
12
11
0.10
11
438
9.7
81 (0.8)
1.0x 107(99.2)
1 . 1 x 1 04
C.B.
1
1
1
23
0.3
23
21
1.1
24 (1.0)
2.5x10^(99)
2.5x 10-3
P.O.D.
3
3
3
12
7.0
5.9
41
1.3
770 (50)
770 (50)
1.5 x 105
IQ
IN)
* Total Volume
** Liquid Volume
-------
TABLE F-5 CALCIUM
INPUT IN CLASS I LANDFILLS
Landfill
Site
No. of Samples
Total (Sol . + Sol ids)
Soluble
Sol ids
Weighted Avg. (Total)*
Weighted Avg. (Sol.)"*
Weighted Avg. (Solids)*
Total Vol. Sampled
1 x 103
Est. Dai ly Flow
1 x 105
Est. Daily Input
gm/day, % of total
Sol uble
Solids
Total
0. I.
39
38
38
1500
170
1400
587
4.7
6.1 X 10r (9.4)
6.5x10^(90.6)
7.1 x 103
B.K.K.
41
31
31
1100
1100
530
1397
5.8
3.1 x1o£ (50)
3.1 x1o£ (50)
6.2x WT
P.M.
14
12
12
100
46
63
438
9.7
3.7x 1oJ(37.4)
6.2x 107(62.6)
9.9x 10
C.B.
1
1
1
35
47
0.97
21
1.1
3.7x 103(97-D
110 (2.9),
3-8x 10J
P.O.D.
3
3
3
51
16
38
41
1.3
1.8 x 10^(26.9)
4.9x 10^(73.1)
6.7x 105
10
CO
* Total Volume
** Liquid Volume
-------
TABLE F-6 CHROMIUM
INPUT IN CLASS I LANDFILLS
Landf i 1 1
Site
No. of Samples
Total (Sol. +Sol ids)
Sol ubl e
Sol ids
Weighted Avg. (Total )*
Weighted Avg. (Sol . )**
Weighted Avg. (Solids)*
Total Vol. Sampled
1 x 103
Est. Dai ly Flow
1 x 105
Est. Dai ly 1 nput
gm/day, % of total
Sol ubl e
Sol ids
Total
0. I .
39
38
38
280
340
24
587
4.7
1.2x 10?(91.6)
1.1 x1o£ (8. A)
1.3x 1CT
B.K.K.
41
31
31
32
12
26
1397
5.8
3.5x10?(l8.9)
1.5x107(81.1)
1.9x 10
P.V.
14
12
12
20
3-5
17
438
9.7
2.9x10-1(15.3)
1.6x107(84.7)
1.9x10
C.B.
1
1
1
58
52
21
21
1.1
4.1 x 103(64.1)
2.3x10^(35.4)
6.4x10^
P.O.D.
3
3
3
320
290
74
41
1.3
3.1 x 1o!|(76. 4)
9.6x10^(23.6)
4.1 x 10
* Total Volume
** Liquid Volume
-------
TABLE F-7 COPPER
INPUT IN CLASS I LANDFILLS
Landfil 1
Site
No. of Samples
Total (Sol. +Sol ids)
Sol uble
Sol ids
Weighted Avg. (Total)*
Weighted Avg. (Sol.)**
Weighted Avg. (Solids)*
Total Vol. Sampled
1 x 103
Est. Dai ly Flow
1 x 105
Est. Dai ly 1 nput
gm/day, % of total
Soluble
Solids
Total
O.I.
39
38
38
16
3.1
13
587
4.7
1.1 x 10^(15. 4)
6.2x 10^(84.6)
7.3x10^
B.K.K.
41
31
31
160
290
15
1397
5.8
8.3x 10? (90. 4)
8.9x10? (9-6)
9.2x 104
P.V.
14
12
12
11
0.24
10
438
9.7
190 (1.9)
I.Ox 10JO8.1)
1.0x 10
C.B.
1
1
1
16
6.8
11
21
1 .1
540 (31)
1.2x 103 (69)
1 .7x 103
P.O.D.
3
3
3
660
520
220
41
1.3
5.7x 1oJ(67.l)
2.8x 107(32.9)
8.5x 10H
01
Total Volume
Liquid Volume
-------
TABLE F-8 IRON
INPUT IN CLASS I LANDFILLS
Landfill
Site
No. of Samples
Total (Sol . + Sol ids)
Soluble
Sol ids
Weighted Avg. (Total)"
Weighted Avg. (Sol.)**
Weighted Avg. (Solids)*
Total Vol. Sampled
1 x 103
Est. Dai ly Flow
1 x 105
Est. Daily Input
gm/day, % of total
Soluble
Solids
Total
O.I .
39
38
38
460
45
430
587
4.7
1.6x1oJ (7.4)
2. Ox 10^(92.6)
2.2x 10b
B.K.K.
41
31
31
2500
4000
500
1397
5.8
1.2x 10^(80.5)
2.9x10^(19.5)
1.5x 10
P.V.
14
12
12
260
2.1
260
438
9.7
1.7x103 (0.7)
2.6x105(99.3)
2.6 x 105
C.B.
1
1
1
320
0.8
320
21
1.1
64 (0.2)
3.5x1oJ(99-8)
3.5x10H
P.O.D.
3
3
3
11 ,000
13,000
7-5
41
1.3
1.5x 106(99.9)
970 (0.1)
1 . 5 x 1 0^
VD
* Total Volume
** Liquid Volume
-------
TABLE F-9 LEAD
INPUT IN CLASS I LANDFILLS
Landfill
Site
No. of Samples
Total (Sol. + Sol ids)
Soluble
Sol i ds
Weighted Avg. (Total)*
Weighted Avg. (Sol.)"*
Weighted Avg. (Solids)*
Total Vol. Sampled
1 x 103
Est. Dai ly Flow
1 x 105
Est. Dai ly I nput
gm/day, % of total
Soluble
Sol ids
Total
0. 1 .
39
38
38
36
2.8
34
587
4.7
1.0x10? (5.9)
1.6x 107(94.1)
1.7x 10
B.K.K.
41
31
31
13
7.9
9.3
1397
5.8
2.3x10^(29.9)
5.4x 10^(70.1)
7.7x10^
P.V.
14
12
12
9-7
1.4
8.5
438
9.7
1.1 x 10^(12.2)
8.3x 10^(87.8)
9.4x 103
C.B.
1
1
1
930
840
340
21
1.1
6.7x 1oJ(64.4)
3.7x 107(35.6)
1.0x 105
P.O.D.
3
3
3
77
28
54
41
1.3
3.1x10^(30.7)
7. Ox 10f(69.3)
1.0x 10
10
* Total Volume
** Liquid Volume
-------
TABLE F-10 MAGNESIUM
INPUT IN CLASS I LANDFILLS
Landfi 11
Site
No. of Samples
Total (Sol. +Sol ids)
Sol uble
Sol ids
Weighted Avg. (Total)"
Weighted Avg. (Sol.)*"
Weighted Avg. (Solids)"
Total Vol. Sampled
1 x 103
Est. Dai ly Flow
1 x 105
Est. Daily Input
gm/day, % of total
Sol uble
Sol ids
Total
0. I .
39
38
38
250
91
180
587
4.7
3.3x10J[(27.5)
8.6x 10^(72.5)
1 . 2 x 1 05
B.K.K.
41
31
31
180
69
140
1397
5.8
2 . 0 x 1 0 ? ( 1 9 - 4.)
8.3x 10^(80.6)
1.0 x i(r
P.V.
14
12
12
71
16
57
438
9.7
1.3x 1oJ(l8.8)
5.6x 107(81.2)
6.9x 10
C.B.
1
1
1
30
42
0
21
1 .1
3x 103(100)
3x 103
P.O.D.
3
3
3
50
59
0.20
41
1.3
6.4x 103(99.6)
26 (0.4),
6.4x103
ID
00
* Total Volume
** Liquid Volume
-------
TABLE F-ll MANGANESE
INPUT IN CLASS I LANDFILLS
Landfill
Site
No. of Samples
Total (Sol . + Sol ids)
Sol uble
Sol ids
Weighted Avg. (Total)"
Weighted Avg. (Sol.)**
Weighted Avg. (Solids)*
Total Vol. Sampled
1 x 103
Est. Dai ly Flow
1 x 105
Est. Daily Input
gm/day, % of total
Sol uble
Solids
Total
O.I.
39
38
38
12
1.3
11
587
4.7
^0 (8.1)
5.3x 103(91.9)
5.8x 1CT
B.K.K.
41
31
31
16
17
7.6
1397
5.8
4.8x 10^(52.2)
4.4x 10^(47.8)
9.2x 1CT
P.V.
14
12
12
4.2
0.77
3.6
438
9.7
6.3x10*05.3)
3.5x10^(84.7)
4.1 x 10^
C.B.
1
1
1
0.97
0.80
0.39
21
1.1
64 (59.8)
43 (40.2)
110
P.O.D.
3
3
3
63
52
19
41
1.3
5.7x10^(69.5)
2.5x 10^(30.5)
8.2x 10^
VO
" Total Volume
** Liquid Volume
-------
TABLE F-12 NICKEL
INPUT IN CLASS I LANDFILLS
Landfill
Site
No. of Samples
Total (Sol. + Sol ids)
Soluble
Sol ids
Weighted Avg. (Total)"
Weighted Avg. (Sol.)"-'
Weighted Avg. (Solids)*
Total Vol. Sampled
1 x 103
Est. Dai ly Flow
1 x 103
Est. Daily Input
gm/day, % of total
Soluble
Sol ids
Total
O.I .
39
38
38
2.0
0.52
1.6
587
4.7
190 (20)
760 (80)
950
B.K.K.
41
31
31
47
56
19
1397
5.8
1.6x1oJ(59.3)
1.1 x 107(40. 7)
2.7x 10
P.V.
14
12
12
2.7
1.3
1.6
438
9.7
I.Ox 103(38.5)
1.6x 10^(61.5)
2.6x 103
C.B.
1
1
1
5.3
6.0
0.97
21
1.1
480 (81.4)
110 (18.6)
590
P.O.D.
3
3
3
490
500
66
41
1.3
5.5x 10? (86. 5)
8.6x1oJ(13.5)
6.4x104
o
o
* Total Volume
** Liquid Volume
-------
TABLE F-13 POTASSIUM
INPUT IN CLASS I LANDFILLS
Landfill
Site
No. of Samples
Total (Sol . + Sol ids)
Sol uble
Solids
Weighted Avg. (Total)"
Weighted Avg. (Sol .)**
Weighted Avg. (Solids)*
Total Vol. Sampled
1 x 103
Est. Daily Flow
1 x 103
Est. Daily Input
gm/day, % of total
Soluble
Sol ids
Total
O.I.
39
38
38
190
130
98
587
4.7
4.5x 10Jj(49.5)
4.6x107(50.5)
9.1 x 10
B.K.K.
41
31
31
200
HO
130
1397
5-8
4.0x1oJ(35.0
7.4x10^(64.9)
1.1 x 105
P.V.
14
12
12
79
30
54
438
9.7
2.4x 1oJ(31.2)
5.3x 107(68.8)
7.7x 10H
C.B.
1
1
1
450
600
15
21
1.1
4. 8x10^(96.8)
1.6x10? (3.2)
5. Ox 10
P.O.D.
3
3
3
29
28
6.0
41
1.3
3. Ox 103(79.6)
770 (20.4)
3.8x 103
'- Total Volume
*» Liquid Volume
-------
TABLE F-14 SILVER
INPUT IN CLASS I LANDFILLS
Landfill
Site
No. of Samples
Total (Sol. + Sol ids)
Sol uble
Solids
Weighted Avg. (Total)*
Weighted Avg. (Sol.)**
Weighted Avg. (Solids)*
Total Vol. Sampled
1 x 103
Est. Dai ly Flow
1 x 103
Est. Daily Input
gm/day, % of total
Sol uble
Sol ids
Total
O.I.
39
38
38
0.013
0.017
--
587
4.7
0.61(100)
-- (o)
0.61
B.K.K.
41
31
31
0.16
-
0.22
0.053
1397
5.8
64(66.7)
32(33.3)
96
P.V.
14
12
12
0.011
0.013
--
438
9.7
10.7(100)
-- (o)
10.7
C.B.
1
1
1
0.96
1.1
0.17
21
1.1
88(82.2)
19(17.8)
110
P.O.D.
3
3
3
1.6
0.056
1.6
41
1.3
6.2(3.0)
200(97.0)
210
o
ro
* Total Volume
** Liquid Volume
-------
TABLE F-15 SODIUM
INPUT IN CLASS I LANDFILLS
Landfill
Site
No. of Samples
Total (Sol. + Sol ids)
Sol uble
Solids
Weighted Avg. (Total )*
Weighted Avg. (Sol.)**
Weighted Avg. (Solids)"
Total Vol. Sampled
1 x 103
Est. Dai ly Flow
1 x 103
Est. Dai ly 1 nput
gm/day, % of total
Sol uble
Sol ids
Total
0. 1.
39
38
38
2800
1300
1800
587
4.7
4.6x10J?(34.6)
8.6x 10?(65.4)
1.3x10
B.K.K.
41
31
31
7000
7700
3100
1397
5.8
2.2x 10x(55)
1.8x10?(45)
4. Ox 10
P.V.
14
12
12
1800
1600
410
438
9.7
1.3x10^(76.5)
4. Ox 10?(23.5)
1.7x 10
C.B.
1
1
1
23,000
2000
22,000
21
1 .1
1.6x 10^(6.3)
2.4x10^(93.7)
2.6x 10b
P.O.D.
3
3
3
25,000
2300
23,000
41
1.3
2.5x 10Jj(7.7)
3.0x10^(92.3)
3-3x 10°
o
u>
* Total Volume
** Liquid Volume
-------
TABLE F-16 VANADIUM
INPUT IN CLASS I LANDFILLS
Landfil I
Site
No. of Samples
Total (Sol. + Sol ids)
Sol ubl e
Sol ids
Weighted Avg. (Total)"
Weighted Avg. (Sol.)**
Weighted Avg. (Solids)*
Total Vol. Sampled
1 x 103
Est. Dai ly Flow
1 x 103
Est. Dai ly Input
gm/day; % of Total
Sol ubl e
Sol ids
Total
0. 1 .
39
38
38
1.1
0.15
0.45
587
4.7
55(10.9)
450(89.1)
510
B.K.K.
41
31
31
2.3
0.35
2.1
1397
5.8
100(7-7)
1.2x 10|(92)
1.3x 10^
P.V.
14
12
12
13
5.1
8.5
438
9-7
4.1 x 103(33.3)
8.2x 10r(66.7)
1.2x10
C.B.
1
1
1
1.5
0.40
1.2
21
1.1
32(20)
130(80)
160
P.O.D.
3
3
3
1.1
0.25
0.93
41
1.3
28(18.9)
120(81.1)
150
o
* Total Volume
** Liquid Volume
-------
TABLE F-17 ZINC
INPUT IN CLASS I LANDFILLS
Landfill
Site
No. of Samples
Total (Sol. + Sol ids)
Sol ubl e
Sol ids
Weighted Avg. (Total )*
Weighted Avg. (Sol . )**
Weighted Avg. (Solids)"
Total Vol. Sampled
1 x 103
Est. Dai ly Flow
1 x 103
Est. Dai ly 1 nput
gm/day, % of total
Soluble
Sol ids
Total
n
O.I.
39
38
38
70
7-9
64
587
4.7
2.9x103(8.8)
3.0x107(91.2)
3.3xlOH
B.K.K.
41
31
31
73
95
26
1397
5-8
2.8x 1o!*(65. 1)
1.5x107(34.9)
4.3x 10*
P.M.
14
12
12
47
3.1
45
438
9.7
2.5x 103(5.5)
4.3x 10?(94.5)
4 . 6 x 1 04
C.B.
1
1
1
100
100
28
21
1.1
8.1 x 103(72.3)
3.1 x I0f(27.7)
1.1 x 10
P.O.D.
3
3
3
7800
3100
3500
41
1.3
3.4x 10^(34.0)
4.6x 10?(66.0)
1.0x10
o
on
> Total Volume
':-: Liquid Volume
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-600/2-78-064
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION'NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
A CASE STUDY OF HAZARDOUS WASTES IN CLASS I LANDFILLS
5. REPORT DATE
June 1978 (Issuing Date)
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO
Bert Eichenberger, J. R. Edwards, K. Y. Chen,
and Robert D. Stephens
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
University of Southern California
Los Angeles, California 90007
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
1DC618A, SOS #1, Task 31
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
R-803813-01-0
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Municipal Environmental Research LaboratoryGin. ,OH
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/600/14
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
Richard A. Carnes (Project Officer), 513/684-7871
16. ABSTRACT
This study documents the average concentration, estimated daily deposition, and
partitioning of 17 metal species in hazardous wastes discharged to five Class I
landfill sites in the greater Los Angeles area. These sites receive a combined
estimated daily volume of 2.3 x 106 I/day of hazardous wastes. A total of 320
samples were collected and consolidated into 99 samples representative of 17
industry types. The data was summarized for six general industry groups:
petroleum, chemical, metal, foods, industrial cleaning, and miscellaneous/unknown.
7.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS C. COS AT I Field/Group
Chemical analysis
Volume
Separation
Class I landfills
Hazardous wastes
Heavy metal analysis
Deposition rates
68C
8. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
RELEASE TO PUBLIC
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport)'
UNCLASSIFIED
21. NO. OF PAGES
114
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
UNCLASSIFIED
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
106
U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1978 757-140/1307
------- |