PB88-131313
MANUAL OF PROCEDURES AND CRITERIA FOR INSPECTING
THE INSTALLATION OF FLEXIBLE MEMBRANE LINERS IN
HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITIES
SCS Engineers
Long Beach, CA
Dec 87
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Technical Information Service
-------
PB88-131313
EPA/600/8-87/056
December 1987
MANUAL OF PROCEDURES AND CRITERIA
FOR INSPECTING THE INSTALLATION
OF FLEXIBLE MEMBRANE LINERS
IN HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITIES
by
Thomas D. Wright
William M. Held
J. Rodney Marsh
SCS Engineers
Long Beach, California 90807
and
Louis R. Hovater
Hovater Engineers
Laguna Hills, California 92653
Contract No. 68-03-3247
Project Officer
Charles Moench, Jr.
Land Pollution Control Division
Hazardous Haste Engineering Research Laboratory
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
HAZARDOUS WASTE ENGINEERING RESEARCH LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CINCINNATI, OHIO 45268
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
flcese ,ead lnsrnicZ:OsaS on the re ern before complerrngj
LREPORT NO 2
EPA/60018-87/056
PB88—131313/AS
5. REPORT DATE
4 TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Manual of Procedures and Criteria for Inspecting the
Installation of Flexible Membrane Liners in Hazardous
Waste Facilities
December 1987
G.PERFORMINGORGANIZATIONCODE
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO
7. AUTHOR(S)
Thomas 0. Wright, William M. Held, J. Rodney Marsh,
Louis R. Hovater
AOORESS
10 PROGRAM ELEMENT NO
B PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME ANO
SCS Engineers -
Long Beach, CA 90807
BRD1A
CO 4T RACT/G ANTN0
68-03-3247
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
1 SPONS.ORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
tiazaruous Waste Engineering Research Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, OH 45268
14. SPONSORING AGENCY COOE
EPA/600/12
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
Project Officer: Charles Moench, Jr. (513) 569—7819
1B•ABSTRACTUnder the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984, certain land-
fills and surface impoundments are required to assure proper containment of wastes by
use of liner systems. Proper installation of the flexible membrane liner (FML) must be
followed to ensure containment of wastes. This manual is intended to assist an inspecto
in performing all aspects of a proper FML installation inspection. Four types of FMLS
are discussed in this manual: PVC, CSPE, CPE, and HDPE. The manual addresses seven in-
stallation operations. These operations include unloading and storage of FML, prepara-
tion and maintenance of supporting surface (both earth and other supporting surfaces),
lacement of FML on the supporting surface, seaming operations, anchoring and sealing
(anchoring in earth and to concrete, piping, etc.), testing (both the seams and the
integrity of the entire FML installation), and covering the FML (earth, concrete, geo-
extiles, or drainage nets). The manual describes each operation and sub-operation, and
lives recommended inspection procedures, inspection frequencies, and interpretations.
he types of documentation necessary for each inspection are discussed. Where appro-
rjate, alternatives to recommended inspection procedures are provided. Inspection
:hecklists are included for each operation to aid the inspector in the field.
(7. KEY WORDS ANO DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
ENDED TERMS C. COSATI Field/Group
3. DESCRIPTORS
b.IOENTIFIERS/OPEN
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release to Public
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Reporr)
Unclassified
20 SECURITY CLASS (T7is:pageh
21 NO OF PAGES
176
22. PRICE
Unclassified
—
EPA Form 2220—1 (R. . 4—77) P v 0u3 LDITIOM II OB OLCT
-------
NOTICE
The information in this document has been funded by the
United States Environmental Protection Agency under Contract No.
68—03—3247 to SCS Engineers. It has been subject to the Agency’s
peer and administrative review, and it has been approved for
publication as an EPA document. Mention of trade names or com-
mercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommenda-
tion for use.
-------
FOREWORD
Today’s rapidly developing and changing technologies and
industrial products and practices frequently carry with them the
increased generation of solid and hazardous wastes. These mate-
rials, .f improperly dealt with, can threaten both public health
and the environment. Abandoned waste sites and accidental
releases of toxic and hazardous substances to the environment
also have important environmental and public health implications.
The Hazardous Waste Engineering Research Laboratory assists in
providing an authoritative and defensible engineering basis for
assessing and solving these problems. Its products support the
policies, programs, and regulations of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, permitting and other responsibilities of state
and local governments, and the needs of both large and small
businesses in handling their wastes responsibly and economically.
This document presents the procedures and criteria for
inspecting the installation of the four most commonly used flex-
ible membrane liners (FMLs) for land containment of hazardous
wastes. The FMLs available for hazardous waste contairtments and
their characteristics are discussed. Installation operations
covered include on—site unloading and storage, preparation and
maintenance of supporting surfaces, FML placement, seaming,
anchors and attachments, testing, and final covering. Finally,
inspection checklists are provided to aid the inspector in the
field.
The intended audience for this document includes engineering
firms, regulatory officials, site operators, and dischargers of
wastes to land. Anyone involved in liner installation inspec-
tions or i.n ensuring that design plans and specifications will
meet inspection guidelines can benefit from this document.
Thomas R. Hauser, Director
Hazardous Waste Engineering
Research Laboratory
1i
-------
ABSTRACT
Under the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of
1984, certain landfills and surface impoundments are required to
assure proper containment of wastes by the use of liner systems.
Proper installation of the flexible membrane liner (FML) must be
followed to ensure containment of wastes. This manual is
intended to assist an inspector in performing all aspects of a
proper FML installation inspection.
Four types of FMLs are discussed in this manual: PVC, CSPE,
CPE, and HDPE. The manual addresses seven installation opera-
tions. These operations include unloading and storage of FML,
preparation and maintenance of supporting surface (both earth and
other supporting surfaces), placement of FML on the supporting
surface, seaming operations, anchoring and sealing (anchoring in
earth and to concrete, piping, etc.), testing (both the seams and
the integrity of the entire FML installation), and covering the
FML (earth, concrete, geotextiles, or drainage nets).
The manual describes each operation and sub—operation, and
gives recommended inspection procedures, inspection frequencies,
and interpretations. The types of documentation necessary for
each inspection are also discussed. Where appropriate, alterna-
tives to recommended inspection procedures are provided. Inspec-
tion checklists are included for each operation to aid the
inspector in the field.
This manual was submitted in fulfillment of Contract No. 68—
03—3247 by SCS Engineers under the sponsorship of the U.S. Envi—
ronmental Protection Agency. Assisting SCS as a subcontractor
was Louis Hovater of Hovater Engineers. All photographs in this
manual were provided by Hovater Engineers. This manual covers.
the period from March 1985 to May 1987, and work was completed as
of May 1987.
iv
-------
CONTENTS
Disclaimer...... • ii
Foreword ...... .1. . 11.1.
Abstract . IV
Contents . v
Figures •1s • Vi
Tables .. . •.... ix
1.. Introduction.... .............. .1—1
2. Flexible Membrane Liners Available for Hazardous
Waste Containments 2—1
3. On—Site rJnloading/Storage. . . .... . . . . .. .3—1
4. Preparation and Maintenance of Supporting Surface....4—l
5. Placement of FML on Supporting Surface...............5—l
6. Seaming Operations . 6—1
7. Liner Anchors/Attachments... ... . . . ..... . . ..... .7—1
8. Testing..... ........... . .•...... . .... . . . . . 8—1
9 • FML Covers...... . ...•..•... . . . . •......• . . . . . . ...9—1
Bibliography
Appendix A — Inspection Checklists
V
-------
FIGURES
Number Page
3—1 FML Damaged During Shipment 3—2
3—2 FML Crate Damaged During Shipment 3—2
3—3 Rolls of FML 3—5
3 —4 FML Ca r r icr Si i rigs . . . 3 — 5
3 — 5 Pal 1 e t s of Cove r ed FM.L . . . . . . . . . . . 3—7
3—6 TransportingFMLUs ingForkl ift 3—7
3—7 Example of a Proper Unloading Area............. 3—9
4—1 Application of Herbicide. . ........ . ........ . . . . . .4—4
4—2 Animal Burrow Holes at Edge of Supporting Surface.....4—6
4—3 RockOutcropinSupportingSurface....................4—8
4—4 Hand Removal of Rocks, Etc., from Supporting
Surface . . . . •.... 4—8
4—5 Vibratory Roller on Supporting Surface.......... 4—10
4—6 Smooth Hand-Held Steel-Wheeled Roller on
Supporting Surface..... . . . . . . •.. .4—10
4—7 A Properly Prepared Final Supporting Surface 4—il
4—8 MoisteningofSupportingSurface............ ...4—ll
4—9 Partially Placed FML. . . . . . . . •. . . . . . . . . •1 • • • • • • • . . . . .4—12
4—10 Eroded Side Slope . . . . . 4—14
4—11 Wet Supporting Surface Exposed for Drying............4—15
4—12 Unprepared Supporting Surface Slope Face with Foot
Depressions . . . 4—16
vi
-------
FIGURES (continued)
Number Page
4—13 Unacceptable Concrete Supporting Surface 4—18
4—14 Concrete Supporting Surface with an Acceptable
Trowel Finish 4—18
4—15 Application of Surface Coating Being Applied on
an Unacceptable Asphaltic Supporting Surface 4—20
5—1 Example of How Not to Remove a Metal Band 5—4
5—2 Workman Standing Aside While FML Is Rolled Down
Side Slope .. 54
5—3 Worker Wearing Appropriate Apparel . ..5—6
5—4 Examp leFMLSheetLayoutPlafl .. . ....5—9
5— 5 Crew P la ci ng FM.!. Sheet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5— 1 0
5—6 SandbagsatEdgeofFML 5—11
5—7 FML Being Transported by Wheel Loader 5—11
5—8 FMLBeingunfoldedfromFOtklift 5—13
5—9 FML Being Unfolded from Truck 5—13
5—10 FML Roll Being Transported by Wheel Loader 5—14
5—li FML Being Spread by Front Loader 5—15
5—12 Acceptable Working Area at Top of Slope 5—17
5—13 Acceptable Working Space at Bottom of Slope 5—17
5—14 Properly Placed FML on Side Slope............. 5—18
6—1 Seaming of F!’IL Using Liquid-Applied
Solvent/Adhesive . . . . 6—6
6—2 Seam ingofFMLasi.ngHOtAir .............6—7
6—3 Seaming of Ff41. by Extrusion (Fusion) Welding..........6—7
6—4 Typical Field Lap Joint and Butt Joint for
PVC F f4 1 ....... . . •. . . . . . . . . . . . • Se...... .6—8
vii
-------
FIGURES (continued)
Number Page
6—5 A “Fishmouth ” That Has Been Torn Along Its Edges.....6—].5
6—6 Workers Seaming with Solvent/Adhesive Using
Latex Gloves ............. ...... 6—17
6—7 TypicalPatchingoperation.... ...... 6—21
7—1 FML Battened to Concrete Structure 7—4
7—2 DetailofRegletConnection... 7—5
7—3 FMLBootClampedtoPipe..............................7—6
7—4 AnchorTrenchforCSPEFML... ......7—8
7—5 Anchor Trench for HDPE............................ ....7—8
8—1 AFie ldCut—OutSeamBeingPrepared........... 8—4
8—2 Probe Testing of HDPE . . . ......... 8—5
8—3 AirLanceTestingofFML......... .. 8—7
8—4 VacuumBoxTesti.ngofHDPE................ . ...........8—9
8—5 Seam Testing Using Pulse Echo Technique 8—11
8—6 Spark Testing of HDPE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8—14
9—1 Scraper Depositing Cover Soil onto FML...............9—2
9—2 Dump Truck Depositing Cover Soil onto FML.............9—2
9—3 Spreading Cover Soil with Track Dozer.................9—3
9—4 Grade Stakes on Top of FML............................9—4
9—5 TrafficConesonTopofFML...........................9—9
9—6 FML Damage During Spreading of Earth Cover...........9—1O
9—7 GuniteBeingSprayedontoFML........................9—13
9—8 Reinforcing Steel Setting on Chairs.......... 9—14
9—9 Geotexti leRo l lsonFML
viii
-------
TABLES
Number Page
2—i Materials Sometimes Used as FMLs for Hazardous
wasteContainment. 2—2
4—i Soil Characteristics Pertinent to FML
Installations, USCS 4—2
5—i Equipment for FML Placement 5—2
6—1 SeamingMethods 6—3
6—2 Factory and Field Seaming Techniques for Each
FML. Type . . . . . . . . . . . . 6—9
6—3 LapSeamBondRequirements. ... 6—10
6—4 Equipment Required During FML Seaming Operations....6—ii
8-1 Methods Commonly Used to Test FML Seam and Sheet
I ritegrity . . . . . . . . . . . 8—2
ix
-------
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
DEFINITION OF A FLEXIBLE MEMBRANE LINER
This manual addresses the criteria and procedures for
inspecting the installation of flexible membrane liners (FML).
For purposes of this manual, an FML is defined as a thin, flex—
ible prefabricated polymeric layer or sheet of plastic or rubber
commonly used for the containment of hazardous wastes.
PURPOSE AND NEED FOR MANUAL
This manual is intended to provide criteria and procedures
for field inspection of FML installations.
Under the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of
1984, certain landfills and surface impoundments are required to
assure proper containment of wastes by the use of liner systems.
In all cases, HSWA requires that compacted material be overlain
by two FMLs with a leachate collection system installed between
the FMLS. Additionally, in the case of a landfill, a second
leachate collection system must be installed above the top FML.
The liners should consist of one of the following:
• One FML nd a compacted low-permeability soil layer
(1 x lO cm/sec permeability or less).
• Two FMLs.
• Two FMLs and a compacted low—permeability soil layer.
Proper installation of the FML must be followed to ensure
containment of wastes. Other steps include proper design and
material selection.
The intent of this manual is to assist an inspector in per-
forming all aspects of a proper FML installation inspection.
However, this document does not include inspection procedures for
construction of other aspects of a waste containment facility,
such as leachate collection systems and low—permeability soil
liners.
1.—I .
-------
SCOPE OF MANUAL
The manual is divided into nine chapters. Chapter 1 is an
introductory chapter which provides an overview of the manual and
briefly describes its use by certain intended audiences.
Chapter 2 discusses the four types of FMLs most commonly
used for land containment (PVC, CSPE, CPE, and HDPE), and pr.o—
vides a tabular listing of several other less commonly used FMLs.
Chapters 3 through 9 address the required inspection proce-
dures for each individual step of FML installation at a waste
containment site. The various installation procedures covered by
each chapter are as follows:
• Chapter 3 — Unloading and storage of FML.
• Chapter 4 — Preparation and maintenance of the FML sup-
porting surface. Both earth and other supporting sur-
faces (e.g., concrete) are covered.
• Chapter 5 — Placement of FML on the supporting surface.
• Chapter 6 — FUL seaming operations, including a brief
discussion of the various seaming methods.
• Chapter 7 — FML anchoring and sealing, including anchor-
ing in earth and anchoring of FML to concrete, piping,
and other materials.
• Chapter 8 — FML testing, including seam testing tech-
niques and methods for testing the integrity of the
entire FML installation (including FML sheets and anchors
and seals) for leaks.
• Chapter 9 — FML covers, including earth, concrete, geo—
textiles, and drainage nets.
Each chapter includes a checklist that lays out the various
inspection steps for a specific installation procedure. These
checklists are provided in Appendix A. In addition, each chapter
is fully contained and can be individually removed from the
manual for easy reference during inspection.
INTENDED AUDIENCES
This manual is intended for use by engineering firms, dis-
chargers of wastes to land, operators, and regulatory officials.
The manual is intended to provide criteria and procedures for
inspecting and testing FIlL installations in land—based waste con-
tainment facilities.
1—2
-------
Throughout the inspection process, the inspector will work
with representatives of the various participants including the
general contractor, the subcontractor(s) and the design engineer.
Participants (other than the inspector) include:
• Contractor (includes both the general contractor and any
subcontractors). The role of the contractor will be to:
— Prepare the site for installation of the FML including
all necessary vegetation removal, excavation, grading,
compaction, and testing.
— Install the FML.
— Test the FML installation using nondestructive testing,
nondestructive sampling, and destructive testing.
• Design engineer. The design engineer and/or his repre-
sentative should visit the site as often as possible to
ensure that the FML system is being installed according
to design, and to answer any questions that may arise in
the field regarding the design.
• Membrane manufacturer and/or fabricator. The inspector
should request that a representative of these groups
visit the site prior to the start of FML installation in
order to approve the use of the ?ML for the intended pur-
pose.
It is the responsibility of the inspector to ensure that
installation design plans and specifications are followed. The
inspector has the authority to reject the work until the noncom-
plying item (e.g., improper seaming) is corrected or until field
conditions (e.g., ambient temperature is too low/high) warrant
restart—up. It is essential that the inspector maintain a coop-
erative attitude toward FML 1 installers while assuring proper FML
installation.
UPDATE OF MANUAL
It is requested that manual users submit ideas and/or sug-
gestions regarding additional/improved installation criteria and
procedures to the EPA at the following address for inclusion in
subsequent manual updates:
u.s. Environmental Protection Agency
Hazardous Waste Engineering Research Laboratory
Andrew W. Breidenbach Environmental Research Center
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
1—3
-------
PERTINENT REGULATIONS REGARDING USE OF FLEXIBLE MEMBRANE LINERS
Pertinent regulations regarding the use of FMLs include:
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Hazardous Waste
Management System; Under the Resource Conservation Recov-
ery Act (RCRA). 40 CFR Parts 260, 261, 262, 264, 265,
266, 270, 271, and 280. July 15, 1985.
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan Under the
Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and
Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980. 40 CFR 2—300 FR 31203.
July 16, 1982, Effective February 18, 1986.
1—4
-------
CHAPTER 2
FLEXIBLE MEMBRANE LINERS AVAILABLE FOR
HAZARDOUS WASTE CONTAINMENTS
INTRODUCTION
This chapter provides a brief discussion of the four FMLs
most commonly used for waste containment:
• Polyvinyl chloride (PVC).
• High-density polyethylene (HDPE).
• Chlorosulfonated polyethylene (CSPE).
• Chlorinated polyethylene (CPE).
FMLs comprised of other materials are also available and
sometimes used for hazardous waste contairiments. These liner
materials, while not discussed in this manual, are listed in
Table 2—1.
POLYVINYL CHLORIDE
Polyvinyl chloride (PVC) is produced by any of several poly-
merization processes from vinyl chloride monomer. PVC is a ther-
moplastic polymer which is compounded with plasticizers and other
modifiers to produce a wide range of physical properties. PVC is
a widely used FML for waste containn ents, due to its compara-
tively low cost arid good physical properties. Though not as
resistant to ultraviolet radiation and weather deterioration as
other commonly used FML5, PVC can be expected to provide many
years of service if it has a protective cover such as earth.
PVC is initially manufactured in roll stock form and then
fabricated into large sheets (up to 30 meters (100 feet] wide by
several hundred feet long). PVC membranes are seamed by solvent
welding, bodied solvent adhesive, heat, and dielectric methods
(see Chapter 6 for a discussion of seaming techniques).
PVC is normally unsupported and used as an FML in thick-
nesses ranging from 10 to 30 mils. It is also available with
fabric reinforcing (supporte&) in various thicknesses and
strengths.
2—1
-------
TABLE 2-1. MATERIALS SOMETIMES USED AS FMLs
FOR EAZARDOUS WASTE CONTAINMENT*
Polyvinyl Chloride — Oil—Resistant (PVC-OR)
Low—Density Polyethylene (LDPE)
Medium—Density Polyethylene (MD ? !)
Linear Low—Density Polyethylene (LLDPE)
High—Density Polyethylene Elastomeric Alloy (HDPE)
Chlorosulfonated Polyethylene — Low Water Absorption (CSPE—LW)
Chlorinated Polyethylene Alloy (CPE—A)
Butyl Rubber (11R)
Polychloroprene (CR)
Epichiorohydrin Plymens (CP)
Polyethylene Ethylene Propylene Alloy (PE-EP-A)
Thermoplastic Nitrile — PVC (TN—PVC)
Ethylene Luterpolymer Alloy (ELA)
* Some of the above materials are supported with a reinforcing
fabric which affects their physical properties, such as
increasing their tensile and tear strengths.
2—2
-------
HIGH—DENSITY POLYETHYLENE
High—density polyethylene (HDPE) is a thermoplastic crystal-
line polymer based on ethylene. Its properties are largely
dependent on crystalliriity and density. HDPE exhibits excellent
weather resistance, and is one of the most chemically resistant
FMLs available. As a result, its use as a lining for hazardous
waste containments is widely accepted. Generally, it is free of
additives such as plasticizers and fillers.
HDPE sheets are produced by an extrusion or blown film pro-
cess in sheet sizes over 9 meters (30 feet) wide by several hun-
dred Eeet long. The sheets are normally used as an FML in thick-
nesses ranging from 40 to 120 mils, and are seamed in the field
using thermally bonded seams produced by extrusion welding, hot
air, and hot wedge (see Chapter 6). HDPE is stiff compared to
most other polymeric membranes.
CHLOROSULFONATED POLYETHYLENE
Chiorosulfonated polyethylene (CSPE) is a family of polymers
produced by reacting polyethylene in solution with chlorine and
sulfur dioxide. CSPE (also known by its trade name Hypalon) is a
widely used lining material. It is a synthetic rubber character-
ized by excellent resistance to weathering and aging. It has
good resistance to corrosive chemicals and to growth of mold,
fungus, and bacteria, but poor resistance to hydrocarbons.
CSPE is initially manufactured in roll stock form and then
fabricated into larger sheets (generally to about 23 meters (75
feet] wide by several hundred feet long). CSPE membranes are
seamed by heat sealing, bodied solvent adhesive, solvent welding,
and dielectric methods (see Chapter 6). It is normally supported
with fabric reinforcing, but is also available in unsupported
form. Reinforcing the CSPE increases its tensile and tear
strengths and reduces the shrinkage resulting from exposure to
the sun. Supported CSPE membranes are normally used as an FML in
thicknesses of 36 or 45 mils; unsupported membrane is used in a
thickness- of 30 mils.
CHLORINATED POLYETHYLENE
Chlorinated polyethylene (CPE) is produced by a chemical
reaction between chlorine and a high—density polyethylene. CPE
is resistant to ozone attack and weathers well. It also has
excellent chemical resistance. Some compounds are serviceable at
very low temperatures and are resistant to hydrocarbons.
CPE is initially manufactured in roll stock form and then
factory—fabricated into large sheets (up to about 30 meters (100
feet] wide by several hundred feet long). CPE membranes are
2—3
-------
seamed by bodied solvent adhesive, solvent welding, heat sealing,
and dielectric methods (see Chapter 6).
CPE is normally unsupported, but is also available in sup-
ported form reinforced with fabric. Reinforcing the CPE
increases material tensile and tear strength. Unsupported CPE is
normally used as an FML in a thickness of 30 mils; supported CPE,
in thicknesses of 36 and 45 mils.
2-4
-------
CHAPTER 3
ON-SITE UNLOADING/STORAGE
INTRODUCTION
The handling and storage of FML prior to its installation
require careful attention. Improper handling may result in dam-
age to the FML, such as punctures or tears. Depending on the FML
material, improper storage may cause damage to the material, such
as ultraviolet degradation.
While every job site is unique, certain guidelines should be
followed all all sites to provide safe handling and storage. The
inspector should be familiar with proper handling and storage
practices, and should regularly inspect these practices at a job
site.
Relative to the FML, a job site can be divided into three
areas: (1) unloading area; (2) storage area; and (3) placement
area. Often, the unloading and storage areas are in the same
location, whereas the placement area may be located a few hundred
feet to over a mile away.
MATERIAL CHECK
When FML material arrives on site, the inspector should
ensure that the installation supervisor has carefully checked the
material for damage during shipment, and should conduct spot—
checks himself. Figures 3—1 and 3—2 provide examples of damage
that can occur during shipment.
Packing slips should be checked to ensure that the proper
material has been delivered. The material itself should be
inspected to verify that it is the right type and thickness. All
accessory materials, such as solvents, adhesives, tapes etc.,
should be examined to make sure that they are the correct type
and have not been damaged during shipment.
Inspection Procedures
FML--
• Method : Visually observe that the FML materials deliv-
ered to the site are the material type, thickness, and
3—1
-------
Figure 3-1. FIlL damaged during shipment
Figure 3-2. FIlL crate damaged during shipment
3-2
-------
quality specified, and that all are unloaded and stored
in a manner that does not damage them.
— Observe FML as it is delivered to the site. Record any
packing crates, rolls, or other type packaging that are
damaged prior to being unloaded.
— Observe unloading of FML. Record any packing crates,
rolls, or other type packaging that are damaged during
unloading operations.
— Compare the packing slips and any other supplemental
shipping information accompanying the FML materials
with the specifications to check proper FML type and
thickness.
• Frequency : Ongoing observation of FML delivery and
unloading.
• Documentation : All observations should be made in a
daily diary. All instances of damaged FML and the method
of resolution (i.e., either repair or rejection of the
FML) must be recorded according to the FML sheet designa-
tion.
• Interpretation : All FML used on the project must be as
specified. All unspecified FML must be repaired or
removed from the site. All scrap FML must be removed
from the site upon completion of installation of FML
materials; however, pieces of the scrap should be
retained and stored by the owner for possible future use.
• Limitations : None.
• Alternatives : None.
Accessories——
• Method : Visually observe that accessories delivered to
the site are the material type, thickness, and quality
specified, and that all are unloaded and stored in a
manner that does not damage them. There are no standard
test methods currently in use to inspect solvents, adhe-
sives, cements, caulks, mastics, pads, tapes, etc. Spe-
cific observations to be made are included in the Docu-
mentation subsection below.
• Location : All containers and packages should be in-
spected at the unloading area and prior to being placed
in storage.
3-3
-------
• Documentation : Observations to be documented include the
following:
— Verification that the material complies with project
specifications. This includes the certification by the
manufacturer or supplier that the material meets or
exceeds specifications.
— Date of manufacture. It is important that the shelf
life of the material not be exceeded prior to use.
— Condition of containers. All containers must be ade-
quately labeled showing brand, type, date of manufac-
ture, and description of proper method of application.
All containers must be properly sealed.
• Interpretation : Only materials which meet project speci-
fications and are of acceptable quality shall be in-
stalled. Damaged or unacceptable materials shall be
replaced.
• Limitations : Visual observations and inspections iden-
tify whether the materials are acceptable based on infor-
mation supplied by the manufacturer. It is not practical
to verify all physical properties via laboratory testing.
• Alternatives : None. Visual inspection is a fundamental
part of any CQA program. The physical testing of the
adhesives used to bond FML to FML is conducted when the
required tests for factory and field seams are performed.
If a cement (for use in bonding an FML to a concrete sur-
face, for example) needs to be tested, a separate sample
could be made by forming a concrete pad and then bonding
the FML to its surface.
UNLOADING AND HANDLING EQUIPMENT
The most common equipment used to unload and handle FML5
includes:
• Forklifts.
• Front-end loaders.
• Cranes.
• A—frame winches.
The FML material will generally arrive on site in one of two
ways, depending on the material. Polyethylenes usually arrive on
site rolled on tubes (see Figure 3—3). These rolls are normally
handled by slings (see Figure 3—4), and should not be moved or
lifted by using the forks of a forklift or teeth of a front—end
loader in contact with the material itself. Other FML materials
3—4
-------
Figure 3-3. Rolls of FML
Figure 3-4. FIlL carrier slings
3 - 5
-------
are normally folded and shipped on pallets (see Figure 3—5) or in
crates. Pallets and crates should be handled by a forklift, and
care should be taken that the forks do not puncture the packaging
(see Figure 3—6).
Inspection Procedures
• Method : Visually observe that the equipment is in work-
ing order and capable of being operated in a safe manner.
Visually observe that any associated equipment including
packaging (such as slings, crates, and pallets) is not
damaged and capable of being used in conjunction with
other equipment to safely unload and handle the FML mate-
rials and accessories. Check all diesel engines to
ensure that each has a spark arrester; this will prevent
hot carbon particles from escaping through the exhaust
system and damaging the FML. Verify that all equipment
operators are competent and qualified to operate equip-
ment. Documentary evidence from third—party sources
(e.g., equipment operator’s license) shall be used for
qualification purposes.
• Frequency :
— Once prior to first use of equipment.
— Ongoing observation during unloading and handling oper-
ations.
• Documentation : The CQA inspector should maintain an
accurate log in the daily diary noting the presence, con-
dition, and workability of all equipment. Defective
slings, crushed crates, and broken pallets should also be
noted. The names of operators (and their designated
equipment) directly involved with the installation of the
liner should be kept in the daily diary.
• Interpretation : All equipment, including packaging for
unloading and handling of FML materials and accessories,
must be functioning properly to complete the work in a
safe and efficient manner. Slings for hoisting rolls for
FMLs must not be frayed or worn. Pallets must be struc-
turally sound to support the folded sheets of FMLs when
hoisted; and crates must be fastened securely as a unit
to contain the FML during handling. Any faulty equip—
• ment, including packaging, must be repaired or replaced
prior to use.
• Limitations : It is probable that some equipment will
fail to operate properly. To minimize this probability,
all equipment should receive the required maintenance to
3—6
-------
Figure 3-5. Pallets of covered FNL.
— . - — —
Figure 3-6.
Transporting Ff41 using forklift
3. 17
-------
ensure its proper working condition at all times. In the
event that a faulty pallet or crate cannot be repaired,
it should be completely removed and another method should
be used to handle the FML.
. Alternatives : None.
UNLOADING AREA
Accessibility
An important requirement of a proper unloading area is that
it be of sufficient size and readily accessible to the delivery
vehicles (trucking) and to on—site FML transport and placement
equipment. A small, cramped area might necessitate improvising
handling procedures that could damage the FML. See Figure 3—7
for an example of a proper unloading area.
Type
Most unloading areas will be open—air with an earth surface.
The most important requirement is that the surface be relatively
level and smooth, and free of rocks, holes, and debris. This
kind of surface may require grading or similar reworking of the
area.
If the unloading area is located in a building, proper
accessibility and maneuverability, such as that provided by a
dock area, are important to facilitate the unloading process.
Location
If the unloading and storage areas are separate, they should
be located close to each other and to the placement area in
accordance with the requirements for accessibility and surface
conditions. Travel distance and degree of slopes along the
access route between these areas should be kept to a minimum in
order to reduce potential damage to the FML during handling and
transport.
Unloading and Handling
FML materials and accessories must be carefully unloaded and
handled to avoid damage. Packaging such as crates and pallets
must be intact, and slings for hoisting rolls of FML 1 must be ade-
quate. The unloading equipment must be of adequate size and
strength to handle the weight. The equipment must not be oper-
ated in an unsafe manner (e.g., excessive speed); and the opera-
tor should be thoroughly experienced with the particular piece of
equipment. Improper unloading and handling methods and tech-
niques may result in damage to the FML and possibly injury to a
worker(s).
3-8
-------
Figure 3e7, Example of a proper unloading area
3-.9
-------
Inspection Procedures
Method : Visually observe that the unloading area surface
is relatively level, smooth, and free of rocks, holes,
debris, and ponded or standing water. Check on accessi-
bility to ensure that trucking and on—site equipment have
sufficient space to operate safely. Check to see that
any dock area is free of clutter. Check the surface of
the access route to be sure that it is safe and free of
obstacles. Check that all all equipment is operated by
workers in a safe manner.
• Frequency : Ongoing until all FML materials and accessor-
ies have been placed and excess materials have been
removed from the site or stored in an area designated by
the owner.
• Documentation : The CQA inspector should maintain an
accurate log in the daily diary noting the status of the
unloading area and access route as to surface conditions
and accessibility. Infractions pertaining to equipment
operation should be noted with the name of the operator,
time, and type of infraction.
• Interpretation : The CQA inspector is not expected to
function as a policeman monitoring traffic or as a street
maintenance foreman. However, it is important that the
unloading area and access route be free of obstacles and
accessible at all times to minimize potential damage to
the FML materials and accessories and to prevent poten-
tial injury to workmen. The CQA inspector should serve
as a monitor and report on a daily basis to the CQA offi-
cer.
• Alternatives : None.
STORAGE AREA
Type
The storage area is often located in the same place as the
unloading area, in which case the area must be large enough to
accommodate unloading, storage, and transport operations. The
storage area surface must be level, smooth, and free of rocks,
holes, and debris. If the storage area is located in a building,
proper accessibility and maneuverability are necessary to facili-
tate the transport of FilL materials and accessories. A loading
dock would be highly beneficial for transport operations. Mdi—
tionally, open storage areas would be fenced for security.
3-10
-------
Location
The storage area should be located close to the placement
area to minimize travel by placement equipment. It should also
be easily accessible for unloading and placement. A remote stor-
age area may not be cost—effective relative to placement activi-
ties due to the travel distance and time required for transport
of FML materials.
Climatic Conditions
It is best to store all FML materials and accessories in a
location out of direct contact with weather conditions. It is
important that PVC and CSPE be protected from the sun prior to
installation and stored in a covered, ventilated area (see Figure
3—5). Heat from the sun causes CSPE to cure; when this occurs,
field seams become more difficult to make. The sun also causes
ultraviolet degradation of PVC. HDPE and CPE are not affected by
the sun as much as other FMLs, but ambient temperatures greatly
impact any FML when it is unfolded or unrolled. Also, blocking
or sticking of an FML may occur, causing delamination or tearing
of the FML. Further, folded FMLs exposed to rain or snow can
capture water in the folds, making the FML package more difficult
to handle and more susceptible to damage during transport to the
placement area. Wind may cause an unprotected FML to unfold,
resulting in damage such as tearing and/or shredding. Finally,
it is best to store all accessories, such as adhesives, cements,
solvents, mastics, caulks, tapes, and welding resins, inside a
sheltered area.
Other Factors
Where it is practical, material in the storage area should
be arranged so that older material is used before newer material.
Also, many projects have specific sheet numbers based on a sheet
layout plan. Storage should therefore be planned so that the
sheet numbers needed (according to the sheet layout plan) are
readily accessible.
Inspection Procedures
• Method : Visually observe that the storage area surface
is relatively level, smooth, and free of rocks, holes,
and debris. Check accessibility to ensure that unloading
and placement have adequate space to operate safely.
Confirm that dock area, if applicable, is free of clut-
ter. Check the surface of the access route from the
storage area to the placement area to be sure that it is
safe and free of obstacles. Check the storage area to be
sure it is secured. Verify that FML material is stored
such that older material is used before newer material,
and that numbered sheets are stored for reaay access as
3—11
-------
needed for placement. Observe that the FML materials,
particularly PVC and CSPE, are stored in original un-
opened rolls arid crates, off the ground, in a dry area,
and protected from the sun by a lightweight, opaque cover
in a manner that allows a free—flowing air space between
the crates and cover. Observe that all accessories are
protected from climatic conditions and stored preferably
inside a sheltered area.
• Frequency : Ongoing until all FML materials and accessor-
ies have been placed and excess materials have been
removed from the site or stored in an area designated by
the owner.
• Documentation : The CQA inspector should maintain an
accurate log in the daily diary noting the status of the
storage area and access route to the placement area as to
surface conditions and accessibility. Infractions per-
taining to equipment operation should be noted with the
name of the operator, time, and type of infraction.
Transport of materials into and out of the storage area
should also be noted in the daily diary.
• Interpretation : The CQA inspector is not expected to
function as a policemen monitoring traffic or as a street
maintenance foreman or warehouseman. However, it is
important that all activities within the storage area be
observed and recorded, and a report made on a daily basis
to the CQA officer.
• Alternatives : None.
3—12
-------
CHAPTER 4
PREPARATION AND MAINTENANCE OF SUPPORTING SURFACE
I NTRO DUCT ION
F r purposes of this manual, the supporting surface is
defined as the surface on which the FML will be placed. For a
single FML system, the supporting surface will probably consist
of compacted earth, concrete, asphalt, or other material. If a
second FML is specified (a double FML system), the supporting
surface for the top FML will generally consist of a drainage net,
a granular soil layer, and/or a geotextile fabric.
Whether a single or double FML system is specified, it is
assumed that the supporting surface has been brought to final
grade, and that the earth subgrade (if applicable) has been com-
pacted and is structurally sound.
EARTH SUPPORTING SURFACES
Type of Soil
Earth supporting surfaces can consist of a variety of soil
types. Each soil type has specific characteristics that need to
be considered with regard to FML installations. For example,
clayey soils form surface cracks when dried, and sandy soils form
depressions under foot and vehicular traffic. Table 4—1 shows
some characteristics pertinent to FML installations.
Vegetation Removal
While it is not a common occurrence, FMLs have reportedly
been penetrated by underlying vegetative growth. It is recom-
mended that all vegetation be removed prior to placement of the
FML. In addition, herbicides are often recommended to completely
kill any remaining vegetation and/or seeds that could grow after
the FML is placed.
If the inspector feels that the site has an undesirable
amount of vegetation or is prone to future growth beneath the
F l it, and vegetation removal and/or use of a herbicide is not spe-
cified, he should contact the CQA officer or design engineer.
4—1
-------
TABLE 4-1. SOIL CIIAftACTERISTICS PERTINENT TO FIlL INSTALLATIONS, USCS
II.. Inorganic sills afid very (m l
sands, rock hour, silly or
claysd fins sands or clayaj
sills with sli tt plasticity
CL Inorganic clays of law Is dii Practically
plasticity, gravelly clays, i s perv lous
sandy clays, silty clays lono
clays
0*. OrganIc sills and organic sill-
clays or law plasticity
m i Inorganic silts. .icaceous or
dialawaceous line sandy or silty
soils, clastic silts
CH Inorganic clays of high plas-
tlclly, (at clayt
Oil Organic clays of .edit to high
plasticity, organic silts
P1 Peat and other highly organic
sol It
Erotica Characlerislics
Wind Cawpact ion Characteritt ics
Fecellent (.cellent Good, tractor, rubber-tired,
tteel—i.tieeled roller, moisture
addit ion
(icellent (acellent Good, tractor, rubber-tired,
Heel-wheeled roller, moIsture
addition
Very good Good, with clos, control.
rubber-tired, steel-wheeled
roller. moltture addition
Good Fair, rubber-tired, tteel-
wheeled roller. moisture
addition
Very good Very good Good, tractor, steel-wheeled
roller, mottture addition
Very good Very good Good, tractor, tteel-wheeled
roller, moisture addition
FaIr Good Good, with clot, control,
rubber-tired, vibratory roller
Fair Fair Fair. vibratory roller, rubber—
tired
Vary poor Fair Good to poor, clots control
essential, rubber-tired
roller, vibratory roller
Vary poor Fair to FaIr to good, vibratory roller,
poor rubber-tIred
Fair to poor (alt to Poor to very poor, vibratory
poor roller
Not rec ended (or (I i.
Instil at ions
Stable when dry, forms
turlace cracks ii wet,
liven dry
Stable when dry, (ormt
surface cracks II wet,
then dry
Valuet are (or guidance only, design should be based on test retulti.
USCS
Sywhol Name
Gsa Wall graded gravels or gravel-
sand aivlures, little or no
fines
GP Poorly graded gravels or
gravel-sand mietures. little
or no lines
1)1 Silty gravels, gravel-sand-
sill •iatures
GC Clayed gravels, gravel-sand-
clay sutures
S Wail graded or gravelly sands,
littl, or no lines
SP Poorly graded sands or gravelly
sands, little or no (Inst
Sit Silly sands, sand—sill sutures
SC Clayed sands, sand-clay sutures
Drainage
Characterl&lici Water
Licel lent
(cc cl lent
Fair to poor Good
Poor to practi- Very good
cally i ervious
(cc cl lent
(cc cl lent
Fair to poor
Poor to practi-
cally i.pervious
FaIr to poor
r 53
Comoent s
Forms depressions under
foot and vehicle loading
Forms depressions under
loot and vehicle loading
Stable when dry
Stable when dry
Forms depressions under
loot and vehicle loading
For.s depressions under
fool and vehicle loading
Stable when dry
Stable when dry, forms
surface crack II wet,
th. dry
Stable when dry
Stable whin dry, forms
surlace crack ii wet,
then dry
Stable when dry
Stable when dry
Poor
Fair to poor
Poor Fair
Poor Fair to
poor
Fair to poor Poor
Practically
l ervi out
Practically
l er vi Ous
Fair to poor, vibratory roller
Poor to very poor, sbeepsfoot
roller
Fair to poor, vibratory roller
I live equipnsnt listed will u ualIy produce the desired densities alter a reasonable
lilt are properly cuntrul led.
number ol passes when mi iure conditions and thickness of
-------
Areas that would be most prone to future vegetative growth
after FML placement would be those with:
• A warm, moist climate.
• A supporting surface that has been exposed for an ex-
tended period of time (e.g., several months) and may have
been covered by a variety of windblown seeds.
Inspection Procedures——
The following procedures should be performed for inspection
of vegetation removal prior to placement of the FML on the sup-
porting surface:
• Method : Visually observe supporting surface to ensure
the following:
— All vegetation and large roots are removed.
— If a herbicide is specified, all areas of the support-
ing surface are thoroughly covered, and the herbicide
is applied in accordance with the manufacturer’s speci-
fications. Figure 4—1 shows the application of a her-
bicide at an FML site.
— Time is allowed for the herbicide to be absorbed in the
soil or to lose its volatile components so that it will
not react with the liner.
— Rain does not wash the herbicide from the area before
it can be effective.
— If the herbicide was applied at the site without obser-
vation by the inspector, a contractor’s certification
verifying that the herbicide was applied per manufac-
turer’s specifications should be obtained.
• ocation : The entire supporting surface should be
observed.
• Documentation : The inspector should keep accurate rec-
ords in the daily diary, noting the type of vegetation
removed, size (e.g., were large roots removed?), type of
herbicide used, and personnel applying herbicide.
• Interpretation : All vegetation must be removed.
• Limitations : In order to assure the effectiveness of the
herbicide, it must be applied according to specifica-
tions.
• Alternatives : No herbicide application.
4—3
-------
Figure 4.1. ApplIcation of herbicide
4—4
-------
Burrowing Animals, Ants, and Other Pests
The inspector should observe the supporting surface area to
detect the presence of burrowing animals (e.g., gophers and
ground squirrels), ants, or other pests (see Figure 4—2). If
their presence is noted, the inspector should advise the CQA
officer or design engineer of the problem. Once the appropriate
course of action has been taken, the inspector’s tasks are as
outlined below.
Inspection Procedures-—
• Method : Visually observe the entrapment, poisoning, or
other elimination of burrowing animals, ants, or other
pests. Observe the collapsing and/or filling of animal
burrow tunnels and/or ant chamber passages, as necessary.
• Location : Wherever FML is to be placed and an extended
area around the placement area as determined by the CQA
officer or design engineer.
• Documentation : Obtain certification from the contractor
E ting that all of the above work has been performed.
Enter certification information and visual observations
in the daily diary.
• Interpretation : All burrows and chamber passages should
be collapsed and/or filled.
• Limitations : It may be difficult to assure that all bur-
rows and chamber passages are collapsed/filled.
• Alternatives : None.
Preparation of Finished Earth Supporting Surface
A variety of factors affect the degree of effort required to
prepare the finished earth supporting surface. These include:
o Type of soil. All soils differ with regard to the amount
of effort required to prepare them as an acceptable sup-
porting surface. Gravelly and sandy soils may lack a
sufficient amount of fines, and clayey soils may be too
hard and fractured. Both soil types often require the
addition of other materials toprovide an acceptable sur-
face. Generally, however, most on-site soils can be pre-
pared as an acceptable surface.
• Type and thickness of FML. A thinner FML (e.g., 30 inil)
will require a smoother surface than a thicker FML (e.g.,
4-5
-------
Figure 4-2. Anima’ burrow holes at edge of supporting surface
4-6
-------
100 mu). Depending on the type of FML, fabric—rein-
forced materials generally offer greater resistance to
punctures caused by imperfections in the supporting sur-
face, and can tolerate a less smooth surface than an
unreinforced material of the same thickness. Regardless,
every effort should be made to prepare a proper subgrade.
Hydraulic head or load to be placed on the FML.
In some cases, the exposed surface of a rock outcrop may be
present. If the outcrop is not too severe, it may be covered
with a layer of additional soil, one or more sections of FML,, or
geotextile to mitigate its effect on the primary FML. Figure 4—3
shows a rock outcrop that was successfully prepared for FML
placement. Removal of all grade stakes and elimination of soil
test holes is very important.
Inspection Procedures——
The first step in the preparation of the finished earth sup-
porting surface is to manually remove all clods, pebbles, etc.,
from the surface, and to fill in the voids (see Figure 4—4). The
inspector’s tasks in this operation are as follows:
Method : Visually inspect the supporting surface to
ensure the following:
— There are no rocks or other objects larger than USCS
sand (SP) on the surface.
— There are no petroleum products or other spills.
— All soil test holes are properly backfilled and com-
pacted.
— It is free of any wet areas and has a uniform moisture
content.
— It if free of all grade stakes, roots, and other for-
eign matter.
— It is free of ravelling, ruts, depressions, and abrupt
changes in grade.
• Location : Entire supporting surface.
• Documentation : The inspector should maintain an accurate
record of areas where rock outcrops were removed to
obtain a proper surface, as well is areas that had to be
worked to remove excess water or contaminant spillage
from the surface soils. The inspector should record the
location of all soil test holes and should note that all
grade stakes were removed. The inspector should record
this information in the daily diary.
4—7
-------
Figure 4e3• Rock outcrop in supporting surface
4-8
-------
Once the hand—finishing has been completed, the surface
should be rolled and compacted. The type of equipment used will
depend on the soil type. Usually, a smooth steel—wheeled roller
is used for soils such as loose sand or silty sand; a vibrating
roller is used for other soils. Two coverages by the roller are
generally required. Areas not accessible to the roller are com-
pacted by approved mechanical or hand tampers. Figures 4—5 and
4—6 show an operator—ridden vibratory roller and a smooth hand—
held vibratory roller, respectively.
The inspector’s responsibilities with regard to surface com-
paction are as follows:
• Method : Visually inspect the supporting surface as it is
prepared to ensure that it is smooth and free of debris
and foreign matter.
• Location : Entire supporting surface.
• Documentation : Record results of observations in the
daily diary.
• Interpretation : The surface should be smooth and ready
for liner placement (see Figure 4—7).
• Limitations : None.
• Alternatives : None.
Maintenance of Earth Supporting Surface
It is important to maintain the integrity of the supporting
surface after it has been accepted for FML placement. The fol-
lowing events must be mitigated or corrected if they occur:
• Wind erosion of the soil fines.
• Storm water erosion.
• Saturation of and/or ponding by storm water.
• Depressions due to foot and vehicular traffic.
• Dragging of FML edges during placement.
Wind Erosion——
Wind erosion can be minimized by:
• Keeping the surface moist, especially during windy
periods (see Figure 4—8).
• Preparing only an area of supporting surface that can be
covered by FML the following day, i.e., schedule support-
ing surface preparation only one day ahead of FML place-
ment (see Figure 4—9).
4—9
-------
Figure 4-5. Vibratory roller on supporting surface.
Figure 4—6. Smooth hand—held steel-wheeled roller
on supporting surface.
4-10
-------
4 -.
i • .4 . ,
Figure 4-7. A properly prepared final supporting surface
Figure 4-8. Moistening of supporting surface
4-il
-------
Figure 4.9. Partially placed FML
4-12
-------
Storm Water Erosion——
Storm water erosion can be minimized by:
Placing the FML on the side slopes first. The FML should
be at least temporarily anchored at the top of the slope
(refer to Chapter 8) to keep storm water from running
under the FML and eroding the side slope under the FML.
If this occurs, the FML must be rolled away and the side
slope supporting surface repaired. Figure 4—10 illus-
trates an eroded side slope.
Preparing only an area of supporting surface that can be
covered by FML the following day, taking into considera-
tion inclement weather forecasts.
Saturation and/or Ponding by Storm Water——
Saturation or portding by storm water will not adversely
affect sandy soils. However, it is not possible to mitigate this
problem with other soils; still, the effect can be minimized if
all potential run—on is diverted around the FML placement area.
If an area of the supporting surface becomes saturated or has
ponded water after a storm, the surface must be allowed to dry.
If water has found its way under the in—place FML, the FML must
be rolled back to allow the area to dry (see Figure 4—11). Wet
areas under in-place FML can be located by walking on the FML and
sensing for soft spots and by looking for gullies that run under
the FML and low spots.
Depressions Due to Foot and Vehicular Traffic——
Damage to the supporting surface can be minimized by:
• Keeping vehicular traffic off the finished supporting
surface.
• Provision of support ladders on the steep side slopes so
that workers are not required to dig their feet into the
slope for support while placing the FML. Ladders should
be constructed so that they do not create their own
depressions in the slope. Figure 4—12 shows an unpre-
pared supporting surface slope face with foot/traffic—
created depressions.
The following summarizes the inspector’s responsibility with
regard to supporting surface maintenance:
• Method : Visually inspect the supporting surface for evi-
dence of damage. Walk on in—place FML after a storm to
detect soft, wet spots.
• Location : Entire supporting surface.
4—13
-------
,.—. ta .
Figure 4—10. Eroded side s’ope
4-14
-------
• t
Figure 4 -11. Wet supporting surface exposed for drying
4 —15
.,e ;
--t. 3) _-
C.
s
-------
Figure 4.12. Unprepared supporting surface slope face
with foot depressions.
4-16
-------
• Documentation : Record results of observations in the
daily diary.
• Interpretation : All damage must be repaired so that the
supporting surface is again ready for FML placement.
• Limitations : None.
• Alternatives : None.
OTHER SUPPORTING SURFACES
Concrete
In many cases, an FML may be placed on a concrete surface.
The concrete might be new (poured recently with the intent of
being the FML supporting surface) or old (an older structure that
is being retrofitted with an FML). Many of the items to be
inspected are similar for both old and new concrete. These are
discussed below.
Inspection Procedures for Old or New Concrete——
• The surface must be checked for voids and projections
such as aggregate, forms, re—bar, or excess mortar (see
Figure 4—13 for an example of an unacceptable concrete
supporting surface).
• The finish should be a steel trowel finish (see Figure
4—14).
• All expansion joints should be cut flush.
• There must be rounded edges at all corners coming into
contact with the FML.
• The surface must be checked for voids both visible and
hidden in concrete.
• There should be no abrupt changes in the surface (abut-
ting surfaces).
• Where there is a transition joint between different mate-
rials, as in the case of earth to concrete, check it
should be confirmed that the earth was compacted properly
adjacent to the concrete to prevent subsequent differen-
tial settlement.
Special inspection requirements for old concrete——Old con-
crete must be observed very carefully, because it is more likely
to have cracks, surface chipping, and a rougher surface. Old
concrete is also more likely to chip and crack when drilling is
4-17
-------
Figure 4—14.
Concrete supporting surface with an acceptable trowel finish
Figure 4—13. unacceptable concrete supporting surface
4e 18
-------
required to set the FML anchor bolts. The effects of surface
irregularities may be minimized by the use of various coating
materials or by covering with a geotextile.
The inspector should also check to see that any vegetation
and/or other debris has been removed from cracks in the concrete.
Generally, if vegetation is present, it should be treated with a
herbicide, since it is difficult to determine that all roots have
been removed.
Special inspection requirements for new concrete——New con-
crete must have been allowed to age at least 28 days in order to
obtain the strength needed to set FML anchor bolts. In addition,
any wax—type curing compound used must be removed prior to FML
placement, since sealing compounds (adhesives, cements, and
caulks) will not adhere to this type of surface. If surface
voids exist, they must be eliminated by sacking with cement
grout.
Asphaltic Supporting Surfaces
Asphaltic supporting surfaces are also used for FML place-
ment. The items to check when inspecting an asphaltic surface
include:
• Surface voids. Surface voids can be filled with a vari-
ety of suitable materials or covered with a geotextile.
Figure 4—15 shows a surface coating being applied to an
unacceptable asphaltic supporting surface to fill the
surface voids.
• All debris removed from the surface. This can be accom-
plished by sweeping.
• Presence of ravelling. Areas not properly rolled when
hot will often result in aggregate that is loose on the
surface.
For all rigid surfaces, the inspection routine should be as
follows:
• Method : Visually inspect the supporting surface for
abrupt grade changes, projections, voids, and rocks or
pebbles.
• Frequency : As necessary after the supporting surface is
in place.
• Location : Entire supporting surface.
• Documentation : Record results of observations in the
daily diary.
4-19
-------
F’ 1_I
Figure 4-15.
Surface coating being applied on an unacceptable
asphaltic supporting surface.
4—20
-------
• Interpretation : Any abrupt grade changes, projections,
and rough surfaces must be smoothed/eliminated.
• Limitations : None.
• Alternatives : Supporting surface could consist of soil,
or geotextiles.
4—21
-------
CHAPTER 5
PLACEMENT OF FML ON SUPPORTING SURFACE
INTRODUCTION
Placement of FML on a supporting surface involves the fol—
lowing procedures:
o Transporting the FML to the working area.
o Removing the FML from its packaging.
o Spreading the FML sheets in their appropriate locations,
checking that each sheet is undamaged (i.e., has no
holes, etc.) and ready for seaming.
Prior to commencing placement of the FML, the inspector
should first ensure that:
o Placement equipment is on—site and in working order.
• A sufficient number of qualified placement personnel are
on site.
• Weather conditions are suitable.
PLACEMENT EQUIPMENT
Various types of large construction and hand—held equipment
are required for placing FML. Table 5—1 lists the equipment
required for placement of FML. Figures showing examples of
equipment used for FilL placement are provided throughout the
chapter.
Inspection Procedures
• Method : Observe all placement equipment to ensure that
appropriate types and quantities are on site. Observe
the check—out of each piece of equipment to ensure that
they are in proper working order.
5—1
-------
TABLE 5—1. EQUIPMENT FOR FML PLACEMENT
t tern
Forklift, front-end loader, and/or
flatbed truck
Ladders, wood, flat type
Wood or plastic dowels with rounded
ends, and/or mechanical grips
Chalk line
Tape measure (100 feet long)
Scissors (bright-colored
with rounded points), knife
Grade stakes or traffic cones
Sand bags
Red and yellow keel
Arch punch
Utility knife, metal sheers
First aid supplies
Portable pumps
Common tool kit (e.g., hammer,
saw, etc.)
Water supply
Pencil and paper
Phone and/or radio communications
Use
To handle FML sheets for placement
To work on slopes
To assist workers in pulling on edges
of FML panels while placing
To assist placing of FML panels
To measure FML sections
To cut F14L materials
To measure soil cover depths
To secure unseamed FNL panels to
prevent damage by wind
To mark FML
To cut holes In FIlL to fit over
anchor bolts
To cut cardboard shipping cartons
containing FIlL and metal bands
To provide relief from minor injuries
To pump any accumulated water from
supporting surface
To make miscellaneous repairs, etc.
To supply personnel drinking and
equipment cooling needs
To write daily reports, etc.
To provide off—site contact
5—2
-------
• Frequency :
- Once prior to commencement of FML placement.
— Daily after placement arid seaming operations commence.
• Documentation : The CQA inspector should maintain an
accurate log in the daily diary noting the presence and
workability of all equipment.
• Interpretation : All required equipment must be on site
and in working condition prior to commencement of FMEJ
placement. Once FML placement begins, all equipment is
to be kept in working order or replaced.
• Alternatives : None.
PERSONNEL
FML placement personnel should be well qualified and must
wear appropriate clothing when placing FML sheets.
Qualifications
FML placement is generally performed using a combination of
large equipment (e.g., a front—end loader) and placement crews.
It is acceptable for placement crews to have only minimum initial
training, provided that each crew is supervised by a qualified
foreman (a person who has installed more than 93,000 square
meters (1,000,000 square feet] of FML). Minimum training should
consist of:
• Brief instruction on the purpose of FML installation.
• Brief instruction on placement procedures.
• Knowledge of safety procedures to be observed during FML
placement, including:
— Techniques for dismounting from art FML lifted several
feet in the air during a windy day.
— Safe methods of removing metal bands from FML packag-
ing. Figure 5—1 illustrates how not to remove a metal
band; note that the band could snap in the person’s
face.
— Staying clear of FML being rolled down side slopes (see
Figure 5—2).
- Refraining from touching dark, sun—exposed FML with
bare skin.
5—3
-------
Example of how not to remove a metal band.
Figure 5- 1.
FIgure 5—2. Workman standing aside while FIlL is rolled
down side slope.
-------
— Awareness of techniques to be used to avoid overstress—
ing of arms, legs, and back during placement opera-
tions.
Inspection Procedures——
• Purpose : Assurance is required that foremen and place-
ment personnel have proper qualifications and training.
• Method : All personnel should meet the minimum experience
and training requirements.
— Foreman: Installed more than 93,000 square meters
(1,000,000 square feet) of FML.
— Placement personnel: At least the minimum training,
including an understanding of the purpose of FML
installation, and knowledge of placement and safety
procedures.
• Frequency : An inquiry of qualifications should be made
prior to personnel beginning work on placement of the
FML.
• Documentation : A record of each installer, by name,
should be kept in the daily diary.
• Interpretation : No foreman or placement personnel may
work on the FML project without proper qualifications or
training.
• Alternatives : The FML installation contractor could pro-
vide the required information to the inspector in lieu of
the inspector requesting signed statements.
Clothing
All on—site personnel should be required to wear special
clothing during FML placement and seaming. This includes:
• Smooth—soled shoes. No shoes with indented patterns
should be worn, since rocks can become trapped in the
void areas and inadvertently puncture and/or tear the
FML.
• Gloves. When handling/pulling FML into place, gloves
should be worn to prevent abrasion or other damage to
worker hands.
Figure 5—3 depicts a worker wearing gloves and smooth—soled
shoes while preparing an EDPE roll for placement.
5—5
-------
Figure 5-3. Worker wearing appropriate appard
5-6
-------
Inspection Procedures——
• Method : Each installer should be inspected to ensure
that his clothing and footwear will not cause damage
either to the FML or to himself during placement (e.g.,
smooth—soled shoes and gloves).
• Frecuency : Each crew must be observed prior to the start
of work each day.
• Location : All crews must be observed.
• Documentation : A record of each installer, by name,
should be maintained in the daily diary; any unacceptable
apparel should be noted.
• Interpretation : All persons handling or working on the
FML should conform to the dress requirements.
• Alternatives : The liner contractor could assume respon-
sibility for a daily check of his employees. The CQA
inspector would then receive an acceptance report from
the contractor and make spot observations throughout the
day for noncompliance.
WEATHER CONDITIONS
The inspector should be aware that certain weather condi-
tions will not permit the placement of FML. These include:
• Windy days. The FML may be blown around the site during
severe winds, causing danger to workers (e.g., the FML
being raised off the ground with workers on top of it).
Strong winds might also cause the FML to whip up at the
edges and ultimately shred or rip.
• Rainy or snowy days.
• Hot days. The FML can be stretched beyond repair under
the stress of being placed, and the surface temperature
atop the FML can be elevated beyond what is safe for
placement crews.
• Days of severe cold. The FML is difficult to unfold or
unroll during extremely cold weather.
Inspection Procedures
• Method : Observe weather conditions at the site for
severe winds, rain, snow, and severe heat or cold.
5—7
-------
• Frequency : Weather conditions should be observed
throughout the day.
• Documentation : Wind velocities, temperatures, and mois-
ture conditions at the site should be periodically
recorded throughout the day in the daily diary.
• Interpretation : Work on the FML cannot proceed during
periods of severe wind, rain, snow, and severe heat or
cold.
FML LAYOtJT
Every project involving the installation of an FML will have
an FML sheet layout plan (see Figure 5—4) prepared that clearly
shows the following information:
• Sheet layout with a number assigned to each sheet accord-
ing to a logical numbering system.
• Seam locations.
• Penetration locations (e.g., inlet piping).
Prior to the placement of FML sheets, the inspector should
meet with the installer to review the layout plan and strategy to
avoid any problems after placement commences.
Once FML placement commences, certain placement procedures
should be followed:
• Only those sheets that can reasonably be handled by the
seaming crew(s) during the course of a work day are to be
placed (see Figure 5—5).
• Sheets should be unfolded or unrolled in the same direc-
tion as the wind.
• Sand bags are to be placed on top of the sheets to pre-
vent movement and damage by wind action (see Figure 5—6).
• Sheets are to be placed with specified overlap for making
field seams.
Placement of the FML on the supporting surface is influenced
by a variety of factors. These include:
• Type of FML.
• Thickness of FML.
• Size and configuration of facility.
5-8
-------
ENGINEERS—
U’
Figure 5-4. Example FML sheet layout plan
-------
Figure 55. Crew placing FML sheet.
5.10
-------
• Accessibility.
• Steepness and length of slopes.
• Location of penetrations.
A discussion of each of these factors is presented below.
Type of FML
The typical procedure for placing a folded CSPE, PVC, or CPE
sheet is to transport the sheet to the location where it will be
placed, unpackage it, unfold it, and position it in accordance
with the sheet layout plan. Care should be taken not to drag the
FML across the supporting surface during unfolding operations.
Figures 5—7, 5—8, and 5—9 show an FML being transported and
unfolded during placement operations.
Rolled materials such as HDPE are transported to the place-
ment location and then unrolled on flat or gently sloping sur-
faces. The FML is transported and unrolled using the bucket of a
front—end loader or similar equipment (see Figures 5—10 and
5—11). Care should be taken not to puncture the FML during
unrolling operations. When unrolling FML down slopes, precau-
tions are necessary to avoid injuring workers near the bottom of
the slope (see Figure 5—2).
Thickness of FML
FML thickness affects sheet placement as follows:
• Thicker materials generally have smaller sheet sizes,
requiring placement of more sheets than for thinner mate-
rials.
• Thicker FML sheets are heavier, sometimes requiring more
equipment and manpower to place than the same size thin-
ner sheets.
• -Most FML manufacturers limit sheet weight to 1,800 kilo-
grams (4,000 pounds).
Size and Configuration of Facility
Facility size and configuration affect FML placement in the
following ways:
• Large sites are generally easier for FML placement than
small sites due to the available work area.
• Odd—shaped sites require more planning with regard to FML
placement, since most sheets are rectangular and require
cutting to conform to odd shapes.
5—12
-------
-
Figure 5—8. FML being unfolded from forklift.
Figure 5-9. FML being unfolded from truck.
.—
5 -13
-------
Figure 5 -10. FM!. roll being transported by wheel loader
5-14
-------
Figure 5-11. FML being spread by front loader
5—15
-------
Accessibility
Accessibility to and around the area where FML sheets are to
be placed is important. Critical placement areas are located at
the top and bottom of slopes. A working area at least 3 meters
(10 feet) wide should be provided at the top of a slope on the
berm to provide ample working space for placing the sheets on the
slope (see Figure 5—12). Ample working space is also required at
the bottom of the slope and on the bottom of the area to permit
efficient placement of the sheets (see Figure 5—13). Sometimes a
ramp is provided for access to the bottom of the slope.
Placement on Slopes
Placement of FML on slopes requires special attention. In
all cases:
• Horizontal seams should be avoided or minimized on steep
slopes. Seams made on sheets placed in this position are
susceptible to failure. Figure 5—14 shows proper seam
positioning on slopes.
• Foot traffic must be restricted on the FML after it has
been placed on a slope. Ladders should be used where
possible.
Placement of FML sheets on slopes steeper than 2:1 (hori-
zontal to vertical) is more difficult, since steep slopes cannot
be easily traversed by placement personnel. Ladders or similar
equipment must be used. Considering earthwork and FML installa-
tion requirements, the best average slope is 3:1
Generally, FML sheets should be long enough to extend the
entire slope length and out onto the bottom (see Figure 5—13), so
that lateral seams do not have to be made on the slope.
Placement Around Penetrations
FML sheets should be placed around penetrations (e.g.,
structures, pipes) in such a manner that the FML sheet can be
attached/anchored directly to the penetration. The location of
all penetrations and placement details at the penetration should
be shown on the sheet layout plans.
Inspection Procedures
• Method : Observations are made of:
— Equipment used for placement of the FML on the support-
ing surface.
5—16
-------
F Igure 5—12. Acceptable working area at top of slope.
Figure 5—13. Acceptable working space at bottom of slope
5—17
-------
Figure 5 -14. Properly placed F$L on side slope
5—18
-------
— FML placement on supporting surface as follows:
—— Only those sheets that can reasonably be seamed by
the seaming crew(s) during the course of a work day
are placed.
—— FMr 3 sheets are unfolded or unrolled in the same
direction as the wind.
—— Sand bags are placed on in—place FML sheets to pre-
vent movement and damage by wind action.
—— FML sheets are placed with specified overlap for
field seams.
—— Crew size and clothing are adequate.
—— Safety procedures are followed.
Each sheet must be walked in such a way that the entire
surface, including factory seams, is visually in-
spected. For FMLs that are factory—fabricated from
roll stock widths, the normal procedure is to walk the
length of each roll stock width and inspect for defects
including punctures, bubbles, etc, as well as observing
the seam on one side at the same time. FMLs with
defects are to be marked for repair using a yellow non—
wax crayon marker.
o Frequency : Ongoing observation.
o Location : All FML sheets and factory seams are in-
spected.
o Documentation : The inspector should record observations
as well as routine information (such as date, time,
weather, equipment, personnel, and construction location)
in the daily diary. Notes should also be maintained on a
print of the sheet layout to monitor the sheets that have
been placed and inspected. Observations to be documented
include the following:
— Quality of material and placement procedures. A
detailed description should include the following
information:
—— Defects encountered.
—— Location and designation number of each FML sheet
placed.
5—19
-------
—— Equipment and personnel utilized.
—— Delays and problems encountered.
—— CQC procedures used.
• Interpretation : Only materials which meet the specifica—
tions and are of acceptable quality should remain in
place. Damaged FMLs or defective seams should be
repaired or replaced, as applicable.
520
-------
CHAPTER 6
SEAMING OPERATIONS
INTRODUCTION
Seaming is a critical step in an FML installation. FML
seams can be prepared either in the factory or the field. Fac-
tory seams are manufactured in a controlled environment, and seam
quality is generally superior to field seams. Since the inspec-
tor is not responsible for observing the manufacture of factory
seams, only a brief summary of factory seaming techniques is pro-
vided in this chapter.
The primary objective of this chapter is to discuss field
seaming operations and the inspection thereof. However, the dis-
cussion is necessarily general, because each FML manufacturer!
fabricator has specific (and often proprietary) seaming equipment
and seaming procedures. Prior to the start of FML seaming opera-
tions, the manufacturer should provide the inspector with precise
specifications on the equipment and procedures that will be used
to seam their material in the factory and field. In addition,
the inspector should meet with a representative of the manufac-
turer/fabricator for an explanation and demonstration of the
seaming equipment and procedures to be used on the job.
SEAMING METHODS
Several methods are available for seaming an FML, whether in
the field or the factory, including:
• Liquid—applied solvent or adhesive methods:
— Solvent bonding.
— Bodied solvent adhesive.
— Solvent adhesive (solvent cement).
- Contact adhesive.
• Thermal methods:
- Hot air.
— Hot wedge (hot knife).
— Dielectric (electronic bonding).
— Extrusion (fusion) welding.
6—j
-------
• Vulcanizing tapes and adhesives.
• Tape and mechanical seaming.
A brief description of each of these seaming methods is
given in Table 6—1. Figures 6—1 through 6—3 illustrate several
of the most commonly used methods.
Factory Seams
Generally, factory seams are lap joints. However, butt
joints are sometimes used for repair of FMI in the factory.
The methods used for factory seaming PVC, CSPE, and CPE are
as follows:
• Solvent bonding.
• Dielectric.
• Thermal (hot air).
Seam bond is generally 2 centimeters (3/4 inch) minimum for PVC
and 4 centimeters (1—1/2 inches) minimum scrim—to—scrim for CSPE
and CPE, with no free edges.
HDPE is generally factory—seamed by fusion welding. Seam
bond is normally 2.5 centimeters (1 inch).
Field Seams
Field seams for PVC, CSPE, and CPE are almost always sol-
vent—bonded lap joints. However, butt joints are sometimes used
(Figure 6—4 shows a typical lap and butt joint for CSPE FML).
The solvents used vary with FML type and manufacturer. No
sophisticated equipment is used in the field; all of the work is
performed by hand using simple tools and materials. PVC field
seams should be at least 5 centimeters (2 inches) wide with no
free edges. CSPE and CPE field seams should be at least 10—
centimeter (4—inch) wide scrim—to—scrim overlap with 7.5—centi-
meter (3—inch) minimum width of adhesive and with no free edges.
HDPE field seams are always lap seams formed by thermal
methods: hot air, hot wedge, and extrusion welding. Seam over-
lap is generally 10 centimeters (4 inches).
Tables 6—2 and 6—3 summarize pertinent seaming information
for each FML type.
EQUIPMENT
A general list of equipment required for FML seaming opera-
tions is provided in Table 6—4. Figures illustrating equipment
being used for field seaming operations are contained throughout
the chapter.
6—2
-------
TABLE 6-1. SEAMING METHODS
Seaming Method Description
Liquid Applied Solvent or Adhesive Systems
Solvent Bonding • A solvent recommended by the FtIL manufacturer Is applied
between the two FML surfaces to be bonded and a pressure
applied to the seam area. The solvent softens the surfaces
to be bonded creating the ‘bond” and then evaporates. Seam-
Ing should generally be accomplished when sheet and adhesive
temperatures are above 15.5°C (60°F). At lower temperatures
auxiliary means of surface area heating such as heat guns or
portable radiant heaters must be used.
• Bodied Solvent Adhesive • A bodied solvent adhesive is prepared by dissolving approxi-
mately 8 to 12 percent of the liner compound In the solvent
recommended by the FML manufacturer. The seaming technique
is the same as for solvent bonding.
• Solvent Adhesive (Solvent Cement) A liquid-applied solvent adhesive is used to develop bond
strength between two sheets by means of an adherent left
after dissipation of the solvent. The adhesive becomes an
additional element in the seam system effecting a surface-
to-surface bond but not a homogeneous bond. Sufficient
rolling pressure must be applied to produce an acceptable
adhesion.
• Contact Adhesive • Usually applied by brush or roller to both lining surfaces
to be joined. After the adhesive has attained the proper
degree of tackiness, the two surfaces are immediately joined
together. The use of this type of adhesive requires careful
alignment of the IMI material before bonding because the
joined surfaces should not be realigned after assembly.
After joining, the seam should be rolled with a steel or
plastic roller In a direction perpendicular to the edge of
the seam. The adhesive forms a bond and remains as an addi-
tional element within the seam.
-------
TABLE 6-1 (continued)
Seaming Method Description
Thermal Methods
Hot Air Methods • A machine consisting of resistance heaters, a blower, and
temperature controls directs a blast of hot air or gas
usually In excess of 260 ‘C (500 ‘F) between two polymer
sheets materials, thus melting the surfaces. Immediately
following the surface melt, pressure (usually by roller is
appfled to bond the area to form a homogeneous seal between
the two membrane at the seam overlap. The heat-producing
machine can be either a hand-held unit for the field or a
large, automated factory machine with preset controls for
temperature, movement rate, and roller pressure.
• Hot Wedge (Hot Knife) • Consists of a hot electrically heated resistance element in
the shape of a blade or V-shaped wedge that is passed
between the two sheets to be sealed and in Intimate contact
with them, thus melting the surfaces. Immediately following
the melting, roller pressure is applied effecting a homo-
geneous bond. Single hot wedge and dual hot wedge systems
are presently available. The dual hot wedge weld forms a
continuous air channel between the two welded seams which Is
used for testing the bond continuity by Injecting air pres-
sure. Welding rate (movement of the machine) as well as
temperature and roller pressure are adjustable and continu-
ously monitored.
• Dielectric (Electronic Bonding) • Used on thermoplastic and thermoplastic elastomer materials
and Is carried out only In a fabrication plant.
• Extrusion (Fusion) Welding • Consists of extruding a ribbon of molten polymer of HOPE
resin (extrudate) between or at the edge of two overlapped
HOPE sheets. (xtrudate placed between two overlapped sheets
is referred to as flat welding. Extrudate placed at the
edge of a seam Is called a fillet or hand extrusion weld.
The fillet-type weld area may or may not preheated with hot
air.
-------
TABLE 6-1 (continued)
Seaming Method Description
Vulcanizing Tapes and Adhesive • An uncured tape or adhesive containing the polymer base of
the liner and cross-linking agents (usually sulfur or sul-
fur-bearing compound) Is placed between the overlaps of two
curd (vulcanized) elastomer sheets. Upon application of
heat and pressure at the seam area, molecular cross linking
(vulcanization) of the polymer base in the tape occurs, thus
achieving a bond strength between the two sheets not attain-
able with ordinary adhesives. Factory vulcanizing press or
an autoclave, whereas field seams can be fabricated using
the uncured tape and a portable seaming machine that pro-
vides the necessary heat and pressure with a bar.
Tape and Mechanical Seaming • Made by applying an adhesive-backed strip between or at the
edge of two sheets providing tensile strength to the joint.
(7
Source: (valuation of Flexible Membrane Liners Seams, Draft Report, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Engineering
and Research Center.
-------
Figure 6—1. SeamIng of FML using liquid—applied
solvent/adhesive.
6—6
-------
Figure 6-2.
Seaming of FML using hot air.
Figure 6—3. Seaming of FML by extrusion (fusion) welding.
6—7
-------
7Yi% P/tZL7 iai,yr
( 4 ’ , e
d4?e)
I_
/ ( * ,5-
]
Figure 6-4.
Typical field lap joint and butt joint for PVC FIlL
Se /
/7 I
8 d *
-__ dc’ r .’
6-8
-------
TABLE 6-2. FACTORY AND FIELD SEAMING TECHNIQUES
FOR EACH FML TYPE
FML Type
Seaming Technique PVC CPE CSPE HDPE
Solvent Bonding
Bodied Solvent
Adhesive
Solvent Adhesive
(Solvent Cement)
Contact Adhesive
Hot Air
Hot Wedge (Hot Knife)
Dielectric (Electronic A * *
Bonding)
Extrusion (Fusion) Welding
Autoclave (Heat & Pressure)
Vulcanizing Tapes and
Adhesives
Tape and Mechanical
Seaming
* Factory seaming technique.
Field seaming technique.
6-9
-------
TABLE 6-3. LAP SEAM BOND REQtJIREMENTS*
Minimum Seam Bond (Irtches)
FML Type Factory Field
PVC 3/4 2
CSPE 1-1/2 3
CPE 1—1/2 3
HDPE 1 1
* Lap seam bond is different from lap seam overlap. Generally,
FMLs are overlapped more than bonded, particularly in the
field. Also, FMLs with scrim must be overlapped and bonded
according to scrim width.
1 inch = 2.54 cm.
6-10
-------
TABLE 6—4. EQUIPMENT REQUIRED DURING FML SEAMING OPERATIONS
Item Use
Scissors (bright-colored To cut FML materials
with rounded points)
Sandbags To secure unseamed FML. panels to
prevent damage by wind
Electric generator and To operate heat guns, power tools, and
extension cords lights.
Scrub brushes To clean FML prior to seaming,
patching, anchoring
Fuel To operate gasoline andfor diesel
equipment
Extra pieces of FML To use as a tarp to store materials
on the seaming area, and for patches
Ladders For working on slope
Seaming equipment:
- Tape For measuring
— Clean bristle brushes 7.5 an To apply adhesive, cement, solvent
(3 inches) wide x 10 cm (4 inches) caulk, etc.
long, squeeze bottles, caulk guns
— Hand rollers To apply pressure to seam after
application of adhesive, cement, and
solvent
— Clean, absorbent white To clean FML in area of seam and to
cotton rags wipe excessive adhesive
— 10—cm (4—Inch) dia plastic To assist in pouring adhesives and
funnel solvents from one container to another
— 3.785—liter (1 —qallon) polyethylene To hold adhesives and solvents
pall s
— Wood boards To provide support under FML during
seaming operations
— Heat guns To warm FML during seaming operations
6—11
-------
TABLE 6—4 (continued)
Item
— Heat sealing equipment
— Grinding equipment
— Fusion welding equipment
First aid supplies
Mechanics tool kit
Water supply
Phone and/or radio conurunlcatlQns
Fire extinguishers
Use
Conronly used on HOPE, sometimes used
on other FML types
For preparation of HOPE seams
For HOPE seaming
To provide relief from minor injuries
To make miscellaneous repairs
To supply personnel drinking and
equipment cooling needs
To provide off-site contact
Use for fires
6-12
-------
Inspection Procedures
Method : Observe all equipment to be used for seaming
operations to ensure that the required types and quanti-
ties are on site. Have installer’s representative
explain and demonstrate the seaming equipment. Ensure
that all equipment is in working order prior to commence-
ment of seaming operations each day.
• Frequency :
— Once prior to commencement of FML seaming operations.
- Daily after seaming operations begin.
• Documentation : The inspector should maintain an accurate
log in the daily diary noting the presence and workabil-
ity of all equipment.
o Interpretation : Al]. required equipment must be on site
and in working condition prior to commencement of FML
seaming operations. Once FML seaming begins, all equip-
ment is to be kept in working order or replaced.
o Alternatives : None.
PERSONNEL
Each field seaming crew should be comprised of a sufficient
number of experienced persons to properly carry out seaming oper-
ations. Each crew member should wear clothing that will not
damage the FML during seaming operations.
Crew Size
For PVC, CSPE, and CPE, a typical crew is comprised of four
individuals:
• One cleaner.
• One washer.
• One solvent/adhesive applier.
• One roller.
If necessary, cleaning and washing can be performed by the same
crew member.
For HDPE, the following crew size is appropriate:
• One cleaner.
• One grinder.
• One welder.
6—13
-------
If necessary, cleaning and grinding can be performed by the same
crew member.
On many jobs, two or more seaming crews will be used. One
inspector should be provided for each seaming crew. Multiple
crews should work in opposite directions to prevent the formation
of “fishmouths” (see Figure 6—5), and should be spaced as far
apart as possible to prevent unnecessary conversation.
Experience
Each project should have a seaming supervisor who is respon-
sible for all seaming crews. The supervisor and all crew foremen
should meet the following minimum installation experience re-
quirements for FMLs:
• Seaming supervisor — 93,000 square meters (1 million
square feet) of FML placed and seamed.
• Crew foreman — 9,300 square meters (100,000 square feet)
of FML placed and seamed.
As a minimum, all crew members should have the following
training:
• Brief instruction on the purpose of FML installation.
• Completion of a training course in seaming operation
including seaming techniques on side slopes (slope
ladders should be used so that no one stands directly on
the FML).
• Knowledge of proper clothing to wear while working on the
FML (see Clothing subsection).
Inspection Procedures——
• Purpose : Assurance is required that all seaming person—
r el have proper qualifications and training.
• Method : All personnel should complete a signed statement
confirming that they meet minimum experience/training
requirements.
• Freguency : Each worker should be tested prior to the
beg .nning of work.
• Documentation : A record of each seaming crew member and
supervisor, by name, should be kept in the daily diary.
6—14
-------
Figure 6—5. A “fishmouth” that has been torn along Its edges
6—15
-------
• Interpretation : No person without proper experience
should work on the FML project without proper qualifica-
tions or training.
• Alternatives : The FML installation contractor could pro-
vide the required information to the inspector in lieu of
the inspector requesting signed statements.
Clothing
All seaming crews should wear the following special clothing
during FML seaming operations:
• Smooth—soled shoes. No shoes with indented patterns
should be worn, since rocks can be trapped in the void
areas and inadvertently puncture and/or tear the FML.
• Gloves. When applying solvent/adhesive to FML, latex or
other type gloves should be worn to prevent irritation to
hands. Figure 6—6 depicts workers wearing latex gloves
during solvent/adhesive application. Leather gloves help
protect crew members’ hands from inadvertent contact with
hot seaming equipment (e.g., hot air guns) or other
damage. Crew members should refrain from touching dark,
sun—exposed FML with their bare skin.
• Knee pads. Knee pads are helpful in protecting workers’
knees during seaming operations.
Inspection Procedures——
• Method : All seaming and auxiliary personnel should be
inspected to ensure that their clothing (including foot-
wear) is of the type that would not damage the FML (e.g.,
smooth—soled shoes). The seaming crew should also be
required to wear personnel protective equipment (e.g.,
gloves) during FML seam installation.
• Frequency : Each crew member and all auxiliary personnel
must be observed to meet dress and safety requirements
prior to the start of each work day.
• Documentation : A record of each crew member, by name,
should be maintained in the daily diary, along with a
notation regarding conformance with pertinent require-
ments.
• Interpretation : All persons walking on or seaming FML
should conform to dress and safety requirements.
6-16
-------
Figure 6 —6. Workers seaming with solvent/adhesive using latex gloves
6—17
-------
• Alternatives : The liner contractor could assume respon-
sibility for a daily check of his employees. The CQA
inspector would then receive an acceptance report from
the contractor and make spot observations throughout the
day for noncompliance.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
Generally, FMLs should not be field—seamed under adverse
weather/environmental conditions. In some cases, protective
measures can be taken to nullify these adverse conditions (e.g.,
construction of wind breaks). The type of FM.L will dictate the
type of protective measures taken.
Adverse weather/environmental conditions include:
• High wind. High winds may stretch the FML, causing
wrinkles and other distortions, or may move the FML out
of position. High winds can also cause solvents to dry
prematurely, creating an inferior seam bond.
• Rain/moisture. PVC, CSPE, and CPE seaming operations
cannot proceed in wet/moist conditions caused by rain,
snow, or heavy mist, because the solvent is affected by
moisture bond. It is also difficult to obtain a satis-
factory fusion weld during rain, since the amount of heat
being applied to the weld could be altered.
• Hail. Hail is capable of damaging an FML after it is in
place. Consequently, after a hail storm, all exposed FML
should be checked for damage and repaired as necessary.
• High or low temperatures. Most FML manufacturers have
recommended minimum and maximum temperatures for seaming
PML. If seams are formed outside these temperature
ranges, the integrity of the seam is questionable. The
FML manufacturer should be contacted for recommended
seaming temperatures.
• Dust. Dust can form a coating on the FML surface,
affecting the ability of the solvent/adhesive to properly
bond the PML at the seam area. The presence of dust can
sometimes be reduced through the application of water to
the supporting surface and the localized surrounding
area.
Adverse environmental conditions can also have an effect on
the attitude of the seaming crews. Unduly cold, hot, wet, windy,
or dusty conditions will cause workers to divert their attention
from seaming operations and often result in seams that have not
been formed with proper care (e.g., insufficient effort dedicated
to cleaning the bonding surface).
6-18
-------
Inspection Procedures
• Method : Observe weather conditions at the site for high
winds, rain, snow, hail, heavy mist, dust, and severe
heat or cold.
• Frequency : Weather conditions should be observed
throughout the day.
• Documentation : Wind velocities, temperatures, moisture
conditions, and the undue presence of dust should be per-
iodically recorded throughout the day in the daily diary.
• Interpretation : FML seaming cannot proceed during severe
environmental conditions.
SEAMING
Although seaming methods vary according to FML type and man-
ufacturer specifications, there are certain standard practices
pertinent to all seaming procedures that must be followed in
order to form satisfactory seams. These procedures apply to
seaming of sheets and patches, and include the following:
• The working area should be clean and smooth and have ade-
quate room for maneuvering. For solvent-bonded or other
similar seams that require pressure during formation, a
hard flat surface is necessary to provide adequate sup-
port for pressure application. A board is often used for
this purpose.
• With PVC, care must be taken not to apply too much sol-
vent/adhesive. Conversely, with CSPE and CPE, a liberal
application of solvent/adhesive is desirable.
• Proper seam overlap is required to ensure a strong bond.
Seam overlap dimensions should be provided in the speci—
fications. Table 6—2 provides generally accepted seam
overlap dimensions for each FML type. The dimensions
given apply to sheets and patches.
• Sandbags should remain placed on all FML sheets and edges
until the FMr is covered. Sandbags should be spaced no
more than 1.8 to 2 meters (5 to 6 feet) apart on edges.
• When seaming on slopes, ladders should be used, so that
workers do not walk directly on the FML. It is important
that workers avoid walking on in—place FML on slopes
because of the tendency to dig their feet into the slope
for support. This can cause depressions in the support-
ing surface and future stress on the FML.
6—19
-------
o Prior to seaming an FML sheet or patch, all edges should
be free of defects such as blisters and tears. Once the
seam is formed, there should be no free edge on the upper
FML, because equipment or other items can catch on or
snag the free edge, potentially destroying the seam at
that location. This ideal cannot always be attained how-
ever, since some FML manufacturers’ seaming techniques
actually specify a free edge at the seam. Figure 6—7
shows a typical FML patching operation.
• Seaming techniques may vary during the day depending on
ambient air temperatures. For example, for solvent adhe-
sive seams, the FML temperature in the area of the seam
may need to be heated, using a heat gun or other means,
during colder early morning or late afternoon hours.
Inspection Procedures
• Purpose : Inspection is required to ensure that field
seams are properly prepared.
• Method : Each seaming operation should be visually
inspected to ensure the following:
- Sheets and/or patches are properly positioned and have
sufficient overlap for seaming.
— Sandbags are in place as required.
— There are no edge defects on the sheet or patch to be
seamed.
— The working area is satisfactory for seam preparation.
— Proper seaming techniques are being followed.
• Frequency : Ongoing inspection is required.
6—20
-------
Figure 6-7. Typical patching operation.
621
-------
CHAPTER 7
LI NER ANCHORS/ATTACHMENTS
INTRODUCT ION
One of the most common sources of failure in an FML instal-
lation occurs at the attachment of the FML to another surface.
In general, these attachments consist of perimeter anchors or
attachments to structures, such as pipes or columns, within the
facility. Failure of a perimeter anchor can lead to seam failure
or to the collapse of major portions of an FML installation. The
failure of attachments within a facility will inevitably result
in significant leaks. Consequently, it is essential that the
anchor/attachment be properly designed and installed.
In addition to the guidance given below on specific types of
anchors/attachments, there are several general practices and pro-
cedures that should be followed:
• Do not use wood battens (refer to the discussion of bat-
tens and bolts in the Anchors/Attachments subsection of
this chapter).
• Do not use percussion driven fasteners.
• Attach every FML on a plane with itself, not perpendic-
ular to the plane of the FML.
• Ensure that placement equipment is on site and in working
order, and that a sufficient number of qualified place-
ment personnel are on site.
PLACEMENT EQUIPMENT
Various types of large construction and hand—held equipment
may be required for the different types of FML anchors/attach-
ments. Figures showing examples of equipment used for FML
anchori.rig/attaching are provided throughout the chapter.
Inspection Procedures
• Method : Observe all anchor/attachment installation
equipment to ensure that appropriate types and quantities
are on site. Observe the check—out of equipment to
ensure that each item is in proper working order.
7 —1
-------
• Frequency :
— Once prior to commencement of anchor/attachment instal-
lation.
— Daily after anchor/attachment operations commence.
Documentation : The CQA inspector should maintain an
accurate log in the daily diary, noting the presence and
workability of all equipment.
• Interpretation : All required equipment must be on site
and in working condition prior to commencement of anchor/
attachment installation. Once installation begins, all
equipment is to be kept in working order or replaced.
P ERSONNEL
Qualifications
In general, FML anchor/attachment installations should be
performed by workers who are experienced in such work.
Inspection Procedures-—
• Purpose : Assurance is required that foremen and anchor/
attachment personnel have proper qualifications and
training.
• Method : All personnel should complete a signed statement
confirming that they meet minimum experience/training
requirements.
• Frequency : An inquiry of qualifications should be made
prior to personnel beginning work on anchoring/attaching
of the FML.
• Interpretation : No foremen or other personnel should
work on anchoring/attaching the FML without proper quali-
fications or training.
• Alternatives : The FML installation contractor could pro-
vide the required information to the inspector.
Clothing
All on-site personnel should be required to wear special
clothing during any FML work. This includes:
• Smooth—soled shoes. No shoes with indented patterns
should be worn, since rocks can become trapped in the
void areas and inadvertently puncture or tear the FML.
7—2
-------
• Gloves. When handling/pulling FML into place, the worker
should wear gloves to prevent abrasion or other damage to
his hands.
Inspection Procedures——
• Method : Personnel should be inspected to ensure that
clothing and footwear are of the type that would not dam-
age the FML or injure the installer (e.g., smooth—soled
shoes and gloves).
• Frequency : Each crew must be observed prior to the start
of each work day.
• Location : All crews should be observed.
• Documentation : A record of each installer, by name,
should be maintained in the daily diary; all unacceptable
apparel should be noted.
• Interpretation : All persons handling or working on the
FML should conform to dress requirements.
• Alternatives : The liner contractor could assume respon-
sibility for a daily check of his employees. The CQA
inspector would then receive an acceptance report from
the contractor and make spot observations throughout the
day for noncompliance.
ANCHORS/ATTACHMENTS
In nearly all cases where the supporting surface for an FML
is soil, the edge of the FML will be anchored in an earth trench.
In those cases where the liner edge must be attached to a mate-
rial such as concrete, battens and bolts are generally used (see
Figure 7—1 for an example of a batten). Reglets are also used
(see Figure 7—2). At piping, a pipe boot made out of the FML and
a clamp may be used (see Figure 7—3), or the FML used as a gasket
between two pipe flanges.
Earth Anchor Trenches
The minimum design requirements for an earth anchor trench
are determined by the following criteria:
• There must be sufficient trench depth and width to resist
pulling of the FML edge out of the trench.
• There must be sufficient distance from the edge of the
trench to the top of the slope so that the top of the
slope will not slough to the downward pull of the FML
after a surface loading is applied.
7—3
-------
F Igure 7—1. FML battened to concrete structure
7-4
-------
A
-‘ SCS ENGINEERS—
F/ 1L
4
• FHL C 4 ’iqF 4 SN e 7
b’,,szp
FI 4 ’lI- T ) ( ‘vc cTE
.4c-.i ivE /twr
A
A
1’.
p
A
6
A
A
1’.
A
A
FIgure 1-2. DetaIl of reglet connection
-------
Figure 7—3. FIlL boot clamped to pipe
7—6
-------
For PVC, CPE, and CSPE, the minimum acceptable depth and
width for a trench are 30.5 centimeters (1 foot) and 30.5 centi-
meters (1 foot), respectively. For these FMLs, the minimum
acceptable distance of the trench from the top of slope is 30.5
centimeters (1 foot). A typical anchor trench for these FMLs is
shown in Figure 7—4. For HDPE, the minimum depth and width are
61 centimeters (2 feet) and 30.5 centimeters (1 foot), respec-
tively, and the trench should be 60 centimeters (2 feet) to 1
meter (3 feet) from the top of the slope. An HDPE anchor trench
is shown in Figure 7—5.
Anchor trenches should be backfilled with a clean, well—
graded soil (usually material excavated from the trench). The
soil should be carefully compacted in the trench. t3n].ess speci-
fied, the FML does not need to be fully seamed in the trench.
Inspection Procedures——
Method : Visually observe the perimeter anchor trench
before the FML, is placed and the trench backfilled to
ensure the following:
— Trench depth and width (and distance from slope, if
applicable) meet specifications.
— The leading edge of the trench is smooth and free of
sharp or jagged edges.
— Temporary anchoring methods (sand bags) do not damage
the FML.
— FML is properly installed in the trench.
— Earth fill for the anchor trench is free of sharp
rocks.
- Final backfilling and compaction operations do not dam-
age the FML.
• Location : The entire perimeter trench should be
observed.
• Documentation : The inspector should keep accurate rec-
ords in the daily diary, noting where sections of trench
are completed, trench dimensions, and personnel engaged
in anchoring procedures.
• Interpretation : FIlL anchoring in earth trenches must be
performed in accordance with design specifications to
ensure lining security.
7 —7
-------
Figure 7-4. Anchor trench for CSPE FML.
Figure 7-5. Anchor trench for HDPE
7-8
-------
Concrete
It is not unusual for an FML to be penetrated by the con-
crete structures and pipes to which the FML is attached.
FMLs can be attached to concrete with battens and bolts or
reglets. An important consideration is whether or not the
attachment will ever be submerged. If an attachment is to be
submerged, it must be sealed to avoid leakage. An attachment
that will not be submerged does not need to be sealed.
Prior to attachment of the FML, an important consideration
is the concrete itself. The inspector should check the following
items:
• Determine how the concrete was cured.
• Ensure that no wax or slick curing compound was used.
• Make sure that surfaces are smooth and free of voids,
jagged edges, and sharp protrusions.
Battens and Bolts——
A batten is a long thin metal bar. It is used in conjunc-
tion with anchor bolts to clamp the FML at the place of attach-
ment to a concrete structure or pipe.
Important features include:
o Spacing of anchor bolts — This is dependent on the type
of FML being used. Generally, stiffer FMLs such as HDPE
will require closer spacing of bolts to provide adequate
support, whereas more flexible materials such as PVC and
CSPE tolerate wider spacing. Bolt spacing should follow
the details shown on the design plans.
o Bolt, nut, and washer material — Generally, stainless
s teel is acceptable; however, metal alloy combinations
are sometimes preferred.
• Batten material — Stainless steel is normally used, but
more metal alloys can be used.
• Padding — For HDPE, one or more layers of padding are
recommended to protect the FML when the nut is tightened
down on the batten. Closed cell neoprene is most com-
monly used.
• Adhesives — Various layers of adhesive or butyl tape are
used to ensure a union between the liner and batten (and
padding). A typical batten and bolt combination is shown
in Figure 7—1.
7-9
-------
Inspection procedures— —
• Method : Visually observe the attachment surface and bat-
ten and bolt materials before the lining is attached to
ensure the following:
— Surface to which the FML is to be attached is smooth
and free of ridges, sharp edges or bumps, and voids.
— Materials are compatible. For example, never attach an
aluminum batten strip with steel nuts and bolts without
separating with Teflon washer nipples.
— Materials (batten bars, padding, bolts, etc.) are con-
sistent with the design. This includes certification
from the manufacturer or supplier that the material
meets or exceeds specifications.
— Adhesives, cements, tapes, and caulks are of a type
recommended or approved by the FML manufacturer.
— Materials are fresh, free of defects, and of the proper
dimensions.
• L,ocation : The entire attachment should be observed.
• Documentation : The inspector should maintain accurate
records in the daily diary, noting when sections of the
attachment are completed, the types and dimensions of
materials used, any delays or problems encountered, and
personnel engaged in the attachment process.
• Interpretation : An attachment can fail due to improper
installation, tearing of the FML at the attachment, or
corrosion of the batten material. Installation must be
performed in accordance with design specifications and
manufacturer recommendations. The inspector should ques-
tion the use of any metal other than stainless steel or
any material that is not strictly in accordance with spe-
cifications.
Reg].ets——
A reglet is a small, long plastic U—shaped piece into which
the edge of the FML is inserted; a long hard rubber rod is placed
into the U to secure the FML.
The plastic U is set into the concrete form before the con-
crete is poured or before it cures. The FML edge is inserted
inside the U; then the rubber rod is inserted. Finally, a thick
bead of caulk is run along the top of the reglet, FML, and rubber
rod as a final seal. A typical reglet is shown in Figure 7—2.
7-10
-------
Inspection procedures— —
• Method : Visually observe the attachment surface and
reglet materials before the lining is attached to ensure
the following:
— The reglet is properly set in the concrete and flush
with the concrete surface. No voids exist in the con-
crete alongside the reglet.
— The reglet is of the material and size specified.
— The surface to which the FML is to be attached is
smooth and free of ridges, sharp edges, bumps, and
voids.
- Adhesive, cements, tapes, and caulks are of a type
recommended or approved by the FML manufacturer.
— Materials are fresh, free of defects, and of the proper
dimensions. At completion of the work, visually
observe that the FML edge is properly inserted into the
reglet; the rubber rod is properly inserted; and the
caulk bead is of the proper material and is properly
placed.
• Location : The entire attachment should be observed.
• Documentation : The inspector should keep accurate rec-
ords in the daily diary, noting when sections of the
attachment are completed, the types and dimensions of
materials used, any delays or problems encountered, and
personnel engaged in attachment procedures.
o Interpretation : An attachment can fail due to improper
installation, tensing of the FML at the attachment, or
failure of the rubber rod to hold. Installation must be
done in accordance with design specifications and manu-
facturer recommendations. The inspector should question
the use of any material not strictly in accordance with
specifications.
Piping
At many facilities, it will be necessary to attach the FML
to one or more pipes that protrude through the FML. The two most
common methods of attachment are a pipe boot and batten and
bolts. The boot is generally of the same material as the FML; it
is attached by adhesive, heat, or fusion welding to the FML and
pipe using SS metal clamps on the pipe. If both the pipe and the
FML are HDPE, the boot is welded to both and no clamp is used.
7—11
-------
If a pipe boot cannot be used, the FML is generally attached
to a concrete shelf surrounding the pipe (flush with the support-
ing surface) using battens and bolts, or the method previously
discussed.
Another method involves using the FML as a gasket between
two pipe flanges. The bottom flange is flush with the concrete
shelf surrounding the pipe. The FML is placed thereon; holes are
punched in the FML to fit the flange bolts, and the upper pipe
ring flanges are secured to the FML and lower flange using bolts
and nuts. This type of atta chxnent is similar to the batten and
bolts previously discussed.
Inspection Procedures——
• Method : Visually observe the attachment surfaces of the
pipe and/or surrounding concrete shelf to ensure that:
— The surfaces are free of burrs, rough areas, projec-
tions, and voids.
— If a pipe flange is part of the attachment, it is flush
with the surrounding concrete surface.
— Adhesives, cements, tapes, caulks, and other materials
are of a type recommended or approved by the FML manu-
facturer. At completion of the work, visually observe
that the attachment is made according to the plans and
specifications, and that all potential visual leaks
paths have been adequately caulked.
• Location : Each attachment should be observed.
• Documentation : The inspector should keep accurate rec-
ords in the daily diary, noting the locations and types
of mixing attachment, materials used, any delays or prob-
lems encountered, and personnel engaged in the attachment
installation.
• Interpretation : An attachment at a pipe may fail for the
same reasons as attachments at other locations. Due to
the greater potential for leaks to occur at attachments,
it is important that extra care and effort go into their
construction. The quality of the material used and the
care taken in the installation are of utmost importance.
7—12
-------
CHAPTER 8
TESTING
INTRODUCTION
Several methods are used to test factory and field seams and
patches. Test methods can be destructive and/or nondestructive.
Nondestructive tests are performed in the field on in—place
FML. Nondestructive tests retain the integrity of the FML seam
or sheet being tested.
Destructive tests are performed in either the field or lab-
oratory. The intent is to determine the strength characteristics
of a seam sample by stressing the sample until either the seam or
the FML sheeting fails.
Table 8—1 lists the most commonly used field and laboratory
test methods, and indicates whether the tests are destructive or
nondestructive. In addition, the most common test methods for
each FML type are noted.
Testing is performed on in—place FML seams sheets and
patches and on samples of FML seams. Seam samples can be either
destructive or nondestructive, depending on the method by which
they were obtained.
Nondestructive Samples
Field—fabricated start—up seams are a representative seam
fabricated from the same material and using the same seaming
methods as those recommended by the FML sheet manufacturer. The
startup seam shall be no less than 3 meters (10 feet) in length,
and shall be provided at the start of each day’s or shift’s seam-
ing. Random samples for shear and peel testing are cut from the
startup seam. The seam must be allowed to cure or age properly
before testing in accordance with manufacturer’s directions.
Random field—fabricated seam samples are similar to field—
fabricated startup seam samples except that they can be taken
randomly at the discretion of the inspector/CQA officer using the
seaming techniques employed by the seaming crew at the time the
random sample is requested (i.e., the sample sheets should be
seamed in a manner similar to the field sheets, and no additional
8-1
-------
TABLE 8-1. METHODS COMMONLY USED TO TEST
FML SEA! ANO SHEET INTEGRITY
FML Type
Destructive Nondestructive
Test Method PVC CSPE CPE HOPE Test Test
Field
Probe* X X X X X
Air Lance* X X X X X
Vacuum 8ox* X X
Ultrasonic Pulse Echo* X X
Ultrasonic Impedance Plane X X X X X
Spark* X X X X X
Pressurized Dual Seam X X
Electrical Resistivity# X X X X x
Hydrostat lc# X X X X X
Seam Strength Peel X X X X X
Seam Strength Shear X
Laboratory
8onded Seam Strength Shear X X X X X
Bonded Seam Strength Peel X X X X X
* See Figures 8-2, 8-3, 8-4, 8—5, and 8—6, respectively, for an Illustration of the
test method.
May be used on all FML of 30 mu or greater sheet thickness.
I Tests both seam and sheet Integrity. All others test for seem integrity only.
8-2
-------
or alternative cleaning effort should be made by the seaming
crew). The seam must be allowed to cure or age properly before
testing in accordance with manufacturer directions.
Destructive Samples
A destructive sample consists of a 60—centimeter (2—foot)
long section of fabricated seam cut from the installed lining
(see Figure 8—1). The cutout section should be wide enough to
accommodate peel and shear testing. Random specimens for peel
and shear testing are cut from the sample. The frequency of cut-
outs can be determined by the size of the FML installation, and
may require only one or two Cutouts. The resulting hole is
patched with a piece of sheet material and seamed in accordance
with the manufacturer’s instructions. Before testing, the cutout
seam should be allowed to cure or age properly in accordance with
manufacturer directions. A minimum of one sample per seaming
crew per day should be tested.
Nondestructive sampling is recommended over destructive sam-
pling except when the following conditions exist:
• There are an insufficient number of inspectors to observe
each seaming crew full time.
• Results of testing a nondestructive sample indicate poor
seam quality.
If one or more of the above conditions prevail, the inspec-
tor should recommend to the CQA officer to implement an agreed—
upon destructive sampling program to supplement nondestructive
sampling.
FIELD TESTS
Probe Test (Mechanical Point Stressing )
• Purpose : This test is designed to detect leak paths and
unbonded edges of seams.
• Method : A dull—pointed probe (e.g., a blunted ice pick)
is run along the edge of a seam to detect seam defects
(see Figure 8—2). All defects detected are marked on the
sheet for repair.
• Frequency : Ongoing to assure that each factory and field
seam (including patching) is probe—tested.
• Location : All seams and patches should be tested.
8-3
-------
Figure 8 1. A field cut out seam being prepared
8.4
-------
, ? 4hI s
; ,s -
%
‘ a
:.i
- •,
-‘
— ‘I .I - -
- “ .-. •- . -‘
‘I
—— -
• I .• j — :
Figure 8-2. Probe testing of HDPE
8-5
-------
• Documentation : Field notes should be maintained on a
print of the sheet layout to record detected defects and
to monitor the seams that have been inspected. Names of
personnel performing the test should also be recorded.
• Interpretation : Defective seams should be repaired and
retested.
• Limitations : The probe test will normally only detect
unbonded areas that are open at the top edge of the seam.
However, if a suspicious area is detected (even though
the edge of the seam is bonded), the probe may be used to
carefully poke through the edge to probe the suspicious
area.
• Alternatives : None. The probe test is normally a funda-
mental part of a CQA program. Other field testing is
usually done in addition to the probe test.
Air Lance
• Purpose : This test is designed to detect leak paths and
unbonded edges of seams.
• Method : A stream of air is directed at the edge of a
seam through a small—diameter nozzle (e.g., 0.5—centi-
meter (3/16—inch]) at a relatively high pressure (minimum
3.5 kilograms per square centimeter (50 pounds per square
inch] held not more than 5 centimeters (2 inches] from
the seam edge) (see Figure 8—3). The stream of air will
tend to inflate leak paths, and will also lift unbonded
edges. Unbonded edges will tend to vibrate when sub-
jected to the air stream, resulting in an audible signal.
All defects are marked on the FML for repair.
• Frequency : Ongoing to assure that each factory and field
seam (including patching) is air lance—tested.
• Location : All seams and patches should be tested.
• Documentation : Field notes should be maintained on a
print of the sheet layout to record detected defects and
to monitor the seams that have been inspected. Names of
personnel performing the test should also be recorded.
• Interpretation : Areas of a seam that become inflated
indicate unbonded areas. Vibrating or uplifting of edges
of the seam indicate unsealed edges. Defective seams
should be repaired and retested.
8-6
-------
Figure 8-3. Air lance testing of FML
8-7
-------
• Limitations : The air lance will only detect unbonded
areas that are open at the top edge of the seam.
Uribonded areas that are closed at the edge of a seam will
not be detected by this method. Also, this method is
less effective for testing the thicker arid less flexible
liners such as HDPE.
• Alternatives : Vacuum box.
Vacuum Box
• Purpose : This test is designed to detect leak paths in
seams, or pinholes in sheets.
• Method : The seam areas of the liner to be tested are
cleaned of all dirt and other foreign matter; a soap
solution is then applied. A vacuum box equipped with a
vacuum gage, a clear glass panel in the top, and a soft
rubber gasket on the periphery of the open bottom (a vac-
uum box similar to the Series A 100 straight seam tester
as supplied by the American Parts and Service Company) is
sequentially placed over sections of the soaped seam area
and the gasket sealed to the FML. A vacuum of 1,380 to
2,760 kilograms per square meter (4 to 8 inches of mer-
cury) is then applied to the vacuum box using a gasoline—
or electric—driven power vacuum pump apparatus. The
applied vacuum will cause bubbles to form in the soap
solution over unbonded areas. All defects detected are
marked on the sheet for repair. Figure 8-4 shows a vac-
uum box being used to test a HDPE field seam.
• Frequency : Ongoing. At a minimum, each factory and
field seam and each patch are vacuum-tested.
• Location : All seams and patches should be tested.
• Documentation : Field notes should be maintained on a
print of the sheet layout to record detected defects and
to monitor the seams that have been inspected. Names of
personnel performing the test should also be recorded.
• Interpretation : Bubbles will form along the edge of a
seam or atop a pinhole if a leak path is present. The
vacuum test will only detect actual leak paths. Not all
unbonded areas will necessarily be detected. Defects
should be repaired and retested.
• Limitations : The vacuum test is difficult to use on
steep slopes, and the liner must be flat in order to
obtain a good seal between the box and the liner. The
vacuum test has questionable value to test thin FMLs
(less than 30 mils). The thinner, more flexible liners
8—8
-------
Figure 8-4. Vacuum box testing of HOPE
8-9
-------
have a tendency to pin themselves together when vacuum—
tested, thereby effecting a seal. Vacuum testing is a
widely used method for testing HDPE.
• Alternatives : Air Lance.
Ultrasonic (High—Frequency) Pulse Echo
• Purpose : This test is designed to detect major voids or
defective areas in the seam.
• Method : Nonreinforced field seams are tested by passing
a high—frequency sound wave through the seam overlap to
detect discoritinuities in the bonded seam. A cominer—
cially available frequency generator capable of producing
frequencies in the range of 5 to 15 MHz should be used.
The contact send/receive transducer head should be the
width of the bonded seam width, and should be capable of
being moved at the rate of 1.5 to 2.1 meters per minute
(5 to 7 feet per minute) along the surface length of the
seam area. The transducer head should be designed to
give continuous surface—to—surface thickness measurements
once calibrated. Good contact of the test head with the
FML surface is assured by providing a continuous contact
medium (water) at the interface between the test head and
the FML. The ultrasonic signal should be viewable on a
monitor and capable of triggering an audible alarm when a
discontinuity is detected. Discontinuities should be
marked for repair after detection. Figure 8—5 shows an
FML seam being inspected using this technique.
• Frequency : Ongoing. All seams should be tested.
• Location : All seams are to be tested using this method.
• Documentation : Field notes should be maintained on a
print of the sheet layout to monitor the seams that have
been inspected and to record the location of defects.
Calibration of the testing equipment should also be
recorded, as well as names of personnel performing the
test.
• Interpretation : Major voids or defective areas of a seam
will be indicated by echoes with an earlier return time
than those from well bonded areas. Defective areas
should be repaired and retested.
• Limitations : The ultrasonic pulse echo test requires the
most sophisticated equipment of all the field tests. It
also requires experienced personnel to perform the test-
ing. Ultrasonic testing is primarily used to test HDPE
seams. However, it is capable of testing seams in other
8-10
-------
Figure 8-5. Seam testing using pu’se echo technique
8-11
-------
nonreinforced FML materials, such as PVC, with thick-
nesses greater than 30 mils.
• Alternatives : Vacuum box.
Ultrasonic Impedance Plane
• Purpose : This test is designed to detect leak paths and
unbonded factory and field seams.
• Method : The Ultrasonic Impedance Plane (UIP) technique
works on the principle of characteristic acoustic imped-
ance. A well bonded seam possesses a different acoustic
impedance after calibration than an unbonded seam. In
order to characterize a well bonded seam, a continuous
wave resonant frequency of 160 to 185 kHz is transmitted
by means of a surface transducer, forming a character-
istic dot pattern on a cathode ray tube (CRT) monitor.
Location of this specific dot pattern on the screen indi-
cates a good bond; any variation of this pattern indi-
cates an unbond or an uncoupled transducer. The operator
visually inspects and marks all unbonded areas for
repair. This method can be applied to supported as well
as unsupported FMLs as the scrim reinforcement does not
appear to affect the low—frequency transmission.
• Frequency : Ongoing to ensure that all seams and patches
are tested.
• Location : All seams and patches should be tested.
• Documentation : Field notes should be maintained on a
print of the sheet layout to record detected defects and
to monitor the seams that have been inspected. Documen-
tation should include names of personnel performing the
test and UIP equipment make and model number.
• Interpretation : Defective seams should be repaired and
retested.
• Limitations : A surface transducer must be used that is
wide enough to be able to scan the full width of a given
seam along the entire bond length. Improvements in
method of application are needed to increase both the
speed and accuracy of testing. The present speed of
• testing is only 1 to 2 meters per minute (3 to 6 feet per
minute).
• Alternatives : All other test methods except the air
lance for HDPE, the vacuum box for thin (< 30 mu) FML,
and dual seam pressurization.
8-12
-------
Electrical Spark Test
• Purpose : This test is used to detect voids, pinholes, or
unbonded areas primarily in HDPE welds. It can also be
used to test in solvent bonds.
• Method : All seams are provided with copper wires prop-
erly embedded in the seam and grounded. A high—voltage
(15 to 30 kv) electrical current is then applied to the
seam area using a high—voltage detector (similar to
Tinker and Razor Holiday Detector Model AP—W), and any
leakage to ground is detected by sparking. Figure 8-6
shows a seam equipped with a spark test wire and the
testing apparatus.
• Frequency : Ongoing to assure that all field seams and
patches are spark—tested.
• Location : All field seams and patches are tested.
• Documentation : Field notes should be maintained on a
print of the sheet layout to record detected defects and
to monitor the seams that have been inspected. Names of
personnel performing the test should also be recorded.
• Interpretation : Defective seams should be repaired and
retested.
• Limitations : Electrical spark testing is best suited for
thicker FML C> 30 mu). Insertion of the copper wire
into solvent—bonded/adhesive—bonded seams slows the seam-
ing rate.
• Alternatives : Air lance (PVC, CSPE, and CPE), vacuum
box, ultrasonic pulse echo (HDPE).
Pressurized Dual Seam
• Purpose : This test is designed to detect leak paths and
unbonded edges of double wedge thermally welded seams
where an air chamber exists between the seams.
• Method : After the dual wedge seam has been fabricated
for a given length, both ends are sealed. A needle with
attached pressure gauge and air valve is inserted into
the air space between the thermally welded areas, and
pressure (usually 207 kPa (30 psigl), is applied to the
air channel. The gauge is monitored for a drop in air
pressure over time as an indicator of a seam unbond or
leak.
• Frequency : Ongoing to assure that all seams are tested.
8-13
-------
r
—
- -. .— - - —, -
— -
- - — - - “ !- - -
- —
-
I
Figure 8-6. Spark testing of HOPE
8-14
-------
• Location : All seams are tested.
• Documentation : Field notes should be maintained on a
print of the sheet layout to record detected defects and
to monitor the seams that have been inspected. Names of
personnel performing the test should also be recorded.
• Interpretation : Defective seams should be repaired and
retested.
• Limitations : If a leak is detected, the entire length of
the seam being tested must be rechecked using a vacuum
box, or the length must be cap—stripped.
• Alternatives : Vacuum box.
Electrical Resistivity
o Purpose : To detect holes, seam unbonds, and improper
penetration seals in FML installation.
o Method : The pre—service containment is filled with 20 to
75 centimeters (8 to 30 inches) of water. A lightweight
man—portable electrical probe is then inserted into the
water to detect leak locations where there is no resis-
tance to electrical current offered by the FML. To make
a complete survey, a series of horizontal transverse
lines are established and scanned with the probe for cov-
erage on each side of the transverse line. When leaks
are detected, they are accurately located to within 1.25
centimeters (0.5 inch) or less, and are immediately
marked with lead markers and floats. Surveys can be con-
ducted in up to 3.5 meters (12 feet) of water using a
small boat.
• Frequency : This test is performed after the entire FML
installation is completed and prior to receiving wastes.
• Location : The entire FML installation is tested.
• Documentation : Field notes should be maintained on FML
layout plans to record any leaks detected. Names of per-
sonnel performing tests should be recorded.
• Interpretation : Defective FML sheets seams and penetra-
tion seals should be repaired and retested.
• Limitations : The maximum distance at which a leak can be
detected depends on several variables, e.g., hole size,
conductivity of the impounded liquid. Most pinholes are
8—15
-------
detected at distances of at least 46 centimeters (18
inches). Many large leaks can be detected at a distance
of at least 125 centimeters (50 feet).
Metal pipes, bolts, studs, and even concrete pipe and
valve supports that penetrate the liner make excellent
electrical conducting paths that interfere with measure—
merits or cause nearby leaks to be overlooked by the
detector. Such interference impacts can often be mini-
mized or eliminated by special actions and temporary
arrangements ranging from plugging and draining penetrat-
ing pipes to using small cofferdams to isolate large
structures which are normally in contact with the liquid.
If the FML has an air—filled void under it which did not
fill with liquid from the leak, no electric current path
would exist, and detection would not be possible. The
liquid must complete an electric current path to the
underlying earth for detection to occur.
• Alternatives : Hydrostatic test.
Hydrostatic Test
• Purpose : This test is designed to detect for any leaks
in the FML including pinholes, tears, seam unbonds, and
faulty attachments to penetrations.
• Method : The containment is filled with water to the
maximum depth that will be exposed to hazardous waste.
Any reduction in water level over the specified period of
time is then measured using a float (hook) gauge for a
single FML, and a monitoring well for the upper FML of a
double FML installation.
• Frequency : This test is performed after the entire FML
installation is completed and prior to receiving wastes.
• Location : The entire FML installation is tested.
• Documentation : Field notes should be maintained on the
FML layout plans to record any leaks detected. Names of
personnel locating leaks should be recorded.
• Interpretation : Defective FML sheets, seams, and pene-
tration seals should be repaired and retested.
• Limitations : Depends on the availability of water and
the size of the FML installation.
• Alternatives : Electrical resistivity.
8-16
-------
Seam Strength Peel Test Field
• Purpose : This is a field test designed to detect prob-
lems in field seaming materials and procedures.
• Method : Samples of seams are made in the field as the
installation progresses, using the same materials and
techniques that are used for the liner. The samples for
the peel test are seamed using pieces of liner material.
The two pieces are seamed together along one side only in
a manner that will provide “ears” on which to pull to put
the seam in peel. For PVC, CSPE, and CPE, the seam must
be allowed to cure for a minimum of 12 hours prior to
being cut for sampling; HDPE can be Cut for sampling
after only a few minutes. These samples are then pulled
apart in peel. The reinforced FMLs (e.g., CPE, CSPE) can
be easily tested by hand. If well bonded, reinforced
materials should fail due to delamination of one of the
sheets. However, well bonded unreinforced materials such
as HDPE or PVC, when tested in peel, should fail due to
tearing of one or both of the sheets. To test such mate-
rials, other equipment such as mechanically operated vice
grips might be required to apply sufficient force.
• Frequency : One peel seam sample per day is the minimum
requirement. In larger installations, one sample per 150
meters (500 feet) of field seam is normally required.
o Location : Test samples are made in the field alongside
the actual seams.
o Documentation : The samples should be numbered, dated,
identified as to the personnel making the seam, and keyed
to the location of field seam work in progress at the
time the sample is made; appropriate notes should be
maintained on a print of the sheet layout. Weather con-
ditions at the time the samples are made should also be
recorded. Results of test samples should be recorded for
each sample.
• Interpretation : The results of the peel test will iden-
tify any problems with the seaming materials or tech-
niques. Well bonded reinforced materials will fail due
to delamination of one of the sheets. Well bonded non—
reinforced materials will fail by tearing of one or both
of the sheets.
Seam Strength Shear Test Field (HDPE Only )
• Purpose : This field test is designed to detect problems
in field seaming materials and procedures for HDPE only.
8-17
-------
• Method : Samples of seams are made in the field as the
installation progresses using the same materials and
techniques that are used for the liner. Samples for
testing can be cut from seam samples only a few minutes
after seaming. These samples are then pulled apart in
shear using a mechanically operated vice grip device.
• Frequency : One shear seam sample per day is the minimum
requirement. In larger installations, one sample per 150
meters (500 feet) of field seam is normally required.
• Location : Test samples are made in the field alongside
seams being made in the field.
• Documentation : The samples should be numbered, dated,
identified as to the personnel making the seam, and keyed
to the location of field seam work in progress at the
time the sample is made; appropriate notes should be
maintained on a print of the sheet layout. Weather con-
ditions at the time the samples are made should also be
recorded. Results of test samples should be recorded for
each sample.
• Interpretation : The results of the shear test will iden-
tify any problems with the seaming materials or tech-
niques. Well bonded HDPE will fail due to breaking of
the material outside the seam.
LABORATORY TESTS
Bonded Seam Strength in Shear of Unreinforced FMLs (ASTM D 3083 —
Specification for Flexible Polyvinyl Chloride Plastic Sheeting
for Pond, Canal, and Reservoir Lining, As Modified by ASTM D 882
or ASTM D 638 )
• Purpose : This laboratory test is designed to determine
the breaking factor (kilograms per centimeter, or pounds
per inch of width) of seams in shear for unreinforced
FMLs.
• Method : ASTM D 3083, Paragraph 9.3, modified to allow
either Method A or Method B of ASTM D 882 or ASTM D 638
for EDPE:
— Method A — Static Weighing: This method employs a con-
stant rate of separation of the grips holding the ends
of the test specimen.
— Method B — Pendulum Weighing: This method employs a
constant rate of motion of one grip and a variable rate
of motion of a second grip. The variable rate grip is
8-18
-------
attached to a pendulum weighing head. Its movement is
dependent on the load deformation behavior of the mate-
rial tested.
— ASTM D 638: This method is for EDPE and employs a con-
stant rate of separation of the grips holding the ends
of the test specimen. The grip separation rate is dif-
ferent than in ASTM D 882 in order to accoirin odate the
different properties of the HDPE material.
Specimens 2—1/2 centimeters (1 inch) wide are used with a
grip separation of 10 centimeters (4 inches) plus the
width of the seam. The seam is centered between the
clamps. Five specimens are tested for each sample.
Seams should cure for a minimum of 12 days prior to test-
ing, except in the case of RDPE which does not need to
cure. Each specimen is strained at a rate of 50 centi-
meters (20 inches) per minute, except for HDPE which is
strained at a rate of 5 centimeters (2 inches) per min-
ute. The maximum load for each specimen is recorded.
The breaking factor is calculated by dividing the maximum
load by the original minimum width of the specimen.
Frequency : The specimen should be taken from samples of
both factory (if applicable) and field seams. Samples of
factory seams can either be provided by the liner fabri-
cator or cut out in the field. One factory seam sample
per 1,525 meters (5,000 feet) of factory seam is normally
required. In accordance with the approved CQA/CQC plans,
samples of field seams can either be made separately and
alongside the actual installation or cut out from the
installed liner. One field seam sample per 152.5 meters
(500 feet) of field seam is normally required.
• Location : Both field and factory seams are tested by
this method. Exact sampling locations are determined by
the CQA inspector.
o Documentation : When taking samples from the field, the
CQA inspector must keep accurate records. Samples should
be numbered, dated, identified as to the personnel making
the seam (if applicable), and keyed to the proper loca-
tion on a print of the sheet layout. Weather conditions
should also be recorded. If the liner fabricator is sup-
plying the factory seam samples, each must be numbered,
dated, and keyed to the appropriate liner panels when the
samples are taken. The laboratory test report should
include the following: sample identification, method of
preparing specimens, type of test specimen and dimen-
sions, number of specimens tested, speed of testing, and
breaking factors.
8-19
-------
• Interpretation : Field and factory seam breaking factor
values which are 80 percent or greater of the specified
minimum strength of the parent material are acceptable.
For HDPE, field and factory seam values 80 percent or
greater of the specified minimum yield strength of the
parent material are acceptable. Where a combination of
dissimilar materials is involved, the value should be 80
percent of the weaker material. Lesser values are not
acceptable and could warrant additional sampling and
testing and possible rejection of the seams in question.
• Limitations : Performance of this test requires special
test equipment and trained personnel. Although acceler-
ated aging of seam samples may be used to obtain quick
results, the time required from initial sampling to docu-
mentation of test results is a minimum of 2 weeks (with
the exception of HDPE which requires no waiting time for
cure). During this time, the lining could be buried
under a leachate collection system or a protective earth
cover before the test results are known.
• Alternatives : None. This is a mandatory test.
Bonded Seam Strength in Shear of Reinforced FMLs (ASTM D 751,
Modified Grab Method A - Testing Coated Fabrics )
• Purpose : This is a laboratory test designed to determine
the breaking strength (pounds) of seams in shear for
reinforced FMLs.
• Method : Specimens 10 centimeters (4 inches) wide and a
minimum length of 23 centimeters (9 inches) plus the seam
width are prepared from the sample material. Five speci-
mens are tested. Each specimen is placed in the 2.5—
centimeter (1—inch) wide grips of a testing machine which
consists of a straining mechanism, clamps for holding the
specimen, and a load recording mechanism. Seams should
have cured for a minimum of 12 days prior to testing.
Each specimen is strained at a uniform speed of 30.5
centimeters (12 inches) per minute. The maximum load for
each specimen is recorded. The load at break is recorded
for each specimen.
• Frequency : Specimens should be taken from samples of
both factory and field seams. Samples of factory seams
can either be provided by the liner fabricator or cut out
in the field. One factory seam sample per 1,525 meters
(5,000 feet) of factory seam is normally required. Sam-
ples of field seams can either be made up separately and
alongside the actual installation or they can be cut out
from the installed liner. One field seam sample per
152.5 meters (500 feet) of field seam is normally
required.
8-20
-------
• Location : Both field and factory seams are tested by
this method. Exact sampling locations are determined by
the CQA inspector.
• Documentation : The CQA inspector must maintain accurate
records of the samples. Samples should be numbered,
dated, identified as to the personnel making the seam (if
applicable), and keyed to the proper location on a print
of the sheet layout. Weather conditions should also be
recorded. The laboratory test report should include the
following: sample identification, method of preparing
specimens, specimen dimensions, number of specimens
tested, speed of testing, arid breaking strengths.
• Interpretation : Field seam and factory seam breaking
strengths which are 80 percent or greater of the speci-
fied strength of the parent material are acceptable.
Lesser values are not acceptable, and could warrant addi-
tional sampling and testing and possible rejection of the
seam in question.
• Limitations : Performance of this test requires special
test equipment and trained personnel. Although acceler-
ated aging of seam samples may be used to obtain quick
results, the time required from initial sampling to docu-
mentation of test results is a minimum of 2 weeks. Dur-
ing this time, the FML could be buried under a leachate
collection system or a protective earth cover before the
test results are known.
• Alternatives : None. This is a mandatory test.
Bonded Seam Strength in Peel (ASTM D 413, Modified Machine
Method, Type A — Test Methods for Rubber Property — Adhesion to
Flexible Substrate )
• Purpose : This is a laboratory test designed to investi-
gate the strength of factory and field seams when tested
in peel.
• Method : Specimens 2.5 centimeters (1 inch) wide and a
minimum length to permit 90-degree peel separation are
cut from the sample material. Five specimens are tested.
Seams should have cured for a minimum of 12 days prior to
testing, except for HDPE which does not need to cure.
Each specimen is placed in the grips of the same testing
machine as that used j n the grab method for breaking
strength. Each specimen is separated by hand to permit
the jaws of the testing machine to be attached to the
individual sheets. The specimen is stripped at a jaw
separation rate of 5 centimeters (2 inches)per minute
8-21
-------
and at an angle of approximately 90 degrees. The separa-
tion is continued for a sufficient distance to ensure
seam adhesion.
Frequency : Specimens should be taken from samples of
both factory and field seams. Samples of factory seams
can either be provided by the liner fabricator or cut out
in the field. One factory seam sample per 1,525 meters
(5,000 feet) of seams can either be made up separately
and alongside the actual installation or they can be cut
out from the installed liner. One field seam sample per
152.5 meters (500 feet) of field seam is normally
required.
• Location : Both field and factory seams are tested by
this method. Exact sampling locations are determined by
the CQA inspector.
• Documentation : The CQA inspector must maintain accurate
records of the samples. Samples should be numbered,
dated, identified as to the personnel making the seam (if
applicable), and keyed to the proper location on a print
of the sheet layout. Weather conditions should also be
recorded. The laboratory test report should include the
following: sample identification, method of preparing
specimens, specimen dimensions, number of specimens
tested, speed of testing, adhesion value (if applicable),
and type of failure (at the seam interface, by delamina-
tion of the sheet, or by tearing of the sheet).
• Interpretation : Peel test results will identify any
problems with the seaming techniques or materials. Well
bonded reinforced materials should fail due to delamina-
tion of one of the sheets. This indicates that the bond
strength between the two sheets is stronger than the ply
adhesion of the sheets. Well bonded HDPE and unrein—
forced PVC seams, when tested in peel, should fail due to
tearing of one of the sheets. This indicates that the
bond strength between the two sheets is as strong as the
parent material.
• Limitations : Special test equipment and trained person-
nel are required to perform this test. Although acceler-
ated aging of seam samples may be used to obtain quick
results, the time required from initial sampling to docu-
mentation of test results is a minimum of 2 weeks (HDPE
is an exception, since there is no waiting time for
cure). During this time, the FML could be buried under a
leachate collection system or a protective earth cover
before test results are known.
• Alternatives : None. This is a mandatory test.
8-22
-------
CHAPTER 9
FML COVERS
INTRODUCTION
FML covers will generally consist of one of the following
mater i a is
• Earth:
- Clay (natural and/or bentonite added).
- Sand.
— Silt.
— Gravel.
— Combination of soils.
• Other:
— Portland cement/gunite.
— Geotextile.
— Drainage net.
Most of these covers are placed over art FML as a protective layer
against mechanical, weather, or other potential damage. Drainage
nets and sand and gravel are used as a permeable layer to convey
leakage and/or leachate that may accumulate on the upper and/or
lower FML after being put into use.
EARTH COVERS
The earth cover to be used may originate on site or may be
imported from off site. An access ramp and dumping pad are typi-
cally prepared over one or several areas of the FML installation;
the cover is deposited in these areas by a scraper, dump truck,
or wheel/track loader (see Figures 9—1 and 9—2). The earth is
then spread over the FML to the specified depth using a track
dozer (for which low ground pressure is desirable) and/or motor
grader (see Figure 9—3). Grade stakes with brightly colored
flags that sit on top of the liner are used to ensure proper
cover depth. Equipment and grade stakes are shown in Figures 9—3
and 9—4.
9—1
-------
Figure 9-1. Scraper depositing cover soil onto FNL.
Figure 9-2. Dump truck depositing cover soil onto Fill
9-2
-------
Figure 9—3. SpreadIng cover soil with track dozer
9-3
-.
U I
• p •_, c;.__.• _
____ •___—•-
— - — .•—• ‘••-— ;•- •-• •— —— --:
-------
Figure 9—4. Grade stakes on top of FI4L.
9 4
-------
Equipment
One or more of the following pieces of equipment are gener-
ally used to place earth cover over FML:
• Scraper, loader, and/or dump truck to deposit earth on
the FML.
• Grade stakes with brightly colored flags to ensure proper
cover depth.
• Track dozer and/or motor grader to spread the earth over
the FML.
All equipment should be present at the site and in proper
working order prior to commencement of covering operations.
Grade stakes should be prepared ahead of time to avoid unneces-
sary delays.
tnspection Procedures——
• Method : Observe all cover placement equipment to ensure
that appropriate types and numbers are on site. Observe
the check-out of each piece of equipment, as appropriate,
to ensure that they are in proper working order.
• Frequency :
— Once prior to commencement of cover placement on the
FML.
— Daily after placement operations commence.
• Documentation : The CQA inspector should maintain an
accurate log in the daily diary noting the presence and
workability of all equipment.
• Interpretation : All required equipment must be on site
and in working condition prior to commencement of cover
placement on the FML. Once cover placement begins, all
equipment is to be kept in working order or replaced.
Personnel
Personnel responsible for cover placement should be properly
qualified and should wear appropriate shoes when walking on the
FML.
Qualifications——
Personnel responsible for covering the FML should be highly
experienced in order to prevent possible damage to the FML by
equipment during cover operations. The contractor should provide
9—5
-------
the inspector with certification that the equipment operators are
qualified to perform cover operations. In addition, all person-
nel should receive instruction on the purpose of FML installation
and on cover placement procedures.
Inspection Procedures——
• Purpose : All equipment operators should have proper
qualiE i.cations and training.
• Method : All personnel should complete a signed statement
confirming that they are qualified equipment operators
and that they have received at least the minimum training
with regard to the purpose of FML installation and cover
placement procedures.
• Frequency : An inquiry of qualifications should be made
prior to personnel beginning work on cover placement.
• Documentation : The record of each installer, by name,
should be maintained in the daily diary.
• Interpretation : No equipment personnel should work on
the FML project without proper qualifications or train-
ing.
• Alternatives : The FML installation contractor could pro-
vide the required information to the inspector rather
than the inspector requesting signed statements.
Clothing
All personnel who are likely to walk on the uncovered FML
must wear smooth—soled shoes. No shoes with indented patterns
should be worn, since rocks can be trapped in the void areas and
inadvertently puncture or tear the FML.
Personnel should wear leather gloves to prevent possible
burns from contact with sun—exposed FML and possible blisters
from long—term use of hand—operated equipment.
Inspection Procedures——
Method : Each installer should be inspected to ensure that
his clothing and footwear is of the type (e.g., smooth—soled
sh.oes and leather gloves) that will not damage the FML or
injure the installer during cover placement.
Frequency : Each crew must be observed prior to the start of
work each day.
Locations : All crews should be observed.
9-6
-------
Documentation : A record of each installer, by name, should
be maintained in the daily diary, and unacceptable apparel
noted.
Interpretation : All persons handling or working on the FML
should conform to acceptable dress requirements.
Alternatives : The liner contractor could assume responsi-
bility for a daily check of his employees. The CQA inspec-
tor would then receive an acceptance report from the con-
tractor and make spot observations throughout the day for
noncompliance.
Weather Conditions
The inspector should be aware that earth cover is not to be
placed in certain weather conditions. These include:
• Rainy days.
• Extremely windy days.
• Extremely cold days when the earth is or could become
frozen. Frozen earth clods could cause puncturing of the
FML when placed.
Inspection Procedures——
• Method : Observe weather conditions at the site for
severe winds, rain, and severe cold.
• Frequency : Weather conditions should be observed
throughout the day.
• Documentation : Wind velocities, temperatures, and mois-
ture conditions at the site should be periodically
recorded throughout the day in the daily diary.
• Interpretation : Work on the FML cannot proceed during
periods of severe wind, rain, or severe cold.
Earth Cover Placement
Placement of earth cover includes setting grade stakes,
transporting the cover onto the F24L surface, and spreading the
cover to the specified depth. Earth cover should be placed and
spread as soon as possible after the FIlL is in place and has been
seamed, anchored, and tested.
9—7
-------
Setting of Grade Stakes——
Grade stakes are placed on the FML surface at many locations
to assist the equipment operator/inspector in obtaining the spec-
ified cover thickness. Grade stakes for use in cover installation
are constructed with a flat base that can be set on the FML surtace
without damaging it (see Figures 9—3 and 9—4). Plastic traffic
cones may also be used, as shown in E’igure 9—5. Grade stakes should
be moved about as the cover is being placed, so that they do not
remain on the FML.
Transport of Earth Cover——
All earth cover must be free of debris, vegetation, sharp
rocks, or any other material that could damage the FML. If an
access ramp and dumping pad are used to deposit the cover mate-
rial, they must be periodically relocated so that the ramp/pad
does not become overly compacted. Figure 9—1 shows a scraper
descending an access ramp with a load of earth cover.
Spreading of Earth Cover——
Earth cover should not be spread over an FML if rain or
other conditions have rendered the supporting surface spongy or
otherwise unstable. Ideally, the supporting surface should be
dried and newly prepared. However, in some cases, a geotextile
placed over the unstable area can provide sufficient supporting
surface for the FML.
The FML must be protected from undue stress from the equip-
ment during cover placement. The equipment should not:
• Operate directly on the lining.
• Slip or run off the earth cover.
• Operate on earth cover of insufficient depth.
• Operate without spark arrestors (diesel equipment only).
• “Hit the pile” of cover with spreading equipment, causing
the FML to stretch or tear.
• Have blades that cut too deeply into the partially com-
pacted stockpiles of earth cover atop the E’ML, causing it
to stretch or tear. It is sometimes appropriate to back—
drag the earth cover material to avoid the wrinkling of
excess or stretched liner material. Figure 9—6 shows an
FML damaged during the spreading of earth cover.
Inspection Procedures——
One inspector should be available to observe each piece of
equipment as it transports and spreads the earth cover. Figure
9—3 shows earth cover being properly spread on an FML by a track
dozer; note the grade stakes and the presence of the inspector.
9-8
-------
r i — . 1 -
— - ‘ 3 -r . —
— -: e’ s -
c2ce t ,;
.
Figure 9-5. TraffIc cones on top of FML
e9
-------
S d
Figure 9—6. FML damage during spreading of earth cover
9.10
-------
• Purpose : To ensure that the specified earth cover mate-
rial is applied at the specified depth without damaging
the FML.
• Method : The contractor should provide the inspector with
test reports on the characteristics of the cover material
to be applied to ensure that they meet specifications.
Visual observations should be made of the following:
— Cover material as it is being applied to ensure that no
large or sharp rocks or objectionable matter are pres-
ent.
— The equipment spreading the cover material to ensure
that a minimum of 30.5 centimeters (12 inches) is main-
tained between the bottom of the equipment and the FML,
and that the FML is not damaged.
— Grade stakes with flat bottom supports or traffic cones
used to monitor for specified cover depth.
— Specified depth of the earth cover is achieved.
• Frequency : Inspection should be ongoing.
• Location : The entire earth cover material placement
operation should be inspected.
• Documentation : The following information should be
recorded in the CQA inspector’s daily diary:
— Cover material characteristics as supplied by the con-
tractor and as observed.
— Type of equipment used to transport and spread cover
material.
— Final depth of material placed.
— Was the FML damaged? If so, how was it repaired and
retested?
— The name of the equipment operator(s) placing the cover
material.
• Interpretation : The entire FML should be covered as spe-
cified. Any area of suspected FML damage must be uncov-
ered and properly repaired before the FML installation
can be accepted. All work should be done only in the
presence of the inspector(s) and on a one—to—one basis,
i.e., one machine, one inspector.
9—11
-------
• Limitations : Visual observation for FML damage during
earth cover application is sometimes superficial. Fur-
ther, even if damage to the FML is suspected, it may be
difficult to locate because of the overlying cover mate-
rial.
• Alternatives : None. Visual observation is mandatory.
PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE/Gt.INITE
In some cases, a Portland cement concrete or gunite cover
will be used to protect an FML from damage. This type of cover
is either sprayed or poured onto the surface of the FML. To pre-
vent cracking of the cover, reinforcing steel may be used.
Equipment
Standard equipment is used to place Portland cement concrete
or gunite cover onto the FML. Figure 9—7 shows gunite being
sprayed onto a FML surface.
Inspection Procedures-—
Similar to the Inspection Procedures subsection for equip-
ment used for earth cover placement.
Personnel
Similar to the Personnel subsection for earth cover place-
ment.
Weather Conditions
Similar to the Weather Conditions sub section for earth
cover placement.
Portland Cement Concrete/Gunite Placement
The following practices should be adhered to when placing
Portland cement concrete and gunite on an FML surface:
• Reinforcing steel should be placed on chairs that sit on
top of the FML, as shown in Figure 9—8.
• The gunite material should be sprayed onto the FML from
an adequate distance to avoid puncturing the FML.
Inspection Procedures——
• Introduction : One inspector should be available to
observe each piece of equipment that is involved in plac-
ing the Portland cement concrete or gunite. The inspec-
tor(s) should also observe all personnel involved.
9—12
-------
Figure 9-7. GunIte being sprayed onto FML
9-13
-------
Figure 9-8. ReinforcIng stee’ setting on chairs
9-14
-------
• Purpose : To ensure that the specified cover material is
applied at the specified thickness and finished without
damaging the FML.
• Method : The contractor should provide the inspector with
test reports on the characteristics of the cover mate-
rials to be applied to ensure that they meet specifica-
tions. The inspector should take samples of applied
materials for testing strength after cure in accordance
with the specifications.
Visual observations should be made of the following:
— FML is clean and free of debris to receive cover mate-
rial.
— No lumps, unmixed materials, or objectionable matter
are present.
— The equipment used to apply the cover materials does
not come into contact with and damage the FML.
— Reinforcing steel, if any, is properly placed and sup-
ported.
— Screeds or other means to measure depth are used to
ensure that the material is applied to the specified
depth.
— Cover material is finished with a surface that is in
compliance with the specifications.
• Frequency : Ongoing throughout applications.
• Location : The entire cover material placement operation
should be inspected.
• Documentation : The following information should be
recorded in the CQA inspector’s daily diary:
— Cover material characteristics as supplied by the con-
tractor and as observed.
— Location, date, time, and type of samples taken for
strength testing.
— Type of equipment used to transport and apply cover
material.
— Was the FML damaged? If so, how was it repaired and
retested?
9 -15
-------
- The names of all personnel involved in applying the
material and their work assignments.
Interpretation : The entire FML should be covered as spe-
cified. Any area of suspected FML damage must be uncov-
ered and properly repaired before the FML installation
can be accepted. All work should be done only in the
presence of the inspector(s) and on a one—to—one basis,
i.e., one machine, one inspector.
• Limitations : Visual observation for FML damage during
cover material application is sometimes superficial.
Further, even if damage to the FML is suspected, it may
be difficult to locate because of the overlying cover
material.
• Alternatives : None. Visual observation is mandatory.
DRAINAGE NETS AND GEOTEXTILES
Like FMLs, drainage nets and geotextiles are geosynthetics.
Drainage nets are used primarily for transmissivity of liquids
(leakage) within them, and geotextiles are chiefly used as fil-
ters to permit the passage of liquids throucji them.
Drainage Nets
Drainage nets are generally made of high-density polyethy—
lerte. Because of their net construction, they have the ability
to transmit significant quantities of liquid with little head
loss, and are well suited for drainage layers, particularly on
slopes where the placement of a sand or gravel material is not
practical due to sloughing. They are also used where a suitable,
cost-effective earth material for drainage is not available.
Drainage nets are packaged in rolls. When placed over the
FML, a drainage net is rolled out in a manner similar to the
placement-of rolled FML. Edges are butted together and periodi-
cally tied together to provide a continuous layer.
Geotextile
Geotextile is a synthetic fiber in cloth form (woven or non—
woven) used as a filter fabric and as a protective layer over and
under art FML. Geotextiles are not subject to biological degrada-
tion, and resist chemical attack. Most geotextiles are packaged
in rolls. When placed over/under the FML, geotextiles are rolled
out in a manner similar to the placement of rolled FML (see
Figure 9—9). Edges are overlapped several inches, and are some-
times sewn but generally not attached.
9—16
-------
Figure 9 -9. Geotextile rolls on FML
9-17
-------
Inspection Procedures
• Purpose : To ensure that the specified drainage net
and/or geotextile materials are placed over the entire
FML without damaging the FML, and that the method of lay-
out of the drainage net does not leave an exposed edge
which can puncture the FML.
• Methods : The CQA inspector should:
— Obtain a confirmation from the contractor or visually
observe that the materials being used are the specified
materials and the proper thickness.
— Observe placement of the geotextile to ensure that the
FML is not damaged.
• Frequency : Installation observation should be ongoing.
• Location : The specified area should be covered.
• Documentation : The progress of drainage net and/or geo—
textile placement should be recorded along with any
required repairs.
• Interpretation : All FML damage should be repaired and
tested using the appropriate method(s).
• Limitations : Constant observation is required, since it
is difficult to locate any damage to the FML covered by
the aforementioned materials.
• Alternatives : Earth cover can be used.
9-18
-------
B IBL IOGRAPHY
American Society for Testing and Materials. Standard methods of
testing coated fabrics. D751—79. Annu. Book ASTM Stand.,
09.02:164—177, 1985.
American Society for Testing and Materials. Standard specifica-
tion for flexible poly(vinyl chloride) plastic sheeting for
pond, canal, and reservoir lining. D3083—76 (reapproved,
1980). Annu. Book ASTM Stand., 04.04:312—315, 1985.
American Society for Testing and Materials. Standard test
methods for rubber property——adhesion to flexible substrate.
D4l3—82. Annu. Book ASTM Stand., 09.01:67—73, 1985.
American Water Works Association. Manual: Flexible Tanks,
Covers and Linings for Potable Water Reservoirs. Draft.
Denver, Colorado, 1982. 57 pp.
Anderson, D., K. W. Brown, and J. Green. Effect of organic
fluids on the permeability of clay soil liners. In: Land
Disposal of Hazardous Waste; Proceedings of the Eighth
Annual Research Symposium, Ft. Mitchell, Kentucky, March
1982. D. W. Shultz, editor. EPA—600/9—82—002, Municipal
Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio, March
1982. pp. 179—180.
Anderson, D., and K. W. Brown. Organic leachate effects on the
permeability of clay liners. In: Land Disposal: Hazardous
Waste; Proceedings of the Seventh Annual Research Symposium,
Philadelphia, March 1981. D. W. Shult:, editor. EPA—600/9—
81-002b, Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory, Cin-
cinnati, Ohio, March 1981. pp. 119—130.
Attala Lining Systems. Geomembrartes for Environmental Contain—
ments. Kosciusko, Mississippi, 1986. 58 pp.
Bass, J. M., W. J. Lyman, and J. P. Tratnyek. Assessment of Syn-
thetic Membrane Successes and Failures at Waste Storage and
Disposal Sites. Final Report. EPA—600/2—85—lOO, Arthur D.
Little, Cambridge, Massachusetts, for Hazardous Waste Engi-
neering Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio, August 1985.
112 pp.
-------
Burke Rubber Company. Specifications: flexible membrane con-
siderations for material specifications. San Jose, Cali-
fornia, July 1979. 4 pp.
Burke Rubber Company. Tough 45-mu Hypalon prevents disastrous
reservoir failure. San Jose, California, June 1979. 2 pp.
Cadwallader, M. W. Double liner systems: a review and case
study. Waste Age, l6(12):99—42, 1985.
Cadwallader, M. W. Quality control objective: manufacturer/
installer cooperates with third party. Geotech. Fabrics
Rept., 3(5):8—14, 1985.
Caizonetti, F. 3. Bentonite liners for power plant lagoons.
Power Engin., 64(3):61—62, 1960.
Carr, C. L., and R. C. Gunkel. Laboratory Studies of Soil Bed-
ding Requirements for Flexible Membrane Liners. EPA—600/2—
84—021, Ceotechnical Laboratory, U.S. Army Engineer Water-
ways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi, for Munici-
pal Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio,
January 1984. 77 pp.
Cedergren, H. R. Seepage, Drainage and Flow Nets. Wiley, New
York, 1977. 554 pp.
Curran, M. A. and R. K. Frobel. Evaluation of Geomembrane Seams
Exposed to Selected Environmental Conditions; Report for
March-December 1983. EPA-600/D—84-079, Bureau of Reclama-
tion, Denver, Colorado, for Municipal Environmental Research
Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1984. 22 pp.
Daniel, D. E. Can liners work? Civil Engin./ASCE, 55(4): 48—
49, 1985.
Daniel, D. E., D. C. Anderson, and S. S. Boynton. Fixed—wall
versus flexible—wall permeameters. In: Hydraulic Barriers
in Soil and Rock. ASTM Special Technical Publication 874,
American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia,
1985.
Daniel, D. E., S. J. Trautwerin, S. S. Boynton, and D. B. Fore-
man. Permeability testing with flexible—wall permeameters.
Geotech. Test. J., 7:113—122, 1984.
Davis, J. L., R. Singh, B. C. Stegman, and M. J. Wailer. Innova-
tive Concepts for Detecting and Locating Leaks in Waste
Impoundment Liner Systems: Acoustic Emission Monitoring and
Time Domain Reflectometry. EPA—600/2—84—058, EarthTech
Research Corporation, Baltimore, Maryland, for Municipal
Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio, Febru-
ary 1984. 105 pp.
-------
Dinchak, W. C. Consider a soil—cement/synthetic membrane liner
for containment of sanitary landfill leachate. Annu. Madi-
son Conf. Appi. Res. Pract. Munic. Indus. Waste, 6:126—137,
1983.
Dinchak, W. G. Consider a soil—cement/synthetic membrane liner
for protecting ground and surface waters from hazardous
wastes. Portland Cement Association, Skokie, Illinois, June
1984. 10 pp.
Dinchak, W. C. Contain hazardous wastes with a soil—cement/syn-
thetic membrane liner. Presented at ASCE National Confer-
ence on Environmental Engineering, June 1984. 3 pp.
EMCON Associates. Field Assessment of Site Closure, Boone
County, Kentucky. EPA—600/2/83—058, San Jose, California,
for Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati,
Ohio, August 1983. 73 pp.
EMCON Associates. Field Verification of Liners from Sanitary
Landfills. Final Report. EPA—600/2—83—046, San Jose, Cali-
fornia, for Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory,
Cincinnati, Ohio, June 1983. 41 pp.
Fluet, J. E., Jr. Ceosynthetic lining systems: installation and
quality assurance. In: Proceedings from the National
Liner/Leachate Conference, June 1986. National Solid Wastes
Management Association, Washington, D.C., July 1986. pp.
40—49.
Fong, M. A., and H. E. Haxo, Jr. Assessment of liner materials
for municipal solid waste landfills. In: Land Disposal:
Municipal Solid Waste; Proceedings of the Seventh Annual
Research Symposium, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, March 1981.
D. W. Shultz, editor. EPA—600/9—8l—002a, Municipal Environ-
mental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio, March 1981.
pp. 138—162.
Forseth, J. M. and P. Kmet. Flexible membrane liners for solid
and hazardous waste landfills — a state of the art review.
Annu. Madison Conf. Appl. Res. Pract. Munic. Indus. Waste,
6:138—166, 1985.
Fred C. Hart Associates. Case Study Analysis of Leachate at Haz-
ardous Waste Facilities. Draft. New York, January 1984.
125 pp.
Fry, Z. B., and C. R. Styron III. The use of liner materials for
selected FGD waste ponds. In: Land Disposal of Hazardous
Wastes; Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Research Symposium,
San Antonio, Texas, March 6—8, 1978. D. W. Shultz, editor.
EPA—600/9—78—016, Municipal Environmental Research Labora-
tory, Cincinnati, Ohio, August 1978. pp. 273—281.
-------
Fuller, W. H. Limestone, Soil Material, and Flux Control in the
Design of Disposal—Site Liners to Minimize Pollution Migra-
tion. Grant No. R803988—Ol, Soils, Water and Engineering,
Arizona Agricultural Experiment Station, Tucson, for Munici-
pal Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio,
October 1977. 126 pp.
Fuller, W. H., and J. Artiola. Use of limestone to limit con-
taminant from landfills. In: Land Disposal of Hazardous
Wastes; Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Research Symposium,
San Antonio, Texas, March 1978. D. W. Shultz, editor. EPA—
600/9—78—016, Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory,
Cincinnati, Ohio, August 1978. pp. 282—298.
Fuller, W. H., B. Alesii, J. Artiola, D. O’Donnell, S. Hathorn,
and c. Mccarthy. Utilization of Lime, Iron Oxides, and Flux
Control in the Design of Disposal—Site Liners to Minimize
Pollution Migration; Progress Report, October 1, 1975
through March, 1976. U.S. EPA—R—803988—Ol, Soils, Water and
Engineering, University of Arizona, Tucson, for Solid and
Hazardous Waste Research Division, Environmental Protection
Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio, March 1976. 105 pp.
Geotextile Technology ‘84; a Construction Industry International
Conference, Imperial College, London, England, April 1984.
Gerber, D. H. Designing and siting a membrane lined pond.
Public Works, ll2(8):73—77, 1981.
Geswein, A. J. Liners for Land Disposal Sites; an Assessment.
SW—l37, Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio,
1975. 70 pp.
Geswein, A. J., R. E. Landreth, and H. Haxo, Jr. Use of liner
materials for land disposal facilities. Presented at the
71st Annual Meeting of the American Institute of Chemical
Engineers, November 12—16, 1978. 18 pp.
Chassemi, M., M. Haxo, J. Metzger, M. Powers, S. Quiniivan, L.
Scinto, and H. White. Assessment of Technology for Con-
structing and Installing Cover and Bottom Liner Systems for
Hazardous Waste Facilities. Final Report. TRW Energy and
Environmental Division, Torrance, California, for Office of
Solid Waste, Environmental Protection Agency, Washington,
D.C., April 1983. Two volumes.
Giroud, J. P., and .7. S. Goldstein. Geomembrane liner design.
Waste Age, l3(9):27—30, 1982.
-------
Goldman, L. 3., R. S. Truesdale, G. L. Kingsbury, C. M. Northeim,
and A. S. Damle. Design, Constructio’, and Evaluation of
Clay Liners for Waste Management Facilities. Draft Techni-
cal Resource Contract for Public Comment. EPA—530—SW—86—
007, Research Triangle Institute, Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina for Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington,
D.C., March 1986. 600 pp.
Goldman, L. 3., G. L. Kingsbury, C. C. Allen, R. S. Truesdale, C.
M. Northeim, S. M. Harkins, A. S. Damle, and M. H. Roulier.
Prepare technical resource document on design, construction,
maintenance, and evaluation of clay liners for hazardous
waste facilities. In: Land Disposal of Hazardous Waste;
Proceedings of the Tenth Annual Research Symposium, Ft.
Mitchell, Kentucky, April 1984. EPA—600/9—84-007, Municipal
Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio, April
1984. p. 199.
Goode, D. J., and P. A. Smith. Procedures for Modeling Flow
through Clay Liners to Determine Required Liner Thickness.
Draft. EPA—530/SW—84—OOl, GCA Corporation, Technology Divi-
sion, Bedford, Massachusetts, for Office of Solid Waste,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio,
April 1984. 154 pp.
Gunkel, R. C. Membrane liner systems for hazardous waste land-
fills. In: Land Disposal: Hazardous Waste; Proceedings of
the Seventh Annual Research Symposium, Philadelphia, March
1981. D. W. Shultz, editor. EPA—600/9—8l—002b, Municipal
Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio, March
1981. pp. 131—139.
Haxo, H. E., Jr. Analysis and fingerprinting of unexposed and
exposed polymeric membrane liners. In: Land Disposal of
Hazardous Waste; Proceedings of the Ninth Annual Research
Symposium. D. W. Shultz and D. Black, editors. EPA—600/9—
83—018, Southwest Research Institute, San Antonio, Texas,
for Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati,
Ohio, September 1983. pp. 157—171.
Haxo, H. E., Jr. Assessing synthetic and admixed materials for
lining landfills. In: Gas and Leachate from Landfills:
Formation, Collection, and Treatment; Proceedings of a
Research Symposium, Rutgers University, March 1975. E. 1.
Genetelli and J. Cirello, editors. EPA—600/9—76—004, Muni-
cipal Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio,
March 1976. pp. 130—158.
-------
Haxo, H. E., Jr. Compatibility of liners with leachate. In:
Management of Gas and Leachate in Landfills; Proceedings of
the Third Annual Municipal Solid Waste Research Symposium,
St. Louis, Missouri, March 1977. S. K. Banerji, editor.
EPA—600/9—77-026, Municipal Environmental Research Labora-
tory, Cincinnati, Ohio, September 1977. pp. 149—158.
Haxo, H. E., Jr. Durability of liner materials for hazardous
waste disposal facilities. In: Land Disposal: Hazardous
• Waste; Proceedings of the Seventh Annual Research Symposium,
Philadelphia, March 1981. D. W. Shultz, editor. EPA—600/9—
81—002b, Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory, Cin-
cinnati, Ohio, March 1981. pp. 140—156.
Haxo, H. E., Jr. Effects on liner materials of long—term expo—
sure in waste environments. In: Land Disposal of Hazardous
Waste; Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Research Symposium,
Ft. Mitchell, Kentucky, March 1982. D. W. Shultz, editor.
EPA—600/9—82—002, Municipal Environmental Research Labora-
tory, Cincinnati, Ohio, March 1982. pp. 191—223.
ifaxo, H. E., Jr. Evaluation of selected liners when exposed to
hazardous wastes. In: Residual Management by Land Dis-
posal; Proceedings of the Hazardous Waste Research Sym-
posium, Tucson, Arizona, February 1976. W. H. Fuller,
editor. EPA—600/9—76—0l5, Municipal Environmental Research
Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio, July 1976. pp. 102—111.
Haxo, H. E., Jr. Interaction of selected lining materials with
various hazardous wastes. In: Land Disposal of Hazardous
Wastes, Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Research Symposium,
San Antonio, Texas, March 1978. D. W. Shultz, editor. EPA—
600/9—78—016, Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory,
Cincinnati, Ohio, March 1982. pp. 256—272.
ifaxo, H. E., Jr. Interaction of selected lining materials with
various hazardous wastes — II. In: Disposal of Hazardous
Waste; Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Research Symposium,
San Antonio, Texas, March 1978. D. Shultz, editor. EPA—
600/9—80—010, Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory,
Cincinnati, Ohio, March 1980. pp. 160—180.
Haxo, H. E., Jr. Laboratory evaluation of flexible membrane
liners for waste disposal sites. In: The Role of Rubber in
Water Conservation and Pollution Control, Henry C. Remsberg
Memorial Symposium, Las Vegas, Nevada, 1980.
Haxo, H. E., Jr. Liner mater .a1s exposed to MSW landfill leach—
ate. In: Municipal Solid Waste: Land Disposal; Proceed-
ings of the Fifth Annual Research Symposium. M. P. Wanie—
lista and J. S. Taylor, editors. EPA—600/9—79—023a, Munici-
pal Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio,
August 1979. pp. 241—267.
-------
Haxo, H. E., Jr. Liner materials for hazardous waste disposal
facilities. In: Proceedings of the National Conference on
Hazardous and Toxic Wastes Management. New Jersey Institute
of Technology, Newark, 1980. Vol. 2, pp. 480—508.
Haxo, H. E., Jr. Lining of Waste Impoundment and Disposal Facil-
ities. Revised Edition. SW—870, Matrecon, Inc., Oakland,
California, for Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory,
Cincinnati, Ohio, March 1983. 478 pp.
Haxo, H. E., Jr. Testing of materials for use in lining waste
disposal facilities. In: Hazardous Solid Waste Testing,
First Conference. R. A. Conway and B. C. Malloy, editors.
ASTM Special Technical Publication 760, American Society
for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, 1981.
Haxo, H. E., Jr., and R. M. White. Evaluation of Liner Materials
Exposed to Leachate. 2d Interim Report. EPA—600/2—76—255,
Matrecon, Inc., Oakland, California, for Municipal Environ-
mental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio, September
1976. 63 pp.
Haxo, H. E., Jr., R. S. Haxo, and R. M. White. Liner Materials
Exposed to Hazardous and Toxic Sludges. 1st Interim Report.
EPA—600/2—77—081, Matrecon, Inc., Oakland, California, for
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati,
Ohio, June 1977. 72 pp.
Haxo, H. E., Jr., R. S. Haxo, N. A. Nelson, P. D. Haxo, R. M.
White, and S. Dakessian. Liner Materials Exposed to Hazard-
ous and Toxic Wastes. EPA—600/2—84—169, Matrecon, Inc.,
Oakland, California, for Municipal Environmental Research
Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio, November 1984. 280 pp.
Haxo, H. E., Jr., R. M. White, P. D. Haxo, and M. A. Fong. Liner
materials exposed to municipal solid waste leachate. Waste
Manage. Res., 3:41—54, 1985.
Haxo, H. E., Jr., R. S. Haxo, N. A. Nelson, P. D. Haxo, R. M.
White, and S. Dakessian. Liner materials exposed to toxic
and hazardous waste. Waste Manage. Res., 4:247—264, 1986.
Haxo, H. E., Jr., R. S. Haxo, and T. F. Kellogg. Liner Materials
Exposed to Municipal Solid Waste Leachate. 3d Interim
Report. EPA—600/2—79—038, Matrecon, Inc., Oakland, Cali-
fornia, for Municipal. Environmental Research Laboratory,
Cincinnati, Ohio, July 1979. 66 pp.
-------
Haxo, H. E., Jr., R. M. White, P. D. Haxo, and M. A. Fong. Liner
Materials Exposed to Municipal Solid Waste Leachate. Final
Report. EPA—600/2—82—097, Matrecon, Inc., Oakland, Cali-
fornia, December 1982. 188 pp.
Haxo, H. E., Jr., R. S. Haxo, N. A. Nelson, P. D. Haxo, R. M.
White, S. Dakessian, and M. A. Fong. Liner Materials for
Hazardous and Toxic Wastes and Municipal Solid Waste Leach—
ate. Noyes Publications, Park Ridge, New Jersey, 1985. 451
pp.
Haxo, H. E., Jr., and N. A. Nelson. Permeability characteristics
of flexible membrane liners measured in pouch tests. In:
Land Disposal of Hazardous Waste; Proceedings of the Tenth
Annual Research Symposium, Ft. Mitchell, Kentucky, April
1984. EPA—600/9—84—007, Municipal Environmental Research
Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio, March 1980. pp. 230—251.
Haxo, H. E., Jr., J. A. Miedema, and N. A. Nelson. Permeability
of polymeric membrane lining materials for waste management
facilities. Elastomerics, ll7(5):29—36, 1985.
Haxo, H. E., Jr., J. A. Miedema, and N. A. Nelson. Permeability
of Polymeric Membrane Lining Materials; Technical Paper.
EPA—6C0/D—84—080, Matrecon, Inc., Oakland, California, for
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati,
Ohio, 1984. 10 pp.
Hickey, M. E. Laboratory and Field Investigations of Plastic
Films as Canal Lining Materials——Open and Closed Conduits
Systems Program. Report No. ChE—82, Bureau of Reclamation,
Denver, Colorado, September 1968. 53 pp.
Hitchings, J. R. Leak detection objective: a technique for pin-
pointing leaks in pond liners. Geotech. Fabrics Rept.,
4(4):6—9, 1986.
Huck, P. .3. Assessment of time domain reflectometry and acoustic
emission monitoring: leak detection systems for landfill
liners. In: Land Disposal of Hazardous Waste; Proceedings
of the Eighth Annual Research Symposium, Ft. Mitchell, Ken-
tucky, March 1982. D. W. Shultz, editor. EPA—600/9—82—002,
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati,
Ohio, March 1982. pp. 261—273.
Jasinski, R. Flexible membrane liners: specification considera-
tions. Waste Age, 16(3):65—70, 1985.
Jasinski, R. Spec’ing a liner? Consider seaming, long—term
costs & leachate compatibility. Waste Age, 16(5):62—65 ,
1985.
-------
Jepsen, C. P. Sodium bentonite still a viable solution for haz-
ardous waste containment. Pollut. Engin., 16(4):50—53,
1984.
Kastman, K. H. Hazardous waste landfill geomembrane design,
installation, and monitoring. Presented at International
Conference on Geomembranes, St. Paul, Minnesota, 1984.
Kays, W. B. Construction of Linings for Reservoirs, Tanks, and
Pollution Control Facilities. Wiley, New York, 1977. 391
pp.
Knipschild, F. W., R. Taprogge, and H. Schneider. Quality Assur-
ance in Production and Installation of Large Area Sealing
Sections of High Density Polyethylene. Mater. Proof.,
21:407—413, 1979.
Kumar, J., and J. A. Jedlicka. Selecting and installing syn-
thetic pond—linings. Chem. Eng., 80(3):67—70, 1973.
Landfill geotextile and membrane guide. Waste Age, 16(5):88—94,
1985.
Laridreth, R. E. Liners for Waste Impoundments and Disposal
Facilities; Technical Paper. EPA—600/D—81—249, Municipal
Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1981.
11 pp.
Landreth, R. E. Research on impounditrertt materials. In: First
Annual Conference on Advanced Pollution Control for the
Metal Finishing Industry, Lake Buena Vista, Florida, January
1978. pp. 115—120.
Landreth, R. E. Role of Flexible Membrane Liners in Support of
RCR.A (Resource Conservation and Recovery Act) Regulations;
Symposium Paper. EPA—600/D—84—078, Municipal Environmental
Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1984. 16 pp.
Lee, J. Selecting membrane pond liners. Pollut. Engin.,
6(l);33—40, 1974.
Lewington, R. Flexible linings can solve containment problems.
Can. Chem. Process., 67(7):26—27, 1984.
Lyman, W. J., K. R. Sidman, J. P. Tratnyek, 11. Damani. J. H.
Ong., A. D. Schwope, and J. M. Bass. Expected Life of Syn-
thetic Liners and Caps. Draft Final Report. Prepared under
Contract No. 68—01—6160. Arthur D. Little, Inc., Cambridge,
Massachusetts, for Municipal Environmental Research Labora-
tory, Cincinnati, Ohio. 170 pp.
-------
Middlebrooks, E. J., C. D. Perrnan, and I. S. Dunn. Wastewater
Stabilization Pond Linings. Special Report 78—28, Middle—
brooks and Associates, Logan, Utah, for U.S. Army Cold
Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory, Hanover, New
Hampshire, November 1978. 116 pp.
Mitchell, D. H., and C. E. Spanner. Field Performance Assessment
of Synthetic Liners for Uranium Tailings Ponds; a Status
Report. PNL—5005, Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richiand,
Washington, for U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of
Nuclear Materials, Safety and Safeguards, Washington, D.C.,
March 1974. 70 pp.
Montague, P. Four Secure Landfills in New Jersey——a Study of the
State of the Art in Shallow Burial Waste Disposal Technol-
ogy. Draft. Department of Chemical Engineering and Center
for Energy and Environmental Studies, Princeton University,
Princeton, New Jersey, February 1982. 101 pp.
Moore, C. A., and M. Roulier. Evaluating landfill containment
capability. In: Land Disposal of Hazardous Waste; Proceed-
ings of the Eighth Annual Research Symposium, Ft. Mitchell,
Kentucky, March 1982. D. W. Shultz, editor. EPA—600/9—82—
002, Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincin-
nati, Ohio, March 1982. pp. 53—66.
Moore, C. A., and E. M. Au. Permeability of cracked clay
liners. In: Land Disposal of Hazardous Waste; Proceedings
of the Eighth Annual Research Symposium, Ft. Mitchell,
Kentucky, March 1982. D. H. Shultz, editor. EPA—600/9—82—
002, Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincin-
nati, Ohio, March 1982. pp. 174—178.
Moreland, J. Underground storage tanks: secondary containment
methods described. Hazard. Waste Consult., 3(6):l/28—l/3l,
1985.
Morrison,. W. R., and L. D. Parkhill. Evaluation of Flexible Mem-
brane Liner Seams. Draft. Interagency Agreement No. DW
14930547—01—2, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Engineering and
Research Center, Denver, Colorado, for Hazardous Waste Engi-
neering Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1986. 90 pp.
Morrison, W. R., E. W. Gray, Jr., D. B. Paul, and R. K. Frobel.
Installation of Flexible Membrane Lining in Mt. Elbert Fore—
bay Reservoir. REC—ERC—82—2, Bureau of Reclamation, Denver,
Colorado, 1981. 46 pp.
National Sanitation Foundation. Standard 54 for Flexible Mem-
brane Liners. Ann Arbor, Michigan, November 1983. 81 pp.
-------
National Seal Company. Flexible Membrane Lining of Ponds, Reser-
voirs, Tanks, and Landfills; (Specifications and Proper-
ties]. Pa..atine, Illinois, 1982. 25 pp.
National Seal Company. Quality Control Manual. Westminster,
Colorado, May 1985. 13 pp.
National Technical Information Service. Liners for Waste Dis-
posal and Waste Storage Facilities (1976—Apr 85); Citations
from the U.S. Department of Energy (EDB) Data—base. NX8/92,
Springfield, Virginia, April 1985. 75 pp.
Northeirn, C. M., and R. S. Truesdale. Technical Guidance Docu-
ment: Construction Quality Assurance for Hazardous Waste
Land Disposal Facilities. Research Triangle Institute,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, for Hazardous Waste
Engineering Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio, July
1986. 88 pp.
NSF Joint Committee for Flexible Membrane Liners. (Memorandum,
Critiques and Draft]. Ann Arbor, Michigan, October 1982.
132 pp.
Pacey, J. C., C. C. Brisley, Jr., and R. L. Dooley. Field veri-
fication of liners; assessment of long—term exposed liner
materials from municipal solid waste landfills. In: Land
Disposal: Municipal Solid Waste; Proceedings of the Seventh
Annual Research Symposium, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, March
1981. D. W. Shultz, editor. EPA—600/9—81—002a, Municipal
Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio, March
1981. pp. 163—169.
Pacey, J., and G. Karpinski. Selecting a landfill liner. Waste
Age, ll(7):26—28, 1980.
Peters, W. R., D. W. Shultz, and B. M. Duff. Electrical resis-
tivity techniques for locating liner leaks. In: Land Dis-
posal of Hazardous Waste; Proceedings of the Eighth Annual
Research Symposium, Ft. Mitchell, Kentucky, March 1982. D.
W. Shultz, editor. EPA—600/9—82—002, Municipal Environ-
mental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio, March 1982.
pp. 250—260.
Phung, H. T., S. P. Shelton, P. Papagoria, and K. V. LaConde.
Feasibility of Using Chemical Liners for Landfilling Elec-
troplating Sludges. Final Report. EPA—600/2—84—l71, SCS
Engineers, Long Beach, California, for Municipal Environ-
mental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio, November 1984.
95 pp.
-------
Ralph Stone and Company. Investigation of Landfill Liners for
the Chandler Site. For Central and West Basin Water Replen-
ishment District, Whittier, California. Los Angeles, Cali-
fornia, September 1969.
Roberts, S. A., N. A. Nelson, and H. E. Haxo, Jr. Evaluation of
a waste impoundment liner system after long—term exposure.
In: Land Disposal of Hazardous Waste; Proceedings of the
Ninth Annual Research Symposium, Ft. Mitchell, Kentucky, May
1983. D. H. Shultz and D. Black, editors. EPA—600/9—83—
018, Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincin-
nati, Ohio, September 1983. pp. 172—187.
Robison, R. Engineering with fabric. Civil Engin./ASCE,
55(12):52,55, 1985.
Rossman, L. A., and H. E. Haxo, Jr. A Rule—Based Inference Sys-
tem for Predicting Liner/Waste Compatibility. EPA—600/D—85—
212, Hazardous Waste Engineering Research Laboratory, Cin-
cinnati, Ohio, September 1985. 8 pp.
Schevon, G. R., and G. Damas. Municipal landfills using double
liners: seven case studies. Waste Age, 16(lO):61—70, 1985.
Schevon, C. R., and C. Damas. Using double liners in landfill
design and operation. Waste Manage Res., 4:161—176, 1986.
Schmidt, R. K., and P. W. Barker. Selection criteria for the use
of synthetic membrane liners in the containment of hazardous
wastes. Presented to 54th Annual Water Pollution Control
Federation Conference, October 1981. 17 pp.
Schwope, A. D., W. J. Lyman, J. M. Bass, and J. H. Ong. Analysis
of Flexible Membrane Liner Chemical Compatibility Tests.
Draft Final Report. Prepared under Contract No. 68—01—6160.
Arthur D. Little, Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts, for Muni-
cipal Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio,
March 1983. 82 pp.
Schwope, A. D., P. Costas, and W. Lyman. Resistance of Flexible
Membrane Liners to Chemicals and Wastes. EPA—600/2—85—l27,
Arthur D. Little, Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts, for Haz-
ardous Waste Engineering Research Laboratory, Cincinnati,
Ohio, October 1985. 222 pp.
Shafer, R., A. Renta—Babb, E. Smith, and J. Band. Landfill
Liners and Covers: Properties and Application to Army Land-
fills. CERL—TR—N—l83, U.S. Army Construction Engineering
Research Laboratory, Champaign, Illinois, June 1984. 61 pp.
-------
Shultz, D. W. Field Studies of Geomembrane Installation Tech-
niques; Technical Paper. EPA—600/D—84122, Southwest
Research Institute, San Antonio, Texas, for Municipal Envi—
ronrrtental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio, May 1984.
16 pp.
Shultz, D. W. Field Studies of Liner Installation Methods at
Landfills and Surface Impoundments. EPA—600/2—84—168,
Southwest Research Institute, San Antonio, Texas, for Muni-
cipal Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio,
November 1984. 69 pp.
Shultz, D. W., and M. P. Miklas, Jr. Assessment of liner instal-
lation procedures. In: Disposal of Hazardous Waste; Pro-
ceedings of the Sixth Annual Research Symposium, Chicago,
March 1980. D. W. Shultz, editor. EPA—600/9—80—0l0, Muni-
cipal Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio,
March 1980. pp. 135—139.
Shultz, D. W., B. M. Duff, and W. R. Peters. Electrical Resis-
tivity Technique to Assess the Integrity of Geomembrane
Liners. EPA—600/2—84—180, Southwest Research Institute, San
Antonio, Texas, for Municipal Environmental Research Labora-
tory, Cincinnati, Ohio, November 1984. 63 pp.
Shultz, D. W., and M. P. Mikias, Jr. Installation practices for
liners. In: Land Disposal: Hazardous Waste; Proceedings
of the Seventh Annual Research Symposium, Philadelphia,
March 1981. D. W. Shultz, editor. EPA—600/9—81—002b, Muni-
cipal Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio,
March 1981. pp. 157—167.
Shultz, D. W., B. M. Duff, and W. R. Peters. Performance of an
Electrical Resistivity Technique for Detecting and Locating
Geomembrane Failures. EPA—600/D—84—123, Southwest Research
Institute, San Antonio, Texas, for Municipal Environmental
Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio, May 1984. 150 pp.
Shultz, D. W., and M. P. Mikias, Jr. Procedures for installing
liner systems. In: Land Disposal of Hazardous Waste; Pro-
ceedings of the Eighth Annual Research Symposium, Ft.
Mitchell, Kentucky, March 1982. D. W. Shultz, editor. EPA—
600/9—82—002, Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory,
Cincinnati, Ohio, March 1982. pp. 224—238.
Small, .D. M. Establishing installation parameters for rubber
membranes. In: The Role of Rubber in Water Conservation
and Pollution Control, the Henry C. Remsberg Memorial Sym-
posium, Las Vegas, Nevada, 1980.
-------
Snow, A. M., Jr. Secondary containment liners for leak detec-
tion/leak prevention of leaking underground storage tanks.
Dupont Company, Polymer Products Dept., Wilmington, Dela-
ware, Rev. May 1983. 12 pp.
Spigolon, S. J., and M. F. Kelley. Geotechnical Quality Assur-
ance of Construction of Disposal Facilities; Final Report.
EPA—600/2-84—040, Geotechnical Laboratory, U.S. Army Engi-
neer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi,
for Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati,
Ohio, February 1984. 192 pp.
Stewart, W. S. State—of—the—Art Study of Land Impoundment Tech-
niques. EPA—600/2—78—].96, Exxon Research and Engineering
Company, Linden, New Jersey, for Municipal Research Labora-
tory, Cincinnati, Ohio, December 1978. 85 pp.
Styron, C. R. III., and Z. B. Fry, Jr. Flue Gas Cleaning Sludge
Leachate/Liner Compatibility Investigation; Interim Report.
EPA—600/2—79—l36, Geotechnical Laboratory, U.S. Army Engi-
neer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi,
for Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati,
Ohio, August 1979. 82 pp.
Tratnyek, J., P. Costas, and W. Lyman. Test Methods for Deter-
mining the Chemical Waste Compatibility of Synthetic Liners.
EPA—600/2—85—029, Arthur D. Little, Inc., Cambridge, Massa-
chusetts, April 1985. 108 pp.
Tunnicliffe, P. W. New Jersey landfill planned with a stake in
the future. World Wastes, 28(12):l2—15, 1985.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Draft RCRA Guidance Docu-
ment: Landfill Design, Liner System and Final Cover. (To
be used with RCRA Regulations, Sections 264.301(a) and
264.310(a)]. Washington, D.C., July 1982. 137 pp.
Waller, M. J., and J. L. Davis. Assessment of Innovative Tech-
niques to Detect Waste Impoundment Liner Failures; Final
Report. EPA—600/2—84—04l, EarthTech Research Corporation,
Baltimore, Maryland, for Municipal Environmental Research
Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio, February 1984. 149 pp.
Wailer, M. J., and J. L. Davis. Assessment of techniques to
detect landfill liner failings. In: Land Disposal of Haz-
ardous Waste; Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Research Sym-
posium, Ft. Mitchell, Kentucky, March 1982. D. W. Shultz,
editor. EPA—600/9—82—002, Municipal Environmental Research
Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio, March 1982. pp. 239—249.
-------
Ware, S. A., and C. S. Jackson. Liners for Sanitary Landfills
and Chemical and Hazardous Waste Disposal Sites. EPA—600/9—
78—005, Ebon Research Systems, Silver Spring, Maryland, for
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati,
Ohio, May 1978. 90 pp.
Wren, E. J. Preventing Landfill Leachate Contamination by Water.
EPA—670/2—73—021, Gulf South Research Institute, Baton
Rouge, Louisiana, for National Environmental Research Cen-
ter, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1973. 119 pp.
-------
APPENDIX A
INSPECTION CHECKLISTS
-------
INSPECTION CHECKLIST
ON-SITE UNLOADING AND STORAGE
1. MATERIAL CHECK
A. Proper Materials
- FML Type Yes ____ No ____ Status
- FML Thickness Yes ____ No ____ Status
- Solvents, Adhesives, Yes ____ No ____ Status
Tapes, etc. -
B. Damaged Materials
— FML Yes ____ No ____ Status
— Accessories Yes ____ No ____ Status
2. UNLOADING AND HANOLING EQUIPMENT
A. Proper Equipment Yes ____ No ____ Status
8. In Working Order Yes ____ No ____ Status
C. Trained Operators Yes ____ No Status
3. UNLOADING AREA
A. Accessible to Delivery Yes No ____ Status
Trucks
B. Accessible to Handllng/ Yes ____ No Status
Transfer Equipment
C. Proper Unloading Surface Yes ____ No ____ Status
0. Materials Damaged Yes ____ No ____ Status
E. Proper Placement on Yes ____ No Status
Unloading Surface
-------
4. STORAGE AREA
A. Accessib e to Transfer! Yes No Status
Handling Equipment
8. Proper Unloading Surface Yes ____ No — Status
C. Materials Damaged During Yes No Status
Loading/Unloading
0. Proper Storage
— PVC, CPE, CSPE, Yes ____ No — Status
and FML Under Cover
- Ancillary Materials Yes No Status
Stored Indoors
- FML Arranged for First Yes ____ Ho — Status
In/First Out Use
-------
INSPECTION CHECKLIST
PREPARATION AND MAINTENANCE OF SUPPORTING SURFACE
1. EARTH SUPPORTING SURFACES
A. Vegetation Removal
- All Vegetation/Large Yes No Status
Roots Removed
- Herbicide Properly Yes No Status
Appl led
B. Burrowing Animals/Pests
- Burrowing Animals/Pests Yes ____ No Status
Have Been Eliminated
— All Burrows/Passages Yes No Status
Fill ed
C. Finished Supporting Surface
— Surface Free of Rocks/ Yes ____ Mo Status
Depressions
- Surface Free of Wet Yes No Status
Areas and Has Uniform
Moisture Content
- Surface Free of Petro- Yes ____ No Status
leum Products or Other
Spills
- Surface Smooth and Ready Yes No ____ Status
for Liner Placement
(no roots, grade stakes,
or abrupt changes In
grade; has been rolled
and compacted)
0. Maintenance of Supporting
Surface
- All Weather/Traffic Yes ____ No Status
Damage Has Been Repaired
Before Liner Placement
-------
2. OTHER SUPPORTING SURFACES
A. Concrete Supporting Surfaces
- Surface Free of Voids! Yes No ____ Status
Projections
- Surface Has Steel Yes ____ No Status
Trowel Finish
- Earth Surface Adjacent Yes No Status
to Concrete Compacted
- All Expansion Joints Yes No Status
Cut Flush -
- Abutting Surfaces Have Yes No Status
Smooth Transition
- All Corners Coming into Yes ___ No — Status
Contact with FML Have
Rounded Edges
- Concrete Free of Hidden Yes No Status
Vo I d s
8. Asphaltlc Supporting Surfaces
- Surface Voids Filled Yes ____ No — Status
- All Debris Removed from Yes ____ No Status
Surface
- All Rough Surfaces Yes ____ No Status
Smoothed/El imi nated
-------
INSPECTION CHECKLIST
PLACEMENT OF FML ON SUPPORTING SURFACE
1. PLACEMENT EQUIPMENT
A. Proper Equipment On Site Yes ____ No Status
(see attached list)
B. Appropriate Quantities Yes ____ No — Status
C. In Working Order Yes No Status
2. PERSONNEL
A. Properly Trained Yes No Status
8. Clothing
- All Workers Must Wear Yes ____ No Status
Smooth-Soled Shoes
- All Workers Must Have Yes No Status
Gloves
3. WEATHER CONDITIONS
A. Weather Is Relatively Yes ____ No — Status
Calm and Mild (no high
wind, rain, snow, severe
heat or cold)
4. FML LAYOUT
A. La ’out Plan Prepared Yes ____ No Status
B. Placement
- Only Those Sheets That Yes ____ No ____ Status
Cam Reasonably Be Seamed
During the Work Day Are
Placed
- Sheets Unfolded/Unrolled Yes No Status
in Same Direction as
Wind
-------
- Sandbags Placed on Yes ____ No Status
Sheets
- Sheets Placed with Yes — No — Status
Specified Overlap
- Each Sheet/Factory Seam Yes — No ____ Status
Visually Inspected for
Defects
-------
EQUIPMENT FOR FML PLACEMENT
Item
Forklift, front-end loader, and/or
flatbed truck
Ladders, wood, flat type
Wood or plastic dowels with rounded
ends, and/or mechanical grips
Chalk line
Tape measure (100 feet long)
Scissors (bright-colored
with rounded points), knife
Grade stakes or traffic cones
Sandbags
Red and yellow keel
Arch punch
Utility knife, metal sheers
First aid supplies
Portable pumps
Conron tool kit (e.g., hammer,
saw, etc.)
Water supply
Pencil and paper
Phone and/or radio communications
Use
To handle FML sheets for placement
To work on slopes
To assist workers in pulling on edges
of FML panels while placing
To assist placing of FML panels
To measure FML sections
To cut FilL materials
To measure soil cover depths
To secure unseamed FML panels to
prevent damage by wind
To mark FilL
To cut holes In FilL to fit over
anchor bolts
To Cut cardboard shipping cartons
containing FilL and metal bands
To provide relief from minor injuries
To pump any accumulated water from
supporting surface
To make miscellaneous repairs, etc.
To supply personnel drinking and
equipment cooling needs
To write daily reports, etc.
To provide off-site contact
-------
INSPECTION CHECKLIST
SEAMING OPERATIONS
1. INSPECTOR ORIENTATION
A. Inspector Provided with Yes No Status
Precise Specifications
on Seaming Equipment and
Procedures
B. Inspector Received Yes No Status
Explanation and Demon-
stration of Seaming
Equipment/Procedures
to Be Used
2. SEAMING EQUIPMENT
A. Proper Equipment On Site Yes No Status
(see attached list)
B. Appropriate Quantities Yes ____ No Status
C. In Working Order Yes ____ No ____ Status
3. PERSONNEL
A. Proper Crew Size Yes ____ No Status
B. Properly Experienced Yes No Status
C. Clothing
- All Workers Must Wear Yes No Status
Smooth-Soled Shoes
- All Workers Must Have Yes No — Status
Gloves
4. ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
A. Weather Relatively Calni Yes ____ No Status
and Mild (no high wind,
rain, snow, hail, heavy
mist, dust, severe heat
or cold)
-------
5. SEAMING
A. Sheets/Patches Properly Yes No Status
Positioned with Sufficient
Overlap (2’7PVC; 3”/CSPE;
3’/CPE: 1/HOPE)
B. Sandbags in Place Yes ____ No — Status
C. Working Area Clean and Yes ____ No Status
Has Adequate Maneuvering
Room
0. No Edge Defects Yes ____ No — Status
E. Proper Seaming Techniques Yes ____ No — Status
Followed
-------
EQUIPMENT REQUIRED DURING FML SEAMING OPERATIONS
— Clean, absorbent white
Cotton rags
- 10-cm (4-inch) dia plastic
fu nriel
- 3.785-liter (1-gallon) polyethylene
pails
— Wood boards
— Heat guns
Use
To cut FML materials
To secure unseajued FML panels to
prevent damage by wind
To operate heat guns, power tools, and
lights.
To clean FML prior to seaming,
patching, anchoring
To operate gasoline and/or diesel
equipment
To use as a tarp to store materials
on the seaming area, and for patches
For working on slope
For measuring
To apply adhesive, cement, solvent
caulk, etc.
To apply pressure to seam after
application of adhesive, cement, and
solvent
To clean FML in area of seam and to
wipe excessive adhesive
To assist In pouring adhesives and
solvents from one container to another
To hold adhesives and solvents
To provide support under FML during
seaming operations
To warm FMI.. during seaming operations
Item
Scissors (bright-colored
with rounded points)
Sandbags
Electric generator and
extension cords
Scrub brushes
Fuel
Extra pieces of FML
Ladders
Seaming equipment:
- Tape
— Clean bristle brushes 7.5 cm
(3 inches) wide x 10 cm (4 inches)
long, squeeze bottles, caulk guns
— Hand rollers
-------
FML SEAMING EQUIPMENT (continued)
Item
- Heat sealing equipment
- Grinding equipment
- Fusion welding equipment
First aid supplies
Mechanics tool kit
Water supply
Phone and/or radio communications
Fire extinguishers
Use
Conrionly used on HOPE, sometimes used
on other FML types
For preparation of HOPE seams
For HOPE seaming
To provide relief from minor injuries
To make miscellaneous repairs
To supply personnel drinking and
equipment cooling needs
To provide off-site contact
Use for fires
-------
INSPECTION CHECKLIST
LINER ANCHORS AND ATTACHMENTS
1. PLACEMENT EQUIPMENT
A. Proper Equipment Yes ____ No — Status
B. Appropriate Quantities Yes ____ No — Status
C. In Working Order Yes No Status
2. PERSONNEL
A. Properly Experienced Yes No Status
B. Clothing
— All Workers Must Wear Yes No Status
Smooth-Soled Shoes
— All Workers Must Have Yes No Status
Gloves
3. ANCHORS AND ATTACHMENTS
A. Anchor Trenches
- Trench Depth/Width Yes No Status
Adequate
— Sufficient Distance Yes ____ No ____ Status
from Trench to Top
of Slope
- teading Edge of Trench Yes ____ No ____ Status
Smooth/Free of Sharp
or Jagged Edges
- FML Properly Installed Yes No Status
In Trench
Trench Fill Free of Yes No Status
Sharp Rocks
— Final Backfilllng and Yes ____ No ____ Status
Compaction Operations
Damaged FML
-------
B. Concrete and Piping Yes No ____ Status
- Surface Smooth, Free of Yes No — Status
Voids, Jagged Edges,
Burrs, Sharp Protrusions
— Batten Strip and Nuts/ Yes ____ No Status
Bolts Compatible
- Batten Materials Yes No Status
Consistent with Design
— Adhesives, Tapes, Caulks Yes ____ No ____ Status
Cements Consistent with
FML Manufacturer’ 5
Recomendat ions
— Materials Fresh, Free Yes No Status
of Defects, and of
Proper Dimensions
- Reglets Properly Set Yes ____ No Status
in Concrete/Flush with
Concrete Surface
— No Voids Exist In Con— Yes No Status
Crete Alongside Reglet
- Reglet of Material and Yes No ____ Status
Size Specified
- FML Edge Properly Yes No Status
[ nserted into Reglet
- Rubber Rod Properly Yes ____ No ____ Status
Inserted
- Caulk Bead of Proper Yes ____ No Status
Material and Properly
Placed
- Attachment to Pipe Is Yes ____ No Status
According to Plans and
Specifications
- All Potential Leak Paths Yes ____ No Status
Around Pipe Have Been
Properly Caulked
-------
INSPECTION CHECKLIST
TESTING
1. FIELD TESTS
Test Method: __________________________
A. Proper Equipment Yes ____ No ____ Status
(consistent with FML
and seam)
B. In Working Order Yes No Status
C. Personnel
— Properly Experienced Yes ____ No ____ Status
— Proper Clothing Yes No Status
(smooth—soled shoes)
0. Defective Sheets/Seams Yes ____ No ____ Status
Repaired/Retested
2. LABORATORY TESTS
A. Specified Number of Yes No Status
Samples Taken
B. Proper Equipment Yes ____ No ____ Status
C. Trained Personnel Yes ____ No ____ Status
0. Tests Performed
- ASIM 0 3083 Yes ____ No ____ Status
— ASTM 0 751 Yes ____ No ____ Status
— ASTM C 413 Yes ____ No ____ Status
E. Defective Seams Repaired! Yes No ____ Status
Retested
-------
INSPECTION CHECKLIST
FML COVERS
1. EARTH COVERS
A. Proper Equipment Yes ____ Mo ____ Status
B. In Working Order Yes No Status
C. Personnel
— Properly Experienced Yes ____ Mo — Status
- Smooth—Soled Shoes Yes ____ No ____ Status
0. Weather Mild; Not Rainy, Yes No Status
Extremely Cold, or Windy
E. Earth Cover Material Yes ____ No ____ Status
Unfrozen, Free of Debris,
Vegetation, Sharp Objects
F. Access Ramp and Dumping Yes No Status
Pad Periodically Relocated
to Prevent Overcompact Ion
G. Grade Stakes Set/Specified Yes ____ No ____ Status
Depth Achieved
H. Was FML Damaged? Yes No Status
Repaired/Retested?
2. PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE/GUNITE
A. Proper Equipment Yes ____ No ____ Status
B. In Working Order Yes No Status
C. Personnel
— Properly Experienced Yes ____ No ____ Status
— Smooth—Soled Shoes Yes ____ No ____ Status
0. Weather Mild, Not Rainy, Yes No Status
Extremely Cold, or Windy
-------
E. Placement
— FML Clean, Free of Yes ____ No — Status
Debris
- Reinforcing Steel Yes No Status
Properly Placed and
Supported
— Material Applied to Yes No Status
Specified Depth Without
Damage to FML
3. DRAINAGE NETS AND GEOTEXTILES
A. Proper Material/Thickness Yes ____ No ____ Status
B. Was FML Damaged? Yes ____ No Status
Repaired/Retested?
------- |