&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Solid Waste
and Emergency Response
Washington, DC 20460
EPA.530-SW-37-023F
October 1987
Solid Waste
Characterization of MWC Ashes
and Leachates from MSW Landfills,
Monofills, and Co-Disposal Sites
Volume VI of VII
Characterization of Leachates from
Municipal Waste Disposal Sites and
Co-Disposal Sites
-------
D-33-5-7-21
FINAL
CHARACTERIZATION OF LEACHATES FROM
MUNICIPAL WASTE DISPOSAL SITES AND
CODISPOSAL SITES
VOLUME VI OF VH
Prepared for
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF SOLID WASTE
WASHINGTON, D.C.
CONTRACT NO. 68-01-7310
WORK ASSIGNMENT NO. 04
EPA Contract Officer EPA Project Officer
Jon R. Perry Gerry Dorian
Prepared by
NUS CORPORATION
-------
CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1-1
1.1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION 1-1
1.2 OBJECTIVES OF STUDY • 1-3
1.3 APPROACH TO STUDY 1-4
2.0 SITE SELECTION 2-1
21 IDENTIFICATION OF MASTER LIST OF OPERATING FACILITIES .. 2-1
2.2 PRELIMINARY SCREENING OF CANDIDATE SITES 2-2
2.3 FINAL SITE SELECTION 2-4
2.3.1 Final Selection of Municipal Disposal Sites 2-4
2.3.2 Final Selection of Codisposal Sites 2-6
2.3.3 Interaction with Site Operators 2-6
3.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL PROGRAM 3-1
3.1 SAMPLING PROCEDURES 3-1
3.2 HEALTH AND SAFETY PROCEDURES 3-1
3.3 CONVENTIONAL ANALYSES - NUS PITTSBURGH
LABORATORY 3-2.-
3.4 RCRA APPENDIX IX ANALYSES-S-CUBED LABORATORY 3-2
3.5 ASH ANALYSES AND LEACH ATE GENERATION TESTS - t
VERSAR 3-3
3.6 PCDD AND PCDF ANALYSES-BATTELLE, COLUMBUS 3-4
4.0 RESULTS OF COLLECTED LEACHATES 4-1
4.1 CONVENTIONAL RESULTS 4-1
4.2 INORGANIC RESULTS 4-7
4.3 ORGANIC RESULTS 4-13
4.4 PCDD AND PCDF RESULTS 4-18
4.5 INORGANIC CONSTITUENTS IN LEACHATES AND
EXTRACTS 4-22
5.0 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5-1
APPENDICES
A NUS Work Plan
B NUS Case Studies
C NUS Trip Report
D NUS Sampling/QA/AC Program
NUS Health and Safety Plan
F S-Cubed - Analytical Results Report for Collected Leachates
including QA/QC Data
G Versar - Trace Element Results Report Including QA/QC Data
H Versar - Organic Results Report Including QA/QC Data
I Battelle Columbus - PCDD and PCDF Results Including QA/QC Data
-------
CONTENTS(continued)
TABLES
NUMBER PAGE
2-1 Characteristics of Selected Municipal
Solid Waste Disposal Sites 2-5
2-2 Characteristics of Selected Codisposal (MSW and MWC Ash) Sites ... 2-7
4-1 In-Situ and Conventional Parameter Analyses of Collected
Leachate Samples in mg/l (ppm) or as indicated 4-2
4-2 Ranges of In-Situ and Conventional Parameter
Concentrations in Collected Leachate Samples
in mg/l (ppm) or as indicated 4-5
4-3 Appendix IX Inorganic Constituents in Leachates
Collected from Municipal and Codisposal Sites
in mg/l (ppm) or as indicated 4-8
4-4 Ranges for Appendix IX Inorganic Constituents in
Leachates Collected from Municipal and Codisposal
Sites in mg/l (ppm) or as indicated 4-12
4-5 Organic Concentrations in Leachates from Municipal and
Codisposal Sites in mg/l (ppm) or as indicated 4-14
4-6 Ranges of Organic Concentrations in Leachates from Municipal
and Codisposal Sites in mg/l (ppm) or as indicated 4-17
4-7 Chlorinated Dioxin and Chlorinated Dibenzofuran Levels in Ash
and Leachates from the NC Codisposal Landfill 4-20
4-8 Chlorinated Dioxin and Chlorinated Dibenzofuran Levels
in Ash and Leachates from the NY Codisposal Landfill 4-21
4-9 Inorganic Content in NY Ashes and in EP Toxicity,
TCLP, and SW-924 Extracts 4-23
4-10 Inorganic Content in NC Ashes and in EP Toxicity,
TCLP, and SW-924 Extracts 4-24
in
-------
ACRONYMS AND DEFINITIONS
PAGE TWO
PCDDs
PCDFs
POTW
RCRA
RDF
RPD
SS
SW-924
TCLP
IDS
TEF
TNK
TOC
TSCA
Polychlorinateddibenzo-p-dioxins
Polychlorinated dibenzofurans
Publically Owned Treatment Works
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
Refuse Derived Fuel
Relative Percent Difference
Suspended Solids
Deionized Water Extraction Test Method
Toxic Characteristics Leaching Procedure Test Method
Total Dissolved Solids
Toxic Equivalency Factors
Total Nitrogen Kjeldahl
Total Organic Carbon
Toxic Substances Control Act
-------
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION
This report on characterization of leachates from municipal waste disposal sites and
codisposai (municipal and municipal-waste-combustion solid residue) sites is
prepared to provide support to EPA's study of the Subtitle D Program. The study
described in this report is one of a series of investigations designed to assist EPA in
developing data to evaluate the potential effects on humans and the environment
from leachates generated by such municipal landfills.
Three reports issued by NUS under the same work assignment summarize the
available literature information regarding the characteristics of leachates from
municipal landfills.
1. Characterization of Municipal Landfill Leachates - A Literature Review.
September 1986 (Volume II of this report).
2. Addendum to Characterization of Municipal Landfill Leachates - A
Literature Review. March 1987 (Volume 111 of this report).
3. Characterization of Municipal Waste Combustion Residues and Their
Leachates - A Literature Review, July 1987 (Volume IV of this report).
The third report summarizes the literature information regarding the chemical
characteristics of municipal-waste-combustion (MWC) solid residues, their leaching
characteristics when exposed to various leaching tests, and the characteristics of
leachates from monofilled MWC residue landfills (Volume IV of this report).
In 1979, under authority of Sections 1008(a)(3) and4004(a) of Subtitle D of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), EPA promulgated "Criteria" for
determining whether specific Subtitle 0 (nonhazardous waste) disposal facilities
and practices pose a reasonable probability of adverse effects on human health or
the environment (40CFR Part 257). Major provisions of the Criteria include
prohibitions on adverse effects on endangered species, discharges to surface water,
1-1
-------
and ground water contamination. Those facilities that violate the Criteria are "open
dumps" and are prohibited under RCRA.
In 1979, EPA also promulgated guidelines for the development of State Solid Waste
Management Plans (40 CFR Part 256). These guidelines required that states seeking
EPA Subtitle D grant funds have the authority to prohibit, close, and upgrade open
dumps. These grant funds were available from 1977 to 1981. State participation in
this program was voluntary. Outside of approval of the state plans and
disbursement of grant funds, EPA had no direct implementation authority. Thus,
Subtitle D has basically been a state-administered program.
Federal funding of state Subtitle D activities was terminated after 1981. Since then,
the focus of EPA's efforts under RCRA has been upon the Subtitle C (hazardous
waste) provisions. As a result, EPA has little current information on the status of
state nonhazardous waste programs or on the Subtitle D facilities themselves.
The Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) to RCRA, signed into law on
November 8,1984, require EPA to submit a report to Congress by November 8,1987;
addressing whether the Subtitle 0 Criteria (40 CFR Part 257) are adequate to protect
human health and the environment from groundwater contamination, and
recommending whether additional authorities are needed to enforce the Criteria.
Further, EPA must revise the Criteria by March 31,1988, for facilities that may
receive hazardous household waste (HHW) or small-quantity-generator (SQG)
waste. These revisions are to include groundwater monitoring, location restrictions,
and corrective active, as appropriate.
Within 18 months of the promulgation of the revised Criteria, each state must
develop a permit program or other system of prior approval to ensure that each
facility that may receive hazardous household waste or small-quantity-generator
waste is in compliance with the Criteria. The HSWA envision Subtitle D to continue
to be State implemented. However, if the states fail to enforce the Criteria, EPA
may intervene.
Since 1984, studies conducted by EPA in support of the report EPA must submit to
Congress, have raised concerns regarding the chemical composition of leachate
generated from municipal waste landfills. These concerns center on the detection
of certain toxic inorganic constituents (mainly metals) and organics, and on the lack
1-2
-------
of available data for a comprehensive and defensible evaluation of the effects of
leachateson human health and the environment.
1.2 OBJECTIVES OF STUDY
This study on characterization of leachates from municipal waste disposal sites and
codisposal sites was designed to provide information for the EPA report to
Congress. Specifically, the objectives of this study were as follows:
• 'TO select four municipal waste disposal sites and sample their leachates
(minimum of three samples per site).
• To select two codisposal sites (MSW disposal sites in which municipal
incinerator ashes also are disposed of) and sample their leachates
(minimum of three samples per site).
• To sample Municipal Waste Combustion (MWC) ashes arriving at the two
selected codisposal sjtes for disposal.
• To analyze all collected leachate samples for the compounds on the RCRA
Appendix IX list at a qualified, experienced, and competent laboratory.
• To subject the collected MWC ashes to the three most commonly applied
leaching tests.
- The EPA Extraction Procedure (EP) toxicity test
- The EPA Toxic Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) toxicity test
- SW-924 (Deionized Water Extraction test method)
• To analyze the laboratory-produced leachates for
- Inorganics
- Semi-volatile compounds
- Homologs of polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and. polychlorinated
dibenzofurans
1-3
-------
• To analyze the ashes and the leachates collected from the codisposal
facilities for homologs of polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDDs) and
polychlorinated dibenzof urans (PCOFs).
• To compare analytical chemical results obtained for the collected leachate
samples from the codisposal sites to those obtained for the
laboratory-produced leachates.
• To compare the analytical chemical results obtained from the collected
teachate samples as well as the laboratory-produced leachate samples, to
results obtained for leachate collected from hazardous waste sites.
1.3 APPROACH TO STUDY
Since this study was one of a series of studies sponsored by EPA for the same
ultimate goal, it was decided to utilize, as much as possible, sampling and analytical.;
methodologies employed by other contractors in the course of the other studies.?
The main study, which had been in progress when this study started, was the Versar
study entitled Characterization of Municipal Waste Combustor Residues.
April 24,1987. To maintain continuity and to allow for comparisons to be made, the
decision was made to
• Send ashes to be leached by Versar.
• Have Versar conduct inorganic and semi volatile analyses on ashes and
laboratory-produced leachates.
• Send leachates and ashes collected from the codisposal sites and Versar
laboratory-produced extracts to Battelle, Columbus, for PCDD and PCDF
analyses.
A thorough search was conducted for a laboratory to conduct the RCRA
Appendix IX analyses (see complete listing in Tables 2-1 and 2-2 in Appendix F of this
report). Since this newly compiled listing of hazardous substances had not
undergone many practical applications, it was decided to use the S-Cubed
laboratory, which conducted significant method development work on this list for
1-4
-------
EPA and which had an EPA-approved quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC)
program.
Care was placed in selecting suitable sites to represent, as much as possible,
naturally occurring leaching conditions from municipal disposal sites and codisposal
sites.
The sampling data used in this study originated from four facilities, none of which
accepted hazardous waste. All four facilities went into operation after RCRA was
promulgated and are believed to be in accordance with RCRA requirements. For
this reason, these data are by no means representative of the solid waste industry in
general.
The approach to the study is summarized in the NUS Work Plan submitted and
approved by EPA. This Work Plan is provided in Appendix A.
1-5
-------
2.0 SITE SELECTION
The objective of the site selection was to identify four professionally managed
municipal waste disposal sites and twocodisposal sites for the purpose of leachate
sampling and analysis. The three major steps in the site selection process were
• Identification of a Master List of Operating Landfills. Locating landfills
throughout the United States that accept either municipal waste or a
combination of municipal waste and MWC residues (codisposal sites).
• Preliminary Screening of Candidates. Screening of located landfills based
on conformance to site-specific criteria; e.g., the existence of a leachate
collection system, site age, and the availability of waste-type information.
• Final Site Selection. Selecting candidate landfills based on willingness to>
participate, site location, waste type, and USEPA approval.
2.1 IDENTIFICATION OF MASTER LIST OF OPERATING FACILITIES
EPA provided NUS with a computerized list of 116 operating landfills in 8 states.
The number of facilities per state was as follows:
Arkansas - 21
Colorado - 15
Connecticut - 8
Delaware - 3
Florida - 18
Oregon - 17
Texas - 20
Wisconsin - 14
This list, which was compiled from answers to a questionnaire, contained pertinent
information regarding the site location, operating conditions, engineering
information, and data related to wastes disposed of on site. Since the data were
2-1
-------
obtained from individuals of different technical backgrounds, the information had
to be verified prior to use.
Very few codisposal sites were identified, and the information supplied about them
was often incorrect. For example, a site that was identified on the master list as a
codisposal site, in reality accepted coal-ashes rather than MWC ashes.
2.2 PRELIMINARY SCREENING OF CANDIDATE SITES
The second step of the site selection process was screening of candidate sites on the
basis of their conformance to certain site-specific criteria. These criteria are listed
below, in decreasing order of importance, and are discussed in the paragraphs that
follow:
• Existence of a leachate collection system
• Accessibility of the site for leachate sampling
• Availability of a "Case Study" for the site
• Age of the site: The site should have been constructed after the enactment:
of RCRA regulations.
• Accessibility of information on waste input: These site should not accept
industrial wastes.
• Geographic and climatic location of the site
The first of the five criteria, the existence of a leachate collection system, was
mandatory in the site selection process. A site was eliminated from further
consideration if it did not have an operating leachate collection system. Samples
could be expeditiously collected only at sites with operating leachate collection
systems.
The second criterion, accessibility of the site for leachate sampling, included
two factors: (1) the willingness of the facility to cooperate with the contractor; and
(2) the physical ease with which leachate could be sampled from the collection
system. Potential sites that satisfied this criterion were ranked more positively than
those sites where leachate collection appeared to be more difficult and time
consuming.
2-2
-------
The third criterion, availability of "Case Studies," was important because these
EPA-generated documents contain extremely important information of studied
disposal sites. These "Case Studies" were generated by EPA contractors and all have
an identical outline, which includes information regarding waste characteristics,
design characteristics, operation and management practices, and environmental
impacts (monitoring and damage assessment) as well as cost data. EPA provided
NUS with the studies for the selected sites.
None of the codisposal sites were included in the "Case Study" lists.'
The age of a site, the fourth criterion, is important because age affects leach ate
generation rates and is a good indicator of environmental design features. A site in
operation for less than 5 years may not generate sufficient leachate for sampling,
and the generated leachate may not be representative of all the disposed wastes at
the site. For these reasons, a minimum age of 5 years was originally designated for
site screening. However, many sites or cells with leachate collection systems had
operated for less than 5 years. Therefore, screening emphasis was instead placed on
whether or not the site's leachate volume was sufficient for sampling. The sites
were to have been constructed after RCRA Regulations came into effect
The fifth significant site selection criterion was the availability of information
regarding waste input. Adequate correlation of leachate quality to specific waste
types is critical in designing containment systems; thus, reliable information
regarding the types and quantities of disposed wastes was necessary. The sites
selected should not accept industrial wastes.
The sixth significant criterion in the site selection process was site location and
associated climate. Precipitation and evaporation rates affect leachate generation
rates; thus climate must be considered in the design of liner containment systems
for hazardous waste facilities. Climate of a site was characterized during this
process, based on an area's net precipitation. Net precipitation indicates the
potential for leachate generation rates at a site, and is calculated for a region by
subtracting the average annual lake evaporation from the mean annual
precipitation.
2-3
-------
An original objective of the site screening process was to select sites in areas with
varying climatic conditions, and thereby create a representative spectrum of
existing site conditions. However, optimum diversity in climate was difficult to
achieve while still satisfying the more important criteria discussed above.
Therefore, during the final selection stage, emphasis was also placed on selection of
sites located in diverse geographic locations, while still maximizing climatic diversity
to the extent possible.
On the basis of conformance with the the first screening consideration, the
availability of a leachate collection system, 44 candidate sites were selected from
the original master list of 116 for further evaluation. Based on the additional
five criteria, the 44-site list was reduced to 25 sites.
2.3 FINAL SITE SELECTION
2.3.1 Final Selection of Municipal Disposal Sites
The applicable state agencies were contacted to verify the information available in-
the Master List for the final list of 25 sites. Following the state contacts, the
individual site operating managers or engineers were contacted with requests for
information, for permission to conduct the study, and for storage space for
containers and in-situ monitoring instruments.
As a result of these contacts four sites were selected, which for confidentiality
purposes are coded as follows
• PC
• FL
• SM
• VD
For these four sites, "Case Studies" were prepared. They are provided, with slight
modifications which were made for confidentiality reasons, in Appendix B.
Table 2-1 provides a summary of the characteristics of the selected Municipal Solid
Waste disposal sites.
2-4
-------
TABLE 2-1
CHARACTERISTICS OF SELECTED MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL SITES
KJ
Facility
PC
Fl
SM
VD
Opened lor
Operation
1461
Clotuit
-1998
May 1975
Cknura
-1992
1976
Unuary
I960
Capacity
(ywdtVvMi)
•0.000
21.000
ISilO*
480.000
(HlomAUy)
Geographic Prolde
18 6 Kfti In rotting Mb, areai
ange Irom rural agricultural
oretktentlal: toll It glacial
•lid moraine, rnottty highly
permeable tandytdl
120-acre lite m Incited am.
toib are medium- lo fine-
grained landi. undeilain by
ully today Me land
U auei m Noodplaln and
ad|actnl upland), agiuulluial
aiea toi conmli ol clay.
mudilont. undtlone. and
volcanic idcli
100 «i« m a laige drainage
lawna; giound n Uiato
covait d wrth ilope waih tolh
and reudual iwh (day ind
thai*)
Witte
CtiMftclctntKi
G*i baqe
Rtluie
Wood mallei
Ocmoliliondebiit
Gaibage
Contliuction debM
Yard liaib
lomalo waile
WoodKiap
Municipal wane
MunKipal Mwage
iludge
Munklpal Waste
Conitiuction Debrll
OeadAnlmab
Method ol
Flactmtnt
Aiea-flll
Sequtntial
liench
method
Tiencti and
aiealill
Ramp
Method
liner
1 loat-lhict clay
peimeabihty
7«IO'»o
4>IO'cmnei)
( inch-tlml
benlonile porymer
and toil
(permeabjlily
lnlO'tmAec)
HOIM • naluially
lined wilh clay and
muditone
Mane
Leach*te Collection/
licalmrntSytlcm
6-inih|Mipei in giavel lienchti.
hauled to POTW
6-inch pel rotated PVC
pipn in gravel Irenchei.
pumped lo traled pool.
evapoiated and hauled lo
FO1W
follectrd in Irenchet.
pumped lulagoon, itoied
inwuilei. tpray ungaled
on idjacenl land in
winner
Collection reitrvoir on
downgiadlcnlildeolfill.
leachat e n (prayed back
over (jndlill area
COWN
Daily -Sunlieiol
toll
Final Ileetol
compatledilay
toil and fiintheiol
loptoil
Daily- Bine heiol
toil
Final • 18 nchei ol
benianil*ioilmi>
Daily Sindieiof
toil
Final - 2 feet ol
day topiocl
Daily -filrxlifiol
weatlieiediliale
Final ?leeiol
compacted topMil
-------
2.3.2 Final Selection of Codisposal Sites
Of the 44 candidate sites identified in the initial screening process, none were
suitable to qualify as codisposal sites. In addition to the criteria provided for the
MSW sites, an additional important criteria was added for the codisposal sites: The
MWC ash fraction of the entire MSW was to be at least 25 percent of the total
volume. This information was obtained through telephone conversations with the
appropriate state agencies.
As a result, a new site selection process was initiated to identify two codisposat sites.
State agencies were contacted to identify sites that fit the criteria described in
Section 2.2. Sites identified by state agencies were individually contacted to verify
the existence of a leachate collection system, accessibility for leachate sampling, etc.
As a result of this effort, two sites were selected. These sites are coded, as follows,
for confidentiality purposes.
• NY
• NC
There are no "Case Studies" for these two codisposal sites. The information
obtained regarding these sites is given in the trip report generated by the sampling
crews who visited the sites and who are also project team members. The trip report
is attached as Appendix C.
Table 2-2 provides a summary of the characteristics of the selected codisposal sites.
2.3.3 Interaction with Site Operators
Following the site selection process, EPA issued individual letters to each site
manager with information about the purpose and nature of the study. NUS
contacted the sites to schedule the sampling trips.
Cooperation from every site was extremely good. Equipment and chemical
preservatives, which had to be shipped to sites prior to the crew arrival, were
obtained by site personnel. Site personnel also accompanied the sampling crew to
the leachate collection and sampling points and were helpful in every possible way.
2-6
-------
TABLE 2-1
CHARACTERISTICS OF SELECT!D CODISPOSAL (MSVW AND MUVC ASH) SITES
>J
FacHily
NY
NC
Opened lot
Operation
Apiil 1985
November
1981
Geographic PtoUt
Metavariable
Not available
Capacity
(yarchVyeai)
4»W«oniA»e»i
ftih and ittule
anda.QOOy«ihi(
yen iludg* and
«»h
Nola««Ufato
WaileCharactcnilki
Aih
HaidliUOt.rneUl
map)
towage tludge
Sewagi iludg* ath
Humane louety witlet
MWCaih
Cakium mint*
atauifudgc
Dimelhyltrlphthalal*
MSW
(MSW ASH-1'1)
liner
Iwoilaylmeit
1-lool.und.
htgh-deniily liner
Moot. (and. 10 mil
PCVhnef
leactiale ColtettionJ
Tiealmenl Syitem
CoBettion tyitero bel ween
two luieri. pumped to
holding tanki and Mien lo
POIW
Collection lyilem above
linen, pumped lo lined
laqoon.liientoPOTW
Conei
None
MWC *ih » uMd at
a daily cover
-------
3.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE AND
QUALJTY CONTROL PROGRAM
NUS and the subcontracted analyzing laboratories adhered to stringent quality
assurance and quality control (QA/QC) practices for the sampling and the analytical
efforts. Because sampling and analytical procedures were already approved by EPA
for similar projects, a site-specific Quality Assurance Program Plan (QAPP) was not
deemed necessary.
3.1 SAMPLING PROCEDURES
Although the sites NUS sampled are not hazardous, NUS adhered to the NUS
Operating Guidelines Manual for CERCLA activities at CERCLA sites, which NUS
prepared for the EPA. The document was thoroughly reviewed and accepted by
EPA for work performed on hazardous waste sites under the Superfund Programs
The document was initially prepared in 1981 and has been updated annually since;
It has served as a QA/QC document for many subcontractors conducting work for
EPA on similar sites. Section 4.2.9 of this document, Sampling, is applicable for the
work conducted for this study and is provided as Appendix D.
Three repetitive samples were taken from each of the six sites sampled. In addition
to these 18 samples, one field blank and one duplicate sample were added by the
sampling team for QC purposes. Other QC samples were incorporated by the
individual laboratories performing the specific analyses, as further described below.
3.2 HEALTH AND SAFETY PROCEDURES
Prior to initiating the field trips, a site-specific health and safety plan was prepared
for each individual site by a qualified and experienced NUS health and safety
specialist. This Health and Safety Plan is given in Appendix E. Samplers were
briefed by the health and safety specialist regarding precautions that should be
taken prior to, during, and after sampling. Samplers were equipped with needed
equipment (e.g, breathing apparatus) in case sampling had to be done inside
manholes or in other unventilated areas.
3-1
-------
NUS personnel who conducted the sampling on this project have had 40 hours of
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and CERCLA health and
safety training, and first-hand experience collecting similar samples at many other
solid and hazardous waste sites.
3.3 CONVENTIONAL ANALYSES- NUS PITTSBURGH LABORATORY
The NUS laboratory in Pittsburgh conducted the conventional analyses, including
tests for nitrate, ammonia, alkalinity, chemical oxygen demand (COD), etc., on the
collected leachate samples. This laboratory adhered to the QA/QC procedures
required by the individual methods employed. The methods employed followed
procedures listed in 16th Edition of Standard Methods for the Examination of Waste
and Wastewater. In addition, NUS adhered to the requirements listed in the NUS
Procedures Manual for the Laboratory Services Division as issued in
October 20,1986.
The results are summarized in Section 4.0. The field blank was not contaminated
with respect to any of the parameters of interest. There was good agreement (low
Relative Percent Differences [RPDs]) between the results for the field duplicate
samples.
3.4 RCRA APPENDIX IX ANALYSES - S-CUBED LABORATORY
Collected leachate samples were analyzed for RCRA Appendix IX analyses by the
S-Cubed Laboratory. This laboratory was selected for this task because it
participated in method development work for Appendix IX analyses for EPA and
because its QA/QC program was acceptable to EPA. Essentially, S-Cubed was asked
by NUS to adhere to the Contract Laboratory Program - Hazardous Substance List
(CLP-HSL) QA/QC program.
Metals by atomic absorbtion (AA) and miscellaneous inorganics, purgeable and
extractable organics by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GS/MS), and
pesticides by GC were incorporated in the S-Cubed analytical effort (Appendix F).
QA objectives were defined as CLP QC limits for all organic and inorganic analyses.
A field blank, duplicate, matrix spike, and matrix spike duplicate were analyzed to
assess analytical precision and accuracy. Additionally, all samples for organic
analysis incorporated specific surrogates for an additional assessment of accuracy.
3-2
-------
Results of the field blank analyses revealed only sodium and methylene chloride as
contaminants. Results of the duplicate sample analytes indicated a good analytical
reproducibility (low RPDs) for essentially all analytes at concentrations significantly
above detection limits.
Recoveries of matrix-spiked organic compounds and surrogates were generally
within CLP QC limits. Recoveries of matrix-spike metal analytes were generally
within the reasonable range of 80-131 percent. Recoveries outside this range were
largely attributable to spike concentrations of less than the sample concentrations
and spiked concentrations approach ing accurate quantification limits.
The list of analyses conducted by S-Cubed on this project, the obtained results, and
QA/QC results are given in Appendix F. Since this project was one of the first to
attempt to provide analytical results for the entire Appendix IX list, several
difficulties in providing analyses for several compounds resulted. These are
discussed on pages 24 and 25 of Appendix F.
3.5 ASH ANALYSES AND LEACHATE GENERATION TESTS • VERSAR
Versar prepared a comprehensive and extensive Quality Assurance Project Plan
(QAPP) for its project regarding monofills. This Quality Assurance Project Plan was
reviewed and approved by the EPA Office of Research and Development, Hazardous
Waste Engineering Research Laboratory (HWERL). Versar was asked by NUS to
adhere precisely to those portions of the QAPP which applied to this project.
The two ash samples collected from the codisposal sites were leached according to
the EP, TCLP, and SW-924 procedures, followed by analysis of the leachates for
metals by inductivily coupled plasma (ICP) and extractable organics (HSL target
compounds) by GC/MS. The complete Versar analytical report is incorporated as
Appendices G (metals) and H (organic). Duplicate and matrix-spiked samples were
run with respect to one of the ash-sample analyses to assess precision and accuracy.
QA objectives for precision and accuracy were defined as an RPD of 20 percent and
recoveries of 80-120 percent for metals, and CLP QC limits for organ ics.
QC results for the metals analyses were comprehensively reported, these results
consistently met QA objectives for both precision and accuracy. In those isolated
3-3
-------
cases in which QA objectives were not met, a reasonable and adequate narrative
explanation was provided. No extractable organic* corresponding to HSL target
compounds (except benzoic acid) or PCBs were detected in the leachates.
Appendix G and Appendix H contain the inorganic and organic results as well as the
QA/QC information as pertained to the analyses reported in these Appendixes.
3.6 PCOD AND PCOF ANALYSES - BATTELLE. COLUMBUS
The Battelle, Columbus laboratory prepared Appendix A of the Versar QAPP, which
applies to the PCDD and PCDF Analysis for this project. As mentioned in Section 3.5,
this QAPP, including the Battelle PCDD and PCDF analytical portion, was reviewed
and approved by the HWERL Appendix I of this report contains the PCDD and PCDF
results and the QA/QC protocols.
Battelle, Columbus laboratories performed the PCDD/PCDF analysis by high
resolution GC and high resolution/MS on two ash samples from the codisposal sites
and associated leachates (Appendix I). A method blank was processed in association
with each sample, and two matrix (native) spikes were processed, one for the ash
matrix and one for the leachate matrix.
Recoveries of nine internal standards were consistently in the 90-110 percent range.
The narrative of Appendix I indicates that recovery of spiked PCDD/PCDF standards
was in the 80-130 percent range.
3-4
-------
4.0 ANALYTICAL RESULTS OF COLLECTED LEACHATES
Chemical analytical results obtained in the course of this study from the four
selected municipal disposal sites and the two selected codisposal sites are reported
in this section.
4.1 CONVENTIONAL RESULTS
Three samples were collected at each of the six sites visited. In addition, one field
blank at the VD site (VD-LE-000), one duplicate sample at the PC site (PC-LE-003A),
and one rainwater runoff sample (from offsite area near entry to the disposal site)
from the SM Site (SM-LE-004) were analyzed in-situ for Eh, pH, specific conductance,
and temperature. These 21 samples were sent to the NUS Pittsburgh laboratory to
be analyzed for the following conventional parameters: alkalinity, organic carbon,
chemical oxygen demand (COD), chloride, hardness, sulfate, phosphate, total
nitrogen, total dissolved solids (TDS), and suspended solids (SS). Nineteen of these
twenty one samples were leachate samples.
Results of the in-situ measurements as well as the conventional parameters are
reported in Table 4-1. Sampling procedures, sampling locations, preservation
methods, and shipping procedures are provided in detail in the NUS trip report,
Appendix C. Table 4-2 summarizes the ranges of these constituents within the
21 samples.
Examination of the data reported in Table 4-1 indicates the following:
• The field blank (VD-LE-000) was essentially pollutant free. This sample's pH
was 9.45. Although it appears to be too basic for a blank sample, the
laboratory deionized water obtained through ion exchange columns is
often of this pH. The sample was checked several times in the laboratory
and in the field.
• The rainwater runoff sample was relatively dean, with a pH of 7.05, total
dissolved solids (TDS) value of 1 SOppm, and a total hardness value of
4-1
-------
TABLE 4-1
IN-SITU AND CONVENTIONAL PARAMETER ANALYSES OF
COLLECTED LEACH ATE SAMPLES IN mg/1 (ppm) OR AS INDICATED
Ki
Inoiganlu
Alkalinity. Total (CaCO,)
Ammonia ai N (thttiBation)
Of ganK Caibon (non-purgeable)
C00(0,»
ChloiKJe(CI)
Haidneti Total M*
-------
TABLE 4-1
IN-SITU AND CONVENTIONAL PARAMETER ANALYSES OF
COLLECTED LEACHATE SAMPLES IN mg/l (ppm) OR AS INDICATED
PAGE TWO
(not garnet
Alkalinity. Total (CaCOj)
Ammonia as N (distillation)
Organic Carbon (non-purgeable|
C00<0,)
Chloride 10.000 gmhos/cm
25' C
-------
TABLE 4-1
IN-SITU AND CONVENTIONAL PARAMETER ANALYSES OF
COLLECTED LEACHATE SAMPLES IN ntg/l (ppm) OR AS INDICATED
PAGE THREE
t
Inorganics
Alkalinity. Total (CaCOjl
Ammonia as N (distillation)
OiganitCaibon(non purgeable)
COD(0;)
Chloride (CD
Hardness. lota(Macto(CaCO))
Nitrate (N)
Niirue(N)
Nitrogen. Kieldahl(N)
Nitrogen. Organic (N)
Phosphoius. Total (P)
Solids. Dissolved at 180*C
Solids. Suspended at 103° C
Sullate. Tuibidimetric (USA)
Field Parameter!
pH.pH units
Eh (Millivolts)
Specific Conductivity (pmhw/tm)
Temperature
NYU 01
t.800
160
1.250
j.Boo
2.100
2.200
0?
. <004
190
30
t I
1.940
4S
<10
NV-LC-02
1.600
170
1.270
1.300
2.100
2.200
05
<004
210
40
097
1.930
54
<20
NY IE 01
1.800
190
1.310
3.900
2.100
2.100
06
<004
2SO
eo
097
7.9/0
251
<20
7J
381 millivolts
> 10.000 umhos/cm
50-C
NC-LE-OI
3.600
380
461
1.400
1.200
900
<0 1
-------
TABLE 4-2
RANGES OF IN-SITU AND CONVENTIONAL PARAMETER
CONCENTRATIONS IN
COLLECTED LEACHATE SAMPLES IN mg/l (ppm) OR AS
INDICATED
Constituent
Range
Inorganics
Alkalinity, Total (CaCO3)
Ammonia as N {distillation)
Organic Carbon (non-purgeable)
COD (O2)
Chloride (Cl)
Hardness, Total Macro (CaCOa)
Nitrate (N)
Nitrite (N)
Nitrogen, Kieldahl (N)
Nitrogen, Organic (N)
Phosphorus, total (P)
Solids, Dissolved at 180° C
Sol ids, Suspended at 1 03° C
Sulfate, Turbidimetric (USA)
1,600-4.700
53-580
138-2,680
470-8,700
570-2,100
670-3,000
<0.1 -0.7
< 0.04 -0.05
73-660
10-100
0.2-12
1,930-31,800
32 - 2,220
<4-420
Field Parameters
pH, pH units
EH (Millivolts)
Specific Conductivity (umhos/cm)
Temperature
6.98- 7.8
-383 millivolts -
-804 millivolts
300 (umhos/cm) -
8,800(umhos/cm)
5.0°C-25°C
Note:
No. of Sites: 6
No. of Samples: 19
(3 per site + one duplicate)
4-5
-------
100 parts per million (ppm) (as CaCOs). The phosphorus value of this runoff sample
was about five times the average of the leachates. This fact indicates that the
phosphorus may be introduced into the landfill from the local soils rather than from
the contents of the landfill.
• There was extremely good agreement between the two field duplicate
samples (PC-LE-003) and PC-LE-003A). Relative Percent Differences (RPD)
between these two samples were very close, except for phosphorus (P),
which had values of 1.3 and 0.53 ppm, and suspended solids, with values of
928 and 508 ppm. The higher suspended solids values could have
contained somewhat higher phosphorus levels. The good agreement
between the duplicate samples indicates sample representativeness, proper
sampling procedures, and analytical reproducibility.
• Each of the three samples collected at each individual landfill was very close
in value to the other two samples. The only exceptions occurred in TDS
(PC-LE-002 and NY-LE-03), suspended solid values (NY-LE-03 and NC-LE-02)',
and sulfate (FL-LE-02). These data indicate the limitations of
representativeness provided by the "grab" sampling method.
• With respect to the conventional parameters, variations of leachate quality
were apparent between the different landfills.
• There was no apparent difference in leachate characteristics (as expressed
by the conventional parameter analyses) between the municipal disposal
sites and the codisposal sites. The NY codisposal landfill appeared relatively
the "cleanest" of the six sites, whereas the NC codisposal landfill was of
similar quality to the rest of the other landfills. The VD municipal landfill
appeared the "cleanest" of the municipal landfills.
• The higher range values of the conventional parameters, listed in Table 4-2,
did not originate from the codisposal sites, except for the following: all
three chloride values from the NY site, one chloride value from the NY site,
and one suspended solid value from the NC site.
4-6
-------
4.2 INORGANIC RESULTS
Table 4-3 lists the inorganic content of leachates collected from the six selected
sites, and Table 4-4 presents a summary of ranges for these elements. Three samples
were collected from each sit. In addition, one field blank (VD-LE-000) and one
duplicate sample (PC-OE-003 and PC-LE-003A), as described in Section 4.1 and in
Appendix C, the trip report, were sent to the S-Cubed laboratory to be analyzed for
the inorganic parameters included in RCRA Appendix IX. Full results are provided in
Appendix F of this report.
Data presented in Tables 4-3 and 4-4 indicate the following:
• The field blank was virtually clean of inorganic contaminants. It contained
only 118 mg/l of sodium and 0.08 mg/l of zinc.
• The two duplicate samples, PC-LE-003 and PC-LE-003A, were very dose in-
composition. RPD values for measurements greater than 10 times the^
detection limts were less than 15 percent, except for potassium, which was
26 percent.
• Generally, the three samples collected from each individual landfill were
very close in inorganic (metal) content.
• Similarly to the conventional parameter results, the inorganic content
varied from site to site. Leachates from one site were higher in one
element while those from another were higher in another element.
• All leachate samples were well below the EP toxicity maximum allowable
limit for metals. The spike recoveries of chromium, lead, silver, and
selenium were relatively low (ranging between 36 and 41 percent), a fact
which could suggest that the actual concentrations of these elements in
these leachate samples might be higher. These concentrations, however,
were significantly lower than the EP toxicity maximum allowable limits.
4-7
-------
TABLE 4-3
APPENDIX IX INORGANIC CONSTITUENTS IN LEACHATES COLLECTED
FROM MUNICIPAL AND CODISPOSAL SITES
IN mg/l (ppm) OR AS INDICATED
Parameter
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Nickel
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Sodium
Thallium
Tin
Vanadium
Zinc
Osmium
pH.(pH Units)
Specific Conductivity
(umhos/cm)
Temperature (°Q
EH (Millivolts}
FL-LE-01
54
—
0023
0.48
—
0006
352
0.012
—
—
16.3
0053
125
1 31
—
—
871 1
0.006
—
1.293
—
—
0.009
232
—
R-LE-02
58
—
0.019
048
—
0005
343
0012
—
—
176
0035
117
134
—
—
744.0
0.006
—
1,228
—
—
0.011
2.S9
—
70S
FL-03
5.0
—
0.023
0.34
—
0.007
319
0.010
—
—
16.4
0.061
116
1 30
—
—
816.6
—
—
1,510
—
—
0.021
2J9
—
> 10,000
25
•804
SM-LE-001
—
—
001
041
—
0002
ISO
0.006
—
—
64
0.009
75
168
—
013
217.8
—
—
576.0
—
—
0.023
0.24
•—
SM-LE-002
—
—
0009
034
—
0003
174
O.OOS
—
—
6.5
0.015
74
1.67
—
0.13
228.7
—
—
7817
—
—
0.024
0.30
—
SM-LE-003
1.6
—
0009
0.34
—
0.002
146
0.009
—
—
6.6
0.006
77
168
—
0.13
199.6
—
—
1,334
—
—
0.020
0.28
—
7.8
300
18
-486
4-8
-------
TABLE 4-3
APPENDIX IX INORGANIC CONSTITUENTS IN LEACHATES COLLECTED
FROM MUNICIPAL AND CODISPOSAL SITES
IN mg/l (ppm) OR AS INDICATED
PAGE TWO
Parameter
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Nickel
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Sodium
Thallium
Tin
Vanadium
Zinc
Osmium
pH (pH Units)
Specific Conductivity (ymhos/em)
Temperature (°Q
EH (Millivolts)
VD-LE-000
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
118.0
—
—
—
0.08
—
.146
VD-LE403
—
—
0007
048
—
—
258
0003
—
—
22.8
—
189
0.31
—
0.16
268.6
—
—
681.8
—
—
0.014
0.10
—
VD-LE-001
—
—
0007
0.48
—
—
272
0.003
—
—
23.2
—
189
0.30
—
—
145.2
—
—
552.5
—
—
0.013
0.07
—
6.98
3.900
9.6
•411
VD-LE-002
—
—
0006
055
—
—
263
0002
—
—
21.2
—
182
0.27
—
0.14
270.4
—
—
552.5
—
—
0.011
0.18
—
4-9
-------
TABLE 4-3
APPENDIX IX INORGANIC CONSTITUENTS IN LEACHATES COLLECTED
FROM MUNICIPAL AND CODISPOSAL SITES
IN mg/l (ppm) OR AS INDICATED
PAGE THREE
Parameter
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Nickel
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Sodium
Thallium
Tin
Vanadium
Zinc
Osmium
pH (pN Units)
Specific Conductivity (vmhos/cm)
Temperature CO
EH (Millivolts)
PC-LE-001
2.4
—
0.011
1 64
—
0.003
709
0011
—
—
268
—
424
8.28
—
—
453.7
—
—
817
—
—
0.016
0.44
—
7.25
8,800
11.3
•481
PC-LE-002
3.4
—
OOOB
1 7
—
0.003
657
0039
—
—
261
0.048
422
887
—
0.13
471 8
—
—
822.8
—
—
0.019
0.51
—
PC-LE-003
2.8
—
0008
1 57
—
—
794
0.006
—
—
242
0.012
412
8.28
—
0.13
471.8
—
—
846.3
—
—
0.018
0.38
—
PC-LE-003A
2.2
—
0.014
143
—
—
747
0.0065
—
—
214
—
400
7.59
—
—
363.0
—
—
752.3
—
—
0.024
0.33
—
4-10
-------
TABLE 4-3
APPENDIX IX INORGANIC CONSTITUENTS IN LEACHATES COLLECTED
FROM MUNICIPAL AND CODISPOSAL SITES
IN mg/l (ppm) OR AS INDICATED
PAGE FOUR
Parameters
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Nickel
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Sodium
Thallium
Tin
Vanadium
Zinc
Osmium
pH (pH Units)
Spoof ic Conductivity (umhos/cm)
Temperature ft)
EH (Millivolts)
NY-LE-01
—
002
0.010
0.89
—
0.011
775
0009
—
0.18
938
0.016
199
113
—
0.23
580.7
—
—
1.646
—
—
0.01 5
1.21
—
7.2
> 10.000
5
•363
NY-LE-02
—
001
0008
0.89
—
0.009
765
0.011
—
0.20
92.4
0.010
184
11.2
—
0.23
707.8
—
—
1.669
—
—
0.01S
1.21
—
NY-LE-03
— •
0.02
0012
082
—
0.006
803
0.013
—
0.19
93.8
0.022
191
11.3
—
0.24
780.3
—
—
2.280
—
—
—
1.21
—
NC-LE-01
—
—
0.044
0.27
—
—
216
—
—
—
21.1
0.026
118
1.31
—
0.13
613.4
—
—
1.076
—
—
0.017
0.15
—
7.3
8.400
21.1
•541
NC-LE-02
—
—
0046
0.41
—
—
207
0005
—
—
104
0.027
124
148
—
0.14
526.3
—
—
1.487
—
—
0.029
0.09
—
NC-LE-03
—
—
0.044
0.34
—
—
174
0.008
—
—
209
0.018
114
1.29
—
—
508.1
—
—
1.134
—
—
0.024
0.12
—
Not detected above laboratory detection limit
4-11
-------
TABLE 4-4
RANGES FOR APPENDIX IX INORGANIC CONSTITUENTS IN LEACHATES
COLLECTEDFROM MUNICIPAL AND COOISPOSAL SITES
IN mg/l (ppm) OR AS INDICATED
Constituent
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Nickel
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Sodium
Thallium
Tin
Vanadium
Zinc
Osmium
pH(pH Units)
Specific Conductivity (umhos/cm)
Temperature ("Q
EH (Millivolts)
Range
1.6-5.8
0.01 - 0.02
0.01 - 0.046
0.27-1.64
—
0.002-0.011
146-803
0.002 - 0.039
—
0.18-0.20
6.4-268
0.006 - 0.053
74-424
0.27-11.3
—
0.13-0.24
145.2-871.1
0.006-0.006
—
552.5-2.280
—
—
0.009-0.029
0.07-2.59
—
6.98-7.8
300-8,800
5- 25
-146- -804
Not detected above laboratory detection
Note:
No. of Sites: 6
No. of Samples: 19
(3 per site + one duplicate)
limit
4-12
-------
• The higher range values listed in Table 4-4 did not originate from the
codisposal sites, except for one arsenic value, one cadmium value, one
calcium value, one copper value, one manganese value, one nickel value,
one sodium value, and one vanadium value.
4.3 ORGANIC RESULTS
Table 4-5 summarizes the results obtained when analyzing the leachate samples
collected at the six sites (including one field blank and one duplicate sample, as
described in Section 4.1) for the organic parameters listed in RCRA Appendix IX.
Table 4-6 lists the ranges of these values. Detailed analytical data are given in
Appendix F of this report.
Data provided in Tables 4-5 and 4-6 indicate the following:
• The field blank was free of organic contaminants, except for methylene
chloride.
• Results of the duplicate samples were close. All RPD values were within
20 percent except for methylene chloride and 4-methyl 2-pentanone,
which were 119 and 57 percent respectively. All contaminants detected in
one sample were also detected in the duplicate sample.
• Leachates from these sites contain a variety of volatile compounds:
Acetone and methylene chloride were detected at every site; 2-butanone
was detected in five sites. 2-Hexanone was present in four of the six sites;
4-methyl-2 pentanone was present in three sites; toluene in four, and
ethylbenzene, xylenes, 1,1-dichloroethane, 1,2-dichloroethane, and
1,1,1-trichloropropane each were found in only one site.
• Acetone, methylene chloride, 2-butanone, and toluene were the most
prevalent of the detected volatiles, and toluene was detected at the
highest detected concentration-1.1 ppm. All of these compounds are
common solvents, which makes their use universal, including their use as
laboratory solvents.
4-13
-------
TABLE 4-5
ORGANIC CONCENTRATIONS IN LEACHATES FROM MUNICIPAL
AND COD1SPOSAL SITES IN mg/l (ppm). OR AS INQICATiO
VOLATILE*
Acetone
2-Buianone
Melhylene chloride
2-Hevanone
4-Melhyl- 2-penlanone
Toluene
Ethylbeniene
Total nylenei
l.l-Dichloroethane
T- 1,2-Dichloroethene
1. l.3-Trichlorop»opane
AdDEXTRACTABlES
P-creiol (4-methyl phenol)
Phenol
BASE/NEUTRAL EXTRACTABLES
Diethyl phlhalate
Bit (2-ethvlhexyl) phthalate
PESTICIDES, iigft(ppb)
4.4-DDT
2.4 D
Lindane
Endosulfansulfate
FL-LE-OI
46
I.S
006J
04
029
1
0.032
OOI7B
014
FL-LE-02
38
FL-LE03
19
13 I 30
OH 1
0039
t 1
OOI9B
016
004J
00851
0.22
SMLEOOt
017
029
0002J
00061
0054
0041
Oil
120
MLE002
035
043
00031
0053
0045
00561
89
M-LE-003
029
044
00031
0012
0078
0078
00421
-------
U1
TABLE 4-5
ORGANIC CONCENTRATIONS IN UACHATES FROM MUNIOPAL
AND COOI5POSAL SITES IN mo/I (ppm|. OR AS INDICATEO
PAGE TWO
VOLAHLES
Acetone
2'Butenone
Melhylene chloride
2-Hexanone
4-Methyl-2-pentanone
Toluene
Elhylbenzene
Tola! vylenei
1,1-Oichloroelhane
T-l,2-Dichloroelhene
1 . 1 ,3-Ti ichloiopropane
AdDEXTRACTABLES
P-cresol (4-melhyl phenol)
Phenol
BASE/NEUTRAL EXTRACTAILES
Dielhyl phthalate
B»(2-«lliyl hexyl) phlhalalv
PESTICIDES, iia/llppb)
4.4-DDT
2.4-0
Lindane
Endrin
EndosulfansulFale
VD-LE-000
0007
VOLE 001
012
0004J
0016
VD-LE002
O.OOBJ
•
0.14
0006
VO-lE-003
0.004J
0006
0.012
PC-LE-OOI
40
9.9
Oil
069
057
OS4
023J
44
14
0042J
028
PC-LE-002
4 t
U.O
032
041J
OSS
44
1 7
OOSJ
PCLE-003
43
120
0092
036
0061
061
45
1.8
•
010
0017J
PC-LE-003A
40
100
036
037
0.11
059
5 1
2 1
on
0021J
-------
TABLE 4-S
ORGANIC CONCENTRATIONS IN IEACHATES FROM MUNICIPAL
AND CODISPOSAl SITES IN mg/l Ippm). OR AS INDICATED
PAGE THREE
at
VOIATIIES
Acetone
2-Butanone
Methylene chloride
2-Hexanone
4-Melhyl-2-penlanone
Toluene
Eihylbemene
Tout nyltnei
I.l-Dichloioflthane
T-t.I-Olchloroethene
1 . t , 3-Trichlaropropane
ADD EXIfl ACTABLE*
P-ci esol (4-methyl phenol)
Phenol
BASE/NEUTRAL EXTRACTABLES
Oiethylpttlhalale
Bii(2-elhyl hexyl) phlhalale
PESTICIDES, ugrt(ppb)
4.4 DDT
2.4-D
Lindane
Endiin
EndotulfanMjIlale
NY-LE-OI
oat
22
0098
012
51
2 t
005JJ
130
025
NY IE 02
OIS
16
Oil
012
OOTBJ
MY IE 03
019
017
00991
160
NCLE-OI
0 IB
0 12
029
0094
021
OOB9
012
NC-LE-02
043
073
0039
0088
0073
OOISI
029
* i
0098
0.12
NC-LE03
t 5
1 t
0038
045
OOB
0073
007B
013
B - Preunl In laboratory blank at well as sample
I - Indicate*estimatedMlue ThepreMnceallhecompoundwatidentiried.bullheietullis
-------
TABLE 4-6
RANGES OF ORGANIC CONCENTRATIONS IN LEACHATES FROM MUNICIPAL
AND CODISPOSAL SITES IN mg/l (ppm), OR AS INDICATED
Constituent
Acid Extractables
P-cresol (4-m ethyl phenol)
Phenol
volatiles
Acetone
2-Butanone
Methylene chloride
2-hexanone
4-methyl-2-pentanone
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Total xylenes
1,1-dichloroethane
T-1 ,2-dichloroethene
1 , 1 ,3-trichloropropane
Base/Neutral Extractables
Diethyl phthalate
Bis (2-ethyl-hexyl) Phthalate
Pesticides, ug/l (ppb)
4.AODT
2.4-0
Lindane
Endrin
Endosulfan-sulfate
Range
0.053-5.1
0.041-2.1
0.004J-4.6
0.12-12.0
0.002J - 0.36
0.006J - 0.69
0.061-0.57
0.073-1.1
0.01 5J
0.29
0.004J
0.006-0.016
0.23J
— - 0.032
0.017B-0.17
0.042J-0.22
89-160
0.01 7J- 0.023 J
— 0.25
— -0.28
J - Indicates estimated value. The presence of the compound was identified,
but the result is less then the specified detection limit although greater
than zero.
— a Not detected above laboratory detection limit.
B - Present in laboratory blank as well as sample.
Note:
No. of Sites: 6
No. of Samples: 19 ...
(3 samples per site + one duplicate)
4-17
-------
• Comparison between the municipal and codisposal leachates indicates no
clear difference. While leachates from one codisposal site were almost free
of volatile compounds, leachates from the second site contained the
highest frequency of volatile detections.
• 4-methyl phenol and phenol were the only two acid extractable
compounds detected in leachates from any of these six sites; these two acid
extractable compounds were detected in the leachates in the NY codisposal
site.
• Leachates from two of the four municipal sites contained no acid
extractables.
• Leachates from both codisposal sites contained both of the detected acid
extractable compounds.
• The levels of phenol in the NY codisposal site leachates reached 2.1 ppm,
and levels of 4-methyl phenol in the same site leachates reached 5.1 ppm.
• 32 ppb of diethyl phthalate was detected in only one leachate sample. This
sample was from a municipal disposal site. Bis (2-ethyl-hexyl) phthalate
was detected in one codisposal site.
• One or more pesticides were detected in every one of the sites except for
the leachates from the VD site.
• The higher range values listed in Table 4-6 did not occur in the codisposal
sites except for one ethyl benzene value and one xylene value, both only in
one of the NC samples.
4.4 PCDD AND PCDF RESULTS
Leachates collected from the codisposal sites were sent to Battelle Columbus to be
analyzed for polychlorinated dibenzo dioxins (PCDDs) and polychlorinated
dibenzofurans (PCDFs). Results are listed in Appendix! of this report This
laboratory also analyzed ash samples collected from the same facilities as well as
4-18
-------
extracts generated by EP.TCLP, and deionized water (SW-924) leaching procedures
for PCDDs and PCDFs. These results are also given in Appendix I.
Tables4-7 and 4-8 summarize these data by site. Evaluation of data presented in
these two tables indicates the following:
• 2,3,7,8-TCDD, the known most carcinogenic homofog, was not detected in
the ashes, the leachates, or the extracts.
• The ashes contained ng/g (ppb) levels of total tetra, penta, hexa, hepta,
and octa PCDDs and PCDFs.
• The NY ashes are a product of non-full combustion, the beginning of the
burn (see trip report, Appendix C of this report). As a result, the
concentrations of most homologs are somewhat higher in these ashes.
• No PCDD or PCDF homologs were detected in TCLP-produced extracts.
• SW-924 was run on only one ash sample. This leaching procedure produced
only 0.035 ng/i (parts per trillion) of the octa dioxin homolog. According to
the EPA "Toxicitv Equivalency Factors" (TEF) by which the individual
homolog toxicity is converted to 2,3,7,8-TCDD equivalency, the
multiplying factor for this octa homolog is 0.00. In other words, the octa
homolog toxicity is equivalent to 0.00 of the 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxicity.
• The EP toxicity leaching procedures produced, for one ash, 0.033 ng/l (parts
per trillion) of the dioxin octa and, for the second ash, 0.031 ng/l (ppb) of
the dioxin octa, and 0.021 ng/l (parts per trillion) of the dioxin hepta
homologs. The TEF for HpCDD is 0.001, which again means in reality no
toxic equivalent value to 2,3,7,8-TCDD.
• The actual leachates collected at both codisposal sites contained very low
concentrations of HXCDO, HpCDD, OCDD, PCDF, HXCDF, HpCDF, and OCDF.
4-19
-------
TABLE 4-7
CHLORINATED DIOXIN AND CHLORINATED DIBENZOFURAN
LEVELS IN ASH AND LEACHATES FROM
THE NC CODISPOSAL LANDFILL
Compound
2,3,7,8-TCDD
Total TCDD
Total PCDD
Total HXCDD
Total HpCDD
Total OCDD
2.3,7,8-TCDF
Total TCDF
Total PCDF
Total HXCDF
Total HpCDF
Total OCDF
Ash in
ng/g.
(ppb)
-
0.03
0.10
0.1
0.18
0.14
0.07
0.56
0.29
0.19
0.11
0.02
Extracts in ng/l*
Field
Leachate
-
-
-
0.130
0.770
15
-
•
0.035
0.035
0.085
0.054
TCLP
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
SW-924
•
-
-
-
-
0.035
-
-
-
-
-
-
EP-Tox
-
-
-
-
0.021
0.031
-
-
-
-
0.012
-
- Not detected
* Parts per trillion
4-20
-------
TABLE 4-8
CHLORINATED DIOXIN AND CHLORINATED DIBENZOFURAN LEVELS
IN ASH AND LEACHATES FROM THE NY CODISPOSAL LANDFILL
Compound
2,3.7.8-TCDD
Total TCDD
Total PCDD
Total HXCDO
Total HpCDD
Total OCDD
2,3,7.8-TCDF
Total TCDF
Total PCDF
Total HXCDF
Total HpCDF
Total OCDF
Ash in ng/g,
(ppb)
-
0.02
0.12
0.43
4.2
9.9
0.11
0.46
0.54
1.2
2.2
1.7
Extracts inng/l*
Field
Leachates
-
-
-
0.047
0.120
0.210
-
-
0.028
0.041
0.043
0.023
TCLP
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
EP-Tox
-
•
-
-
-
0.033
-
-
-
-
-
-
Not detected
Parts per trillion
4-21
-------
• The actual leachates from the two codisposal sites did not contain any tetra
homologs, including 2,3,7,8.
• Although the ashes from one site exhibited higher concentrations of most
homologs because of incomplete combustion, the leachate did not exhibit
the same trend. The leachates reflect previously disposed ashes present at
the site rather than the analyzed ashes.
• According to a recent Canadian Government publication, Ontario Ministry
of the Environment: PCDDs and PCDFs. Scientific Criteria Document for
Standard Development No. 4-84, Sept. 1985, dioxins and dibenzofurans
were detected in actual solid waste found in municipal waste disposal sites.
Such waste, the bulk of the codisposal site material, could contribute
PCDDs and PCDFs to the leachates produced by these codisposal sites.
4.5 INORGANIC CONSTITUENTS IN LEACHATES AND EXTRACTS
Ashes collected from the two codisposal facilities were extracted by distilled water
(SW-924), and by EP toxicity and TCLP leaching procedures. Samples were analyzed
for inorganic constituents. Results are compared to the EP toxicity maximum
allowable limit in Tables 4-9 and 4-10.
A review of the data presented in Tables 4-9 and 4-10 indicates the following:
• All EP toxicity maximum allowable limits were met except for lead. For the
NY ash, the EP toxicity leachate was only 3.17 ppm. For the NC ash sample,
the EP toxicity maximum allowable limits of 5 ppm was not met by any of
the three leaching procedures, and in fact, exceeded it many folds. The
levels were 49 ppm (EP); 240 ppm (TCLP), and 75 ppm (SW-924).
• Comparison of the severity of the leaching process between the EP and the
TCLP procedures indicates that for one ash. the TCLP procedure leached
consistently higher levels of metals, while for the second ash, the EP toxicity
leaching procedure leached higher levels of cadmium and barium.
4-22
-------
TABLE 4-9
INORGANIC CONTENT IN NY ASHES AND IN EP TOXIQTY,
TOP, AND SW-924 EXTRACTS
Contaminant
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
Barium
Silver
Ash
inmg/kg
(ppm)
11.4
14.8
55.2
226
18,900
630
508
0.10
144
<5
1,510
-
-
EP Toxicity
inmg/l
(ppm)
<0.02
0.195
<0.02
-
-
3.17
-
<0.02
-
-------
TABLE 4-10
INORGANIC CONTENT IN NC ASHES AND IN EP TOXldTY.
TCLP, AND SW-924 EXTRACTS
Contaminant
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
Barium
Silver
Ash
in mg/kg
(ppm)
19.6
8.6
28.2
5,100
11.900
3,240
352
3.8
498
-------
5.0 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
In the course of this study, 13 samples of leachates from four municipal waste
disposal sites and 6 leachate samples from two codisposal sites were analyzed for
many conventional parameters to characterize the general water quality, as well as
the entire Appendix IX list of compounds. These samples were not designed to
represent samples from the entire industry but rather to report the situation at
these six sites.
Sampling was selectively done at sites equipped with leachate collection systems
and sites which were constructed post-RCRA and which do not accept industrial
wastes for disposal. Sampling and analyses were carefully done while adhering to
stringent QA/QC procedures.
The main findings of this study are as follows:
In-situ and Conventional Parameters
• The range of water-quality parameters detected in leachates collected in
the 13 samples from the four municipal waste sites was similar to those
reported in the literature for other sites, except for pH, BOD, COD and TOC.
The pH of leachates from these sites was neutral to slightly basic and
ranged between 6.98 and 7.8, whereas the literature reports values as low
as 3.7. The high values of biological oxygen demand (BOD), chemical
oxygen demand (COD), and total organic carbon (TOC) detected in
leachates from these sites were at least an order of magnitude lower than
the high values reported in the literature.
• Generally, there was no clear difference between the quality of the
13 leachate samples from the four municipal disposal sites and the
6 leachate samples from the two codisposal sites.
• The consistently neutral to basic pH of these leachate samples makes the
acidic leaching solution of the EP and TCLP test questionable.
5-1
-------
Inorganic Constituents
• Inorganic parameter concentrations detected in leachates from the four
municipal disposal sites were similar to levels reported in the literature for
leachates from other municipal disposal sites.
• Ranges of levels of inorganics detected in the leachates from the codisposal
sites were similar to those reported in the literature for other sites. In
general, there were very few reports on this subject.
• In general, there is no clear difference between inorganic content in
leachates from the codisposal sites and from the municipal disposal sites.
• Inorganic parameter content in actual leachates collected from codisposal
sites (this study and literature reported studies) was always lower than in
test leachates (EP, TCLP or SW-924). The actual leachates always met the EP
maximum allowable limit; the test-generated leachates periodically did?
not.
• A recently published EPA sponsored study, Composition of Leachates from
Actual Hazardous Waste Sites, conducted by Science Application
International Corporation (SAIC) for EPA under Contract 68-03-3113, Work
Assignment 39-7, describes the collection of leachates from 13 carefully
selected hazardous waste disposal sites. The inorganic constituents
detected in leachates from the hazardous waste sites were at much higher
concentrations than in the leachates collected from the four municipal
waste disposal sites and from the codisposal sites.
Organic Constituents
• Very few organic compounds of the huge list of organics on Appendix IX
were detected in the leachates from either the municipal waste disposal
sites or the codisposal sites. Only 11 volatile compounds, 4 semivolatile
compounds, and 5 pesticides were detected in these leachates.
Concentrations of these compounds were very low.
5-2
-------
• There is no difference in the number of compounds or in the detected
levels between the leachates collected from the codisposal sites and those
from the municipal disposal sites.
• Leachates generated from ashes collected from the codisposal sites by EP,
TCLP or SW-924 leaching procedures, did not generate detectable
semivolatile compounds or PCBs.
• In the recently published, EPA-sponsored study in which leachates from
13 carefully selected, actual hazardous waste sites were analyzed for the
same compounds, leachates from these hazardous sites contained
42 organic acids, 43 oxygenated/heteroatomic hydrocarbons, 39 halo-
genated hydrocarbons, 26 organic bases, 32 aromatic hydrocarbons, and
8 aliphatic hydrocarbons. The levels of these detected compounds ranged
from a ppb level to many thousands of ppms.
PCDDs and PCDFs
• The leachates from the four municipal waste disposal sites were not
analyzed for PCDDS or PCDFs. Only the actual leachates from the
codisposal sites, the ashes from these sites, and the artificially generated
leachates were analyzed for PCDDs and PCDFs.
• None of the analyzed samples contained 2,3,7,8-TCDD, which is the known
most toxic homolog.
• The ashes contained ppb levels of total tetra, penta, hexa, hepta, and octa.
PCDDs or PCDFs were not detected in TCLP-generated extracts; the EP
toxicity procedure and SW-924 produced part-per-trillion levels of the octa
(equivalenttoxicity factor (ETF) 0.00) and hepta (ETF 0.001).
• The actual leachates contained only parts per trillion levels of octa, hepta,
and hexa levels of PCDDs and octa, hepta, hexa, and penta levels of PCDFs.
The 2,3,7,8-TCDD equivalents for these compounds are extremely low.
These levels are extremely low.
5-3
-------
The ash at the NY site, which was from the beginning of a run and did not
go through complete combustion, contained somewhat higher PCDD and
PCDF levels than the second site (NC) ash.
A recent Government of Canada publication claims that PCDDs and PCDFs
are present in raw municipal waste.
Recommendations
The data base for the general characterization and toxic characteristics of
codisposal sites, as well as monofills, is very limited. Carefully conducted
studies at such sites are essential.
The data base for metal levels in test-generated leachates from ashes is
large, but the relation between ashes and actually generated leachates in
codisposal sites and monofills is almost absent. In this area, where:
additional studies are needed.
Levels of PCDDs and PCDFs in leachates from municipal waste disposal sites
should be determined.
Levels of PCDDs and PCDFs in leachates from codisposal sites and monofills
should be established and evaluated.
Levels of semivolatile compounds in leachates from monofills should be
established and evaluated.
5-4
-------
APPENOII A
NUS HORK PLAN
-------
MQK PIM
1.0 isfTtOOUCTlOII
This Work Plan has been prepared for the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in
response to Work Assignment No. 4 under Contract No 6M1-7310.
NUS herewith submits its work plan in response to Work Assignment No. 4. This Work Plan is based
on general use of the NUS team staff required to assin the EPA project manager in developing data
to evaluate the potential health and environmental effects of leachate from municipal landfills.
in 1979, EPA promulgated criteria for determining which Subtitle 0 (nonhazardous wane) disposal
facilities pose a reasonable probability of advene effects upon human health and the environment
and therefore should be classified as 'open dumps'.
The Hazardous and Solid Wane Amendments of 1904 to ftCKA require EPA. by November a. 1917. to
submit a report to Congress addressing whether the Subtitle 0 criteria authorized by RCP.A Sections
1008U) and 4004 Criteria (40 OH Part 2S7) are adequate to protect human health and the
environment from groundwater contamination, and recommending whether additional authorities
are needed to enforce there criteria. Further, by March 31,19M, EPA must revise the criteria for
facilities that may receive hazardous household waste or small quantity generator hazardous wane.
Since 1984, itudies conducted in support of this report to Congress, have raised concerns regarding
the chemical composition of leachate generated from municipal waste landfills. These concerns
center on the detection of certain tone metals and onjarikfc and on the lack of available data for a
comprehensive and defensible evaluation of the effects of leachates on human health and the
environment.
The purpose of the work described herein is to conduct fioM sampling and perform chemical
analyses of leachate and municipal waste combustion (MWQ ash from municipal waste landfills to
provide additional data for the detailed evaluation of potential health and environmental effects.
1-1
-------
IMUS
CORPORATION
•UBS. MA*vi>MQ aamfm. 139*
January 19, 1987
Mr. Jon R. Percy
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Solid Waste/Land Disposal Branch (WH-565E)
401 M Street, SH
Washington, DC 20460
Subject: EPA Contract No. 68-01-7310, Work Assignment
Work Plan Ho. 4, Revision 3
Dear Mr. Perry:
Enclosed please find a copy at the above-referenced Work plan. If you have
any questions, please don't hesitate to contact either ayself or H. Hoffman..
Sincerely,
Barbara E. Cxerw
Senior Contract Administrator
Government Contracts
/clr
cc: T. O'Connell, EPA (PM-214T)
R. waller
G. Galida
K. Grosanickle
B. Rofl
A HeMurton Comseny
-------
WORK PUUt
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This Work Plan has been prepared for the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in
response to Work Assignment No. 4 under Contract No 68-01-7310.
NUS herewith submits its work plan in response to Work Assignment No. 4. This Work Plan is based
an general use of the NUS team staff required to assist the EPA project manager in developing data
to evaluate the potential health and environmental effects of leachate from municipal landfill*.
in 1979, EPA promulgated criteria for determining which Subtitle 0 (nonhazardous waste) disposal
facilities pose a reasonable probability of adverse effects upon human health and the environment
and therefore should be classified as "open dumps'.
The Hazardous and Solid Wast* Amendments of 1984 to ROU require EPA, by November 8, 1987. to
submit a report to Congress addressing whether the Subtitle 0 criteria authorized by RCRA Sections
I008(a) and 4004 Criteria (40 CFR Part 257) are adequate to protect human health andithe
environment from groundwater contamination, and recommending whether additional authorities
are needed to enforce there criteria. Further, by March 31.1981, EPA must revise the) criteria for
facilities that may receive hazardous household waste or small quantity generator hazardous waste.
Since 1984, studies conducted in support of this report to Congress, have raised concerns regarding
the chemical composition of leechato generated from municipal wast* landfills. These concerns
center on the detection of carton toxic metals and organic* and on the lack of available data for a
comprehensive and defensible evaluation of the effects of leachates on human health and the
environment.
The purpose of the work described herein is to conduct field sampling and perform chemical
analyse* of leachate and municipal waste combustion (MWQ ash from municipal watte landfills to
provide additional data for the detailed evaluation of potential health arrf environmental effeca.
1-1
-------
2.0 GUOJUiSCOWOPWOJUC
NUS Corporation (NUS) will provide support to EPA in determining municipal landfill leechato
characteristics. To conduct this tffbrt with a sound methodology, the work will bo approached in
two phases. Phase r involves developing a baseline for leachate characteristics through a review of
•lifting data, and the collection and analysis of temples from six municipal landfills. Phase II will
expand the data bete through additional sample collection and analyses. The separate tasks m
Phase t are described in the following sections.
2-1
-------
TAIU2.1
ANALYTICAL PARAMITOIS, CONTAINIRS AND MUSIKVATIVB
SOURCI: LMdMR*
Number of
Samples
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
Analysis
Volatile Organic*
SNA Organic*
Pesticide/Herbicide
Dionn
Metals
Cyanide
Sulfide
Container^)"
(2) 40 ml vials
(2) 1/2 gallon amber glass
(2) 1/2 gallon amber glass
(2) 1/2 gallon amber glass
(1) lliter PI
(1)1 liter P€
(1)1 liter PI
Preservative**
None
None
None
*«^ — ^
PrarW
HNO|tepH<2
NAOHtOpH>12
If residual chlorine is present.
add 0.6 g ascorbic acid
2 ml of 2N sine acetate.
NaOHtopH>9
SOURCI: MWCAsh
2
2
2
2
2
SPToa
TOP
SW924
Metals
Pdi
1 liter wide-mouth glass
1 quart
1 quart
1 quart
1 quart
ftinnai
ivfjriw
U^^Bk^
iwnv
UJBAA
WQrW
Mftftm
rlfeWIV
•vJ^.^^.
IvfJVtw
All containen will have Teflon-lined screw on lids
All samples will be cooled 10 4*C
-------
3.0 OfTAILEOSCOPfOPWOWl
3.1 Ty«k 1 • Summary at fairtna Laechate DM
Task 1 summaries in rtport form existing laachate characteristics from data and rtports supplied by
EPA. This rapert supplies characteristic*, including concentrations of organic and inorganic
parameters.
This tatk alto mdudat the praparation of a projact overview including the study rational in a concise
form.
3.2 Taak a - Pavalaa P«ttilad Work Plan
Oavalop a work plan describing sit* satactton critaria. and fia4d sampling protocols for coUacting
thraa (3) laachata samplat at «« (S) municipal landfills, and MWC ash sampt«s from two (2) sitM
whtr* such ash is co-disposad. This work plan also providas a description of analytical procedures for
the eighteen field leachate samples and the extraction methods for the two solids ash samples.
Validation and review procedures and a description of deiiveraWes are also included in this plan.
The detailed work plan is this document.
3-1
-------
4.0 TASK 3-SITE SUCTION
Criteria for site selection will bo developed baMd on several factors induding existence of a loachate
colltction system, accessibility and location of landfill, and the presence of a working incinerator for
tha MWC ash sites. A review of EPA data on all applicabla sitat will ba completed and observation*
will ba discussed with EPA's Hazardous Watta Engineering Uboratory in Gndnnati. Pottntial
facilitiat will ba raviawad by EPA with final selection being made by the EPA project manager.
4.1 Preliminary Survey of Paclltle*
The lead technicians for each sampling team, with the supervision of the Project Manager and the
Task Manager, will make telephone contact with facility personnel in order to (1) acquaint facility
personnel with the objectives of the study, (2) determine general operating characteristics of the
facilities, (3) determine locations for sampling ash residues and field leachate. and (4) schedule dates
for preliminary site inspection and sampling. A brief questionnaire will be developed to provide)
guidance for this telephone interview.
4.2 initial Site VlaH and Inspection
The lead technicians for each sampling team and the NUS Project Manager at his designee will visit
each facility to obtain additional detail on facility operation, locate points of access for collecting
residue samples, identify locations for sampling field leechata, and establish working relationships
with facility personnel
introduction
The objective of field sampling and analysis in Phase I it to provide data to be used in determining
municipal landfill teachate charectoriiticL All samples will be collected, handled and anaJyied by
qualified personnel in accordance with EPA approved protocort and metnods, fiold work will bo
conducted following she specific health and safety guidelines, in some case*, srte conditions may
dictate the use of additional personnel and equipment
4.1
-------
4.3.1 Sample Collection
Leacheto Sample Collection
Bawd on the existence of a leachate collection system and its accessibility, six municipal landfills will
be chosen for sampling. Thrt« samples will be collected at tach of .the six landfills, with two samples
for laboratory duplicate QA/QC
Where possible, three separate collection points will be sampled at each landfill. Examples of
probable locations are collection sumps and drainage ditches. Preferably, the samples will be
collected by submerging the sample container*. Alternatively, they will be collected using stainless
steel buckets attached to an aluminum handle or a length of polyethylene rope. All sample
containers will be filled to capacity to prevent oxidation and precipitation of dissolved material.
4.3.2 MWC Aah Sample Collection
in addition to the leachate samples, one sample per site of MWC ash will be collected at two- sites
where ash is co-disposed.
The ash will be sampled prior to burial to ensure that its composition may be accurately evaluated.
Samples will be collected using stainless steel spoons or scoops. Material will be collected from all
parts of the ash deposit. AT adequate volume will be collected to allow for laboratory QA/QC
procedures.
Table 2-1 lists the number, analytical parameters, containers, and preservatives for all samples.
4.33
All samples will be assigned e field identification number to include codes for the site name, sample
type and station number.
ML The sample typo will be denoted as either Ut for leoeheteieinsjles, or AM, for esh sample*.
station number refers to a specific sampling location.
Example: A I eachate sample collected at the flm location w<^ be designated Ml-LMOI.
Duplicate samples will indude the letter A directly after the station number.
4*2
-------
4.3.4
All site activity and sampling will be documented in a waterproof, bound log book to be computed
by the field team leader. Additionally, the following documents will be prepared in order to track
each sample through shipping and analysis':
e Sample labels • One par sample container, which will indude data, time, sample number.
analysis, and preservative.
e Traffic report forms • Two per sample, one for the organic aliquot plus one for the
inorganic aliquot
e Chain-of
-------
4.3.1 Sample Packaging and Shipping
in order to ensure that the laboratories will receive enough sample volume, ail samples will be
treated at tnvironmtntal. sample*. Tht following stops will ba taken during packaging and
shipping:
• Plug dram and line cooler with a large impervious plasticsheet
• Place samples in cooler.
e include several watertight ice packs.
e Pill with a light absorbent packing material such as vermiculite.
e Place laboratory copies of sample documentation in a sealed plastic bag and tape to cooler
lid.
e Affix custody seals.
e Secure cooler with strapping tap*.
e The traffic report forms will indicate if the field team feet* that a sample may be of
medium concentration.
4.3.7 Equipment Oocomwninedon
Dedicated disposable or lab cleaned equipment will be used to collect all sampJei. After use. any
nondisposabte equipment will be decontaminated by the following procedure*:
•Procedures may be altered depending according to regional protocols.
-------
• Tap water and laboratory grade soap wash
• Tap water rinse
• 10 percent mtrie acid solution nine
• 01 water rinse
• Solvent rinse
• 01 wattr nnse
• Air dry
• Wrap in foil and store in a secure area
4.4 Conduct Analviea
Samples collKtad during this study will eomist of two basic types of media: field leachate samples
and MWC aih. in the laboratory a leachate will be generated from the MWC ash. Both the field
Itachate and the leachate prepared from the ash in the laboratory will be analyzed for various
inorganic and organic compounds.
4.4.1 Field iMghate Analvtaa
Leachato samples collected from the field will be analyzed for volatile organic*, SNA organic,
pesticide • herbicides, dionn, metals, cyanide and wlfide as listed in Appendix IX.
volatile compounds will be analyzed by a modified EPA Method 624. This is very similar to
Method 8240 from SW-046 utilizing different surrogates and internal standards. Tuning criteria for
bromofluorobenzene will follow the Contract Laboratory Program (OP) requirements. A three) level
initial calibration curve will be analyzed for all AppendixIX compounds and response factors
checked daily with the mid-point solution. As per OP requirements ie»e«ed compounds will be
checked to meet minimum mponia factor requirements in both the. initial and continuing
calibration analysts. Other representative compounds will bo checked to determine the linearity of
the initial calibration curve response facton with a limit of less than 30 percent difference from the
mean response factor. These compounds' response facton will be calculated and a percent
difference of less than 25 percent from the initial calibration curve moan response factor will be the
criteria to bo mot prior to sample analysis.
Somivolatilo compounds will bo analyzed by a modified EM Method 629 which is very similar to SW-
8M Method C70. once again utilizing different intamaj standards md surrogjta compounds. Mass
spectrometer tuning will bo Of OFTPf criteria. Once again • three point initial calibration curve will
4-5
-------
be analyzed for ail Appendix IX compounds and reports* factor* checked to meet minimum
response factors and a 30 percent maximum percent difference from the mean for selected
representative compounds. These response factors will be cheeked daily with the mid-point
standard, once again meeting minimum response factor and a 25 percent difference from the mean
response factor pnor to sample analysis.
Herbicide and pesticide analysis will be determined by proposed Method 1618. This method is a
consolidation and modification of Sw 8*6 methods. These modifications an listed below:
e Pttenoxyacid Herbicide Extraction (Method II SO)
Ether extraction of samples wilt be replaced with methyiene chloride extraction for
aqueous samples and methyiene chloride/acetone (1:1 v/v) extraction for solids. S-GJBCD
had reasonable precision and accuracy for the recovery of matrix spikes from real world
soil and sludge samples using methyiene chloride and methyiene chloride/acetone, while-
ether extraction did not work for POTW samples,
e Megabore Capillary GC (Method 8080 and 81 SO)
Packed column GC analysis lacks the resolution to separate anatytes from each other or
from matnx interference peaks in complex environmental samples. Our experience in
analysing sludge samples and in the validation of the new CLP Pesticide Protocol has
demonstrated that identification of peaks using megabore capillary analysis is less
ambiguous than with packed column and that ejuamrtation is more precise with capillary.
in addition, the use of capillary analysis allows determination of more Appendix IX analytes
than does packed column anarysrs.
The use of thaw canridgat greatly increase the throughput of samples in the laboratory.
Based on our experience with the validation of the new CLP pesticide method, sample
preparation with florhil or slumina column ^omatoqraphy it dower and less
reproducible than with cartridges.
-------
Matrix spike compounds are listed in the method. Recovery limits will be as listed on the CLP forms
for the organochlorine pesticides. The limits are in the process of being determined (through an
interiaboratory study) for tha organophosphorus and phenoxyacid compounds.
Dioxim and furans will be determined by SW-846 8280 with no modifications. Metals will be
determined by tha listed SW-846 on EPA methods without modification. All QC requirements of the
above methods will be earned out
Extraction of samples will be started within 24 hours of sample receipt Volatile analyses will be
completed within seven days of sample receipt All samples will be kept sealed, cold and in tha dark
prior to extraction or analysis to preclude sample degradation and/or precipitation of target
compounds. Extracts will ba stored at 4< when not in use.
Samples and extracts will be retained for 60 days after the submission of the data unless otherwise
requested. All GOMS information will be stored on magnetic tape for a minimum of three years.
Raw daf (including GC chromatograms) will ba retained fro the same period.
4.4.2 MWCAihAnalviii
Laboratory leachates will be prepared from the MWC ash by three different extraction procedures:
the Extraction Procedure (EP). the Toxitity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TOP) and two
sequential aqueous extractions by SW-924. Analyse* to be performed on the ash generated leachato
includes, total organic carbon, total metals, an organic scan. PCDO/PCDF, and PCS analyses. Total
organic carbon analysis will only ba performed on the laboratory leachates prepared by the SW-924
procedure.
An organic scan will ba performed on all laboratory leechetes to determine whether organic
compounds other than PCOO*.PCD«* and PCBt are present, if the results of the total organic carbon
(TOO determination and tha organic scan suggest that significant concentrations of organic* other
than PCOOnKDNKI are present, tha laboratory leachates will be solvent extracted and the
compound* in each extract fraction (base/neutral, add) will ba identified and quantified using
GOMS technique*. Thus thaw analyses will ba performed contingent upon tha result* of the
required analyse*. The TOCorganic scan, and any subsequemGGMSenelymv«ll quantify the total
4.7
-------
Analym for polychlonnatad dibanzo dioams (PCOOs) and pdychtonnatad dibanio furons (PCOFi)
will ba parformad on all laboratory ganaratad laachatat.
-------
5.0 TASK 4-DATA VALIDATION
Data obtained from the Appendix IX analysis of the leachate and MWC ash samples will be reviewed
(validated), reduced and evaluated by NUS qualified chemists. All chemical analytical data will be
validated according to QA-Standards similar to those established by EPA for OP data. This data
review is independent of internal validations performed-by the laboratory.
S-1
-------
6.0 TASK S • MfcPARI DATA REPORT
Analytic** rnuits and site information will be wbmitttd in a rtport form to the EPA project
manager. This report will include quality assurance and quality control records and an evaluation of
the sampling and analytical methodologies used for these types of samples and analyses.
frl
-------
October 16,1986
Or. Haia Roffman
NUS Corporation
Park West Two
Cliff Mine Road
Pittsburgh, PA 15275
Dear Or. Hoffman:
This letter is to follow up and expand upon the methods S-CUBED plans to
utilize for the analysis of leachate samples for Appendix IX compounds. This
letter will also outline expected Quality Control (QC) goals for surrogate and
matrix spike recoveries.
Volatile compounds will be analyzed modified by EPA Method 624. This is very.
similar to Method 8240 from SW-846 utilizing different surrogates and internal
standards. Tuning criteria for bromofluorobenzene will follow the Contract
Laboratory Program (CLP) requirements. A three level initial calibration curve
will be analyzed for all Appendix IX compounds and response factors checked
daily with the mid-point solution. As per CLP requirements selected compounds
will be checked to meet minimum response factor requirements in both the initial
and continuing calibration analyses. Other representative compounds will be
checked to determine the linearity of the initial calibration curve response factors
with a limit of less than • 30 percent difference from the mean response factor.
These compounds' response factors will be calculated and a percent difference
of less than • 25 percent from the initial calibration curve mean response factor
will be the criteria to be met prior to sample analysis.
Semivolatile compounds wOl be analyzed by a modified EPA Method 625 which
is very similar to SW-846 Method 8270, once again utilizing different internal
standards and surrogate) compounds. Mass spectrometer tuning will be CLP
OFTPP criteria. Once again a three-point initial calibration curve wfll be analyzed
for all Appendix DC compounds and response factors checked to meet minimum
response factors and a 30 percent maximum percent difference from the mean
for selected representative compounds. These response factors will be checked
daty with the mid-point standard, once again meeting minimum response factor
and a • 25 percent difference) from the mean response factor prior to sample
analysis.
P.O. au 1030. LiJbte C*fb«B 02009-(020 JJW Cam* MbwMW*o«4 3mO*g* CMfbmtt 93M-IO93
T* (619) 4334060 HWt 910-337-1233 Ataeppttr (919 7334*74
-------
Dr. Haia Hoffman
October 16,1986
Page Two
Included as enclosures to this letter are copies of the CLP QC forms and a list of
Internal standards and surrogates to be used on this project The surrogates
limits will be strictly adhered to, with reanalysia of samples which do not meet
criteria when sufficient sample is available. Matrix spike and duplicate analysis
criteria are guidelines in the sense that these data are utilized to oive information
on the precision and accuracy of the method for samples or this particular
matrix. Preanalysis will not be performed if these goals are not met unless there
is an obvious laboratory error (in which case re-extraction will be carried out if
there is sufficient sample). We expect there will be enough sample volume to
reanalyze all but the sample chosen for matrix analyses.
Also included in this package is a copy of proposed Method 1618. This is
essentially a consolidation and modification of SW-846 methods. These
modifications are listed befow:
(1) Phenoxyadd Herbicide Extraction (Method 8150)
Ether extraction of samples will be replaced with methylene chloride'
extraction for aqueous samples and methylene chloride/acetone (1:1
v/v) extraction for solids. s-CUBED had reasonable precision and
accuracy for the recovery of matrix spikes from real-world soil and
sludge samples using methylene chloride and methylene
chloride/acetone, while ether extraction did not work for POTW samples.
(2) Megabore Capillary QC (Method 8080 and 6180)
Packed column GC analysis lades the resolution to separate anaiytes
from each other or from matrix interference peaks in complex
environmental samples. Our experience in analyzing sludge samples
and in the validation of the new CLP Pesticide Protocol has
demonstrated that identification of peaks using megabore capillary
analysis is less ambiguous than with packed column and that
quantttatfon ia more) precise with capillary. In addition, the use of
capillary analysis allows determination of more Appendix IX analytes
than does packed column analysis.
(3) CtoaiMip Cartridge (Method 8080)
The use of ihese cartridges greatly Increase the throughput of samples
in the laboratory. Based on our experience wtth the validation of the new
CLP pesticide method, sample preparation with Florlsil or alumina
column chromatography it slower and less reproducible than with
-------
Dr. Haia Hoffman
October 16,1966
Page Three
Matrix spike compounds are listed in the method. Recovery limits will be as
listed on the CLP forms for the organochlorine pesticides. The limits are in the
process of being determined (through an interlaboratory study) for the
organophosphoms and phenoxyadd compounds.
At this point this method does not use surrogates. The CLP surrogate dibutyl
chiorendate has been determined to be ineffective due to degradation problems.
S-CUBED is currently investigating the use of hexabromobenzene as a
surrogate. If NUS requests the use of a surrogate, S-CUBED will include this
compound and report the recoveries. Since no recovery limits have been
determined no corrective action (for high or tow recoveries) is anticipated.
Dioxins and furans (if necessary) will be determined by SW-846 8280 with no
modifications. As outlined in our previous communications, metals will be
determined by the listed SW-846 on EPA methods without modification. AH QC
requirements of the above methods wOl be carried out
Extraction of samples will be started within 24 hours of sample receipt Volatile
analyses will be completed within seven days of sample receipt AU samples will
be kept sealed, cold and in the dark prior to extraction or analysis to preclude
sample degradation and/or precipitation of target compounds. Extracts will be
stored at 4*C when not in use.
Samples and extracts will be retained for 80 days after the submission of the
data unless otherwise requested. All GC/MS information will be stored on
magnetic tape for a minimum of three years. Raw data (including GC
chromatograms) will be retained for the same period.
I hope this gives you suffldert infomwttan to writs- your work plan. Please give
me a call if you need to modify any of the QC goals or if further information is
necessary.
Sincerely,
JoAnnl
GC/MS Laboratory Supervisor
/alb
ce B. Blackburn
aSwsnson
-------
APPENDIX B
NUS CASE STUDIES
B1 - VD Landfill
Final Draft by PEI Associates, Inc.
Contract No. 68-02-3890
Work Assignment No. 27
Project Officer: Mike Flynn
June 1986
B2 - FL Municipal Solid Waste Site
Preliminary Draft by SRW Associates, Inc
Contract No.
Work Assignment No.
Project Officer:
June 1986
B3 - SM Landfill
Draft by ICF Northwest
Contract No. 68-01-7290
Work Assignment No. 25
Project Officer: Ronald McHugh
August 1986
B4 - PC Landfill
Draft by ICF Northwest
Contract No. 68-01-7290
Work Assignment No. 25
Project Officer: Ronald McHugh
July 1986
-------
CASE STUDY
VO LANDFILL
Final Draft
by
PEI Associates. Inc
1133 15th Street N.W.
Suite 205
Washington, D.C 20005
Contract No. 68-02-3890
Work Assignment No. 27
PEI Project No. 3655-27
Project Officer
Mike Flynn
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
401 M STREET, S.W.
WASHINGTON. D.C 20460
June 1987
-------
CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
1.0 GENERAL NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION 81-1
2.0 DETAILED DESCRIPTION B1-2
2.1 GENERAL 31-2
2.2 WASTE CHARACTERISTICS 81-2
2.3 DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS 31-3
2.3.1 LEACHATE COLLECTION 81-3
2.3.2 GAS CONTROL B1-3
2.3.3 RUN-ON/RUNOFF CONTROLS 81-7
2.4 OPERATION AND MANAGEMENT PRACTICES B1-7
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT 81-10
3.1 MONITORING DATA 81-10
3.2 DAM AGE ASSESSMENT 81-10
3.3 CORRECTIVE ACTION Bl-11
4.0 COST DATA 81-12
-------
NUMBER PAGE
1 PHASE I PLAN 81-4
2 CROSS SECTION OP LANDFILL SHOWING CELL
CONSTRUCTION AND LEACHATE RESERVOIR 81-5
3 RAMP VARIATION OF AREA METHOD
OF CELL CONSTRUCTION B1-6
4 METHANE GAS CONTROL DEVICE B1-8
Ml
-------
SUMMARY PACT SHEET
Key elements of this case study include:
• The landfill is located in a drainage area that is intermittently covered with
surface water that drains from the nearby foothills and mountains.
• The landfill design includes an upstream diversion ditch to route surface
water around the fill, and a downhill leachate collection pond to contain
leachate seeping from the fill.
• No shallow ground water or wells are in the vicinity of the landfill.
• The landfill is unlined.
• Problems have arisen at the landfill with slumping of the diversion ditches
and overtopping of the leachate collection pond.
• No monitoring data are collected at the landfill.
IV
-------
1.0 GENERAL NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION
The VD Landfill is a small privately operated facility. The 100-acre site is divided into
two phases: Phase I consists of 12 acres of fill area, and Phase II consists of 18 acres
of fill area. The landfill is located in a large drainage ravine. Because of its
topography, the site has been characterized as "extremely poor to unacceptable"
by the Geological Survey in the preliminary plan for the landfill, submitted in
December 1978. Situated in a drainage area with shallow sandy soil and steep
slopes, the site was evaluated as having a high potential for problems with run-on
and runoff, erosion, unstable slopes and high maintenance of diversion ditches,
slopes, and roads. In January 1979, the Department of Health also concluded that
the property was "...a poor candidate for a solid waste disposal site, and significant
improvements will be required prior to any consideration of this site." Despite
these evaluations, the site was approved for use as a landfill in 1979. It was opened
in late 1979, and operations began in January 1980.
Phase I is currently full and in the process of being closed. Phase I has not been
approved as of April 1986. Problems have occurred with leachate seeping through
the settling ponds and running downhill. Additional identified problems are
improper compaction, questionable cell structure, and lack of methane and
leachate control devices.
B1-1
-------
2.0 DETAILED DESCRIPTION
2.1 GENERAL
The VO Landfill was designed to include two fill areas. The Phase I fill area covers 12
acres, and the Phase II area covers 18 acres. The operations plan states that cells will
be filled daily by a ramp method. The cells are 25 feet wide by 30 feet long and are
6 feet deep.
Operations began in the Phase I area in January 1980, and this area is currently full.
An application for approval of operations in the Phase II area has not yet been
submitted (as of April 1986). The Phase I fill operated 5 days per week and accepted
about 75 tons per day, or 185 cubic yards compacted.
—M
The immediately surrounding land is undeveloped. This area, which is part of the
foothils that rise from the floor of the Valley, which is dissected by numerous ridges
and ravines. The site is characterized as a draw, or canyon, with sloping sides of
weathered shale underlain by deep shale formations. The shale is covered with up
to 10 feet of slope-wash deposited soils and residual soils. The slope wash and
residual soils are mainly clays but include angular sand- to gravel-size shale
fragments that are nonstratified. The alluvial sand and sheet-wash-deposited soils
are similar in composition to the slope wash and residual soils and are poorly
stratified. The subsurface investigation conducted at the site identified up to 10
feet of silty clay over shale, with permeabilities ranging from 1 x 10-« to
2.1x10-«cm/s.
There are no wells in the area because of the lack of ground water in the shale
bedrock. Only a few seasonal seeps occur along the shale bedding joints.
2.2 WASTECHARACTERISTKS
Phase I of the fill accepted municipal solid waste and construction debns and
maintained separate pits for dead animals and sludge. Hazardous or toxic wastes,
POTW liquid wastes, septic tank wastes and liquid industrial wastes were not
accepted.
81-2
-------
No data in the files provided information on volumes of waste in place. According
to the design, the landfill accepted 75 tons per day, or 185 cubic yards, compacted,
5 days per week for 7 years; thus, the completed Phase I area could contain about
136,500 tons of waste (or 336,700 cubic yards, .compacted). The files do not provide
any data on the relative composition of the waste with respect to percentage of
industrial waste, municipal waste, sludge, etc
2.3 DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS
The landfill permit application states that leachate will be minimized by the in-place
"clayish" topsoil. The application further states that there will be 2 to 6 feet of
"dense tight day* underneath any refuse cell. No synthetic or constructed day liner
was installed at the landfill.
2.3.1 Leachate Collection
The operational plan for the landfill includes a leachate reservoir on the
downgradient side of the landfill. Figures 1 and 2 show the location of construction
of the leachate reservoir and the earthen dam around it. The plan called for the
surface and subsurface water collected in the leachate reservoir to be used for fire
control and for revegetation. A memo issued before the landfill began operating,
mentioned several alternatives for leachate handling, induding recyding on the
landfill or discharge to the sanitary system. The latter alternative evidently was not
pursued because the file makes no mention of an NPDES permit. A newspaper
article in the file implies that the collected leachate was pumped to sprinklers and
sprayed back over the landlfill.
2.3.2 Gas Control
The drawings and operational plan indude methane gas control devices, as shown
in Figure 3; however, the files indicate that these were never installed.
B1-3
-------
Figure |. Phase I plan.
-------
•DRAINAGE DITCH
FINAL GRADED
M -*• .1.
6800 *
10 ft
(VARIES)
NATURAL
30 ftt
i ftt
SLUDGE AND DEAD
ANIMAL PIT
ACCESS ROAD
SURFACE DRAINAGE DITCH
CD
Wl
METHANE GAS CONTROL DEVICE
PORTABLE TRASH FENCE TO
IE MOVED AS LANDFILL DEVELOPS
2 ft TOPSOIL NIN.(FINAL LAYER)
4700 *
(VARIES)
L —
L NATURAL GROUND
LANDFILL BEGINS HERE
6670*
EARTHEN
0AM
figure ^Cross section of landfill shotting cell construction and leachate reservoir.
-------
DAILY EARTHEN COVER
(6 in. WEATHERED SHALE)
ORIGINAL
GROUND
•COW ACTED
SOLID HASTE
Ffgurt 5- *««P variation of artt utthod of call construction.
B1-6
-------
2.3.3 Rurvon/RunoffControls
Run-on and runoff controls are a major design feature of this landfill. The site is in a
ravine. Because the area is occasionally covered with surface-water flow, the
landfill was designed with a drainage diversion ditch around the fill area. A
diversion dam is located on the upstream end of the fill to divert storm drainage
into the ditch (see Figure 1). The ditch is designed to contain twice the volume of
rain and runoff of a 100-year flood. A consultant's report recommended that the
ditches be lined with asphalt; however, they stayed unlined so that heavy
equipment could be operated in them.
2.4 OPERATION AND MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
The ramp method of filling (see Figure 3) was used at the site to construct and fill
daily cells. The daily cover was excavated to make a trench for the cell; the
excavated soil was placed on the previously completed cell to help compact the
refuse. The development plan submitted to the county states that a minimurrvof 6
inches of cover material composed of weathered shale will be utilized to cover each
cell and compacted lift to prevent the blowing of trash. A minimum depth of 2 feet
of compacted topsoil cover material is to be used over the final lift upon completion
of final grades.
The permit application and development plan state that leachate will be collected
in the leachate rerservoir and that it may be used for dust control, revegetation, or
reapplication to the landfill, or it may be discharged to the Wastewater Treatment
Plant. The files indicate that the leachate was evaporated when possible or was
sprinkled back over the landfill surface.
The development plan and the permit application state that gas recovery devices
(see Figure 4) would be constructed in the fill; however, letters and memos in the
State files indicate that these devices had not been installed as of October 1985.
The files do not include information on whether these devices might have been
installed in late 1985 or 1986.
B1-7
-------
I
8 ft 10 in.
OIFFUSER
1
2 ft 3 1n.;
«•
VAHIA8L
i
row OF -3
ST CELL -^
i
•*
E
*
J
^
•41
^
1
«•
^
**
*,
•l«
h»»
A _
COMPACTED
i — COHESIVE SOIL
i COUPLING
PERFORATED PI
t — GRAVEL
Figure *. Methane gas control device.
81-8
-------
A search of the State files did not reveal any information on remedial actions taken
at the VD Landfill. A memo and a newspaper article mention problems with
leachate seepage and slumping of diversion ditches, but the solutions (if any were
taken) to these problems are not addressed in the files reviewed.
81-9
-------
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
3.1 MONITORING DATA
The State file contains no monitoring data.
32 DAMAGE ASSESSMENT
In a memo dated May 1980, 4 months after the VD Landfill began operation, a
representative of the Department of Health described some damage noted during
an inspection. Surface water in the interceptor trenches was soaking through the
trench and seeping into natural drainage ravines. The water then passed through
the fill and became impounded in the dams below the fill. The memo states that
both impoundments were constructed of non-compacted earth and that they had
slumped so badly they were in danger of failure. The uppermost impoundment was
being siphoned into the lower impoundment, which was overtopping. Leach ate
was being discharged by the lower impoundment into the natural drainageway
that flows 1 mile away. The leachate overtopping the bottom impoundment was
being discharged at a rate of more than 15 gallons per minute. Trash was floating
in the waters of the uppermost impoundment.
In an October 1985 memo covering a survey of the landfill, the following
observations were made: 1) methane gas control devices were not in place as
shown on the operational plan; 2) no dead animal and sludge pits were noted as
mentioned in the narrative of the operational plan; 3) nor portable fencing was
seen as mentioned in the narrative of the operational plan; and 4) revegetation or
reclamation efforts were not evident.
In a newspaper article included in the State files (no date provided), the author
described the seepage of a bright orange liquid through the settling ponds at the
landfill, which was flowing downhill. The article says that the site operators
acknowledged the problem and were making plans to remedy it The article
described the settling ponds as water-permeable shale and said that the leachate
collected in them normally evaporates before causing a problem. The article
further stated that the operators completed compaction of the pond banks as
81-10
-------
ordered by the Health Department, but that no other remedial action, such as lining
the ponds or treating the leachate have been taken. The author further indicated
that the operators applied to the State Water Quality Control Commission for a
discharge permit.
The files reviewed do not contain information on any effects on human health and
the environment from the VD Landlfill.
3.3 CORRECTIVE ACTION
The aforementioned newspaper article in the file states that the operator will be
required to correct leachate seepage problems at the landlfill, but there is no
further discussion of the actions required or taken.
81-11
-------
4.0 COST DATA
No cost data are available.
81-12
-------
CASE STUDY
Ft MUNICIPAL SOUD WASTE SITE
by
SRW Associates Inc
A Subsidiary of ICF Technology Incorporated
2793 Nofalestown Road
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 1520S
Contract No.
Work Assignment No.
Project Officer
Work Assignment Manager
Jim Pittman
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
401 M STREET, S.W.
WASHINGTON, D.C 20460
June 1986
-------
CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
SUMMARY FACT SHEET
1.0 GENERAL NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION 82-1
2.0 DETAILED ESTABLISHMENT DESCRIPTION 82-3
2.1 GENERAL B2-3
2.2 WASTE CHARACTERISTICS B2-5
2.3 DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS 82-10
2.4 OPERATION AND MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 82-12
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT B2-16
3.1 MONITORING 82-16
3.2 DAMAGE ASSESSMENT B2-16
3.3 CORRECTIVE ACTION B2?17
,-*
4.0 COST DATA 82^19
-------
FIGURES
NUMBER PAGE
1 SITE PLAN B2-6
2 TYPICAL LEACHATE COLLECTION SYSTEM B2-11
3 AREA DIAGRAM B2-14
TABLES
NUMBER
1 LABORATORY CERTIFICATION FORM
2 TYPES, SOURCES AND QUANTITIES OF WASTE PLACED
IN THE LANDFILL / NOT PLACED IN THE LANDFILL 32-8
3 RATE OF CHARGES 82-18
in
-------
SUM MARY FACT SHEET
Key elements of this case study include the following:
• The 120 acre site is owned and operated by the city.
• The city was granted a permit to construct the Class! Sanitary Landfill on
January 17, 1985.
• The initial operating permit was granted on May 23,1975. Two subsequent
operating permits were granted in April 1980 and on December 4,1985.
The expiration date of the latest permit is November 1,1990.
• The projected closure date is 1992.
• The land use adjacent to the site is primarily forest, except for the access
road to the site which is residential.
•• The soils underlying the site consist of a medium to fine-grained sand to a
depth of about 40 feet below the ground surface. The medium to fine sand
was reported to be underlain by silty to clayey sand to a depth of at least
50 feet below the ground surface.
• The sequential trench method of disposal is being utilized at this site.
• A bentonite-polymer soil liner is to be installed along the bottom and side
slopes of new cells. The liner is to reduce the permeability of the material
adjacent to the wastes to 1 x 10-7 cm/sec.
• The groundwater regime underlying the site consists of three separate
aquifer systems. These aquifer systems are a surfkial unconftned aquifer,
an upper artesian aquifer, and a deeper aquifer.
IV
-------
SUMMARY FACT SHEET (continued)
• (t is estimated from the water balance calculations performed for this site,
the leachate- production from this landfill is about 17 million gallons per
year.
• A leachate collection plan is to be installed in the unused portion of one
cell and in three proposed cells.
• No significant methane production is anticipated; however, provisions for
methane venting and monitoring is included in the latest permit
application in case significant quantities of methane are encountered.
• A groundwater monitoring plan consisting of five monitoring wells is
included in the latest permit Three of the monitoring wells were
developed in the surficial aquifer downgradient from the landfill. Another
of the monitoring wells was developed in the deeper aquifer. The fifth
monitoring well was developed in the surficial aquifer upgradient of the
landfill.
• No monitoring of gas, surface water or the upper artesian aquifer was
proposed.
-------
1.0 GENERAL NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION
The FL Landfill is a currently operating facility. Construction Permit No. was issued
on January 17,1975 to permit construction activities for this landfill. The initial
operating permit was issued on May 23,1975 to allow this landfill to begin
accepting wastes. Two subsequent operating permits have been issued for this site
with the latest operating permit issued on December 4,1985 for the period of
December 4, 1985to November 1,1990.
The operating permit application dated March 8,1985 indicated the method for
disposing of the wastes was the sequential trench method with a yard trash
composting pile, a tomato waste pit, and a wood chip and fiberboard open
stock-pile. The March 1985 operating permit application indicated seven cells with
several areas for additional cells. Three of the cells (Nos. 1,2 and 5) were previously
filled. Another cell (No. 3) was in operation, one cell (No. 4) was about completely
excavated, and two additional cells (Nos. 6 and 7) were proposed.
The existing cells were excavated to a depth of between 10 and 30 feet. The
proposed cells were shown as excavated to a depth of 30 feet The sizes of the cells
at the ground surface varied from 1,260 feet long by 50 feet wide to 350 feet long
by 120 feet wide. The side slopes for the existing cells were not indicated, while the
side slopes for Cells 6 and 7 were shown as 2 horizontal to 1 vertical. The estimated
life for the remainder of Cell 3 and Cells 4,6, and 7 was about 7 years.
The 120 acre landfill is located on land of which 100 acres is owned by the city and
the remaining 20 acres are owned by the county. The topographic relief varied
from 130 feet NGVO to 230 feet NGVD. The land adjacent to the site is generally
forest in which timber operations have been conducted. The land use for areas
adjacent to the access road to the landfill is residential.
The FL Landfill accepts municipal wastes, wastes from a furniture manufacturing
plant, and a tomato packing plant and wastes from a hospital. The landfill serves a
population of about 9,000. The estimated quantity of wastes was about 75 cubic
yards per day in the 1985 operating permit application.
B2-1
-------
In the December 1974 construction permit application, wastes were shown to be
placed in 6 foot lifts and covered daily. Additionally, both an intermediate and final
cover were to be placed over the refuse. A leachate collection system was also
shown in this application. This leachate collection system consisted of a 4 inch
perforated pipe in a sand filter. This leachate collection system was placed at the
base of each side slope.
The March 1985 operating permit application stated a leachate collection system
which would be installed in the unused portion of Cell 3 and in Cells 4, 6 and 7.
Additionally, the bottom of Cells 3,4, 6, and 7 was to be graded at a minimum slope
of 2 percent to the south, a bentonite polymer soil liner with a permeability of
1x10-7 cm/sec was to be installed along the bottom of Cells 4, 6, and 7, and along
the sides of Cells € and 7. The leachate collection system consisted of a trench
beneath the base of each trench and installation of a 6 inch PVC in a gravel filter in
each trench. The 6 inch PVC pipes were shown flowing into one of two lift stations
where the leachate would be pumped to a sealed leachate pond. The leachate
would be allowed to evaporate and trucked to a sanitary treatment plant for
treatment.
The bentonite-polymer soil liner consisted of mixing the bentonite polymer with the
top 6 inches of material in contact with the wastes. The quantity of the bentonite
polymer would be sufficient so that a permeability of 1 x 10-7 cm/sec was obtained
after compaction of the mixture.
A Special Report estimated that 17 million gallons per year could be produced from
this landfill. This report also estimated it would take 6.5 years before the leachate
would first appear.
B2-2
-------
2.0 DETAILED ESTABLISHMENT DESCRIPTION
2.1 GENERAL
The March 1985 permit application stated the soil profile consisted of about 40 feet
of slightly silty medium to fine grain sand (SP-SM) interlayered with silty and clayey
sands (SM-SC). Underlying the medium to fine grain sands was a 10 foot thick layer
of silty and clayey sands (SM-SC). Bedrock beneath the site consists of, in descending
order: Miocene Age Hawthorne Formation, Miocene Age Tampa Limestone,
Oliogene Age Suwanee Limestone, and Eocene Age Ocala Limestone.
The Hawthorn Formation is composed of a sequence of highly variable clays, sands
and interbedded limestone with no dominant lithologic type. The thickness of the
Hawthorn Formation was estimated to be about 200 feet at the FL Landfill. The
Tampa Limestone was described as a gray sandy, micritic to crystalline, argillaceous
limestone with the top of this unit at a depth of 200 feet below the ground surface.
The thickness of the Tampa Limestone is about 140 feet at this site.
The Suwanee Limestone was described in the March 1985 permit application as a
crystallized, highly dolomitic, fossiliferous limestone containing thin beds of
dolomitic days. The Suwanee Limestone was estimated to occur at a depth of
340 feet and to be about 160 feet thick at this site. The Ocala Limestone was
described as a micritic to crystalline fossiliferous limestone. Additionally, the
formation was described as highly dolomitic near the top of the unit and contains
some calcareous day. The Ocala Limestone was estimated to occur at a depth of
about 500 feet below the site and was about 310 feet thick.
The May 1984 Groundwater Monitoring Plan prepared by a Consulting Engineers
Company indicated three aquifers in the groundwater regime beneath the site.
One of the aquifers is an unconfined surficial aquifer consisting df about 50 feet of
sandy soils at the site. The aquifer is generally not used as well yields are generally
less than 5 gpm.
Below the surficial aquifer, the groundwater regime consists of two artesian
aquifers, which are the upper artesian aquifer and a deeper aquifer. The upper
B2-3
-------
artesian aquifer consists of beds of sandy limestones near the base of the Hawthorn
Formation. The specific capacity of wells developed in this highly variable aquifer is
reported to average 5 gpm or less. There were no report users of this aquifer in the
vicinity of the PL Landfill.
The stratigraphically lowest aquifer beneath the landfill is reported to be over
1,000 feet thick beneath this site. This aquifer is the major source of potable water
in the area.
Monitoring well MW-3 was developed in the Tampa Limestone. The specific
capacity of this well was 0.9 gpm per foot of drawdown. The results of a pump test
in a well several miles to the east of the site and cased through the upper unit
yielded a transmissivity of 1,260 square feet per day and a storage capacity of
2.6x10-4
In-situ variable head permeability tests were performed for the four monrtpnng
wells in the surficial aquifer. The test results indicated the in-place permeability
ranged from 2.0 x 10-* cm/sec to 6.8 x 10-5 cm/sec
Water levels were obtained on December 18,1985 in monitoring wells MW-1,
MW-2, MW-4 andMW-5. These measurements indicated the groundwater
elevation varied from an elevation of 182.6 in MW-1 to an elevation of 172.79
m MW-2. Test results of groundwater samples collected on December 18,1985
indicated a slightly higher concentration of most parameters downgradient from
the landfill. The highest concentrations were obtained in Monitoring well MW-5,
which is the closest monitoring well downgradient of the landfill.
The March 1985 operating permit application indicated the FL Landfill consisted of
seven cells, a yard trash composting pile, a tomato waste pit a wood chip and fiber
board open stockpile, and two areas for additional cells. The sequential trench
method was shown as the method for disposing of the wastes. Three of the seven
trenches (Nos. 1, 2, and 5) were filled, but needed a final cover. Cell 3 was about
completely excavated. The material excavated from Cell 4 was being used as daily
and intermediate cover for Cell 3. Cells 6 and 7 were proposed for future waste
disposal. It was estimated Cells 6 and 7. and the additional areas, would be filled
B2-4
-------
by 1992. The size of the cells varied at the ground surface from 1,260 feet long by
50 feet wide for Cells 1 and 2 to 350 feet long by 120 feet wide for Cell 7.
Construction permit was issued on January 17,1985 to begin construction of this
landfill. The initial operating permit was issued on May 23,1975, at which time the
landfill began accepting wastes. Two subsequent operating permits have been
issued for this site with the latest permit for the period of December 4,1985 to
November 1,1990.
The site is located on a hilltop which slopes from 2% to 8% east-northeast. The
original topographic relief for this site ranged from about 130 feet NGVO to
230feetNGVD.
The FL Landfill serves a population of about 9,000. The lands adjacent to the landfill
are forested, except for the area adjacent to the access road which is residential.
Timber operations have been reported in the forest areas adjacent to the landfill.
After the access road to the landfill was constructed, about 20 residences were built
on properties adjacent to the access road.
2.2 WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
From the March 1985 operating permit application, the types and volumes of wastes
disposed of at this site are shown on Table II. As a special condition of the latest
permit, the site is not permitted to accept significant quantities of hazardous
wastes. Another special condition of the latest permit is prior to disposal of
industrial wastes, the industrial concern is to provide a letter stating the nature,
volume, and chemical characteristics of the wastes. To be included in this letter was
a statement indicating the waste is or has been rendered innocuous or
nonhazardous.
The types and volumes of wastes accepted in the past at this landfill are similar to
those indicated in Table II. The total volume of wastes disposed of previously at this
site was not indicated in the data fit*. Based on calculations in the March 1985
permit application, the total volume available in Calls4, 6 and? is about
168,000 cubic yards, while the volume remaining in Ceil 3 was not indicated.
B2-5
-------
-------
1 t
WATE* ft WASTE WATEH ANALYSIS
PANAMA Of*.
• MM if
LABOPATQAV CfiftTPCATlQN 081
TABLE I
Systtm Name.
Sample Location
Sampit Type __
Dale
it.
. System I.D. 1020 x 1P011
Sampit Tim* »;30 a.». - I0;30 a.
Collector
Sampia Received Dee. 18. 1983
6;00 a.a. Sampit Stl-Up
The results of analysts are e>en below:
Saaplt eice
Conduce ivltv. umhoa
COO, ••/!
Total eollforv 1/100 ml
Water level
Temperature
TOC. pp.
TKN. •«/!
n
650
4
•1
10.92*
ia*e
•i '
0.20
•let* c>
12
130
13
•1
12.84'
!?•€
3.2
0.32
an
13
2S1
7
•1
enclosed
e«flln*
2I*C
•1
0.28
14
31
4
13
14.88*
u-c
•1
0.16
n
160
10
•I
10.0'
19*C
1.3
0.24
r"VTD
*.4 in
sowar fui
urn
B2"7
-------
TABLE II
FL LANDFILL
TYPES, SOURCES AND QUANTITIES OF WASTE
PLACED IN THE LANDFILL
HOUSEHOLD GARBAGE
City Collection Trucks
County Health Department Swacars
County Waste Control
Experiment Station
Unclassified (Cash Collections • No Detail
Records Kept)
BOXES AND PAPER GOODS
Hidgon Grocery
IGA Grocery
School Board
CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS
City
Fletcher Company
O.V. McPherson
Solomon Contraction
Peavy and Son Construction
Recon Paving
Shiver Construction
Niagara Wire
FOOT
OTHER WASTE
Wastewater Treatment Plant Sludge
Gulf Coast Hatchery - Egg Waste
PL Crab Company • Crab Shells
Southeast Hide Co. - Floor Sweepings
containing 50% salt; also cow tails
Big Bend Tires -Tires
TOTAL
Average Waste*
Received
(CY/Month)
4,200
450
90
10
350
5.100
90
120
S
215
50
100
30
40
110
5
35
10
25
405
30
60
50
180
5
32S
6,045
Percent
85
7
5
100
* July 1983 through June 1984.
B2-8
-------
TABLE II
FL LANDFILL
TYPES. SOURCES AND QUANTITIES OF WASTE
NOT PLACED IN THE LANDFILL
YARD TRASH
City
Marty Ard Landscape
Thad White Tree Service
FURNITURE MANUFACTURERS - WOOD SCRAP
McTavish Furniture
Pat Higdon
Warren Higdon
TOMATO WASTE
Beef Stake Tomato Growers
TOTAL
Average Waste*
Received
(CY/Month)
500
70
25
595
40
60
200
300
250
1,145
Percent
July 1983 through June 1984.
B2-9
-------
2.3 DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS
The construction permit application dated December 13,1974 indicated the
trenches were to be excavated to a depth of 10 to 30 feet below the original ground
surface. The bottom of the trenches waste be graded at a slope of 1/2%. The side
slopes of the trenches were not specified. Surface drainage was to be provided by
4 inch perforated pipes in sand backfilled trenches at the base of each side slope for
each trench.
The wastes were to be placed in cells with a maximum working face of 40 feet in
about 2 foot lifts. A 6 inch daily cover and an additional 6 inch intermediate cover
over a completed cell were to be placed. The maximum settled height of a cell was
to be 6 feet.
The March 1985 operating permit application indicated Ceils 4. 6 and 7 were to be
excavated to a depth of 20 to 30 feet, with 2 horizontal to 1 vertical side slopes.
Additionally, a leachate collection system waste be installed in the unused portion
of Cell 3 and in Cells 4, 6 and 7. The leachates collection system for each cell is
shown on Figure 2. A bentonite-polymer soil liner was to be installed on the
bottoms of Cells 4, 6 and 7, the sides of Cells 6 and 7, and as part of the final cover
for Cells 1 *hrough7.
The individual cells within a trench were shown as 10 feet thick with a 6 inch daily
and intermediate cover placed over the wastes. The method for compacting the
wastes was not indicated in the copy of the permit application we were provided,
although it may be included in the original or the permit application as several
pages were missing in the copy we received.
The leachates collection systems were shown as a trench in each cell excavated
below the base of the trench. Each of the trenches was shown lined with a 6 inch
thick bentonite-polymer soil liner. After the liner is installed, a 6 inch perforated
PVC pipe is shown enclosed in a gravel backfill. The gravel backfill is enclosed in
filter doth with the remainder of the trench backfilled with sand: The leachate
collection systems are shown sloped to drain to one of two lift stations from which
the leachates would be pumped to a leachate treatment pond. Once the leachate
82-10
-------
©
PLAN-CCLLS 6
I** SO'
or CSLL
TYPICAL LEACHATE COLLECT/ON
FIGURE
i
WILLIAM M. BIS
CONSULTING ENGINEERS,
82-11
TA1
-------
was pumped to the leachate treatment pond, it would be allowed to evaporate or
hauled to a sanitary treatment plant for treatment.
After placing the ieachate collection system, a liner was to be placed on the bottom
of the trench for Cells 4, 6 and 7, and along the sides of the trench for Cells 6 and 7.
The liner was indicated to consist of 6 inches of soil mixed with a sufficient quantity
of i bentonite polymer to obtain a permeability of 1x10-7 cm/sec After the
bentonite-polymer and soil are mixed, the mixture is to be compacted.
Storm water runoff was to be collected using two methods. One method was to
convey runoff from the tops of cells to a detention pond using a combination of
small berms and shallow ditches or swales. Another method to be used was to
construct temporary berms in the bottoms of the cells in advance of the placement
of wastes. These berms are to prevent uncontaminated storm water from coming
into contact with the wastes or leachates.
A final cover was indicated to be placed over each completed cetl and as each of the
new cells is completed. The final cover was stated to consist of three 6 inch thick
lifts, in addition to the 6 inch daily cover and 6 inch intermediate cover. The first
6 inches of the final cover was stated as a 6 inch loose lift of soil mixed with a
sufficient quantity of a bentonite-polymer to obtain a coefficient of permeability of
1 x 10-7 cm/sec The mixed material was then to be compacted. After placing the
initial 6 inch lift, a 6 inch thick layer of compacted earth topped by a 6 inch layer of
loose earth was to be placed.
A detail of a gas monitoring well was shown in the March 1985 permit application.
Although a portion of the narrative regarding the gas monitoring well was missing
from the file, it appears gas monitoring wells are to be installed if a significant
quantity of gas is detected.
2.4 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PRACTICES
The landfill has been operating 6 days per week, 8 hours per day. The hours of
operation and whether the landfill was operated on holidays were not indicated in
the March 1985 permit application.
82-12
-------
According to the March 1985 permit application, the equipment on site is a
Caterpillar 955 tract loader which is used for spreading compacting, and covering
wastes. The Caterpillar 955 tract loader is also used for excavation of new cells.
Additional equipment provided on an as-needed basis includes a rototiller
attachment, a loader/backhoe, a road grader, dump trucks, and a farm tractor and
attachment for seeding and mowing grass. It was stated in the March 1985 permit
application that the following equipment needed to be purchased: a tank truck, a
fertilizer spreader attachment, and a steel drum compactor. It was inferred from
this permit application that the following personnel were on site: an operator for
the Caterpillar 955 loader, a gate keeper, a supervisor part-time, and other
personnel on an as-needed basis.
The facility utilizes the sequential trench methods for disposal of the wastes and
currently has seven cells permitted. Five of the seven cells have been excavated and
the excavated material used as daily and intermediate cover in the cell in which
wastes were being placed. The March 1985 permit application estimated there
would be excess material after the material excavated from Cells 6 and 7 was used
as daily and intermediate cover for the remainder of Cell 3 and for new Cells 4, 6,
and 7. The excavated material was also to be used as final cover for Cells 1
through 7.
The individual cells in a trench were shown to be constructed by spreading and
compacting refuse in 10 foot lifts. The wastes are to be covered with a 6 inch layer
of soil at the end of the day. The succeeding individual cells are to be placed as
shown on Figure 3. An intermediate soil cover of an additional 6 inches is to be
placed over the 6 inch daily cover after an individual cell is completed. A final cover
of 18 inches is to be installed using the material excavated from Cells 6 and 7.
A leachate collection system is to be in the remainder of Cell No. 3 and for new
Cells 4,6 and 7, The leachate collection system is to drain to a lift station where it is
to be pumped to a leachate treatment pond. From the leachate collection pond,
the leachate is to be trucked to a sanitary treatment plant or allowed to evaporate.
A liner is to be placed in the bottom of Cells 4.6 and 7, and on the sides of Cells 6
and 7. The liner is to be a bentonfee-polymer soil mixture with sufficient
bentonite-polymer to obtain a permeability of 1 x 10-7 cm/sec
B2-13
-------
DUMPING AREA
KCVIOUS MULING INTERVAL
\
OHUIBfr WOWING INTERVAL
DO OF
LEAOMTC CDUHCTICH
AND; LINES
I
-------
Oust was indicated in the March 1985 permit application to be controlled by either
wetting the access road or applying an approved sesicant such as calcium chloride.
Litter was indicated to be controlled by the use of portable fences and covering the
site daily. The permit application indicated the County Agriculture Extension would
be consulted for the proper control methods if insects become a problem. Other
controls for disease and vector control were not indicated in the case file, although
they may be in the original permit application as a page was missing in this section
of the operation plan.
Open burning is not permitted at the landfill site. Accidental fires would be
extinguished by smothering the fire with either soil or water from monitoring
well MW-3. If assistance is required to extinguish a fire, the Fire Department would
be called. A specific condition of the latest permit is suitable backup equipment be
available for use within 24 hours in case the existing machinery should fail.
Another specific condition of the latest permit is the operator obtaining, prior to
accepting industrial wastes, and keeping records on the nature, volume and
chemical characteristics of the industrial waste. Included in the record is to be a
statement that waste is or has been rendered innocuous or nonhazardous. Records
are also to be retained of all monitoring information, copies of all reports required
by the permit, and records of all data used to complete the application for the
permit.
A closure plan for the FL Landfill is to be submitted at least 1 year prior to the
projected date of 1992 when the proposed future cells wouid be filled.
82-15
-------
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
3.1 MONITORING
A ground water monitoring program for this site was submitted in May 1984 and
was approved on September 2,1984. The ground water monitoring plan consisted
of five wells at the locations shown on Figure 1.
Monitoring well MW-1 was developed in the surficial aquifer upgradient of the
landfill to provide background water quality. Monitoring wells MW-2, MW-4,
and MW-5 were developed in the surficial aquifer downgradient of the landfill.
Monitoring wells MW-2 and MW-4 are intermediate wells and monitoring
well MW-5 is a compliance well. Monitoring well MW-3 was developed in the
Floridian aquifer and is a compliance well.
A specific condition of the latest operating permit (S020-100774) was the
monitoring wells were to be sampled and tested on a quarterly basis.
Additionally, the samples were to be analyzed for the following parameters: water
level (field), pH (field), conductivity (field), IDS, TOC, TNK, chlorides, iron, nitrates,
sulfates, and manganese.
The 1985 permit application included a detail showing a gas monitoring well. It was
not indicated in the copy of this permit application we received if gas monitoring
wells were to be installed or if the gas monitoring wells were contingent upon gas
being encountered.
3.2 DAMAGE ASSESSMENT
No environmental damage was reported to have been attributed to this landfill.
82-16
-------
3.3 CORRECTIVE ACTION
While specific corrective actions were not indicated in the file, the
bentonite-polymer soil mixture liner, the I each ate collection system, and the
leachate collection pond to be constructed could be considered as corrective
actions. The bentonite-polymer soil mixture liner would reduce the generation and
migration of leachate from the new cells. The bentonite-polymer soil mixture as a
final cover would reduce the generation of leachate from both new and existing
cells. The leachate collection system and treatment pond would collect leachate
generated by the landfill and transport it so that it could be treated. The
bentonite-polymer soil liner, bentonite-polymer soil mixture final cover, and the
leachate collection system and treatment pond should reduce leachate generation
and migration.
B2-17
-------
TABLE III
RATE OF CHARGES
FL LANDFILL
Type of Vehicle
2-Wheel Trailer
Pick-Up Trucks
1 -Ton Trucks
1.5-Ton Trucks
2-Ton Trucks
Small Dump Trucks
4-Wheel Trailer
Swacar-Type Trailer
Tractor-Trailer
16-24 CY Garbage Compactors
25-32 CY Garbage Compactors
Large Dump Trucks
Large Dump Trailer
Charge
$1.50
1.50
3.00
4.00
5.00
5.00
6.00
6.00
8.00-
10.00
10.00
14.00
10.00
20.00
B2-18
-------
4.0 COST DATA
Cost data included in the 1985 permit application included the charges for different
types of vehicles and are presented in Table III. The time period for these charges is
not known.
B2-19
-------
CASE STUDY
SM LANDFILL
by
ICF Northwest
Hapo Building, 4th Floor
601 Williams Boulevard
Richland, WA 99352
Contract No. 68-01-7290
Work Assignment No. 25
Project Officer
Ronald McHugh
Work Assignment Manager
Jim PHtman
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
401 M STREET, S.W.
WASHINGTON. O.C 20460
August 1986
-------
CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
SUMMARY FACT SHEET
1.0 ESTABLISHMENT IDENTIFICATION B3-1
2.0 DETAILED ESTABLISHMENT DESCRIPTION B3-2
2.1 GENERAL B3-2
2.2 WASTE CHARACTERISTICS B3-4
2.3 DESIGN CHARAaERISTICS 83-5
2.4 OPERATION AND MANAGEMENT PRACTICES B3-6
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT B3-7
3.1 MONITORING B3-7
3.2 DAMAGE ASSESSMENT B3-7
3.3 CORRECTIVE ACTION B3,-10
4.0 COST DATA B3§14
ii
-------
FIGURES
NUMBER PAGE
1 TOPOGRAPHY AT THE SM SANITARY
LANDFILL 83-3
2 LOCATION OF MONITORING STATIONS AT SHORT
MOUNTAIN SANITARY LANDFILL 83-8
3 TYPICAL MONITORING WELL CONSTRUCTION DETAILS
FOR SM SANITARY LANDFILL 83-9
TABLES
NUMBER PAGE
1 SUMMARY OF MONITORING WELL DEPTHS AT SHORT
MOUNTAIN SANITARY LANDFILL B3-11
2 SUMMARY OF GROUNDWATER MONITORING RESULTS
FROM SM SANITARY LANDFILL. APRIL, 1985 B3-12
3 SUMMARY OF SURFACE WATER AND LEACHATE
MONITORING RESULTS FROM SM SANITARY
LANDFILL, APRIL 1985 B3-13
iii
-------
SUMMARY FACT SHEET
Key elements of this case study include the following:
• A permit to construct and operate the 58 acre landfill was issued in 1976.
• The site receives approximately 1.5 x 106 yd3/year of municipal solid wastes
from commercial waste haulers.
• The topography at the site includes both a flood plain and adjacent
uplands.
• Various materials underlie the site including day, mudstone, sandstone,
and volcanic rocks. Active disposal areas are generally underlain by
low-permeability clays and mudstone. No engineered liners are required.
• The facility is operated using both the trench- and area-fill methods of
disposal. The bottom of trench excavations must be at least 3 feet above
the seasonal high groundwater table.
• The depth of groundwater at the site is generally shallow, ranging from
5 to 12 feet
• Landfill'operation includes collection of leachate with treatment bylspray
irrigation at the site during the summer months.
• The original leachate storage lagoon had a capacity of 6.9 x 106 gallons,
which was inadequate for storage during the winter months. An
additional 25.7 x 106 gallon lagoon was constructed in 1983.
• Groundwater monitoring appears to indicate elevated 'levels of some
contaminants when compared to the background well. No surface water
contamination has been detected.
IV
-------
1.0 ESTABLISHMENT IDENTIFICATION
The SM landfill was constructed to serve as a central landfill as part of the county's
regional solid waste management program. A permit application for the site was
issued in December 1976.
The site had been used as an automobile raceway. The site topography is ranging
from flat to moderately sloped. Land use around the site is apparently agricultural
with a low population density.
The site is underlain by several different materials including day, mudstone, and
basalt. Most of the site where disposal occurs is underlain by low-permeability
material. During wet winter months, water may be ponded on the ground surface.
Depth to groundwater varies seasonally.
Wastes received by the site are municipal wastes hauled by commercial haulers. The
public is not allowed to use the site. Municipal sewage sludge is apparently also
disposed of at the site.
Wastes are disposed of using the trench- area-fill methods of disposal. An
important design feature of the site is a leachate collection and treatment system.
Leachate is collected in a lagoon at the site and treated by land application. The
leachate lagoon was recently expended to increase its storage capacity. The site has
reportedly has some operational problems related to odor control.
B3-1
-------
2.0 DETAILED ESTABLISHMENT DESCRIPTION
2.1 GENERAL
The SM Landfill was established in 1975-1976. The 58 acre landfill is owned and
operated by the county and accepts waste only from commercial haulers. The
facility is located on a 580-acre parcel of land. An inspection conducted in 1983
indicated that approximately 2 to 3 acres of fill had received final cover.
The site topography ranges from flat to moderately sloped. The southwestern
portion of the site is generally flat, being located in the flood plain. The
topography then rises to the northeast. A topographic map of the site is shown in
Figure 1. There is approximately 500 feet of relief at the site with elevations
ranging from 500 to 1,000 feet. The land use and population distribution around
the site were not described in the file information.
The site is underlain by four major materials: day, mudstone, sandstone, and
volcanic rock. The clay underlies the lower, southwestern portion of the site and is
generally found below an elevation of 520 feet. This soil is derived from the
weathering of the mudstone of the Eugene Formation and is generally described as
moist, gray-black, very stiff, slightly sandy day. The thickness of this soil is typically
greater than 8 feet. Mudstone is generally found in the central portion of the site
at elevations between 530 and 700 feet The rock is fresh to moderately weathered
and is generally described as moist gray, brown, or gray-brown mottled, widely
jointed mudstone with rust staining on jointing and bedding planes. Sandstones at
the site are sedimentary sandstones and conglomeratic sandstones of the Eugene
Formation. These materials are interbedded with the mudstones and occur in the
northwest part of the site in a bed at an elevation of 550 to 600 feet Where
exposed , the sandstone is deeply weathered to a friable reddish-buff color. The
rock is generally described as arkosic, tuffaceous, volcanic-derived from weathered
volcanic rocks. Volcanic rock at the site consists of basalt and andesite flows and
dike intrusives with little soil cover. These rocks are generally confined to the upper
east and northeast portions of the site.
B3-2
-------
00
Ul
T MOUNTAIN LAOOOM
CNLMKfMlNI
•til M.M
ScaU: I" • tOO*
Figure |. lopogr.phy at th» SM Sanitary Landfill
-------
The above materials were generally considered to be suitable for development of a
sanitary landfill. While permeability tests were not performed, the clays were
described as being nearly impermeable at or near optimum moisture content.
Groundwater at the site was not well characterized or described in the site
investigation report. It was mentioned that during winter months, the
groundwater may actually rise to the ground surface. It was not certain, however, if
this condition was caused by rising groundwater or by surface water ponding due to
poor soil drainage. Depths to groundwater in monitoring wells ranged from 6.0 to
11.8 feet as measured in April 1985. Uses of groundwater near the site were not
described.
Surface water drainage at the site is generally to the south.
2.2 WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
The facility file contained very little information on the types and amounts of
wastes received. The only information given was that the site receives wastes only
from commercial haulers and that the public is not allowed to use the site. The
SM Landfill received a total of 1,444,626 yd3 of solid wastes in 1983 and
1,512,006yd3inl984.
Although hazardous waste disposal is not allowed at the site, the facility file
indicates that hazardous wastes have been stored at the site. Correspondence
dated April 1985, indicates that an accumulation of PCS capacitors and transformers
were in temporary storage at the site. The final disposition of those materials was
not specified.
Information in the facility file also describes the disposal of sewage sludge at the
site by land application. It is not clear from the information presented whether the
site is routinely used for disposal of sewage sludge or if sludge is applied only to aid
in revegetation of final cover. The site reportedly received a total of
128,200 gallons of sludge in 1983 and 240,855 gallons in 1984.
B3-4
-------
2.3 DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS
From the information presented in the facility file, it does not appear that synthetic
or engineered liners are required at the site. The only reference to liners is
contained in the general conditions of the permit. These conditions require that the
deepest landfill excavation be a minimum of 3 feet above the seasonal high
groundwater table. An inspection conducted in April 1983, indicated that wastes
were being placed in cells directly on top of the existing ground surface.
Surface runon and runoff are controlled through the use of diversion ditches and
berms. Temporary berms are used to route all potentially contaminated runoff
from active disposal areas to the leachate storage lagoon. Runon from
uncontaminated areas is diverted around active disposal areas. No other details of
the surface runoff control system were provided.
Leachate collection is an important aspect of the facility design. The facility permit
requires that all 4eachate and contaminated rain and surface water must be stored
through the period from November 1 through May 1 of each year without
discharge. From May 1 through November 1, stored leachate is disposed of by
irrigating on adjacent land.
The leachate collection system for the site consists of an interceptor trench located
downgradient (south) of the disposal area. Leachate flows by gravity through this
trench to a wet well/pump station where it is pumped to the storage lagoon.
Specific design details of the system were not available in the facility file. The
storage lagoon originally constructed at the site consisted of a 2.4 acre lagoon
having a volume of 6,930,000 gallons. This lagoon did not prove large enough to
store leachate during the winter months. Therefore, in 1983 the construction of an
additional 25,667,000 gallon, "I" shaped lagoon around the existing facility began.
The combined capacity is great enough that irrigation is required only during the
summer months. Both lagoons are constructed above grade with dikes made of
compacted day soil. The lagoon bottoms are lined with 1 foot of compacted clay
soil.
A site inspection report prepared in 1983 indicated that methane control systems
are present at the site. No details were provided on these systems.
B3-5
-------
2.4 OPERATION AND MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
No data were available in the facility file on the number of employees present,
hours worked, or equipment used on site. The site is operated using a combination
of the area-fill and trench-fill methods of disposal. Clay topsoil is excavated from
the southwestern part of the site for use as daily and final cover. The facility permit
requires daily cover consisting of at least 6 inches of compacted soil and final cover
consisting of at least 2 feet of compacted soil. Or ginally, wood chips were used as
daily cover. This practice was stopped because of odor problems. Revegetation of
the final cover is apparently enhanced by the application of sewage sludge.
Some operational problems have been encountered in the past with operation of
the leachate collection/treatment system. These problems were apparently related
to the size of the collection/treatment system. As described above, the lagoon was
recently expanded to contain increased leachate flow. The leachate flow measured
in 1983 was 8,250,000 gallons. Estimated flows for 1984 and 1989 were 8,500*000
and 12,500,000 gallons, respectively. The irrigation system was also expanded to
correct leachate runoff problems encountered in the past
B3-6
-------
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
3.1 MONITORING
Groundwater monitoring is a requirement of the facility operating permit. The
permit requires that groundwater monitoring wells be installed in accordance with
specified recommendations. Biannual monitoring must be conducted for pH,
alkalinity, conductivity, chemical oxygen demand (COD), ammonia nitrogen,
chloride, and nitrate nitrogen. In 1983, six wells were constructed at the site at the
locations shown in Figure 2. Typical well completion details are shown in Figure 3.
The logs of these wells were not available. The completed well depths and depths
to groundwater in April 1985, are shown in Table 1. Monitoring data are available
for April!984; October 1984; and April 1985. Analytes include the required
parameters plus temperature, suifate, color, iron, calcium, magnesium, hardness,
and total organic carbon (TOO. The most recently available results (April 1985,
sampling) are shown in Table 2.
Surface water and leachate sampling are also required at the site. Three surface
water sampling stations and one leachate sampling station are maintained, as
shown in Figure 2. Since 1984, these stations have been sampled at the same time
and for the same analytes as the monitoring wells. Prior to 1984, the leachate
lagoon and Camas Swale Creek were occasionally sampled. The most recently
available results (April 1985, sampling) are shown in Table 3.
3.2 DAMAGE ASSESSMENT
No documentation of environmental damage was presented in the site file
information. The groundwater monitoring data presented in Table 2 indicate
several parameters in downgradient wells elevated above levels in the background
well (GW-1). The most notable of these are the organic parameters, COO and TOC,
which are high in well GW-6. The impact of landfill operations on these levels is not
specifically known because there are no comparative background data collected
before disposal began. The environmental impact of elevated levels is not known
because the use of shallow groundwater in the area is not described. Because of the
83-7
-------
Seal*: 1" • 1.000'
Existing
Racttrack
I
Ftgurt 3. Location of Monitoring Stations.
B3-8
-------
•—MHTAI«JCC\f
NATURAL r.nouNp sun? ACS
CK.MCNT CZiOUT SOL
OUTSIDE STKKL CASIKC
WHEN JACKED HACK
Typical Non1tor1ng u»11 Construction DtUlls,
B3-9
-------
low permeability of the shallow aquifer, use of shallow groundwater is likely to be
minimal.
The surface water monitoring data shown in Table 3 shows essentially no difference
between samples taken from the Creek upstream and downstream of the site.
These results are suggestive of minimal impact of landfill operations on surface
water quality.
3.3 CORRECTIVE ACTIONS
No corrective action at the site have been required other than the expansion and
improvement of the leachate collection and treatment system.
B3-10
-------
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF MONITORING WELL DEPTHS
AT SM SANITARY LANDFILL
Well No.
GW-1
GW-2
GW-3
GW-4
GW-5
GW-6
Location
North of Access Road (Background)
Southwest of Lagoon
Immediately East of Lagoon
East of Lagoon; South of Pill
South of Fill
South of Fill; Near GW-5
Well Depth,
Feet
31.2
16.5
13.8
14.0
15.9
33.8
Depth To
Water, Feet
April, 1985
11.2
6.8
4.9
6.1
5.9
9.6
83-11
-------
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF GROUND WATER MONITORING RESULTS
FROM SM SANITARY LANDFILL
APRIL. 1985
Parameter
Temperature. *C
Conductivity, umnos/cm
PH
NH3-N, mg/l as N
NOj * N02-N, mg/l as N
Alkalinity, mg/l as CaCOj
Chloride, mg/l
Sulfate, mg/l
Color. Pt-Co Units
Iron, mg/l
Calcium, mg/l
Magnesium, mg/l
Hardness, mg/l
COO, mg/l
TOC. mg/l
GW-1
13
479
7.5
0.03
1.7
237
18
2.8
<5
<0.05
36
94
130
-------
TABU 3
SUMMARY OF SURFACE WATER AND LEACHATE MONITORING RESULTS
FROM SM SANITARY LANDFILL
APRIL, 1985
Parameter
Temperature, "C
Conductivity, umhos/cm
PH
NH3-N, mg/l as N
N03 + NO2-N, mg/l as N
Alkalinity, mg/l as CaCOa
Chloride, mg/l
Sulfate, mg/l
Color, Pt-Co Units
Iron, mg/l
Calcium, mg/l
Magnesium, mg/l
Hardness, mg/l
COO, mg/l
TOC. mg/l
Monitoring Well
SW-1
14.5
133
7.2
0.49
Q.S9
45
11
1.9
60
0.14
11
3.6
42
8
3
SW-2
*
*
•
•
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
SW-3
17.0
153
7.3
0.72
1.4
51
14
2.2
50
0.12
11
4.1
44
<5
4
L-1
16.5
3,068
8.7
44
0.04
884
480
6.4.
400
0.20
62
63
410
245
108
* Not Sampled
83-13
-------
4.0 COST DATA
No cost data were available for this site.
83-14
-------
CASE STUDY
PC LANDFILL
by
ICF Northwest
Hapo Building, 4th Floor
601 Williams Boulevard
Richland. WA 99352
Contract No. 68-01 -7290
Work Assignment No. 25
Work Assignment Manager
JimPittman
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
401 M STREET, S.W.
WASHINGTON, D.C 20460
June 1986
-------
CONTENTS
SECTION PAGES
SUMMARY FACT SHEET
1.0 ESTABLISHMENT IDENTIFICATION B4-1
2.0 DETAILED ESTABLISHMENT DESCRIPTION B4-2
2.1 GENERAL B4-2
2.2 WASTE CHARACTERISTICS B4-5
2.3 DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS B4-5
2.4 OPERATION AND MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 84-8
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT 84-11
3.1 MONITORING 84-11
3.2 DAMAGE ASSESSMENT B4-11
3.3 CORRECTIVE ACTION B4-11
4.0 COST DATA B4-T6
li
-------
FIGURES
PAGE
1 EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY AT PC SANITARY LANDFILL SITE B4-3
2 REGIONAL WATER TABLE MAP NEAR PC
SANITARY LANDFILL DECEMBER 23,1980 B4-6
3 LAYOUT OF LEACHATE COLLECTION SYSTEM B4-7
4 PHASED DEVELOPMENT OF PC SANITARY 84-9
5 FINAL GRADES AT PC SANITARY LANDFILL 84-12
6 LOCATION OF MONITORING WELLS AND LOCAL GROUND-
WATER LOW DIRECTION AT PC SANITARY LANDFILL B4-13
7 TYPICAL MONITORING WELL CONSTRUCTION
DETAILS AT PC SANITARY LANDFILL B4-U
TABLES
NUMBER
1 GROUNDWATER MONITORING DATA FOR PC
SANITARY LANDFILL, SEPTEMBER 1985
ill
-------
SUMMARY FACT SHEET
Key elements of this case study include the following:
• Construction of the PC site was approved in December, 1982.
• The facility is designed as a containment/collection landfill with a clay liner
and leachate collection system.
• The land fill occupies 18.6 acres and will be developed in 4 phases with an
estimated life of 15 years and a capacity of approximately 1,200,000 yd3 of
refuse.
• The site receives approximately 80,000 yd3/yr of residential/commercial
solid waste generated in PC.
• The surrounding land use varies from rural agricultural to rural residential
to residential.
• The topography is rolling with depressions, typical of glacial end-moraine.
• The site is underlain by thick deposits of glacially-derived, unconsolidated
material consisting primarily of sandy till. These deposits generally exhibit
relatively high permeabilities.
• Because of the permeable on-site soils, day for constructing liners must be
imported from off-site.
• The depth to groundwater at the site varies from 40 to 160 feet depending
on topography.
• Routine monitoring is done on a quarterly basis. No environmental
damage has been documented.
IV
-------
1.0 ESTABLISHMENT IDENTIRCATION
The PC Landfill is-a relatively new facility. A permit for operation of the site was
issued in December 1982.
The site is characterized topographically by rolling hills with numerous kettle
depressions. Surrounding land use varies from rural agricultural to rural residential
residential. Future land use for the area was not specified in the facility file.
The site is located on deep deposits of glacially-derived, unconsolidated sediments
consisting predominantly of sandy, glacial till. The depth to groundwater ranges
from 40 to 160 feet, depending upon site topography. No navigabte surface waters
are located on the property; however, some of the surface water runoff collects
locally in kettle holes or infiltrates directly into the subsurface. The site primarily
receives municipal/commercial solid waste. Approximately 80,000 yd? of waste are
disposed of at the site yearly. The facility occupies 18.6 acres and has an estimated
life of 15 years.
The landfill is designed as a day lined containment/collection site. The site design
includes a 5-foot thick clay liner a and a leachate collection system. The site will be
developed in 4 phases using the area fill method of disposal.
B4-1
-------
2.0 DETAILED ESTABLISHMENT DESCRIPTION
2.1 GENERAL
The PC Landfill is located on 80 acres of land. The facility operating plan was
approved in April, 1982, and construction approved and a permit issued in
December, 1982.
The site is characterized topographically by rolling hills with numerous kettle
depressions (Figure 1). The general slope of the land is to the east-southeast.
Ground elevations at the disposal site range from 1,244 feet in the northwest corner
to 1,168 feet in the northeast.
Land use surrounding the site varies from rural agriculture to rural residential to
residential. The population immediately surrounding the site was not specified in
the facility file.
The unconsolidated deposits at the site consist mainly of sandy glacial till. The site is
mantled in most places by a thin veneer of topsoil ranging from 0 to 1 foot in
thickness. The texture of the topsoil is a silty sand. The sandy till deposits are
directly under the topsoil and have been divided into three groups based on
grain-size analyses. A brown fine sand, little to some silt and day, little gravel is the
upper sand unit over the majority of the site. The fine sand unit ranges in thickness
from 0 to over 100feet The soil gradations range from 5-IS percent gravel,
3-8 percent coarse sand, 20-27 percent medium sand, 41-59 percent find sand, and
8-15 percent silt and day. Generally underlying the fine sand is a brown, fine to
medium sand, some gravel, little silt and clay. The unit varies in thickness from 0 to
over 140 feet The gradations range from 15-26 percent gravel, 5-12 percent coarse
sand, 19-41 percent medium sand, 28-51 percent fine sand, and 6-10 percent silt and
day. This unit is somewhat coarser than the upper fine sand. Underlying the fine to
medium sand is a brown fine to coarse sand, little silt and day, trace to some gravel.
The gradations for this unit range from 2 to 40 percent gravel, 13-33 percent coarse
and, 22-31 percent medium sand, 11-29 percent fine and 6-8 percent silt and day.
Approximations of the permeability (based on grain-size analyses) indicate the
B4-2
-------
llaJ-lLLL*' V'"'V~-~~Fc^\v *x /'
'w&^^jffi'tfT?- ^xV^T f^
iln 11" f s£2*Jjif \ ii; " • • .jy^-'A.! N>\\v'»\VvV\ V'/tfr-
XX X^.X •»-.
• 1 f N N. v N «* '
I I ' C\ONX I I
5 I b^^«. X.^^*— I
north
-j>y£^g
Scale: 1" • 200*
Figure A Existing Topography at the fC Sanitary Landfill.
-------
permeability to be in the range of 7x10-3 cm/sec to 4x10-2 cm/sec The percent of silt
and day in the sandy soils appears to be the controlling factor on the permeability
of the soils.
Bedrock was not encountered in any of the soil borings at the site (which ranged up
to 110 feet in depth). The glacial drift deposits of northern PC are underlain by
Precambrian aged igneous and metamorphic rocks. The rocks are generally
impermeable, consisting largely of granite. Gneiss, schist, shale, greenstone, and
quartzite do occur, however, in outcrops in the northern parts of the County. The
surface of the Precambrian basement is generally flat, slopping to the south at
approximately 10 feet per mile.
The depth to groundwater at the site ranges between 40 and 160 feet. The glacial
drift is the major water bearing aquifer in the site vicinity. Areas of clean sand and
gravel outwash can yield up to 2,000 gpm, whereas the most productive wells in the
glaciat till yield less than 1,000 gpm and typically less than 500 gpm.
Regional data indicate the presence of a regional groundwater divide to the west of
the site as shown in Figure 2. The divide is rather broad in the vicinity of the site.
Plow directions are generally to the south-southeast through the site area.
Recharge to the aquifer is predominantly from infiltration of precipitation. Due to
the high permeability sands, large volumes of precipitation infiltrate into the
subsurface soils. Many of the kettle depressions in the morainal areas collect local
surface wter runoff and act as local infiltration basins replenishing groundwater
supplies.
Groundwater discharges generally occurs along lakes, rivers, and wetlands. The
closest discharge areas to the site are wetland areas to the southeast. A major
discharge area for groundwater flowing beneath the site appears to be the
Tomorrow River, located several miles to the east
The closest well to the landfill site is approximately 1,400 feet to the north
(upgradient). The closest downgradient well is approximately 1,800 feet to the
southeast Although high capacity irrigation wells are common in the area, there
are none in the immediate vacinity of the site due to the irregular topography (i.e.,
B44
-------
the topography does not allow use of large center pivot irrigation systems).
Available information indicates the nearest high capacity well is 3/4 of a mile
southwest of the site. The next nearest high capacity well is 2 miles northwest of
the site. Neither will is expected to affect grcundwater flow at the site or to be
affected by the site.
The only on-site surface waters are the areas of ponded waters within the kettle
depressions. Several small wetlands occur to the east of the site area.
2.2 WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
The PC Landfill is permitted to receive municipal/commercial solid wastes. These
wastes include, but are not limited to, garbage, refuse, wood matter, and
demolition waste. The quantity of waste received at the site is approximately
80,000 yd3/yr. The site has an approximate 15-year life, with a total refuse capacity
of approximately 1,200,000 yd3. The quantity of wastes presently in place was not
specified.
The site receives no liquid wastes or hazardous wastes.
2.3 DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS
Because of the thick deposits of highly permeable sands, a 5-foot day liner with a
leachate collection system was required. Clay used for constructing the liner is
obtained from an off-site source. The clay soil is required to have at least 50 percent
material finer than a No. 200 sieve, at least 25 percent day content, a liquid limit of
30 percent or greater, a plasticity index of 15 percent or greater, and a permeability
of less than 10-7 cm/sec The liner is sloped a 2.5 percent toward leachate collection
pipes. For protection and to improve leachate drainage, the liner is covered with a
1-ft thick drainage blanket consisting of granular material having a permeability
greater than 10-3 cm/sec
The leachate collection system consists of a network of 6-in. diameter perforated
PVC pipes which drain to a central leachate collection point Collection pipes are
installed in trenches backfilled with coarse gravel. The layout of the leachate
collection system is shown in Figure 3. The average leachate flow distance is
B4-5
-------
I
-------
Figure^. Layout of Le«ch«tt Collection Systea
-------
150 feet Construction of the leachate collection system is to occur in phases
corresponding to the operation of the landfill. Collected leachate is hauled to the
Sewage Treatment Plant for treatment and disposal.
Runon and runoff at the site are controlled by a perimeter drainage flume which
discharges to infiltration basins. Rainfall which falls in the active area of the site is
captured by the leachate collection system.
The feasibility study report for the site describes the installation of a passive gas
venting system. This system is to be installed in gravel trenches which will be
constructed in the upper reaches of the landfill prior to closure. No details of the
gas venting system were available.
The site design also includes the construction of a collection lysimeter beneath the
Phase I liner. The lysimeter consists of a perforated PVC pipe installed in a trench
lined with a synthetic membrane. The collection pipe drains to a manhole where
leachate is collected. The purpose of the collection lysimeter is to measurei the
volume of leachate which passes through the day liner.
2.4 OPERATION AND MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
The number of employees at the site and the equipment used at the site were not
specified in the facility file. The facility will be developed in 4 phases using the area
fill method of disposal. The layout of the phases is shown in Figure 4. Phases I
through III will have refuse capacities of 282,506; 370500; and 291,862 yd3,
respectively. These phases will have an average fill thickness of approximately
34 feet and a maximum thickness of approximately 60 feet The base of the fill will
range from approximately 30 feet below existing grade to approximately 30 feet
above existing grade, depending on topography. Phase IV will cover the entire site
area and will be emplaced above the first three phases. Phase IV will have a refuse
capacity of 287,546 yd3 and an average thickness of approximately 10 feet
Refuse will be compacted daily and covered with 6 inches of daily cover. Because of
the phased operation, Phase I through III will be covered with an intermediate cover
consisting of 2 feet of compacted day and 6 inches of topsoil. This intermediate
cover will then be removed progressively as Phase IV is constructed. Phase IV will be
-------
Seal*: 1* • 320*
FigureVf. Phased Development of the PC Sanitary Landfill.
-------
covered with a final cover consisting of 2 feet of compacted clay soil and 6 inches of
topsoil. The final site grade is shown in Figure 5.
84-10
-------
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
3.1 MONITORING
The facility permit operating conditions require groundwater monitoring during
the active life of the site and for 20 years after closure. These conditions specify
monitoring of 19 wells during Phase I, 23 wells during Phase II, and 25 wells during
Phase III and Phase IV. Available well locations and the local groundwater flow
direction are shown in Figure 6. Typical well construction details are shown in
Figure 7.
3.2 DAMAGE ASSESSMENT
No environmental damage at the site has been documented. The results in Table 1
are not indicative of leach ate contamination of groundwater.
3.3 CORRECTIVE ACTIONS
No corrective actions have been required or taken at the site.
B4-11
-------
Sc.lt: 1* - 320'
Figure]^ Fin*I Grades «t the PC Sanitary Landfill.
-------
5
»*•
Sc«Ui If r »*'
-------
WATER TABLE WELLS
PIEZOMETER
GWUNO-7
SURFACE/
TVJRAL
BACKFILL MIXED Wl
25% 8EMTGNITE POWOEK
PVC WELL SCREEN
'Oft ASOVE THC MKTOI
SACKflLL «TN WASTE WHEW
NO, 99 MO
OTMCRWIU.
Plgurt Jb. Typical Monitoring Moll Construction Ootalls,
B4-14
-------
Table 1. Groundwater Monitoring Data for PC Sanitary
Landfill, September, 1985
Well
w-1
W-1P
W-2
W-3
W-3P
W-7
W-7P
W-9
W-9P
W-10
W-10P
W-ll
H-12
H-17
W-18
W-20
W-20P
W-21
W-21P
W-22
W-22P
W-23
W-23P
L-l
Leachate
Tank
Infiltration
Basin No. 1
Infiltration
Basin No. 2
Infiltration
Basin No. 3
ci-
4
1
1
<1
<1
1
3
4
8
4
6
2
1
<1
2
<1
<1
<1
<1
1
<1
0.29
359
2
5
16
COD
4.1
4.8
B A I L E
8.2
1.4
1.4
2.0
3.4
6.8
5.4
B A I L E
11.6
5.4
2.7
2.0
4.8
5.4
4.1
1.4
2.7
2.3
2.0
1.4
12.9
9,333
98.6
35.8
33.3
pK
7.25
7.48
R S T
7.25
7.40
7.49
7.45
7.40
7.38
7.22
R S T
7.28
7.50
7.45
7.88
7.62
7.50
7.52
7.50
7.72
7.70
7.45
7.78
7.30
6.93
7.19
7.66
7.70
Alk.
220
182
U C K
136
236
168
210
323
224
220
U C K
242
184
214
146
166
202
178
204
172
176
290
162
256
2,000
18
26
102
Cond.
495
400
I N U E
295
460
342
440
465
475
500
I N W E
498
390
420
300
348
432
360
435
342
360
550
335
699
5,810
48
93
252
Hard.
246
189
L L
137
242
170
229
239
239
246
L L
248
191
216
152
166
210
187
212
176
181
286
168
326
2,260
24
36
102
Fe
<.02
.10
<.02
<.02
<.02
<.02
<.02
<.02
<.02
.25
<.02
<.02
<.02
<.02
<.02
<.02
<.02
<.02
<.02
<.02
.04
<.02
53.5
.24
.02
.04
Note: All results 1n mg/1 except pH (standard units) and conductivity
(umno/cm).
B4-15
-------
4.0 COST DATA
The facility file contains a detailed cost estimate prepared as part of the feasibility
study study report. Major cost elements are reported below on a present worth
bases (1981 dollars).
Pre-development Costs $ 252,500
Site Preparation Costs 1,041,715
Site Operation and Maintenance Costs 4,847,200
Site Abandonment Costs 107,720
Long-Term Maintenance Costs 475.310
Total Costs $6,724,445
This total cost amounts to $10.91 per ton of waste based on an estiamted site
capacity of 616,200 tons.
B4-16
-------
APPENDIX C
NUS TRIP REPORT
-------
ROM MORK ASSIOKKT NO. 4
FEBRUARY 2 THROUGH 6. 1987
PROJECT HO. T950
TO: HAIA ROFFMM
FROM: OENICE TAYLOR
APPROVAL: M.S. ULINTZ
COPIES: TERRY ROJAM
ROB NMUOCLL
Introduction
During the week of February 1, 1987, NUS personnel conducted field sampling of
six municipal waste landfills to provide baseline data for Phase I of RCRA*
Work Assignment 4. The objective of the project Is to evaluate potential;
health and environmental effects of leachates generated by municipal*
landfills.
Scope of mart
The scope of work for Phase I Involved collecting three leachate samples at
six municipal landfills, and Incinerator ash samples from two sites where such
ash Is co-disposed with solid waste. Site selection was based on the
existence of a leachate collection system, the accessibility and location of
the.site, and the presence of a working Incinerator for the ash sites. A
brief description of each site, containing Information gathered through
telephone conversations and field observations and sample location maps Is
Included as Attachment A. A photograph Index documenting field operations and
site conditions Is Included as Attachment B.
Two duplicate samples and one field blank were collected as QA/QC measures.
The duplicates, were collected at the same time and handled 1n the same manner
as other leachatt samples; the field blank consisted of HPLC grade water which
was preserved and analyzed as a leachate sample.
Changes in the Sccom of Mark
Prior to beginning field work the following changes were made In the scope of
work:
1. The leachate samples collected from each site would be replicates. If
distinct leachates were generated at a given site, they were composited
In proportion to the volumes generated.
-------
RCRA
PROJECT NO. Y9SO
PAGE TW
2. If It was raining or had rained prior to sample collection, a sample
would be taken of the rainwater from a clean puddle or depression and
analyzed to determine the characteristics of water Infiltrating the
waste.
3. Traditional water chemistry parameters were added to the analyses.
Because of the difficulty Involved 1n shipping preservatives, the
allquots marked for water chemistry were preserved by the NUS lab. See
Attachment C for a complete list of analytical requirements and
laboratory Information.
4. In addition to pH, specific conductivity and temperature* redox potential
was Included as a field measurement.
Field Operations
Sample data Including times, dates, locations, and field measurements are
listed In Attachment 0. The following 1s a summary of field operations during
the week of February 1, 1987.
Teaa 1 (Denlcc Taylor. Terry tejahn)
February 2. 1987; Collected, preserved, packaged, and shipped samples PC-LE-
001. PC-LE-002, PC-LE-003, and PC-LE-003A.
February 3. 1987; Collected, preserved and packaged samples SM-LE-001. SM-LE-
002. 5M-LE-003, and SM-LE-004.
February 4. 1987; Shipped SM facility samples.
February 5. 1987; Collected, preserved, packaged, and shipped samples YD-LE-
001, VO-LE-OOZ. VD-LE-003, and VD-LE-000.
DST:lld
Attachments
-------
TEAM 2 (ROB UMBCl. SUES
February 2. 1987
The sampling team arrived at the NY Landfill at 11:20 and net the Landfill
Supervisor. The Resource Recovery facility supervisor also arrived to discuss
the sampling plan and to answer any questions.
The ash sample was collected from a fresh pile, prior to It being disposed 1n
a cell. The sampling team was Informed as they sampled the ash that 1t was
probably from a startup burn and the material had not been exposed to the
actual operating temperatures of between 1600°F and 2100°F.
All 3 leachate samples were collected from the leachate flow as It entered a
collection sump. The samples were collected using an amber glass bottle taped
to a pole. The leachate was gray with some turbidity associated with It. The
samples took approximately 45 minutes to collect. Once the samples were
collected, field measurements of the samples were made and the samples were
then preserved, labelled, and packaged for shipment according to the
procedures outlined In the scope of work.
February 4. 1987
The sampling team arrived at the FL Landfill at 08:15 and spoke with the
Facility Supervisor.
The sampling team collected all 3 leachate samples from the lone collection
sump. The leachate Is normally pumped from this sump Into a tank truck and
hauled to the local Wastewater Treatment Plant. Samples were collected by
lowering a stainless steel beaker on a polypropylene rope Into the leachate
that had collected In the collection sump. The leachate was gray with some
turbidity associated with 1t.
Again, the samples took approximately 45 minutes to collect. Once the samples
were collected, field measurements of the samples were made and the samples
were then preserved, labelled, and packaged for shipment according to the
procedures outlined In the scope of work.
February 6, 1987
The sampling team arrived at the NC Landfill at 09:00 after meeting with the
Facility Supervisor at his office.
The leachate samples were collected from 2 collection sumps 1n a 10-acre
closed ceil and from 1 collection sump for the 2 and 1/2 acre active area.
The samples were collected by lowering a stainless steel bailer on a
polypropylene rope Into the leachate that had collected at the bottom of each
sump. All four samples (Includes a duplicate) were composited 1/3. 1/3, and
1/3 from each sump. The leachate from the closed area was light gray and
almost free of turbidity, while the leachate from the active area ranged from
light gray and slightly turbid to black and very turbid.
-------
ATTAOKMTA
SITE SUMURIES AMD
SAIVLE LOCATIOU IMPS
-------
The PC Landfill
All leachate 1s collected 1n a 20,000 gallon holding sump accessible via a
manhole. (Figure 1 shows sample locations and site details). When the sump
Is full, the leachate Is pumped to a tanker truck and taken to the City Sewage
Treatment Plant. The schedule for disposal depends on the amount of rainfall
and may range from everyday during wet months to every week and a half during
dry months. The sump was being emptied February 2, 1987, the day of sampling;
it had last been emptied a week and a half before. It Is not possible to
enter the sump without wearing a breathing apparatus. Samples were collected
by lowering a bailer Into the tank.
It appears from site plans that the facility has entered Phase II of
development. Presently, there are 24 monitoring wells on site which are being
sampled quarterly for conventional parameters. In addition, leachate samples
are collected and analyzed once a year.
A detailed case study of the site, dated July 1986. has been prepared and 1s
on file with EPA.
-------
»-
UM
>
V ;
«
X
LI
i°r-
t
fir>»
. »•»
Of (ICC
ft
-------
The SH Landfill
All leachate generated from the facility, as well as surface water diverted
from the fill area. Is collected In one sump prior to discharge to a two stage
lagoon. (Figure 2 shows sample locations and site details). An automatic
pump empties the sump on average of once an hour during the wetest months and
once or twice a day during drier times. (During sampling the sump was emptied
twice). In the summer, leachate from the secondary lagoon 1s sprayed over the
vegetated area of the fill.
About two years ago, a tanker permitted to dispose of glue sludge from the
plywood Industry emptied thick black oil Into a manhole draining to the
collection sump. The responsible party was required to remove as much oil as
possible at the time, and periodically they are called to remove any
additional accumulation. At the time of sample collection, there was at least
a one foot layer of oil In the sump. In order to collect a wore
representative sample, the samples were collected from the primary lagoon at
the discharge point. There was an Irredescent film on the water's surface
near the pipe. The site contact also mentioned that there are plans for
expanding the capacity of the lagoons.
Six monitoring wells on site are sampled blannually for conventional
parameters. Surface water and leachate samples are collected at the same time
and are analyzed for the same parameters.
A detailed case study, dated August 1986 has been prepared and Is on file with
EPA.
-------
fltl
i \ ••
I S»» VC • n.tt
-I» « « * x x x ,
I (—Pi.mi-
I—I
11
e> --.H,'* ,
! t
I
• % J'"/'t
ASCHft«6t i
^
i S»» i< ooi,-o4
-------
The VD Landfill
Leachate generated from the fill 1$ collected 1n a two or three stage lagoon
system. It Is unclear if there are two separate secondary lagoons. Surface
water Is diverted around the fin to other drainage ways. When the lagoons
reach capacity, leachate from the primary lagoon Is pumped and sprayed over
the fill. Leachate from the lower lagoon 1s then pumped to the primary
lagoon. A greenish seep was observed flowing from approximately half way
downslope to the primary lagoon. The Facility Supervisor later said that the
seep formed after an Intermittent spring was covered with fill and that 1t
flows only during wet periods. (Figure 3 shows sample location and site
details).
There are no monitoring wells at this site.
A detailed case study, dated June 1986, has been prepared and 1s on file with
EPA.
-------
" / '•< I, -I.
-l-.i
IT imtnvM
Jn \
Kill 1
P"
>• I
1,
f
,|J, . | M*MI i
-------
The NY Landfill
The landfill accepts ash from the Resource Recovery facility, Hastewater
Treatment Plant sludge, and municipal solid waste In excess of the
Incinerator's capacity.
The landfill began operation 1n April of. 1985. The Deputy Commissioner of
Energy Recovery Facility, provided the following numbers In regards to the
types of waste disposed 1n the landfill In 1986:
o 28206 tons of ash
o 6886 tons of bypass refuse (materials 1n excess of incinerator's
capacity)
o 1119 tons of hardflll (metal scrap, building materials, mattresses, etc.
sorted out before Incineration)
o 3000 yards of sewage sludge ash (density unknown)
o 5000 yards of sewage sludge (density unknown)
o 80 yards of humane society wastes
He did not have numbers available for 1985, but did Indicate that the facility
did not receive the sewage or animal wastes prior to 1986.
The landfill has 2 clay liners with a leachate collection system above the
first Hner. A leak detection system 1s located between the 2 liners with no
leaks being reported as of yet. The landfill has no groundwater monitoring
system because It Is located next to a hazardous waste site. The hazardous
waste site has Its own groundwater monitoring system.
The leachate collection system drains Into a collection sump, the leachate Is
pumped from there to a holding tank, and flows from the holding tank into the
main sewage line. The leachate mixes with the domestic sewage before It enter
the City Hastewater Treatment Plant (9MGO).
-------
:c*K
-------
The a Landfill
Details on the construction and operation of the FL Landfill are available 1n
a case study on file with EPA.
The NC Landfill
The landfill accepts ash from the Resource Recovery facility, calcium nitrite
from a local fertilizer manufacturer, and municipal solid waste 1n excess of
the Incinerator's capacity. The County Environmental Specialist, estimates
the ratio of ash to solid wastes to be 1 to 3. The ash Is used as a dally
cover.
The landfill consists of numerous cells. One ten acre cell has been closed
and the construction of a clay cap for It has been started. The wastes-are
currently being placed 1n a two acre cell. Each cell Is lined with 3 feet of
sand, a high density liner, another 2 feet of sand, and a 20-mll PYC liner. A
leachate collection system 1s placed above the first liner of each cell and a
leak detection system has been placed between the liners. A groundwater
monitoring system Is also 1n place. The leachate. once It has been collected.
1s pumped to a lined lagoon, and then to the treatment system. From the
treatment system, the leachate flows to a NPOES permitted surface stream
discharge.
A detailed file on the leachate characteristics from the landfill Is available
at the facility.
-------
I
-------
il A
-------
ATTACmENT B
PHOTOGRAPH INDEX
-------
ATTAOKIT B
Photograph Index
PC landfill
February 2, 1987
PhotograptMr: Terry tojahn
Photo Description
R1P1 Photo of leachate being pumped Into tanker for shipment to
treatment facility.
R1P2 View of manhole access for leachate collecting jump,
sampling location for PC-LE-001, -002. -003, and -003A. An
active dumping area Is pictured In the background. Note
the monitoring well to the left of the manhole.
R1P3 view of pump house located to the left of the manhole.
R1P4 View of the manhole and discharge station.
RIPS Photo of the discharge station. One vent 1s located to the
right, Inside the dumping area.
R1P6 Additional view of monitoring well, dumping area, and
another vent to the left of the manhole.
-------
Photograph Index
SN Landfill
Februry 3* 1987
Photographer: Terry tojahn
Photo Description
S1P2 View of rainwater puddle near pump house, sample location
SM-LE-004.
S1P4 Photo of pump house. Inside there Is a manhole access to
the collection sump. The samples could not be collected
from the sump due to the presence of a very thick (>1 foot)
oil layer. The steps behind the building lead to the
primary lagoon.
SIPS Photo of leachate discharging Into the primary lagoon.
Samples SM-LE-001, -002, and -003 were collected at this
location before the discharge.
S1P6 An additional view of the discharge.
S1P8 View from the far side of the primary lagoon, looking back
at discharge.
S1P11 Photo of the spillway from the primary to the secondary
lagoon.
S1P13 View across the secondary lagoon from the far side of the
dividing dike. The working face of the landfill can be
seen to the right In the background. The white pipe In the
left background Is part of the aeration treatment system.
This view 1s to the left of the pump house.
-------
Photograph Indox
YD Undflll
February 5. 1987
Photographers: Terry Rojalm/Denlce Taylor
Photo Description
R2P1 View of location where leachate seep discharges to the
primary lagoon.
R2P2 Photo of sample location near leachate discharge point,
samples collected were VO-LE-QOl, -002, and -003.
R2P3 Photo showing sampling location (lower left), flow from the
primary to secondary lagoons, and the pump and pipe for the
aeration treatment.
R2P4 Additional view of lagoons, pump and pipe.
R2P6 View of source of leachate seep. The blue green puddle 1n
the left foreground Is the leachate.
R2P7 Photo of drainage path from leachate seep to primary
lagoon. The distance Is approximately 50-60 feet.
-------
Photograph Index
NY Landfill
February 2. 1987
Photographer: Rob Hartal 1
Photo . Description
01 View of the leachate storage tank.
02 Photo of the Leachate Collection Sump. The leachate enters
the sump from the direction of the upper left hand corner.
03 Photo of the pump control box on the Leachate Collection
Sump.
04 View of the leachate Leak Detection Sump.
OS View of the leachate Leak Detection Sump with the Leachate
Collection Sump and pump control box In the background.
-------
Photograph index
FL Landfill
February 4. 1987
Photographers: Rob MrfcMll/Greg Zli
Photo Description
06 Photo of the Leachate Collection Sump with the pump control
box on right side of sump. The black hose 1s for pumping
the leachate Into the truck that hauls the leachate to the
local wastewater treatment plant.
07 Photo of an apparent landfill cell under construction.
-------
Photograph Index
NC Ludflll
Febrvary 6. 1987
Photographers: Rob Mrfcwll/Greg Zli
Photo Description
09 Photo of the Leachate Collection Sump for the active
portion of the landfill.
10 Photo of the Leachate Collection Sump (one with the lid
open) that serves the active portion of the landfill. The
punp control box Is In the center of the photo. The Leak
Detection Sump 1s to the left of the pump control box. A
storm runoff sump 1s 1n the far left side of the photo.
11 Photo of the Incinerator ash before It 1s spread as dally
cover.
12 View of the Leachate Treatment Basins. (Filters that are
located to left of the basins are not pictured).
13 View of the Leachate Treatment Filters with the Basins In
the background.
14 View of the Leachate Collection Lagoon with 1 surface
aerator operating. The control building Is In the right
background portion of the photo.
15 View of the Leachate Collection Lagoon with 1 of the 2
Leachate Collection Sumps 1n the Inactive portion of the
landfill In the background.
16 Another view of the Leachate Treatment Basins.
17 View of one of the Leachate Collection Sumps In the
Inactive portion of the landfill.
18 Another view of one of the Leachate Collection Sumps In the
Inactive portion of the landfill. Photo was taken from- the
other sump. Leachate collection lagoon Is 1n the right
hand portion of the photo. This photo along with the next
two photos (19 and 20) are a panoramic view of the lagoons.
19 Photo of Leachate Collection Lagoon.
20 Photo of the Leachate Collection Lagoon. The Leachate
Treatment Basin and Filters are In the right hand portion
of the photo.
-------
Pnotograpli Indsx
NC Landfill
Continued
Photo Description
21 View across the Inactive portion of the landfill of the
active portion of the landfill. Access roads and an unused
cell are located between the Inactive and active areas of
the landfill.
22 View of the Inactive portion of the landfill showing the
partial clay cap.
23 View of a pile of tires with the active portion of the
landfill In the background.
-------
ATTACHE*! C
ANALYTICAL REQUIREMENTS AND
LABORATORY INFORMATION
-------
*
G..»..*i.^. Led-.*
AuaJtlfteoj
u Q
6) '
, T5S j
i CO 0; 11) ' JL Pt ^jcuiutxdL kiuL
0
i, L/yytJLA-tyyLt-^—LSJ £^^L^
£P rox, rc<./>, Cj) , ^. yflr
^ */
«K
6J / JJ ^£. >//v^ jy 4# 43. 3 •*
U)iJ.P£, JOO.OH; pti >/& SJ
Ci} i j PL * 4*0/1*25*$** ' ?3
6 &{ *1
PC&s (,) ty
°5 1
S2 xw^ct b) > J fc £P*teus*4*,^ farrr^ JeuchJSS&nvalL jto Sfiti ACRk.
Si
-------
- — "- - — - - fa / Ja*. Ovujo . Co-.
, At.
-------
ATTACWENT 0
SAIVLE DATA
-------
PC-Lff-001, PC-.J6-
0
, 04
sm- cC - oo I y
5m-c6-OoZ /
NO • <_£••>-•••>
TMV-*.
2,
0
M.3
7.25
f*/V*» —
3,
,
.-3
7.S
I -*/?
/ I?-
370
/ 7-0$
^i->%
juiriUaX_
-------
•*•"?-
IO\
noi
a
vd
»OQtOM
/s^.
x/u.
c
Jcuikfcfc^-i-^-.
-------
•w
U
*
I
Q
g
I
£
O
V)
§
i
§
3
HI
O
5
ti*Atf
12-00
titr
?.*>
/f"/
-------
APPENDIX 0
NUS SAMPLING QA/QC PROGRAM
-------
0
EMUS
_J CORPORATION
A Halliburton Company
Superfund
Division
OPERATING
GOXDKLZmS
MANUAL
IM*M<
SAMPLING
4.29
Draft 2
All Division
ftff
1 of 29
0
Activity
RKMPO-Pittiburgh
A"**<— Paul Goldstein
Zone Project Manager
1.0 OBJECTIVE
The objective of theae guideline* ia to provide general reference Infor-
mation on sampling.
2.0 LIHITATIOHS
Thee* guideline* are for information only and are not to take precedence
over the requirement* of project-apecifie plan* for aaapling.
3.0 DETIltlTIOHS
Sampling. The phy*ical collection of a repreaentatlve portion of a popu-
lation, univerae, or environment.
Environmental Sample e. aeually offaita aample* with mid- or low-contaminant
eoncantrationa eueh a* ambient air, etream*. ground water, laachatea,
dl tehee, eoil, and eediment* collected at a dlatance from direct eource* of
contaminant*.
Hasardeu* Sample*. Samplee of "raw" waatee, up to 100 percent by concen-
tration. auch a* thoa* taken from drum*, tank*, and other container*; from
waate pile*, •pill*, or on*ita lagoon* or ditch**; and from contaminated aoll
in tho immediate vicinity of vaat* atorage or apill area*.
Sampling Plan. A d*tail*d plan that cover* th* *ampllng objective* and
atrategy.
4.0
Th**e gaid*lin*» identify th*- sampling equipment, th* eequence of opera-
atlon*, and th*- document* Involved in pnyelcal aampllng at or near uncon-
trolled: h*sardou*-sub*tanc* el tee. Reference 1* mad* to other descriptive or
ln*truetional document* a* appropriate.
4.1 OVERVIEW
Th*** guideline* are applicable to the, phyeical sampling of environmental or
ha«ardeu*-«ub«tanee aample*. The guidollne* cover aampl** of air. radio-
activity. ground and aurfac* w«t*r, eoil*, aediment*. *ludg*e, containerized
wa*t**, and wa*t** that are not containerised.
-------
SAMPUm
"""*"' 4.29
njl -Ltr o
*" 2 of 29
IftaMBM Qra£t j
Sampling haa been called the most important part of site activities before
remedial actions are planned, tt ia axiomatic in sampling and anal/els that
the only true sample ia a TOO percent sample and that the subsequent analyela
can be only as good am the sample. Obvioualy, it ia either physically la-
posaible or undesirable to take all of a Maple eouree. Therefore, only a
representative portion can be taken. Row this aaaple is taken and handled
determines, to a large aeaaure, the quality of the ensuing reeults and their
Interpretation. Zt ia imperative that uniform, standardised procedures and
equipment be used to collect Mmpleo. The provlalon of quality control
aeaaures and documentation Is also eeaential. These are legal as well as
technical requirements.
Saapling in the Superfund prograa ia closely guided by many EPA documents
that originate in seversl offlcee, such aa the Contract Laboratory Prograa/
Sample Management Office Deer's Guide: the Rational Enforcement Xnveeti-
gatlona Center (NEZC) Contractor's Manual and Policiee and Procedures; the
Office of Solid Haste Teet Method* for Evaluating Solid Haatee. Physical/
Chemical Methoda; and Procedures Manual for Ground Hater Monitoring at Solid
waato Disposal Facilities. The BUS Superfund Training Manual also provides a
considerable amount of detailed information about sampling.
Theee guidelinee assume that sampling teams have received prior Inetruction
or formal training in health and Mfety, site operation*, and sampling.
4.2 SAMPLING RESPONSIBILITIES
Project Mnaoers are responsible for ensuring that the project specific sam-
pling procedures are followed, maintaining chain of custody, and determining
that all Mapllng documents have bean completed properly and are accounted
for. Samplers are responsible for collecting aamplee, Initiating chaln-of-
custody forms, traffic reports, and the necessary Maple documents aa re-
quired. The sampling and analyeia coordinator and/or the EPA'a Saaple Man-
agement Office authorised requestor ia responsible for arranging for saapls
bottle deliveries and coordinating the activities of the FIT Office and the
Sample Management Office.
4.3 SAMPLING BQOXPHEHT
Typical equipment used for air and radioactivity Mapling ia summarized in
Table* 4.29-1 aad aampllng equipment for solid or liquid Mmplea Is listed in
Table-4.29-2. Table 4.29-3 preaenta container and preservation requirements
for- samples.
Safety and personnel protection equipments requirements are specified in the
health and Mfety plan. Additional descrlptlona and sketch** of mcst Mfety
and sampling equipment are given in the Superfund Training Manual under the
module* on health and Mfety. sample handling, and monitoring instrument*.
n we *••• !•
-------
SMOtlNQ
4.29
3 of 29
Draft 2
4.4 SAMPtUW MTHOOf
4.4.1 Pivirenmental Samplaa
Air
Xf initial elte ataeapharie hazard mrvaya have baan conducted and levela of
paraonnal pretaetion have baan eatabliahed, eurveya for organic/inorganic
vapors, oxygen eontant, combuatible gaaaa, and radioactivity auat ba re-
paatad to confirm previoua findinga. Thaaa aurvaya ara to ba rapaatad peri-
odical ly, aa apacifiad in tha aampling plan.
Surfaea water
Collaetlng a representative eample froai surface water ia difficult bat not
impoeaible. Saaplea ahould ba collactad naar tha ahora unleaa boata ara
faaalbla and permitted. A avail container or dipper attached to a pole la
uaad to obtain tha aamplao. Samplea from varioua location* and depths
ahould ba eompoeited; otherwise, aaparata aaaplea will have to ba collected.
Approximate sampling pointa should ba identified on a sketch of the water
body. The following procedures) ara uaed:
1. Record available Information for tha pond, atream, or other water
body, such aa ita size, location, depth, and probable eontenta. In
the field logbook, on the- ehain-of-cuatody form, and on the aaaple
log aheet.
2. Take aaaplee near the. shore of the water body and tranafar them to
appropriate bottlaa. See Table 4.29-3.
3. Secure tha lid of each aaaple bottle and attach a label containing
aaapla Identification, lumber, and data. Securely tape the lid to
tha bottle; than data and initial tha tape.
4. Measure tha aaaple radioactivity and record. Zf reedinga exceed 10
aft/hr, notify tha team leader or tha site safety officer
immediately.
5. Carefully pack aaaplaa. caatody-seal tha shipping package and
praparar a. traffic report.
Ground Mater
Monitoring Welle. Figure 4.29-1 ia a typical wall sampling data aheec. Mot
all tha' information shown can ba obtained at all walla. Critical, required
information iaelitdaa
1. wall locatlona
2. Nail radioa or diameter
NWS44MII0tM
-------
SAMPLZHQ
4.29
4 of 29
Draft 2
3. Depth to water level
4. Total well depth
5. Amount of. water in wall
Thia information ehould ba entered In the logbook.
Welle muet be bailed or pumped three to five well volumea before eampllng.
Samplea are taken after tha wall rechargea to Initial water depth. Welle*
that do not recharge within 24 hours will ba aamplad after the well rechergee
to e sufficient depth to provide an adequate volume of sample for analysis.
Care must be taken not to disturb eediment at the bottom of the well when
taking saaplee. The following proceduree are uaed:
1. Neeaura tha watar level in tha wall uaing an N-aeope or other de-
vice and record the elevation et the top of the water surface.
2. Determine the submerged casing volume (atanding watar volume) in
the well from tha following equation:
v • t r^h
where
V • volume
r • radiua
h • atanding water height am determined from .drilling logs and
actual measurement.
for example, a 30-ft drilled well with 5 ft of screen haa a 2-In.
caalng with a nominal inaida diameter of 1.90 in. (4.83 em). The
standing water level haa been determined to be 10 ft or approxi-
mately 305 cm. Therefore, the submerged caalng volume (in cubic
centime term end Utere)
• [3.14(2.42)2]30S
• 5609 cm3 or 5.« 11tare
3. with a manual bailer, remove three to five casing voluaaa of water
from the wall. To avoid disturbing tha aadiaent, do not inaart the
bailer to. tha bottom of tha screen. (Note: If tha caalng aiza
allowa. the wall may ba pumped with e eubmeraible electric pump or
other device until the appropriate volume haa been removed. Do not
4. Whan tha wall haa recharged efficiently, remove enough water to
fill all aaapla bottlem in accordance with Table 4.29-3. Add pre-
eervatlvea where required. Za the. event that recovery time of tha
wall la vary alov (e.g., 24 hoara). attempta to collect aaapiaa
Immediately after bailing or pumping can ba delayed until tha
following day. If tha well haa bam bailed aarly in tha morning.
mafficiaat water may ba atanding In tha wall by tha day'a end to
-------
SAMPLING
4.2»
5 of 29
fffemwOm
Draft 2
p*rait *aaple collection. If th* w*ll ia incapable of producing a
•officiant volua* of aaapl* at any tiaa, take the largoet quantity
available' and record ia th* logbook.
5. Label, tag, and nuaber the eaaple bottle. Tape the lid on securely
and a*rk th* tape with th* data and the collector's initial*.
«. Replace the well cap. Make sure th* well ia readily identifiable
a* th* eource of th* aaaplea.
7. Pack the Maples for ahipping. Attach a cuatody Mai to the ship-
ping package a* described above. Hake cure that traffic report*
and chaln-of-cuetody fora* are properly filled out and encloaed or
attached.
Hydrant* or Puap*d Well*. Sampling froa hydrant* or pumped well* such a*
deaaitlc wail* require* • modified procedure. Th* well aust b* flushed by
running th* water for 5 minute* through tha tap neareat th* well. Take the-
sample froa th* continuously running tap after the S-alnute period. Nor*
detailed procedure* can b* found in Guideline 4.8.
Follow th* stsp* above for entering information, packing, preserving,
labeling, and marking.
Soil*
Environmental soil aaapling 1* generally performed off th* aits. Th* sam-
pler to b* used 1* dependent on soil type, depth of sample desired, and
homogeneity of soil.
For loosely packed earth, th* aeoop*. trowel*, and wait* pile Mmplera de-
scribed above can b* u**d to collect representative sample*. For densely
packed soil* or d**p soil *aapl**,-a coil augar or other technique* may b*'
u*ed.
1. a** • soil auger for deep saaple* (6 to 12 ia.) or • scoop or trowel
for surface aaaplea. Remove debria, rock*, twig*, and vegetation
before collecting 200 to 250 g. Mark th* location with • nuabered
atak* if poMlbl* and locate- aaapl* point*- on a sketch of the site.
2. Transfer 100 to 200 g of the aaaple to a 2SO-al container. Attach a
label, identification number, and tag. Record all required infor-
mation in th*- field logbook and on the amapl* log sheet (am Figure
3. Stor* th* aaapler in a plastic bag until decontaainatlon or
dicpoaal.
NWS44t*U
-------
SAMPLING
4.29
*"•*" o
'*t
6 of 29
•ftanmOM*
Draft 2
4. Tip* th* Ud on tlw Maple bottla Mcurely and **rk th* tap* with
til* dat* and the eaapla collector1* Initial*.
5. Canfally pack th* Maple*. Attach • euatody ••«! to th* shipping
package. Make certain that a traffic report and chain-of-cuatody
fora* are properly filled oat and encloaod or attached.
Sludgea and Sediaenta
Sludge Maple* and eediaenta can usually bo collected by bucket or long-
handled dipper. If the eludgeo or aediaenta are relatively denae, waata
pile aaaplara or triera «ay be aaed.
t. collect at leaat three ••all, equal-•lied Maple* for several
pointa along the sludge or aediaent depoeition area. Zf possible,
•ark the location with a nuaberod ataka and locate Maple pointa en
a aketch of tho aite. Oepoait Maple portion* in a clean, 1/2-gal
«id*»aouth Jar. Carefully atir portlona together Into on*'
eoapoait*.
2. Sodiaenta froa large otreaa*. lake*, and the like *ay be taken with
ir Ponar dredg** froa a boat.
3. Transfer 100 to 200 g of the coapo*lta aludgea froa the 1/2-gal«j«r
to a 230-al Maple bottle. Attach identification label nua&er and
tag. Record all nece**ary inforaation in the field logbook and on
the Maple log eheet.
4. Store the aaapler and jar in a plaatlc bag until decontaainatlon or
diapoaal.
9. Tap* the lid on the eaaple bottle aecarely and a*rk the tap* with
the date aad the Maple collector'* initial*.
6. Peck th* Map!** for shipping. Attach a custody a*al to the •hip-
ping packag*. Nak* certain that a traffic report and chain-of-
coatody fen* are properly filled cat and eneloeed or attached.
4.4.2 H*a«rd
-------
SAMTLZNG
4.29
7 Of 29
Draft 2
ehoald be followed. Added safety precautions, each aa lifelines, an
Druas
Probably the aoet common container at hasardeus waste sitae ia the drua,
which la conetrueted of either aatal or paper. Drua aaaplee should be
obtained through a free opening or through the bung hole whenever poealble,
using the procedure described below. Because druaa say fall structurally,
losing all or part of their contents, caution auat always be exercised whan
it ia neceesary to move drums to gain access to them. The wiaeat course of
action ia to saaple. analyse, and remove the aost accessibis drums before
handling daaagad, tipped, or buried druaa. Remote-controlled bung wrenches
are tha beat tools for opening drums.
Drums must be opened slowly and carefully. If tha drum ia bulging because
of inside preesure or vacuum, special precautions auet be taken in opening
it.
It ia permissible to place disposable aaapling equipment in e drum that wae
aeapled before reseellng it. Separately labeled druaa aay be need aa te-
eeptaclee for contaminated sampling equipment aa long aa compatibility^ of
the western is ensured.
The following proceduree are used to obtain saaplea from druaa:
1. Record any markings, special drua conditions! and type of opening
ia the field logbook, on the sample log aheet, and, later, on the
chain-of•custody form, locate the general area on a sketch of the
eite.
2. Stencil an identifying nuaber on the druaa and record in logbook.
Consult tha sampling plan for identifications.
3. Make certain that the drua ia sat an a fin baae. preferably in a
fully upright poaitlon.
4. Oaing a noasparking bung wrench or a remote-controlled bung remover,
carefully remove tha bung and aet it aaida. Oruaa with top lida
and snap-ring see la aay be opened by carefully reaoving the aeal
and prying off the lid with a nonaparking tool. Set the lid and
snap ring aaida.
S. Carefully insert the sampling tuba (either aatal, glass, or com-
patible- plastic) into the drua) contents. Secure the upper end of
tha tuba with tha thumb or palm and withdraw tha tube. (Rota: If
tha- sample ia not free flowing and ia- contained ia a drum with a
lid, tha sample may be removed with a eleaa scoop or a small
•hovel).
NWS 4*iO •••!••
-------
SAMPLING
4.29
8 of 29
Draft 2
6. Deliver 100 to 250 ml of the aaapla (the eaapling plan will specify
tin amount) to • clean, vide-eouth, 900-al (1-pt) glaeo Maple
jar. If the aaaplo la not free flowing and ia taken through • bung
opening, repeated eaapling aay be aacoeaarjr. Replace the bung or
cover carefully.
7. Place the uaed eeapling tube, along with paper towela or waate rage
ueed to wipe up any apille, into an empty natal barrel for subso-
quent diapoaal. Xf glaea tubing haa -been uaed, it aay be broken
and left inalda the drum being eaapled.
8. Replace the cap on the aaapla jar; label, date, and nuaber the
jar. Record all information on the chain-of-cuetody fora, aaaple
log sheet, aaaple tag, and field logbook. The sample jar uuabere
and da tee maet aatch those recorded on all forma.
9. Secure the aaaple container lid with heavy-duty tape. Date and
sign the tape.
10. Measure the sample for radioactivity. If the meter readinga ex-
ceed 10 aft/hr, notify the eite aanager immediately.
11. Carefully pack saaplea. The finished package will be padlocked or
cuatody-eealed for shipment to the laboratory. The preferred pro-
cedure includea the uae of a cuatody aeal wrapped acroaa filament
tape that ia wrapped around the package at leaat twice. The cua-
tody eeal (paper, plaatie. or metal) ia then folded over and stuck
to Itself so that the only aeeeea to the eaaplea ia by cutting the
filament tape or breaking the eeal to unwrap the tape. The seal
ia eigned before the package ia shipped.
12. Complete the appropriate traffic report. Drum, eaaplea are always
coneidered to be hlgh-haaard eamplee.
More detailed proeadurea are provided in Guideline 4.28 on drum opening and
•pllng.
Tanka
Tha> sampling of tanka ia aiailar to the sampling of druma. Techniquoe of
sampling are the- eeme, except eaapling equipment aay need to be longer to
give a repreaeatative sample of deep tanka.
1. Record the tank'a condition, aarkinga, opening or velve typee, and
approximate eiae in gallona ia the field logbook, on the chain-of.
euatody form, and on the sample log eheet. Note the tank location
oa the eite aketch.
2. Attach em identification number to the tank ualag a stencil or
weatherproof tag. number succeeding tanka consecutively. Record
the nuabera ia the logbook.
•US Ml* •••!••
-------
SAMPLING
4.39
9 of 29
n
raft 2
3. Oataraine whether the tank contanta art atratifled by inaerting a
long plaatic or flaaa tuba aaapler, withdrawing it, and examining
tha tuba con ten ta.
4. Saaplaa. of atratlflad oontanta can ba taken with a boab or weighted
bottle aaaplar at aach level. * aagaantad tuba aaaplar may alao be
uaed if available. Deliver aaaplar contanta, if atratlfied. to
aaparata 300-el giaaa aaapla jara. otherwiae. a aingle aaapie will
auffica.
5. Secure tha jar lid and label, data, and number tha jar aa above.
Securely tapa the lid to the jar; date and Initial the tape.
6. Neaaure tha aaapla radioactivity and record. Notify the aita man-
ager if readinga exceed 10 aft/hr.
7. Carefully pack aaaplaa. Cuetody-eeal the ahipping package aa da-
acribad pravloualy.
8. Clean any nondiapoaable aaapling equipaent and diapoea of cleaning
aolventa and aatariala in a metal drum, wipe up any apilla and
plaea rage or paper tovela in the metal drum for later dlapoael.
9. Coaplete a high-hazard traffic report.
Solid Waata Pilaa
Pilea of waata uaually vary in aiza and eoapoaitlon. dee acoopa or trovela
to obtain email diacreta aaaplea of hoaogeneoue pilaa. Layered (nenhoao-
geneoua) pilea require the uae of tube aaaplara or trlara to obtain croaa-
aectlonal aaaplaa.
1. Collact aaall, aqual portiona of the waate froa aeveral pointa at
or near the anrfaee of the. pile. Oaa numbered atakea. if poaaible,
to aark the aaapling loeationa and locate aaapling pointa on the
alto aketch.
2. Collect a weata aaapie totaling 100 to 200 g and place it in a
290-al giaaa container. Attach a label, identification number, and
tag. Record all the required information in the field logbook and
on the aaapie log aheet.
3. Store the. aaapling tool in a plaatic bag until decontamination or
dlapoaal.
4. Tapa tha lid on the aaapie bottle aecurely and aark tha tapa with
tha date and the- aaapla collector*a inltiala.
5. Pack aaaplaa for ahipping. Attach • coatody aaal to the ahipping
package. Make aura that tha traffic raport and the- chaia-of-
cuatody form are properly filled oat and aacloeed or attached.
NWS Mia ••••••
-------
SAMPLING
4.29
10 of 29
Draft 2
For layarad, nonhoaogansous pilaa, v-ln Mapi-r., aaapling triars, or waata
pila saaplara mat ba uMd to aequira . croaa-aaction of tha pila. tha
basic atapa ara 11atad balow.
1. tnaart a aaaplar into the pila at a 0- to 49-dagraa angla froa tha
horizontal to ainiaiza apliiaga.
2. Rotata tha aaaplar onoa or twica to cut a eora of waata aatsrial.
Rotata tha grain aaaplar innar tuba to tha opan position and than
ahaka tha aaaplar a fav tloao to allow tha aatarlal to sntar tha
opan allta.
3. Nova tha aaaplar Into position with alota upward (grain aaaplar
eloaod) and slowly withdraw it froa tha pila.
4. Tranafar 100 to 200 g of aaapla into a 290-al eontainar with tha aid
of a apatula or bruah. Attach a labal idantiflcatlon nuabar and
tag. Racord all nacsssary information in tha fiald logbook and on
tha aaaplo log shaat.
5. Storo tha aaaplar in a plaatie bag until dacontaainatlon or
diapoaal.
«. Tapa tha lid on tha saapla bottla sacuraly and aark tha tapa with
tha data and tha aaapla eollaetor'a initials.
7. Pack aaaplaa for ahlpping. Attach a- cuatody saal to tha shipping
packaga. Naka cartaln that tha traffic raport and chain-of-custody
fora ara proporly (Iliad out and ancloaod or attachad.
Soila
Cuidolinaa for collaeting hasardoua aoll aaaplaa ara tha aaaa aa thoaa for
eollacting anvlronaantal soil aaaplaa.
Sludgaa and Sadlaanta
Guidalinaa for eollacting hasardoua aludga and sadiaant aaaplaa ara tha aaaa
aa. thoaa for collaeting anvironaantal aludga and aadiaant aaapiaa.
4.S SAMPLING OOCDM»TS AND RECORDS
Thia> aaction idantlfiaa tho varioaa docuaanta, forma, labala, and taga that
saapling parsoanal wiU ba rsquirad to uaa in tha fiald. Moat of tha forms
and' labala hawa baan atandardisad, thna providing for eonaistaney of
dooaaantation.
a Fiald logbook(a)
a- Plaid data racorda
- Saapla log ahaat
• Tabla of contanta for aaaplo log ahaat notabook
• Othar
MWS44IS •••!••
-------
SAMPLING
*""*"' 4.29
nnjjn 0
"* 11 of 29
•ItaniMO.*. Draft 2
label*
- Saapla Identification label
• traffic-report label
• Staple Identification tag
e Chain-of-cuatody fora
e Traffic report*
• Organic
• Inorganic
• High hazard
e Custody aeal
There are additional form* of documentation that nay need to be maintained
that are not atandard in fonat. Theee ferae are diacuaeed separately. De-
tailed description* of each of the fora* are provided in the Superfund Train-
ing Manual.
4.S.I field Logbook
A field logbook ia a bound notebook with numbered page* in which all per-
tinent inforaation about a field investigation (data, observations, phone
call*, etc.) 1* entered, one field logbook is Maintained per site. This
logbook 1* issued by the Regional Project Manager (or hi* doeignoe) to-the
Project Manager for the life of the project. In addition, logbook* nay be
Issued to othor field personnel (including those collecting aaapla*). The
doeuMnt custodian numbers all logbooks and record* the transfer of other
logbook* to individual* designated by the Regional Project Manager. All
project logbook* are to be turned over to the docuaant custodian and to a
central file at the completion of the particular field activity.
4.S.2 Field Data Record*
Field data record* aay include sample log sheets, table* of contents for
•ample log sheet notebook*, and any othor data record* that the Project Man-
agor or task leader aay designate for uee ia field data collection. The
exact fora* used win depend on the scope of the project and the situations
preeented.
4.5.3 Sample Log Shoot
A sample log sheet ia a notebook page a.5 by 11 in. that la used to record
specif1*4 type* of data while sampling, figure 4.29-2 ia an example of a
saaplev log sheet. The data recorded on these sheet*, is useful in describing
the- wast* aoureo aad the sample (if obtained) a* well a* pointing out any
problea* encountered daring sampling. Blank sample log sheets aay bo
obtained from the document custodian; these fora* are not controlled
docuaanta.
NWS •«•*•! •«•»
-------
SAwum
*"** 4.29
OOTM* Q
"* 12 of 29
«"— - o«« a
4.S.4 Table of Contente for Saaple Log Shoot Kotebook
The table of conto&ta for* ia • notebook peg* 8.3 bjr 11 in. on which ontriee
an aada aa the coapleted aaoplo 109 oheota are placed In • thru-tin?
binder. Figure 4.29-3 ia aa exaaplo of tho table of content* fen. Thia
fora facilltatee quick reference to tho oeaple 109 aheota contained in the
notebook and r*Min< in th« notebook «t all tiMO. Blank tabu of contents
fonu >ay be obtained from the docuaent ciutodiair. Thoae Cone en not
controlled doeuaente end therefore do not bear a eequential eerial nuaber.
4.5.S Ubelinq of Saaplee
OTIS Sample Label
Tho ea*plo label !• a 2- by 4-in. white label with black lettering end an ad-
heeive becking. Figure 4.29-4 ia ea example of an MOS eaaple Identification
label. Blank label* eay bo obtained froa tho oocuaent cuatodian when
needed. Theeo labela are controlled docuaonta.
A eeapla label auat be attached to each bottle that eontaine a eaaple. Tho
label euat be attached to tho bottle Juat befon patting tho eaaple into tho
bottle. Xn addition, tho label ehould bo cowered with clear plaatie tape to
enaure that it dooa not peel off or becoao daaagod. Tho BUS aaaple nuaber ia
tho nuaber aeelgnod to tho weeto eoureo- under inepeetion and any aeapleo
taken froa It.
traffic Report Label
The traffic report label ie a oaall prenuaberod white label with black let-
tering and an adheeivo backing. Figaro 4.29-9 provideo exaaplee of Mverai
traffic report labela. Thia label auat bo attached to the appropriate eaa-
plo bottle before chipping it to tho dooignatod laboratory. Traffic report
labela eoao attached to tho traffic reporta. Any onuaod labela auat be re-
turned to the docuaaat cuatodian and eventually to 0V a Soaplo Nanagoaeat
office.
Tho nuaber which appoara an a traffic nport label ia the eeao nuaber that
appeara in tho upper left-hand corner of the traffic report. In addition to
tho. nuaber, each labol eontaina a deaignatlon aa to the typo of analyaia to
bo perforated (VOA, eta.) or aa- to proaorvation of the aaaplo (preaervod, ua-
preeerved, etc.). Ho additional intonation need be entered an tho label.
-------
SAMflXNB
4.29
13 of 29
Draft 2
4.3.6 aaaalo Identification Tag
aaapla identification tag ia a heavy paper tag (6 by 2.3 in.) with a wire
faatener. Xt ia attached to the top of a aaaple bottle before ahipping. An
example of a aaaple identification tag la preaeated in Figure 4.29-6. Theee
tags, together with tha NDS aaaple labela, serve to identify the aaaple.
Blank tags aay be obtained froa the docuaent cuatodian when needed. Theae
tags are controlled docuaenta.
4.3.7 Chain-of-CBatody Fora
The chain-of-cuatody fora (8.5 by 11 ia.) accompanist a sample or group of
saaplea aa it ia tranaferred froa person to person. Figure 4.29-7 ia an
exaapla of a chaia-of-cuetody fora. Thia fora docuaenta cuetody transfer
froa person to person. The chaln-of-cuetody fora ia a controlled docuaent.
Blank foraa aay be obtained froa the docuaent cuatodian when needed.
4.5.8 Traffic Reporta
A traffic report ia a preprinted, prenuabered fora (8.3 by 11 in.) that ia
provided by the EPA* a Saaple Management Office. Theae foraa are part of the
CPA'a aaaple-tracking eyataa and are uaed to trace the ahlpaent of aaaplea
for laboratory analyaia. Presently, theeo foraa are for three typea ofi
saaplea: organiea, inorganico, and high hazard (see Figures 4.29-8. 4.29-9.
and 4.29-10, respectively). The organiea and Inorganica foraa are-uaed to
docuaent and Identify the collection of low- and aediua-concentratlon aaaplea
for organic and inorganic analyela; the high-hasard fora la for high-
concentration eaaplee. Traffic reporta are controlled documents that are
maintained by the docuaent cuetodian.
The person doing the eaapling coapletee a traffic report for each eaaple
that ia to be ahlpped for laboratory analyele. Theae foraa are simple
enough and the iaatmctiona sufficiently clear that a detailed procedure for
filling than out ia not warranted.
Saapllng personnel ahould uae tha proper traffic report fora for each eaaple
collected, environmental aaaplaa aust alwayo bo subaitted on the regular
organiea or inorganlea traffic report, while aoat haaardoua waota saaplea
require.^ Che- uae of tha high-hasard traffic report. The regular traffic re-
port foraa- ask tho> aaapler to indicate low or aaditav concentration. Envl-
ronaontal saaplea (ground water, strseaa. offsite ditehee, apringa. or
wella, aa well aa offaite aoil aaaplaa) era claaolfled aa being of low con-
centration. The aoat likely aediua-concentratlon eoureea are leaehate col-
lection pools, onolto iapoundaents, aad onaita ditcheo. Soils- froa spoil
banks or adjacent to oasite atorage areas are also likely to have a aadiua
concentration of poliutanta. Site eaapling plans should be used aa a guide
in assessing likely oaaditiono.
NWS 44»e IS •! M
-------
SubiKt
SAMPLING
Number
Rcvtwon
4.29
0
'•*
14 of 29
6««,,..0... OMft 2
4.5.9 Cuatody Seal
A custody seal is a 1- by 3-In. white paper label with black lettering on an
adhesive backing. Figure 4.29-11 is an example of a custody seal. The
custody seal is part of the chain-of-custody process and is used to prevent
tampering with samples after they have been collected in the field. Custody
seals are provided by the Sampling Management Office and are distributed by
the document custodian on an as-needed basis.
4.5.10 Nonstandard Documentation
Shipping Documents
A shipping document will have to be completed for each shipment of samples.
These forms will be provided by the carrier at the time of shipments. The
form should be completed as directed and should include the appropriate sam-
ple identification numbers {NUS sample source number and traffic report num-
ber). An example of a typical shipping fora is provided in Figure 4.29-12.
This form also provides certification to the carrier that the samples are
identified, packaged, and presented for shipment in accordance with U.S.
Department of Transportation regulations.
Photographs
When movies, slides, or photographs are taken of a site or any monitoring
location, they are numbered to correspond to logbook entries. The name of
the photographer, date, time, site location, site description, and weather
conditions are entered in the logbook as the photographs are taken. A
aeries entry nay be used for rapid-sequence photographs. The photographer
is not required to record the aperture settings and shutter speeds for
photographs taken within the normal automatic exposure range. However,
special lenses, films, filters, and other image-enhancement techniques must
be noted in the logbook. If possible, such techniques should be avoided,
since they can adversely affect the admissibillty of photographs as evi-
dence. Chain-of-custody procedures depend upon the subject matter, type of
film, and the processing it requires. Film used for aerial photography,
confidential information, or criminal investigations require chaln-of-
cuatody procedures. Adequate logbook notations and receipts may be used to
account for routine film processing. Once developed, the slides or photo-
graphic print* shall be serially numbered and labeled according to the log-
book descriptions.
NUI •••••( ««•!
-------
SMOtXMG
4.29
19 Of 29
Draft 2
Table 4.29-1. Inatrasantation far Air Monitor ing
Racard
Direct Reading
Ziu
nt
Collection Madia
Explosive
ataosphere
Oxygen-de t i eient
ataosphere
Toxic ataosphare
Coabuatlble gaa
indicator
oxygen seter
Photoloniiation
MSA-2A
K3A-245R
mm-px-ioi ,
Not uaed
Hot used
Saapllng puape
in
Radloaetivity
d«t«etor, flaa*
loni««tlon d«-
toetor with 91•
chroMtography
option, oolor1-
Mtrlc tubes
Radiation survey
•eters (Geiger-
ftaeller), pas-
sive eonltors
cvA-Century,
OVA 108,
Oraoer,
Bendlx.
Cberline.
vietoreea
conjunction with
gss chroaato-
graph. absorption
tubes, filters,
ispingera
ReslMters,
badges
HUB «••••! •!••
-------
SAHPLXHO
4.29
MOTMN Q
16 of 39
"li^*0" Draft 2
Table 4.29-2. Solid and Liquid Sampling Equipment
Saaplar
Applications
Limitations
Plaatic*
Glass tubee*
Pustpa, bailara Walla
Liquids, alurriaa
Pond (dip)
ssfplor*
Manual hand poop Liquids
Weighted bettla Liquids
aaapler
Liquids, sludges
Bucks ta
Grain aamplsr
Straama, ponds
Granular aolida
Sampling trisr Solids
Trowol/acoop/ SolIda, soil
apoon*
wisk pile soapier Loess solids
Soil auger
(manual)
Soil dsapar than
3 to 4 in.
Not for waatae containing katonaa,
nltrobansana, diosthylforaaaida,
sssltyl oxida, tatrahydrofuran. or
•any cession aolventa auch aa
aeotens.
Not for waataa containing hydro-
fluoric acid and concentrated
alkali solutions.
Pump say be uaed for preclaanlng
well. Power or gaa aourcee re-
quired. Bailers are slower than
pnatps, require no tubing.
Cannot be used to collect aaaplas
beyond 12 ft.
Requires Urge aaounts of disposable
tubing; cannot be used when tubing
is not compatible with astarla1.
Difficult to use with very viacoua
liquids. Exterior of aaepla
bottle is exposed to hazardous
•atariala.
Rsstricted to onshore aaspllng.
Liaited application for aaspllng
s»ist and atlcky solids with a
diaswter of 1/4 in.
Nay incur difficulty in retaining
core- aaapla of very dry granular
•atarlala during saapling.
Not applicable to aaspling dssper
than 3 la. Difficult to obtain
reproducible- sass of sasiplee.
Not applicable to aaapllng solid
wests* with dimensions grsatsr
than half ths dlaaster of the
aaaipling tubs.
Doss not collect undisturbed core
aasjple.
mdsd dsvices.
-------
SAMPLING
4.29
17 of 29
Table 4.29-3. Container and Preeervation Requirement*
Typ* of
Sanpla*
Concentration
Sanpla
Container
sanpl*
Sia*
Preaervativea
GC and GC/NS
organiea
Extractablea
VOAa
Inorganic*
General
cheaiiatry
COD/TOG
Cyanide
Oil and greaee
Phonola
Sulfidea
Low
Median and High
Low
Medina
High
Liquid*
1/2 gal glaaa
40-«1 glaaa
ampule
8-oa glaaa
1-liter
polyethylene
8-08 glaaa
8-08 glaaa
1-liter
polyethylene
1-liter
polyethylene
1/2-11tar
polyethylene
1-11ter
gleaa
1-liter
polyethylene
1/2-liter
glaaa
aoila/aolida
1 gal
80 nl
4 to 6 oa
1 liter6
4 oa
4 08
1 liter
0.9 liter
0.9 liter
1.0 liter
1.0 liter
0.5 liter
Ice
ice
None
NIZCe
None
Nona
None
H2S04 to
NaOR To pH
i12
H2sb4 to
1 g/llter of
copper
•ulfate
H3P04 to
P" <*
2-al of 2N line
acetate
solution/liter
GC and OC/NS
organiea
Inorganic*
Low
Medial
High
tow
Media
High
8-08 glaaa
4-08 glaaa
8-08 glaaa
4-08 glaaa
4-08 glaaa
8-08 glaa*
oa
08
oa
08e
08
oa
None
None
None
NSXC6
Rone-
None
•GC « gas chrosatographr; W - aaaa apeotroaeopy; CDO/TOC • CheaUcal Oxygen
Oeaand/total Organic Carbon.
^Low • aaaple ooataiaa laaa than 10 ppn of any aingle oantaaUnant; aadloai •
aaapla contalaa between 10 ppa and 19 percent of any one coataninaat; high
aanpla contains greater than 19 percent of any on* contaminant.
^Sea HCZC reojuirenenta in MB2C Denver1 a tnforeaaant CoHaidaratlona for
Kveluatlona of Onci
April 1980.
tte Diapoaal Sitea by Centractora.
Mwa 44te ii •« ••
-------
SAM
4.2» 18 of 29
""""•* o °^0ra£t 2
Wall-Monitoring Data Shtat
vaata Sita Naaa Aaalyaa fen
Waata Sita locatiea
H.11 I.D.i _., „ .,
""P1** -
Data aad Tlaa _
SaaBla I.O.I ....
Wall Oaaffe
Hatar Oaotft
Caaiao SiM
Vbluaa Ballad
p^rtia^-M W44C
Daoch Saavlad ^ _^__
Saayla Nachod
•alia*
fraaaun-
Otbar
•MMmaloa Hachad _ ______
m^^el—
Fi«un 4.2§-l. Exaapla- of waU^oaitaring Data Shaat
NWCMtM •••!»
-------
MNttZW
4.39
of 29
Draft 2
•US
iSL
Mf*******.
^^^^^^^" '9^~
ca=i. §
0«
a«
a<
IM. QM Q<
Li.
a-o
«M a<
4.29-2. Ixupl« of 3««pU bog SlM«t
MUI *••••! t«M
-------
3AHP1IHG
4.29
20 of
Draft 2
rigor* 4.29-3. KxupU of fatal* of Contents for Supi* Log Notebook
MM* «•!• •••«••
-------
SMVLXN6
4.29
21 ot 29
Draft 2
SAMFLC*
Cflcm
4.29.4. Bxupla of NOS 3««pl« Latel
-------
SAMPLIM
4.29
0
22 o« 29
INmw B—
Draft 2
* 1463
(EtftVQAI
1104 .Tol
11S4
ri«on 4.29-5. KxuplM of tn traffic Report Label*
MIM MI* ii
-------
SMPLZIW
4.2t
23 of 2*
Draft 2
aTATtOMMOu
MOMM/ OAT/TCAM:
STAnOMWOCAnONi
1!
1
*
aAM^uwa laMwATUMaais
I
m
i
i
i
i
s
NUS CORPORATION
REM/FIT PROJECT
TOM
4.29-4. cxaapla of saapia ZdMttiCteaUon Ta«
-------
VUS CORPORA JlOt
SUPfafUNOOMSIOt
MOJtCfNOJ
1
•AMMCM |IIOIHlUM|i
WIIQM
HO
OAII
M IMMMMMO •VltMUUtUl
'MUMOUMMiO »W (ilQilAlS
•W4M
•Mt «*MM
CHAIN Of CUSTODY afCOHO\
AfM/fIT PHOJfCrt
lOi^Mtu*
MCIIVIO •¥ HKINAIUIIf I.
•IMMIIC
M1IMOUIMJOIV ItlOIUIUU I.
OA1I/TMU IMMAMS:
•AII/tlMf.
MCIIVIO IV |«M*UiruM|:
w •-
•
-------
SAMPLING
4.29
25 of 29
Draft 2
(Z)
-------
SAMPLING
4.29
26 of 29
IffwawOw
Draft 2
'MA 91? i-
SiM
1U9106 -T-h
roe
• •N
MA910S -T-kJ
t MA91Q6 -
Pigox* 4.29»9. Cxupl* of Znorfanies Traffic Mport
-------
-«.
4.29
Trjjn o
27 of 29
°**0r«ft 2
—Ol
Plgnr* 4.29-10. Cxupl* eC
Traffic Report
-------
SANPtZMO
4.29
NWBH Q
'"'* 28 o« 29
•!•••" °*IBOra ft 2
Nt-wi^
CUSTODY SEAL
I 5at«
Signatur*
rt«an 4.29-H. Swap!* of BR ehaiA-of-Cutedf
NIM44M •*•«••
-------
i
i
it
»•.
i •
• ••
• i
i*
it
it
*i
• i •
• i
it
• •
c •
• f
• I.
• I
I •
• •
ret
IM
•If MOTU IMtfNH KAMI
•-• •>
UAIM
IOAIS
COM
II-
U-M
U-
COMAW*
MC
I
1
••mi!
famnlMMlto
f
b01«0*®im MIC (Item rum IIJI
«w I-M
Plqura 4.29-12.
of SMPU Shipping Ooeua«nt
-------
APPENDIX E
NUS HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN
-------
TASK-SPECIFIC HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN
FOR
LEACHATE SAMPLING OF MUNICIPAL LANDFILLS
UNDER
RCRA WORK ASSIGNMENT NO. *
FOR
VAN DAL SITE, DURANGO, COLORADO
SHORT MOUNTAIN SITE, GO5HEN, OREGON
PORTAGE COUNTY LANDFILL, STEVEN'S POINT, WISCONSIN
NUS PROJECT NO. Y950
-------
Project Name i
Attrttt * Y Project Mo.
Scop* of Work and Purpose of Visit:
sita Visit Personnel;
Responsibility
(Personnel must meet training aad medical requirements)
(Medical sheets attached)
other Contacts
Phone Hos»
l€ (
-------
American Red Cross
First Aid
NUMBEXS
Police
Fin Depameflt
Doctor
Poison Control Center
tfjt.
Jf a u»«.|i*-
9ITES Animal Bites - Thoroughly w«ah the wound with
soap and water Fluin cne ares with runmoi water and apply a
seenie dressing. Immobilize tlfeeted PAR untii the vicnm ha*
been attended bv a physician. See thai ch« aaimal it kept
ii.v and in ^uaraaaae Obtain name aad address of the owner
.11 rr.e aiumai.
l-secr 3ites . Remove 'mager ' if preseat. Keep affected pan
aown below the level of the near*. Apply ice bag. For minor
bites aad sung* apply toothing loaoo*. such a* calamme.
BURNS AND SCALDS Minor Burn* - DO NOT
APPLY VASELINE OR GREASE OF AMY KIND. Apply cold
water application* until pain subsides. Cover with a dry. icenie
game drawing. Do nor break blunn or remove cuaue. Seek
medical amntwa.
Severe Burn* . DO oot remove adhered parade* of clothing. Do
not applv ice or immerse in cold water . Da aoc apply ointment.
greaae or vaseline. Cover buna with chick stenie dressing*.
Keep burned fen ar lets elevated. Seek medical attention
uafflediauly
Chemical Buna . Wain away the chemical soaked clothing
with large amounts M water Remote vtcnm i chemical soaked
doming If dry lune. arush away before flushing. Apply itcnie
dressing and seec medical attention.
CRAMPS Symptom* . Craapa ia mueclei of abdomen and
extremities. Heat exnaiutun may also be present.
Treatment • Same ai far heat eihamnoa.
CUTS Apply pressure with sterile geute dresaing. aad
elevate the area uanl bleediag itopa. Apply a baada«e and seek
medical attention.
EYES PoreiatiObieca • Keep the ncam from rubbing hia
hit eve. Fluaa the eye with water. If flushing nib a remove
the obtect. apply a dry . protective dnaaiof aad couuli a
physician.
Chemicala • Flood the eye ihoroughly via water fiw I) minute*.
Caver the eye with a dry pad and seek medical atteaooa.
FAINTING Keea tte vieaai lyinff dava.
right docking. If vkom VOOUBI. rail him onto hu tide or ran
hi* head to the side. If aecenary wipe out bia mouth. Maintain
an open airway. Bathe hi* face gently with cool water. Cain*
recovery a prompt, tees medical atmr.en.
FRACTURES Oerermirv of an tniwred pan uuallv
mean* at'racnre ii fracrjre §s luspectsd. •ftiPt -se ?trr 1-"
NOT ATTEMPT TO MOVE INJUSSD ?ES*-:v i«« T.«..i.
airentton ur..T.eoia(e:v
FROSTBITE Symptom* • Just before frostbite occur*
skin may be flushed, then cnange to white or iravisn-veilow
Paia may be felt early then lubside*. Blisters may appear.
affected pair reel* very cold and numb.
Treatment. 3^, vtcam indoors, caver the froten area, provide
extra clothing and blanket*. Rewarm troien area qui»h av
immenioa in warm water--NOT HOT WATER. 00 NOT RL'3
THE PART. Seek medical attention immediately.
HEAT EXHAUSTION Caused by exposure to heat -
either sun or indoor*. Symptom* • Near normal body temp-
erature. Skin i* pale and clammy. Profue iweaong. oredaes*.
weaanea*. headache, perhapa cramp*, oaiuea. duaneu. aad
poaaible fiunong. i
Treatment . Keep m lying pennon and raiae victim's feet.
Loosen clocking, apply cool wet clothe. Ifcooacioiu. give sip* af
sale water (1 leaspoco of salt per |ia*a) over a penod of ooe hour
If vomung. ocean, dacoannue me salt water. Seek medical
i immediately
SUNSTROKE Symptom* . Body temoenrare is high
(106degree* For higher). Skin ia hoc. red. aad dry PuUe is
rapid and strong. Victim may be unconscious.
Treatment . Ken victim in lying pooiooa with head elevated.
Remove clothing aad repeatedly sponge me bare tkia with cool
water or rubome akohoi. Seek medical aneaaoa immediately
POISONING Call the poawa comrol center for inairuc-
can. If vtcom become unconscious, keep the
If breaching stop* give arafkui reapintua. bv
breaching. Call an emergency sejuad at soon a*
airway epea.
POISON IVY Remove rnnminin*tfd clothing: *uh ail
UBimii area* thoroughly with soap and water followed by
rohhiag alcohol. If mahia mild, apply calamme or other soothing
If a seven reacaon ocain. seek medical attention.
PUNCTURE WOUNDS If paacmn wound ia deeper
than son surface, seek medical anennoa. Sennu* infection eta
SPRAINS EJevate mmred put ud apply ice bag or cold
pack*. DO NOT SOAK OK HOT WATER. If pain aad iwellmg
persist, ices medical attention.
UNCONSCIOUSNESS Never attempt :o |i«e *nv
•n:nj tv .•sou:.1). Keep victim Iving flat, maintain open 4ir«..
.( ;U.T. .j-..-: i.-ji;.1:. ( p.-otide uti/icial respiration 51. -.^.-
-------
APPENDIX A
EMERGENCY PHYSICIAN ACCESS PUN
NUS CORPORATION
i VC'O-v"-aC".'CHgqiSAv 9 00 AM -;COa.M
Dial the (412) 648-3240 numb«r When answcrid statt that:
{') vou are cailmg from NUS Corooration;
.1) :nu nan emergency cail.
3rogram jtarf will be alerted how to contact the onysician designated to provide emergency
coverage on :nat day Codec calls will be acceoted.
3 SVENINGS. W6EK-6NPS 1 HOLIDAYS:
Dial the (412) 648-3240 number. An operator from the answering service will answer the
telephone. Do the following.
11) tell the ooerator that you are calling from NUS Corporation
v 2) tell tne operator that inn it an emergency call
(3) give her vour name
!3240 number and *oilew *re
procedures in A or 8 as appropriate.
-------
Emergency Information!
Type
Police
Ambulance
Hospital
Rescue
Poison Control center
CHSS
Site Manager
HSM
Hospital Haute fAttach Mao)
va
Haai
Phone Moa.
\UQ O
I.-4-
faa 4«
A. «k«
g* ? r'yv **
^ ^*A IH
-------
Police
Aabuianca
Hospital
Hescua Sarvica/Pl4£
Poison Control Cantar
CESS
Sita Managar
HSU
S H
Kama
via*. A
c.
Hospital Souta Attach Man>
Phone Mea.
-------
".T.errsrcv Irfferaation;
Police
Hospital
Rescutt s«rvic«
Poison Control C«nt«r
CHSS
Situ Manager
HSM
Hoanital gouca f AttactL MaoV
Nama
Phone ?foa.
-------
site Background/Overall Information;
S M
PC
£.0.6 a <
Pthi
iU£j
-------
Hatard Assessment:
A
VUc.
a»idl buckt
standard Operating Procadurea (!.•.» btsic hygi«n«, buddy
sy»taa, no oral contact with any articl«« wh«a working on cite,
etc.)
other
YYVUJ
-------
PPE Requirements
Miniimun - Steel toe/shank shoes or boots, standard field
clothes, (If -hard hats and safety glasses not worn indicate
why).
Other
£^
/ Si
ppg selection Criteria
T?a
PPE
(if
Monitorino EouloMRt and calibration Information
-------
Monitoring Equipment Selection Criteria*.
I • A
/ <*l p
U^L
U**~* Qu.finstjf
Action t.»vai« for Upgrading of PPB and/or Sit« withdrawal*
Oi
-
lacidaat topert. Sit« tef*ty follow-Up tepertJ Sita KapArill b«
-------
APPENDIX F
S3 - ANALYTICAL RESULTS REPORT FOR COLLECTED LEACHATES INCLUDING QA/QC DATA
-------
Inc.
ANALYTICAL DATA REPORT - APPENDIX IX ANALYSES
TMk 02 (Prime EPA Contract No. 68-01-7310)
Revised Final Report
S-CUBED Reference No. 31089-02
S-CUBED Document No. SSS-R-87-8629
Prepared for.
NUS Corporation
Park West Two
Cliff Mine Road
PltUburg, PA 15275
Approved by:
Gregory R. Swanson
Subcontract Technical Manager
April 20,1987
P. O. Box 1620, La Jotta. California 92038-1620
(619) 4534060
-------
SSS-R-a7-6629
TABLE OP CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
2.0 ANALYTICAL METHODS 2
Table 2.1 Standard Analytical Procedures 3-4
Table 2.2 Analyte List 5-10
3.0 ANALYTICAL RESULTS 11
Table 3.1 GC Data Summary • All Compounds Detected 11
Table 3.2 GC/MS Data Summary • Volatile Compounds Detected 12
Table 3.3 GC/MS Data Summary • Semivolatile Compounds Detected 13
Table 3.4 Analytical Data Summary - Metal Analysis 14
4.0 QA/QC SAMPLE RESULTS .*.... 15
Table 4.1 QC Results - QC Duplicate Analyses .....16
Table 4.2 QC Results - VOA Duplicate Analysis 17
Table 4.3 QC Results - Semivolatile Duplicate Analysis. 18-19
Table 4.4 QC Results • Inorganics - Duplicate Analyses 20
Table 4.5 QC Results - Spike/Matrix Spike Duplicate
Recovery • Organic Analyses 21
Table 4.6 QC Results - Spike/Matrix Spike Duplicate
Recovery Inorganic Analyses 22
Table 4.7 QC Results • Surrogate Percent Recovery 23
5.0 ANALYTICAL DISCUSSION 24
5.1 Appendix IX Volatile and Semivolatile GC/MS Analyses 24
5.1.1 Volatile Appendix IX Analysis 24
5.1.2 Semivdatile Appendix « Analysis 25
5.1.2 Analytical Review 26
5.1.4 Dloxin Screening 27
&2 Metals Analysis 27
S-CUBED DMaton of Maxwtfl LaOoratorm, Inc.
-------
SSS-R-87-8629
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Twenty-two samples were submitted by NUS to S-CUBED for analysis. Of these, 20
were aqueous samples for Appendix IX parameters and two were soil/solid samples for
analysis of chlorinated dibenzodioxins/dibenzofurans only. The samples were received
in four shipments and were identified as follows:
Date Received S-CUBED Control No. NUS Identification
2/03/87 185-1 PC-LE-001
185-2 PC-LE-002
185-3 PC-LE-003
18S-3(DUP) PC-LE-003A (OUP)
185-4 NY-LS-01
185-5 NY-LE-Q2
1854 NY-LE-03
185-7 NY-ASHOT
2/05/87 188-1 FL-LE41
188-2 FL-LE-02
188-3 FL-LE-03
188-4 SM-LE001
1884 SM-LE-002
1884 SM4£403
2/06/87 191-1 VD-LE-000
191-2 VO-LE-001
191-3 VD-LEO02
191-4 VD4£-003
2/10/87 194-1 NC4E-01
1944 NC^E-02
1944 N&LE03
194-4 NC4JE-01A (MS)
1944 NC-ASH-01"
•denotaa soil/solid sample
Samples for dioxin analysis were sent to Battelle-Columbus Laboratories.
Standard S-CUBED laboratory cnain-of-custody procedures were followed, beginning
at the time of sample receipt. While awaiting analysis, all samples were stored in a
walk-in refrigerator at 4* C.
S-CUB6O OtvWon of Maxwell Laboratories, ire.
-------
SSS-R-87-8629
2.0 ANALYTICAL METHODS
The standard analytical procedures followed for the analysis for the analysis of the
samples were primarily SW-6461 method as listed in Table 2.1. The exceptions are
water methods2 for the determination of fluoride (Method 340.1) and analysis of
pesticides/PCBs and herbicides using proposed Method 1618 (soon be published in
the Federal Register). Method 1618 is known as the Consolidated GO Method for
Determination oflTD/RCRA Pesticides Using Selected Detectors, and is a consolidation
of Methods 608,614, 615. 617, 622. and 702.
A comprehensive list of analytes associated with these analytical procedures is given in
Table 2.2.
*•»**•»••*•**»*••*••
1J Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste. Physical/Chemical Methods (SW-846),"
3rd Edition, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1986.
2J Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes (EPA-600/4-79-020, Revised
March 1983).
S-CUBED Division of Maxwell Laboratories, inc.
-------
SSS-fl-ar-8629
TABLE 2.1. Standard Analytical Procedures
SAMPLE PREPARATION
Metals
Rama AAS or ICP Analyses
Metals
Flame AAS or ICP Analyses
Metals
Pumaca AAS Analyses
Volatile Organic Compounds
Semivoiatiie Organic Compounds
Organocniorine Pesticides and PC8s
Organoptiospnorus Pesticides
Cnionnated Herbicides by Denvrtlzatlon
Aod Digestion of Aqueous Liquids
Acid Digestion of Aqueous Liquids
Acid Digestion of Aqui
Purge and Trap
Continuous Liquid-Uquid
iuaU
Continuous Liquid-Liquid Extraction
Continuous Liquid-Liquid Extraction
Continuous Liquid-Liquid Extraction
Reference Method
(SW-846. 3rd Edition)
3005
3010
3030
5030
3520
W-1818
W-1618
W-1618
S-CU8ED Division of Maxwell Laboratories, inc.
-------
SSS-H-Q7-6629
TABLE 2.1. Standard Analytical Procedures (Continued)
INORGANIC ANALYSES
Analvte
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Nicfcal
Osmium
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Sodium
Thallium
Tin
Vanadium
Zinc
Cyanide
Ruanda
Suffice
Rame
Furnaca
Furnace
Rame
Rama
Furnace
Rame
Furnace
Rame
Rame
Rame
Fumaca
Rame
Rame
Cold Vapor AAS
Flame
Rame
Rame
Fumaca
Rame
Rama
Furnace
Rama
Furnace
Rama
Colonrnetnc
Colorimetric
Tftrimetric
Referance^flettaid
7020
7041
7060
7080
7090
7131
7140
7191
7200
7210
7380
7421
7450
7460
7470
7520
7550
7610
7740
7760
7770
7841
7870
7911
7950
9010
W-340.1
9030
ORGANIC ANALYSES
Anarvte
Volatile Organic Compounds
Semivoiatlla Organic Con
(Basa/Nautrai and Add Exbactables)
OrganocMortna Pestfddea and PCBa
Organophasphorus Pesticides
Criiorinatad Herbfcfdaa
Packed Column QC/MS
Capillary Column QC/MS
QOECO
QC/FPO
QC/ECO
Reference Method
8240
8270
W-1S18
W-1618
W-1618
3-CUBED DMaton of Maxwell Laboratories, Inc.
-------
SSS-H-87-3629
TABLC2.2. AnalyteUst
VOLATILE ORGANICS BY GC/MS (Method 8240)
Chlorinated Methanes
Carton Tetrachtoride
Chloroform (Trfchforometfiane)
Chtoromethane
Metnyene Chloride (Dlcrrtoromethane)
Chlorinated Ethanes
Chioraethane
1,1-Otchioroethane
1,2-Otahioroethane
U-Dtehlorcetnylene
trans- 1 ,2-Olchicroathylene
1 . i . 1 ,2-Tetracniorwirane
TetracMoroettrylena
1,1,2-Trtcfiloroemana
Triehtoreetttytena
Vinyl Chloride (Chtoroethylen
Chtortnatad Propanaa/Butanaa
Mlyt Chlohda (3-Chloropropyena)
i ,2-Oictiloropropana
cis-1,3-Olehloropropytena
trans-1,3-Oicftloropropyfene
i ,2.3-Tricniaropropare
trans-i ,4-Oicnioro-2-butana
ChtofoaJkyt Etftafa
2-Chloroethyi vinyi
Chtortnatad Bromocartoo
B rom
Bromocafbona
Bfomoftym (TMOromomatfiane)
Bnsmomathana
1,2-Otbremomethane (EDB)
Dibromomethana
Chtorlnatad FTuorocarbona
OichlorodMuoromathana
Trictrlorofluoramathana
1,1,2-TrichtoM ,Z2-tnfluaroethane
AddEstara
Etftyl mathacryiata
Matttyi matnaoytata
Vinyl i
Aramatte Hydrocartona
Banzana
Ethyl benzene
Styrena
Totuane
Xytenaa
Katonee and AUeltydaa
Acatona
Acratein (2-Propenefl
2-Hexanone
Methyl ethyl ketone (2-Butanone)
Methyl isobutyl ketone {-WMethyl-2-pemanone}
NRrflea
Aoykanitrte
Methacrytonitrila
Acatonrtnla"
Garden dbulflda
lodomeihana
Pyridlne*
* Poor response factor. Otnar methods may yield improved Quantitative analysis.
— StyMlea specific analytical prebtema(&g.stBftiartav^^
S^UBEO OMston of Maxwell Laboratories, inc.
-------
SSS-R-87-S629
TABLE 2£. Analyte List (Continued)
SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS BY GC/MS (Method 8270)
Chlorinated EUianee/Prooanea
Hexacfiloroethane
Hexachtoropropene
Pentachtoroethane
Chlorinated Butanea/Pentanea
Hexachiorobutadiene
Hexacnlorocydopentadiene
Chlorinated Benzenea/Naphtnalenea
2-Chloronaphthalane
o-Oicworobenzene (1,2-OteMorobanzene)
m-Oichlorebenzane (1.3-Oiehlorabenzene)
p-Olchlorobenzene (1,4-Oichlarobenzene)
Hexacfilorodflnzene
Pentaehtorobanz«n«
i .2.4,5Tetrachtarobenzene
i.Z3-Tr1chlorabenzen0*
1 .Z4-Trtcrtoroberuene
ChtortmMd
p-Oiioro-m-crasol (4-CWoro3-
-------
SSS-fl-87-8629
TABLE 22. Analyta List (Continued)
SEMJVOLAT1LE ORGANICS BY QC/MS (Method 8270) - Continued
Aromatic Amines
2-Acetyiaminofluorene
4-Aminobiphenyt
Anilina
Benzjdlne
Carbazoie
p^jimethylaminoazobenzene
3,3'-Oimethylbenzidlne
a.a-0imetfiyipnenetfiyianine
Dlphenytamine
1-Napntrtytamina
2-Naprnnylamine
Prtenyienediamina
Nitrated Aromatic Amlnaa
2-Nltroanilina
3-Mtroanaline
4-Nitroaniline
5-Nttro-o-toluidina (Sflitro-2-amino toluene)
m-Oinitrabenzine (1.3-OinitrobenzBne)
2,4-Oinitrotoluene
2,6-Oinrtritoluene
Nitrobenzene
NKrophanota
4,6-OinrtroH>cr8aol (4,6-Olnrtro-
2-mettiyl phanol)(ONOC)
2.4-Oinrtrophenol
2-Nitrophenol
4-Nrtropnanol
Signiflaa potential analytical difflcuttiaa.
Nltroaamlnea
N-Nitraso-dl-n-Qutyiamine
N-Nitraaodlethyiamine
N-Nitrosodimemyiamine
N-Nltrosophenytamme"
N-NKroao-dt-n-propytamine**
N-NKresomethyletnytamine
N-Nftreaomorprroline
l^-Nttrosoplperidine
rwsirtroaopyrrolidine
Sulfur-Containing Hydrocarbons
Banzenethiol
Mlscellaneoua
Aramita*
Benzole Acid
3-Chloropropionitrile
m-Crasol (3-Metrtylphenoi)
Oibenzofumn
i ,2-Oioromo^cfiloropropane (DBCP)
3.3'-OlrnetnoxybenzKJine
1,2-Oiptienytnydrazine
HsjQchioropriena
Malononitnla (Proparedinitnle)
Methapyrilene
Metftyt msthane sulfonate*
Phenacetin (Acetophenetidin)
2-Ptacilne
Pronamide
Safrole
Trichlorornetnanetriiol
Tris(2>dibromoprapyl)phosphata*
Not on proposed 40 CFR 264. Appendix IX list (51 FR 26632).
3-CUBED DMston of Maxwell Laboratories, Inc.
-------
SSS-R-87-8629
TABLE 2.2. Analyte Ust (Continued)
OHGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES AND PC8S BY GC/ECO (Method 8080)
Dlene-Baaed
AMrfn
OieWrin
Endrin
Endrin Aldehyde*
Heptachlor
Hepthacnlor Epoxide
Isodrin
BHC«
«-BHC
P-8HC
£rBHC (LJndane)
DOT and Derivatives
4,4'-000
4,4'-OOE
4,4'-OOT
Endosulfane
Endosuttani
Endosulfanll
Other PeettoUM
Chlordane
Chiorobenzilata*
Kepone
Methoxychlar
Pentachtaronitra
Toxaphena
PCS*
Aradar 1016
Arodori22i
Arodori232
Aredori24a
Arodari248
Aradari2S4
Aradar 1260
ne (PCNB)'
•Denotes potential analytical difficuWea.
S-CUBED DtvWon of Maxwell Laboratories, inc
-------
SSS-fl-87-8629
TABLE 2J. Analyte List (Continued)
ORGANOPHOSPHORUS PESTICIDES BY GC/PPO (Method 8140)
Disulfuiun + Phorate +
Pamphur+# Sulfotepp+
Parathion, ethyl + Zncphos+•#
Paratnion, fn0tnyi+
-t-On the proposed CRF, Appendix IX list (51 PR 26632).
•Denotes potential analytical difficulties (ag., standard availability).
#Not currently approved analyte for Method 8140
CHLORINATED HERBICIDES BY DERIVmZATION AND QC/ECO (Method 8150)
Category/Common Name Systematic Name
2,4-0 and DerlvatNM
2,443 2,4-Oicfitoroptienoxvac9tiCACtd*
2,4,5-T and Dertvatlvee
2.4.5-T 2.4.5TrichtorophenoxyacetlcAtid*
2.4,5-TP (Silvex 2,4,5-Trtchlorophenoxypropionic Acid*
Dlnftropnenol Dertvatrvee
Dinoseo 2-sec-8utyM,6-OinttropnenoJ (DNBP)*
•Currently listed on 40 CFR 281, Appendix VHI.
# Not on the proposed 40 CFR 264. Appendix IX list (51 PR 26832).
S-CUBED Division of Maxwell Laboratories, inc.
-------
SSS-fl-37-a629
TABLE 22. Analyte List (Continued)
Inorganic Anatytes
Aluminum Mercury
Antimony Nickel
Arsenic Osmium
Barium Potassium
Beryllium Selenium
Cadmium Silver
Calcium Sodium
Chromium Thallium
Cobalt Tin
Copper Vanadium
Iron Zinc
Lead Cyanide
Magnesium Fluoride
Manganese Suiflda
Otaxln (Included wttfi Method 8270)
10
S-CUBED DMatan of Maxwell Laboratories. Inc.
-------
SSS-R.67.a629
3.0 ANALYTICAL RESULTS
The analytical results for the water samples can be found in Tables 3.1 through 3.3.
These tables list the concentration of all analytes detected. Values reported with a flag
of J represent compounds identified, but with values calculated to be below the formal
detection limit Values reported with a flag of B represent analytes found in the blank
as well as the sample and warn of possible/probable contamination. Analytes not
detected or otherwise qualified are not reported in these tables. Additional information
pertaining to these samples, including S-CUBED standard reporting sheets and
detection limits can be found in Appendices A through C.
TABLE 3.1. GC Data Summary - All Compounds Detected
S-CUBED ID NUSID 2.4-O
185-1
185-2
18S-3
18S-*
18S4
185-8
168-1
1884
188-3
188-1
188-5
1884
191-1
191-2
191-3
191-4
194-1
194-2
194-3
PC-LE401
PC-LE-002
PC-LE-003
NY-LE-01
NY-LE-02
NY-LE-03
R.-L601
FL-LE-02
RAE-03
SM-LE-001
SM-LE-002
SM-LE-003
VD-LE-000
VD-LE-001
VO-LE-QQ2
VD-LE-003
NC-LE-01
NC-L&02
NC-iE-03
NO
NO
NO
130
NO
160
NO
NO
NO
120
89
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Qamme-BHC
fUndanel
NO
NO
0.01 TJ
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
0.2S
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
findomrftm
Sutfite
0.28
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
0,042 J
0.05 J
0.10-
0.053 J
0.098 J
0.099 J
0.14
0.16
0.22
0.11
0.056 J
0.042 J
NO
NO
NO
NO
0.12
0.12
0.13
Concentrations reported are in Ug/L and are confirmed By QC Dual Column.
J Indicates as estimated value, This flag is used when the data indicates the presence of a compound that
mean the Identification criteria but the result is lesa than the specified detection limit but greater than
zero (e.o> 10 J). If the detection limit is 10 Ug/L and a concentration of 3 Ug/L is calculated, the value is
reported as 3 J.
11
S-CUBED DMston of Maxwell Laboratories. Inc.
-------
TABLE 3.2. GC/MS Data Summary - Volatile Compounds Detected
S-CUBEDiO MUSID Acetone
185-1
185-2
185-3
18S4
185-5
1854
186-1
168-2
188-3
188-4
186-5
1884
191-1
191-2
191-3
191-4
194-1
194-2
194-3
185-1
185-2
186-3
185-4
1854
1854
186-1
186-2
186-3
188-4
188-5
1864
191-1
191-2
191-3
1914
194-1
194-2
PCtE-001
P&LE-OQ2
PC-LE-003
NY4E-OI
NVtf-02
NV-LE-03
H.4E41
FL-tE-02
FL4£-O3
SftU£-001
SftHE-002
SM-LE403
VD-L£-OQO
VD4£401
VD-LE-002
VD-LE-003
NOLE-01
NC-LE-02
NOLf-03
MUSID
•••i^MM^B
PC4E-001
PC-LE402
P&LE-003
NY-LE-Ot
NY-LE-02
NY-LE-03
FL-lE-01
FL-LE-02
FL-LE-03
SU-LE-001
S*4-LE-002
Si^LE-003
VD-LE-OQO
VD-LE-001
VD-LE-002
VD-LE-003
NC-LE4))
NCLE02
4
4.1
4.3
0-81
ais
NO
44
34
1.9
017
035
0.29
NO
NO
0.006 J
0004 J
0.18
043
I*
Toluene
0.54
ass
041
0.12
a 12
NO
1
1.1
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
ND
ND
NO
0094
0073
fl M7O
2-Bulanone
9.9
12
22
1.6
NO
1.5
1.3
3
0.29
043
0.44
ND
ND
ND
ND
• vV
0.12
0.73
1.1
1.1.3-Trt-
CtitofODfopana
0.23 J
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.1-Dtetitoro-
ethana
NO
ND
ND
ND
NO
NO
ND
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
O004J
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
Total
xytenef
ND
NO
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
029
Tfant-1.2-
Plchloioeihane
NO
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
NO
ND
ND
ND
0.016
0006
0.012
ND
ND
NO
4-UeUHrt-
2-Penianone
0.57
NO
0.061
NO
NO
NO
0.29
NO
ND
NO
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
Etlwl-
Beniene
NO
NO
ND
ND
NO
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
0.015 J
ND
a-Hexanone
0.69
0.41J
0.36
ND
NO
ND
0.4
0.039 J
0.085 J
0.006 J
ND
0.012
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
O.O8B
0.45
Methvtene
Chtoikte
031
0.32
0.092
0.098
0.17
0.19
0.006 J
0.11
0.04 J
0002J
0003J
O.OO3J
0.007
0012
0.014
0006
0.29
0.039
0.038
in
tn
•>*
A>
-------
SSS-R-37-8629
TABLE 3.3. GC/MS Data Summary - Semlvolatlle Compounds Detected
S^UBED ID NUSID
185-1
185-3
185-4
185-5
18S6
188-1
188-2
188-3
188-4
188-5
188-6
191-1
191-2
191-3
191-4
194-1
194-2
194-3
PC-LE-001
PC4JE-Q02
PC-LE-003
NY-LE-01
NY-LE-02
NY-LE-03
FL-LE-01
FU£-02
FL-L&03
SM-lE-001
SM^E-002
SM-LE-003
VD-LE-000
VO-LE-001
VD-LE-Q02
VD-LE-003
NC-LE-01
NC-LE-02
NC-LE-03
4.4
4.4
4J
5.1
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
0.054
Q.053
0.078
NO
NO
NO
NO
OJ1
NO
NO
'1.4
1.T
1.8
2.1
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
0.041
0.045
0.078
NO
NO
NO
NO
0.089
0.098
04178
DlMhyt-
HexvnPtittialat*
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
0.17
aoi7B
0.019 B
ND
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
ND
ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
0.032
NO
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
Alt concentrations are in Mg/L
8 itxlkattatriatttieanaJytewaatoundinthabianKaaweUaaihesampfa
13
S-CXiaeD OMston at Maxwell Laboratories. Inc.
-------
TABLE 3.4. Analytical Data Summary - Metal Analysis (All results are expressed In mg/L)
8-CUBCD ID NUS IP
166-1
IM-t
iw-a
196-90
IM-4
IM-6
IM-4)
189-1
IM-t
iM-a
IM-4
1M-C
IM-9
181-
181-
181-
181-
184-
184-2
194-8
•^•••^•^
FC-U-O01
FC-U-002
FC-iC-OOJ
FC-U-009A
MY-U-01
Mt-U-02
HI-U-09
a-u-oi
FL-u-02
FL-U-09
SM-U-001
SM-U-002
SM-u-ooa
VD-U-000
VD-U-001
tfO-U-002
VD-U-O09
NC-U-01
NC-U-02
MC-U-09
MrtJmd DcUciloa LUIt
t-CUDCO 10
166-1
lac-t
iM-a
186-90
186-4
IM-6
186-0
189-1
189-2
188-8
IM-4
IM-6
181-1
I8l-t
181-8
181-4
184-1
184-2
184-8
NUS 10
FC-U-001
FC-U-002
FC-U-009
FC-U-OOU
NY-U-01
Nt-U-02
NV-U-09
FL-U-OI
FL-U-02
FL-U-09
SM-U-001
SM-U-002
SM-U-009
VD-U-000
VD-U-001
VO-U-002
VD-U-009
NC-U-01
NC-U-02
NC-U-02
Itothod 0«t«ctio« Lialt
2.4
8.4
2.9
t.t
ND
MO
ND
9.4
6.0
6.0
ND
MD
i.a
MD
ND
MD
ND
ND
ND
MD
1.6
M»rcur»
MD
MD
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
MD
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.002
NO
ND
ND
ND
0.02
0.01
0.02
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
MO
ND
MD
ND
ND
0.01
Ml«fc«l |
MD
0.18
0.18
MD
0.28
0.28
0.24
MD
ND
ND
0.18
0.19
0.19
ND
ND
0.14
0.18
0.18
0.14
ND
0.19
» MfeA***** •Mte*MM*
0.011 1.04
0.008 1.70
0.008 1.67
0.014 1.48
0.010 0.89
0.008 0.89
0.012 0.82
0.029 0.48
0.019 0.48
0.028 0.84
0.010 0.41
0.008 0.94
0.008 0.84
ND NO
0.007 0.48
O.OOa 0.66
0.007 0.49
0.044 0.27
0.048 0.41
0.044 0.84
0.009 0.10
1 tu. Fot...i«.
ND 469.7
ND 471.
ND 471.
MD 909.
ND 680.
ND 707.
MD 780.
MD 071.
ND 744.
MD aia.
ND 217.
MD 228.
ND 188.8
ND ND
ND 146.2
ND 270.4
ND 208.0
ND 013.4
ND 620.9
ND 608.1
46 0.20
NO
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
MD
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
MD
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.04
S.IMI«.
ND
MD
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.000
0.000
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
o.ooa
0.008 0
o.ooa o
ND 0
ND 0
0.011 0
0.009 0
0.008 0
0.008 0
0.006 0
0.007 0
0.002 0
0.008 0
0.002 0
NO
ND 0
MO 0
ND 0
ND
ND 0
MD 0
0.002 0
811 Mr SodliM
MD 817.0
ND 822.8
ND 848.8
ND 762.8
MD 1846.7
ND 1M9.2
MD 2260.4
ND 1288.0
MD 1228.4
MD 1610.6
ND 670.0
ND 761 .7
ND 1894.2
ND 118.0
MD 662.6
ND 662.6
MD 881.8
ND 1076.6
ND 1487.0
MD 1184.8
0.06 0.04
.011
.OS8
.008
.066
.008
.011
.018
.012
.012
.010
.008
.006
.008
MD
.008
.002
.008
ND
.006
.008
.008
Tt>*Hl
MD
MD
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
ND
NO
NO
ND
ND
NO
NO
ND
ND
ND
NO
0.8
ND
ND
ND
MD
ND
NO
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
MD
NO
NO
ND
MO
ND
ND
ND
MD
0.18
•m Ila
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
ND
MO
ND
ND
MO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
2.1
S5aH6^B*» a^txs sKBauB 1
NO 208 ND
ND 201 0.040
ND 242 0.012
ND 214 IB
0.18 99.8 0.019
0.20 92.4 0.010
0.19 99.8 0.022
ND 10.8 0.068
ND 17.8 0.096
ND 10.4 0.001
ND 8.4 0.009
ND 8.6 0.016
ND a. a o.ooa
ND ND ND
ND 28.2 ND
MO 21.2 ND
ND 22.8 ND
ND 21.1 0.026
ND 104 0.027
MD 20.8 0.018
8.06 1.2 0.007
V*n*dliif 7. IRC (ttcty
0.016 0.44 708
0.019 0.61 667
0.016 O.M 784
0.024 ' 0.88 747
0.016 1.21 776
0.016 1.21 70S
M) 1.21 809
0.008 2.82 962
0.011 2.68 949
0.021 2.88 918
0.028 0.24 160
0.024 0.90 174
0.020 0.28 146
MD 0.08 ND
0.019 0.07 272
0.011 0.16 209
0.014 0.10 266
0.017 0.16 218
0.028 0.08 207
0.024 0.12 174
0.009 0.01 09
""•
8.28
8.87
8.28
7.68
11.8
11.2
11.8
.91
.84
.90
.86
.67
.08
ND
0.90
0.27
0.81
1. 81
1.48
1.29
0.09
9 Mlfll
4
4
4
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
»
1
1
1
1
1
1
fl
424
422
412
400
198
184
191
126
117
118
76
74
77
ND
-------
SSS-R-87-6629
4.0 QA/QC SAMPLE RESULTS
Quality assurance objectives for precision and accuracy are expressed in terms of
relative percent deviation (RPD) for duplicate analysis and percent recovery of matrix
spike compounds. Two samples received were specifically labelled for duplicate and
matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate analyses (PC-LE-003A and NC-LE-01A
respectively). Tables 4.1 through 4.7 detail the accuracy and/or precision associated in
the analysis of these samples. Percent recovery of surrogate compounds added to
each sample can be found in Table 4.7.
Note that for cyanide analysis, S-CUBED Number 185-3 (PC-LE-003) was used for
matrix spike analysis because of matrix interference problems encountered with 194-4
MS (NC-LE-01A).
15
S-CUBCD OMston of MsxwtU Laboratories, inc.
-------
SSS-R-87-8629
TABLE 4.1. QC Results - GC Duplicate Analyses
PMrtddea/PCB Analysis
Alpha-BHC
Beta-BHC
Oatta-BHC
Qamma-BHC(Lindane)
Heptachior
AWrin
Heptacnior Epoxide
Endosulten I
OiekJrin
4,4'-ODE
Endrin
Endoaultenll
4.4'-OOO
Endrin Aldehyde
Endosuifan Suflata
4,4'-ODT
Metnoxychtar
Endrin ketona
Chtardane
Toxapnene
Arocfttaf-1018
Arecntor-1221
Arocntor-1232
AraeMor-1242
AfOCfllOr-1248
Aracfilor-1254
AfOC*1(OM280
Org«nophO8hat« AnanmK
Pnorats
Sulfdtepp
Metnyl Parattiion
Ethyl Paratfilon
Fampnur
Analvm
2,44
2,4,8-TP
2,4*1
Oinoseb
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
1884 OUP
fua/D
NO
NO
NO
0.023 J
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
0.11
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
RPO
30
9.52
10
S-CUBED DMatan of Maxwell Laboratories, inc.
-------
SSS-fl-87-6629
TABLE 4.2 QC Results - VGA Duplicate Analysis
Acetone
Benzene
Bromodicnloromethane
Bromomethane
2-flutanone
Cartxjn Tetracnloride
ChioroDenzene
Dibramochloramethane
Cntaretnene
2-Cnloretnylvinylelher
Cnioromethana
1,1-Otchtaroettiane
1,2-Oicnioroetnane
1,1-Olcnioroetnene
Trana-1 ,2-Oicnioroetnene
1.2-Oicniorapropane
1 ,2-Oibromametttane
Oibromomethane
Metflyl Methacrylate
Acrolein
Acryionftnta
Methacrylonitrile
1,4-Oioxane
Ethy) Cyanide
CiS-1 ,3-Oichlorpropene
Trans-i ,3^3lcnioropropene
Ethyibenzene
2'Hexanone
Methyiene Chloride
Styrene
i . i .2.2-Tetracnioraetfiane
Tsvacniaroetnena
Toluene
1,1.1-Tricfiloroethane
1,1.2-Trichloroethana
Trichioroetnene
1 ,2,3-Tnchlaropropafte
Vinyl Oiloriae
Total Xyienea
Ally) Cnionde
1,1,1,2-Tetradiioroethane
Trana-i .4-Otenton>2-Butena
lodomethane
Trichioraftuoromathane
1.1 .2-THchtaroWfluoroailwrw
Bromofonri-
Vinyi Acetate
4-Metnyt-i-Pentancna
Caroon OiauMda
ISM
(mam
4.3
NO
NO
NO
12
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
0.38
0.098
NO
NO
NO
0.61
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
O.OS1
NO
18S-30up
4
NO
NO
NO
10
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
0.37
0.36
NO
NO
NO
0.59
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
0.11
NO
RPD
732
18. 8
2.73
118.58
3.33
57.31
17
3-OJBED OMtfon of Maxwell Laboratories, inc.
-------
SSS-R-87-8629
TABLE 4.3. QC Results - Semlvolatlle Duplicate Analysis
185-3 185-30
fmg/n (mq/n RPD
185-3 185-30
(main fmg/n RPC
2-Ac8t^amtnofluorene
4-Aminodiphenyl
Aniline
Benzdine
Caroazoia
p-Oimethyiaminoazobenzane
3.3-Oimethylbenadine
a^Oimethyiphenatftyiamine
Dipnenyiamine
1-Napmntiamine
2-Naphthytamine
Ptienyienediamine
2-Nitroaniline
3-Nrtroaniiine
4-NKroaniiin0
5-NrtroO-Toluidine
rn-Oinitrobenzene
2,4-Olnitrotoluene
ZWDinrtrotoluene
Nitrobenzene
4.6-Oinitro-O-Cresol
2.4-Oinrtropnenol
2-Nitrophenol
4^itrophenol
N-Nrtroao-Oi-N-Butyiamine
N-Nitrosoaiethyiamine
N-Nitroaodlrnethytamine
N-Nrtrosodiphenyiamine
N-NitroMmethylethylamine
N-Nitroaomorpholine
N-Nttroaoperidine
N-Nitroaopyrralidine
m-Oicniorobenzene
p-Ofchiorobenzane
Hexadiiorebenzene
Pemachiorabenzene
i ,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzena
i ,2.4-Tricnlorabenzene
p-Chtonxn-Cresol
2-Chtaropnenol
2.4OtaMorophenol
PentacMarophend
2.3,4.6»reiracMofopnenol
2.4.6-Triehloraphenol
2.4.5-TricMorophenol
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
3,3-OichIorobenzidine
4,4-Mettrytene Bis(2-CWoroaniiina) NO
)Methara
Bts(2-Chloroethy1)Ettief
Bis(2-Chlorisopropyl)Etner
4-Bramophenyl Pnenyl Ether
4-Chlorophenyl Phenyl Ether
Benzyl Alcohol
Resortinol
Acetopnenol
uinane
aphorone
1.4-Naprrthquinone
2-Methylnapnthalene
Naphthalene
2,4-Oimethyiphenol
Oenzenethiol
Aramite
Benzole Acid
3-Chioropropionitrile
nvCnwol
Olbenzofuren
1,2-Olbromo-3-Chioroproeane
3,3-Olmethoxyoenzidlne
1,2-Olphwiylhydrazfne
Haxachtorphene
laoaafroie
Malonrtrile
Methapyniine
Methyl Methane Sulfonate
Pnenacedne
2-Pleoline
Pronamide
Safroto
Trictnorometnanethlai
Tria(2,3-Oibromopropyi)Ptiospate NO
Pyridlne
Etnyl Methacryaiate
Hexachlofoethane
Hexachkxopropene
Pentachtoroethare
Hexachiorobutadlere
Hexachiorocydopentadiene
2-CMoionapnthaiene
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
1 NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
18
S-CUBED Division of Maxwell Laboratories, Inc.
-------
SSS-R-87-8629
TABLE 4.3. QC Results - Semivolatlle Duplicate Analysis (Continued)
18S-3 18*30
fmg/D fmg/rt HPD
o-Cresol NO NO
p-CraSOl 4.5 3.1 1247
Phenoi 1.8 2.1 15.38
Bla(2-Emytha«yi|PWha)atB NO NO
Butyl Benryt PMhalata NO NO
Diathyl PWialate NO NO
Dlmetnyl Pfrttiaiaie NO NO
OI-N-Butyl PWhaiate NO NO
OM4-Octyt Phtftalaia NO NO
NO NO
Acenapmtrtene NO NO
Anthracene NO NO
Benz(a)anthracena NO NO
BenzQ(b)Ruarantftene NO NO
Benzo(k)Ruorantftene NO NO
Benzo
-------
SSS-R-87-8629
TABLE 4.4. QC Results - Inorganics • Duplicate Analyses
185-3
Fluoride
Sulflde
Cyanide
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Calcium
Cadmium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Nlcka)
Osmium
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Sodium
Thallium
Tin
Vanadium
Zinc
2.79
0.0045
0.0077
1.572
-0.015
793.5
0.000901
0.00598
0
-0.010
242.5
0.012
411.8
&2T6
-------
TABLE 4.5. QC Results Spike/Matrix Spike Duplicate Recovery - Organic Analyses
Vobtte
Baae/NeutraJ
Add
Pentode
Herbicide
compound
1.1 OfcNoKMthane
Trichtoroaihena
CMorabannna
Tohjona
Benzene
1,2.4-TricMofobanzane
Acenapltttiatene
2.4-Diniirololuane
Pyrene
1.4-Oichtorobenzane
Pi i.tachlofophenoi
Phenol
2-CMorophenol
4-Chloro-34Jetftytprienol
4-Nittopheno)
Undane
HeptacNor
AJdrin
Diefdrin
Endrin
4.4'^DST
Phorate
Sultotepp
Oisulfton
Methyl Parathion
Ethyl Paralhioo
Famphur
2.4-O
2.4.5-TP
2.4.5-T
Oirtoseb
Conc.Splke Sample
Added fteMiH
(ua/ll
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
100
100
100
100
100
200
200
200
200
200
10
10
10
25
25
25
5000
5000
5000
NA
5000
5000
200
200
200
200
luo/n
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
89
NO
NO
NO
0
o
o
o
o
0.12
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Cone.
MS
lug/ft
830
810
1000
1000
1100
64
56
13
37
49
91
220
230
280
NO
11.8
6.3
2.7
20.6
26.4
5200
2700
1300
NA
1800
910
194
225
110
149
%
Recovery
83
81
100
110
110
64
56
13
37
49
45.5
65.5
115
140
0
118
53
27
66
82
1OS
104
55
25
NA
36
18
97
112
54
74
Cone.
MSO
lufl/tt
820
840
1000
1000
1100
78
60
15
50
65
84
220
210
240
NO
% QCUmlU
Recovery
82
84
100
100
110
78
60
15
50
65
42
65.5
105
120
0
SfO
1.23
3.64
0
9.52
0
19.72
6.90
14.29
29.89
28.07
8
0
9.09
15.38
0
RPD
14
14
13
13
11
28
31
38
31
28
50
42
40
42
50
IS
20
22
IB
21
27
Recovery
61-145
71-120
75-130
76-125
76-127
39-98
46-118
24-96
26-127
36-97
9-103
12-89
27-123
23-97
10-80
56-123
40-131
40-120
52-126
56-121
38-127
(A
in
ii
do
A!
B
-------
TABLE 4.6. QC Results Spike/Matrix Spike Duplicate Recovery Inorganic Analyses
S-CUBED ID Anatvte
194-4
194-4
185-3*
191-4
Fluoride
SuMde
Cyanide
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Banum
Ben/Ilium
Calcium
Cadmium
Chiuinium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Nickel
Osmium
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Sodium
Thallium
Tin
Vanadium
Znc
Cone. Spike
Added
(mg/IV
1.0
22.6
4.0
5.0
0.025
0.025
1.00
aoso
200
0.004
0.020
0.500
0.200
15.0
0.010
40.0
1.00
0.005
0.30
400
200
0.0250
0.200
500
10.0
10.0
0.0250
0.050
Sample
Result
frng/l)
0.67
65.5
0.04
0.80
0.0022
0.0438
0.273
0.007
216
0.000685
0.000561
0.094
-0.010
21.07
0.0263
1.314
-------
TABLE 4.7. QC Results - Surrogate Percent Recovery
8-CUBEDID
185-1
185-2
1854
18&4D
185-4
165-5
1854
188-1
168-2
1684
188-4
188-5
168-6
191-1
191-2
1913
191-4
194-1
194-2
PO1C-001
PC4C-002
PC-LE-003
PC-LE-003A
NY-LE-01
NY-Lf-02
NV-LE-03
FL-U-01
FL-iE-02
FL-lf-03
SM4E-001
SltLE-002
SM4E-003
VD4E-000
VD4£-001
VIK£-002
VD4£-003
N&LE-02
NC-LE43
«WaMI *JK9 1 |
1,2-OtChloro- Nttro-
Toluene-M
(88-1101
108
102
110
104
97
98
98
134*
126*
103
99
97
94
102
97
101
96
96
110
103
BFB
188-1181
108
108
111
106
104
97
103
59*
102
101
93
102
108
104
106
99
103
98
109
105
EllMnft-DS
(78-1141
99
101
104
100
101
92
109
53*
46*
98
64*
96
37*
97
96
102
91
87
97
36*
Benzene-OS
(35-1141
...
...
...
...
so
39
36
56
104
101
84
86
86
102
110
108
105
49
55
61
2-Fluro-
Blpnenyl
(43-1161
...
...
...
...
96
100
95
61
67
100
69
71
72
93
99
102
102
99
103
104
aeMnru
Terphenyf-
D14
(33-1411
...
...
...
...
81
58
70
58
65
55
51
55
59
115
90
90
83
57
56
77
Phenol-OS
(10-941
0*
0*
143*
101 •
146*
137*
134*
130*
140*
100*
123*
117*
112*
ISO*
ISO*
141-
1 PESTICIDES
2-Fluro- 2,4,e-Trt- Olbulyl-
Phenol Bromophenol Chlomedate
(21 1001 (10-1231 124-1541**
115
105
116
108
100
101
99
114
120
105
88
100
104
96
101
97
101
97
117
141
22
126*
133-
80
25
81
83
75
131"
86
91
89
90
156*
137*
145*
112
111
115
99
119
100
106
109
138*
106
127*
120
130*
120
149*
129*
* Values are outside of contract requked QC ttmita
*• Advisory limits only
*•• Surrogates not observed at sufficient levels lo report
at
M
to
-------
SSS-R-87-8629
5.0 ANALYTICAL DISCUSSION
5.1 Appendix IX Volatile and Semlvolatlle GC/MS Analyses
A series of 22 landfill leachate samples were submitted to S-CUBED for GC/MS
analyses, with an emphasis on determination of parts per billion levels of EPA
Appendix IX substances. This newly compiled listing of hazardous substances is
undergoing its first practical application to environmental samples. Thus, new libraries
were created, permitting full qualitative and quantitative analyses for both the volatile
and semivolatile components on this list
Due to this present study being the first application of the analysis of the Appendix IX
compounds in this laboratory and possibly in any laboratory, several technical
difficulties were recognized, which are documented here. These technical difficulties
include recognition that a few of the compounds under analysis are not suitable for
GC/MS analysis; certain of the compounds are cross reactive with other members of
the group; and finally certain of the compounds are unavailable as standards, due in
some cases to their extremely hazardous nature.
5.1.1 Volatile Appendix IX Analysis
Compilation of a standard mixture of Appendix IX volatile substances resulted in
creation of a GC/MS library describing 57 substances. These substances included 3
internal standards (used as an analytical aid), 3 surrogate compounds (permitting
quality control) and 51 out of the 61 hazardous substances on the Appendix IX list. Of
the original 61 volatile substances, two were redassified as semivolatile (pyridine and
ethyl methacrylate) and one was too great of a health hazard to permit analysis as a
standard (2-chloro-l,3-butadiene). Finally, tour compounds (ethyl ether, 2-propen-l-ol,
2-propyM-ol and l,3-dtchloro-2-propenal) are inappropriate for purge and trap analysis
due to their high solubility in water.
The standard Tenex volatile trap used in these analyses led to difficulties in analyses
with four compounds, specifically dichlorofluoromethane, trichlorofluoromethane,
trichlorotrifluoroetriane (3 types of Freon™), and methyl isobutyl ketone. A three phase
trap, including charcoal as an adsorbent, may more effectively retain these compounds
for successful GC/MS analysis. Reactivity of certain of the compounds led to poor
analysis performance, most notably with the analysis of 2-chloroethyt vinyl ether, and to
a lesser extent with 2-hexanone and 2-butanone.
24
S-CUBED Division of Maxwell Laboratories, inc.
-------
SSS-R-ar.6629
5.1.2 Semlvolatlle Appendix IX Analysis
A library of 133 compounds was created to permit analysis of the Appendix IX
semivolatile compound group. This library consisted of 6 Internal Standards, 6
Surrogates, and 121 hazardous substances. A certain amount of rearrangement of the
Appendix IX list was required in this practical application. Two substances were
added from the Volatile list (mentioned above), two compounds were found to exist in
two isomeric forms (aramite and isosafrole) additionally lengthening the list of
hazardous substances. Several compounds were subtracted from the list, either due to
the inappropriate nature of analyzing these compounds by GO/MS or their non-
availability as standards. Presented below is a list of problem compounds:
3.3'-OlmetfT
ritwnzidine
N-Nftroa^dl-n-propylamine
B
C
a.a4)imetnyiphenetfiy»amine ?
Phanylanadiamine 2
2,4-Toluanediamin* X
0-TohJidin* 5
p-Totuidtrn a
2-Nltroaniline °
3^4ltroanilln«
4^4ttraanillne
S-Nitro-otoluidire
£
B
nvCresol a
3,3'-Oirnetfi(wyCenzJdlne 2
1.2-Oipfionylhydrazine ?
Hoachiaroptrena
TridtioromethanetWoi
rtdttw
Ettiyt MMhaoytat*
—*-• *-
Olptwnylaihtr \
2 Mattiylii8pttiiil>m
0[banzo(ae)pyreno
Olbonzo(i.0pyrene
Expttrwflon: .A- Difficulty in QCComporwm of Analysis
C - Compound removed from list Mora Analyala.
3-CUBED OMaton ol Maxwell Laboratories, Inc.
-------
SSS-R-67-6629
Additional difficulties were observed with the newly constructed Appendix IX library
system. Difficulties with our first internal standard (l,4-Dichlorobenzene-04) were
observed, whereby a suspected interference from the undeuterated, heavy chlorinated
isotopic isomers of dichlorobenzenes may have caused quantitation difficulties. Thus
corrective action was taken, changing quantitation standard reference for several
compounds to a more stable reference compound. Two compounds were apparently
unstable or otherwise reactive, providing difficulties in analyses: ethyl methacrylate and
hexachlorophene were only detectable in our most concentrated GC/MS standards. The
naming of the three naturally occurring dichlorobenzene isomers was found to
juxtaposed, however these compounds were not observed in the target samples.
Finally, evidence for a cross reaction between certain of the Appendix IX compounds
was seen when an intermediate standard solution of sulfur-containing hydrocarbons, the
miscellaneous chlorinated ethanes/propanes, chlorinated butanes/pentanes, chlorinated
benzenes/napthalenes, haloethers, phthalate esters and polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons were mixed and left in a laboratory freezer overnight, turning blue.
5.1.2 Analytical Review
The composition of many of the samples under analysis resulted in significant analytical
challenges. The following samples were observed to be comprised of large amounts of
organic acids and related polar compounds, consistent with degrading natural organic
matter resulting in difficulties in analysis due to chromatographic interference, whereby
the retention of target compounds may be shifted by unpredictable amounts. The
solution to this type of problem is re-extraction at the following recommended levels, and
subsequent re-examination by GC/MS for absolutely certain analytical data.
OvtrtoMtod Swnpfc*
194-1A 100 mt
194-1A 100 mt
1S4-3A 100 ml.
18*4 100 ml.
188-6A 100 m».
188-4A 100 ml.
18S-8A 100 mi
18M 10 mi
186-9 10 mt
188-1A 10 ml
188-2A 10 ml
185-1 10 mi
186-2 10 mt
186-3 10 ml
S-CUBED Division of Maxwell Laboratories. Inc.
-------
SSS-R-87-8629
Certain of the samples presented other analysis difficulties. Four such samples
provided solid extracts for GC/MS analyses. These were diluted to a larger extent (e.g.
1:60 vs. 1:2). As a result of these dilutions, the surrogates for samples 185-1,185-2.
185-3 and 185-30 were not observed at sufficient levels to report
5.1.4 Dloxirr Screening
Screening for dioxin contamination was approached by analysis of a pure dioxin
standard, and subsequent examination of the GC/MS data for this compound. Analysis
of 32 nanograms (0.000000032 grams) of the 2,3,7,8-TCDD isomer provided an exact
mass spectrum and retention time as produced by our GC/MS equipment. These data
were used within a wide window to determine if this isomer, or any similar compounds,
were detectable in the NUS samples. None were detected in any of the samples
associated with this project
5.2 Metals Analysis
All correlation coefficients are greater than 0.955. Instrument calibration linearity is
verified.
IDL are 1 to 15 times optimum as specified in SW-846, p. 7000-02, Table 1'. (Aluminum
was the worst case; see below regarding osmium).
MDL are 0.2 to 7.5 times ground water monitoring detection limits specified in SW-846,
p. TWQ-29, Table 2-15 (Aluminum worst case).
EPA QC check sample results are all within 95-120% of true values.
Precision, as measured by duplicate analysis, is within 15% RDP for all analytes for
which sufficient native analyte concentration exists. For analyte concentrations at or
near MDL, RPD values of 20% to 60% are typical, while for analyte concentrations well
below MDL, RPD values up to 200% are found.
Accuracy, as measured by matrix spike recoveries, is within 80-131% recovery for most
analytes. Exceptions: manganese (142%), whose anomalously high recovery cannot
be explained at this time; selenium (41.2%), whose recovery is probably due to
volatilization loss during digestion; zinc (19.6%), whose recovery is below MDL is
therefore quantitatively indistinguishable from zero, and probably indicative of a
laboratory spike omission error; silver (35.6%), whose recovery is probably
27
S-CUB6D Division of Maxwell Laboratories, inc.
-------
due to a high chloride concentration native to the sample; calcium (193%), whose high
recovery is most likely due to contamination; chromium (39%), whose low recovery is
probably due to high chloride concentration; lead (41%) is probably due to high
chloride as well; potassium (220%) whose high recovery is probably due to extremely
high dilution error or possible contamination.
In summary, the sample matrix contained many interferents, such as high
concentrations of salts (chloride), organic matter, and observable surfactants. In order
to dilute out these interferents for low level analytes, detection limits are sacrificed.
rendering the use of GFAA pointless. High chloride causes early volatilization in many
furnace metals, hence, low recoveries for chromium, lead, and selenium. Chloride can
also cause enhancement of signal for flame metals which may explain high recoveries
for many flame metals.
S-CUBED Division of Maxwoll Laboratories, Inc.
-------
APPENDIX fi
VERSAR - TRACE ELEMENT RESULTS REPORT INCLUDING QA/QC DATA
-------
INC
Laboratory Operation* March 17,
Trace Metal* Section
ANAL.VSZS NARRATIVE
Project: 3030*003.02 - 1.2 (Total Metal*)
Titlet HUS EPA TSO Regulations Support
Client: EPA
This is an analytical task in support of the NUS EPA TSO Regul-
ations Support project which consisted of two solid - day. All. reference and cheek atandard* were within twenty
percent window*. Calibration and reagent blank* were clean. Sample ar
duplicate RPD wa*- 9. 3 percent and apllte recovery wa* 100 percent but
aaaple hoaogeneity for aereury ahould be auapect beeauae of the results
for other analyte*.
Steven L. Helberg ^
Shift Supervisor
VIMAN CINTIA • P 0. MX IMS • SMINOPIIIO. VIRGINIA 221S1 • TILWMONI: 17031 790-3000 • TILIX 901129
-------
Versnn
INC
LABORATORY OPERATIONS March 16. 1967
TRACE METALS SECTION
ANALYTICAL- RESULTS
Proj»cti 3030.3.2 - 112
Lab No.> 22394
Field No.> NY ASH 01
< Cone, ini mg/kg )
v£r uj:*G,nr
1CP Analyaia AA Analyaia
Paraaeter
Cadalua
Chroalua
Copper
Iron
Lead
Hanganeee
Nickel
Zinc
Sample
Concentration
14.8
33. 2
226.
18, 9OO.
630.
308.
144.
1310.
Saaple
Paraaeter Concentration
Araenlc 11.4
Mercury 0. 10
Selenlua < 3.
Conaentat • Detection Halt changed due to dilution becauae
of interference. Pe&Cffer
£
Procedure In accordance vlthi Robert Haxfield.
Teat Method* for Evaluating Lab Manager
Solid W.ete, SW-846,. Third Edition
USEPA. Waeftinaton O.C., 198A
6MO VIMSAM CINTIM • ^O. MX 1541 • SPMINOPIf LO. VIMOIMIA H1S1 • TILWMONI: 1703) 7BO-3000 • TILIX: 901135
-------
LABORATORY OPERATIONS
TRACE METALS SECTION
March 16. 1987
ANALYTICAL. RESULTS
Project: 3030.3.2 * 112
Lab No.:23004
Field No. i NC ASH 01
< Cone, in: ng/fcg >
£«.£' iu £ £6i H T
ICP Analyala
AA Analyala
Parameter
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Iron
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
at interference.
Sample
Concentration
8.6
28.2
91OO.
11,900.
3240.
498.
392.
3790.
• Detection limit
pe.cc 6 >ur /n
-------
Versar.
LABORATORY OPEHATIOIIS
TRACE HCTALS SECTION
March 16, 1987
QUALITY ASSURANCE DATA
Project! 5030.3.2 - U2
1C? Anelyela
< Cone, in: ug/1 )
Cd
Cr
Cu
Fe
Jin
Mi
Pb
Za
Ref.
Std.
Found
True
X Ree.
296.0
294.6
100. SX
230.0
292. 0
91. 3X
198.0
200.0
99. OX
209.0
200.0
104. 3X
199.0
200.0
99. 9X
198.0
200.0
99. OX
948.0
993.0
99. IX
204.0
200.0
102.01
Blank
Reeulte
Calb Blk
Reg Blk 1
Reg Blk 2
< 10.
< 10.
< 18. •
< 8.
< 10.
< 10.
< 10.
34.0
< 2.0
< 2.0
< 19.
< 19.
< 70.
« 70.
< 3.
< 3.
Cheek
Std.
Found
True
X Ree.
260.0
294.6
102. IX
234.0
232.0
92, 9X
199.0
200.0
99. SX
217.0
200.0
106. SX
203.0
200.0
101.3X
202.0
200.0
101.01
970.0
993.0
103. IX
206.0
200.0
103. OX
Dup *1
Field #»
MY ASH 01
••
Saaple
Duplicate
RPD
14.8
8.7
91. 9X
39. 2
92.0
6. OX
226.0
127.0
96. IX
18900.0
8710. 0
73. 8X
908.0
403.0
23. IX
144.0
93.0
92. 4X
630.0
294.0
89. IX
1910.0
942.0
94. 3X
Dup »2
Field ft
Staple
Duplicate
RPO
Spike »1
Field ft
NY ASH 01
••
Saaple
Spike
Added
X Ree.
14.6
99.7
100.0
84. 9X
99.2
161.0
100.0
109. ax
226.0
340.0
200.0
97. OX
18900.0
28300.0
1000.0
»»•
908.0
801.0
200.0
146. 9X
144.0
328.0
200.0
92. OX
630.0
2090.0
200.0
730. OX
1910.0
1400.0
200.0
O.OX
Oup Spk 91
Field «t
• •
Saaple
Spike
Added
X Ree.
14.8
99.9
100.0
89. IX
99.2.
1390.0
100.0
1334. at
226.0
666.0
200.0
220. OX
18900.0
20300.0
1000.0
•••
308.0
714.0
200.0
103. OX
144.0
7440.0
200.0
3648. OX
630.0
978.0
200.0
174. OX
1910.0
2210. 0
200.0
390. OX
• Detection Uelt changed to account for hlgn negative background
correction.
•• Cone, int ag/kg
LOS el
••• Spike < lO
aaaple cone.
-------
Vfersar.cc
UBOBATORT OPERATIONS
TRACE NSTALS SECTION
Harch 16, 1987
QUALITY ASSURANCE DATA
Projectt 3030.3.2 - 142
AA Analyale
( Cone, lai ugVl )
km
H«
Se
Re*.
Std.
Found
True
X Ree.
110.0
100.0
110. OX
3.9
4.8
81. 3X
21.0
21.8
96. 3X
i
Blank
Remit*
Calb Blk
Reg Blk 1
Reg Blk 2
< 1O.
< 10.
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 9.
< 9.
Cheek
Std.
Found
True
X Rec.
112.0
100.0
112. OX
2.9
2.3
100. OX
90.0
90.0
100. OX
Oup fl
Field ft
NT ASH 01
Staple
Duplicate
RPD
11.4
7.4
42. 6X
0.10
0.11
9.9X
< 3. •
< 3. »
-
Oup *2
Field »i
Saaple
Duplicate
RPD
Spike «1
Field -ft
NT ASM 01
Saaple
Spite
Added
X Rec.
11.4
44.3
30.0
63. ax
0.10
1.10
1.0
100. OX
< 3. •
27.9
30.0
33. ai
Dup Spk #1
Field *i
NT ASH 01
Saaple
Spike
Added
X Ree.
11.4
41.9
90.0
60. 2X
< 3. •
36.3
90.0
72. SX
• Detection limit ebaaoed due to dilution because oi interference.
•• Cone.
-------
Laboratory Operation* March 17, 1987
Trace Metal* Section
ANAL.YSXS NARRATIVE
Project: 503O..003.02 - 1,2 < EP Tax)
Title: NUS EPA TSO Regulation* Support
Client: EPA
Thi* 1* an analytical ta*k in aupport of the NUS EPA TSO Regul-
ation* Support project which eonaiated of two aolid
The aample* were received February 12, 1967, and aubjected to tha> Extr.
ion Procedure Toxicity in accordance with Method 1310 of Taat Methods
for Evaluating Solid Waate, SW-846. Third Edition, September 1986. on
February 28, 1987. Becauae of the United aample volume available, no
method duplicate* were run for the procedure. Mo probleM were noted
for the extraction.
The extract* were digested for PAA and ICP analyae* by Method*
7060/7740 and 3O10 of Teat Method* for Evaluating Solid Va*t*. SV-846,
Third Edition, September 1986, on March 9 and 10, 1987. No problem*
were noted for the digestion.
The eample* were analyzed by ZCP on March 12, 1987. All]referenc-
ed standard value* were within twenty percent window*. Barium wa* pr-
ent in the reagent blank at 68 ppb. Thl* i* a algnlficant amount whlc
i* probably due to croa* contamination from the aample* during the dig
eation procedure. Although the accuracy of the re*ult* could be effec-
by a* much a* eight percent, the reagent blank wa* not redigeated beca>
the aample* would not exceed the aaxlmum contaminant level due to this
experimental error. Duplicate preclalon for reported value* above det
action limit* were within twenty percent window* with the- exception of
araenie; however, both aaaple and duplicate value* are approximately
twice the detection limit and greater variation in precision 1* expect.
at thl* concentration level. Spike recoveries were within twenty per-
cent window* for all analyte* except barium which wa* 43 percent. Thie
indicate* the probable exlatence of chemical interference* for thi* ans
yte. The level of interference for barium doe* not appear to be aign-
ifleant enough to alter the determination that the cample* are not tax:
for barium.
Selenium wa* analyzed by furnace AA on March 11. 1987. All refer
and check atandard* were within twenty percent window*. The calibratl
and reagent blank- were clean. The detection limit for both aamplea wa
ralaed by a- factor of ten due to dilution becau** of interference a*
evidenced by poor replicate burn precision and MSA recoveries. The aa
and duplicate concentration* were reported aa lea* than the- elevated d
ectlon Halt) therefore, no RPD'a are available. Spike recovery for
the analyai* wa* 92 percent.
MOO VCMAN CiMTIfl • P.O. MX iMt • aWNO'llkO. VlNQIMIA «1S1 • TILUMOM: (7011 7M-MOO • TIV.SX. 901 US
-------
Versaru
March 17. 1987
Th* sample* w*r* dig**t*d for Hg CVAA analy*i* according to th*
SW-846 r*f*r*nc* abov», N.thod 7470. on March n, 1987. and analyzed th«
•am* day. All r»f»r»nc* and ch»c»c atandarda w»r» within twenty p»rc»nt
window*. Calibration and r»ag»nt blank* w»r* cl*an. Sampl* and dupliei
w*r» reported at !••• than detection limits «o no eonclu«iona can b»
mad* concerning th* pr*ei*ion of th* method.
St*v*n L. H*lb*r(
Shift Sup*rvi*or
-------
LABORATORY OPERATIOMS
TRACE HCTALS SECTION
lUrch 16, 1987
EXTRACTION PROCEDURE TOXXCXTY
ANALYTICAL. RESULTS
Project t 5030.3.2-112
E? TOX
( Cone, ini ag/L )
Field Saaple *
1. MY ASM 01
2. MC ASH 01
3.
4.
S.
Lab f
22392
23002
EP To*. Max. Cone.
Araenic
< 0.02
0.049
3.0
Bariiia
0.832
0.820
100.
CadBiua
0.199
0.279
1.0
Chroaiua
< 0.02
0.043
9.0
Field Saaple *
1. NY ASM 01
2. NC ASH 01
3.
4.
9.
Lab f
22392
23002
SP Tox. Rax. Cone.
Lead
3.17
48.a
9.0
Mercury
< 0.002
< 0.002
0.2
Seleniua
< 0.09*
< 0.09*
1.0
Silver
< 0.02
< 0.02
9.0
Coaaentai • Detection limit changed due to dilution becaua*
ei interference.
Procedure* In accordance vithi
Teat Method* lor Evaluating
Solid Vaate. SV-84A. Third Edition
USEPA, KMhiftOtan, B.C..
Lab Manager
eeao VIKSAN CINTIN • P.O. MX
. VIHOINIA am • TILVNOMI: ITOH TOO-WOO • rttix: 901129
-------
Versar-
LABORATORY
TRACK METALS SECTION
March 16. 1987
EXTRACTION PROCEDURE TOXICITY
QUALITY ASSURANCE DATA
Project: 3030.3.2-142
E? TOX
< Cone, int
•g/V. >
Ag
Am
Ba
Cd
Cr
K9
»•
Pb
Se
• »
Ref.
Sid.
Pound
True
x Rec.
0.060
0.063
93. 2X
0.297
0.246
104. SX
0.268
0.280
102. 9X
0.242
0.2346
9S.1X
0.217
0.232
86. IX
0.0034
0.0040
as. ox
0.482
0.933
87. 2X
0.043
0.090
8S.7X
Blink
Reeulta
C«lb Blk
Reg Blk 1
Reg Blk 2
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.02
0.068
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.002
< 0.002
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.009
« 0.009
Check
Std.
Tound
True
X Ree.
0.098
0.063
92. IX
0.293
0.246
102. ax
0.289
e.&O
101.0*1
0.244
0.2946
99. 8X
0.214
0.292
64. 9X
0.0021
0.0029
84. OX
0.319
0.993
93. IX
0.091
0.090
102. OX
Oup #1
Field »i
MC ASM 01
Saapl*
Duplicate
RPO
< 0.02
< 0.02
0.049
0.040
20. 2X
0.820
o.aoo
2.9X
0.279
0.271
1.9X
0.043
0.043
O.OX
< 0.002
< 0.002
•
48.6
48.1
1.4X
< 0.09 •
< 0.09 •
•
Duo «2
Field •:
SMpl*
Duplicate
RPD
Spike »1
Field f>
NT ASH 01
Sarale
Spike
Added
X Bee.
< 0.02
0.819
1.00
81. 9X
40.01.
!•(•<•
*fl*
°t?S
1.00
42. 6X
0.199
1.04
1.00
84. 9X
< 0.02
0.849
1.00
34.91
3.170
4.860
2.00
84. 9X
< 0.09*
0.046
0.090
92. OX
Spike #2
Field «:
Saaple
Spike
Added
X Bee.
to
becauee of interference.
-------
Versus
Laboratory Operations March 17, 1967
Trace Metals Section
ANALYSIS NARRATIVE
Projsct: 5030.003.02 - 1,2 (TCLP)
Title: NUS EPA- ISO Regulations Support
Client: EPA
This is an analytical task in support of the NUS SPA TSD Regul-
ations Support project which consisted of two solid (ash) matrix aamplea
The aamplea were received February 12. 1967. and aubjected to the Tox-
iclty Characteristic Leachate Procedure in accordance with the Federal
Register. Volume 31, Number 216. Page 40643, November 7, 1966, on Feb-
ruary 27, 1967. Because of the limited sample volume available, no
method duplicates were run for the procedure. No problems were noted fc
the procedure.
The extracts were digested for FAA and ICP analyses by Methods
706Qy7740 and 301O of Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, SW-846.
Third Edition. September 1966, on March 9 and 10, 1967. No problems
were noted for the digestion.
The samples were analyzed by ZCP on March 12, 1967. All reference
and atandard values were vlthin twenty percent windows. Lead was pres-
ent in the reagent blank at 746 ppb. This is a elgnlfieant amount which
is probably due to cross, contamination from the samples during the dig-
estion procedure. It should be noted that the lead levels reported caul
be positively biased by at least the reagent blank contamination level.
Duplicate precision for reported values above detection limits were with
twenty percent windows with the exception of arsenic which was 46 pereer
therefore, accuracy of the reported results is questionable. Spike rec-
overies were within twenty percent windows for all analytes.
Selenium was analyzed by furnace AA on March 10 and 16, 1967. All
reference and check standards were within twenty percent windows. The
calibration and reagent blank were clean. The detection limit for both
aamples was raised by a factor of five due to dilution because of inter-
ference as evidenced by poor replicate burn precision and MSA recoveriea
The sample and duplicate concentrations were reported as less than the
elevated detection limitj therefore, no RPO's are available. Spike
recovery for the- analysis was 70 percent. This indicates a possible
negative- bias: for reported results due to interferences.
The sssples were- digested for Hg CVAA analysis according to the
SW-846 reference above. Method 7470. on March 11 and 12. 1967, and
analyzed the sase day for each digestion. All reference and check atanc
ards were within twenty percent windows. Calibration and reagent blanki
were clean. Values reported for sample and duplicate were the same and
indicated good method precision.
Steven L. Helberg
Shift Supervisor
VKMAft C1NTIK • P.O. MX ISM • SMINQPHLD. VIMQINIA H181 • TILIPHONI: 17031 7W-3000 • TILIX 901139
-------
Versus
(larch 16. 1947
Project! 9030.3.2 - 112
PROCEDURE
TCLP
< Cone, int
ag/L )
Field Saaple #
1. NY ASH 01
2. DC ASH 01
3.
4.
S.
Lab i
22392
23002
Araenlc
0.203
0.169
Bariua
0.633
0.924
Cadaiue
0.199
0.384
Chroaiua
0.270
< 0. 1 •
Field Saaplo 9
1. NY ASH 01
2. MC ASH 01
3.
4.
9.
Lab 9
22392
23002
Lead
9.94
24O.
Mercury
< 0.002
0.044
Stlmiiw
« 0.029 t
< 0.023 *
f
Silver
< 0.02
< 0.1 •
Coiwntct » Detection Halt changed due to dilution beeauee of high amounte
of dieealved aolide. ")
Precedurae in accordance vitht
Teet Method* for Evaluating
Solid Vaete. SV-446, Third Edition
USEPA, Washington. O.C., 1944
8MO VIMAM CINTM • 9.0. MX IBM • VMINOPIILO. VIHQINIA UW • TIlWMOfM: 17031
• TILIX. 90I12S
-------
Vcrsar-
LABORATORY OPERATIOTS
TBACE HETALS SECT101
Hareh 16, 1987
TOXICITV
Project) 5030 3.2 - 112
TOP
( Cone, ini «g/L >
A«
A*
Be.
Cd
Cr
Hg
••
Pb
se
••
Ref.
Std.
Pound
True
X Rec.
O.OM
0.063
92. IX
0.233
0.246
102. as
0.289
0.280
101. ax
0.244
0.2S46
99. 8X
0.214
0.292
84. 9X
0.0034
0.0040
89.01
0.916
0.993
93.31
0.042
0.0900
84.01
Blank
Remit*
Calb Blk
Reg Blk 1
Reg Blk 2
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.02
0.339
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.002
< 0.002
< 0.02
0.746
< 0.009
< 0.009
Cheek
Std.
Pound
True
X Ree.
0.061
0.063
96. 8X
0.24O
0.246
97. 6X
0.263
0.280
101. IX
0.236
0.2946
92.71
0.217
0.292
86. IX
0.0023
0.0029
92. OX
0.911
0.393
92. 4X
0.094
0.090
lOt. OX
Due *1
Field #1
NC ASH 01
Sarnie
Duplicate
RPD
< 0.01 •
< 0.01 *
0.169
0.106
49. 6X
0.924
0.8O4
13. 9X
0.384
0.374
2.6X
< 0.01 •
< 0.01 •
0.044
0.044
O.OX
240.0
217.0
10. IX
< 0.029 •
< 0.029 »
DUB «2
Pl»ld #i
Saul*
Duplicate
RPD
Spik* »1
PUld #i
NT ASH 01
Saml*
Spik.
Added
X R«e.
< 0.01 •
0.809
1.00
80. 9X
0.203
1.89
2.00
82. 4X
0.633
1.34
1.00
90. 7t
0.139
0.996
1.00
84. 3X
< 0.1 •
1.14
1.00
114.0X
9.6
11.30
2.00
96. OX
< 0.029 •
0.039
0.090
70. «
Spike *2
Field »:
Staple
Spike
Added
X Reo.
• Detection liait changed due to dilutic
6) f) ^^| Aa*ek 1 MMJ A
of interference.
-------
Laboratory Operation* March 17, 1987
Trace Metal* Section
ANALYSIS NARRATIVE:
Project: 5030.003.02 - 2 CSW924)
Title: NUS EPA TSD Regulation* Support
Client: EPA
Thia la an analytical taak in aupport of the NUS EPA TSD Regul-
ation* Support project which conalated of one aolid (a*h) matrix aample
The aample* were received February 12, 1987. and aubjeeted to the deion
ized water leachate procedure mm outlined in A Procedure for Estimating
Monofllled Solid Waste Leachate Composition, SW-924, Second Edition.
Jsnuary 1986, on March 3, 1987. Because of the limited sample volume
available, no method duplicates were run for the procedure. No problemi
were noted for the procedure.
The extrsets were digested for FAA and ICP analyae* by Method*
7060/774O and 3010 of Tc*t Method* for Evaluating Solid Waate, SW-846.
Third Edition. September 1986, on March 9 and 10, 1987. No problem*
were noted for the dlgeatlon*.
The aample* were analyzed by XCP on March 12, 1987. All reference
and cheek standard* were within twenty percent, window*. The ealibratioi
and reagent blank were clean. Duplicate preciaion for values reported
above detection limits were within twenty percent windows. Spike reeov*
lea were within twenty percent window* except for lead which could not
be- reported because the spike was les* than ten percent of the aample
concentration.
Selenium wa* analyzed by furnace AA on March 10, 1987. All referei
and check standards were within twenty percent windows. The ealibratioi
and reagent blank were clean. Duplicate precision could not be determir
because aaaple and duplicate were reported belov detection limit. Spike
recovery for the analyaia we* 96 percent.
The extract* were dlgeated for Hg CVAA analyaia according to the
SW-846 reference above. Method 7470, on March 11, 1987, and analyzed
the aame day. All reference and cheek standard* were within twenty per-
cent window*. Calibration and reagent blank*, were clean. Sample and
duplicate were reported below detection llait* so no conclusions about
method precisian can be made.
tevenLHelberg
Shift Supervisor
6*MVCfltAACINTIH • P.O. MX 1B4» • SMIMQNILO. VIRGINIA Bill • TILWHONI: (TO* 7MMOOO • TlliX. 901129
-------
Hareh 16. 1987
EXTRACTION PROCEDURE
ANALYTICAL. RESULTS
Project) 5030.3.2 - 112
SV 924
( Cone, lai
Fl»ld Saapl* •
1. MC ASM 01
2.
3.
4.
9.
Lab t
23002
Aramic
0.026
Bariua:
3.29
Cadaiua
< 0.02
Chreaiua
< 0.02
Fiald S««pl» »
1. NC ASM 01
2.
3.
4.
3.
Lab •
23002
Utd
73.4
Nvreurr
< 0.002
S«l«niu«
< 0.005
Silvw f
< 0.02 >
Proe*dur»« la accordance vitlis
Trat Hvthoda lor Evaluating
Solid Vaat*, SV-84ft, Third Edition
USEPA, Vaflftinatoa. O.C.. 1964
MM Vf MAM CINTM • f O. MX Utt • JMlMQPUtO, VMQWIA J2«t • TILVMOMI:
-------
Vfersar.
LABORATORY OPERATIONS
TRACE HBTALS SKCT1M
March 16, 1987
EXTRACTION PROCEDURE
QUALITY ASSURANCE DATA
Project! 3030.3.2 - 142
S« 924
( Cone, ini ag/V. >
A4
Am
Ba
Cd
Cr
"9
»•
Pb
se
•»
Ref.
Std.
Pound
True
X Rec.
0.036
0.060
96. 71
0.233
0.246
102. ax
0.289
0.280
101.8*
0.244
0.2946
99. 8X
0.214
0.292
84. 9X
0.0034
0.0040
83. OX
0.916
0.333
93. 3X
0.043
0.030
tM.«*
Blank
Recult*
Calb Blk
Reg Blk 1
Reg Blk 2
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.002
< 0.002
< 0.02
< 0.02
« 0.003
4 0.009
Cn«ck
Std.
Pound
True
X Rtc.
0.061
0.060
101. 7X
0.240
0.246
97. 6X
0.263
0.280
101. IX
0.236
0.2346
92. 7X
0.217
0.292
86. IX
0.0021
0.0023
84. OX
0.911
0.333
92. «
0.034
0.030
106. OX
Dun 11
Field »i
NC ASH 01
SMpl*
Duplicate
RPO
< 0.02
< 0.02
0.026
< 0.02
3.290
3. 29O
1.2X
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.002
< 0.002
73.4
73.6
2.4X
< 0.003
< 0.003
DUD #2
Field »i
S«*pl»
Duplicate
RPO
Spike •!
Field •>
MY ASH 01
Saaple
Spike
Added
X Ree.
< 0.02
0.830
1.00
83. OX
0.026
1.67
2.00
82.21
3.29
4.18
1.00
89. OX
< 0.02
0.868
1.00
86. 8X
< 0.02
0.676
1.00
87. 6X
73.40
76.30
2.00
•
< 0.003
0.048
0.030
96.0
Spike 12
Pield •:
Saaple
Spike
Added
X Rec.
• Spike < 10X oi Maple concentration.
•• AA Aaalyaie
-------
GENERAL IMORGAN1C CHEMISTRY SECTION
ANALYSIS REPORT
PROJECT :
BATCH :
3030.3.2
2
DATE
PAGE
: 16-H«r-87
1
I I P»trol*un
LAB 9 I SAMPLE ID (Hydrocarbon
I I (mg/1)
TOC
(mg/1)
230O2 I NY ASH Ol
EP
TCLP
SV924
<0. 2
<0.2
<0. 2
30. 1
LABOI
viMAftcurrtii • r.o. NX i*u • vnwariiLO. VIMQINIA ai«« • TILVHONI: (Tat
MANAGER
• TILSX: 90112S
-------
GENERAL INORGANIC CHEMISTRY
QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT
DATE: 16-M«r-87
PAGE: 1
* OF SAMPLES: 3
PROJECT: 3030.3.2
BATCH: 142 P»t.Hydro
PARAMETER: (mg/1)
I.
INITIAL CALIBRATION
VERT FTC AT TQM
II.
CONTINUING
CALIBRATION
VERIFICATION
III.
DUPLICATE
SAMPLE RESULTS
IV.
SPIKED
SAMPLE RESULT
REFERENCE
STANDARD
SOURCE
WP 379 §3 (O&G)
METHOD DETECTION
BLANK 1
BLANK 2
STANDARD 1
SOURCE
WP 379 «3 (QIC)
STANDARD 2
SOURCE
DUPLICATE 1
SAMPLE ID
DUPLICATE 2
SAMPLE ID
SPIKED
SAMPLE ID
NY ASH 01 EP
FOUND
TRUE
RECOVERY
LIMIT
RESULTS
RESULTS
FOUND
TRUE
RECOVERY
FOUND
TRUE
RECOVER Y
SAMPLE RESULT
DUPLICATE RESULT
RPD X
SAMPLE RESULT
DUPLICATE RESULT
DBA M
RPD X
X SAMPLE RESULT
SPIKE RESULT
SPIKE ADDED
X RECOVERY
16.4
13.6
121X
0.2O
<0. 20
17.1
V13. 6
126X
<0. 2
1. 17
1.0
117X
VI MAM CINTIM • P.O. MX IBM • VNINQPIILD. VIRGINIA 221B1 • TILVNONI: (TOM 7SO-MOO • TILIX: 90112S
-------
GENERAL INORGANIC CHEMISTRY
QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT
DATE: lS-Mar-87
PAGE: 1
* OF SAMPLES: 1
PROJECT: 3030.3.2
BATCH: 2 TOG
PARAMETER: (tng/1)
I.
vuWTAl f* At TdDATTftU
INITIAL CAL-innA I 1UN
VERIFICATION
TT
XX.
/•MU«|i T HI 1 T tm
w(jftT4NUJHu
(~AI TDPATTftll
VERIFICATION
T T T
XXX.
(MIDI T/"ATff
UUI*b4(vA* 1 fc
SAMPLE RESULTS
IV.
CBTWn
aPXKED
SAMPLE RESULT
_
REFERENCE
STANDARD
SOURCE
up 19AJ, A**
METHOD DETECTION
BLANK 1
BLANK 2
cfiiinADn i
a i AJIUAK u i
SOURCE
UO 1 9A^ *•»
Wr X«O4 »J
CTAIinABn *9
a 1 AHUAIfU A
SOURCE
ni tor T/*ATr" i
UUfU^CA 1 b i.
SAMPLE ID
UV ACU A 1 CEU Q*9 A
n< Aan UA aw 7^4
HUB! Tl"A^ff 9
UUrUXUAl b «
SAMPLE ID
SPIKED
eAHBt fi> rn
aAI1rlȣ XB
NY ASH 01 SW 924
FOUND
TRUE
XBe*r*rttf C*DV
K&CUVEiiY
LIMIT
RESULTS
RESULTS
FOUND
TRUE
XDC*^nvc*ov
If&dJVbKT
FOUND
TRUE
XOK?r*m/c*Dv
IfCbLUTbJf T
SAMPLE RESULT
DUPLICATE RESULT
oon v
RrQ *
SAMPLE RESULT
DUPLICATE RESULT
oon v
ICrU X
X SAMPLE RESULT
SPIKE RESULT
SPIKE ADDED
X RECOVERY
3. 7O
6.12
Q*9V
935C
0. 2O
0.39
$.04
6.12
oov
77 ?(
3O.3
30.0
IA
30.2
39.8
30.0
99X
VHUAft CINTtM • P.O. MX 18M • VHINOPIILO, VIMOIMIA U181 • TILtmoMC: I7Q3I TW-3000 • TILBX: 901125
-------
GENERAL ZNORGANZC CHEMISTRY SECTION
ANALYSIS REPORT
PROJECT : 3030.3.2
BATCH : 1
DATE
PAGE
: 16-««r-Q7
: 1
LAB »
SAMPLE 10
I P»trol»um
I Hydrocarbon
I (mg/1)
TOC
(mg/1)
22392
NY ASH 01
EP
TCLP
SW924
<0.2
<0.2
inauff.
sample
inauf*.
6MO VIMSAN CINTIM • f.Q. BOX 18M
LAmftKTQRY MANAGER
VIRQINIA 22181 • TILIFMONI: 1702) 7MMOOO • TILKX: 901129
-------
GENERAL INORGANIC CHEMISTRY
QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT
DATE: 16-H«r-87
PAGE: 1
• OF SAMPLES: 3
PROJECT: 3030.3.2
BATCH: 142 P.t. Hydro
PARAMETER:
I.
INITIAL CALIBRATION
VERIFICATION
II.
CONTINUING
CALIBRATION
VERIFICATION
III.
DUPLICATE
SAMPLE RESULTS
IV.
SPIKED
SAMPLE RESULT
REFERENCE
STANDARD
SOURCE
WP 379 #3 (Q4G)
METHOD DETECTION
BLANK 1
BLANK 2
STANDARD 1
SOURCE
WP 379 *3 (OtG)
STANDARD 2
SOURCE
DUPLICATE 1
SAMPLE ID
DUPLICATE 2
SAMPLE ID
SPIKED
SAMPLE ID
NY ASH 01 EP
FOUND
TRUE
RECOVERY
LIMIT
RESULTS
RESULTS
FOUND
TRUE
RECOVERY
FOUND
TRUE
RECOVERY
SAMPLE RESULT
DUPLICATE RESULT
RPD X
SAMPLE RESULT
DUPLICATE RESULT
RPD X
X SAMPLE RESULT
SPIKE RESULT
SPIKE ADDED
X RECOVERY
16.4
13.6
121X
0.20
<0.20
17.1
?13. 6
126X
<0. 2
1.17
l.O
117X
MM VIMSAft CINTIM • P.O. MX IMS • VNINOPIILO. VIRGINIA 22181 • TILWHONI: 1703) 700-3000 • TILIX: 901129
-------
APPENDIX H
VERSAR - ORGANIC RESULTS REPORT INCLUDING QA/QC DATA
-------
INC.
March 30, 1987
I. Narrative
Veraar Project 3030.3.2 - Batch 1 & 2
This report contains the analytical data for aemivolatile
analysis of leachate samples generated from ash samples which
arrived at Versar on February 12. 1987. Analyses for poly-
chlorinated biphenyls (PCB's) by GC/NS were also performed.
A sample list follows:
SAMPLE LIST
NY ASH 01
NC ASH 01
Leachate
EP TOX TCLP SW924
X X
XXX
Ash
PCS
X
X
GC/MS instrument calibration using OFTPP met contract
requirements for semivolatile analyses. SPCC and CCC criteria
were met for semivolatile initial calibration curves ~: and
continuing calibration check standards. All standards, reagent
blanks, and samples were analyzed during the twelve hour period
that followed instrument calibration.
The leachate samples were derived from the Toxicity
Characteristic Leachate Procedures (TCLP) outlined in the US
Federal Register, (June 13, 1986 40 CFR Parts 261, 271, and 302;
November 7, 1987 40 CFR Part 260 et al.) Leachate samples were
also prepared according to the EPTOX procedures and from the EPA
Office of Solid Waste Method SW924. GC/HS analyses of these
leachate samples followed the EPA CLP protocol for aemivolatile
analysis of water samples.
Method SW924 analysis could not be performed for sample
NY ASH 01 due to the limited amount of raw sample supplied to
the laboratory. A memo documenting the problem fallows this
narrative.
Quality control samples analyzed in association with the
leachate- samples included individual reagent blanks for each
leachate- and extraction procedure. Due to the limited volume of
leachate, no duplicate nor matrix spiked QC analyses could be
performed. However, a method standard was analyzed to verify
acceptable extraction efficiency for the EPA CLP protocol HS/NSD
base-neutral and acid compounds.
All base-neutral surrogate standard compounds met recovery
limits specified by the EPA CLP protocol for the analysis of
water samples. Lov recoveries of the acid surrogate compounds
were' noted in both samples extracted with the TCLP and EPTOX
leachate methods. Acid surrogate recoveries were acceptable in
the reagent blanks extracted in conjunction with these methods.
MM VIMAM CINTIM • P.O. MX 184* • SMINQPIILO. VIMOINIA 22181 • TILWMONI: 17031 730-3000 • TILIX: 901129
-------
Project 3020. 3. 2
Batches 1 & 2
ASH: Leachate
PCB
Benzole acid was the only HSL target compound present in
these samples; in some analyses, the presence of this organic
acid could not be confirmed by CLP mass apectral identification
criteria -- therefore, in these instances, a tentative
identification vas performed using the EPA/NBS mass spectral
database library.
PCB analyses utilized EPA Method 680, Determination of
pesticides and PCB 'a in water and soil/sediment by GC/HS. Both
samples listed above, NY-ASH-01 and NC-ASH-01 were analyzed in
addition to analysis of a duplicate sample and a matrix spiked
sample. Labeled chlorine PCB isotopes were used for the matrix
spike material. Recovery of surrogate compounds and matrix
spiked PCBs were acceptable. No PCBs were confirmed present in
either sample.
Please contact Hike Buchanan, Rass Spectrometry Section
Chief, or me, should you have any question* or require additional
information pertaining to the semivolatile or PCB analyses
contained in this report.
Sincerely,
.
v/^Lawrence P. Pollack
GC/HS Data Quality Manager
Laboratory Operations
OSM VMSAN CINTf R • P.O. MX 1«U • SMIKOf I«UJ. VIMINIA 22181 • TM.WMONC: (703) 700-3000 • TfLKX: 9011M
-------
HEHORAKOUH
TO: Bill divert*
FROH: Chrie Pappaa DATE:27-Feb-87
SUBJECT: 3030.3.2-1 &2 Extraction*
I have calculated that we vill need the following amount of sample
to perform the required extractions:
to yield SI EP Tex extract. 230g — \
to yield 91 TCLP extract, 2SOg f
to yield SI SW924 extract. SQQg
<
Note that thie doee not take duplicate extraction* into account.
The problem ie that there are approx. SlOg of eample 22392 and
llSOg of eemple 23002. After informing Hark Carkhuff of thie. He eet the
following extraction prioritiee: EP Tox, TCLP, SW924.
By excluding an extraction duplicate, sample 23002 vill have all 3 extractic
done. Zf there are any problems eee me.
I for a grand total of lOOOg.
IJ
ec: Carkhuff
-------
PROJECTi 3030.3.3
BATCHES I 1,2
PCS ASH / METHOD 680 / GC/MS
SAMPLE RESULT SUMMARY
SAMPLE*
RB917
NC-ASH-01
NC-ASH-01-Y
NC-ASH-Ol-Z
NY-ASH-01
1 LAB*
AB3706
23003
_l. _!_..._._
23003V
23003Z
22393
PCS DETECTED 1
NONE
NONE
NONE
.__ — -. M_L .- — . -i r •••«- -•
NONE
NONE
CONC. (ug/kg>
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
-------
PROJECT: 9030.3.3
BATCHES! 1,2
PCB ASH / METHOD 680 / QC/MS
PCS SURROGATE RECOVERY SUMMARY
RB917
NC-ASH-01
NC-ASH-Ol-Y
NC-ASH-01 -Z
NY-ASH-01
AB3706
23003
— — — ~
33003Y
_____._•
£30031
22393
31
60
59
64
67
»-•-•-»—
93
81
96
91
•_____«•«
100
96
82
___«_••_«
93
— .—_—.
91
82
,---.-——
103
87
91
94
36
•LABELLED PCB SURROGATESI
•SSfl- 4-MONOCHLOROBIPHENYL
*SS*a- 3,3',4,4'-TETRACHLOROBIPHENYL
•SS«3- QCTACHLOROBIPKENYL
*SS»4« OECACHLQROBIPHENYL
Y- DUPLICATE
Z* SPIKED TRIPLICATE
PCB SPIKE PERCENT RECOVERY SUMMARY
SAMPLE* I LABt I Cll-PCB I CI4-PCB I CE8-PCB ICS. 10-PCB I
NC-ASH-01-Z I 23003Z I
46 I
aa i
39 I
75 I
•I-
SPIKE SOL'N.I STDM14B
(SEE PREP INFO.)
-------
CM* Mo.
WATER SURROGATE PEh-ENT RECOVERY SUMMARY
*gfo Confeacl UbMclwy - *-*****. .^*XA.: _____ Connect No.
• VALUES ARC UJlSUC OF CON IH AC I REOUMCU QC IIMIIS
**AOVIStJHir I IMIlS ONLV
_/l -W|.l_6
I'fflWI^tll
_ i ouliite of OC
. t oulii4« •' QC
_ | ouliute of OC haul i
- /!« / / —
-------
WATER MATRIX SPIKE/MA ••W SPIKE DUPLICATE RECOVERY
lASnMSKIO vAiMt JMIOUTSIOC OC INMTS.
HO
nrcovciiv:
mr
•«•:
OC
OC
Mor
-------
METHOD DLANK SUMMAI1Y
MU
Mo..
-«/•»•*» VJ V
M T
-------
Mn,, inc., Laboratory Optratiow
r, Sprinifitld M 22131 (703) 790-3000
names MUSIS ana XET (Pap u
Canitoi
I EPTOI
Lab Sa*l« IB MM.
Sa*lt Natriii.
Ma MHH flutiioriMd Byi
CRooortJtoi
Contract (tot
Oitt Staplt
SftlL
vouniicoraMB
Gonntritioni . Lfll
Ditt EitrarttnVPrtpartdi
Date fealyndt
Cone/Ml Fartori.
Pirnnk Itoisturtt
COB
i . f*
xJ ^touJUuGJu
I78-17-5
110061-08-6
179-01-6
1124-41-1
-01-S eis-lt3-OidilorooroaM
1931-71-6
I 127-18-*
ITW»-5
uoe-fla-3
1100-90-7
Mfcumt
I Tftrtdilaratttm
11,1,2,2-Tiiradiloraflthm
ITol
1100-41-4-
I10IHM
Val« If tt» mat is •
oiMcti«i lint.
to pnkicidt |
lut bm eanfirvtf by BC/W.
taft not tfitaetadL 1h>
toi liatt for tto wplt.
is U»
I Ikit flif it «Mri rf«i Wit iMlyta it found m
tat Uaah as »11 aa tht melt. II indieatas
poniUt/pratablt bla* cmtatiMtiaM art wm
tht data war to tab aporopriati action.
£stiwtad valot. JhA% naf is osd titHsr rfw
a Itl rtspons/factor is smsM,
tktsrwMiola
idantifiptftioM vitsrta bet «• rmlt is Ins
lint oil jmatar than nr«i (•.!•
10J)
VQVli CM62M6
For. I
-------
vtrur Ire., U&crrtory Operation
6690 Vtnar Cwttr, Spring uld VA 22131 703/750-3000
No._5030.3.2 BII I 2_
Conetntr»tion:LQy
roi
OHflMICS AKUSIS MTQ 9CET
SatvolatiU Coapounds
2)
Oatt btractid/Prtpartdi.
Datt flnalyiidi
03/11/87
Cone/Oil Factor:.
CAS
1108-95-2
IM1-44-*
195-57-4
1541-73-1
1106-46-7
I
1100-91-6
195-50-1
195-48-7
139638-32-9
1106-44-5
I
1621-64-7
167-72-1
198-95-3
178-59-1
188-75-5
iPfcfMl
1 bis<2-0ilerwthyl lEttar
12-Chlorapfiml
11,3-QicMorebnifi*
11,4-Oidiloretansm
iBmyl Mcetel
11,2-OirtlorobiNtiw
I bis(2-ctiloroisepropy 1) ittar
14-Mthylptawl
.1
I N*i trow-Oi-n-propy Imim
1 N 1 1 roOMHW
llsopftoront
•I-
1105-67-9
165-45-0
1111-91-1
H20-83-2
1120-82-1
I
191-20-3
1106-47-8
187-64-3
159-50-7
191-57-6
I
177-47-4-
I6A-06-8
195-95-4
191-51-7
181-74-4
1
1131-11-3
1208-96-4
I99HJ9-2
iBmieic Acid
1 bts(2-cftloratttioiy >«ttunt
12,4-diehlorophwiol
1 1 1 2, 4^n ch l
•I-
14-OiloroniliM
•I-
12,4,6-rrichloroplMBol
12,4,5-Trichloroshtnol
12-OiloroMfMlulm
12-ftitraamlint
•I
Attalito
I
13-WtrNmliM
ug/l
13 ti
13 u
13 u
13 a
13 u
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13a
13 u
13 ii
13d
13 a
13 a
13 a
13 a
13 «
13 «
13 >
13 »
13 «
13 «
63 a
13 «
63 a
13*
13 •
63 a
SPC ClHMp C )Vn C 1N»
Sfparatory Fumtl Extraction ( ]Yn
Continuous Liquid-Liquid Extraction CHYn
08
Nuoir
!8>32-9
131-28-5
1100-02-7 14-mtropJMMl
1132-64-9 lOibnmfvn
1121-14-2 lZ,4-Oimtretal
1
l
1606-20-8 12,6-OiiutrotaliM
17005-0-3
186-73-7 in
1100-01-6
I
1534-52-1
186-30-6
1101-59-3
•I-
1 4, 6-dinitra-e-^HylplMnel 1
IIHHtreMdivtanylanM (1)1
1 4-voflOfMny 1— pimylniMP
1 Hmdil orobmm
-I-
187-46-5
!•.
189-01-4 If
1120-12-7 Id
184-74*2 lOi-n-Mylphtnalat*
1206-44-0 IFlu
I129H30H) IP
I 1-
191-94-1
156-59-3
1117-41-7 lbit<2-ethylht*ylJPhtnalatt
1218-01-9 IdiryMW
I—
\
1117-44-0 IW-tHHylphtnalaU
1205-99-2 ItauolbJFlBorajrtfMnt
1207-OM
150-32-8
U9>39-5
I-
•I-
153-70-3 lKbM(«,M
1191-24-2
ug/l
13 u
63 u
Uu
13 u
13 u
13 u
I3u
-* 13 u
Hi
63u
13 u
13 u
13 u
ttu
13 v
13 v
13 u
13 «
13 u
13 u
29 u
13 u
13 u
13 u
13 «
13 u
13 ii
13 u
13 «
13
-------
Inc.,
CHMr, Spriiff ifltf W S15I (TOD 730-MOO
jtolytit feta 9Mft
Totatiwly
Copwndi
I
I Fraction
I
II
12.
ir
14.
in.fj in 0.
It
17,
!&.. ...........
iaot
121.
ig.
124.
IJX
iMfiam^
IffflBfl
mmm
IGBMUC ACID. 6-AHIMh.
Ml .1
ML
ML
ML
MT
69!
711
m
9%I
9B
ion
lOli
tost
21 J...I
It J^. 1
11 j...|
11 J...I
6 J.T1
13 J...I
44 J...I
11 J...t
23 J...f
JEttiMtrt
RTor
-------
Vmar, Ire., Liborrtcry Qpffrationt
U90 Uw Cantir, Sprinjfitld W 22131 (703) 790-3000
labowtory Nttfi
Lab S«t»lt 10 NDI
SMtlt fctriii
0«t«
amiics navsis MIR aer
_ Cut Not
(Piatl)
23MB
ChptrtNoi.
Contract NDI
VOLATILE coma
Canetntratiani • UH
0«tt Eitrtrtid/Prtpartd]
0*tt
08
174-67-3 ICMoroHthant
I74-43-9 Ifrantthm
179-01-4 I Vinyl CMondt
17940-3 ICMaretthaM
179-OW iNMiylm Chloric*
I 1
167-64-1 Ifcttom
179-19-0 ICartm Oiwlfidt
179-39-4 ll,H>icMorotthm
179-34-3 11,1-OicMorotthant
1136-60-5 I Trmt-l, Michlorotthtnt
I 1
167-66-3 lOilorofon
1107-064 11,2-Oichlorotthnt
171-594
136-23-9
11,1,1-rrichlorotthw
ICartot Trtradilaridt-
-t
1108-05-4 IVinyl Oatatt
Ualui If tlit r«Mll is « ralot
dttKtign liiit,
Cone/Oil Ftetart
Pimit Noisturti
I991-7K
I127-1M
I79-3W
I10I-4B-3
I10S-90-7
for but not fttKtrt. Hit
lint for tlw
if tin
Thit flaf ippJitf tt ptftieidt
tht idtrtiflcition DM festn eonfintd by 8C/M8.
B Thw flag it
-------
Varwr Inc., Laboratory Optrrtiom
6850 VMW Crntv, Sprinqfilld W 22131 7(0/730-3000
Can Moi__5030.12 Ml I 2.
CowntrrtiCBiLOH
ISHpli Muattr I
IEPTOI I
ORSMICS DMLYSIS MTU 9CET
SmwUtiU CMfloundi
(Pap 2)
0*tt EitractioVPrtpartdJ.
DaU flnalrztd:
_03/ll/87_
Cone/Oil Factori.
COS
Nuiotr
1108-93-2
1111-44-4
195-57-6
1541-73-1
1106-46-7
I
1100-51-6
195-50-1
193-46-7
139636-32-9
1106-44-3
I
1621-64-7
167-72-1
198-93-3
IPNMI
l6ii(2-Chlorotthyl)EWnr
12-ChloroBlwml
11,3-Oidiloraaiium
11,4-Oidilorobmnw
-I
iBmyl alcohol
11,2-OidilorobimM*
12-MrUiylplHfiol
I b»(2-chloroiwpropyl IfftlMr
14-wtftylprnnol
186-73-3
I
1105-67-9
165-65-0
III1-91-1
1120-63-2
1120-62-1
iHrncMoroattuiw
INitraomnw
llwflhcront
12-NitrapRtnol
-f
iBmieie flcitf
191-20-3
1106-47-6
187-66-3
159-30-7
191-57-S
I
177-47-4
186-06-2
193-99-1
191-56-7
166-74-4
I
1131-11-3
1
12,4-tficnlorooJMMl
11,2,4-tndili
-I
INaontlulm
14-Chloraamltiv
•\-
iMnudilflneyclopBiUdim
l2,4,6-TVidil«r«Bjiml
12,4,9-TrtefilaroajHnol
12-OilereMBjithaliM
•I-
PMtatatt)
I
199-09-2 13-Nitroamlim
ug/l
13 v
13 «
13 u
13 v
13 u
13 u
13 v
13 «
13 a
13u
13 «
13 «
13 «
13 v
13 a
13 u
66 a
13 «
13 u
13 u
13 u
13 it
13 v
13 •
13 «
13 «
13 a
66 Q
139
Gin
13 •
13 •
66 a
SPC Cltmip ( IVn ( ]fe
Stnarjtcry Funrtl Extraction [ ]Yn
Continuow Liquio-Uqtud Extraction (X1YH
COS
163-32*9
131-26-5
1100-02-7
1121-14-2
1606-20-2
I700S-22-3
186-73-7
1100-01-6
I
1334-52-1
186-30-6
1101-55-3
I-
1120-12-7
164-74-2
1206-44-0
1129-OOH)
I
165-66-7
191-94-1
156-53-3
IU7-61-7
1216-01-9
I
1117-44-0
1205-994
(207-06-9
136-32-6
1193-39-5
I
133-70-3
1191-24-2
l2,4-6iiritroptnnol
l4-*tttrop»wnel
lOibnufaran
•I
12,6-Dinitrotol
I Dirtily IpMfulHi
l4Hhtroa»ilin».
.1
IIHIitroMdialwiylannfl (1)1
l4*npQiK0wiyi*pMnyliltni)|p
IHnactilorobjniiw
IPmtadiloropfttnol
-I
IPhtnanthrtnt
I:
IF1
I;
-I
IBntylbanylplittMlatt
l3f3l-OiGhl«rotai»tfin
lBnn(a)afithractiit
lOiiHktyipJrtluUtt
ItauoUJFlaortntnm
lBMota)ayr«m
-I-
13 u
669
669
13 9
139
13 u
13 u
13 a
13 «
66 9
66 u
13 u
13 u
13 u
6Su
139
13 u
139
13
-------
IK., Utaratory DHrittaM
virw CM**, S0rii*f iiU « 221S1 (W TSO-JOW
frames flmljnit toU SNM
'
r«rt*tivtly
Ccmwntt
1 1
I CDS 1
I ***> 1
I
119. 1. .......
130. I........
I
Cowmntf iFrirtian
Htm I
NO SBMMUTIUS KTEtrtg. IM.
1
1
1
i mvA
1 (^
1
,1
!
i^rtu
SSTjtonc
_^Xi«i/i
« 1
1....
1....
Ht>d i
fRtrtUmO
Kg arZy\))
NO ..1
,
il
I
1
i
-------
Vinar, Ire., laboratory Operation*
6B90 Virur Cant*, Sarintf itU W 22131 (703) 730-3000
laboratory
Lab Sa*l« U
Saatla
MLYSIS OPTB 9BT (P«gt 1)
ISaaDlt
(TOP
Data blaua fluthorind Byi
Cftatort NDI
Contrart NBI.
Datt Saaplt
.3030.12
02/12/87
voATiLf cotxiMS
Cemntratimt • UH
Data EitrartanVPrtflindi
Data PMlyiarii
Cone/Oil Fartort
Ptrcmt Noisturti
l7*-«7-3
I7V43-9
l7«l-4
I7HO-3
I73H3W
167-6*-!
I7V13-0
I7S-39-4
179-3*- J
I156-&0-3
167-66-3
1107-06-2
I7M3-3
171-55-6
156-23-3
I1QB-OS-4
173-87-4
IChlenHttunt
IBronrtum
IViryl Otleridt
IQilorwtham
INrthyltm Oiloridt
lAettow
ICvtai Diwlfidt
11,1-Oirtlortwthwt
11,1-OidiloraiUura
irrm-l(2^idilor«ttiim
IQilorefan
11,2-Oidilontthan
12-Manont
11,1,1-Tridilororthw
ICirton Tttridiloridl
IVtnyl Deit«lt
iBraedirtlerarthM
10 a
10 v
10 a
10 u
3u
10 t
3»
3«
3 «
3«
3y
la/
A «
/3»
/10a
5,
«t/l
17847-9
1100*1-02-6
179-01-6
I
1,3-MdilorapropanB
iTnehleroathan
11,1,2-TrichleroathaM
I
leis-l,3HHdilaraBnpnt
12-dilorarthylvinyltthtr
1391-78-6
I127-1M
IT9-3*-3
1108-88-3
1108-90-7
is tht
bat net attactas. TKt
ion lint far tht
iratradilorotthtnt
iu,2,a-
iToluam
it
•I-
lEkftyll
iStyrwt
(Total lyltnas
»
^1
t
10
3
10
10 a
3d
Sti
3u
Sa
Sit
Sa
Valut If tht rttiilt it a vaitt
dttartion lint,
CetBoqnd «tt naiynd
attainaMt
C This flat tpphn to pnticidt
tht idtntifieitiw h» btm ccnfiraft by 8C/MB.
I Ihif flaf »» uHri *m tht iMlytt »• found in
tht blMh it mil » tht *«pli. It Mieatn
poniUt/probibli bio* cwtannttian «d Nit«
tht aito IMP to Ukt •BpFOpptatt artiaw
flat is was* tithar *an astitatiitj
idarttfiad
is MBtaaat; OF *an tht t
f of a eoatotnal thai
tin entaria brt tht rmlt it Ian tlut tht
Martian licit M ffettsf ttMt an. (1.1. 10J)
floral
varit
-------
Viw Inc., laboratory Optrrtiow
6890 Vtnar Cantar, Springfitld VA £151 703/730-3000
Caw Nat 5030.3.2 Ml I 2_
CcncmtrattoniUV
Oatt E*tr*ctid/Prtp4rtd:_
i rap
QRSAMIB AMLYSIS DATA 9CET (Pup 2)
Stvtvolatxlc
_03/li;87
Oatt
Cone/Oil Factori.
CAS
Nwtor
ug/1
M08-9K
1111-44-4
195-37-4
1541-73-1
1106-46-7
1100-31-6
195-50-1
IS-44-7
139638-32-9
1106-44-5
1621-64-7
167-72-1
199-95-3
178-59-1
188-75-5
1109-67-9
165-45-0
1111-91-1
1120-03-2
1120-32-1
191-20-3
ll06H7-ft
I87-6A-3
159-50-7
191-57-6
i
177-47-4
I8B-C6-*
195-95-4
I91-5S-7
138-74-4
1131-11-2
I208-9W
199-OH
IPdtnol
lbit(2-Chlar«tliyl)EtlMr
I2
IHMcMorocrclopintadim
12,4,6-rrirtlorapNnol
l2,4tS-rridiloraBlMnol
12-Chloraniphttialvn
12-Mitromlin*
lOiMtftyl PMtalate
iflcntimiiylm
13-Mtranilint
14 u
14 u
14 «
14 u
14 u
14 v
14u
14 u
14 u
14 v
14 u
14u
14 u
14 u
14 u
14 g
ttau
14 g
14 u
14 u
14 g
14 a
14 u
14 •
14 g
14 «
14 «
ttu
14 a
Mil
I4u
14 II
6Su
SPC Cleanup [ ]Vn t INo
Saparatory Fumtl Eitraction t ]Yn
Continuous Liqud-Uqind Eitraction CIlYn
CAS
Nuator
183-32-9
151-28-5
1100-02-7
1132-64-9
1121-14-2
I
1606-20-2
I84-6W
17005-22-3
I8S-73-7
UOO-01-«
12,4-Oitiitrotol
•I
12,6-Wnitrotol
lOiattiylptthaUU
l4-Chloropnanyl-ptMnylit)tar
IF1
-i-
1334-52-1
186-30-6
1101-55-3
1118-74-1
187-86-5
I
ias-oi-8
1120-12-7
IIHHtroMalpJMiiylanni (1)1
1 Hnacfilorclwnznw
ItaitachlorogOtnel
1206-44-0
I12>«H>
I
I
lAnttracm
IDi-n-MylpMlMlatt
iFluoranttww
I
-I-
iBatylbBoylpMtuUtt
156 55-3 IBannlaJantliracM
1117-41-7 lbit(2-€tnyUmyl)PMhaUto
1218-01-9 lOiryunt
I 1
I117-84H) lOi-iHktylpMhalati
1205-99-2
UO/1
68u
68u
14 v
14 U
14 a
14 «
14 «
14 a
6ft «
68 v
14 v
14 u
14 u
68*
14 u
14 u
14 u
14 v
14 a
14 u
27 u
14 v
14 v
14 u
(U-Camak t» uparit* frai dlphtiylaiiw
-------
lie.,
ioM
SfriiffteU « 22191 C7B8 730-3000
(Pip 4)
Tntttiwly IdnlifM Co^xwidt
1
1 CP8
Ifk.f9-O4l....
17.
Ill
116.
Ill
tax
\zi.
129.
Capound
IMOOIi..,..,,^ .
tfWfff^
IMNOOk
UMOM.
1
IFrvtiflM
1
ML
ML
M
iror(£ir
> —
<t
41*
MM)
KM
iQdi
I«M
Eftint* 1
ConcfntritifuJ
«i|^<^VJ>)
1ft 1 1
»i i
at i
«t »l
BJ...I
J? n
37 JL..I
Ul. 1
T-
con POO*/ o
-------
Vtrw, Inc., Laboratory Operation
6850 Vtanor Cantor, Spnnfiold V» 22131 (7031 730-3000
Laboratory Naooi
Lab Sooplo 19 Hoi
•jtriii
Data MOM* Authoriurt Byi,
CDmntrationi LDV
Oat* Ertractid/Prtflandi
Oatt Aulyzadt
Cone/Oil Factor:
Noisturt:
I74-I7-3
I7V43-9
1 75-01-*
173-00-3
173-09-2
IS7-M-1
175-13-0
I75-3SH
173-34-3
U5Sr60-5
167-66-3
1107-OK
1?O_A1_1
l7frT»"J
171-58-6
I3&-3-5
II06-09H
173-27-4
lOilorartftaM
(Vinyl Chloridi
lOilorottham
lIMIiylm Oiloridt
Ifcttont
iCarbm Oiwlfidt
11,1-OidiloroiUWM
11,1-OicnlonMuni
ITr«»-l,2H)idtlorwtt*i»
IQileroferi
11,2-OicJilflrofthai*
11,1,1-rndilorwthani
ICartan Tttradilori*
iVinyl Pxitat* /
1 BroBBtf ichloroavthaw /
10
10
10
10
s
10
3
3«-3
liOft-90-7
I
1100-41-4
I10Q-IM
I
1^—•—•
11,1,2-Tnchloroothano
•I
leit-l.J-Mdilorooropm
12-eMoraothylviiiylotlMr
!4HMIiyl-cwintanoW'
•t-
12-Hnamno
ITotradiloroothono
11,1,2,2-TttrachloPOtthw
(Toil
•I-
lEUiyl
iStyrcw
(Total Xyl
10
3
10
10 a
3u
3«
3u
3 v
3 «
Qulifim
tqoai totht
This
Mi
na| appltM to pKtieidt
lOintificition has bMn confin* oy
for tat not drtacM. Tht
Maction lint for U» ta^lt.
istto
This flat is mad *an tl» analyto ii found in
tnt blank « «11 • tht uoolo. It irticatn
pooBiblo/probablt blart contaumtion «ri
tho flato «or to tako appropriat* action.
Thio fla| if BOOB oiUtor rfton Mtioating
for tontativoly ioonttfiod
aroooRGi of a eoonowd] that oooto tht
kiooj critoria brt «• ronlt it loot than tht
dotoction lint bot trootor thon oro. (o.|> 10J1
Fora I
VORFli CV0624M
-------
Vtrw Inc., Uttoritory Opvrtuw
6890 Mrur Onto, SfriiqHM W 22151 703/730-3000
C*M Not_9030i3.2 HI I 2.
SMIVOUtlll
I TOP
DATA 96T
-------
Uvur Inc., Utontory Opvttiom
USO *w Guitar, Spring itltf « 22151 (70!) 750-3000
frgmet Bnilyiis Dita 9mt
*)
Tntativily Idnkifiid Co^poundt
COS
Copound
I
IFnction
I
EstiMtid
11...
12.
11
17.
114.
111.
116.
117.
118.
(21
127
130.
lUMUCHi.... nm.,1 tt
*
M
«T .
»f
2A J
t
-------
APPENDIX I
BATTELLE COLUMBUS - PCDD AND PCDF RESULTS REPORT IHCLUDING QA/QC DATA
-------
FINAL REPORT
on
DETERMINATION OF POLYCHLORIMATED DIBENZO-P-
OIOXINS AND POLYCHLORINATED DIBENZOFURANS
IN WATER AND ASH SAMPLES
to
NUS CORPORATION
April 29, 1987
by
M. R. Bauer, M. L. Zlmmernan, T. R. Powell, G. E. Pitts,
0. J. Oyler, V. R. Katona, and F. L. OeRoos
BATTELLE '
Columbus Division
505 King Avenue
Columbus, Ohio 43201
-------
Columbus Division
SOS King Avenue
Columbus. Ohio 432U1-.169}
Telephone ^feUl -114-6424
Telex :-t-5-»5J
April 29, 1987
Or. Hal a Roffman
NUS Corporation
Park West 2
Cliff Mine Road
Pittsburgh, PA 15275
Dear Or. Roffman:
We have completed the analyses of the seven water and two ash samples for
polychlorlnated d1benzo-p-d1ox1ns (PCOO) and polychUrinated dlbenzofurans
(PCOF). These analyses were performed under the terms of Battelie's
Proposal/Agreement No. 822-N-0708. I am enclosing a final report which
Includes our results and a description of the analytical methodology,
Instrumentation, and quality assurance measures that we employed.
Chromatograms from the PCOO/PCOF analyses are Included In the appendix.
Please contact me at (614) 424-3913 If you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Nark R. Bauer, Ph.D.
Research Scientist
Analytical Chemistry Section
MRB:bsf
-------
, Inc., laboratory Opratiom
600 Arw Cwtar, Sprinof itld Ml 22151
Laboratory Nam
Lao Sa«lo IB Ml
Suplo Natriu
Data fel
(703) 730-3000
QRBMICS PMLYSIS DMA SHEET
Cast Not.
ac
(P«at »
19 924
<£/12/87
Conctntrationi LOU
Dato Eitractad/Prtpartdi
Oato
Fjetorj
Pircwit Meisturti
ug/l
174-87-3
I74-43-9
17941-4
179-00-3
175-09*
I67-44-1
179-19-0
1 79-39-4
179-34-3
1156-40-5
167-66-3
I107-OB-*
I7B-43-3
171-99-6
156-23-5
I108-09-4
17947-4
lOileroHthiM
iBrOHMttUM
IVtnyl Oileridt
ICMorwthwt
INrthylm Oiloridi
Ifcttont
ICartan Oiwlfidt
11,1-OidilorartlMW
llft-CichloreittiaM
ITrwt-l,e-Oidilerortlwi»
lOilorofom
11,2-Oidilorocthaw
12-butanoni
11,1,1-rridiiorotUunt
ICrtan Titrtriiloridi
iVinyl flcttat*
iBroMdidiloroHtlwni
10 a
10 «
10 ii
10 a
Sa
10 a
5a
9a
9ii
5u
9u
Sal
10 /
fi
/10u
S.
179-97-9
I10QM-OW
179-01-6 /ITrictiloroitnene
I124-44-/ lOibroeodiloroeethano
11,1,2-TricMoreothant
* Urthyi 8PmUn»»
1 Tttridilaretttant
Value If ths rtsolt is • veto
detection licit, rtoort tta
bit nob dattctadt
ion lint for W»o
UOe-fld-3
HOft-40-7
I
1100-41-4
110M2-S
I
1^—
ITolg
IQilerotamnt
H '
lEttyl
ISkyran
I Total lyl
5
S
10
S
10
10
S
3u
So
Su
9u
Data fbiparting dual if Ian
tnanoriqval to the
flaf tpelin to ptrticidt .
tht idtntifteation )IM bm cwfirwd by
K/flS.
The
isttit
This flaf it «Hd rittn Uit analytt it found in
tht blank « «11 as tt» sa^lt. It indieatn
pOMiDlt/prtoiU* blank eontannatio* and MTT»
is flJ| is vsod eitner itien oetuatini
tantativtly idsrtafied
is asveis, or *m the i
thi cfSBBRGe of • cospmnd thai eaets the-
criteria tat Me reeall is less the* the
lint bit roater thje an. (t,|. 10J)
Fora!
VQRFlt
-------
Inc., Laboratory
5650 Vtnar Cant*, Sprino/uld M 22131 703/730-3000
Co* lte._30J0.2.2 Nl t 2.
ConcflntritiontUV
Oatt
l&wplt
19924 i
QREPNIC5 MUSIS DATA 9CET (Pagt 2)
Smvelatili
_03/ll/67_
Oat* Onilyzad!
CmeJDil Fwtart
CAS
03/19/87
1
1108-95-2
1111-44-4
195-97-8
1541-73-1
1106-46-7
I
1100-51-6
195-59-1
195-46-7
139638-32-9
1106-44-5
I
Iffiwol
lb»(2-Oilaraffthyl)Ethir
12-CMoropniral
11,3-OicMoroftwiim
ll,4-0ichlorob»nuni
-I
IBmiyl AlcalMl
11,2-Oicftl
12-%Wiy 1 plural
167-72-1
198-95-3
178-59-1
188-75-5
I
1108-67-9
165-85-0
1111-91-1
1120-63-*
.1
IKHHtroH-Oi-n-praayl
iHnadilomtlUM
iNitroftmm
llsophorent
12-IWroflhiTiol
-I
itanzoic Acid
I
191-20-3
1106-47-8
187-68-3
159-50-7
191-57-6
I
177-47-4
188-06*
193-93-4
191-58-7
161-74-4
I
1131-11-3
I20MM
199-09-8
J2,4-dicftlaro0Nnol
11,2,4-tndil
-I
iv-QileroimliM
iMuchloraMadiM
I *-ehior»-3-«rthy Ipttml
•I
iMMdiloraeyclooHitatfii
12,4,6-rridiloraolMMl
12,4,5-TrichloroalMfiol
12-Oitroaulint
•1
lOiHihyl Phtltalatt
13-NUroamliflt
uo/1
11 it
11 u
11 u
11 a
11 ii
11 u
11 u
11 u
11 «
11 u
11 u
11 it
11 u
11 u
11 a
U «
11 a
11 it
11 «
11 v
11 «
11 «
11 «
11 u
U u
11
S3
11
S3
11
11
S3 u
SPC Cliamip I
( Jte
Stpu-jtory Fumti Eitrartion { ]Yn
Continuout Liquid-liquid Ext net ton H1Y«
as
133-32-9
131-28-5 l2,4-Oiiutra0Mnol
1100-02-7 14-NitroptMnl
1132-44-4
•I-
I
1606-20-e 12,6-Oimtrotol
184-66* lOifthylpMlulatt
17005*2-3
166-73-7 IF1
1100-01-6 14-Nitroanilint
1
I
1334-52-1
I8&-34K IIHlitroMriiplMiylani* (1M
1101-55-3
187-86-5
I
185-01-8
1120-12-7
184-74*
1206-44-0
1129-00-0
I
185-68-7
111-94-1
156-55-3
IU7-81-7
1218-01-9
I
t117-44-0
1205-99*
1207-0*4
150-32-8
1193-3*4
I
153-70-3
1191*4*
Iflntta-acm
!Oi-it-tatyl«MlMl4tt
IRuoranthm
-I-
iBvtylbmylphttalatt
IQtryim
-I
IOi-iHktyl|MlMUtt
iBmotunaonnkliM
IBmoUtpyrOTi
•>
IOiomU,h)
(D-Cmot bt wparat* fro*
Ill/I
11 «
S3 it
53it
11 «
11 u
11 «
11 u
11 «
11 «
S3 u
11 u
11 u
11 u
53
-------
lie.,
CM*», SpnifNfJ* V« 22131 (70B 750-3000
frVria JMyiii bta
(ftp 4)
I
1919*
1
1 CM
12.
I&.14M2-1....
I4..7U-A4....
11
li..fiHB-tt.....
17.
11
114.
1301
CMpwnrf
NM
INQOMi
2,armwac, 3,4-uicnnL-.
INNIIL.»...^J.x^ , * 4 ,«« ,,i ,a.
Fnction
8MA.
mv.
M.
ITorn^
7B
•1*
EfltiHttd I
'Conmitritiflk^J
•ai^^jjj
S_i
Bt
Wi
9J...
9f
mr
»t
T-
aor
-------
lie. i Ubontory Operation
6980 MTMP Carter, Sonnof uld « 22151 (703) 750-3000
Laboratory
S«plt
I7V-J7-3
I74-43-9
I7V01-4
I73H30-3
I
I67-6V-1
175-15-0
175-35-4
I73-3W
1156-60-5
t
167-66-3
1107-06-2
171-
156-eM
I
iioft-oa-4
DHBMICS MUSIS DATA 96T tPtft 1)
Cm Not.
KhportNoi
Contract Nat
I
l«9i6/B29St I
Oati MNM Autrnrtnd Byi
CoRcntritiani
Ortt Eitrirttd/Prtpirtdj
Cos/Oil Factor)
Pvcnt Nonturtt
I
iVinyi Chleridt
lOiloroflthant
IOft^AOM*!^^^ (%|AAB.^^.
Nttnyiant uiionot
-I
ICirtM Oiwlfiat
11,1-Oidilerorttam
11,1-Oidilororttoit
•I
iDileroforo
l2-twt*nont
11,1,1-Tridileroithaw
ICtron Tttrartlorido
••
IVinyl AntUt
V«loo If tto rtwlt it • volot
••tertian licit, naart thto
HIM or
Data Saopli HKtivtdi
anon
l, 3-Oidileroprepno
ITricMonotlw*
Il,l|2-Tnchlarasthno
eto-l,3-Oidil
1591-71-6
1127-18-4
179-34-9
UOWft-3
I106-60-7
ll,l,2,2-Tttr«S»lor»tlum
C This flat tpplid to portiei*;
Uio idsntifierttM has baort confiraao* by
M not dttoetodi Tta
ion lint for tho wopli.
I This flap, is uart atai tt» nslyto is fonri in
is tho ths sink as «11 as ttio smlo. It iiriicatas
possiMi/probtolo blank contasinrtion and Mn»
ttio dtU «sor to taho ipprapriato action.
fla| is osod tittior
idontifiod
is
eritarta b«b tho rssslt is lass than tat
tioi liBt M inttor that aro. (0,1. 10J)
Font
-------
Virur Inc., laboratory Operation
8890 *rw Cuittr, Soriiqf if Id M 22131 703/730-3000
Can *i_50JO.M BN I 2_
CoKflntrttioRiUK
IW16/K964
OR8RNIB MUSIS OTA MET (Pap 2)
Sam volatile
Oat* E»tract*d/Prtpindi.
Oat* flnalyztd:
CMC/Oil Factori.
OB
Nwbtr
1106-95-2
1111-44-4
195-57-6
I941-73-1
1106-46-7
I
1100-51-6
199-50-1
199-46-7
1106-44-5
I
1621-64-7
167-72-1
196-95-3
186-75-5
1109-67-9
169-69-0
1111-91-1
U20-«-l
I
191-20-3
1106-47-6
117-66-3
159-50-7
191-57-6
I
177-47-4
I
191-56-7
(86-74-4
I
1131-11-3
U
iPhtml
lbi*(2-C
12-Oiloraphml
11,4-OicJtleroamm
-I
iBtwyl Alcatel
11,2-OidilorobtMwt
-l-
IN-Nitra*0HK-n-propyli
iHrndilorotttiam
JNitroamm
llsophoront
12-ttitropJwnol
-I
iBmzoie Acid
-I-
lH9iloroMilin
iHtiactileretatadin*
14-chtou 3 •iftylph^ol
-I-
iHnwMorecyvlapMkadim
12,4,6-TridilonjgNnol
l2,*,5-Trirtloropl>tnol
12-OiloranachtlMlnt
-I-
13-Nttrawtlin
ug/1
10 a
10 u
10 ii
10 «
10 u
10 ii
10 a
10 «
10 «
10 it
10 u
10 «
10 u
10 a
10 ii
10 «
50ii
10 a
10 u
10 u
10 a
10 a
10 a
10 «
10 «
10 •
10 •
30 «
10 «
30 •
10 •
10 t
30 »
GPCClHMp tJVn MNo
Stparatory Fumtl Extraction C lYn
ContiMMi Liquid-Liquid Eitractiot HlYn
CP8
183-32-9
151-28-5
1100-02-7
1132-64-9
1121-14-2
t
1606-20-2
I6S-73-T
1100-01-6
I
1334-52-1
166-30-6
1101-55-3
I
189-01-6
1120-12-7
J-
1
I117-W-7
I-
14-Nttraptwml
12,4-OlMitrotoli
-1
l4HtttroniliM
-I
(1)1
iHmdilorabmm
IPtaMitUtrm
1129-00-0 IPyr«M
•I
IBvtylbmylpMiMlxtt
lbii(2-Rhythnyl)PMhal*t*
IChryMM-
•I-
1117-61-6 fOHHktylpttlMUlf
1209-99-2
I207HJ6-9
150-3M
U3>39-5
I 1-
133-70-3 lUtaMU,Mf
1191-24-t
(1)
ug/1
10 «
90u
50 a
10 u
10 «
10 t
10 »
10 •
10 «
SO a
10 a
10 v
10 v
SO it
10 u
10 u
10 u
10 u
10 u
10 u
20 «
10 «
10
-------
VHW Inc., Udarrtorr
vtmr CHIMP, S«rin|fitld V* 2131 (703) 73HOM
flMlyvu (teta 9iwt
(Pip 4)
Idtntiftid Coapowidt
1
1
1
16...
17...,
IS...,
MO,.,
III...
11?..
111...
114...
111.,,
lift...
117...
lift..,
111...
I.'!...
123.
12*
13.
l,9*...
!?«...
130...
1
OS 1
Motor 1
, 1
1
, 1
, 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 | ^VEatiHtid i
Co«po«nd Ifrtcticn 1 (T or fcjJlCorewtraj^i
*~ 1 1 ^^KQWfa/UJ;
NO SBUVOUTIUS OCreCFED. IBM. 1 Ml Ml i
i i i |
i i i i
-------
, Inc.i Laboratory Opsratians
Vftrw Cintir, Sprinafifld W £2131 (703) 750-3000
Laboratory
Lib SasBlt 10 NM.
Sopli Hatriu.
UGPMCS PJMLVSIS MTU 9ST
_ Cast Not
E
(P«gt 1)
Data HilfliM ftithoriMd Byi.
UWTIIE 0*0106
Conctntrationt
Oatt
Oatt
l
lEPTOIBUNI I
_5030.3.2
JO*. 3.2
Coc/Dil Fictori
Pwrtnt Dei stun:
COS
ug/l
174-87-3
I74-4J-9
179-01-4
179-00-3
179-09-2
I
167-64-1
179-19-0
179-39-4
179-34-3
1156-60-3
I
167-66-3
1107-06-e
I7M3-3
171-SM
I
IVinyl Qilondt
iChlorotthan
IIMhylsnt Chlondt
.1
Ifcitont
(Carbon Diwlfidt
11,1-DieMeretthffnt
11,1-OicMoretthant
•I-
ua/l
3.
IChlorofort
11,2-Oidtlorotthant
I
I108-OS-4
179-27-4
l«—
11,1,1-rnehl
I Carton
-I
flntate
3*
10 »
3u
3u
10 «
3u
Value Iftl»
(Martian 1
171-67-5
110061-08-6
17941-6
1124-44-1
179-00-5
I
171-43-2
110061-01-5
1110-75-4
17949-2
1108-10-1
I •
1991-78-6
1127-18-4
179-34-3
I1Q8-4B-3
1106-90-7
1
1100-41-4
1100-42-5
I
11,2-Udilaroprapni
1 Tr«f»-l, Micftlera^opm
ITridtlorwWum
11,1,2-Tricftioratthan
-I
I
Icia-ltJ-OieMeraprapm*
•I-
ITttratiilorotthm
li,l,2,Mttrachlorottha
IToluam
IGhlorabtntnt
.|
lEthylbtmt
iStyrwt
I Total MtJM
10
3
10
10 v
3u
3«
3 «
5 v
5 u
l>
Data Ikiertini Onalifitrs
thanoraqoal to tht
for tat no* datartco. rto
lint ftp tht ta^l
is Uit
valv*. This flaf it vstd tithsr rim ntiMtinf
for ttntaftivtly idtntifitd (MaounH rfMr*
a 111 I'lipanaa factor is asflosit; or rim tht aass tpactral
data invest* tht prtsnct of a cotjoan] that ssrts tht
idsntificatiet ertttria bit tht rtnlt is list than tht
•sseifistf dtttctitn lint hrt fnattr than tart. (t.a. 10J)
C This flaf applits to ptsticidt
tht idtntifieatioft hat bun confirm* by 8C/NS.
B This flaf is latd rim tht anslytt it fond in
tht blank as mil as tht ust)lt. It indicates
potublt/probablt blank contatiMtion and
tht data mar to taht appropnatt action.
VQRFli
Fora I
-------
Inc., Laboratory Opmtiora
6BSO Vmr Cawtar, Spmqf wU VA 22131 703/750-3000
Caw *M_3fl30.3.2 Ml 11
ComntrationiUH
ISaapii Nustvr I
lEPTOIBUM I
ORGMICS flMLVSIS DATA MET (Pagt 2)
Saw volatile Coipoundt
Oatt EitrKtid/Pripandi.
Oatt ftnalyzfdt
Cone/Oil Factor:.
CAB
Nuiter
ug/1
1108-95-2
1111-44-4
l95-57-«
1341-73-1
I106-4fir7
1100-51-6
195-50-1
195-48-7
139638-32-9
1106-44-5
1621-64-7
167-72-1
198-95-3
178-59-1
188-75-9
I109-67-9
63-85-0
111-91-1
120-43-4
120-82-1
91-20-3
106-47-8
07-64-3
39-30-7
91-57-6
77-47-4
88-06-2
95-95-»
91-58-7
81-74-4
131-11-3
208-96-4
119-09-2
iRuml
lbis(2-Chlorathyl)Et(Mr
1 c^h lorophvno 1
11,3-OicMorotauM
iBMayl Alnnol
11,2-Oidilorobnzint
12-Nrtnylpnmel
lbis(2-diloroiMqropyl)tth»
14-vthylphml
iN-Nitrow-Oi-n-propylaunt
iHmdilorofthan
iNitrobminf
llsophorant
12-Nitropnmol
>
12,4-diMthylBRfnol
(Binzoic Acid
ibis (2-fihloroithMy) •HUM
l2,4-dichlorop)MMl
1 1« 2| 4- tridilorobnm
iNapMhalnt
14-OiLoromliw
l4-diloro-3-^liylp]MMl
12-Mtftylnaptithalaw
lltaudilaroeyclopMitadim
12,4,6-rridiloroaJwnl
12,4,5-Tridilorophwol
12-OiloranapMnaltm
IMtitrowiliw
lOivtnyl PMtaltfc
i|^^_Aa^4fIM.| ^^
ipCflfHpmiyiM
13-Wtromliw
10 a
10 u
10 u
10 a
10 II
10 «
10 ii
10 a
10 u
10 u
10 v
10 u
10 u
10 u
10 a
10 v
SOU
10 ii
10 a
109
10 u
10 u
Wtt
10 «
10 u
10 u
10 u
SOu
10 9
30«
10 «
10 «
50 ii
SPC Cleanup [ ]yn [ ]ft>
' Sfparatory Fuml Extraction t IVtt
Continuous Liquid-Liquid Extraction CIlYn
ens
Nwbtr
183-32-9
131-28-4
1100-02-7
1132-64-9
1121-14-2
1606-20-2
194-66-2
1 7008-22-3
186-73-7
1100-01-6
1334-52-1
186-30-6
1101-53-3
1118-74-1
187-86-5
IAS-4C-A
1120-12-7
184-74-2
1206-44-0
1129-00-0
185-68-7
191-94-1
156-59-3
1117-81-7
1218-41-9
1117-81-0
1203-99-2
1207-08-9
130-32-8
1193-394
153-70-3
1 191-24-1
lfctnaphthti«
12,4-Oinitropnmol
14-WtrooNnol
IDiBMizofuran
12,4-Oimtfttolum
12,6-Oiiulrotoliim
lOitthylptrthaJat*
IFluortnt
14-Wtroanilint
l4,6-tfimtr«-2-«UiylpJWHll
INHHtroMdiplwnylaniw (1)1
1 4-flrMopJWRyl-plMiiy litlwr
iHnadilorobMim
lOi-n-MylpMluliti
IFluorntRM
iPyrm
iButylbMylptthalatt
l3,3t-OidilorobMaidiM
lBMw
-------
Inc.* laboratory
VftW CffMP, Son"|f»U M 23151 (703) 730-3000
Organic* ftulym Data
Tntativtly Iftntifirt Cotpoundt
1
1 CM
1 tatar
19.
no.
114
1 16.. .........
117
lit.
113.
120.
122.
123.
124.
'31.. ........
I2t
127.
.130.
1
1
1
..1
..1
..1
..1. .......
..1
..1
..1
..1
..1
..1
1
Co^ourd (Fraction
Maw l
NO SBHVOOTILES OETSTED. iBMt
1
,
(
,
!
1
,...., 1
I ,
I ,
1
1 RTor
1
1
,1
,j
,1
,1
, i
,l
,l
.1
lErtiMt
/^ut^Conctnt
^/((MtyX,
M 1
I.
I
1
1
.......1.
•4 1
ritjia^l
(f&u)
« 1
., |
1
1
1
-------
Vtnar, Inc., laboratory Opsratiow
Vtnar Cawtsr, Sprinqfitld M 22131 (703) 750-3000
Laboratory Nastt.
Ub Sa*ls ID to
Mriit.
OAWICS MUSIS DATA 9BT (Past 1)
_ Cats Ml
QC
I
ITOPBLJK I
Oat* RtlHM Autbomsi Byi
HATB
Ml.
Contract Mi
3030.3.
Date Swplt Rtctivto:
CAS
VOLATILE
Concmtrktioni ' KM
Oati
Oats AMlyndi
Cone/Oil Factori
Ptrctnt Noisturti
l7»-«7-J
I74-4M
I7VOM
175-00-3
17*09-2
167-64-1
I73-13-*
175-33-4
173-34-3
I15WO-3
167-66-3
1 107-06-2
i7«_aT_i
l/B-Ta-J
171-55-6
155-eW
UOe-05-4
I75-Z7-4
lOilorartham
iViiqrl Ollori*
lOiioraliian
iNrthylam Oiloridt
IfcfltOM
(Carbon OinlFidt
11,1-OidiloreMMw
ll.l-OidllOKlMHW
I Trawl, MienlamUwnt
lOilorefar*
M,2-i>tdilor«ttiant
IC~OUIlnOnV
11,1,1-TriehlerotttaM
(Carton Tttracftlon*
1 Vinyl Aertatt /
iBroHdidtlonoittHRi /
10 erttsris btk tat rastll it 1m than tht
ifioa dttactioB lisit btt rsstsr Mm an. <•.* 10A
B This fla| it mod *on tin analytt it fowni in
thi blank as mil as tte tMplt. It inlieatM
powtblt/prooaolt blank nMaHnitian and
Uw data osr to taks aapropmts action.
VOVli
I
-------
vtrwr Inc., latarttory Oprttim
S850 ftrw CtrrtiT, Sprinqfitld Vfl 22151 703/730-3000
C»M
GoMflfltrrtioniLOl
Datt
ft a.
IS«plt
ITOPBUK I
OMM1B MLVSIS MTO 9fET (Pip 2)
Smvolitilt
JU/11/B7_
Ottt Antlyzid:.
Ceic/Dil Factor:.
1111-**-*
195-57-6
1541-73-t
1106-46-7
I
MOO-51-6
195-50-1
195-46-7
1106-44-5
1 •
IS7-7Z-1
196-95-3
178-59-1
1105-67-9
itt-as-o
lkll-91-l
1120-63-8
1120-42-1
I
l91-»-J
1106-47-6
I87-6A-3
ISWO-7
191-57-6
177-47-4
I8MW
195-95-4
191-SM
ftt-74-4
I
1131-11-3
199-OM
IffWttl
l2-CMora0wnol
11,3-OicMorobwm
11,4-DidilaretaizM
-I
IBmyl AlcoDol
l2-*W»yIpNfiol
I b»(e-chlaroi«oqrapy Utthcp
l*-Mthylphml
•I-
IN-NitraM-Oi-ff-propyU
IHtMdtloratlUR*
I IiapftaroM
l2-Nitra0wml
-I
l2,*-di»»thylphtnol
iBmotc fleid
12,4-didilorepMMi
ll^t-tndtJ
-I
l*-Oilora«tliM
I *-cfilare-l-HtliylplMiol
-I •
iHradiUracycloBjntadim
13-Wtromlint
iil/l
11 u
11 \i
tl ii
U v
11 u
11 u
11 u
U u
11 ti
11 u
u u
U u
11 u
II u
11 u
11 u
S6u
11 V
11 II
11 a
11 «
U «
11 «
11 «
11 «
U ii
11
ss
11
SI
11
11
X
6K ClMiwp C 1V« Mfe
Stpjritory Fumtl Extraction [ JYw
Continuum Li«a«-Uquid Extrtctien CHYtt
CflB
119/1
iflcmpktlwiw
1100-02-7 t
112-64-9 lOibMiorurM
12,4-OiMtrctoluwt
_l
17009-88-3
186-73-7
1100-01-6
I^HHuitrotol
IOi«tHylphttMl
-------
lie.,
MB Vww Cntar, Spring itU M 23151 (7031 750-3000
AMlytii fata ShHl
I
I1OPUK
Idmtifivd
1
1
1
II....
12....
Ik...
Ilk...
110...
112...
114...
118...
111..
171,,
ia...,
12k.,
127...
129...
130...
1
CDS 1 Gnpowd
IIMMW fXPTW^D HflMBBWKx
1
1
1 /fT-34
Fr«rtio« 1 HI orfScm
1 ^^-^l
ML 1 2011
EstiMtrt i
£oncflntratak4
««i«g^y»p
Ut
SJ...
-------
Vinar, IK., Laboratory Operations
USD Wnar CaBtar, Spr»if itM W 22151 (703) 730-3000
Laboratory Nasti
Lab SMpii D MM
Nitrtii
onus AMLYSIS i»ra XET
Cast Not.
K
iSanplt
ISUS4BU9K I
Data MMM AuthoriM* Byi
Connntrationi KM
Data Extractod/Pitparodi
Data Pjwlyindj
Cone/Oil
Ptretnt Xoisturti
1,3-Oidtlanpopm
12-fhleraihylvinxlftlMr
iTdradilarorttim
II, 1,2,2-Tttridilorortlww
IQilarahmn
IToUl lylmi
Qulifim
to Uw
This fla| applies to ptttieida
the idantifieation has toon confirasd by SDW.
Value If tUt rtnil is a valot
rtport tin val
for brt
attaintblt ditsction
ndfithar
y ioentifiad
I This fla| is ossd 4m tha analyta is found in
bUnh as Hill as tto uspls. It indicates
possatta/probablt blank eontwnrtion and
tha data ussr to taks appropriata action.
EstiMtarf valua. This
a concsRtratioB for
a lil IHUWB factor
data indiestss th» poassHca of a fisiiiiiH that assts tt»
loMifleatioa enjoria bH tke rwdt is last tlun tha
limi tak imtar tha* isro. (•.». 10J)
For. I
\Ofii RWtttfi
-------
Virw lie. i Lifantary Otaritiom
6890 VVMT Curt*, Sptiqfiild VII 82131 703/730-3000
5039.12 Ml I
urtHT t
19V «4 BUMI I
CmntritioniUV
OMM1B flMLYSIS MTH 9CET (Pap 2)
Swvolrtilt
Otti
Cone/Oil Fictort.
08
Muter
I108-9K
1111-44-4
195-97-8
1541-73-1
1106-46-7
I
1100-41-6
199-90-1
IPhMBl
lbit(2-CMorwthyl]Eth*r
11,3-Oidilflrotaum
11,4-Oidilantainm
I39638-3M
I10S-44-3
I
1621-64-7
167-72-1
198-99-3
178-59-1
188-79-9
I
105-67-9
.69-83-0
1111-91-1
1120-93-2
1120-42-1
I
191-20-3
1106-47-6
187-66-3
159-50-7
191-57-6
I
•I
IBtnyl Alcohol
11,2-Oidili
12-Nrtftylptanol
14-vrtftylplwnol
IHnadilanNtlum
1 fell A^M^^^^k*^^^
iNitroanzmt
Iliofharom
-I-
rlmn*
iBwxoic fleid
14-OilerwMlin
177-47-4
9WB-4 12,4,5-Trid.lorophwl
11-58-7
86-74-4
131-11-3
Ii
9WW UHtttrwriliw
ug/1
10 u
10 u
10 v
lOii
10 «
10 «
10 a
10 ii
10 a
10 v
10 •
10 «
10 u
10 ii
10 ii
10 •
30 »
10 «
10 •
10 ii
10 •
10 v
10 a
10 «
10 a
10 ii
10 ii
30 tt
10 •
50 »
10 a
10 •
8PC ClMiwp C ]Yn (JKo
Sfparitory Fuml Extraction [ ]Ytt
Continmt Liquid-Liquid Extraction CWw
08
183-32-9
191-26-9
1100-02-7
1132-44-9 IDibmofvrn
1121-14-2 12,4-Oiititrotol
I-
I
1606-20-2
17009-22-3
1100-41-6
I
1934-92-1
(lit
1101-99-3
1118-74-1
I87-8S-9 iPinttdtloroBtWMl
1
I
189-01-6 I
1120-12-7 I
1206-44-0 IF1
1129-00-0 I
1-
\
169-69-7
191-94-1
I117-W-7
I-
•I-
IBmelbJFlu
I297-46-9 IBMolk)n
-------
v«nar inc., Udoratonr Oparatiwt
Vir«p COTMP, Sprmff »Itf « 22191 (703) 73HOOO
Italytit Data 9**
(Pig* 4)
Umtifirt bapeunds
1
1
1
11..
17...,
19....
111...
112...
H3...
116...
M7...
US...
HI...
121...
l??
123...
1.3...
I2J...
130...
1
OS 1 Cflipwnd
Nwfiar 1 Nw
1
, |
, l
j
..........I..
l
1
1
1
,
j
1
1 1 lEstuut*
(Fraction 1 IT ar&tffLlConctntrit;;
1 1 V^Hm/Ka «/uj
...... . I.........I............I
1 | |
1 ...| |
1 | 1.....
1.. | t .,..,
1 .I............1............
1 | i
1 1...., 1 ,
1 | .....1 ,
1 | i ,
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
.......I.... | i
l
» 1
..1
,
,
1
1
!
!
!
!
(
-------
600
Ctntar, Springfiild W 22131 (703) 730-3UO
Laboratory NSMI
Lab S-olt 10 Not
BQ991.
OmUCS (MUSIS MTR 9ST
_ CasiNoi.
K
(Past 1)
IS«plt
IWB 319
*'.
Contract Noi
.5030.12
.3030.12
tati Savlo flactivod:
•y
VOLATILE OMUICS
Conctntrationi UM
Dttt EitractadVPr«partdi
Oato A«ly»d>
Core/Oil Faetori
Pfrctnt Noiiturti
174-47-3
IQilarartlum
I7W1-4
173-00-3
173-OM
I
167-64-1
173-13-0
173-39-4
173-34-3
1156-60-fl
I
167-66-3
1107-06-2
(Vinyl Chlorido
lOilorootham
INrthylra Oiloridt
•I-
(Carbon Bisulfide
tl,l-0ienloroftftr»
11,1-OidiloroothaM
ITran»-l,2-Oichlorotthtr»
-I
lOilorofoni
171-94
ISM3-S
I
1108-05-4
IT3-e7-4
I——
11,1,1-rriGhloroatham
ICvom rotrachloriot
-I
IVinyl fcttatt
Valut If th* molt is a «•!«
dotoctiM li«t, nsgrt tht
bat not drtattat Tni
ion link for tlw weU
feU hgerting Ouliflon
tnaneriqual to ti»
ihit flat ippliit to
tht idontificatien has bom eonflraod by SD«.
ittht
n«| it uod rfwi tht tMlytt it found in
U» blank at «11 «• Hit uoplt. It tnaicatM
potubla/orobiBl* blank contannation and
tht data OOF to tako ippropriiti action.
his fla| is und lithor
twtativtly idontifiad
faetop is astofldf OP riMi ttiv ooav ipoctnl
a.^. _^ _ ^^^^^^^^^^ fc.j- - A ^^^^i^» otO^^
i «•) prtaoncs1 or a coaoowo inn •am na>
tin entarii bat tta nstlt is IMS tlw tta
doivtian lint bit artstv than oro. (t.|. 10J1
For. I
WFtt KV062U6
-------
Vtnar lie,, Laboratory Opmtiom
U90 Vfcnar Cintir, Springflild VA £2151 703/790-3000
Can
»»12 Ml I 2_
INTO 919
OMMICS flNRLVSIS DATA MET (Piy 2)
CdfctntrationiUN
Oitt E»tract«d/Prtpar«d»
Datt
.03/1l/§7_
Caic/Dil Factor*.
I10MB-2
1111-44-4
195-57-*,
I341-73-1
1106-46-7
I
1100-91-6
198-30-1
ll,3-0idilerot«uin>
11,4-OiehlantamnM
139631-32-9
1106-44-4
I
1621-64-7
167-72-1
.1
itaoyl Alcohol
11,2-OidilorobMam
12 Mjlhylphonol
I bis<2-dilaroiHaraoyl)tthor
14-MthylBfNfiol
178-39-1
IM-75-5
I
1108-67-9
-I
IIHIitroio-Oi-ri-proBylattnt
iHnadtlorootliw
iNitrabnum
II
iBmeie (teid
1111-91-1
U20-43-2
1120-42-1
I
191-20-3
1106-47-4
187-61-3
159-50-7
191-57-4
I • •
l2,V-dicMoreahnol
11,2,4-tndili
•I
INckthftlm
14-Oiloromliii
•I-
177-47-4 iHBHdilorocyelopnkadlflw
195*99-4 12,4,5-TndilorophMl
191-51-7 12-GhloreMphtlutam
lftt-74-l
I
1131-11-3
•I-
PMtalatc
13-Wtroomliw
ug/l
10 »
10 «
10 (I
10 «
ion
10 a
10 a
10 i
10 a
10 •
10 a
10 «
10*
10 a
10 »
10 «
B«
10 •
10 «
10 •
10 tt
10 a
10 •
10 a
10 a
10 «
10 •
30 •
10 •
30 •
10 •
10 •
30 •
BC ClNmp t lYn [ 1MB
Saparatory Fml Extraction t ]Vn
Continwm liquid-liquid Eitractioi
CM
IA3-3M I
I51-O-4 12,4-Mnitrophoml
1100-02-7 t4-mti
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
INTRODUCTION : 1
ANALYTICAL METHODOLOGY 1
Sample Extraction and Analyte Enrichment 1
Analysis 3
Quality Assurance 4
Recovery of Internal Standards 5
Quantification 6
RESULTS 8
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. HRGC/HRMS Operating Parameters 10
Table 2. Exact Masses Used for the Determination of PCDD
and PCDF . .^ 11
Table 3. Levels of PCDO/PCDF 1n Samples 12
Table 4. Percent Recoveries of Internal Standards 14
Table 5. Chlorine Isotope Ratios for Samples 15
APPENDIX
SINGLE ION CURRENT CHROMATOGRAMS A-l
-------
FINAL REPORT
on
DETERMINATION OF POLVCHLORINATED
DIBENZO-P-DIOXINS AND POLYCHLORINATED
OIBENZOFURANS IN WATER AND ASH SAMPLES
to
NUS CORPORATION
from
BATTELLE
Columbus Division
April 29, 1987
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this report Is to present the measured levels of
polychlorlnated d1benzo-p-d1ox1ns (PCDO) and polychlorfnated dlbenzofurans
(PCDF) in samples received from NUS on March 3 and March 16, 1987. The
report also describes the analytical procedures used to obtain these
results. The analytical results for the samples, which consisted of two
samples, one ash and one water leachate, from the Onleda County leach field,
two similar samples from the New Hanover County leach field, and five water
samples collected by Versar Inc., are presented.
ANALYTICAL METHODOLOGY
Sample Extraction
Hater Samples. Samples containing sediment were filtered and the
sediment saved for extraction. AHquots of the water were spiked with 13C12
Internal standards to the levels listed below.
-------
Internal Standard^ Spike Level
2,3,7,8-tetrach1orod1benzorD-d1ox1n-I3Ci9 9.5 nq
(2,3,7,8-tetra-CDD-l3c12)
l,2,3,7,8-pentachlorod1benzo;D-d1ox1n-l3Ci9 10.0 ng
(l,2,3,7,8-penta-CDD-13C12)
l,2,3,6,7,8-hexachlorod1benzo-D-d1oxin-l3Ci;> 9.85 ng
-------
Extract Cleanup. The extracts were transferred to tandem silica
gel columns containing activated silica gel, 44 percent concentrated
sulfurlc add on silica gel, and 33 percent 1H sodium hydroxide on silica
gel. The purpose of these columns was to remove acidic and basic compounds
and easily oxidized materials from the extracts. The silica gel support
provided a large surface area for contact with the sample extracts, thus
improving the cleanup efficiency. The PCDD/PCOF isomers were eluted from
the columns with 70 ml of hexane and the entire eluates, including the
original extract volume, were collected. The hexane eluates were
concentrated to 2-3 ml with a gentle stream of nitrogen gas.
Elemental sulfur found In sample NY-LE-02 was removed by shaking
the extract with an aqueous solution of tetrabutylammonium sulfite until the
yellow precipitate dissolved. The hexane layer was removed and then dried
by passing it through a four Inch column of hexane washed sodium sulfate.
The column was eluted with 30 ml of hexane and then concentrated to 2 jnL
under a stream of nitrogen gas.
All the extracts were then passed onto five gram macro alumina
columns and eluted with hexane/methylene chloride (97:3); followed by
hexane/methylene chloride (1:1). The 1:1 fractions were concentrated to
approximately 2 ml and passed onto one gram micro alumina columns. After
elution with 97:3 hexane/methylene chloride, a 1:1 hexane/methylene chloride
fractions were collected, concentrated to near dryness under a slow stream
of nitrogen and then redissolved in 20 ml of n-decane containing 5 ng of an
absolute recovery standard, l,2,3,4-tetrachlorod1benzo-p-diox1n-l3Ci2
(l,2,3,4-tetra-CDD-13C12). All solutions were stored at 0 C and protected
from light until analysis.
Analysis
The extracts were analyzed and quantified for PCDD/PCOF by
combined capillary column gas chromatography/high resolution mass spectrome-
try (HRGC/HRMS). The HRGC/HRMS system consists of a Carlo Erba Model 4160
gas chromatograph Interfaced directly Into the Ion source of a VG Nodel 7070
high resolution mass spectrometer. The chromatograph1c column was a 60 N
-------
DB-5 fused silica column using helium as the carrier gas at a flow velocity
of 30 cm/sec. The mass spectrometer was operated In the electron Impact
(El) 1on1zat1on mode at a mass resolution of 9,000-12,000 (M/&M, 10 percent
valley definition). The operating parameters of the HRGC/HRMS system are
summarized 1n Table 1. All HRGC/HRMS data were acquired by itiultiple-ion-de-
tectlon (HID) with a VG Model 11-250J Data System. The exact masses that
were monitored are shown in Table 2.
Quality Assurance
The operation of the HRGC/HRMS was evaluated each day by analyzing
standard mixtures of PCOD/PCOF Isomers. These mixtures consisted of
2,3,7,8-tetra-CDD, 2,3,7,8-tetra-CDF, 2,3,7,8-tetra-CDO-13C12, and
2,3,7,8-tetra-CDF-13Ci2 to evaluate accuracy of quantification and to
evaluate Isomer resolution. Mixtures of selected PCOO/PCOF Isomers were
used to evaluate.the stability of the chromatographlc elutlon windows. The
mass focus accuracy of the MID unit was evaluated before each analysis by
observing selected 1on masses from perfluorokerosene (PFK). Adjustments were
made to the offset to correct for minor variations. Mass focus stability
was assured by use of a reference PFK "lock mass" to correct for any mass
focus drift.
Native spike and a laboratory method blank samples were processed
during the extraction and cleanup of the samples. The native spike samples
were used to evaluate the accuracy of quantification, while the laboratory
method blanks were used to demonstrate freedom from contamination. The
results of these analyses are summarized In Table 3. The analyses of the
method blanks were free of PCOO/PCOF contamination except for traces of
hepta- and octa- CDD/COF.
Recovery of the spiked PCOO/PCOF standards from the native spike
samples ranged from 80-130 percent, which 1s within the expected range of
variation for a sample subjected to extensive chronatographlc clean-up.
-------
Recovery of Internal Standard?
Recoveries of the Internal standards were calculated by comparison
to the external standard, l,2,3,4-tetra-CDD-13C12, which was added following
extraction. Relative response factors were determined from multiple
analyses of a standard mixture containing all of the Isotopically labelled
standards. The response factors were calculated by comparing the sum of the
chromatographic peak areas of the two Ions monitored for each chlorine level
class to the sum of the peak areas for the two Ion masses from 1,2,3,4-
tetra-CCD-13Ci2- The experimental relative response factors were:
Congener Class Response Factor
Tetra-CDO 1.19
Pent a -COO 0.59
Hexa-COO 1.00
Hepta-CDO 0.71
Octa-CDD 0.64
Tetra-COF 1.28
Penta-COF 1.66
Hexa-CDF 1.60
Hepta-COF 1.16
The equation used to calculate the recoveries was:
Recovery (X) - Als * Or I X Iff
Ars x Q1s x Rf
Where:
A1s • Sum of Integrated areas for Internal standard;
Qrs - Quantity of recovery standard In ng;
Ars » Sun of Integrated areas for recovery standard;
Qts • Quantity of Internal standard In ng; and
Rf • Response factor.
-------
Quantification
The PCDO/PCOF were quantified by comparing the sum of the
chromatographic peak areas for the two Ions monitored 1n each congener class
to the sum of the peak areas of the two Ions monitored for the corresponding
isotopically labelled Isomer. The octa-CDO-13Cj2 was used to quantify the
octa-CDF.
Experimental relative response factors were calculated from seven
analyses of a standard mixture which contains representatives from each of
the tetrachloro- through octachloro- PCOO/PCOF congener classes and their
corresponding *3Cj2 isotopes. These response factors were Included In all
calculations used to quantify the data. The response factors were
calculated by comparing the sum of the chroraatographic peak areas of the two
ions monitored for each congener class to the sum of the peak areas for the
two Ions monitored for the corresponding Isotopically labelled internal
standard. The experimental response factors were:
Congener Class Response Factor
Tetra-CDD 0.99
Penta-CDO 0.97
Hexa-CDD l.OS
Hepta-CDO 0.93
Octa-CDD 0.94
Tetra-CDF 0.91
Penta-COF 1.03
Hexa-COF 1.05
Hepta-COF 0.97
Octa-CDF 0.92
The formula used for quantifying the PCOO/PCOF Isomers was:
Concentration • AC X01i
A1s x U x Rf
-------
Where:
Cone. • Concentration of target isomer or congener class
Ac • Sum of Integrated peak areas for the target
Isomer or congener class
Q1s » Quantity of Internal standard
Ais • Total Integrated peak areas for the Internal standard
W • Sample weight in g
Rf • Response factor.
Each resolved peak present In the pair of selected-1on-current
chromatograms collected for each congener class was evaluated manually to
determine 1f 1t met the criteria for a PCDO or PCOF Isomer. By examining
each of the peaks separately, quantitative accuracy 1s Improved over what Is
obtained when the areas of all of the peaks in a selected chromatographlt
window are averaged. When averaged data are used. It Is possible for pairs
of peaks with high and low chlorine Isotope ratios to produce averaged data
that meets the Isotope ratio criterion. For example, two pairs of peaks
having chlorine isotope ratios of 0.56 and 0.96, which are outside of the
acceptable range, calculate to an average ratio of 0.76, which is in range.
The criteria that were used to identify PCX and PCDF Isomers
were:
(1) Simultaneous responses in both ion
chromatograms
(2) Chlorine isotope ratio within t 15* of
the theoretical value
(3) Chromatograph1c retention tines within
windows determined fro* analyses of
standard mixtures
(4) Signal-to-noise ratio equal to or
greater than 2.5 to 1
The 2,3,7,8-substituted KOO/PCOf Isomers and the octa-COO
Included the additional criterion that they coeluted within ±2 seconds of
their tsotopically labelled analogs.
-------
8
A limit of detection (LOO) was calculated for samples In which
isoraers of a particular chlorine congener class were not detected. The
formula used for calculating the LOO was:
Inn » Hn x 01s x 2.5
His x W x Rf
Where:
LOO - Single Isomer limits of detection for a congener class
Hn • Average height of background noise
Q1s • Quantity of Internal standard
His • Peak height of Internal standard
U • Sample weight
Rf • Response factor; and
2.5 • Signal-to-nolse ratio.
RESULTS
The results from the PCOF/PCDD analyses are summarized In Table 3.
These data are the actual measured levels In the samples and have not been
corrected for laboratory or field blank levels. They have been corrected,
however, for extraction efficiency and cleanup losses. A detection limit Is
listed, In parentheses, for samples 1n which a particular chlorine congener
class was not detected. The concentration of the 2,3,7,8-substltuted
PCOO/PCOF which coeluted with the Internal standards are also given in Table
3. However, on the 08-5 capillary gas-chromatography column, the 2,3,7,8-
tetra-COF Is not easily resolved from certain other Isoners In the same
congener class, and thus* may contain contributions from other Isomers. For
example, 2,3,7,8-tetra-COF may coelute with 1,2,4,9-tetra-CDF, 2,3,4,7-
tetra-COF, 2,3,4,8-tetra-CDF, and 2,3,4,6-tetra-COF. To further resolve
tetra-COF Isomers, a second gas chromatographlc column can be used, however
this 1s beyond the scope of the present study.
The recoveries of the Internal standards are summarized In Table
4. The recovery of tetra- through octa- COO/CDF averaged 80-130 percent,
which Is within the expected range of recoveries for samples subjected to
-------
multiple chromatographlc cleanups. Chlorine Isotope ratios for samples that
contained PCDD/PCOF Isomers are summarized In Table 5, and all met
acceptance criteria.
The single Ion current chromatograms for the sample, standard, and
decane analyses are included separately In the Appendix. The data files are
labelled with a 7-letter-d1git combination, with the beginning letter
Identifying the Instrument used, and the first two numbers denoting the
Instrument logbook 1n which the analysis Is recorded. The third and fourth
numbers denote the page in the logbook and the fifth and sixth numbers the
line on which the entry was made.
-------
10
TABLE 1. HRGC/HRHS OPERATING PARAMETERS
Mass Resolution
Electron Energy
Accelerating Voltage
Source Temperature
Preamplifier Gain
Electron Multiplier Gain
Transfer Line Temperature
Column
Injector Temperature
Column Temp - Initial
Column Temp - Program
Carrier Gas
Flow Velocity
Injection Node
Injection Volume
9,000-12,000 (MAM, 10% valley definition)
70 eV
6,000 Volts
200 C
10'7 amps/volt
280 C
OB- 5 60N
300 C
160 C Hold for 2 mln
20 C/mln to 240 C hold for 30 m1n
20 C/mln to 320 C hold for 20 m1n
Helium
•30 cm/sec
SplUless
2uL
-------
11
TABLE 2. EXACT MASSES USED FOR THE DETERMINATION OF PCOO AND PCOF
Accurate Mass Theoretical Isotope Ratio
Compound Mass 1 Mass 2 Mass I/Mass 2
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-d1oxins 319.8965 321.8936 0.77
Tetrachlorodibenzofurans 303.9016 305.8987 Q.77
Pentach1orod1benzo-p-d1ox1ns 355.8546 357.8517 1.54
Pentachlorodlbenzofurans 339.8597 341.8567 1.54
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-d1ox1ns 389.8156 391.8127 1.23
Hexachlorodlbenzofurans 373.8207 375.8178 1.23
Heptachlorod1benzo-p-d1ox1ns 423.7766 425.7737 1.03
Heptachlorodibenzofurans 407.7817 409.7788 1.03
Octachlorodlbenzo-p-dioxins 457.7377 459.7347 0.88
Octachlorodlbenzofurans 441.7428 443.7398 0.88
Tetrachlorod1benzo-p-d1oxin-l3Ci2 331.9367 333.9338 0.77
Tetrachlorodibenzofuran-I3C12 315.9418 317.9389 0.77
Pentach1orod1benzo-p-d1oxin-l3Ci2 367.8948 369.8918 1.54
Pentachlorod1benzofuran-I3Ci2 351.8999 353.8969 1.54
Hexach1orod1benzo-p-d1oxln-l3Ci2 401.8558 403.8529 1.23
Hexach1orod1benzofuran-I3C12 385.8609 387.8580 1.23
Heptachlorod1benzo-p-d1ox1n-l3Cl2 435.8168 437.8139 1.03
Heptach1orod1benzofuran-l3Cl2 419.8219 421.8190 1.03
Octachlorod1benzo-p-d1ox1n-l3Cl2 469.7779 471.7749 0.88
-------
12
TABLE 3. LEVELS OF PCDO/PCOF IN SAMPLES
Sample Number
23002 TCLP -,vf
23002SU924
23002EP-TOX
NC-LE-02
NY-LE-02
METHOD BLANK
22392EP-TOX ^
22392 TCLP
NATIVE SPIKE
METHOD BLANK
NC-ASH-01
NY-ASH-01
NATIVE SPIKE
METHOD BLANK
Units
pg/L
pg/L
pg/L
pg/L
pg/L
pg/L
pg/L
pg/L
pg/L
pg/L
ng/g
ng/g
ng/g
ng/g
2,3,7,8-
TETRA
-CDD
(27)
(42)
(53)
(46)
(57)
(17)
(83)
(27)
21000
(37)
(0.02)
(0.02)
18
(0.03)
TOTAL
TETRA
-COD
(27)
(42)
(53)
(57)
(17)
(83)
(27)
21000
(37)
0.03
0.02
18
(0.03)
TOTAL
PENTA
-CDD
(16)
(16)
(13)
(64)
(23)
(15)
(31)
(25)
9900
(17)
0.10
0.12
8.5
(0.01)
TOTAL
HEXA
-CDD
(7.3)
(4.8)
(4.9)
130
47
(6.2)
(10)
(6.7)
8400
(12)
0.1
0.43
6.9
(0.01)
TOTAL
HEPTA
-CDD
(18)
(23)
21
770
120
17
(29)
(20)
10000
30
0.18
4.2
9.0
(0.01)
OCTA
-COD
(48);
35
31
.15000
210
18
33
(32)
4300
(33)
0.14
9.9
4.0
0.02
-------
13
TABLE 3. (CONTINUED)
Sample Number
23002 TCLP Jt,
23002SW924 '
23002EP-TOX
NC-LE-02
NY-LE-02
METHOD BLANK
22392EP-TOX ^
22392 TCLP
NATIVE SPIKE
METHOD BLANK
NC-ASH-01
NY-ASH-01
NATIVE SPIKE
METHOD BLANK
Units
pg/L
P9/L
pg/L
pg/L
pg/L
pg/L
pg/L
pg/L
pg/L
pg/L
ng/g
ng/g
ng/g
ng/g
2,3,7,8-
TETRA
-CDF»
(33)
(23)
(19)
(75)
(45)
(15)
(36)
(14)
10000
(27)
0.07
0.11
8.9
(0.01)
TOTAL
TETRA
-CDF
(33)
(23)
(19)
(75)
(45)
(15)
(36)
(14)
10000
(27)
0.56
0.46
8.9
(0.01)
TOTAL
PENTA
-CDF
(8.8)
(5.4)
(4.0)
35
28
(3.6)
(6-7)
(6.2)
9700
(5.2)
0.29
0.54
8.4
(0.003)
TOTAL
HEXA
-CDF
(7.0)
(4-4)
(8.9)
35
41
(5.2)
(7.2)
(6.9)
10000
(2.8)
0.19
1.2
8.2
0.005
TOTAL
HEPTA
-CDF
(8.9)
(6.2)
12
85
43
4.2
(19)
(12)
9900
4.7
0.11
2.2
8.7
(0.003)
OCTA
-CDF;
(80)
(41)
(51)
54
23
(18)
(47)
(68)
9900
(36)
0.02
1.7
8.8
0.13
a May Include contributions from four additional tetra-CDF tsoners
-------
14
TABLE 4. PERCENT RECOVERIES OF INTERNAL STANDARDS
Sample
23002 TCLP
23002SH924
23002EP-TOX
NC-LE-02
NY-LE-02
METHOD BLANK
22392EP-TOX
22392 TCLP
NATIVE SPIKE
METHOD BLANK
NC-ASH-Ol
NY-ASH-01
NATIVE SPIKE
METHOD BLANK
TETRA
-COD
94
100
96
99
110
110
92
100
100
110
91
100
100
99
PENTA
-COO
100
110
110
96
80
120
91
110
110
100
92
110
110
100
HEXA
-COD
110
110
110
100
93
110
95
100
110
110
100
120
120
no
HEPTA
-COO
91
97
96
94
100
110
87
98
120
110
100
120
120
110
OCTA
-COD
99
100
83
97
120
100
90
100
130
140
110
130
110
120
TETRA
-CDF
98
100
92
100
110
110
92
100
94
100
93
110
98
92
PENTA
-CDF
91
99
100
92
96
100
88
94
100
100
87
92
94
92
HEXA
-CDF
99
100
88
93
110
100
89
95
100
120
95
100
110
100
HEPTA
-COF
100
110
110
100
100
120
96
100
130
120
99
120
130
120
-------
15
TABLE 5. CHLORINE ISOTOPE RATIOS
(Theoretical Chlorine Isotope Ratio)
Sample Number
23002 TCLP
23002SW924
23002EP-TOX
NC-LE-02
NY-LE-02
METHOD BLANK
22392EP-TOX
22392 TCLP
NATIVE SPIKE
METHOD BLANK
NC-ASH-01
NY-ASH-01
NATIVE SPIKE
METHOD BLANK
2,3,7,8-
TETRA
-COO,
(0.77)1
—
...
—
...
...
...
...
0.79
...
...
...
0.78
...
TOTAL
TETRA
-CDD
(0.77)
- -
. .
. .
. .
- -
...
...
0.79
...
0.80
0.78
0.78
...
PENTA
-CDD
(1.54)
' V - 1 -
...
-.
.-
--
--
--
...
1.61
...
1.43
1.63
1.60
...
HEXA
-CDD
,(1'")
...
...
1.26
1.31
...
...
...
1.25
...
1.41
1.20
1.23
...
HEPTA
-CDD
(1.03)
..T- ' !
—
1.01
0.98
1.05
0.96
...
...
1.03
1.09
0.97
1.05
1.05
...
OCTA
-COD
(0.88)
0.83
0.99
0.92"
0.78
0.96
0.98
...
0.88
...
0.91
0.89
0.90
0.76
--- Congener class not detected In sample.
1 Expected theoretical value In parentheses.
-------
16
TABLE 5. (CONTINUED)
Sample Number
23002 TCLP
23002SW924
23002EP-TOX
NC-LE-02
NY-LE-02
METHOD BLANK
Z2392EP-TOX
22392 TCLP
NATIVE SPIKE
METHOD BLANK
NC-ASH-01
NY-ASH-OI
NATIVE SPIKE
METHOD BLANK
2,3,7,8-
TETRA
-CDF,
(0.77)1
, -v
...
—
—
...
—
...
...
0.77
...
0.78
0.79
0.77
* " •
TOTAL
TETRA
-CDF
(0.77)
-,-?T
...
—
—
...
...
...
...
0.77
...
0.79
0.79
0.77
*• •
PENTA
-CDF
(1.54)
• •
...
...
1.51
1.40
...
...
1.58
...
1.52
1.55
1.46
* • .
HEXA
-CDF
(1.23)
... ..
...
...
1.31
1.14
. ._
...
1.28
—
1.25
1.25
1.25
1.31
HEPTA
-CDF
(1.03)
-• • f
...
0.93
1.09
1.11
1.09
• • •
1.02
1.05
1.03
1.06
1.04
...
OCTA
-CDF
(0.88)
.•>!
...
...
1.01
0.94
• __
• -» •
0.94
0.90
0.92
0.91
1.00
—- Congener class not detected in sample.
1 Expected theoretical value In parentheses.
-------
|